rtij 
 
 AST 
 
THE GIFT OF 
 
 .. pAJc/|iJa?Mr\.W,'3r..>^A^^ 
 
THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 NEW YORK STATE SCHOOL 
 
 OF 
 
 INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR 
 
 RELATIONS 
 
 AT 
 CORNELL UNIVERSITY 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924078655960 
 

 wt 
 
 REPORT 
 
 5501 
 
 
 ■ A-Sl 
 
 OP THE 
 
 V. i'Z^ 
 
 ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 ON 
 
 IliSIlL Dims II Ti PROICE OF MM COLil 
 
 ISSUED BY 
 
 THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR 
 
 o^isr^DA. 
 
 OTTAWA 
 GOVERNMENT PRINTING BUREAU 
 
 1903 
 
 [^A a F?f?^ H5yj^' j'y- ^ ^ 1 
 
 ^ 
 

 /V-2^']b^i4- 
 
KOYAL LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 t 
 
 ^ 
 
 COMMISSIONERS 
 
 The Honourable Gokdon Hunter, 
 
 Chief Justice of British Columbia, 
 Chairman. 
 
 ■Rev. Elliott S. Eowe. 
 SECRETARY : 
 
 STENOGRAPHER 
 
 W. L. Mackenzie King, 
 
 Deputy Minister of Labour, 
 
 Francis W. Giddens, 
 
 Department of Labour. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PAGR. 
 
 Commission vii 
 
 Letter transmitting Eeport of Commissioners ix 
 
 Chapter 1 — Introductory 1 
 
 2 — Strike of United Brotherhood of Railway Employees and Sym- 
 pathetic Strikes 2 
 
 3 — Disputes in the coal mines of British Columbia during 1903. ... 35 
 
 4 — Strike of coal miners at Ladysmith 37 
 
 5 — Strike of coal miners at Union 49 
 
 6 — General Conclusions 63 
 
COMMISSION 
 
 APPOINTING THE HONOURABLE GORDON HUNTER AND THE REV. ELLIOTT 
 S. ROWS COMMISSIONERS TO INQUIRE INTO AND REPORT UPON 
 NUMEROUS DISPUTES BETWEEN OWNERS OF COAL AND METAL- 
 LIFEROUS MINES AND THEIR EMPLOYEES, AND BETWEEN TRANS- 
 PORTATION COMPANIES AND THEIR EMPLOYEES IN THE PROVINCE 
 OF BRITISH COLUMBIA ; DATED APRIL 18, 1903 ; RECORDED, APRIL 
 22, 1903. (SGD.) P. PELLETIER, ACTING DEPUTY REGISTRAR GENERAL 
 OF CANADA. 
 
 MINTO (L.S.) CANADA. 
 
 Edward the Seventh, hy the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain 
 and Ireland, and of the British Dominions heyond the Seas, King, Defender of 
 the Faith, Emperor of India. 
 
 To all to whom these Presents shall come, or whom the same may in anywise 
 concern. 
 
 Greeting : 
 
 Whereas it appears from a report from our Minister of Lahour that numerous 
 disputes frequently resulting in strikes and lockouts between (amongst others), owners 
 of coal and metalliferous mines and their employees, and between transportation com- 
 panies and their employees, have prevailed throughout the Province of British Colum- 
 bia for a considerable length of time, occasioning serious industrial depression and 
 great public injury : 
 
 And Whereas we deem it expedient that inquiry under oath should be made into 
 and concerning s uch disputes and the nature and causes thereof : 
 
 Now Know Ye that We, by and with the advice of our Privy Council for Canada 
 do by these presents nominate, constitute and appoint The Honourable Gordon Hunter, 
 Chief Justice of the said Province of British Columbia, and the Beverend Elliott S. 
 Eowe, of the City of Victoria, in said Province of British Columbia, to be Our Com- 
 missioners, to inquire into and concerning the said disputes hereintofore referred to, 
 and the nature and causes thereof. 
 
 And we do hereby, under the authority of the Revised Statutes of Canada, Chapter 
 
 144, intituled 'An Act respecting Inquiries concerning Public Matters' ; confer upon 
 
 you, Our said Commissioners, the power of summoning before you any witnesses and 
 
 requiring them to give evidence on oath, orally or in writing, or on solemn aiSrma- 
 
 , tion, if they are persons entitled to affirm in civil matters, and to produce such docu- 
 
Viii SRITI8B COLVUBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 ments and things as you. Our said Commissioners, stall deem requisite to the full 
 investigation of the matters into which you are hereby appointed to examine, inquire 
 into and investigate, to have, hold, exercise and enjoy the said office, place and trust 
 unto you the said The Honourable Gordon Hunter, and you the Severed Elliott 
 S. Eowe, together with the rights, powers, privileges and emoluments unto the said 
 office, place and trust of right and by law appertaining during pleasure. And we do 
 hereby require and direct you to report to Our Minister of Labour of Canada the 
 result of your investigation, together with the evidence taken before you, and any 
 opinion you may see fit to express thereon. 
 
 In Testimony Whereof we have caused these Our Letters to be made Patent, and 
 the Great Seal of Canada to be hereunto affixed : — 
 
 Witness : Our Bight Trusty and Bight Well-Beloved Cousin and Councillor, 
 the Bight Honourable Sir Gilbert John Elliot, Earl of Minto 
 and Viscount Melgund of Melgund, County or Forfar in the 
 Peerage of the United Kingdom, Baron Minto of Minto, County 
 of Boxburgh in the Peerage of Oreat Britain, Baronet of Nova 
 Scotia, Knight Grand Cross of Our Most Distinguished Order 
 of Saint Michael and Saint George, &c., &., Governor General 
 of Canada. 
 
 At our Government House in Our City of Ottawa, this Eighteenth day of April, 
 in the year of Our Lord One thousand nine hundred and three, and in the Third year 
 of Our Reign. 
 
 By command, 
 
 (Signed) P. PELLETIER, 
 Acting Under Secretary of State. 
 
 (Signed) E. L. Newcombb, 
 
 Deputy of the Minister of Justice, Canada.-^ 
 
LETTER TRANSMITTING REPORT OF COMMISSIONERS 
 
 Victoria, July 10, 1903. 
 
 To the Honourable 
 
 Sir William Mulock, K.C.M.G., M.P,, 
 Minister of Labour, 
 Ottawa. 
 
 SiK, — We have the honour to transmit to you the Report of the Commission 
 appointed to inquire into numerous disputes between the owners of coal and metalli- 
 ferous mines and their employees, and between transportation companies and their 
 employees in the Province of British Columbia. 
 
 We hare the honour to be, 
 Sir, 
 Tour obedient servants, 
 
 (Signed) Gordon Hunter, 
 Elliott S. Eowe, 
 
 Commissioners. 
 
 86a— 2 
 
REPORT OF THE COMMISSION 
 
 To the Honourable 
 
 Sir William Mulook, K.C.M.G , M.P., 
 Minister of Labour, 
 Ottawa. 
 
 Sm, — ^We have the honour to submit here- 
 with the results of our investiga- 
 tions into ihe nature and causes of recent 
 industrial disputes in the province of Brit- 
 
 ish Columbia, between owners of coal and 
 metalliferous mines and their employees 
 and between transportation companies and 
 their employees, together with the evidence 
 taken before . us, and the opinions which 
 we have deemed it fit to express, pursuant 
 to the directions of the commission issued 
 to us by Ilis Excellency the Governor Gen- 
 eral of Canada. 
 
 CHAP. I— INTKODUCTOEY. 
 
 THE Commission entered upon its 
 duties at the end of April, and 
 the taking of evidence was commen- 
 ced on May 4, at Ladysmith, and 
 ■was concluded at Vancouver on June 
 15. Evidence waS' taken in the cities 
 of Victoria, Vancouver and Nanaimo, and 
 in the mining towns of Ladysmith, Exten- 
 sion and Cumberland (Union). The sittings 
 of the Commission were continuous and 
 uninterrupted, and during the time over 
 one- hundred witnesses were examined. The 
 Commission made every effort to hear as 
 many parties as possible who were or might 
 be immediately interested in the matters 
 under investigation. In the case of the ex- 
 isting disputes, the employers and employ- 
 ees concerned, or their representatives, were 
 examined at considerable length, and op- 
 portunity given to any persons who de- 
 sired to appear before the Commission. The 
 opinions of representative employers and 
 workmen other than those who were parties 
 to existing disputes were also obtained in 
 regard to general questions' afFecting their 
 relations and the settlement of labour dis- 
 putes, and on matters on which the Com- 
 missioners felt it desirable to have inde- 
 pendent testimony. Owing, however, to the 
 limited time at its disposal, it was neces- 
 sary to restrict the taking of evidence both 
 as to the places which the Commissioners 
 had, at the outset, hoped to visit, and the 
 
 36o~2i 
 
 number of witnesses examined in those lo- 
 calities where sittings were held. We be- 
 lieve, however, in regard to the disputes 
 which were made the subject of special in- 
 quiry, the evidence obtained, and the docu- 
 ments and correspondence submitted to the 
 Commission, have made us fully acquainted 
 with all the material facts and circum- 
 stances relevant to the purposes of the in- 
 quiry, and that such additional evidence aa 
 might have been obtained by fuller investi- 
 gation would have been merely corrobora- 
 tive of the facta disclosed. 
 
 The Commissioners have much pleasure 
 in stating that the parties to the various 
 controversies under investigation were re- 
 presented by able counsel, who much facili- 
 tated the worlc of the Commission, and only 
 regret that they were unable to hear ex- 
 tended argument from them as to what 
 legislation ought to be suggested. They 
 also desire to record their appreciation of 
 tho invaluable assistance rendered by Mr. 
 W. L. Mackenzie King, secretary to tho 
 Commission, to whose unceasing efforts and 
 interest in the work of the Commission is 
 due much of any value that may be found 
 in this report. They also feel it due to Mr. 
 F. W. Giddens, the stenographer attached 
 to the Commission, to acknowledge the ac- 
 curacy and rapidity of his work in report- 
 ing and transcribing the evidence, owing 
 to which the report was completed at aa 
 early a date as was possible. 
 
BBITISE COLUMBIA LABOUR COMUISSWTf 
 
 CHAP. II— THE UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF RAILWAY EMPLOYEES' AND 
 
 SYMPATHETIC STRIKES. 
 
 THE strike at Vancouver of certain 
 employees of the Canadian Paci- 
 fic Eailway, who were members of the 
 United Brotherhood of Railway Em- 
 .ployees, and which commenced on 
 February 27, had, at the time the 
 Commission began its investigation, 
 been on foot for a longer time than any 
 of the strikes in the province during the 
 present year. This strike was investigated 
 during the sittings of the Commission at 
 the city of Vancouver, which were held 
 after the Commission had concluded its 
 sittings at different places on Vancouver 
 Island. The Commission having originally 
 intended to visit the boundary and Koote- 
 nay districts, it was deemed advisable to 
 conclude the taking of evidence on Van- 
 couver Island before proceeding to the 
 mainland, and for this reason, and the ad- 
 ditional fact that there appeared to be 
 greater urgency for an immediate investi- 
 gation of the mining disputes, the strike of 
 the United Brotherhood of Railway Em- 
 ployees, although occurring earlier than the 
 strikes on Vancouver Island, was not taken 
 up until the taking of evidence in regard to 
 the latter was concluded. But its relation 
 to, and bearing upon the other disputes, 
 make it desirable that it should be the first 
 to be taken up in this report. 
 
 Sources of information. 
 
 Preliminary to the taking of evidence at 
 Vancouver the Commission required each 
 party to the dispute to file an affidavit of 
 documents' which would cover all corres- 
 pondence relating in any way to the strike. 
 An immense mass of material was produced 
 in response to this direction of the Com- 
 mission by both the company and the strik- 
 ers. Privilege was claimed by both sides 
 for the greater part of th© correspondence 
 
 produced. On examining the correspond- 
 ence the Commissioners found that it con- 
 tained practically all the information which 
 was necessary to give a complete under- 
 standing of the entire situation, and of the 
 purposes and methods of both parties to the 
 dispute. To have formally brought out in 
 open court even the most important of the 
 facts established by these documents would 
 have occupied the time of the Commission 
 for several weeks. The parties themselves 
 were unwilling to have much of the informa- 
 tion publicly disclosed, but expressed their 
 willingness to leave all of the documents 
 in the hands of the Commission, and joint 
 admissions were very properly made that 
 all the documents and correspondence were 
 what they purported to be, and it was 
 agreed by the parties that the Commission- 
 ers might refer to such of them as they 
 might think necessary or proper and draw 
 inferences of fact therefrom. The agents 
 of the telegraph companies at Vancouver 
 and other points, were required by the Com- 
 mission to produce all telegrams which had 
 been sent or received by their offices by any 
 parties concerned in the dispute, and which 
 related in any way to the matters before 
 the Commission. 
 
 Settlement of Strike before Commission. 
 
 The Commission having in its possession 
 all the material evidence bearing on the 
 situation, the parties requested its assist- 
 ance in effecting a settlement of the dis- 
 pute, and after one or two days' negotia- 
 tions a settlement was arrived at, the terma 
 of which, having been accepted by the re- 
 presentatives of both parties, were filed with 
 the Commission, to be retained as a sealed 
 document in the Department of Labour at 
 Ottawa. This course led to the immediate 
 termination of the original strike, and the 
 several strikes which had taken place at 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 other points on the company's Bystem, as 
 well as the sympathetic strikes in other 
 trades. 
 
 It was felt by the Commissioners that to 
 have pursued the taking of evidence to other 
 than a limited extent, while negotiations 
 were pending, would have precluded the 
 possibility of a settlement, and that after 
 the settlement was efiected, it was not in 
 the public interest that the trouble should 
 be publicly ventilated any more than was 
 necessary. The Commission, however, Eat- 
 isfied itself in the first instance that the 
 documents in its possession were sufficient 
 to satisfactorily demonstrate the nature and 
 causes of the strike. Our report on this 
 strike is, therefore, based primarily on 
 documentary evidence, but only such docu- 
 ments have been made use of as the Oom,- 
 mission feel satisfied are authorative and 
 in the public interest to disclose. 
 
 The TJnited Brotherhood of Railway 
 Employees. 
 
 As has been mentioned, the strike of the 
 employees of the Camadian Pacific Rail- 
 way Company at Vancouver who were 
 members of the United Brotherhood of 
 Railway Employees, commenced on Febru- 
 ary 27, 1903. Immediately after, it was 
 followed by strikes among members of the 
 Brotherhood at other points on the Cana- 
 dian Pacific Railway, and by sympathetic 
 strikes in other callings at Vancouver and 
 elsewhere. The nature and causes of 
 the strike itself, and the strikes which fol- 
 lowed in consequence of it, cannot be right- 
 ly understood without explaining in some 
 detail the nature of the organization known 
 as the United Brotherhood of Railway Em- 
 ployees and the relations which existed be- 
 tween this organization and the Canadian 
 Pacific Railway Company for some time 
 previous. 
 
 Oath Administered to Members. 
 
 The United Brotherhood of Railway Em- 
 ployees was constituted in January, 1901. 
 It is a secret society, bound together by the 
 folllowing oath : 
 
 I do most solemnly and sincerely swear (or 
 affirm), freely and voluntarily, upon the Holy 
 Bible and my sacred honour, that I will never 
 reveal any of the secrets of the United Brother- 
 hood of Railway Employees, which have been 
 heretofore, shall be at this time, or may at any 
 future time, be imparted to me as such, to any 
 person whomsoever, unless under lawful au- 
 thority of the Brotherhood ; that I will never 
 write, indite or print, or allow to be written, 
 indited or printed, if in my power to prevent 
 it, any of the unwritten work of the Brother- 
 hood ; that I will uphold and support its con- 
 stitution and by-laws, and will obey and abide 
 by all regulations and mandates issued through 
 its various official channels, and will respect 
 and comply with all decisions of its tribunals, 
 when in acordance with its constitution and 
 laws ; that I will not knowingly wrong, cheat, 
 nor defraud any member of this Brotherhood, 
 or speak ill or slightingly of any member there- 
 of ; that I will assist all destitute worthy mem- 
 bers of the Brotherhood who may apply to me 
 for relief, so far as lies within my power ; that, 
 other things being equal, I will give employment 
 to a member of this Brotherhood in preference 
 to a stranger ; that I will give members due 
 and timely notice of any danger that I may 
 know of, threatening them or their families ; 
 that I will recognize all signs, passwords, grips 
 or signals which may be given me by members 
 of the Brotherhood ; that I will endeavour at all 
 times to uphold and maintain the dignity of 
 the Brotherhood ; that I will not recommend 
 any candidate for membership therein, whom I 
 have reason to believe would prove unworthy. 
 All this I most sincerely and faithfully swear 
 (or affirm), and will steadfastly keep and per- 
 form without the least equivocation or mental 
 reservation whatsoever, and will consider this 
 obligation binding, whether I remain a member 
 of the Brotherhood or not. 
 
 Nature of Organization. 
 
 Thisi oath is administered during a 
 lengthy and impressive ceremony. 
 
 The headquarters of the organization are 
 at San Francisco, and its purpose is to em- 
 brace in one organization all classes of rail' 
 way employees. The management of the 
 affairs of the Brotherhood is in the hands 
 of its president and board of directors, who 
 are clothed with exceptional powers in the 
 direction of the affairs of tlie. entire Bro- 
 therhood. As an illustration of the na- 
 ture of this power, and also of the main 
 purposes of the Brotherhood in endeavor- 
 ing to effect an organization that may em- 
 brace all classes of employees upon rail- 
 ways, the following, which is section 25 of 
 Article 5 of the constitution of the Brother- 
 hood (the Article which defines the power 
 of the president) may be quoted : — 
 
 Whenever a reasonable satisfactory adjust- 
 ment of grievances of a member or members 
 ot the Brotherhood, or of the Brotherhood, or 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSIOy 
 
 any division or departments thereof. Is re- 
 fused by the management of any railway, notice 
 of refusal to adjust grievance may be given by 
 the joint order of the president and board of 
 directors, and upon the same being made, and 
 until the same is revoked, no member of the 
 Brotherhood shall perform any labour or ser- 
 vice in or upon any such railway, or upon 
 freight or passengers thereof, either while ac- 
 tually upon said railway or upon premises own- 
 ed by the corporation owning the same, or un- 
 der the control or direction of such corpora- 
 tion or its management, or that may be destin- 
 ed for or to be carried upon any such railway 
 or any part thereof, or that may be coming 
 from or to be transported from the same, or 
 from any part thereof, and while such notice is 
 in effect and until the same is lawfully revoked 
 by the authority issuing the same, no member 
 cf the Brotherhood shall in any wise handle, 
 transport or be in any way connected with the 
 handling, transmission or transportation of any 
 of the freight, or passengers, or property of 
 said railway, or of the railways affected by and 
 specified in said order under penalty of expul- 
 sion. Nothing herein shall ever be construed 
 as authorizing any act of violence or the des- 
 truction of any property, or any other unlawful 
 act, or to secure or effect the hindrance of any 
 person or persons not connected with the Bro- 
 therhood in the preformance of any service, 
 which it or its members hereunder fail or re- 
 fuse to perform, but is in all cases to be limited 
 to a lawful and peaceful refusal to render fur- 
 ther service in connection with the transporta- 
 tion of passengers, or of freight, or of property 
 of the railway or railways affected by such 
 notice of refusal to adjust grievance. 
 
 From this Article it will be seen that tm- 
 like the provisions usually found in the 
 constitutions of trade unions, relating to 
 strikes, the constitution of the United 
 Brotherhood of Railway Employees leaves 
 no option under certain circumstances, to 
 the members to determine in their local 
 lodges whether or not they will become in- 
 volved in a sympathetic strike, but subjects 
 one and all, under penalty of expulsion, to 
 the order of the president and a board of 
 directors. Those, therefore, who are ac- 
 customed to trades' union methods of pro- 
 ceeding, will be at a loss to understand the 
 action of the men involved in this strike at 
 different points on the Canadian Pacific 
 Railway, or some of the sympathetic strikes 
 referred to, unless the nature of this or- 
 ganization is kept in mind. 
 
 Nature and Extent of Organization on 
 C.P.R. 
 
 In June, 1902, the clerks in the employ 
 of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company 
 at Vancouver were organized as a branch 
 
 (called a ' division ') of the United Brother- 
 hood of Railway Employees. Divisions 
 were formed during the fall of the same 
 year at Revelstoke, Nelsion and Calgary. 
 In November George Estes, the president 
 of the Brotherhood, visited Vancouver to 
 work up the membership of the order, and 
 one of the results of his visit was the ad- 
 dition to the order of the Vancouver freight 
 handlers and checkers, who were already 
 members of a local organization which had 
 an agreement with the company, including 
 a schedule of wagesi which was to be in 
 force until June 21, 1903. From that 
 time on, the relations between Estes and 
 executive officers of the Canadian divisions 
 were of an intimate nature, Estes appar- 
 ently directing much of his time and en- 
 ergy to furthering organization of the 
 Brotherhood in Canada. 
 
 From reports furnished by secret service 
 detectives the company learned : — 
 
 (1). That the purpose of the organization 
 was to include all classes of employees, 
 whether memibersi of other orders or not. 
 For example, men were being taken into 
 the Brotherhood from the shops at the sev- 
 eral divisional points on the Canadian Pa- 
 cific Railway, although the mechanical de- 
 partments to which these men belonged had 
 organizations which had agreements with 
 the company ; one or two train baggage 
 men, members of the Order of Railway 
 Trainmen, with which the company had an 
 agreement, also joined the Brotherhood. In 
 December instructions were given by Estes 
 to one P , the organizer of the Bro- 
 therhood in Canada, to endeavour to organ- 
 ize the bridge and trackmen in the Koote- 
 nay country as members of the Brother- 
 hood, although they belonged to a union of 
 the maintenance-of-way men, with whom 
 the company had made an agreement fol- 
 lowing upon a strike which lasted a good 
 part of the summer of 1901. 
 
 (2). That sailors on the Pacific and local 
 boats of the Canadian Pacific Navigation 
 Company were being taken into the order. 
 
 (3). That the general foreman of the 
 freight sheds at Vancouver, who had charge 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 of 95 men, and had the power of engaging 
 and dismissing men, had joined the organi- 
 zation. 
 
 (4). That (preparations were being made 
 to organize the Brotherhood along the en- 
 tire line of the Canadian Pacific Railway, 
 and that it was contemplated to make a de- 
 mand for recognition of the Brotherhood 
 and schedules at Montreal on July 1 of the 
 present year. 
 
 (5). That an employee who had been dis- 
 missed for cause at Nelson and afterwards 
 given work in the sheds at Vancouver and 
 again dismissed, had placed his case in the 
 hands of the Vancouver division, and that 
 that division had asked snpport from Eev- 
 elstoke, Nelson and Oalgary, but had re- 
 ceived a promise of it only from the last 
 named. It was decided to wait on the 
 general superintendent of the Pacific 
 division, Mr. Marpole, and demand 
 the reinstatement of this employee, and be- 
 fore doing so, to publish their intention in 
 the papers, in order, as Estes stated when 
 advising the course named, that they might 
 ' work a bluff,' and get glory for the order 
 as well as indicate strength, the idea being 
 that the general superintendent, in order 
 to prevent trouble, might pretend ignorance 
 of the case and do as requested. 
 
 (6). That the private business of the 
 company was being given out and discussed 
 in the divisions of the Brotherhood. Mat- 
 ters were mentioned by officers of the Bro- 
 therhood, that could not have come to them 
 Bxcept by the treachery of some employees 
 having confidential positions. One of the 
 telegraph operators was seen to hand Estes 
 a number of copies of dispatches. Upon 
 investigation it was' discovered that this 
 :nan had given to Estes, at the latter's re- 
 quest, private information that came to 
 him in the course of his work as operator. 
 He signed a confession to this effect. 
 
 Private Business of Company discussed. 
 
 The fact that the confidential clerk of the 
 -reneral •uperintendent was being sent to 
 San Francisco and other coast towns was 
 discussed in the division. The advance 
 
 voucher for his expenses was perused and 
 reported oij, and the conclusion reached that 
 he was being sent to the points named to 
 find out the strength of the Brotherhood, 
 and to report on the probability of getting 
 men to take the places of those employed 
 in the event of a strike on the Canadian 
 Pacific Railway. This supposed discovery 
 was communicated to Estes, who is, by the 
 secret service detectives, reported to have 
 replied to the following effect from Seattle 
 on January 2 : ' I am proud to think that 
 the union is so well organized as to put us in 
 a position to get such information, and con- 
 gratulate you on your promptitude in giv- 
 ing me the information. I will make it im- 
 possible for him here in Seattle to get any 
 clerks, as they get about $60 a month here, 
 and 'are nearly all solid for the U.B.R.E. 
 However, I will put them on their guard, 
 and have wired Massey (the vice-president 
 of the II.B.R.E.) in San Francisco. I will 
 go at once to Tacoma and make that place 
 my headquarters and try to keep them from 
 scabbing and organize there aa quickly as 
 possible. Keep me posted.' This letter was 
 directed to F. J. Halton, the agent (sec- 
 retary) of the local lodge at Vancouver, 
 who decided that it was best to have an in- 
 terview with Estes, and with the connivance 
 of his immediate superior, left his work on 
 sick leave and went to Seattle. 
 
 Suspension of Member of Brotherhood 
 in January. 
 
 These disclosures resulted in the sus- 
 pension of Halton and the transfer of a 
 young woman, who was a member of the 
 Brotherhood, from the office of the assist- 
 ant to the general superintendent, to an- 
 other department, in pursuance of a de- 
 cision that no member of the Brotherhood 
 should remain in the private office of the 
 superintendent. The cases of Halton and 
 this young woman were taken up by the 
 Vancouver division. A grievance com- 
 mittee was formed to present a request for 
 the reinstatement of Halton, and the em- 
 ployment of the young woman in a perma- 
 nent position at no less wages than she had 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 been receiving. This committee waited 
 upon the general superintendent on Janu- 
 ary 5 (the general superintendent's confi- 
 dential clerk had left on December 29, Hal- 
 ton on the 30 th, and the latter suspended on 
 January 2) who refused to deal with them 
 as representing the Brotherhood. He agreed 
 to meet the committee of general ofBce 
 clerks and explain the reaspns for Halton's 
 suspension, and the transfer of the other 
 clerk. He explained that they had been 
 wrong as to the supposed purpose of the 
 mission of his confidential clerk to the 
 States, and read them correspondence re- 
 lative to that between himself and Mr. 
 McNicoll, the general manager at Montreal, 
 and Mr. Tait. This correspondence, inas- 
 niiich as it has a direct bearing on the 
 whole situation, it may be well to repro- 
 duce. 
 
 Correspondence re Wages of Clerks on 
 C.P.R. 
 
 In a letter to Mr. Marpole on December 
 
 15, Tait says : — 
 
 In reference to the organization of clerical 
 labour in Vaneouver and elsewhere on your di- 
 viaion under the auspices of U.B.R.E., I do not 
 know what we can do to stop this and prevent 
 trouble, except to pay our men as well as they 
 are paid elsewhere under the same conditions. 
 In order that we may know where we stand in 
 this respect, will you kindly select some one in 
 whom you have confidence, to go to Portland, 
 Seattle, Tacoma and San Francisco, and ascer- 
 tain just what salaries are paid to clerks in 
 various positions at each of these points, and 
 send me a statement showing this, with the 
 corresponding salaries paid at Vancouver, and 
 your recommendation as to what, it any, in- 
 crease should be granted. 
 
 In a letter of Mr. Marpole to Mr. Mc- 
 Nicoll, dated January 26, to which was at- 
 tached a statement containing the recom- 
 mendations of the former as to the increases 
 growing out of the inquiries of his confi- 
 dential clerk, and a statement covering pre- 
 sent and proposed wages and the rates of 
 pay at Seattle, Tacoma, Portland and Spo- 
 kane, Mr. Marpole says : — 
 
 I have already discussed pretty fully with 
 you the subject of the action we proposed now 
 to take, and desire to repeat now my earnest 
 appeal to you to let me make these effective 
 from the first of February, so as to put us on 
 a proper and fair footing before we force the 
 issue of pending trouble. 
 
 We must be just and reasonable in dealing 
 with this class of employees, and give them the 
 satisfaction of knowing that this company Is 
 willing to pay as much as other transcontinen- 
 tal lines immediately south of us for exactly 
 similar work done. 
 
 I am especially anxious to retain the services 
 and respect of those employees whose loyalty 
 has already been demonstrated, and can only 
 do so by being absolutely just in the matter of 
 remuneration, and make this equivalent to 
 what they can get readily from other com- 
 panies. I am asking only what I consider the 
 responsible and loyal element are entitled to, 
 and the total increase in this connection does 
 not cut much of a figure when we look at the 
 faithful services rendered at all hours and 
 places. 
 
 Please wire me you decision, as I desire to 
 announce the increase immediately for a reason 
 you are aware of. 
 
 Having read the preceding correspond- 
 ence to the members of the committee who 
 waited upon him on January 5, and had 
 some discussion with them, Mr. Marpole 
 remained firm in his determination not to 
 recognize the committee as a committee of 
 the Brotherhood. Halton thereupon wired 
 to Estes : ' Will not deal with committee as 
 union, but as employees ; will try to satisfy 
 re request as such, but not as union.' To 
 this telegram Estes replied : ' Must deal 
 with union ; it is vital and only solution ; 
 will be with you at noon to-morrow.' The 
 committee then withdrew, as it felt it could 
 not accept anything less than recognition 
 without the consent of the kical division. 
 
 Threatened Strike in January. 
 
 At the meeting of the division that night 
 the committee was instructed to inform the 
 general superintendent at 10 o'clock on the 
 following day that a reply in writing would 
 be required before noon, and that if it were 
 not satisfactory the committee would have 
 power to act at its discretion and call out 
 such employees belonging to the order as it 
 saw fit. A strike committee was formed 
 and a meeting called for the following day 
 at noon to receive the report. The general 
 committee was given power to appoint 
 pickets to interview those not aware of the 
 strike who were to be called on with a view 
 of inducing them to quit work. Suspected 
 men were followed home from the meeting, 
 and a picket placed near the residence of 
 the general superintendent to see if any 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 one gave him information before the proper 
 time. In short, every preparation was made 
 for an immediate strike. Tlie freight hand- 
 lers -who were working under the schedule 
 which had been agreed to by them and the 
 company, were in some doubt as to what 
 should be done in view of this obligation. 
 It was decided, however, that the position 
 should be taken that their agreement provid- 
 ed that the company was not to discriminate 
 against any of their members, which condi- 
 tion would be broken in case Halton was 
 not reinstated, as, all being members of the 
 Brotherhood, he was now one of them. 
 
 The committee met at the time appointed 
 on the following morning, but no settlement 
 was reached. Mr. Marpole was told that 
 Estes was in town and asked if he would 
 meet him. He replied to the effect that he 
 would be glad to meet any one, but could not 
 meet Estes as representing them. He 
 would, however, meet him privately in or- 
 der to convince him that the recognition 
 of the Brotherhood was impossible. In the 
 afternoon Estes accompanied a small com- 
 mittee as their attorney, and as a result of 
 this meeting an understanding was reached 
 which was embodied in the following let- 
 ter, signed by T. G. Townley, the assistant 
 of the general superintendent, and ad- 
 dressed to Mr. Eoulds, for a committee of 
 the employees : — 
 
 Re interview between committee of employees 
 and myself this afternoon : My understanding Is 
 that Clerk Halton is to be suspended one week 
 for absenting himself without leave and de- 
 ceiving you as to the reason for his absence on 
 Wednesday last ; this decision being arrived at 
 after the explanation given by Halton and your- 
 self as to the reason of his absence, which 
 shouJd have been forthcoming before, and that 
 any similar breach of discipline will mean im- 
 mediate dismissal. As to Miss C , there 
 
 appears to be some misapprehension as to her 
 case, as she is still employed, and no intima- 
 tion was given her that her services were not 
 required. 
 
 False representations by Estes, Presi- 
 dent TJ.B.R.E. 
 
 On the evening of the same day (January 
 6) there was a mass meeting of the members 
 of the Brotherhood at Vancouver, at which 
 Estes gave an account of the proceedings 
 of the day. After reading the above letter 
 36a— 3 
 
 to the meeting Estes is reported to have 
 said : — 
 
 This is practical recognition. If we had not 
 gone to Marpole, Halton would not have got his 
 position back, and I, as attorney for this union, 
 carried out the negotiations with Mr. Marpole. 
 I told him what to say in that letter, and he 
 wrote it. I did not think of getting a state- 
 ment In writing from him that he would not 
 discriminate against members of the union, but 
 feel sure if I had asked it that he would have 
 put that down also. However, he stated in the 
 morning, before 15 witnesses, that he would 
 not do so, and that is good enough for us also ; 
 at least a dozen times he hinted to us to put in 
 our schedule. This is quite a victory for us, 
 as at the interview in the morning he had no 
 idea of reinstating Halton — he said ' it would 
 play the devil it I reinstated him.' It will play 
 the devil all right, as our organizer will take 
 this news all along the line, and If that does 
 not organize the Canadian Pacific Railway, 
 nothing would. If I were you I would rest on 
 my laurels tor a short while now, until we get 
 solid. I have set down June 30 to have the 
 Canadian Pacific Railway organized solid ; then 
 I will go to Montreal with your representatives, 
 and if we cannot get recognition then and a 
 fine schedule, I am a long way out of my reck- 
 oning. 
 
 Regarding the letter to Foulds, Mr. Mar- 
 pole's version is that the committee with- 
 drew and Townley prepared the letter. He 
 says : ' I told them I could not recognize 
 the union, having no power to do so, and 
 could only deal with them as a committee 
 of employees.' And in regard to the meet- 
 ing at which Estes was present : ' After a 
 few words Estes admitted to us that reco- 
 gnition could not be gained througt me.' 
 
 The use subsequently made by Estes of 
 this understanding and interview in con- 
 nection with the strike of the Brotherliood^ 
 commenced in February, may serve to indi- 
 cate the deliberate manner in which ])e at- 
 tempted to mislead the members of the 
 United Brotherhood in his endeavours to 
 further the strike and gain for it the finan- 
 cial and moral support of other organiza- 
 tions. In a circular letter dated March 4, 
 he says : — 
 
 This strike was brought about by the per- 
 sistent discrimination and intimidation of our 
 members, which was in deliberate violation of 
 an agreement between the U.B.R.E. and the 
 management of the C.P.R., which was signed 
 by General Superintendent Marpole early in 
 January as an outcome of the efforts of the 
 company at that time to destroy the organiza- 
 tion, but which resulted in a complete back- 
 down on its part when it saw the completeness 
 of our organization and the extent of our 
 power at Vancouver, and its utter inability to 
 defeat us. It was believed at that time the 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 management would respect this agreement, but 
 they seem to have had no regard whatever for 
 their word or the sacredness of a contract, and 
 from that time to this they have evidently been 
 making preparations for another test of 
 strength. 
 
 It is to be noted in connection witli the 
 above statements that there had never at 
 any time been an agreement between the 
 Canadian Pacific Eailway Company and 
 the United Brotherhood of Eailway Em- 
 ployees, and that the former had refused 
 absolutely to recognize the Brotherhood in 
 any way whatever, and that no wage sche- 
 dule was given to the employees collectively 
 who had concerned themselves with Hal- 
 ton's suspension. 
 
 Estes' plan for Organizing the Brother- 
 hood in Canada. 
 
 Besides the division formed at Vancouver, 
 the United Brotherhood had, as already 
 mentioned, organized divisions at Eevel- 
 stoke. Nelson and Calgary during the fall 
 of 1902. These, together with the division 
 at Winnipeg, seem to have constituted all 
 the lodges established on the Canadian Pa- 
 cific Eailway up to the end of last year. 
 But it was the purpose of the order to push 
 forward the work of organization over the 
 entire line, and for the execution of this 
 
 work one P , was appointed general 
 
 organizer for Canada. Estes' plans for 
 the order may be gathered from his several 
 
 letters to P , who subsequently sold 
 
 them for valuable consideration to the Can- 
 adian Pacific Eailway Company. 
 
 It will be well to reproduce at length 
 parts of some of these communications, as 
 they serve to illustrate the manner in which 
 Estes intended to organize and use Cana- 
 dian workmen to further ends and purposes 
 of his own. They are also important as 
 helping to explain, in part, the attitude of 
 the Canadian Pacific Railway Company 
 towards this organization in refusing to 
 grant it recognition. 
 
 Under date of December 25, Estes writes 
 
 from Seattle to P , at Winnipeg, as 
 
 follows : — 
 
 I have to-day written the Railway Employees' 
 Journal to honour your personal requests upon 
 the Journal for papers to the extent of 25 of 
 
 each issue of the Journal for organizng pur- 
 poses (No free copies of the Journal can be 
 fssued except on the president's personal 
 
 Therefore please advise the Journal from 
 time to time where you want the Journals sent 
 to giving as much advance notice as possible. 
 I have also said to the editor that I expected you 
 to contribute to the Journal weekly, giving 
 favourable information of your work In your 
 steady march across the continent, and that I 
 wanted these articles given preference (as our 
 space is always overcrowded) because I desire 
 every possible attention given to the Canadian 
 portion of the U. B. work. 
 
 I desiire you to be especially cbarged with the 
 work of getting all Canadian divisions pro- 
 perly into the Directory, and the editor in 
 chief has received instructions to the effect that 
 you will supply this information to him just 
 as rapidly as you reach each division. 
 
 As you work your way eastward please send 
 in good, vigorous articles about your reception 
 (whenever favourable) and the spirit and 
 enthusiasm of the members. Let them bo 
 signed articles, using your official title — General 
 Organizer for Canada. This title will appear 
 in the Directory of the Journal, as I have sent 
 it to San Francisco to-day. In these articles 
 have your work even showing details where 
 interesting, giving names of places and of 
 persons where sate to do so. 
 
 In all your writings carefully word your 
 articles so as to deve.lop a public sentiment 
 far the U.B.R.E. — the Industrial Union plan— 
 the A. L. U. and against the reactionary and 
 capitalistic party now temporarily in control of 
 the A. F. of L., but not against the masses of 
 members comprising the A. F. of L. Continu- 
 ally separate the administration of the A. F of 
 L. from the A. F. of L. itself, and give all 
 possible praise to the masses of the A. F. of L., 
 but without being personal or vindicative con- 
 demn the temporary capitalistic administration 
 of the A. F. of L. in the strongest terms you 
 can possibly employ. 
 
 In this way you will constantly stimulate and 
 augment a great public sentiment for the U. B. 
 R. E. — for Industrial Unions, for the A. L. U. 
 and for Socialism (but don't use the word) and 
 against capitalism and the Gompers faction 
 which is working in harmony with Marcus A. 
 Hanna and the infamous civic federation to 
 keep down the masses of the people. 
 
 Let your articles be serial or continued in 
 character, as it is my desire for our whole 
 membership, through the paper, to carefully 
 trace your movements across the continent. By 
 the time you reach the Atlantic seaboard. It 
 you handle this matter as I desire you to, you 
 will be in the minds of twenty-five thousand 
 railroad men and women of North America. 
 Not only that, but it will make you the 
 strongest man in Canada in the labour move- 
 ment provided you show yourself to be a 
 natural leader in the work you perform and the 
 reports you make of it through the Journal. 
 
 This will all have its effect in building the 
 U. B. R. E. throughout the Dominion, besides 
 that, our Canadian divisions wiill watch your 
 march across Canada with the most boundless 
 interest, provided you portray it for them pro- 
 perly m the Journal, and this will give you a 
 prestige among them which you cannot other- 
 wise acquire. This will also be the cheapest 
 
 advised nr/.'"''"^''^ ^°" "=^° ^^"^ =11 Canada 
 advised of your movements. In order to pre- 
 serve the continuity of your articles it would 
 be best not to miss a single issue of the JoumaJ. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSIOIf 
 
 ■without sjmething from you to keep up the 
 Interest^ 
 
 It would be well, as soon as you get this, to 
 send in a preliminary article to open up the 
 case, so to speak, and then follow it weekly 
 thereafter. 
 
 Massey advises me that there is a movement 
 on foot for the Bridge and Trackmen in the 
 Kootenay country to go into our division there. 
 If you can put this through do so, and I will 
 back any reasonable action you take to accom- 
 plish that end. 
 
 As before stated, I give you large authority 
 within the Dominion, and, of course, as I wrote 
 Gault, I expeict results. I wish you to send 
 your photograph (bust) to the Railway Employ- 
 ees' Journal, and when you have made some good 
 stroke at some point I will personally write an 
 article and have the picture appear in the paper. 
 
 Under date of January 28, Estea writes 
 to P , aS' follows, concerning the con- 
 clusion of the strike of the Canadian 
 Northern Railway at Winnipeg :— 
 
 It is a wonderful victory, and we can now say 
 we are an organization which has never lost 
 a strike, as we won the great strike at Houston, 
 Texas, comprising 688 men, and the brush at 
 Vancouver on January 6, and the great strike 
 on the C. N. R. which has lasted seven months. 
 
 We should now sweep Canada from Ocean to 
 Ocean, Vancouver to Halifax, and should be 
 ready to get our committees into Montreal 
 early in the coming summer. 
 
 la another letter of the same day, in re- 
 ply to a letter from P — , complaining 
 
 that he is being shadowed by a Canadian 
 Pacific Pailway detective, he, in an eiiort 
 
 to encourage P , (who had sold out 
 
 to the Canadian Pacific Railway four days 
 before the date of the letter) speaks of the 
 plan he had for the conquest of the Cana- 
 dian Pacific Railway : — 
 
 The whole division of Vancouver Is now ex- 
 erting its combined strength to build up the 
 U. B. R. E. I have requested that division to 
 open Divisions at Victoria, North Bend and 
 Kamloops, also a division of the Express 
 Auxiliary at Vancouver, which it will proceed 
 to do as rapidly as possible. I have requested 
 the division at Revelstoke to open divisions at 
 Field and Laggan. Gault, now that he has the 
 strike oS his hands, has gone solidly to work 
 building up at Winnipeg and in that vicinity. 
 Besides this, after Massey finishes organizing 
 at Tacoma, Seattle, Everett, Spokane Falls and 
 Victoria, I will send him to join you about 
 May 1, and I expect you will be about Winni- 
 peg or Port Arthur by that time, and by the 
 time the work has progressed well toward 
 Montreal, I will myself begin at Victoria and 
 traverse the whole Canadian Pacific Railway 
 into Montreal, leading the committees in their 
 last great stand at that point. 
 
 Farchasability of Leaders disclosed. 
 
 In publishing these letters as part of this 
 report, the Commissioners feel that it is 
 36a— 3J 
 
 in the interests of the workingmen, as well 
 as of the public, that there should be no 
 concealment as to the method by which 
 they came into possession of the Canadian 
 Pacific RailwaV Company. We feel that 
 they should be published, if only to show 
 that there is a possibility of labour 
 leaders being bought to serve the inter- 
 ests of a corporation in view of the power 
 or influence which they may have among 
 their fellow workmen. It has often been 
 asserted that many of the strikes of recent 
 occurrence in this province were fomented 
 by agitators who were in the pay of some 
 rival corporation in the United States. 
 When such allegations have been made 
 they have always been strongly resented by 
 workingmen everywhere. If, however, it 
 might occur, as it in fact did, that the 
 chief organizer for Canada of an inter- 
 national order such as the United Brother- 
 hood of Railway Employees, was made, for 
 a small gratuity, to reveal in their entirety 
 the secret workings and plans of an organi- 
 zation of which he was, within the Domin- 
 ion, the head and trusted representative, 
 there can be little doubt that men in a less 
 responsible position and for larger induce- 
 ments, might be found who would under- 
 take the less traitorous tasic of fomenting 
 strife among the employees of a particular 
 corporation in order to further the business 
 of a rival corporation elsewhere. 
 
 The C. P. E. Secret Service. 
 
 It appears from the correspondence that 
 with few exceptions there were present at 
 the meetings of the several lodges of the 
 United Brotherhood of Railwjiy Employees 
 in Canada, paid secret service officials of 
 the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, 
 who reported in full the proceedings of the 
 meetings to the company. As only mem- 
 bers of the BrotheAood were admitted to 
 these meetings, these men must have gained 
 admission through the order. In fact it 
 would appear from the written report of 
 one of these secret service men to the com- 
 pany that he was not only present at the 
 meetings, but that he, on occasions, rd- 
 dressed the meetings at considerable length, 
 
10 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 and at one time went so far as to initiate 
 four new members into the organization, 
 administering to them the oath by which 
 he himself was bound. The purpose to be 
 gained could make but little difference to 
 a man who would lend his services to work 
 of this kind, while the fact that such ser- 
 vices were performed successfully would 
 clearly indicate that, while zealously guard- 
 ing their own rights in the matter of their 
 relations to their employers, a body of men 
 might quite unconsciously be led to adopt 
 a course of action detrimental to them- 
 selves and their employers alike, and which 
 might only help to further the purposes of 
 some rival interest. 
 
 Canadian Organizer of 11 B. R. E. enters 
 Company's Secret Service. 
 
 P , who was selected by Estes as 
 
 liis chief representative to do the work of 
 organizing in Canada, and who was looked 
 up to as a leader by the members of the 
 Brotherhood in this country, appears to 
 have been a weak man with a doubtful re- 
 cord, and at the time of his appointment 
 to the post of organizer of the Brotherhood, 
 in financial difficulties, and apparently in 
 poor health. At Nelson he was threatened 
 with exposure by the Canadian Pacific Rail- 
 way detective, who had discovered some 
 facts regarding his career elsewhere. Un- 
 der the influence of fear^ and under the 
 stress of having to make provision for hia 
 family, he yielded to the pressure applied 
 by the detective and subsequently signed 
 the following written statement : — 
 
 I. P- 
 
 -, Organizer General of the United 
 Brotherhood of Railway Employees for Canada, 
 do hereby ofEer my service to the Sipecial service 
 department of the Canadian Pacific Railway 
 Company, and shall be pleased to accept a 
 position under them. This offer Is made of my 
 own free will and without conditions. 
 
 This proposal is dated and witnessed at 
 
 Nelson, January 24, 1903. P was 
 
 then evidently hurried on to Winnipeg, 
 where, on the 27th of the month, he gave a 
 receipt to the Chief Inspector of the com- 
 pany's special service department at Win- 
 nipeg, for 'the sum of $25 for expenses, 
 the same to be accounted for. Also trans- 
 portation, Winnipeg to Calgary and re- 
 
 turn.' In a report by the Chief Inspector 
 at Winnipeg on January 29, the following 
 statements are made : — 
 
 After discussing the matter thoroughly and 
 
 also after the proposal, P had made to 
 
 me, he having offered to work for my depart- 
 ment by continuing to organize from place to 
 place, but to confine himself to speaking on 
 Socialism and Labour Unions, and keep out 
 the U. B. R. B. from all his meetings, I 
 then went up to the hotel and made arrange- 
 ments for P to return to Calgary and to 
 
 keep me posted every day as to his progress 
 in the work, and also give me the names of all 
 the men joining the U. B. R. E. and on his 
 agreeing to those conditions, I gave him trans- 
 portation to Calgary and return to Winnipeg 
 in the shape of a first-class ticket, and also 
 gave him $25 for expenses as he would not be 
 able to collect any fees from the men joining 
 the Union. I took his receipt for this amount 
 and we left to take No. 1 at 18.05 K. 
 
 I omitted to say in the above that he had 
 given me several letters of introduction and 
 considerable correspondence between himself 
 and Estes which has been going on since the 
 18th of December last in regard to the progress 
 of organizing the U. B. R. B. 
 
 P wrote from Calgary on Febru- 
 
 ary 1 to Winnipeg, concerning his work 
 in that place, and sent in other reports, in 
 one of which he gives an estimate of the 
 relative influence of different members 
 whom he named. Later he returned to 
 Winnipeg, and a letter from him to the 
 ' Voice ' in favour of the United Brother- 
 hood of Railway Employees appeared on 
 February 13. Shortly afterwards he fell 
 sick in Winnipeg and was taken to the hos- 
 pital, where he was cared for by the 
 Brotherhood until his death, which took 
 place during the month of April. 
 
 C. P. R. takes steps to Suppress TJ. B. R. E. 
 
 During January, Mr. Marpole went east, 
 and, with the knowledge he had of the in- 
 tentions and methods of the United 
 Brotherhood, decided after, consultation 
 with other officials, on a certain course of. 
 action. It was determined that men on 
 steamships and men who already had agree- 
 ments with the company should not be al- 
 lowed to join the United Brotherhood of 
 Railway Employees. That in view of 
 Estes' evident intention to tie up the road, 
 and the certainty that upon any attempt 
 being made by the company to reorganize 
 its staff, or to discipline a member of the 
 order, there would be trouble, provision was 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 11 
 
 to be made to secure substitutes in the 
 event of a strike being declared. That the 
 general foreman of the wharfs and local 
 shed, who had practically control of all the 
 time and employment of about 95 men, in- 
 cluding their engagement and discharge, 
 should be required to retire from the order 
 in any event, as he had proved himself to 
 be an aggressive member of the order, and 
 had acted as a member of the committee 
 which had interviewed Mr. Marpole in re- 
 gard to the Halton affair. It was, more- 
 over, decided that the wages of the clerks 
 and foremen should be readjusted. 
 
 Erom this time until the strike was de- 
 clared On February 27, a kind of secret 
 warfare was kept up between the company 
 and its employees, who were members of 
 tho Brotherhood, both parties having know- 
 ledge of each other's movements through 
 spies and traitors ; the Brotherhood get- 
 ting information from, disloyal employees 
 of the company, and the company learning 
 the secrets of the organization through 
 faithless members, the latter violating their 
 oath in order to serve the corporation. 
 
 Events immediately preceding Strike. 
 
 On January 23 four men on the 'Empress 
 of Japan ' joined the Brotherhood, and on 
 February 13, fourteen men on different ves- 
 eel of the company, including the first 
 officer of the ' Empress of Japan.' On 
 January SO the allied mechanics in the 
 company's workshops at Kevelstoke, who 
 were already organized as an independent 
 lodge of the International Association of 
 Machinists, and who had an agreement 
 with the company, joined the Brotherhood. 
 On February 12 the freight handlers at 
 Vancouver handed over their funds to the 
 Brotherhood. On February 19 two train 
 baggage men, members of the Order of Rail- 
 way Trainmen, joined the Brotherhood. On 
 February 20, the Vancouver division ap- 
 pointed an emergency executive. On the 
 following days three or four of the promi- 
 nent officials of the Brotherhood were sent 
 to Montreal by the company, two at the di- 
 rect request of the accounting department 
 in Montreal, to confer in regard to the 
 
 changes in the form of accounting on di- 
 visions, and two that they might be segre- 
 gated from the influence of the United 
 Brotherhood at Vancouver. On February 
 24 a freight checker at Revelstoke, who was 
 a member of the Brotherhood, was dis- 
 charged for general inattention to duty, 
 resulting in numerous claims for missing 
 and damaged freight. On the same day an 
 employee named Forrest, of the local 
 freight staff at Vancouver, was suspended 
 pending investigation by Superintendent 
 Beasley, on the charge that he had in col- 
 lusion with another member of the United 
 Brotherhood at Winnipeg, underbilled some 
 freight for a third party from Winnipeg 
 to Vancouver. Forrest asked to be brought 
 before Mr. Marpole, the general superin- 
 tendent, who, after hearing his defence, 
 warned him that if he found that he was 
 not telling the truth, Beasley's decision 
 would be confirmed. Within an hour after- 
 wards, Mr. Marpole believed that he had 
 evidence that Forrest had not told him the 
 truth, and sent word to Beasley to continue 
 the suspension pending further investiga- 
 tion. On February 26, the general foreman 
 of the wharfs and local shed, whom the 
 company had decided should be retired 
 from the order, was offered a position as 
 assistant agent — a new office created to per- 
 mit of the agent having more time, for 
 general supervision and less for purely 
 office duties. This position was offered the 
 foreman with an increase of wages on the 
 condition that he should withdraw from the 
 order, but he declined. 
 
 Notice of Strike served by TJ. B. R. E. 
 
 At 9.30 in the morning of February 27, 
 Mr. Marpole received the following letter 
 from a committee of employees who were 
 members of the Vancouver division : — 
 Vancouver, February 26, 190S. 
 
 R. Marpole, Esq., 
 
 General SuperinteniJent, 
 Canadian Pacific Railway, 
 Vancouver. 
 Dear Sir, — We, the undersigned committee of 
 Employees, have been Instructed to write you 
 requesting the Immediate withdrawal of the 
 suspension of H. P. Forrest of the local freight 
 staff, issued subsequent to your cancellation of 
 his Buspension by Mr. Beasley. 
 
12 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSIOy 
 
 We further request a ceBsatlon of the policy 
 of Intimidation lately pursued against the em- 
 ployees of various departments by your various 
 officials because of their membership In tho 
 United Brotherhood of Railway Employees. 
 
 A satisfactory reply hereto is requested by 
 11.30 o'clock a.m. to-morrow, 27th Instant, 
 otherwise the employees represented by thii 
 committee will cease work at 12 o'clock noon. 
 
 Tours truly, 
 
 (Sgd.) ROBT. BROOKE, 
 F. J. WALKER, 
 DAVID LAVEROCK, 
 P. G. DBNISON, 
 S. GARNHAM, 
 
 Acting Agent. 
 
 Strike of Clerks, Baggagemen and others 
 at Vanconver^ February 27. 
 
 Mr. Marpole met this committee at 11 
 o'clock on the morning of the 27th, and at 
 11.40 the committee retired. In addition 
 to the suspension of Forrest mentioned iu 
 this communication, the case of the freight 
 checker at Eevelstoke, who had been dis- 
 charged on the 24th, was als'o taken up at 
 the interview. Mr. Marjiole understood 
 that the committee were to come back in 
 the aftemon, but they did not, and a strike 
 was declared at noon, twenty minutes after 
 they had left his office. Thereupon the 
 clerks, office men, station baggage men and 
 men at the stores who were members of the 
 Brotherhood at Vancouver went out. 
 
 Immediately after the strike had been 
 d-olar©d a circular letter was issued t ; other 
 unions in the city, in which an appeal was 
 made for their aid and sympathy. A direct 
 appeal was made to the city trades, such as 
 the teamsters, the building trades and the 
 iron trades, to make an effective boy- 
 cott of all materials which they might 
 be expected to handle which in any 
 way might have come over the C.P.E. Car- 
 ried out in accordance with the wishes of 
 the strikers, compliance with this request 
 on the part of those appealed to might have 
 produced a complete paralysis of industry 
 and business throughout the city. 
 
 Forrest was suspended on Tuesday, 
 February 24. The letter sent by the com- 
 mittee demanding his reinstatement was 
 dated February 26. On the 25th Estei 
 
 wired from Portland, Oregon, to Garnham, 
 
 at Vancouver : 
 
 Will arrive Vancouver ' Mainlauder ' Friday 
 morning or train Friday evening. 
 
 The Strike directed by Estes. 
 
 The strike was declared on Friday, the 
 day of Estes' arrival, and he at once took 
 supreme command of the striking forces. 
 The correspondence indicates that no im- 
 portant step was taken without his initia- 
 tive or authority. In fact, both letters and 
 telegrams reveal very clearly that the order 
 is governed by an autocracy, and that ex- 
 ecutive officers, not only in Winnipeg, but 
 at different places along the line where the 
 Brotherhood has established divisions, were 
 in many cases not so much as consulted as 
 to what course it would be advisable to pur- 
 sue, but were entirely subject to the dictates 
 and directions of the president of the order. 
 
 As examples of the manner in which 
 Estes exercised his authority, and as il- 
 lustrating the means taken to extend the 
 strike over different parts of the company's 
 system, the following may be quoted from 
 the originals of telegrams produced. The 
 telegi-ams here quoted are such only as were 
 sent to executive officers of the Brotherhood 
 at different points. 
 
 On the day on which the strike was de- 
 clared, Garnham, of the strikers' executive, 
 at Vancouver, had wired to Gault, of the 
 local executive at Winnipeg : 
 
 We quit work noon ; wire Calgary immedi- 
 ately. 
 
 Gault was acting at this time as organ- 
 izer for the Brotherhood, P bein"- in 
 
 the hospital, and he evidently communicat- 
 ed at once to the headquarters of the 
 Brotherhood, at San Francisco, as on the 
 day following a wire was received by Estes 
 at Vancouver from C. M. Hurlburt, one of 
 the executive at San Francisco, stating : 
 
 Gault says Vancouver wires quit work ; wants 
 him call out Calgary ; keep us posted. 
 
 On receipt of this telegram from Hurl- 
 burt, Estes wired to Gault at Winnipeg : 
 
 Trouble confined to Pacific division only ■ 
 Revelstoke goes out next. ' 
 
BRITISB COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 13 
 
 On March 2, Estes wired Gault that fif- 
 teen clerls left Montreal Saturday for Van- 
 couver, and instructed him to watch west- 
 bound trains. The next day he advised 
 Gault by wire as follows : — 
 
 Publish In ■ Voice ' (a Winnipeg labour paper) 
 and other papers for all men keep away from 
 British Columbia ; 100 machinists, clerks, 
 freight handlers struck (at) Revelstoke to-day.. 
 
 On March 4, Estes wired Clarence Smith, 
 
 secretary of the American Labour Union, 
 
 Butte, Montana, as follows : — 
 
 Strike spreading ; Revelstoke out ; longshore- 
 men struck here to-day. Please have Western 
 Federation Miners refuse to allow coal loaded 
 on cars, steamboats, ships or hulks at Lady- 
 smith, Union or other points on Vancouver 
 Island for Vancouver. This to prevent Can- 
 adian Pacific getting coal. Rush orders by 
 wire — Don't fail — Fight for lite — Answer. 
 
 On March 5, Estes wired Gault at Win- 
 nipeg, addressing the latter by his official 
 title of vice-president, and subscribing his 
 title as president to his own signature : 
 
 Call out all Canadian Pacific Railway mem- 
 bers at Winnipeg and Calgary on strike to-day. 
 File written statement with superintendent that 
 men will return to work when settlement made 
 here, and advise when out. 
 
 Later in the day he wired Gault, tempo- 
 rarily rescinding this order, as follows : — • 
 
 Negotiations for settlement opened ; call 
 strike off Winnipeg and Calgary until further 
 advised. 
 
 The same day he wired to George Hor- 
 sted at Nelson, B.C., at 11.22 in the fore- 
 noon : 
 
 Call out all members of 92 on strike to-day. 
 File written statement with superintendent 
 that men will return to work when settle- 
 ment made here. Advise number out. 
 
 At 1.10 p.m. Horsted, having received 
 Estes' message, wires in reply : 
 
 Please say quick if any objection to members 
 carrying on work for Great Northern ; this Is 
 a union depot. 
 
 Estes answered this telegram at 7.55 p.m. 
 
 as follows : — 
 
 Yes, go ahead and carry on Great Northern 
 work. 
 
 In the meantime, however, other tele- 
 grams passed between Estes and Horsted, 
 in regard to the men working for the C.P.E. 
 At 2.55 Horsted informed Estes that 26 
 members at Nelson, 3 at Ross^.and and 3 
 
 at Eholt, had quit work at 1 p.m. At 5.30 
 Horsted wired Estes as follows : — 
 
 Superintendent Downie requests Division 
 ninety-eight to resume work until he com- 
 municates with his superiors at Vancouver. 
 Wire instructions quick. 
 
 At six o'clock Estes replied to this tele- 
 gram : 
 
 Hold all members out until strike settled. 
 Negotiations now progressing. 
 
 The negotiations hero referred to, and 
 
 which were the occasion for the holding 
 
 off of the strike at Winnipeg and Calgary 
 
 were those carried on by the Vancouver 
 
 Board of Trade, and other parties, to bring 
 
 dbout a settlement of the dispute. These 
 
 efforts not having been sitccessful, Estes 
 
 commenced to re-extend the strike. On 
 
 March 9, he wired to Gault at Winnipeg, 
 
 as follows': — 
 
 Board of Trade endorsed proposed Canadian 
 Pacific Railway agreement ; Montreal declined 
 it this morning. Call out all Canadian Pacific 
 Railway members Winnipeg and Calgary im- 
 mediately. Notify Leonard in writing strike 
 on this division is for recognition (at) Montreal. 
 Get endorsement Labour Council. Labour 
 Council here has endorsed ; fight to finish. 
 
 This telegram was sent from Vancouver 
 at noon. At 3.20 p.m. (Vancouver time) 
 Estes received from E. B. Smith, Winni- 
 peg, executive officer, the following wire : 
 
 All out four o'clock ; Calgary called on ; vflll 
 stand to finish. 
 
 At 1.30 p.m. Estates wired to Hal ton, 
 
 who at this time was in Montreal : 
 
 Yourself, Foulds, Dick, Wilson, prepare, sign 
 as committee and deliver letter to-day to Mc- 
 Nicholl, requesting recognition of U. B. R. S., 
 stating s'trike will be settled when recognition 
 granted. Calgary now out. 
 
 To this telegram Estes received the fol- 
 lowing reply the next day (March 10) : 
 
 Letter delivered ; refuse to treat except 
 through departmental head ; claims customary 
 procedure. 
 
 On the same day Estes wired from Van- 
 couver to Halton again at Montreal : 
 
 Press reports say four hundred clerks Mont- 
 real striking. Organize them on any terms. 
 
 J. W. Stanley, at Calgary, wired Estes 
 
 on the same day : 
 
 Teamsters in sympathy ; won't haul baggage ; 
 is this right ? Answer 
 
14 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 To which Estes replied 
 
 That is right ; no freight or baggage handled 
 by teamsters here. 
 
 He also wired Stanley : 
 Will go to Calgary personally soon. Stand 
 firm ; will report daily. 
 
 Horsted at Nelson wired Estes to know 
 if any arrangement had been made towards 
 immediate settlement ; also as to whether 
 there was any possibility of him or other 
 speakers being there shortly in order to 
 hold a mass meeting. Estes replied on the 
 10th of March, that no immediate settle- 
 ment was in sight, but that the provincial 
 government had proposed arbitration, and 
 that the Premier was coming on Friday, 
 and on March 11 that he himseK would 
 visit Nelson or send some one shortly, that 
 the teamsters at Calgary were with them, 
 and to stand firm. On the 12th of March 
 he wired Horsted at Nelson : 
 
 Have instructed Forrest, now (at) Revel- 
 stoke ; to go (to) Nelson immediately to assist 
 you. 
 
 and sent the following wire to H. P. Ecr- 
 
 rest at Revelstoke : 
 
 Please go (to) Nelson and assist there ; 
 Greenwood Smelter Junction have struck. 
 
 He wired Gault at Winnipeg : 
 
 All teamsters, 200 struck here to-day ; refuse 
 haul scab freight. Premier Prior arrives here 
 to-morrow. 
 
 The same telegram was sent to Horsted 
 at Nelson. On the 13th Estes wired Hor- 
 sted at Nelson : 
 
 Mass meeting, 1,000 men here last night. 
 Steamship men say will tie up all vessels to- 
 morrow ; Premier not yet arrived ; 150 out 
 Winnipeg. 
 
 To Gault at Winnipeg he wired : 
 
 Employ counsel protect your men ; Premier 
 not arrived yet ; mass meeting 1,000 men last 
 night : steamshipmen say will tie up all vessels 
 to-morrow. 
 
 The reference to employing counsel in 
 this telegram is to a telegram received 
 from Smith, at Winnipeg, on the morning 
 of the same day, informing Estes that four 
 office clerks had been summoned for break- 
 ing contracts and deserting employment, 
 but that all was well. 
 
 On the 15th of March, Estes wired Gault 
 
 at Winnipeg : 
 
 Railroad men, longshoremen, steamshipmen, 
 teamsters, formed immense mass meeting last 
 night. Waterfront tied up ; Skagway boat left 
 without cargo. ' Empress ' crew struck. Cal- 
 gary, Revelstoke, Nelson still out and increas- 
 ing membership. 
 
 To A. J. Jamieson, 260J Eourteenth 
 Street, Portland, Oregon, he sent the fol- 
 lowing : — 
 
 Railroad men, longshoremen, steamshipmen, 
 teamsters, formed immense mass meeting las* 
 night ; waterfront tied up. Skagway boat left 
 without cargo last night. Help us financially ^' 
 all possible. k' 
 
 *'- 
 On March 16, he wired J. E. Massey, 
 
 Seattle : 
 
 Situation better to-day than heretofore ; men 
 standing firm ; waterfront completely tied up ; 
 I go Victoria to-night. 
 
 To Horsted, at Nelson, he wired : 
 
 Advise all members stand absolutely firm, no 
 matter if all places are filled ; will win just 
 same. Everything tied up here ; all men stand- 
 ing firm ; steamshipmen come out to-morrow. 
 
 To E. B. Smith at Winnipeg, Thornton 
 
 at Eevelstoke and Cardell at Calgary, he 
 
 wired : 
 
 Montreal ' Star ' publishes report that men 
 back to work ; deny it ; we are all firm ; 
 steamshipmen come out to-morrow. 
 
 As mentioned in his' telegram to Massey 
 at Seattle, Estes arrived at Victoria on the 
 evening of March 16. On the following 
 morning he wired to Garnham at Vancou- 
 ver : 
 
 All steamshipmen struck here last night. 
 Engineers and officers of other boats scabbing 
 as firemen and deckhands on ' Charmer ' to-day. 
 
 On the 19th he wired from Victoria to 
 Garnham : 
 
 Strike getting stronger here ; have requested 
 Massey come Vancouver. 
 
 Other Leaders brought in from United 
 States. 
 
 About this time Estes was arrested in 
 Victoria on the charge of conspiracy in 
 attempting to stop the government mail on 
 the steamboats. His trial occupied some 
 days, during which time he arranged to 
 have several members of the executive 
 board in the United States come to Canada 
 to direct the movement of the strikers at 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 15 
 
 different points. Among these were J. T. 
 Massey, referred to in Estes' telegram to 
 Garnham on tte lOtli. Massey having ar- 
 rived, and taking command, wired on 
 March 24th to 0. M. Hurlburt at San Fran- 
 cisco : 
 
 Have French come here ; Canadian Paclflo 
 Railway summoning all our prominent members 
 to Victoria. Want assistance to prevent dis- 
 organizing our forces. All firm. Can win with 
 some ona to assist. 
 
 On the 9th of April another executive 
 officer from the United States was brought 
 in to direct the forces of the strikers, as is 
 shown by the following telegram sent by 
 Estes to W. J. Bradley, St. Paul, Minn.: 
 
 Please go Winnipeg soon as possible. Assist 
 Gault with work. 
 
 Estes having been discharged on the 
 charges preferred against him at Victoria, 
 proceeded to tour over the line of the Cana- 
 dian Pacific Railway, personally visiting 
 committees and addressing mass meetings 
 of the strikers and others at Nelson, Ee- 
 velstoke, Calgary and Winnipeg. It was 
 the latter part of April when he arrived in 
 Winnipeg, and he remained in Canada un- 
 til some time in May, when he left to at- 
 tend the annual convention of the Ameri- 
 can Labour Union at Denver, and has not 
 since returned. During the entire time of 
 his stay in this country he continued to 
 exercise the same absolute control, even in 
 regard to matters of detail, as the telegrams 
 here quoted disclose. As free a use of the 
 wires appears to have been made by him, 
 during the months of April and May, as 
 was made during March. The telegrams 
 sent during April and May, however, are 
 for the most part in cipher, and the Com- 
 mission, owing to his absence from the 
 country at the time of its sittings in Van- 
 couver, and also to the limited time at its 
 disposal there, were unable to obtain their 
 translation. Other telegrams appear to 
 have passed in cipher from the commence- 
 ment of the strike, between Estes and offi- 
 cers in the United States. We have reason 
 to think from the reference made to these 
 telegrams in the correspondence before us 
 that, were their contents disclosed, the part 
 36a— 4 
 
 played by Estes in the direction and mani- 
 pulation of matters pertaining to the strike, 
 and of movements auxiliary thereto, would 
 be shown to have been much more extensive 
 and daring than even the messages already 
 quoted might suggest. 
 
 Strike in Violation of Constitution of 
 U. B. E. E. 
 
 The strike of the Vancouver clerks and 
 office men having been declared practically 
 without notice to the company or other 
 members of the Brotherhood, and in viola- 
 tion of the constitution, which provides 
 that no strike is to be declared till the mem- 
 bership of the order reaches 100,000, the 
 strikers found themselves in an isolated 
 position. They had been preparing for a 
 struggle, but the strike came when it did, 
 only because local members felt that to al- 
 low the company additional time might 
 have meant a disruption of the order. The 
 constitution of the Brotherhood, however, 
 is framed with a view to provide for emer- 
 gencies of this kind. Unlike the loca's of 
 regular unions, lodges of the Brotherhood 
 are not left to determine for themselves 
 whether or not sympathetic support is to be 
 given to branches of the order elsewhere, or 
 to employees who follow a different calling. 
 The plan is to bring all classes of em- 
 ployees connected in any way with railways 
 into one organization, and to subject all 
 lodges, wherever situate, to the order and 
 direction of the executive head. While, 
 therefore, the strike was prematurely 
 forced, once it had taken place, full rein 
 was given by Estes to the powers conferred 
 upon him by the constitution ; and methods 
 which it was evidently intended were not 
 to be adopted until a more perfect organiza- 
 tion had been effected, were utilized on 
 every side to gain a victory at any cost. A 
 brief review of these methods and of their 
 results will serve to bring out the more 
 important developments of the strike, 
 while at the same time they disclose the 
 latent possibilities of evil to be found in 
 this organization. 
 
16 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 Methods adopted to force Recognition. 
 
 The methods adopted by Estes and local 
 strikers at Vancouver to force the Canadian 
 Pacific Eailway Company into a recogni- 
 tion of the United Brotherhood may be 
 briefly classified as follows : — 
 
 (1). The extension of the strike at Van- 
 , couver so as to embrace other classes of 
 employees who were members of the 
 Brotherhood, and the initiation of strikes 
 at other places on the company's system 
 among members of the Brotherhood in its 
 divisions at those points, notwithstanding 
 the fact that members thus called upon had 
 no immediate grievance against the com- 
 pany. 
 
 (2). The bringing about of sympathetic 
 strikes wherever possible among members 
 of organizations engaged in such callings as 
 might lead to an embarrassment of the rail- 
 way, and the attempted formation of new 
 organizations among employees of the com- 
 pany and others at different points, with a 
 view to bringing them out on strilce. 
 
 (3). Attempts to tie up the steamships 
 belonging to the Canadian Pacific Naviga- 
 tion Company and other companies. 
 
 (4). Efforts to bring about a stoppage 
 of the supply of coal, thereby making it 
 impossible for the company to carry on its 
 transportation business either by land or 
 sea. 1 
 
 (5). The creation of a gigantic boycott 
 to immediately injure the company's busi- 
 ness, and the business of any concern that 
 might happen to have any dealings with it. 
 
 (G). The prevention of persons from 
 taking the places of strikers, or those who 
 
 I. — Extension of Original Strike. 
 
 The Extension of the strike among mem- 
 hers of the Brotherhood, in other callings 
 and at different points. 
 
 The members of the Brotherhood who 
 originally went out on the 27th of Febru- 
 ary, included only such as were employed 
 as clerks, office men, station baggagemen, 
 or men at the stores. The Vancouver 
 division, however, embraced also men em- 
 ployed in the freight sheds, known as 
 freight handlers and checkers, who had be- 
 come members of the order at the time of 
 Estes' visit to Vancouver in November. 
 Previous to that time the freight hand- 
 lers had had an organization of their own, 
 and as members of such had an agreement 
 with the company, which was to be in force 
 until June 21. This agreement contained 
 certain concessions to the freight hand- 
 lers' union, and increased rates of pay 
 over what they had been previously receiv- 
 ing. The question, therefore, which pre- 
 sented itself to the freight handlers, after 
 the office men and clerks had gone out, was 
 how they could at once remain loyal to their 
 agreement and to the obligation which they 
 were under to their fellow members of the 
 Brotherhood who were on strike. 
 
 On the 1st of March, Superintendent 
 Beasley, fearing that the strike of clerks 
 and office men might, because of their con- 
 nection with the Brotherhood, be followed 
 by a similar course of action on the part 
 of the freight handlers, interviewed John- 
 stone, who was a prominent member of the 
 latter. Beasley assured Johnstone in this 
 interview that he did not want to have any 
 trouble with the freight handlers. He 
 
 the time, but stated that the company was 
 entirely opposed to the United Brother- 
 hood, and would not have a man like Estes 
 interfering with its business. 
 
 might have gone out in sympathy, making ^^^ted them to continue as they were at 
 use m inis connection of the practices of 
 picketing, black-listing, molesting and in- 
 timidating innocent parties. 
 
 (7). The dissemination, through the 
 press and other sources, of literature in- 
 tenJed to create antagonism to the railway 
 in the minds of worklngmcn in particular, 
 and on the part of the general public, and 
 to arouse in the strikers and their sympa- 
 thizers undue expectations of success. 
 
 Strike of Freight Handlers at Vancouver 
 on March 2. 
 
 On March 2, Beasley sent for a com- 
 mittee of the freight handlers. At this 
 meeting, according to the evidence of John- 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 17 
 
 stone, given before the Commission, Beas- 
 ley wished to draw up a new agreement 
 with them, and also intimated that any re- 
 newal of the agreement could only be had 
 upon the understanding that they would 
 withdraw from ' the Brotherhood. One of 
 the freight handlers named Fowler had re- 
 fused, after the clerks had gone on strike, 
 to handle a bill made out by a person who 
 was filling the position of one of the 
 strikers, as he looked upon him in the light 
 of a scab. For this refusal Fowler was dis- 
 charged. Between 20 and 25 men had been 
 brought by the company to Vancouver to 
 take the places of men who might happen 
 to go out on strike. These circumstances, 
 jointly considered, were alleged by the 
 freight handlers as suiEcient reasons to 
 justify the breaking of their agreement 
 with the company, or, as they termed it, 
 constituted a violation of the agreement 
 by the company itself. There was the ad- 
 ditional circumstance that the foreman of 
 the local freight sheds had gone out on 
 strike with the clerks, and the freight hand- 
 lers maintained that they could not permit 
 one of their own members to accept promo- 
 tion to the position, or work with any other 
 man w'ho might take it, on the ground that 
 he would be a scab. , 
 
 The telegrams already quoted as having 
 passed between Estes and executive officers 
 of the Brotherhood at Nelson, Eevelstoke, 
 Winnipeg and Calgary are of themselves 
 sufficient to indicate the manner in which 
 the strikes among members of the Brother- 
 hood at these several points were procured. 
 Additional light, however, is to be had from 
 the correspondence which passed by letter 
 between Estes and officers of the local exe- 
 cutive at Vancouver and local executive 
 officers at other points. 
 
 Strike at KeTelstoke on March 3. 
 The following appears as part of a com- 
 munication sent by Forest at Eevelstoke on 
 the 2nd of March to the Vancouver execu- 
 tive, Forrest having been sent to Eevelstoke 
 on the day previous under orders from 
 Estes. 
 
 I founa that a meeting ot the- division had 
 already been held at which it had been decided 
 
 36a-4i 
 
 to cease work as soon as they were In posses- 
 sion of authoritative re3»Mns fo.r the necessity of 
 doing so. This they felt they had not r<;elved, 
 although they had been Informed by Brother 
 M. — ■■ — :- that the men at Vancouver had quit 
 work, and the causes which led up to their 
 action, and so they were Very glad to see me. 
 I was received in open arms by the executive 
 committee, and that body Immediately pro- 
 ceeded to draft a communication to Superin- 
 tendent Kilpatriek on the lines suggested by 
 Brother Estes. 
 
 The following is a copy of the ultimatum 
 addressed to Superintendent Kilpatriek, at 
 Eevelstoke, and it is the one referred to in 
 this letter of Forrest : 
 
 Revelstoke, B.C., March 2, 1903. 
 I. Kilpatriek, Esq., 
 Supt., Revelstoke, 
 Dear Sir, — As you are aware, D. Inches, em- 
 ployed in the freight department at this station, 
 was discharged as we believe, because he was 
 a member of the U. B. of R. E. It has also 
 come to our knowledge that H. P. Forrest, of 
 the local freight office at Vancouver, was dis- 
 charged for the same cause, and that intimi- 
 dation and discrimination against members of 
 the union is being extensively practiced by 
 officials of the Canadian Paciflo Railway. We 
 therefore hereby demand that the above 
 mentiou'ed e-mployiee'S be Im.me'diately re-inist- 
 atexl, and tha-t all discrimination and intimida- 
 tion against our meimbers cease. Unlesg wo 
 reo&ive a favourable answer to this communica- 
 tion In twenty-lour- hours, we beg to aotlfy 
 you that all members of the U. B. of R. E. at 
 this station and under our jurisdiction will cease 
 work at 8 a.m, March 3, 1903. 
 
 (Sgd) W. A. CHAMBERS, 
 HUGH A. BOYD, 
 T. H. DUNNE, 
 CHAS. CLARKE, 
 C. A. HART, 
 
 Executive Committee. 
 DAVID INCHES, Jr., 
 ' Agent. 
 
 As threatened in this ultimatum, at 8 
 o'clock on the following morning the mem- 
 bers of the TJ.B.E.E. in the shops of the 
 company at Eevelstoke, to the number of 
 fifty-two, dropped their work and walked 
 out without saying a word to the foreman 
 or the acting master mechanics as' to their 
 reason for going out. Two charge men 
 and six fitters who had not joined the 
 United Brotherhood of Eailway Emplryces 
 refused to go out and remained at their 
 work. This was on March 3. 
 
 Strike at Nelson and other points, 
 March 4. 
 
 On March 4, Forrest, at Eevelstoke, in a 
 letter to Garnham at Vancouver says 
 among other things : 
 
18 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSIOlff 
 
 The boys are hanging together splendidly, and 
 we are gaining accessions to our ranks every 
 day, but there is a feeling that it would strength- 
 en our cause if Nelson and Calgary were to 
 come out. There seems to be a little suspicion 
 that they possibly are not called out because 
 they are not entirely wUHng to come out. Men- 
 tion this to President Estes so that he may de- 
 cide as to whether, under these circumstanices, 
 it would be better to call them out. 
 
 In a reply to tliis communication sent by 
 
 Garnham to Forrest on the 6tli of March, 
 
 the former says : 
 
 You say that it would strengthen the cause at 
 Revelstoke were Nelson to be called out. This 
 has been done, as you have learned since writ- 
 ing. Three are out at Rosslaud, three at Eholt 
 as well as the Nelson boys. 
 
 As already quoted, Estes had wired to 
 
 Ilorsted at Nelson at 11.22 a.m. on March 
 
 5 : 
 
 Call out all members of 92 on strike to-day. 
 File written statement with the superintendent 
 that men will return to work when settlement 
 made here. Advise number out. 
 
 On the same day Horsted had replied to 
 
 Estes : 
 
 Twenty-six members Nelson, three Rossland, 
 three Bholt, quit work at 1 p.m. 
 
 In this connection, too, it may also be 
 recalled that before the men at Nelson felt 
 at liberty to do any work for the Great 
 Northern Eailway, which, so far as they 
 were* concerned, they had no grievance 
 against, they felt it necessary to wire in the 
 first instance to Estes to know if the m.em- 
 bers might carry on work for the Great 
 Northern Eailway, informing him that it 
 was a union depot, and received hie permis- 
 sion to work. 
 
 It appears from the correspondence that 
 from the commencement of the strike Ee- 
 velstoke was anxious to have the support of 
 Nelson. As soon as Inches was discharged 
 he wrote to Nelson asking if the division 
 there w®uld support Eevelstoke if they took 
 up his case. Nelson replied on March 1 
 that they would. On the 2nd of March, 
 Eevelstoke wired Nelson that the Eevel- 
 stoke division was out, and on March 4 
 wired again to know what action had been 
 taken by Nelson in the matter, saying in 
 the inquiry : ' Please say quickly what 
 action taken.' This message being received 
 by Horsted at Nelson, and the latter having 
 
 in mind the reply sent by him to Inches on 
 
 March 1, suspected that the telegram — 
 
 * Please say quickly what action taken ' — 
 
 might be a decoy sent out by the company 
 
 to get information of the Nelson division, 
 
 and wrote to Estes on the matter. In this 
 
 letter, speaking of Eevelstoke, Horited 
 
 says : 
 
 Since the striko has started in Vancouver they 
 would also be aware that Nelson would not act 
 on its own account or on word from Revelstoke, 
 but only on authority from yourself (Estes), be- 
 ing on the ground and having the strike in 
 charge. 
 
 This view of Estes' authority in direct- 
 ing the strike is further supported by the 
 reply sent by the chief executive officer of 
 the local division at Vancouver to Horsted 
 at Nelson, which was written on behalf of 
 Estes, who was busy with other matters at 
 the time. In this letter the Vancouver 
 agent says : 
 
 Of course, when the Vancouver division de- 
 clared a strike and the president was here in 
 person to conduct affairs, it could hardly be ex- 
 pected that any outside divisions would take 
 instructions from any other source than the pre- 
 sident. 
 
 The letter goes on to say, referring to the 
 statement in a communication from Hor- 
 sted to Estes, that the men were not very 
 well organized at Nelson, and could em- 
 barrass the company very little there: 
 
 You must continue to do the best you can to 
 prevent men working in the freight sheds and 
 office. They are the main points, and should 
 be carefully guarded. When Brother Inches at 
 Revelstoke wrote you advising you that he had 
 been discharged and asking your support, there 
 was no idea that we at Vancouver were so close 
 to trouble. 
 
 Elsewhere in the letter, the same writer 
 
 Had the company not 'endeavoured to extin- 
 guish us here when they did, we would have 
 come to the support of Revelstoke if required. 
 
 Eight to call off Strike Refused. 
 
 As noted above, the men at Nelson quit 
 on March 4, in pursuance of Estes' com- 
 mand to Horsted to call out all members 
 of 92 on strike. On March 13, a committee 
 of three of the employees on strike at 
 Nelson wrote a personal letter to Estes, 
 which indicates clearly the desire of the 
 men at that point to return to work, but 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 19 
 
 also their complete submission to Estes, 
 whom probably they had never seen : 
 
 The majority of the members of this division 
 are under the impression that you are not thor- 
 oughly conversant with the position Nelson oc- 
 cupies with regard to the main line. The bulk 
 of freight .arriving here comes either from Van- 
 couver or through Winnipeg, and on account of 
 the strike being now on at these points, prac- 
 tically no freight is arriving here, and the little 
 that is arriving is being handled by our local 
 officials here without inconvenience to the com- 
 pany. This practically nullifies our position here 
 eitlier one way or the other, anid in consequence 
 a number of our members are of the opinion 
 that more practical assistance could be rendered 
 by our members by returning to work and as- 
 sisting financially towards maintaining the 
 strike on the main line. In the meantime our 
 positions here are being gradually filled, and 
 the work is going on as heretofore, without any 
 very great inconvenience to the company. This 
 letter is written on the presumption that you 
 are not, as previously mentioned, acquainted 
 with the situation of affairs in the Kootenay 
 country. We would, therefore, be pleased If 
 you would reply by wire immediately on receipt 
 of this, as we have been informed by the com- 
 pany that all positions will be filled by Monday 
 morning. 
 
 This letter was received at Vancouver on 
 
 the 16th, and waa replied to by Estes in a 
 
 telegram already quoted and which was as 
 
 follows : — 
 
 Advise all members stand absolutely firm, no 
 matter If all positions are filled. Will win Just 
 same. Everything tied up here, all men stand- 
 ing firm; steamshipmen come out to-morrow. 
 
 The acting agent of the local division at 
 
 Vancouver wrote the same day to Horsted 
 
 at Nelson the following letter : 
 
 Your personal letter March 13th to Brother 
 Estes was very discouraging to our executive. 
 I am Informed that a message has been sent 
 to you to-day in connection with your standing 
 firm in the Kootenays. I have to advise you of 
 the fact that President Estes should arrive in 
 Nelson towards the latter end of this week. He 
 will be in Revelstoke on Thursday, where you 
 can address him care of Brother Inches. In the 
 meantime, do not, under any circumstances, per- 
 mit a member to return to work, as it would 
 prejudice our stand with the public. When one 
 man goes back it Is reported that half a dozen 
 have done so, and if three or four go back 
 thirty or forty, and members of other points 
 become discouraged and disheartened. Would 
 It not be a terrible thing were this strike to be 
 lost through the action on the part cf the Koot- 
 enay boys, such as your letter states to be their 
 wishes. It is absolutely necessary to stand firm 
 until we win. 
 
 Strikes at Winnipeg' and Calgary, 
 March 9. 
 
 Winnipeg and Calgary were the next di- 
 visions to be ordered out. On March 5, 
 Estes had wired Gault at Winnipeg : 
 
 Call out all C.P.R. members at Winnipag and 
 Oalgajy on strike to-day— ■ 
 
 but later rescinded this order in the telo- 
 
 gram : 
 
 Negotiations for settlement opened ; call 
 strike oft Winnipeg and Calgary until further 
 advised. 
 
 In a letter written the same day, copies 
 of which were sent to all Canadian divi- 
 sions, Estes says : 
 
 We will call out Calgary and Winnipeg next 
 If we find It necessary to do so. 
 
 In a letter written on March 7, to a gen- 
 tleman who was endeavouring to effect a 
 settlement of the strike, Estes says, 
 amongst other things : 
 
 It Is proper that we should advise you of a 
 decision just arrived at by the Joint executive 
 committee of all the strikers in this city, which 
 is to the effect that there is no apparent desire 
 on the part of the C.P.R. to come to a settlement 
 of the trouble, but on the other hand, merely 
 attempt to delay proceedings in the hopes of Im- 
 porting men and delaying the strike. The joint 
 executive have decided to extend the strike still 
 further, involving several unions in the move- 
 ment. The order for the extension of the strike 
 will be held until 2 p.m. Cor the purpose of as- 
 certaining if there is any possible hope of fair 
 treatment to» the strikers, and it nothing definite 
 is received from the C.P.R., direct, or through 
 yourself by that hour, the order as decided upon 
 will be issued. 
 
 The settlement not having been arrived 
 at through the intervention of the Board 
 of Trades, Estes immediately proceeded to 
 extend the scope of the strike. Gault, at 
 Winnipeg, was commanded to call out all 
 C.P.K. members at Winnipeg and Calgary 
 immediately, and to notify Leonard (Su- 
 perintendent C.P.E. at Winnipeg), in 
 writing that the strike was for recognition. 
 Officers of the Vancouver division who wei e 
 at Montreal were instructed to form a com- 
 mittee to prepare and deliver to ihe gen- 
 eral manager there a request demanding 
 recognition of the U.B.E.E., and stating 
 that the strike would be settled wh?n the 
 recognition was granted. 
 
 Ultimatum presented at Montreal. 
 
 The ultimatum presented to Ihe general 
 
 manager of the C.P.E. in furtherance of 
 
 this order was as follows : 
 
 We, a committee of the U.B.R.E., are re- 
 quested by Mr. George Estes, president, to wait 
 on you and request recognition of the U.B.R.E., 
 whose members are now on strike at Vancouver, 
 Revelstoke, Calgary and Winnipeg. On your 
 advising us in writing that this will be done. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 our members -will return to work Immeaiately 
 and endeavour in the future to serve the com- 
 pany's interests as faithfully as In the past. 
 
 With the divisions of the Brotherhood 
 at Vancouver, Eevelstoke, Calgary and 
 Winnipeg on strike, and the demand for 
 recognition of the entire order from the 
 head office of the Canadian Pacific Eai'/way 
 at ifontreal, the United Brotherhood of 
 Kailway Employees had gone as far in its 
 direction of all its members in Canada as 
 it was possible, owing to their limited 
 numbers, for it to do. 
 
 II. — Creation of Sympathetic Strikes. 
 
 iS ympaihetic strilies. — While the strike of 
 the freight handlers at Vancouver on the 
 2nd of March, and the strikes of the local 
 divisions of the Brotherhood at Eevelstoke, 
 Nelson, Calgary and Winnipeg should 
 really be regarded in the nature of sym- 
 pathetic strikes, yet they were strikes by 
 different bodies of men belonging to the 
 same organization. There were also strikes 
 by members of other organizations, not 
 members of the United Brotherhood, but 
 who came out in consequence of conditions 
 created by the brotherhood strike, and in 
 order to strengthen the hands of the mem- 
 bers of the U. B. E. E. in. their conflict 
 with the company. 
 
 Longshoremen, Steamshipmen, Teamsters 
 and Messenger Boys Strike. 
 
 On ilarch 4, between 150 and 200 long- 
 shoremen, members of the Longshoremen's 
 Union at Vancouver, quit work. 
 
 On the same day the members of the Brit- 
 ish Columbia Steamshipmen's Society at 
 Vancouver and telegraph messenger boys 
 also quit. 
 
 The Teamsters' Union decided not to haul 
 freight or baggage to or from the Canadian 
 Pacific Eailway wharf and shed, or in 
 places where it was likely to be handled by 
 ' scabs.' It being absolutely essential, in 
 order to prevent a general dislocation of 
 business, that much of this freight , should 
 be hauled, the master teamsters undertook 
 the work of hauling the freight themselves 
 
 where their employees objected. This ac- 
 tion on their part lead to the Teamsters' 
 Union to the number of 200, declaring a 
 general strike on March 12. 
 
 About the same time the teamsters at 
 Calgary refused also to haul any baggage 
 from the Canadian Pacific Eailway. 
 
 In all these cases it was the refusal to 
 have anything to do with ' scab ' freight 
 which led to the strikes being declared, and 
 in all it would appear that no regard had 
 been paid by the unions involved to the 
 clauses in their constitutions regarding the 
 declaration of strikes ; and the evidence ob- 
 tained by the commission and parts of the 
 correspondence leave no room for doubt that 
 Estes and other officers of the brotherhood 
 were primarily responsible for bringing 
 about these several sympathetic strikes. 
 
 in. — Efforts to tie up Shipping and 
 Transportation by Water. 
 
 Efforts to tie up 0. P. N. Oo.'s and other 
 sMps.~On March 13 Estes wired to several 
 divisions : 
 
 Steamship men say will tie up all vessels to- 
 morrow. 
 
 On the same day, A. B. Bulley, chairman 
 of the Victoria Branqh of the British Col- 
 umbia Steamshipmen's Society, wired from 
 Vancouver to the secretary in Victoria : 
 
 Call special to-night ; " Charmer " (Canadian 
 Pacmc mail steamer between Vancouver an" 
 Iuf?oinight '^ ^""^ '"''' '^^'^"■- -"coming 
 
 Bulley went to Victoria that night, evi- 
 dently with the purpose of carrying out the 
 plan stated in his telegram. 
 
 On the same day at Victoria, the Cana- 
 dian Pacific Navigation Company, however, 
 entered into an agreement with the Steam- 
 shipmen's Society that the company would 
 not take any ' scab ' freight or baggage on 
 any boats in the fleet, or carry coal for use 
 on the Empress line of .steamers, known as 
 the Canadian Pacific Railway's Royal Mail 
 Steamsmps, at Vancouver, without givin- 
 twelve hours notice, during which time no 
 scab freight or baggage would be handled 
 ihis agreement deprived the SteamcJup So- 
 
BRITISS COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSIOTfT 
 
 21 
 
 ciety of any excuse for declaring a strike, 
 and on the same night Bulley, after reach- 
 ing Victoria, wired back to the secretary of 
 the society at Vancouver that the terms of- 
 fered by the Canadian Pacific Navigation 
 Company had been accepted. 
 
 Strike of Steamshipinen at Victoria, 
 March 16. 
 
 On March 16, Estes again, in telegrams 
 sent to Winnipeg, Eevelstoke, Nelson and 
 Calgary, informed the executive officers of 
 the Brotherhood at these points that the 
 steamshipmen would go out on the follow- 
 ing day. He also wired to the vice-presi- 
 dent of the order in Seattle that he was 
 going to Victoria that night. He went, as 
 stated, and attended a meeting of the Vic- 
 toria division of the Steamshipmcn's So- 
 ciety, and at this meeting a strike was de- 
 clared. It is to he noted in connection with 
 this strike that the constitution of the Brit- 
 ish Columbia Steamshipmen's Society re- 
 quires that before a strike can be declared, 
 the matter must be considered at two spe- 
 cial meetings, that all members must re- 
 ceive due notification, and that two-thirds 
 of the membership must decide by secret 
 ballot in favour of a strike. According to 
 the evidence of one of the officers of this 
 Union, it would appear that not one of these 
 provisions had been observed by the Steam- 
 shipmen's Society when they decided to 
 strike. No notice of the meeting was given 
 till 10.30 p.m. on the night Estes arrived, 
 when the president and secretary notified a 
 number of the men personally. About 40 
 out of 160 members were present, and be- 
 tween 12 and 1 o'clock at night, by open 
 vote of 39 to 1 it was decided, after Estes 
 had addressed the meeting, that a strike 
 should be declared. 
 
 The Charmer was due to leave at 1 a.m., 
 and the members of the union refused to 
 go aboard. To prevent a crippling of the 
 service, the other boats of the fleet had to 
 assist the management in sending out the 
 Charmer, in order that she might reach 
 Vancouver on time to connect with the 
 train for the east. The next day Estes 
 
 wired the chief executive officers of the di- 
 vision of the TJ. B. R. E. at Vancouver : 
 
 All steamship men struck here last night ; 
 engineers and ofBcers of other boats scabbing 
 as firemen and deck-hands on " Charmer " to- 
 day. 
 
 Nature of Embarrassment. 
 
 The strike was so unexpected by the offi- 
 cials of the company that no preparation 
 had been made for such an emergency. The 
 men attempted to justify their action be- 
 fore the commission on the ground that the 
 Canadian Pacific Navigation Company had 
 violated its agreement with them in rela- 
 tion to carrying scab freight and baggage 
 without giving them the twelve hours' no- 
 tice provided. Officials of the company, on 
 the other hand, assert that their captains 
 had instructions not to receive or carry any 
 'scab' freight. In order to insure that none 
 such would be carried, the company allowed 
 tliree officers of the association to overlook 
 the freight which was taken on board, in 
 spite of which arrangement a scab barrel of 
 oil found its way on board, which the com- 
 pany contended was brought on purposely, 
 in order to furnish a pretext for the strike. 
 
 The action of the British Columbia 
 Steamshipmen's Society did not affect very 
 seriously the work of the Canadian Pacific 
 Navigation Company, owing to the fact 
 that the company was able to fill the places 
 of the strikers. On the other hand, the 
 correspondence indicates very clearly that 
 had Estes and other officers of the Brother- 
 hood been able to carry out the scheme 
 which they had contemplated, all vessels 
 carrying baggage or freight, either to or 
 from the station at Vancouver, or carrying 
 any coal, would have been completely tied 
 up, quite regardless of the disastrous effects 
 which such action might have had upon 
 public and private interests generally. 
 
 Attempts to Organize Crews on Empress 
 Steamers and Lake Boats. 
 
 Strenuous efforts were made to organize, 
 as members of the Brotherhood, the crews 
 of the Empress steamships, sailing between 
 Canada and China and Japan ; also the 
 crews of other boats which had Vancouver 
 
22 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 as a port, and the crews of tte boats of the 
 Canadian Pacific Railway Company whicli 
 sail on the Arrow Lakes between Revelstoke 
 and Nelson. Although these efforts were 
 not in any way generally successful, embar- 
 rassment and loss was, nevertheless, in- 
 curred by the company in consequence of 
 them. The fact that the strikers believed 
 that they had succeeded in undermanning 
 the crew of one of the Empress steamships, 
 and caused her to leave port with her coal 
 bunkers half full, that the Skagway boat 
 had been compelled to leave without cargo, 
 and that the water front was completely de- 
 moralized, and that all these statements 
 were made with a view to stimulating the 
 enthusiasm of the members of the Brother- 
 hood on strike at different places, indicates 
 very clearly to what extremes they were pre- 
 pared to have gone, had their efforts in any 
 way been followed with success, and that 
 these bodies had become as effectually sub- 
 ject to Estes' control as the members of his 
 own organization. 
 
 IV. — Efforts to stop Coal Supply. 
 
 Efforts to stop the supply of coal. — The 
 correspondence sent by Estes to other 
 officers of the United Brotherhood s.hows 
 very clearly that efforts no less determined 
 were made by the Brotherhood to stop the 
 supply of coal to the railway than were 
 made with a view to the crippling of the 
 steamship service. In fact the two projects 
 were intimately associated, inasmuch as the 
 main supply of coal to the railway v/as 
 brought by water from mines on Vancou- 
 ver Island to Vancouver. 
 
 The Mines on Vancouver Island. 
 
 On March 4, the same day that the Brit- 
 ish Columbia Steamshipmen's Society de- 
 cided that they could not handle ' scab ' 
 baggage or freight at Vancouver, and that 
 the longshoremen and telegraph messengers 
 came out on strike, Estes sent the message 
 already quoted to Clarence Smith, the secre- 
 tary of the American Labour Union at 
 Butte, Montana, which may be quoted 
 again : 
 
 Strike spreading. Revelstoke out ; 'longshore- 
 men struck here to-day. Please have Western 
 Federation of Miners refuse to allow coal loaded 
 on cars, steamboats, ships or hulks at Lady- 
 smith, Union, or other points on Vancouver Is- 
 land for Vancouver. This to prevent Canadian 
 Pacific getting coal. Rush orders by wire. 
 Don't tail— Fight for life. 
 
 The main sources of supply to the Cana- 
 dian Pacific Railway being the mines of the 
 Wellington Colliery Company at Union and 
 Ladysmith, it followed that special efforts 
 were made by the strikers to stop the sup- 
 ply from these points. The strikes at 
 Ladysmith and Union, which took place on 
 March 14 and May 2 respectively, have been 
 the subjects of special investigation by the 
 commission, and are dealt with in a sub- 
 sequent part of this report, as are the re- 
 lations between the United Brotherhood of 
 Railway Employees and the Western Eed- 
 eration of Miners in connection therewith. 
 Supplementary to the facts recited there, 
 and as showing that the coal supply at all 
 points was a matter of first importance in 
 the eyes of the strikers, the following ex- 
 tracts may be quoted from communications 
 in the correspondence. 
 
 The Supply from other Sources. 
 
 In a letter written by direction of Estes 
 to J. R. Lawson, of the United Brotherhood 
 at Seattle, on the 6 th of March, the follow- 
 ing appears: — 
 
 We have managed to stop the C.P.R. from ob- 
 taining coal for their boats and engines and 
 we have stopped the shipment of coke into the 
 Boundary country. 
 
 The day following a circular letter was 
 sent out by the Vancouver division, in 
 which, ennumerating the embarrassements 
 to which the company had been subjected 
 in consequence of the strike, the following 
 passage occurs: — 
 
 We have closed out their coal sunoly at Van- 
 couver; prevented them from loading or un- 
 loading ships ; forced them to decline ac-ent- 
 ance of freight for shipment ; prevented thZ, 
 from delivering freight aireaiy dn theif warT 
 houses ; in fact, harassed them in ma^ ways 
 but we are not done yet. *^ ' 
 
 On March 20, tlie acting agent of the 
 division at Vanvouver, writes to the agent 
 of the Revelstoke division as follows :— 
 
 In connection with the coal suddIv nht-iinoM. 
 from Canmore, will advise tliat "^tbe closing i? 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 23 
 
 the Canmore and Anthracite mines, more espe- 
 cially the former, has greatly helped us. As a 
 matter of fact, we want all the coal supply cut 
 out altogether ; although the C.P.R. claims to 
 have coal coming from Australia and Japan, we 
 know that they cannot get it here in a reasonable 
 time, nor can they afford to do so. 
 
 The following appears in a circular let- 
 ter sent by the chief representative of the 
 Ciilgary division to the executive oflicers 
 of otlier divisions : — 
 
 No doubt you have all heard of the accident 
 at Frank. All coal mined at this point is con- 
 signed to the C.P.R. , so that this will be an- 
 other trump card for us, as the mines will cer- 
 tainly have to close up for some time. 
 
 In a communication dated May 7 to an 
 
 officer of another union in Victoria, the 
 
 writer says : 
 
 I have just received a telegram to say that 
 the Canmore mine has given out, and that there 
 is only one vvreek's supply at Roger's Pass. This 
 is sMendid news. 
 
 Eelation of Strikes on Railway and in 
 Mines. 
 
 On' May 13 the following appears as part 
 of a circular letter addressed to all the offi- 
 cers and members of the U. B. E. E. in 
 North America. It is written by the Van- 
 couver agent : — 
 
 The coal situation on the C.P.R. is rapidly 
 approaching alarming conditions. It is a tact 
 that they are compelled to use up their reserve 
 supply at ail western points, and that supply 
 will soon be exhausted. In fact the Roger's 
 Pass engines are now running to Revelstoke 
 for coal. If the U.B.R.E. strike were satisfac- 
 torily Eettled it would be found that the coal 
 situation on the C.P.R. would quicldy be ad- 
 justed. 
 
 The statement in the communieation sent 
 by direction of Estes to Lawson at Seattle, 
 on March 6, that ' We have stopped the 
 shipment of coke into the Boundary coun- 
 try,' would, if true, indicate, at least, that 
 there had been some connection and joint 
 action between the members of the Western 
 Federation who went on strike in the mines 
 of the Crow's ISTest Pass Coal Company 
 at Ecrnie, Morrissey and Michel, on Eebru- 
 ary 11, and the members of the TJ.B.E.E. 
 who came out on strike on the 27th of that 
 month. This assumption gathers addition- 
 al weight from the following paragraph 
 taken from a letter dated March 30, tSie 
 day on which the strike at the Crow's Nest 
 Pass was settled, which letter was sent by a 
 36a— 5 
 
 neutral and responsible person (who had, 
 however, the conlldence of the strikers, be- 
 cause of the efforts made by him to effect 
 a settlement of the dispute), to General Su- 
 perintendent Marpole at Vancouver : — 
 
 Although the conciliation committee of the 
 Provincial Mining Association has, at so much 
 trouble, succeeded in effecting a settlement of 
 the strike of the Crow's Nest Coal Miners, I tear 
 if the strike affecting your company is allowed 
 to continue it will mean a renewal of the strilce 
 if the railway is supplied with fuel from these 
 mines, and the different interests of the pro- 
 vince will be placed in a worse position than 
 ever. 
 
 The sig-nificant remark contained in the 
 circular letter of May 13 that 'If the U. 
 B.E.E. strike were satisfactorily settled it 
 would be found that the coal situation on 
 the Canadian Pacific Eailway would quick- 
 ly be ad,iusted ' — would show that those in 
 authority believed that the strike situation 
 as it had developed in the mines of the 
 Wellington Colliery Company on Vancou- 
 ver Island during the preceding months, 
 had an intimate connection with the U.B. 
 E.E. situation. The same opinion was 
 evidently held by the editor of the ' Eail- 
 way Employees' Journal,' the official organ 
 of the United Brotherhood, as he writes as 
 follows in the issue of March 12 : — 
 
 Besides the power of the United Brotherhood: 
 besides the power of organized labour through- 
 out Canada, there has been enlisted in the cause 
 a power that is already realized and feared tor 
 its method of doing something. 
 
 The American Labour Union has thrown Us 
 weight into the balance of justice's scales in 
 favour of the United Brotherhood. 
 
 On the 6th lust., a telegram was directed to 
 the American Labour Union requesting that the 
 Western Federation of Miners stop handling 
 coal on Vancouver Island for the Canadian Pa- 
 ciflo Railway. 
 
 Within a few hours every member of the pow- 
 erful Western Federation of Miners in Vancou- 
 ver had ceased work. 
 
 There was no "ahem" or " ahaw " or let- 
 ters of supplication or such Gomperian tom- 
 foolery about it. As quickly as messages could 
 be flashed over v,-ilres, and Wiithout a dis- 
 senting voice, but with a willingness born only 
 of true fraternal union spirit, the Western Fed- 
 eration of Miners, through the American Labour 
 Union, as a body of reserves rushing to the as- 
 sistance of their comrades, administered a stag- 
 gering blow to the octopus that is striving to 
 overthrow the rights of railway men to organ- 
 ize when and how they wish. 
 
 Let no member of the United E."otherho3d or 
 any railroad man worthy of the name ever tor- 
 get this act. If anything were lacking to ce- 
 ment the feelings of friendline.'is which the U.B, 
 of R.E. has entertained for the A.L.U. and its 
 members, this unquestionable display of loyalty 
 has furnished it. 
 
2A 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSIOlf 
 
 Other issues of the same journal are full 
 of similar references, some of which assert 
 positively that the strikes in the coal mines 
 on Vancouver Island were directly attribut- 
 able to the influence of the U.B.E.E. 
 
 As a matter of fact, the Canadian Pacific 
 Eailway was obliged to import 10,000 tons 
 of coal from Japan, to be sure of a supply. 
 
 V. — Extensive use of the Boycott. 
 
 T/ie Boycott. — ^It is difficult to assign any 
 limits within which the leaders of the 
 United Brotherhood were prepared to con- 
 finti the use of the boycott wherever, by 
 any possible way, there seemed to be an 
 opportunity of causing embarrassment to 
 the llailway Company through this means. 
 A few instances, from a great number con- 
 tained in the correspondence, are cited only 
 as examples to show that few trades or 
 callings could hope to escape the ban which 
 might be put upon them in consequence of 
 possible relationship to the railway com- 
 pany, by reason of what might or might 
 not be proclaimed from, time to time as 
 ' scabbing ' or ' scab ' material. 
 
 It has already been seen that the strikes 
 of the freight handlers, longshoremen, 
 teamsters and steamship men were brought 
 about in response to the appeal ' not to 
 handle scab baggage, scab freight, or any 
 other scab material of any kind while this 
 strike is in progi'ess.' 
 
 Buildingf and Iron Trades appealed to. 
 
 To all engaged in the building trades an 
 
 appeal was made — 
 
 Not to use lumber, paint, nails or any 
 material of any kind whatsoever that 
 may be handled through the freight 
 sheds during the progress of the strike 
 as it will be all scab material, because 
 billed, booked and entered by scab bill- 
 ers, revisers or expense clerks. 
 
 To all in the iron trades apx)eal was made 
 
 To support us by not handling any scab 
 material transported through the Cana- 
 dian Pacific Railway local freight sta- 
 tion until this matter is settled. 
 
 Bakers asked to Refuse Bread. 
 
 The Bakers' Union of Vancouver, in re- 
 sponse to a general appeal of this kind, re- 
 plied ^s follows :-— 
 
 The Bakers' Union do most heartily endorse 
 your action, and we do resolve that we will not 
 handle any flour, butter, or any other article 
 shipped over the C.P.R. until the strike Is set- 
 tled. 
 
 This offer of assistance was taken up by 
 the strikers, and the agent of the Vancou- 
 ver executive addressed the following to the 
 Bakers' Union : — 
 
 I am directed to inform you that it Is reported 
 that W. D. Muir, baker, Mount Pleasant, has 
 supplied the steamers " Empress of India " and 
 " Princess May " with bread, and we are also 
 informed that said baker is about to haul flour 
 from the C.P.R. delivery track, contrary to 
 union principles. You will be good enough to 
 call the attention of your members to these as- 
 sertions and advise me what steps are being 
 taken to discountenance this action on the part 
 of the master balcers. 
 
 With what consequences this communica- 
 tion was followed will appear elsewhere in 
 a reference to the action of the Bakprs' 
 Union in this report. 
 
 Steel Girders declared ' Scab Goods.' 
 
 The following obtained from the Build- 
 ing Trades Council was sent for publica- 
 tion to the press committee of the U.B. 
 E.E. :— 
 
 A number of steel girders from Ross & How- 
 ard's works were delivered by the Pacific Coast 
 Transfer Co.'s teams this morning to a build- 
 ing in course of erection on Granville street 
 next to the Bank of Montreal. The building Is 
 being constructed for Parr & Fee, architects, 
 by union labour only. The Pacific Coast Trans- 
 fer Co. being on the unfair list, these girders 
 cannot go into the building until they have 
 been made fair by being hauled back by union 
 teamsters and re-delivered by them, or by the 
 payment of the fine to the Teamsters' Union 
 equivalent to such haulage. The girders re- 
 ferred to ire now labelled 'scab goods' in 
 plain writing. 
 
 Merchants in outside Towns asked to 
 Boycott Vancouver. 
 
 Some of the appeals appear to have been 
 so exacting in their nature as to have been 
 flatly refused by organisations who would 
 not sacrifice their interests or conceptions 
 of justice to what they evidently regarded 
 as an ' unfair ' request. 
 
 The following communication of March 
 
 16, sent by the Miners' Union at Silverton, 
 
 belongs to this class : — 
 
 While we heartily endorse the action of No. 
 81 In striking for its existence, we do not see 
 how we can consistently urge our merchants to 
 refuse to patronize the wholesale merchants of 
 Vancouver, because they handle goods shipped 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 25 
 
 by the C.P.R., as we have no other means of 
 transportation than that of the C.P.R. 
 
 A more reciprocal feeling is manifested 
 in the following communications wliich 
 were exchanged about the same time be- 
 tween the New Denver Miners' Union and 
 the Vancouver division of the U.B.E.E. 
 The New Denver Miners' Union writes : 
 
 We ■would Inform you that there will be a 
 new citizen in Vancouver from this town, whom 
 It would pay all union men to watch and boy- 
 cott. He is a scab, and an enemy ot organized 
 
 labour. His name is . He comes to 
 
 open a dry goods store. 
 
 Eeplying to this communication, the offi- 
 cers of the Brotherhood say : 
 
 We note your remarks in connection with. . . 
 and will have the matter brought up before the 
 Trades and Labour Council at its next meeting. 
 
 Attempts to bring about Sympathetic 
 Strikes in New South Wales. 
 
 The following letter sent to the long- 
 shoremen at Sydney, in New South Wales, 
 requesting them not to handle freight on 
 the Canadian Pacific Railway ships arriv- 
 ing at that port, will indicate the extent 
 to which the United Brotherhood was pre- 
 pared to go in the matter of endeavouring 
 to bring about a sympathetic strike and 
 boycott on the part of any body of men 
 who in any way were engaged upon work 
 connected with the business of the Cana- 
 dian Pacific Eailway :— 
 
 Vancouver, B.C., March 31, 1903, 
 To the Secretary, 
 
 Wharf Lumpers' Union, 
 Sidney, N.S.W. 
 Dear Sir and Brother : 
 
 The wharf lumpers ('longshoremen), steam- 
 ship men, railway freight handlers and other 
 Canadian Pacific Railway employees are on 
 strike in Vancouver, and all freight loaded at 
 this port is handled by blacklegs, or as they 
 are called in this country, ' scabs,' and should 
 not consistently be handled by union men in 
 Australia. 
 
 You will readily understand the assistance 
 you could render us by refusing to handle this 
 ' scab ' freight, and if the time should come 
 when you will require our assistance you can 
 depend on us to a man. 
 
 The enclosed circular will give you an Insight 
 into the present status of this light and you, as 
 union men, will understand that we will not 
 tolerate the attempt on the part ot the Cana- 
 dian Pacific Railway to dictate to their em- 
 ployees as to whether they shall organize, and 
 with what organization they shall affiliate. 
 
 All the members of the United Brotherhood 
 of Railway Employees at Vancouver, Revel- 
 stoke, Nelson, Calgary and Winnipeg are on 
 strike, also all members ot the British Colum- 
 
 36a— 5J 
 
 bla Steamshipmen Society and the International 
 'Longshoremen of America at this port, and this 
 action on the part of these unions is endorsed 
 by the Trades and Labour Councils at all the 
 affected points, as well as the endorsation, moral 
 and financial, of nearly all branches of organ- 
 ized labour on the continent ot North America. 
 
 The reports coming in from all points are most 
 encouraging, and the railway business is practi- 
 cally at a standstill, so serious is the position 
 ot the company that men are being imported 
 from all points ot Canada and the United States 
 and even from England. 
 
 We will cable you immediately on the conclu- 
 sion ot this strike, so that you may guard 
 against fictitious messages cabled by the rail- 
 way and steamship companies. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the unions attected. 
 
 To this communication were attached the 
 names of the president of the United Bro- 
 therhood of Eailway Employees, the presi- 
 dent of the British Columbia Steamship- 
 men's Society, the president of the Long- 
 shoremen's Union, and it was endorsed by 
 the president and secretary of the Van- 
 couver Trades and Labour Council. 
 
 Finally, that no part of the system might 
 escape, Estes, about the end of May, 
 secured from the convention of the Ameri- 
 can Labour Union at Denver a resolution, 
 denouncing the whole Canadian Pacific 
 Eailway as unfair. He also managed to 
 get an appropriation of $500, as a contri- 
 bution from the American Labour Union 
 to the resources of the members of his 
 Brotherhood on strike, although he asked 
 for $5,000. 
 
 VI. — Treatment of Non-Strikers. 
 
 Treatment of persons wJio refused to 
 strike. — Attention has already been directed 
 to the efforts made on the part of the 
 strikers to organize other classes of the 
 company's employees, and of men whose 
 work was in no way connected with the 
 business of the company, with a view of 
 bringjng out these men in support of the 
 strikers. As an indication that in ])ursu- 
 ing these tactics the Brotherhood was not 
 very particular as to the manner in which 
 new members were admitted to its ranks, 
 the following telegram from Estes at Van- 
 couver to Halton at Montreal, on Marcli 
 10, may be cited : — 
 
 Press reports say 400 dorks Montreal strik- 
 ing. Organize them on any terms. 
 
26 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 The most strenuous efforts appear to 
 have been put forth in the direction of 
 intercepting any men brought by the com- 
 pany to fill the places of strikers, or who 
 of their own accord might have sought 
 employment in consequence of the vacan- 
 cies created by the strike; also to make as 
 miserable as possible the lot of any man 
 who might, in the opinion of the strikers, 
 have come to be regarded as a ' scab.' 
 
 Efforts to prevent Men Working. 
 
 A member of the order was sent to Seat- 
 tle to prevent the company from procuring 
 substitutes in that city. Members of the 
 order in Montreal were instructed to in- 
 form emigrants of the conditions existing 
 in British Columbia. Advertisements were 
 inserted in the papers throughout the Do- 
 minion warning men to keep away from 
 th.B coast. 
 
 An oiler on the steamship Joan received 
 the following intimation from the secre- 
 tary of the Vancouver division : — 
 
 strike executive asks you and other two to 
 come out. 
 
 Instructions were sent from the same 
 
 officer in reference to another individual 
 
 at Nelson, in the following words, by wire : 
 
 Jensen working ; pull him out, by order of 
 Massey [the itinerant executive head from 
 Seattle]. 
 
 ' Princess May's crew ordered out, war de- 
 clared, order out C.P.N, fleet — 
 
 were the words sent over the wires from 
 Vancouver as a command to an executive 
 officer of the British Columbia Steamship- 
 men's Society from a fellow officer in Van- 
 couver, when it had been determined that 
 all persons should be brought out on strike. 
 
 Meet ' Maiulander.' I coralled seven, but 
 some e&;aped me — ■ 
 
 was the wire sent from an agent of the 
 Brotherhood in Seattle to the chief execu- 
 tive officer, on March 16, as the report of 
 his zeal and misfortune in this connection. 
 
 In Vancouver and other cities aflected 
 by the strike, committees of strikers were 
 told off to persuade men to refuse to work 
 for the company. Where men had accepted 
 positions vacated by strikers they were 
 
 made to suffer as many inconveniences as 
 possible. Efforts were made to prevent 
 them from getting accommodation in hotels 
 and boarding houses. An effort was made 
 to organize the waitresses in the Canadian 
 Pacific Railway hotel at Eevelstoke, so that 
 they would not serve the ' scabs.' Mer- 
 chants were urged in some cases to refuse 
 to supply them with goods. Their names 
 were put, together with names of persons 
 who had declined to quit work, in a black- 
 list, which was published in certain labour 
 papers and other periodicals. The oath 
 which had been administered to members 
 of the organization was brought to the at- 
 tention of those who wished to withdraw 
 as a solemn obligation which they were 
 forced to respect, and men who returned to 
 work without permission of the union were 
 referred to in circular communications, 
 which were sent to different parts of the 
 country, as having 'forfeited all rights to 
 the respect of their fello%v men, and not 
 deserving of the least sympathy.' 
 
 ' Scabs ' Molested. 
 
 The following may be quoted from com- 
 munications which passed between execu- 
 tive officers of different divisions. The 
 officer at Nelson writes as follows : — 
 
 We expect a number of would-be scabs in by 
 to-night's train from Vancouver, but our picket 
 is all set for them and will attend to them. This 
 committee (picket) is doing gooA work, and has 
 been instrumental in having the majority of the 
 scabs ejected from their boarding houses and 
 otherwise making it unpleasant for them. 
 
 A man went to Eholt to scab. He remained 
 there one day, then returned to Nelson on ac- 
 count of his not being able to get anything to 
 eat or a place to sleep. He has since been 
 given employment by the company here, and has 
 already been told to get out of two boarding 
 houses here. 
 
 Calgary division is advised as follows by 
 the Vancouver division : — 
 
 In connection with that scab working in the 
 baggage department, use every effort to get him 
 away. Get after the place that supplies him 
 with grub, and induce thera to shut oft the sup- 
 ply. If he takes his meals at the station eat- 
 ing house get the girls after him. That course 
 of action is working well in Revelstoke, and 
 the lives of scabs at that point are made doubly 
 misierable. 
 
 Winnipeg division writes as follows : — 
 
 We have dropped our pickets, and have put 
 on a sysitem of paid specials who put in hall 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOVR COMMISSION 
 
 27 
 
 time. They are in cliarge of a chief special. 
 These mon, with additionai assistance, follow 
 all scabs that have the nerve to board down 
 f.own, report to a special committee who inter- 
 view the landladies with a view of getting these 
 scabs out of their boarding houses. We have 
 been very successful along these lines, and in- 
 tend to bring the aame of scab home to every- 
 one of them. 
 
 In a circular letter of May 1, addressed 
 to all officers and members of the United 
 Brotherliood of Eailway Employees in 
 North America, the following appears : — 
 
 The strike situation at Vancouver, Revelstoke 
 and Winnipeg remains about the same as at last 
 writing. At Vancouver a number o£ scabs seem 
 to have met with accidents in some unaccount- 
 able maner. 
 
 If they receive them whilst at work they must 
 surely be very awkward and unaccustomed to 
 the work they are doing, for the men whose 
 places they are attempting to fill, were never 
 seen with bandaged heads or black eyes. 
 
 Permission to ' Scabs ' granted on 
 occasions. 
 
 It must not be supposed, however, that 
 it was not possible for a man to ' scab ' with 
 the permission of the division. On March 
 10 a permit was issued under the seal of 
 the United Brotherhood, allowing two train 
 baggagemen, who had joined on February 
 19, to follow their calling during the strike, 
 until such time as the same was cancelled 
 by order of the division. The object doubt- 
 less was to avoid a collision with the Order 
 of Eailway Trainmen, to which these men 
 also belonged, and with which the company 
 had an agreement. 
 
 Dispensation from the pains and penal- 
 ties of scabbing was also granted to the 
 crew of the ' Aorange,' to enable them to 
 handle a shipment of frozen meat. ' Scab ' 
 permits were also issued to team drivers ou 
 special occasions during the strike. 
 
 The following permit was issued to one 
 John Lane, a member of the crew of the 
 ' Charmer ' : — 
 
 John Lane, Ksq., 
 
 SS. ' Charmer,' at Vancouver. 
 Dear Sir,— This will be authority granting you 
 the right to continue at work on the SS. 
 ' Charmp.r.' and will be effective until cancelled 
 and withdrawn. 
 
 (Sgd.) J. TURNBULL, 
 
 For Executive Committee. 
 
 Approved. 
 
 (Sgd.) GEO. ESTES, 
 
 President. 
 
 On the same date Lane was authorized 
 by the same authority to ' organize for the 
 U.B.E.E. Vancouver Division 81.' 
 
 It must also be noted that, according to 
 Estes, there are ' scab ' unions, and the ef- 
 fect of the declaration by the American 
 Labour Union that the whole Canadian 
 Pacific Eailway was unfair is, of course, 
 to stigmatize all the existing railway unions 
 w'ho have all disregarded the declaration, 
 as scab unions. 
 
 All of which goes to show that the term 
 ' scab ' is of elastic signification. 
 
 Attitude of other Eailroad Brother- 
 hoods toward the TJ. B. R. E. 
 
 The attitude of the several existing rail- 
 way organizations towards the Brotherhood 
 in its conflict with the Canadian Pacific 
 Eailway is important as illustrating the 
 difference between methods pursued by legi- 
 timate and responsible unions in the mat- 
 ter of dealing with their employers, and 
 the purposes and method of working pur- 
 sued by an organization like the U.B.E.E. 
 Although urgent appeals were made by the 
 Brotherhood to all of the several railway 
 organizations, as the Locomotive Engineers, 
 Locomotive Eiremen, Eailway Trainmen, 
 Conductors, Telegraphers, and Mainten- 
 ance-of-way men, for their co-operation and 
 assistance, it does not appear that the 
 United Brotherhood received a single cent 
 from the local lodges or members of any 
 of these organizations. In fact there is di- 
 rect evidence to show that as an organiza- 
 tion it was discountenanced from the out- 
 set by the several existing orders of rail- 
 way employees. 
 
 The following extract taken from the 
 ' Advance Advocate,' the official organ of 
 the llaintenance-of-way Employees, pub- 
 lished monthly at St. Louis, Mo., contained 
 in the April number of that publication, 
 may be taken as giving an epitome of the 
 views entertained by the majority of mem- 
 bers of the several class organizations of 
 the United Brotherhood and its president, 
 as well as their estimation of the purposes 
 for which it was created, and its likelihood 
 
23 
 
 DRITI8B COLVUBTA LABOUR COMMISSWN 
 
 of future success. The Maintenance-of-way 
 employees were among the last of the sev- 
 eral classes of railway employees to become 
 organized into a body of their own. The 
 extract from the article is as follows : — 
 
 In a recent address in San Francisco. Cal.; 
 one Estes, who is president of a mixed organi- 
 zation of railway employees which has attracted 
 some attention on the Pacific coast, stated that 
 ' no effort had ever been made to organize the 
 trackmen ' until the task was undertaken by the 
 organization he represents. Mr. Estes knew 
 that he was stating a falsehood at the time, 
 for he knew of the existence ot the Trackmen's 
 Brotherhood at the time when he was fighting 
 hard to have his ambitions recognized, and to 
 have himself elected oresident of the O.R.T., 
 but since those who know him best decided that 
 he was not the man to lead the hopes and to 
 preside over the destinies of the ' men of the 
 key,' and turned him down very coldly in that 
 organization, and since none of the other es- 
 tablished railway organizations saw fit to take 
 up Mr. Estes and his grievances, he decided he 
 would start a little organization of his own, 
 not r,o much for the good he might do to the 
 toiling thousands in the railway service, as for 
 the purpose of securing funds from them to 
 carry out his work of retaliation against those 
 who tailed to see and recognize his greatness. 
 If Mr. Estes thinks it will be anything to his 
 advantage to utter such palpable falsehoods as 
 the one above referred to, he has placed a dif- 
 ferent estimate upon the character and intelli- 
 gence of men in the railway service to that 
 which has been held by the real leaders of or- 
 ganized labour. Men in the railway service who 
 have shown themselves to have the intelligence 
 to get together, the determination to sticit to- 
 gether, and the courage to fight together for 
 improved conditions, prefer to remain in their 
 class organizations which have shown ability to 
 secure results. Many of these men remember 
 with sorrow their previous connection with gen- 
 eral organizations like ttie K. of L. and the 
 A.R.U.. which failed miserably in their efforts 
 to hasten the millenium, and they feel that it 
 is only a question of time — and a short time at 
 that — when the U.B. will follow the K. of L. and 
 the A.R.U. to the shades of the bone-yard. No 
 permanent good results can come to labour 
 through an organization whose principal mis- 
 sion is to disorganize established unions. 
 
 Opinions expressed in Journals of Class 
 Organizations. 
 
 A circular printed for general distribu- 
 tion and addressed to ' Members of pro- 
 perly constituted and recognized unions,' 
 appeared at the time of the strike in Van- 
 ccuver. It contained extracts from edi- 
 torials in some of the journals of the re- 
 gular orders, and the following among other 
 references may be quoted as further illus- 
 trating the estimation in which the United 
 Brotherhood of Railway Employees is held 
 by the class orders : — 
 
 The U.B.R.E. has appealed to the trades or- 
 ganizations of Canada for sympathy. Naturally 
 they have to, for the other railway organizations 
 recognize the enmity of this organization pirate 
 in the same manner they would the enmity of 
 an unfriendly corporation. There is no friend- 
 ship, no sympathy for it, for it is recognized as 
 the agent of disruption and disintegration and 
 nothing less than an a.titempt to destroy what 
 has been done by the older organizations. 
 
 The officers have gone into Canada and lied 
 deliberately to bolster up their organization. 
 They have intimated that they have secured the 
 schedules for train and engine service on the 
 Southern Pacific lines, and the statements are 
 false, for those schedules are made with the 
 older organizations. They have paraded the fact 
 that they destroyed the Southern Pacific relief 
 plan, and they lied out of the whole cloth when 
 they said so. At the time the Southern Pacific 
 relief plan was placed before the men there was 
 no U.B.R.B.. and the old organizations, the in- 
 surance fraternities, and the people of the coast 
 are united against ft, and it was killed by their 
 influence. The U.B.R.E. had nothing whatever 
 to do with it, it had not even been started, yet 
 it has gone into Canada preaching its success 
 and leading the railway employees into trouble. 
 
 In the United States the U.B.R.E. movement 
 has fizzled down to the unorganized trades, for 
 the men in the train and engine service under- 
 stand that this movement is simply another 
 American railway union, with its loud sounding 
 pretenses, its traitors, who have violated their 
 obligations to their organizations, its destroyers 
 of unionism, its place hunters and impractical 
 schemers, that may cause a little flurry of ex- 
 citement for a time, destroy what has been done 
 in some instances and leave wreck and ruin in 
 its train. 
 
 As far as the Brotherhood of Railv/ay Train- 
 men Is concerned, there will be no false senti- 
 ment in dealing with it. Wherever it shows it- 
 self Interfering with the work of the organiza- 
 tion right there it will meet the opposition of 
 the brotherhood in a way that will not be con- 
 ducive to its organization peace ot mind. The 
 ' Journal ' dislikes to be compelled to take this 
 position, because quarrels between labour or- 
 ganizations seldom do much good. But this has 
 been forced upon us, and there will be no mis- 
 taken feelings of delicacy in meeting the ques- 
 tion wherever it arises. It was organized by 
 discontents, ofllce hunters and enemies to the 
 labour cragnizations that have accomplished the 
 greatest work that labour organization has to 
 its credit. We will oppose every action on their 
 part that threatens our organization. There will 
 be no pandering to sickly sentiment that calls 
 for ' glad hands ' and brotherly feelings, but the 
 traitors who violate the rights and laws of the 
 brotherhood and expect that appeals made in 
 the name ot unionism will be heard, until they 
 have wrought their purpose, will be turned 
 down hard. 
 
 The freight handlers' strike in Chicago, and 
 the sympathetic strike of the teamsters is an- 
 other case in point that should prove to every 
 member ot a labour organization the fallacy of 
 the sympathetic strike as the means of adjust- 
 ing disturbed labour conditions. 
 
 Estes' opinion of other Kailway Oi^ani- 
 zations. 
 
 That such arc the opinions held by the 
 regular unions of railway employees of the 
 
BRITISE COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 29 
 
 United Brotlierliood is not to be wondered 
 at in view of the manner in which these 
 unions have been characterized by the presi- 
 dent and members of the United Brother- 
 hood at different times. Speaking at a mass 
 meeting in Vancouver during the course 
 of the strike, President Estes is reported in 
 an official account prepared by U.B.E.E. 
 officials, to have said : — 
 
 There are orders and orders, religions and re- 
 ligions, unions and unions, som« so constituted 
 that they cannot carry out the true laws of un- 
 ionism. This, he (the speaker) had practiced 
 at the start and this had come true. 
 
 These orders were a curse to railway em- 
 ployees, because they were under the control of 
 capital. These truths might hurt, he knew that, 
 and the men might hate him for making such 
 statements — it was his duty to speak plain — he 
 could not help it — his statements were true. 
 Class orders and contracts make men scab ; one 
 cannot Ket away from that. The recent ruling 
 of the Trades and Labour. Council hurt, he 
 would sooneir see men scab without a contract 
 than with one, because with one it made the 
 action appear to be premeditated. One is sim- 
 ply forced into it, and the only solution was to 
 get out of such an order. 
 
 Blacksmiths' International Union refuses 
 to Sanction Strike at Eevelstoke. 
 
 A number of men who were on strike 
 at Eevelstoke were members of the Inter- 
 national Brotherhood of Blacksmiths, 
 which order had, at that time, an agree- 
 ment with the Canadian Pacific Eailway 
 covering the terms and conditions of em- 
 ployment of its members in the shops at 
 Eevelstoke. They had, however, become 
 members of the United Brotherhood of Eail- 
 way Employees as well. When the latter 
 went on strike there at once arose a con- 
 flict of jurisdiction as between these two 
 orders, the executive officers of the Black- 
 smiths' Union taking the ground that no 
 members of a. local union belonging to tho 
 International order had any right to violate 
 a contract which they, had with their em- 
 ployers. 
 
 As sooij as it was brought to the notice 
 of the headquarters executive of the Black- 
 smiths' Union at Moline, Illinois, that the 
 local at Eevelstoke had gone out in 
 violation of its contract, a member of the 
 executive board came to Eevelstoke, inves- 
 tigated the matter, and ordered the men 
 back to work immediately, on penalty, if 
 
 they refused, of being expelled from the 
 union. This action on the part of the mem- 
 ber of the executive was reinforced by mes- 
 sages from headquarters stating that the 
 men ' must religiously observe agreement 
 with company.' The men thereupon re- 
 turned to work. 
 
 The U.B.R. refuses to allow Eevelstoke 
 Strikers to return to work. 
 
 When these matters were first considered 
 
 by the Brotherhood, Estes, in a letter to 
 
 Mr. Marpole, of the 5th March, says : 
 
 We regret we cannot authorize the majchimlats 
 at Eevelstoke to return to work, as until the 
 whole £0 back they would have to work with 
 non-union labour, which they will not do. 
 
 The next day Eorrest, at Eevelstoke, was 
 informed as follows by the Vancouver divi- 
 sion : — 
 
 As advised Broither Inches, a machinist by 
 the name of Dunn left here yesterday at the 
 reouest of the C. P. R., with the irttenition of 
 prevailing upon the mjachinist^ at that point 
 to work. Brother Estes won't permit this. You 
 can understand the disadvamtage we would be 
 under were they to return to work. 
 
 In a letter of March 9 to the agent of 
 
 the division at Eevelstoke from the agent 
 
 of the Vancouver division, the latter says : 
 
 Brother Estes has instruated me to reply to 
 your letter of March 7, which, owing to press 
 of businesss he is unable td undertake. I am, 
 however, directed to say that under no cii- 
 cumstaneeis will the .machinists be permitted 
 to return to work at Revelatofce until we win 
 the fight. 
 
 Estes' communication from Victoria to 
 Halton at Vancouver on the 23rd of March, 
 after the machinists at Eevelstoke had re- 
 turned to work, is rather characteristic. 
 Eeferring to this matter, he says : — 
 
 Your telegriaim of yesterday received. I will 
 do the best I can on the machinists' proposition, 
 but th§ result has been just as I expected, and 
 juat as it alv«.ys is in cases where ' class ' or- 
 ganizations ar« comcerned. We must flght the 
 battle without the Revelstoke machinists, and 
 fight it we will, and win, if our other men stand 
 
 firm Had I been free here the 
 
 machinisits would never have returned to work 
 at Reveilstpke. 
 
 Boilermakers' International Union refuses 
 to Sanction Strike at Vancouver. 
 
 A strong effort was made by the United 
 Brotherhood to have the machinists and 
 boilermakers in Vancouver, as well as at 
 
30 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 Eevelstoke, come out on strike. To place 
 his lodge on a sure footing in the matter, 
 the secretary of the local of the Brother- 
 hood of Boilermakers and Iron Ship- 
 builders at Vancouver wrote to head- 
 quarters at Kansas City, explaining the 
 situation to the executive board there. The 
 foUo^ving reply, received by the secretary 
 from the grand president, speaks for itself : 
 
 Brotherhood ot Boiler Makers and Iron Ship 
 Builders of America. 
 Kansas City. Kas., April 11, 1903. 
 
 J, H. Watson, Esq., 
 
 Cor. See.. L. No. 194, 
 Vanicouver, B.C. 
 
 Dear Sir and Brother, — 
 
 Now, in regard to the boilermakers worlting 
 on the Canadian Pacific Railway, will say, that 
 under no consideration will we allow any 
 ot our members to violate a contract, and if 
 any of the men attach themselves to any dual 
 orKanization, or go out in sympathy with any 
 other orgamization and violate their contract, 
 they will immediately annul their card, and a 
 lodge that will encourage them to do so, we 
 will call in their charter. We appreciate the 
 sanctity of a contract, and if we do not live 
 up to conti'acts. in a very short time the em- 
 ployers will refuse to make any with us. I 
 hope you will so notify those members, as you 
 can rest assured that we will do just as state3 
 ip *-iii=; leitter. 
 With best wishes and regards, I remain. 
 Yours fraternally, 
 
 (Signed) JOHN MeNEIL, 
 
 G. P. O. 
 
 The jurisdiction of the Vancouver local 
 of this Brotherhood extended as far as Eev- 
 elstoke. A member having gone out at 
 that point, he was fined $25 by the union 
 for violation of its rules. 
 
 Instances of Interference on part of 
 
 Officers of Unions in United 
 
 States. 
 
 It is to be regretted that these instances 
 cannot be cited as without exception on 
 belialf of international bodies, in the mat- 
 ter of th^r regard for the sacredness of 
 contract between members and their em- 
 ployers. The action of the International 
 Brotherhood of Boilermakers two years pre- 
 vious, in regard to a contract between its 
 members in Victoria and the Albion Iron 
 Works, which came to the attentiow of the 
 Commission at its sittings in Victoria, and 
 the action taken by the International 
 Bakers and Confectioners' Union during 
 the present strike at Vancouver, show a 
 serious lack of appreciation of the respon- 
 
 sibilities of executive heads, and an un- 
 warrantable interference in matters of local 
 concern. 
 
 The Case of tlie ' Garonne ' Contract. 
 
 In March, 1901, a contract was entered 
 into by the Albion Iron Works Company 
 of Victoria with Frank Waterhouse of 
 Seattle, for the repairing of a ship, the 
 ' Garonne,' of which he was the owner. The 
 contract had originally been given to the 
 firm, Moran Bros., of Seattle, but owing 
 to their men in the moulding and machine 
 department having gone on strike for 
 higher wages, ]\Ioran Bros, were unable 
 to complete the contract. In order to have 
 the work comjiletcd in time, Waterhouse 
 arranged that Moran Bros, wore to give up 
 the contract, and" a new contract was to 
 be entered into with the Albion Iron Works 
 Company. Before accepting this contract, 
 B. Seabrooke, at that time manager of the 
 Albion Iron Works, called a meeting of the 
 Boilermakers' Union of Victoria, of which 
 the men in his employ were members, 
 showed them the total correapoudence iji 
 regard to the matter, and left it to them to 
 say whether or not the Albion Iron Works 
 might take the contract. They said that it 
 would be all right, and agreed to work on 
 the ship when it was brought over. Sea- 
 brooke thereupon drew up a telegram, 
 which was submitted to the union, and 
 approved by it. It was addressed to Water- 
 house at Seattle, and was to the effect that 
 Seabrooke could take the contract, and 
 would leave that night for Seattle. After 
 arrival there a contract was entered into 
 with Waterhouse, a condition of which was 
 that in the event of it turning out tliat the 
 Albion Iron Works could not complete the 
 contract on account of any trouble with 
 its union boilermakers, the company should 
 pay the expenses of the ship both ways. 
 On the expenses being guaranteed the con- 
 tract was closed, l^o contract of any kind 
 was made with Moran Bros., the dealings 
 of the Albion Iron Works Company being 
 entirely with Waterhouse. The amount in- 
 volved in the contract was estimated at be- 
 tween $30,000 and $35,000. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 31 
 
 The Seattle Union. 
 
 A committee of boiler-makers from Se- 
 attle came to Victoria on the same boat by 
 which Seabrooke returned. He did not 
 know that they were a committee, but 
 thought they were boiler-makers coming 
 over to get work on the boat. On the fol- 
 lowing morning (the ' Garonne ' having ar- 
 rived late that night), when repairs were 
 started, the boiler-makers refused to work. 
 The committee which had come over from 
 Seattle had held a meeting with the boiler- 
 makers, and claimed that the job was an 
 unfair one, and would not allow them to go 
 to work. The machinists and other trades 
 took hold of the work without asking a 
 question, but the boiler-makers refused. 
 
 At the time Seabrooke had first consulted 
 with his men only the machinists were on 
 strike at Seattle, and not the boiler-makers, 
 but before he left Seattle with the ship, the 
 boiler-makers in Seattle had gone out. 
 When he returned he called the men to- 
 gether and told them that he would not ask 
 them to carry out the contract on the wages 
 first agreed upon, but that he would give 
 them what was being demanded bv the men 
 in Seattle. The boiler-makers had given 
 him Eotice some time previously that they 
 would go out on a certain date if better 
 terms were not granted them. These terms 
 were conceded, and they promised Sea- 
 brooke at the meeting that afternoon that 
 they would go to work the next morning. 
 This was before they had any interview 
 with the Seattle committee. When asked 
 on the following morning why they would 
 not go to work, the men stated that they 
 could not, owing to instructions from the 
 committee which had come over from Se- 
 attle. The committee had informed tJiejn 
 that the Seattle boiler-makers regarded the 
 job as ' unfair ' ; that they, as well as the 
 machinists, had had trouble with their em- 
 ployers. After having had several meetings 
 with the boiler-makers and being unable to 
 effect a satisfactory arrangement, Sea- 
 brooke was obliged to take the other men 
 off tlie ship and send her back to Seattle, 
 36a— 6 
 
 notwithstanding that between $300 and 
 $400 worth of work had been done. The 
 total loss to the firm in consequence of its 
 undertaking to pay the expenses of the ship 
 both ways in the event of the contract not 
 being carried out, and of the loss of the 
 work which had 'been partly performed, 
 was about $1,250. The local union offered 
 to reimburse the company. They regretted 
 their action, bxil claimed that it was against 
 the rules of tlie international union to work 
 oa tlu- ship, 
 
 Losses to Company and Men in conse- 
 quence. 
 
 There were several other jobs which 
 might have been secured, but the company 
 was obliged to reject them. The company 
 estimated that in consequence of this in- 
 cident, over $100,000 . worth of work was 
 lost to Victoria, of which about 15 per cent 
 would have gone to workmen in their em- 
 ploy as wages. 
 
 The manager of the Albion Iron Works 
 interviewed not only his own men, but also 
 the committee from Seattle, at the time of 
 this occurrence. At these interviews one 
 of the members of the Seattle committee 
 did most of the talking, and as far as 
 the manager was able to judge, the difli- 
 culty could have been got over but for this 
 individual. 
 
 The president of the local boiler-makers' 
 union at Victoria agreed in substance with 
 Seahrooke's statement of the facts, but his 
 idea seemed to be that thr' union had en- 
 tered into the agreement on the footing 
 that there would be no trouble between the 
 boiler-makers at Seattle and their employ- 
 ers. However this may be, the president 
 stated that even after the Seattle committee 
 had conversed with them, they were pre- 
 pared to go on with the work if the consent 
 of the executive board at Kansas City could 
 be obtained. In his evidence this witness 
 said : 
 
 We asked the lodge at Kansas by telegram 
 what to do, explained -as tar as we could the 
 facts of the case ; that the Seattle men claimed 
 it would assist them ; that we had given our 
 promise to do the work, and that we were wil- 
 ling to do the work it we could get the consent 
 
32 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 of the Supreme Lodge. The nature of the re- 
 ply was that we were not to work on the job 
 on account of the Seattle union — we were to 
 work In conjunction with Seattle. 
 
 The witness explained that had the work 
 been gone on with, notwithstanding that all 
 conditions asked for by the men in Seattle 
 had been granted by the Victoria firm, the 
 charter of the Victoria lodge mig'ht have 
 been taken away, and its members declared 
 ' scabs ' and their names so posted all over 
 the continent of America. 
 
 Action of Vancouver Bakers' Union at 
 instance of TJ. B. R. E. ^ 
 
 Muir, the baker, referred to in the com- 
 munication quoted from the U.B.E.E. offi- 
 cers to the Bakers' Union in Vancouver, 
 and certain of his employees, testified be- 
 fore the Commission as to the course pur- 
 sued by the Bakers' Union in consequence 
 of their decision to assist the strikers, and 
 its effect upon them. Muir said that he 
 received a comm.unication from the sec- 
 retary of the Bakers' Union, requesting 
 him not to supply the ' Princess May ' with 
 bread. When he refused to do this, on the 
 ground that he had been supplying bread 
 for two years to the C.P.N. steamers, he 
 received word that his shop would be put on 
 the unfair list, and his employees, to the 
 number of eight, who were members of the 
 union, were ordered out on strike. Six of 
 the men refused to obey the order of the 
 union and were expelled. Two left his em- 
 ploy. As a further consequence of his re- 
 fusal to stop supplying bread to the ' Prin- 
 cess May,' several men quit buying bread 
 from him, and an effort was made to induce 
 others to follow their example. In his evi- 
 dence on this point, Muir said : ' At the 
 time six men were taken out of my shop. 
 Several men belonging to the Bakers' Union 
 went to a lot of places in the city, grocery 
 stores, hotels, restaurants and other places, 
 and solicited them to quit buying bread 
 from me.' As a consequence of this action 
 some of the restaurants stopped buying his 
 bread, and he lost the custom of forty- 
 three private houses. 
 
 As a further evidence of the manner in 
 whi6h his business was embarrassed in con- 
 sequence of the action of the strikers, Muir 
 gave the following : 'I had a carload of 
 flour consigned to me, and as the teamsters 
 were on strike I could not get it delivered. 
 I had to use the wholesale warehouse, have 
 the flour put in there, and get it delivered 
 from there .... Wliy I had to take the flour 
 from the wholesale house was because my 
 union men would not take it if it was 
 hauled by non-union teamsters. I had to 
 do this way to get the union to handle it. 
 They would take it from the sidewalk, but 
 not from the track. I sent one of my men 
 up and we brought it through this wholesale 
 grocery.' That disinfected it. 
 
 It should be noted in this connection 
 that Muir's shop had been a union shop for 
 some time, and that he had a written con- 
 tract with the Journeymen Bakers' Union, 
 which was to stand good until the 1st of 
 July. As a consequence of the breach of 
 contract on the part of the union, and their 
 action towards him, Muir declared that his 
 shop would be a non-union shop in the 
 future. 
 
 Union Principles and Constitution 
 Violated. 
 
 George Nelson, a baker in Muir's employ, 
 testified that at the time the appeal was 
 made to the union the bakers in Muir's 
 employ should be called out on sym- 
 pathetic strike, he wrote to the head- 
 quarters of the union at Cleveland, asking 
 whether the local union, of which lie was 
 a member and officer, could order out on 
 strike when his employer was acting up to 
 his agreement with the union as to wages 
 and hours. For having written to headquar- 
 ters of his own initiative Nelson was fined 
 $25, and having refused to pay his fine was 
 expelled from the union. This was two 
 days before the six other bakers in Muir's 
 shop refused to go out on strike on the 
 orders of the union, and were also ex- 
 pelled. The Bakers' Journal of May 23, 
 inserting the names of all these men, con- 
 tained the following notice : — 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR C0MMI8SI02}' 
 
 33 
 
 The following men are expelled from Union 
 46, Vancouver, B.C., for scabbing in Muir's 
 shop of this city. [Names given]. 
 By order of the union, 
 
 MURDO Maclean, 
 
 2160 Westminster Avenue, Vancouver. 
 
 The constitution of the Journeymen 
 Bakers and Confectioners' International 
 Union, of which Vancouver Union No. 46 
 was a local, contains the following, as 
 Article 9 (that part of the constitution 
 which deals with the question of strikes) : 
 
 Section 1. In case of diSiculties between em- 
 ployees and employers it becomes the duty of 
 local unions to prevent strikes as much as pos- 
 sible by attempting to settle such difficulties 
 in a peaceful way. Only in the event that iill 
 attempts at a peaceful settlement shall prove 
 of no avail, or if the demands of the employers 
 should be be-neath the dignity of the employees 
 and contrary to the principles of unionists, a 
 strike shall be resorted to. 
 
 Section 4. Strikes can only be declared when 
 three-fourths of the members in good standing 
 vote in favour thereof. The same vote is re- 
 quired to declare a strike ended. 
 
 Section 8. No strikes shall be decided upon 
 unless every member has been invited in writ- 
 ing or personally by an officer of the union to 
 attend the meeting where it is to be aoted 
 upon. 
 
 In his evidence as to the manner in 
 which this strike had been declared, Nel- 
 son said that written notices were not given 
 to anyone in the shop in which he was 
 employed, and that the strike was declared 
 by less than a two-thirds vote. 
 
 Strike of TJ. B. R. E. conducted mostly by 
 Funds from United States. 
 
 It is rather remarkable that during the 
 whole of its struggle, the aid given to the 
 Brotherhood by Canadian unions was com- 
 paratively insignificant. The strikers were 
 successful in obtaining an endorsation of 
 their actions &om a number of Canadian 
 unions, and even from the Trades and 
 Labour Councils of a few cities, but most 
 of the financial assistance came from 
 unions in the United States affiliated with 
 the American Labour Union. The man- 
 ner in which some of these appeals were 
 made is interesting, as revealing the way 
 in which Americans were induced to 
 render assistance to the Brotherhood at this 
 time. Exhibit No. 37, filed with the Com- 
 
 mission, is a circular addressed — ' To all 
 unions affiliated with the American Labour 
 Union.' It is printed on paper intended 
 to represent the official letter paper of the 
 Brotherhood — 
 
 United Brotherhood of Railway Employees, 
 
 General Offitoa, 
 
 210-211. 573-571 Parrot Building, 
 
 San Francisco, Cal. 
 
 appears at the top to the left. The cir- 
 cular is signed — 
 
 Yours tor industrial unionism, 
 
 GEO. ESTE3, 
 President, U.B.R.B. 
 
 Estes being in Canada at the time, re- 
 ference is made to this country at the head 
 of the circular in these words, to the right — 
 
 Executive Office, 
 
 President's Headguarters in the Flield, 
 Vancouver. B.C., March 27, 1903. 
 
 The circular in the lower left-hand corner 
 has the following — 
 
 Heajdauarters American Labour Union, 
 Butte. Montana, March 31st, 1903. 
 We approve and endorse the above appeal. 
 (Sgd.) CLARENCE SMITH, 
 
 Seo'y. A.L.U. 
 
 DANIEL Mcdonald, 
 
 President A.L.U. 
 
 The circular itself, after giving an ac- 
 count of the situation, in terms which are 
 very exaggerated and misleading, concludes 
 as follows : — 
 
 To win this fight we must have all the finan- 
 cial help possible and as quickly as possible, 
 and we urgently appeal to all unions affiliated 
 with the A. L. U., whose principles we believe 
 in and uphold, to send us financial add in as 
 large amounts as possible, and to continue 
 aiding us until the flght is won. 
 
 Numbers concerned in Strike and Affected 
 by Settlement. 
 
 According to the statement of the 
 Brotherhood's counsel before the Commis- 
 sion there were at the time of its sittings 
 in Vancouver, about 1,000 employees in all 
 on strike ; this included Longshoremen, 
 Teamsters, Steamshipmen and members of 
 the U.B.E.E. at different points. Tlie 
 following statement put in by the company 
 
34 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 indicates the number of the latter whose 
 places had not been filled at the time : — 
 
 Vancouver — 
 
 General freight oflace 5 
 
 Supt. telegraplLs office 10 
 
 General superiratendent's office.. 1 
 General superintendent's account- 
 ing department 12 
 
 Passenger department (depot 
 
 ticket office) 2 
 
 Stores department 13 
 
 Baggage department 4 
 
 Freight office 127 
 
 Mechanical department 23 
 
 197 
 
 New Westminster — 
 Operating department .. 9 
 
 Revelstoke — 
 
 Operating department 7 
 
 MechanJcal department 58 
 
 Golden 
 
 Field 
 
 Nelson — 
 
 Mechanical department 6 
 
 Operating department 17 
 
 Rossland 
 
 Greenwood 
 
 65 
 1 
 1 
 
 294 
 
 All these strikes were declared at an end 
 in consequence of the agreement arrived 
 at during the sittings of the Commission. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 35 
 
 CHAP, ni— DISPUTES IN THE COAL MINES OF BRITISH COLUMBIA DURING 
 
 1903. 
 
 THE coal mining properties of import- 
 ance operated in British Columbia 
 during the present year are the mines of 
 the Crow's Nest Pass Coal Company at 
 Fernie, Morissey and Michel, situate in 
 East Kootenay ; and the mines of the Wel- 
 lington Colliery Company at Extension and 
 Union, and the mines of the Western Fuel 
 Company at Nanaimo on Vancouver Island. 
 It is a singular fact that since the com- 
 mencement of the year there has been a 
 strike in every one of these camps, and in 
 all, without exception, local unions of the 
 Western Federation of Miners have been 
 concerned. 
 
 Strike of Employees of Crow's Nest Pass 
 
 Coal Company at Feniie, Morissey 
 
 and Michel. 
 
 The first of these strikes was the strike 
 of the miners in the employ of the Crow's 
 Nest Pass Coal Company, where the main 
 question at the outset was one of recogni- 
 tion of a district union comprised of repre- 
 sentatives from the local lodges of the 
 Western Federation at Fernie, Michel and 
 Morissey. This strike was commenced on 
 February 11, and lasted until March 31 ; 
 it involved in all about 1,500 employees. 
 
 Strike of Employees of Western Fuel 
 Company at Nanaimo. 
 
 The second strike was that of the coal min- 
 ers in the employ of the Western Fuel Com- 
 pany at Nanaimo, who were members of the 
 Nanaimo Miners' Union No. 177, of the 
 Western Federation of Miners. This strike 
 commenced on February 16, and was ter- 
 minated on the 26th of the same month. 
 The cause of the dispute was the withdraw- 
 al by the company of an allowance of 25 
 cents per day, which had been paid to min- 
 ers working with safety lamps, on the in- 
 troduction of an improved and more costly 
 
 lamp. On the restoration of the allowance 
 the men resumed work. Between 600 and 
 700 employees were afPected by this strike. 
 
 Strikes of Employees of Wellington Col- 
 liery Company at Ladysmith and 
 Union. 
 
 \ The third strike was that of the em- 
 iployees of the Wellington Colliery Com- 
 ipany at Ladysmith, which commenced on 
 (March 12, and as the result of which the 
 mines of the company at Extension were 
 (closed, and remained closed until July 3. 
 (About 800 employees were immediately 
 jaffected by this strike. The last strike 
 pccurred in the mines of the same company 
 at Union on the 2nd of May. Between 3G0 
 and 400 miners have been affected by that 
 ■strike, which is still unsettled. 
 
 Investigation of these Disputes. 
 
 ' It was our intention to inquire fully 
 ■into the causes and circumstances of all 
 ■these strikes, but owing to the limited 
 •time at the disposal of the Commission it 
 was found impossible to investigate the 
 facts and circumstances connected with 
 (the strike of the several mines of the 
 iCrow's Nest Pass Coal Company. In 
 view, however, of the fact that this strike 
 was made the subject of a special investi- 
 gation by a conciliation committee consti- 
 tuted under the auspices of the Provincial 
 Mining Association of British Columbia, 
 and that operations had been resumed be- 
 fore the Commission was appointed, the 
 omission of more than a passing reference 
 to it in this report is not as important as 
 it might have been had the dispute not 
 been settled, and its main features already 
 disclosed to the public through authorita- 
 tive sources. 
 
 The strike of the employees of the West ■ 
 ern Fuel Company at Nanaimo was investi- 
 
36 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COilMISSION 
 
 gated by the Commission, and an account 
 both of its causes and of the settlement 
 will Be found in the evidence taken at Na- 
 naimo, which is submitted with this re- 
 port. In view of the larger issues which 
 came to the attention of the Commission in 
 its investigation of the strikes at Lady- 
 smith and Union, and because there did 
 not appear to be any difference of opinion 
 between the parties as to the nature and 
 cause of this dispute, which was of short 
 duration and not far-reaching in its effects, 
 it has not appeared to us necessary to 
 make more than mention of the fact of its 
 occurrence. 
 
 Strikes at Ladysmith and Union specially 
 important. 
 
 The strikes at Ladysmith and Union, on 
 the other hand, have been of a most serious 
 nature, both as regards the way in which 
 they were brought about, and the great in- 
 convenience and loss which they have 
 caused to the people of Vancouver Island 
 in particular, and the province in general. 
 The strike at Ladysmith having been in 
 existence for seven weeks at the time the 
 Commission commenced the inquiry, we 
 felt it expedient to make this strike the 
 first subject of investigation. The strike 
 at Union commenced only a day or two 
 before the Commission began hearing evi- 
 .dence in regard to the strike at Ladysmith. 
 
 The Extension mines are about 12 miles 
 distant from the town of Ladysmith. Min- 
 ing operations were commenced at this 
 place about six years ago, shortly after 
 which a number of houses were built by 
 the miners, and a small mining town es- 
 tablished there. Owing to the orders of the 
 president of the Wellington Colliery Com- 
 pany, the miners at Extension were com- 
 pelled to give up residing at the mines, 
 and take up their residence in the town of 
 Ladysmith. It is now over a ysar since 
 most of the miners who at one time might 
 have resided at Extension have had their 
 homes at Ladysmith. This separation of 
 the places of work and residence is apt to 
 give rise to some confusion unless it is 
 borne in mind that when Ladysmith miners 
 are referred to, what is meant, in reality, 
 are the miners who work at Extension and 
 reside at Ladysmith. A similar confusion 
 is apt to arise in speaking of Union and 
 Cumberland. The two places are situated 
 side by side, separated only by an imagin- 
 ary line, and both are sometimes referred 
 to under one designation, as Comox, which 
 is the name of the electoral district in 
 which they are situate. Where, therefore, 
 reference is made to either Cumberland or 
 Union, or the mines at Cumberland or 
 Union, this interchangeability of names 
 should be kept in mind. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 S7 
 
 CHAP. IV— THE STRIKE AT lABYSMITH. 
 
 ON Sunday, March 8, a mass raeeting of 
 the Extension Miners was held at 
 Ladysmith. Between 300 and 400 of the com- 
 pany's employees were present. James 
 Pritchard and Samuel Mottishaw, sr., two 
 Extension miners, were chosen respectively 
 as chairman and secretary of the meeting. 
 The notice calling the meeting, which was 
 not signed, and did not state any ohject, 
 had heen put up on the day previous at the 
 Post Office at Ladysmith. According to the 
 minutes of this meeting, as filed with the 
 Commission, and the evidence of the wit- 
 nesses who testified in regard to it, the 
 chairman first explained that the meeting 
 had been called with a view of asking for 
 an advance of 15 per cent in wages. The 
 subject was left open to the meeting, and 
 the question of sending a deputation to 
 James Dunsmuir, the president of the Wel- 
 lington Colliery Company, discussed. It 
 was suggested in opposition to this that 
 the employees should first form themselves 
 into an organization, but that in view of 
 the attitude of the company towards unions 
 in the past, it would he useless to form a 
 local organization. A motion was then put 
 to the meeting that ' the demand of a 15 
 per cent increase be waived, and that, in- 
 stead, the men organize in the Western Fed- 
 eration of Miners.' It was urged by those 
 who supported this motion that the West- 
 ern Federation was a numerous and pow- 
 erful body and that it could he counted on 
 for financial support in the event pf the 
 local union encountering difficulties with 
 the company. An amendment that a secret 
 ballot should be taken on the subject was 
 proposed and carried, but after considerable 
 argument and discussion was withdrawn, 
 and the question as to whether or not a local 
 union of the Western Federation should 
 be formed was decided by a show of hands. 
 The minutes record the result of this vote 
 
 as unanimous, but from the evidence of cer- 
 tain witnesses who were present it would 
 appear that few had voted against the pro- 
 posal. The secretary was instructed to noti- 
 fy James A. Baker, the Canadian organi- 
 zer of the Western Federation of Miners, 
 as quickly as possible, to form a branch of 
 that organization at Ladysmith, and a mo- 
 tion was carried that those present would 
 agree to stand by any miner who might be 
 discharged by the company through tak- 
 ing steps to join the Western Federation 
 of Miners. 
 
 Ladysmith Miners decide to join* 
 W. F. of M., March 8. 
 
 Mottishaw left Ladysmith on the first 
 train for Nanaimo, and after a conversa- 
 tion with Thomas Shcnton, the secretary of 
 the Nanaimo union, the following telegram 
 was sent to Baker : — 
 
 Urgent request for your presence ; oome to 
 Nanalmo If possible immediately. 
 
 This telegram was not signed by Mot- 
 tishaw, the secretary of the Ladysmith 
 meeting, but by Shenton. 
 
 On Tuesday, March 10, Pritchard and 
 Mottishaw, the president and secretary of 
 the Ladysmith meeting on the Sunday pre- 
 vious, were discharged, also two other min- 
 ers, S. K. Mottishaw, jr., and Robert Bell. 
 No reason was given for their summary 
 dismissal, but as all four had been promi- 
 nent in connection with the Sunday meet- 
 ing, there was no doubt in the mind of 
 anyone concerned as to the cause. On the 
 same day an official notice was posted by 
 the Wellington Colliery Company at the 
 mines and the depot, stating that on April 
 1 the mines would be closed, and notifying 
 the men to take out their tools on that date. 
 No reason was stated in the notice why 
 the. company has decided on this course of 
 action. 
 
33 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 Strike declared at ladysmith on March 
 12. 
 
 A mass meeting of the miners and mine 
 labourers -was immediately called for the 
 following Thursday, the 12th of March. 
 At this meeting, which was held at Lady- 
 smith in the morning, the dismissal of 
 Pritchard, Bell and the two Mottishaws 
 was announced, and a motion carried that 
 the meeting reaffirm its adherence to the 
 resolution of March 8, wherein it had been 
 decided to stand by any man who might be 
 discharged because of having taken part 
 in the meeting on that day. It was then 
 moved and seconded that the secretary be 
 instructed to write Mr. Dunsmuir in regard 
 to reinstating the men who had been dis- 
 charged. In amendment to this motion it 
 was proposed that a committee be appointed 
 to interview Mr. Dunsmuir on the matter. 
 Finally, an amendment to the amendment 
 was moved and subsequently carried, as 
 follows : ' That we stay as we are until Mr. 
 Baker arrives and organizes us as a branch 
 of the Western Federation of Miners, before 
 we approach the company with regard to 
 reinstating men that were discharged.' 
 
 Abiding by the terms of this resolution, 
 the men did not return to work, and it be- 
 came necessary for the company to close 
 up the mines. It was claimed by some of 
 the witnesses who testified before the Com- 
 mission that as the company had post- 
 ed the notice requiring the miners to take 
 out their tools on April 1, and had dis- 
 charged persons who had been prominent 
 at the meeting at which it was decided to 
 organize a branch of the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners, the cessation of work which 
 ensued was in the nature of a lock-out rath- 
 er than a strike. In view, however, of the 
 fact that events might have transpired in 
 the interval which would have caused the 
 company to alter its deoision as to the clos- 
 ing of the mines of April 1 ; and the fact 
 that the quitting of work was in conse- 
 quence of a resolution passed by the miners 
 themselves, and voluntarily adhered to by 
 them, it would appear that the status quo 
 was altered of their own initiative, and that 
 
 their collective action in quitting work un- 
 der the circumstances constituted a strike. 
 There were, at the time the strike was 
 declared, about 800 employees in the mines 
 at Extension, all of whom became involved 
 in the strike. 
 
 Local Organization of W. T. of M. 
 formed March 15. 
 
 On Sunday, the 15th of March, Baker 
 arrived at Ladysmith. A meeting of the 
 miners was held that day, and a local 
 branch of the Western Federation of 
 Miners, known as ' Enterprise Union, No. 
 181,' was formed. It was stated before the 
 Commission by officers of the union that 
 about 600 miners and miners' helpers had 
 joined at the outset, and about 200 more 
 in the course of the following weeks. Some 
 of the witnesses testified to having joined, 
 not from any particular desire to become 
 members of the Western Federation, but 
 simply because they wished to have a voice 
 in any collective action which might be 
 taken by the union whereby their interests 
 might be affected. 
 
 The events, as here recorded, considered 
 by themselves, and irrespective of other in- 
 cidents and happenings at the time, are 
 calculated to give the impression that the 
 strike at Ladysmith was the spontaneous 
 expression on the part of the miners in the 
 Extension camp of their determination to 
 have an organization, through the agency 
 of which they might be able to obtain an 
 increase in the existing rates of remunera- 
 tion. Such, undoubtedly, was the impres- 
 sion created in the minds of many of the 
 miners, and of a large secti<in of the public 
 as well. In view, however, of the facta 
 disclosed in the evidence taken by the Com- 
 mission, and the nature of the testimony 
 given by certain of the witnesses, we are 
 of the opinion that the true inwardness 
 of the Ladysmith strike cannot be rightly 
 understood apart from its relation to other 
 industrial disturbances existing at the time, 
 and particularly to the strike of the United 
 Brotherhood of Railway Employees at Van- 
 couver. 
 
BRITISH COWUBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 39 
 
 delation of Miners' Strike at Ladysmith 
 to Strike of TI.B.R.E. at Vancouver. 
 
 As already described the strike of tlie 
 United Brotlierliood was declared on Feb- 
 ruary 27, and involved, in the first instance, 
 clerks, officemen, baggagemen, and men in 
 stores among the employees of the Cana- 
 dian Pacific Eailway at Yanconver. It 
 v.-as followed by strikes of freight-handlers, 
 longshoremen and steanishipmen on llarch 
 4. On this day the following telegram, 
 already quoted, was sent by George Estes, 
 tlie president of the United Brotherhood, 
 from Vancouver, to Clarence Snrith, secre- 
 tary of the American Labour Union at 
 Butte, Montana : — 
 
 Vanco'uv&r, B.C., March 4, 1903. 
 Clarence Smith, 
 
 Secretary American Labour Union, 
 Butte, Montana. 
 Strike spreading — Revelstoke out — 'Longshore- 
 men struclc here to-day. Please have Western 
 Federation Miners refuse to allow coal loaded 
 on cars, steamboats, ships or hulks at Lady- 
 smith, Union or other points on Vancouver Is- 
 land, for Vancouver. This to prevent Canadian 
 Pacific getting coal. Rush orders by wire — 
 Don't fail — Fight for life — Answer. 
 
 GEO. ESTES. 
 
 On the day following, March 5, Estes 
 received the following reply from W. D. 
 Haywood, secretary of the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners at Denver : — 
 
 Denver, Col., March 5, 1903. 
 
 Geo. Estes, ' 
 
 Vancouver, B.C. 
 Have complied with your request. Notified 
 union at Nanalmo. 
 
 WM. D. HAYWOOD. 
 
 Relation of American Labour Union at 
 
 Butte, Mon., to the IT. B. E. E. and 
 
 W. F. of M. 
 
 The aifiliated relations of the United 
 Brotherhood of Eailway Employees, the 
 Western Federation of Miners and the 
 American Labour Union are of the first 
 importance in considering the significance 
 of the telegram sent by Estes, and the reply 
 received. The American Labour Uuioa <vas 
 formed at Salt Lake City, Vtah, in May, 
 1895. It is a delegate body, and holds 
 annual conventions, to wliich affiliated 
 bodies send representatives. Tlie United 
 Brotherhood qf Bailway Employees, and 
 
 the Western Federation of Miners, are in- 
 ternational labour organizations, which 
 grant charters to local unions, and each of 
 these bodies is affiliated with the American 
 Labour Union. The preamble to the con- 
 stitution of the American Labour Union 
 states that the organization is formed for 
 the purpose of ' concentrating energies and 
 consolidating the labour forces,' and the 
 constitution itself gives to the executive 
 board, which is appointed at the conven- 
 tion, full power to direct the working of 
 the union between conventions. The head- 
 quarters of tlio United Brotherhood of Rail- 
 way Employees are at San Francisco, Cali- 
 fornia; the headquarters of the American 
 Labour Union at Butte, Montana; and the 
 headquarters of the Western Federation of 
 Miners at Denver, Colorado. From the 
 fact that the telegram sent by Estes to the 
 secretary of theAnierican Labour Union 
 at Butte was replied to by the secretary of 
 the Western Federation at Denver, it is 
 evident that its contents were immediately 
 communicated by some person at Butte to 
 some person at Denver. The wording of 
 Estes' telegram — ' Please have Western 
 Federation refuse to allow coal loaded on 
 Vancouver Island. .. .this to prevent Cana- 
 dian Pacific getting coal. . .fight for life.' — ■ 
 would indicate pretty clearly by what it 
 leaves unsaid, no less than by the nature 
 of the request made, and the reasons given, 
 that there existed a vital connection be- 
 tween the workings of the three organiza- 
 tions, and that there was an understaaiding 
 between the American Labour Union and 
 both the United Brotherhood of Railway 
 Employees and the Western Federation of 
 Miners whereby the three were to act in 
 conjunction in the event of either of the 
 latter requiring the aid of the other. The 
 actual occurrences are the demonstration 
 that such was the case.* 
 
 ■* For further account of relations existing be- 
 tween ofhcers of the United Brotherhood 
 of Railway Employees and the Weatern Fe.lera- 
 tion of Miners, see particulars in connection 
 with the strike at Union, at pages 50 and 51. 
 
40 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 TJnited Action of American Orgranizations 
 to bring about Strikes in Canada. 
 
 Informed by the American Labour Union 
 that it is the desire of tbe members of the 
 Brotherhood on strike at Vancouver that 
 the coal supply to the railway from Van- 
 couver Island should be stopped within 
 twenty-four hours the secretary of the 
 Western Federation wires to the president 
 of the Brotherhood : ' Have complied with 
 your request. Notified union at Nanimo.' 
 
 The union at ISTanaimo, referred to in 
 the telegram, in Miners' Union No. 177, of 
 the Western Federation of Miners, which 
 obtained its charter from the Federation 
 in December, 1902. It was the only union 
 on Vancouver Island which, at the time, 
 was affiliated with the Western Federation 
 of Miners, and the only union existing in 
 any of the coal mines on the island. The 
 telegram sent to th-is union, referred to in 
 the telegram of the secretary of the West- 
 ern Federation of Miners to Estes, was not 
 delivered at jSTanaimo till 8.40 on the morn- 
 ing of March 6. It was addressed to Shen- 
 ton, the secretary of the Nanaimo union, 
 and was signed by Charles Moyer, the pre- 
 sident of the Western Federation of Min- 
 ers, Moyer signing his official designation 
 as well as his name. The telegram was as 
 follows : — 
 
 Denver, Col., March 6, 1903. 
 
 T. J. Shenton, 
 Nanaimo, B.C. 
 Use your best efforts to prevent Canadian Pa- 
 cific from getting coal at Vancouver. Assist 
 strilters all you can. 
 
 CHAS. MOVER. 
 
 (rjresident, W.F.M.) 
 
 It is important to notice that in the tele- 
 gram sent by Estes to the secretary of the 
 American Labour Union the camps at Lady- 
 smith and Union were specified. The mines 
 at each of these places, as has been men- 
 tioned, are the property of the Wellington 
 Colliery Company, and were the main sour- 
 ces of supply to the Canadian Pacific Hall- 
 way ; the Western Fuel Company, which 
 owns the mines at Nanaimo, not having any 
 coal contract with the railway. Ladysmith 
 is about fifteen miles south, and Union 
 some eighty miles north of Nanaimo. 
 
 Organization at ladysmith, how 
 effected. 
 
 On the same day as he received from the 
 president of the Western Federation the 
 telegram asking that best efforts be used 
 to prevent the Canadian Pacific from get- 
 ting coal, and that all assistance be given 
 strikers, the following reply was sent by 
 Shenton to Moyer at Denver : — 
 
 Nanaimo, B.C., March 6th, 1903, 
 Chas. Moyer, 
 
 (President W.F.M.), 
 Denver, Colorado. 
 We vfill render all assistance possible. 
 T. J. SHENTON, 
 
 Secretary. 
 
 The notice calling the mass meeting of 
 Extension employees was posted at Lady- 
 smith on March 7, the day after Shenton 
 had replied that all assistance possible 
 would be rendered. As already mentioned, 
 it was not signed, nor did it say for what 
 purpose the meeting was being called, nor 
 was it known, until the sittings of the Com- 
 mission, by whom the notice had been post- 
 ed. From the evidence given it would appear 
 that there had . been no general agitation 
 at the time among the body of miners at 
 Ladysmith, either in regard to conditions 
 of employment or the formation of a union. 
 There had been some talk among a few 
 as to asking for an increase in wages of 
 ten to fifteen per cent in consequence of 
 the removal of the United States tariff on 
 coal a short time before, but in the state- 
 ment filed with the Commission by the 
 strikers, setting forth the grounds primar- 
 ily responsible for the trouble, the subject 
 of wages was not mentioned, and counsel 
 for the miners disclaimed any desire to 
 have the question of wages gone into. In 
 fact, the witnesses testified generally as to 
 there having been satisfaction on the score 
 of wages, and such special evidence as was 
 put in on this point indicated that, as com- 
 pared with the rate of return in similar 
 undertakings elsewhere, there was little 
 room for complaint, and much for favour- 
 able comparisons, if desired. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 41 
 
 No general demand for Organization. 
 
 Up to the time of tlie meeting on Marcli 
 8, there appears to have been less general 
 discussion among the mass of the miners 
 on the subject of the formation of a la- 
 bour organization than there had been on 
 the subject of demanding an increase in 
 the rate of wages. It was well known that 
 Mr. Dunsmuir was strongly opposed to the 
 formation of_ unions among his employees ; 
 that attempts at organization had, prac- 
 tically without exception, been followed by 
 the immediate dismissal of those employees 
 who had been prominent in the work of 
 organization ; and it was tolerably certain 
 that like efforts at this time would be fol- 
 lowed by like results. No question of wages 
 or conditions being urgent at the time, the 
 motive for effecting an immediate organi- 
 zation did not exist. The clause contained 
 in the statement filed by the men that ' the 
 mine-owner insisting upon all his workmen 
 residing at Ladysmith as a condition of 
 employment ' was a ground for the trouble, 
 undoubtedly contains a truth as to what 
 was a cause of complaint among a consid- 
 erable number during former years, but it 
 was not a complaint to which the demand 
 for organization at this time was in any way 
 related, either by the miners themselves, 
 at the meeting at which they decided it 
 was desirable to organize, or, in fact, since 
 the exodus had been completed for over 
 six months, and Ladysmith had already 
 become the place of residence of practically 
 all of the miners and their labourers em- 
 ployed in the Extension mines. On the other 
 hand, there had been for some time a desire 
 on the part of a few men, who at one time 
 or another had resided at Nanaimo, or were 
 pretty constantly in touch with the union 
 officials there, to effect an organization 
 among the miners at Extension. Among 
 these few, Mottishaw and Pritchard, the 
 secretary and chairman, respectively, of the 
 mass meeting at Ladysmith on March 8, 
 were conspicuous. Mottishaw admitted hav- 
 ing talked over the matter of organization 
 with different miners at Extension, and the 
 evideuce of other witnesses disclosed the 
 
 fact that he had been instrumental in en- 
 deavouring to form a committee which 
 might serve as a nucleus to effect the de- 
 sired result. It was also brought out that 
 it was Mottishaw who posted the notice 
 calling the meeting, and it was the day 
 after ^henton had promised that all pos- 
 sible assistance would be given the strik- 
 ers at Vancouver that he posted it. 
 
 Evidences of Intrigue. 
 
 The fact of Mottishaw posting the notice 
 at this time is of itself not sufScient to 
 connect him and Shenton in the matter, 
 but the circumstances that, having procured 
 from the meeting on March 8 a resolution 
 approving of organization and instructions 
 to send for the organizer, Mottishaw left 
 at once for Nanaimo, and there, after con- 
 ference with Shenton, had the latter send 
 the telegram to Baker in his (Shenton's) 
 name, does, when scrutinized in ther^ight 
 of the conflicting statements made by these 
 parties before the Commission in reference 
 to the transaction, and their relations to 
 each other, as well as subsequent events, 
 constitute, in our opinion, satisfactory 
 proof of the connection without any ad- 
 mission. 
 
 Asked before the Commission how he 
 
 came to post up the notice calling the 
 
 meeting on March 8, Mottishaw replied : 
 
 By the unanimous request of the fellow- 
 workmen. 
 
 Q. When did you begin to get these requests ? 
 
 A. Two weeks before the notice was posted 
 up. 
 
 Q. You don't happen to remember the names 
 of any men who requested you ? 
 
 A. There are some gone away. There may 
 be a few here. I could not give the names. 
 
 Mottishaw's explanation of what hap- 
 pened at the meeting oii March 8, given 
 elsewhere in his examination, is interest- 
 ing, in view of his statement that it was 
 at the unanimous request of his fellow- 
 workmen he had called the meeting to con- 
 sider an advance. Eoplying to the question 
 put by counsel for the minors as to what 
 took place at that meeting, Mottishaw said : 
 
 The first question that the chairman put to 
 the meeting was that he understood the meet- 
 ing was called to consider an advance of 10 or 
 15 per cent, not more than 15, but left it to the 
 
42 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 men whether It should be 10 or 15. The major- 
 ity of the men did not want to hear anything 
 about an advance. They thought it was no use 
 attempting to get an advance without organi- 
 zation. Every one was clamouring tor organi- 
 zation and that knocked the first question out. 
 The meeting was called on purpose to ask for 
 an advance, and not for the purpose of organiza- 
 tion at all. 
 
 Q. Was it the general consensus of* opinion 
 to have some form of organization ? 
 
 A. Yes, it was sprung on the meeting sud- 
 denly. 
 
 Contradictions and Evasions in Evidence 
 of Secretary of Ladysmith Meeting. 
 
 Quite as interesting were the contradic- 
 tions, pointing to an evident desire at 
 concealment, made by Mottishaw in his 
 evidence in regard to interviews with any 
 of the Nanaimo officials. 
 
 Counsel for the miners in a leading ques- 
 tion designed to establish a plausible reason 
 for the men at Ladysmith choosing the 
 Western Federation of Miners as the or- 
 ganization with which they desired to be- 
 come allied, had suggested to the witness 
 that the men at Ladysmith knew at the 
 time that the miners working at Nanaimo 
 were organized as a branch of the Western 
 Federation of Miners, to which Mottishaw 
 assented. Then following this question, the 
 question was put — 
 
 So from your Intercourse with workmen at 
 Nanaimo you had some knowledge of the organi- 
 zation ? 
 
 Immediately Mottishaw replied — ■ 
 
 I did not have any intercourse with the Nan- 
 aimo men. 
 
 Elsewhere on the same point he was ques- 
 tioner!, and answered as follows : — 
 
 Q. You lived in Nanaimo ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And were familiar with the workings of 
 the organization there ? 
 
 A. No, I was not in the lodge but once. 
 
 Q. You had familiarized yourself with the 
 workings o£ the organization ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Never talked with any Nanaimo men, or 
 with the labour leaders ? 
 
 A. Not until after the trouble. 
 
 Q. What date — the day you fixed the meet- 
 ing ? 
 
 A. Yes, I had talked with no one until after 
 the meeting. 
 
 Q. Had any one talked to you at Nanaimo 
 about organization at Ladysmith before the 
 meeitans ? 
 
 A. Yes, I believe that cropped up there. 
 
 Q. How did it crop up there ? 
 
 A. I suppose there was a general feeling that 
 we ought to be organized, and able to defend 
 ourselves. 
 
 Q. You talked about the probability of being 
 able to effect organization at Ladysmith ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you only talk with one person on that 
 subject at Nanaimo ? 
 
 A. There were very few. 
 
 Q. Was it because your conversations were 
 confidential, or because there was no one else 
 Interested ? 
 
 A. I think all the men were generally Inter- 
 ested. 
 
 Q. So this was confidential, and consequently 
 you only talked to a few ? 
 
 A. It may be so. 
 
 Q. M^as it, or was it not ? 
 
 A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. You did not want to start the work of or- 
 ganization until you thought it would be a suc- 
 cess ? 
 
 A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. And you discussed the prospects of Its be- 
 ing a success ? 
 
 A. Yes, I wanted to make It a success. 
 
 Q. And when you had discussed the plan you 
 came to Ladysmith and talked It over here ? 
 
 A. Casually. 
 
 Q. Every time you talked to the men when 
 you considered it safe ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And when you had got a sufficient number 
 of them, you posted a notice of the meeting ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Nowhere in his evidence did Mottishaw 
 make any allusion to any conversation 
 with Shenton, nor to the telegram which 
 had been sent by Shenton to Baker at his 
 request. 
 
 Contradictions and Evasions in Evidence 
 
 of Secretary of Nanaimo Union, 
 
 W. F. of M. 
 
 Shenton was called before the Commis- 
 sion a number of times and questioned in 
 regard to his relations with Mottishaw, and 
 his knowledge of attempts on the part of 
 the United Brotherhood of Eailway. Em- 
 ployees and the Western Federation of 
 Miners to effect a stoppage of coal from the 
 mines of the Wellington Colliery Com- 
 pany. The conscious evasions and the in- 
 explicable contradictions contained in the 
 statements of this witness before the Com- 
 mission render unintelligible much of the 
 evidence given by him, and ho cannot be 
 regarded in any light other than as one 
 who went to the limit in withholding from 
 the Commission all information about 
 those matters which he thought it wisest 
 to have remain concealed. 
 
 With a knowledge of the fact that the 
 president of the Western Federation at 
 Denver had wired to him to prevent the 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 43 
 
 Canadian Pacific Eailway from getting 
 coal on Vancouver Island, and to assist 
 the strikers all he could, with this telegram 
 still in his possession, and a full knowl- 
 edge of the reply sent, and the circum- 
 stances under which it had been prepared, 
 he replied in his first examination to some 
 of the questions bearing on this matter 
 as follows : — 
 
 Q. Do you know Mr. Estes ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Have you had any correspondence with 
 hina ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. It is stated that he said to the Board of 
 Trade in Vancouver that he had communicated 
 wibh the executive o£ the Western Federation 
 at Denver ; and that they had endorsed his 
 request, aind that if the strilce were persisted 
 in he would call out all the coal miners on 
 Vancouver Island. Could he dio that ? 
 
 A. Thajt would be a questionable position. 
 
 Q. You think he was stating what was not 
 true when he s.tated that the exeoutive at Den- 
 vcT had endorsed his application ? 
 
 A. No. it the Wesitern Federation had, as an 
 executive board representing the whole body, 
 approved of that, then it has to be submitted 
 to the loioal union, and I am pretty sure 
 
 Q. Then it is possible that on Mr. Estes' ap- 
 plication a request could be made by the execu- 
 tive from Deniver that this union sliould go out 
 en strilte in sympathy with the United Brother- 
 hood of Railway Employees — that is possible ? 
 
 A. It could make the request — I don't, know. 
 
 Q. Mr. Esites says it is possible, and that he 
 had a telegram to show it. Is he right or 
 wrong ? 
 
 A. If he is right, then we don't know it. It 
 Is not in the constitutioin. 
 
 Q. Then, if Mr. Estes is right, it must be 
 that while the oomstitution makes a general 
 statement, the executive can interpret it in 
 particular instances, the way he mentions ? 
 
 A. It might be that. 
 
 Q. What do yom think abcut it ? 
 
 A. Well. I simply think little about it. 
 
 Q. You don't believe Mr. Estes' statement 
 then ? 
 
 A. Well, I would not like to discredit the 
 statement exactly, of Mr. Estes, but we have 
 n/ot been made resiponsible for that statement 
 through the Federation. 
 
 Q. That is not the point. I am simply ask- 
 ing you if, under the constitution, and in ac- 
 cor.daiijce with the manner of the interpreta- 
 tion, at Mr. Estes' request, could the executive 
 nrake that call on you ? 
 
 A. Well, there is nothing in the constitution 
 saying so. 
 
 Q. The.n you don't know whether it could 
 or not ? 
 
 A. No, I am not Just exactly aware. There Is 
 nothing to inform me, in the constitution, thit 
 he could do that. 
 
 Replying elsewhere to a similar question 
 
 Shenton said : — 
 
 Well. I feelThis regarding that matter. Sup- 
 posing it may be possible — we are not sure 
 what Mr. Estes' says is correct — well, in the 
 abse'uce of anything to the contrary that it is 
 correct, we would not like to say it is not, 
 
 but so far as 1 know, we are not aware of 
 the fact that he could do that, and if a request 
 of the executive board of the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners was made, it would have to be 
 endlorS'Sd or rejected in accordance with the 
 local union's vote. 
 
 Q. Supposing the statement made by Mr. 
 Estes was true — ^that he had that power, with 
 the assurance that he would call out the 
 miners on Vancouver Island — would that sur- 
 prise you ? 
 
 A. Yes, it would, to some extent. 
 
 Q. It would present the Western Federation 
 in a light that you did not conceive it pos- 
 sible to be viewed in. Do you think your local 
 is subject to a possible call of that kind ? It 
 is a case that does not affect your wages or 
 your work, simply the general cause of labour ? 
 
 A. I ha.rdly think they would do it, nor I 
 don't think if a request of that nature was 
 made, it would certainly on our part be opposed. 
 
 Matters of fact denied. 
 
 During the same examination on- May 
 
 21, Shenton was asked in regard to the 
 
 organization of the miners at Ladysmith : 
 
 You had no connection with the agitation and 
 organization at Ladysmith ? 
 
 With a full knowledge of his conversa- 
 tions with llottishaw on the subject, and of 
 the fact that he had himself, at Mottishaw's 
 request, written out and signed the telegram 
 which brought Baker to Ladysmith to or- 
 ganize, he replied to this question ' none 
 whatever,' and further testified as follows : — 
 
 Q. You never suggested to any person that 
 they should go to Ladysmith to organize ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. You had no communication with Mr. Mot- 
 tishaw on that subject ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. No talk with him on the subject of or- 
 ganization at Ladysmith ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. No suggestion that some one should go to 
 Ladysmith and bring about organization ? 
 
 A. No, I don't remember. 
 
 Q. You had no conversation with Mr. Motti- 
 shaw which in any way bore on the question of 
 organization at Ladysmith ? 
 
 A. Since then, since the organization ? 
 
 Q. But before the meeting was held, the meet- 
 ing to call on Ladysmith ? 
 
 A. I was going to say that I did not know 
 anything about the meeting that was called. 
 
 Q. When did you have a conversation with 
 him, what was it about ? 
 
 A. Well, the only conversation I had with 
 Mr. Mottishaw — I had a talk with him prior to 
 that — just previous to that meeting. I don't 
 know anything about the meeting. 
 
 Q. Did you know it was being talked of prior 
 to the meeting ? 
 
 A. Yes, representations had been made in sev- 
 eral instances at Nanaimo that the men down 
 there were wishful to organize. That is about 
 the sum and substance of the conversation that 
 transpired. Then I had no conversations until 
 afterwards. 
 
 ' Q. The iirst conversation was before the meet- 
 ing, and it was to the effect of the communica- 
 
44 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSIOlf 
 
 tion from Mr. Mottishaw that the men were an- 
 xious to organize at Ladysmith ? 
 
 A. No, none by letter. 
 
 Q. I mean the statement by Mr. Mottishaw to 
 you, that the men at Ladysmith wanted to or- 
 ganize T 
 
 A. It was commonly repeated by men passing 
 to and tro from here to Ladysmith — that that 
 was so. 
 
 Q. V/hat did Mr. Mottishaw say about It to 
 you ? 
 
 A. Mr. Mottishaw Simply repeated the state- 
 ments made by other parties. 
 
 Q. Did he volunteer the statements, or did 
 you ask some questions ? 
 
 A. Mostly volunteered. 
 
 Q. What part was not volunteered, or what 
 part was not brought out by you ? Did he be- 
 gin the conversation or did you ? 
 
 A. He began the conversation. 
 
 Q. What did he say ? 
 
 A. I am open to tell you exactly what he said. 
 It will help my case. Mr. Mottishaw has been 
 in the habit of coming into town. He has a 
 house here. He said that the men were feeling 
 disposed to be organized at Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. That is what he told you ? 
 
 A. Yes, and other men prior to me. 
 
 Evidence given on previous Examination 
 subsequently refuted. 
 
 On June 1 Shenton was recalled before 
 the Commission, and shown the telegram 
 of March 9, sent by him to Baker, and ask- 
 ed if he could explain it. His reply was 
 that he guessed he could, but he would like 
 to ask whether the ConiTuission expected to 
 make him responsible for everything con- 
 niclci-l with ' our consolidated organization.' 
 Oji being told that the Commission had 
 been appointed to find out all the facts, and 
 that he was simply asked to explain the 
 telegram, he asked if he might be allowed 
 an adjournment until he had conferred 
 with other men. Asked if there was any- 
 thing in the matter, he had reason to bo 
 ashamed of, his reply was — ' No, I don't 
 think so. These things are connected be- 
 tween our union and the Federation, and 
 I might be committing myself in regard to 
 the secret and private affairs of otir or- 
 ganization. If I have to give this I would 
 like an adjournment until I can consult 
 with the parties and confer with our lawyer 
 in the matter.' On his undertaking to ap- 
 ^pear before the Commission at Vancouver 
 on June 3, he was not questioned further 
 at the time in regard to it. Questioned at 
 Vancouver on June 3, in regard to this 
 telegram, his reply was as follows : — 
 
 As near as I can remember that telegram 
 for the calling on Mr. Baker was in connection 
 with — was simply sent from Nanaimo as for- 
 warded on from Ladysmith in connection, I 
 think, with the organization of the miners at 
 that town as a request. I believe this is the 
 same telegram. 
 
 Q. Then the object of this telegram was to 
 come and organize the miners at Ladysmith ? 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why did you send it ? 
 
 A. I think I am mistaken your Lordship ; 
 there are so many telegrams. I think I am sub- 
 stituting that telegram in the wrong place. That 
 is the telegram that was sent rather — I remem- 
 ber now — that is the telegram that was sent — 
 there were two sent — in connection with the pos- 
 sible trouble that we had in sight at our own 
 place, and we wanted Mr. Baker there in connec- 
 tion with our own trouble, and I was requested 
 to send for him immediately. That is the tele- 
 gram. 
 Q. What trouble was in sight ? 
 A. That was in connection with the local dis- 
 pute that occurred there ; in the month of 
 February I think it was. 
 Q. When was that ilo^al dispute settled ? 
 A. That was settled about the latter part of 
 February. 
 
 Q. I think you must still be mistaken, Mr. 
 Shenton, because this telegram is dated March 
 9. so it cannot have anything to do with that 
 dispute ? 
 
 A. Yes, your Lordship, but the matter was 
 under way for three or tour weeks pending. 
 
 Q. But you told us the dispute was settled 
 the end of February, and here is the telegram 
 sent on March 9, asiking Mr. Baker to come 
 immediately. You also say there is an urgent 
 request for his presence 7 
 
 A. Yes, it is in connection with the matter 
 on hand then ; it extended over a. period of 
 three or four weeks. 
 
 Q. But you tell ua that particular trouble 
 was settled at the end of February. I am 
 reminding you that this telegram is dated on 
 March 9, and the strike at Ladysmith took 
 ni&c-e on March U. In view of that is not 
 your first answer the correct one ? 
 A. (No answer.) 
 
 Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. I think it must be, because Mr. Baker said 
 he was called about the 10th of March ; he said 
 that in his evidence. 
 
 A. 1 am not able to recall. I am not clear. 
 I am sorry. 
 
 His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Is It not clear that the object of the tele- 
 gram was to request him to come and organize 
 the men at Ladysmith— this telegram on the 9th 
 of March, sent by you 7 
 
 A. I cannot recall the matter clearly. 
 
 Q. It is the reasonable and obvious conclusion 
 that that is the meaning of the telegram is It 
 not ? 
 
 A. It seems so, although I thought— I know 
 there was a second telegram urging Mr. Baker 
 to come immediately in connection with our 
 trouble. I have forgotten the date. 
 Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Did he come 7 
 
 A. Yes, he was at Nanaimo during the dis- 
 pute, as speedily as he could be got there. 
 His Lordship : 
 
 Q. He answered on March 10 that he would 
 leave Fernie for Nanaimo ' to-morrow morning ' 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 45 
 
 and he himself says lu his evidence that he was 
 sent to organize. I suppose there is no diffi- 
 culty in coming to the conclusion that this is 
 the telegram ? 
 
 A. Yes, I guess it must be. I cannot just 
 recall all the telegrams. We had our own 
 trouble somewhere about that time. 
 
 Q. Who requested you to send this telegram ? 
 
 A. The request of Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Who at Ladysmith requested you ? 
 
 A. I think it was Mr. Mottishaw, if I am not 
 mistaken. 
 
 Q. Why should they not have sent the tele- 
 gram direct instead of through you ? 
 
 A. Well, I don't know that they have any 
 telegraph ofHce at Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Yes, there is a telegraph office at Lady- 
 smith ? 
 
 A. Yes, that is right ; I don't know why they 
 did that. 
 
 Q. Who paid for this telegram ? 
 
 A. The Ladysmith— Mr. Mottishaw. 
 
 Q. They paid for it ? 
 
 A. A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did not you pay for it at the Nanaimo 
 office ? 
 
 A. Not that I am aware of. 
 
 Q. How did you geit the telegram from Lady- 
 smith ? How were you instructed to send this 
 telegram — ^by letter ? 
 
 A. If my memory serves me right, Mr, Motti- 
 shaw came into town on the day. 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why did not you ask him to send it him- 
 self ? 
 
 A. Well, usually, as men knowing each other, 
 we will help each other in that regard. He 
 simply asked me to send it for him. 
 
 Q. If that is the case, why should you ask 
 Baker to oome to Nanaimo, rather than Lady- 
 smith ? 
 
 A. I cannot see that there was any special 
 reason why, Mr. Hunter. 
 
 Q. Is it not the obvious inference that It was 
 Intended to discuss the matter before proceeding 
 to Ladysmith ? 
 
 A. No, I think not. The only connection I 
 have with that circumstance is the fact of my 
 being called on, and that was to suit his con- 
 venience in regard to sending that telegram ; 
 that is all. 
 
 Q. .4nd you say it is a wrong inference to 
 suppose that Mr. Baker should have a discussion 
 with you and other Nanaimo leaders before he 
 proceeded to Ladysmith ? Is that correct or 
 
 wrong ? , , . ^1. 
 
 A. I think that is correct simply from the 
 fact, as I have stated previously in my evi- 
 dence, that we always tried to keep out of the 
 matter because the Ladysmith men, or Duns- 
 rauir's employees, had been feeling a little sore 
 with Nanaimo having anything to do with the 
 matter, and we tried to keep out of it as much 
 as possible. 
 
 Q. If that is the case, why did not you tell Mot- 
 tishaw to send the telegram himself ? 
 
 A. In the first place he is a very poor writer ; 
 it was only a matter of convenience. 
 
 Q. But you could have signed Mottishaw's 
 name to the telegram ?, 
 
 A. Yes. I could have ; I cannot Just say now 
 why I signed my own name. I am willing to con- 
 fess my name was signed. 
 
 Q I don't see why you make so much mystery 
 over the matter, Mr. Shenton. You would 
 naturally like to see a union at Ladysmith, as 
 a union man ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you would naturally do all you could 
 with Mr. Baker to suggest the best way of doing 
 it, would you not ? 
 
 A. Well, that was not the reason why he was 
 sent for to come to Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. What was the reason v/hy he was asked to 
 co:me to Nanaimo ? 
 
 A. As I have said, I don't know that there was 
 any SDecial reason that I could give. 
 
 Q. Then you don't want us to inter that it 
 was the intention that you and he should have 
 a talk over the matter before he proceeded to 
 Ladysmith ? 
 
 A. No, I don't. 
 
 Q. Yet it is the obvious inference, is it not ? 
 Is that not so ? 
 
 A. Well, it may appear to te so, but at the 
 time, as far as my knowledge goes, that was 
 not so. 
 
 Q. Why was he to come immediately to 
 Nannimo ? What was the urgency ? 
 
 A. Well, of course that meant immediately to 
 Ladysmith, I guess. 
 
 Q. What was the urgency ? 
 
 A, The only urgency that I know is that the 
 men had stated they vi'anted to organize at 
 Ladysmith, and they wanted him there to 
 organize them. 
 
 Q. Now, did Mr. Baker show you a telegram 
 which he sent to Moyer, asking Moyer to come 
 to Nanaimo ? 
 
 A. Yes, I believe I have seen the telegram.* 
 
 Q. So tha.t Mr. Baker and you were discus- 
 sing this matter together evidently ? 
 
 A. Well, at times of course, naturally so. 
 Mr. Baker and myself talked the matter over ; 
 that was only natural. 
 
 Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Did you see Mr. Baker before he went 
 to Ladysmith. when he came to Nanaimo ? 
 
 A. If I did see him it was just on matters of 
 his business there. I don't remember having 
 any conversation with him at all when he came 
 to N-a.njaimo. 
 
 Q. He would naturally want to know why you 
 sent for him ? ' 
 
 A. Of course the Ladysmith men — that is, Mr. 
 Mottishaw — knew he was coming and the time 
 he would be there, and we waited and received 
 him there, to conduct him down to Ladysmith. 
 
 His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did Baker show you a telegram dated 
 March 14, in which Moyer tells him he has 
 full power to act for the Federation ? 
 
 A. Yes. I think I have seen that. 
 
 Q. So that there is no doubt that Mr. Baker 
 and you were consulting frequently about the 
 organization of these men at Ladysmith, and 
 about the strike generally ? 
 
 A. Mr. Baker often came to me with either 
 letters, communications or telegrams from 
 Moyer, and would read them to me. 
 
 Q. And Baker was taking advice from you as 
 to how to conduct the affair ? 
 
 A. Not that I am aware of. 
 
 Q. He would naturally take advice from some- 
 body on the subject ? 
 
 A. I don't know as to advice ; we simply 
 talked over the matter. 
 
 * This telegram was in cipher. Elsewhere 
 in his evidence, when Informed of this fact, 
 Shenton denied having seen the telegram, and 
 said that Baker had ' informed me regarding 
 the matter." 
 
45 
 
 BRITISB COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 Q. He was consulting with you from time to 
 time ? That is the evidence by this correspon- 
 dence, is it not ? 
 
 A. Well, if he took advice from any discus- 
 sions that we had, of course I don't know any- 
 thing at)out it. 
 
 Q. Well, he was discussing the matter with 
 you anyway ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Who else did he discuss it with ? I mean 
 o£ the Nanaimo men ? 
 
 A. He had a tew conversations with the presi- 
 dent ; I cannot say how may times they met. 
 
 Q. This is Mr. Neave ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And I suppose you and Mr. Neave had dis- 
 cussions about the situation ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. He is president, and you are secretary of 
 the union ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When did Baker get to Nanaimo ? 
 
 A. I don't remember the date of that either. 
 
 Q. About the 11th or 12th of March, was it 
 not ? Because he sends a telegram to Moyer on 
 the 13th for Nanaimo, and you asked him to 
 come on the 9th. so he must have come between 
 the 11th and 12th ? 
 
 A. Yes, somewhere between those dates. 
 
 Q. Were you at Ladysmith about that time ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q, How long before that were yoiu at Lady- 
 smith ? 
 
 A. I don't know how long before that. 
 
 Q. You had a conversation with Mottishaw 
 about the advisability of organizing the Lady- 
 smith men ? 
 
 A. He had a conversation with me regarding 
 the matter, yes. 
 
 Q. When was that ? 
 
 A. Previous, I tihink, to the time of organiza- 
 tion ; I cannot just remember the date. He 
 had a conversation with me. 
 
 At this examination on June 3, Shenton 
 was required to produce all documents in 
 his possession bearing in any way on the 
 situation. Among the papers produced was 
 the telegram of March 6, from Moyer to 
 himself : ' U,se your best efforts to pre- 
 vent Canadian Pacific from getting coal at 
 Vancouver. Assist strikers all you can.' 
 Asked if he received this telegram, he an- 
 swered ' Yes.' Asked if he did not know of 
 these telegrams when questioned in regard 
 to the matter in his examination at Nanai- 
 mo, he replied, ' Yes,' and pressed as to why 
 he had said nothing of them, gave, as an 
 explanation, that the questions which had 
 been put to him were not directly on the 
 point. 
 
 Admissions that Organization of Lady- 
 smith Miners would lead to Strike. 
 Questioned as to whether he did not 
 know that if he got the Western Confedera- 
 tion organized at Ladysmith they would 
 
 demand recognition, and there would be a 
 strike immediately, he answered that he 
 believed these things were possible in the 
 trend of events. 
 
 Q. Did not you think that was going to hap- 
 pen ? Did not you think in your own mind 
 that that would be the result of the action ? 
 If the Western Federation was organized they 
 would demand recognition, Dunsmuir would 
 refuse it. .i.nd there would be a strike. Did no;t 
 you think that was the course ? 
 
 A. I foresaw that was possible, but we did 
 not expect that. 
 
 Q. Will you swear that you did not expect 
 that result ? 
 
 A. Well, we were hopeful it would not. 
 
 After Shenton had admitted later in his 
 examination that he knew Mr. Dunsmuir 
 would not recognize a union, and had ex- 
 pressed himself over and over again to the 
 effect that he would not have a union 
 among his men, the question was put : 
 
 Q. Now, I ask you, if you did not expect when 
 you organized the union at Ladysmith that they 
 would demand recognition ? 
 
 He replied : 
 
 Yes, I expected they would demand recogni- 
 tion. 
 
 Q. And did not you expect that Mr. Dunsmuir 
 would refuse it as he had always done in the 
 past ? Did not you look for it ? 
 
 A. It was most likely of course. 
 
 Q. You knew the kind of man Mr. Dunsmuir 
 is, so you knew it would be refused and did 
 not you expect a strike would follow ''' 
 
 A. Well, of course I did. 
 
 Q. And would not a strike at Ladysmith shut 
 off the Canadian Pacific Railway supply of coal 
 to the best of your knowledge and information ■' 
 
 A. Yes, it would. 
 
 Significance of Organization by W. F. of 
 M. Tinder circumstances. 
 
 Hardly less significant than the admis- 
 sions contained in these statements 'are 
 the circumstances under which the work 
 of organization at Ladysmith was effected 
 by the official representative of the Western 
 Federation in Canada. On the 11th of 
 February the strike involving all of the 
 coal miners in the employ of the Crow's 
 Nest Pass Coal Company at the company's 
 mines at Fernie, Michel and Morissey com- 
 menced. The men in these camps had been 
 organized as locals of the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners some little time before ; 
 and the recognition of a joint committee' 
 of the officials of these unions by the com- 
 pany was, as has been pointed out, one of 
 
BKITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 47 
 
 the cardinal issues in the dispute. Tliis 
 strike had been in continuance for four 
 weeks. Baker, who had organized these 
 unions, and was particularly interested in 
 bringing about a successful issue, was at 
 Fernie with the union officials there at the 
 time that Shenton wired the urgent request 
 for his presence a Nanaimo, ' to come im- 
 mediately if possible.' Ho replied to this 
 telegram ©n March 10 : ' Will leave hero 
 for Nanaimo to-morrow evening.' He ar- 
 rived at Nanaimo on either the 12th or 
 13th of March. He had come to organize 
 the Ladysmith miners as a branch of the 
 Western Federation, but encountered, upon 
 his arrival, a situation which gave the 
 question of organization at Ladysmith a 
 more serious aspect. The miners had struck 
 on the 12th, so that to organize them under 
 these circumstances meant that the West- 
 ern Federation of Miners must ass^ime at 
 once the obligation of financial aid which, 
 escept for special and urgent reasons, was 
 not to be lightly undertaken. Baker evi- 
 dently felt the critical nature of the situa- 
 tion, for instead of going on immediately 
 to Ladysmith he stayed at Nanaimo, con- 
 sulting with Shenton and other parties 
 there, and on the 13th of March wired from 
 Nanaimo in cipher to Meyer, the president 
 of the Western Federation of Miners at 
 Denver : ' Can you come here ; important ; 
 answer.' To this telegram Moyer replied 
 on the following day : ' Situation such can- 
 not leave; you have full powers to act for 
 Western Federation of Miners.' With this 
 authority from headquarters. Baker pro- 
 ceeded forthwith from Nanaimo to Lady- 
 smith, and on the 15 th of March organized 
 the strikers into a local of the Western 
 Federation, giving them full assurances 
 that they now had the Western Federation 
 at their backs. 
 
 Ladysmith Strike brought about by In- 
 trigue of TJ. B. R. ju. and W. F. of M. 
 
 Taking all the facts and circumstances 
 into account, the nature of the organiza- 
 tions concerned, the United Brotherhood 
 of Eailway Employees and the Western 
 
 Federation of Miners, and their relations 
 to the American Labour Union; the ac- 
 tions of the executive officers in the United 
 States and Canada, and the known corres- 
 pondence which passed between them; the 
 request from the U.B.R.E. president that 
 the supply of coal from Ladysmith and 
 Union should be stopped, and the reply 
 from the Western Federation officials that 
 the request had been complied with; the 
 command from headquarters to the Nana- 
 imo local to prevent coal being supplied 
 the railway, and to assist strikers all they 
 could; the evident desire on the part of 
 Mottishaw and Shenton to conceal from 
 the Commission what they knew of the 
 circumstances surrounding the establish- 
 ment of organization at Ladysmith; the 
 wilful misstatements and contradictions of 
 each of these witrussses on material points; 
 the fact admitted by Shenton that he knew 
 a strike would probably ensue on the forma- 
 tion of a union at Ladysmith, and that he 
 had conversed with Mottishaw on the 
 matter; Mottishaw's denial that he had had 
 any conversation with Shenton prior to the 
 meeting; the hasty manner in which so 
 important a step was taken by the miners 
 at Ladysmith; the part played by Motti- 
 shaw in secretly posting the notice calling 
 the meeting, and his being the secretary of 
 the meeting; the joint action of Mottishaw 
 and Shenton in the matter of the telegram 
 sent to Baker urging his immediate pre- 
 sence; the denial of Shenton at the outset 
 of having had anything to do in the send- 
 ing of this telegram; Baker's further con- 
 versation after arrival at Nanaimo M'ith 
 officials there, and his comumnications with 
 headquarters at Denver before taking final 
 action ; the incurring by the Western Fede- 
 ration of Miners of an enormous obliga- 
 tion at a time when its resources were 
 already being heavily taxed in virtue of 
 difficulties at other points in the Dominion 
 and in the United States — all these facts 
 and circumstances, coupled with the ab- 
 sence of any general desire among the 
 miners at Ladysmith for organization at 
 the time, or dissatisfaction with the wages 
 or the conditions of their employment, 
 
43 
 
 BRITI8E COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 load us to the inevitable conclusion that 
 the trouble at Ladysmith would never have 
 taken place but for the strike of the United 
 Brotlioi'hood of Railway Employees at Van- 
 couver; that it originated in the intrigues 
 of a few men, who, in part consciously, in 
 part imwittingly, allowed themselves to be 
 used as instruments to serve the desires 
 and ends of a handful of dictators residing 
 in the United States, and who are not in 
 any way amenable to the laws of this 
 country or responsible to those of its in- 
 habitants whom they succeed in enlisting 
 in the forces over which they hold sway. 
 
 Ke Compulsory Removal of "Wellington 
 
 Colliery Company's Employees from 
 
 Extension to Ladysmith. 
 
 Eeverting to the allegation made in the 
 statement filed by the 'miners, that their 
 forced removal to Ladysmith was one of the 
 grounds primarily responsible for the trou- 
 ble, we think that this was a small factor, if 
 a factor at all, in the promotion of the or- 
 ganization. The removal had taken place 
 more than six months before — many had 
 moved over a year before, — and there is 
 nothing in the evidence to show that this 
 was a subject of discussion in the agitation 
 leading up to the organization. Moreover, 
 the majority seemed to be satisfied to live 
 at Ladysmith, as that place is much to be 
 preferred as a place of residence to Exten- 
 sion. The former is on the main line, and 
 the town site overloolcs the sea, is easily 
 
 drained, and good water is available; the 
 latter lies in a depression in the hills, and 
 is badly situated from a sanitary point of 
 view. 
 
 At the same time, there is no doubt that 
 the removal was effected in an arbitrary 
 way, and caused more or less loss to a num- 
 ber of the men, which has not been recoup- 
 ed. The order was given verbally to the 
 foreman, who passed it on to the men, and 
 some few who persisted in disobeying the 
 order were dropped out of employment. The 
 company charged nothing for carrying the 
 men's effects and what houses were pulled 
 down to Ladysmith, but did not pay the 
 cost of their re-erection, or recoup those of 
 the men whose houses were left, the losses 
 as sworn to, ranging from $150 to $300. 
 
 Although about 200 families were re- 
 moved by virtue of the order, the contention 
 of the company was that its intention to 
 establish the miners at Ladysmith was made 
 clear shortly after starting up the mines, 
 while a good many of the miners maintain- 
 ed that the decision was not finally arrived 
 at or announced until after they had leased 
 ground and erected their houses. How- 
 ever this may be, the dissatisfaction of 
 many seemed to be not so much with the 
 removal as with the way in which it was 
 brought about, and it is just such arbitrary 
 and inconsiderate dealing that antagonizes 
 employees to their employers, and is at once 
 a provocation and justification for the for- 
 mation of unions. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 CHAP. V— THE STEIKE AT UNION, 
 
 ON May 2, tlie miners in tlie employ of 
 the Wellington Colliery Company at 
 Union went on strike \inder circumstances 
 somewhat similar to the Extension miners 
 seven weeks before. A local of the Western 
 Federation of Miners was formed at Union 
 on April 5. Almost immediately after its 
 formation one after the other of the officials 
 of the union were dropped from the com- 
 pany's employ. This was not done in the 
 way of a direct dismissal, but as their 
 places in the mine were worked out, new 
 places were not given to them. Before the 
 end of the month the services of all the 
 of&cers, of whom there were nine, with the 
 exception of two, had been dispensed with 
 in this way ; also the services of other min- 
 ers holding the offices of trustees of the 
 union. On May 1, a committee of three of 
 the union interviewed Matthews, the man- 
 ager, and asked for a reinstatement of the 
 men dismissed, in the order of their dis- 
 missal. This request Matthews refused, 
 stating to the committee that as Mr. Duns- 
 muir had refused to recognize any union, 
 he was unwilling to do so. Notices were 
 immediately posted, calling a meeting of 
 the union for the following day. At the 
 meeting the following resolution was car- 
 ried : ' That because officers discharged af- 
 ter organization on April 5, we take a bal- 
 lot on whether or not we stop work till 
 such time as the officials and members who 
 have been discriminated against by the 
 Wellington Colliery Company are reinstat- 
 ed in their proper order, with full recogni- 
 tion of the Western Federation of Miners.' 
 According to the return given by the secre- 
 tary to the Commission, out of 208 votes 
 cast on this resolution only 12 were op- 
 posed to it. As a result of this decision all 
 of the miners in No. 4 mine quit work. 
 
 The Strike at Union part of a !?eneral 
 intrigue. 
 
 The organization of the miners at Union 
 into a union at this time, and the subse- 
 
 quent declaration of strike cannot, in our 
 opinion, be accounted for except as part of 
 the general scheme to tie up the coal sup- 
 ply on Vancouver Island, in aid of the 
 U.B.E.E. strikers at Vancouver. The strike 
 at Union was in reality a strike in sym- 
 pathy with the men who were out at Lady- 
 smith, and the manner in which this was 
 procured cannot be too carefully consid- 
 ered, as illustrating, on the one hand, the 
 secret and irresponsible nature of the in- 
 ner workings of the Western JTederation of 
 Miners and the deceptive practices of some 
 of its most prominent officials ; and on the 
 other, the comparatively simple manner in 
 which a body of men may, at the instance 
 of a few persons of ordinary adroitness and 
 cunning, be drawn into a deplorable situa- 
 tion, from which they are unable to extri- 
 cate themselves without humiliation and 
 loss. 
 
 What the exact relations were at this 
 time between Baker, the Canadian organ- 
 izer of the Western Federation of Miners 
 and Estes, the president of the United 
 Brotherhood of Eailway Employees, the 
 Commissioners were unable to ascertain, 
 owing to the absence of the latter from the 
 country at the time the Commission was 
 holding its sittings at Vancouver. How- 
 ever, the evidence obtained from many 
 sources leaves no question as to the design 
 of the Brotherhood and its president in 
 attempting the stoppage of the coal supply 
 from Vancouver Island, while the actions 
 of the Canadian organizer of the Western 
 Federation tend, on the whole, to indicate 
 very clearly that he was a prime mover in 
 the furthering of this design. 
 
 Efforts of U. B. K. E. to stop Coal Supply 
 at Union. 
 
 Amongst other facts mentioned in the 
 account already given of the efforts made 
 by the strikers at Vancouver to stop the 
 coal supply to the Canadian Pacific, it will 
 be remembered that the telegram sent on 
 
50 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 Jlarcli 4 by Estes to Clarence Smith, sec- 
 retary of the American Labour Union, 
 mentioned Union as one of the points on 
 Vancouver Island at which the Western 
 Federation was to refuse coal to be loaded 
 on cars, steamships, boats or hulks, the 
 object being to cut off the Canadian Pacific 
 Railway from its supply of coal. Union, 
 as well as Ladysmith, was, therefore, aimed 
 at in the telegram sent by the president of 
 the Western Federation at Denver to Shen- 
 ton, the secretary of the Nanaimo union, 
 when the former wired : ' Use your best 
 efforts to prevent Canadian Pacific from 
 getting coal at Vancouver. Assist strikers 
 all you can,' to which the reply was : ' We 
 will render all assistance possible.' The 
 following circular, signed in prominent 
 type,_' George Estes, president U.B.E.E.,' 
 was printed at Seattle, and distributed in 
 different places after the sympathetic strike 
 of the longshoremen, steamshipmen and 
 teamsters had been declared at Vancouver: 
 NOTICE ! 
 
 TO ALL, UNION MEN. 
 
 The United Brotherhood ol Railway Em- 
 ployees, International Longshoremen's' Union 
 No. 211, British Columbia Steamship Society 
 and Teamsters Union of Vancouver, B.C. 
 
 Are . involved in a strike with the Canadian 
 Pacific Railway Company. The United Brother- 
 hood has ordered out the members of that 
 organization at Vancouver, Revelstoke, Calgary, 
 Coutney, Rossland, Winnipeg and Fort William. 
 
 This strike was due to the Canadian Pacific 
 Railway Company trying to destroy Unionism 
 on Its line. 
 
 The three above named organizations have 
 struck in order to assist the United Brother- 
 hood. 
 
 The Western Federation oi Miners will be 
 asked to stop the mining of coal on Vancouver 
 Island in order to deprive the Canadian Pacifio 
 Railway o£ fuel, and they will strike within the 
 next few days. 
 
 II you are a Union Man, or if you are friendly 
 to Unionism, stay away from British Columbia, 
 and ask your friends to do likewise, as this is 
 a fight to a finish, and the Canadian Pacifio 
 Railway must give in or the United Brother- 
 hood of Railway Employees with the assistance 
 o£ th# other organizations will carry on the 
 battle indefinitely. 
 
 We asic the aid and co-operation of all Unions 
 in helping us to make this struggle a success, 
 and in the end the victory must be ours. 
 
 GEOliGE ESTES, 
 President U.B.R.E. 
 Denny-Coryell Co. Printers, Seattle. 
 
 This circular was evidently prepared by 
 authority of Estes as president of the 
 U.E.K.E., with the full knowledge of what 
 
 might be expected from the Western Feder- 
 ation of Miners in view of the request by 
 the American Labour Union to, them for 
 assistance to the Brotherhood, or at least 
 as the result of some mutual understand- 
 ing between the parties. 
 
 The Organizer of W. F. of M. remains on 
 Vancouver Island. 
 
 After his arrival at Nanaimo for the 
 purpose of organizing the men at Lady- 
 smith, and after the organization of the 
 latter place had been formed. Baker re- 
 mained on the island, making Nanaimo 
 his headquarters ; this, as already men- 
 tioned, notwithstanding the fact that the 
 strike in the camps at Fernie, Michel and 
 Morissey continued to the last day of the- 
 month, and was causing some anxiety to 
 the Denver officials, as evidenced by tele- 
 grams which passed between the executive 
 at Denver, the Canadian organizer and 
 other parties, which telegrams were pro- 
 duced before the Commission at its Nana- 
 imo sittings. 
 
 Estes claims he is tying up Coal Mines 
 at Union. 
 
 The day after the formation of the 
 union at Ladysmith, Estes left Vancouver 
 for Victoria, having wired to several Bro- 
 therhood officials at different points that 
 the steamshipmen would strike the day 
 after his arrival there. They did strike 
 the same night (March 16), having agreed 
 to do so at the meeting in Victoria, at 
 v/hich Estes was present. Estes then re- 
 mained for a day or two on Vancouver 
 Island. On the 17th one of the Vancouver 
 papers published the following special from 
 its correspondent at Victoria : — 
 
 Victoria, March 17.— (Special)— George Estes, 
 president of the U.B.R.E. is here. To your cor- 
 respondent he spoke as follows : 
 
 ' I am here in response to a telegram from 
 Portland to deal with the strike here. We now 
 have the Canadian Pacific Railway practically 
 tied up, all sources o£ its coal supply having 
 been blocked with the exception of Union, and 
 Prank in Alberta. We have the assurance of 
 the miners at the latter point that they will go 
 out as ri'ou as askeid to do so by the union. 
 
 ' I am going to tie up the Dunsmuir mines at 
 Union.' 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 61 
 
 The next day the following telegrams 
 were sent by Garnham, acting agent of the 
 Vancouver division of the U.B.E.E., to ofE- 
 cers at different points: 
 
 To J. T. ' . 
 
 Revelstoke. 
 Esiteis ■woking island miners successfully. Ex- 
 perts reach you Friday sure. 
 
 To C. C. 
 
 Revel sitoke. 
 Estes delayed at Victoria tying up coal. AH 
 Is well. 
 
 To H. C. 
 
 Calgary. 
 Estea delayed at Victoria tying up coal on 
 Island. Will be there soon. All well here. 
 
 Further Eridence of attempts to stop 
 Coal Supply. 
 
 Simultaneously with these telegrams, the 
 following letter was sent by the same exe- 
 cutive officer at Vancouver to one of the 
 officers at Revelstoke, to whom he had 
 wired in the matter. It confirms the state- 
 ments contained in the telegrams and the 
 representations made by Estes in the press 
 interview above quoted. Moreover, it shows 
 conclusively that, having secured the simul- 
 taneous action of certain organizations by 
 way of sympathetic strikes, the main ener- 
 gies of the Brotherhood and its president, 
 as pointed out in the account already given 
 of the Vancouver strike, were directed at 
 this time towards effecting a famine in 
 coal, with the intention of completely crip- 
 pling, .if possible, the Canadian Pacific 
 Railway, and this without any regard to 
 the injury and loss which might be caused, 
 either directly or indirectly, to innocent 
 and neutral parties. 
 
 March 18, 1903. 
 
 C. C, Esq., 
 
 Acting Agent Division 97, 
 Revelstoke, B.C. 
 
 Dear Sir and Brother, — Acknowledging your 
 communication of the 16th, I wired Brother T. 
 this morning that Brother Estes would be un- 
 able to reach there before Friday. This is 
 owing to his endeavours to Induce the miners 
 at Union, on Vancouver Island, to quit mining 
 coal, if it is to be sold to the Canadian Pacifi* 
 Railway or allied steamship companies. Our 
 greatest hold v/ill be through causing a fuel 
 shortage, not alone with the Canadian Pacific 
 Railway but with every one who uses coal. We 
 understand that there Is considerable coal be- 
 tween here and Revelstoke, but it is our under- 
 standing that this coal Is hardly fit for steam 
 purposes, some of it having been on the ground 
 tor upwards of 12 months and exposed to the 
 
 weather. Get me what information you can aa 
 to the coal on hand at Revelstoke, North Bend, 
 and Kamloops. These are the main points 
 where coal supplied is kept on hand. 
 
 Yours in E. [quality], U.[nity], 
 
 and P.[rotection], 
 (Signed) S. GARNHAM, 
 Acting Agent Division 81, U.B.R.E. 
 
 TI.B.R.E. and W. F. of M. interested in 
 Coal Supply and Strikers. 
 
 From other telegrams and letters pro- 
 duced before the Commission, it would ap- 
 pear that both Baker and the U.B.R.E. 
 officials were watching the interests of the 
 strikers, and the coal supply during the 
 weeks that followed. On March 23, Baker 
 sent a circular letter from Nanaimo to 
 local unions of the "Western Federation of 
 Miners, telling them of the organization of 
 the njiners at Ladysmith on March 15 ; 
 giving an account of the strike and its 
 alleged causes, and asking that a word of 
 encouragement be sent from the several 
 locals to the Ladysmith Union. On March 
 25, a telegram was sent from F. J. Halton, 
 the secretary of the strikers' executive com- 
 mittee, at Vancouver, to Shenton, at Nau- 
 aimo, which was as follows :— ■' Coal com- 
 ing to Vancouver said to be from Nanaimo. 
 Please say.' On receipt of this telegram, 
 Shenton interviewed the management of the 
 Western Fuel Company at Nanaimo, and 
 on the 28th reported to the Nanaimo union 
 that the company had informed him that 
 they had not shipped coal to the Canadian 
 Pacific Railway for three or four years, 
 and that about 150 tons per week were 
 shipped to Vancouver by the company, but 
 only for domestic purposes, and he so in- 
 formed Halton at Vancouver. In his evi- 
 dence before the Commission, Shenton 
 stated that had it appeared as the result of 
 the investigation made in consequence of 
 this telegram that the Canadian Pacific 
 Railway Company were being supplied 
 with coal by the Western Fuel Company, 
 the Nanaimo union would probably havo 
 taken steps to stop the supply to the Cana- 
 dian Pacific Railway from that source. But 
 he would not go so far as to state that the 
 union would have violated its contract 
 with the company to effect that purpose, or 
 
E2 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 would have deelared a strike which might 
 
 A. One was James Higney, I think, and an- 
 . . , other waa an Italian, I don'it know his name, I 
 
 have effected the company s business with never met him. 
 
 Q. When did they get here ? 
 
 other concerns ; but that in regard to coal 
 being supplied to Canadian Pacific Eail- 
 way an effort would certainly have been 
 made to prevent such a supply being con- 
 tinued. 
 
 A. I could not exactly state. It was a week 
 after they were here before I saw them. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us as nearly as you can ? 
 
 A. About two weeks before the 5th of April. 
 
 Q. Did you have any conversation with one 
 of them ? 
 
 A. A conversation with one of them a week 
 previous to the 5th of April. 
 
 Q. Tell us what that was about ? 
 
 A. Ha asked my opinion as to how it would 
 be to form a branch of the Western Federation 
 of Miners, if the men would lilce to become 
 , . , members of that organization. I said T could 
 
 ihere appears to be something more than not state that— t had only been here about two 
 
 Organized effort to form an Organization 
 among Miners at Union. 
 
 a coincidence in the fact that at this time 
 an organized effort was being made by par- 
 ties in no way immediately connected with 
 Union, but directly connected with Lady- 
 smith and ISTanaimo, to bring about the 
 formation of a local organization among 
 the miners at Union. Somewhere about 
 the time of the sending of the circular 
 letter by Baker to the several locals of the 
 Western Federation, asking them to send a 
 word of encouragement to the strikers at 
 Ladysmith, three or four strangers arrived 
 at Union and registered at different hotels 
 there. These persons commenced at once an 
 organizing campaign. They moved about 
 among the miners, sounding them on the 
 question of organization, and on short ac- 
 quaintance suggested the advisability of 
 such a step being taken. Two of these men 
 represented themselves as being members of 
 
 a delegation sent by the executive board ^. ,, ^,g„, „« ^g^^ to conclude so. I sup- 
 of the Ladysmith imion for the purpose of 1'°^'^ 't would, but I cannot state, 
 seeing if it were possible to effect an or- 
 
 months previous to that, and that he had b 
 pretty hard nut to craclc to form any branch 
 of a union under the conditions that were exisit- 
 ing here previous to that. 
 Q. Yes, what did he say ? 
 
 A. He said he came to investigate Individual 
 opinion as to whether or not they wished to 
 form a branch of that organization. 
 Q. What was the result ? 
 
 A. The result was that he found most of the 
 men were in favour of forming a branch of the 
 Western Federation of IWiners. 
 
 Q. Most of them ? Can you give us some id3a 
 of the numbers ? 
 
 A. I could not give you an idea of the num- 
 bers. 
 Q. That was your own honest opinion ? 
 A. That wag his opinion — not mine. I told 
 him 1 could do nothing to aid him ; that he 
 would have to do his own work, Investigating 
 matters. He only asked my opinion. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Higney tell you he had an inter- 
 view with Mr. Baker ? 
 A. I cannot recollect. 
 
 Q. Did he tell you he had an Interview with 
 people in authority belonging to the Federa- 
 tion ? 
 
 A. Certainly, that he was sent here by the 
 executive board of the Ladysmith union. 
 
 Q. Would it be right to conclude that he had 
 the approval of the Denver people before he 
 started on this Investigation ? 
 A. It might be right to conclude so. 
 
 ganization among the miners at Union. 
 One man, Higney by name, appears to have 
 been specially active in this work. As an 
 esamjile of his method of proceeding, the 
 following may be quoted from the evidence 
 of David Halliday, who was appointed to 
 the position of treasurer of the union which 
 was formed on April 5. In reply to a ques- 
 tion bearing on the subject, he said : 
 
 Having spent about two weeks in pre- 
 paring the field for organization in this 
 way, and believing that it might at that 
 time be possible to effect an organization, 
 Higney sent word to Baker at Nanaimo to 
 come to Union to organize. Baker arrived 
 at Union from Nanaimo on the 4th of 
 April, and on the day following he orgaa- 
 ized a local union of the Western Federa- 
 tion among the miners at that place, under 
 the name of the Cumberland Miner's Union 
 No. 156. 
 
 There were two members sent here from En- 
 terprise rnion No. ISl, Western Federation of 
 Miners, by the executive board of that union. 
 
 Q. Where is that ? ^ 
 
 A. Ladysmith— by the executive board of that Organization forced by W. F. of M Reprc- 
 
 Q. Was it by their wish, or by request from tative Oil April 4. 
 
 A. N«. sir. they wore sent by the eiecuUye. "^^^ means whereby this organization of 
 
 Q. Who vrere they ? the ' ' 
 
 miners at Union was effected, reveals, 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSIOIf 
 
 53 
 
 in the clearest niannor possible, a determi- 
 nation on tLe part of Baker and his emis- 
 saries to form a union at that place and 
 time at any cost. It reveals, further, the 
 fact that the miners were not allowed the 
 opportunity which should have been given 
 them of fully considering the nature and 
 consequences of so important a step, but 
 rather, that advantage was taken, by Baker 
 and others, of their inclinations and sus- 
 ceptibilities to draw them into a trap from 
 which they might find it diificult to escape. 
 In the first place, the notices calling the 
 meeting at which organization was to be 
 effected, were posted only the day previous 
 to that on which the meeting was held. 
 They did not state for what purpose the 
 meeting was being called, nor do they ap- 
 pear to have been signed by any one. When 
 the meeting assembled on Simday, the 5th 
 of April, between 200 and 250 were present. 
 No motions were put nominating any one 
 as chairman or secretary of the meeting. 
 Higney constituted himself chairman, and 
 one of the men who had come with him to 
 Union acted as secretary. Baker was call- 
 ed by Higney to the platform, and when the 
 speaking commenced, there was not, as a 
 matter of fact, a single local miner on the 
 platform at the time. A letter was first 
 read to the meeting by Higney, purporting 
 to be from the Ladysmith miners, and call- 
 ing for the sympathetic support of their 
 fellow workers at Union. Higney then an- 
 nounced that he had received sufiicient 
 names to enable him to send for Baker, 
 whom he introduced to the meeting. Baker 
 then addressed the meeting on the subject 
 of unions, and the benefits to be derived 
 from them. He spoke of the number of 
 unions which he had already organized, and 
 of his intention to complete the work of the 
 Western Federation in that part of the 
 Dominion. On the conclusion of Lis ad- 
 dress a miner named Barber (who was sub- 
 sequently elected as president of the newly- 
 formed union), m.oved that a brancli of the 
 Western Federation of Miners be formed. 
 The motion was seconded, and Iligncy was 
 about to put it to the meeting, witliout giv- 
 ing opportunity for any discussion, -when 
 
 one of the miners arose and moved that thia 
 step be not taken, pointing out at the time 
 that if the Ladysmith miners were out on 
 strike that had nothing whatever to do with 
 the miners at Union. This motion waa 
 seconded. Another motion was made by 
 another miner, who suggested that the mat- 
 ter be left over for a week, that it was a 
 serious affair, and that time should be given 
 to consider the step, also that a seci-et ballot 
 should be taken at the pit to decide the 
 issue. Discussion on this point having 
 been aroused, Baker took the matter out of 
 the hands of the chairman, and stepping to 
 the front declared that all the motions were 
 out of order, stating that he had come to 
 organize a branch of the Western Federa- 
 tion in Union, and that all those who were 
 not willing to join the organization should 
 leave the hall. As a result of this proceed- 
 ing a few of the miners left the meeting. 
 The others remained, and the organization 
 was formed without any m,otion or resolu- 
 tion having been voted upon or even dis- 
 cussed. 
 
 Evidence disclosing methods adopted by 
 Organizer Baker of W. F. of M. 
 
 It may be well to quote at length the 
 evidence of a witness who testified pretty 
 fully before the Commission in regard to 
 the actual occurrences and order of events 
 at this meeting, especially as none of the 
 oflicers of the union took exception to or in 
 any way contradicted it in regard to the 
 material points. On the contrary, there 
 was an evident reluctance on the part of 
 these ofiicers to disclose anything in regard 
 to what had happened at the meeting, and 
 ws believe that the statements as here 
 quoted from the evidence of this witness 
 are substantially correct : 
 
 Q. Will yo« plcjse tell the Commissicme-s 
 exactly what happened, as nearly as you can 
 reniember, from the beginnins to the end of 
 the meeting. When the meeting w;=; asscm- 
 blcid, did anybody go oft the platform- ? 
 
 A. There were four or five different men ; I 
 only knew one— an Italian. 
 
 Q. From what you have since learned, do you 
 know ? 
 
 A. One of the men was Higney. 
 
 Q. He came from Ladysmith ? 
 
 A. Yes, and the secretary, Mr. Henderson, 
 Peter Baranzoni, from Ladysmith, and J.Ir. Baker 
 went on the platform. 
 
51 
 
 BJtITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 Q. Then Higney, Henderson and Baranzonl 
 went on in the first place ? 
 
 A. Yes, Mr. Higney took the chair. 
 
 Q. There was no one voted in the chair ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. "Who was secretary ? 
 
 A. Henderson. 
 
 Q. He was not proposed or voted ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Then there was not a Cumberland man on 
 the platform ? 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Mr. Baker was invited from the back of 
 the hall to the platform by the chairman ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was the first thing the chairman did 
 after asking Baker to come to the platform ? 
 
 A. The first thing Mr. Higney did was to read 
 a communication from the executive board of 
 the Ladysmith men, addressed to the brother 
 workers of Cumberland. 
 
 Q. Where is that letter, why has It not- been 
 produced ? Mr. Higney read it at the meeting ? 
 
 A. Yes, from the executive board of the Lady- 
 smith union, addressed to their brother workers 
 in Cumberland. The letter related the circum- 
 stances leading to the trouble at Ladysmith, 
 and part of the letter stated that their trouble 
 was OUT trouble here. It was a pretty long let- 
 ter, two sheets of it altogether. I remember 
 that part of it very well. 
 
 Q. When the chairman had finished reading 
 the letter did he say anything ? 
 
 A. He introduced Mr. Baker to the meeting. 
 He was not able to say much ; he excused him- 
 self on that account. 
 
 Q. And Mr. Baker made a speech ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was the purport of his speech ? 
 
 A. It was leading up to unions, and the bene- 
 fit to be derived from it, and that he was going 
 around BritisK Columbia, and that he had or- 
 ganized twenty-four unions altogether. He in- 
 tended to travel through Manitoba, and also take 
 in Ontario, and thai, practically speaking, Cum- 
 berland was the last place. I took from that 
 that Cumberland was the last place on the 
 western conjtinen.t not organized. 
 
 Q. And that he was here for the purpose of 
 organizing ? 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did he say how he came up here ? 
 A. Mr. Higney said that he had, during the 
 short Btay he had In town, received sufficient 
 names to enable him to send for Mr. Baker to 
 come up. 
 
 Q. The men ready to organize Justified Mr. 
 Baker in coming up here ? 
 A. Yes. 
 
 His Lordship : 
 Q. Did he state the number ? 
 A. No. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. But that it was sufficient to justify him in 
 sending for Mr. Baker ? 
 
 A. Yes. I heard It was eighty. 
 
 Q. You have heard that it was eighty ? 
 
 A. Y'es. 
 
 Q. When Baker finished his speech what hap- 
 pened next ? 
 
 A. After he got through with his address, Mr. 
 Barber, the president of the union, rose up and 
 moved a motion that we join — that we form a 
 branch of the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 His Lordship : 
 Q. Who was this 7 
 A. Mr. Barber. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Where was Barber ? 
 
 A. He was sitting back about three or four 
 Beats from the front of the hall— this hall. He 
 made just a few remarks In regard to the or- 
 ganization. I think he said he had been a mem- 
 ber in the Kootenay country. 
 
 Q. And that motion was seconded ? 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Then what ? 
 
 A. Well, Mr. Higney was_goi_ng to put the 
 motion without giving any one a chance to speak, 
 and I saw that the motion was going through 
 without opposition, and I rose and moved an 
 amendment to the motion, that we don't form a 
 branch of the Federation in this place. I added 
 to it also that if the Ladysmith men were out 
 on strike that had nothing whatever to do with 
 us here. 
 
 Q. How were you received ? 
 
 A. They started to hiss considerably, and 
 shouted to put me out. That was the response 
 I received when I moved that amendment. 
 
 Q. Did anybody follow you ? 
 
 A. Yes, Richard Conishaw, senior, made a few 
 remarks. I believe they were deprecating the 
 insulting attitude on the part of the audience 
 towards me. ,, \ 
 
 Q. Did anybody follow him ? 
 
 A. Mr. Hunden ; he also got up and spoke in 
 support of freedom of speech. 
 
 Q. Did anybody support your motion ? 
 
 A. Yes, Mr. Bickell. Mr. Hunden got up and 
 deprecated also the attitude of the audience 
 about hissing, and shouting to put me out. He 
 considered it was right to give every person 
 in the hall fair play. The next gentleman who 
 tried to speak was Mr. Conishaw. 
 
 Q. What did he have to say ? 
 
 A. He suggested that we leave this matter 
 for a week ; that it was a serious matter, and 
 that we should consider it, and take a secret 
 ballot at the pit. He asked if Mr. Sangster was 
 in the hall. He says : Is that not the way you 
 did at Nanaimo ? Every vital question at Nan- 
 aimo is voted by secret ballot ? ' Replying, Mr. 
 Bangster said that things had changed there 
 now — ' we have the Western Federation there 
 now, and we usually get what we want.' 
 
 Q. At thia stage did anything happen ? 
 
 A. Mr. Baker stepped to the front, excused 
 himself to the chairman, and said that the mo- 
 tion and the amendment was out of order. He 
 was here to organize a branch of the Western 
 Federation in Cumberland, and all those not 
 willing to join the organization he would re- 
 quest to leave the hall. 
 
 His Lordship : 
 Q. Mr. Baker said this — not the chairman ? 
 A. Baker — not the chairman. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. That he was going to organize, no matter 
 how many were taken in ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. "What did the chairman do — was the motion 
 put ? 
 
 A. No, the motion was not put, nor the amend- 
 ment. 
 
 His Lordship : 
 
 Q. He said the motion was out of order, that 
 the meeting was for the purpose of organizing 
 and that these who did not wish to organize 
 could retire ? 
 
 A. Yes, Your Honour. 
 
 Q. You say both motion and amendment were 
 out of order ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 65 
 
 Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. How was the meeting called ? 
 A. For a mass meeting of miners ; no object 
 was stated in the notice. 
 Q. Was the notice signed ? 
 A. No. 
 
 His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long notice was given of this meet- 
 ing ? 
 
 A. I believe it was posted on Saturday. 
 
 Q. And the meeting was on Sunday ? 
 
 A. Yes ; the notice might have been on Fri- 
 day night or Saturday ; I believe it was just one 
 day. 
 
 Q. I gather that what Mr. Baker said was 
 that both the motion and the amendment were 
 cut of order, as the meeting was tor the pur- 
 pose of organizing, and that those who did not 
 v/ant to organize should retire ? 
 
 A. Yes, those are about the words he used. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. What struck you at the time that Baker 
 should Interrupt ? 
 
 A. I came to the conclusion that what he said 
 was correct ; that he was there to organize and 
 came for that purpose. 
 
 Q. Why should he interrupt at that stage of 
 the croccedings ? 
 
 A. There were likely to be expressions of 
 opinion. There were quite a number of people 
 in the hall who were not favourable to the or- 
 ganization at the time. 
 
 Q. You knew that to be the fact ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. After Baker said that some went out, you 
 among the rest ? 
 
 A. Yes. I waited a couple of minutes and then 
 went out. 
 
 Q. Do you know, as a matter of fact, whether 
 all the people who had expressed themselves as 
 l)elng opposed to the union went out ? 
 
 A. No, some of them did not go out. 
 
 Q. Do you know why ? 
 
 A. I came to the conclusion that the men 
 were afraid, when they saw the treatment I 
 had received by being hissed and shouting to 
 put me out, that they were afraid of expressing 
 their opinion. 
 
 Significance of Organization being formed 
 at this time. 
 
 In estimating the significance of the step 
 taken in organizing these miners into a 
 union, the known attitude of the Welling- 
 ton. Colliery Company towards unions 
 among its employees, and the conditions of 
 employment at the time cannot be too care- 
 fully considered. In their evidence beforo 
 the Commission the miners made little or 
 no complaint of the wages they had been 
 earning at the time. Most of them, when 
 questioned on the subject, testified that 
 they were quite satisfied with the scale of 
 remuneration, and admitted that, as com- 
 pared with wages paid in other mines in the 
 province and elsewhere in America, the 
 
 figures were most favourable. They all ad- 
 mitted that they knew that the company 
 was hostile to the formation of any unions, 
 and that they knew the formation of a 
 union at Ladysmith only a month or two 
 before was responsible for the fact that the 
 men there were out of work. In fact, the 
 explanation given by some of the witnesses 
 to questions which were put to them would 
 indicate that they were fully conscious that 
 a dismissal of the persons elected to oiBce in 
 the union would be one of the first steps 
 taken by the 'company after the organiza- 
 tion was effected. This probability, for 
 example, was cited as the reason for the 
 selection for the most part of young men 
 to the chief executive offices in the union. 
 There was, moreover, not a single reason 
 of importance given by any witness which 
 would satisfactorily account for the for- 
 mation of an organization under the exist- 
 ing circumstances and at this particular 
 time. A desire for ' freedom of expression 
 of opinion,' for ' individual liberty,' for 
 ' freedom of liberty,' for the ' right to have 
 an organization,' were put forv.'ard by the 
 union officials as the reasons which prompt- 
 ed the formation of an organization. On 
 the other hand, there was nothing adduced 
 before the Commission which would point 
 to any general desire on the part of the 
 majority for organization, nor does there 
 appear to have been any such desire. And 
 it is clear that Baker and his coadjutors 
 found the task of organization difficult to 
 carry out. Had it been otherwise, the pro- 
 ceedings would hardly have been managed 
 as it has just been shown that they were 
 at the meeting on April 5. 
 
 Were the facts and circumstances sur- 
 rounding the formation of the organization 
 at Union at this time not of themselves 
 sufficient to point to an evident design on 
 the part of the Western Federation of Min- 
 ers to bring about a common understand- 
 ing and simultaneous action between the 
 employees of the Wellington Colliery Com- 
 pany at Ladysmith and Union, no room 
 for doubt would be left from the incidents 
 and events which followed this organiza- 
 tion, and which account for the strike at 
 
56 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSIOTT 
 
 TJnion, whicli took place within the next 
 month. 
 
 Organization followed by Strike in May. 
 
 As had been anticipated by some of the 
 miners at the time of organization, and as 
 already mentioned, one after another of the 
 officials of the newly-formed union found 
 themselves out of employment very shortly 
 after the organization was formed. By the 
 end of April all of the officers, with the 
 exception of two, were out of work, and 
 had reasonable grounds for supposing that 
 their connection with the union was ac- 
 countable for the fact. On May 1 a com- 
 mittee of three of the dismissed officials 
 intervied the manager of the company, and 
 asked for the reinstatement of all officials 
 in the order in which they had been dis- 
 missed. The manager's refusal of this de- 
 mand was followed by a strike on the next 
 day. 
 
 Relations of the ladysmith and TJnion 
 Strikers. 
 
 The demand and the strike can only be 
 rightly understood in the light of what 
 transpired on the preceding days. The 
 events point to one conclusion only, namely, 
 the desire on the part of Baker and others 
 to bring about a sympathetic strike of the 
 miners at Union with the men who were 
 out at Ladysmith. On April 10 Baker had 
 sent from Nanaimo to the several locals of 
 the Western Federation a letter telling 
 them of the formation of the union at 
 Union on April 5, which organization, he 
 says in these letters, was effected ' in the 
 face of stern opposition.' He states that 
 the men at Union were ' well united, and 
 thoroughly in interest with their brothers 
 at Ladysmith.' He asks that all encourage- 
 ment possible should be given the brother 
 workers at Union, because they have to 
 encounter the competition of so large a 
 number of Chinese and Japanese. On 
 April 13 the secretary of the Ladysmith 
 union wrote a congratulatory letter to the 
 men at Union, in which, on behalf of the 
 Ladysmith union, he says in regard to their 
 
 having formed an organization : ' We feel 
 you have strengthened our hands consider- 
 ably in so doing.' On April 15 he also sent 
 a communication to Shenton, at Nanaimo, 
 stating that he and the president of the 
 Ladysmith union would attend a meeting 
 of the Nanaimo union on the 18th instant, 
 to lay before that union the situation of 
 the men at Ladysmith in regard to their 
 need of financial assistance. Having heard 
 these delegates on the 18 th, the Nanaimo 
 executive board recommended to its regu- 
 lar meeting that an assessment be levied 
 on its members to assist the men at Lady- 
 smith, and that an arrangement should, if 
 possible, be efEected whereby a joint execu- 
 tive meeting of the Union, Ladysmith and 
 Nanaimo unions, might take place. In 
 furtherance of this recommendation the re- 
 cording secretary of the Nanaimo union, 
 on April 20, informed the secretary of the 
 branch at Union that representatives from 
 Ladysmith had been at a meeting of the 
 Nanaimo union on the 18th, and that from 
 their representations it was evident that 
 assistance was greatly needed; that the 
 Denver executive could not recommend aid 
 until there had been a full meeting of its 
 hoard. Meantime it was advisable for local 
 unions of the Western Federation of Min- 
 ers to assist Ladysmith. With a view to 
 making some suitable arrangement a meet- 
 ing was being called for the 25th instant 
 to go into the matter, and it was requested 
 that one or more delegates from Union 
 should attend this meeting. 
 
 What representations, other than those 
 relating to the need of financial support, 
 were made by the delegates from Ladysmith 
 at the meeting of the Nanaimo union on 
 the 18th, the Commissioners were not in- 
 formed. All the witnesses, without excep- 
 tion, however, who were asked in regard to 
 the relations between the Union and Lady- 
 smith organizations were emphatic in their 
 denial that the subject of a sympathetic 
 strike at Union was so much as hinted at 
 by any persons in authority. Furthermore, 
 those who were questioned on the matter 
 denied having had any conversation or dis- 
 cussion in regard to it with Baker. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COiWISSION 
 
 57 
 
 The Strike at Union a Sympathetic Strike. 
 
 On April 21, however, four days before 
 the joint delegate meeting, at -which repre- 
 sentatives from Union were to be present, 
 was held at Nanaimo, Baker wired the fol- 
 lowing message in cipher from Nanaimo to 
 Moyer, president of the Western Federa- 
 tion at Denver, Coiorado : 
 
 Lady smith asks Cumberland (Union) out In 
 svTnp^thy. I approve. Have we your consent. 
 Answer. 
 
 The next day the following telegram, signed 
 by both Moyer, the president, and Haywood, 
 the secretary of the Western Federation of 
 Miners, was received by Baker at Nanaimo : 
 
 Denver, Colo., April 22, 1903. 
 J. J. Baker, 
 
 Nanaimo. ■ 
 
 "We approve of calling out any or all men ne- 
 cessary to win at Ladysmith. Organize Japan- 
 ei.^e aiud Chinamen if possible. 
 
 (Sgd) CHAS. MOYER, 
 
 President W.F.IM. 
 WM. D. HAYWOOD, 
 
 Secretary. 
 
 Deception practised by Canadian Organi- 
 zer of W. F. of M. 
 
 The use made by Baker of this reply, and 
 the concealment by him from apparently 
 all Canadian officials of the nature or con- 
 tents of the telegrams sent by him to Moyer, 
 in which he stated that Ladysmith asked 
 Cumberland (Union) out in sympathy, 
 point, in our opinion, to a deliberate move 
 on his part to bring about a strike at Union 
 which might strengthen the hands of the 
 strikers at Ladysmith, and at the same time 
 stop the supply of coal to the Canadian 
 Pacific Kailway from Union; and this view 
 is supported by the evidence, amongst 
 others, of Shenton, who expressed his inabi- 
 lity to account for Baker's action in this 
 connection on any other hypothesis than 
 that of deception and the absence of good 
 faith in dealing with the officers of the 
 Canadian unions. 
 
 At the meeting of the joint delegate exe- 
 cutive board at Nanaimo on the 25th of 
 April, there were present two representa- 
 tives from Ladysmith, three from Union 
 and three from Nanaimo. According to 
 the minutes of this meeting, which extend- 
 
 ed over two days, and the evidence of wit- 
 nesses who were present, the meeting con- 
 corned itself with the discussion of mea- 
 sures calculated to secure the success of the 
 strike at Ladysmith and the matter of aid 
 to the strikers. The question of a sympa- 
 thetic strike was not brought up by any 
 one, nor does the telegram sent by Baker 
 to Denver, or the reply received by him 
 from the officers there, appear to have come 
 before the meeting in any official way. The 
 assessment of different unions to assist the 
 strikers at Ladysmith, and the taking up 
 of subscriptions to aid them, were the mat- 
 ters discussed. There was also some dis- 
 cussion of the Conciliation Bill which was 
 before the provincial legislature at the 
 time. On the 26th it was decided to send 
 three delegates to Victoria with a view to 
 bring the situation at Ladysmith to the at- 
 tention of the provincial government, and 
 to have pressure brought through this 
 source, if possible, on the president of the 
 company which might lead to a settlement 
 of the dispute on the lines of recognition 
 of the Western Federation of Miners and 
 the reinstatement of men discliarged at 
 Ladysmith and Union. The delegates ap- 
 pointed at this meeting proceeded to Vic- 
 toria on the 27th, and interviewed tlie gov- 
 ernment on that day and the day following, 
 returning to Nanaimo on the 29 th, when 
 they reported the result of their interview 
 to the joint executive board. 
 
 Double dealings with Union Officials. 
 
 While the two telegrams above vpforrcd 
 to were not officially discussed at any of the 
 meetings of the joint executive board, use 
 was, nevertheless, made of the reply re- 
 ceived by Baker in conversations -which he 
 had with members of the joint board. It 
 would appear that he made particnl.Tr use 
 of the telegram approving o£ the calling 
 out of all men necessary to win at Lady- 
 smith. Shenton swore that he himself was 
 strongly opposed to calling out any of the 
 men at Union, and that his opposition to 
 s-uch a course of action was well known to 
 Baker. He testified further that Baker did 
 
58 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 not discuss the matter with him at all, and 
 that until the sittings of the Commission 
 he knew nothing whatever, either of the 
 telegram which had been sent by Baker to 
 Meyer or of the reply. The only way in 
 which he could account for the fact that 
 Baker had not taken him into his confi- 
 dence in regard to these messages was that 
 Baker knew of his opposition and did not 
 wish to encounter it. He stated, however, 
 that as one of the chief executive officers 
 of the Nanaimo union, he was entitled to 
 the fullest confidence in a matter of this 
 kind from the Canadian organizer, and that 
 Baker's action in not extending this confi- 
 dence was unjustifiable and wrong. 
 
 There appears on the other hand to have 
 been a definite understanding between 
 Baker and the delegates who were present 
 at the joint executive meeting from Union. 
 The telegram frcwn Moyer and Haywood 
 was shown by Baker to these men, and given 
 by him to Barber, the president of the 
 union organization, to take back with him 
 to Union. The impression conveyed to these 
 men by this telegram, and Baker's repre- 
 sentations in regard to it, was that they 
 might count on the support of the Western 
 Federation of Miners in the event of their 
 declaring a strike. So strong was this im- 
 pression that when Barber and other officers 
 of the union were questioned as to whether 
 or not the constitution of the Western 
 Federation of Miners had been violated in 
 consequence of the strike having been de- 
 clared at Union, without the previous ap- 
 proval of the executive at Denver, the tele- 
 gram from Moyer and Haywood to Baker 
 was produced by these officers as their 
 authority for the statement that this ap- 
 proval had been secured in advance. None 
 of the officials of the union, however, knew 
 anything of the contents of the telegram 
 sent by Baker to Denver, and to which the 
 telegram they had in their possession was 
 the reply. It was with some difficulty that 
 this telegram was obtained by the Commis- 
 sioners. It had to be secured under sub- 
 poina from the telegraph agent at Nanaimo, 
 and when obtained was found to be in 
 cipher. 
 
 Strikers at TJnion Misled. 
 
 Upon the telegram being deciphered it 
 was felt by the Commissioners that its con- 
 tents should be communicated to the men, 
 in view of the fact that all of the witnesses 
 at Union had testified that there was no re- 
 lation between the strike there and the 
 strike at Ladysmith, and that some had de- 
 clared emphatically that they would in no 
 way have countenanced a sympathetic 
 strike. The ofiicers of the union who had 
 testified were first recalled, however, and 
 questioned again as to whether or not they 
 had had any knowledge of the telegram 
 sent by Baker to v/hich the telegram given 
 Barber was the reply. To which they all 
 answered that they had none. Asked as to 
 whether they would have in any way been 
 parties to a sympathetic strike with Lady- 
 smith, they declared they would not. Asked 
 further as to whether, in the event of there 
 being evidence to show that Baker had been 
 instrumental in seeking to bring about a 
 sympathetic strike, they would feel that 
 they had not been taken into his confidence, 
 and that he had not dealt with them as his 
 relation to them required that he should 
 have done, they replied in the affirmative. 
 The telegram — ' Ladysmith asks Cumber- 
 land^ out on sympathy. I approve. Have 
 we your consent ', sent by Baker to Moyer 
 on the 21st of April was then read aloud, 
 and so far as the Commission is able to 
 ascertain, this was the first intimation that 
 any of the men at Union had of the nature 
 of its contents. 
 
 Misleading Testimony given before Com- 
 mission. 
 
 Baker's own evidence before the Commis- 
 sion in regard to his connection, with the 
 strike at Union would indicate that he re- 
 spected his oath as little as he did the trust 
 that had been reposed in him by the work- 
 ingmen of the province on whose behalf 
 and in whose interest he pretended to he 
 acting. Questioned by the Commissioners 
 at Ladysmith on May Y, as to his know- 
 ledge of affairs. Baker replied as follows : 
 
 Q. Can you tell us, Mr. Baker, what you know 
 'bout this Cumberland (Union) strike. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 59 
 
 A. I simply got a wire saying they were out, 
 and asking me to go up there. 
 
 Q. You had nothing to do with the Initiation 
 of that strike ? 
 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 These replies were given with full know- 
 ledge of the telegram which he himself had 
 sent in cipher to the chief executive offi- 
 cers at Denver, and of all the dealing's 
 which he had had with the miners at Na- 
 naimo, Ladysmith and Union. 
 
 It is interesting to note, in connection 
 with this same matter, that, according to 
 tho testimony of witnesses who were exam- 
 ined at Ladysmith, there appers to have 
 heen a meeting of Ladysmith miners about 
 the end of April, at which a motion was 
 put requesting that the union men should 
 come out in sympathy. Baker was present 
 at this meeting, and when the question was 
 raised that possibly the constitution of the 
 Western Federation would stand in the way 
 of any action of this kind, he represented 
 to the meeting that there need be no fear 
 of embarrassment or hindrance on this 
 score, as he could secure the consent of the 
 executive at Denver, and that the consti- 
 tutional difficulties would be overcome. 
 Barber testified that at the joint executive 
 meeting at Nanaimo Baker had given him 
 assurances that the Western Federation of 
 Miners would stand behind a strike at 
 Union and help it financially, and this he 
 (Barber) had construed as the approval of 
 the Western Federation before the strike. 
 
 Precipitous Proceedings prior to Strike. 
 
 The proceedings preliminary to the meet- 
 ing of May 2, at which it was decided that 
 the men would go on strike, were hardly 
 less mysterious or hasty in their nature 
 than were the proceedings leading up to the 
 creation of the organization. The delegates 
 to the joint executive meeting at Nanaimo 
 had returned but a short time to Union 
 when the committee of three was appointed 
 from the union to interview the manager 
 of the company and ask for the reinstate- 
 ment of the officials who had been dismissed, 
 in the order of their dismissal. The mana- 
 ger having refused to accede to this demand, 
 notices were forthwith posted Ih different 
 
 places calling a meeting of the union for 
 May 2. There does not appear to have been 
 more than twenty-four hours' notice givfen 
 of this meeting. A little over 200 were 
 present when the meeting assembled on 
 May 2. A resolution was carried that be- 
 cause officers had been discharged after the 
 organization had been formed on April 5, 
 a ballot should be taken on whether or not 
 the men should stop work until such time 
 as the officials and members who had been 
 discriminated against by the company were 
 reinstated in their proper order, with full 
 recognition of the Western Federation of 
 Miners. This resolution was voted upon, 
 and only 12 ballots opposing the strike were 
 cast. 
 
 It would appear that at this meeting the 
 miners were informed that in the event of 
 declaring a strike they would have the full 
 support, financially and otherwise, of the 
 Western Federation. 
 
 Strike declared in Violation of Terms of 
 Constitution. 
 
 Article 5, section 1, of the constitution 
 of the Western Federation of Miners de- 
 clares that : 
 
 It shall be unlawful for a union to enter upon 
 a strike unless ordered by three-fourths of Its 
 resident members In good standing voting. Such 
 questions shall be decided by a secret ballot 
 at a special meeting called for that purpose, 
 after having received the approval of the exe- 
 cutive board of the Western Federation of 
 Miners. Should any employer or employees at- 
 tack the rights of the members of the union or 
 its established principles, without allowing the 
 union suiflcient time to notify the executive 
 board of the proposed change, then the mem- 
 bers shall have the right to declare a strike 
 to maintain their rights. In this they shall be 
 assisted by the executive board. 
 
 The telegram sent by Moyer and Hay- 
 wood to Baker, and handed by him to Bar- 
 ber, was read to the meeting as proof that 
 the approval of the executive board of the 
 Western Federation, as required by this 
 clause of its constitution, had been obtain- 
 ed. It did not appear, however, from any- 
 thing given in evidence that the clause of 
 the constitution requiring that a special 
 meeting should be called for the purpose 
 had been complied with, for, as already 
 mentioned, the notice calling the meeting 
 
60 
 
 BRITI8B COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 did not state for what purpose it was being 
 called. 
 
 The day that the strike was declared the 
 secretary wired to Baker at Nanaimo: 
 ' Cumberland Miners' Union No. 156 decid- 
 ed by unanimous vote to-day to come out on 
 strike. Come up if possible.' Baker, on 
 May 4, wired in reply : ' Will come to-mor- 
 row evening.' Owing to the fact, however, 
 that the Commission had commenced its 
 sittings at Ladysmith, Baker did not go to 
 Union, but in the course of a few days sent 
 Shenton in his place. On May 11 he ad- 
 dressed a letter to the executive board of 
 the miners' unions at Ladysmith, Nanaimo 
 and Union, stating that he was obliged to 
 leave owing to pressure of work. He 
 recommended co-operative arrangements 
 among the three boards and means of 
 speedy communication, stating in his letter 
 that for all the unions this was a common 
 cause. On the day following, the 12th, on 
 board the steamer taking him from Nanai- 
 mo, lie wrote a personal letter to the secre- 
 tary of the union at Union, giving his rea- 
 sons for not having been able to go there, 
 and explaining that he had sent Shenton in 
 his place, as he regarded the men in Union 
 as ' too new in organization to be secure 
 against bombardment.' 
 
 had been made in the telegram to which 
 this was a reply, would indicate that the 
 officials at Denver had been previously in- 
 formed of one important element that would 
 have to be taken into consideration in any 
 efforts to bring about a successful strike at 
 Union. The fact that in a letter to local 
 unions Baker had spoken of the number of 
 Chinese and Japanese at Union as a source 
 of discouragement to the union members 
 there, and this only after organization had 
 taken place, and before a strike had been 
 mentioned, would indicate that this diffi- 
 culty had been present in his mind. These 
 facts jointly considered make it fairly ap- 
 parent that the Canadian organizer had 
 fully informed his fellow members on the 
 executive at Denver of the exact situation 
 in view of a probable conflict. 
 
 Movements largely directed from Denver, 
 Colorado. 
 
 "With the exception of the telegram, to 
 which reference has been made, and one or 
 two other communications, it was not pos- 
 sible for the Commission to secure informa- 
 tion which, would throw any further light 
 on the nature af the correspondence which 
 took place between Baker and the executive 
 officers of the Western Federation at Den- 
 ver. However, such evidence as was pro- 
 duced would indicate a continuous corres- 
 pondence between the organizer for Canada 
 and the chief executive officers at Denver. 
 For example, the mention in the telegram of 
 April 22, from Moyer and Haywood to 
 Baker — ' Organize Japanese and Chinamen 
 if possible,' when no mention of the subject 
 
 Ee the Organization of Chinamen and 
 Japanese. 
 
 Evidence was given by the Eev. L. W. 
 Hall, a Chinese missionary at Union, to the 
 effect that while Shenton, whom he had 
 not previously known, was there as the 
 representative of Baker, he (Shenton) 
 had called upon him and introduced 
 the subject of organization among the 
 Chinese, and that from his conversa- 
 tion he judged that Shenton was de- 
 sirous of having the Chinese organized, and 
 that the Western Federation would support 
 any efforts in that direction. Shenton did 
 not deny having had a conversation with 
 Hall upon this subject, but contended that 
 his visit to Hall's house had not been with 
 the object of interviewing him on that par- 
 ticular subject, and that Hall had brought 
 up the subject himself, and that all sugges- 
 tions and propositions had come from him. 
 He admitted that there had been some talk 
 about guarantees being given by the West- 
 ern Federation, and that he had mentioned 
 this point to Baker on his return to Nanai- 
 mo. He adhered firm.ly, however, to the 
 statement that he had in no way approved 
 of, nor was he favourable to the formation 
 of a labour organization among the Chinese 
 and Japanese. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSIOI^ 
 
 61 
 
 Review of facts shows Strike at Union 
 brougfht about by intrigue. 
 
 The formation in the first instance of 
 an organization among tlie miners at Union, 
 througli the instrumentality of agents sent 
 there for this express purpose and not be- 
 cause of a general desire on the part of 
 those concerned, or even of the existence of 
 conditions which would naturally create 
 such a desire, and in the presence, more- 
 over, of circumstances which at any other 
 time would have led to the rejection of any 
 proposal to form a union — as, for instance, 
 the realization by the miners that the men 
 at Ladysmith were out of work by reason 
 of their having joined the Federation in de- 
 fiance of the company; the request by 
 Baker, assuming to act on behalf of the 
 Ladysmith union, for instructions for a 
 sjnnpathetio strike at Union; the command 
 of the executive at Denver to call out all 
 men necessary to win at Ladysmith and to 
 organize the Chinese and Japanese; the 
 trickery and deception practiced by Baker 
 in the manipulation of these telegrams, and 
 of the members of several committees with 
 which he had to deal; his own false testi- 
 mony before the Commission in regard to 
 one of the most vital points of the whole in- 
 quiry ; his action in forcing organization at 
 any cost, and the action of the ofScials at 
 Union, with whom he had been in communi- 
 cation, of a like desire to precipitate a 
 strike at that place regardless of the terms 
 of the constitution, and with the evident 
 sanction and approval of Baker and other 
 members of the Denver executive, and the 
 statement of Estes that he would tie up the 
 mines on Vancouver Island; — these facts, 
 together with the circumstances that so long 
 as the mines at Union could be sucessfully 
 worked, the miners at Ladysmith would find 
 it very diflacult to cope successfully with 
 the company, and that the company would 
 be still in a position to fulfil its contracts 
 with the Canadian Pacific Eailway, lead us 
 inevitably to the conclusion that, as in the 
 case of Ladysmith, the explanation of the 
 cause of the strike at Union is to be found 
 rather in the conditions existing elsewhere 
 
 at the time, than from any general feeling 
 of dissatisfaction in regard to the conditions 
 of their employment among the miners at 
 Union, and that it was the result of a care- 
 fully contrived and skillfully executed in- 
 trigue on the part of persons acting as part 
 of, or in connection with the executive of 
 the Western Federation at Denver, and 
 which, but for the action of this executive 
 and its members, would not have taken 
 place. 
 
 Strikers not Supported by W. F. of M. as 
 promised. 
 
 We feel that the extent of the deception 
 practiced by the ofiicials of the Western 
 Federation, and the hai-mful consequence 
 to theses whose acts the Federation has pre- 
 tented to champion, to say nothing of the 
 injuries which have been caused the public 
 as a direct consequence of these strikes, 
 would not be fully realized, if this report 
 did not contain a direct reference to the 
 nature of the treatment which the miners, 
 both at Ladysmith and Union, have re- 
 ceived from the Federation since the strikes 
 were declared. The one reason for joining 
 the Western Federation, alleged at both 
 these places on the part of all the witnesses 
 who testified on the matter, was that the 
 Western Federation was a numerous and 
 powerful body, and that they had full as- 
 surances that in the event of its support 
 being required at any time they would re- 
 ceive sufficient financial assistance. Not- 
 withstanding the fact that the strike at 
 Ladysmith had been in existence for over 
 two months at the time the Commission 
 commenced its sittings at that place, and 
 that there appeared to be, even at that 
 time, considerable suffering and need of 
 assistance among the miners and their 
 families, the Western Federation had con- 
 tributed but a few hundred dollars to the 
 relief of the most urgent cases. Not until 
 eleven days after the strike at Union had 
 been declared, was word sent to the miners 
 at Ladysmith that a draft for $1,000 for 
 their relief would be mailed on the follow- 
 ing day. Not having received this draft by 
 the 16th of May, and being reduced to ex- 
 
62 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 tremity, the secretary of the Ladysmith 
 union wired to the secretary of the West- 
 ern Federation at Denver, as follows :— 
 
 Can you support us with $14,000 (less than 
 one-fifth of their usual earnings) per month . 
 Answer at once, yes or no. 
 
 On the 18th a reply was received to this 
 telegram as follows:^ 
 
 Baker has not arrived yet. Will answer your 
 message later. 
 
 At the time of present writing, so far as 
 can be ascertained, the Western Federation 
 had done very little more for the relief of 
 destitute families at Ladysmith, and little 
 or nothing by way of assistance to the men 
 at Union. 
 
 Results of ladysmith and TJnion Strikes. 
 
 The mines at Union have never been 
 closed, owing to the employment of a 
 large number of Chinamen and Japanese 
 at that place, but virtually all the white 
 labour is still unemployed. The mines at 
 Extension remained closed from the 12th 
 of March, until the 3rd of July, Respite the 
 fact that many efforts were made at settle- 
 
 ment between the president of the company 
 and the employees at that place. 
 
 The men not having received the assis- 
 tance from the Western Federation which 
 they were led to expect would be extended, 
 resolved by a majority to return to work, 
 and some 200 of them have been indivi- 
 dually re-engaged on terms not quite as 
 favourable as when they went out. In the 
 same manner the miners at Union, except 
 those whose places have been filled, will 
 probably resume work in a few days. 
 
 It will thus be seen that these strikes 
 have been not only barren of beneficial re- 
 sult to the miners, but that they have lost 
 in wages over $350,000, while business in 
 Ladysmith and Union has been brought to 
 the vanishing point. 
 
 We may add that we are informed that 
 the m.iners at Fernie, Morissey and Michel 
 have abandoned the Western Federation, 
 and have joined the United Mine Workers 
 of North America and that similar action 
 is being discussed among the miners at 
 Nanaimo. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSIOlf 
 
 63 
 
 CHAP. VI— GENERAL CONCLTISIONS. 
 
 HAVING now detailed the causes which 
 led up to the strikes, which we were 
 specially commissioned to investigate, and 
 having set forth their inter-connection, aa 
 well as the principal occurrences to which 
 they gave birth, we now proceed shortly to 
 discuss the general questions which they 
 raise for consideration. 
 
 Duties of Employers and Employees in 
 regard to Strikes. 
 
 As strikes are intended to cause loss and 
 inconvenience to the employer in order to 
 force him to yield in whole or in part to the 
 demands of the strikers, and as they always 
 cause loss and privation to the strikers 
 themselves; and as they are almost invari- 
 ably followed by loss and damage to many 
 others in the community where' they occur; 
 as they are in some cases accompanied by 
 sympathetic strikes and are frequently ac- 
 companied by reprehensible and illegal prac- 
 tices, such as boycotting, blacklisting, pick- 
 eting and intimidation, and sometimes by 
 assaults, riots and loss of life and property ; 
 it is the plain duty of the employer and 
 employed, and of the state, to exhaust all 
 possible means to secure their prevention. 
 
 With respect to the employers and the 
 employed, it is their clear duty to the com- 
 munity, whose protection they both enjoy, 
 to meet each other either by themselves, or 
 through the mediation of third parties, and 
 by temperate discussion and conciliation, 
 settle their difficulties as best they can, each 
 making considerable sacrifice, if necessary, 
 to avoid the loss and injury which will 
 otherwise occur to the public. And here it 
 may not be amiss to warn employers of la- 
 bour that the old relation of master and 
 servant no longer obtains, that it has been 
 supplanted by that of employer and work- 
 man, with the probability that it will de- 
 velop in the near future into that of co- 
 contractors. There is no doubt that a con- 
 
 siderable percentage of strikes are caused, 
 not so much by the refusal of the employer 
 to yield to the particular demand, as by the 
 way in which it is done, or by a long course 
 of arbitrary conduct. One of the results of 
 the spread of unionism throughout the vari- 
 ous trades has been to put the workman in 
 a better position to make terms with his 
 employer; to preserve his independence of 
 character; he is now able to drive a bargain 
 and does not have to accept a dole. For- 
 merly, employers were too often in the habit 
 of regarding their men as so many ma- 
 chines or units of labour, and those of them 
 who felt humane instincts thought they ful- 
 filled their whole obligation if they gave 
 an occasional extra remuneration or bonus, 
 or conferred some benefit which they re- 
 garded as a gratuity. But the workmen of 
 modern times demands as his due a fair 
 day^s pay for a fair day's work, and that he 
 shall get a reasonable share of the product 
 of his toil ; what he seeks is honourable em- 
 plojrment, not slavery; he wants fair deal- 
 ing and justice, and not charity or patron- 
 age. 
 
 It is necessary, then, in their own inter- 
 est, and in that of the community gener- 
 ally, that employers bear in mind that they 
 are no longer dealing with submissive and 
 unquestioning units of labour, but with 
 sentient beings who have, equally with 
 themselves, senses, affections, desires, doubts 
 and fears. It is, therefore, especially in- 
 cumbent on corporations, and other large 
 employers of labour who do not come in per- 
 sonal contact with their employees, to place 
 persons of tact and discretion in all the 
 ofiices of superintendence, and to forthwith 
 dispense with the services of any one who is 
 found to be tyrannical or arrogant in his 
 dealings with the men. Many a strike 
 could have been averted if the employer or 
 his superintendent had taken the trouble to 
 reason the whole matter out with his men. 
 
6i 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMUISSIOIf 
 
 and had shown them why he was unable to 
 accede to the demand. In this connection 
 we may refer to the case of the Nanaimo 
 colliery, operated by the New Vancouver 
 Coal Mining and Land Company. For 
 fifteen years this colliery has been worked 
 with unioTi labour, the numbers often reach- 
 ing 800 men, and owing to the reasonable 
 and conciliatory attitude towards each 
 other of the superintendent, Mr. S. M. 
 Eobins, and the officers of the union, there 
 was never any strike during his term of 
 office, which lasted until a few months ago, 
 and on more than one occasion the adjust- 
 ment involved a reduction of wages. 
 
 Eights of Employers and Employees in 
 regard to Strikes. 
 
 With respect to the rights of. employers 
 and workmen in relation to strikes and 
 lock-outs, we think much would be gained 
 if these could be clearly set forth in a code. 
 
 It is generally recognized that the work- 
 men are justified in combining together to 
 secure increased wages or shorter hours, or 
 other legitimate changes in the conditions 
 of their employment, and failing assent by 
 their employer, in quitting simultaneously, 
 or, as it is called, going out on strike. And 
 this even though it may occasion the em- 
 ployer great loss and damage, unless some 
 valid contract is thereby violated; or unless 
 the strike is such as to amount to malicious 
 injury to property ; or is liable to cause loss 
 of life ; or is in furtherance of a conspiracy 
 to injure or restrain trade, some of which 
 acts involve only civil, others both civil and 
 criminal liability. 
 
 On the other hand, we think that public 
 opinion, as well as that of those prominent 
 in labour circles, emphatically condemns 
 the sympathetic strike, the boycott, intimi- 
 dation, the blacklist, and picketing as it is 
 commonly practiced. 
 
 Eights of Union and Non-TJnion Men. 
 
 It is one of the fundamental rights of a 
 free people that every man shall choose for 
 himself whether he shall belong or not to 
 a union, and that whether he belongs or not 
 he may work without being insulted, mo- 
 
 lested, intimidated or oppressed by any per- 
 son or union whatever. It is also clearly 
 one of the fundamental rights of every 
 employer that he may employ any man he 
 chooses, subject, of course, to any laws that 
 may be regulating the particular business. 
 Tried by this test, the sympathetic strike, 
 which is declared on account of the em- 
 ployment of non-union labour to take the 
 places of other strikers, is irrational and 
 wrong. The original strikers may have the 
 legal or moral right to strike on account 
 of some disagreement with their employer, 
 biTt they have no right by force to make 
 him keep their places open until they see fit 
 to return, or to beset, boycott or intimi- 
 date meni who may see fit to work on the 
 terms which they reject. Then, if they 
 have no such right a fortiori, other union 
 employees who may be working for the same 
 or a different employer, have no right to in- 
 terfere or to strike because of the employ- 
 ment of such substitute labour. A number 
 of Protestant workmen might just as well 
 claim a right to force the employer to dis- 
 charge or refuse employment to Roman 
 Catholics as union men claim a right to 
 force the employer to discharge or refuse 
 employment to so-called ' scabs.' Such a 
 claim has no foundation whatever, either in 
 law, reason or morals, and is opposed to the 
 fundamental rights of a free people and 
 amounts to a tyrannical attack on the 
 rights of others ; and therefore we think 
 that strikes solely because of the employ- 
 ment of non-union labour ought to be made 
 punishable by law. 
 
 Sympathetic Strikes. 
 
 Similarly, other kinds of sympathetic 
 strikes ought to be rigidly repressed, as they 
 are opposed to public opinion, and to the 
 great mass of opinion among the labouring 
 classes themselves, as well as to natural 
 justice and reason. For instance, take the 
 case of a strike by a body of coal miners 
 solely for the purpose of preventing coal 
 being supplied to a railway company which 
 had had a disagreement with some of its 
 employees. Cpcn what principle can this 
 be justified? Waj should the employer of 
 
BRITISH COLVMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 65 
 
 the coal miners be forced to break his con- 
 tract with the railway company ? Why 
 should he be subjected to great loss and 
 damage because of a disagreement between 
 others to which he is not a party, and 
 which arises through no fault of hi» own, 
 and why should the innocent public and 
 neutral industries be subjected to embar- 
 rassment and loss ? And yet, it appears 
 that it was actually doubtful as to what 
 course the Nanaimo branch of the Western 
 Federation would have taken, had their em- 
 ployer been supplying any coal to the rail- 
 way company at the time of the strike by 
 the United Brotherhood of Kailway Em- 
 ployees, and one of its officers intimated 
 that it would be well for the coal company 
 to have an agreement with the men which 
 would preclude the possibility of a strike 
 under such circumstances. It may be 
 added on the authority of Carroll D. 
 Wright, Commissioner of Labour at Wash- 
 ington, that the history of the sympathetic 
 strike is practically an uninterrupted story 
 of defeat, and last year the statement was 
 made by John Mitchell, president of the 
 United Mine Workers of America, that he 
 had never known a sympathetic strike to 
 succeed. 
 
 The Strike for Eecognition. 
 
 Whether the strike for recognition should 
 be allowed or prohibited is not so easy to 
 determine. It is true that in theory a body 
 of men should have the right to say that 
 they will deal collectively and not indivi- 
 dually with an employer ; and if all that 
 was meant by a strike for recognition was 
 that they would merely refrain from work 
 until the employer saw fit to accede to the 
 demand, such a strike could not be regarded 
 as inherently wrong; but the fact is that 
 strikes solely for recognition are frequently 
 accompanied by the coercion by illegal 
 practices of both employers and any non- 
 union men who may be disposed to take up 
 the work which the strikers have left. 
 
 At the same time it must be remember- 
 ed that imionism and the demand for re- 
 cognition of the union, i.e. of the right to 
 make a collective bargain, are the natural 
 outcome of the present stage of industrial 
 
 development. In former times the work- 
 man had an immediate interest in the in- 
 struments of production, and in the dis- 
 posal of the finished product, and while all 
 worlanen were not masters, the masters 
 were all workmen, and the possibility at 
 least of becoming a master was open to ap- 
 prentices and journeymen alike. Where 
 the wages contract existed it was a matter 
 of individual bargain between persons who 
 were likely to be associated together in the 
 work of production. Now-a-days the work- 
 men, for the most part, are massed to- 
 gether for the purpose of doing work on 
 material supplied to them by the employer, 
 who is generally a corporation or trust re- 
 presented by a manager and sub-managers, 
 who are selected for their capacity to drive 
 advantageous bargains and extract as much 
 work out of the men as possible. The cor- 
 poration or trust represents the collectivism 
 of the employers, and it is natural and lo- 
 gical that the same spirit should animate 
 the employed. If compelled to contract for 
 himself alone the modern workman would 
 generally have to deal with a purely mer- 
 cenary organization which is in a position 
 to take advantage of his fellow workman's 
 necessities in order to compel him to ac- 
 cept terms which a union, dealing on his 
 bohalf, might be justified in refusing, and 
 able successfully to reject. The right view 
 of this matter, then, seems to be that the 
 strike for recognition, that is, for the right 
 to make a collective bargain, should not be 
 declared unlawful, but that it is specially 
 incumbent on the authorities, when such a 
 strike takes place, to see that no illegal or 
 criminal methods are used to reinforce it. 
 
 There is, however, one way for unions to 
 get recognition which is obviously the sur- 
 est and the best way. It is by showing em- 
 ployers by experience that it is to their ad- 
 vantage to deal with unions as such, and 
 that the unions will regard the interests of 
 the employers as well as their own, remem- 
 bering that the financial burdens and risks 
 of the business fall upon the employers. 
 And here, it may be remarked, lies the essen- 
 tial difl^erence between the legitimate trade 
 unionist and the revolutionary socialist: 
 the former realizes that he has a common 
 
BRITISH COLVUBIA LABOUR COMMISSWy 
 
 interest with the employer in the successful 
 conduct of the business; the latter postu- 
 lates an irreconcilable hostility and is ever 
 compassing the embarrassment or ruin of 
 the employer, all the while ignoring the 
 fact that capital and labour are the two 
 blades of the shears which, to work well, 
 must be joined together by the bolt of mu- 
 tual confidence, hut, if wrenched apart, are 
 both helpless and useless. 
 
 It is also necessary for the unions, in or- 
 der to win recognition, to leave no doubt in 
 the minds of employers that they appreciate 
 the obligation of contract, and in this re- 
 gard we are glad to note that the impor- 
 tance of this is realized by the majority of 
 the unions and their leaders, as is illus- 
 trated by the letter of the president of the 
 International Boilermakers' Union, already 
 quoted. 
 
 Definition of rig^hts and duties of Unions 
 needed. 
 
 The majority of workmen feel the neces- 
 sity for some kind of organization, and or- 
 ganize they will, in some form or other, and 
 therefore their right to combine to improve 
 their conditions and to form unions for that 
 purpose ought to be better recognized and 
 regulated by law than it is. It is better that 
 they be encouraged to establish legitimate 
 unions which will be clothed with respon- 
 sibility for the exercise of power, and which 
 will, therefore, be more readily recognized 
 and dealt with by employers, than that they 
 should join secret organizations, some of 
 which are really nothing more than con- 
 spiracies against society in general and em- 
 ployers in particular. 
 
 At the present time nearly all the indus- 
 trial callings in Canada are organized, and 
 some three or four score of them as integral 
 parts of international unions which have 
 their headquarters in the United States. 
 
 International Organizations. 
 
 It is, we think, a very difficult question 
 as to how far the joining by Canadians of 
 these organizations ought to be sanctioned 
 or interfered with. Many of them claim 
 the right to approve of any settlement 
 
 which may be arrived at between the em- 
 ployer and their members as the result of 
 a strike, especially if the members have been 
 receiving strike pay, as, for instance, in the 
 case of the Western Federation of Miners, 
 Article V, section 2 of the constitution, of 
 which is as follows : — 
 
 Any contract or agreement entered into be- 
 tween the members of any local union and their 
 employers as a final settlement of any difficulty 
 or trouble that may occur between them shall 
 not be considered valid or binding until the 
 same shall have the approval of the executive 
 board of the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Nor is any contract recognized as valid 
 which conflicts with the rules of the union, 
 which are generally framed to suit the 
 union without the authority or sanction of 
 any law. It is thus plain that a Canadian, 
 when he joins such a union, surrenders a 
 considerable portion of his freedom in mat- 
 ters of contract to a small body of men in 
 a foreign country, and is, to that extent at 
 all events, subject to their dictation. How- 
 ever, so far as we have been able to gather, 
 the control exercised by these foreign offi- 
 cials has, generally speaking, not been in- 
 imical to the interests of the Canadian 
 members either as workmen or as British 
 subjects. They have, generally speaking, 
 stood for the observance of contracts, and 
 appear on the whole to realize the necessity 
 for fair and reasonable dealing with the 
 employers, although the cases of the Bakers' 
 Union and the Garonne, already detailed, 
 are conspicuous exceptions. 
 
 The main arguments advanced by Can,a- 
 dian workmen for the necessity of joining 
 these international organizations are as fol- 
 lows : — First, that they are too few in num- 
 bers to form effective organizations of their 
 own. For instance, in the case of the prin- 
 ters, there are only about 2,400 union men 
 in all Canada, whereas in the International 
 there are about 56,000. This body is strong 
 enough to maintain a large benefit fund 
 and a home for destitute and aged printers 
 in Colorado. Second, there is greater econ- 
 omy in the administration of the interna- 
 tional body, and so a greater margin for 
 benefit funds. Third, membership in such 
 organization practically insures work any- 
 where in North America. All the member 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 67 
 
 has to do is to present his membership card 
 to any official who proceeds to secure him 
 work, and until he gets it he is assisted by 
 the union. Fourth, in the event of strike, 
 they have the co-operation and financial aid 
 of a powerful body, and the chances of 
 substitute labour coming from the other 
 side to take their places are reduced to a 
 minimum, as of course no members of the 
 union would come over to take their places. 
 The chief objection to the system of in- 
 ternational unions is the liability of Cana- 
 dian workmen to interferences by the offi- 
 cials in matters of contract and settlement 
 of differences with their employers. If, 
 however, parliament were to declare that 
 notwithstanding anything contained in the 
 constitutions or in the rules' of the inter- 
 national bodies, any agreement arrived at 
 by the employer with his employees in set- 
 tlement of disputes shall be valid and bind- 
 ing, we think the most formidable objection 
 to these bodies would be removed. 
 
 Certain Labour Organizations not Legiti- 
 mate Trade Unions. 
 
 There is, however, a class of so-called 
 union developing rapidly in Western Ameri- 
 ca, which is really not a trade union at all, 
 but a secret political organization whose 
 members are bound by an oath so strong as 
 to be considered a shield against giving any 
 but forced testimony before the Commis- 
 sion. The primary object and common 
 end of this class of organization is to seize 
 the political power of the state for the pur- 
 pose of confiscating all franchises and na- 
 tural resources without compensation, and 
 to this class belong the American Labour 
 Union, the Western Federation of Miners 
 and the United Brotherhood of Railway 
 Employees, with an aggregate membership 
 of between 200,000 and 300,000 men. These 
 three, as already stated, are in confedera- 
 tion with each other, the two latter being 
 affiliated with the former, and, as we have 
 just seen, their leaders were engaged in a 
 conspiracy to sweep all the employees of 
 the Canadian Pacific Eailway; into the 
 
 United Brotherhood, and all coal miners 
 into the Western Federation, and no doubt 
 with a view to being able to stop all trans- 
 portation and coal mining whenever it 
 might appear expedient in the advance- 
 ment of the common end. 
 
 All these bodies have declared for socia- 
 lism, and the following resolution was, we 
 understand, passed by a vote of 125 to 20 
 at the last convention of the Western Fe- 
 deration of Miners, held at Denver on June 
 4, 1903 : 
 
 ' Whereas, the natural resoairces of the earth 
 upon which humanity depends are being swiftly 
 concentrated into the hands of the privileged 
 few ; and 
 
 Whereas, political independence is a bauble 
 and a delusion while the toiling millions bear 
 the yoke of wage slavery in the industrial field; 
 and 
 
 Whereas, no man among the vast army of 
 labouring humanity can successfully assert his 
 manhood while his necessities make him a sup- 
 pliant at the feet of another for a job which 
 he must have to sustain life ; and 
 
 Whereas, the privileged few who own the jobs 
 which the many must have must necessarily 
 own the man ; and 
 
 Wh«reas, capitalism can never be dethroned 
 and wage slavery abolished until the natural 
 resources o^ the earth and the machinery of 
 production and distribution shall be taken from 
 the hands of the few by the political power of 
 the many, to become the collective property of 
 all mankind, to be utilized for the use and bene- 
 fit of all humanity ; and 
 
 Whereas, the socialist party Is the only poli- 
 tical party in any nation of the world that de- 
 mands that the land and the machinery of pro- 
 duction and distribution shall become the com- 
 mon property of all, and that labour shall re- 
 ceive the full product of Its toil ; 
 
 Now, therefore be it resolved, that the dele- 
 gates of the Western Federation of Miners in 
 their eleventh annual convention assembled, re- 
 affirm the political policy of the tenth annual 
 convention, believing that the principles enun- 
 ciated by the socialist party will make man the 
 ' noblest work of God," woman the queen of the 
 home, and the child the bud and blossom of an 
 emianclpated generation.' 
 
 An amendment to the constitution was 
 also passed, obligating the local unions to 
 obey the direction of the executive when 
 called upon by them to go out on strike, 
 which has not yet been submitted to the re- 
 ferendum, as required by the constitution, 
 and as already mentioned a resolution was 
 also adopted at the request of tlie United 
 Brotherhood of Eailway Employees de- 
 claring the Canadian Pacific Eailway ' un- 
 fair.' 
 
63 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 The Western Federation of Miners, the 
 United Brotherhood of Railway 
 Employees and the American 
 Labour Union. 
 
 It is obviously against tlie public in- 
 terest that any body of Canadian •worlnnen 
 should be subject to be called out on strike 
 by a foreign authority over ■whom, neither 
 our legislatures nor courts can exercise any 
 control, and that whether they have any 
 grievances against their employers or not. 
 Whether the wheels of Canadian industry 
 shall run or shall rust ought not to de- 
 pend upon, the decrees of a secret council 
 at Denver. With regard to these organiza- 
 tions we think they ought to be specially 
 declared to be illegal, as their leaders have 
 shown that they care nothing about the 
 obligation of contracts or about the in- 
 terests of their employers, against whom 
 they are ever fomenting discontent ; that 
 they ignore the constitutions and rules of 
 their own organizations whenever it suits 
 them to do so ; that they at all times preach 
 the doctrine of confiscation of property 
 without compensation, and that society is 
 divided into two classes, the toilers and the 
 spoilers ; that they justify the use of the 
 boycott and the sympathetic strike; that 
 they do not disapprove of violence and in- 
 timidation; that they are wholly indifferent 
 to the loss and damage which they inflict 
 upon the public; and that they recklessly 
 allow suffering and privation to befall the 
 families of their misguided followers, with 
 regard to whom they are constantly guilty 
 of deception and concealment. 
 
 There is an additional reason in the case 
 of the United Brotherhood of Eailway Em- 
 ployees, which is that it is the aim of this 
 body to force all classes of railway em- 
 ployees, from the highest to the lowest, to- 
 gether into one organization, in opposition 
 to the wishes of virtually all of the existing 
 railway unions. The great majority of the 
 railway men have no such desire. They 
 have their own class organizations which 
 contract on their behalf with the company, 
 and with which they are satisfied, as, on the 
 one hand their grievances are passed on by 
 
 a committee of their own num'ber who fully 
 understand them, and, on the other hand, 
 they deal directly with those oflicials of 
 the railway who are in control of the de- 
 partment to which they belong. It is ob- 
 vious that a committee of car labourers or 
 freight handlers could not deal as intelli- 
 gently with a trouble arising among the 
 conductors or engineers as the latter can 
 themselves; in fact the latter (who are, ac- 
 cording to one of the sympathetic strikers, 
 the aristocrats of unionism) would not sub- 
 mit to have their movements dictated by 
 the former. To allow an organization like 
 the United Brotherhood of Eailway Em- 
 ployees to gain any foothold among the em- 
 ployees of a great railway system like the 
 Canadian Pacific Eailway, would be to in- 
 troduce the bitterest dissensions among 
 them, and at the same time make it im- 
 possible to carry on the proper management 
 and discipline of the railway, which is just 
 as necessary as in a ship at sea. The best 
 evidence that the United Brotherhood of 
 Eailway Employees is not wanted by rail- 
 way employees as a whole, is that the en- 
 gineers, conductors, firemen, trainmen, &c., 
 of the Canadian Pacific Eailway, although 
 appealed to, refused to come out in aid of, 
 or to render financial assistance to that or- 
 ganization. Moreover, this body has not 
 gained any official recognition frcm any 
 railway company, so far as we are aware, 
 nor could this be expected, as a glance at 
 its constitution will show that it is not a 
 trade union at all, but in reality a one-man 
 despotism. 
 
 Incendiary and Scurrilous Literature. 
 
 Another reason for parliamentary con- 
 demnation of these organizations is that it 
 might serve to stop the .distribution of their 
 incendiary and scurrilous literature. As 
 examples of the kind of matter which is 
 periodically put forth in the journals of 
 these bodies, we may quote the following 
 extracts. 
 
 In an editorial in the official organ of the 
 
 Western Federation of Miners, the M; 
 
 inera 
 
liRITISn COLVUBIA LABOUR COMMISSIOl^ 
 
 69 
 
 Magazine for April, 1903, at page 46, tlie 
 
 following statement appears : — 
 
 Organized labour has been fighting on the In- 
 dustrial field to maintain a wage compensation 
 that enables the human family to obtain some 
 of the necessaries of life, but organized labour 
 is arousing from the hypnotic spell of fake 
 leaders, and moving towards the political battle- 
 field where capitalism will be assassinated for 
 once and forever. 
 
 Commenting on the statement of the 
 
 Governor of Colorado that ' If a man wants 
 
 to work'ijie has a perfect right to do so, and 
 
 the troops are there to see that everyhody's 
 
 rights are protected ', the editor says, at 
 
 page 10: 
 
 These mouthings of the governor convict him 
 as an ofilcial assassin of labour's rights, a ser- 
 vile tool who has disgraced the executive chair 
 by turning over to the corporations the power of 
 his ofiice, to be utilized for the aggrandizement 
 of watered stock gamblers. 
 
 At page 17 he quotes with approval the 
 following from an editoral in a Denver 
 paper : — 
 
 Now, the situation Is this : the miners of this 
 state do not propose to submit to such oppres- 
 sion. They are advocates of law and order, and 
 they will not long permit It to be violated even 
 by the state's chief executive. There is a grave 
 danger in pushing oppression too far, and it is 
 certain that the miners are now In a mood to 
 strike back. They will preserve their liberties 
 and retain their rights if it is necessary to 
 pass through the Red Sea of revolution in order 
 to do so. The colonists had lesis Oiccasion to 
 rebel against the authority of King George than 
 have the miners of Colorado to resist the op- 
 pression of Governor Peabody. 
 
 Again at page 23 : 
 
 The man who will scab on strikers will scab 
 on his honour, if it is possible for a scab to 
 have any honour. 
 
 Commenting on the following state- 
 ment of John Mitchell, president of 
 the United Mine Workers of America, 
 ' I do not believe that in our country 
 there should be an irreconcilable con- 
 flict between labour and capital. Not- 
 withstanding the fact that I have gone 
 through quite a number of strikes, I have 
 not yet abandoned my opinion that if the 
 representatives of capital and the represen- 
 tatives of labour can be brought together, 
 and if they can sit down in honest confer- 
 ence, if they will look one another straight 
 in the eye and tell one another the absolute 
 truth, I believe when that is done that the 
 day of conflict between capital and labour 
 shall end ' the editor says, at page 40 : 
 
 There can he no reconciliation between the 
 capitalist and the labourer, and no one la in a 
 better position to realize this fact than Mr. 
 Mitchell. 
 
 At page 59 appears the following letter, 
 with no signs of disapproval from the edi- 
 tor: 
 
 Park City, Utah, March 5, 1903. 
 Editor Miners' Magazine : 
 
 The United States government is arming 100,- 
 000 more mairderers to assassinate labour, and 
 still some toil worn fools sleep on ! 
 
 Come, ye uniformed butchers to the slaughter 
 your Neroes prepared for us ! We welcome you 
 with bloody arms to the graves your tyrants dig 
 for labour ! The star-spangled banner of bar- 
 barism that floated over the blue-bellied Hes- 
 sians in the Coeur D'Alenes hath no terrors for 
 patriots who will die, as they have lived, for 
 liberty. ■ 
 
 The army reorganization bill is a notice 
 served on labour that liberty is sentenced to 
 death ; and that unless labour prefers peace at 
 the price of chains and slavery, it must arm it- 
 self for labour's Gettysburg, and give battle to 
 tyranny for victory or death. The enemy's ad- 
 vance guard is already thundering at the gates 
 of labour's Lexington. Do your pickets sleep 
 and your soldiei-s dream ? Can none ot you see 
 the crimson dawn ot the American Thermidor, 
 and the stalking phantom of Robespierre ? Your 
 laws defied, your rights denied, your last liber- 
 ties assailed by the Goths and Vandals of pluto- 
 cracy, and still ye cower in submission to the 
 galling yoke of Cassar ! Peace — with hunger ! 
 Liberty — ^to starve ! 
 
 Famine for your wives, wihoredom for your 
 daughters, slavery for your sons, and chains 
 and bayonets for you ! This is the terms of sur- 
 render your enemy proposes ! Let your answer 
 be the answer of Sumpter to the guns of Beau- 
 regard ! 
 
 SALTAIRE. 
 
 At page 68 appears the following: 
 
 Then let them march to the polls as free men, 
 not as slaves, and cast their ballots for the 
 emancipation of the wage slave, a ballot that 
 will not disgrace the gubernatorial chair with 
 a despot, who is the willing tool of plutocracy, 
 who,* at the beck and call of a corporation hire- 
 ling sends out his peanut soldiers to awe honest 
 labour into servile srubjection for demanding 
 their right to organize and to petition for a 
 little more wages to keep the wolf from the 
 door. A ballot that will banish forever master 
 and slave. A ballot that will not disgrace ' Old 
 Glory' by floating over corruption and petticoit 
 soldiers, who would murder their brother in toil 
 if it would win an encomium' from' their master. 
 It I had the power ot the Almighty I would 
 gathCT them all up and place them under my 
 heel and grind them into the dust of oWivIon. 
 Fraternally, 
 
 W. T. HUBBBLL, 
 Globe Miners' Union, No. 60, W. F. ot M. 
 
 The following appears in the editorial 
 New Year's Greeting in the January num- 
 ber: 
 
 We believe that organized labour throughout 
 the west is approaching a crisis. The merging 
 ot railroads and coalition ol millionaires in tha 
 
70 
 
 BRITISE COLUMBIA. LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 Industries of manufacture are the signals that 
 that would warn the forces beneath the banner 
 of unionism to prepare for the fray. ' In times 
 of peace prepare for war." There Is generally 
 a lull before a storm, and the temporary calm 
 sometimes gathers the force of a cyclone to 
 render impotent a weak and staggering resist- 
 ance. The question arises : what shall the 
 members of the Federation do to neutralize the 
 ominous portending shadows that point to a 
 measuring of strength between labour and capi- 
 tal ? We would suggest that every member 
 who is employed contribute to the treasury of 
 his local one day's pay each month for a period 
 at one year. By doing this organized labour 
 will be placing in Its arsenal some of the am- 
 munlticHi that is necessary to cope with capital 
 on the field of battle. 
 
 At page 10: 
 
 Conservatism in a labour organization is rapid- 
 ly becoming a synonym for cowardice. 
 
 At page 19 : 
 Discontent is an indication of Intelligence. 
 
 At page 35 the following editorial para- 
 graph : 
 
 Dicl£ Adams, who won corporation gratitude 
 tor his distinguished services as a hired thug 
 during the Coeur D'Alene trouble of 1892 and 
 1899, was killed a few weeks ago In the Bunker 
 Hill mill. According to the account in the Idaho 
 State Tribune ' he was caught by a set screw In 
 the line shaft and wound up and Instantly killed. 
 His neck was broken, his head nearly severed 
 from tihe body, his arms and legs broken anid 
 the body badly crushed. Throughout the min- 
 ing states and territories of the west there are 
 many miners who know and have heard of this 
 cold-blooded hireling, and some who have felt 
 the sting of his sneers and Jeers, and It Is safe 
 to say that among the miners few tears will 
 be shed over the tidings that he met an untime- 
 ly end. When he ceased to be useful In carry- 
 ing out the cruel mandates issued by Standard 
 Oil brutality, he was given a Job like any other 
 wage slave, and In the performance of his duties 
 in the mill he met his death. His remains have 
 been shipped to Oregon for Interment, and It 
 may be that Rockefeller and the other mining 
 magnates of Idaho will pass the hat around for 
 a collection to place a slab at his grave that 
 will bear the following inscription : ' Here lies 
 our servile tool." 
 
 In the May number, in commenting on 
 the appointment by the Governor of Color- 
 ado of a commission to inquire into and re- 
 port on the labour troubles. President Moyer 
 and Secretary Hayvpood of the Western 
 Federation of Miners say, over their own 
 signatures at page 4 : 
 
 An arbitration commission that was appointed 
 Isat OctiobeT by President Rooseveiit have just 
 brouehjt lin their verdict, which Is an insult to 
 the honour and dignity of organized labour. 
 
 At page 27, commenting on the Anthra- 
 cite Commission's report, the editor says : 
 
 The courts are recognized to-day by organ- 
 ised labour as partial to capital. Nearly every 
 labour law that passes a legislative body U de- 
 
 clared unconstitutional. What Justice can be 
 expected from tribunals which, upon the slight- 
 est pretext, grant Injun-otlons to corporations 
 which shackle the power o€ organized labour 
 in its struggle for Justice. 
 
 At page 36 the editor says : 
 
 The minister of the gospel who is not in sym- 
 pathy with organized labour should be placed 
 on the ' scab ' list. 
 
 At page 49 a contributor says: 
 
 Dion't you know that the next strike must 
 be won by a national or International strike to 
 show capitalism and ourselves how omnipotent 
 unified, consolidated labour Is ? Stop every 
 wheel in America ; silence every telegraph ; 
 stop every train ; hold every ship at anchor ; 
 close every market ; silence every press for ten 
 days ! E'lrope will follow our example, and 
 it will be the last strike of labour. The next 
 strike will occur at the ballot box, and the war 
 will be over forever. 
 
 There is not food enough to feed the world 
 longer than ten days without our work In pro- 
 duction and distribution ; not Jails enough to 
 hold us ; not soldiers enough to guard us ; not 
 police enough to arrest us, and not Judges 
 enough to ' enjoin ' us ! The universal ten days' 
 strike Is the means to the end ! 
 
 These examples have been taken at ran- 
 dom out of the only numbers of this pub- 
 lication that have been handed in to the 
 Commission, but they are enough, we think^ 
 to show its character. 
 
 The Incorporation of Unions. 
 
 We think, then, that legitimate trade 
 unionism ought to be encouraged and pi-o- 
 teeted, and that organizations of the class 
 just dealt with ought to be prohibited and 
 declared illegal, and that there ought to be 
 strict enforcement of the law relating to 
 the administration of voluntary oaths. We 
 would, therefore, suggest that provision be 
 made for the incorporation of trade unions 
 with a model constitution ; that among 
 other things it should be provided that no 
 strike should be declared without at least 
 30 days' notice to the employer except in 
 cases where the employer is attempting to 
 change the conditions of employment to the 
 disadvantage of the employer without 
 giving similar notice ; that there should 
 be at least a two-thirds majority of 
 those present in its favour at a meeting 
 called specially to consider the question ; 
 that the matter should be decided by ballot; 
 that no strike be declared which shall be in 
 violation of any contract not already vio- 
 lated by the employer ; that all strikes. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 71 
 
 lockouts and disagreements with the em- 
 ployer shall be settled -without the inter- 
 ference of any person residing outside of 
 the Dominion unless by mutual consent. 
 
 To protect the union it ought to be made 
 an ofEence for the employer to discriminate 
 against, or discharge any member of an in- 
 corporated union for the reason only that he 
 is, or intends to become a member of such 
 union; and, generally on this subject, it 
 would appear to be just to enact that no 
 person should be refused emplo3rment or in 
 any way discriminated against on account 
 of membership or non-membership in any 
 labour organization, except such as may be 
 declared illegal by competent authority ; 
 and on the other hand, that there should be 
 no discrimination against or interference 
 with an employee who is not a member of 
 any legal organization by members of such 
 organization. We think that the incorpora- 
 tion of such unions with adequate protec- 
 tion, would meet with the approval of the 
 majority of the intelligent and reasonable 
 leaders in labour circles. It has been urged 
 as an objection that they would be merely 
 targets for law suits, and that their benefit 
 funds would be liable to be seized to make 
 good any judgments against them. As to 
 this, it could be provided that purely benefit 
 funds should be vested in trustees nomin- 
 ated for that purpose, and they should not 
 be liable to answer any judgments, other 
 than such "as may be rendered in litigation 
 relating to such funds ; and if this were 
 done we cannot see how any valid objection 
 can be taken to the proposition that a union 
 should be liable for any violation of con- 
 tract or any legal wrong it may commit 
 equally with any other organization. In 
 fact it is a mistake to suppose that an un- 
 incorporated body can not be sued for 
 wrongs done by the action of the body as a 
 whole. Lord Lindlay says, in the Tajf Vale 
 Case, (1902, Appeal Cases, at page 443) : 
 
 I have myselt no doubt whatever that it the 
 trade union couM not be sued in this case in its 
 registered name, some of its members (namely, 
 its executive committee) could be sued on behalf 
 of themselves and the other members of the 
 society, and an injunction and judgment for 
 damages could be obtained in a proper case in 
 an action so framed. Further, it is, in my opin- 
 ion, equally plain that if the trustees In whom 
 
 the property of the society Is legally vested 
 were added as parties, an order could be made 
 in the same action, for the payment by them 
 out of the funds of the society of all damages 
 and costs for which the plaintiff might obtain 
 judgment against the trade union. 
 
 On the other hand, an employer would be 
 very much more willing to deal with an in- 
 corporated union than with an unincor- 
 porated body, as he would be dealing with a 
 body that had a legal status, and generally 
 some corporeal substance, and not with a 
 shadow; and those workmen who desire re- 
 cognition of their unions would have much 
 more reason to expect it if their unions 
 were incorporated than if they were not. 
 
 It is also objected that the unions might 
 be subject to repeated litigation, and ex- 
 hausted by a series of appeals by wealthy 
 employers. As to this it could be provided 
 that if the union were successful in the 
 first instance there should be no appeal ex- 
 cept by leave of the judge appealed from, 
 or of the Court of Appeal, and that either 
 could, in any case in which it might appear 
 to be just, require the appellant to pay all 
 costs in any event as a condition of the 
 leave to appeal, for which course there is 
 ample precedent in the practice of the Ju- 
 dicial Committee of the Privy Council. 
 
 There would, of course, be nothing to 
 prevent members of the incorporated unions 
 from retaining their international mem- 
 bership if they chose to do so. 
 
 The Union Label and the ' Unfair ' and 
 ' Scab ' List. 
 
 Further, we see no reason why incor- 
 porated unions should not be given the 
 right to use the union label on the products 
 of their manufacture. And here is an ilhis- 
 tration of the difl^erence between methods 
 which are right in principle and those which 
 are wrong in principle. There is no reason 
 why a union should- not be allowed to ad- 
 vertise its products by means of the label, 
 and in this way bespeak the patronage of 
 the public. On the other hand, the publica- 
 tion of the ' unfair ' and ' scab ' list is 
 wrong in principle. Why should any per- 
 son or union be allowed to publish or pla- 
 card any other person or body of men as 
 ' unfair ' or as ' scabs ' ? Such action tends 
 
72 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 manifestly to a breach of the peace and 
 argues a contemptuous indifFerence to, and 
 a high-handed attack upon the rights of 
 others. There is no reason why the unions 
 cannot confine themselves to the publication 
 of ' fair ' instead of ' unfair ' or ' scab ' 
 lists — a ' white ' list, and not a ' black ' list. 
 A case was brought to our attention of a 
 contractor who employed union men and 
 paid the union scale, and of the owners for 
 whom he was building, who were posted up 
 by the Trades and Labour Council of Van- 
 couver as ' unfair,' and placarded as sucli 
 on different streets in the city. It was also 
 stated in the placard that a number of la- 
 bour organizations endorsed the action of 
 the Trades and Labour Council, but we have 
 every reason to believe that this statement 
 was made without the authority of several 
 of the organizations mentioned. The pla- 
 card in question is Exhibit 72a to this re- 
 port. Exhibit 76, a calendar advertising 
 the Gurney Foundry Company, of Toronto, 
 in large type as ' unfair ' was' also brought 
 to our attention. Other examples of the mode 
 in which the ' unfair ' and ' scab ' list are 
 used will be found in Exhibits Y2 (b), Y5, 
 T6, 7Y. If the posting up of others as 
 'unfair' or as 'scabs' is not prohibited 
 then, as the appetite grows by what it feeds 
 on, other wrongs, such as boycotting and 
 intimidation will occur with increasing fre- 
 quency and boldness until the employers 
 will be driven into combination for the pur- 
 pose of retaliating in kind, and it will not 
 be long before society gets into the explo- 
 sive condition which precedes riot and civil 
 war. We tliink, therefore, that the use of 
 the union label should be recognized by law, 
 and that it should be allowod to incorporat- 
 ed bodies, but that it should be made a spe- 
 cific offence to use or publish the epithets 
 ' scab ' or ' unfair ' in connection with the 
 name of any person or organization. 
 
 /The Boycott, Intimidation and Picketing. 
 
 We have already alluded to the boycott, 
 intimidation and picketing. The two for- 
 mer are condemned by the best type of la- 
 bour leaders, and indeed by all right think- 
 ing people. We may note, in addition to in- 
 
 stances already cited, a ease that was espe- 
 cially brought to our attention. A widow 
 who was keeping a boarding house (it being 
 her only means of living) was waited on by 
 three union boarders, who informed her that 
 unless she turned away some six or eight 
 non-union boarders they would withdraw, 
 and on her refusal they did withdraw. The 
 men who did this were no friends of union- 
 ism, for, as Junius would say, the man who 
 is truly loyal to unionism will neither ad- 
 vise nor submit to arbitrary measures. Yet 
 not only was this action lauded and de- 
 fended by some exponents of unionism, but 
 it was further explained to us that a ' scab ' 
 is a murderer. To such as are imbued with 
 this spirit, which savours rather of the 
 bigotry of the middle ages than of enlight- 
 ened imionism, we would commend the 
 words of Coriolanus: 
 
 ■WhatV"! the matter, you disseatious rogues. 
 That, rubbing the poor itch of your opiaion. 
 Make yourselves scabs ? 
 
 With regard to picketing, some evidence 
 was given to show that this was done in the 
 ease of the railway strike, accompanied by 
 acts of intimidation, and there is no doubt 
 that a number of assaults on both striiierg 
 and ' scabs ' took place, resulting in one case 
 in the death of a striker, which are directly 
 attributable to the existence of the strike. 
 All of which demonstrates, if it needed de- 
 monstration, that a strike is a very serious 
 disturbance of tlio social peace and pros- 
 perity, and is to be prevented by'all means 
 possible. 
 
 Preventive Measures by Parties. 
 
 With regard to preventive measures by 
 the parties themselves, obviously the sim- 
 plest and best way is for the contending 
 parties to settle their differences by com- 
 promise and mutual concession, either with 
 or without the mediation of others, both 
 keeping in mind the fact that there may be 
 good reason for the other's stand, and that 
 they both owe a duty to the community 
 which protects and sustains them, not to 
 inflict any more damage and inconvenience 
 upon it than is absolutely necessary. It is 
 also too often forgotten by employees that 
 
BRITISil COLVMBIA LABOUR COMMISSlOTif 
 
 7S 
 
 they have families to support, and that they 
 have no right to plunge the community into 
 a state of strife which a strike invariably 
 causes unless they are forced to do so by 
 the mast compelling necessity ; and by em- 
 ployers, especially those who are in control 
 of exclusive franchises and natural mono- 
 polies, that they do not own their franchise 
 or property in any absolute sense, but that 
 they enjoy their beneficial control by the 
 sanction and approval of the society in 
 which they live, and that they are therefore 
 under a special obligation to society to see 
 to it that their management does not, by 
 arbitrary and unreasonable conduct, be- 
 come a public nuisance. 
 
 Preventive Measures by the State. 
 
 As to the best method of minimizing the 
 danger of strikes and lock-outs by legisla- 
 tion, we think the most effective means will 
 be found in compelling publicity at the 
 earliest stage of the trouble. 
 
 Greater Publicity. 
 
 No strike or lock-out should be allowed 
 except upon giving at least 30 days' notice, 
 (some of the unions prescribe 3 months), 
 where the other party is not attempting to 
 change the terms or conditions of the em- 
 ployment, and the intending strikers or em- 
 ployers should be compelled to file a sworn 
 statement, fully and accurately setting forth 
 the reasons for the intended strike or lock- 
 out in the oflice of the Registrar of the 
 Supreme Court of the province, and of the 
 Minister of Labour at Ottawa, at least 3 
 weeks before the day fixed for the strike or 
 lock-out. The statement should eAso be 
 served upon the opposite party, who should 
 be required to file a sworn answer thereto 
 within iO days of its receipt. On the other 
 hand, v/here the other party attempts to 
 change the terms and conditions of the em- 
 ployment, provision could be made requir- 
 ing statements to be filed either before or 
 after the strike or lock-out takes place, ac- 
 cording to the nature of the case. In this 
 way the pr^ss and the public will at once 
 become authoritatively informed by both 
 sides of their position at the outset of 
 
 the trouble, and public opinion will at once 
 begin to act upon the parties, and no doubt 
 in many cases, before the day fixed for the 
 strike or lock-out arrives, better counsels 
 will prevail. It would also afford an oppor- 
 tunity for settlement by means of concilia- 
 tion or arbitration before the parties came 
 to arm's length. If a law to this effect had 
 been in force there would have been no 
 strike on the part of the longshoremen or 
 teamsters or the steamshipmen's associa- 
 tion, as the only excuse they could have 
 given for their actions was that they were 
 being brought in contact with so-called 
 ' scab ' freight, or, at any rate, if they did 
 venture to put such a ground for a strike 
 before the public they would have soon 
 found that they had taken up an untenable 
 position. Similarly if an employer were to 
 order a lock-out solely on the ground that 
 the men had joined a union not prohibited 
 by law, we think public opinion would soon 
 make it unmistakably appear that such a 
 lock-out would not be justifiable. 
 
 Boards of Conciliation. 
 
 There is no doubt that the establishment 
 of boards of conciliation will go far in the 
 direction of avoiding strikes and lock-outs. 
 The weight of opinion in Great Britain and 
 in the United States, both among employers 
 and employed, seems to be that conciliation 
 ought to be the method invariably resorted 
 to in the settlement of industrial disputes, 
 and that a general scheme of compulsory 
 arbitration would be productive of moro 
 harm than good, the chief grounds of ob- 
 jection being that it is a very serious inter- 
 ference with the freedom of contract, that 
 it is generally a compromise which is not 
 satisfactory to either party, being arrived 
 at in the last result by an umpire who may 
 not fully appreciate the position of one or 
 other of the parties, and that it is seldom 
 loyally accepted and lived up to by both 
 parties. 
 
 We would strongly recommend both em- 
 ployers and employed to enno-jrage and 
 practice the spirit of conciliation, and we 
 think it would be a good plan, in the case 
 of the larger industries, if both would re- 
 
74 
 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 cognize the possibilities of disputes, and 
 make it a rule periodically to appoint some 
 person or persons on each side to form a 
 permanent conciliation committee to con- 
 sider any differences that cannot otherwise 
 be settled to the satisfaction of both parties. 
 These persons cculd, in the event of failure 
 to agree, if both employer and workmen 
 assented, be converted into a hoard of ar- 
 bitration by the appointment of an umpire ; 
 or a board of arbitration could be consti- 
 tuted of other persons altogether, and the 
 conciliators on each side could present the 
 case to the arbitrators. 
 
 Compulsory Investigation. 
 
 Compulsory investigation may also some- 
 times be employed with advantage. We 
 have no doubt that the present investigation 
 was a large factor in hurrying the railway 
 strike to an end, and we believe that a 
 method providing an expeditious mode of 
 compulsory investigation by persons to be 
 nominated by the parties and an umpire 
 would satisfactorily dispose of a good many 
 labour disputes. 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration. 
 
 The weight of opinion as expressed before 
 the Commission was against compulsory ar- 
 bitration, and while we do not think that a 
 law applying this method of settling dis- 
 putes to industries generally would meet 
 with general approval, there are special 
 cases in which it would seem to be the ne- 
 cessary final resort. 
 
 It does not need any argument to show 
 that public service undertakings, such as 
 railways, telegraphs, telephones, steamships, 
 the supplying of power, water and light, 
 and particular industries, such as coal min- 
 ing, must be carried on without interruption 
 if the whole industrial business of the com- 
 munity is not to be seriously damaged or 
 ruined. 
 
 No gain that can possibly accrue to 
 cither of the parties in this class of case 
 by means of a strike or lock-out can possi- 
 bly bo commensurate with the loss inflicted 
 upon the general public, v.-hich may easily 
 cause, in some instances, the total extinc- 
 
 tion of a particular industry, or its transfer 
 to another district or country. We there- 
 fore think that, notwithstanding the objec- 
 tions that can be raised to compulsory ar- 
 bitration, this mode of settling disputes 
 ought to be resorted to in this class of case 
 whenever the strike or lock-out has reached 
 such dimensions as to seriously affect the 
 public, and when all other means have been 
 exhausted or would appear to be of no 
 avail. 
 
 We would, therefore, suggest that the 
 Governor in Council be armed with author- 
 ity in the cases mentioned to notify the par- 
 ties by proclamation that unless the dis- 
 pute is settled by a day to be iixed, it will 
 be referred to the court which shall have 
 power to summarily investigate and try the 
 same, and give a decision and award which 
 shall be binding for a period not to exceed 
 one year. This jurisdiction should not be 
 open to be invoked by either party, and 
 should only be exercised by the Governor in 
 Council wjienever it shall appear that the 
 strike or lock-out has reached, or is likely 
 to reach such dimensions, or has lasted, or 
 is likely to last so long as to seriously affect 
 the general welfare of the public; in short, 
 the only ground on which the jurisdiction 
 should be exercised is that of public neces- 
 sity. Had the recent coal strikes in Koote- 
 nay lasted another two weeks there is no 
 doubt that 76 per cent of the mining and 
 smelting industries of the province would 
 have had to close down and several thou- 
 sand men would have been thrown out of 
 employment. Such a crisis would be im- 
 possible under the proposed law. 
 
 When the trouble exists in more than one 
 province, the court referred to should be the 
 Exchequer Court of Canada, as its jurisdic- 
 tion and process is binding over the whole 
 of Canada, but all judges of the highest 
 Provincial Courts of First Instance should 
 be made ex officio judges of the Exchequy 
 Court for this purpose. The reference 
 should be made to the court, and not to any 
 particular judge, and on receipt of the order 
 of reference the Registrar of the Supreme 
 Court or other highest Court of Eirst In- 
 stance in the province shou ld determine the 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOXJK COUUIS^ON 
 
 75 
 
 judge by lot, and in this way the parties 
 would not be able to speculate on the per- 
 sonality of the judge who would try the dis- 
 pute. We think that such an enactment 
 would have a legitimate coercive influence 
 on the parties, and that the proclamation 
 would generally be productive of a settle- 
 ment without the necessity for a reference. 
 From and after the day fixed, the continu- 
 ance of the strike or lock-out should be 
 made unlawful. 
 
 Labour Leaders. 
 
 The testimony shows that it is of the ut- 
 most consequence to the workmen them- 
 selves that they exercise extreme caution in 
 their decision to join any given organiza- 
 'tion. There can be no doubt that the de- 
 signs and aims of the orfe'anizations, which 
 we have suggested should be declared illegal, 
 were to a large extent concealed from the 
 men by their leaders. Workmen ought not, 
 in their own interests, to leave themselves 
 open to the charge that they are, as some 
 employers claim ' slaves of the union,' and 
 yet the evidence shows that it would not be 
 a wholly incorrect description of the posi- 
 tion of those who were engaged in the 
 strikes in question. If workmen are not 
 careful in the selection of their leaders, if 
 they do not choose straightforward and 
 fair-minded men as the officers of their or- 
 ganizations, the case for recognition is 
 hopeless. Looking at the evasive and equi- 
 vocating way in which the testimony of 
 some of the leaders was given, and at the 
 extraordinary trouble that was taken by 
 them to keep their followers in the dark as 
 to their real designs, it would be a miracle 
 if any organization led by such men could 
 ever maintain peaceful relations with any 
 employer, no matter how friendly he was 
 disposed to be, or how far he might go in 
 his concessions. If the experience of the 
 business world should unhappily demons- 
 trate that unionism is symbolical of tyr- 
 anny and treachery, the position of the 
 workmen will become hard indeed, unless 
 some other institution is devised which will 
 better maintain the equilibrium which 
 
 ought to exist between them and their em- 
 ployers. A special obligation is therefore 
 placed upon the upholders and leaders of 
 unionism to see to it that it is not over- 
 whelmed with that just scorn and oppro- 
 brium which is certain to happen unless it is 
 animated by the dictates of justice and rea- 
 son. No institution which habitually vio- 
 lates the fundamental rules of right and 
 wrong can last long in any civilized society. 
 
 That the workmen should be careful in 
 the selection of their leaders is also shown 
 by the fact that in at least two or three in- 
 stances their purchasability was proved be- 
 yond doubt. The man who was the chief 
 organizer for Canada of the United Broth- 
 erhood of Eailway Employees is shown to 
 have betrayed the secrets of the union to the 
 employers for hire, at the very time that he 
 was being paid by the union for bringing in 
 new members, and while he was administer- 
 ing the oath which binds to secrecy. The 
 evidence is also clear that paid hirelings of 
 the railway company worked their way into 
 the union, took a leading part in its delib- 
 erations, initiated new members, and duly 
 reported all that took place to their master. 
 
 It is obvious from these facts that it is 
 not beyond the bounds of possibility that 
 the legitimate desire of a body of working- 
 men to establish a proper union may be 
 used as a means to forward illegal and un- 
 worthy ends by plausible leaders who are 
 in the pay of foreign capitalists, and that a 
 union may be persuaded into a strike by un- 
 principled men for no other purpose than 
 to cripple or destroy a Canadian industry 
 for the benefit of its rivals. It was further 
 shown that the United Brotherhood pursued 
 just as reprehensible tactics as the company, 
 inasmuch as private telegrams between ofii- 
 cials of the company were disclosed to the 
 union, arrangements made with an em- 
 ployee of a foreign telegraph company to 
 reveal information, copies of confidential 
 documents abstracted, waste paper baskets 
 ransacked, and the house of the local super- 
 tendent watched, and all with the express 
 approval and encouragement of the presi- 
 dent of the Brotherhood. 
 
76 
 
 'BR'M'SB CXiLVMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 Interference of Foreign Officials, 
 
 As will be seen by tbe evidence already 
 detailed, the question of how far there 
 should be legislation directed against 
 foreign interference with Canadian work- 
 men comes up squarely for consideration. 
 1 The evidence presents two classes of in- 
 terference: one, that of procuring and in- 
 citing to quit work by the foreign agitator 
 in person; and the other, the case of ofBi- 
 cials of international or other organizations 
 who remain in the foreign country, but 
 who procure and incite by means of othfEr 
 officials within Canada, and who assume the 
 control and direction of Canadian work- 
 men until the termination of the dispute. 
 
 As has already been said, it should not be 
 tolerated that Canadian industries should 
 be subject to the dictation of foreigners who 
 know no law, so far as such industries are 
 concerned, but their own desires, and whose 
 business and avowed object it is to keep up 
 unceasing friction between the employer 
 and employed, and who are not trade union- 
 ists, but socialistic agitators of the most 
 bigoted and ignorant type. We therefore 
 think that it is necessary for Parliament 
 to interfere in the direction of making it 
 an offence, punishable, in minor cases, on 
 summaiy conviction before a county judge 
 or police or stipendiary magistrate, by fine 
 or imprisonment, and in graver cases, on 
 conviction by indictment, by imprisonment 
 only, for any pei-son not a British subject, 
 and who has not been residing in the pro- 
 vince for at least one year, to procure or 
 incite any employee or employees in Can- 
 ada to quit the emplojonent without the 
 consent of the employer; or for any person 
 within Canada to exhibit or publish, or in 
 any way communicate to any employee or 
 employees the contents of any order, re- 
 quest, suggestion or recommendation, (or 
 any document purporting to be a copy 
 thereof), by any person or persons ordina- 
 rily resident without Canada, that he or 
 they quit the employment as aforesaid, 
 whether such order, request, suggestion or 
 recommendation, or copy thereof is signed, 
 or purports to be signed by such person or 
 
 persons on his or their own behalf, or on be- 
 half of any other person, or of any associa- 
 tion of persons, whether incorporated or 
 not. 
 
 , The testimony before us showed practical 
 unanimity on the part of the intelligent and 
 strong minded members of the labouring 
 classes that foreign agitators and their me- 
 thods were not wanted, in fact, as one of 
 them put it, they regarded it as an insult 
 that such proposals should be made to them 
 by any outsiders. 
 
 Violaticn of Contracts. 
 The testimony shows that it is necessary 
 to penalize the wanton violation of con- 
 tracts as well as the sympathetic strike. 
 The older unions for the most part show a 
 commendable appreciation of their obliga- 
 tions in this regard, but some of the recent- 
 ly organized bodies have shown little or no 
 such appreciation, which is probably due 
 to the fact that while they felt a new sense 
 of power their was no sense of responsibili- 
 ty. "We would, therefore, suggest that the 
 courts be clothed with power to disincor- 
 porate any incorporated union and to de- 
 clare illegal any unincorporated organiza- 
 tion which is shown to have violated any 
 contract without colour of right, or to have 
 gone out on sympathetic strike. This, of 
 course, would not authorize the court to 
 give such a judgment where any reasonable 
 justification is given in defence of the con- 
 duct impugned. 
 
 Blacklisting^. 
 
 It was alleged by counsel for the United 
 Brotherhood that the Canadian Pacific 
 Company was privy to a blacklisting 
 scheme, in common with other railway com- 
 panies in North America, and some evid- 
 ence was given to show that certificates of 
 service, called ' clearances ', did not always 
 fairly state the cause of dismissal. Time 
 did not admit of full investigation into 
 this matter, and the charge respecting 
 blacklisting to other railway companies of 
 the names of employees who had been en- 
 gaged in a strike, was vigorously repudiated 
 by the officers of the company. 
 
BRITISH COLUMBIA LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 77 
 
 Some evidence was also given to show 
 that employers were beginning to move in 
 the direction of combining to boycott and 
 blacklist men participating in strikes, and- 
 one witness swore that before he could ob- 
 tain lumber from a saw-mill he had to sa- 
 tisfy the Builders' Exchange that certain 
 strikers would not be employed on the 
 building. Neither could this matter be 
 fully investigated, but assuming that em- 
 ployers are combining in this way, it is the 
 natural counter move to the ' unfair " list, 
 the boycott and the sympathetic strike, and 
 equally reprehensible and wrong, and ought 
 equally with them to be declared unlawful. 
 Employers should also be required, if ask- 
 ed, to fully and accurately state the cause 
 of dismissal in the ' clearance ', and not 
 leave it open to be inferred that the em- 
 ployee was guilty of some misconduct 
 which would debar him from securing 
 other employment when the real cause was 
 such as to leave it at least open to question 
 as to whether or not the dismissal was 
 wrongful. 
 
 Hours of Labour. 
 During the sittings of the Commission a 
 strike took place among the operators in the 
 saw-mills and planing mills in Vancouver 
 and New Westminster, which we were ask- 
 ed by them to investigate, but we were un- 
 able to do so. The demand was for a short- 
 ening of hours from 10 hours to 9, with 
 Saturday afternoons off and without reduc- 
 tion of pay, and a memorandum was handed 
 in to show that the product is sold on the 
 average at about three times its cost. As the 
 employers have not filed any statement, we 
 cannot pretend to pass on the merits of this 
 dispute, but we think that much good would 
 result by legislation moving in the direc- 
 tion of the shortening of hours. In these 
 days, v/hen the human energies are strained 
 
 to their utmost amid whirling dust and 
 machinery, long hours are a crime against 
 nature. The machine should be the servant 
 of man, and not man the slave of the ma- 
 chine. One of the most legitimate modes 
 in which a legislature can aid in improving 
 the condition of the workmen is by the 
 shorteniDg of hours. Of course this ought 
 to be done gradually, and after carefully 
 taking into account the conditions of the 
 particular industry in other countries bo 
 as not to transfer it elsewhere, or drive it 
 out of our own country. If it could be 
 brought to pass that the workman would 
 have to work only long enough so as to 
 make his work a pleasurable exercise, in- 
 stead of an exhausting toil, and at the same 
 time secure a comfortable living, society 
 will have advanced a long way towards the 
 millenium. 
 
 These then are the opinions and conclu- 
 sions which we have formed after the per- 
 usal of some two thousand pages of evi- 
 dence and a large mass of documents and 
 correspondence ; and while the inquiry 
 might have taken a wider scope and been 
 more searching and thorough than the time 
 allotted us permitted, yet we do not 
 think it likely, that we should have 
 reached any different conclusions on the 
 points of importance. At the same time 
 we feel quite free to admit that, while much 
 good can be accomplished by wise legisla- 
 tion, the labour problem, so-called, is in- 
 capable of final solution, and that it will 
 be with us as long as human nature remains 
 what it is, and present civilization endures. 
 
 Dated at Victoria, 
 
 this eighth day of July, 1903. 
 
 (Sd.) GOEDON HUNTEK, 
 ELLIOTT S. EOWE. 
 
 Commissioners. 
 
XOTTRABLE SIB VVILMAM MULOCK, K.C.M.G., MINISTER OV LABOUR 
 
 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE 
 
 ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN THE PROVINCE OF 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA 
 
 PRINTED BY ORDER OF PARLIAMENT 
 
 OTTAWA 
 
 PRINTED BY S. E. DAWSON, PRINTER TO THE KING'S MOST 
 
 EXCELLENT MAJESTY 
 
 1904 
 
 [No. 36a— 1904] 
 
/ 
 3-4 EDWARD VII. 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 A. 1904 
 
 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE 
 
 ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 ON 
 
 INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN THE PROVINCE OF 
 BRITISH COLUMBIA 
 
 ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OP LABOUR, CANADA 
 
 VI 
 
 OTTAWA 
 
 PRINTED BY S. E. DAWSON, PRINTER TO THE KING'S MOST 
 
 EXCELLENT MAJESTY 
 
 1904 
 
3-4 EDWARD VII. SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a A. 1904 
 
 ROYAL LABOUR COMMISSION 
 
 COMMISSIONERS 
 
 The Honourable Gordon Hunter, 
 
 Chief Justice of British Columiia, 
 Chairman. 
 
 Rev. Elliott S. Rowp, 
 
 SECRETARY : 
 
 W. L. Mackenzie King, 
 
 Deputy Minister of Labour, 
 
 STENOGRAPHER : 
 
 Francis W. Giddens, 
 
 Department of Labour. 
 
8-4 EDWARD VII. SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a A. 1904 
 
 EVIDEISTOE 
 
 TAKEN BEFORE THE 
 
 ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 TO INQUIRE INTO 
 
 lAllPU 
 
 Tlie Hon. GORDON HUNTER 
 
 (' 
 
 _ . . I (Chief Justice of British Columbia) 
 
 Commissioners { ^, : 
 
 Chairman 
 
 I: 
 
 R9V. ELLIOTT S. ROWE 
 
 OPENING DAY'S PEOCEEDINGS. 
 
 Ladysmith, B.C., May 4, 1903. 
 
 The, Commission read hy Mr. W. L. Mackenzie King, the Secretary. 
 
 His Lordship, Chief Justice Hunter. — Gentlemen, you have heard the Com- 
 mission read, and you understand, no doubt, what the object of the Commission is. 
 If there is any one present who would like to make suggestions to the Commission as 
 to what procedure should be adopted to get at the subject matter of the inquiry we 
 shall be glad to listen to him. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Your Honour, I appear with my friend, Mr. Luxton, for the Wel- 
 lington Collieries Company. It has occurred to us that a definite method of conduct- 
 ing this inquiry would be if those interested in it from a labour standpoint, should 
 be represented by counsel, and as has been the practice in some other inquiries of this 
 kind, should occupy the position of plaintiffs, or a position analogous to plaintiffs in 
 a civil action, and speaking of my own thought in the matter it seems to me that it 
 would be more convenient and would facilitate the work of the( Commission if some 
 formulated statement of the matters which those on either side wish investigated 
 should be made in the first instance. Then the evidence such as would be thought 
 advisable to bring before the Commission could be called, and the examination would 
 be appointed to a certain end, and in that way we might proceed systematically, and it 
 seems to me that would be the best way to get at the facts. I understand that Mr. 
 Wilson, K.C., of Vancouver, will be here to represent the labour interests. 
 
 His Lordship. — Can any one tell the Commission whether Mr. Wilson is to be 
 here ? 
 
 Mr. A. A. Barnes. — Your Honour, it is not known definitely as to whether Mr. 
 Wilson is engaged or not, but we presume he is. Our secretary is over in Vancouver 
 36a— 1 
 
2 MmffTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 to engage him. I think we can fully expect him on to-morrow morning's train. We 
 would like to ask for an adjournment until to-morrow at two o'clock. 
 
 His Lordship. — Speaking for myself, I think the best course would be for the 
 men through their counsel to file a statement of their grievances. If you would get 
 Mr. Wilson to file a statement, then Mr. Bodwell could say what he had to say. Do 
 you think you will have a statement of grievances filed to-morrow ? 
 
 Mr. Barnes. — We have no authority to state that, but at any rate we will submit 
 it to him. 
 
 His Lordship. — We will take an adjournment until to-morrow. I suggest that we 
 adjourn until two o'clock and get the statement by then. The gentlemen present will 
 understand that the Commission is sitting to inquire into and hear everything that is 
 to be said, but in order that the inquiry should be conducted in a proper way we deem 
 it best to have the men file a statement of their grievances on their side, and then, 
 on the other hand, hear what the company have to say in answer to it. It is expected 
 that any men who wish to give evidence will come forward willingly and give what 
 evidence they can. We need not say that every man will be expected to tell the 
 truth, and if it comes to the ear of the court that any intimidation is offered, the 
 Commission will take steps to prevent it. What we want to get at is the truth, no 
 matter whom it hurts. I hope everyone will understand that this Commission means 
 business. In the meantime, we adjourn until to-morrow. 
 
 (Commission adjourned to Tuesday, May 5, at 2 p.m.) 
 
 Ladysmith, May 5, 1903. 
 
 His Lordship. — Before going on with the proceedings I think it is just as well to 
 relieve a misapprehension which may exist as to the purpose of this Commission. We 
 are not authorized in any manner whatsoever to settle any dispute which has arisen 
 between the parties to this controversy. We have no power to make any award or 
 judgment of any kind in regard to the rights of either the men or the company. 
 Now, that being the case, it has occurred to me that it might be well for the parties 
 to consider just what their position is, and what they have to expect from the labours 
 of this Commission. All that we are empowered to do is to inquire into the causes 
 loading up to this strike and report what we consider the cause to the Government, 
 and suggest any remedy which may occur to us for the avoidance of such strikes in 
 the future. ISTow, we have been empowered by the Government to make a number of 
 inquiries at various points throughout the province. These inquiries will probably 
 take a long time, and the probabilities are that thej labours of the Commission will 
 not be completed for a month or six weeks. I understand that the chief cause of 
 controversy arose from the fact that the men, or a majority of them have joined the 
 Western Federation of Miners. ISTow, we, of course, intend to hear evidence, and 
 intend to inquire into the reason why that action was taken by the men, and to hear 
 from the men why that action was taken, and to hear what the company has to say 
 as to why such action was not considered right. There can only be one of two issues 
 attending the results of this Commission. Either the Commission will adopt, in whole 
 or in part, the attitude of the men that they had the right to join this Federation or 
 that they had not, and to report to the Federal Government, and then it is fop the 
 Federal Government to say whether they approve or disapprove of the finding of Ihe 
 Commission. If the Federal Government approve of the findings of the Commission it 
 is highly probably tha« they will be in a position to introduce legislation, but it is 
 altogether improbable that the Govei-nment will be able to introduce legislation during 
 the present session. 
 
OW INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 3 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Now, under these circumstances it has appeared to me to be right to suggest to 
 the parties to this controversy that some means be arrived at by which the men may 
 resume their work, pending the decision of the Commission, and the approval or dis- 
 iipproval of the Federal Government. It seems to me if they did that they could not 
 prejudice their position before the Commission, and at the same time they would 
 have the advantage of keeping their families, and thus remain square with the world 
 in the meantime. If the Commission finds in favour of the men, and the Federal 
 Government theiil finding, there is no harm done. On the other hand, if the Com- 
 mission disapproves, and if the Federal Government disapprove, there will be no harm 
 done. It seems to me it would be in the interests of the men at all events if they 
 could so arrange as to go back to work. I suppose that will probably mean the 
 abandonment, for the time being, of their connection with the Western Federation of 
 Miners. Even if they did abandon their position, that would not, as far as I am con- 
 cerned, at all events, prejudice their position in the slightest. It might bo felt by 
 some of the men that this would arouse a feeling of hostility in the Western Feder- 
 ation of Miners. If the Western Federation of Miners do take such a harsh view, 
 then I should say, speaking for myself, 1hat the Federation would not be a desirable 
 body for our men to enter into. I think that the men should consider this. I, of 
 course, speak for myself; I do not know how my colleague views the matter. 
 
 Rev. Mr. Howe. — It seems to me that if work could be resumed, it is altogether 
 desirable that it should be. There is a great deal of damage being suffered both by 
 the men and the company, and also by parties not parties to this dispute, who might 
 bo called the innocent parties, who are suffering, and public interests are being injured 
 by the continuance of the strike. Either party does not confess or admit any wrong- 
 doing by reaching an agreement whereby work is resumed, and) there are no rights, 
 as His Lor3ship has stated, to be jeopardized by such a settlement. I assume that the 
 chief point of dispute is that mentioned by His Lordship, the matter of the men's 
 lolationship to a union, which is more or less technical matter, which will have to be 
 dealt with in some way. It seems to me there will have to be some decision as to the 
 question of trade unions and the relationship of employers and employees, and pend- 
 ing such a decision, a settlement which will take these disputes out of the arena in 
 which they now are, that there is nothing to be gained by suffering the loss which a 
 continuance of the strike will occasion. Then, I think the work of the Commission 
 would proceed considerably better. It seems to me the men might think that going 
 back to work would be a confession of weakness. I understand that this will not be 
 regarded as such. The conclusions of the Commission will be reached from investiga- 
 tions made, and from the evidence produced, and the only effect, to my mind, that 
 such action could have would be to impress me with the idea that the parties were 
 anxious not to cause any injury or any greater disturbance of business relations than 
 they could avoid. I personally would be very glad if such an arrangement could be 
 reached. 
 
 His Lordship. — Have counsel any suggestions to make ? 
 
 Mr. Chas. Wilson, K.C. — I should like to correct what seems to be a misappre- 
 hension in regard to what has been called this ' strike.' Our idea is that it is not a 
 strike in any sensa of the word, but that it is a lockout. Ths situation from our 
 standpoint arose in this way. The men first met with the idea that they would like 
 an increase in wages, and they met for the purpose of discussing this increase. They 
 realized that without organization it would be impossible for them to accomplish this; 
 that without a union they would be unable to accomplish the purpose for which they 
 met. They therefore conceived the idea of organization. They then went one step 
 further, and came to the conclusion that it would be better for them to affiliate with a 
 large and imp.-^rtant body — the Western Federation of Miners. Believing they would 
 have not only the moral support of this affiliation, and possibly thus obviate the neces- 
 36a— IJ 
 
4 MINUTES OF EriDEyCE OF EOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 sity of invoking the Alien Labour Law, which has proved wholly inoperative, and also 
 that in any difficulties in regard to finances, the support they would receive would be 
 very largely extended, they conceived the idea of affiliating with the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners. The instant that this resolution was passed, a notice was posted 
 directing that the tools be brought out of the mine and the mines closed. Before this, 
 they had seen Mr. Baker, who is a prominent man in connection with the affiliation 
 of unions with the Western Federation of Miners, and a committee was formed to ask 
 Mr. Dunsmuir to open the mines, but he refused to reeogiize the men in any way as a 
 union. These are statements of fact- 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — It is these very statements of fact which we deny. I think it is 
 a pity, however, to raise any controversial discussion at this stage. 
 
 His Lordship. — The reason I made these remarks was to draw attention to the fact 
 that we had no power to settle these disputes. If we had, Mr. Wilson's remarks would 
 be much in point. All I desired to do was to point out to the men what was likely 
 to be the consequence ; that we would be unable to finish our labours in time for the 
 federal government to have opportunity to take action at this session, and we all 
 understand, of course, 'that men in the position that the men are in, have probably 
 little saved up, and yet are powerless to do anything to compel employers to receive 
 them back. It seems to me that the best thing the men could do is to go back upon 
 such conditions as the employers could be prevailed upon to give, and the men would 
 not prejudice their position. As between the wives and families on the one hand 
 and the Western Federation of Miners on the other, I should think the families have 
 the highest claim upon the husband. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — My only object in saying anything on the subject wa^ to remove 
 what I considered to be a misapprehension in regard to the men having struck work, 
 because that is a misapprehension. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — If this is a case of a lockout it would seem to add strength to the 
 position that the men are not conceding anything if they decide to go back. This 
 would seem to remove any possibility of prejudicing the case. 
 
 His Lordship. — I cannot see how the officers of the Western Federation of Miners 
 can take offence if the men they have return to work, and as far as their connection 
 with that body in the meantime goes, it is a case of necessity. If the Federal govern- 
 ment decide that the Commission were right, the matter can keep until a year from 
 now, if necessary, but the stomachs of the wives and babies cannot keep until that 
 time. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I am quite satisfied that the men will appreciate what your Lordship 
 has said, and that the suggestion will receive a most respectful consideration. It is a 
 suggestion that occurs to one, if not easy, of a highly reasonable character. I have 
 received no instructions upon the subject, however, neither do I think the men have 
 considered it themselves. 
 
 His Lordship. — I wish to remove the idea that their position will be prejudiced 
 further. It won't be prejudiced one particle, as far as I can see. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — Would your Lordship think it better to go on with the labours of 
 the Commission, or defer it until such a proposition has been decided on? 
 
 His Lordship. — I think it would assist if matters were deferred until they have 
 decided. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — The probability is that unless this is done bad feeling may arise 
 over the matter, and the less bad feeling the better. I presume also that the Commis- 
 Bion would like to have the statements of both sides. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 5 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — Whether we are right or wrong in calling it a lockout or a strike, 
 the absolute refusal of Mr. Dunsmuir to have anything to do with a labour union at 
 all, remains. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — That is not our decision. My instructions are that Mr. Dunsmuir 
 has given no instructions whatever to refuse to recognize a union among his own men, 
 but his objection is that the men who work in his mines should affiliate themselves with 
 an organization whose headquarters and constitution are actually out of the jurisdiction 
 of this country. Wc have, in accordance with your Honour's suggestion, formulated a 
 preliminary statement of our position on that point. ,It is a matter of principle, 
 it does not arise out of any feeling on Mr. Dunsmuir's part against the men or any 
 desire to intimidate them in any way, but simply as a matter in his own interest that 
 disputes which arise in works of his undertaking should be settled between the parties 
 themselves, and that it only tends to serious loss and direct antagonism on both sides 
 if outside parties, who have no interest in the quarrel, are called in to settle it. That 
 is the position we take now and the stand we will take during the sittings of this Com- 
 mission, and as your honours have very well said, it is quite possible that without 
 prejudice to our position as well as the men's position, that a modus vivendi can be 
 agreed on and do no harm to anyone. 
 
 His Lordship. — I think the best plan would bs to adjourn until to-morrow at 10.30 
 o'clock, to give the parties an opportunity to make some arrangement, and time for you 
 and Mr. Wilson to exchange statements and file copies with the secretary. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — We have reached a proposition in which there is a direct conflict of 
 instructions as to whether or not Mr. Dunsmuir was willing to permit his workmen to 
 form a union among themselves. In dealing with this modus' vivendi, do I understand 
 from my learned friend, assuming that my clients are willing to adopt the suggestion 
 which has fallen, that no objection would be offered to the formation of a union em- 
 tracing say the whole of Mr. Dunsmuir's employees, and no discrimination against 
 them ? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I should think it would be better not to ask for terms or make 
 conditions just at the present time. The suggestion which fell from the Commission 
 was this : that the men go back to work without prejudice. It only entails a delay 
 at any rate to begin now the work of terms and conditions to be made. It is better 
 for the men to go back on the same terms and conditions. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is desirable that Mr. Dunsmuir should communicate in some 
 way to what extent he is prepared to go in the matter of unions. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — The statement — in just the bald way in which my learned friend 
 
 put it is one which will require a good deal of qualification. In the case of forming 
 
 simply a union it might take a much larger scope and yet fall within the definition 
 of the words which my friend has used. We must negotiate back andl forward and 
 get something definite on both sides. These things can go on now just the same as they 
 have beforehand. It will be necessary for my learned friend to lay down the scope and 
 field, the constitution of the union which he expects to form. That will require time 
 to consider. As a general principle Mr. Dunsmuir stated that he did not and would 
 not discourage organization among his own men, say for instance, if the men in this 
 camp formed a union of its own, there would be no opposition to that, but I have no 
 instructions from him which would authorize me to say that in case of a local 
 union there could be formed a far reaching union. It would all depend on the rules 
 and constitution of the proposed union. That matter would have to be settled first. 
 
 His Lordship. — I would suggest that you discuss this matter between yourselves, 
 and you could, at the same time, file your statement, as we want to get some definite 
 issues before us, as our time is limited. 
 
6 MINUTES OF EYIDENGE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — While I propose to satisfy your Honour that my clients will give 
 every attention to the suggestion that has fallen from you, I feel that they will find 
 themselves in a great deal of difficulty, not with the Western Federation of Miners, 
 but from what I can call the unyielding terms of the modus vivendi, in other words, 
 our idea, being that our interests cannot be subserved at all unless we have some form 
 of organization and the suggestion being that that organization should embrace Mr. 
 Dunsmuir's workingmen. I understand from Mr. Bodwell that he had never opposed 
 anything of the kind, and it seems to me, in that ease, that if he would consent to that 
 in each case, I would have a definite proposition to lay before the men. 
 
 His Lordship. — You and Mr. Bodwell can see each other in the interval. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — Has my friend got his statement ready ? 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — My statement is not yet completed. 
 
 His Lordship. — We would like to have you formulate your grievances and make 
 your reply, and state how far you are prepared to go in this matter of unions, and 
 file both with the secretary. Exchange them and file them. I might ask, Mr. Wilson, if 
 you appear for all the employees ? 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — There has been a meeting held, I believe, and the fact that I am 
 retained has been carried by a majority, I cannot say that I represent all. 
 
 His Lordship. — What I want to get at is if there are any considerable number of 
 men who are opposed to unions and desire to be represented before this commission. 
 There are always some of that class, and these people should be heard as well as the 
 others. If there are any men who wi«h to be represented they had better inform the 
 Commission — any who are not members of this union. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — It might be given out that your Honour would heap any one of 
 that class whenever they wish to appear before the Commission. 
 
 His Lordship. — I wish to hear every one who wishes to appear before the Com- 
 mission. 
 
 The Commission stands adjourned until 10.30 a.m., to-morrow. 
 
 Ladysmith, B. C, May 6, 1903. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — At the sittings of the Commission yesterday, the suggestion was 
 made by the Commissioners in respect to what may be termed a modus vivendi during 
 the time which the Commission would be sitting, the suggestion being that the men 
 should return to work until a report had been made. I stated then that I was unable 
 to consent to anything of the kind. I might state that the union has met since then, 
 and the result, which they have handed to me this morning, is a unanimous one! 
 The suggestion coming from the Commissioners was, of course, entitled to the highest 
 consideration, and it has received that, because there was a very full meeting indeed, 
 the matter was .discussed at great length before a conclusion was arrived at. I now 
 hand in to the secretary the conclusion reached. 
 
 (Exhibit 3.) 
 
 Mr. Bodwell.— Before the resolution is read I would like to have some statement 
 as to how the meeting was called, and who would ordinarily be entitled to vote at such 
 a meeting. - 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPVTES IN BRITTSn COLUMBIA 7 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 His Lordship. — I don't think you are entitled to inquire into that. The men 
 are entitled to carry on their proceedings in their own way. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — The company would be entitled to know that this was a full 
 meeting of the men employed in the company's works. The reason I make the state- 
 ment is that I understand there were at the works when they closed down about 
 1,000 men, and that there are now about 500 in all in the neighbourhood. The news- 
 paper report says there were only about 260 at the meeting. 
 
 His Lordship. — If you desire to elicit any of these facts you can in examination, 
 I suppose? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Yes, I suppose so. 
 
 The Secretary of the Commission then read the resolution put in by Mr. Wilson, 
 on behalf of the men, as follows : — 
 
 (Exhibit 3.) 
 
 ' Whereas the Chief Justice and members of the Commission to investigate 
 the cause of labour troubles in British Columbia have suggested that, pending the 
 inquiry and report by the Commission, the mines should be re-opened and the men 
 return to work. 
 
 ' And whereas this local union has taken that matter into consideration, and 
 has arrived at the following conclusions: 
 
 ' That past experience has taught us beyond the shadow of a doubt that if we 
 at this time comply with the suggestions of His Lordship and the Commission, we 
 feel we would be at the mercy of our employer, and that to now abandon our 
 affiliation with the Western Federation of Miners would be to lose its sympathy 
 and active support, and thereby destroy all unity among the workers. That with- 
 out the support of a union or organization in sympathy with it, men would now, 
 as in the past, be discharged or in some manner forced to quit work. That no men 
 would dare to move in the direction of organization for fear of discharge; 
 
 ' Therefore this union respectfully declines to abandon its affiliation with the 
 W. F. M.' 
 
 His Lordship. — Speaking for myself, I can only say I regret very much the 
 decision come to, as I think the men's stand is likely to prejudice their case in the 
 mind of the public. Coal mining is an absolute necessity — all the country must have 
 coal. All I can say is that if the men went back to work they would not prejudice 
 their case in the slightest. However, the men are the best judges of their own case. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I would like to say that so far as the company is concerned, the 
 fears expressed in the resolution are groundless. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — That is a mere statement. The statement made by the men is 
 founded upon experience. 
 
 His Lordship. — I have no doubt of that, Mr. Wilson. I should have thought that 
 the Western Federation people would be very willing to take the men back in the 
 course of a year or so, when the Commission or Parliament came to a conclusion in 
 the matter. I suppose we had better go on. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — Is it proper to ask what course the tribunal will take with respect 
 to the evidence? I may state, and I think it is proper to do so, that we are not in 
 any sense accusers. We have done something wli "h the law permits us to do, and 
 what from our standpoint is perfectly just, and having done that, we are debarred 
 from work. It seems to me that the act of closing the mines does not lie upon us. 
 
8 MINUTES OF EriDEXCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 His Lordship. — You have altered the status quo. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — We have altered it by lawful act. 
 
 His Lordship. — At all events you cannot complain, if we takel the same course 
 that was taken in regard to the anthracite strike in the United States, and in that 
 case the miners were called upon to take the course of plaintiffs in a civil case. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — That was the course adopted in that ease? Very well. We will 
 bring forward some evidence in support of the soundness of our 'position, and I think 
 it will be first in order to show the nature and objects of ^he organization which the 
 men have joined. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is very desirable to have all the light possible on that subject 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I think possibly the best man I can call for 'that purpose is to ask 
 Mr. Baker to give evidence. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell.- — We were to have a v.-ritten statement. ' 
 
 His Lordship. — Yes, we asked for a written statement on each side, to be handed 
 to the secretary. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I have no objection. I may state that the only grounds we allege 
 for the present case are the mine owners' refusal to employ men affiliated with the 
 Western Federation of Miners, the mine owners' refusal to employ men conected 
 with any union, and the general hostility shown by the mine owners to any organiz- 
 ation. Our suggestion is that these causes are primarily responsible for the existing 
 trouble. We further say there has been a grievance in forcing men who reside 
 in other parts of the locality to live at Ladysmith, the town site owned by the mine 
 owners, as a condition of their employment. 
 
 (Statements of both parties exchanged; Wellington Colliery Co.'s Statement, Exhibit 
 1; Miners' Statement, Exhibit 2.) 
 
 His Lordship. — ^You had better sign a copy of your statements, both of you, and 
 file with the secretary. Just state under your signature for whom you are acting. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I will call Mr. Baker. 
 
 James A. Bakee, sworn. 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Where do you reside, Mr. Baker ? — A. Slocan City, B.C. 
 
 Q. And at present what is your occupation ? — A. I am a member of the executive 
 board of the Western Federation of Miners, as general organizer and looking after 
 the interests of the organization. 
 
 Q. Throughout the whole of British Columbia? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you been connected with the Western Federation for any length of 
 time?— A. Since 1899. 
 
 Q. The original organization was formed when ? — A. About 11 years ago • about 
 1892 or 1893. 
 
 Q. By the way, are you of Canadian birth? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You are still a Canadian? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Are you on the voters' list? — A. I am. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
ON IxnuSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLOMBIA 9 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Will you please state to the Commissioners what the purpose and objects of 
 the Western Federation are? Have you a copy of the constitution and by-laws with 
 you? — A. I have. 
 
 Q. I wish you would be kind enough to hand it in. 
 
 (Copy of by-laws handed in. Exhibit A.) 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. That is a copy, Mr. Baker, of the by-laws up to date? — A. Xea, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. I see the last time it was amended was in May, 1902, and there has been no 
 amendment since, Mr. Baker? — A. No amendment since. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. There are no other by-laws in force other than what are here? — A. Those are 
 the general by-laws; there are local by-laws in each local union. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Other than the book you have handed in, there are no further by-laws govern- 
 ing the central organization? — A. No. 
 
 Q. May each local union, subject to the constitution of the central body's con- 
 stitution, make its own by-laws, for its own government? — A. Yes, sir, so long as it 
 does not conflict with the constitution of the central body. 
 
 Q. Will you be kind enough to take that book, and please tell the Commission 
 what the purpose and object of the Western Federation of Miners is? — A. It is| on 
 similar lines to those of general organizations. The main object is the betterment 
 of the condition of the working classes, mentally, socially, intellectually and fin- 
 ancially. 
 
 Q. With'iut actually reading the whole book, how do you generally attempt to 
 carry out these objects? — A. By the educational feature which is derived from the 
 interchange of ideas, that is, being as closely in touch with each other as possible, 
 giving to each other the benefit of experience derived from time to time and advanced 
 throughout the membership. 
 
 Q. Will you describe now the mode of government, the manner in which the 
 central organization is governed and its business conducted, and then we, will go on 
 to the manner in which the locals become members of the central body? — A. The 
 central organization is governed directly by the constitution, unless an emergency 
 arises, when there is power in the hands of the executive committee to deal with such 
 an emergency. The mode of government of the organization is wholly in the hands 
 of the members. The legislation is under the executive rule in all cases. 
 
 Q. That is article 10, section 1, is it not ? — A. Yes, that is right. 
 
 Q. Of what is the central body composed ? — A. It is composed at the present time 
 of a president and vice-president, a secretary-treasurer and an executive board of six 
 additional members. 
 
 Q. With respect to the internal management of the organization I don't imagine 
 the Commissioners care very much, but they will probably like to know something of 
 its method of dealing in relation to the formation of new unions, Ihe powers of new 
 unions, and the duties of their officers? — A. In forming a new union, the aims and 
 objects of the organization are illustrated by the organizer as thoroughly as he may 
 be able, and their duties explained as members of the organization. The local union 
 has total jurisdiction over its own affairs subject to the conformity to the constitution 
 of the Federation. The local union makes its own by-laws subject to the constitution 
 of the general organization, and they transact their own local business in so far as it 
 does not conflict. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
10 MINUTES OF EVIDEKCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Now coming to one of the most Important questions, the manner in which a 
 local organization or the central bodyt might act in disputes which might or might 
 not culminate in a strike. What are the powers with respect to that ? A. It is defined 
 in article 5, section 1 of the constitution. 
 
 Q. I think I would like to have that article read? A. (Article read by witness) : 
 ' It shall be unlawful for any union to enter upon a strike unless ordered by three- 
 fourths of its resident members in good standing voting. Such questions shall be 
 decided by a secret ballot at a special meeting called for that purpose, after having 
 received the approval of the Executive Board of the Western Federation of Miners. 
 Should any employer or employers attack the rights of the members of a union or its 
 established principles without allowing the union sufficient time to notify the Execu- 
 tive Board of the proposed change, then the members shall have the right to declare 
 a strike to maintain their rights. In this they shall be assisted by the Executive 
 Board.' 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Read the next clause, please, Mr. Baker, the next section. — A. (Witness reads 
 section 2, same article). 
 
 ' Any contract or agreement entered into between the members of any local union 
 and their employers as a final settlement of any difficulty or trouble that may occur 
 between them shall not be considered valid or binding until the same shall have the 
 approval of the Executive Board of the Western Federation of Miners." 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. What is your experience of the effect of the working of that second section? — ■ 
 A. I have never seen that section exercised yet. It is simply a protection of the non- 
 violation of the constitution as I understand it. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You mean you have no instance where a settlement has been arrived at as to 
 a local union in British Columbia where the Western Federation has not interfered, 
 it has to be submitted for approval? — A. Yes. The executive board is not the final 
 authority; the convention, as represented by the local unions has authority over the 
 executive board. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. How is that convention called together? — A. By representatives from all the 
 locals of the organization. Each union in good standing is entitled to one represent- 
 ative for each 100 members, and small unions under that number are entitled to one 
 representative. 
 
 Q. Over and above the executive board there would stand a convention of the 
 whole organization? — A. An appeal on any question can come before the convention. 
 There can always be an appeal from the executive. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How is this convention held?— A. The convention is held annually, and at the 
 close of one convention a discussion as to the headquarters is had, and the place of 
 the next convention chosen. 
 
 Q. Thus an appeal could not be heard for a year, if it occurred immediately on 
 the close of a convention ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. You have never known an instance where the central authority have interfered 
 with a settlement made by a local union and employers, as far as your experience 
 goes?— A. No sir. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmlth, May 6. 
 
ON INDUaTRTAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 11 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Can you tell us in what case the central authority would be likely to inter- 
 fere? — A. It would arise in case an adjustment was made entirely at variance with 
 the constitution of the organization. 
 
 Q. Could you put your finger on one specific principle so as ta illustrate a case 
 in which the central power would intervene? — A. I do not know that X can. 
 
 Q. For example, what violation of the constitution would warrant interference 
 under section 2 with the conclusion arrived at by a local union? — A. Well, I do not 
 know how to illustrate that intelligently. It might be, for instance, where there were 
 a number of local unions in a given locality. Take the question of wages. If some 
 local made a single arrangement which would affect the status of more than one union, 
 I am satisfied the organization would not approve; that while the rate of wages is 
 governed by the rate in that locality, if it w£is affecting the locals adjoining, the organ- 
 ization would probably not approve. 
 
 Q. I think I can understand how it might arise. Suppose it might arise in the 
 case of a small union interfering with the rate of wages of several hundreds scattered 
 around in other local unions ? — A. Yes, it would break the established principle of 
 interfering with others. 
 
 Q. What would be the consequences if the central authority disapproved? — A. It 
 would, in all probability, come before the convention. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. What would the immediate effect be, psnding the meeting of the convention? — • 
 A. It would be hard for me to say what the immediate effect would be. It might be 
 the suspension of the charter. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. That is, if the local union did not recede from its position? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson: 
 
 Q. And the suspension of the charter would mean that during the time of sus- 
 pension they would cease to have the rights of the organization? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. u\hat union would not be represented at the convention ? — A. Well, no, but 
 they would have the right to a hearing there. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Would the central authority suspend the charter, or would it require a vote of 
 the convention? — A. If the executive board came to the conclusion that the members 
 of the union had acted in violation of the constitution they would assuredly suspend 
 the charter, pending an investigation. 
 
 Q. Following out Mr. Eowe's suggestion, if the members of that union had been 
 suspended, in general convention would they be entitled to vote? — A. That would 
 depend on circumstances. I believe such a case would be the first. If it was decided 
 that they had a right to their charter they would certainly have a vote. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. But it might be a very close vote, so that one or two might turn it in either 
 direction, and the vote of the suspended union might have the effect of turning it in 
 one direction or the other? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I might suggest to the Commissioners that Mr. Baker is not cap- 
 able of pronouncing an opinion, he has not a case! in point, and he cannot give us 
 the document. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
12 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 His Lordship. — He can only give his word. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — It is really asking Mr. Baker to argue the case on the constitution. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Ig there any definite statement in the by-laws? 
 
 His Lordship. — As I gather it, he has told us the union would not be entitled to a 
 vote, but would be entitled to vote in the decision. 
 
 Witness. — ^You will find in article 7 two sections practically on this point in the 
 constitution. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Is the business of the organization so carried on that the men who come under 
 its control may be ordered on strike if no grievance occurs in the course of their own 
 employment? — A. ISTo. They might be requested under certain conditions to go out 
 in sympathy with a neighbouring union. That could only be done in this way. If a 
 neighbouring union of the Western Federation of Miners was in trouble with an em- 
 ployer, and the employers of the local union in question came to the assistance of that 
 corporation or individual undertaking to take their business off their hands to assist 
 them in defeating the organization in their struggle, then they would be requested 
 by the organization to co-operate with them. 
 
 Q. But is there any power to compel them to do it? — A. !N"o. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What would prevent the central authority suspending such a union if it did 
 not go on strike? — A. There is no provision of the constitution which enables them 
 to do it. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. In a case of this kind the central authority have no power to do so? — A. The 
 central board and all the officers are simply servants of the organization, and can be 
 called from office at any time. 
 
 Q. Is there any power! in the central body or organization which might compel 
 men to leave their employment in consequenece of some particular agitation in a 
 foreign country, in which the organization has no interest whatever? — A. Ifone, 
 except in the manner in which I have spoken of. That feature would not apply to 
 any particular locality. From our standpoint it would be immaterial where it was, if 
 it was members of the organization that were receiving this injury. 
 
 Q. In other words you know no boundary line, as far as your organization is con- 
 cerned, just the same as an employer does not in regard to employing men? — A. No 
 sir. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Assuming in a case of this kind that the local union submits to some infrac- 
 tion of the union at the instance of an employer, has the central body authority to 
 suspend the union for submitting to that? — A. Under the first section — in reply to 
 that I might read it — 
 
 -'Any union failing or refusing to comply with the Constitution and By-laws 
 shall for the first offence be suspended from the privileges and benefits of the Feder- 
 ation for three months, and for a second offence six months, or be expelled, as the 
 Executive Board may determine.'^ 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 13 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. I mean a case of this kind, if a local. union was submitting to some infrac- 
 tion of the constitution in order to avoid trouble? — A. No, the constitution is very 
 elastic in that particular, that every honourable means shall be used to avoid resort to 
 extremes. 
 
 Q. Has a local union the final decision as to whether or not an emjiloyer is 
 unfair? — A. No, when they rebel against an existing condition it has to be submitted 
 to the central board. It is submitted to the executive board before they are granted 
 the support of the organization. 
 
 Q. If it comes to an officer of the Federation that a local union has submitted to 
 an infraction in order to avoid trouble with an employer, would the central body have 
 power to suspend that union? — A. If it cams to the notice that an infraction of the 
 constitution was being made it would be the duty of the local union to bring it up 
 before the central organization. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. And that having been done the attention of the local union would be called 
 to the violation by it ? — A. Yes, it would be investigated if it were considered a serious 
 grievance in that way. 
 
 Q. Is there anything in your constitution or by-laws, or the manner in which you 
 carry on your business which would enable the central authority to close the mines ? — 
 A. No sir, there is no such authority. 
 
 Q. Not even to "increase the business or raise the price of coal in the United 
 States ?— A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Is your organization then absolutely free from national prejudice? — A. It 
 certainly is. I speak advisedly. 
 
 Q. In other words, you know no differenca in race, language or creed, except that 
 it is among white men ? — A. Well, yes. I think there are black men included though, 
 both white and dark men. 
 
 Q. Is there anything in your constitution or by-laws, or the manner of conduct- 
 ing your business which would justify the statement that it would be possible to 
 extend the field so as to recognize the right of a foreign authority in the industrial 
 affairs of British Columbia? — A. Not in any case. 
 
 Q. There is nothing to justify a statement of that kind? — A. No, nothing. 
 
 Q. Is there anything further which you think yo^ would like to tell the Com- 
 mission with respect to the objects or purposes of the Federation? I may omit some- 
 thing. You are at liberty to tell the Commissioners anything you can think of which 
 will throw light on the manner in which this Western Federation of Miners carries 
 on its aSairs? — A. It is an organization madei up wholly of the workingmen them- 
 selves. They control and handle it. Its officers are simply the servants of the organiz- 
 ation to carry out its constitution as it is arranged annually at the convention, and 
 under the convention submitted to the referendum before it becomes the law of the 
 organization. The officers are simply there to carry this out. 
 
 Q. And then in the case of a strike, they must obtain the consent of the central 
 authority? — A. It is the only position the central body takes in a strike. They have 
 no authority to call a strike. It has to be submitted to them for approval, through the 
 mertiber of the executive in the district. 
 
 By Mr. Roive : 
 
 Q. What is the district in British Columbia, you used the words * of the district ? ' 
 — A. I will read from the book : — 
 (Sec. 10 Art. 3.) 
 
 'The territory covered by the Western Federation of Miners shall be divided 
 into the following districts : 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
14 MINUTHS OF EVIDE'NCIB OF R07AL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 'No. 1. — California, Nevada and Arizona. 
 
 ' No. 2. — Washington, Oregon and Idaho. 
 
 ' No. 3. — Montana and Wyoming. 
 
 'No. 4. — Colorado, Utah and New Mexico. 
 
 ' No. 5. — South Dakota, Kansas and Missouri. 
 
 'No. 6. — Territory north of United States boundary. 
 
 ' Each of the districts herein designated shall be entitled to one representative on 
 the Executive Board exclusive of the general officers, said representative to be an 
 actual bona fide resident of the district he represents.' 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. As I understand it, Mr. Baker, the territory north of the International bound- 
 ary line is one district? — A. Yes, at the present time. 
 
 Q. How far east does that go? It goes to the Mississippi river does it not, just 
 one district? — A. I will try and make that as intelligible as I possibly can. So far 
 our work has been largely confined to British Columbia, although we have a couple 
 of organizations in Alberta. As organization is growing i1^ is now recommended to 
 have another representative from this part of the country. The one representative 
 chosen has authority under the constitution to represent the whole of Canada. 
 
 Q. The executive board is constituted by one representative from each district. 
 Now what territory will be included in the district for which British Columbia would 
 have a representative, as the constitution now stands, how far east and how far south? 
 — A. At the present time it is not operating east" of Alberta. 
 
 Q. In the United States, how far is it? — A. There is no prohibitory line in the 
 constitution. 
 
 Q. I want the inclusive line — the limit line? — A. Would not the limit mean 
 prohibitory ? 
 
 Q. I don't want to argue over words — you know what I mean. British Columbia 
 has one representative on this executive. Now how much does his territory include ? — 
 A. The actual territory where we have already got organization is confined to British 
 Columbia and Alberta. This territory lies north of the United States boundary line. 
 All Canadian tei-ritory would be just one district. 
 
 Q. And then Washington, Oregon and Idaho would be one. Is this district sup- 
 posed to come any further than Nevada would?' — A. We extend the field as fast as 
 we can get to it. 
 
 Q. Is it intended to include Western States and Canada ? — A. It was named the 
 Western Federation and the name has not been changed. It was formed first from a 
 limited number of local unions. Then they federated together, and it was named the 
 Western Federation of Miners still. 
 
 Q. It was organized for quartz miners? — A. The majority are. 
 
 Q. You have no organization in the coal mines of Washington? — A. I do not 
 know whether there are any. 
 
 Q. The coal miners of Washington are not in the Western Federation? A. I 
 
 don't think they arc. 
 
 Q. Do you happen to know how many coal mines are operating in Washington ' 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Bp His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How is it they have not come into the Federation? — A. I can hardly say ex- 
 cept by inference. I became more intimate with the situation, more recently from 
 information gathered here. I think it is simply that the field has not received the 
 attention that it should have by the representative of that district. 
 
 By Mr. Roioe : 
 Q. At present these coal mines are not in the Federation — you are sure about 
 th&t ? — A. I do not know. If they are, there are not many. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Laaysmith, May 6. 
 
JV WD USTRIAL BISPBTES IN BRITISH : COLUMBIA 15 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36r 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Do they belong to any other organization? — A. I do not know; that is terri- 
 tory I have not been in, not in the coal district. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Your constitution is expressed in the first two pages, the preamble is supposed 
 to contain the principles of the constitution, that is in general terms? — A. It is sup- 
 posed to. 
 
 Q. I will quote from the preamble : — ' To establish as speedily as possible, and so 
 that it may be enduring, our right to receive pay for labour performed in lawful money 
 and to rid ourselves of the iniquitous and unfair system of spending our earnings 
 where and how our employers or their agents or officers may designate. To secure 
 the introduction and use of any and all suitable, efficient appliances for th^ preserv- 
 ation of life, limb and health of all employees, and thereby preserve to society the lives 
 and usefulness of a large number of wealth producers ' and so on. I simply read one 
 or two of these passages to show that the principles of the constitution are expressed 
 here? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Ifow the executive body is elected at the convention, and that executive body 
 interprets the constitution? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So that the question whether any particular act falls within the constitution 
 mvist be determined by the executive body ? — A. Yes, they are the interpreters. 
 
 Q. And they are also the body to act on that interpretation? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The only power the convention has is to alter or amend the constitution, is it 
 not? — A. They can overthrow any rule of the executive board on any question. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Can the convention over-rule by a fair majority? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Suppose a question arose in British Columbia, that convention would only 
 have, according to the number of unions, one delegate for every 100 men? — A. One 
 delegate for each union of 20 members or more, and one for each 100 members. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. But there are a great many more unions in the United States than in British 
 Columbia, and from the nature of things there always will be a large majority in the 
 United States? — A. That is a forecast, of course. 
 
 Q. The executive body would have the right, supposing a certain principle was 
 being carried outi in the United States, to say that it was against the constitution, 
 would they? — A. A majority of the executive board, yes. 
 
 Q. Is it not a practice of the executive to procure strikes or request strikes for 
 the purpose of obtaining recognition of a principle ? — A. Never that I know of. They 
 have no such authority in the constitution. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. They have no power to order, but can request? — A. The request was made on 
 one occasion. They requested the men at Michel to come out. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Suppose the executive should decide that a certain principle of action ought 
 to be adopted in the interest of the Federation, how would they enforce that directly— 
 the adoption of that principle? — A. A new principle that had not been embodied 
 
 before t 
 
 Q. No, that a certain principle of the constitution, a specific thing. Suppose 
 they decide that a certain particular form of mining, say, for instance, was within 
 the principles of the constitution, they would be entitled to say so? — A. They might 
 pass an opinion. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
16 MIl^'UTES OF ETIDE^'CE OP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. If they pass an opinion is there any way o5 enforcing that ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Could they order a strike in mines where that principle was not acted on? — 
 A. You are speaking of something which has never come under my observation. 
 
 Q. You are here partly to tell us what has come under your observation and 
 partly to interpret the constitution? — A. You are asking me for forecasts. 
 
 Q. I ask your opinion as an expert on this constitution. Could they not recom- 
 mend a strike in a locality where that principle was not being carried out. ? — A. There 
 is no provision in our regulations whereby the executive board has authority to recom- 
 mend a strike. 
 
 Q. You said they requested the men at Michel to come out, it was the executive 
 body who made the request? — A. Yes, the request originally came from the other 
 union. 
 
 Q. As far as the Michel union were concerned, they were requested to come out 
 on strike, so that shows that where the executive think it proper they can request) a 
 union to strike? — A. Well, it is an unwritten law. It is understood the same as 
 where an employer gives assistance to another employer. 
 
 Q. Yes, I know, but the power is there, the executive act if they see fit? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Can they request by themselves, or must it come from another local union? — 
 A. By the other union. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. The Fernie union were on strike; they wanted to get the Michel union out. 
 They requested the executive, and the executive requested Michel. Now you say that 
 Michel could not be ordered out except by their own vote. Suppose the Michel union 
 had refused to go out at the request of the executive, would it have been in the power 
 oi the executive to bring that matter before the convention — the fact that the men 
 had refused to go out — have they that power? — A. Their action is subject to the ap- 
 proval of the men at large. 
 
 Q. The initiative and referendum is the only clause you have on that, so that if 
 the Michel union refused to obey the order of the executive they would have expected 
 that that would be brought up at the convention, and would reasonably anticipate 
 that the convention would support the executive. In the case of a strike requested by 
 the executive would not the local union have reason to suppose that the convention 
 would support the action of the executive? — A. "Well, they might support it morally 
 but as to what extremes that support would go, it would be a matter of a particular 
 case, of course. So far as my experience goes they have taken the view that it' was 
 necessary for something to be done to get men to see things in the right shape. 
 
 Q. I want the general principle. Would it not be a fact, to take that' particular 
 instance, that unless the Michel union could be satisfied that the majority of the 
 unions belonging to the Western Federation of Miners, were on their side that their 
 charter would be suspended if they did not go out on that request? — A. No I don't 
 think so. 
 
 Q. Why not? — A. There is no provision for it. 
 
 Q. The executive, at the request of the Fernie union, requested Michel to come 
 out on strike in sympathy; that is a particular case in point? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That is an actual case. The Michel union must either accept or refuse that 
 request. In considering what they would do these are the things they would have to 
 bear in mind. First, if they refused, the executive or any member of the executive 
 
 or a representative of any other union could refer that matter to the convention that 
 
 is the first thing ? — A. It could be referred. 
 
 Q. Then the convention have the power of suspending the charter? — A. Not for 
 that cause. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
ON INDUSfRiAL mSPVTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 17 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Why not? — A. For this reason; this executive board is only composed of so 
 many members. 
 
 Q. I say the convention have the power, when they see fit to suspend that charter 
 of the Michel union ? — A. Not under our constitution ; there is no provision that 
 they have made a breach in the constitution when they have made such a request. 
 
 Q. The interpretation of the constitution is in the executive body; they are the 
 ones to determine whether or not any particular thing is against the constitution ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The local union is not subject to suspension because it refuses to go out on 
 strike? — A. The request doesi not come from the executive board for a union to go 
 out on strike. When a local union requests anything the sanction of the executive 
 board is obtained to that request. Michel were out without saying anything to any 
 executive officer. I requested them to go back, which was done. 
 
 Q. The local union is not subject to suspension by either the executive or con- 
 vention if it refuses to go out on strike? — A. It certainly is not. 
 
 Q. Show me that in the constitution? — A. I cannot. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Suppose that the Femie union were striking for recognition, that is a legiti- 
 mate cause of strike ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. Suppose that the Fernie union requested the executive to call out the Michel 
 union in sympathy with that movement, that would be legitimate, would it not? — A. 
 They have the right to make that request. 
 
 Q. Suppose the Michel iinion refused to go out on that ground? — A. They have 
 the light to make such a reply. 
 
 Q. And you say their charter could not be suspended for doing that? — A. That 
 ia my opinion. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that the whole body of the Western Federation could not 
 act on that principle? 
 
 His LoEDsmp. — ^I suppose Mr. Bodwell, they could exclude any union they chose. 
 As I understand it, the constitution provides for cases in which suspension can be 
 ordered. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. What is the provision ? — A. It is in article 7, section 1. 
 
 Q. (Quotes) ' Any union failing or refusing to comply with the constitution and 
 by-laws shall for the first offence be suspended from the privileges and benefits of the 
 Federation for three months, and for the second ofEence, six months, or be expelled as 
 the executive board may determine.' Do you read that to be the executive board 
 simply who have the power ? — A. They render the decision. It is subject then to the 
 succeeding convention. The right to appeal from their decision on any question is 
 established there. 
 
 Q. We may take this — that the executive may request sympathetic strikes, that is 
 admitted is it not? — A. They may sanction it. I do not know of anything prohibiting 
 them from doing it. I have never seen a case. 
 
 Q. When one union is out on strike they naturally want to get as many out as 
 possible? Is that not known to be so? We know in the ease of the Brotherhood of 
 Railway Employees- 
 Mr. WiLSON.^I would not .make these statettients without some evidence to sup- 
 port them, I. do not think that my learneij friend is entitled to make these state- 
 ments^ 
 
 JAMBS A. BAKER— Ladysmlth, May 6. 
 3Ca— 2 
 
18 MINtirM OF ETIBETfCE OF ROYAL COMUlSSIOJf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 His Lordship.— We know that sympathetic strikes hav^ frequently been ordered 
 in the past. It is one of the difficulties of the whole situation. ., 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Now, these conventions are held in the tfnited States? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The questions that come before the conventions for consideration principally 
 relate to matters arising in the United States?— A. A large number of circumstances 
 arise there. 
 
 Q. Would it not be a fair tiling to say that the conditions which prevail in the 
 LTnited States would determine the policy of the executive with reference to conditions 
 in British Columbia, if they were affiliated with the Western Federation of .Miners?^ — 
 A. It is not affected in that particular at all. Each local organization, deals with, its 
 own conditions. 
 
 Q. As far as a strike is concerned, bub not as far as a sympathetic strilce is 
 concerned? — A. A sympathetic strike is very rare in this organization. It has dif- 
 ferent employees, different corporations. 
 
 Q. As a principle that must be so, must it not ? Once you admit the principle of 
 sympathetic strikes, then from the nature of things, the conditions in the United 
 States with reference to labc-ar, would control British Columbia, if British Columbia 
 worlonen were in this union? — A. l^o. i 
 
 Q. Why not ? — A. For the simple reason that the local unions in British Columbia 
 are a part and parcel of themselves. They control their own affairs ; they fix their own 
 wage scales, their conditions of employment and all that sort of thing. , 
 
 Q. Suppose the executive should determine that in the interests of the miners of 
 the United States a certain line of action should be taken. Once you admit the 
 right of sympathetic strikes, you necessarily admit a position of contrpi from the 
 United States? — A. It is not a position of control. 
 
 Q. Not a condition of legal control, but a condition of practical control, by reason 
 of the power of their interference. Is not a request, given with a great deal of force, 
 practically a command ? Is it not the idea of the organization that the request shall 
 practically amount to a command ? — A. The executive is not supposed to do these things, 
 ilf it is a matter of organization they are. They arc not to do the thinking any more 
 than the membership at large. 
 
 Q. The government of the association depends upon the action of the convention 
 to a great extent? — A. No, the action of the convention is a part of the duties. Th-j 
 regulation of the government comes from the locals. 
 
 Q. I suppose you will admit that the majority in that convention, from the neces- 
 sity of things, must always be in the United States ? — A. Yes, I suppose so. 
 
 Q. And as far as that much is concerned, you are putting the British Columbia 
 unions under the unions in the United States? — A. I think not, there is no such feel- 
 ing in our organization. 
 
 Q. Is it not an actual fact? — A. They are not in control. 
 
 Q. The majority rules — that is a principle of your Federation? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the majority must be in the United States? — A. Yes, I suppose so. 
 
 Q. And the majority of the executive board must ba in the United States? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. Then as far as) the moral influence of the majority is concerned it must be 
 against British Columbia? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And from a business man's point of view and an employer's is it not fair to 
 consider that the control is there ? — A. I do not think so. 
 
 Q. You say you do not think so, from what you know of the practical working, 
 but you must admit the abstract condition is there ; it could be changed into a prac- 
 tical condition ? — ^A. The national line is obliterated, so far as our position is concern- 
 ed, entirely. 
 JAMBS A. BAKER— Ladysmlth, May 6. 
 
ON TNDV'STRIAL t)ISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 19 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ■ Q. But you cannot obliterate business conditions ?— A. We found it was obliter- 
 ated when men were wanted to take our places in British Columbia. 
 
 Q. What do you refer to particularly ?— A. The importations of men brought in 
 to take the place of men on strike. 
 
 Q. This refers to the Alien Labour Act. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — The Alien Labour Act is waste paper. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You think that would be wrong, I suppose, to bring in men from the United 
 States to, take the places of union men in British Columbia mines. Suppose now — 
 here was the Fernie strike — did you happen to know about it, were you there when it 
 started?— A. Nb. 
 
 Q. Is it right to say that only a very small proportion of the men on the ground 
 voted for the strike in. the first instance? — A. I believe it is. 
 
 Q. How did the strike originate then ? — A. There was only a minority of the men 
 in the union at the time. 
 
 Q. I have been told that less than 18 per cent of the men precipitated the strike 
 at Fernie ? — ^A. I think that is an error. I am sure it is. It was largely hearsay how 
 many men were working. I have never gone into the facts to find out exactly the num- 
 ber. It might not exceed 20 or 25 per cent. 
 
 Q. Tou will say that 25 per cent of the coal workers joined the Western Feder- 
 ation to begin with? — A. I cannot say that. They joined the Western Federation 
 some three years ago. 
 
 Q. I understood you to say there were only a small portion of the men at Fernie? 
 — ^A. That were in good standing. 
 
 Q. A two-thirds majority of that proportion voted for a strike? — A. Yes, they 
 explained to me that they had the approval of a large majority of those men who were 
 not represented in the union, but of course from an organization standpoint we only 
 considered the position of the union, the men represented in the union. 
 
 Q. So there was 25 per cent of the coal workers at that time who were properly 
 members of the Federation, that a proper majority of that 25 per cent voted for the 
 strike, and the Federation approved it. Would it be right to say that- if the remain- 
 ing 75 per cent had stayed out that they would have been called scabs? — A. I don't 
 want to avoid your question, but without that understanding among themselves, these 
 very men you speak of, I do not think the strike would have been called. 
 
 Q. We will say for purposes of argument that that is so, we will put that particu- 
 lar case, as an illustration. If the 75 per cent had stayed out on strike would they 
 have been called scabs ? — A. Well, that is another of those imaginary cases. 
 
 Q. There were 25 per cent of these men voted a strike? — A. It was carrying out 
 a provision of the constitution that men must be in good standing to vote. All I 
 know of that situation is hearsay, press reports and so on. 
 
 Q. If a man declined to go out on a strike that the executive approved of, would 
 he be allowed to work in other places where the Federation had a union? — A. He 
 would not be looked on as a fair man. 
 
 Q. That means he can't work where union men are employed ? — A. Not always. 
 
 Q. It is the general meaning, is it not — that he cannot work with union men if 
 he is called an unfair man? — A. There are eases where these things have been 
 adjusted. 
 
 Q. The general rule is as I have said ? — A. Men regarded as unfair, union men 
 don't want to work with them. 
 
 Q. Now, you tell me that one of the objects of the Federation is to advance the 
 position of the union by the circulation of literature. The Western Federation pub- 
 lish a magazine, do they not? 
 
 JAMBS A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6.' 
 86a— 2J 
 
20 MINUTES OF ETIDENOE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VI h, A. 1904 
 
 His Lordship. — Are you going to put that in? 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 I was going to ask if that is a fair sample of the kind of literature the Western 
 Federation aim to circulate. 
 
 Q. That is the official organ ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Plave you read the magazine this month ? — A. I have just glanced at it. 
 
 Q. Do you think the articles there are inclined to advance intelligence and bring 
 about wide harmony between employers and employees? — A. I do not know that it is 
 my place to criticize. 
 
 Q. Perhaps you would rather not give an opinion. The document, however, speaks 
 for itself. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Are you going to put that in ? 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 I want to read one or two extracts from it. 
 
 (Miner's Magazine, April, 1903, put in and marked Exhibit B). 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. When you say it is the official organ, you mean it has the approval and sanc- 
 tion of the membership at large ? — A. Yes, of the majority at large. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. The whole first part of this magazine seems to be taken up with a description 
 of the men on strike in Colorado. I will read one or two extracts : ' On the 14th of 
 February the Mill and Smeltermen's Union 'No. 125 of the Western Federation of 
 Miners, were forced to strike a blow on the industrial field against the arrogance of 
 the mill trust, whose employees were denied the right to organize for self-protection 
 under the penalty of forfeiture of employment ' and so on. This was a strike there 
 for recognition the same as here? — A. Yes.' 
 
 Q. And a great many of these strikes are for recognition? — ^A. It is termed that 
 way. 
 
 Q. Because an employer does not want an organization amongst his ipen, and he 
 discharges men who had joined the organization, and the organization ordered a 
 strike until he should submit and recognize the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was there any sympathetic strike there?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How did that strike come out? — A. What I have learned about that I have 
 gathered from the press. 
 
 Q. (Quotes) ' When the Western Federation of Miners invaded the domain that 
 was considered sacred to MacNeill, Fullerton and Peck, and organized the Mill and 
 SmeltermenV Union, corporation coin secured the services of a Benedict Arnold in 
 the union by the name of A. K. Crane, who for Judas money prostituted his manhood 
 and betrayed his fellowmen by furnishing the corporationsi the names of every man 
 who sought shelter in the membership of the Western Federation of Miners.' Now, 
 is it a fair thing to say that this is the way in which a man who does not agree with 
 the union is usually referred to? — A. Speaking from a personal standpoint, I do not 
 resort to such things myself, even though I have been alluded to in much the same 
 way. 
 
 Q. This is the official organ. Is it a fair thing to assume that a man who does not 
 agree with the union may expect to see statements in the official organ in that way? 
 It seems that this man had been guilty of reporting the names of men under him who 
 had joined the organization, and he is characterized in the official organ of the Feder- 
 ation in this language. Suppose Mr. Dimsmuir told one of hie foremen to report to 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IB BUITISU COLUMBIA 21 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 him the names of any men under him, and he was a member of the Federation, would 
 he expect to be spoken of in the official organ in this way? — A. Well, I don't know, 
 I am not in a position to judge Ihe editor. 
 
 Q. Has he a free hand, do the executive exercise any control of him? — A. They 
 exercise a certain control, but the executive, is not in session at all times. 
 
 Q. Here we have a letter from George F. Doherty, do you know him? — A. He is 
 a resident of Greenwood. 
 
 Q. Has he any official place in the Western Federation of Miners? — A. He is 
 president of the British Columbia District Association. 
 
 Q. So he may be taken to be speaking with authority when he writes ? — A. I don't 
 know about that. A man expresses a personal view. I don't know that he is speaking 
 officially. 
 
 Q. Do you think it would be calculated to produce a good state of things if Mr. 
 Doherty should take it into his head to write and publish a statement about Mr. Ton- 
 kin? Here is one clause of Mr. Doherty's letter. Mr. Doherty pronounces Manager 
 Tonkin as ' the most unscrupulous scoundrel that God Almighty ever permited to 
 tread the earth.' Is that calculated to produce harmony ?— A. I do not use those kind 
 of terms myself. If you wanted to get my opinion of Mr. Tonkin I would try and 
 take a different way of expressing it. 
 
 Q. Do you think this kind of literature should be furnished to the men?^ 
 A. That is a communication. 
 
 Q. It is a communication from an officer of the organization in the official maga- 
 zine of the organization. May we expect that in Ladysmith that is the kind of 
 literature that is going to be circulated officially with the men belonging to the West- 
 ern Federation ?- — A. That is just what the membership see fit to make it. 
 
 Q. The majority appears to be a foreign influence— a majority out of British 
 Columbia. I am asking you if we may expect it. Here is another thing, a manifesto 
 from Park City, Utah : (Quotes) ' The United States Government is arming 100,- 
 000 more murderers to assassinate labour, and still some toil worn fools sleep on ! 
 Come, ye uniformed butchers to the slaughter your Neroes prepared for us ! We wel- 
 come you with bloody arms to the graves your tyrants dig for labour! The star 
 spangled banner of barbarism that floated over the blue-bellied Hessians in the Coeur 
 d'Alenes hath no terrors for patriots who will die, as they have lived, for liberty.' Is 
 that the sort of thing you want to stir up here ? — A. I suppose you want me to give 
 my opinion, or hold me responsible for what appears 'there ? 
 
 Q. That appears to be the policy of the Federation, is that right? — A. You know 
 how it is with an editor. Tou are reading from communications from different parties. 
 The general idea is to give the different views of the various locals. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Do you approve of the circulation of such language as that among the organ- 
 ization? — A. I don't like the language, to be candid with you. 
 
 Q. Then I suppose if the majority of the officers were like yourself and disap- 
 proved of that sort of language, it would not be used in the organ? — A. There is no 
 , restriction, they are selected. 
 
 Q. I suppose if a majority of the officers were of the same opinion as yourself, 
 that such language ought not to be used in the official organ, that would not be pub- 
 lished?— A. Well, I do not know; that idea has never been brought up. 
 
 Q. How long has this organ been published? — A. Something over two years. 
 
 By Mr., Rowe : 
 
 Q. Are there any other copies ? 
 
 Mr. BoDWEtL. — It is a nionthly. It is the only one I have. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May «. 
 
22 mNUTSS OF EVIDENGE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 190% 
 
 By His Lordship ', 
 
 Q. I suppose you read the organ yourself regularly ? — A. Yes. ! 
 
 Q. Is that an average issue in respect of such language as that? — A. I have seen 
 something of that kind in regard to certain cases. Communications come from dif- 
 ferent individuals. They write as they think. 
 
 Q. Would it be right to say that many of that kind have appeared ? — A. In some 
 extreme cases whenever anything of that kind is provoked. 
 
 Q. I suppose we could get a complete file of the publication; we could send for 
 them and get them? — A. I have none at my disposal. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Is there any limit to the number of different kinds of employment that may 
 enter the Western Federation? — A. It is outlined in the first section of the constitu- 
 tion, section 1, article 1. 
 
 Q. Mines, mills and smelters and reduction of ore. That is all the classes of work- 
 men that can joini the Federation? — A. Well, there are sometimes cases where men 
 work part of the time, and somelimes they get other employment. 
 
 Q. I mean a body of men wishing to affiliate with the order would have to be 
 engaged in some of these occupations as a body?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. We have in this magazine a public list of the branches in British Columbia 
 and there are no coal mines in that lot ? — A. In British Columbia ? Yes; sir. 
 
 Q. Which ones ? — A. The union here is the first one on the list. Gladstone Union 
 at Femie, the Michel Union, the Morrissey Union, and one at Frank also. 
 
 Q. The majority are quartz miners? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Would the Western Federation of Miners think it proper under their consti- 
 tution to request a sympathetic strike in coal mines on account of a difiiculty arising 
 in quartz mines ? — A. I would not think so. 
 
 Q. Suppose we did not have an 8 hour law, and suppose the quartz miners should 
 strike to obtain an 8 hour law, would the Federation think it right to call a sympath- 
 etic strike of coal miners in order to get 8 hours for the quartz miners? — A. It cer- 
 tainly wotdd be a local proposition. It might be worked through the local district' 
 here. The Federation would not make the call. 
 
 Q. Suppose the quartz miners of the Eossland district requested the coal miners 
 to come out at Ladysmith, would the Federation make that request? — A. No, they 
 have no such authority. 
 
 Q. They would have the authority to make the request. The quartz miners of 
 Eossland, striking for 8 hours a day, requested the Federation to call out the coal 
 miners at Ladysmith in sympathy. Would the executive make that request? — A. The 
 request would come from the Eossland union, and the approval of the executive would 
 be required. It would not come as a request from the executive. 
 
 Q. The executive would understand that as a request which they had to consider, 
 and it would be in their power to pass the request on to the coal miners here? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. Would it be a thing which the executive would think they were bound to con- 
 sider? — ^A. It is a part of their duty to consider any request. They have not the 
 authority to demand that any body of men go out on strike. 
 
 Q. A condition of things might happen that in a matter which affects quartz 
 mines alone the executive might properly request a sympathetic strike from coal min- 
 ers? — A. No, I cannot say that. I say they might approve of it. The request would 
 come from the local. They might get the sanction of the executive. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Supposing there was a strike on at a smelter, which was unfair. Would it be 
 necessary to come out if their company attempted to furnish coal or coke to that smel- 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May .6. . 
 
Olif mDGHTErAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLVUBIA 23 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ter? — A. It -would depend on circumstances. If they were lending their efforts by 
 virtue of the case, then, undoubtedly a request would be made on them. 
 
 Q. Would they be called unfair if they refused to come out ?— A. They might be. 
 
 Q. They would not be considered as strike, breakers ? — A. No, but they would be 
 looked upon as falling short of having done their duty to their fellowmen. 
 
 Q. So that there must be a very vital connection between coal mining and quartz 
 mining under the circumstances ? — A- Tinder certain circumstances, yes. The coal 
 miners and quartz miners are frequently mechanics in this country. The same indiv- 
 iduals work in both capacities. , ' , 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. When were you first called to Ladysmith in connection with the present dif- 
 ficulty? — A. I do not remember the date now, I think it was along about the 9th or 
 10th of March. 
 
 By His Lordship : ' 
 
 Q. You came here about the 9th or 10th of March?— A. I was first called. I got 
 here on Sunday, I think it was Sunday. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Tou are the oflicial organizer for the Western Federation of Miners for Brit- 
 ish Columbia? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Had you taken any steps to obtain the organization of the union here? — A. 
 None. 
 
 Q. Have you any knowledge of the first steps taken ? — A. What knowledge I have 
 has been told me since I came here. 
 
 Q. You only knew from what has been told you here? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I suppose we can get the information from the same men who told you? — 
 A. It is second-hand with me. 
 
 Q. What are the usual steps taken by you as organizer, how do you go about it ? — 
 A. Explain the aims and objects of the association and solicit their membership, but 
 never attempt td force it. Just explain in detail the full aims and objects, and its 
 mode of operation and work. In fact there are no rules governing the method of 
 organization. 
 
 Q. Did the Federation take up the case of the Ladysmith miners here? — A. Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 ' Q. Are they undertaking to carry them through finandially while on strike? — A. 
 That is the intention, I believe. 
 
 Q. Do they intend to supply them with funds as long as they are out on this 
 strike ?— A. That is my inference. 
 
 Q. Have you any official statement to that effect — that the Federation propose to 
 pay the men who are now on strike here ? — A. You will understand that their know- 
 ledge of the situation here is based on my reports, and if they approve of the decision 
 of the men here, and if it is proved that the statements! I have represented to them 
 are true they will be maintained. 
 
 By His Lordship : ' 
 
 Q. For how long? — A. It is indefinite. We will try and bring it to a successful 
 termination. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Why is it imderstood your decision that the men should not go to work 
 without prejudice pending the result 6f the action on the report of this Commission? 
 Why is that decision entertained? — A. I do not loiow that I have said that that ^Vas 
 the case. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
24 MiyVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. I suppose the men would not have come to the votel which they did without 
 your approval? — A. I did not know that they had a meeting. 
 
 Q. Did you officially approve of their action? Now, I understand the question 
 they had to determine was this, that they, should go back to work without prejudice 
 to their position, and allow the situation to stand as it is until the report of this 
 Commission is made. Why would you not approve of a suggestion of that kind ? — A. 
 I do not see any necessity for such an action. I claim that organization is a proper 
 thing for the wage earner. 
 
 Q. Supposing that to be so. Here is a question which is acute. This particular 
 organization is not one which the employer wishes to see established here. Whether 
 or not the men will retain their position or the employer maintain his, probably 
 depends upon the report which the Commission will make. Now, why not approve of 
 the men going back to work without prejudice to that decision ? — A. I should be glad 
 to see the men go back to work, but I do not see any necessity for them dropping this 
 organization. 
 
 Q. Not dropping it permanently, but in the meantime. Will you say this — that 
 the constitution of the Western Federation of Miners is such that a decision of that 
 kind could' not be dealt with by the executive ? — A. If they drop the organization it 
 will simply take up the charter and send it in. 
 
 Q. And that puts them on the unfair list ?^-A. No, I do not know that it would. 
 
 Q. Is the character and manner of conducting the affairs of the Western Feder- ■ 
 ation such that in this particular instance they could not approve of . the men going 
 back to work without prejudicing their position?— A. I don't think that is the case. 
 
 Q. Do you say that your body would not approve of you if you recommended now 
 that these men should go back to work without prejudice to theii rights ?— A. I could 
 not approve of that myself. At the same time I have never brought any pressure to 
 bear on any local body of men. 
 
 Q. You would take up this charter ? — A. If they, dropped the organization the 
 charter has no business here. 
 
 Q. And then they would understand that the Federation would drop them for 
 all time to come? — A. I don't know that. 
 
 Q. Would you have any right to say that that would not be the case? — A. No, I 
 would not. 
 
 Q. So that the men must either stay out and depend upon the Western Federation 
 for support, or else have this charter taken up with the idea that they will never be 
 allowed in the Western Federation again? — A. No, that is not so. The local men 
 have always the right to do the best they can under the circumstances. When they 
 have done that they are not in a position to receive the censure of the organization. 
 
 Q. They would not be censured by the organization if they went back to work 
 without prejudice to their position I — A. They would not be taking an unfair position 
 to anyone but themselves. For that reason there is no one else to kick. 
 
 Q. Can you officially say that the Western Federation would not consider them 
 objects of censure if they should accept the suggestion made by the Commission ?— A. 
 In my opinion they would be regarded in the light of very weak men to take a position 
 like they have taken, and do it under the circumstances that confronted them, and 
 then throw it up so easily. 
 
 Q. The suggestion was not that they should abandon their claim to belong to 
 the Western Federation, it was that a modus vivendi should be agreed to, whereby the 
 men could work in the meantime and the Commission investigate and report at| the 
 same time. Why will you not approve of that? — A. That is a feature I had not had 
 brought to my observation before. . - 
 
 Q. That is the exact proposition, that the men should go back to work now,. that 
 this question of the Federation should not be dropped on the part, of the inep that 
 the matter should just stand as it is until the Commission had investigated! the sub- 
 ject and made their report and suggestions. I do not see why they shoiild nqt ie%ve 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Laaysmitii, May 6. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 25 
 
 •: SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 the charter in your hands, to be delivered to the union if their position should be up- 
 held. In the meantime the men could be working. Why should that not) be?^ — A. I 
 presume that the organization will take the inference at least that these men are doing 
 the best under the circumstances, whatever position they take. 
 
 Q. Will you approve of a recommendation of that kind? — A. Personally I could 
 not do it. It is not in accordance with my conscientious dictates on that score. 
 
 Q. Then the representative of the Western Federation is a man whose conscience 
 will not allow him to recommend a decision of that kind? — A. I do not know that it 
 is necessary to put it in that way. It was not I who came here to recommend these 
 men to join this organization. 
 
 Q. 'Now here is the proposition — it would no doubt be accepted if the Federation 
 would approve? 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — That is something which is not shown. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Will you say that in your opinion that suggestion would not be adopted by the 
 men, if the Western Federation gave its approval? — A. From my conversation with 
 the men I do not think it would. 
 
 Q. But whether it would, or would not, you would not approve? — A. It would 
 not be in accordance with my judgment. 
 
 Q. Give your reason for that statement? — A. For the reason that I think they 
 have taken the right step, and I do not think they are doing any harm to any one else. 
 
 Q. You assume all the time, and that is where you are wrong, I think, that the 
 men would be abandoning their position by accepting the suggestion of the Commis- 
 sioners ? — A. Well, I had not given that much thought, but at first glance it would look 
 like that. 
 
 Q. I think the Commissioners will tell you now as they did yesterday that that 
 is not the situation at all, that neither practically, sentimentally or theoretically, or in 
 any other way are they abandoning their position. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. One of the objects of this Commission is to come to a conclusion whether 
 it is to tie public interest to allow our citizens to join American unions. I do 
 not see in this case how it can prejudice the men to go back to work. — A. That is the 
 position that has been taken. This has been termed a foreign organization. We claim 
 it is international in all its workings. The majority of course are in the United States. 
 
 Q. The effective control is in the United States? — A. At the same time the local 
 has full jurisdiction. 
 
 Q. We thought that it was in the public interest that the strike should cease, 
 and the matter investigated just as if the strike were going on. We madei it clear 
 that the men's position would not be prejudiced. — A. I don't want to approach these 
 men and make them do anything they don't want to do. I have goti yet 1o see the 
 first time in my life to advise a strike, and I think these men are intelligent enough 
 to know what they want to do. I simply say I approve of their decision, and as 
 a representative of the organization am willing to do all I can to assist them. 
 
 Q. But you are not prepared to recommend the men to adopt the suggestion of the 
 Commissioners? — A. No, the way I see that now, I do not approve il. 
 
 By Mr, Bodwell : , 
 
 Q. The suggestion is that the men should go back to work maintaining their 
 position, and' you say the Federation could not endorse it ? — A. I say that I do not 
 ■think they would be doing the best thing. 
 
 Q. That is the kind of Fedel-ationyou want the men to operate with?— A. You 
 asked inefbr my opinion. ■ •, 
 
 JAMES A. . BAKEE— Ladjsniitli, lij^y 6. 
 
26 iirNVT^S OP EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. How many men belonged to the Western Federation when this strike was 
 taken here, altogether? — A. I cannot tell you. 
 
 Q. Yon do not know how many when the first resolution was come to ?^— -A. Oh, 
 how many here in Ladysmith? We organized this union the day I came here, and at 
 that organization there were about 600 joined. That isl the information I got from 
 the secretary. That is when the charter was ordered. These men were out on their 
 trouble before I came here. They did not strike according to the constitution. They 
 agreed to form an organization and sent for me to come and organize. After I got 
 here they had been out on this trouble. 
 
 Q. So you did not make inquiries as to whether a resolution bringing about the 
 strike had been carried in the same way as if they had been members of the organiz- 
 ation before? — A. I understood the manner in which they acted. 
 
 Q. Did you understand that three-fourths of them had met together to decide on 
 a strike ? — A. I was told it was a unanimous decision as to that. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Unanimous of all the men previous to the organization? — A. Tes. 
 Q. They held a meeting? — A. I was told so. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. You were asked a few minutes ago as to your conscience; do you conscienti- 
 ously think that thei-e would' be enough men left here to form a union, in a year's 
 time, if the suggestion of the Commissioners had been acceded to? — A. If the con- 
 ditions which they have obtained in the past continued then I would not think so. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — What is meant by that question? 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I mean that the great majority of the men would be discharged. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Are there any unions affiliated with the Western Federation west of British 
 Columbia, other than those mentioned in Alberta, any other coal miners unions? — A. 
 Yes, there are some in Montana. 
 
 Q. In Canada ? — A. None that I know of — a union at Nanaimo I believe. 
 
 Q. Although the Western Federation has the title that it has, is it intended ultim- 
 ately that it may extend its operations east of the Rocky .Mountains? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. There is nothing which would prevent it enlarging its influence over the great- 
 er part of this continent? — A. Nothing at all. 
 
 Q. I understand you came here at the request of the miners of this place? — A. 
 I came in response to a telegram calling me to come to Nanaimo at once if possible. 
 I did not state the objects for which I came here. 
 
 Q. You did not discover this until you arrived in Nanaimo? — A. No, until I was 
 told what I was wanted for. 
 
 Q. And you arrived here, as I understand, on March 11? — A. About that time. 
 
 Q. And were you then informed that there had been a notice posted that the 
 workmen were to leave the mines on April 1, and bring their tools out? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Eefering to this question again of the powers of the local union as compared 
 with those of the executive, the initiative in all questions relating to wages must pro- 
 ceed from the local union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Suppose one local union makes a request of the executive board that another 
 local union should strike in sympathy with them, is it left_to. the" second local union 
 
 to determine whether they shall strike, or is it in the nature of a command? A. No 
 
 it is not in the nature of a command. They would give them their view and possibly 
 write them a long letter. ^ 
 
 Q. There would be nothing in the shapa of coercion brought to bear upon them? 
 —A. No. 
 JAMES A. BAltER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
OlvrnDUSTBIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 27 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Would it be considered unfair to decline to accept the request made?— A. 
 They would not be regarded as having done their duty. 
 
 Q. That would be a moral obligation rather than an obligation of the union? 
 Tqu would look at it if a second union declined to strike in sympathy with the other, 
 it would be regarded as a breach of moral duty, but no breach of the rules of the con- 
 stitution of the union? — A. I have had no illustration of a case of that kind coming 
 up, but that is the way I understand it. 
 
 Q. There is no such thing as coercion on the part of the central authority towards 
 a local union? — A. ISTone whatever. 
 
 Qi Does, the central authority exercise any power -or any control over the local 
 union in relation to the manner of making the rate of wages and hours of employment 
 that should be worked, or any other by-laws? — A. The local union establish all their 
 local conditions. They arrange that. > 
 
 (Sittings adjourned.) 
 
 James A. Baker, (continued). 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Can you tell me, has the executive any further powers than those disclosed in 
 the constitution and by-laws ?: — A. None whatever. 
 
 Q. Does the convention which is formed under your constitution and rules con- 
 cern itself : with the local unions or their policy ?^A. Most assuredly. Anything a 
 local union has to recommend is placed before the convention. 
 
 Q. Does the convention interfere with the policy of the local union? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Except in such matters as the local union may bring before it ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The passages cited to you from the Miners' Magazine, and the purpose of cit- 
 ing it was to show that that was the sort of literature and the principles that those 
 who eontrolled it, had. I want to cite another passage or two : — 
 
 ' What we, who believe in the labour union, who have struggled with it and fought 
 for it, for its legal rights, its political rights, its sociail rights — -what we contend is 
 that you have no right to compel the workingman to lay down his arms upon the field 
 of battle. When the ideal state shall come, when that day for which we have dreamed 
 and hoped and worked so long shall come, when there are no longer employees or 
 employers, no longer rich or poor, no longer master and slave, when that day shall 
 have come the labour union will have done its work and this world will be united 
 in one grand universal brotherhood — a brotherhood whpre the fondest hope and dream 
 of each is the highest act of all.' 
 
 Q. Is that the ultimate purpose you spoke of? — A. It is the hope of the organiz- 
 ation to work to the end of the united brotherhood of mankind. 
 
 Q. Does the editor of this magazine undertake to be responsible for the principles 
 of the magazine? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You have, I suppose, been assailed by the public press yourself ? — A. Very fre- 
 quently, I have been called plenty of names. 
 
 Q. I cite from ' American Industries ' I find such words as these : ' Trade union 
 meetings are generally a mixture of beer and anarchy,' so it would seem such terms 
 are used by employers as well. Suppose the workmen yesterday had decided to accept 
 the suggestion that had been made to them, would they have been considered unfair 
 workmen? — A. I don't think so. • 
 
 Q. By the way, you were not here yesterday ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You knew nothing about the meeting until this morning? — A. I saw it bul- 
 letined in the Press window in Nanaimo last night. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I think that is all. " 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
28 MINVTE8 OF EVIDE'NCE OP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I would like to get some statistics of the Federation; -what is the total mem- 
 bership of the Federation? — A. I cannot give you that your Honour. We only keep 
 track of the membership in good standing. I cannot say what the total membership 
 would be. It would be almost impossible. 
 
 Q. Have you any idea ? — A. I might be a long way* off from the fact. I would 
 judge it to be somewhere in the vicinity of 100,000. 
 
 Q. How many local unions are there? — A. As near as I can tell you about 190. 
 I think the highest in the directory is 181. Probably that is all. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Less than 200 ?— A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Is the Western Federation affiliated with any other organization? — A. With 
 the American Labour Union. 
 
 Q. Where does that union have its headquarters? — A. In Butte, Montana, at 
 the present time. 
 
 Q. Is that an organization formed on the same principles? — A. Largely so. It 
 is for the other crafts, all occupations including miners who come in by affiliation of 
 our organization. It includes all other labour organizations. 
 
 Q. What would be the membership of- that, as nearly as you can tell ? — A. That 
 is hard to say; it is a younger organization than the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. How long has it been in existence ? — A. About 4 or 5 years. 
 
 Q. It is similar in membership? — A. Yes, though I believe the membership in 
 good standing is larger in that organization. 
 
 Q. Is that the only organization that the Western Federation of Miners has any 
 business connection with? — A. The only one with which they have any direct affili- 
 ation. 
 
 Q. It has nothing to do with the United Mine Workers? — A. Except by relations 
 that occur from one circumstance or another. There have been negotiations for inter- 
 changeable cards between the United Mine Workers and the Western Federation. I 
 do not know how far that has progressed. 
 
 Q. I suppose the ultimate aim of labour organizations is to consolidate? — A. Yes, 
 that is the hope, as I understand it. 
 
 Q. Over the whole of North America? — A. There is no limit placed on it really. 
 At the last meeting there was a strong idea advanced to enter the Republic of Mexico, 
 but as far as I have been informed there has been nothing done as to that yet. 
 
 Q. I do not notice that these by-laws provide what the dues are? — A. Ko, it is 
 a local arrangement. Each union has the right toi prescribe its own fees and dues. 
 The constitution provides a per capita tax from the locals. 
 
 -Q. How is that determined — by the number of men ini the union? — A. The per 
 capita tax is $2.00 per annum. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — Article 4, sectipn 1. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. They would have a fund at their disposal of $200,000 a year ? — A. No ' it is 
 only the membership in good standing; that is all we keep track of. I do not think 
 the membership in good standing would reach that amount. 
 
 Q. Would it average $50,000 a year?— A. Speaking of an average, the organiz- 
 ation has been growing. I do not know what it will approximate in the' last year. It 
 did not reach that average before. . . 
 
 Q. It would be safe to say $50,000 for the current year?— A. I think thirt would 
 ...be close to, it. ■ -■ ' - '■■ •?• ;i v ':.■ ,- i . 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DmPUTES IN BRITISH COLVMlilA 29 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. The Secretary-Treasurer has control of that fund, I suppose? — A. He has 
 charge of it. The executive have control of it. It is controlled in the same manner 
 as other things, in carrying out the provisions as laid down. 
 
 Q. When a strike is inaugurated by a local union, who settles the question as to 
 their payment out of the funds ? — A. That is taken up by the local committee and the 
 member of the executive. He has to investigate and see the necessity that exists. 
 
 Q. And the representative reports to the executive what the probable necessity 
 will be?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And how is that managed — so much a day paid out 'jo the men? — -A. All we 
 have done heretofore is just to look after the needy cases. That is the custom. 
 
 Q. The effect of that is this : that the man who saves gets no help from the ex- 
 ecutive, but the man who is shiftless draws on the funds? — A. That might apply in 
 certain instances. Through the past we have had a limited distribution to make in 
 any event. 
 
 Q. Am I right in saying that the majority of the members of the executive in 
 the Western Federation of Miners are men who hold socialistic views? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I suppose the doctrines of socialism are frequently discussed in meetings of 
 the men? — A. They are in many instances, in other places they exclude it. It is 
 optional with the men in each locality to discuss anything they tJiink tends ii their 
 benefit. It is optional with each union. 
 
 Q. Could you tell us the view held byl the majority of the executive about the 
 right of the members to join the militia? — A. I could not give the idea of the majority. 
 My own opinion is that the majority of the executive disfavour it and ai'e opposed to 
 it. They do not look on it with favour. 
 
 Mr. BoDVVELL. — There is a clause in the constitution about it. I refer to this 
 clause: (6th clause in preamble). 
 
 ' To prevent by law any mine owner, mining company or corporation, or the 
 agents thereof, from employing detectives, or armed forces, and to provide that only 
 the lawfully elected or appointed officers of the country, starte or province, who shall 
 be bona fide citizens thereof, shall act in any capacity in the enforcement of the 
 law." 
 
 His Lordship. — I see no objection to that. That simply means that an employer 
 could not take the matter in his own hands. It seems, as far as I can gather, that 
 the employer is not to have the appointment of the officers who are called upon to en- 
 force the law. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I think in the United States that would be aimed at the Federal 
 forces in keeping the enforcement of the law from the militia. 
 
 Witness. — That is aimed at detectives, the Pinkerton men, and the man who is 
 looking for a job of that kind. It is to protect against the wandering adventurers. 
 
 His Lordship. — They do not object to the officers of the state enforcing the law, 
 but they do object to hirelings being called in to keep the law. 
 
 Q. Do I understand you to say that the majority of the men themselves look on 
 joining the militia with disfavour ?^A. I could not say that, your Honour. Many of 
 the members of the organization, both in the United States and British Columbia are 
 members of the militia. 
 
 Q. Are the conditions of menibership stated in this book? — A. Yes, sir, I think so. 
 
 Q, At what age is a man eligible ? — A- There is no specification. 
 
 Q. What is generally accepted as the lowest, limit ? — A. There is no such limit, 
 hxA w€( consider the years of discretion, go that the men thoroughly understand the 
 nature of what is Tindertaken. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmlth, May 6. 
 
30 MtmrTES Of ETtDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD yil., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Can you give me some idea of thd limit?— A. That is left optional with, the, 
 local. 
 
 Q. I suppose no matter how young a man may be he has the full right to vote? — 
 A. If he becomes a member, of course. 
 
 Q. Are the proceedings invariably taken by ballot? — A. Np, the ordinary ques- 
 tions come before the meetings. The ballot is not taken unless specially called for. 
 
 Q. Is the question of strike or no strike always determined by ballot? — A. Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 Q. Then of course all miners under 21 years of age would have a right to vote? — ■ 
 A. If they are entered as members of the union they have all the pi'ivileges of mem- 
 bers. ,:■,-,. 
 
 Q. Are there any oaths of secrecy administered by any officers of the Federation? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Does a man, when he joins the Federation, take an oath ?— A; Yes, it is not 
 specified in the book. It is an oath of secrecy in regard to the business transactions 
 before meetings, and to support their fellow workers in time of trouble, and not to 
 receive or misappropriate any^ of the funds of the organization. 
 
 Q. Could you. give us an exact copy of the oath? — A. I could; I have it with me. 
 
 (Copy of oath read by the Secretary). 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. That is the only oath?— A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 
 Q. Are there any other obligations than that? — A. 'None, except the installation 
 of officers. There is a specific ceremony for that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Now, referring to this matter of a few moments ago — I presume it is the 
 belief of the majority of the executive that all natural resources ought to be the pro- 
 perty of ihe state? Is that so? — A. Yes, the natural resources. 
 
 Q. For instance, coal mines? — A. Yes, I believe that would be the opinion of the 
 majority. The executive are temporary; they shift from year to year. 
 
 Q. I suppose one of the objects of the organization is to work towards that end? — 
 A. It does not become a specified part of the workings of the organization in any man- 
 ner. It is simply that the individuals who hold these views have the privilege of. exer- 
 cising their rights along that line. They meet with some opposition, too. 
 
 Q. Is this body — the Western Federation of Miners — incorporated in any state 
 of the union? — A. No, some of the local unions are incorporated. There are three or 
 four incorporated here in British Columbia. 
 
 Q. Some of the local unions are incorporated? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you mean all the local unions in British Columbia, or some? — A. Some 
 of them. Under British Columbia law, most of them under the Benevolent Societies 
 Act. 
 
 Q. None of the coal mining unions? — A. I don't think so. I am not positive. 
 Nanaimo, I think, is incorporated, and I am not positive as to Frank. I am not sure 
 as to that. 
 
 Q. I understand, Mr. Baker, that you are a Canadian by birth? — A. Yes sir. 
 
 Q. Would! you explain, from the standpoint of a Canadian, what the benefit of 
 the international feature is?— A. From my point of view I see no difference with 
 regard to locality. It is a question of the unity of the workmen of the country. 
 
 Q. Would Canadian workmen not be benefited just as well with their own organ- 
 ization ? — A. I don't think so. They would not have the unity and strength and would 
 be out of touch with each other. The competition against them is largely inter- 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
02^ liitliVSi'RIALIfll^PVTES IN BRITISH COLVMBIA 31 
 
 SESSrONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 national, as we find it. They hare the united strength on the opposite side of the 
 entire country. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. What do you mean by competition? — A. The employing class, 
 Q. It does not recognize national boundaries? — A. No, sir. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Supposing a local union lias contributed money to the general fund in Denver, 
 and consider that these funds have not been justly dealt with, what remedy would the 
 local union here have to see that these funds are properly handled? — ^A. They would 
 send their complaint before the executive, and if they were not satisfied with their 
 position, it would come before the convention. 
 
 Q. They would have no redress in their own courts ? — A. I never gave that part a 
 thought. It has never gone into court. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. The funds are kept in Denver, I suppose? — ^A. Tes, the general fund. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. In the case of any internal grievances that were not remedied by the organiz- 
 ation itself — for the redress of these the Canadians would have to go into the United 
 States courts would they not? — A. I do not know how that would be. It is a question 
 of a legal technicality. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. I suppose they could proceed against the local representative? — A. That would 
 be poor picking. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The funds, at all events, would be beyond the reach of a Canadian court ? — A. 
 The organization would certainly lose the afiiliation of every organization in British 
 Columbia if such a process had to be adopted. 
 
 Q. We can conceive of a case where a local union might take an unreasonable 
 view, but the point is that Canadians who put their money into the fund at Denver 
 have no redress ? — A. They are in the same position as the whole body, of course. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Is there anything requiring the headquarters to be in the United States, where 
 is it now? — A. In Denver. It may be moved. It is placed annually by the vote of 
 the convention. 
 
 Q. There is nothing to prevent it being one year in Canada? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. But suppose the question is how much the men on strike are to get per 
 diem? — A. It is not taken in that way so far. 
 
 Q. We have a number of men on strike now, suppose tlie question is how much 
 they are to get. Is it a question of application for relief?— A. That has been the 
 procedure. 
 
 Q. And any man who feels that he requires money applies to you ? — A. No, it is 
 arranged by the local committee. 
 
 Q. He applies to the president of the local committee? — A. Any o£ them, I 
 suppose. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
32 ' MI^'UTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. The committee get the money from headquarters at Denver? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And they settle how much they will give to each? — A. They get a statement 
 as to how much is necessary. 
 
 Q. They are not obliged to give all the local committee recommends? — A. There 
 is nothing on that in the constitution. 
 
 Q. They could refuse altogether, could they? — A. Well, they would be in a very 
 independent position. 
 
 Q. They have the abstract right? — A. I do not think so. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. It is in the -discretion of the executive? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The simple fact that the committee report that they should have so much does 
 not settle the question of the amount? — A.. It might, they generally try; to make it 
 satisfactory. 
 
 Q. How much has the organization expended on strike pay up toi date? — A. It 
 has not come properly before the executive. They meet in convention on the 18th 
 and have not yet been called together. Temporarily, I was to turn over some funds 
 that were in my hands, for this purpose. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Has the executive met since this trouble here? — A. No. I think the approval 
 has been arranged by telegraph. I was assured by the general officers that the decis- 
 ion had been approved. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How much money has been devoted to the strikers up to date? — A. I turned 
 over $790 for local relief. 
 
 Q. Then as I understand the position, Mr. Baker, as soon as the union here 
 determine to come out on strike by a majority, the executive is bound to support 
 them? — A. As long as they remain in their decision. 
 
 Q. The executive have the right to intervene and say that in their judgment the 
 strike should cease? — A. ISTo, I cannot say that they have that right. At the same 
 time it would be in a certain sense in their hands to determine whether the conditions 
 would justify a continuation of the strike. But there is not much probability of that. 
 The men usually become discouraged before any one else. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. If the executive became convinced that a continuance of the strike was futile 
 it would be within their power to cut off supplies ? — A. Yes, it would be in that case. 
 It just depends on the circumstances. The supplies or funds are raised from the 
 general membership. Sometimes it is necessary to levy; a special assessment on the 
 general membership. 
 
 Q. But generally there is sufficient in hand to meet requirements ? — A. Generally 
 though assessments have been made. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are the paid organizer for the province, you devote your whole time to 
 that ? — A. Not altogether. For the last year my time has been devoted to it. I am 
 in receipt of a salary when I am employed. My salary is only by the day when I am 
 actually employed. It is $5.00 per day. , 
 
 .Q. When you are actually at work foi" the Federation ?7— A,. Yes. 
 
 Q. Exclusive of expenses ? — A. I pay my own expenses out of that, outside of 
 railway fare. 
 
 JAMBS A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
02V TNDVSTRIAL IfWVVTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 33 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. That is not a very remunerative occupation ? — A. 'Ho, about the poorest. Any 
 work in the mines rewarded me just as well. 
 
 Q. You yourself hold socialistic views do you not? — A. I do, yes. 
 
 Q. And I suppose you discuss these doctrines frequently with members of the 
 union? — A. Whenever it is agreeable. I never try to impose my views. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. Were you worldng in Canada when you were elected a member of the 
 executive? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How is the executive elected? — A. From among the delegates attending the 
 convention. They are nominated in the convention generally. There is no rule. The 
 person elected must be a resident of the district he represents. 
 
 Q. You spoke of the jurisdiction of the local. How is the jurisdiction of a local 
 lodge defined ?^A. : It embraces those in that craft in that vicinity. Those who are 
 close enough to affiliate with that local union. 
 
 Q. It is in the discretion of the executive to grant a charter, and they would 
 not grant two charters to two locals in the same community working in the same 
 craft? — A. No, though that has been done in certain cases. Some men employed 
 around the mines have, in certain cases, separate unions, blacksmiths, &c. These 
 are members of the Federation and have power of representation. It is under the same 
 constitution. In a few instances the membership is increased in that way. 
 
 •Q. What is the district organization?^ A. The unions in British Columbia are 
 affiliated in one district and have a district representative. Th(!y hold an annual 
 convention and transact local blisiness.- They, become more thoroughly in touch with 
 the requirements of the local. 
 
 Q. Has that district organization affiliation with any other Canadian labour 
 body? — A. There is some talk of thfet, but I do not know as to that. I do not think 
 it sends representatives to the Labour Congress of Canada. 
 
 Q. What was the nature of the affiliation existing between the Western Federation 
 and the American Labour Union?— ^. It is simply an affiliation of bodies; they act 
 in harmony with each other. They co-operate so far as possible for unity of interests. 
 
 Q. Is the obligation for sympathetic strikes greater between the members of 
 affiliated bodies?'— A. There is no relationship. There is, no agreement. 
 
 Q. You spoke of a charter feeing suspended for certain causes. Supposing a 
 charter was suspended, what effect will that have on the individuals? Would they 
 be regarded as unfair? — A. They would simply be dropped. They would have just 
 the same status as before. 
 
 Q. That is quite clear? — A. ISi'ot unless there were some certain individuals who 
 had taken such a position that they would be made a record o£F. 
 
 Q. They would be blacklisted? — A. They would certainly be kept track of. 
 
 Q. In case of the surrender of a charter by a local union, would the individuals 
 of that union become unfair in the eyes of the Federation? — A. ISTo, sir. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You might tell us how many unions there are in the province?— A. It is 24, 
 I think, with an aggregate membership of 4,000 or that vicinity. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Whea a strike is on, in the ease of a local union, who directs it? — A. The 
 local comihittee, assisted by a member of the executive board-^the local committee 
 elected by the members. 
 
 Q. Has the representative of the executive any greater power than other members 
 of tie committee ?— A. He is looked aipon as an individual at headquarters for gny 
 circumstances demanding attention, or special assistance in any shape or form. He 
 is looked on with confidence. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May t. 
 
 36a— 3 
 
34 MINVTE8 OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL CQMMISSrON 
 
 3A EDWARD VII., A., 1904. . 
 
 Q. SupposiHg ho aalvocated a certain 'course of action, and, members of the,lo<;aI, 
 committee opposed that by a vote, would their act be reported against them ? — A., 
 Hardly, but it would probably go in. . , ■, , 
 
 Q. Would they be persecuted by them ?-^A. There wQuld be riofhinf stand 
 against- them.' ■ The members of the ,0'rganization generally might approve ., or, disap;^ 
 prove, ' ^ .•.,,-.. , , ., ; ,v' ,.: ■ 
 
 Q. So that if a representative of the Federation stated that members of tlie ur^ion 
 doing that thing would be blackiisted, he wouid be stating what 'wa? not., the case ?, 
 For' instance, if you' were to go to the Ip.eal! \iip.ion, would it be witljiini-your, .province r 
 to say that the men who took that position would be blacklisted ? — A. No, ^ir. ,,,j,/.„ 
 
 Q. I ask that because I- want to make inquiries concerning another.- matter. 
 
 By His. Lordship •' ;,. , ;. ■, . ■ , 
 
 Q. How far is it permissible by the rules of the organization to interfere \x\ poli- 
 tics ? — A. There are ho rules as' to that,; ; : ,. ,\ -■ ,, .,;■.■', 
 
 Q. Can the executive of the local union bring up any political questions in a. 
 meeting' ? — A. No, I don't tliink so. It is -a local option. They can discuss .and, ex- 
 clude what they see fit. , 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. The district organization has no funds ? — A. A little, just for its own local pur- 
 poses. 
 
 Q. Has it any paid o-fEcers ? — A. There are: limit-ed salaries — nominal salarios. 
 
 By His Lordship : - ..■,-,...'' . . ^ - 
 
 Q. Political discussions frequently take place in meetings of the Western Feder- . 
 alion -of Miners ? — A. Yes, in many instanoes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : ' I ' ' . ' 
 
 Q. Is it a fact that in some trade linions the discussion of politics is barred ? — ^A. '- 
 I think it is. '""' - ' .-■... , , ■, 
 
 By His Lordship :. ' 
 
 Q. In those in which it is not. barred is it common for them to come, to any 
 agreement on the subject ? — A. It is rather uncommon to be united.. They are not 
 usually united on questions of poktics. 
 
 Q'. Is the boycott recognized by th6 Western Federation as a fair weapon ?^A. 
 Well, it is regarded as sometimes a necessary weapon in this way. If there are cer- 
 tain parties who treat the men fairly, and others who are not, they will recommend 
 the patronage of the man who will treat them fairly. 
 
 Q. The Western Federation has adopted the boycott ?^A. No, we. have -no pro-, 
 duct, no label on our goods. 
 
 Q. But it adopts the boycott system ? — A. No, not that I know of. Appeals are 
 made to the miners' unions by various organizations throughout the continent, niak- 
 ing those kind of requests at different times. 
 
 Q. Take the ease of merchants in a town sympathizing with the employer and ono 
 Tith the men, do the executive persuade the inen to patronize the one man' against 
 the other — the executive of the local union ?-^A. I cannot say. They have no in- ■ 
 structions from the general organization. ■■ . ,,;i 
 
 Q. What do you say as to picketing^is that' considered a right thing to do by 
 the Western Federation ? — A. At certain tim.es whenever they consider it right. ' 
 
 Q. You say that piclceting is sometimes necessary ? — A. When it becomes neces- 
 sary, to do so they consider it r^ght. It has been done. 
 
 Q. Am I right in saying that the Western Federation recognizes the Boycott and 
 picketing as proper means of warfare ? — A. The boycott, as I understand it, has not 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6, 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BltlTISH COLUMBIA 35 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 been used, except in the way I told you. We have requests from other organizations 
 concerning certain lines of goods. We only use the boycott sympathetically. We 
 have no goods to put a label on. In what sense do you mean picketing ? 
 ' Q. We all know there are a certain number of workmen who do not see the util- 
 ity of 'belbnging to unions, and that- it is a custom of union people to try and persuade, 
 them to^join the union, and one of the means is by picketing or pestering the non- 
 u'l'iioii rnen and their familiei.— A. I thought in a certain sense that was what you 
 mesiiit. I have been in ^iich a capacity myself, though not to the extent you dcgeribed. 
 I 'ufe(i'airthe influence I can. ' That is ae f ar as' I ever went, or as far as the men with* 
 whom I Vas associated went. • ■ ' 
 
 Q. It is the' cusk)m in some unions to refuse to work with non-union men, is it 
 not 1 — A. There are some localities where that is not even required. There is an ar- 
 rangement between them and their employers. A man is not denied work simply be- 
 cause he is n6t a' member of the union: . ■ ■ , - . ■ ' ■ -\ 
 
 Q. What is the rule with the Western Federation ? Is that left to each local ?— 
 A. Yps, there is ho rule'.' '• , , 
 
 Q.'Wiiuld it be a justiflaMe reasod for a local union to go on strike because an. 
 employer was employing non-union men ? — A. No, the employment of non-union njeil 
 is not considered a good caus-e of strike, unless it is in discrimination of men because 
 they are union men. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. When you speak of discrimination — that is to say while you had union men 
 available for the job you would expect the employer to employ them ? — A. Yes. There 
 are men systematically discharged from jobs on account of their affiliation -with the 
 uriioli. ' ' " " ' ' ' .-' ' '■ 
 By Bis Lordship : 
 
 Q. One of the objects of unionism is to prevent the employment of non-union men, 
 is /it not ? — A. IdonH like to put itdn that v^ay. The better way, is to try and make 
 union men of the workingmen as fast as possible. 
 
 Q. One of the objects of the unions is to have a uniform rate of wages, whether 
 the man is a good or a poor workman ? — A. It is a minimum rate they desiiB. 
 
 Q. Is not the tendency to bring down the wages of a good man to the level of the 
 poor man ■■? Is that not the effect of establishing a minimum rate ? — A. I don't think 
 
 80. 
 
 Q. Because an employer has to take from the good man to pay the poorer man ? — 
 
 A. If a man is not able to fill the requirements, he should not be there, in my opinion. 
 
 ' Q. Tou would not deny that there- are some poor workmen in all unions ? — A. The 
 
 men are employed before they are- gathered into the unions, by employers. That would 
 
 seem to say that they were considered good men. 
 
 By Mr. JRowe : 
 ; t Q.. Can a man be a member of a union unless he is employed in a craft ? — A. That 
 is what it is confined to. There may be exceptions. 
 !. Q,:There is.no maximum wage? — A. No, sir. 
 
 . Q. :As,tO| men working, by the, piece in mines— ^is there any regulation as to dis- 
 crimination between different men ?^A. That is a local arrangement. It is between 
 the local men themselves. 
 
 Q. The, union has the option of fixing the prices for any particular class of work ? 
 —A. Yes. ,.,,,,,, / , ^ 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. It i§,not a good cause of strike because an employer employs non-union men ? 
 
 —A. No.'-',' ;. '" 
 
 JAliES A. BAKER— LadysmitK, May 6.1 
 
 36a— 3} 
 
J36 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD. VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. Do you think it would be in the interest of trade unions if they should be 
 incorporated ? — A. I do not know. I have advocated that. The union of which I am 
 a member is incorporated. It is a question if it is to their best interest. : 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Why do you say that ? — A. In the -first place the Benevolent Societies Act does 
 not meet the requirements. : , 
 
 By Mr. Rbwe : ''' 
 
 Q. Supposing there was an Act specially provided ? — A. It would be more in liilc. 
 I would think it would be much better, hut this Bijnevolent Societies Act does not 
 touch the situation at all. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I do not think it was ever intended for that- purpose. ' 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Do I understand you to say that if there was a good Act permitting incorpora- 
 tion of trade unions, it would be better ? — A: I don't say that. I have no doubt it 
 would be better than the Benevolent Societies Act. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Why do you feel doubts as to the utility of incorporating imder a proper Act? 
 — A. I look at it as putting up a mass of hunjanity as property. This is a mass .of 
 humanity put up as a chattel. 
 
 Q. It is a voluntary act of the incorporators ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Their labour is a commodity for sale, and they can control it to strengthen,. a 
 man's power in regard to his labour ?— A. It is a question I am not altogether clear 
 on. I did advocate incorporation. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. It is a cold, iron fact that unions sell the labour of their members by agree- 
 ments between employers ? — A. They stipulate that not less than a minimum price 
 shall be paid. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Don't you think it to the advantage of unions that wanted to use a label if they 
 were iscorporated under certain conditions, that their label might be registered as a 
 trade-mark — would not that be an advantage ? — ^A. I think it would be beneficial, 
 of course. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The trouble would seem to be that the courts have shown a tendency to hold 
 unions responsible for their acts the same as companies. Is that not one of. the 
 troubles ?- — A. That is one of them, certainly. 
 
 Q. Don't you think that where there is power there should be corresponding re- 
 sponsibility ? — A. Certaijily, but not if you feel that you were condemned and con- 
 xicted before you were tried. 
 
 Q. The remedy for ihat is to get proper judges and juries. 
 
 His Lordship. — Any more questions to ask ? 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — Nothing. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. How long will you be here ? — A. A day or two. I will inform you if it is 
 necessai-y for me to go away. 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BKITISH COLUMBIA 37 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 James Pritchard, sworn : 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. You reside in Ladysmith ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You are a miner ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How long have you been mining ? — A. I commenced mining in the coal mines 
 when I was nine' and a half years old, about 34 years ago. 
 
 Q. You have been working here, how long ? — A. Some four years. 
 
 Q. How long have you been working at Extension ? — A. Somewhere about eleven 
 months. 
 
 Q. Where were you working before Exteusio-- ? — A. At Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. You remember a meeting held on March 8 ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. A meeting of miners had been called on March 8 'i—A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You attended- that meeting ? — A. Yes. 
 . Q. In what capacity were you elected ? — A. They elected me as chairman. 
 
 Q. Who was secretary ? A. Mr. Mottishaw, senior. 
 
 Q. That meeting had been called f6r what purpose ? — A. I believe it had been 
 called for the purpose of considering the advisability of seeing the company about n 
 15 per cent increase. 
 
 Q. And what action was taken with respect to the apjiolntment of that com- 
 mitt€e ? — A. They did not take any i..3tion at all, simply discussed it. 
 
 Q. Why did they not take any action on it ? — ^A. They seemed to consider it 
 would be futile, without being organized, to take it up. 
 
 Q. What was the next step ? — A. Some person submitted to the men that we 
 organize a union. 
 
 Q. Was any action taken on that ? — A. It was discussed for some time, and 
 while it was being discussed it was moved that we organize a union with the Western 
 Federation of Miners, as far as I can reniember. 
 
 Q. What was done after that ?— A. This motion as amended was put to the Vote 
 and carried unanimously. 
 
 Q. How many were present at that time ? — A. The hall was crowded., I did not 
 . count them. , It was .in the, Finn's hall. 
 
 Q. Were there several hundred there? — A. I should think there would be. The 
 hall was packed to the doors. 
 
 Q. There was a unanimous vote that you should form a union and aflBliate with 
 the Western Federation of Miners. What did you then do ? — A. When this motion 
 was carried it was moved that the ofScial organizer of the Western Federation be noti- 
 fied to come along at once. 
 
 ,Q. You then sent a telegram to Mr. Baker ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was then done ? — A. Mr. Baker came here on Sunday morning, the 
 15th, and addressed the men outside for a short time, and it was moved that we proceed 
 to the Finn's hall and proceed to organize forthwith. 
 
 Q. Then you went up to the hall and proceeded with the work of organization ? 
 — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How many joined the union ? — A. There were somewhere about 600. ♦ 
 
 Q. About how many men had been working in the mines ?— A. I think thera 
 were somewhere about 800. 
 
 Q. So that as far as your opinion goes, 600 out of 800 joined the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did the union afterwards receive any further increase in its membership ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. To what extent ? — A. It came up over 800, I believe. 
 
 Q. It ran up to about 800, is that about its strength now? — A. Yes, that is about 
 its numerical strength now. 
 
 Q. Why was it that you decided to join the Western Federation ?— A. I presume 
 theirreasons were that if they had trouble of any kind, they would be supported better 
 by being affiliated with some other body instead of being by themselves. 
 
 JAMES PRITCHARI>— Laaysmith, May 6. 
 
38 MIWOTES OF EVIDENCE OP ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 a-A EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 Q. The power and strength of the Western Federation was a motive to you ? — A. 
 
 Yes. - . ^ ; . ; , ■:; ^ 
 
 Q. Did you rea41y think you needed that, had your experience pointed that direc- 
 tion? — A. My own persQoal experience had not. .. , , . ^ v/ a 
 
 Q. But the experience generally ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you hold any office in the existing union ? — A. I am president of , the union. 
 
 Q. Who is secretary ? — A. Mr. Mottishaw, junior. 
 
 Q. After the union had been formed; what liappened the nuxf day ? — As'The 
 rest of the men began ccrr.'ng, and we initiated and took applications; &c., trntilpracti^ 
 cally all were in. ' ■ ' : i ,--■,.■•; . 
 
 By His Lordship : -.;■-*,' 
 
 Q. About 800? — A.' I think so, I do not know tJie exact figures* 
 
 Bp Mr. Wiison : ^ •-,..■ v.- '^' 
 
 Q. And what took place after that? — A. 1 do not know to what youiefer. ; 
 Q. Were there any notices posted? What took place between the comliany "andi 
 the union? — A. There were lioticSs placed at the depot, and I believe at the- mines — 
 I did, not see the one at the mines — that the mines would be closed down on the 1st 
 April, and that the men must bring out their tools and return themi to the ■stofelsseper 
 of tlie mine. I have not a copy of the notice. 
 
 By Mr. lioive : , , .,, r^.,,; 
 
 Q. What date was that posted? — A. It was on thife moriling of the lOtTi. ' -': ' - 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : ■,-,,-,.! 
 
 . Q. The meeting was held on the 8th, and, the r^sol\ition to organize was pas§ed 
 
 on the 8th, and then this notice was stuck up?-^A. Yes, on the lOth. ' '■ ' ■'' 
 
 Q. So soon as it was known that the miners purposed forming a union, this notice 
 
 was put up? — A-,Yes. ' . ," ' ' ••'■'•--• .: 
 
 Q. How long' afterwards did' you work in ths mine?— A. I did not work at all, 
 because I was laid off. ' '" , '' ' 
 
 Q, You were disbharged ?— A. On Tuesday' morning, on the loth. ' ^ ' 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q.,This first meeting was on Saturday? ^. \ . 
 
 By His Lordship : ,, 
 
 Q. The meeting was held; on Sunday the 8th? — ^A. Yes. - ., ■ ■ p 
 
 Q. And on that morning you were discharged? — A. Yes. ■, , .-i.,! 
 
 Q. Who discharged you?— A. I could not say, only that the mine boss told -me 1 
 was laid off, that he did not know the reason. 
 
 Q. Who was the mine boss? — A. Mr. Johns. ,> 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : ' r. - , 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Mottishaw discharged too ? — A. I believe so, on the same day. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Any one else on that date? — A. I do not know, only from what I was told. 
 There were two or three others, one by the name of Bell and Mottishaw. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Both the Mottishaws were discharged ? — A. Yes. -. rf, ;« ... ' - r 
 
 JAMES PRITCHARD— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA ^ 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER Na. 36a 
 
 By His Lordship : ... • 
 
 Q. What was Bell in the union ? Had he taken any particular part in the meet-* 
 ing* — a; Yes, he had been speaking. ■ 
 
 Q. When did Mr. Baker get here? — A. The fblloiving Sunday, the l6th. 
 
 '" ' By Mr. Wilson : '■'',,,, 
 
 1 : Q^, Were you a member oi a committee which sought to obtain an interview with 
 llr»,l»unsm\iir?., Djd you, pot g<? to.ViQtoxia ^or that purpose ?— A. Yes, but not to 
 see Mr. Dunsvnuir, to interview Mr. Mclnnis and other members of the legislature. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : , . .• , 
 
 Q. The first meeting Was on Sunday the 8th. When did you firsts hear of the 
 meeting? — A. Friday or Saturday, I forget which. 
 
 Q. How did you hear of it ? — A. Some person asked me if I was going to the 
 meeting. I said.' What meeting-?.' He : said there was a meeting called :£or Sunday 
 in theihall. , . 
 
 Q-. Who called tli0 meeting?.- Do you know now?- — A. No. 
 , Q. Do you know who arranged iti?--r-A, No. , . 
 
 : Q. Had there been any disdussioii among the men about having a meeting? — A^ 
 I did not hear of it. 
 
 Q. Any discussion generally about wanting an increase in wages? — A. I had 
 heard several speaking among themselves — I did not enter the discussion myself — 
 about the 67 cents a ton duty beipg takejn off on the. other side. 
 
 Q. They wanted an increase on that account? — A. They seemed to talk that way. 
 
 Q. That -because the duty was taken off coal the wages should be increased? — A. 
 Yes., _ , , . , ,,,^ . - • . , 
 
 Q. Who was talking of that? — A. Different men, I could hot remember vCho they 
 were. . ;,.,-,..,-., 
 
 Q. About how many ? — A. I could not state how many. 
 ,,^ Q. Don't jemenjber how many spoke tp.you^ — A. I do not know that any spoke 
 to me directly at all. 
 
 Q. You did not think there was . such a general agitation about that, that there 
 was going to be a meeting, you were surprised to hear of "the meeting? — A. Yes, I 
 was kind of surprised, as I did not know there was going to be a meeting held. 
 
 Q. You have no idea how the meeting originated? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Mottishaw have anything to do with getting up the meeting ?^-A. I 
 could not say. 
 
 Q. How long had he worked here? — A. I could not answer that either. 
 
 Q. Were you working in the Vancouver Coal- Company's mines befoi'e you came 
 here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. There has always been a .union- there? — A. Yes, all the time I was there. 
 
 Q. Were there many of the men who formerly worked at Nanaimo working at 
 Extension? — A. A few. 
 
 Q. When this meeting was called there wasn't very much said about a raise of 
 wages; they immediately went to the question of organization? — A. No, they dis- 
 cussed the advisability pf appointing this committee for something like 20 minutes. 
 
 Q. Who was the chairman ? — A. I was. 
 
 Q. Did you make any statement asl to why the meeting had been called ? — A. I 
 made the statement that I believed it was called for that purpose. 
 
 ■ " Q. Did no one there say who had called the meeting? No body gave any explan- 
 ation? — A. I don't remember any one giving any explanation at all. 
 
 Q. No one asked the question why they had been brought together? — A. I hardly 
 know how that came about. I know that some one mentioned about asking for an 
 advance that night. 
 
 JAMRS PRITCHARD— iJidyBmith, May 6. 
 
40 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Who begaa the speeches ? — A. I could not state, I did not know all the men 
 there. 
 
 Q. Was there any one prominent in the proceedings? Who moved the resolution? 
 — A. I do not know. 
 
 Q. Did you keep any minutes? — A. I believe there were minutes. Mi'. Motti- 
 shaw was the secretary. I believe he kept minutes of some kind. 
 
 Q. How did he come to be secretary? Who proposed him? — A. He was -pro- 
 posed to be secretary in the usual manner. 
 
 Q. Who proposed that you should be chairman ?7— A. I could not state who it was. 
 
 Q. At a public meeting there is generally some one ■ who is responsible, who takes 
 the initiative. You had nothing to do with the getting up of the meeting ? — A; iNo. 
 
 Q. You went there simply as an ordinary person attending a meeting? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. There must have been some one who took the responsibility of assuming the 
 lead? Who was that man?— A. I am not sure, but I- have an idea that iti was Mr. 
 Mottishaw, junior, the young man. I could not say for sure. . '..'■■. 
 
 Q. Did the notice say they were going to discuss an increase of wagesj — A. i 
 don't think it did. ' i^; 
 
 Q. How did you know that was going to be discussed? Who told you that ? — 
 A. I don't reaiember now who it was. Mr. Mottishaw said something to me while 
 I was taking the chair — the old Mr. Mottishaw. 
 
 Q. Was there somebody there who moved a resolution about organization ? — 
 A. I don't remember. 
 
 Q. You don't remember who spoke of organization? — A. No, I could not state 
 who they were. - ... , ■ , - i 
 
 Q. At first they seemed to be satisfied with an organization amoug themselves, 
 did they ? — A. There was a| man submitted that they organize a union, but I don't 
 remember who submitted that motion. - . 
 
 Q. That meant a local union ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Who suggested the Western Federation, and why?— A. If I remember right I 
 believe it was Mr. Bell. i 
 
 Q. It was either Mr. Bell or Mr. Mottishaw ? — A. I don't think it -was M-r. Motti- 
 shaw, I think it was Mr. EeU who moved the amendment. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe ■ 
 
 Q. Who moved the original motion ? — A. 1 cannot remember who it was. I do not 
 know most of the members. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I might mention to the Commissioners that we will call in Mr. Mot- 
 tishaw and put in the minutes of the meeting. , ^ 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The first resolution was for an increase of wages, was it? — ^A. It waS' for a 
 committee to see Mr. Dunsmuir, and they were going to discuss the 15 per cent ad- 
 vance with him, the reason for that advance being the reduction of the duty onicor/l. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : • . ■, i i 
 
 Q. Then that was abandoned, and you immediately went to the subject oforgai;- 
 ization ? — A. IS^ot immediately, it was the next business. ■ , , ; 
 
 Q. That part of the business was interrupted with a motion for organization 
 
 that would be the right way to put it?— A. I do not know whether it would or not. 
 
 Q. You had not appointed a committee or finished the discussion of that subject, 
 when the organization question came up — that is right ? — A. Yes, that is right. 
 
 Q. Did you have any personal opinion yourself in favour of the Western Feder- 
 ation of Miners as against a local organization? — A. I did not enter into the discus- 
 sion at all. 
 JAMES PRITCHARD— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
0,V INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 41 
 
 ■SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ' Q. What was your personal view of the matter? — A. I did not give any personal 
 
 view. 
 
 Q. I suppose you had an opinion? — A. I did not express any. 
 
 Q. Did you have any decided opiwlon one way or the other ? — A. Outside of 
 the meeting. 
 
 Q. I mean to say when that question came up was it a new question to you per- 
 sonally?— A. The Western Federation of Miners? 
 
 Q. The question of joining the Western Federation as against having a local 
 union, or a Canadian union ?^A. Yes, it was new to me— the Western Federation. 
 
 . Q. If no one had suggested the Western Federation yOu would have been satis- 
 fied with a local organization ? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Hqw did the- men receive the suggestion of local organization — favourably? — 
 A. Some did and some did not. 
 ■ :_ -Q. Some w-ere against organization altogether ?-^A. I did not hear anything as 
 to that. 
 
 Q. Didn't you think if the question of tho Western Federation had been left out 
 altogether that the men would have passed a resolution for a local organization ? — A. 
 I could not say whether they would or not. 
 
 Q. Did you not form- any opilfidn of what the feeling of the meeting was ?— -A. 
 From the' discussion which took place one could form the opinion that it would be 
 useless to organize locally. . 
 
 Q. Why? — A. Because they had been discriminated against in times past. 
 
 Q. How, and when, and wliere — what was said about that ? — A. They had- unions 
 before in this company, and the company has been able to burst them up. 
 
 Q. What unions were they? — A. They had a union at Alexandria, one here and 
 one at Extension. 
 
 Q. Who spoke about these things?' — A. Some persons in the hall. 
 
 Q. Can you give us the names of any of them? — A. I cannot remember the names. 
 I have been hei-e only about' 11 months. ■ 
 
 Q. You favoured the Western Federation on account of statements of this kind ? 
 A. The reason that wfe must favour it. That "was how I was putting it. 
 
 Q. You must have come to a conclusion in favour of it?— A. Yes, that was after- 
 wards. 
 
 Q. For the reason, you say, that the company would burst up a local union? — A. 
 I said that that wasthe consensus of opinion of the meeting. 
 
 Q. It was your opinion, too, was it not? — A. I suppose my opinion -went along 
 with the majority. 
 
 Q. And if you had not been afraid that the local union would have been broken 
 up, you would have been satisfied with a Ioca;l ilnion ? — A. I could not say as to that. 
 
 Q. The reason I understand why it carried the meeting between the Western 
 Federation and the local, was that the company's officers could break up a local ? — A. 
 I did not say the company's officers. 
 
 Q. The company then, without distinguishing ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That the influence of the company would be strong enough to break up the 
 union, and that was the only reason why the Western Federation would be an advant- 
 age? — A. The main reason I suppose. 
 
 Q. How would tlifi company break up the union — discharge the officers? — A. 
 Discharging the officers and discharging the men belonging to the union. 
 
 Q. That would go, on for ever, would it not? — A. I don't say it like that at all. 
 
 Q. The trouble seems to be that you were afraid that if a loc;i] union were 
 established it v.'ould not continue — it would be disrupted by the company? — A. I sup- 
 pose that is so. 
 
 Q. But as far as protecting your interests and taking care of your local affairs, 
 and. getting a fair wage, you would be just as well off with a local organization ? — A. 
 
 JAMES PRITCHARD— Ladj'sraitli, May 0. 
 
42 MINVTE8 OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 I suppose they would, if they did get a fair wage, and all went smooth' and nice, but 
 supposing they did not, they would only have themselves to lean on. 
 
 Q. How about now ? You have only yourselves to lean on ?^A. That remains 
 to be proved. 
 
 Q. Do you mean by getting' finanijial assistance? — A. I suppose; tbti' mtoral 
 support, too. ' ' - ■ "' . W '■■ ■ ' .' ' " '■ ■' ■/ 
 
 Q. You get tiie moral support of the community anyway, if you are Tight, don't 
 you ? Do you e^^ct to get strength'*by having a f orteigri organization supporting your 
 case ? — ^A. I expect we have got the support of our own class in this ' C'Ouiitt*y, :ot any 
 other. We are not foreigners to one aiiot;her.' ' -'-■' - '' 
 
 Q. Outside the financial support that' you expect to get, give -me" another r6Ason 
 for ^belonging to this outside organization ? — A. One reason that I ^an see why' we 
 should is beeause'ws can help to 'educate, >on« another. " ■■' - • .-.tjI" :■; ?.■■ ;■ 
 
 ■' Q; "Well, gi-ye me anofchep reason ?— A. (No reply); ■'-' ' ' -' ■-' •':"> Q 
 
 Q. Was not the real reason given to join the Western Federation that you ex- 
 pected trouble if you formed A labour <)i'ganizati'on ?— A. They itnust liave' l^xpefcted 
 trouble, or they would not have gone to work and decide that any man who was dis- 
 criminated against, the men would stiind'by' him. ' ' "'• ■ "' ' ' " '' '" '' 
 
 Q. Was not the real reason in case you got into trouble you would get some assist- 
 ance from the Western Federation to help fight the strike ? Was. th^t reason not 
 given at the meeting ? — A. I did not hear any one mention that at all. 
 
 Q; Y'ou will say that it was not said ?^A; I did iibt hear it said at all. '-' ... 
 
 Q. There was no one there on behalf of the Western Federation io give that 
 undertaking to the men ? — A. No one that I know. of; , ,, ' " , ' , 
 
 Q. What wages were you getting ?— ^A. I Was getting $3' a day.'" ■' ' ' 
 
 Q. You were being paid by the d^y ?^A. T had been timbering. 
 
 Q. That was just timbering. Do you ■n'ork By the piece ? — A. The miners do. 
 
 Q. Are you not a miner ? Do you work by the ton, or the day ? — A. I had been 
 working at timbering, and I was getting $3 a day. ' ■,< '• 
 
 Q. What did you make when you were working at mining ?— A. I only put one 
 shift in. 
 
 Q. What were you making at the Vancouver Coal Company, were yoti ^cirking by 
 the day or piece ? — A. By the piece. 
 
 Q. What were you making there I— A. On an average about $3.50 j or $3.25. 
 
 Q. On an average what does a good miner make here: — ^before the trouble ?— A. 
 1 could not say ; I have not been in mining. 
 
 Q. Don't you know ? — A. I have not seen any of the miners' atetements. 
 
 Q. Don't they talk to you ? — A. I haVe not discussed the matter at all. 
 
 Q. How many hours a day did you work when you were, getting $3 a day ?— A. 
 8 hours 
 
 Q. $3 per day for 8 hours is pretty good wages ? — A. That is the regular rate 
 here. 
 
 By His Lordship: - '■ -, ,. a. ?;:;.:,■, 
 
 Q. Is it the same at Nanaimo ? — A. I believe it is. " "; i-V'-. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson: . . -■ ': ; .:. 
 
 Q. Why was the discussion of the 15 per cent abandoned ? — A. As far as I can^ 
 remember, because they thought it would be futile. The majority of them seemed to 
 think it would be futile for them to ask for an advance until the men were organized. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. They seemed to think it would be useless. 
 
 Q. That you would not get it ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You were asked about that notice — the notice calling the first meeting — was 
 it signed by anybody ? — A. I don't think so ; I don't ,know why. 
 
 JAMES PRITCHARD— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
02f INDUSTRIAL DISfVTEB INBUITISH COLUMBIA 43 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Boclpell : , , 
 
 Q. Where was it posted? — A. At t-he depot and the niiMS.^ 
 
 By Mr. Roive : 
 
 Q. Ypu worked in; Nanaimo-r-ypu; remembi?!' the union? — A^ Yes. 
 Q. Was the union affiliated with the Western Federation ?— A. Not at that- time. 
 ■ ,,Q. Sinee you left? — A. Yes. ,, ■ , , , 
 
 ,; , Q. Was the matter not dis_QUSsed vyhile you , were there?: — A. .Not whiW I was 
 working in. Ncinaimo. . ,-,- ; -. 
 
 Q. The discussion of affiliation had not. been taken up? — A. Not when I le/:t., 
 !.. Q. The meeting at which you were made chairman was on the 8th March, then on 
 Tuesday morning you were discharged.. When was tJie next meeting hSld?— A. The- 
 next meeting was held on Thursday, morning,, the 12th of March in the pavillion. 
 
 Q. That was a meeting of the men — the uniim had not been formed yet? — A. 
 Yes. ■., V .i- l-i ;-:':-.; .■" - -■ ' : ' .■ : • . r' - 'j ■ . ■ 
 
 \ ■ Q. What .took pla<?e.-at the meeting on. the 12th of March? 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — These papers will CQ-ver the .meeting to which, yoii refer. 
 
 '■- • (Exhibit 4). 
 
 By Mr. Rome ;■■-■■- 
 
 Q. I was not clear as to what w.as done at that meeting. .Kindly tell us?— A. 
 When they moved me to the chair I asked if any one had any statement to make, ai:d 
 some person said that several men had been discharged^ so they asoertained the names 
 of four of them, Mr. Bell, the two Mottishaws and myself. There was a motion sub- 
 mitted, I believe, th,at£i committee he appointed to interview the company with regard 
 to getting the men reinstated, and it -s^as lost. The motion to appoint a committee 
 WAS lost. 
 
 By His Lordship : , '^ --...,,. ■ - . ■ .■ 
 
 ■ ' 3.' Why was that?^A. Because they hadnot yet organized themselves into'a union. 
 
 By Mr; Bowe ; , , , , 
 
 Q. Were there any resolutions adopted at that meeting ?— A. Yes, there was' one 
 
 adopted, that wc stop work until the official organizer of the Western Federation came 
 
 along and organized us into a branch of the Federation, before we ask the Company 
 
 to reinstate these men. 
 
 Q. That is, that you decided to quit work?— A. They liad to quit work. 
 
 Q. Did the men quit work voluntarily? — A. They quit work in accordance with 
 
 tlie resolution of the first meeting, that if any men were laid off they would stand by 
 
 them. 
 
 By Mr.' Bodwell : 
 
 Q. The real reason for quiting work was on account of the discharge of the men 
 who had been prominent in the organization? — A. I do not know as to prominent in 
 organization or not. 
 
 Q. The real reason for quitting work was on account of the discharge of your- 
 self, Bell and the r.vo Motfishaws? — A. Yes, and on account of the notice posted up, I 
 presume. ' 
 
 ' By Mr. Roioe : , , 
 Q. That was three weeks before ?— A. The notice was posted that the mines 
 would be closed on the 1st of April. This was on the 10th March. 
 
 ■ •■■■ ' By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. You knew you had to face dismissal then on the 1st of April? — A. Yes. 
 
 JAMES PRITCHARD— Ladysmith, May C. 
 
44 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Bowe 
 
 Q. Had you any reason to believe that Mr. Dunsmuir would refuse the proposal to 
 increase your wages? How had previous requests o£ that kind been treated?— A. I 
 could not give any reason at all myself, as I had no experience with the company prior 
 to this time. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You were in the employ of the Vancouver Coal Company before coming to 
 Ladysmith ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why did you quit that company? — A. I-quit because I was outof , work- o,n 
 account of a fire. There were four places cut off by fire. 
 
 Q. The company did not need as many men?— A. They. had not room for all 
 of us. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. By the places, you mean tbe places where you work .in the min€ ? — A. Yqs, , , 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Has this strike any connection whatever with the strike of the U. B. R. E., of 
 Vancouver? (United Brotherhood of Railroad Employees) .^A. Not that I know of. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Nothing said about tbe fact that these men were wanted out to prevent the 
 selling of coal to tbe C. P. R. ? — A. The U. B. of R. E. has never been 'mentioned in 
 the town, that I know of. . ; , 
 
 Q. Have you ever heard it suggested among yourselves tkat tbjs strike was being 
 gotten up in the interests of any American capitalists or mines ?^A. No, I have heard 
 no suggestions of that kind at all. , , . 
 
 Q. Did you ever bear any comment on tbe fact that the papers said it was to the 
 interest of tbe Washington mines to have this strike ? — A. No, I have not. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Have you ever known of a case where an officer of a union has been, found to 
 be in tbe pay of some capitalist? — A. No. Well, I have seen cases in the paper; I 
 do not know whether it is true or not. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. You live in Ladysmith? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Is it your own property ? — A. I have no property. 
 
 Q. Were you required to live here ? Did you find any restriqtion as to place of 
 residence? — A. No, not after I went to the mines. I was i;iot requested. Jt seemed 
 to be the common understanding that all bad to live here. I was not requested to live 
 here. 
 
 Q. Were you forced by any circumstances to live here ?^— A. I was forced by the 
 only circumstance that every man was forced to come and live bere. , 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. How far are the mines from bere? — A. Twelve or fourteen miles I think. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. What lengtb of time is consumed in reaching tbe place where the miners work. 
 from here, from tbe time they leave their bome and get to their work in the morning ? 
 .—A. Probably an hour. 
 
 Q. Tbe same time at night? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So it is about two hours then? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 JAMES PRITCHARD^-Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
ON 1NDV8TBIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 45 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 '■ Q. When you were at Nanaimo where did you live — how far from the mines? — 
 A. I was working at Protection, ju&t across the hay. 
 
 Q. How long did it take you to get there in the morning, from your home to the 
 shaft? — A. We used to leave at 20 minutes to 6 o'clock, and get over about 10 minutes 
 to 6. 
 
 Q. About 10 minutes then from where you lived? — A. No, about a quarter of an 
 hoiir'altogether. . • ,. 
 
 Q. You do not know the actual time this train takes to run — I am told it is only 
 half an hour? — A. Somewhere about thit. • 
 
 Q. So there would be an hour a day spent in travelling — not two hours ? Half an 
 hour in the morning, and half an hour at night?— A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. When did your time count in the Vancouver Coal Company, from the time you 
 reached the pit-head?-^ A. From the. time we went down till we came up again. 
 
 Q. And how did your time count at Extension? — A. At Extension when you got 
 there. The same at the two places. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You say it takes an hour going and an hour coming? — A. No, it is half an 
 hour going and half an hour coming. 
 
 By Mr4 Bodwell :, 
 
 Q. When is the regular time for the shift to be over? — A. Three o'clock. 
 
 Q. And the train starts at 3.30.' The men aTe in the mines at 3, they get through 
 about 3, but they have a right to stay there until 3, and half an hour is spent in get- 
 ting out to the station ? How much time is required to get from the mine to the train ? 
 — A. About five minues. 
 
 Q. From the place where you work in the mine? — A. No. ■ The men are supposed 
 to come out of the mine at three. 
 
 By His Lords-hip : 
 Q. How long should the train wait ? — A.' I should think 10 or 15 minutes. 
 Q. Does the train stay too late? — A. I have heard no complaint in that direction. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Did you live at Extension yourself ? — ^A. Previous to coming down here, yes. 
 Q. Why did you have to leave Extension to come down here to live?-^A. Because 
 everyone else was leaving. 
 
 Q. Why did everyone else leave? — A. Because they 'were compelled to.- 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. In what way ? — A. Because vfrhen they did not come down here they were told 
 there would be no Work for them. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Was that posted?— ^A. I did not see any notice. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Were they personally notified they would be discharged unless they came 
 down? — A. I believe so. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. You were told not to go to Extension to live before you worked there, were 
 you not?— A. No. 
 
 ' JAMES PRITCHARD— Ladysmith, May 6. 
 
46 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VH.,, A,. ,1.904 , 
 
 By His Lordship : ■..'■,'• 
 
 Q. You did not ask any of thte officers of the company whether you had to go to 
 Ladysmith or not ? — A. Yes, I think I asked Mr. Jones once, and he said, ' I suppose 
 we shall all have to, I have to go myself ' though no other official of the fctraipany had 
 said anything ahout it. ■ ■-''''' -'■ ' r:.---- ;: .- ■,■ k-, ,,,-•. .' ',; 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Where would you have preferred to live as between the two places ? — A. I 
 prefer to live at' Exiehsion. ' '"''•■•" J-. ■■■' ■ " •>.'■•. ••'•,• - '!■ ■'■;■■ i\un-\ .\) 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. Because it suits my health better. . '...:. i . : .- ' ■ ' .0 
 ' Q. How long would it take you to get fromyOur house there to- work? — A. Some- 
 where about a quarter of an hour. ' ■ ' ■ ■ '■' ■■' '''■'■■' 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Are there any miners allowed to live at Extension ? Up to the time of there 
 being no work, were all the miners down 'to- Ladysmith? — ^A. They were as far 4a J 
 know. '■'■".■ ■ •■• ■ i,' 
 
 By Mr, Rowe : 
 
 Qi How do the wages paid by this company compare with the; wages at.N^naimo! ? 
 Could you give an intelligent answer ? — A. No, I could not. , .,,. . , , 
 
 Q. Has. there been any recent increase of wages at Nanaimo ? — A. Not that I 
 know of. ' , : , 
 
 Q. Was anything of that kind quoted which waa made to justify^ the expectation 
 of a 15 per cent increase ? — A. Not that I remember... . ,.,,; • ^i 
 
 Ladysmith/ May f, 1903. 
 William Joseph, sworn : ' - . • ■ . , , .,; 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : - ■ > . > , ; s ! 
 
 Q. Where do you live, Mr. Joseph ? — A. At Ladysmith, ... ,, 
 
 Q. How have you been employed ? — A. As a miner. 
 
 Q. Where have you been working ? — A. At Extension. \ 
 
 Q. Tell the .Commissioners what you have got to say as to your understanding of 
 what took place ? — A. I came to Extension about three and a half years ago, and I 
 batched in an old place close to the face. I could not get another house. I built a 
 boarding house, and everything went very well until this pressure came oh us to go to 
 Ladysmith. We had a house full of boarders, and a few went to Ladysmith in one 
 month. They would go away a -few day;S. before the time and not pay us, until at last, 
 everybody had to go to Ladysmith. One of my boys was working for $1 a day an4i 
 the other $2.50. The youngest boy was only 16 and only got $1, not. more than! 
 enough to pay his board, and the wife had to come down here. We had to, pay for the 
 house, and could not do it, and the house. was sold. We rented a house in Ladysmith. 
 If it had not been for a friend we would be on the street. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long ago since you were compelled to leave Extension ? — A. About 5 
 months ago. I came down here and came to the conclusion to go to work. I asked 
 Mr. Wilson on Saturday, 'Will you please give me a job,' and he said he would, t 
 started to work the next week after that, and after T worlced about 9 days I went to 
 Extension to live in my own homee. After I had worked about 9 days, Mr. Wilson 
 came to me and said, ' You must go to Ladysmith.' I said to my partner, ' "You have 
 to come too.' He said, ' I won't go, my father won't drive me, and Dunsmuir can't.' 
 
 Q. Do you own the house at Extension ? — A. I built it, sir, 
 WILLIAM JOSEPH— Ladysmith, May 7. ^ 
 
02\r INDUSTTtlAL DISPUTES /A'^ BRITISH COLUMBIA 47 , 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Bij Mi: Rowe : 
 ' Q. Who owned the liouse you rented here ? — A. A man named Seeley, I believe. 
 
 !,{,. By Bis Lordship : 
 
 Q. Do you still own the house in Extension ? — A. Yes, it has been empty about 
 6 mouths. There is no one living in it now. 
 
 ' By Mr. Bodwell: ,..,..:. 
 
 Q. From whom did you buy the land at Extension ? — A. From Mr. Bramley. 
 Q. Not from the company ?^A. No. ; ■|,,: ,...,.,,- 
 ^Q., Did you ' inquire- from the company's, officers what the intention was with 
 reference to the men living at Extension ? — A. No, I did not, because there were men 
 besides me living there at the time. 
 
 . ;' 'By. His Lordship : " : ;-,':, ' ,. ' , ' ,, • 
 
 Q. Wlien did you build the house ?^A. About 3 years ago. - 
 
 , Q. How much money did you put into it ? — A. About $1,200. 
 Q. How many rooms are there in it? — A. About 9. 
 
 Q. You built it for the purposes of a boarding house ? — A. I thought I would 
 buildit' for my own family. Thele *6re'lots of people. wanting board, and we boarded 
 some of these. . . . : i 
 
 Q.' Have you ever gone to see any 'of the officers of the company to see whether ;you 
 could go back ? — A. No, I heard we could not go back unless we came here. 
 '■' Q; ITow many, people' live in Extension^ now ?'— A. There is' a good few. 
 Q. What do you mean by that, 50; ? — A. Yes, more than 50, I guess. 
 Q. How many would you say ? — A. I could not tell, sir, more than 50 anyway. 
 
 By Mr.Wiison : , ^ 
 Q. Some of them have gone back since cessation of work .?— A. Yes. 
 
 His Lordship. — By that you mean strike or lockout ? 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — Yes, one or 'tlid other. " ~ ::.-..•--:. .v. .. 
 
 f. ; i,- . ■ : 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Were ybii hot warned before you built your house that this was going to hap- 
 pen, by the officers of the company ?^A. No. ■ .. 
 
 Q.' Was it not generally known there ? — A. After I built my house — first I built - 
 it like' a' skeleton, and we caine to the conclusion Some of -us— we heard it said that we 
 had to go to Ladysmith— that We ought to have a deputation to see Mr. DiUismuir, 
 and' we took three men to see him, Mr. George Johnston, William Spenee and W. ^ 
 McCloskey, and they came back with a' report from Mr. Dunsmuir to say it made no 
 difference where they built, provided they' would Suit the officials of the mines. I 
 then spent a few riiore hundred ddllars, on the strength of that, on the house. 
 
 ' Q. Was'it nbt told you by the officers that they wore going to live in Ladysmith ? , 
 — A. No, they did not tell me. ■ . ., - 
 
 Q. Did you know it before you had your house built ? — A. No. I had to build 
 there, because I had my family. 
 
 Q.' bid hot the rnen think they would have to live at Extension, no matter what 
 the company said ?— A. No, I could not say that. ■ 
 
 Q. You knew it was generally stated;' at' Extension, that the men would live at 
 Ladysmith ?— A. No. ' ' 
 
 Q. Had not that statement been given out by the officials of the company, that = 
 Mr..Bryden told a lot ofriien' 'so that yoii' heard he did say it ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q: Before you had your house built"?— A. No. ■ . . i 
 
 Q. Before it was fihished ?— A. No. ' ■' ■ 
 
 WILLIAM.: : J.OSEPH, Ladysmith, May 7. ,7 
 
48 iinWTES OF EYIDE^'CE OF ROYAL COMUISSIOTH: 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A.. 1904 
 
 Q. You heard that Mr. Bryden had said that Xadysmith would be the town site 
 befor^ you had the skeleton up, and the officials were saying at the same time that' 
 the men were going to live at Ladysmith, and you thought that they would live at Ex- 
 tension and take the chances? — A. ISTo, I did not think it was a fact. 
 
 By Mr, Wilson : 
 Q. Did the men come to live at Ladysmith of their own free will, or because 
 they were obliged? — A. There are linudreds who would not' have come down if they 
 were left alone. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. How many people Vv'ere in Extension before this order to move to Ladysmith : 
 
 was given? — A. I heard some say from 2,000 to 3,000 people, I am not sure. 
 
 Q. You were there at the time? — A. Yes, but I am not in a position to know. ' 
 Q. Then I gather that there must be a good mary empty houses there to-day? — 
 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 His LonDSHiP. — Could you fix a time, Mr. Bodwell, when this order was given.? 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — Yes, I will call witness, and tell all about it. Full warning was ' 
 given before any building? was done. 
 
 His Lordship. — It. seems to me there is a very heavy onus on you to' show that 
 these men were dealt fairly with. These people spent their money building houses, 
 and it is a pretty strong action on the part of the company to say 'you tnust live in 
 Ladysmith as a condition of employment.' 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — The company gave this out before they- built. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is a strong, onus on you to. show this. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — We will give fhs exact date at which this notice was given. ' '" ' 
 
 By His Lordship : ■ - 
 
 Q. When was the general evacuation of the place? ' When did the people leave 
 in a lump? — A. They left our house about 6 months ago. 
 
 Q. Did the entire 2,000 people leave 6 months ago? — A. Somewhere about that 
 time. There were a lot of houses pulled down and brought down here. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Who owned the town site at Extension? — A. Mr. Dunsmuir sold some' lots', 
 and Mr. Bramley sold others. -' 
 
 His Lordship. — Bramley owned the town site ? i 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — Yes. : 
 
 By His Lordship : ' ' 
 
 Q. Were any reasons given bj' the company for this order? — A. No, I have never 
 heard any reasons, except that we had to go. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. What size lot did you purchase there? — A. I could not say exactly, about 100 
 feet. 
 
 Q. What did it cost you?— A. I paid $1 a month, $100 for the lot You have 
 the option of paying $1 a month until you pay $100, and you have t^n years tp pay 
 it. There is no title given until you pay the $100. 
 
 WILLIAM JOSEPH— Ladysmith, May 7. 
 
OF IJfDmTBIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISB COLUMBIA 49 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Would the lots be surrendered to the seller if you defaulted? — A. Yes, I 
 believe so. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Where would you sooner live, which is the most convenienti place? — A. Ex- 
 tension, sure. 
 
 George Johnson, sworn : 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Mr. Johnson, where are you now living? — A. In Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. What is your occupation? Where have you been working? — A, I am a miner, 
 I have been! working at Extension for 5 years last January. 
 
 Q. Tell the Commissioners what you have got to tell about the removal to Lady- 
 smith ? — A. Well, I was working in Extension, and there was a fire started there, and 
 the place was taken from me and given to a Ladysmith man. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Who was the man? — A. A Mr. Smith. There were three, I do not know the 
 other men's names. 
 
 Q. When was this? — A. Twelve months last March, I think somewhere about 
 there. 
 
 Q. What did you say about it? — A. I said nothing, I said 'that settles it, I 
 cannot do anything now.' 
 
 Q. Did you ask why your place was taken away from you? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Was it a matter of indifference to you? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Did you work for the company afterwards ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. After you came to live at Ladysmith ? — A. No, before I came to Ladysmith. 
 Q. After your place was taken from you, you worked for them since ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. When did you move to Extension, and why? — A, Last September; I was told. 
 Q. By whom? — ^A. Mr. Dunsmuir. 
 
 By ZTis Lordship : 
 Q. Were you told by Mr. Dunsmuir, personally ? — A. No, not personally. 
 Q. Who told you ? — A. John Johns said we would have to come down. He is the 
 boss in No. 3. He said we all had to come down. 
 Q. When was this?— A. Last summer. 
 
 Q. Can you get any nearer than that ? — A. In August, I think. 
 Q. Did he say why?— A. No. . 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Did you have a house there?— A. Yes, I took it down to Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Because you liked to do it?— A. No, sir. ' 
 
 Q. Cost you something ? — A. It cost me between the lot and the house about $600. 
 I paid $250 for the lot — that is when it is paid for, I bought it on time. I bought it 
 from the E. & N. Eailway Co. 
 
 By Bis Lordship : 
 
 Q. Is that the way your agreement reads? — A. Yes, I think so. I have an agree- 
 ment in writing. 
 
 Q. How much did you pay down? — A. yery little, I do not know but what that 
 is my own business. 
 
 GEORGE JOHNSON— Ladysmith, May 7. 
 36a — i 
 
50 itlNufE^ OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMUlSSIOlf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A- 1904 , 
 
 Q. We are not so deeply interested in it if you don't want to tell. If you think it 
 
 is going to help your case to conceal any of the fact8> that is your business. ^ a 
 
 • ' ' ' ■ ' 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : . ., , 
 
 Q. How much haVd you paid on it altogether? — A. Five dollars. 
 
 By His Lordship : , , • 
 
 Q. You paid $5 down ? How much did you pay to move the house to Lady- 
 smith? — A- I did the work myself, and the company brought it down on the cars. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : , ■ 
 
 Q. You pulled the house down, and put if; up again? — A. Yes, myself. , 
 
 Q. Before this time had you not had an interview with Mr. Dunsmuir some two 
 years ago about where the men should reside? — A. Yes, Mr. Dunsmuir said the men 
 could reside where they wanted to, as losg as there was no kick among them. 
 
 Q. When did you see Mr. Dunsmuir? — A. Two years ago. I was one of the com- 
 mittee who saw Mr. Dunsmuir two years ago. He said it made no difference to him. 
 He did not mention the company. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. So long as suiBcient work was done? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. At this time had you your house built?— A. Yes, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : " 
 
 Q. What else did he say, did he say anything about discrimination against the 
 men? — A. He said he could not on account of residence. We reported bacls the same 
 thing to the people who sent us down, and I put improvements on my house, relying on 
 Mr. Dunsmuir's statement. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you estimate your loss at? — A. Well, the house is there. It was not 
 paid for, and is not yet. The agreement for the lot there was $100, and it was $250 
 here. 
 
 Q. How are these payments made, deductions from your wages? — A. No, sir, 
 they would not do that. You received your money and pay it yourself. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 
 Q. In your interview with Mr. Dunsmuir, when he said it would make no dif- 
 ference where you lived, he said so long as the work was satisfactory? — A,' Yes, he 
 said it made no difference as long as the bosses were satisfied. The bosses were to be 
 satisfied with the work, not the place of residence. ' i 
 
 Q. I gathered from the last witness that the officers would have to be consulted as 
 to the place of residence ? — A. Mr. Dunsmuir told me to build at Extension. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You would have remained at Extension if you had not been compelled to live 
 at Ladysmith? — A. Certainly, I would. 
 
 Q. You have not given me any estimate of your loss? — A. Say $300, besides $130 
 extra for the lot, and price of pulling do*n the house and putting it up, and the in- 
 convenience of riding up and down. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. You say you worked 5 years for the company, all that time at Extension— 
 you lived there all that time? — A. Yes. 
 
 GEORGE JOHNSON— Ladysmith, May 7. , 
 
ON WBlJS'l'RIAL brSPUTBS tlf BRITISH COLUMBIA 51 
 
 SESS:ONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q.' Your work was taken from you after tte fire, and you came to Lady8mith? — 
 A. Yes, since that timfe I have worked there, until Ust, September, ,. 
 
 Q. What instructions did you get about moving? — A. I was told I had to go to 
 Ladysmith by Mr. Johns, that we all had to go to Ladysmith. - ' ' 
 
 Q. And that you could not get work unless you did ? — ^A. No, he did not ^ay that. 
 
 By His Lordship : ■,.,.■ 
 
 Q. You took it to mean that ?^-A,. Yea. . . 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. There was a difference in your pay? — A. One was by yardage and one by the 
 ton. •■■-■,.. 
 
 Q. What was the diEFerence in your earnings before and after that time? — A. I 
 did not keep my statements. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Is it cheaper to live at Ladysmith than at Extension? — A. Cheaper to live in 
 Extension than Ladysmith. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Whom did you buy your lot at Extension from? — A. Mr. Bramley. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. How much were you making on your last work, do you know? — A. No, I did 
 Dot keep my statements, 
 
 Q. Have you any idea generally? — A. Somewhere around $3.50 a day. 
 Q. You have not paid the rest of the payment on your Extension lot? — A. No, I 
 have not been asked for that. I paid $1 a month. 
 
 Q. You commenced work when the mine began to be opened? — A. Yes 
 Q. And there was only preliminary work opening up the mine? — A. Yes, I waa 
 living at Extension then. 
 
 Q. How many men were working in the mine at that time? — A. Five in the 
 tunnel, besides Chinamen. I 
 
 Q. And this order for the men to live at Ladysmith was not made until they 
 began to ship from the mine? — A, They were going to build a town site at Extension, 
 and they were going to build one at Ladysmith and they decided on Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Do you know the reason they built at Ladysmith, instead of Extension? — A. 
 I can partly tell, I guess. I do not think there would have been any Ladysmith if the 
 coal could have gone to Departure Bay. 
 
 Q. You think it was for the want of a port ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Is your idea then that the town would have been at Departure Buy or Exten- 
 sion? — A. Well, at Extension. 
 
 .Q;..You don't know anything about the difference in sanitary conditions between 
 Extension and Ladysmith ?— ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What do you know about that? — A. I don't know anything unless you ask me. 
 Q. You never heard that that wag one of the reasons that Ladysmith was selected ? 
 — ^A. No, I always enjoyed good health. 
 
 Q. I mean the relative value of the two' places, from that point of view. You 
 never heard that discussed? — A. No^ I cannot say that I have. They could have 
 made the town site where they wauted if they had left me alone. 
 
 Q. Probably I had better take your advioe, and leave you alone. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Might I ask if you think it was for the benefit of your health that you were 
 ordered to Ladysmith? — A. No, sir it was a detriment. 
 
 GEORGE JOHNSON— Ladysmith, May 7. 
 36a— 4i 
 
52 MINUTES OP EYIOmCE OF R07AL COMMlSmOy 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. When was it that Mr. Dunsmuir first led! you to believe you could reside, at 
 Ladysmith? — A. Five years ago. 
 
 By Mr. Bo dwell : 
 Q. Was that the time of the deputation, fiye years ago?— A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Does Ladysmith depend upon this Extension mine for its existence ? — A. Yes, 
 as far as I know. 
 
 By Mr. Bo dwell : 
 
 Q. How long have you been a coal miner? — A. Ever since I was 15. 
 
 Q. Which way is the future development of the Extension vein likely to come, 
 towards Ladysmith? — A. I do not know as to that. Mr. Bryden may answer that, 
 I don't know. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. In what was it cheaper to live at Extension than Ladysmith? — A. It is more 
 of a country place. 
 
 Mr. BoDWFLL. — Not so many city temptations. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Food is cheaper there? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How much cheaper ? — A. I cannot say, they are up and down so much. 
 Q. Whiskey, I suppose, is the same price? — A. Yes, it might be a little cheaper 
 there now. 
 
 Samuel Mottishaw, Sr., sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. You live at Ladysmith, Mr. Mottishaw? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Your occupation is a miner? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Where have you been mining? — A. At Extension. 
 
 Q. Have you been mining manyi years? — A. I have been in mining the last six 
 years, until I was with this company, off and on. The last time I had been working 
 about four months. 
 
 Q. You attended a meeting held on March 8?— A. Yes, I was secretary of that 
 meeting. 
 
 Q. There was a subsequent meeting held on March 12, at which you were also 
 secretary, I think, and then one on the 14th? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. These are the minutes of the liiefetings are they ?— A. Yes. 
 
 (Exhibit 4.) 
 
 Q. When the first meeting on March 8 was called, it was called with the idea 
 of asking for an advance of 10 or 15 per cent ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Tell us what took place at the meeting, and why it was that the mbtiori was 
 abandoned? — A. The first question that the chairman put to the meeting was that he 
 
 understood the meeting was called to consider an advance of 10 or 15 per cent not 
 
 , more than 1-5, but, left it to the men as to whether it should be 10 or 15. The majority 
 of the men did not want to hear anything' ttbbat an advance. Ihey tliought U was no 
 
 SAMUEL MOTTISHAW. Sr.— Ladysinith", MajV? 
 
ON mDTJ&TRlAL mSPVTKS m BRITISH COLUMJilA 53 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 'tise attempting to get «n advance without organization. Everyone was clamouring 
 for organization, and that knocked the first question out. The meeting was called on 
 purpose to ask for an advance, and not for the purpose of organization at all. 
 
 Q. It was the general consensus of opinion to have some form of organization ? — 
 A. Yes, it was sprung on the meeting suddenly. 
 
 Q. Did it seem to meet with the approval of the large number of those present? — 
 A. It was put to the meeting and carried, that we organize — ^that we organize in the 
 Western Federation of Miners. There were only about three votes contrary; it was 
 carried unanimously. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Was it by ballot? — A. No, by show of hands. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. How many men were there? — A. Between 300 and 400. 
 
 Q. When you say to be organized, you mean as a branch of the Western Feder- 
 ation of Miners ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. You knew at that time that the miners working at Nanaimo for the Van- 
 couver Coal Co., or the Western Fuel Co. as it is now, I believe — you knew they were 
 a branch of the Western Federation of Miners? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So from your intercourse with workmen at Nanaimo you had some knowledge 
 of the organization ?— ^A. I did not have any intercourse with the Nanaimo men. 
 
 Q. The miners generally were aware of the benefits to be derived from affiliation 
 vrith the Western Federation ? — A. What I learned was through the press. It was 
 my opinion that a union by itself has no backbone. We did not want a useless organ- 
 ization. ' 
 
 Q. What were the wages that you were receiving when you were working there ? — 
 A. The last time I was there I was working at $3 a day. The last day I worked I 
 got $2.60. 
 
 Q. How are the workmen paid in the mines? — A. Some places by the yard, and 
 ether places by the yard and tonnage. 
 
 His LoBDSHiP. — There is no object in going into this. We have plenty of things to 
 inquire into without going into matters not a subject of dispute. There is no ques- 
 tion of wages in your statement. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I thought it was information you would like to have. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Is there any check-weighman in Extension mine? — A. No, sir. 
 Q. So you have no means of ascertaining the amount of coal which the workmen 
 sendup?-^A. None at all. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL.-r-That is not one of the thingsi complained of. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^If you want to raise any other grievances, Mr. Wilson, you must 
 give notice. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I don't want to spring anything on my friend without notice. 
 There are other things bound to come out. 
 
 His Lordship. — If the; men don't have any particular grievance, I don't think 
 you should establish oh€ for them. . 
 
 Mr. Wilson.— I have only arrived here. How long have I had to acquaint myself 
 with the conditioti of affairs? 
 SAMUEL MOTTISHAW, Sr.— Ladysmith, May 7 ' 
 
54 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll.r A.- 1904 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — There is no objection at all, only I want to know if there is to 
 be aj point made out of it. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Of course we want to know all matters that enter intb the relations 
 existing. 
 
 Mr, "Wilson. — I understand all this, and want to give everything that concerns 
 my clients. 
 
 His LoEDSHiP. — ^I have no objection as long as the otl^er side bas notice.- 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I understand that each side has the right to amend on giving 
 the other side notice. I only wanted to know whether this was going to be made a 
 ground of complaint. 
 
 Mr. Howe. — It seems to me if there is to be any effective regulation of work in 
 the mines, all the possible items of complaint should be brought in some way before 
 the Commission. If there is any favouritism in the matter of work and so forth, it 
 seems to me that it is a matter which should be known. Speaking for myself, I hope 
 that the counsel present will arrange so that there is nothing left out that is at all the 
 occasion of irritation. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You say you were getting a current rate of wages, $3 a day ? — A. . Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you happen to know what the current rate of wages in the Yancpuyer 
 Coal Company is, for the same class of work? — A. Yes, $3. 
 
 Q. Know anything as to rate of wages for the same class of work, or what the 
 current rate is in the Fernie mines? — A. There is no comparison between the two 
 mines. 
 
 Q. Do you happen to know what the cjrrent day rate is in Washington? — A. 
 Yes, it is $2 in some mines and $2.50 in others, not more than $3. 
 
 His Lordship. — I did not know that there is any complaint on the ground of 
 wages. The Commissioners are only too anxjous to hear evidence bearing on all 
 complaints, but the evidence should be directed to those matters only. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — It will be necessary for me to show this in connection with the 
 men's meeting to get a 15 per cent advance. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — And then abandoned it. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — They abandoned it only to take up the work of organization. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — ^I may say, in order to shorten the matter, that we are not bringing 
 in any question of wages at all. My only object was that I intended to go a step fur- 
 ther and show you something of the working of the mine. 
 
 His Lordship.— My time is limited, and all we wish to know is evidence about any 
 subject matter of dispute. 
 
 Mr. EowE.— It seems to me that this whole matter originated in a desire to have 
 an increase of wages. I understand the men wanted an increase, and felt it was im- 
 possible without a union, and that they wanted a union in order to get the wa^e^. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — If that is the idea — 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — We don't want to raise any question of wages at all. 
 
 His Lordship.— I suppose you admit the men's wa^es were as good as anv received 
 in America. ,._ . . . . . - . 
 
 SAMUEL MOTTISHAW, Sr.— Ladysmith, May 7 
 
0^ IWDtJSfRiir, liI8PUtE8 /«• BRITISH COLUMBIA 65 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Bbdwell r 
 
 Q. Are you the person who posted up the notice to call this meeting ? — A. I am. 
 
 Q. How did, you come to do that ?^ A. By thd unanimous request of the fellow 
 workmen. 
 
 Q. When did you begin to get these requests ? — A. Tww weeks before the notice 
 was posted up, 
 
 Q. You don't happen to remember the names of any men who requested you? — 
 A. There are some gore away. There may be a few here. I could not give the names. 
 
 Q. Had you spoken to these nien befol-e -they spoke to yon on the subject of the 
 meeting ? — A. No. The first man I spoke to was Sam. Lauderbach about organization. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — ^I submit that the names of men who were prominently engaged, 
 unless produced as witnesses, should not be disclosed. The names of men who are 
 prominently brought forward in an organization which does not meet with approval 
 would possibly he blacklisted in the future. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — That is not my idea at all. It is simply because I have an idea I 
 would not get all the story from One man, and I would like to know the men to go to. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — ^I think Mr. Mottishaw will tell all he can. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — ^I want to be sure, that is the reason I asked for the names. 
 
 Mr. KowE.^To get further information as to the individuals involved in the 
 dispute here? It seems to me the Commission have not a very deep interest in that. 
 
 His Lordship. — What was the question? 
 
 Mr. BODWELi/.-^-Who he was talking with. I asked him who were the men he said. 
 
 Witness. — Landerbeek spoke to me. 
 
 His Lordship. — I think you should give some kind of undertaking that these men 
 would not be prejudiced. These people might be singled out. It is frequently done, 
 and whether it is right or wrong we cannot shut our eyes to that. Unless this is done 
 I do not think the names of these men should be asked. Perhaps it might be arranged 
 between counsel. You might arrange to get the names in confidence from Mr. Wilson. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — One name has been mentioned anyway, it is too late for that. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : , 
 
 Q. The subject of your conversation was organiz£^tion ? — A. Yes, before the 
 meeting was called. About a month, more or less, before the meeting was called. 
 
 Q. And you had conversations f roin that time up to the date of the meeting with 
 different men? — A. Yes, there were several spoke to me. 
 
 Q. And the subject of this conversation was organization, or an advance? — A. 
 The advance was the first question talked about aniong the men. 
 
 Q. I understood you to say that was a month before ? — A. Lauderbach broached 
 the subject of organization. I spoke of that with him. 
 
 Q. And you talked with other men about organization? — A. Yes, before the 
 meeting. 
 
 Q. Have you any idea of what number of men you talked to before the meeting ? 
 — ^A. Twenty or thirty. 
 
 Q. And then, after you had conversations with these 20 or 30 men, you had 
 reason to believe that they were talking to other men besides yourself? — A. That 
 might have been done. 
 
 Q. Have you any idea why all these men came to you to talk about organization ? 
 ^, Because I was in a more independent position than the balance of them. 
 
 SAMUEL. MOTTISHAW, Sr.— Ladysmith, May 7 
 
56 MINUTES OF EVIJDEKCE OF ROTAL GOMMI!?SJ0N. 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VI.U A. 1904 
 
 Q. In what way ? — A. That I am not /)bliged to be tyrannized ,bjr any boss. I 
 am independent of any coal company. 
 
 Q. And' consequently they selected you as a man to talk to ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Now, is it not the other way, that you selected them? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You lived in Nanaimo ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And were familiar with the workings of the organization there? — ^A'. No, I 
 was not in the lodge but once, 
 
 Q. You had familiarized yourself with the workings of the organization ? — A. No, 
 sir. 
 
 Q. Never talked with any Nanaimo men, or with the labour leaders? — A. Not 
 until after the trouble. 
 
 Q. What date, the day you fixed the meeting ? — A. Yes, I had talked with no one 
 until after the meeting. 
 
 Q. Had any one talked to you at Nanaimo about organization at Ladysmith 
 before the meeting? — A. Yes, I believe that cropped up there. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us when? — A. A few weeks before the meeting. 
 
 Q. Was it not before the time that Lauderbach spoke to you ? — A. Lauderbach 
 spoke to me before ever I thought about organization at all. 
 
 Q. It was two or three weeks before the meeting that it cropped up in Nanaimo ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How did it crop up there? — A. I suppose there was a general feeling that we 
 ought to be organized, and able to defend ourselves. 
 
 Q. Who did it crop up with in Nanaimo? — A. I cannot remember the first per- 
 sons that spoke to me on the question. 
 
 Q. Can you remember any person that spoke to you on that question?— A. I 
 remember one person. 
 
 Q. Was he prominent in the labour organization in Nanaimo ? — A. He had been 
 in the old union, but not in the new. He was an official in the old union. 
 
 Q. He was working at the time ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. He was a member of the union, but not an official? — A. I don't think so. 
 
 Q. You talked about the probability of being able to effect organization at Lady- 
 smith?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you only talk with one person on thai^ subject at Nanaimo?— A. There 
 w'ere very few. 
 
 Q. Was it because your conversations were confidential or because there was no 
 one else interested? — A. I think all the men were generally interested. 
 
 Q. So this was) confidential, and consequently you only talked to a few? — A. It 
 may be so. " 
 
 Q. Was it, or was it not? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Why can't you tell us? Was it a confidential conversation which had to be 
 kept among a few people ? — A. There was nothing secret about it. 
 
 Q. It was not a confidential communication between you as to what should be 
 done at Ladysmith ?^A. That! question was first broached in Ladysmith, and I had 
 no communication in Nanaimo until after approached here by one of the men. 
 
 Q. You were talking to a few men. Now I ask you why? — A. I can only remem- 
 ber talking to one man. 
 
 Q. Was that hecause you did not want to talk to others? — A. If I did not feel 
 like it. 
 
 Q. I am talking about a man you talked to at Nanaimo — 
 
 His Lordship. — This man at Nanaimo was not an employee of this company. 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — He said he would rather not give his name. 
 His Lordship. — I do not see any objection to this man's name being given. 
 Witness. — It was John Johnston. . 
 
 SAMUEL MOTTISHAW, Sr.— Laaysmith, May 7 
 
ON Wt)VSTRIAL DISPUT£!S IN BRITIBE COLVMliilA 57 
 
 aeSSIONAL PAP£R No. 36a 
 
 ' By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. And you and he discussed the question whether ox not a labour organization 
 could be formed at Ladysmith ? — A. We talked the question over. 
 
 Q. You did not want to start the work of organization until you thought it would 
 be a sueCess?— A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. And you discussed the propeots of its being a success?- — A. Yes, I wanted to 
 make it a success. 
 
 Q. And when you had discussed the plan you came to Ladysmith and talked it 
 over here ?— A. Casually. 
 
 Q. Every time you talked to the men when you considered it safe ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And when you had got a sufficient number of them you posted a notice of the 
 meeting? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the ostensible reason for an increase in wages? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. But the reason you had for calling the meeting was to get organization?: — A. 
 No, sir. 
 
 Q. You say you came here for the purpose of making the organization a success ? 
 — A. Can I give you the difference between my proposition asd Mr. Lauderbach's 
 Mr. Lauderbach made the proposition that we should organize. I and my son went 
 over there about a month after. We broached the subject on the cars. I said, I don't 
 think it would be wise to mention union at all. We could get more from Mr. Duns- 
 muir by not mentioning anything about union at all. He dropped his proposition and 
 accepted mine, that we would make more by not organizing. 
 
 Q. That was at your first conversation? — A. No, the second. 
 
 Q. Pretty nearly a month before the meeting? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The second conversation was how long after the first one? — A. About a week. 
 
 Q. So there were two weeks before the meeting or the second conversation? — A. 
 It may have been one or two weeks before -the meeting on the 8th. 
 
 Q. When you talked to the other men, what was their idea, did they adopt your 
 suggestion or that of Mr. Lauderbach ? — A. There was a consensus of opinion that we 
 were entitled to a little of the 67 cents a ton rebate on duty. 
 
 Q. They thought that Mr. Dunsmuir should divide up the 67 cents? — A. They 
 wanted a small division. 
 
 Q. Although the rate of wages was as high here as at other places ? — A. They are 
 not. I know a man who made only $1.30 digging coal on contract by the ton. 
 
 Q. Who is the man? — ^A. They would discharge an employee at sight if I told you 
 his name. I wiU produce the statement, his name is on the statement. 
 
 Q. Where is the statment? You say you know a man who only got $1.30? — A. 
 Thereabouts. 
 
 Q. I want to know the name of that man? — A. I will tell you later on. 
 
 Q. How many men do. you know of that kind ? — A. I know there is quite a few 
 ujnder $3 a day by (contract. 
 
 Q. Do you know the reason why they don't make it? — A. There may be two 
 reasons. . . 
 
 Q. What aire they? — A. Digging dirt and getting nothing for it. 
 
 Q. Where do the men! work? — A. I don't know the place. 
 
 Q. Do you know the conditions at all?— A. The conditions vary considerably. 
 
 Q. What is the second reason? — A. Maybe the man may be a little deficient him- 
 self. 
 
 Q. Which do you think is the real reason? — A. Deficient place. 
 
 Q, Are there toy men working in the Vancouver Coal Co. who do not make over 
 $1.30? — ^A. They have an agreement there, that no man shall work for less than $3. 
 
 Q. Whether he earns it or not? — A. If he is not able to earn it they don't employ 
 
 him. 
 
 Q. And if he does not earn it the union would call a strike ?— A. I am. not talking 
 
 about strike at alL . ^ -. 
 
 SAMUEL MOTTISHAW, Sr.— Ladysinith, May 7 
 
58 MINUTES OF EYIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vlli, A. 1904 
 
 Q. But I am. You want to introduce a state Of affairs by which a man who is 
 not able to make over $1.30 can make over $3?— A. I donH want to introduce anything 
 at all. 
 
 Q. How much wages does your son make?-^A. About $50 some months. 
 
 Q. Would you be surprised to know that he made $5.01 in September, .$6.02 in 
 January and $5.25 in February?— A. I don't' think that is true. ' 
 
 Q. And that his brother made $7.06 in December, $4.73 in January and $4.01 in 
 ■February, would that surprise you?— A. I don't believe that is correct. My sou will 
 be able to prove that. 
 
 Q. That is taken from the books of the company. Your son makes th*. money— 
 not out of favouritism ? — A. There is that more or less in every mine you go^to. 
 
 Q. You think your son is favoured? — A. I don't say- that. • • 
 
 Q. He must be a good workman?-^ A. Yes, he must be. 
 
 Q. They make allowances when they are given poor, places? — A. A good man 
 would, but a poor man would not. . 
 
 Q. Why would a poor man not get the same?— A. Because they are down on him. 
 In Extension there is the greatest inequality in wages that I have ever kno^^n of. 
 It consists in the measure of the coal. 
 
 Q. Do the men not get a fair measure? — A. The vein varies. In some places 
 there will be 4 feet of dirt, and they pay for powder where there is no money in it. 
 It does not pay for powder. 
 
 Q. Do they get an allowance ? — A. Sometimes, but not sufficient, 
 
 Q. Not sufficient for what? — A. For instance, I mined 4 tons of dirt and 3 of 
 coal, I got nothing for the dirt. 
 
 Q. That was only one day? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So there was no time to form an estimate of what allowance should be made. 
 Do you think the company are bound to fix a rate on one day? — A. No, they must have 
 a reasonable time. 
 
 Q. Have you any reason to believe that it would have been a whole month at 
 the same figure? — A. No, of course I would not have worked. 
 
 Q. That particular instance does sot show anything ? — A. There are several 
 men who have to take just what they can get. 
 
 Q. Do you suggest as your statement that when the company have a man working 
 for them who is not independent, that they put him in a place where he could not make 
 a wage? Are you ready to commit yourself to that proposition? Doi you make the 
 charge that this company, when they find a man is not itidepyendent so that he must 
 work, that they put him in a bad place, and give him pay he cannot live on ? — ^A. The 
 nature of the mine makes the wages. I am not going to lay any charge to the bosses 
 at all. It is true all the same. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. You told us you put up that notice, was it signed ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Why not? — A. For certain reasons; that we did not want the officers to know 
 who put the noticeJ up for fear of being discharged. 
 
 Q. In discussing this question of organization with Lauderbach and others, did 
 you conceive the idea that organization would be a "benefit? — ^A. If you make in organ- 
 ization successful it certainly would be. 
 
 Q. So that was your sole object in promoting the m-ganization of the miners?— 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You told us something about inequality of wages, you said there was a greater 
 inequality of wages here ? — A. It is the inequality of the coal measures. They run- 
 thick and run thin. 
 
 Q. And when it runs thin a larger .amount of dirt has to be taken out of it ?— A. 
 Sometimes there is an allowance made, sometimes not. There used to be a schedule 'of 
 prices, but that is done away with. Now it has lapsed into the old condition. 
 SAMUEL MOTTISHAW, Sr.— Ladfsmith, May 7 
 
ON mDUSTUlAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 59 
 
 StSSiONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Upon wiiat ratd is the pay made?^-Ai The schedule of prices is the same in 
 .the narrow work, $5 per yard, which is $2 less that the Vap.couv©r Coal Co., which is 
 $7 per yard. It is always between $1.50 per yard less than the Vancouver Coal Co. 
 or the Western Fuel Co., as it is now called. 
 
 Q.Is there anything else you would like to tell us with reference to this matter ? 
 — A. The consensus of opinion is that there is a great injustice done to the men by 
 the weighing machine. They don't know how many hundred to the ton they are 
 digging. , 
 
 B^y His Lordship : 
 
 ■ Q. -Did you work for the Vancouver Coal Co. ? — A. For 10 years. 
 
 Q. Why did you quit ? — ^A. Because I wanted a. change. 
 
 Q. When did you quit ?^ A. About 6 years ago last September. 
 
 Q. Tou went farming then?— A, A little bit. 
 
 Q. Tou were not discharged ? — A. No, sir,- 1 do not think I was ever discharged 
 in my life yet. I guess this.is about the last time. 
 
 Q. Why do you say it is necessary to join the Western Federation of Miners? — A. 
 I did not say it was necessary to join the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. Do you think it necessary? — A. It is necessary to have an organization that 
 is able to stand. 
 
 Q. Do you say it is necessary? — A. I do not say that. 
 
 Q. What is your opinion about it? — A. I think if the Western Federation stand 
 by the men it is a good thing for the men. 
 
 Q. Would -it be sufficient for the purposes of the men if they organized some 
 Canadian organization? — A. Provided it was a good strong organization. A Can- 
 adian organization would answer the same purpose, provided Dunsmuir could not 
 kill it. 
 
 Q. Suppose the coal miners of the province formed a union of their own, would 
 it be strong enough ? — A. I suppose it would. It would depend on the strength of the 
 capital to oppose it. 
 
 Q. Tou would not say at all events, that a union of coal miners of British Col- 
 umbia would not be sufficient for all legitimate purposes? — A. Vancouver Island is 
 isolated. A union on Vancouver Island alone would not answer much, I don't think. 
 
 Q. But take the whole province? — A. The whole province I think would be all 
 right. 
 
 Q. It is plain I suppose that if our people join a union whose headquarters are in 
 Denver, they are to a certain extent outside of the counti-y? — A. I think the idea 
 that the men wanted to join the Western Federation was on account of its strength, 
 and the numerous failures of local unions. Men have been discharged for taking part 
 in a union. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. The local union in Nanaimo existed without the Federation? — A. It was a 
 figurehead. It was no good. They could approach the management--it was good for 
 that — hut financially it was no good. 
 
 Q. How do you mean financially? — A. Supposing there was a strike, there would 
 be no backing. 
 
 Q, Is a strike ever prevented by that fact? — A. It has a tendency to prevent them. 
 
 Q. Would you have struck if you had the funds? — A. There was no necessity 
 cropped up for any action like that. 
 
 By His Lordsliip : 
 
 Q. You say you think a union of all the men in British Columbia would answer 
 all legitimate purposes ?-^A. Yes, provided capitalists could not disrupt it. 
 
 SAMUEL MOTTISHAW, Sr.— Ladysmith, May 7 
 
60 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 19Q4 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. The Commissioners asked if, in your opinion, an organization extending 
 throughout British Columbia would be sufficient protection to workmen. Would not 
 the efiect of that be, without a proper alien law, that workmen could be brought in from 
 the other side in the event of any disagreement? — A. That would depend on circum- 
 stances. 
 
 Q. With your affiliation with the Western Federation you have got such an organ- 
 ization that workmen will not come from the other side to displace men here ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. If the union were restricted to British Columbia there would be no moral sup- 
 port on the other side of the line ? — A. It would have a tendency to encourage scabs 
 to come in. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. At the present time I understand the miners of Washington come in. 
 
 jMr. Wilson. — They would not with a proper alien law. 
 
 His Lordship. — If you have not a proper alien law how do you keep the scabs 
 from Washington from coming in ? Assuming there is no proper alien law, all the 
 miners in Washington could come in, because they do not belong to the union. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Are we to understand that if there was a union in British Columbia, and that 
 union were having trouble, that the Western Federation of Miners would allow men to 
 come in and take their places? 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — That is what I want to know. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Answer the question that Mr. Eowe has put. Union labour on the other side 
 of the line would not interfere with you if you had a union of your own? — A. No, if 
 the Western Federation was on the other side and here they would help the brothers 
 here, and the other way it would be just the reverse. If the Western Federation was 
 over the line the one would help the other. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Do you mean to say that the Western Federation would play the part of scabs 
 and take the places of the men here? — A. I don't think so. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. There is a question I would like to ask about. Is it not a fact that the men 
 had a check-weighman ? — A. Yes, for a little while. 
 
 Q. And they gave it up? — A. The company would not allow the check-weighman 
 to deduct the boxes from the workmen to pay the check-weighman's wages. 
 
 Q. The company would not allow the! check-weighman to deduct the boxes? A. 
 
 They would not allow him to have a tally. 
 
 Q. The check-weighman wanted to make sure of his wages by taking a box out 
 of the men's production? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The check-weighman was to get so much per riionth and wanted more wages ? 
 —A. No. 
 
 Q. I understood you to say that the check-weighman was being paid by the men ? 
 — A. Yes, that is right. 
 
 Q. But he wanted to get more salary than the men had agreed to pay him? A. I 
 
 don't think so. 
 
 Q. He wanted to take a box of coal untrl he had sufficient to ^ay his-tvages? A. 
 
 , Yes, there was a mutual understanding between the men and the check-Weighmani 
 
 SAMUEL MOTTISHAW, Sr.— Lady smith. May 7 
 
02f INDUSTRIAL Dli^PUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 61 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. a6a 
 
 It was less trouble to procure his wages that way. He could go to the office and get 
 his wages handed out, and the other way he had to lose a day in collecting the dues. 
 
 Q. It seems fo me that it was simply a question of the man paying himself or 
 trusting to the employers to pay him? — A. It was the advantage of not losing a day 
 to collect his wages. 
 
 Q. Because the company did not want the business done in that way, the men 
 decided not to have a check-weighman ? — A. It was on account of the last time. 
 
 Q. Do you want us to believe that if they had any serious doubt about the wages 
 they were getting they would have agreed to give up the check-weighman? — A. That 
 would be a short-sighted policy to do that. There may be some men who would be 
 too mean to pay for the coal being weighed. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : ' 
 
 Q. What is the other method of paying the men ? — A. They have a machine there. 
 
 On the same boxes that used to run 28i hundredweight, now the standard is reduced 
 
 to 16 hundredweight. 
 
 Q. Was the check-weighman taken off because the company objected? — A. Keally, 
 
 the company did not want any check-weighman at all. 
 
 His Lordship. — Do you intend to insist on this as a grievance? I don't propose 
 paying any attention to grievances that are not stated. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — ^I had dropped the subject, it was brought up by my learned friend. 
 
 His Lordship. — If you are going to brirg it up let us have it stated. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — This man brought up the subject of check-weighman. 
 
 His LoEDSHiP. — I want it clearly understood by both that I do not intend to hear 
 evidence on any grievance unless it is to be made a point of. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I understand this, and I intentionally yielded to what you said. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^You had better either drop the subject, or have the statement 
 amended. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Now that it has come up I think it had better be investigated. 
 
 His LoRDSHiP.^I won't pay any attention to it unless it is made a part of the 
 statement. I propose to confine my attention to this memorandum. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — If we decide to make a spiecial point of this we wiU give notice. 
 His Lordship. — That is business. 
 
 Joseph Jeffries, sworn : 
 
 By Mr. Wilson, : 
 Q. Where do you reside ? — A. In Ladysmith. 
 . Q.You are a member of the local union?— A. I am. 
 Q. You are engaged in mining? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Were you appointed as one of the committee to see Mr, Dunsmuir? — A. I was, 
 after Mottishaw, Bell, and Pritchard had been discharged. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What was the date of the interview? — A. I think on the 18th April, about 
 
 ' XOi. JOSEPH JEFFRIES— Ladysmith, May 7. 
 
62 miNVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL eOUMISSIOy 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904- 
 
 Q. You saw Mr. Dunsmtiir on the 18th April?— A.. Yea, in Victoria.,, There were 
 four of us appointed as a deputation to see Mr. Dunsmuir, myselfj Mpttishaw, iKobin- 
 Bon and Malore. ' :" • . , 
 
 Q. Who appointed you? — A. The executive of Enterprise Union — the new union. 
 
 Q. Well, tell us about it ?-^A. When we arriTed in Victoria we asked for an 
 interview with Mr, Dunsmuir, and got one. He inquired our business. We asked 
 him would he open up the mine, reinstate the men who had been discharged, and let ua 
 go to work. Mr. Dunsmuir questioned us — did we belong to the Western Federation of 
 Miners? We said we did, and he then said 'I can't talk business with you.' Before 
 he would talk business with any committee we would have to call an^ open. meeting, 
 purge ourselves from the Western Federation and appoint a committee, and then he 
 would talk business, and then only. I then asked him if he intended that he would not 
 employ any men belonging to the Western Federation of Miners, and he said that was 
 so. The next question was asked ' Supposing we broke from the Western Federation 
 of Miners and formed a local union here, would that meet the requirements ' and he 
 said he ■^^ould have nothing to dd with any union at all, nor would he employ any 
 member of the union. That of course, ended our interview. Of course we said seeing 
 that was the case we would have to return. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Was there any one present with Mr. Dunsmuir? — A. Mr. Dunsmuir, Mr. 
 Hunter, and Mr. Frank Little. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. He said he had no objection to meeting a committee of his own men ? — A. He 
 said he had no objection to meeting a committee from an open meeting, after purging 
 ourselves from the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. If you withdrew from the Western Federation of Miners and appointed a com- 
 mittee he would discuss with them ? — A. Yes, if we had declared ourselves away from 
 the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q, How long have you been working at Extension ? — A. I have been working for 
 the company for about 10 years. 
 
 Q. That is always the course that Mr. Dunsmuir's men have adopted ? They have 
 often had committees of his own men to meet him? — A. I don't remember any. 
 
 Q. They used to meet Mr. Bryden ? — A. In all my experience in working with this 
 company I only know of two meetings being called, one at Ladysmith and one at 
 Wellington. He gave them 10 per cent advance in February, somewhere about that 
 time. It was kept on for one month, and then a notice was put up that it would be 
 discontinued. The pushers and drivers raised a kick, were going to quit work so there 
 was a mass meeting called. The company was asked to allow the ten per cent to stay 
 on. A committee was appointed to wait upon him. 
 
 Q. As to Ladysmith ? — A. That was this last one. 
 
 Q. Mr. Dunsmuir seemed to object to your calling yourselves a union ? He 
 did not object to your organizing, or associating yourselves together, so that you- could 
 represent your grievances ? — A. Is it possible to represent our grievances without 
 forming a union ? He also said no form of organization. 
 
 Q. Did he say he would not submit to any form of organization among your- 
 selves, or did he say union? — A. When we went down in the first place he asked were 
 we members from the organization of the Western Federation of Miners. We said 
 yes. He then said, ' I cannot talk business with you.' 
 
 Q. Then he said if you would hold a meeting and withdraw from the committee 
 he would talk with you, and he said he wovJd have nothing to do with any union?— ^ 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You drew the inference that he would object to any kind of organization 
 whether it was called a union or not? — A. I call an organization, a union, 
 
 JOSEPH JEFFRIES— Ladysmith, Ma? 7. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COWMIilA 63 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Tte conclusion you formed in your own mind was that he was opposed to any 
 kind of organization among the men? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. But what he actually said was that he would not have anything to do with 
 any union? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Yoii'don't say that you do not think that if you had a grievance you could not 
 get it before Mr. DunSmuir— that he did not want to listen to any grievances? You 
 did not think he would object if the men appointed a committee, that he would object 
 tio listen to that? — A; No, certainly not. 
 
 By Mr. Wifeon : 
 
 Q. There have been but, two general meetings that have appointed committees 
 ito w^it on Mr. Dunsmuir, and one was when this 10 per cent had been given. When 
 W3s the other ?^A.. In Ladysmith. That was outside of any Union. I am talking 
 about when the men were not organized in any union. There have been only two 
 public meetings. 
 
 Q. Have you had any effective organization among the miners ? — A. For a little 
 while. 
 
 Q. Why didn't it last ? — A. I don't know, I was a member of it when they stopped 
 the union pay in the company's oifices. It was taken in the o£B.ee from each man's 
 pay. The company, for some reason or other, quit stopping the pay in the office. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 . Q. When was that union? — A. I cannot answer that very well as to the date. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Qj^When you were talking to Mr. Dunsmuir in Victoria, was there any doubt in 
 your mind as to the meaning of the word union? — A. None at all. He knewl what 
 we meant, and we knew what he meant. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Did the union at Extension ever send a committee to Mr. Dunsmuir? — A. I 
 think so. 
 
 Q. They had a committee and Mr. Dunsmuir used to deal with it? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was that within the last two or three years ? — A. Within the last four years. 
 
 Q. The company used to collect the dues for the members in its offices? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What were the dues utilized for — union business ? — ^A. I suppose so, I was not 
 an officer. 
 
 Q. There was no medical arrangement ? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : ' 
 Q. How did it break up?— A. I cannot answer that question. 
 
 His Lordship. — We would like to have some evidence as to the membership of 
 that union,^ its formation and break-up. 
 
 (The Commissioners expressed a desire to visit Extension, and Mr. Bodwell 
 agreed to arrange for a special train at any time to suit. It was arranged to visit 
 Extension in the afternoon, if convenient, or the following morning.) 
 
 JOSEPH JEFFRIES— Laaysmith, May 7. 
 
64 MINUTES OP EVIDENCE QP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 Samuel K. Mottishaw, Jr., sworn : 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Are you a son of Mr. Mottishaw who gave his evidence this morning? — A. 
 Yes, sir. - 
 
 Q. You worked in the mines and reside in Ladysmith? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. "Were you a member of any committee in regard' to these troubles? — A. Yes, 
 I was on two committees. I was on the committees to interview Mr. Dunsmuir. 
 
 Q. Did you attend on him at Victoria? — A. Yes, the first time was on April 1, 
 and the second time on April 18. 
 
 Q. What took place on April 1 ? — A. We were refused an interview. 
 
 Q. How many went down? — A. Three of us. 
 
 Q. You went down on April 18; what took place then? — A. We gained an. inter- 
 view with Mr. Dunsmuir, and asked him if he would open his mines and reinstate all 
 the men who were discharged. He asked us the question, were we members of the 
 Western Federation of Miners, and we told him yes. Then he said, I cannot talk 
 business with you. Until you purge yourselves from the Western Federation, call 
 an open meeting and choose a committee from that meeting and send them down to 
 me, then I will talk business ; but he would not talk business with members of the 
 Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. After that, what was said? — A. Ha was asked the question, would he allow 
 his miners here to have a union of their own in Ladysmith and Extension mines. He 
 said, no, but I will allow my own men to have a standing committee, so that they 
 could interview him, or the men could report any grievance and that committee could 
 interview him, and we could probably settle the dispute that we might have. 
 
 Q. Now, were you discharged from the mine ? — A. Yes, on March 10. 
 
 Q. Who discharged you ? — A. The mine foreman. No. 3 Mine, John Johns. 
 
 Q. Was your father discharged at the same time ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Sis Lordship : 
 
 Q. Any reason given? — A. No, sir; there was no reason given. Not definite. I 
 always got along well with the foreman of the mine, and I was requested to square up 
 my place and take out my tools. Mr. Johns said he had received instructions to that 
 effect. He is the foreman of No. 3 mine. 
 
 Q. Did not give any reason ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. And at the same time your father was dismissed ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Sis Lordship : 
 
 Q. Any one else? — A. I could not say, your Lordship. After I came down to 
 Ladysmith I was told that James Pritchard was discharged. 
 
 By Mr. Luxton : 
 Q. Have you ever had any grievance that you wanted to bring before Mr. Duns- 
 muir that you have not been able to bring before him? — A. No, sir. 
 
 By Sis Lordship : 
 
 Q. Have you ever belonged to a union before?— A. L was vice-president of the 
 union at Extension about three years ago. 
 
 Q. You might tell us shortly, the history of that union? — A. Well, really as 
 regards the history of that union I know but very little. There appeared to be a certain 
 amount of unrest, and the men did not seem to have confidence in one Another. For 
 that purpose, I suppose, I was asked to take that office. I was living at No. 1 Extenf- 
 sion. The union held its meetings at the tunnel, and I supijose it is a walk of about 
 SAMUEL K. MOTTISHAW, Jr.— liadysmith, May 7. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 65 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 3 miles, and I did not use to attend the meetings very regularly, although I held that 
 office. It finally disbanded, but the cause of its disbandment I don't know, I could not 
 say. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. As far as you know it was not through any action of the company? — A. Yes, 
 so far as. I know. 
 
 Q. Were all the members eligible for membership in the union? — A. Yes, they 
 were eligible, but I don't think all belonged. 
 
 Q. It used to meet in one particular place? — A. Yes, in Finn's hall. 
 
 Q. How long since it has been broken up ? — A. Probably 18 months or two years 
 ago. I could not be sure about the time. 
 
 Q. Was it not in existence after the offices of tlKs company were here ? I thought 
 perhaps you could fix the time ? — A. It was before the offices were moved down here. 
 
 (Adjourned until 2 p.m.) 
 
 His Lordship. — The Commission have thought in the luncheon interval that it 
 might possibly tend to bring about a settlement if the Commission were enabled to 
 interview the executive of the association here, and if the executive wish to meet us 
 we shall be glad to see them when the Commission rises this afternoon. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — We might say 5 o'clock after the session. They shall be glad of an 
 opportunity of meeting^ you. I hope that you will consider that your former intima- 
 tion received all the consideration which it deserved. They simply differed with your 
 views. I shall try and make the necessary arrangements in the meantime. 
 
 His Lordship. — How many members are there on the committee? 
 
 Mr. A. A. Baenes. — I believe there are 12, your honour. 
 
 (Commissioners arranged to meet the executive of the local association at the 
 close of the day's sittings.) 
 
 Joseph Tassin, sworn : ' 
 
 (Mr. Tassin being* a Frenchman and unable to speak English, Mr. Jules Moul- 
 lard was sworn as interpreter). 
 
 V 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Where do you live? — A. At Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Where have you been working ? — A. At Extension, as a miner. 
 
 Q. Have you ever lived at Extension? — A. Yes, about 4 months. 
 
 Q. Why did you leave Extension to come here? — A. First, I was told to go to 
 work at Extension No. 1, and when I came to ask for a job the boss told me I was 
 T^upposed to build a house at Extension No. 1 before I could get a job. When the work 
 was done at i^o. 1 I c-jne down to the tunnel, where I was 4 months ago. I had to 
 mov6 my house from S'o. 1 to the tunnel. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. f/hat distance? — A. About 3 miles. 
 
 JOSEPH TASSIN— Ladysmith, May 7. 
 
 36a— 5 
 
66 MlNUmS OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMiftSSION > 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. And after that ?— A. Then I heard that every one was supposed to go to Lady- 
 smith. I was about to build a house. I had not applied for work yet. 
 Q. Have you biilt a house here ? — A. I have a big house, 24 x 34. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Did he build a house, or move it down here? — A. I built the house at the tunnel 
 and moved it down here. 
 
 Q. You moved it down here ? — A. Yes, rebuilt it here. 
 
 Q. Which place do you prefer to live in ? — A. I like Extension better. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Why ? — A. Because I hav« more accommodation, and am closer to my work. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What do you estimate your loss at ? — A. It took me about two months to tate 
 down the house and build it up again. 
 
 By Mr. Luxton : 
 
 Q. When did you come to Extension first ? — A. I don't remember exactly. 
 
 Q. How many years ago ? — A. About three years, lived at No. 1 Extension. 
 
 Q. When they were getting the mine ready ? — A. Yes, when they began to take 
 some men to open the work. I don't remember exactly. 
 
 Q. It was before they began mining coal ? — A. There were only a few men work- 
 ing there, I was one of them. They had not begun to mine coal. 
 
 Q. No. 1 is not being worked now, is it ? — A. No. 1 was still working when I 
 quit. I got out of a place, and they thought it was better for me to go to some other 
 mine. 
 
 Q. Who was the boss who told you that you would be supposed to build a house ? — 
 A. That was Mr. Haggart. 
 
 Q. Is this the first time that you moved from No. 1 to the tunnel, or down here ? 
 — A. When I went from Wellington No. 5 to No. 1. 
 
 Q. Were there any boarding houses there then ? — A. I do not know anything 
 about boarding houses. Mr. Haggart told me to build a house and then come to work. 
 
 Thomas Doherty, sworn : 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. You are a miner by occupation, Mr. Doherty ? — A. 'Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You have been working at Extension ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Where do you live ? — A. At Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Where formerly ? — A. At Extension, after I went to work there. I lived in 
 another place formerly. 
 
 Q. How long have you lived at Extension ?— A. Probably about 10 months. 
 
 Q. Why did you leave ?— A. I was informed by the mine foreman I would have 
 to leave, or else my place would be given to any other man from Ladysmith who wanted 
 the place. The foreman was John Johns. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. How long ago was this ?— A. The first time I guess that he warned me would 
 be in July or August of 1902. 
 
 THOMAS DOHERTY— Ladysmith, May 7. 
 
0\ INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 67 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Bu Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Under what circumstances did that take place ? — A. He came into my place 
 at the end of the month — I would not be sure of the date — and asked me where I was 
 living. I told him Extension. He says, ' it is time you were getting down to Lady- 
 smith/ or words to that effect. I did not take very much stock in what he said, but 
 in the course of a few days he asked me again if I had moved to Ladysmith. I said 
 no, and I wanted to know if I was forced to move. He told me the way the case stood 
 I would have to move, or leave my place liable for any man at Ladysmith, or that 
 I would be discharged. 
 
 By' His Lordship : 
 Q. What did you say to that ? — A. I told him I did not want to leave. I pre- 
 ferred living there, but if it was a case of necessity I supposed I would have to shift, 
 and I did shift. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q.,With whom were you living there ? — A. I was boarding with Mrs. Bailey. 
 
 Q. Who was she ? — A. She was a widow lady, the wife of the late W. J. Bailey. 
 I believe he was a former employee of the company. He was killed in the mines. 
 
 Q. Then she built a boarding house there ? — A. He had built it previous to his 
 death. At the time I was boarding with her that was her only means of making a 
 livelihood. We preferred turning our board money in to her. 
 
 Q. What happened to her as a result of her losing her boarders ? — A. She had 
 to shift from there to Nanaimo, and Nanaimo being already croweded she was unable 
 to make a living there, and moved from there to Crofton. She has a son-in-law there 
 who, I think, provides for her in some shape. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Do you board now at Ladysmith ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. What is the difference in board ? — A. Practically no difference at all. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Why did you prefer to live in Extension ? — A. One preference was, I was 
 nearer to my work. I like to live as near to my work as possible, and I wished to 
 turn my money in to this woman, as we felt she was deserving of sympathy. 
 
 Q. She didn't try to establish a boarding house in Ladysmith ? — A. Yes, I think 
 she approached Mr. Dunsmuir. I told her that her best plan was to see Mr. Dunsmuir 
 and see if he would not allow her to move, or for us to remain with her up there, 
 before he went to the old country. He had gone, I think, but he wrote a reply refer- 
 ring her grievance to Mr. Little. Of course, what transpired between him and herself, 
 she could giye better evidence than I could. She did not appear to be satisfied. She 
 said she got bad satisfaction from Mr. Little. After Mr. Dunsmuir came back to 
 Victoria she went there to try and see him and was unable to do so. I only have her 
 words for that. 
 
 James A. Bakek, (recalled). 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. I wish to ask you with respect to the disposition of the funds of the Western 
 Federation of Miners ? I am afraid we did not get a correct idea as to this before — 
 A. There is only one general fund in the Western Federation of Miners. That 13 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 7. 
 
 36a— 5i 
 
68 UmVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII.. A. 1904 
 
 for the maintenance of all the business of the Federation, as well as assistance for its 
 locals. In case of locals being in trouble the same fund is used for that. It is also 
 used for the general -business expenses, such as for my own case, for instance, while 
 I am in service for the organization, that is paid from that fund. 
 
 Q. Can you give an instance of the application of these funds in British Col- 
 umbia ? — A. There has been much of it distributed in British Columbia, large amounts 
 during the trouble in Rossland, and the disaster at Fernie. As soon as a wire reached 
 Denver on the morning of the assembly of the_eonvention last May there was $3,000 
 immediately appropriated to be sent there for relief. A few days ago at Frank I tele- 
 graphed to find out their intention. The secretary replied that they would need fin- 
 ancial assistance. I notified the Denver office and they recommended that $1,000 be 
 sent. They requested my sanction to it. 
 
 Q. Would it be proper to say that a larger sum could be had, if needed ? — A. Yes, 
 I am instructed to go there and see what is needed. 
 
 Q. Is there anything further you would like to tell the Commissioners with 
 regard "to the organization, which escaped us yesterday? — A. Unless it might be to 
 point out that the aim and object is to create and maintain the most friendly relations 
 beween ourselves and employers. We believe that through organized methods we can 
 perfect that idea to a much greater extent than it can be done without organization. 
 We have proved it in many instances. 
 
 Q. You have demonstrated that organized labour meeting organized capital can 
 settle their grievances better ? — A. Yes, and even if it is not organized capital, even if 
 it is an individual employer. I thinjj it is much more satisfactory if he can deal with 
 committees. Many grievances are brought before the local organization. They are 
 investigated by the committee, and sometimes by the organization at a regular meet- 
 ing, and it is often turned down and the employer hears nothing of the trouble. If it 
 is deemed worthy of notice a committee is form-ed to wait on the management and see 
 what adjustment can be made. It limits grievances that arise from minor circum- 
 stances. 
 
 Q. Do you think the same purpose could be obtained by a committee of unorgan- 
 ized labour approaching their employer? — A. I don't think so, especially if there is 
 any feature of discrimination involved, for the reason that they have no protection 
 behind them. They think a man is signing a warrant for his discharge when he takes 
 the position. 
 
 Bi/ Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Of course what you have just been telling us is not the exclusive quality of the 
 Western Federation of Miners; any labour union properly organized could accom- 
 plish that result ? — A. No, I hope we have not a monopoly of that. 
 
 Q. The only reason you can suggest why a permanent committee from an unor- 
 ganized body of men would not do as well would be that the men would not be willing 
 to serve on the committee for fear of discharge? — A. I don't say that. That would 
 be a prominent reason. The men feel bound together by a common obligation, and 
 there *is more confidence existing. 
 
 Q. There is better machinery in an organization such as yours than might be 
 found among one lot of men alone? — A. Yes, I think so. 
 
 Q. Nov;, you spoke yesterday about the Western Federation being affiliated 
 with the American Labour Union, and also seeking affiliation with the United Mine 
 Workers in the east ? — A. They were negotiating for an arrangement for interchange- 
 able cards. 
 
 Q. What does that mean?— A. It means that if a member of the Western Fed- 
 eration goes into a camp where there is an organization of the United Mine Workers 
 that a trcncf er may be effected into that union, or vice versa. * 
 
 Q. That could be arranged between your Federation and any other labour union 
 you wished to make the arrangement with? — A. It is interchangeable membership. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 7. 
 
ON rNBVSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISB COLUMBIA 69 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 If he shifts from the United Mine Workers to the Western red«ration he comes 
 under the constitution of the Western Federation. 
 
 Q. If there was a Canadian federation of miners that interchange of cards could 
 not he arranged between your Federation? — A. It could be done. That is one of the 
 features of affiliation. 
 
 Q. Affiliation, as I understand it, means the affiliation of everything except cor- 
 porate intcBCsts? — A. The unity of everything. The aims and methods would be the 
 same. 
 
 Q. One body would lend its moral force and its sympathy to the affiliated body 
 to as large an extent as possible ? — A. It would not be so complete in our opinion. 
 
 Q. So far as moral support is concerned it would be nearly as complete? — A. I 
 don't think it would for the reason that they would not be so closely in touch with 
 each other in business relations. 
 
 Q. Suppose there was a body here affiliated with the Western Federation of 
 Miners, and that they were having a labour trouble. Would not the Federation do all 
 they could to assist in that trouble ? — A. Meet assuredly. 
 
 Q. Don't they sometimes tax themselves for the benefit of affiliated bodies ? — A. 
 Yes, and for non-affiliated bodies. 
 
 Q. So that if there was a Canadian Federation there would be nothing to pre- 
 vent this kind of affiliation with the Western Federation of Miners? — A. Well, i1 
 would not be so complete. I do not see why good feeling might not exist. 
 
 Q. The only element lacking would be the fact that the officials of one body could 
 not call on the other for financial assistance ?— A. Yes, there is another feature. 
 While they are affiliated as they are, they are a body practically all of the same organ- 
 ization in case of trouble arising, while if they have organizations throughout the 
 country they must have all the men organized. These unorganized men may be 
 easily prevailed upon to take the places of other men, when if they looked on it as 
 part of their business they would use their influence to prevent these men being taken 
 from other places of business. 
 
 Q. Suppose that there was a Canadian federation and a strike was on, and a 
 body of men were being .taken from a place where the Western Federation of Miners 
 was-^a body of non-union men — do you mean to say that the Western Federation 
 would not use their influence to prevent that ? — A. They would use their influence as 
 far as they reasonably could. 
 
 Q. Thej^ would not make a business of finding out? — A. They would not be in 
 touch with each other. They would not know, as they do to-day, where other unions 
 exist and the conditions. What I was about to) say is this: They might not have 
 information of the union being in existence. It might have passed out of existence 
 and they would not know of it. 
 
 Q. Supposing there was a union here fighting a case, they would know where the 
 general offices of the Western Federation were ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So that except for the fact that it would not be the business of the Western 
 Federation — that is the only thing to prevent them being exactly in the same position 
 as if they were actually one corporation ? — A. jSTo, the separation would lend great 
 discouragement to the men in their efforts to fight organized capital. 
 
 Q. The Western Federation do not expect to take the burden of fighting organ- 
 ized capital alone ? — A. Certainly not. 
 
 Q. Why could they not affiliate just as well for that fight with a Canadian organ- 
 ization? — A. It is an international organization. It is not particularly American. 
 
 Q. For all practical purposes it may be called an American organization? — A. I 
 do not know why, any more than others, the railway men, the typographical union, 
 telegraphers and all the others. 
 
 Q. The headquarters are in the United States, and its perma»ent officers are in 
 the United States, except yourself ?— A. At the present time, yes. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith. May 7. 
 
70 illNVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. That is the condition to-day, and what I want to know is whether there ia 
 any serious difficulty in an affiliation between the Western Federation and a Canadian 
 organization more than there is between the Western Federation of Miners and say 
 the United Mine Workers of Pennsylvania ? — A. There are other features why these 
 have been held apart, features of the different forms of organization. 
 
 Q. Can weigh-men and time bosses belong to a union in the Western Federation? 
 — A. I do not know whether there are any cases or not. If they are agents of. the 
 corporation as representing the company on the one side as against the interests of the 
 men on the other, I would not consider they were eligible. 
 
 Q. Any one who is an agent of the employer could not join the union? — A. Take 
 for instance a man who has the power of hiring and discharging men. We would not 
 regard him as eligible. 
 
 Q. Where do you draw the line, what is the rule? — A. Where his agency inter- 
 feres between other employees and the corporation or employer. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I would like to hear a little more about the exact power of the central body 
 over the local union? Suppose there was a man wanted to join the union say at 
 Fernie, and he had not been allowed to join. Suppose it was a case of prejudice, and 
 he came to Ladysmith and there was a union here, what would be his position, would 
 he be allowed to join the union here? — A. Not until cleared there. He would' have 
 the right in that case to, have his case taken before the executive board and from 
 them to the ensuing convention, 
 
 Q. If he was excluded from the union at one point he could not get admission at 
 another? — A. Not until that was cleared up. 
 
 Q. Suppose the man did not want to join a union at all, and came here. What 
 would be his position as regards work? Would the rest of the men strike if he went 
 to work? What is the rule about that? — A. In the majority of cases there are non- 
 union men working where we have union men at work. In some cases the organiza- 
 tion is practically complete. At Frank the organization was one of the most strength 
 in America, although small.' If a man came there, and was not in a position, finan- 
 cially or otherwise, to join the union, they allowed him to work a sufficient time until 
 he had a pay-day, and he was taken in then, provided there was nothing in his record 
 to bar him. 
 
 Q. Suppose he did not want to join the union ? Could he have stayed there ? — A. 
 I don't think he would have stayed there. They would probably have made it uncom- 
 fortable for him, where a man has established a record in a case of that kind. 
 
 Q. Suppose he simply did not want to join the union, and he came to Frank and 
 stayed there for a month, and he did not join the union, whal; would happen to that 
 man? — A. Personally, I think in such cases a great deal of leniency would be shown. 
 I think every reason would be shown him. 
 
 Q. Suppose they could not convince him, what then? — A. One never knows. 
 
 Q. What stand would the union take? — A. If he was a hopeless case it would be 
 a local action. I don't think they would have power to strike in a case of that kind. 
 
 Q. Well, what else would they do, drive him away? — A. There is no occasion for 
 such a clash'to arise, for the reason that the relations between employers and employ- 
 ees have been on the most friendly terms. 
 
 Q. I am only using that case as an illustration. Suppose this union has con- 
 tinued here, and there are 20 or 30 or 40 men who don't want to join the union. What 
 is going to happen ? Are those men allowed to pursue their employment peaceably ? — 
 A. I think they would be allowed to pursue their employment peaceably. 
 
 Q. What power would the union have in that respect? Would the local body 
 have power to take action ? — A. They would use every effort to get these men to become 
 union men. Failing in that, possibly they would prefer to get somebody favourable 
 to unionism to work in their stead. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 7. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPVTES IN BRITISH VOLVMBIA 71 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. They would have it in their power to drive these men away if they wanted to ? 
 — A. That is taking the extreme measure. 
 
 Q. I am putting the case of 40 men say at Ladysmith who could not be persuaded 
 to join the union. Could the local union if they saw fit, take such measures as they 
 chose to use, to drive the men out of the place? — A. I do not think they would resort 
 to extreme measuies. I do not think their views would be approved either, if they 
 went on strike in such a case. I know of no strike under such conditions. It is only 
 where union labour i?i displaced on account of the employment of non-union labour. 
 
 Q. You might ^;ell us the exact power of the central authority over the local union ? 
 — A. 1 do not know of anything more that I can give. They simply have the power of 
 enforcing the constitution. When that is heing violated by a local it is their duty 
 to see to that. 
 
 Q. Has the local union power to go out on strike without the consent of the cen- 
 tral authority ? — A. No, they get no assistance. 
 
 Q. They have power to initiate a strike ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The strike must be ratified by the executive board before they can get any 
 funds? — A. There is a saving clause in regard to that — in case of violation of any of 
 the fixed principles, ^and there is no time to communicate with the executive body. 
 
 Q. The executive has no power to order a union out on strike against the wishes 
 of the union? — A. No, no power that I know of. 
 
 Q. Have youi ever known of a case where the central authority has refused to 
 sanction a strike ? — A. Well, I have, for the time being. The strike finally occurred 
 The strike at Rossland was brought before the first convention I attended. It was not 
 brought about at that time, but evidently they got the consent of the executive later on. 
 
 Q. Then the executive has refused to sanction a strike ? — A. They did in that 
 instance I know. I have only been on this executive committee for two sessions. 
 
 Q. What is the general attitude of the executive towards strikes? — A. They 
 deplore them. They look on them as the last resort. If any other means can be 
 adopted with consistency it is preferred. 
 
 Q. What attitude do they take towards arbitration ? — A. They approve of fair 
 arbitration. They insist that the organization be fairly represented on that com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Q. What do you suggest would be their view of a law compelling arbitration so 
 far as the general principle is concerned ? — A. So far as the general principle is con- 
 cerned, I believe they would approve it. It would depend on how the third party 
 would be arrived at. 
 
 Q. Who should the third party be — a judge? — A. In my opinion and in the 
 opinion of the organization generally I think one fixed by mutual agreement of the 
 two parties, if possible, or representatives of the two parties. 
 
 Q. In general would they approve of the intervention of the state in labour dis- 
 putes? — A. It would depend on circumstances. If they thought the state hostile to 
 organized labour they would not. Any time they felt they could get justice they would 
 prefer to have it in that respect. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us, Mr. Baker, what you know about this Cumberland strike? — 
 A. I simply got a wire saying they were out, and asking me to go up there. 
 
 Q. You had nothing to do with the initiation of that strike? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. The reason I asked is because if we could get some information of the cause of 
 the strike it might not be necessary to go there ? — A. I am satisfied I know the cause. 
 They stated to me that practically all the ofiieers of their union have been discharged 
 from work. I saw these men in Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. I suppose the trouble is practically the same as here? — A. It is not exactly the 
 same case. This trouble was on here before the men organized. These men have been 
 gradually dismissed, one or two at a time, from what I can find out. 
 
 ' His Lordship. — Possibly it would be possible for counsel to agree on the causes 
 of that strike, and keep us from going up there. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Laaysmith, May 7. 
 
72 M1XVTE8 OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Mr. EoDWELL. — I won't know anything about that until Mr. Little gets back. He 
 is up there now. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I understand then that personally you are in favour of compulsory arbitration ? 
 — A. I cannot say that I am on the broad ground. It would depend on how the third 
 party is arrived at. 
 
 Q. Assuming the third party is arrived at by agreement ? — A. By agreement, yes. 
 
 Q. Or by a judge, if the parties refused to agree on a third party, would be satis- 
 factory ? — A. Well, I find humanity pretty much the same. There is of course great 
 difference between judges, but I find humanity pretty much the same — all after the 
 almighty dollar. 
 
 Q. You find judges no exception ? — A. Well, I don't know 
 
 Mr. EowE. — I suppose you would not except even the preachers. 
 
 By Mr. Bo we : 
 
 Q. Do you think it should be possible to have an effective alien labour law ? — A. I 
 think it should be. 
 
 Q. In the event of an effective alien labour law, a large portion of the need of 
 an international federation would cease, would it not ? — A. It would be a great relief, 
 anyivay. At the same time it brings matters to this point, that if the principle of 
 unionism is proper, then whenever you place a limit on it you destroy the first 
 principle. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. How many international organizations are there that you know of ? — A. I do 
 not know. I could get a list, I expect. Mr. King probably can post you better on that 
 than I can. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Tou say the aim and object of the Western Federation is to arrange friendly 
 relations between employers and employees ? — A. Most assuredly. 
 
 Q. You don't sympathize with the doctrine that there is no common ground of 
 interest betweeen employers anad employees ? — A. Well, as long as we are working 
 under this system I think there should be. In my opinion, if men do their duty under 
 a contract system — an agreement to work for a wage under certain conditions — they 
 are bound to do it to the best of their ability. When they do that I am satisfied an 
 employer is better served than by any arbitrary method he may use. 
 
 Q. At the same time, you do not approve of the wages contract ? — A. No, can- 
 didly speaking, I do not. Unless you can get organization so perfected that you can 
 make it universal, the competitive system under which we are living, where different 
 employers are catering to the same market, and some by some means or other have 
 an advantage over the others, one must economize, and the first place he looks is the 
 income of his labour. If organization were universal so that all could be protected 
 and put on the same level, there might be some abiding peace and unity. 
 
 Q. What I want to get at is the general influence of the doctrines taught by the 
 Western Federation. It is not held or taught that when a man is working for wages 
 he is being unnecessarily robbed ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. And you do not use the term ' wage slavery ? ' — A. From an organization 
 standpoint, no. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What method would you siigg-gest for the settlement of labour disputes if the 
 two parties could not agree upon a third arbitrator ? — A. It is a hard proposition. If 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, May 7. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISFUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 73 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 a man could solve this problem and advance it I think he will have done a great deal 
 lor the world. The best method I know of is perfect and universal organization, and 
 perfect such a system that all employees be dealt with on lines of equality. 
 
 Q. I would like to get at something practical. I would like to know what prac- 
 tical suggestion you would make in the event of the third party not being agreed on ? 
 — A. I would like to have someone tell me that myself. 
 
 Q. Do you know the policy adopted in ISTew Zealand? — A. Yes, it has resulted 
 pretty fairly. But in New Zealand they have government by the people. In this 
 country we have not. It is the people's vote, I am bound to adniit, but not govern- 
 ment by the people. 
 
 Q. As I understand the situation in New Zealand a judge of the Supreme Court 
 is taken for third party. You think that not good enough for Canada ? — A. I do not 
 know as to that. I would want to know the individual. 
 
 Q. Suppose you determined the personality of the judge by lot? — A. It does not 
 look to me that that would appeal much to our intelligence, to arrive at a point of 
 justice by that means. 
 
 Hisi LoEDSHiP. — Well, the judges are supposed to do justice. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — I think that this matter is attracting public attention, and that the 
 majority of the people want something to limit difficulties in the future. 
 
 Witness. — I think that is essential. I want to see their interest excited as much 
 as possible, so that they will investigate and understand. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. We would like to hear some practical suggestion as to the settlement of these 
 labour disputes? — A. I would be glad to hand it to you if I was able, and would be 
 glad to receive it from any source. 
 
 Q. I think there is no doubt that parliament should take some action to stop 
 these strikes? — A. They are disastrous to all parties concerned. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Assuming that machinery were satisfactory would you think it right to try 
 and stop them without the initiative of either of the parties ? — A. It is a question. 
 I would not like to see a mandate issued that men shall not strike, but if conditio i:s 
 are running in a certain way for a good length of time, that the men could not go out 
 on strike in demanding a higher rate of wages, and that the employers could not cut 
 wages or extend the hours, without a notice being given before the change took place. 
 X' think that would be better than to say that men should not resort to a strike no 
 matter what takes place." 
 
 Q. Could not the state bring into a dispute a power substituted for that of a 
 strike or lockout, and under its influence bring about a settlement ? — A. It seems to 
 me that it ought to be done, if the true spirit of truth and honesty were applied at 
 ell times. 
 
 Q. You regard a strike as a state of warfare? — A. I do. 
 
 Q. Do you think it would be better under some circumstances to accept half a loaf 
 instead of a whole loaf? — A. If you did not prejudice your position by so doing. 
 
 Q. Did I understand you to say yesterday that strikes do not accomplish their 
 purpose? — A No, I don't think so. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. It is evident that after a strike has lasted for a certain time, and has reached 
 certain conditions, that the state should take some means to stop it? — A. It seems 
 to me if the st^te takes any stand it should bo before the strike occurs. Ths state 
 generally only knows of a =trike after the men are out. 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmith, Mav 7. 
 
74 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Take this case. The public must have coal. There must come a time when 
 that strike must be stopped and by the intervention of the state. Now, the only 
 thing is, what machinery should be applied. I should not think it would be at all 
 advisable for the state to interfere with every petty dispute, but where a strike reaches 
 such dimensions as to seriously injure the public interest, then I think the state must 
 interfere on the ground that the public is being damaged. Now, the question is, what 
 kind of machinery are you going to provide? 
 
 (No answer.) 
 
 liy Mr. Jiowe : 
 
 Q. I understand you to say that such a plan as this should be adopted before a 
 strike — that if the employees decide on a strike they must give certain notice, and the 
 employers a like notice? — A. I said if the state did interfere. They should not wait 
 until it -reached a strike. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The difficulty of that is that the state would be constantly interfering? — A. 
 Thei possibility is that if it were so there would not be the necessity for so much 
 interference. 
 
 Q. It seems to me we must provide for a case where a strike has reached pro- 
 portions like tl'.e case here. Something must be done to stop it, and what measure 
 would best meet the situation. I would like to hear from both sides as to that ? — A. 
 It is a question I am pondering on all the time, very deeply. 
 
 Q. Tou spoke of international organization of capital. Do you know of any such ? 
 — A Yes, many of them. 
 
 Q. Is there any such organization among coal mine owners? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Does it include Canadian mines? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about the constitution or controlling centres, or met- 
 hods of that organization? — A. The organization I had in mind is the Crow's Nest 
 Pass Coal Company. Its general offices are in Toronto, the directors are there. The 
 workings of the corporation are largely controlled by the Great Northern Railway 
 Company. 
 
 Q. That is not exactly what I mean. I mean cases where a number of owners of 
 mines organize an owners' association — an international employers' association? — A. 
 I cannot give statistics, but I have encountered them. We had trouble up in the 
 Slocan country in 1898 and 1899, when they were importing non-union men from 
 Minnesota, they co-operated right through, the officers of both nations. They were 
 brought to the United States boundary line and the Canadian officials received them 
 there. This was all arranged at that time, I believe, on the best authority through a 
 mine owners' association. 
 
 Q. Do you know, as a matter of fact that the United States and Canadian officials 
 co-operated in that manner? — A. No, not directly, but I had it direct from men en- 
 gaged in that struggle. 
 
 (Commission adjourned to meet at Extension.) 
 
 JAMES A. BAKER— Ladysmlth, May 7. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 75 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Extension, May 8, 1903. 
 
 Jonathan Bramley^ sworn : 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Where do you live, Mr. Bramley? — A. In Extension. 
 Q. How long have you lived here? — A. Since 1884. 
 
 Q. Ever buy any property in this neighbourhood? — A. Yes, 200 acres of land. 
 Q. Who from? — A. From the E. & N. Eailway Company. 
 
 Q. When? — A. I forget just exactly when — in the fall or spring of 1883 or 1884. 
 Q. Have you any documents to show ? — A. Yes, sir, I have them home. 
 Q. Can you get them ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (Documents sent for). 
 
 Q. What did you pay for the land? — A. $1.00 an acre. 
 
 Q. Part down, and part on time? — A. No, all at once, $200 cash. 
 
 Q. To whom ? — A. Mr. Shaw was the agent who took the money. I paid the 
 money in iNanaimo. 
 
 Q. Have you sold any of the land ? — A. About 16 acres I think. 
 
 Q. What size are the lots? — A. They are not all exactly a size. The price was 
 $100 a lot, except one that we sold to Mr. Skedenson, I think we got $150 for that. 
 
 Q. Were they sold according to a plan? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was the plan registered? — A. Yes, at Victoria. 
 
 Q. They were sold on time, I suppose? — A. No, we got cash for all the lots we 
 Bold. 
 
 Q. Have e^y of these lots been built upon? — A. Yes, most of them. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by most? — A. I know of only two that were not built on. 
 
 Q. Have you ever had any difficulty with the railway company over the title ? — A. 
 No, not about the title. 
 
 Q. Have you had any difficulty about any other matter in connection with the 
 mines ? — A. We have had trouble about putting up the fence, and about making a road 
 across. I could not get here this morning without climbing the fence, and I am too old 
 for that. 
 
 Q. What is the exact trouble between you and the railway company? — A. They 
 have shut me out of a road. 
 
 Q. They built the fence on their own land? — A. Yes, on the land they measured 
 ofE to buy. 
 
 Q. It is built partly on land which you still own? — A. No, not exactly, I suppose 
 the land is still mine in the eyes of the law. I agreed to sell them 50 acres at $10 an 
 acre. 
 
 Q. For coal mining purposes ? — A. For railway purposes and colliery purposes. 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of that document ? — A. It is a verbal agreement. They came 
 to pay for it, but they blocked the road up. I would not sign any land away until I 
 had a road across. I made this bargain with Mr. James Dunsmuir about 3 years ago. 
 
 Q. You agreed to sell him 50 acres of your land for coal and colliery purposes at 
 $10 an acre? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was there an agreement to give you a roadway? — A. A verbal agreement, I 
 took his word. 
 
 Q. A road from where? — A. From one side of the track to the other. 
 
 Q. That would include a bridge over the tracks? — A. Yes, it was talked of having 
 a bridge over the tracks. 
 
 JONATHAN BRAMLEY— Extension, May 8. 
 
76 MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. A road was to be made across the property over the tracks ? — A. Yes, we agreed 
 to that verbally. 
 
 Q. Was the place of the road agreed upon ? — A. 'No, not particularly. We talked 
 about it. They would not have a bridge through and we agreed to give the $500 we 
 were going <o get for the land to try and have a bridge across. 
 
 Q. Was the exact position of the road agreed upon ? — A. Yes, we put a good 
 long track to it from the other side. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 Q. Is there any place where your property bought from you stretches from fence 
 to fence? — A. We have property on both sides of the fence. The property inside the 
 fence was originally my property, except this part on this side of the fence. 
 
 By His Lordship : , 
 
 Q. There is 50 acres of the land inside the fence which originally belonged to 
 you? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What about the surface rights; did Mr. Dunsmuir get the surface rights by 
 the agreement? — A. Well, he gets the land complete. He gets all rights to it. 
 
 Q. Has there been any understanding between you and the railway company about 
 the town site here ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When was coal first taken out of here? — A. I think 5 years ago the first of 
 November. 
 
 Q. At what time was the population the largest here? — A. I think about a year 
 and a half since. 
 
 Q. How many people would you estimate were living here ? — A. I could not tell 
 I am sure, there must have been 1,000 people, men, women and children. 
 
 Q. How many people are there living here now? — A, I do not know the exact 
 number. 
 
 Q. Can you give an estimate ? — A. I could not give it to you now. I could f uvn- 
 ich you with a list of the occupied houses in a day or two. 
 
 Q. Could you give us that next week? — A. I can give it to you to-morro^^. 
 
 Q. You could come down, say next Thursday, to Ladysmith? — A. All right, sir. 
 
 Q. Could you give us a list of the houses pulled down ? — A. Yes, and those empty, 
 and the number of people as nearly as I can estimate it. 
 
 Q. When was this building (the school house) put up ? — A. Upwards of two years 
 tago. 
 
 Q. Did you have anything to do with the putting up of this building ? — A. No,sir. 
 
 Q. When was the other school house built ? — A. That must have been nearly a 
 couple of years. 
 
 Q. What school house do you call that? — A. The government school house, I 
 guess it was built about 4 years ago. 
 
 Q. How do the children get there? — A. They climb over the fence, or go around 
 by the railway, a good mile around. 
 
 Q. When was this fence built ? — A. I think it was something near a year since. 
 
 Q. What is your business here now, farming? — A. A bit of ranching, sir. 
 
 Q. You have no buildings that you rent here ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You rent lands ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You have not built any yourself? — A. No. We have had a few cabins to buy. 
 We bought a few cabins of people who could not pay, and wanted to get away. 
 
 Q. Were these cabins on land sold by you?— A. We don't sell the land with lhe 
 cabins on them. 
 
 Q. They have been empty most of them? How long? — A. Six or seven months. 
 
 Q. What arrangement had you about the lands these cabins were built on? A. 
 
 They were to pay $1 per month ground rent. The land was leased to them. But when 
 
 the men were on strike and had to go away we charged 50 cents a month instead of 
 
 $1.00. 
 
 JONATHAN BRAMLEY— Extension, May 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DIBPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 77 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. I understand Mr. Dunsmuir wanted to buy the whole property? — A. I did not 
 say that. He did make me an offer, it was $5,000 for the whole business. 
 
 Q. You did not want to sell?— A. Not for $5,000. 
 
 Q. Did you make a proposition to him? — A. I did. There were 200 acres of land, 
 and he was to have 100 acres for nothing, and he should give us half what the others 
 were worth. He was to sell the others at $100 a lot and give us half of it. 
 
 Q. And then he was to divide tlie other 100 acres into lots and give you half ? — A. 
 Yes, and sell them at $100 a lot. 
 
 Q. He was to give you $100 a lot ? — A. ISTo, he was to give us $50 a lot. He would 
 give us half of $100, and he was to get $50 a lot. 
 
 Q. You did not make him any offer to sell out altogether? — A. That was to sell 
 out altogether. 
 
 Q. He would have to divide it into lots and sell the land? — A. Yes, and he could 
 have made 300 per cent out of it. 
 
 Q. When was this offer made? — A. About 3 or 4 years ago, but there were build- 
 ings on it, and gardens are worth something. 
 
 Q. Your offer involved making this the town site? — A. He could make it what 
 he liked. It is the only place to make a town, for work. 
 
 Q. And four years ago Mr. Dunsmuir would not accept an offer from you which 
 involved making this the town site? — A. I could not give you the exact date. 
 
 Q. You knew that he intended to make the town at Ladysmith? — A. I must not 
 say I knew. Men were told they could live where they liked. I never asked him. The 
 only conversation I had with him was when he refused my offer. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. Do I understand you to say that Mr. Dunsmuir would not take the offer? 
 That he would make the town at Ladysmith? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. I suppose the subject was talked about a good deal? — A. Certainly. One 
 man said, I would give $200 if they would let me stay here. 
 
 Q. I suppose you used to tell them about your conversation with Mr. Dunsmuir ? 
 — ^A. Well, I never told them as far as what offer he had made, and I told the men if 
 you build here and have to go away you can take your house with you, 
 
 Q. You told them if they did have to go they could take their house with them? — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Can you show us on the plan where we are now ? 
 
 (Plan produced and examined by witness and Commissioners). 
 
 Q. These houses were here before the plan was made? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Some of them are on the road allowance? — A. Well, yes. 
 
 Q. These people built houses on land they bought from you?— A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. How many lots did you make? — A. A good many, I could not tell you. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You owned these lota here, and what you wanted was the road?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was it not an extraordinary thing to get up a plan in this shape when houses 
 were built on the road? How were they to get title? — A. They were to be moved. 
 
 Q. You expected these people were going to remove their houses, and you would 
 pay part of the expense?— A. Yes, I paid $20 for one moving. 
 
 JONATHAN BRAMLEY— Kxtension, May 8. 
 
tT" minutes of evidence of rotal commission 
 
 3-4 edward vii., a. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. It is around here (indicating on plan) where the children go to school? — A, 
 Yes. 
 
 His Lordship. — I am afraid that would have been a very good harvest for the 
 lawyers if it had ever come to anything. There are fully a third of the houses built 
 on the road allowance, according to the plan. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I believe your Lordship knows the form of the original deed, 
 reserving the minerals, and that all he had to sell were the surface rights. 
 
 Q. Tou got the usual form of deed from; the E. & F. Kailway Company ? — A. 
 Yes, certainly. 
 
 Q. You just had the surface rights ? — A. Yes. I think the man who made the 
 deed ought to be ashamed of it. I come from a country where deed were deeds. 
 
 His Lordship. — All I can say is if you had sold land according to that' plan you 
 would have had a hornet's nest around your ears. There are at least 30 houses shown 
 on the road. 
 
 Q. We would like to have these statistics from you on Thursday, Mr. Bramley 2 — 
 A. Yes, sir, I will bring them down. 
 
 Thomas Isherwood, sworn : 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. You live here, Mr. Isherwood? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You work in the mines? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Were you working in the mines at the time of cessation of work? — A. No, I 
 have not been working for some time, I have been sick. 
 
 Q. Did you ever live at Ladysmith ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Anything ever said to you by any of the officials — by the mining company — 
 relative to your living at Ladysmith? — A. Yes, they told me to go to Ladysmitli or 
 quit. - — 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Who told you?— A. Dave Wilson. 
 
 Q. Who is he ? — A. One of the bosses, I suppose. 
 
 Q. Was he in authority over you? — A. Yes, one of the bosses in the mines. 
 
 Q. The mine boss told you to go to Ladysmith or quit? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When did he tell you? — A. In February, I do not know the date. This last 
 February. I commenced the iirst day then, after being idle about 6 months, on and off. 
 
 Q. This was the first day you had gone to work? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you ask him why you had to go to Ladysmith? — A. I asked him if they 
 all had to go, and he said, yes, everybody. 
 
 Q. What did you say?— A. I didn't say much. 
 
 Q. Did you tell him what you would do ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. What did you do ? — A. I quit. 
 
 Q. What have you been doing since? — A. Nothing. 
 
 Q. Why did you quit? — A. Because I was not any way prepared to go to Lady- 
 smith. 
 
 Q. Are you a married man? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You could not afford to go to Ladysmith? — ^A. No, sir, 
 
 THOMAS ISHERWOOD— Extension, May 8. 
 
0,V TWDT78TR1AI, DIS^^TES IN BRITISH COLnMBIA 19 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. How many children have you? — A. Five. 
 
 Q. Did the company make any effort to assist you to go to Ladysmith? — A. No, 
 sir, I never asked them. 
 
 Q. How do you live now? — A. I live as well as I can. 
 
 Q. What means of livelihood have you ? — A. I have no means coming in. I have 
 nothing. Make odd bits knocking around. 
 
 Q. You work occasionally? — A. I cannot work. The wife works a little. 
 
 Q. You are unable to work ? — A. I am able now, but I was not before. 
 
 Q. Did you buy the place where you are living? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. From whom ? — A. From a fellow named Dickison. 
 
 Q. Have you paid for it?— A. No. 
 
 Q. How much have you paid down? — A. Am I supposed to tell how much? I 
 don't think I am compelled to tell. I am not paying much because it is not worth 
 much. 
 
 Q. What objection have you got to telling how much you have paid? — A. Well, 
 I paid $28 on it. 
 
 Q. How much have you agreed to give for it? — A, $40. 
 
 Q. Did you sign an agreement to that effect? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Who did Dickison buy from ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Where is he now? — A. In Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. You knew there was a standing offer on the part of the company to move all 
 the men down without expense? — A. Yes, they would give you transportation! You 
 had to take the house down yourself. You would put it on the train and they would 
 take it down on the train. 
 
 Q. How big is your house ? — A. Only a two-room bedroom house, built of straight 
 up boards. 
 
 Q. How long would it take a good man to take it down ? — A. In a day probably. 
 
 Q. Put it up in a day? — A. No, about three days to put it up. 
 
 Q. You did not ask the company to allow your time while you were taking it down 
 and putting it up ? — A. I asked them nothing. I thought I had a right to live where 
 I liked. That was the reason I did not ask any of these things. 
 
 Q. You could buy a lot from the company at Ladysmith and pay for it on easy 
 terms? — A. I don't know about the terms. 
 
 Q. How long had you been sick? — A. Between 6 and 7 months. 
 
 Q. And you have not been very well since ? — A. I am just getting well now. 
 
 Q. So you were not very anxious to get to work at that time? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You would like to go to work now ? — A. Yes, I am ready for work. 
 
 Q. Have you applied for work? — A. No, the work has stopped. 
 
 Q. I mean before the strike ? — A. I never asked since they told me to go to Lady- 
 smith; never bothered them. 
 
 John Mochar, sworn : 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. You live here, Mr. Mochar? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Working here in the mines? — A. I have been working in the mines. 
 Q. Did you ever live at Ladysmith? — A. Yes, I was down there for a few days. 
 Q. Anything said to you about moving from here there? — A. Yes. In last Sep- 
 tember the pit boss, Mr, Sharp, said: 'Now, its Ladysmith or nothing.' I said 
 
 JOHN MOCHAR— Extension, May 8. 
 
80 MiyVTES OF ETIDEXCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 'what do you mean ?' He said I would have to go down or there would be no more 
 work. 
 
 Q. What did you do?— A. I quit. 
 
 Q. That was in September last ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you quit before you were obliged to, or was there no alternative? — A. 
 Well, I suppose because I was obliged to. I built a house at No. 1 and I built a house 
 here. The house was not quite finished. No. 1 is about two miles below. Then I 
 built another one here. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. How much did you put into it — tlie one here? — A. Not very much, about $100. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Did you use your own labour ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Did you buy the ground? — A. No, I paid ground rent. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. I suppose the $100 is cash, exclusive of labour? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. That would be the cost of material?— A. Yes. I built it in my spare hours. 
 I had a man to give me a hand. I paid him about $15 or $16. 
 
 Q. How many days did you put in on it yourself? — A. About two weeks. 
 
 Q. Anything said about the company assisting you to move your house down to 
 Ladysmith? — A. No, not to move the house. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Did the company offer to take the house down? — A. I did not ask that. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 Q. When was it you built you house here? — A. In May last. May a year ago. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Are you married? — ^Yes. 
 Q. Any children ? — A. I have two, one died a couple of days ago. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. At the time you were building your house was anything said about suggesting 
 you would have to move it? — A. Yes, I said I had not finished yet, and I could not 
 move yet. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. When you built the house here did any person belonging to the company tell 
 you you were taking chances on being moved to Ladysmith? — A. I don't think so. 
 
 Q. Nobody told you there was a likelihood of your going to Ladysmith ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Ever hear anything oi that when you were building the house, or before? — 
 A. No, I did not hear anything. I was looking for a house to rent, and every house 
 ■was filled. No ond had to move, and I started to build, and after I commenced lo 
 build it was talked about moving down. 
 
 Q. What nationality are you ?— A. Austrian. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. You say the town was so filled that you could not rent a house? — A. Yes, the 
 town was so filled in April a year ago, when I came I could not rent a house. 
 JOHN MOCHAR— Extension, May 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLVMlilA 81 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Sy Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Is there much sickness here? — A. I do not think there has been very much. 
 Q. The last man who gave evidence was sick, and your child has d'.ed ? — A. That 
 is all I know. I do not know of anybody else. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Have you a graveyard here ? — A. 'No. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You lived over at No. 1? — A. No, here. At first I was at No. 1. 
 
 Q. When did you come to live at No. 1 ?-^A. Four years next fall. 
 
 Q. When they were through at No. 1 you moved down here? — A. Yes, I brought 
 my house over myself. 
 
 Q. And that was the same house you rebuilt here? — A. A part of it. 
 
 Q. And while! you were building you were told you might have to go to Lady- 
 smith? — A. After, I believe. 
 
 Q. Was it not talked around here that they were going to move down to Lady- 
 smith ? — A. I heard something about it after I built. 
 
 Q. Before you built^-while you were building — didn't you hear this talk? — A. 
 No. 
 
 Q. You didn't hear that talk — you must have?— ^A. Yes, after I built the house. 
 
 Q. No, while you were building the house — didn't you hear that talk around 
 while you were building ? — ^A. No. 
 
 His Lordship. — Assuming that this is so, why have they not the right to live as 
 they like? 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — Why have we not the same right to employ whom we like? 
 
 His Lordship. — Would aa employer have a right to say he would not employ a 
 man who wore a top hat on Sunday? 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — I suppose he would if he paid the man. 
 
 His Lordship. — On the ground of abstract right he might have, but it remains 
 to be shown that he would be right in exercising it. It seems to me, Mr. Bodwell, that 
 there is a very heavy onus on you to show that these men have beeu fairly dealt with. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — We have an explanation of all these things which I think will be 
 satisfactory. If the question is going to be on ground of abstract right, there are 
 mutual rights. 
 
 Q. What I want to know is whether this man did not know at the time that this 
 was likely to be the order — to go to Ladysmith ? — A. I say that I did not hear anything 
 talked around. Of course if I had I would not have left. 
 
 Q. When you heard that talked around, did you go to any man in the company 
 and ask them whether that was going to be so ? — A. No, I just went ahead. 
 
 Q. You knew the) company would move you down to Ladysmith if you wanted 
 them to ? — A. Yes, I knew that ; I have seen them do it with others. 
 
 Q. And you did not ask to have anything of the kind done ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You didn't ask to have this money paid back to you — that you had spent? — 
 A. NO; I didn't ask for any of these things. I did not know whether it would have 
 been refused or not. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Did the company offer to move your house down from No. 1? — No, they did 
 not. 
 
 JOHN MOCHAR— Extension, May 8.^ 
 
 36a— 6 
 
82 MINUTE8 OF ETIDENOE OF ROYAL COM MISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A, 1904 . 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : • r >■ - 
 
 Q. When you heard this talk about moving to Ladysmith did it impress you as 
 more than idle rumour— you did not imagine that any man would force his men 
 to go down, would you ? — A. 'No. 
 
 By His Lordship : . 
 
 Q. Were any of the bouses moved from No. 1 down by the company ?-^A. None 
 that I know of. ,. ; 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — We will prove that we moved houses down from No, 1 when, that 
 Was -wanted. 'We \vill call our officials on our side"- to prove that, if the other side do not 
 give the evidence. : - 
 
 Jacob Myllymaki,, sworn : . i ■, ... . ; .;, , ' -,■ -, 
 
 By nis Lordship : ^ ' ' '■ ' ' ■ ' -■' ' ^ 
 
 Q. What is your nationality ? — ^A, I am a Finlander, 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Do you work in the mines here?— A. I did, but not now. 
 Q. Where did you work here? — A. I worked at the tunnel. 
 Q. How long did you work there!: — A. For two years. 
 Q. Do you live here? — ;A. Yes. 
 Q. Ever live in Ladysmith ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Anything said to you about moving to Ladysmith? — A. Not yet. 
 Q. Did the officials say anything to you about moving to Ladysmith? — A. No, 
 1 stayed here until some person came to me and said 'You have to go to Ladysmith.' 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How did you come to quit work?— A. I got a very bad place. I struc^c rock — 
 pretty near all rock. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — That is an indirect way of telling him to go to Ladysmith. 
 
 By His Lordship : . 
 Q. Then things were being made rocky for you? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You are working on a f armi now ? — A. Yes, I left two or three times to go 
 to the mines. ' - 
 
 Q. You do not like to work where the rock is? — A. No, I have lots of work out- 
 side I would rather work on. I get just as much for outside rock as inside rock, and I 
 would as soon work outside when it comes to rock. 
 
 Q. No one suggested to you to go to Ladysmith? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did yon ever hear about it? — A. Yes, I heard all right, but I did not want to 
 go. I like this place. 
 
 JACOB MYLLTMAKI— Extension, May 8. 
 
Otr^lNDUSTRIALDrSPVTESINBRrTISBOOLDMBIA 63 
 
 SESSIONAL PAl>ER No. 36a 
 
 Joseph Fontana^ sworn : 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What are you — an Italian ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Where do you live, Mr. Fontana ? — A. Right here, in Extension. 
 ^Q. Have you been working in. Extension I>iiiws?-^A.. Yes.-, 
 
 Q. Up till when? — A. Until the strike came on. 
 
 Q. Was anything ever said about quitting your residence here and going to 
 Ladysmith? — A. Yes, sir; ,. . •... 
 
 ' - Q. What was said to you?-T^A.jI was asked in the first placeif I was willing, to 
 go to Ladysmith. v ■; , . 
 
 Q. Asked by whom? — A. The superintendent, Andrew Bryden and Mr. Sharp. 
 
 Q. When ? — A. I could not tell you, it was quite a while before we had to go down. 
 
 Q. A year ago? — A. Ko, I should think about a couple of months before we had 
 to go down to Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. That would be in July or August ? — A. Sometime then. 
 
 Q. You were asked if you would like to go down — what did yoii say?-^A. I toM 
 them I would rather live where I was close to the work, than to be 12 or, 14 miles from 
 the work. .- ; • 
 
 Q. What did he say? — A. He said he could see no diilerenee to live in Extension 
 than in Ladysmith, and I says to Mr. Bryden : ' It may be so for you, Mr. Bryd-en, 
 btrt it is not for the miners.' In the town they would always be around the mines 
 until 4 and 5 o'clock. If they would have to go down to Ladysmith they would have 
 to leave on the same train as the miners. They, would be working shorter time. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Have you a family? — A. Yes, I am married and have two children. 
 
 Q. You would be that much longer away from your family if you had to go to 
 Ladysmith? — A. If I had to go to Ladysmith and had no money to move my house 
 that would be worse between me and the missus. I would simply think that I was 
 single again by that. 
 
 Q. You would have to leave your family here ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What was the conclusion reached between Mr. Bryden and you? — A. I siiitl 
 that if they would force me to go that I had to go, because I was not in a position to 
 support my family by not working, but that I should be forced before I would go dowii. 
 
 Q. What did he say to that ? — A. There never was a thing said any more. 
 
 Q. Did you quit work?— A. Ko, I did not quit work. 
 
 Q. How long did you work after that? — A. I should think a couple of months, 
 until I was told to go down to Ladysmith; that if on Monday morning I would not 
 be on the Ladysmith train, or at least get off the train, I could not go to work any more. 
 It was repeated to me again before the boss left the place. That wag the second' time 
 I was told. 
 
 Q. The second time who told you?— A. Mr. Sharp. 
 
 Q. Who is he ? — A. The mine boss. 
 
 Q. Then you quit work? — A. Ko, sir, I could not get away from work. I had to 
 work to make a living. I moved to Ladysmith myself. I took a divorce from my wife 
 for a long time. 
 
 Q. Do you ever see your family here? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When do you visit them? — A. Whenever I have a chance. 
 
 Q. They are still living here? — A. Yes, and so am I at the present time. 
 
 By Mr. Boive : . . 
 Q. When you were working what time did you get here in the morning ? — A. I got 
 here at 6.30 in the morning. 
 
 JOSEPH FONTANA— Extension, May 8 
 
 36a— 6J 
 
84 1 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. What time were you off at night? — A. I worked till 3 o'clock. 
 
 Q. What time did the train leave for Ladysmith? — A. Half past 3. 
 
 Q. When could you see your family th^n ? — A. I would see my family after 
 I came out, from 3 until half -past 3. I am not far away. I take a run over. Some- 
 times if I was hungry I would have a piece of pie. 
 
 Q. Well, do you mean to say you would get nothing to eat between 6.30 and 3 
 o'clock? — A. In Ladysmith I have to have my breakfast at 5 o'clock in the morning, 
 and by the time that I get up to the mines I am ready for another meal because I could 
 not have my appetite so early in the morning. 
 
 Q. Was there a later train than 3.30 ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What time did it leave ? — ^A. Somewhere about six o'clock. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You could take that train, could you ? — A. Yes, I did a couple of times. 
 
 By Mr.. Rows : 
 Q. What time does it get to Ladysmith? — A. About i8.30 I think. 
 Q. Does that train leave every working day? — A. So long as the men worked, I 
 believe it did. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. What time did you leave your house in the morning when you lived at Exten- 
 sion ? — A. Five or ten minutes to Y. 
 
 Q. What time would you take to get back from work? — A. About the same length 
 of time. If I ran it would take me five minutes, if I went slow about ten minutes. 
 
 Q. When you lived in Ladysmith you left what time ? — ^A. About 5.30, and got 
 back about 4.30. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. But the men go to work at 20 minutes to 7. How could you leave for work 
 at 10 minutes to 7 ? — A. We are supposed to go in the mines at 3 o'clock and in the 
 morning at 7 o'clock. 
 
 Q. They start down at 20 minutes to 7. Don't they start at their work af 7 — at 
 the face at 7 ? — A. No, sir, that is the tunnel, I worked in No. 3. 
 
 Q. When you were living at Extension you worked at the tunnel ? — A. Yes, and in 
 No, 3. : ' 
 
 Q. Where is No. 3 ? — A. A couple of miles I think, I used to live close to it. 
 
 Q. I am talking about the time you lived at Extension — you must start from the 
 pit's mouth at 20 minutes to 7? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You could not stay in your house until 10 minutes to 7. You leave Ladysmith 
 now at 6 o'clock ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you get here at half-past six ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So you are ten minutes ahead of time ? — A. What do you say ? 
 
 Q. Why did you not take your wife down to Ladysmith ? — A. I could not afford it. 
 
 Q. Could you not have taken your house down I — A. No, I had no house " my 
 own at the time. 
 
 Q. Could you not have rented a house at Ladysniith ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. No houses at all ? — A. No, I could not find a house to rent. 
 
 Q. You did not try to get a house ? — A. Yes, I did. 
 
 Q. What did you do ; who did you see ? — A. I tried to get a place to go and board. 
 
 Q. What did you do towards trying to get a house at Ladysmith ? — A. I tried all 
 over and I could not get a house — not to rent. 
 
 Q. Who did you go and see ? — A. I went to see whether I could not see a notice 
 put up about houses for rent. 
 
 Q. Did you ask anybody about it ? — A. Yes, I asked some of my friends, 
 
 Q. Did you go to Mr. Bryden and ask him about it ? — Ai No, sir. 
 
 JOSEPH FONTANA— Extension, May 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 85 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Wty not ? — A. I thought that he was not a man who had houses for rent. 
 
 His Lordship. — Not a real estate agent ? 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. He tqld you to go to Ladysmith ?— A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Would it not be a reasonable thing to ask him about it ? — A. No, sir. 
 Q. Now, as a matter of fact, you preferred to leave your family here than to move 
 to Ladysmith ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I don't think he understands that question. 
 
 Q. Do you prefer to live here, with your wife and family or without them ? — A. I 
 prefer to live with my wife. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Eather than live in Ladysrnith you would rather leave your wife here ? 
 (No answer.) 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. If the company had moved down your effects 'and given you free transportation, 
 would you go to Ladysmith ? — A. I could not afford to build a house. 
 
 Q. If you could rent a house in Ladysmith, would you object to go ?— A. Well, 
 I could not tell you. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Rent is cheaper here, is it not ? How much rent do you pay here ? — A. I do 
 not pay any rent. 
 
 Q. You get a house free here ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who owns the house ? — A. A brother-in-law of mine. 
 
 Q. And he lets you live in it without rent ? — A. Yes, I was not able to work 
 
 Q. You do not pay any rent here at all ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. That is cheaper than if you rented a house in Ladysmith ? — A. How do you 
 mean ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You get a house free from your brother-in-law ?— A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Louis Astori, sworn : 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. You live here, Mr. Astori ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Are you a married man ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Any children ? — A. Yes, I have six children. 
 
 Q. Did you work in the mines ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Anything said to you about removing from here to Ladysmith ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 The first time was in June. I finished my place, and I asked the boss to get a place 
 for me. He says, not for the present time. He says, you come and see me again. I 
 asked if I would have to move to Ladysmith to get a place. He says, it makes no differ- 
 ence, Ladysmith men or Extension. 
 
 Q. Who said this ? — A. The pit boss, Mr. Sharp. He said to me, it didn't make 
 any difference between Extension men or Ladysmith men. I came two or three days 
 after to the office and asked if he had a place for me. He says, I cannot take any more 
 
 LOUIS ASTORI— Extension, May 8. 
 
86 ' MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904^ 
 
 men on, you will have to see Andy O'Brien. I saw him and he said, 'everybody 
 said you will have to go down.' I told him 'before I come down you had 
 best give me my time.' He did, and I came away. I went up to Union 
 to work about a couple of months. I found it no good to work there, and leave my 
 family here, and I came down. I went to see O'Brien, and he asked me where I lived, 
 and I said in Extension. He says 'No need to come and ask for a job if you live at 
 .Extension. Tou know all right that you have to move down,' and I told him I had to 
 take my family and had no money to move, that I could not move down. He says, 
 'Do what the other fellows are doing.' I asked what was that. He said, 'You can 
 leave the family here and go and board down there.' I came down and saw him again 
 for a place. I was there for several days, and at the station he said, ' Have you got no 
 work yet ?' I said, 'There is none.' He says, 'Go to the pit-boss and ask him for 
 work.' I saw Mr. Sharp, and he gave me a place. This was in Septeniber; I worked 
 about fifteen days. He .came around to my place and asked me where I lived. I told . 
 him Extension. He says, I have an order that the ipen who do not, come up on the 
 train do not need to work. The first of the month I went to see about 'batching,' and 
 looked to see if I could get a place. After a while I started ' batching ' and sometimes 
 I stayed here and sometimes came down there. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Tour family is still here ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Why do you object'fo going to Ladysmith ? — A. I think for my part that it is 
 worse to live at Ladysmith than what I do here. For myself it is better for my health. 
 
 Q. When you said you lived partly up there and party here, you mean you slept 
 here — that you stayed with your family — was there any trouble about that ? — A. I had 
 to watch out anyway. 
 
 Q. You had to watch out when you stayed here ? — A. When I came down in the 
 morning to work. I didn't want anybody to see me not getting off the train. 
 
 Q. You mean you circulated through the men on Monday morning, so as to make 
 believe you were on the train, but in the meantime you were up hfere most of Sunday ? 
 — A. Most of the time I was up here. 
 
 Q. Then you needed all the eyes you have got ? — A. Yes. When it was dark 
 I had to put my light out. , ' 
 
 Q. So that they would not see which direction you were travelling in ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Where is your house here ? — A. About two minutes from the tunnel. 
 
 Q. Did you buy the lot?— A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Buy a house? — A. Built a house. 
 
 Q. Whose lot is it ? — A. I got it from Mr. Bramley. 
 
 Q. You mean you didn't pay for it? — A. I pay $1.00 a month, ground rent. It 
 cost me about $250 to build. 
 
 Q. What does it cost for a house in Ladysmith? — A.. I did not try to find out. 
 
 Q. Can you get a lot for $100 in Ladysmith ? —A. I heard that. 
 
 Q. You can pay that $100, $1 a month ? — A. I do not know. I heard the men had 
 to pay $25 first, and the rest in 18 months. Now I hear if the men could not pay at 
 the end of the 18 months, they would lose the house and lot. That was what I heard. 
 
 Q. You never asked anything about that from the company?— A. No. I did not 
 want to live at Ladysmith anyway. I would rather go batching. 
 
 Q. Maybe you might quit and then go away, and so have to leaye your lot at 
 Ladysmith. You left here and went to Union ? — A. Yes, I was there foi; two months. 
 
 Q. And you might leave and go to work some place else ? — A. I might. Maybe 
 if nobody says anything I can live at Extension. 
 
 Q. And Mr. Bryden was willing to let you have work?^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And then you go4; orders to go to Ladysmith? — A. Yes. 
 
 LOUIS ASTORI— Extension, May 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COWMDI' 87 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. They would move your liouse dovm for you ? — A. I would have to put fhp 
 house oh the train and put it up. 
 
 Q. You built your house ? — A. I cannot build a house myself. Someone helped 
 me. It cost Hie about $i3() f 6r the man, W liiaybe $50, aboilt that. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I do not think I will call any more evidence in this direction. It 
 seeins to' me that is eiiough, without amplifying it. 
 
 His LoEDSHiP. — Quite enough, I think. Is there anything el&e you want to take 
 up here ? ,.,■,. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I would like to have heard ,a little more about thig bridge, and vvhat 
 was said about it. \, . , :, 
 
 pis Lordship .-^Apparently it was m^f^ talk, ^othiiig in writing. It would not 
 amount to anything. 
 
 (Adjourned.) 
 
 Victoria, May 11, 1903. 
 
 • (Opening Session, 11 a.m;) 
 
 His LoHBSHiP. — The Commission would like to hear the evidence of any person 
 ■having any material evidence to give relating to the causes of these strikes, and any 
 suggestions as to their reinedy. We would like to hear from unions and employers 
 of union labour, and in addition we would like very much to hear from that class cf 
 men who do not belong to any union, as well as that class of ewployer who is not 
 favourably disposed to the employment of union men, but prefers to employ non-union 
 men. I am well aware that there is a great repugnance on the part of non-union men 
 and non-union employers to come forward and give evidence, but of course all sides 
 of this question should be 'brought before this tribunal, and I hope; that people who 
 have honest views about these matters will come forward willingly and give us the 
 benefit of them. If there is anything that the non-union men or the non-union em- 
 ployers could suggest that would prevent anything in- the shape of boycotting or in- 
 timidation, we should be glad to hear any suggestion from them. What I propose to 
 do on my part is to secure a clear hearing of these questions from all points of view. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I might say that I expect to have some evidence of that kir^l 
 here by to-morrow. I know there is a considerable amount of evidence on that question, 
 if it can be had. People are not exactly afraid to give evidence, but are doubtful 
 of the expediency of coming forward and making their statements. They are afraid 
 that some indirect injury to their business might arise. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is no object in holding the Commission unless evidence of 
 that kind is forthcoming. We know there is a great difference of opinion concerning 
 these matters. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I think the only way to take that evidence is to send out sub- 
 poenas to people whom the Commission think are likely to give information. 
 
 His Lordship. — You had better hand me a list of people who you think will give 
 evidence, and they will be brought here. 
 
 LOUIS ASTORI— Ladysmith, May 8. 
 
88 MIXUTES OP EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISiilOlS! 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — There you see I will get myself into difficulty. I suppose the 
 Commission understand thoroughly that in my position as counsel I only represent 
 the Wellington Colliery Company in reference to matters concerning that company, 
 but I amj willing to do anything I can to assist the Commission. As counsel, my 
 instructions are limited, and that is why I think the Dominion of Canada should be 
 represented on this Commission by some one to assist the men, occupying relatively 
 the position that the Attorney-General could occupy in a public inquiry. If I go out- 
 side the limits) of my instructions, I may be censured for doing so, whereas if the 
 Government were represented by some one who really acts for the whole it would be 
 much better for the work of the Commission, and would take the responsibility off me 
 which ought not to be put upon my shoulders. I am quite satisfied that if there were 
 some one here in that capacity they could easily enough get the information, and 
 that they would be able to bring a lot of evidence before the Commission. 
 
 His LoEDSHiP. — If we had counsel here for the Dominion Government he would 
 feel that he had to hold a brief for non-union people, and the government might have 
 reason to believe that the union people might suppose that the government was ranged 
 against them. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I think not. He would be in the position of an impartial searcher 
 after the truth. He would be able to subpoena any one, whether union or non-union, 
 from whom he thought he would be able to get information valuable to the Commis- 
 sion. I do not see why he should be considered the representative of any class. He 
 would occupy a public position, in the interests of the public generally. I am quite 
 certain these people will not come voluntarily — I am Sure they won't. Personally I 
 do not feel that my instructions would justify me in giving the Commission any in- 
 formation of that kind that is official. 
 
 His Lordship. — I suppose everybody understands that any suggestions can be 
 made to the Commission through the Secretary, and if any person has information 
 that any one could give material evidence, all he has to do is suggest the names to 
 the Secretary of the Commission, and they will pass on the advisability of having that 
 person summoned. If the general public would aid us to that extent it would mater- 
 ially assist. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I think I could get plenty of Information, if I had no retainer 
 here, but I do not know how far my retaA'er permits me to go. I am troubled about 
 the limits of my retainer in that respect. 
 
 His Lordship. — Of coursel we don't want tne time of the Commission taken up 
 with theory. We want people who can give material evidence. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Yes, the facts are what you want to get. 
 
 His Lordship. — Is there any one prepared to give evidence now? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — There is one witness we will perhaps be able to bring in a minute 
 or two. To-morrow I expect to have witnesses who will give useful information. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — With relation to this Ladysmith strike? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Their evidence will relate to the workings of coal mines generally, 
 not to the particular interests of this strike, but on the question generally. 
 
 His Lordship. — How long before this witness will be here? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I expect them over to-night on the steamer. 
 
 His LoRbSHiP.- — I thought you said you had some witness here. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — We will know in five minutes whether he can come or not. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 89 
 
 SESSIC,>1AL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 William Wilson, sworn : 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long have you lived in Victoria ? — A. Since 1864. 
 
 Q. Have you been engaged in business since then? — A. Yes, ever since, in the 
 plumbing and tinsmithing business. 
 
 Q. Have you ever employed what is called union labour in your business ? — A. 
 I have not. 
 
 Q. How many people do you employ now ? — A. About eight hands altogether. 
 
 Q. That is outside of yourself ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. None of whom are members of any union as far as you know ? — A. No, none 
 of them are members of any union that I am aware of. 
 
 Q. Some of these hands are relatives or members of your own family, are they 
 not ? — A. Yes, there are six, practically, of my family, and my brothers. 
 
 Q. Have you ever had any diiRculty of any kind with any union ? — A. Yes, on 
 one occasion. Some years ago one of our hands that we employed left us and joined the 
 union. 
 
 Q. When was this ? — A. A number of years ago. I can hardly recollect — probably 
 seven or eight years ago. There was pressure brought to bear upon him by what they 
 tall, the Tinsmiths' Union, and he left our employ. 
 
 Q. Did you tell him that would mean discharge ?^A. I did not tell him so. He 
 left of his own accord. 
 
 Q. Would you have allowed him to remain after joining the union ? — A. Well, I 
 might state that our shop is a non-union shop, that we do not recognize any of these 
 unions. 
 
 Q. You prefer non-union labour ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Do you use any other ? — A. No other kind of labour. 
 
 Q. You say you would not employ union men ? — A. I won't go so far as to say 
 that, but I would not be guided or ruled by any of these unions, and as long as I am the 
 owner of that business I calculate on conducting it as I see fit, but I am perfectly 
 willing to sell out to any one who wants to continue it on union principles. As long 
 as I am master of that business I intend to run it to suit myself. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Has any particular consequence happened from this man joining the union ? 
 — ^A. Yes, he came back, I think, in less than a month and wished to be employed 
 again, simply because the union shops could not keep him fully employed. He was a 
 man with a family, and to the best of my recollection he stated he could only get three 
 days employment during a week. 
 
 Q. What was the result ? — A. Jfor that reason he came back and worked for us 
 afterwards. 
 
 Q. For h3W long ? — A. For over a year. He is in business for himself in Victoria 
 
 now. 
 
 Q. Have you had any difficuUy or trouble with any of the unions lately ?— A. Well, 
 I do not know, your Lordship, what you term difficulty. I understand we are adver- 
 tised as a scab shop, but that does not cut any figure with us. 
 
 Q. Where are you advertised ? — A. Well, in the Labour Hall, on the blackboard. 
 It is posted in large type so that the blind could feel it. I do not know this myself ; 
 different parties have informed me to that effect. 
 
 Q. How long has this been going on ? — A. Probably it would date back two months. 
 
 Q. Have you ever protested against it ?— A. I have not. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us whether or not it has in any way affected your business ? — A. 
 To the best of my knowledge I don't think it has. 
 
 WILLIAM WILSON— Victoria, May 11. 
 
90 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL VOMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Do you know whether or not there are others posted up in the same way ? — A. 
 That I could not say. . -■ . , .. ; ; 
 
 Q. Were you over notified by any offi<;er,of this' or.any linion. that, jtbatj was tobq 
 done ? — A. No, we have received np notice to that effept. I api certain if we .J>ad I 
 would have seen it. There was a notice in on* of thp. papers, I think in the ' Colpnigt,' 
 ■in what they call 'Labour Notes/ that opr shop was what; is caljed an unfaii:^,shop. 
 There was a notice in the labour column some two or three weeks ago. ,. . - ■ „ ;,; 
 
 ' Q. Could you get a copy of ihat i sue ? — A. 1 presunae so. 
 
 Q. To the effect that you were an unfair shop? — A- To that effect, yes., 
 
 Q. What is meant by an unfair shop ? — -A. Well, that we do not comply with the 
 union rules, I presume. 
 
 Q. What is your principal objection to employing union men ?^-A. Well, I think 
 myself it is pretty nearly time for;a bidsiness man to close his place of business when 
 he is to be dictated to by his employees. r ; .; ■■ \- 
 
 Q. Dictated to in what way-r-as to wages h—A. Yea, and as to howrs of laboijr. , 
 
 Q. I suppose the case is that it is practically impossible for an employer to em- 
 ploy union and non-union labour at the same time ? — A. They arfe aA elemfent which 
 does not seem to mix very well. I understand, ^accorditig to the rulespf; the {.union 
 that they are supposed to strike immediately a nons-union -man, is employed^; - .- ■; 
 
 Q. Have you any remedies to suggest to put an end to strikes ? — A. Pretty hard 
 question to answer, your Lordship, pretty hard question to answer. - 
 
 Q. You see we are instructed by the commission to inquire into the 'dauses of 
 strikes and suggest, if we can suggest, any remedy ? — A. Probably if the world was 
 depopulated a little. I think the labour market seems to be overdone. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. A surplus of men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Have you ever considered the question of interference in any way by the state 
 between employers and employees ? — A. Well, I think myself, that would be a death- 
 blow to politicians if an attempt of that sort were made. I think myself there is a 
 good deal of politics at the bottom of it. You cannot get any one in politics to take a 
 stand. For instance, if you asked our Premier or the Premier of the Dominion to in- 
 troduce a bill, do you think he would do it ? 
 
 Q. Depends altogether on the character oi the bill I should say. — A. You know 
 they all vote, and those votes tell in the case of an election. There is the trouble. 
 
 Q. It seems to me at present that in case of those strikes which reach large dimen- 
 sions, and in which the public are being injured, that sooner or later there must be 
 some machinery provided by the state — by which it may interfere ? — A. For instance, 
 the woik'ngmen soy there is nothing to prevent a rich man or a speculator, for instance, 
 making a corner of any product, flour, sugar or any commodity that they can advance. 
 They say, we have to pay for that. Now, why should not we combine our labour in 
 the same way ? 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. That is, make a corner in labour ? — A. Yes, so to speak. But there is one 
 thing the workingmen do not take into consideration at all. For instance, take in our 
 own business, they are paid their wages every Saturday night. There is a little book- 
 keeping done here, I am sorry to say, too much of it._ It may be months, or may be 
 for yeais before we can collect that amount back, before we can get paid for the labour 
 ourselves. They do not take that into consideration at all. They are working for 
 o'bers, and then we are making immense profits out of our labour. They don't take 
 intc conp-'lexation that we sometimes don't get paid at all. I am sorry to gay, too often. 
 
 WILLIAM WILSON— Victoria, May 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRTAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 91 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By His Lordship ■: ■ ■ :\'' ■ - . ; • . • 
 
 Q. You had better bring that ' Colonist ' here if you can, Mr. Wilson. — A. If 1 
 can get the paper you shall have it. I presume they have the paper On file; 
 
 Q.' How do the wages paid fey you compare with the union wages ? — A. Our wages 
 compare with the union rate of wages. 
 
 Q'. Do you pay as much — how much do you pay ? — A. We pay as much as the 
 union men get. 
 
 Q. How much do you pay ?-^A. The union scale run:s from $2.50, $3 and $3.50. 
 
 Q. And you say you pay as high as union labour ?^A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 Q. How many apprentices have you ? — A. One. '' 
 Q. Is he a member of your family ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact there is only one adult employee outside of the family ?— 
 A. No, two. We don't call an apprentice one of the hands. 
 
 By His, Lordship i ... .. , , , 
 
 ' Q.' I suppose you cannot tell what the objeit of posting up as unfair is ? — A. I 
 do not know unless it is to try and coerce us and compel us to join the union. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe :. 
 
 Q. Had you any difficulty rjust previous tp this time with the union ?^ — A. No. 
 cdifficulty. 
 
 Q. No more reason why that should be done now than any other time ? — A. No. 
 We declined to enter the union when they first formed. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. When was that ? — A. About a year ago. - 
 
 Q. You were asked to join that yourselves, or the men in the shop ? — A. The 
 master plumbers. 
 
 Q. Do you know any' one else who refused ? — A. Well, at that time I think we were 
 the only firm that refused. 
 
 Q. How many others are there in the master plumbers union? — A. A few — a 
 dozen — I can tell you in a minute — thirteen. 
 
 Q; There are thirteen master plumbers in this union, and you are the only one 
 standing out? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Has that in any way affected your business?^ A. I don't think it has. 
 
 Q. Was it the plumbers' union that posted you?— A. No, it was the Journeymen 
 Plnmbers Association. 
 
 Q. Who is the president and secretary of that concern? — A. Really, I cannot toll 
 you. To the best of my recollection a Mr. Colbert is secretary. I cannot be sure. 
 
 Q. Was there much pressure Isrought to bear on you to join the union? — A. Well, 
 T can't say that there was. Of course there was a general discussion that evening. 
 They tried to convince me that it would' be to my advantage to join the association. 
 
 Q. The master plumbers association is really an association of employers? — A. 
 Yes, there is the Master Plumbers' Association and the Journeymen's Association. 
 
 Q. Well, the masters is a union of employers? — A. It is, and it is not. There 
 does not seem to be any harmony among the master plumbers. Of course a journey- 
 man has got to belong to the union, the masters don't. They accede, of course, to 
 the journeymen's deinands as regards hours of labour, rate of wages, &c., but that 
 is all. There has not been what you would call a regular master plumbers association 
 formed. There are difficulties in the way of doing so which I prefer not to mention. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Is that the association you spoke of as having been formed a year ago? — A, 
 The Journeymen's Association. 
 
 WILLIAM WILSON— Victoria. May 11. 
 
92 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 Q. The masters' association was formed first ? — A. They tried to form it. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The journeymen's union has been in existence about a year ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that includes practically all the journeymen pluaaliers? — A. Yes, all the 
 journeymen plumbers. 
 
 Q. Eow many do they number ? — A. To the best of my knowledge, about 20 men. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether they are affiliated with any American organization ? — - 
 A. I cannot say. 
 
 Q. You think a man named Colbert is secretary ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Is there anything else you would like to tell the Commission ? — A. No, 
 nothing that I am aware of. 
 
 Thomas Henry Twigo, sworn : 
 
 Q. What is your occupation ? — A. Printer. 
 
 Q. How long have you lived in Victoria ?— A. Aboui 5 years. 
 
 Q. You are employed with the ' Colonist ' ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You are what is called a union man ?— A. I have been for about 18 years. 
 
 Q. What union are you a member of ? — A. The Typographical Union. 
 
 Q. That is an international ? — A. An international, yes. 
 
 Q. How many members h9.s tbat union got ? — A. About 50 local members. 
 
 Q. Are there any printers who are not union men, mot members of that union ?^ 
 A. Not in Victoria that I know of. 
 
 Q. How many members are there in the Canadian organization ? — A. I could not 
 tell you. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us how many in the total organization ? — A. I think somewhere 
 in the neighbourhood of 57,000. 
 
 Q. Where is its headquarters ? — A. Indianapolis. 
 
 Q, How long have you had branches in Canada ? — A. I could not answer that at 
 
 all. 
 
 The Secretary.— About 18C0. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. When the case of a strike comes up, who has the power to authorize or declare 
 a strike ? — A. It is declared by secret ballot of the local union. 
 
 Q. Has the executive at Indianapolis any power to order you out on strike ? A. 
 
 I have never in all my experience seen anything like that, but I know the International 
 could order a strike where a contravention of the international rules happened, where 
 there is a breakage. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of the constitution ? — A. I could get -vou one from the 
 secretary of the union, George M. Watt. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You say the headquarters have power, under some circumstances, to order you 
 out ? — A. I should think they could. 
 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGG— Victoria, May 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BBITISH COLUMBIA 93 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. That is in the case where a regulation of the international union was being 
 violated in a particular union ? — A. -Noi a particular union. Say, for instance, a local 
 union entered into an arrangement with an ofiSce itself which would be a violation of 
 international law. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The executive of Indianapolis could^ order them to refrain from entering into 
 that arrangement and order them out on strike if necessary ? — A. Yes, sir. I might 
 explain that. For instance, eight hours is a day's work on machines. If the union went 
 into an agreement to work longer hours than that it would be a contravention of the 
 rules of the international union. 
 
 Q. No matter if it was overtime or not ? — A. Oh, no, not if it was overtime'. 
 On linotype machines the international would not permit nine hours. On those 
 machines the executive could declare that invalid. 
 
 Q. What would be the consequences if the union did not fall in with the view of 
 the executive — could they be cashiered out of the union ? — A. That is something so 
 unlikely to happen. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Would their charter be suspended ? — A. The international has power to sus- 
 pend the charter. 
 
 Q. Would the individual members then be regarded as unfair ? — A. I should 
 think only that portion of the union that voted. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. But it was by secret ballot ? — A. Well, if seven members decided to hold the 
 charter the charter would stay with those seven. 
 
 Q. At any rate, there is a large degree of control reserved to the International 
 at Indianapolis ? — A. Little or none. 
 
 Q. Well, you told us if the international came to the conclusion that its rules 
 were being infringed, they could be compelled to give up their charter, so there is a 
 considerable control in the executive at Indianapolis ? — A. That is a power that I 
 have never seen exercised. 
 
 Q. You have never heard of the central authority suspending a charter for dis- 
 obedience of the regulations ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. What power has the executive as to sympathetic strikes ? — A. That would 
 require a little detail. That would be found in the international statement in the 
 agreement between the allied trades — the trades associated with it. As far as outside 
 sjrmpathetic strikes are concerned, I do not know. 
 
 Q. For instance, if one union was on strike, and it was thought necessary to its 
 success that another should go out on strike also — I mean the Typographical Union ? 
 (No answer.) 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : . ^ 
 
 Q. There could be more than one typographical union in a city ? — A. Not more 
 than one. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. And the jurisdiction of the local would cover the community in which it was ? — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Suppose there was some diflSculty between a corporation which owned a print- 
 ing plant in this place, and one in another, and a diflSculty arose in this place, what 
 would be the power of the executive, to call out the union in the other place in a sym- 
 pathetic strike ? — A. I think the executive would have that power. 
 
 Q. Is there any appeal from the action of the executive ? — A. There is an appeal 
 to the international and to the union in convention. 
 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGG— Victoria, May 11. 
 
94 MINtfTm OP tlVJbEnCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION- 
 
 S' EDWARD VI U A. 1904 
 
 Q. Is the International Typographical TJnion associated with any other organiza- 
 tion ? — A. With the American Federation of Labour. 
 
 Q. Where is the headquarters of that ? — A. Washington, I am local organizer for 
 that institution. - 
 
 Q. Has that body a local union of its own ?— A. It issues charters, t9, unions 
 where there is no national or international union. . '■. ,'::.-- j 
 
 Q. I don't quite understand that ? — A. For instance, if a local union is formed here, 
 you may take some trade that has no international union. The American Federation 
 of Labour is the same as the Dominion Trades Congress. It would issue what is called 
 a federal charter until such time as there would be- sufficient unions to form an inter- 
 national body. A recent decision of the''Artiericau Federation of Labour in Toronto, 
 decided that they must go first to the Dominion Trades Congress. That is a Canadian 
 institution. ■ ~ ; • .. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : . ■ 
 
 Q. So this American Federation lof Labour is the United States equisalent qf the 
 Trades and Labour Congress of Canada ?-^ A. Some: compare it as a sister body and; 
 by others the Dominion Congress is looked upon more as a state organization. 
 
 Q. Then the object of the American Federation of Labour is to issue charters 
 t» bodies which cannot- be affiliated- with any other body-? — -A. Tes, 
 
 Q. I suppose the grand aim of that body is to consolidate all labour ? — A. First 
 to give them charters and then to bring them together by themselves into an interna- 
 tional union. 
 
 Q. And then make that part of the American Federation of Labour ? — Ai Not 
 necessarily. 
 
 Q. Do they have a convention ? — A. Yes, it is constituted from the locals of the 
 bodies affiliated with it. 
 
 Q. What may affiliate — a local union ? — A. Yes. The Trades and Labour Council 
 is affiliated with the American Federation of Labour, or an international union may be 
 affiliated, and they would send delegates. 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of the constitution of the American Federation of Labour ? 
 — A. Yes, I think I have one at home. 
 
 Q. Could you let us have that ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How many members has the American Federation of Labour ? — A. I under- 
 stand they have about a million and a half. 
 
 Q. Is that the largest labour organization in America ? — A. In the world, I think. 
 
 Q. What relation, if any, exists between that organization and the Western Fede- 
 ration of Mipers ? — A. None whatever. 
 
 Q. Or between them and the United Mine Workers ? — A. There is some relatipn- 
 Aip, but I don't just exactly know what. The American Labour Union is a rival 
 body to the American Federation of Labour. 
 
 Q. Where has the American Labour Union got its headquarters ?^A. I think 
 in Denver. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That is a body of the same nature then — its chief object is to bring unions to- 
 gether ?- — A. Yes, and to go into politics. 
 
 Q. They interfere in politics — the American Labour Union ? — A. Yes, they have 
 declared for socialism, I think. 
 
 Q. Does the American Federation of Labour interfere in politics ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. What is its attitude to socialism ?. — A. It has not expressed any, I think 
 either for or again-^t it. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Are there any mining unions in British Columbia affilia1;pd with the American 
 Federation of Labour ?— A. Not that I know of. ; ; 
 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGG^Vlctoria, Maj 11. 
 
ON" moVSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH GOlVMlilA 05 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ' Q. -You state the difierence between .the -two unions to be, one renounce? poiUtics 
 and the other does not. One is a piire organization of crafts - and the other has also 
 pblitics ? — ^A. Yes, organization of crafts and politics. As they put it, they ' vote as 
 they strike.' 
 
 Q. Do you know enough of the rules of the Typographical Union or the American 
 Federation of Labour to say whether or not the boycott is regarded as a proper weapon, 
 of warfare ?— A. Well, the use of the label is more resorted to by it. , 
 
 Q. Is the boycott regarded as a legitimate weapon ? — A. I would not like to speak 
 lot the association on that. 
 
 Q. Have you any personal view about it ?— A. I think the boycott is legitimate. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to picketing ? — ^A. I think picketing is all right if pro- 
 perly carried on, , , ,,.;,. - : 
 
 Q. You would approve of posting up an employer as unfair in a labour hall, 
 would you ? — A. Perhaps I would not want to put it that way, but I would like to see 
 the fair employers posted up. 
 
 Q. You would like to put it in negative,- instead of -positive fashion ? — A. That is 
 to help the union. I would like them to get the benefit. 
 
 Q. You ar& not certain as to whether .you would post up a man as unfair ? — A. 
 It would depend a good deal on cireumstahces. 
 
 Q. What is the object of posting; a man as utifaiT ? — A. So that union men will 
 know him. ' 
 
 Q. So that the union will'let him severely alohe ? — A. They may let him alone, 
 and they may not. 
 
 Q. It is a species of boycott, is it not, to post a man as unfair ? — A. Not neces- 
 sarily, I should not think. 
 
 Q. When a man is posted as unfair that is notice to all union men not to have 
 any dealings with him is it not ? — A. There is no hard and fast rule that they should 
 not. 
 
 Q. What is the exact meaning of posting a man as unfair ? — A. That he does not 
 employ union help. 
 
 Q. What is the reason for advertising and posting the fact? — A. So that! union 
 men will know that this man's shop is unfair. 
 
 Q. But they would know without that? — A. Not all of them. Take 2,000 men in 
 the city. There might be a plumber, for instance, who would not know that a certain 
 plumber was unfair to the balance of organized labour. 
 
 Q. The fact of that would render the man hateful to the members- of the union ? — 
 A. I do not think hateful. 
 
 Q. What adjective would you employ in the situation? — A. TIateful is a strong 
 word. 
 
 Q. Would you say obnoxious ? — A. I would put it a little milder than that. 
 
 Q. Well, you select the adjective? 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Objectionable? — j.-. Perhaps objectionable would be the word. 
 
 By His Lordship : ' 
 
 Q. You think the better plan would, be to post up those who do employ union 
 men? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. I should think so, too. I . do not think there is any doubt, Mr. Twigg, but 
 that the other is rather an invidious way of advertising the fact? — A. It is a matter 
 of business. 
 
 Q. Do you think an employer should be molested in any way because he employs 
 non-union men? — A. No, I do not. 
 
 Q. Or that: a non-union man should be molested because he chose to work without 
 joining a union? — A. No, he should not be molested. 
 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGG— Victoria, May 11. 
 
S6 MIXUTES OF EVIDEKCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Have you any remedies to suggest for the stoppage or settlement of strikes ? — 
 A. It is a pretty hard question. 
 
 Q. Do you think that either the employer or the employee should be starved into 
 submission ? — A. No, I do not. 
 
 Q. What do you suggest as a proper remedy to settle a strike ? — A. I think con- 
 ciliation should be first attempted. 
 
 Q. Suppose the parties did not conciliate — what then ? — A. I 'would go as far 
 as arbitration, without a binding award. 
 
 Q. What is the good of that ? — A. I think public sentiment is strong enough to 
 decide. 
 
 Q. Do you think that public sentiment operates upon a body of men called a 
 union in any measure of degree ? — A. I think it does to a considerable degree. 
 
 Q. Men whose names are not even known to the public. Do you think public 
 sentiment affects a union very much ? — A. I do. 
 
 Q. If public opinion would bind, why not have it without arbitration ? — A. I do 
 not see how they could do that. 
 
 Q. You are not aware then that there are plenty of arbitrations which are absol- 
 utely binding — ^made so by law ? — A. That is different. I think that public sentiment 
 would be strong between right and wrong, that as a general rule the public sides with 
 right. Not always, but generally. 
 
 Q. That assumes that the public interest themselves in the dispute sufficiently 
 to acquaint themselves with the facts 3 — A. Yes, and that would come up by arbi- 
 tration. 
 
 Q. You do not think that compulsory arbitration is a proper arbitration ? — A. 
 No, I don't think we could have compulsory arbitration. 
 
 Q. They have it in New Zealand to-day f And in several Australian colonies ? 
 — A. Conditions are different in New Zealand. They ha,ve not the same land tax th^re. 
 
 Q. I suppose you admit that strikes may reach such proportions that the public 
 generally are interested as well as the parties of the dispute ?^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that in that event there should be some interference by the state ?-*-A. - 
 The public are interested in other ways and the state does not interfere. 
 
 Q. That is true enough, but things are getting to such a pass that it look« a^ if 
 the state would have to interfere ? — A. Why make it particular with trade unions ? 
 
 Q. I don't think it should be restricted to trade unions. Any employee can go 
 on strike, whether they are called a trade union or not, or any employer can lock- 
 out. What is the objection to a compulsory award, if there is any objection 'i—A. 
 There are several objections, I think. In the first place, in procuring the machivierys 
 
 Q. Suppose the parties agree ? — A. In my opinion they disagree more than they 
 agree. 
 
 Q. An ordinary civil dispute is tried by a judge in the face of the desires of the 
 parties ? — At Yes. 
 
 Q. I think we have not yet heard that we could get along without courts of law ? 
 — A. Yes, we often hear there is one law for the rich and one for the poor, and that 
 I think would be the case in this, that the judge, while he might be impartial in his 
 own way, because he has not observed the environments and surroundings of the 
 workingmen, he would not be able to give an impartial decision. 
 
 Q. You mean he cannot appreciate his work ? — A. No, he cannot appreciate it.. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. That is assuming a judge would be selected from outside of the class of labour ? 
 — A. I suppose one would have to go to the Supreme Court to get the most impartial 
 men. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Suppose you had a Supreme Court judge, with an assessor for each side ?-tA. 
 That would lead to more difficulty. 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGG— Victoria, May 11. 
 
ON ISDO^TRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 97 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. There would be no clanger but what the judge would have all sides presented 
 to him? — A. That would not alter his nature. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Do you know the dii-ection in which the majority of decisions in arbitration 
 cases in New Zealand have gone? — A. No, I do not. Sometimes we read of the men 
 objecting and sometimes they are perfectly satisfied. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You would not say that the unions were always in the right, would you ? — A. 
 No, I don't suppose they are always totally right. 
 
 Q. Well, if they are not always right there sho\ild be some one to settle the dif- 
 ference ? — A. That is the difficulty — to find somjeone who can settle it. 
 
 Q. Almost anything would be preferable to a constant condition of strike, would 
 it not — even a bad decision? — A. No, I don't think so. A bad decision might lead to 
 worse than a strike. 
 
 Q. You mean that a bad decision would not be carried out — would be disobeyed ? 
 A. It would be gotten over in some way. 
 
 Q. If the decision did not suit the union it would be counted a bad decision, and 
 any means of disobeying it would be countenanced ? That would be the spirit in which 
 it would be received by the union ? — A. Oh, no ; I don't think so. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Does the American Federation of Labour take part in strikes ? — A. No, I 
 don't think it does. It is an assembly similar to the Dominion Trades Congress. 
 
 Q. Is there any test of qualification for admission to the Typographical Union ?- 
 — A. Oh, yes. 
 
 Q. What is it ? — A. Five years apprenticeship first, and at the expiration of five 
 years if the applicant is not thought to be fit he is put back under instructions — that 
 is, if he Is not competent in a required time to earn a minimum wage. 
 
 Q. I understood you to speak of conciliation. Would that be voluntary concilia- 
 tion on the part of parties concerned, or would the state have any share ? — A. Com- 
 pulsory conciliation. 
 
 Q. That is to say that the strikers would announce that efforts would be made to 
 "orciliate, and if one party refused ? — A. That would require a court to bring them 
 together. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. That would be like bringing two quarrelling dogs together ? — A. I have seen 
 several cases of quarrelling dogs brought together. There is often the feeling that the 
 parties don't want to be the first to speak. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. At what stage do you think there should be intervention of the state ? You 
 say there should be compulsory conciliation. A strike is begun ; who is to decide how 
 long the strike may go on before it is time to settle ? Supposing it was left to the 
 initiative of the state ? It occurs to me, should not one of the parties have the power 
 to initiate the action ?— A. One of the parties, certainly. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Why should not the state itself have the power ? — A. I don't see anylhing 
 wrong with that. 
 
 Q. Take the case of the present coal strike. The public is as much damaged as 
 either party. Why should not the state have the power to step in and say to both 
 sides ' This must stop ' ?; — A. I do;i't think the state would have any more right to 
 interfere than it would when the coal combine puts up the price $1 a ton. 
 
 36a— 7 
 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGG— Victoria, May 11. 
 
98 mUfUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSIOV 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. That is another case which the state may have to settle at a future time. 
 Because there are several wrongs existing it is no argument to say others should not 
 be stopped by proper machinery ? — A. It is both the same iu my mind. 
 
 Q. So long as the immediate parties are only injured it may be proper that the 
 state should not interfere, but where the public is being damaged then, to my mind, it 
 is a very different question. 
 
 By Mr. liowe : 
 Q. Is it the opinion of the men generally that the state should have a larger control 
 in regard to such commodities as coal ? — A. I think the majority of organized men 
 would think that way. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. There is a difference, for instance, between the newspaper business and the 
 coal business. We can get along without newspapers, but not without coal. The 
 parties to a newspaper difficulty might fight it out until they were both starved to 
 death, and the public would not be damage{3 ? — A. On the other hand, they would not 
 know of a coal difficulty if the papers were not going. 
 
 Q. They would know if they could not get coal. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Do you know of any method equivalent to boycotting which could be used 
 by employers in regard to nien being blacklisted ? — A. I have heard of it. Men have 
 told me they have been blacklisted. 
 
 Q. Is the Trades anad Labour Council of Victoria incorporated ? — A. Not yet. 
 It was decided at their last meeting to seek incorporation under the Benevolent Socie- 
 ties Act. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I suppose it is an advantage, is it not ? — A. There is a difference of opinion. 
 
 Q. I suppose because the courts appear to hold them responsible ? — A. They seem 
 to hold them responsible anyway. 
 
 Q. Don't you think that where a union has power there should be a corresponding 
 responsibility for the use or misuse of that power ? — A. I do myself, though the 
 opinion is not generally shared. Would you make a union responsible for the acts of 
 individuals ? 
 
 Mr. EowE. — They should be responsible for the acts of their officers. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Why should not the union be responsible for the acts of officers purporting 
 to be acting for the union? — A. I think they should. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Can you tell us what is the object of joining an international or American 
 organization ? — A. I suppose it would be on account of the strength — the force there 
 would be in numbers. 
 
 Q. That is the chief advantage ? — A. I do not know whether it would be the chief 
 advantage, but there is so little difference in this country and an organization in an- 
 other country. Their interests are the same. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you say the chief advantage of international organization is ? A. 
 
 I think there are so many advantages. 
 
 Q. As compared with purely Canadian unions ? — A. In the first instance, I do 
 not think there is any one trade of itself sufficiently strong in Canada to successfully 
 run a national union. 
 
 THOMAS HENET TWIGG— Victoria, May 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 99 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. In other words, to conduct a strike to a successful issue ? — A. Yes, that is 
 one way of putting it. 
 
 Q. What are the other advantages ? — A. That would have a double advantage ; 
 it would cost less to run an international union. 
 
 By Mr. Howe : 
 Q. The relative cost ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Are there any disadvantages ? — A. Not that I am aware oil 
 
 Q. Suppose there was some difficulty about the purpose to which the funds were 
 being devoted, which were contributed by Canadians. What redress would Canadian 
 organizations have ? — A. Most of the laws of peculation of funds of unions are voted 
 on by a majority of the union. 
 
 Q. But the control of the funds is largely rn American hands? — A. Yes, but I 
 don't think there is any feeling of nationality between American organizations and 
 Canadian. I have worked on both sides of the line and found no difficulty. 
 
 Q. The flag cuts no figure ? — A. The union card is all that is required. 
 
 Q. It goes at par anywhere in America ? — A. Sometimes more than par. 
 
 Q. You have no fear about funds ? — A. I think there is more money coming from 
 international unions than ever went out. 
 
 Q. Are there ever any international disputes arising about the funds ? — A. Not of 
 any consequence. I did hear of one. A man once asked how much money the Typo- 
 graphical Uniou paid into the American Federation of Labour for Canadian members. 
 It amounted to about $53, so there was nothing in that. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us how much a year it costs the average union man to belong to 
 these unions of one kind or another ? What are your dues, for instance ? — A. It costs 
 me Y5 cents a month. 
 
 Q. To belong to the International Typographical Union ? — A. And the local union. 
 That includes everything. The direct dues are $1, and there is a remittance of 25 
 cents if you attend the meeting. 
 
 Mr. Rove. — That would be a good thing to have in the church. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Sometimes it's worth two bits to stay away ? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 Q. Wiiat is the yearly revenue of the Typographical Union — about what ? — A. 
 I could not tell you. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Well, you said there were 57,000 members. Would the average be 50 cents a 
 month ? — A. About 50 cents. 
 
 Q. That would be about $29,000 a month. What is the per capita ? — A. The 
 regular per capita is 35 cents, about 40 cents now. 
 
 Q. Are you liable to assessments for strikes ? — A. Not unless submitted to refer-' 
 endum vote. 
 
 Q. Uuless there is you are not bound to any assessment ?— A. Except in special 
 cases, in a particular fight, like the fight against the Los Angeles ' Times.' That is 
 25 cents a month, there was a referendum taken on that. 
 
 Q. Is there anything to make it impossible for a non-union man to work with 
 union men ? — A. Every one working in a union shop in Victoria is supposed to have 
 his current monthly working card. He might work on a permit granted by the union. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. If the employer employs non-union men, the union men will go on strike ? — A. 
 The employer does not hire the printera. 
 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGG— Victoria, May 11. 
 
100 illNUTES OF EVIDEXCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Who does ? — A. The foreman of the office. He is always a member of the 
 union. 
 
 Q. It is practically impossible for non-union printers to get employment ? — A. No, 
 he has as good an opportunity to get work as other men, until the next itieeting of the 
 union. He goes to the foreman. 
 
 Q. So 'that it is impossible for a non-union man to get employment without sooner 
 or later becoming a member of the organization ? — A. Yes, I guess that is right. 
 
 By Mr. Boiue : 
 
 Q. They would not impose that condition in the allied trades ? — A. There are 
 occasions where the binding department of a printing concern might be non-union. 
 
 Q. Would that be true of the press room also ? — A. The same with the press room. 
 
 Q. And the machinists ? — A. The machinists are members of the Typographical 
 Union. 
 
 Q. The machine repairers ? — A. Yes, they are members of the Typographical 
 Union. 
 
 Q. Would it be considered proper for a union man to walk out if a non-union 
 man started to repair a broken-down mac"hine ? — A. If there was a union machinist 
 available the men would have the right to say that they did not care to work. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. He would be looked upon as a leper ? — A. No, not in that way. 
 Q. Well, the case is very bad, is it not ? 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. I suppose you mean if there was discrimination against a union man the men 
 would object to working ? — A. Well, it would not even need to be discrimination. The 
 office makes an agreement with the union that it will employ union help and none 
 but that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Would it always be impossible ? Union men might work in a shop where no 
 agreement existed? — A. There is no agreement, so far as a written agreement is con- 
 cerned. Some unions make these agreements, but not in Victoria — it has been 
 recognized so long. 
 
 Q. It is understood in the printing trades that no one but a union man need 
 apply ? — A. Yes, that is practically what it comes to. 
 
 Q. Case of have to, or get out of the printing business ? — A. No, there are other 
 places they could work. 
 
 Q. Where? — A. They might work in Los Angeles. 
 
 Q. Or probably in Dawson ? — A. No, they could not work up there. 
 
 Q. There are one or two places where they might work ?— A. No, there might be 
 more. 
 
 Q. How r.bout Los Angeles — what is the reason they could get work there ?— A. 
 I understand there is a paper there, the Los Angeles ' Times,' where they are working 
 about 15 hours a day. There might be a chance there until they were worn out 
 
 Q. That is the situation in the printing business ?— A. They do not compel any 
 man to join the union. They have reserved the right to choose whom they shall work 
 with. 
 
 Q. You select your company ? 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 By the way, un 
 opinion ? — A. 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGG— Victoria, May 11. 
 
 Q. By the way, unions have resulted in the improvement of wages of the men 
 in their opinion ? — A. Yes, undoubtedly. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 101 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Do you think if there were no unions that wages would be lower ? — A. Yes, 
 very much. I also think that they do not alone improve the wages of the organized 
 men, but also any men not organized. The non-union men also benefit. 
 
 Q. And I suppose you think that that indirectly is an advantage to the public ? 
 — A. Most certainly, it makes a more contented people and brightens their lives. 
 
 Makes better men. 
 f 
 His Lordship. — I suppose we may adjourn. 
 
 Victoria, May 12, 1903. 
 Bagstee R. Seabeooke^ sworn : 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Where do you live ? — A. In Victoria South. 
 Q. How long have you lived here? — A. Thirty-three years. 
 
 Q. You were, up to a short time ago, manager of the Albion Iron Works i — A. 
 Yes, sir. I quit on February 28. 
 
 Q. When were you appointed manager ? — A. I was manager eight years — in 1895. 
 
 Q. During that time you can tell us roughly what number of men you employed ? 
 — A. That varies a good deal. In 1899 we had about 300. 
 
 Q. You had a contract, or at least the firm had a contract, for the repairing of a 
 ship called the ' Garonne ' — when was that ? — A. That was in 1901. 
 
 Q. Tell us what you know about that contract and about the strike that happened ? 
 — A. At the time that the work was opened there was trouble on the other side. That 
 was before we took the contract. There was a contract made in the first place with 
 Moran Brothers. 
 
 Q. There was trouble in the works of Moran Brothers ? — A. Yes, in the moulding 
 and machine departments in Seattle. The boilermakers were working on the 'Garonne' 
 in Seattle when I took the work ; before I took the contract I called a meeting of the 
 Boilermakers' Union here. 
 
 Q. For what purpose ? — A. For the purpose of knowing whether I could take the 
 contract or otherwise. 
 
 Q. And by that I gather if they had refused to consent to your doing that you 
 could not have secured any men ? — A. No, sir. It was entirely with them to say 
 whether I could take it or not. 
 
 Q. It was up to them ? — A. Yes, I showed them the total correspondence. 
 
 Q. The boilermakers were not on strike in Seattle ? — A. Not at that time ; it 
 was the machinists and moulders, I thinls: ; I am not sure about the moulders. 
 
 Q. What was the result of the interview ? — A. I gave them the correspondence 
 to read, so that they would understand the situation exactly, and then asked them 
 i f I was open to take the contract. They said it was all rJfeht, and they would work on 
 it when the ship was brought over. I drew up a telegram which I submitted to them. 
 
 Q. What was the telegram ? — A. I cannot exactly remember what the wording 
 was. It was that I could take the contract, and could leave that night. It was ad- 
 dressed to Frank Waterhouse, the owner of the ' Garonne.' I met Mr. Waterhouse, 
 and Mr. Robert Moran, of Moran Brothers, and it was mutually arranged to take 
 over the contract — that is Moran's contract. It was not exactly taking over Moran's 
 contract. I was to take a wew contract from Waterhouse, and he was to close his con- 
 tract with Moran Brothers. 
 
 Q. It was arranged that Waterhouse should release the Morans ? — A. Yes, and 
 make a new contract with me, provided I would put up a guarantee that if I could 
 
 BAGSTER R. SEABROOKE— Victoria, May 12. 
 
102 illNUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 190* 
 
 not do the work, in the event of falling down with the union boilermakers, that I should 
 pay the expense of the ship both ways. 
 
 Q. If the Boilermakers' Union went back on their proposition ? — ^A. Yes. You see 
 Waterhouse was rather sceptical. I was sure of it, because I had had this meeting, 
 and they had given me their word, so I gave the assurance by guaranteeing expenses 
 both ways. When I guaranteed the expenses Mr. Waterhouse closed it. I went to 
 the ship with Mr. Moran, and he gathered all the parts that were neeessary and put 
 them aboard the ship. 
 
 Q. What was the matter with the ship ? — A. They were having new furnaces put 
 in, in the four boilers, and a lot of other alterations. 
 
 Q. They were necessary repairs ? — A. Oh, yes. All the furnaces were out at the 
 time. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. The;e parts were something he had already supplied ? — A. Parts he had already 
 made in the shop. 
 
 Q. You had no contract with Morans ? — A. Nothing whatever — no connection 
 whatever. My dealings were with Frank Waterhouse. He was just completing the 
 terms of the contract. There was nothing to do with Morans. So much so that it 
 did not matter whether Mr. Moran put anything on board the ship or not, so far as our 
 contract went. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What was it you were to do ? — A. I was to complete the boilers, and make all 
 the other work, engine work, boiler heads. 
 
 By Mr. Roive : 
 
 Q. The other work specified in the original contract ? — A. Yes. The boat was in 
 very bad shape at the time. 
 
 Q. A large amount involved ?— A. It would run about $30,000 or $35,000 all told. 
 It was the biggest proposition I had. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You got the ship over ? — A. Yes, I got her over, and when I came over there 
 was a committee of boilermakers from Seattle sent over on the same boat with me. 
 
 Q. They came over on the same boat ? — A. Yes. I did not know they were a com- 
 mittee at the time. Of course I knew the boilermakers were aboard, but I thought 
 they were going over to get work on the boat. 
 
 Q. You thought they were going to "Victoria to get work on the ship ? — A. Yes, 
 the Garonne. The next moi-ning — the ship arrived late that night — this was in 1901, 
 I think somewhere in March. She arrived late that night, and next morning I started 
 to undertake the repairs, and the men refused to work. The boilermakers refused 
 to touch the job. The committee which was sent over held a meeting with them and 
 claimed the job an unfair one, and would not allow them to go to work. 
 
 Q. Who told you this?— A. This was told me by the foreman — the foreman of 
 the shop. 
 
 Q. Is he a member of the union ? — A. He has been a member, but is not now. 
 He telephoned me in the house before I got down. The machinists and other trades! 
 took hold of the work without asking a question. They went to work, but the boiler- 
 makers refused. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Although it was a machinists' strike, and not boilermakers ? A. Yes 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What do these men mean by the job being an unfair one ? — A. A scab job. 
 BAGSTER R. SEABROOKT'— Victoria, May 12. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISFDTES IN BRITISB COLUMBIA 103 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. What is meant by that? — A. It means it was taken from a port where there 
 was a dispute. A job taken in an effort to break a strike. 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Who decides the point for the boilermakers ? — A. It is very difficult to say. 
 Sometimes they hold a i^gular meeting, and other times they hold an informal 
 meeting. 
 
 Q. Was it a question of wages at Seattle? — A. Hours more than wages. 
 
 Q. How did the terms that you gave your men compare with the terms demanded 
 in Seattle ? — A. I gave them the terms they were demanding in' every particular, al- 
 though they were working on other terms when I made the arrangement. They 
 agreed to work. I gave them the Seattle wages all around — a good deal better than 
 contemplated in the original agreement. 
 
 Q. Was this before Ihey struck ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How did they know you were going to give them these wages? — A. I instruct- 
 ed the foreman to do so. I called a meeting that night, as soon as I returned, about 
 four or five o'clock — I called a meeting of the same men, and I told the men direct 
 that they were going to get Seattle wages. This was at a subsequent meeting, with 
 the foreman present. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. You amended the terms? — A. What I told them was that I had just returned 
 from Seattle, and what the other trades were going out for I was prepared to give 
 them, and I would not ask them to carry it out on the old wages. , 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. That is, the terms they were asking in Seattle? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. They were not getting them? — A. No. The boilermakers had given notice 
 that they would go out on a certain date for particular terms. So I met these terms. 
 And they told me at the meeting that afternoon that they would go to work the next 
 morning. That was before they had an opportunity of knowing that this committee 
 was coming over. I saw the men before the committee did. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. When they informed you that Ihey were not going to work what did you say? 
 — I came down as soon as I could after I got the telephone message, and had a meeting. 
 
 Q. What did you tell them? — A. I told them I expected them to carry out their 
 promise to me. 
 
 Q. What did they say ? — A. They said they could not, as this committee had come 
 over from Seattle. 
 
 Q. I suppose the foreman was speaking then? — A. No, it was the president of 
 the union, and the secretary-treasurer, with the men present. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. They said they could not — why ? — A. They could not go to work owing to their 
 instructions not to do so — instructions from the committee that came over — the result 
 of their meeting. 
 
 Q. Is this a committee of the local lodge at Seattle? — A. I presume so. I could 
 not tell you for sure. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. This was evidently the International Union? — -A. It was fi'om the Seattle 
 union. They have all different lodges, but they are all affiliated. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Who is the president of the lodge here ? — A. Penkith was at that time. 
 
 BAGSTER R. SEABROOKE— Victoria. May 12. 
 
101 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Do you know who is now ? — A. Some of the boilermakers here, I suppose. 
 Q. Penkith was president, and I think Gough was secretai-y. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. They said they were instructed by the Seattle committee not to go to work ? — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Any explanation given ? — A. They said it was an unfair job. 
 
 Q. What did you say to that ? — A. I had several meetings with them. 
 
 Q. On the same day or different days ? — A. On the same day and at different 
 days, and at night also. I could do nothing with them. We had to send the ship 
 back to Seattle, and take the other men off the ship. I called off all the labour on the 
 ship at the time ; in fact I think I called them off before that time. 
 
 Q. Had you done any work on the ship at all ? — A. Oh, yes, about $300 worth, 
 I think it was— $300 or $400. 
 
 Q. Did you get paid for that ? — A. No, sir, that was lost. 
 
 Q. You could not get paid for this under your contract ? — A. No, because we did 
 not complete it. 
 
 Q. What do you estimate the firm's loss at ? — A. In the general neighbourhood 
 of about $1,250, probably a little more. 
 
 Q. Did you point out to the men that Waterhouse and yourselves were being in- 
 jured as well as Moran Brothers ? — A. So much so that the local union here did offer 
 to reimburse the company to the extent of what they were out. 
 
 Q. No stated sum ? — A. No, they did not specifiy any stated sum. 
 
 Q.'What did you do about that ? — A. I did not exactly'see how they could help 
 us to any extent. We would sooner that they did the work than take any money from 
 them. We did not care about that. 
 
 Q. They would not work on that ship ? — A. No ; nothing would induce them. 
 
 Q. Did they tell you it was against the rules of the International Union to work 
 on this ship ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did they tell you what the consequence would be if they did go to work ? — A. 
 I don't think they did. I think they just said they were sorry they could not work. 
 
 By Mr. Roive : 
 
 Q. Did they remain in your employ ?^A. They said the meeting they had was an 
 informal meeting and they could not go to work, although I had the president and 
 secretary and treasurer of the union here. They were all employed at the work at the 
 time. 
 
 Q. They had two meetings ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Did they mean that they had no jurisdiction to decide the question ? 
 His LoEDSHip. — No, they said they were not bound by their promise. 
 Mr. Bodwell. — Would not that mean that the meeting here had no jurisdiction ? 
 
 His Lordship. — It means it was in contravention of their regulations. After the 
 men have given a promise by the president and other officers, and they found when 
 the Seattle men came over that they had been violating some regulation of the union. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell.— Was it not that the meeting had not been properly called ? But 
 I suppose we will get the particulars when the president comes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. They were not bound by informal meetings ? Did they give any reason ?— A. 
 It would have been carried out had it not been for this committee which came over 
 They said they would have carried it out, if it had not been for the committee which 
 came over from Seattle. There is no question about that. 
 
 BAGSTER R. SEA BROOKE— Victoria, May 12. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL TflBPUTES IN BRITI8B COLUMBIA 105 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Are the employees in the Albion Iron Works all union men ? — A. 'So. 
 
 Q. What percentage are ? — A. Ninety per cent are union. 
 
 Q. Has any trouble arisen from the fact that the firm has employed non-union 
 men ? — A. Only in the boiler shop. 
 
 Q. There are non-union boilermakers there ? — A. Yes. That is this last year. 
 It was an open shop ; now it is a union shop. 
 
 Q. When did it become a union shop ? — A. It is practically a union shop, last 
 November, I think it was. 
 
 Q. What brought that about ? — A. The Amphion contract. We were standing out 
 then against the union, and this contract came on, and we wanted to put in a tender, 
 and we could not do it without giving in to the unions. So we patched it up and called 
 it a union shop. 
 
 Q. How did you mean? You could not get the contract? — A. We could not find 
 enough union men to take the work. 
 
 Q. Tha union men would not work with the non-union men on the work ? — A. No, 
 they would not touch it. 
 
 Q. How many men are employed in the boiler shop? — A. It varies a good deal. 
 The average would probably be 25 or 30. 
 
 Q. Are there any disadvantages, from the point of view of the employer, in em- 
 ploying union men only? — A. No, I don't think so. I would sooner deal with union 
 men than I would otherwise, provided they were reasonable in Iheir demands. 
 
 Q. That is a pretty big proviso?— A. Yes, they have these agitators coming in 
 from the other side, and interfering with them. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Provided the professional agitator could be kept away? — A. Yes, would leave 
 theim alone." 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Why do you say you would sooner deal with the union ? — A. Because I believe 
 in unionism, for the reason that all shops have got to pay the same wages. 
 
 Q. Then I suppose you know better how to figure contracts ? — A. You know'j'ou 
 are on the same level with your competitors, that they are not getting cheaper labour. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. I suppose if one shop is unionized, it is to the interest of that shop that all 
 the others should be? — A. Not altogether; that would depend. 
 
 Q. They might get cheaper labour? — A. They might and they might not. But 
 the unionsi are strong enough now, so that all shops must employ union men, both 
 machinists and boilermakers. 
 
 Q. Did you keep these men in your employ after the Garonne incident? — A. Yes, 
 they went to work. ] 
 
 Q. Did they get the wages offered on the Garonne, or less? — A. They took less. 
 They went on taking less wages in preference to working on the Garonne. They 
 said it was not a question of wages at all; it was a principle of the union. 
 
 Q. That correspondence you submitted at the first meeting was it with Mr. Water- 
 house or Mr. Moran? — A. The correspondence was with Mr. Waterhouse. I did not 
 know Mr. Moran in the business at all. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You say the sole disadvantage of a union is the danger of interference by out- 
 siders? — A. Yes; that has been the trouble in every case. 
 
 Q. You mean by outsiders, the agitators, the walking delegate? — A. Yes. There 
 is one point I mi^ht have stated. That was that Mr. Waterhouse engaged the services 
 of Mr. Jenkins to oversee the work in Victoria — to represent his. interests while here. 
 
 BAGSTER R. SEABROOKE— Victoria, May 12. 
 
106 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Jenkins was an ex-foreman in the Albion Iron Works. That was one objection the 
 jTieoi had. He represented the owner, not the workmen. He had no power over the 
 workmen. That was oi^e objection that they raised. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 
 Q. His dealings would be entirely with you— to see that the contract was properly 
 ,carrfed out?— A. Y.^s. Of course they claimed that I was still doing the iwork for 
 Morans, and that Jenkins was still representing Morans— he was Moran's foreman. 
 
 Q. They were not complaining in Seattle about Jenkins before the awarding of the 
 contract? — A. No, not that I know of. 
 
 Q. They thought that was an evidence that they were doing work for Moran 
 under his foreman ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bod-well : 
 
 Q. But they agreed, if you got another man in Jenkins' place, that they would 
 work ? They would not touch it then ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. In your experience with unions, have you found that there is a tendency on 
 their part to demand increased prices, when conditions go up? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Is there any inclination to take less wages when times get bad? — A. They 
 always want all they can get. 
 
 Q. They don't make reciprocal offers ? — A. Never heard of any case of that kind. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. They never consent to a reduction ? — A. No. 
 Q. Well, you would not if you were a workman, and I would not if I were. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. So, if in good times you establish a rate of wages, the foundation of that i» 
 the increased business and the added profits. Now, when there comes a depreciation, 
 and business decreases, and profits come down, they still want to maintain the good- 
 time wage, and would probably strike if there was a reduction ? That would be 
 your experience? — A. Yes, that is right. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That cures itself in the end by the amount of work ? — ^A. Yes, you have to lay 
 men off. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. That means the cessation of business in the country — the only cure for that 
 is to have business stop ?— A. When business is falling off you select the best men. 
 
 Q. Will the union consent to your selecting the best men ?— A. I have never 
 heard anything to the contrary. 
 
 Q. Don't they have to pass inspection, and say whether or not that is the thing 
 to be done ?— A. You could not go outside of Victoria, provided there were men idle 
 in Victoria. 
 
 Q. They could tell you to employ men here, although they were not as good as 
 men elsewhere ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Don't Ihey go to the extent of ascertaining whether or not you ought to lay 
 men off, and would they not call it an unfair shop in case you laid off any consider- 
 able men on account of the fact that the wages were so high you could not undertake 
 a certain work ?— A. I don't think I ever had an experience like that. 
 
 Q. In your dealings with unions have you reason to believe ' that is a stand 
 which could be taken ? — A. It is quite possible. 
 
 Q. You would have to come to their terms, or in accordance with the constitution 
 they could call your shop unfair and cut you out of good work by refu^ng to work ?— 
 A. Yes, I suppose so. 
 
 BAGSTER R. SEABROOKE— Victoria, May 12. 
 
OK INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IK BRITISH COLUMBIA 107 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. But do they do so ? — A. I never heard of an instance. 
 
 Q. Did you ever have occasion to ask men to take less wages ? — A. Many years 
 ago we simply told them there would be a reduction. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. That was before union shops ?• — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You would not try it now ? — A. Eo. 
 
 Q. And that necessarily prevents you taking work, and works to the disadvant- 
 age of Victoria — in such cases you could not make a profit on the higher rate of wages? 
 —A. No. 
 
 Q. And although that rate of wages was established in good times ? — A. No. Of 
 course in the eastern provinces they work at a lower rate although they have unions 
 there. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. I suppose that is because the cost of living is less ? — A. Probably the cost 
 of living, I suppose. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You say you prefer dealing with union men. Do you say that as manager of 
 the company, or assuming you v>'ere in the works ?- — A. In a general way. I believe 
 in unions. If they pull together right, everybody is on the same road as regards com- 
 petition in work. It is a matter also of equipment of your shop how you can compete. 
 
 Q. There was another strike in 1901, was there not ? — A. Yes, I think that was 
 in November. That was a ship from the other side — ^the ' Topeka.' 
 
 Q. Can you tell us about that ? — A. That was in connection with the ' Topeka ' 
 coming over. The men said they would only work e^ght hours, and when it came to 
 the boat leaving here they agreed to take nine. I was returning with the tender in 
 my hand. I figured on the contract with the ' Topeka ' for nine hours, when the fore- 
 man told me the eight hour system was off. 
 
 Q. Then they consented to go to work on the ' Topeka ' if it would be eight hours ? 
 — A. They said they would have to have eight hours on a ship coming from the Ameri- 
 can ports. 
 
 Q. Because they worked on the other side where they had eight hours ? — A. They 
 said they had to have eight hours. We could not stand for that, and I put non-union 
 men on the work and finished the contract. That involved a strike, and the men went 
 out for something like nine months until we fixed it up. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. Do you mean there was no work in your shop ? — A. Yes, but it was with non- 
 union men in the boiler shop. 
 
 Q. Is there any difference noticeable in the skill of non-union men and union 
 men ? — A. You cannot find any non-union men — they are very scarce. 
 
 Q. You say you had them for nine months in your shop ? — A. Some of them have 
 since joined the union. Some of them were helpers and we made boilermakers out of 
 them. I think three or four of them jsined the union. We made boilermakers out of 
 them. 
 
 Q. What do they make ?— A. They make $3.50 a day — they make boilers. 
 
 Q. And the result of the ' Topeka ' strike was that union men were excluded from 
 your shop for nine months ? — A. Yes. We did not refuse to give them work, but they 
 would not work. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Would you call that a satisfactory experience with unionism ?— A. No, I would 
 not. That is the same trouble again. These agitators came in and would not allow 
 them to carry on the thing in a reasonable way. 
 
 BAGSTER R. SEABROOKE— Victoria, May 12. 
 
108 MiyUTES OF EMDEyCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. They simply held you up for eight hours after you entered into the contract 
 for nine ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that was due to foreign interference ? — A. Yes, I am sure of that. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. This was a foreign job ?— A. Yes, and they simply said if they worked on the 
 job they would have to draw so much money for it. 
 
 Q. And it is evident then, in dealing with unions that you have to reckon on the 
 possibility of outside interference ? — A. Yes, at every stage of the game. 
 
 Q. You had to provide against this sort of thing ? — A. I don't think they would 
 guarantee anything. Another case in point — a boat from 'Frisco. We had a meeting 
 also to know whether we would take that job or not. A telegram was sent to 'Frisco, 
 and a telegram came back saying they could not work on it. They sent a telegram 
 wanting to know why it was an unfair job. A telegram came back saying it was a 
 fair job and saying they could work on it. I went down, and the ship had left for 
 foreign parts. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Then that, means that the boilermakers are subject to interference of persons 
 in Seattle and San Francisco ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Where else ? — A. From Denver, I believe. 
 
 Q. Are they affiliated with the Western Federation of Miners ? — A. I could not 
 say. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Do you know from experience whether similar action would be taken on the 
 other side at the instance of a union from this side ? Suppose the trouble had been 
 in your shop, would the same result have followed ? — A. I hardly think it would. I 
 think they would have done the work in Seattle. Of course I can't tell. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. They are very greedy for work over there ?— A. I think they would have been 
 more willing to help Seattle out. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Was it the executive's interference, or interference on the solicitation of one 
 union to another ? — A. I think it was solicitation of one union to another. 
 
 Q. What was the name of that other ship ?— A. The ' Horda.' I was cut out of 
 that contract by interference in San Francisco. They did not want to put me in a 
 false position, and they telegraphed to 'Frisco. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. That means that San Francisco was the place that gave the orders ?— A. Yea, 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. In Seattle and San Francisco— where else ?— A. We '-><.n only take the work 
 on what they claim is a fair job. If not, we cannot touch it. 
 
 Q. What aie the limits in which they are likely to interfere ?— A. We cannot tell. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Was there a contract on this boat in San Francisco ?— A. No she had been on 
 the union dock, and had a couple of patches put on her. Outside of that nothinc Was 
 done. ^ 
 
 Q. Why didn't they repair her there ?-A. They could not ; there were troubles 
 on there at the time. 
 
 BAGSTER R. SE.\BROOKE— Victoria, May 12. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 109 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. In July, 1902, there was a strike, was there not, of shipwrights and caullcers ? 
 — A. I had nothing to do with that. I know a little about it, but it was nothing to do 
 with me. They called them shipwrights. They are ship carpenters. 
 
 Q. As far as you can say, then, the whole objection is the liability of outside in- 
 terference ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If the mou on this side were unionized under Canadian law you think there 
 would be no difficulty ? — A. No. I have always found them reasonable and willing 
 to meet any one fairly if left alone. Before the unions were strong a firm could take 
 advantage of them. A good many of them that were earning their money would not 
 get it, and others again in other shops would take advantage of that. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. An unscrupulous man would set the pace and the others would have to follow ! 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Then an advantage of the union is to steady the rate of wages, so that you 
 can compete more favourably with competitors ? — A. Yes, so that you can compete 
 more favourably in a modern way. The labour does not make the profit altogether. 
 You have to have your equipment — machinery. 
 
 Q. Could you say in this 'Gaionne ' matter what Lvnount would have been expended 
 in labour ? — A. The labour would have been in the neighbourhood of about $23,000. 
 It might go a little higher. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. In dealing with a union, when you dismiss a man for incompetency or refus- 
 ing to work have you to consult the union ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. They don't take that as a causus belli ? — A. No, I never had any interference 
 in that way. 1 have never dismissed a union man exactly — just simply laid them off. 
 
 Q. No inquiry made about it? — A. No. 
 
 Q. The question which chiefly concerned you was the rate of wa^es? — A. Yes, 
 and the reduction of the hours. 
 
 Q. What are the hours now? — A. They are working nine hours. 
 
 Q. In all these trades? — A. Yes, nine hours in on outside the sho^,. 
 
 Q. I suppose it is only a short time when they will have eight hours ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. What are the wages of boilermakers ? — A. $3.50 minimum rate for nine hours. 
 
 Q. Can you pay other men more if you desire, without discriminating as between 
 men ? — A. Yes, as long as we don't pay any less than $3.50 we can pay any oth^r man 
 as much as we please. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. When you don't consider a man is worth $3.50 you simply discharge him? — 
 A. We lay him off. 
 
 Q. That's what you call it?— A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Do any boys work in your shop? — A. No, except in the stove department. 
 
 Q. Is there a union in the stove department? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Is there a standard there— that a man must do a certain amount of work?— 
 A. No, they work on piece work, and they make what they can. There is no 
 limitation. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. It ia said there is in some places. It does not apply to this one ? — A. No. 
 
 BAGSTER R. SEABROOKE— Victoria, May 14 
 
110 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. In the event of a dispute between the union and an employer, which has lasted 
 any time, what method of settling the thing would you advocate ? — A. The only way 
 you can settle is simply meet them and argue the points in dispute. 
 
 Q. Would you favour compulsory arbitration in the event of refusal to agree ? — 
 A. Yes, I think I would. 
 
 Q. Suppose the parties refused to agree upon the third arbitrator, how would you 
 have the third arbitrator appointed? — A. I think the third arbitrator would have to 
 decide the question. 
 
 Q. How would you get the third arbitrator appointed ? — A. As to that I would 
 consider the Supreme Court judge satisfactory. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Would you think it an advantage to have an official third arbitrator appointed 
 to act in all cases of dispute, appointed by some central authority, or one for the whole 
 of British Columbia, who would always be the third arbitrator? — A. I don't think that 
 would be as good as if the Chief Justice should make the appointment at the time. 
 I think he would be apt to get a good man if he appointed in eao'i particular case. 
 
 Q. Is there such a difference in the different trades that one man who made a 
 business of the matter would not be as qualified as if you got a particular man in each 
 particular case ? — A. I would prefer a particular man in each particular case. 
 
 Q. Would you not think that a man who made it his profession to study trade con- 
 ditions generally, and to gather information from all kinds of practical experience — 
 don't you think he would be more useful, supposing him to be in other respects equal 
 to the particular man ? — A. You are quite right enough in that — he would probably 
 be more useful in a way, but it would ineet the union far better to have a different man 
 appointed in different cases. They would look upon it as though they were having 
 fair treatment. 
 
 Q. What would your opinion be as to the actual beneficial result ? — A. I don't 
 know ; I could not say, except in my opinion it would be more to the advantage to 
 appoint a man in every case. 
 
 Q. You mean it would be more likely to give satisfaction ?— A. Yes, far more — 
 so that they did not know who the man is beforehand. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Suppose I had a scheme by which a Supreme Court Judge was selected, and 
 that Supreme Court judge was selected by lot, so that Tio one would know in advance ? 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — They would know it would be one of the five. 
 
 A. I don't think there would be any objection to that. I think they would have 
 an objection if a permanent man were appointed. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. For the reason that, sooner or later, he would develop a bias ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — It seems to me his mind would be broadened. He is bound to be 
 more qualified. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Have you any opinion as to the causes of strikes or disagreements ? — ^A. Well 
 in some cases it is caused through lodges having very little business to transact, and 
 they want to make business, and they put up some of these questions to discuss, and 
 they have to work on them. 
 
 Q. Do you thinlc that they arise from the distance between employer and employed 
 — lack of personal contact ? — A. I don't think so. 
 BAGSTER R. SEABROOKE— Victoria, May 12. 
 
Oy INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA HI 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Do you think many strikes are caused by the policy of the international rather 
 than the local trouble? — A. I don't know; I think it is more of a local trouble. 
 
 Q. In all these questions affecting your shop, they were all foreign jobs? — A. 
 Mostly, yes. 
 
 Q. They could look on you as, in a ssnse, interfering with business in the United 
 States?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Their reasoning would probably be if you interfere in our warfare we have a 
 right to stir it up in yours? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That is all right as between the Moran Bros, and the employees, but wliy 
 should they kick at the unfortunate owner of tlie ship? — A. They would not beli(;vo 
 but what I was doing the work for Morans. It was that suspicion they had. 
 
 Q. That you were concluding Moran's contract for Waterhouse? — A. Yes, Moran's 
 had nothing to do with it. They did not believe that. Although they saw the cor- 
 respondence, thoy thought there was something at the back of it that they did not 
 know. 
 
 Q. And that you were simply standing in with Moran to help him out? — A. Yes. 
 I was only with Moran a short while. He showed me the part3 to put on board. 
 
 By Ii[r. Bowe : 
 Q. Did he think himself unable to complete the contract? — A. Yes, he was unable 
 The other trades wore out at the time. I believe the boilermakers walked out the same 
 day that I took the contract. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. If there was. a little more disposition displayed on the part of employers to 
 interview their men when these troubles arose, a good many of these strikes would be 
 avoided ? — A. I think they could, although I had interviews with them. I never used 
 to put my company in a false position. I was at the meeting at which the members 
 from Seattle were present. The meeting was cal'ed by mutual understandirg. 
 
 Q. Did any of the committee from Seattle speak ? — A. Yes, in fact they were 
 the only men who held the floor. They would not listen to anything. You could not 
 argue with them, no matter what they said. They had only one opinion and would 
 not change their opinion — one of them in particular, did most of the talking. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. As far as you could judge he was responsible for the trouble ? — A. "Yes. 
 
 Q. What was his office ? — A. I think he was just a member of his local lodge. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. And he did all the talking ? — A. Yes, practically all. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Did he remain here until the ship went back ? — A. I think he remained here 
 after the ship went back. 
 
 His LoBDSiiir'. — Probably a Yankee Irishman ! 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. And the position he took was that it was an unfair job ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. Did he quote the constitution ? — A. No. 
 Q. He was the constitution ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That proposition v;as not disputed by any of the local men — none of the men 
 did battle with this giant from Seattle ? — A. ISTo, what he said was law. 
 
 BAGSTER R. SEABROOKE— Victoria, May 12. 
 
112 UiyUTES OF ETIDEXCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Did you gather that he held any official position— a member of the executive 
 or anything of that kind ?— A. I really could not tell you. He seemed to be the 
 whole push in the thing. There were several other jobs which I could have brought 
 over, but I had to turn them down. I might have closed contracts for ships over there. 
 I think there were three. 
 
 Q. The aggregate amount of these contracts would have been what » — A. I sup- 
 pose the total business would have been about $120,000. We could have handled that 
 work in 1901. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Two other ships in Seattle ? — A. One in Tacoma. I made an estimate that we 
 missed a little over $100,000 gross amount. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. What percentage of that would be wages ? — A. You can generally figure about 
 seventy per cent. 
 
 Q. Do you know how these strikes in Seattle were settled ? — A. Moran's is not 
 settled yet. It is an open shop. They are working union men and non-union men. 
 They have some union men in the machine shop, but all non-union boilermakers. 
 
 Q. In the nine months that you were an open shop did you suffer any interference 
 from the union I — A. They distributed some bills, and were very careful to examine 
 our work. 
 
 Q. What were on the bills ?— A. Naming the shops that were fair shops and those 
 that were not. They were distributed around the streets — some posted up outside of 
 our works. 
 
 Q. Were all the shops that were listed, Victoria shops ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. When you say there was about $70,000 lost to Victoria in one year in wages, 
 is that an exceptional year ? — A. That would be exceptional, on account of strikes in 
 Seattle. The chances are that not less than half that would be obtained. 
 
 George Penrith, sworn : 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long have you lived here ?^A. Fifteen years in July. 
 
 Q. Your business is that of a boikrmaker? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You are a member of the Boilermakers' Union ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When was that union started? — A. Five years ago last January. 
 
 Q. Is it affiliated with any American organization ? — A. Not that I am aware of. 
 
 Q. It is an international organization ?— A. Well, it is not called an internationiil. 
 They call it Xhe Boilermakers and Iron Ship Builders Union of America. That is 
 the name. Its headquarters are in Kansas City. 
 
 Q. And there are local unions over the whole of Western America and Britisli 
 Columbia? — A. Yes, all over the continent of America, including Canada. 
 
 Q. How many members are there in the union — in the whole organization? A. 
 
 I could not just say— between 15,000 and 20,000. 
 
 Q. How many members are there in your local union ? — A. Thirty-five of them 
 I think. 
 
 Q. And you have a charter from Kan-sas City? — A. Yes. 
 
 BAGSTER R. SEABROOKE— Victoria, May 12. 
 
OJif llfDmrRlAU mSPVTES JN. JBJtlTISH CQLUM.BI4. 113 
 
 SESSION-AL PAPER No.'3€a 
 
 Q. Did you take any oath when you joined the union?— A-. Yes. 
 
 Q. What is the nature of the' oath ?■— A. It is not exactly an oath, ft is to abide 
 by the laws of the uftion. .= . ■ ■ ; 
 
 Q. Are ybu put. under an oath whenyou join?— A. Not an oath as you use it 
 Bel-e. We simply take an obligation. We are npt sworn. 
 
 Q. An obligation- to abide by the rule^ of the union? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Can yougiye us a copy of the constitution and by.-laws? — A. I could not how. 
 I have not got it with me. I could get you one. 
 
 ■ Q. Are you at present an officer of the local union? — A. l^ot at the pressnt time. 
 I am a trustee. , , 
 
 Q. At6 you Tiot inooiiporated — &I6 yoia a legal union? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. And you say the boilermakers and iron shipbniidars are not affiliated with any 
 other organization? — A. Not that I know of. I don't think tliey are. 
 ' Q. You were president of. the union in.l901?^Ar Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And you were employed by the Albion Irou Works?— A. I was not at that 
 time. 
 
 Q. Have you heard what Mr. Seabrooke has told us about the trouble with the 
 'Garonne' ? — A.' A great part of it. • ; 1 
 
 Q. What is your account of that?— A. Mr. Seiibrooke has besn pretty fair, I 
 ttink," all through. At the same time I differ. on some points. If th';re are any ques- 
 tions I would be pleased to answer them. 
 
 Q. You heard Mr. ■ SeabTooke say th;it he had an undei standing with the men that 
 he could go* to Seattle to get that ship and bring hqr here?^A. Yes, that is right. 
 We came to the understanding 1hat there was no dispuie at the time with the boiler- 
 maker's.- Mr. Seabrcok-e showed us at the time by « paper he got from Mr. Waterhouse, 
 saying Mr. Moran asked him if he would do the job-7-that there was a dispute witTi the 
 machinists, but not with the boilermakers. We -did net see any difficulty in doing the 
 job so long as theie was no difficulty with the bo!leimakers. I may say further, there 
 was" no dispute at that time, but the boilermakers wouid not work on it at Seattle. 
 
 ■ Q. So that when he went to Seattle and got this boat, he was correct, when ho 
 Slated there "was 'n!o dispute, except with ths machinists at Seattle,, and your men 
 were willing that h6 should go to Seattle ajid get the boat, and that situation was cor- 
 rect at that time-?- A. Yes. 
 
 Q. He got the boat, and you found there was a difficulty ? — A. When he took the 
 boat from Seattle there was a dispuie two days before it was taken away. 
 
 Q. You were willing to wcrk until the men from Seattle came over to see you? — 
 A. Yes, because we did not know there was a dispute until they came and told us. 
 There was ho dispute with Mr. Seabrooke. The dispute took place on the afternoon 
 that he got there. The dispute occurred on Wednesday, and he brought the boat on 
 Friday. At the time he went there was no dispute. It arose after he got there. 
 
 Q. So I suppose you think that Mr. Seabrooke should have communicated with 
 J ou first before bringing the vessel over ? — A. I. think Mr. Seabrooke was quite right 
 -wheii speaking With us,but I don't think he was right in bringing, the boat over while 
 there was a dispute. . , , 
 
 Q. When he found there was a dispute at Seattle he should not have taken the 
 ship away without consulting you ? — E. Yes, sir. , 
 
 Q. If he had asked you by wire from Seattle whether he should come on and 
 bring the. boat back, what would you have said ? — A. Of course I should have laid it 
 before the lodge; 1 would not have taken it on myself, arid would have wired back to 
 Seattle to that effect. 
 
 Q. You vpei-e bound by your organization to consult the boilermakers in Seattle 
 before you could work on this vessel ? — A. We were not really bound. Brotherly love 
 you might c^ll it, _ ^ , 
 
 Q.' At any rate you felt under- an obligatioii to "them to inqiiire into their trouble 
 and dispute before you could go to work on the 'Garonne ' ? — A. Yed. 
 
 36a— 8 QBGRGE PENKITH— Victoria, May 12. 
 
ni HmUTES OF EVIDENOE OF ROYAL COMMISSION .^ 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VU-, A. 1904 
 
 Q. How many were there on this Seattle committee w^hich oame oyer tp see you ,? — 
 
 ■ A 
 
 A. Three, I think. ..- . :> .,,,,. . :. ..■-. , , , - ■ , ,,„> ■. ,■ - . h vi 
 
 Q. They were Americans, I suppose ? — A. One of them was a V^Jctoria man. .' 
 
 *o Q. Two Americans and one British Coluinbifiii ?r— Ar Xes, 
 
 Q. Who-wexe these men ? What office did they bold ia their union ?— A. One was 
 the president, and the other two simply men appointed. 
 
 Q. Was the president the man who did most of the talking ?— :A. Yes. „;■, 
 Q. What was his name ? — A., Ryan.' ,, : ,, ■ i: 
 
 '• J Q. I was right ihen. And-Jae; told you about the existence pi the strike, oycrthfere ? 
 — A; Yesj- sir. '■:,.■''■,' ,,- ,_ ,.. , , .,, ,, , , , . , ,^ ^.-, 
 
 Q.. Didi he-discusg, the, situation, with you and the boiler^akers ? — A. Ho. , „,, 
 rQ. Yo.u. accepted everything he said as gospel, did ^ou ?— A. Ko. . ^ 
 . Q. How did you know you were bound to go on strike ? — A. We did not go on . 
 
 Q. You refused to go' to work on the ' Garonne ' ? — A. I sujipose you would call 
 it a sympathetic strike, I suppose. ./.,.. , ;•■ 
 
 .. Q. And you wentqutiou this 8ymp:?th3tic strike by the request of the Seattle 
 people ? — A, No, we did not go out. tV* wrote to the Suprerne 'Court of the Ipdge, in 
 Kansas to see what their clecision was. We communicated by telegrarn. , 
 
 Q. Do you remember how you worded the telegrarn ?^A., I could not just reineih'-' 
 ber. It was a long telegram^, .,/■•■. 
 
 ,. Q. 1 suppose you. ; explained what the facts were— that there 'was a strike at 
 Seattle, and th^t you, were being asked to work on Ihe ship ?— A. We explained, as far 
 as we could, the facts of the case. That the Seattle people claimed it would assist 
 them ; that we hadgiveii our promise to do the work, and that we were willing to do' 
 the work if we could have got the consent of the Suprenie Court lodge. , 
 
 , Q. And. that the Seattle men thought it would help them if you did hot go to 
 
 ^o'^k? ,, ^.;,,, ,,, .,... , r ,.,,, .M,,.^.., ,„,,; ,„,, ,^^,.^,;, , ,^^.^,^ .,; ;',^;„^^. ^^.^^ ^^^^^ 
 
 '" '■'"' By Mr.Bodwell : '■""■ ^^'" ■'"''''■ ■-"-'" '<-''' ^'^■'' i'^>i ' ^-'' ;" -i -^f^v;'; 
 
 Q. And also that you h^d given your pronjise, j:o go to work ?-^A. Yes. We also 
 stated that the Albion Iron, Works bad iheir contract.- We explained the full matter. 
 
 By His Lordship : ,r.:-' ' ..-'■ .■ \ (,(;.•! ,.: 
 
 Q. What was the nature of the reply ? — A. That we were not to work on the job 
 on account of the Seattle union. We were to work in conjunction with Seattle.. Some- 
 thing to that effect. , ,., '"'',''"" '" ■-' 
 
 Q. And the meaning of the reply was that as long as the fight went oh in Seattle' 
 between the boilermakers that you could not have gone to work on' tbia, ship ? — A. 
 Unless the boycott was, lifted by thelocal Jodg?.. They could give the permission for 
 any one to work on it. . , , ,^ . 
 
 Q. That is, if they consented to regard it as a fair job, you could go to work,'" and 
 as long as it was an unfair job you could not go to work. Those were the woids from 
 Kansas city ?— A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. The effect of the reply was that you could not work on the job as long as 
 Seattle felt unfair ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So that before you could go to work you had to consult two bodies, one at 
 Seattle and one si- Kansas ?■ — A. Well, yes. ;.i...,''T : ■.-.•: ■ ^^:h:\ -- :. -. i ..■ \. ". ■:. 
 
 By His Lordship: .. .- . .^ . ■ . ■ «. -.'■..; u;. "=.;.: '.,' 
 
 Q. What would have been the, consequences if you had disobeyed the Kansas city, 
 people and had worked on the Contract ?— A. They might have taken our charter 
 away from us, and have declared us scabs. .,,. ■ . " ,^. 
 
 Q. Ihey prcbably would h&V3 '? — A. Yes. - j _,.„,..,.. '■' ,.'■ 
 
 GEORGE PENKITH— 'Victoria, May 12. 
 
ON ikmrsTRiAL bispGrW^ W s'&trrsm columbta^ 115 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36^ 
 
 Q. WoulS you hav^' been posted or blacklisted if' yoit had done that ?— A'. Certain- 
 ly they would take our charter away from us, we would have been posted all over. 
 America — each individual , ' \ '" ' \- '■ - 
 
 Q. Jhe_reSiUlt of that wouH be yott could iibt get a job on the continent of 
 America ?— ^A. i^ot where there was a local tffiion — riot in^ atmion shopi •' ■ 
 
 By Mr' Rvwe : ::"-•, 
 Q. That is, unless you joined the union ? — A. Yes. ■' '' ■ • 
 
 Q'. If ybu went to aiiolher Vown, for" iiistance, and ofiered iO join the union— the 
 fact that ypu Jiad been in tljis union would not preclude you ? — A. That would depend 
 on what tt'ey' thought" 'Tlr^y'wdtild probably put a penalty of $100 or $200;on us. 
 
 Q. Is there any pjovision for that in the constitution ?"-A. I could not tell' de- 
 finitely as to the constitution. I suppose it iS ' whatefv^r ' they choDs6 to put. on you. 
 There is a clause for penalties. It is left to the lodge. - 
 
 ,.By His Lordship : ' ' '- . - , 
 
 , . Q...'Wha,t is t]he advantage pf belonging to a union of Canadian worknlen whose 
 headquarters are in the United States ?^— A. Well, the strength given bynumber&. 
 Th,e,lo,C£\l lodge has 20 or 30, They are not as strong ss with 30,000 or 50,000. 
 
 Q. You mean ydii could not remEim out on strike for aiiy time ?-^A. 'Yes. 
 
 Q. That is the sole advantage — in numbers ?7— A. An advahtage' is with a man' 
 travelling around the; country. He gets a lot of assistance until he gets a job. If a 
 man has A union card he can go to 'Frisco' and get a job. If he had not he could not 
 get'a job. ,./_,'',,' . , ' ' i ', ■, 
 
 Q. Do you think an organization confined to Canada V/ould not be strong enough 
 to ensure all legitimate purposes ?^A. I thiTik so. , 
 
 Q~. Provided of course tbere was a suitaWe alien labour law ? — A. Yes. Other- 
 wise you would have them coming over from Seattle and 'Frisco and taking our jobs 
 away from us. I don't think Ihey would come and scab particularly, but still there 
 would Jjfe that to qpntend with. 
 
 /, _Q. They would not,- think you'had any' rights as against them unless affiliated or 
 part of the same association ?^— A. ISTb, we could not bind them. Of course they are 
 bound under this. : , ,i, 
 
 ■ By Mfr Rome '. "" ■■'•-■ ' - 
 
 iQ. You would have the same power against them ? — A. Yes, b^t tbe men in 
 British-Columbia are too, good for that. Th.e men here would not do a thing like that. 
 
 ' By His Lordship : r ■: . 
 
 ' Q. ^bu lhink they are a higher grade than in the United States ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. I am glad to hear it. 
 
 Victoria, May 12, 1903. 
 GhaHlBs a. GRfiGG^ sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : ■.._.. 
 
 Q. You were the editor of the ' Kossland Miner ' in 1901 ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. During the months of July, August and September ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You remember that during these months a series of articles appeared with 
 relation to the strike then going on at Eossland ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Qi In 80 far- as thtese articles Contained copies of letters and doCnments, can you 
 tell us whether or not they are correct copies.' — A. They Were. Those, that appear aa 
 signed in the papers. Actual copies of documents. 
 
 36a — 8J CHARLES A. GREGG— Victoria, May 12. 
 
116 MtNVTES OF ETIDnVCB OF ROTIL COM MISSION. 
 
 iA EDWARDiVllv A. 1904 
 
 Q. Where these articles contain subjects' of controversy" .between the', miners and 
 the owners, and dealiijgs with the Board of Trade, are they actual occurrences that 
 happened at the time ? — A. Yes. '■ -'" ' ' • . . : 
 
 Q. And is the report correct as to what took' place ? What knowledge havfeyou 
 as to accuracy ? — A. Any articles containing documents bearing signatures and inter- 
 views with parties to the controversy are accurate. 
 
 Q. How do you know that ?— A; I had to deal myself personally with the piatter 
 in the way of collecting these signed documents, and I know that any of them 
 material to an inquiry of this kind are correct; • ■ .. ; >' 
 
 Q. Take the case of an interview between mine owners and the labour union — 
 reports of interviews between them — 'how were these obtained ?^ — A. W6ll, I think that 
 the officers of the miners' union were asked to make statements, which they did, and 
 on the other hand the mine managers were asked to malve statements, and they did, 
 and they were published simultaneously. 
 
 Q. Were the accuracy of any of these statements (questioned during the period of 
 which they were being published ? — A. I don't remember that they were. 
 
 Q. There is some information there which was obtained from the TJnited States. 
 Can you tell us how that inforrjation was obtained ? — A. That was handed in by 
 Mr. Bernard McDxmald, manager of the Le Roi .mine. It had been sent to him by 
 a friend in the States. The accuracy was not questioned' by any one, although thfe're 
 was trouble at the tipie. . , , . . 
 
 Q. How were the reports in the court takeii ? — A. By a reporter of the paper — 
 by a, trustworthy man. . , . ' "' '■ ' 
 
 Q. Was the accuracy of tlie reports questioned at any tinie? — A. No statement of 
 fact was ever questioned that I know of. 
 
 By His Lordsliip : 
 
 Q. The ' Rossland Miner ' was the oragn of the mine-owners ? — A. It was at that 
 time. . . , 1 , , „ . ,, 
 
 Q. You took your instructions from the nianager of the mine — from Mr. Kirby 
 and others ? — A.'Mr. Kirby tind Mr. McDbriald. There was another organ called- the 
 'Evening World.'' That was supposed tO be the' organ of th'te'iheri. There were accounts 
 of these interviews in that paper.' ' '-'■ '■■' ■■•"■■ ■ M 
 
 Q. Did they differ materially '( — A. The only difference that was apparent 'be- 
 tween the two papers in rfspoct of the strike, consisted in presentation of arguments. 
 There was hardly any very serious question of fact in dispute at any time. ' 
 
 (Mr. Bodwell suggests that the Commissioners exaniine files of 'Eossland Miper ' 
 and ' Evening World,' from -July 14 to September 20.) 
 
 George Pekkith, recalled^ . 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Could you tell us, Mr. Penkith, whether the men would have gone to worlc on 
 
 the Garonne, if they had not been requested not tO; do so from the ot}jer side ? 
 
 A. They would have preferred to. ,^ / ' _' . , 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : • . -.: 
 
 Q. They considered it quitting work then 1 — A. No, not exactly. ^ 
 
 By His Lordship .• - 
 
 Q. I understand the position was tliat. the contract had been entered into before 
 the boilermakers' strike broke out ? — ^A. 1 don't kriow about "thai ■ 
 
 GEORGE PENKITH— Victoria, May 12. 
 
ON I'NDUSTRI4:lt. DISBVTm IN SRITIBH OOJjUMBIA 117 
 
 SEBSIONAL PAPtR Nb.-aea 
 
 '■■■'■ 'Q.Is there any >way of -ascertaining ithat? — A. From Mr, Se^brooke, j 
 
 His Lordship. — Had the contract been signed by y°^' Mr. Seabrooke, with Mr. 
 lAYaterhouse.Jsefore the; trouble broke Oiit? ^ 
 
 Mr. Seabrooke.^I never knew of this. 
 
 Mr.' EOwfe.— You did not know' when you left Seattle ? 
 
 Mr. Seabrooke.— I knew when I left- Seattle. . The ship left ahead of me. 
 
 His LoKDSHiP.^-The contract was signed before the strike had taken place ? 
 
 i^r. Seabrooke.— Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : ■ ■ , 
 
 Q. Would you, consider a union of boilermakers in Canada sufficieilt to meet all 
 legitimate purposes wjthoiit affiliation with any American organization ?^A. Yes,' I 
 thiilkiSO. 
 
 Q. The .men would have more control over themselves 'and their actions ? — A. I 
 .don't think that would make any difference, lecauae they have control over themselves 
 anyway. 
 
 Q. You cannot say tha^t they have control oyer themselves wheii they get orders 
 from Kansas City ? — A. The local lodge has its own option. 
 
 Q: You people asked the lodge in Kansas City and obeyed their instructions ?^ — 
 A. Of course it was a difference between two lodges. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. I. think if you had.nol; Ijeen associated with an American union you could 
 have taken that work in spite of them if you felt that it was fair ? — A. Oh, yes. 
 
 ■ Q.pid the local lodge think, it 3 hardship to have to come out ? — A. No. After 
 
 the stateraent. was placed before^ them they thought it vJas only right. The Seattle 
 
 .people claimed , if they, got the boat, baj^ik again it would be a great assistance to win 
 
 the strike there. If the Seattle men could control the work they would have the honour 
 
 , of -getting the strike settled...-! ,,.:,,.,:. 
 
 -.:v( ■Qv .Supposing the; nien had beeii locked. put by. the Albion Iron Works as a result, 
 would the. federation have furnished them with supi-ort ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Supposing the Albion Iron Works put non-union men to work on the Garonne, 
 Would the lihion men have gone otit from other work ?^A. They might have. They 
 would not have' been able to do that so lopg^as they were not compelled to work with 
 non-union men. They would not have worked on the boat with non-union men. 
 
 Q. Did not the local lodge think that the action of the Kansas City people was 
 making them break faith with Mr. Seabrooke ? — A. No, I don't think so. We told Mr. 
 Seabrooke we would do the job, if it came before there was a strike on. 
 
 Q. Supposing you had not imposed that condition — would you feel your obligation 
 to the union to be greater or less than your obligation to the Albion Iron Works ? 
 Which would have to yield? — A. For myself, individually, I would have felt justified 
 in going with the Albion Iron Works. 
 
 ' Q. Yo^ eould'iiot say what the boilerfnak^rswould do?— A. .No. :. , 
 'Q. Snpposhig yoii had made a condition with Mr. Seabrooke, -and that was made 
 clear to the centMl authority in Kansas City, wouldthey have the, power fo make you 
 break that contract ? — A. Yes, I think they would. 
 
 By litis Lofds%ip. - . , . ■ 
 
 Q. The short and the long of it is, that a contract won't. stand in the way of a 
 
 ,strike^'.-7-A, JSTo. . -; 
 
 Q. Uo the boilermakers discuss socialisjic doctrines and liolitics in their meetings ? 
 
 — A. No, sir. 
 
 GEORGE PENKITH— yjctoria, Mpy 12. 
 
118 MiyVTHS OF ETIDENOE OF R07AL e0MUIB8I0Jf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 ; 
 
 Q. Are strikes declared by ballot?— A. Yes, all question* of .strikes/; ... : 
 ..- Q. Is that ;the inyarig-ble rule S — A., Yes, sir. ;, ■ . , . • 
 
 By Mr. iiowe: ''', i'"''' '■'■■■ " '" '"■ '. ' •" 
 
 . Q. Is ypur unio^ ijicQrporated? — A. Ko, sir. ,' . . ,. . .^ 
 
 Q. What is the opinion generally of your craft' with regarcl to iiicorpor^tip^ of 
 unions? — A. I have not discussed the matter at alL 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q.ilave you a . benefit fund? — A. Only when striking. ' , '\ 'V' ' \ . "' . 
 
 Q. What amount does it cost"you a yea^'tb belong to t5i4 utiionl — ''K. It costs 5Cf 
 cents a month. Then, of course, there are other assessments comjng ^Jpng to assist 
 strikers outside. If ^here is a strike in 'Frisco pr somewhere else, — : — ,, ,, 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. How does the central authority get its funds ? — A. By per capita tax, 25 cents 
 
 per member' per month. ' ' ' ' ' " i;-^:"'-' •.• •■ =: ' i- ■ ■ . ■ - . .v 
 
 Q. Is that included in the 50 cents a month?^^A. That iS' included in "tJiat. ■•"'!;''-5 
 Q. Have ij^ou any personal opinion' On' the question of -i'Aco'rporati'on?-^A. No, I 
 
 never went into it. ' ' ' ' "■• ■■ ■■ ' — .- .■.,-■ ■">■, , .;,.' 
 
 By His Lordship:. •, -^ ■ -•. :. ■■'. ■- . ,,-.:-.• .-^ • .: •;•-,>.,.■ . -'.. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to arbitration in the case of strikes ?^A. I ■ think arbi.tr^^ 
 tion is all right. ^ 
 
 Q. Supposing that parties fail to agree on a third arbitrator, how wouM you say 
 be should be appointed ? — A. I think that should be dn the authority.. of •'the, ifihief 
 Justice. ;-;'■■/ ...kA:- ■•■ ••i,,'.j. 
 
 Q. You think a judge should be given power to appoint the third party? — A Yes. 
 
 Q. You understand what I mean by arbitration — arbitration' whose 'award was 
 binding? — A. Yes, I understand. • - ; : ^ ■ '-= ■; . :■:-■ ;^ \ ■■'■] .'./ 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. What is meant, exactly, by recognition of the union by att etoplOyer^^A. Sup- 
 pose you hav« a shop' eommittee^the employer would rebognize- that; shop; <j&thni;Htee, 
 and' not take any action against the -men. Supposing we had. some little, grigvaflee 
 and we appointed a committee to see the employer, and he would not recognize -that; 
 committee as coming officially from the union. To simply acknowledge them as com- 
 ing from the union. •■•.■•■= ,...:. iV. 
 
 Q. To deal with thern as representing the union.?-^A. Yes. . 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. I suppose in your craft you don'-t allow non-union wen in- the. sanje :Shop ^^A 
 
 Ho. . '_ ,•._:, ■ ,;-...,,.- - ,;. ,'.■,.,. 
 
 Q. Eecognition of the union would involve the exclusion of non-union men?-^ 
 A. Yes. ■ . V. ■•■ ., v^ 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: ' ■■ . ■ . ■.,. 
 
 Q. You are speaking of your own craft? That is not necessarily the case in all? 
 — A. Yes, I speak of my own craft. ' ' ' ' 
 
 By His Loi'dship: 
 
 Q. The paramount aim of unions is to maintain a standard rate of wages? A 
 
 jYes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. I suppose no union man has a right to approach the management with a griev- 
 ance, except through a shop committee? — A. No. 
 Q. He would be violating a union law i — ^A. Yes. 
 
 GEORGE PENKITH— Victoria, May 12. 
 
ONIimVSTmAL 'DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 119; 
 
 SESSrONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The result of that is, that any ^rietaince- is first discussed amohg the men, and 
 they decide whether it is sufficiently important? — A. The men go, to the shop commit- 
 tee, and the shop committee go to the foremfvn. = , , 
 .■_ Q, The shop committee seyould decide as to a proper list of grievailceSl-|^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In that way, ihe' employer njight he saved some difficulty? — A. YeS. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: , , 
 
 Q. Is a shop committee, authorized to settle tjie grievance, or must they go, back 
 ^the Ipdge for iti^tpuctions ?^-A. They go hack to the lodge and' repdrt. ^ 
 
 ■'' Sy'llTr. HovJe :' '":" ' ' "''"' ' ' ''.„";' -' "'''-' ' ■■ ' -.u--,^ 
 
 Q. They might be instructed to settle on certain terms ? — A. Y63. ' ' ."j.'i..'; 
 
 ; ., , By Bis, Lordship: , ■;,.-. 
 
 Q. The effect of a union is to arrange a better understanding arriong the men and 
 employer^-?— A.; Yes;, .^mpng. thpm Jboth. ; ,. ,, , . : , ,, » 
 
 . ._ Q. Have! you apythipg ;to 5ay on the. subject of .boycott ?ind picketting? — A, No. 
 
 Q. Do you regard these as fair weapons to use in strikes? — ^A. I don't believe in 
 them altogether. I believe, if a man goes to work — a non-union man — I believe in a 
 man speaking to him, and asking if it is a proper thing to do. But I don't think it is 
 right to cfcMnpel him. . \, . , - '; ,; 
 
 y ■:, , , B:y Mr, JRowe:;, • , , . 
 
 - • Q. YouTiigepefsuasion— flot" threats ?^A. Yes, J. don't believe in going into a 
 
 shop in that way. 
 
 . v ..By Sis Lordship : ;, ;.,.,. > , , 
 
 Q. Do you believe in posting a man up as unfair tind declaring a Ijoyeott against 
 him ?— A. No. 
 
 By-Mr. Bodmell : -■;?;. 
 
 Q. Still>, that' is the- usual course pursued-^lots of men posted in the Labom hall ,1 
 — ^A. I don't know any. One or 'two of ttie shops posted — ^ne or two of the..employera 
 are'>'J)osted.- '-■• ■■,;,-■,;:, , • , . ,: - f, i .■■,-, - , .; , ,. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. How would it be ^o publish a list of employers , who .employ union labour, 
 instead of publishing those who don't ? — A. They simply say it is an ^nfair shop. 
 That simply gives a man an idea if he wants anything done, not to go to that shop. 
 
 ■ Q.: What is the thing that will make a shop unfair ?-^A. By not paying the union 
 rate of wages. One shop might pay $3.25 and another $3.50. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Suppose they pay the union rate to any one except union men, would that be 
 unfair ? — A. It would not be unfair. It would not be recognizing the union. I 
 wotld' not call it an unfair shop, but it would not be recognizing the union. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. The effect of, posting up a man as unfair is to engender a certain amount of 
 ill-feeling ?— ^A. Simply to tell the men not to go to that shop. 
 
 Q. The same object would be effected by using a white list and not a black list, 
 giving the names of those who were fair ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q.Have you a copy of the constitution now ?— A. Yes. 
 
 (Witness puts in copy of Constitution of Boilermakers' Union — Exhibit C. and 
 Constitution of local lodge — Exhibit B.) • 
 
 GEORGE PENKITH— Victoria, May 12. 
 
120 • MiNUTES OP EVIDENCE OP ROYAL GOMHIS^im 
 
 , i3-4 EDWARD ytl., A. i?04 
 
 By His Lordship : , ^, ,■ -v'. 
 
 • Q. When you ask a man to join the union, i\?hat is the chief olDJection ?! — A. I 
 ^ never found any one object to joining the ujiioni r'; ..,■.'■ .;: 'r r.-.r ■ 'i^N 
 
 Q. That means that all the.boilermakersiin Victoria aye Juiion men ? — A-Y^s,. 
 Q. Do you know what is the general objection raised by uoiiTUniou men to join- 
 ing the union ? — A. I don't know any objection.^ They Jike to .work out theip.own 
 salvation. They want to be , independent. ■ They. are always willing to take any good 
 thing that may come to them by the union's action, r ,, .n : r 
 
 By Mr. Rome : ,. , . ,. ,.,,.,■ ^j ,; 
 
 Q. Do you thinlv unionism improves the condition of all classes of workmen ? — 
 'A. Yes, sir. '.''.- 
 
 Q. Has the price of labour increased since the formation of the union in Victotia ? 
 —A. Yes. ..■ -.. , ■ ■■■ -.:■ 
 
 Q. Has' that been due to the union, or the condition of industry .?-^A. li think 
 in one sense it is a good deal to do with the union.r ' . . ,.■ > ■ ■ .. ■ ; 
 
 Q. Do you do anj- piece-work in your trade ?— No, sir, not in Victoria. 
 
 Q. What is the custom in your trade where there is piece-work ? Is a man 
 limited as to his output ? — A. No, he is not limited. He gets all he can. He .*s 
 allowed to earn as much as he can as far as the union is concerned. 
 
 Q. Do you know of any cases where an employer has reduced the price of piece- 
 work if a man can do a lot of it in a day ? — A. That is done all over — it is a custom. 
 
 Q. So that his earnings in a day will not rise above a certain level ,? — A. Some- 
 times they allow a man to make ajjout time and, a third, or sometimes time and a half. 
 
 Q. Do they make that man do that work for less price than p. slow man ^wrl^ing 
 beside him I — ^A. It is the same rate all round, and everyone has to. tajke. the same 
 chance. / 
 
 :Q, So it would be better for a good workman to set a good paqe ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Not to do so would be to drag a good man down to the level pf a weak man 'i — 
 A. It is as broad as it is long. They pay a man according to what he. is worth. 
 
 Q. Anyway, an employer can prqtect himself by laying .pfE the poorer men ? — 
 A. Yes. ' ' ■:.', .,, ,, , ■ „;j 
 
 ■Q. When a new piece is introduced, how ,do they .sfit|.the pjice, ? — A. A certain 
 price is allowed for rivetting and so much for plating. , They have a sort of standard. 
 and anything extra that is not in the standard, of course tliey allow what is right. 
 
 Q. The variations are not very numerous ? — A. No.^ ! : , 
 
 Q. If the ultimate object of labour unions is to raise the. rate of wages it will 
 come to this — that when wages, are raised all round the. cost of living will.be raised. ?-t- 
 A. I don't think the ultimate object is to raise the; wages to that, extent, but simply to 
 get a good. living wage, so that every one can live comfortably, . , v 
 
 Q. I suppose the idea of unions is to get a larger proportion of the product' i^th^r 
 than simply an increase in the wages ? — A. Yes. , , ... 
 
 By llis Lordship : ' ' ' - ' ' ' 
 
 Q. When unions consider the question of demanding, a raise in wages do thov 
 take into consideration the bad debts of the employers ?— A. I don't think. they have 
 many bad debts.- - : , . . _ 
 
 Q. That was suggested to me by the evidence of Mr. Wilson ? — A. There is no 
 doubt the employers have to wait a great length of time in many cases. I don't.think 
 there is any union that would try and force a: man in a case of that kind. 
 
 Q. I understand, Mr. Penkith, that in the case of the boilermakers you take no 
 oath, simply an obligation ?^ A. That is all. : , . 
 
 Q. I suppose that is in the constitution, is it ?— A, It is not in the constitution. 
 
 Q. Would you call yourselves a secret society ? — A.: Yes» • • 
 
 Q. You are a secret society ?— A. Yes; -r < : , 
 
 ,, . GEORGE PENKITH^Victori^, May 12. 
 
t>'2r mrymfRiAf/ ms'PVTm /r British coiVMrniA m. 
 
 f^ESStoNAL PAPER n&. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : ■ - • 
 
 ' Q. H*ve.^ou-a;riy Gahadian affiliations or asfeocratiGns of your lodge ? — A. .We are 
 affiliated with the Dominion Trades Congress. We pay a per Capita from our 50 cents 
 a month — 6 'cfent^ 'pe? -mfemher'. Six out 6f ^50 goes to the'Tradies and Labour Ctouncil. 
 ■'■' '■ Q. 'And the balance bf that' money '.is' sent over to Kailsag City'?— A. Twenty-five 
 ^'cfenfe a fai#n-thi&sent'to Kansas'^ity. ' ' ' i - .:- ' 
 
 "■■ ' Q.-Wbat bedomes -of- the balance ?^— That is used for local purposes. ' 
 Q. Does the parent association hold conventions ?^A. Yes. ' ■ • 
 
 Q. Do you send delegates ? — A. We never have — we have the right- 
 Q. Is the headquarters always in Kansas City ? — A. It always has been. 
 ' Q,- 'It do'es not change tyear hy year ■? — A-.-Nc.. ' - 
 Q. Do you know whether there are any boilermakers' unions in Canada affiliated 
 wrththem.? — A. . About sevenj I think. ■'. ■■- ' , ■ • r 
 
 Q. Have you anything like a district association ? — A. No. 
 ■' " Q. -What is the basis of your representation tO' the grand lodge 'i—^A. One-repre- 
 sentative from a union, one to evesy twenty-five. ' ' 
 
 Harry'T. Bulled, sworh': '.' ' 
 
 • - By Mr. Bodwell). ■■ - . ' • . 
 
 Q. ft your coiapany an incorporated iristitutiott ? — A. Yes, it is called the British 
 ' Columbia' Marine Railway Company, 'Limited. , V 
 
 ■^■■'-- Q; You 'have' works in Victoria' and also in Esquimalt?— A. Victoria, Esquimdlt 
 and Vancouver. ' ' 
 
 Q; And your business ' is what'^ — A.' Building, docking vessels and repainiig- them. 
 Q[ How long since ybufcegan'optji-nnons in Esquimalt?^ A. In '''4. 
 Q; Andwhendid you'Stkrt in V.nnc.ouver'^— A. In '1>8. " • ■ ■ 
 
 Q. What ds the average' nuinber of men employed by you here? — A. It depends on 
 the volume of the work. _ ' 
 
 '■' '" Q. What is' the greatest ntimb'er "you ha^e employed at any time in' 10O2, for 
 'instance ^'-^ Al From-' ISO to 200'.-' ■• ■■ •■.-'-■■ 
 
 Q. What- class' of 'workmen ate empl6yed?^A. Boilermakete, machinists, joiners, 
 caulkers, carpenters and engineers. 
 
 Q. What is the' proportion of men'who work in metal as compared with ' men who 
 -work'in'wood ?— A. Abciut 70 to 30^— 70 per cent in favour of the wooden shipwrights. 
 ' Q. Arc your men union,' as a b6dy ? — 'A. Nearly all of them. ' ■; : ; 
 
 Q. The shipwrights ha-ve a' union^the boilermakers ?— A. They all have their dif- 
 ferent 'umolis.'" -" ' ■ ' ' '' '"'''- ,''■■ "" ' ' '■ 
 
 Q. Do you recognize the unions-^I suppose you do ?^A. Nearly all of them. - ■ '•' 
 Q. What do you understand by that term? — A. To accept their constitution and 
 their by-laws. 
 
 'J. ■' Q. And treat with their committees ?-^ A. Oh, yes. , - 
 
 ■'.. ^' Q. What, In your experience, are the duties usually performed by the committees? 
 — A. The committees are supposed to represent the'body of the union in any negotia- 
 ■tioBS •with -the employers-; "'■' ,- - ' ,-- - 
 
 ,'■ ' Q. Do they -do more than discuss the question of wages, as a rule? — A. They are 
 supposed to -act on- every question that may turn up. , .; ,> 
 
 : Q. Supposing that you were employing a man who belonged to a union working 
 in metalwork which could be done by a shipwright,' a man wha- works in wood, would 
 the committee interfere in a case of that kind ?t— A- Yes, they would, ,, - :: 
 
 Q. That would com© tffithin their jurisdiction ?-^A. Yes. _ The uhions have an 
 agreement between themselves that they shall .do a certain class of work— one, one, 
 and another, another, ,...., 
 
 HARR-iT F. B-CLLEN— Victoria, May 12. 
 
122 MINUTES OF tiriDEJfCE OF EOYAL dttMUtSstOTf 
 
 3^ EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 ' Q. Then, if a man was capable bf suiiin^ you, you could not employ hiiii on si 
 piecfe of Work not recognized as niiion Work?— A. No. ' , 
 
 Q. He may be' able to work in wood peffectl'y well, yet, ' if he beliiiged to thg 
 machinists, you could not ask him to do the W9rk ? — A. No, that would b^ a subject of 
 fomplaint. ,, ' ,"' ' " ' / '.' ■. '- . x ■ . . 
 
 Q. Have you had any strikes in comiectiori With your business here, or have you 
 •lad any labour troubles — perhaps we will put it in that 'way? — A. 'Wo had a little 
 trouble last year. - -■ 
 
 Q. What caused that trouble last year, or did it go back farther than t^at| — A. 
 Well, the trouble caused last year was'by the eriiptoyment oh oui- part of two men ■wh9, 
 belonged to the union in Vancouver, and who had been working here forsbinp time, with 
 other unioii nien^-the shipwrights' unidri and Carpenters' union. , ' . < ^, ,. i 
 
 ,Q. How did that cause trouble? — A. Qur men refused to work with them. '\ ," 
 
 Q. Why? — ^A. They said th^y beloriged to the, Vancouver union. 'I 
 
 Q. Did that mean they could riot work in Victoria ?— A.' No, they h^d been wort 
 ing in Victoria on the Venture for four or five 'mohthsl ^hey we're not' wbrting for iis 
 then. They were working with the men who were employed on that boat. .When the 
 Venture was finished,; they cam& to us> and. thp, union .men .refused to \7Qr^( .Two 
 Allans by name, came here and said they had been working, on tbe VeV'tifrf for gom^ 
 months, and if we would employ thepj, they wqulfl move from Vancouver and work in 
 Victoria. I told them we; ^ould give then; work at the regular union wages.. , 
 
 Q. What objection Y?as. made to that? — A. They were to. come dpwrt to work on' 
 Monday morning. They arrived and told me tliat if they went to wprk, the jinion irieh 
 said they would quit. ... .; ,,,,,.•.., , 
 
 Q. For wha,t reason? — A. The reasbn . the union '.gave' w^s, that they, wer6 npt 
 members of their union. , ..... 
 
 Q. Did that mean they could not work here unless they were members of the Vic- 
 toria union? — A. That is what they said. . 
 
 Q. Not unless they joined the "lOqal lodge in Victoria ?-^A. They Ijiad beeii :work- 
 ing with the same men previously, and no objection was befri^' raised then,' .^j 
 
 Q. Why was the objection raised when they came to work "for you'?— A. I'saW the 
 president of the union, and he: s,aid they had psissed a resolution at their union meeting, 
 and they decided not to work with the Allans. - , • .,.' 
 
 Q. What reason did the president give? — A. They said they had passed a resolu- 
 tion — I think it was to the effect that they would not work with the Vanccniver union 
 without the consent of their -own union, -and' they had • not the' consent of itheit' own 
 union. ■..■••.■'. ' . -'■'•' ■: .- ■ . ,; r f ■;:.;:■ .-■ .'■ 
 
 Q. Who TPas president of the union at that tim8?Ti-A. David Kelly. He is: in 
 Victoria at the present time. ■ ■ '<■> -■■ .< , 
 
 Q.. He is working now? — A. Yes. .... .^ ,. ,. , ; 
 
 Q. Was there anything that occurred prior to thi«,^ coimected with it in any'waso,? 
 Any trouble previous to this trouble ?^— A. There were one or- two;, little things, that 
 happened, but nothing serious. ,. ■ .; ., ./ 
 
 Q. What were they? — A. We had a steamer here, called the Bertha, for repairs, 
 from the American side. , ■ , 
 
 Q. When was that ? — A. About a year ago, the first part of this month. Time 
 was the essence of our agreement in making the repairs, and we had all the available 
 ^mion men employed, and I asked permission of the executive of, the Shipwrights,' 
 Union to put on. outside handy men to facilitate despatch. They said they coul,d not 
 do so without calling a meeting. And then they held a meeting and notified metliat 
 they could not grant the request. 
 
 Q. You were not able then to get your vessel out on time ? — :A. No. . 
 
 Q. V^ere there men here you could have employed sugicient to get her mit on time? 
 — A. Yes. The reason given was that they would not work with n6n-iinion men. 
 
 Q. You had employed all the union men available, and yet they would not al)aw 
 you to employ non-union m.en ? — A. No. It was not a time contract — it was a verb&l 
 
 HARRY F. BUbLEN— Victoria, May 12. 
 
OJV mppSTIilAL DISPUTES IN BRiTISH COLUMJilA 123 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 assurance, that we would give gopd despatch. I explained this t^ thp union,. ^They said 
 tliey could not help that — that they-^ could npt worlc with non-union men. - I explained 
 that we could not get union men, an(l e:!fplained that the longer she, stay(?d the better 
 
 iOTUS.,.,.:, /, ;;„,,„,,,;,.;. ■/. .,,, ,,',,;.,., ,r;:^; ,i^..^.^. S;^!'... -,. ^■-■■.,Vs..;o 
 
 Q. And they would not consent ? — A. No. ,., ' . ^ , 
 
 Q. And did not consent ?^A. No. , The upshot was, .we had to do the best we 
 
 cquld with the union help, available. i,, ,,:_,^ ,,,;. ,5.,:.;:.. ;. i,i v,- •;■,';; ^■■u :/■;"■■ 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : '''-' '''"' ''-''■'' ' 
 
 ",i Q. "Would they have permitted you to'fjring union men from Vancouver ? — A. I 
 t"h'Jmt we had to wire and arr.ang;e from VanQOUver. 
 
 * Q. Would they have permitted you to, foiiig, union rnen ftfom Vancouver ?^A. We 
 have had me;i from the other side. '' _ .', ',' [,'.\, ,,,, ). > 
 
 Q. Have you had any experience 19 fcy^^ing men from. Sea.y;le/^ay 1—K. Yes. 
 . Q. What is there about thstt ?r— A. 1 pnly had tr.oiibleonc^. In the, other instances 
 the men saw .that, \ve got the jpen ourselves.:^ .. . ' -j _,-, ,,..,„ ■.; .;. ,,, |.,,.-, ,,. , ,,, 
 
 Q. What are the Hi-cuVftStaticfeS iti'tha't 'caSe ?— AMt is St) long ago I' cannot re- 
 meinbe'r. I' forget the details.'"' ' ',■■' ''' ','," :' '" ''"'/. "'' '' 
 
 Q.' Whit was' thti' subSla'nc'e'bf the tfoutt'e thrit you.hkd, in a gesheral way ? — A. I 
 think the oTjie'ction ffie inen raised -feaS that' 'the meti on the other side were not the 
 same starhp as the liien here — not'aa nigh clas^'.tn'&.'y'' Tliey "wei'e px>t as good, and did 
 nottake'the same interest ih'the'ir work.'" "' •<■•-- .>....■■;.= . ^ ,•.,,. 
 
 Q. You c.quld not get in sufficient good men here,? — A. No. Of course, since then, 
 when we had our 'trotjble last'July,"we threshed the inatter out pretty fjilly .'between 
 the union and ourselves, and we came to a ve-y clear imderstanding' and' settled all 
 our difficulties amicahly, and made ah agreement that 'was satisfactory to botji the men 
 and ourselves. I dqn't think it is policy ^to stir up, things of the past. ', ' I 
 
 i^. W'ell', thi^ iiistory is very 'useful to the' Commission, and' I don't see. '^hy you 
 should not tell us. You have niaae ah amicable arrangement v?ith theoc men ? 
 
 .9'! His-LoBDSHip.^— Youiai'e'iHot'stirrirfg'-it tip, 'Mr. Bullen-^it is the' lawyers and the 
 Commission. ^ ^.ii-r . , ■/■tij ,:.';v. ' . v, ., u..;i •■■■-> '< ' - 
 
 .-,.;,.., By.Mr. Bodwell : ,,..,,^, ir:- Iktv; v- •;. ^.ul: jv- :• ■■:.]:■ ,..: :-.■:. . •• •.• i 1 i 
 
 Qj I think the Commission would like to know all about it, and I don't see how 
 it can make any difference ? — A. It does not make any difference, because all the 
 points of conteniio'n that We had with the men were satisfactorily arranged. 
 
 Q. Cannot you tell us what it was ? — A. The trouble we had was over the fact that 
 they would not work with outside men unless all the uiiion men were employed. Fre- 
 quently in the shipping business; you' require a large number of men to rush a job 
 throu^. It frequently^is not practicable to send to Va'ncouver or Seattle. You must 
 have the men here. >-•!..>, , . .;• ■■:";:!: 
 
 .>■:■ Q. What' course do'ybu.like to pursue ?-^A. We like to put on anyone who iscom- 
 petent to do the woik, whether they belong to the union or not. ■•■"■''■ '' ■> 
 
 ;. : Q. And theuliion would'not stand it ?— A. No. ' ' -' ; • '' ." - , 
 
 ->'! . Q.Have you ever had to refn=c jobs on that account ^ — A. We have had to send 
 vessel's' away not properly done. ' ' "^ -' _ ■■■" ^- '',•■■ '■■•'•■y 
 
 i' ■ Q;^ Can you give: us an instance ?— A. One instance was the vessel Sonoma/'^'We 
 coTild-not get naen.'. It did not amount to very much, but it is a serious thin^ to uS 
 and the port to have a vessel go away unfinished. -■ 
 
 Q. Has that occurred more than onee ? — A. Yes, several times. 
 ■: Q, In diffei'^nt years, or in the same years ? — A. I could not remember the date. 
 
 Q. You say it is bad for the port ? — A. It is bad in this respect— that if a vessel 
 is sent to have certain work done, afld then has not a satisfactory job done, it means 
 she won't come here again, i 
 
 HAR8Y F. BULLEN— Victoria, May 12. 
 
124 itl^VTES OP EVIDENCE OF R07AL eOUUISSim 
 
 .■3-4 EDWARD VIJ., A. 1904 
 
 ■ Bi) Mr. Rbwe i >•-' ■■ ci ■ .;■■ . ' :■ . :.,'.■ > - ■ ;: , i. : 
 
 Q. Why were these vessels serit^way ?— A. "Krotti inability to get men. ' ' ' '' 
 
 Q. Although there were men here who could ha^e done the work ?^^A. Ttes. 
 
 Q. But the union would not allow you to employ them because lihey were not 
 ,un,ion men ?— A. Yes. ' , ■ ' 
 
 Q. Tell us the ^'tbry of the contention of the union men, the settlement and the 
 terms on which you are now dealing with them. How did the. contention arise, ' How 
 was it carried .on, during what lime did it last, aiid how wag it settled ? — A. It Occurred 
 in July last year, and I think it lasted about two we^ks. 
 
 Q. Wa? it a strike or a locknDut ?^A.'The men called it a lock-out; We called' it 
 ■ a strike.! . ; . , . .,..'.■ . ,. 
 
 Q. What brought it about ? — A. The cause of it was that there were two inen 
 named Allan who, belonged to the Vancouver union of carpeiiters, who had beeii work- 
 ing with the, Victoria union on other work in town. They were employed by us to 
 start work at Esquimalt on a certain date. Wheii'they came to start work they 't6ld 
 us that the union men would not work with them, and I, insisted .or tried to insist, iilid 
 sent for the executive officer of the Shipwrights' Union, who came in the office, and I 
 told him that he had driven these two union men away, and tliat We required them', and 
 if they were not at work by one o'clock' they could consider their services not re4tlired. 
 He said they had not driven them away, and I maintained he had, When, one o'clock 
 came the men were not there, and I told the executive that I intended to carry out 
 what I had said, to call the men off, and they, all quit work. 
 
 Q. What followed then ? — ^A. That lasted about two weeks, probably a little less. 
 Then, through the assistance of the Trades arid Labour .Council, I think, Mr. Twigg 
 and one or two others, we reached an amicable settlement. The principal point in the 
 settlement was the fact that v/e absolutely maintained the right to ufee outside men 
 when union men were not available. That was talked over, and aftear quite a lot of 
 consideration they consented to it. In the meantinie the Allans had gone back to Van- 
 couver. ., ■ ^ ,,',--, ,,-'.' 
 
 By His Lordship : , . . , , ,, 
 
 Q. Why did they n6t recognize the Vancouver union i-— A. They- had passed some 
 by-law a night or two before without notifying us, but what the nature of that by-law 
 was I don't remember, but it had the effect of barring the Varicoilver men out. This 
 covered all outside unioiis. ' '^ ' '" .■,.,..■ 
 
 By Mr. Bodivell : , ; : , ; ... 
 
 Q> In dealing with th^ Shipwrights' tjnibn what wias the course of business, wlio 
 would you meet and what woiild be the. way in -vyhich the business was conduct^ ? — 
 A. Mr. Twigg came down to our office. He was in the Trades and L^lDour Council. 
 They, acted as a conciliatory body. ' ' ,,' ' 
 
 ; Q.What is the .Trades and Xabour Council as distipguished from the Ship- 
 wrights' Union t-^ A, I don't think they have any connection at, .all. ' ' 
 
 Q. Are they an organization represenfing allthe trades in the city ? — A. I think 
 they represent the Montreal association; — the Trades and Lafcoiir Council of Canada.' 
 
 Q. Is that usual for, them to interfere as a conciliatory body in case of troiible ? 
 
 A. It was not.Lnterfer^ncc. Mr. Twigg came down and asked if we would agree to 
 see hLm. We toldhim.yes, and we discussed it. with him, ■.-.-,. 
 
 Q. And he discussed it with the head of the Shipwrights Union ?— A. Yes and 
 we had mutual conferences after' that. i ' .; :'r 
 
 Q. And the 'I'rades and Labour Council acted as an arbitration board ? — A. They 
 tried to bring us together, and the result. of tliat was a mutual understanding. ; 
 
 Q. Would you thirtk. that a permanent board of tliat kind esitablished here would 
 bo uhoful in coimeciion with labour disputes? — A. I should think it would, if, it 
 would lie outsideof any influence^ , „ 
 
 HARRY K., BULLEN—V'ict9(rla. May 18. , > j- 
 
OV momTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 125 
 
 iSESSICNAL PAPER Nov 86a 
 
 Q. What would be your idea of the constitution of the board ? -Wpuld you think 
 it well for the employer to appoint a man, the union one, and then a third arbitrator ? 
 — A. Yes, I think that wo\ild be a good way. 
 
 . Q. Would yoy thiQk that. a. permanent arbitrator would be more useful or less 
 useful than a particular arbitrator appointed from time to timie as disputes arose ? — 
 .A. I should think it would be letter. to have a judge of the SBjuieme Gouiifie a third 
 .; arbitrator. , 
 
 Q. Why ?^A. I think he would be outside of all influence. 
 
 Q. Suppose you had a permanent official appointed, would you not think he would 
 be outside of influenca ? — A. No, he would be \inder political influence. 
 
 Q. If he was appointed permanently and only removable as a judge for cause, 
 would. you .not.think we would be removed from political influence ? — A. That would 
 .,be the same .as a judge. " ' >-■.'.:,■. 
 
 Q. And if he \yas permanently employed in these matters would he nbt be a better 
 man than one who only took it up from time to time ? — ^^A; Yes,' he should be better 
 qualified. 
 
 Q. Assuming that you had ar^ independent man, removable only for cause, would 
 you not think that a permanent roan would be better than a particular man appointed 
 from time to time ?— A. if he waa beyond influence. 
 
 By His Lordship,: 
 
 Q. What do you say as to a judge appointing the third arbitrator ? — A. I should 
 think \mder the circumstances it would be better to have a permanent man — a man 
 who would qualify himself for such a position. 
 
 Q, Would there be a danger of a permanent official developing a bias of one sort 
 or other i — ^A. I should not think so, / 
 
 By Mr. Bodwelt :' • 
 
 Q. As a business man do you think, taking into consideration the distinction 
 between different classes of business in which labour disputes arise, that one man 
 would not be able or competent to act as arbitrator in all matters of labour disputes ? 
 ..T^A. A think if one man werg appointed permanently he. could pp^t himself. 
 
 By Ills Lordship ; 
 
 Q. What do you find to be the disadvantages in dealing with unions ? — A. There 
 are some, yes. I think the disadvantage in dealing with a union is the fact that the 
 men don't seem to realize that the employers are entitled to proper consideration ; that 
 the union seems to be run too much with the idea of regarding the interests of the 
 men, and that the unions do not ajppreciate the fact in many branches of business that 
 the interests of employers, aiid themselves are identical, and that t3iey shouM work irr 
 harmony with each other. ' • . r 
 
 Q., You think, then they are too much after their own interests ? — A. Yes. I 
 don't think the better element in the unions ta;ke the active interest they should. I 
 doji't think they allow themselves to be bound by4he union, but ratherthat they are 
 not sufficiently prominent in their format-ion. ■'' • 
 
 ' Q. Any' other disadvantages? — A. I think that is all. ' 
 
 Q. 'What are tlie advantages?— A. I think it is an advantage in having a uniform 
 scale' of wages and prevents men taking advantage of it. Employers are all on the 
 same footing- If they make a contract, fliey know what they have to pay the men, 
 ahd can arrange tlieir figure's aceordingly.- '■, ' ' 
 
 ' BuiMr. Bodwellr .^ , ., / 
 
 Q. Do you think there w^ould be so many strikes; if the union funds were made 
 liable for losses occasioned-by tlieii' taking an improper stand?— A. I certainly don't 
 
 -think 'SO.'-' i^ ■--•-'-'; '-i— -n: .1 -y. -■ -r-X^:-'-- . . .';.. ■ ... 
 
 Q. You don't know very much about how they^manage the finances of the union? 
 —A- No, I don't. , 
 
 HlRRY F. Bt'LLEN— Victoria, May 12. 
 
126 MINVi'ES OF EVIDENCE OF BOTAL COMMISSION ■^ 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VH., A. 1904 i 
 
 ; By His Lordship: ,, ^ .:[;■•-- -js ■;:'.''' i->:'d'i\i:--' : ' ■---i;..'j < ■ ■ '■ ■"■■''" "-'■'} 
 Q. I suppose some strikes are caused by the refusal on the part of an employei:"to ' 
 meet his men ? — A. Frequently, I think;' ' .=. . • • : ji;? 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. In this settlement you spoke of, was a written agreement made?— A. Yea. 
 
 By His Lordship: : .- ' :; •; , '^a-n hLi'-.-s,-,']' 
 
 ■ Q; Youand your brother met ,with the heads of the union ? — A.' Yes. ■ 'V [ 
 Q. You did not do it through the foreman? — A. No. f. '/ . ;:■■ . )-:■?.' 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. This is a year ago? — A. A year ago last July. 
 
 Q. In that agreement is any provision made for settlement of subsequent disputes ? 
 — A. The agreement sets forth that we cannot constitute a lockout without giving 
 the men on a week's notice, and that they cannot go on strike ;withou:t' rgi^i^g ar iwefek's 
 notice. That their by-laws are not subject to change without six months' notice, and 
 that the agreement remains in force for a year. -•,; a 
 
 Q. No arrangement for arbitration or cpnciliation, or anything of ..that kind-^to 
 refer the- dispute to any one in particular ? — A. Np; we thought it would cover J;he 
 ground where we limited the time oyer a week. In the event of hasty .action .on'the 
 anion's part it would give us' time to discuss the niatter. 
 
 By His Lordship:- , ,■ , 
 
 Q. Do you find that recognition of the union involves the exclusion of non-union 
 men? — A. Yes. ' All our men are union men with the exception of the labourers., Si?me 
 of them art and some are not. ' . . '' '. 
 
 , Q, You cannot employ a hoh-union shipwright ?^A, ^o. ' ' " " ", ', 
 
 Q. That is what is meant by ifecognitibn of the \iniori ? — A. Y'es. ' "" ' ' ' 
 
 By Mr. Roive: • ■ ■ '- 
 
 "J. Does your .agreement read, an agreement, with the Shipwrights' un,i6n ?-7-A. ,Yes. 
 
 Q. They . igned as ofiicers for that unioij I — A. Signed by the president. 
 
 Q. Would it facilitate the making of such agreements "if si^ch unions were incor- 
 porated ?^A. I think so, , ,..-.' . . 
 
 Q. "Would it increase the sense of security on the part of the ertiployer ?— ;i.^ We 
 would feel that we were naaking an agreement with a mofe responsible body< ,, '. * 
 
 Q. As it is now, you are without any recourse at law? — ^A. Yes. ' ' 
 
 By His Lordship: - , :, ,. 
 
 . • Q. Is the agreement drawn up between you and the Shipwrights' IJnion as the 
 bhipwrirfhts' Union? — A. Yes, between the, union and signed by the president of ithe 
 union. 
 
 Q. Who would, you sue in the event of difBculty ?— A. It is just a written under- 
 standing between ourselves. ■. ,, 
 
 Q. .You might find you had entered into an agreement with a siiadow?' A. It is 
 
 oiily the moral strength. '" 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: ' ,^^ ;.: 
 
 Q. They usually keep to their written agreements ?— A. They always Have with 
 us. Any understanding come to is always carried out. This was the first written' 
 agreement we have had. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. You heard the evidence in regard to the bollermakers. You don't know whe- 
 ther this shipwrights' union is subject to authority similar to that?— A. <rhis is a . 
 HARRT F. BUtLEN— Victoria, May 12. 
 
Olf INDUSTniAti bISPVTM IN BRITI8H HOWMBIA 127 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 purely local union— purely Canadian. They are affiliated with the Trades and" Labour 
 CounciL ■ - , , , . , , _ . , ■ ; . :,.-,,,.,■ 
 
 Q. Would the fact that it is not internationfil maUe ydu foel inorS secure in your 
 agreement with it? — A. Yes. 
 
 -By Jlis Lordship ; 
 
 Q. They are entirely masters of themselves? — A. Yes, with the exception of the 
 Trades and Labour Council. , < - 
 
 Q. You would sooner deal with a union that is not a member of an international 
 federation ? — A. Yes. , . .../■; 
 
 SiMBOS LEISER/iSt^Om:-' • ^ • ■: 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: - - 
 
 ,^Q. You, qarry on business in Victoria ?T- A, Yes, sir. 
 
 ;Q.\You '^Iso^haVe businesses established at Opmoj^ and tadysihith 1 — A. Yes. 
 '"'Q; For ho'wloiig a period?— A, At Cfomox for 'twelve years, and, at Ladyamith for 
 about two years now. 
 
 Q. Have you had any experience with strikes at Comox while you were carrying 
 8n business ?-r-A. No, __,.,, .. 
 
 ' Q.^ The only; sti-jlce has been at Ladysmith ? — A. Yes. _ '■ , • . 
 
 Q. Can you give us any idea of the generar effect on business conditions^ in re-' 
 gard to your trade, occasioried by, the strike? — A. It has a very bad'e6'ect oii tr^de. 
 Where we were doing, a good business, at Ladysmith preyidus, we don't do riiore than 
 half at the present moment. 
 
 Q. Have you any objection to giving iis fully the figures before and after ? — A. I 
 don'^ like ^o give the, figures, , . , 
 
 Q. The falling-ofi is, tiow rnuch?^A./The fa]ling-off from here,, from the, whole- 
 sale business at Victoria — business done vyith Ladysmith since, the strike, the jobbing 
 busiries's has fallen off $50,(300; '~ ; ^ • : ' ^-^ ; .• ,: •...- 
 
 ,Q.,An.d the retail business between the merchants and the men?— A. That has 
 fallen off 25 p6r cent. ' ^ 
 
 Q. What is thb effept on collections? — A. Collections up there, direct with the 
 men, are about in the' same proportion — 25 per cent less in the last two months than 
 in the two previous. 
 
 . ,Q. If the, strike should continue for several months, would the merchants be in 
 dano'er of making permanent losses on goods already sold oH credit, never getting th 3 
 moiiey at all ?— A. If the strike continued, I think they would. 
 
 Q. That is to §ay, there is no way of getting paid unless the ipen are working, 
 and if the men leave it is a total loss 1— A. Yes ; it cannot be ptherwise. 
 
 Q. Do you know what particular businesses are most affected by a stirike such as 
 the one now being carried on at Ladysmith ?— A. Every kind of business is affected, 
 but the principal one is the grocery business, because they have got to eat. At tha 
 present moment trade is very bad up there since the first of May. 
 
 J Q Can you give us any way of forming an estimate of the general condition of 
 trade in the country— how it has been affected by strikes in the, last year. The strike 
 at rernie, the strike this spring at Vancouver, and now the strike at the Wellington 
 Colliery Company's mines. Can you give us any idea of the effect ?— A. The trade 
 of the province has been disastrous. The Fernie strike, when it toqk places it was 
 simply fearful. The whole business .of the Kootenays fell right out. Some of the 
 houses called their travellers back— some of liie Victoria houses. 
 
 SiMBON LEISER— Victoria, May 12. 
 
128 MIJfVTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD V,l|., A. 1,904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Have you any branches in Va,ncO\jver ? — A. ISTo, 
 
 Q. Have you made any estimate of what the etfect of the strike at the Welling^ton 
 colliery has. on the wholesale, trade of Victoria ?— A. It has a very 'big eff'".ct. 
 
 Q. In figures ? It woiild include ihe sale to the retail stores, the company and 
 the men living at the mines ?^A. The trade has fallen off 50 per cent. Fojr instance, 
 there is Ladysmith — the Welliiigton Colliery Company. I puppose their pay-roll 
 monthly is a large one. 
 
 Q. How much ?— A. Probably in'tbe neighbburhood of $70,000 to $75,000 a month. 
 That money is all paid out at Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. How much is represented in the trade of Victoria for the next montji ? — A. A 
 good deal of it. Not as much as 50. per cent. I think 30 per cent. 
 
 Q. Soniething like $26,000 a nloiith lost to Victoria. I want to kripw what amount 
 per month is lost to the merchants. of Victoria by virtue of this strike ? — A. I think, 
 with supplies and everything, it would run close to $50,000 since the strike. . 
 
 Bu Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Do you know how much is allowed to' the nien on strike ? — A. No ; I did not 
 find that out. yt_i^}^^ 
 
 Q. it gives a man barely eribugh te exist ? — A. Hardlj^ that. Some have got to 
 get along with very little. - ' -^ -' > ' . - 
 
 Q. Take the Eossland strike that was in 1902, the Fernie strike this year, and 
 all these others, can you give us an estiraate as a business man of the percentage of 
 loss to the whole country by these three strikes ? — A. It is an enormous loss. 
 
 Q. What percentage ? — A. Per month ? I could not tell unless I figured it out. 
 I could get it all right. I will try .and get it. ' ' ' 
 
 By His Lordship : - ■ --•■,-. 
 
 Q. Do' you know of any business failures ? — A. There are always business failures 
 during strikes. A good many of thie storekeepers can't stand it out. Their payments 
 are due, and there are no receipts. If the men have ho worli they cannot pa^' Unless 
 the man who carries him is willihg^ to carry him hie' has got to give ift. 
 
 Q. He does nothing to bring- about a strike, and cannot db atiylhing towards 
 settling it ?— A. Yes. • •. ■ ; ,- 
 
 Q. He has to make a loss ? — A. Yes. ' 
 
 Bu Mr. Rome: 
 
 Q. I suppose you have a list of delinquent debtors, men 'who attribute their in- 
 solvency purely to the strike ?— ^A. Oh, yes. • ■ ^ 
 
 By His Lordship : ,■■-.: ... 
 
 Q. What do you say as to settling strikes ?. WJiat would you advocate as to that ? 
 — A. I am sure I don't know.' I am pondering a gofid deal over it, but! have fouiid 
 no solution of it. ■; - . - . -. , 
 
 Q. What do you-say as to compulsory arbitration ? — A. I think the govei-nmerit 
 has to do something to settle tliese strikes. ' ' .. " .. ■' ; 
 
 Bii Mr. Eowe: , , , . 
 
 Q. You think there should be government intervention ? — A. 1 am positive. ' 
 
 By His Lordship: .... 
 
 Q. Suppose the parties are unable to, agree on a third arbitrator— how should he 
 be appointed ? — A, I think if they, appointed a business man— r^- , . • ; 
 
 Q. But suppose the arbitrators are unable to agree upon the third man ?— ^A. Then 
 they should appoint an independent man. ,■ - 
 
 SIMEON LEISER--"Vlctoria, May 12. ' 
 
ON mDVSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISE COLUMBIA 129 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. But supposing they are unable to agree upon an independent man, who should 
 appoint that man, the government or the court ? — A. I think the government — the 
 Dominion government. 
 
 Q. Somebody down there would have to know a good deal more about British 
 Columbia than most of them ? — A. They should appoint a man out here who knew 
 something about conditions. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Your idea would be to get the appointment away from local influences ?^ 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Your idea would be to get some man in the province ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Would you make him a permanent ofiieer ? — A. Sure. 
 
 Q. Whose business would be to consider questions of labour and post himself 
 thoroughly on these questions ? — A. I am in favour of the government appointing a 
 business man, because there are lots of business men who have good common sense, and 
 are able and capable of settling these matters; and sometimes accomplish more than 
 others. 
 
 Q. Supposing him to be a man of fair ability, he will be able to post himself in a 
 short time, and you think good common sense would be the best equipment he could 
 have ? — A- Yes. 
 
 T. H. TwiGG, sworn, recalled. 
 
 (Witness produces and identifies copy of Constitution of American Federation of 
 Labour — Exhibit E. List of organizations affiliated with American Federation of 
 Labour — Exhibit F.) 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The American Federation of Labour is not incorporated ? — A. Not that I 
 know of. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us whether the Internationa^ Typographical Union is incorpor- 
 ated t — A. No, it is not' incorporated. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether the members of that organizition have to take an oath ? 
 — A. They take an obligation. 
 
 Q. Do they take an oath ? — A. How would you interpret an oath ? 
 
 Q. Is an oath adrninislered to them — is the name of the Almighty used ? — 
 A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. I should think a man would know what an oath is. There is an obligation 
 taken to observe the rules and regulations ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You are the local organizer of the Dominion Trades and Labour Congress ? — 
 A. No I am on the executive of the Trades and Labour Council of British Columbia, 
 and local organizer for the American Federation of Labour. 
 
 Q. And as local organizer what are your duties — to secure the affiliation of local 
 bodies ? — A. Not necessarily. To organize workmfen into Unions. 
 
 O. Your duty is to organize men into unions, but not necessarily to affiliate these 
 men with the American Federation of Labour ?— A. Not necessarily. 
 
 Q. Are you paid a salary for that ?^A. No. Some of the international unions 
 allow a commission, but so far as I am coneemcl I have never used it foi- my own 
 
 personal use, . , . . • • » a ^ 
 
 Q. Some of the international unions give a commission { — A. Yes. 
 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGG— Victoria, May 12. 
 
 36a— 9 
 
130 MINUTED OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL C&W^UISSWJl ; 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Rowe ; ; , , , , ■ ; , , 
 
 Q. The typographical union has a benefit fund ? — A. Usually the local unions 
 form benefit funds. For instance, Ottawa has. They have a sick fund and provide fot 
 the burial of the dead. 
 
 Q. Have you any institutions ? — A. We have a home in Colorado Springs for 
 infirm printers. 
 
 Q. That is supported by assessments ? — A. Supported by the membership. 
 
 Q. On permanent assessment ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you organize a good many of the local unions here ? — A. Yes, I have 
 organized quite a few. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How many ? — A. I was just looking it up. I organized seventeen, fourteen in 
 existence to-day. 
 
 Q. Would you mind telling us what the nature of the occupations is ? — A. They 
 are mostly all in the trades. 
 
 Q. Did you get up the boilermakers' ? — A. No, they are an old organization. 1 
 organized the boilermakers' helpers. 
 
 Q. You say you don't get any commission ? — A. Sometimes I receive a commis- 
 sion, but I don't use it personally, and as a rule turn it over to the union. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : ■ 
 
 Q. The organizer gets so much of the charge made for the charter ? — A. Some- 
 times you may deduct it, and sometimes it is sent to you. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did you organize the shipwrights ? — A. No, that is an old organization. The 
 shipwrights' was a local organization until about a year ago, and then they took out n 
 charter from the Dominion Trades Congress. 
 
 Q. Are all the bodies you organized connected with the Dominion Trades Con- 
 gress ? — A. No, only two, I think. 
 
 Q. So far as the trade unions that you know of in British Columbia are concerned, 
 they are more closely related to international unions than to the Dominion Trades 
 Congress, are they not ? — A. There is a difference between an international union. 
 The Dominion Trades Congress will not issue a charter to a local if there is an inter- 
 national. They will affiliate with the local union, but won't issue a charter. 
 
 Q. And then it yields the ground to international unions ? — A. Oh, yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. The natural thing would be to look upon it as a Canadian equivalent to the 
 American Federation of Labour ? — A. It is looked upon as a sister organization. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You mean it won't issue a charter to an international union where there is 
 one already in existence, so that they will be forced to join the international ? — A. Not 
 forced exactly. 
 
 Q. Supposing a union v.'as organized in a trade in which there was an interna- 
 tional. Am I to understand that the Dominion Congress would not recognize it unless 
 that was so ? — A. I have an instance. We have a local union, and I wrote to Mr. Dra- 
 per, and he said that while he could not charter < he union he would affiliate. I rather 
 question his decision. 
 
 Q. Then, if they would not charter it, could this lodge be represented in the 
 Trades Congress? — A. It could not. According to that decision, affiliation would give 
 lit full representation, as I understand it. 
 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGG— Victoria, May 12. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 131 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. It would be a queer thing if you could not join the Dominion Congress unless 
 you joined an international union? — A. There are, a great many, unions, while they 
 belong to an international, also laxe affiliated with the Trades Congress. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. I can hardly understand them being excluded from the Dominion Congress 
 unless they join; the international union? — A, The, Dominion Congress is more of a 
 legislative nature. ^ 
 
 ■ ; ; Q. So, the Canadian uuiQus are virtually forced to join an international organiza- 
 tion, or else stand by themselves? — A. They are not forced into joining, 
 
 Q. They have to stand by themselves, unless they do that ? — A. Yes. 
 
 • By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Would it meet all legitimate demands of labour, if Canadian organizations 
 were by themselves? — A. You mean, to create a national union? 
 
 Q. Confine members to Canadian organizations? — A. I would not give much for 
 Canadiaii trade, unionisim in three or four years. 
 
 Q. Why? — A. Not sufficient strength. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe; 
 
 Q. Having a national organization would not remove the possibility of affiliation 
 with international organizations? — A. I don't see any benefit to be derived. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The benefit would be you would not have to run the fear of having scab labour 
 introduced; if you affiliated with the American organization, that would protect you 
 against scab labour? — A. That is provided for now. 
 
 Q. On the other hand, if you were only affiliated, but not incorporated into their 
 bodies, you would be better able to control yourselves — you would be completely auto- 
 nomous, would you not? — A. I have not thought of that part of it. I suppose we 
 would. 
 
 Q. I understand the chief object is to protect yourselves against the influx of scab 
 labour during strikes? — A. No, I don't think that is the only reason. For instance, if 
 I were to leave here and go to 'Frisco and Seattle, I have no trouble. I simply take my 
 travelling card. 
 
 Q. But you could get that condition by simply being affiliated? — A. I suppose 
 such an arrangement might be made. 
 
 Q. And, on the other hand, you would not have the disadvantage of being subject 
 to the control or direction of the Americans ? — A. Well, I question it. 
 
 Q. We have had a very speaking case of control, in the matter of the Garonne, by 
 the organization or headquarters in Kansas City — A. That was a muddle anyway, and 
 no one just exactly understood it. 
 
 Q. But that difficulty might arise any time with international unions? — A. They 
 might also arise with national unions. 
 
 Q. How? — A. Supposing we had trouble in Vancouver, and that boat was sent 
 over there. The trouble would be in Victoria, even if they were national. If Van- 
 couver gave trouble with the Garonne, for instance, and she was sent over here, she 
 would be unfair in Victoria. 
 
 By Mr. Rowa: 
 Q. Then the national organization would decide the question? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You think it makes no difference where your headquarters are, whether at 
 Winnipeg, Ottawa or Kansas? — A. No. 
 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGG— Victoria, May 12. 
 
 36a— 9i 
 
132 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. The relationship between the locals of the Typographical Union, in British 
 Columbia is just the same as in Washington State— not district union ? — A. Not in 
 British Columbia. I believe there were districts, one in the west, at one time. I am 
 not quite sure. 
 
 Q. What is the exact conformation of the Trades and Labour Council ? — A. The 
 Trades and Labour Council is composed of delegates from the different unions com- 
 posing it. They meet and discuss matters pertaining to the welfare of organized 
 labour and working-people generally. That is about as close as I can make it. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. There cannot be admitted to that any order except such as hold charters from 
 some recognized union ?— A. That was a recent amendment to the constitution, that a 
 union must belong to the international of its trade, if such exists. If not, they must 
 take out a charter from the Dominion Trades Congress, or else it is denied representa- 
 tion at the Trades Council. 
 
 Q. The members of that union would not be regarded as union people ? — A. Oh, 
 yes, they are regarded as union people. 
 
 Q. Suppose there was a local organization of the same craft. Suppose the city 
 were large enough for two, and one affiliated with the internatioiial and the other chose 
 to stand alone. Would the latter be considered as alone ? — A. It would be considered 
 a clandestine institution. 
 
 Q. And the members would not have the right to join the Council? — A. No, I 
 think not. 
 
 Q. Do you think that the right to use the label and to have the label registered by 
 all the incorporated unions, and only by them, would be an inducement for unions to 
 incorporate ? Suppose a union under certain conditions could have its label registered, 
 would not more unions avail themselves of that opportunity? — A. I don't know how 
 you would arrange it. Would it be under Designs and Trade Marks Act ? What 
 would you do with the international label ? I think at one time the Toronto Typo- 
 graphical Union was incorporated 
 
 Q. The suggestion might be that only national labels would be registered and 
 protected? — A. I don't think that is altogether fair. I think the label is the work- 
 men's trade mark, and should be afforded all the privileges of other designs, without 
 imposing more conditions than are imposed on others. 
 
 Q. Of course, the difference is, I suppose, that it is thought that in order to use 
 the label, the shop has to submit to conditions imposed, and the terms upon which the 
 labels are granted may be changed from time to time, and incorporation would pro- 
 tect the employer against that possibility? — A. The employer now makes a volimtary 
 agreement that he shall follow out certain rules laid down by the union, and he is 
 granted the use of the label on the strength "of that. It is rarely that there is ever a 
 violation on the part of the union. I have known of none. . 
 
 Q. Do you think the use of the label is a protection to the public in any way ? 
 
 A. Yes, I think it is a protection. It guarantees, in the first instance, that the goods 
 are made under conditions in which the men are receiving a just remuneration for 
 their wages, and a guarantee that they are made in sanitary places. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The advantage of the international is that it has more power than any national 
 organization ? — A. Tes; that is one reason. 
 
 Q. Greater strength, owing to its greater numbers ? — ^A. Tes. 
 
 Q. Do you think that compensates for any disadvantage that the control is virtu- 
 ally lodged in the States ? — A. I hold a different opinion as to the control exercised 
 in the United States; and, as for the national feeling, I think trade unions are doing 
 more to bring about a friendly feeling than any other movement. . 
 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGGf— Victoria, May 12. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 133 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a • 
 
 Q. You think these organizations have a tendency to make good friends ? — A. 
 Yes, to make things friendly. 
 
 Q. When you say the Oaronne affair was a muddle, what do you mean ? — A. As 
 far as I understand it ; it was pretty hard to find out how it stood. ; 
 
 Q. It was pretty hard on Canadian people that they shotild have been driven from 
 working by directions from Kansas City. The men were willing to go to work ? — A. 
 Yes, the job was declared fair. I don't know a great deal about that. It was so long 
 ago, and I did not take a very active part in it. 
 
 By Mr. Howe: 
 
 Q. So far as you know, in these unions is there any objection to the members 
 being members of the militia ? — A. Not in any of the unions in thi^ city. 
 
 Q. There are, as a matter of fact, a great many men in the militia ? — A. The 
 Musicians' Union comprises the 5th Eegimeht band, and that band is militia. 
 
 Q. There are no restrictions, as far as you know, against the militia ? — A. I be- 
 lieve there are some unions, but not in the city. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. What unions have you in mind — the Western Federation, for instance? — ^A. 
 I, don't know whether that institution is or not. There was a time when the Painters' 
 Union had some difficulty, but I believe that law was rescinded. 
 
 By Mr. Rovoo: 
 
 Q. Does that not preyail more across the line I — A. Almost entirely, I think. 
 
 Q. Is it more marked with a union affiliated with the American Labour Union or 
 more with the American Federation of Labour ? — A. I would not like to say. as , to 
 that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The Western Federation of Miners is a socialistic organization, is it not ? — 
 A. I have heard it said that they have declared for socialism. Whether it ^as done by 
 referendum vote or in convention, I do not know. I believe the American Labour Uijion 
 has declared for socialism. 
 
 Bii Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. The socialistic newspapers are mostly endorsed by trade unions, are they not ? 
 ^A. Not all of them. There is a certain amount of jangling all the time between 
 them. "'■"■! iji ;'■ : 
 
 By His Lordship ; 
 
 Q. A man may be a good trade unionist and a poor socialist ?— A. Well, I don't 
 know. I think every good nnion man has certain socialistic principles — a certain 
 amount of socialism. There are so many kinds advocated. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe; 
 Q. Generally speaking, that means collective ownership ? — A. That would be one 
 of the planks. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. Of all property ? — ^Aw Not all property — mines, street cars, waterworks, and 
 so on. 
 
 By Mr. Rpwe: 
 Q. Natural monopolies, we will say ?— A. Yes. 
 
 THOMAS HENRY TWIGG— Victoria, May 12. 
 
134 UINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 ViOTOUiA, May 13, 1903. 
 Arthur Benjamin Bulley^ sworn : 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are the president of the British Columbia Steamshipmen's Society ? — 
 A. I am the president of this division. 
 
 Q. How many divisions are there ? — A. One in Vancouver and one in Victoria 
 at present. 
 
 Q. Are you incorporated ? — A. Yes, under the Friendly Societies Act of British 
 Columbia. 
 
 Q. How long has it been organized ? — A. Well, I forget the exact date. I have 
 not my books here. I believe our secretary has a book which will give that. The 
 secretary has also the constitution. 
 
 (Copy of constitution put in. Exhibit G.) 
 
 Q. Is it a secret organization — do you take an oath ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Is the oath there ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. What sort of an oath is it ? — A. It is only an ordinary oath to protect us in 
 our meetings — the same as any other fraternal society. 
 
 -Q. Each member to stand by the other? — A. Well, yes; much on the same principle 
 as a friendly society. 
 
 Q. Not to reveal the transactions at the meetings ? — A. Yes, we are not supposed 
 to reveal any transactions. 
 
 Q. Under what authority ? — ^A. I suppose our original constitution. 
 
 Q. Under the Friendly Societies Act ? — A. I could not tell you as to that. 
 
 Q. Can you give us a copy of the oath ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you a copy anywhere ? — A. We have none bound, but I could not do so 
 without the consent of our members. 
 
 Q. What objection is there to showing the Commission the nature of the oath ? — 
 A. I should not feel justified as a member of the society in doing anything contrary 
 to the wishes of the society itself. 
 
 Q. But you are revealing none of the proceedings — you are simply informing the 
 Commission of the nature of the oath ? — A. As. I said before, it would be much the 
 same as any fraternal society. All fraternal societies have oaths similar to this one, 
 and I don't know that they would care to hand over the inner workings of the society. 
 Take the Orangemen or the Masons — none of their oaths or ritual would be produced if 
 they could possibly help it. 
 
 Q. You understand that you must produce that oath if we require it. How 
 many men are in the society ? — A. About 160 in the Victoria division. 
 
 Q. What classes of labour does it include ? — A. Oilers, water tenders, firemen 
 trimmers, sailmakers, watchmen, lookouts, deckhands, quartermasters, paint scrubbers 
 and may, according to our constitution, take in cooks and stewards. 
 
 Q. It does not include engineers ? — A. Yes, and the firemen, oilers and water 
 tenders. 
 
 Q. There is a strike on at the present time ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The members of this organization are now on strike ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. For whom are they refusing to work ? — A. For the Canadian Pacific Naviga- 
 tion Company, and also Mr. Dunsmuir's boats, the E. and N. Company, I believe, and 
 any other vessel propelled by steam that may be chartered in the carrying of unfair 
 freight or baggage. 
 
 ARTHUR BENJAMIN BULLBY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
02V mo usftttiL D/SPurgsr m bkittse xtoeumbia 135 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. What do you mean by unfair freight ? — A. Freight that has been handled by 
 unfair labour, or substitute labour. Labour used in the place of men who may bo 
 now on strike. 
 
 Q. Why have these people gone on stt-ike ? — A. You are speaking of our society ? 
 Well, in consequence of a broken agreement. 
 
 Q. What agreement is that ?— A. With the C. P. N. Company. They agreed that 
 they would not carry unfair freight or baggage or *ould not handle coal foi* the 
 Empress boats. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — That agreement, is in writing^t will speak for itself. 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. who has the agreement ? — A. It is in our hall on file. I could not say the 
 precise day it was entered into. It was entered into by Captain Troupe himself on 
 board the Charmer. Our demands were made to him soon after the men came out 
 in Vancouver. They agreed to them. In an interview with Captain Troupe he told 
 Mr. Thompson and myself that he did not intend to carry anything unfair, and that 
 any time that he put such stufi on the boat he would expect the men to quit. When 
 he did so, they did quit. The agreement was voted on by the union and the terms 
 accepted. The next Saturday night unfair stufE was put on the Pnncess May, and 
 the next Monday there was unfair stuff on the Princess Louise, which caused a strike. 
 I might say, it passed the unanimous vote of the union that the agreement was being 
 broken. 
 
 Q. What is it to the Steamshipmen's Society what goes on between the C. P. K. 
 and its men ? — A. Simply that there is a union law among union men that one man 
 will not act unfair to another. There is an understanding among all labour men. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. You call this a sympathetic strike ? — A. Hardly. If Captain Troupe had not 
 broken this agreement we should have carried it out. 
 
 Q. You would have struck if ofi had not made an agreement ? — A. Well, we might 
 have, yes. This agreement was the foundation of the strike. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long have you been out ? — A. I thinlc since March 16. Is not that the 
 date ? 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Yes, March 16 or lY. Your places have all been filled ? — A. Not to my know- 
 ledge. The boats are running. I have not bothered myself how they are running, t 
 have kept away from it to avoid trouble. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long are you going to stay out ? — A. Until such time as the company are 
 prepared to carry business. 
 
 Q. Going to stay out as long as they carry scab freight ? — A, Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who is going to support the men ? — A. Partly done by subscription. 
 
 Q. Among themselves ? — A. From outside sources, other unions. 
 
 Q. What other unions ? — A. A number of them, the local unions in Victoria, and 
 from funds that have been paid into the advisory board at Victoria. 
 
 Q. Subscriptions come in from other unions — as for instance ? — A. The Carpen- 
 ters' Union in Victoria, Bricklayers, Cigarmakers, Typographical union, and so on. 
 
 -Q. Before you get subscriptions from these people you lay the case before them ? — 
 A. Yes, the case has bccn^laid befor them. 
 
 Q. Not before you inaugurated the strike ? — A. No, sir. After the strike was in- 
 augurated we laid the case before them. 
 
 Q. And if they see fit they subscribe ? — A. Yes. 
 
 ARTHUR BENJAMIN BULLEY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
136 MIWUTES OF ETIDENCET OF KOYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. And you would be expected to do the same thing ? — A. Whether they helped us 
 or not, we certainly would not work unfair — I would not for one. There may be more 
 unions that have subscribed, but I have only just quoted a few from memory. 
 
 Q. Does it make any kind of difference what union it is ? — A. No, I don't think 
 that it does. 
 
 Q. In this case you are really striking in sympathy with the U.B.E.E. ? — A. It 
 might be placed in that light. 
 
 Q. Is there any organization with whom you would not strike in sympathy ? — A. 
 Not that I know of, if the case was brought before them, that is, if our work was in 
 any way affected. Suppose the bakers were on strike, and the thing was really local 
 and did not affec-t us at all, and we could not benefit them by striking, or it would not 
 be unfair in our business, it woiild be foolish to strike. Although we might refuse to 
 eat the bread which was baked by the unfair men. 
 
 Q. Suppose all the iniions of the town struck in sympathy with the U.B.R.E., what 
 would be the effect ? — A. I don't know that I am well enough posted to say. 
 
 Q. Where would they get any money to subsist on ? — Of course that is taking the 
 conclusion out pretty far. The unions that have struck at present are only those con- 
 cerned with the freight and transportation business. 
 
 Q. What other unions have struck ? — A. Local 211 of the International Long- 
 shoremen's Union, Vancouver, and the Teamsters' Union in Vancouver. Thes3 are 
 the other two besides our society. 
 
 Q. What is the advisory board ? — A. The advisory board is a board composed of 
 members of the different unions represented on the Trades and Labour Council of Van- 
 couver. 
 
 Q. Have you any men in your union employed on other boats besides those of the 
 C.P.E. ? — A. Yes, on different boats. I could not name them all. The steamer 
 Victoria was manned by members of our organization. 
 
 Q. I suppose under your agreement that boat could not handle any C.P.E. stuff ? 
 — A. Not if we knew it. 
 
 Q. So far as your strike is concerned, I suppose you know little or nothing, of the 
 merits of the strike ? — A. Oh, yes, that was thoroughly gone into. We heard ,the 
 evidence and endorsement of both the U.B.E.E., and of the Longshoremen's Union, ajid 
 the Teamsters' Union, and also of the Vancouver Trades and Labour Council, ^nd the 
 Vancouver Board of Trade. 
 
 Q, You did not hear anything from the other side ? — A. As a rule we would not 
 go to the company for information. 
 
 Q. So yOu really only heard one side of the case before you concluded to strike ? 
 A. I suppose that is right. 
 
 Q. And it makes no difference whether the U.B.R.E. were right or wrong, you 
 would strike anyway ? — A. It is fair enough what they ask, that they should not be dis- 
 criminated against by belonging to this union. That is all they ask. 
 
 Q. What do you say to the l-ightof the C. P. E. to employ non-union men ? — A. 
 I don't see anything against it. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. What do you understand by recognition of the union ?— A. Suppose Mr. Mar- 
 pole or Captain Troupe had any business with us at all, he would recognize the union. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That means the exclusion of non-union labour sooner or later ? — A. I cannot 
 put it in those terms. If a non-union man goes and works anyway among non-union 
 men, then it is a foregone conclusion that they will get him to belong to the union. 
 
 Q. Suppose he stands out, would the men consider they were working with an 
 unfair man ? — A. Most positively. 
 
 Q. Practically the recognition of a union involves the exclusion of non-union 
 labour ? — A. Yes, as far as I see, I guess it amounts to that. 
 
 ARTHUR BKNJAMIN BULLEY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
ON moVSTBIAL DI8PVTE8 IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 137 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Supposing your union was working with non-union men; there was a com- 
 mittee to deal with the management. Would you permit non-union men to co-operate 
 with your committee in approaching the management ? — A. Well, that would all de- 
 pend. If it was in such a case that we had no jurisdiction over these non-union men, 
 I don't see anything to hold us. But in most cases, when all the men were union men, 
 it stands to reason that an outsider would be looked on with suspicion. 
 
 Q. Are there any other unions that have men working on the C. P. N. boats ? — 
 A. None except the longshoremen here. 
 
 Q. Why didn't they go out ? — A. That is a matter for themselves. I could not 
 say. There is a Master Association of Marine Engineers and Mates Association. 
 Neither of these have come out. 
 
 Q. Are they unfair in working on unfair boats ? — A. That is for them to decide. 
 As far as we are concerned, they are. The engineers are really the aristocrats of 
 unionism. They are the masters — we are the men that work under them. There is 
 very little in common between them. 
 
 Q. Are they represented in the Trades and Labour Congress ? — -A. No, sir. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. The engineers are among the natural enemies of the union ? — A. So to speak. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. What are your dues i — A. Seventy-five cents per month. That is placed in the 
 treasury for running expenses, &c. 
 
 Q. The whole of your society is out on strike ? — A. Yes^-the Vancouver branch. 
 
 Q. Suppose an organizer came along from the other side and wanted to start a 
 new society, and the labour people refused to recognize it, would that be ground for 
 walking out ? — A. If it was practically in opposition to our society as now constituted, 
 we would not consider it at all. It would be only stirring up strife. 
 
 Q. Does a man sometimes belong to more than one union ?— A. We have men 
 in our society belonging to the Longshoremen's Union, and in one instance one of Qur 
 men belonged to the Bricklayers' Helpers' Union. 
 
 Q. In your union do you dictate as to what work the men shall be put at ? — A. 
 No, a man is put in for certain work — whatever he is fitted for. No dictation. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. It is in the first page of the constitution the men who can belong to the union ? 
 — A. At present, but provision is made in our constitution to take in those men who 
 are not represented now. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What stand does your organization take on the question of boycott ? Do you 
 approve of the boycott ? — A. It depends on what is meant by boycott. It has never 
 been brought up to us yet in the way of boycott. 
 
 Q. Have you pickets out ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. There have been cases during the present strike of men being assaulted by 
 members of the union ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How many cases ? — A. Three, I believe. 
 
 Q. Cases of assault by members of the union ? — A. Yes. In one case a half-breel 
 that had got into the union and was begging for drinks. That was not recognized in 
 the union and he got expelled. Another case wa& of a man in the California Hotel. 
 A man said he had scabbed in other places, and he was going to scab here. It was 
 really a bar-room fight. The other case was between a man named McBride and 
 Snider brothers, I believe. There was- some dispute on the street, and it ended up in 
 an assault. But otherwise there has been no trouble whatever. 
 
 ARTHUR BENJAMIN BULLEY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
138 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE QF R07±L COmfimTOS 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Were any of the men impeded on their way towork ?— A. Not that I know of. 
 We may have stopped and talked to a man on the street, the- same as I might talk co 
 you. No threats were madei In fact, any man who gets into trouble by that reason 
 is' immediately expelled from the union. 
 
 Q. Is there any clause in the constitution against intimidation ? — A. None that 
 •l know of. 
 
 Q. What dues are you required to pay ?— A. Seventy-five cents a month, and $5 
 initiation fee. He is given a chance to pay that. 
 
 Q. A fraction of that goes into the Trades and Labour Council ? — ^A. Their duea 
 amount to so much from each member per quarter. Just what it is I am not pre- 
 pared to say. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Did you expel McBride ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. The union put up McBride's bail ? — A. Only partly. 
 
 Q. You were in the police court and heard the evidence in that case ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And you heard it sworn to, and not contradicted, that McBride and a number 
 of others were on the street corner ? — A. I beg to differ. McBride and the two Sniders 
 were alone. We think they were not on the street corner. 
 
 Q. And that these two Sniders were two men who were employed by the C.P.N. to 
 take the places of others on board the Danube. That all three were out, that McBrido 
 said there was a strike, and that they said they were going on board the Danube. You 
 heard- McBride go into the box — he did not deny the words he used ? — A. To the best 
 of my recollection, no. 
 
 Q. The union paid his fine ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Would you have paid the fine of the other man in the California saloon, Alex- 
 ander McKinnon ? The union wont his bail ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. They did not jjut up his bail ? — A. No, none was asked. 
 
 Q. Are you sure about that. He was brought and remanded for a week ? — ^A. Not 
 that I know of. He was not remanded at all. 
 
 Q. He was remanded for several days on the first appearance, don't you remember 
 that. Don't you remember you yourself came forward ? — A. Only in the case of 
 McBride. I am sure I did not give any bail for McKinnon. 
 
 Q. If McKinnon had been fined, would the union have paid the fine ? — A. Under 
 the circumstances, I believe thoj' would. 
 
 Q. You had pickets out on the wharfs and on the streets ? — A. No one on the 
 wharfs. 
 
 Q. The police were there to protect the men on the wharfs. They had to have 
 police protection to keep the men off the wharfs ? — A. I don't know. what they thought. 
 It was against none of the union. 
 
 Q. Sheff Thompson is secretary of your union ? — A. Not at present. 
 
 Q. At the time of the strike ? — A. No, sir. He is agent and recording secretary. 
 The man who does all the business is my brother. 
 
 Q. Was he not ordered off the wharf by Captain Troupe ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Don't you know the reason there were no more assaults was on account of the 
 representations made by the C.P.N. Company to the police force, and they were obliged 
 to watch your men carefully ? — A. No, sir. I say I know nothing about it. 
 
 Q. You won't deny it is the fact ? — A. I know nothing about it. I have no per- 
 sonal knowledge at all of the fact. 
 
 Q. This U.B.E.E. is an American institution ? — A. Yes, headquarters at 'Frisco. 
 
 Q. And when this strUce was called in Vancouver, it was for recognition of the 
 TJ.B.E.E. ? — A. A strike for the life of the union. 
 
 Q. The fact was that the cause of the strike was for the U.B.R.E, to be recog- 
 nized ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 ARTHUR BENJAMIN BULLBY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 139 
 
 SesSIONAL' PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. I>id you ever say so-s-itwas not a strikeior ireeognition ? — A. No. The G.P.R. 
 was disdriminating against the members of the U.BjR.E., and they asked that it be 
 stopped. They refused to take any notice of it, and they went on strike. 
 
 Q. When Mr. Estes was tried, it was not treated as a strike for recognition — you 
 say that ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Mr. Estes was brought here from the other side — from San Francidco or Port-; 
 land *^A. He was not brought here at all. 
 
 Q. Didn't you hear Mr. Brookes say that ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Say in the police court that Mr. Estes was invited to come since the strike ? — 
 A. I have no knowledge of the inner workings of the U.B.K.E. more than you have. 
 
 Q. Didn't you make a trip to Vancouver to investigate this subject ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And you did not acquire any knowledge of the U.B.K.E. ? — A. I had no need. 
 I had conversations with Mr. Estes. 
 
 Q. What I want to get is the fact that Mr. Estes came here and stayed in this 
 country ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And he made his headquarters in Vancouver ? — A. Yes, he was there. 
 
 Q. And he was a member of the headquarters committee? — A. To the best of my 
 belief. , . 
 
 Q. Don't you know it as a fact ? Didn't you taUc to him as such ? — A. Yes, I 
 talked to him. 
 
 Q. And you went over for the purpose of inquiring into the strike situation ? — 
 A. .Yes, ■ ' , 
 
 Q. You knew Mr. Estes came down here Mondays — he arrived here about nine 
 o'clock in the evening, and the seamen's strike was called about eleven o'clock tliat 
 night — that is right ? — A. It was called that same night. 
 
 Q. He stayed here for some days, and then the investigation in the police court 
 went on, and there was an adjournment of that investigation from Thursday until 
 Monday ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And Mr. Estes went to Kamloops, up the line of the C. P. E. ? — A. I was not 
 posted on Mr. Estes' movements after he left here. I know it was difPerent points 
 along the line, but where I do not know. 
 
 Q. For the purpose of stirring up the strike ? — A. I don't know that I did. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What other purpose could Mr. Estes have for going up the line ? — A. I cannot 
 tell about all that. I want to tell the whole truth, but Mr. Bodwell and I have been 
 together before. 
 
 Q. You are expected to tell the truth as far as you know it ? — A. He may have 
 gone up there, of course, to visit the other unions that were on strike, but for ma to 
 swear that he went "to extend the strike, is something I cannot do. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Don't you know, as a member of the Seamen's Union, that that was the busi- 
 ness he had ? — A. I don't know. As president of the U. B. E. E., he could have gone 
 up and visited any union that was on strike. 
 
 Q. Didn't you see some of the inflammatory circulars he was issuing at that time ? 
 — A. I don't know of any. 
 
 Q. You don't know that he issued several inflammatory circulars at that period ? 
 —A. No. ' 
 
 B^ His Lordship : 
 Q. Did he issue any circulars — without the ' inflammatory ' ? — A. I don't know 
 that he issued any circulars at all. There was a daily bulletin of the progress of the 
 strike sent over from Vancouver. 
 
 AjPTHUR BENJAMIN BULLEY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
140 VINUTES OF EVIDENCE OP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 34 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Didn't ycu see the documents issued by Mr. Estes over his own signature ? — 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You would be surprised if you saw a copy of these ? — A. I believe I would. 
 
 Q. At first your union here did not want to strika They were requested by the 
 Vancouver union to come out, and did not want to ? — A. Not without sufficient cause. 
 We wanted to know what we were going out for. 
 
 Q. You refused for a considerable time ? — A. Until we had just cause. 
 
 Q. You made several trips to Vancouver ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And you yourself were not favourable to the strike ? — A. Not if it could be 
 avoided. 
 
 Q. The strike you were asked to bring about was one to assist the U. B. E. E. in 
 Vancouver ? — A. I don't know that we were asked that. 
 
 Q. Don't you remember Mr. Thompson, president of the Vancouver branch, and 
 really the president of the whole society — don't you remember him stating in the 
 police court that this was a sympathetic strike ? — A. I don't know — I was not present. 
 I don't remember his saying that. 
 
 Q. Is it not a fact that the real purpose of this strike here was to assist the 
 tl. B. R. E. strike in Vancouver ? — A. No, I cannot look at it in that light. 
 
 Q. And the excuse for the strike was the fact that you found two or three pieces 
 of scab freight on the Charmer on March 16 ? — A. We had a boat-load of scab stuff 
 on the Charmer on the Friday before. 
 
 Q. I am talking about the 16th ? — A. But the 16th had nothing to do with it. 
 
 Q. Was it not a matter of fact that there were two or three pieces on Monday ? 
 — A. On the Princess Louise several tons. Several tons, I should think^unfair stuff. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Why was that freight scab freight ? — A. It was handled by unfair teamsters. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. The U.B.R.E. got the teamsters out in Vancouver ? — A. I don't know any- 
 thing about that. I know they were out. As far as the best of my belief goes, they 
 were out because they would not handle unfair stuff. 
 
 Q. They were requested by the U.B.RE. to come out — did not you find that out ? — 
 A. No, I didn't find that out. It is impossible for me to know that the teamsters went 
 out at the request of the TJ.B.R.E. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to tell us you don't know why the teamsters had gone out before 
 you went on strike ? — A. I cannot say that they were requested by the TJ.B.R.E. 
 
 Q. Was not the headquarters committee foi-med in Vancouver ? — ^A. Yes I believe 
 there was. 
 
 Q. And Were there not at least thirty organizations on strike and represented on 
 that committee ? — A. Oh, no: 
 
 Q. Didn't Mr. Estes say so ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 Q. Is that the advisory board ? 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. No, it is the headquarters committee. That committee was composed of differ- 
 ent unions on strike, and there were representatives of the teamsters there ? A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you had several consultations with that Committee ?-t-A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you mean to tell us that you didn't know why the teamsters went out ? 
 
 A. They were out in connection with the strike. I cannot swear they were out because 
 Mr. Estes called them out. 
 
 Q. The men on strike were members of the TJ.B.R.E. ? — A. I don't know that they 
 were in all cases. 
 
 ANTHONY -SEN J AMIN BULLEY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
02V I\DV8THIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH CO'hVMBIA 1^1 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Did the longshoremen go out before the TT.B.E.E. ? — A. No, sir. There were 
 several non-union men came out. 
 
 Q. How many non-union men came out ? — A. I cannot tell you tbat. I don't 
 know how many. 
 
 Q. Will you suggest- that the non-union men were out in sympathy with the 
 U.B.R.E. ? — A. I will swear that they did not come out at the request. 
 
 Q. You mean you don't know ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Can you give us any further reason why they should come out? — A. Yes, that the 
 men they were working with, freight handlers, &c., they would consider that these men's 
 interests were identical with their own, and would affect the members of the TJ.B.R.E. 
 as men employed in a like capacity would also affect them. 
 
 Q. How could a grievance of the U.B.R.E. affect non-union strikers ?— A. What 
 would work against the union men would work against them too. 
 
 Q. You say that the objection of the U.B.R.E. men was that their members were 
 being dismissed. How would that affect the non-union men ? — A. They would not 
 want to work under unfair men. 
 
 Q. How can the word unfair affect a man who is not a member of a union. He is 
 an unfair nian if he is not a member of the union ? — A. I suppose we may look at it 
 that way. 
 
 Q. You say the non-union men struck in Vancouver because they would l?e unfair 
 if they did not strike. Is that right ? — A. Well, I don't wish to give my answer iu 
 those terms. I do worlv on a certain class of work. Most of the men are union mew. 
 1 have not been asked to join the union, or it has not come before me, and there is a 
 strike on. If I go out rather than stay when that strike is on 
 
 Q. You go out in sympathy ? — A. Of course I do. 
 
 Q. And the non-union men who went out in Vancouver went out in sympathy 
 with the union men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Will you undertake to swear that in this case they went without being intimi- 
 dated ? — A. I know absolutely nothing about that. 
 
 Q. Can you tell me any non-union men who went out in Victoria % — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Were they intimidated ? — ^A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Was not Snider intimidated ?^A. No, I don't know anything about the Snider 
 case. 
 
 Q. Will you say that the non-union men at Victoria were not intimidated ? — j^. To 
 the best of my knowledge they were not. If MoBride got full of liquor, it was contrary 
 to the wishes of the union. 
 
 Q. Why did you go his bail, and why did you pay his fine ? — A. That has hap- 
 pened before. There was no action taken by the union. 
 
 Q. Why didn't you help the half-breed 'i — A. The half-breed's case came up after 
 McBride, and between the two a resolution had been passed that any man who gave any 
 trouble would have to stand on his own footing. Everything was. done to get him home. 
 
 Q. And what were the other men doing on the street. They were on the corner 
 of Johnston and Stewart street ? — A. According to the evidence. 
 
 Q. And that was the road that men going to the boat would be likely to take ? — A. 
 It might be so. 
 
 Q. And you had men at several places where men would likely walk on their way 
 to the steamer ? — A. I was not aware of the fact 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Did the union put out pickets ? — A. In the fore part of the strike, yes. There 
 are none now, and have not been for some time. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What are the duties of the pickets ?— A. To see the men who come down on 
 the boats. 
 
 ARTHUR BENJAMIN BULLEY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
142 SimnfES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 ^. To stop anybody going on board the boat ? You swear it was not for that ? — 
 A. I Swear it ^vas not. Wo wotild want to get next to any man belonging to the union. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Would the pickets have power to stop any man coming down? — ^A. No violence. 
 He could accost him. 
 
 Q. Did they take hold of non-union men ? — A. They might have persuaded them 
 against working against them. It is not contrary to the law. ' 
 
 Q. Would you expect us to helieve that there has been no case of •intimidsition' 
 during the strike ? — A. I know of absolutely none. 
 
 By His Lordship :■ 
 
 Q. Were any of these men who had trouble men who had been put out by the! 
 union for picketting ?— A. They were not on duty to make trouble. One of them; 
 McKinnon, was in the California — in the saloon away from any picketting. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Where did you station the men for picketting ? Where were the men to go ? 
 — A. I suppose, as far as picTketting is concerned, it would only be to walk up and 
 down certain streets. I know nothing about that. 
 
 Q. You were the president of that association — did you give any instructions to 
 pickets ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What were your instructions ? — A. That they should not molest or interfere 
 with any man. I had no decided instructions to give. 
 
 Q. They had to do something. What were they to do ? — ^A. It would assist in 
 this shape. If I shoTild be asked to watch what was going on in front of this court — 
 who came in and who came out. 
 
 Q. I wanted to get at v.'hat the duties of a picket are ? — A. They are really watch- 
 men. 
 
 Q. To report who were going down to the boat ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Were they assigned particular boats ? — A. To the best of my belief they were. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. I may tell you, Mr. Bulley, that a man came up to me on the street and asked 
 me if I could get him a job, and I said, ' Why don't you go down to the boat.' He said, 
 ' If I did I will take my life in my hands ' ? — A. That man was exaggerating things. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Why do you object to unions handling unfair freight ? — A. The simple answer 
 is this : a certain man belongs to the union and is being discriminated against. It 
 seems to me that I should help that man. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Your refusal to handle the freight is really aiding the strikers ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So that it is contributing to the strength of the strikers ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So that in this casff you were Contributing to the strength of the U. B. E. E. ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did they ask you to do this ? — A. Not to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. Didn't you swear that there was a formal request to come out ? — A. Not from 
 the U. B. E. E. — by the Vancouver union. 
 
 Q. Didn't you know that they were requested to come out by the IJ. B. E. E. ? 
 
 A. Not that I know of. 
 
 ARTHUR BENJAMIN BULIiEY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
CW WBUSTRIAL DTSPFTES IN BRITISH VOLTJMBIA 143 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. You say that you got in oh your trip and that the agreement had been broken, 
 and you decided to go on strike ? — A. This agreement had been broken. I was on the 
 crew of the Charmer when this agreement was broken in the first place. The men felt 
 that the company was waiting to get a chance to get a non-union crew, and that we 
 would have to carry the stuff or walk ashore. We had a meeting after we arrived that 
 night, and the men struck. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Supposing it turned out that the U. B. E. E. was wrong, would you not think 
 you had been misled ? — A. Yes, but the whole body of the men of the U. B. K. E. had 
 given good satisfaction for a number of years. How is it possible also that the men's 
 places should be filled a day after the strike with men from Montreal. There were 
 men arrived in Vancouver from Montreal a day after the strike. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Do you know what brought about the strike in Vancouver ? Don't you know 
 there was a man who disobeyed the regulations of the company and allowed a friend 
 to bring in freight as settlers' effects and to get a lower rate on it ? — A. No, I don't 
 know about that. 
 
 Q. And that the man was suspended for that offence, and that the U.B.E.E. de- 
 manded his reinstatement without investigation, and that was the reason of the strike ? 
 — A. No, sir. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Suppose that turned out to be so, would you not think you had been fooKshly 
 misled into a sympathetic srike ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. If this man had been contravening the regulations of the company, would you 
 not consider you had been foolishly misled into a sympathetic strike ?— A. No. In the 
 first place, it might be that no such thing happened as Mr. BodwcU has asked me. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. His Lordship asked if it were true, would you consider it justified you going 
 out on strike ? — A. No, I would not consider it right. The fact is this : we know that 
 several demands had been made and endorsed before going on strike. These demands 
 are simply this, that the C.P.E. will not discriminate against members of the U.B.R.E., 
 and also that they will allow them to organize. That is the sum and substance 
 of the strike. They refused that, and as long as they refused that they are perfectly 
 justified. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Supposing your ground was all wrong — the difficulty is you have been led into 
 going on strike without a proper knowledge of the facts ? — A. That is only a supposi- 
 tion. 
 
 Q. You yourself admit you did not get the story of the C.P.E. ? — A. There was 
 no necessity of it. 
 
 Q. After the strike was called, then the demand was that the C.P.E. should recog- 
 nize the union and reinstate this man who had been discharged ? — ^A. Not that I 
 know of. 
 
 ARTHUR BENJAMIN BULLBY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
144 MINUTES OF ETIDENCK OF RffTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Thomas Piper, sworn. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Do you live here, Mr. Piper ? — A. In Beaumont, Esquimalt. 
 
 Q. How long have you lived there ? — A. Since '95. 
 
 Q. What is your ocoupation ? — A. Shipwright. 
 
 Q. Were you wording at Bullen's ways at the time the Allans were taken on ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. What do you know about that ? — A. The two Allans were working, and we 
 noticed that a number of our best men were not working, and to the best of my l^elief 
 we raised strong objections about it. 
 
 Q. Did you hold any official position in the Shipwrights' Union at that time ? — A. 
 The diificulty occurred on July 18, and I took the secretaryship on the 24th. 
 
 Q. When you say we, are you referring to the union ?t-A. Yes, to the men work- 
 ing on the job. 
 
 Q. You, as one of the men, interested yourself in the circumstances ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You understood these men were working, and some of your best men were not 
 working*? — A. As far as my memory serves me, we objected to that, and we persuaded 
 these two men that our men had rights, because it is an unwritten law that local men 
 shall have preference over outside labour, and these two men went back to Vancouver, 
 and I don't remember exactly why they were not started to work right away. I think 
 Mr. Bullen was dissatisfied because we persuaded them to go away. 
 
 Q. Did you inform Mr. Bullen on the subject ? — A. Three of us, the president, 
 treasurer and myself. 
 
 Q. What occurred at that interview ? — A. In the final interview an agreement was 
 made getting over the difficulty, and we came to an amicable settlement with regard 
 to all points, and on all points likely to arise, and we agreed that in the event of trouble 
 there should be no strike without a week's notice on either side, and we have now an 
 amicable settlement, and don't think any trouble is likely to arise. 
 
 Q. You say there were some here in Victoria who were qualified and not em- 
 ployed, and the Allans were ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Was the fact made known to Mr. Bullen before he employed the Allans ? A. 
 
 I don't know as to that. 
 
 Q. Was that the ground you took with Mr. Bullen, or did you take some other stand 
 with him ?— A. The substance of our dispute with Mr. Bullen was that the Allans were 
 working and men here who were considered better men were not working. 
 
 Q. You insisted he had no right to employ men in Vancouver as long as there 
 were men in Victoria ready to work ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Would that be a principle of your union ? — A. An unwritten law. 
 
 Q. Would.it be so that an employer would not have the right to choose competent 
 men who happened to have their residence in Vancouver ? — A. We have now an agree- 
 ment with Vancouver that they won't come unless sent for by our president and we 
 won't go on the same terms. 
 
 Q. Outside of an arrangement of that kind, would you consider that is a part of 
 the system in force where the Shipwrights' Union is in operation ? — A. Yes I think 
 it is a very good system I consider it poor economy to get other men when there is 
 a resident union available. 
 
 Q. You had not objected to these men working on another job ?— A. Because all 
 our men were working. 
 
 Q. How long had the Allans been here ? — A. A few months. 
 
 Q. How long would a man have to be here before you would consider him a Vic- 
 toria man ? — A. When he joined our union. 
 
 Q. Suppose he lived here for two years and did not join the union, he would still 
 be an outsider ? — A. Oh, yes. 
 
 THOMAS PIPER— Victoria, May 13. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 145 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You would not permit any man to work on a job in Victoria unless he joined 
 the Victoria union — is that right ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What good reason can be given for that ? — A. Just the same as lawyers and 
 doctors. 
 
 Q. But we don't stop a man from working if he wants to work ? — A. Could a 
 lawyer come into your society and practice, or a doctor ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. A Vancouver man could come to Victoria ? — A. We have rules the same as a 
 club They are conceived in the best wisdom, and if they don't like to abide by our 
 rules they need not join us. 
 
 By Mr. Bodivell : 
 
 Q. And you won't let them work ? So you bring an improper influence to bear 
 on these men ? — A. Not at all. 
 
 Q. Suppose a man does not believe in unions — he has a right to his opinion ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. What right have j'ou to say that he must join your union or not work ? — A. 
 He could get a job with other non-union men. 
 
 Q. Here were two men who practically were non-union men because they had not 
 joined the Victoria union. iSTow, then, you thought the union was a good thing, per- 
 haps they did not — you would admit their right to have an opinion ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What right have you to say they can't work because they don't care to join 
 your union ? — A. Just the same as a club. If I went to the Union Club, they would 
 say you are not toney enough. 
 
 Q. Do you think you possess the right to prevent a man earning his living if lie 
 doesn't agree with your opinion ? — A. I think we have a right to say here are a sftt 
 of by-laws, and are you willing to abide by these by-laws ? 
 
 Q. Has he not the right to say no ? How is he to get a living ? — A. There are other 
 non-union men. 
 
 Q. But you won't let them work ? — A. There are other non-union yards. 
 
 Q. We will say at that time Mr. Bullen's yard was the only one where work was 
 going on. The two Allans were workmen and wanted to earn their living; that they 
 had conscientious conviction against unions — by what right do you say they should not 
 earn their living at their trade in this town ? — A. Just the same right as any hotly of 
 men say you shan't come into our club. 
 
 Q. But they don't want to go into your club. Why should they not work ? — A. 
 Let them go to Vancouver — they lived there. 
 
 Q. This is a free country — they wanted to stay in Victoria. Why should they not 
 work in Victoria ? — A. Because we have resident men paying taxes in the city. 
 
 Q. Was that the reason ? Were you considering the benefit that would be to the 
 community ? — A. Yes, sir. That enters very largely into our consideration whether 
 we take a man into our union or not. Suppose he is a drunkeir man, he is very likely 
 not to be elected, but if he is a respectable man it is different. 
 
 Q. A poor man addicted to drink would have to starve ? — A. Yes. There are 
 plenty of good men. Let the drunkards die by starvation. 
 
 Q. No right to live ?— A. That is my contention. 
 
 Q. Do you voice the principle of labour unions when you make that statement ? — 
 A. I may say I do with the majority of the men in our union — that the drunkards 
 should starve to death and the good men survive. 
 
 Q. What position do you occupy in the union ? — A. I am merely recording secre- 
 tary of the shipwrights. 
 
 Q. Are you giving your individual opinion or that of the members of your union ? 
 
 ^_ Merely my individual opinion. I am certain a large number of the members 
 
 think as I do. : I should think four-fifths of them. 
 
 THOMAS PIPER— Victoria, May 13. 
 
 36a— 10 
 
146 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROrAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 ' Q. If that: question came up to you as a body do you think the body would act on 
 i,hat principle ? — A. Undoubtedly; I am certain we would elect a competent man who 
 was sober; I am nearly sure that a :drunken man would, be rejected. 
 
 Q. And if rejected on account of drunlvenness he could not work ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. How about a cripple '< He is in much the same position as a man who drinlis. 
 He could not do a good day's work on account of not having two hands — A. A cripple 
 is out of cour.t-t-he could not work, You want two hands and two pretty good ones. 
 
 Q. Suppose, however, that he could do a certain amount of work, and he was will- 
 ing to do it, and the employer was willing to let him?' — A. We have no by-laws relating 
 .to cripples. . , . : . • : ■■ . • 
 
 , ,, Q, I am putting a principle, to you. You would not recognize that principle In 
 regard to a cripple ? — A. I do not know how we would deal with a cripple. 
 
 Q. What is your idea ? — A. I remember some years ago we had an old man, and 
 the men allowed him to stay and spin oakum and do the easiest parts, and they went 
 out and did the hard part. 
 
 • Q. Suppose he wanted to do some work on the hard part — would you let him ? 
 A. He simply could not do it — he would be quite useless. 
 
 Q. Then you think it would be wrong to debar a cripple from doing work he could 
 do because he was a member of the union ? — A. I am nearly sure our union would 
 na^ke a special law enabling a cripple to do what he could. 
 
 Q. You would have to make a special law ? — 'A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If your principle is that the competent men should live and the incompetent 
 die, why not exclude the cripple ? — A. The man who drinks has himself to blame, but 
 the cripple is so by no fault of his own. 
 
 ■ Q. Suppose he could not get away from drink---you would not let that man live ? 
 — A. No, I would not, personally. 
 
 Q. Why don't you apply it to the case of a man who is unable from some other 
 misfortune to do competent work ? — A. A cripple is perhaps crippled through misfor- 
 tune — not his o\ya fault. 
 
 Q. I am discussing the principle — that a man who is not able to live and do com- 
 petent; work, ought not to live-^that is the principle ? — A. That he ought not to live. 
 If you have ever seen men working in a shipyard, a man is quite useless unless he 
 is a pretty able man. 
 
 Q. Suppose the employer is satisfied ? — A. Mr. BuUen there will tell you that 
 cripples would be very little good to him. 
 
 Q. I am talking of the principle that a man should not be allowed to work unless 
 he can do hard work ? — A. I don't understand you fully. I say that the man who is 
 a drunkard, it is through his own fault, and I have no sympathy for him. If he is 
 a cripple I have. I think that answers the question. 
 
 Q. Where do you imbibe these principles ? Any discussion among your union 
 as to this ? — A. I do my own thinking. 
 
 Q. You foi-m your conclusions as the result; of discussions ?— A. Partly. 
 
 Q. Do you think for the other men ? Do they convince you ? — A. Sometimes 
 they convince me. 
 
 Q. About 50 per cent of the union think what you do ? — A. Four-fifths of them, I 
 think. 
 
 Q. Is unionism calculated to bring about that state of mind on the part of the 
 members ? — A. I could not say. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Have you even been a member of any other union ? — A. In Sydney, Australia, 
 and London, England, of the Shipwrights' Union in London, and the Shipwrights' 
 TTnion in Australia. 
 
 ' Q. Do you understand what is ineaiit" by recognition of the uhion ? — ^A. Recogni- 
 tion by whom ? 
 
 THOMAS PIPER— Victoria, May 13. , i w ; 
 
OF INDVSTRTAL DISPUTES IIT BRITI8B COLUMBIA 147 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. By the employer ? — A. Wlien the employer says he will agree to be bound by 
 our by-laws. 
 
 Q. Does it involve the exclusion of non-union labour ? — A. Oh, yes, 1 should say 
 
 so. ' -■' M ■. ; , ,. . . , , 
 
 ■J Q. Is the business of shipbuilding pretty well unionized in England ? — A. I left 
 there sixteen years ago, and it certainly was then. , : • ' 
 
 - Q; Are there any non-union shipyards in England 1 — A. I should say about One- 
 
 flfth...." .:..:. .,:[;.. 
 
 Q. IJow do they manage to get employment ?— A. There are little out-of-the-way 
 jobp on vessels and boats scattered along the banks of the Thames. Eor instance, at 
 Gruvesend, twenty miles from London— I have been down^— there would be nothing of a 
 union, and above LondoTi they Would be doing boat work. 
 
 By Mr.Eowe : 
 Q. What is the objection they have to a union as a rule ?-— A. Some of them ara 
 not competent erfough to join a union. There is a committee of three appointed to 
 decide on a man's fitness in Victoria, in San Erancisco and Seattle. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. By asking verbal questions ? — -A. They set to work and watch him for a couple 
 of weeks and report at the next meeting. < 
 
 ., Qi So when a man employs a union shipwright it is a guarantee that he is a com- 
 petent man ? — A. It is so considered. The union endeavours to make it that. 
 
 Q. Have you ever heard that it is a tendency of unions to drag down a good man 
 to the level of a poor one ?- — A. I don't believe it has any force in it. I have heard it. 
 We endeavour to get good men into our union. The good men get the work. 
 
 Q. I suppose an employer can choose whom he likes out of the union ? — A. Yes, 
 the employer takes whom he pleases. 
 
 Q. The union does not require the employer to make an even distribution when 
 work is short ? — A. ISTo. 
 
 Q. What do you say about the boycott ? Is that a legitimate weapon for a union 
 to iresort to ? — A. We shipwrights are a somewhat conservative body, and we have never 
 been brought into any sympathetic strike. I have not studied the subject of boycott 
 sufficiently to give an answer. 
 
 Q. You don't resort to the boycott ? — A. No. We have never had any need to. 
 We have very little friction with anybody. 
 
 Q. It is modelled after the English trade union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Are you affiliated with the Trades and Labour Council ?— A. The Congress of 
 Canada and the local council. 
 
 Q. Have you any maximum wage % — A. $4.50 on old work, and $i.00 on novj 
 work. 
 
 Q. Can an employer pay more than that — he can discriminate as between them ? — ■ 
 A. Ho may pay a man more, but not less. Unless he is on the old man list. He may 
 pay him $3. 
 
 By. His Lordship : 
 Q. Can you t6ll us anything about the doctrines of socialism ? — A. Many of the 
 members might be termed capitalists — that is to say, they have their own houses. I 
 feel that I am in a measure a,capi,talist;, apd.many others pre capitalists. I think thei- ■ 
 may be, perhaps five or si^ spcialists, ,but J am, pretty certain tbe; others are not, soejal- 
 ists. There are 258 in the union. 
 
 Q. YoiiT-^bo^y would not likely ,j<?in a body, like, the YtTesterii Eederation of Miners ? 
 
 A.. I should personally be opposed to it. I consulted three members of the executive 
 
 THOMAS PIPER— Victoria, May 13. 
 
 36a— lOJ '■' ''-'• ■"-■'-'■''■ ■■■-■ • ' - ' ' -■•■ 
 
148 MIXVTES OP ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 before I came, and they are strongly opposed to the affiliation with any American 
 institution. We think we should be merely the ' tail of the dog ' if we joined an Ameri- 
 can institution. 
 
 Q. Is it against your principles to allow an employer to employ non-union men 
 when all the union men are employed ? — A. We think when sufficient union labour ia 
 not available, the foreman may decide as to outside labour. That is a term of our 
 agreement. 
 
 Q. There is nothing in your constitution to prevent that ? — A. It would be held 
 that the agreement suspended the constitution. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you maintain to be the chief advantages of unionism ? — A. It keeps 
 the wages uniform. It fixes a standard of hours, and I think it is an advantage to the 
 employer becaiise in the taking of contracts he knows exactly where he stands. For in- 
 tance, Messrs. Bullen can take a ship, and they will know they will have no trouble be- 
 cause of having an agreement beforehand. 
 
 Q. They did not seem to know in the case of the Garonne ? — A. That was not 
 our union — that was the boilermakers. I don't know much of the circumstances of 
 that case. 
 
 Q. I suppose a good deal depends upon the character of the men who run the 
 union, as to its benefit ? — A. I should say it is a factor. For instance, when thei 
 association is not in session, then the executive control the union. They administer 
 the affairs, and if they are sensible men it has a good effect on unions. 
 
 By Mr. Rotve : 
 
 Q. Are there many such agreements between shipwrights' unions and employers 
 as this one you have with Messrs. Bullen ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. In regard to the employment of non-union men, is it a departure ? — A. I 
 have heard it has come into use in 'Frisco and Sydney, that they have asked permis- 
 sion to be allowed to put non-union men on, and we have granted the permission. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. A good deal depends upon the character of the men who control the union ? — 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When they are reasonable men there is never any ground for difficulty ? — A. 
 As far as Victoria is concerned and our own union, I don't thinli there is any cause 
 for complaint. According to the agreement with Messrs. Bvillen, we are not allowed 
 to strike without a week's notice. 
 
 Q. I gather from your evidence that you don't approve of Canadian workmen 
 belonging to American unions which may have the power to call them out in sym- 
 pathetic strike for something happening in the United States ? — A. I am strongly 
 opposed to that. 
 
 Q. How do your wages compare with British ports ? — A. Here we will say the 
 minimum is two dollars, in Sydney it would be six shillings. In Sydney you can live 
 for two-thirds of what you can get here. Here you get $3 a day. In the old country 
 men get 7 on new work and 8 on old work. You can live there for two-thirds of what 
 you can here. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. You consider your wages as good as in other places ? — A. I consider this the 
 most favoured place in the world so far as any places I have been. The conditions 
 affecting labour are the most favourable of any here. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. There seems to be a radical difference of opinion as to joining international 
 organizations. Could you give us any idea of what the percentage of opinion is ? 
 
 THOMAS PIPER— Victoria, May 13. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 149 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Are your views in the majority or minority ? — A. I tliinli members of the Trades and 
 Labour Council could tell you better. I should say in our own union that four-fifths 
 are against having anything to do with American labour. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. Does your union take part as such in political affairs ? — A. No, I think a fine 
 — I think it is 50 cents — according to the by-laws, for introducing any subject of a 
 political nature in the lodge room. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. We would like to have a copy of the by-laws ? 
 (Constitution and by-laws of Shipwrights' Union put in — Exhibit H.) 
 
 A. The by-laws are taken from by-laws drawn up by Englishmen who arrived here 
 twenty or thirty years ago. The union has been in existence since 1862. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : v 
 
 Q. As a rule, your craft is not overcrowded ? — A. It is subject to spurts. For 
 instance, from 1892 to 1897 I suppose there was only work here to keep one-fifth of us 
 steady. Since the Winnipeg rush and revival in the Territories, we may say it has 
 kept four-fifths of us busy. Sometimes we have all been busy. 
 
 Q. For twelve months in the year ? — A. I should thlnl-c it would average nearly 
 four-fifths of the men over the whole year. 
 
 Q. As a rule, throughout the world, it is not crowded ? — A. It is crowded iji 
 Sydney, San Francisco and Seattle — somewhat crowded in these places. 
 
 Q. What do men get in Seattle ? — A. I think it is $4.50 on old work. 
 
 Q. I understood you to say your union does not take account of what are called 
 sympathetic strikes ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. That is opposed to English opinions, anyway, is it not ? — A. We never heard 
 of such a thing being done. I think it is an American institution. I should judge 
 so. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Have you ever considered the question of the best means of settling strikes in 
 the interests of the public, where the parties cannot agree ? — A. No, sir. It is a ques- 
 tion I have thought upon, but I have not been able to hit upon anj'thing satisfactory. 
 It appears to me that representatives of the employers and the men should get together. 
 I cannot see why not, their interests being to a great extent identical, why they cannot 
 settle all difficulties. 
 
 Q. Do you think a trade agreement would help, with a time clause in it ? — A. 
 Yes, I think so, because it prevents a few hot-heads, or men who do not feel like work- 
 ing, from working up a strike. I have noticed on the otlier side tliere are fellows who 
 seem to think it is a distinction to raise a strike, and they claim distinction as men 
 who have raised a strike, whereas a strike is a hateful thing. 
 
 Q. What is your opinion about the men who start such matters ? Are they tlie 
 skilled workmen of the craft or the others ? — A. They, as a rule, are men whom the 
 superior workmen withdraw from. 
 
 Q. Do you think there should be a law enacted against the walking delegate or 
 the foreign agitator ? — A. I think so. I think it is an insult to Canadian labour for 
 foreign interference to come over. It might as well be the Empress of China or Roose- 
 velt. I think it is a gross insult. 
 
 Q. It is the privilege of Canadian labouring men to be left alone and discover 
 their own salvation ? — A. Yes, I thinl?; so. 
 
 Q. What would you suggest could be done ? — A. I think we need, say, a better 
 alien law. We need a good alien law because the worst kickers we have are from the 
 other side. One or two of them will raise more trouble than twenty of our own meu. 
 Let the alien labour law work go that these disturbers shouhl be kept out. 
 
 THOMAS PIPER— Victoria, May 13. 
 
15D MIX0TE8 OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Would yoii say there should be a law itself preventing any one except a British 
 Golumbia subject going among the men and agitating these matters ? — ^A. Yes, that 
 is my personal opinion. I don't say the union would vote for it 
 
 Q. You think conciliation is the best method of settling strikes ? — A. We find 
 the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada a good body to be affiliated with, and I 
 thinlv the Trades and Labour Council here might be a great help as a conciliatory 
 body. I think the local Trades and Labour Council have taken the best means of 
 settling any strike. j 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 
 Q. Is your union incorporated ? — A. Our union is not incorporated; it is affi- 
 liated with the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada. 
 
 Q. A contract made, then, by a imion if incorporated would be binding in law, 
 •and might facilitate the making of contracts ? — A. If the union were incorporated ? 
 
 Q. Yes, they would then become responsible and take the consequences of the 
 wrongful acts of its officers. Do you think employers would be more likely to make 
 agreements with unions of that kind than others ? — A. Yes, I think so, but the 
 employer would have capital behind him and we would not. 
 
 Q: There are a good many unions in England incorporated ? — A. Yes. I thought 
 you referred more particularly to Canadian unions. 
 
 Q. As time goes on the Canadian unions would soon have a fund. What are the 
 dues of your lodge ? — A. Twenty-five cents a month. 
 
 Q. You have no benefit fund ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Part of that 25 cents goes to the Dominion Trades and Labour Congress ? — A. 
 Twenty-five cents per year per member. 
 
 David Kelly, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You were the president of the Shipwrights' Union at the time of the Allan 
 incident ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You heard what Mr. Piper said about it ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That was substantially correct ? — A. Yes, I thinlc so. 
 
 Q. Do you remember anything he has not mentioned ? — A. I think he has made 
 a pretty clear statement. 
 
 Q. JIow long have you been a member of the Shipwrights' Union ? — A. About 1(5 
 y^ars. 
 
 Q. Have there been many difficulties arising in your time between the union 
 and the employers — serious difficulties ? — A. No, not to amount to anything. 
 
 Q. What method do you have of discussing and arranging questions that arise ? 
 Do you have a permanent committee ? — A. We have an executive committee on all 
 questions which arise out of the ordinary. 
 
 Q. Is that executive committee a medium of communication with the employer ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The grievance is first stated by a member of the union to the executive com- 
 mittee ^-A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do they consider it in the first place, whether it should be mentioned in the 
 first place, or do they afterwards take that grievance to the employer ? — A. As regards 
 the question of being on strike, for instance, or anything of that nature, the union 
 would certainly, decide ;as to what -course- they should .take. 
 
 Q. Take this particular case of the Allans — was that brought before. the executive 
 committee ? — A. Previous to the Allans coming here we had a working law that ail 
 
 DAVID KELLY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
Oy INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 151 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 the members of our association — that is, all the members who were capable of doitiiP! 
 the work required of them — should be employed on a job before outsiders would bo 
 employed. That was a working rule. 
 
 - Q. I was speaking npw oi what the course of business would be in your owu lodtic. 
 That complaint would be brought before the executive committee in the first place to 
 be considered ?^A. Generally. 
 
 Q. Suppose a man tliought he was being put at work that he should not do, what 
 would happen then? Would that be investigated by the executive committee fi,rst ? — 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. What would happen in that case ? — A. The man who was running the job — if 
 he satisfied the boss he would satisfy the union. The bo^; would; send the m^n off tlw 
 job. * i . 
 
 Q. Suppose the man himself had a complaint of that nature, and he wSinted tho 
 union to take action on it, v/hat would be the course of business — would he co.raplain to 
 the executive ? — ^A. Yes, I, suppose that would most likely be the case. There would be 
 a committee appointed to investigate. 
 
 Q. You would hold your investigation first ? — A. We allow the foreman on the 
 work to judge as to whether a man is capable or not. 
 
 Q. Suppose he says the man is not, and the man says he is, and wishes the union 
 to take his part, would the union then appoint a committee to investigate ? — A. I don't 
 know what case would arise. There are several hundred men amongst our union, and 
 every man knows pretty well what the other can do. That question would not be apt 
 to arise. 
 
 Q. Sq I, suppose yQU are a small family and don't have to consider any of theae 
 propositions, as a rule ? — A. No. , ; 
 
 Q. Have you had much experience of the workings of trade unions outside of your 
 own business ? Have you been a member of the Trades and Labour Congress, or any- 
 thing like that ? — A. I have been a delegate to the Trades and Labour Council at 
 Victoria for the last three years. 
 
 Q. No outside body ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. At the meetings of the congress where you were a delegate, I suppose some of 
 the larger questions relating to trade unionism, were discussed ? — A. Very often. 
 
 Q. You have formed opinions about several of the questions ?^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you any. opinion, formed from your own observation, as to the question of, 
 say, compulsory arbitration in case of strikes ? — A. I don't believe in it at nil. 
 
 Q. What objection- have you got to it ? — A. I have this objection : I don't believa 
 that a workman would be liltely to get a fair deal with compulsory arbitration. It 
 certainly would largely depend upon the constitution of the board. 
 
 Q. Suppose you form a board for each particular case — do you think that would 
 be meeting the case ? — A. If the men were well versed in the particular trade. 
 
 Q. Suppose there were a dispute in Mr. Bullen's shipyard, which could not be 
 arranged between the parties. Would you think that a man appointed by means of 
 one special arbitrator appointed by the employer and a third man chosen by the men^- 
 would that likely give an equitable solution ? — A. I think possibly it might, if they 
 were parties who understood the situation, but if they were parties who did not I 
 would not consider it a fair way at all. 
 
 Q. Of course the man appointed by the men would always be familiar with the cir- 
 cumstances, and an employer would always appoint a man who know his side of the 
 
 case ? — A. Yes.. 
 
 Q. If you had a permanent third arbitrator — a man who made a business of 
 studying these questions and familiar with all kinds of business in the country, don't 
 you think that would be a pretty good board, and apt to reach a satisfactory conclu- 
 sio.n ? — A. Yes, if he was an impartial man. 
 
 Q. Say he was like a judge — could not be removed from his office and had a 
 salary so that he could afford to give his whole time absolutely to the business ? 
 Would that be a pretty good institution ?— A. Possibly it might be. 
 
 DAVID KELLY— Victoria, May IS. 
 
152 MiyUTES OF ETIDEXUE OP ROYAL COMML'ifiWN 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Vriiat objection would you have to an institution of that kind ? What objec- 
 tion do you see to it ( There is a man, a permanent official whose sole business is to 
 act as third arbitrator in trade disputes. He is independent of all political influences 
 and personal influences just as a judge. The workingmen appoint an arbitrator and 
 the employer chooses his. What objection do you see to referring a trade dispute to ii 
 tribunal of that sort ? — A. Well, I don't know that possibly there could be any objec- 
 tion at all, if he was an impartial man and he was left to decide on the merits of the 
 case without any influence, I do not see why he should not come to a just conclusion. 
 
 Q. Devoting his whole time to the business he should be more competent than a 
 man selected for a particular case ? — A. I will say I think the great trouble with 
 nine-tenths of the strikes is that employer and employees don't get together. I believe 
 that nine cases out of ten would be settled if they could be got together. 
 
 Q. They won't talk without prejudice ? — A. Yes, there is something in that. 
 
 Q. Don't you think the only reason that the unions object to compulsory arbitra- 
 tion is the fear that the board will not be an impartial tribunal ? — A. Yes, I think so. 
 
 Q. They would be willing to have some place to refer disputes if they could have 
 confidence in the court 'i — A. I think so. But it is pretty hard for them to place that 
 confidence. 
 
 Q. Don't you think there is a feeling among workmen that the rest of the world 
 is joined against them ? — A. They naturally think that the capitalist class is. 
 
 Q. That represents the world as far as they are concerned ? — A. Yes, I suppose so. 
 
 Q. Is it not made tte text of a great many speeches that are made to workmen 
 on occasions when they meet ? — A. It certainly is on some occasions. 
 
 Q. Does not the professional agitator make these attacks ? — A. Yes, he very often 
 has good reason. 
 
 Q. He never fails to make use of his opportunities ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Don't you think there is good deal of unnecessary prejudice occasioned by 
 that kind of talk ? — A. I daresay, very much. I believe myself if the labour class 
 generally would study the question they would not be so prejudiced. 
 
 Q. Don't you think a great deal of their literature is one-sided and inflammatory ? 
 — A. I have seen none that is not pretty fair. 
 
 Q. What publications are you familiar with from the labour standpoint ?— A. Just 
 the local labour papers. I read the Vancouver Independetit — that is a labour paper, 
 the Western Socialist and others. I don't have much time to read a great deal. 
 
 Q. Speaking of your knowledge of labouring men generally, do you know whether 
 there is very much of that literature circulated here in Victoria ? — A. Not in our 
 union. Very little, we cannot get enough, that is the great trouble. You cannot get 
 men to study labour matters enough to have a right understanding. 
 
 Q. They, don't care to study the subject at all ? — A. They are kind of dilatory. 
 They don't take a very active part, a great part of our men. 
 
 Q. Have yon any view as to whether it is in the interests of labour men of Can- 
 ada to become part or belong to unions whose headquarters and numerical strength are 
 in the United States ? — A. We at one time were 0]ily a local union, and did not have 
 any charter. Finally we decided to take out a charier, and it was a question for somo 
 time with us as to where the charter would come from, v.'hether we would take a Cana- 
 dian charter or an American. Of course nearly all the vmions in this city are chart- 
 ered from the American Federation of Labour — a few from the Dominion Trades 
 Congress. We considered it would be to our interests to take out a Canadian charter 
 in preference to an American. 
 
 Q. What reasons led you to that ? — A. If we took out an American charter we 
 would have a larger body of men to join than we would if we took out a Canadian 
 charter. We would consider that all our per capita would be going into American 
 territory. That is the question we considered, and we thought it would bo better to 
 keep it home. 
 
 Q. Speaking of your trade you consider that in, Canada, at least, there are suffi- 
 cient numbers to give you any necessary protection, if they were all unionized ?— 
 DAVID KELLY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 153 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 A. I think it would largely depend upon the alien law myself. I am only speaking 
 now personally. I believe if we had a good alien law we would have protection enough, 
 but as it is we have none, I am sorry to say. 
 
 Q. What is the matter with the present alien law ? — A. I don't think it is work- 
 able at all. 
 
 Q. What would you suggest ? — A. I believe if we had a good alien law that would 
 cover the whole ground, that we would then be better not affiliated with any American 
 miion, but at the present time we have to affiliate with American unions in order to 
 protect ourselves. 
 
 Q. Would you favour a law which under no circumstances would permit any alien 
 
 labour to come into Canada ? — A. N"o. I would draw the line here. For instance if 
 
 there were trouble between an employer and employees here I would draw the line here. 
 
 Q. If there was no trouble you would advocate the right of an employer to import 
 
 labour to carry on business ? — A. Kot if there was labour available here. 
 
 Q. What principle would you lay down to be acted on? Suppose this case. Sup- 
 pose that there were not sufficient men in Victoria, but siippose there were plenty of 
 men in Winnipeg, and there were also men available in Seattle. The Seattle men 
 v,'0uld be foreigners, the Winnipeg men Canadians. The employer cannot get his work 
 done in Victoria. What would you say as to that ? — A. I would say, bring the Cana- 
 dians in, notwithstanding the additional expense. 
 
 Q. And the consequent loss of profit to the employer? — A. I don't know that it 
 would be a loss to the employer. 
 
 Q. Tie would have to pay the additional expense between Winnipeg and Victoria? 
 • — A. Certainly, if he imported them. I think, in that case, if all the men in that 
 particular trade were employed here, that an employer should certainly have enough 
 m.en to carry on his business. 
 
 Q. Suppose there were 100 men belonging to your union — 50 of them good men, 
 and 50 very indifferent, but still not so bad but that they could belong to the union, 
 and in Seattle 50 first-class men could be got. You would object to the first-class men 
 ■ — you would expect the employer to employ the indifferent men here? — A. Certainly, 
 if they could do the work. 
 
 Q. We will say they could not do the work so as to make the same profit to the 
 employer? — A. We cannot always consider the employer. 
 
 Q. In that case, you would think the law should keep out the aliens ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe: 
 Q. You think it is right, then, sometimes to import labour under contract? — A. 
 Not if there were available labour in the country. If they are not available, then I 
 don't think a man's business should suffer. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. As long as men could be had, competent or not, you would consider they were 
 competent ? — A. No, there is no use putting a blacksmith at a carpenter's job. I would 
 consider a man should be capable. There is no use importing a caulker and putting 
 him at first-class carpenter work. 
 
 Q. So, as long as they were carpenters, whether good or bad, you would consider 
 them available, if they were in the country? — A. Yes, I should certainly say so. 
 
 Q. Have you had any particular instance in the working of the alien law to which 
 you can refer us? — A. No, none whatever. 
 
 Q. In the case of a great enterprise of unusual magnitude, requiring a lai'ge 
 amount of labour, do you think it is in the interests of the country that labour should 
 be imported? In building a railway or something of that kind — would it be right to 
 import labour under contract? — A. I should think it would depend altogether upon 
 whether the work was required at a certain time. They would come in and take sev- 
 eral thousand dollars and then go out of the country. I think it would be better to 
 extend it over a longer time and keep the money in the country. 
 
 DAVID KELLY— Victoria, May 13. 
 
154 MINUTES OF EVIDETfCE OF R07AL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. There is always the possibility of having the alien stay, when he comes hero? — 
 lA, Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you say about the disadvantage of Canadian workmen joining these 
 international or American organizations ?^A. I think it is a disadvantage from my 
 own standpoint. 
 
 Q. On what grounds ? On account of the alien labour law ? — A. Well, I think, in 
 this way : that if a branch, say of the carpenters or shipwrights, is affiliated with any 
 American body representing the same trade, and this body has trouble here, that these 
 ■men that belong to that body won't come over here while there is trouble. I think it 
 would be a benefit to them in that way. ' 
 
 ■ Q. Would they anyway? — A. We have had them do so right here. 
 
 Q. That is a violation of the first principles of unionism, is it' not? — A. We con- 
 sidered it so, but at that time we were not affiliated with them in any way. 
 
 Q. The result could be obtained by affiliation, without actual incorporation into 
 the body? — A. I would stand for affiliation, but not for incorporation. I would not 
 want to belong to an international union. _ x 
 
 Q. Your reason is, that part of the control would pass to the American side? — A. 
 I think the control should be on this side. Affiliation gains the real object, 
 
 , By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. Does your union make any special rules for dealing with the navy? — A. No, 
 sir; we try to deal the same with all classes of people and all employers. We insist on 
 the same terms with regard to conditions of employment. Of course, the navy always 
 has the right as long as I have been here. We never object to working with navy car- 
 penters. We always work on the same job, although they are not union men. They 
 belong to the ship. 
 
 Q. Is that because of the fact that it is the property of the empire?— -A. I don't 
 know ; I think it is because, it has been recognized as a rule. 
 
 Q. It is a pretty difficult matter for the union to hold up the Imperial govern- 
 ment? — A. They have held up the Dominion. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. I suppose, the only effect of the union refusing to work for the navy here would 
 be that the ship would be moved elsewhere? — ^A. I guess so. They are pretty good 
 people to work for. ' 
 
 William James Ladingham^ sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. I understand there was a blacksmiths' strike here ? — A. Yes, your Honour. 
 Q. Can you tell us what led up to that ?— A. Well, the Blacksmith's Union asked 
 
 $18 per week 
 
 Q. How long has that union been in existence ? — A. A little over a year. 
 Q. It is affiliated with the Trades and Labour Council ? — A. l\o, sir, with the In- 
 temationnl Brotherhood of Blacksmiths, with headquarters at Moline, Illinois. 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of the constitution ? — A. I have one that is a little defaced. 
 (Constitution produced — marked Exhibit I.) 
 
 , . Q., Are all the blacksmiths in town members of this union, or any non-union ? 
 
 A. There are two non-union. 
 
 yriLLIAM JAMES LADINGHAM— Victoria, May IS. 
 
Oif INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES Iff BRITISH COLUMBIA 155 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. How many members of the union are there ? — ^A. Thirty-two. It includes 
 blacksmiths and helpers. They decided recently to take the helpers in with the same 
 union as the blacksmiths. Each branch decides on its own wages, so the helpers would 
 decide on what they want, the horseshoers, the machine blacksmiths, and also carriage 
 builders. , Tliey, each, set- their owp wages. .;Th^t is rati1(ied.by the imion. The ma- 
 chine blaclvsiniths and shop men have made a request of the employers and that was 
 granted. Then there was a strike of the carriage blacksmiths and horseshoers. The 
 others thought they would be overcome. . That was about 7 weeks ago, It is settled 
 now. It ys'as settled the night before -last, May 11 — Monday night. 
 
 Q. That was a strike for increased wages ? — A. Increased wages and shorter hours. 
 
 Q. What was the result 'i-^A- They got what they were asking for. Both tha 
 raise asked for and the hours. 
 
 Q. What are the hours ? — A. Fifty-one in a we-ek. They had been working '50. 
 
 Q. It took seven weeks to fix that up ?-:— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How many people idle in the meantime ? — A. Somewhere about 13 ; I don't 
 know the exact number. One of the shops of course remained out only a few days. 
 They paid the wages that were asked for and complied, with all the requirements of 
 the union. 
 
 Q. When you went out on strike did you have to consult the international .people 
 in Illinois ? — -A We would have according to the constitution, but we did' hot' go by 
 that. 
 
 Q. The constitution requires permission ? — A. Yes, if you want to receive bene- 
 fits. If they don't allow you to strike the penalty is that you receive no benefits. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. If you strike without approval ? — A. Yes. They discourage strikes as far as 
 possible. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You cannot call on then! for assistance ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Have they pov/er to call you out ? — A. It is not given in the constitution. 
 
 By His Lordship :,',.■ .,.,.,,,;;, 
 
 Q. You settled the question of strike yourself ? — A. That is what we have done. 
 We go by conditions as we find them. The general law is there, but we are governed 
 by conditions as they exist. The men remain more peaceable and quiet. 
 
 Q. You can strike or not as you like, provided you don't ask for strike benefit ? — 
 A. That is what we did — that is what the men did. I was not included in the strike. 
 
 Q. They would get the sanction of the people in Illinois ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. It was only a section of the trade ? — A; Two sections — the horseshoers and 
 carriage workers. Some are horseshoers alone, and some are horseshoers and carriage 
 blacksmiths. 
 
 Q. Can a man belonging to the union work at either of these branches without 
 any trouble ? — A. Yes: 
 
 Q. You did not get any assistance from Illinois ? — A. No, they did n6t ask for 
 
 Q. Have the headquarters got power to call you out on strike ?— A. Not that I 
 know of. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe,. : . 
 Q. What is the wage now got ? — A. $18, that is the minimum. There are others 
 got "more for' 51 hours' work. The shop smiths and machine blacksmiths get $3.50 
 per day of 9 hours. I might say that the first to comply with' the rsqurs; Was tlie 
 
 y^ilillASi' JAMES LAbiNGHAM— Victoria, May 13. 
 
156 MnTTES OF EVIDETsCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 British Columbia Kailway. They said they had no objection to the men bettering 
 their condition as long as they did not hit them too hard, and our request was granted. 
 
 If all men were treated that way there would be no reason for strikes, or eve-i to 
 organize. The employer generally does not understand the nature and requirements 
 of the men, and not understand that there is no getting them together. 
 
 Q. You look upon unions as beneficial ? — A. Yes. The blacksmiths have beon 
 working for some $3 for 9 hours. The boilermakers were getting up to ,$i, or $3.75 
 and $3.50 working on the same jobs as the blacksmith's. Not being organized they 
 were not in a position to ask for more. It was not the employer's fault because that 
 is all they were paying elsewhere. As soon as they were organized they got it without 
 any trouble, for the simple reason that one firm did not hesitate to pay when they 
 knew the other firms were paying the same. 
 
 Q. What is the necessity of belonging to the American organization ? — A. We 
 believed in the first place that our men were working under conditions too low. They 
 asked for $18 for fifty-one hours. One of the bosses said he would have to send to 
 Vancoiiyer for men. He afterwards said he did not like to do it, but he wovild have 
 to send to Seattle for men. 
 
 Q. He could not get men in one place by reason of your belonging to one union ? 
 —A. Yes. If the strike were prolonged over any reasonable time it would be known 
 all over and no person would come. In the Blachsmiths' Journal, published in Illinois, 
 there is a little article — ' Our duty toward our employers.' We want employers to 
 organize. That is a recent effect of the strike in Victoria. Now they are organized, 
 and wo helij them to fix the prices. 
 
 Q. If they formed an international organization and they sent to Seattle to get 
 men, if there was a strike here and you went to Seattle to get work, these employers 
 would not take you ? — A. Oh, yes. 
 
 Q. Suppose the employers were organized ? — A. Certainly, we want them to or- 
 ganize, if it is a legitimate organization. The difilculty here — our difficulty was to get 
 the men to organize. 
 
 Q. I want to point out that the employers would organize an international union. 
 Fcir instaMce, suppose there was a strike here and you wanted to get work and went to 
 Seattle to get work wovild not the employer there refuse to take you on, if you had left 
 it here ? — A. I don't know. They would have great difficulty in keeping track of the 
 men. 
 
 By Mr. Howe : 
 
 Q. The employers here would not have difficulty in sending over a list of the men ? 
 — A. That has never happened. I think when a man wants men he will hire them. 
 That would rest wholly with the foreman. 
 
 Q. How do the wages here compare with wages in other parts of Canada ? — 
 A. Much higher than was awarded the men up at Fernie by the commission, where 
 cost of living is higher and where they should have higher wages than they have here. 
 They have been giving $3 a day for ten hours. 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about labour conditions in this province as compared 
 with other provinces ? — A. I don't know; I know more with regard to Victoria ; I 
 have been through the Kootenays. 
 
 Q. Say compared with the state of Washington or the provinces of the east ? — 
 A. They would be much the same as Seattle and Tacoma — about the same here as in 
 Portland. 
 
 Q. You do not know as to the east ? — A. Yes, I have worked in Toronto. The 
 foreman in the shop where I worked got only $2. In another place in Jackson he got 
 $2.50, both men about equal. The same man would get $5.75 here. Then the cost of 
 living was lower there than here. Rent would be higher there, but board was lower 
 than here. It was when I left. 
 
 Q. So you v/ould think, speaking generally, that the conditions in British Colum- 
 bia of workingmeu would he as good as in any otjer province ? — A. About the- same. 
 
 WILLIAM JAMES LADINGHAM— Victoria, May 13. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA Iff? 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 He gets a little more than along the Canadian Pacific Eailwny. They have perhaps as 
 good or better than $3.25 i» the east. I don't know about the cost of living. 
 
 Q. Do you think that belonging to an international union narrows your sense of 
 citizenship ? — A. No, I think it enlarges it. I think it will not be long when you will 
 find that union men won't fight with each other. , 
 
 Q. It tends to make a more friendly feeling ?■— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Some unions seem to regard that there is nothing in common between employ- 
 ers and employees — that there is hostility between the two interests ? — A. Yes, but 
 there is no occasion for trouble between the two. The interest of the one is the interest 
 of the other. That is how our strike was probably settled. A letter was drafted to 
 show them. "We had come together and wo wanted them to organize, and we would 
 assist them in having them do what was right, 
 
 Q. To bring the refractory employers to time ? — A. Yes. There are some with a 
 tendency to take advantage of the others. Ovir letter showed our attitude towards 
 them. The man who moved the resolution to prolong the strike said he wished he had 
 been to the last meeting. 
 
 Q. How would you assist them in a matter of that sort ? — A. They might not 
 approve of the way we could assist them. I might say that if one boss was knou'n to 
 cut prices or to do anything contrary to legitimate trade, that it would be made known 
 to the blacksmiths' union, and he would be an unfair man. You see the drivers who 
 get the horses shod, they might have a preference — they belong to the clerks' union or 
 the teamsters' union, and they all want to see uniform prices, and in that way we 
 could assist them. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Your union — the United States part of it — is a pretty large body ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether there is organization among the employers to any extent? 
 — A. iWe tried to^get them. We urged in our journal the necessity of them organizing. 
 
 Q. You don't know whether it has been taken up by them to any extent ? — A. No, 
 I don't know. If they organized and we could help them and had the members on a 
 proper footing we could get reasonable wages, by working together. 
 
 Q. But if you worked together it would be hard on the public i — A. The public 
 work together, and there would be no special difference for anybody. I might say the 
 employers have a clubbing arrangement, and they went outside of their own organiza- 
 tion to get a member of the union to draw it up for them. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. To what extent have labour-saving appliances displaced labour ? — A. I have 
 never made an estimate — never saw an estimate. The unskilled man can do skilled 
 work now. An ordinary man can handle a machine if he has any intelligence. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Is it not a fact that the more labour-saving macliines introduced invariably 
 results in a greater demand for labour in the long. run ? — A. Nevertheless we find a 
 large quantity of unemployed throughout the world. 
 
 Q. Your suggestion is, that more men should work a less number of hours? — A. 
 Divide the men according to the work, whenever there is a surplus of men who cannot 
 get work. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 Q. Your idea would be to shorten the hours, when you have surplus labour? — A. 
 To give them a chance to live. 
 
 Q. Suppose your case. You get the day down to such a time that the ordinary 
 business of the year would keep every blacksmith employed. Suppose the blacksmiths 
 say : We want more wages. The employer has no surplus labour to resort to ? — A. No. 
 
 WILLIAM JAMES LADINGHAM— Victoria, May 13. 
 
158 MINUTES OF ETIDENGB OF SOTAL COUMtSSlOlf 
 
 3-i EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q; The result would be, theTe is no competition in' labburj and gives the union 
 power to dictate the wages?— A. We study it over and see what is the interest of the 
 employer and ourselves. If we ask what is unreasonable, we place both himself and 
 ourselves at a disadvantage. 
 
 Q» You don't think the labour men would push that advantage? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You will admit that would place him in a position to push his demands to tJie 
 last limit? You would have to rely da the generosity of others?— A. Always some 
 person has to rely on the reasonableness of others. 
 
 "Victoria, May 14, 1903. 
 
 Arthur B. Buli.ey, recalled. 
 
 ■ ■ His Lordship.— I understand, Mr. Bodwell, that you are appearing for the E. & 
 N. corporation in regard to the strike at Ladysmith, and also in connection with any 
 evidence to throw light on the withdrawal of the men from, the E. & N. boats. These 
 are the parties for whom you appear? ^ 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — At present. I understand I am to have another retainer. 
 
 ' • 'His Lordship. — We will expect you to confine your examination to matters relat- 
 ing to the parties for whom you act. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — I have been doing that, except where the commission has wished 
 me to assist them in other matters. If a witness is called on any subject, and I think 
 his evidence would throw any light on matters in which I am interested, I would con- 
 sider I had the right to examine on that point. 
 
 Ills LoHDSHip. — The Commission is placed in an embarrassing position with only 
 one counsel. Some of the outside people may get the idea that you are running the 
 cbmmiftsion. On the other hand, without counsel, as one or other of the commis- 
 sioners must ask questions, matters move in a certain direction, and with counsel on 
 both sides, matters are facilitated. It is the position of the commission to listen, and 
 not ask questions. 
 
 Witness. — We are hardly in a position to employ counsel. We have been out on 
 strike for quite a while, and counsels' scale of wages are a little high. I think it will 
 be only fair to both parties to have counsel excluded.! 
 
 Ills Lordship. — You have a perfect right to make any statements in the box which 
 you think should be made. 
 
 ■ Witness. — I would like to ask that the case of George Estes be ruled out of this. 
 To bring this up I would like to know as well Mr. Bodwell's action in bringing in the 
 C.P.R. and C.P.N. I think it is really putting me in a very bad light. 
 
 - His Lohdshlp. — I think you are. quite, able to take care of yourself. 
 
 Witness. — Ir> this case I would like to toll the truth, but to run a string of 
 questions on me that might be very easily turned into something else would put me in 
 a false light, by me saying yes or no to .confusing questions.,. 
 
 Mr. .JioDwr.LL. — I will not permit you to say that I am actiiig from any improper 
 motive. 
 
 His Lordship.^-A lawyer is really no good to his client unless he is able to some- 
 what mix up a witness. It is the duty of the commissioners to-.t^ care they pfoil't 
 
 ARTHUR B. BITLLEY— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 159 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 receive a wrong impression from the evidence. A very large discount is placed on this. 
 You need not be at all alarmed at any evidence you may give. 
 
 WiTKKSS. — In this morning's press it says that the witness admitted that tho 
 union would have struck even if Captain Troupe had made the agreement, which is 
 not so. You must \mderstand that a number of men ^yho don't wish to work unfair 
 are hard to control and I could only follow the dictations of these men. I might use 
 my influence as I told Captain Troupe, which I did. In this cas3 I might state that 
 Captain Troupe was notified that they would not handle any unfair baggage, and 
 Captain Troupe told one of our men that he was willing to live up to it, and after- 
 wards when we went over to Vancouver for fear the boat would he used for t'lo carry- 
 ing of that kind of stuff we interviewed Captain Troupe, and he gave us both to 
 understand then that he had received our letter, and that if he at any time put unfair 
 stuff on board he would expect the men would walk off. That is what he himself 
 stated. On the Friday following this unfair stuff was placed oil the boat, and the 
 captain was notified of the fact and oi the agreement or understanding between 
 Captain Troupe and the union. We notified these men that we would go out in Vic- 
 toria. On our way over Captain Troxipe made a proposal to me. The facts of that are 
 in the agreement placed before the commission yesterday. We had a special meeting 
 that night, and that as it was a mistake as far as Captain Troupe was concerned we 
 agreed to run the boats. On the Saturday night following unfair stuff was put on the 
 Princess May, and there was trouble there. The secretary wired that the agreement 
 was broken and to order out the fleet. I went over, I saw Captain Troupe the next 
 morning, and as far as I was able to tell I understood that I would be backed up by 
 the men, but I would have to get the approval of the union. On the voyage over on 
 Monday there was quite a lot of scab stuff on^ 
 
 By His Loiship : 
 
 Q. How would you be able to tell that ? — A. By the quantity on the boat. Goods 
 coming down from the town were carried by non-union teamsters to the. dock and this 
 was declared unfair. In consequence of this, and the breaking of the agresment the 
 men walked out. 
 
 Q. You took the position you would not handle the unfair stuff ? — A. Yes, and 
 Captain Troupe made an agreement under which he agreed not to handle unfair 
 stuff. It was alleged that we intended to go out whether or no, and it put us in a 
 very bad. light. 
 
 Q. Your suggestion is that Captain Troupe agreed he would not carry any freight,. 
 from the wharf so long as the teamsters were out in Vancouver ?^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Any- one of these organizations that were out could decline to take unfair 
 stuff ? — A. In their line of business. 
 
 Q. And if they did so all other unions would be obliged to accept that position 
 and not have any dealings with the freight as long as it was unfair ?^A. Yes. so long 
 as it was unfair. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Was not the agreement that you would not strilie vs'ithout twelve hours' notice ? 
 — A. Personally it was. 
 
 Q. You were acting for, the Seamen's TJnion then ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You were not to strike without twelve hours' notice ?— ^A. We agreed to' go, on 
 and run the boat. Captain Troupe told us that any tirne Unfair stuff was put on the 
 boat he expected the men wovild walk off. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Is this agreement in writing ?— -A. Part of it is. That was a verbal agree- 
 ment between ourselves. '' - 
 
 ARTHUR B. BULLEY— Victoria, May 14, 
 
160 MIXUTES OF EYIDEFCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Captain Troupe agreed that he would not carry any unfair freight ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And all freight that was delivered at that wharf was unfair ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was not the agreement that you men agreed that you would not strike without 
 12 hours' notice, and Captain Troupe agreed not to dismiss you without 12 hours' 
 notice ? — A. No, I don't thinli so. 
 
 Q. Do you say that Captain Troupe agreed he would not carry any unfair 
 freight ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that the whole of the freight delivered at the wharf ^vas unfair? — A That 
 is my idea of the agreement. 
 
 Q. The fact is you came here on the Louise, arriving in Victoria on March 10 
 about 9 ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that you gave Captbin Troupe no notice whatever that you were even 
 going to hold a meeting ? — A. I gave him no notice — it was not necessary. 
 
 Q. You had your meeting ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And about 11 o'clock at night you went down yourself or was it Thompson — • 
 to the Charmer i — A. I went myself to the Charmer. I said a strike had been 
 declared. 
 
 Q. And that they had to come out ? — A. They could do as they liked about that. 
 
 Q. Did you send any word to Captain Troupe ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. The idea was you would stop the Charmer making that trip ? — A. I had no 
 idea of that. I had nothing at all to do with that. 
 
 Q. You stopped the Danube ? — A. I know nothing about who went down there. 
 
 Q. Don't you know as a matter of fact that the Daniibe did not go out that 
 night ? — A. Yes, I know she didn't go ou-t. 
 
 Q. Don't you know the Charmer was delayed ? — A. Yes, 45 minutes. 
 
 Q. And that she had to go out without a sufficient crew ? — A. I don't know as to 
 that. 
 
 Q. Didn't you try to get th^; engineers out ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Didn't you ask the quartermaster to come out ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Who spoke to the men — what member of the union ? — A. I don't know. I 
 went down to the Charmer an.l got my clothes. I went to the room I occupied and 
 back out with my clothes. 
 
 Q. Where did you go when you told the men a strike was declared ? — A. I told 
 the ones I met on the way to my room. I went straight home. I might have spoken 
 to my brother. 
 
 Q. Who was the man sent do-svn from the lodge to notify the Charmer men ? — A. 
 I don't know of any. 
 
 Q. You said once that a great many of the crew were at the meeting ? — A. I don't 
 know that there was. The Charmer's men would be all over town. 
 
 Q. How long were you on the Charmer ? — A. About six minutes. 
 
 Q. And you don't know the Charmer crew ? — A. Yes, I know them. 
 
 Q. How large a room is it where you had the meeting ? — A. The Eagle Hal), 1 
 cannot say— possibly as large as this. In a large meeting I could not tell you. 
 
 Q. You didn't know the crew of the Charmer was there ? — A. With the exception 
 of my own brother I don't remember any one positively. I might suppose they were 
 there, and not be aware of the fact. I did not give the fact any attention. 
 
 Q. Was it necessary for somebody to notify the Charmer's crew ? Did anybody 
 notify them ? — A. I Imow of no one. 
 
 Q. You don't know they were at the meeting ? — A. I paid no attention at the 
 meeting. 
 
 Q. No one notified the men, and yet they all went out ? — A. I don't know. 
 Q. Was any one appointed to go down ?— A. I was not. I don't know. I was at 
 the meeting and did not know of anybody being appointed. 
 
 ARTHUR B. BULLET— Victoria, May 14. 
 
OAT INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 161 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. It is a most remarkable thing that the men walked out ? — A. It is only a 
 matter of fact. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. Were some of these men at the meeting ? — A. I could only speak of one inan 
 positively, and that was my brother. You could not tell men in a church — you could" 
 not say. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How many people were there on the boat ? — ^A. I could not say. I told every- 
 body I met, and in that way the news of the strike would very likely spread. As a 
 matter of fact there were very few men on the Charmer, and when the men decided 
 to come out the news would spread easily. I did not bother about it. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. You say that Captain Troupe said to you that the moment the company broke 
 the agreement you were to be at liberty to walk out ? — A. Yes. He told our agent, 
 Mr. Thompson. We believed that Captain Troupe would live up to the agreement. He 
 had broken his part. 
 
 Q. The agreeinent is dated March 14 ? — A. Yes, it was after that. It was on 
 Friday. 
 
 Q. The strike took place on Monday night ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Would it not have been possible for any freight to have reached the Charmer 
 without being unfair ? — A. If a man had carried it down himself ? 
 
 Q. If expressmen had come down ? — A. No, no union express men would go near 
 the dock. 
 
 Q. If any one other than the owner delivered it it would be unfair ^ — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I want to know whether it would have been possible for anything to hav3 
 reached the Charmer at all ? — A. Yes, it was. On trains coming from the east the 
 baggageman is a fair man, and baggageman would come through provided the men in 
 the station did not touch it, and it would come on the boat and come across fair. Express 
 parcels the same — Dominion express only excluded. 
 
 Q. This baggageman you .say was fair ? — A. On the train. The man on the 
 platform was unfair. 
 
 Q. The crew of the Charmer could go to the train ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The reason the baggageman was fair was because his craft was not included 
 in the U.B.R.E. ? — A. It was really a difPerent class of work altogether. When they 
 handled the baggage it was on the train, and in no way connected with the baggage 
 on the station. There is another point to be looked at. Had the freight been put on 
 the trucks after a strike of the freight handlers and longshoremen to do that work he 
 would become unfair — he would be a substitute. 
 
 By His Lordship : • 
 
 Q. You say you undertook, as far as you could on behalf of the men to give 
 twelve hours' notice. You gave this undertaking on Sunday, and yet you went out on 
 Monday without giving notice ? — A. If it was unfair to him it was unfair to me. I 
 was powerless. I did not know Captain Troupe's residence. I never took that into 
 consideration. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q, The arrangement to hold this meeting was niade on the Way down from Van- 
 couver—you told us in the police court. You ordered the meeting before yon left 
 Vancouver ? — ^A. I forget that circumstance. 
 
 ARTHUR B. BULLEY— Victoria, May J4i 
 
 360—11 
 
162 MmVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Did you order the meeting before you left Vancouver ? — A. I am not really 
 sure. 
 
 Q. You don't remember whether you said it or not ? — A. I forget all about it. 
 
 Q. Would you admit it if I showed that you had said it ? — A. I don't remember. 
 
 Q. You did have a talk about the matter on the way down ? — A. I cannot remem- 
 ber. 
 
 Q. You don't reiriember swearing that once before ? — A. No. really. 
 
 Q. Do you remember that you ordered a meeting to be held by telegram before 
 you left Vancouver ? — A. Whether I said so or not is something I don't remember. 
 It is very hard to follow a little matter of detail like that. 
 
 By Mr. JRowe : 
 
 Q. You sav the meeting ordering the strike was on the evening of that Monday ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was there action taken on the fact that you had been bound in a personal 
 agreement with Captain Troupe ? — A. I placed it before- them. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What did they say about that ? — A. They decided to come out, whether or no. 
 
 Q. Don't you think that kind of thing is calculated to raise a prejudice — if 
 unions won't keep their promises ? — A. There is another thing to look at — that wa 
 were not expecting this — that 12 hours' notice would be given us. It was believed that 
 no freight would come on the boat but what was fair. 
 
 Q. When you are led into a contract of this sort you should consider the public ? 
 — A. So should the company. 
 
 Q. The company tried to carry the freight, but you would not ? — A. They were 
 going to do it to the disadvantage of the men. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. I understand that your action was taken in view of the suspicion that the 
 company were prepared to displace you with other crews so that they would be released 
 from the agreement ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you expect them to get these men ? — A. I certainly did. 
 
 Q. Did you not say in your evidence in the police court — 
 
 ' Q. What did you call the meeting for ? Didn't you call the meeting for the 
 purpose of striking ? — A. T'es, sir. 
 
 ' Q. Didn't you issue a call on the wire to that effect ? — A. Yes.' 
 
 Q. Didn't you say that ?-.-A. If that is my evidence, yes. 
 
 Q. The meeting you were to call was to discuss the question of this agreement ? — 
 A. To the best of my belief. 
 
 Q. Did you give Captain Troupe or any officer on the boat any notice that the 
 meetingtwas to be called ? — A. No, I did not. 
 
 Q. When you came to Victoria you had a meeting, and you did not give Captain 
 Troupe notice that the meeting was being called or held ? — A. I met Captain Troupe 
 on the dock. I told him the men had decided to go out — when I went down for my 
 clothes. 
 
 Q. About one o'clock that night ? — A. To the best of my belief. 
 
 Q. You arranged for that meeting before you left Vancouver, you discussed it on 
 the way down, yovi arrived at Victoria, you held a meeting after getting there, some 
 time between 11 and 12, you went down in your official capacity to notify the men ?^ 
 A. I beg to differ. 
 
 Q. Didn't you say you went down in your official capacity ? — A. I don't know 
 whether that was so. I went down to get my clothes. 
 
 ARTHUR B. BULLET— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DiSPVTm IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 163 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 • ■ Q. Did you come down in your official capacity to notify the men that the strike 
 was on ? — A. I don't Itnow that I did. 
 
 Q. Did you ever say you did ?^^A. I don't remember. 
 " Q.' Would it be my mistake, your mistake, or the mistake of the stenographer ? — 
 Ai The real fact is simply this : that after this meeting was over I went down to get 
 my clothes, and you are trying to make capital out of the fact that I was chairman 
 of the association. 
 
 • By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Tour personal influence was rather against the strike ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. And you had to come into the view of the union ? — A. I had to. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 ■ '■' Q. And you simply went down to the Gharmer to get your clothes ? — A. No one 
 was selected by the lodge to go down. 
 
 Q. Was that because the men of the Gharmer were all at the meeting ? — A. I 
 don't remember as to that. 
 
 Q. Were you at the public meeting ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. Did you hear Estes say with reference to the strike in Vancouver — 'the Labour 
 Council of Vancouver, composed of 37 unions has endorsed the cause of the strikers ' ? 
 —A. Something to that effect. 
 
 Q. Did you understand that to mean there were 37 unions in that strike, sym- 
 pathetically or otherwise ? — A. No. I understood it to be that the Trades and Labour 
 Council is composed of those different representatives from different unions. 
 
 Q. How many unions were represented in that headquarters committee ? — A. 
 Tour, I believe striking unions — the B.C. Steamshipmen's Society, the Longshore- 
 men's Union, the Teamsters' Union and the U.B.R.E. 
 
 Q. What did the U.B.R.E. include — the railway employees not in any other union ? 
 — A. They will take in anything I believe — from the man who walks on the track to 
 the engineer. 
 
 Q. The result was that no man could work — none of the local men engaged in 
 Vancouver, either in the business of carrying the ordinary freight to the railway, or 
 engaged in the transportation of coal for the railway companies, and be fair — was 
 that not the fact ? — A. I believe it was. 
 
 Q. Didn't it extend so far that the Czar, engaged in bringing coal over from 
 Nanaimo, was tied up — that is true? — A. I believe she was tied up alongside the wharf. 
 
 Q. You know what tied up means. As a matter of fact, were the men working on 
 that tug directed to go out on strike? — A. I am not aware of the fact. 
 
 Q. They came out on strike ? — A. I believe they did. 
 
 Q. The result of that was that no coal could be carried to Vancouver — it came to 
 that pitch, didn't it ? — A. Not to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. You didn't "know that? — A. Only afterwards. 
 
 Q. And would have stayed so, only Mr. Marpole made a special arrangement 
 with Mr. Estes? — A. I object to that. Mr. Estes had nothing to do with our society 
 at all. Mr. Estes — ^it was impossible for him to make any agreement regarding the 
 steamshi^men. 
 
 Q. Is this true ? I will read from the evidence given by Mr. Marpole in the police 
 
 ieourt: 
 
 ■' At the door of the hall I met Mr. Thompson an*" explained Uie situation to him, 
 and Mr. Thompson told me that at a meeting of the executive that afternoon it had 
 been decided that no coal should come to Vancouver, but the matter was now out of 
 his hands, and we would have to see Mr. Estes. So, from there, accompanied by Mr. 
 
 ARTHUR B. BULLET— Victoria, May 14. 
 38a— Hi 
 
164 MINUTES OF EVIDEMJE OF EOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll.j A. 1904 
 
 Thompson, we went down to the Commercial. Hotel; we were introduced to Mr. Estes, 
 and I explained to him why we came down there, and he said that he did not see any 
 use in opening up the discussion, as, at a meeting that afternoon or some time that 
 day, it had heen decided that no coal should >come to Vancouver. I then asked Mr. 
 Estes if he meant by that that all the coal merchants of Vancouver were to be cut off 
 of their supply, and he said, yes. I then explained to Mr. Estes the hardship that 
 would impose on the public ; and he replied that there was nobody more sorry than he 
 was that such a hardship should be imposed, but that strikes usually brought about 
 that condition of affairs, and that it was the only way they could bring pressure to 
 bear on the strike. I then told Mr. Estes, if the Czar was not released — if we could 
 not get an order to release the Czar, we would have to do the best we could to get her 
 away from Vancouver, and failing that, we would have to advertise to the public the 
 reason we could not get coal was because the tJ.B.K.E. would not allow it. Mr. Estes 
 then referred to an advertisement that we inserted in the TJ.B.K.E. j)amt)hlet some 
 time previous to that, and said that, as we had stood by the TJ.B JR.E. to that extent, 
 that he would be willing to let the Czar go, provided we would guarantee that she 
 would take no freight out, nor bring coal into Vancouver for the C.P.E. I asked Mr. 
 Estes to write out that agreement, which he did, and I signed it." ' 
 
 Q. That was the true state of affairs, was it not? — A. I don't know anything 
 about it. 
 
 Q. Were you not in the police court when that statement was made? — A. I was 
 not. 
 
 Q. From your knowledge of the conditions, would you say that was the correct 
 state of affairs? — A. I would say that the man told a deliberate falsehood, for the 
 simple reason that Estes had no connection with our union. To the best of my belief, 
 Mr. Estes had no right to sign an agreement. 
 
 Q. Mr. E. W. Thompson is president of the Vancouver branch of your society? 
 You know Mr. Thompson was present at that interview? — A. I don't remember any- 
 thing about that. 
 
 Q. Were you not in the police court? Don't you know, as a matter of fact, that 
 he was there? — A. I heard something about this agreement. 
 
 Q. Who did you hear talking about the agreement? — A. There was some talk by 
 Mr. Brooke. 
 
 Q. Didn't you hear Mr. Brooke say Mr. Thompson was there ? — A. No, I didn't 
 hear him. 
 
 Q. I ask you, from your knowledge of the circumstances, whether that is a true 
 statement, or not? — A. I don't know anything about it. .■ 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. I suppose you have no reason to doubt that the Czar was enabled to carry coal 
 by some understanding with Mr. Estes? — A. I know nothing about it. Mr. Estes re- 
 presents the U.B.R.E. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Why did you go to Vancouver and consult Mr. Estes with reference to the 
 strike, yourself ? — A. I wanted to know the merits of their side of the case. 
 
 Q. Will you say that Mr. Estes was not present at the discussion which took place 
 at the headquarters committee when you were there? — A. Sometimes he was. 
 
 Q. And he took part in the discussion and took your side once, didn't he ?^-A. I 
 think he did. 
 
 Q. Now you suggest that Mr. Estes was not interested in that strike? — A, I say 
 he was not. He is not, and never was. 
 
 Q. The TJ.B.R.E. were the people who^ called the strike?— A. In thp first place. 
 
 Q. And they were the people with him when. the negotiations toolc place. with, re- 
 ference to the settlement of the strike? — A. No, I cannot say that. 
 ARTHUR B. BULLEY— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDVSTBIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 165 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You don't remember hearing Mr. Lockyer and Mr. Skene, members of the 
 Board of Trade?— A, I think they are apt to be mistaken. 
 
 Q. And that Mr. Estes at the meeting was the spokesman ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. I am asking you whether Mr. Lockyer and Mr. Skene were telling a falsehood? 
 — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Do you know about that being the condition of things — that there was an 
 attempt to settle the strike, and that the spokesman and head was Mr. Estes? — A. I 
 think there is liable to be a misunderstanding. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Would you call Mr. Estes the leader of the strike? — A. No, he might be one 
 of the principal speakers, but I would say he is not a leader. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Why did they send over Mr. Estes ?— A. That is the U.B.E.E.'s business— not 
 mine. 
 
 Q. You knew the Board of Trade got their arbitration committee to bring about 
 £ settlement between the U.B.R.E. ? — A. I have been told so. 
 
 Q. And that they had several meetings in that connection? — A. I Kave been 
 told so. 
 
 Q. Did they not deal with Mr. Estes as the man who was the representative of 
 the strikers? — A. I cannot say so. 
 
 Q. Would you be surprised that this statement was made to them. (Quotes from 
 evidence of Mr. Skene.) 
 
 Q. At the meeting which was held where the strikers' committee were present 
 with Mr. Estes, did anything come Under your observation, and if so, what, with re- 
 ference to Mr. Estes' position among the strikers? — A. He seemed to be the head man 
 at the time.' 
 
 Q. Would Mr. Skene be liable to tell a falsehood ? — A. It is different. In the first 
 place, you say that Mr. Marpole said that Mr. Estes signed a release of the Czar, and I 
 say he had no right to do so. 
 
 Q. At this meeting with the arbitration committee there was a proposal drawn up 
 in writing? — A. I am not sure — I don't remember. 
 
 Q. And if you found out that Mr. Estes was the man who settled that agreement 
 on behalf of the strikers what would you say as to his position among the strikers ?— 
 A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Suppose Mr. Lockyer, president of the Board of Trade, were to say : — (Quotes) 
 
 ' Q. You spoke of a document. Who practically settled the terms of that docu- 
 ment on behalf of the strikers ? — A. Well, it was drawn up — it is only right to say it 
 was drawn- up, and in a great many cases the phraseology was altered at Mr. Estes' 
 own proposition himself.' 
 
 Q. You don't know that statement is true ? — A. No, I would not make that state- 
 ment. 
 
 Q. Do you admit that these things are true ? — A. I don't know anything about 
 them. 
 
 Q. Ever hear that before ? — A. Don't know that I did. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You went to see Mr. Estes yourself ? — ^A. Yes. But you might put it in this 
 light. Suppose we say that the C.P.N, had to draw up some kind of an agreement, 
 and Mr. Bodwell was called in to draw up an agreement, would he be president or 
 leader of the C.P.N. ? 
 
 Q. The difficulty is that Mr. Estes' position is different. Will you tell us just 
 What Mr. Estes is ?— A. He is president of the TJ.B.R.E. ' ' 
 
 ARTHUR B. BULLET— Victoria, May 14. 
 
166 : MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF KOTAL jCOMUISSIOV 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Is he there in an advisory capacity ? — ^A. In relation to our strike. 
 
 Q. You said you went over to get the facts of the TJ.B.K.E. strike, and you 
 selected Mr. Estes ? — A. Yes. 
 
 ,Q. And is that not a pretty good indication that Mr. Estes is the leader of the 
 strike ? Are we not justified in thinking that ? — ^A. I suppose you are. I could not 
 say Mr. Estes is the leader of the strike. 
 
 Q. He is the president of the U.B.E.E. ? — A. Yes, but there are other men. 
 
 By Mr. Roive : 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Estes give you any assurance of financial assistance ? — ^A. He might 
 have done so; I don't remember. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did you ever discuss the question with him ? — ^A. I believe I have. Anything 
 in the way of financial assistance has always come before the executive committee of 
 the combined strikers. 
 
 Q. Have the U.B.R.E. a strike fund at headquarters ? — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. He would have some influence upon the action of the men because of hia 
 position ? — A. Mr. Estes is really at the beck and call of the joint executive at Van- 
 couver. If they say, go to Winnipeg, he has to go. He is at the disposal of the execu- 
 tive board of the joint strikers at the present time. I don't know in what particular 
 capacity. Suppose they want him to go and lecture at any one point. If they send him 
 he has to go. I don't know that the combined strikers pay him. 
 
 Q. Has your association got a representative on that joint board ? — A. Yes, I 
 sat on it myself. 
 
 Q. Don't you know his relations with that board ? — A. I never troubled myself 
 to get access to their minutes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. He said he gave up a position of $-300 a month to take one at $125 for the 
 U.B.R.E. ?— A. I don't know as to that. 
 
 Q. You know that he is a paid ofiicial of the U.B.II.E. and has his travelling 
 expenses paid by that body ? — A. You know it is unfair to ask me anything in connec- 
 tion with the U.B.E.E., although I am willing to give you anything I know, and any- 
 thing in connection with Mr. Estes it is only right that that man should have a chance 
 of answering for himself. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What we want to understand is the exact nature or connection in ihis strike 
 between that body and your body. It looks as if Mr. Estes was the engineer of this 
 whole business, and that he was the man who procured the tying up of the Czar ? — 
 A. I will tell you he was not. In the first place we knew nothing about the U.B.R.E. 
 until the time of the strike. Wo heard they were organized. We were only organized 
 here two weeks before this strike was called in Vancouver. How is it possible that us 
 people not knowing anything about Mr. Estes could be influenced by him ? The 
 connection between the two bodies is this : we always fight shy of anything unfair. 
 
 By Mr. Boive : 
 
 Q. Da you know, as a matter of personal knowledge, when the first trouble oc- 
 curred between the U.B.E.E. ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Who was it that promoted the organization of your union here ? — A. It was 
 really a necessity of the members who had joined the Vancouver division. We thought 
 it would be better to have a branch in Victoria. 
 
 ARTHUR B. BTJUiEY— Victoria, May 14. 
 
oy IVDUStRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 167 
 
 SESSIO>JAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. When was the Vancouver part organized ? — A. I believe there has been a 
 union for over ten years. When we came over to Victoria I was made chairman. Our 
 society has been in existence two weeks before the strike. 
 
 Q. Was the organization here suggested by the idea that there was lilcely to be 
 trouble with the C.P.E. ? — A. No, it was a matter of convenience. 
 
 Q. Do you know where the suggestion came from that you should take a hand in 
 the dispute of the C.P.R. ? — A. We knew there were a lot of unfair men on the wharf. 
 It arose among the men themselves. Just a matter of man to man. 
 
 Q. Would you discharge goods on to an unfair dock ? — A. That is a question to 
 be. left to discussion with the men, according to the merits of the case. It all depends 
 on circumstances. If the dock was unfair and there would be unfair longshoremen 
 working on it, and the crew worked with them they would be unfair, and would refuse 
 to do it. 
 
 . , ; Q. I don't understand how your union which is young, should have taken this 
 attitude when old unions associated with this work did not. For instance, take the 
 men on the trains ? — A. They would decide among themselves. One union might take 
 a different view. Take the engineers and firemen's unions. They recognize no other 
 unions except themselves. They make agreements entirely by themselves. Suppose 
 they went on strike 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You would not strike in sympathy with them ? — A. We have never had an 
 opportunity. I would never work unfair. 
 
 Q. Just what the public wants to know is how far these sympathetic strikes are 
 liable to go. You have taken up a battle in which you are not concerned. The 
 public want to know the limits of this kind of thing ? — A. You must understand that 
 I have a wife and family dependent upon me, and am interested also. We will say, for 
 instance, the U.B.E.E. come out; I will know they would be sensible men, and as a 
 matter of fact that these men would never come out as a body without they first under- 
 stood what they were doing. I would not go on strike without I thought they were 
 right. 
 
 Q. It is a quarrel in which you are not at all interested. You are doing it out 
 of sympathy ? — A. It is- to our interests to see that unionism is kept up. If one union 
 is beaten, sooner or later it will affect others. 
 
 Q. You went into the strike without knowing anything really as to the merits ? 
 — ^A. I believe I should have a chance of belonging to the union. The demands are 
 published, and all that is asked of the C.P.K. is that they will not discriminate against 
 members of the U.B.E.E., and will allow them to organize employees of the C.P.R. 
 into their union. 
 
 Q. They say it originated in a man disobeying the regulations of the company ? 
 -—A. The C.P.E. say so. They certainly make their side good. 
 
 Q. But you went into this strike without hearing what the C.P.E. had to say. 
 The public have an interest in finding out how far this sympathetic strike is to be 
 allowed. You people are not the only people concerned in these matters ? — A. It con- 
 cerns us as njueh as anyone else. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether it is proposed to call out other crafts ? — A. I don't know 
 as to that at all. 
 
 Q. Is there any reason you know of why there should be more labour disturbances 
 in British Columbia than other parts of Canada ? — A. The only reason I can see is 
 simply that capital itself has got more control and is more arbitrary in its demands— 
 when a corporation like the C.P.E. says a man cannot belong to a union. 
 
 Q. Do you say that the C.P.E. or any other cerporation have the right to employ 
 
 non-union men if they want to ?— A. If bodies like the C.P.E. have the right to or- 
 
 eanlze capital, labour has a right to organize. 
 
 ^ ARTHUR B. BULLEY— Victoria, May 14. 
 
168 . MJ^WTES OF EMDESCE OF JiOJAL- COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VU;, A. 1904 
 
 Q. We want to find out the opinions of union men whether it is right for employ- 
 ers, to employ non-union men l — A. Provided he does not discriminate against \mion 
 Hien. 
 
 Q. Surely an employer has the right to say whether he shall employ union men 
 or non-union men ? — A. It leaves a chance of discrimination in favour of non-union 
 men against union men. Suppose we say now that there is a possibility of the men in 
 his line of business would not be union men. If the men were giving good service it 
 would look a little foolish if in taking on men an employer would reject union men and 
 take on non-union men. On the steamer Joan the reason of our trouble thei'e was 
 four of our men were working in the capacity of deckhands on that boat for several 
 months and gave every satisfaction. The captain when he heard of them being union 
 men, tore up the book and told them to get to hell and get out. He was paying thehi 
 $40 a month and four men were hired at $45 to take their places. 
 
 B2) Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Do you remember there was a fireman on the Charme)^— one of the most' com- 
 petent men they had, and that a delegation from your lodge went down one night 
 and insisted on that man coming off the boat because he was not a member of the 
 , union ? — A. The fireman was my brother, and I was on strike against my brother. 
 
 Q. And you insisted on his coming off the boat ? — A. Yes, because he would n6t 
 join the union. 
 
 Q. You insisted on his coming off or else the men would strike? — A. Yes — liiy 
 brother, Alfred H. Bulley. ' ' 
 
 Q. The captain had the option- of tying up the Charmer or putting that man off 
 the boat? — A. I suppose that is so. 
 
 Q. Do you remember a man named L. M. Bell who did not want to join the union 
 and had to go to Dawson and leave his family here ? — A. If it is Mr. Devril, when ho 
 was asked to join the union he said yes. 
 
 Q. You are talking about another man ? — A. That is the man who was known as 
 Little Billy. 
 
 Q. And you say he went into the union immediately he was asked ? — A. Yes — Wil- 
 liam Devril. 
 
 Q. I would like to know the names of the men on the Joan when this event 
 occurred ? — A. I am not prepared to give the names. I don't know the names. The 
 men are in Vancouver. It occurred the same day as we came out on strike. 
 
 Q. You had published to the world that you were going to tie up all boats ? — A. 
 I don't know that they did. 
 
 Q. Mr. Estes was here for that purpose and told us that ? — A. No, and he never 
 said so. 
 
 Q. No words to that effect ? — A. No, sir — that he was going to tie up the Duns- 
 muir boats. 
 
 Q. That is what your institution was out to do — you don't remember saying that? 
 — A. I don't remember. 
 
 Q. Mr. C. W. Thomson, president of the association, didn't say so? — A. I don't 
 remember. 
 
 Q. You didn't say fhe idea was to extend the influence of that strike over tlie 
 whole of British Columbia? — A. I don't know that I did. 
 
 Q. That was t»he idea — to stop the Dunsmuir boats, the C.P.N, and other boats 
 that were carrying coal to the C.P.E. ? — A. We would not have any of our men. work 
 unfair. 
 
 Q. It was after that determination was come to that these men were orderjed off 
 the Joan? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When was it that they were ordered off?— A. On the same Monday, I believe^ 
 Monday, the 16th, before any strike wag called at all. 
 
 ARTHUR B. BULLEY— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL- DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA tm 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Don't you know that it was known that Mr. Estes was coming over here before 
 you came— you would be suprised to know that Mr. Estes. was on the way to tie lip 
 this institution ? — A. I would be surprised. 
 
 Q. Do you suppose Mr. Dunsmuir did not know that Estes was on the way to 
 Victoria for the purpose, if possible, of tying up this fleet?— A. I will swear that Mv. 
 Dunsmuir, or any other man, would not know that Mr. Estes was on his way, twelve 
 hours before he started. He was asked to come. 
 
 Q. Who asked him to come ? — A. I did. I asked Mr. Estes to come to Victoria. 
 
 Q. For what purpose ? — A. My intention was this : Victoria was getting, through 
 the press, a very garbled account of the strike, and I wanted Mr. Estes to appear at' a 
 public meeting and tell the people exactly how the matter stood. Why should we, as 
 labouring men, be so bound down to capitalists simply because he has a power over 
 us? We have a right to put down our side of the case in as good a manner as possible. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. I think the very fact that tSis Commission is appointed is testimony of the 
 ability of the workingmen to raise questions, if they see fit ? — A. Suppose we did npt 
 raise any trouble? 
 
 Q. What this commission is here to find out is the limit of your rights in the 
 public interest ? — A. Would it not also include the rights and limits of capitalists ? 
 
 Q. We are here to deal with capitalists also. We would like to know the object of 
 Mr. Estes' visit i — A. To i)resent the case to the public. He said, as near as I can 
 remember, that he did not order strikes and was much against strikes. I thought he 
 was putting cold water on the subject and confusing things. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. You wovild have liked to have seen him warmer ? — A. One way or other. 
 
 Q. Did he offer you financial assistance ? — A. I don't know that he did. 
 
 Q. I asked you if there is any reason why there should be strikes in British Colum- 
 bia more than other places. Do you think working-people are oppressed unduly, as 
 compared with other localities ? — A. As near as I can see, the labour union, movement 
 is gaining a little headway in British Columbia, and the capitalists are doing their 
 best to stop this. 
 
 Q. Speaking generally, do you think labour is as good a commodity in British 
 Columbia as in other places ? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. And that a man having labour to sell is likely to sell it to as good advantage 
 in British Columbia as in other places ? — A. About the same, taking into consideration 
 the cost of living. The fact of what your money will buy is about the same as in 
 Montreal. You may make more money here. 
 
 Q. What would your wages be in Montreal? — A. I got $1.25 in the Dominion 
 Cotton Mills — I was not employed on a steamboat in Montreal. 
 
 Q. What do you get here on the boats ? — A. $50 a month and my board. 
 
 Q. What did you pay for rent in Montreal, and what here? — A. From $5 to $7.50 
 a month. We pay $5 for a very inferior place. You can get a brick house in Montreal 
 for $5 or $6. I had a place there with a large hall, parlour, dining-room, three or four 
 bedrooms, kitchen and woodshed for $5 a month. I paid the water rates, which 
 amounted- to $5.26 a year. 
 
 Q. The necessaries of life are dearer here than there?— A. I think they are, on 
 the whole. It costs more to live. , 
 
 Q. You think the purchasing power of your wages is about the same as in Mont- 
 real? — A. Yes, when I was there. 
 
 Q. The cost of living has increased, I understand? — A. And wages have come up 
 
 in proportion. , ' v, . ^r i 
 
 ' Q. About 15 per cent, I understand ? — A. Yes, the wages have come up in prp- 
 portion. Men on the street who were getting $1.25, I believe they get $1.50. 
 
 ARTHUR B. BULLBY— Victoi-ia, May 14. 
 
170 iiimiTm OF Eywmcm of foyal commission 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Thore is no more reason for unionism in British Columbia than other places? 
 ^A. I might state that labour is organizing, and capital is trying to offset this. 
 
 Q. Is the opportunity for a man as good here as in other places ? — A. I think it is. 
 
 Q. Outsiders think that labour disturbances have made conditions here very bad, 
 and it seems to me that one duty we should perform is to get the true facts of the case 
 before the public mind ( — A. Yes, that is what we ought to do. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Suppose the C.P.N, people maintain their stand-^what is going to become of 
 your people and the families? Your places are now occupied by others? — A. I don't 
 know — the fishing season is coming on. 
 
 Q. Your positions on the boats are occupied ? — A. Not satisfactorily, I don't think. 
 We have been given to understand they are not. 
 
 Q. Where do you get your support in the meantime? — A. Partly from the advisory 
 board and other unions in the town — not exactly on strike, but contributing to our 
 assistance. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. How many unions in the Trades and Labour Council have assisted you? — A. 
 Most all of them. 
 
 Q. So most of the unions approve of your action — your action is approved by the 
 Labour Council in the city ? — A. I think it does. 
 
 Q. Have the merits of the case been presented to the different unions?— A. Aa 
 nearly as possible, both in a written statement of the joint strikers published in Van- 
 couver and statements published in the press by the strikers there — the Independent 
 and other papers in the city, and at the different public meetings given by Mr. Estes 
 himself. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I suppose the strike, to be effective in any way, is to prevent the operation of 
 the industry in which you are engaged ? — A. I suppose so. It would have no effect 
 unless we did. 
 
 Q. Do you lose a strike when the company go on operating without your men ? — 
 A. Not always. 
 
 Q. You don't lose until your men go back without a concession ? — A. Without a 
 concession, yes. 
 
 Q. Your attitude is this — that when you are not working and your men are not 
 working on the C.P.N, boats because they are handling goods that are handled by 
 substitute labour ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And so long as that condition remains, so long you will remain away from 
 work ? — A. Most decidedly. 
 
 Q. Or any other work that will bring into contact with other unfair labour ? — 
 A. Yes. , . 
 
 Q. And your conclusion is that a non-union man has no right to work ? — A. No, 
 they can do other work. 
 
 Q. What kind of work should they do ? — A. There is always other work to do. 
 When men come off these boats they withdraw their labour from the labour market. 
 
 Q. You quit a job whenever you see fit ? — A. The point is, where do these men 
 come from before ? 
 
 Q. Your idea is that a man is unfair if he substitutes ? — A. Most decidedly. 
 
 Q. If a union man chooses to drop his employment how can he expect the ein- 
 ployer to sit still and say he would not employ any one but union men. Why should 
 not a non-union man have a right to step in and get work ? — A. I claim tiint if a 
 workman his interests are identical with mine. 
 
 ARTHUR B. BULLET— Victoria, May 14. 
 
OV INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 171 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. He does not see it in the same light as you ? — A, He may see it. 
 
 Q. Suppose your brother was expelled from the lodge and he is non-union. They 
 can simply say you cannot work here and cannot work there, and can drive a man out 
 of his craft. Is there no check on this — no body where appeal could be taken ?— 
 A. The question could be brought up before the headquarters lodge. 
 
 Q. Would there be any general appeal from the action of a union — to the Trades 
 and Labour Council for instance ? — A. Oh, no. Because you see they would be inter- 
 fering with the internal workings of each local, which would spoil their sphere. 
 
 Q. There is evidently a difference in opinion as to whether this U.B.R.E. strike 
 was justified or not. The engineers and firemen have not gone out 2— A. They recog- 
 nize no other rights. 
 
 Q. Who were right ? — A. I should say the U.B.R.E. have the right to hold up 
 their organization. 
 
 Q. And the engineers and firemen have the same right to remain in the employ- 
 ment of the company with unfair men, and they are still good men ? — A. As far as 
 their own union is concerned. 
 
 Q. They are unfair people from your point of view ? — A. Most decidedly. 
 
 Victoria, May 14, 1903. 
 Sheff Thompson, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You live here, Mr. Thompson ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What is your nationality ? — A. British Columbia. 
 
 Q. Are you on the voters' list here ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You are connected with the same labour organization ? — A. With the steam- 
 shipmen— secretary. 
 
 Q. The same organization of which Mr. Bulley is president ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You might tell us what you know about this existing strike ? — A. It came 
 about through the company breaking an agreement — the C.P.N. Company. 
 
 Q. Was that agreement a verbal one ? — A. That is the agreement — the verbal one. 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of the oath administered ? — A. Yes. 
 
 (Oath of Steamshipmen's Union produced and marked Exhibit 6.) 
 
 Q. Is this oath administered to every one ? — A. That is the obligation that 
 
 every one takes. 
 
 Q. You say the company broke an agreement ? — A. Broke it three times in one 
 
 week that it was made. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Were you a party to any promise made to the company that they should receive 
 twelve hours' notice before you went out ?— A. No. , „ . ^ 
 
 Q. There was an engagement entered into by Mr. Bulley on his own accord ?— A. It 
 was brought before a meeting and was carried, that we should act up to the agree- 
 ment, but we could not, the agreement was broken on the Charmer m the first place, 
 on the Princess May the following Saturday and on the Louise the following Monday. 
 The company broke their agreement, so that the union members could not stand it 
 
 any longer and came out on strike. ■. ■> \ r\ t? -a +i, 
 
 Q. The agreement was entered into on Wednesday, was it i—A. On i<riday, the 
 14th I think it was, and we struck on the 16th or 17th. 
 
 SHEFF THOMPSON— Victoria, May 14. 
 
172 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ItOTAL COMMISSION' 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904' 
 
 Q. What led up to the breaking of that agreement ?— A. We saw tlie management 
 and Captain Troupe, and he said he would not touch anything these men handled — 
 what we claimed to be unfair freight. I saw Troupe several times. I went down to 
 the Chaimer and the mate came to me before the agreement was made, and he says, 
 see what you can do with these men, and see if they won't put this freight on. The 
 captain had notified the mate not to handle this stufF. If he had known this ^freight 
 was unfair he would have put it ashore. I told the boys how it was, and he let it go 
 this time, and he asked me to get four more men for him that night, so that there 
 would he no danger of that. ; 
 
 Q. When was that conversation ? — A. A week before the strike — the middle. of the 
 week — the instructions were given. I have seen written instructions on the Louise, 
 notifying men not to handle the stuff. The mate of the Charmer said he had no 
 orders not to handle this stviff and that he would have put it ashore if he had known 
 that. That was on the Princess May, and on Saturday I got a telegram that the 
 crew was forced to handle scab freight and baggage or go to jail. I reported tcJ the 
 meeting. Coming down on the Louise there were about 25 tons of scab freight. 
 When I went to the dock the purser came to me and said, ' the boys won't touch this 
 freight.' This was express. The crew were not going to touch it. He showed me where 
 the stuff had come from. I said, 'it is all right,' and it was put aboard. But there was 
 scab stuff aboard. They called me down from the dock to show me, and Mr. Bulley 
 and Mr. Estes, who was on the boat. They said to me, ' what are you, union Men or 
 scabs.' I said, ' union men, I guess.' They said, ' there is that freight — you ' know 
 where it came from.' This was on the Monday. " 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Estes was on the boat, was he ? — A. Yes, he was a passenger. 
 
 Q. Did Estes give you any assurance that you would receive assistance from the 
 U.B.E.E.?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Did you have any discussion with him as to the why and wherefore of that 
 strike ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Why did you call the men off the E. & N. steamers ? — A. Because there were 
 four of our members on the Joan, I think it was on Sunday, they notified them they 
 would have to tear their books up or go ashore. That was in Vancouver. There were 
 men sent from here at $45 a month. When they found out the way things were they 
 came back on the Louise. 
 
 Q. Were you present at a discussion in the Steamshipmen's Union as to the ad- 
 visability of going out in sympathy with the U.B.R.E. ? — A. We did not come out in 
 sympathy with the TJ.B.E.E. We went out because we Were forced. Scab freight wd 
 baggage was forced on us. 
 
 Q. The freight would not have been scab if it had not been for the trouble be- 
 tween the U.B.E.E. and the C.P.R. ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. So, that was really at the bottom of it? — A. It all points that way. If one 
 union is out on strike and another union working in the same capacity from the rail- 
 road to the boat, and if there are unfair men handling that freight. 
 
 Q. It is one of the regulations of the union that you cannot liandle stuff handl(;d 
 by unfair men ? — A. That is so. 
 
 Q. That is part of the oath you take ? — A. I don't know as to whether there is an 
 obligation in the by-laws. 
 
 Q. The oath pledges you to observe the by-laws ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. It makes no difference, then, whether the demand made by the' other ui)ion is 
 reasonable or not? — A. It is left to a meeting; it is no two-man affair. Uverytyng has 
 to go to a meeting. There was a discussion, and 39 to 1 was the result by a standing 
 vote. ■•,:., 
 
 6HEFF THOMPSON— Victoria, Hay 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 173 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ' Q. Why did you not take that vote hy ballot ?— A. It was not necessary. 
 
 Q. Would not the men be more liable to give their opinions, if it were by ballot! 
 — A. I don't know — it was taken by standing vote. 
 
 Q. No demand to have it taken by ballot?— A. No. 
 
 Q. It might have been less favourable, if taken by ballot?— A. No, they wore all 
 feeling pretty much the same way at that meeting. 
 
 Q. How long was the matter discussed? — A. I think the meeting was called at 
 10.30, and between twelve and one the motion was put and carried. 
 
 Q. You were about two hours discussing this ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did anyone except your own members speak on this question? — A. Mr. Estos 
 spoke, but he urged against a strike. He was strongly against astrike. 
 
 By Mr. Rome: 
 
 Q. What reasons did he give? — A. He told the men to use every precaution and 
 to thoroughly understand what they were doing. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. You say he advised the men to thoroughly consider the matter. Was that all 
 he said ? He didn't say not to go on strike ?— A. No, not that directly. 
 
 Q. Did he say their strike would aid the cause of the U.B.E.E. or hurt it ? — A. 
 He did not say — not that I know of. 
 
 Q. How long was his speech? — A. A few minutes — it might have been ten 
 minutes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. Before the vote was taken ? — :A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. 1 suppose he gave you a pretty full account of the U.B.E.E. situation in 
 Vancouver ? — A. That was at a meeting afterwards. 
 
 Q. Did he explain at this first meeting? — A. No, he gave no full details. 
 
 Q. Did he explain anything about it? — A. He told us there was a strike. We 
 knew that already. 
 
 Q. I suppose he outlined the reason for it ? — A. I don't know just what he did say 
 about it. 
 
 Q. He gave you some opinion about it ? — A. He spoke of the strike. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Had you had the merits of the strike put before your lodge previous to this 
 time ? — A. It had been discussed. 
 
 Q. Had some one from the outside presented it and discussed it ?— A. No, the 
 boys in Vancouver and on the boats. He was the only man from the outside who miade 
 any speech about it to our lodge. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How many others spoke that evening ? — A. The president, and I gave in my 
 report about the trouble on the Princess May, and the president of our union, I 
 believe he spoke. There was lots of discussion on tlie floor. 
 
 Q. It seems to me that Mr. Estes must have spoken more than ten minutes ? — A. 
 There was my report and our chairman's report, and one thing and another. The 
 meeting was called to report on the trouble on the Princess May. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Estes say anything about supplying funds or assistance in any, way ? 
 — A. Not that I know of. , , \ . , , 
 
 Q. Did you consider the question where you were going to get aid if you went on 
 strike ? — A. No, not particularly. 
 
 BHEfF THOMPSON— Victoria, May 14. 
 
174 SltNOTES OF EYWEXCE OF R07AL COMMISSION , 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. lYou had no idea how long the strike was going to last, and didn't it occur to 
 you that the time might come when you might need funds ? — A. It did not occur to 
 me — I don't think it occurred to any one. 
 
 Q. That is usually the case ?— A. It is a thing that did not bother the steamboat- 
 men much as a rule. They can always get some other kind of work. 
 
 Q. You don't mean by that that you are indifferent as to whether you work at 
 the same job ? — A. I have a number of occupations. You see, if I don't get work at 
 that 
 
 Q. What is your business ? — A. I am a longshoreman and steamboat man. 
 
 Q. Was the Vancouver branch out at the time ? — A. The Steamshipmen's Society? 
 Yes, they declared a strike there when the trouble occurred on Saturday night on the 
 Princess May. They went out Saturday and we went out Monday. 
 
 Q. You say you got a telegram to the effect that the men must be on the Princess 
 May or go to jail ? — A. Yes, either one way or the other. I went over to find out what 
 the trouble was. The Princess May had gone, and I went to headquarters — there was 
 a meeting on Sunday night, and they explained. 
 
 Q. Did you find that to be true ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Who made that threat ? — A. The officers of the ship. 
 
 Q. Did the men, acting under that, load the boat ? — A. They went to Skagway 
 and came back, and then they went ashore at Vancouver. 
 
 Q. A case of desertion ? — A. No, not that. 
 
 Q. Do you take the position that when a union like the U. B. K. E. goes on strike 
 a non-union man has no right to take their places ? — A. Well, I don't know as to that, 
 of course. 
 
 Q. You think it is not right for a non-union man to get a job if he can ? — A. 
 The people don't seem to want these jobs before a strike. 
 
 Q. I don't suppose they could very well get them if you were in a job and gave 
 satisfaction. How far do you claim the right to exclude non-union people from getting 
 work ? — A. We are organized as a body, and of course if a man comes on board and 
 does not belong to the union, he is asked to join, and if he has not got the money we 
 give him a show until he has. 
 
 Q. You don't allow him to enjoy any of the advantages of the union until he does? 
 —A. No. 
 
 Q. This strike of the IT. B. li. E. is recognized, is it not ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that involves the exclusion of non-union labour, and you think you are 
 justified in bringing matters to such a pass that an employer should not be allowed to 
 ' employ non-union men ? — A. If he employs union men. He must employ either one 
 or the other. They won't mix. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 
 Q. Would a man who had signed articles on a ship be required to come out under 
 such circumstances in violation of his articles ? — ^A. When you sign that you must 
 give 24 hours' notice, according to the Shipping Act. 
 
 Q. Would the union think a man under obligation to ignore that notice ? — A. 
 No, the union would not stand by him for that. He would be required to fulfil the 
 tsrms of his obligation. We work by the month on these boats here — it is different. 
 
 Q. Did the union urge the men to take that trip to Skagway on the Princess May ? 
 —A. Yes, they were told to make that trip, and to give due notice coming back — twenty- 
 four hours' notice. 
 
 By Mr. Bodivell : 
 
 Q. But they were first requested to strike, and the only reason they went was that 
 Mr. Estes gave them persnission to go ? — A. Mr. Estes did not give them permission. 
 
 Q. Mr. Estes made it out that he allowed these men to go % — ^A. Mr. Estes is not 
 handling our affairs. 
 SHEFF THOMPSON— VUtoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 175 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. The union would have taken care of the men on that strike if the company had 
 not given notice that they were going to enforce their legal rights ? — A. The union 
 would not stand by any member who breaks the rules. 
 
 Q. You were quite satisfied to have these men strike on the Princess May ? — A. It 
 was amongst themselves that the trouble started. 
 
 Q. They had struck ? — A. They could not strike — they were on articles and could 
 not strike. 
 
 Q. If the men on the Princess May had struck, if the company had not given notico 
 that they were going to enforce their legal rights, do you mean to say these men would 
 not have received benefits from your union ? — A. They could not strike. They did 
 not go out. They went up to the meeting to report, and when they were advised to 
 fulfil their contract they went back on the vessel. 
 
 Q. Because they knew the company were going to enforce their legal rights, and 
 thejr went up to headquarters and said they would have to stand the penalty of deser- 
 tion, and then Mr. Estes allowed them to go back ? — A. Mr. Estes had nothing to do 
 with it. 
 
 Q. You say Mr. Estes only spoke once at the meeting on the 16th? — A. Just once. 
 I am pretty sure. 
 
 Q. This is what Mr. Bulley said: — 
 
 ' Q. Did Mr. Estes speak during that two hours 1 — A. Yes, sir. 
 ' Q. Towards the beginning or towards the end of the discussion ? — A. 
 Well, from the middle to the end, I should say.' 
 Do you agree with that ? — A. I know he spoke once. 
 
 Q. ,Do you remember these statements. C. H. Thompson is the president of your 
 society, and I was asking him if this strike in Victoria was not a part of a prescribed 
 plan by which every C.P.K. steamer was to be tied up. Do you remember my asking 
 about that ? — A. I heard you say something about that. 
 Q. I said : — 
 
 ' Q. I suggest to you that the plan of campaign, as developed in the news- 
 papers, was to tie up every steamer operating in connection with the Canadian 
 Pacific Eailway Company; is that right ? — A. Not only the C.P.N. 
 ' Q. But including the C.P.N. ?— A. Including the C.P.N. ; yes. 
 ' Q. And every steamer which carried coal to the C.P.E. or the Empress 
 line ? — A. To the port of Vancouver.' 
 I suggest to you now that that statement is correct, and that this scab freight business 
 was merely to influence your members to come out ? — A. No, it is not so. 
 
 Q. Although your president admitted it ? — A. I knew the Charmer would leave 
 that night when we came out on strike — I knew she would. 
 
 Q.. You thought you had taken means to prevent her — your idea was to call off 
 every man ? — A. Every man of our members. 
 
 Q. Didn't you try to influence the engineers ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Nobody from your society ? — A. Not that I know of. I didn't go near the 
 Charmer. 
 
 Q. This was Monday night, when there were some steamers in Victoria belonging 
 to the C.P.N. — the Charmer, the Danube, the Tees and the Queen City ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That was the night you chose to strike ? — A. It was the night I came from 
 Vancouver to give my report. It was discussed, and the strike was called by the 
 members. 
 
 Q. Didn't your hear your president say that it was arranged at the headquarters 
 committee on the Sunday that the meeting should be held and the strike begun that 
 night, ? — ^A. There was no arrangement made until I arrived Sunday night. 
 
 Q. Mr. Thompson said that this matter was arranged for Sunday night, and to 
 strike on that night ? — A. I called the meeting. There was no meeting called until we 
 
 arrived in Victoria Sunday night. 
 
 SHEFF THOMPSON— Victoria, May 14. 
 
176 2iINDTES OF ETIDITSCB OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VH., A. t904 '■ ' 
 
 Q. Didn't you hear Mr. Thompson say that the meeting was arrangedby the head- 
 onarters committee for Sunday ? — A. I didn't hear him say it. 
 
 Q. Do you know — you were in Vancouver on Sunday ? — A, Yes. 
 
 Q. Were you at the headquarters committee ? — A. I was up at our headquarters. 
 
 Q. The headquarters committee of the strike ? — A. That had nothing to do with 
 me. 
 
 Q. Your union was represented ? — A. I went to our headquarters, I went to. the., 
 Labour hall. 
 
 Q. You didn't go to the headquarters committee ? — -A. I believe I did. 
 
 Q. Did you know that this meeting was arranged at the headquarters meeting ? 
 Why did Mr. Thompson say so ? — A. There might have been something happened whle , 
 I was out, but it never was arranged on Sunday. 
 
 Q. How did you know the meeting was called ? You heard Mr. BuUey say. he,, 
 telegraphed over to call the meeting ? — A. I did not know that. I can say that the 
 mieeting was called for Monday night. — 
 
 Q. Could any one else call the meeting ? — A. No one but the president and myself. 
 When we arrived in Victoria, on Monday night I notified the boys that we were going 
 to have a meeting. 
 
 His Lordship. — Who composed that headquarters committee ? , , 
 
 Mr. BODWELL. — It was composed of representatives of the unions on strike. Mr. 
 Bulky represents the union here, and Mr. Thompson the Seamen's Union in Van-' 
 couver. 
 
 Q. When did you call the meeting ? — A. I called the meeting Monday night by 
 notifying the men personally. I notified the men that there was to be a special meet- 
 ing of the Steamshipmen's Association of Victoria. 
 
 Q. .ITor what purpose ? — A.- So as to report the trouble on the May. 
 
 Q. Before you left Vancouver, didn't you know there was to be a meeting at Vic- 
 toria ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. It is a fact that there were several meetings of the headquarters committee on 
 Sunday ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. There was one ? — A. Yes, I was at one. 
 
 Q. The next day Mr. C. H. Thompson, who is the provincial president of your 
 society, Mr. Estes, you and Mr. Bulley came to Victoria together ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And none had been here before — that is, neither Thomson nor Estes ? — A. Yes, 
 Thomson a dozen times, but not during the progress of the strike. ■ 
 
 Q. And on Monday night when you arrived you found a lot of men on the wharf ? 
 — A. 1 es. 
 
 Q. On the Charmer, or working on the Charmer — they expected. you ? — A. Yes, 
 certainly. 
 
 Q. You immediately went to the Eagle Hall and held a meeting ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that happened to be the time the C. P. N. steamers were all in port ? — A. ■ 
 Yes, that is one of the coincidences. 
 
 Q. If you could have carried out your plan — if the company had not been able 
 to fill your men's places — ^not one of the steamers could have got out ? — A. Yes, the 
 Charmer left pretty near on time. 
 
 Q. You would have called out every fireman on the Charmer ? — A. We did. 
 
 Q. Every deckhand, every quartermaster ? — A. That belonged to the society— a 
 quartermaster did not belong to the society — he stayed. 
 
 Q. Every one except the captain, the mate and the engineers ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You would have done that with the Danube ? — A. We did. 
 
 Q. She did not get out. And if it had, not been that after 12 o'clock Captain 
 Troupe had been enabled to get a few men, not a vessel would have sailed from Vicr, 
 toria that night ? All the men on these boats belonging to your organization ,wer» 
 called out ? — A. Yes. 
 SHEFF THOMPSON— Victoria, May 1*, 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 17T 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Without any notice ?— A. The men did not think it necessary to give any 
 notice on account of the contract being broken with us. We thought we had a perfect 
 right. 
 
 Q. Mr. Estes did not advise any notice ? — A. He had nothing to do with it. ,; 
 
 Q. Thomson did not advise any notice ?^A. He had nothing to do with it. 
 
 ' By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You say you were ordered out from headquarters, when ? — A. On a Saturday 
 night. I had a telegram from Vancouver — the Vancouver headquarters of the Steam- 
 shipmen's Society. The telegram was signed by a delegate on the Princess May. Ho 
 was not a member of the headquarters committee. 
 
 Q. How did he have authority to do that ? — A. On every boat we have a delegate, 
 and if any trouble arises he has to fix it up. 
 
 Q. By whose authority were you called on strike ? — A. We came out on our own 
 account. 
 
 Q. Who ordered you out ? — A. The meeting on the 16th. 
 
 Q. But on the Saturday ? — A. We were ordered out. 
 
 Q. Tou had been requested to strike some time before— a long time before the 
 Saturday ? — A. Yes, the time the freight came over on the Charmer, three or four dayn 
 before the Saturday. We had two metings to consider it, and we did not come out. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — ^What is the provision in the constitution for a strike ? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — One meeting and another to consider it. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You had better let us have the telegram calling the strike ? 
 
 (Telegram produced, marked Exhibit 7.) 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. I think there has to be one meeting first and then another meeting before you 
 can call a strike ? — A. It had been discussed in several meetings before this trouble. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. What is the first intimation that the men had that there was to be a meeting 
 that night ?— A. When I came off the boat. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. But they were down waiting for you ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Who would Mr. Bulley have telegraphed to here ? — A. I did not know that he 
 sent a telegram. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How many men are there in the division at Victoria ? — A. About 150 men. 
 
 Q. You say you only had a vote of 39 to 1 ? — A. It must be two-thirds of those 
 present. 
 
 Q. How would the whole 150 men know there was a meeting ? — A. I went aroUnd 
 and notified everybody I could. 
 
 Q. It would be impossible to notify 150 people ? — A. There were not many. There 
 were about forty members attended that meeting. 
 
 Q. Did the action of the 40 bind the 150 or 160 ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Not unless the 150 were notified ! — ^A. The majority of the meeting. 
 
 SHBFF THOMPSON— Victoria, May 14. 
 
 36a— 12 
 
178 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF liOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 ' By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. But the IGO were not notified in any legal way. Their action would not bind 
 them, surely ? — A. Yes, a member who had not received notice of the meeting would 
 consider himself bound by the majority. 
 
 Q. And he would have to be bound by that action ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I suppose you made up your mind there would have to be a strike when in Van- 
 couver that Sunday ? — A. After I found out the whole thing about the Princess May, 
 I was pretty well satisfied there would be trouble on account of threatening to put the 
 men in jail, and doing what they did on the Charmer. 
 
 Q. I suppose that threat would apply to any seaman indicating a disposition to 
 desert ? — A. It is in the articles. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. It is a breach of contract, and they are liable to be committed ?— A. The only 
 thing they could have done would be to put them in jail for refusing. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — They could have put them on the boat and made them stay there, 
 under the Shipping Act. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Had there been any meeting of the Victoria people before these people went out 
 that Monday night ? — A. Two meetings in Victoria. 
 
 Q. Was there a resolution passed in favour of a strike ? — A. I don't remember. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. If that is the case, Mr. Thomson, you contravened the charter when you wen: 
 out on the one meeting ? — A. I don't thinlc so. We were allowed to strike. He broke 
 that contract with the company. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. But that refers to something else. The chief justice says you did not observe 
 the terms of the constitution ? — A. We had three meetings. 
 
 Q. You did not have a meeting down here at which a resolution in favour of a 
 strike was passed ? — A. We had meetings. There was a meeting, I think, before the 
 Monday night. The agreement with the company was brought up, and it was carried 
 that we should act. 
 
 Q. But was there a resolution passed ordering a strike ? — A. No. 
 
 His Lordship. — So there was only one meeting at which a resolution was passed 
 ordering a strike. I would like to see just how far the constitution is observed, or 
 whether these things are only waste paper. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — As I understand it, from the evidence given before Thomson, whea 
 he came here, argued that no more meetings were necessary, because they had already 
 had two. They had neglected their opportunity and he chided them for not taking it. 
 I conclude that they regard that they had two meetings and did not need any more, and 
 that their plain duty was to strike, because the headquarters at Vancouver had decided 
 on it, and he came here for that purpose. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 ft 
 
 Q. You see the diflicrilty that a man is in when he joins your union. In the first 
 place, you tell us he is bound by the action of the majority, although he never got any 
 notice. In the next place, you override the constitution and say you were justified in 
 going out on strike, although only one meeting was held at which a resolution was 
 passed. Don't you thinlc it is unfair to these 150 men that the action of 40 should bind 
 SHEKF THOMPSON— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITI8B COLUMBIA 179 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 them witEbut notice ? — A. No, I don't see how it could be called unfair. A man has 
 to abide by the action of the majority of the meeting. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Here are forty men. There are in your society 120 other men who were not 
 present ? — A. They have to abide by the meeting. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Although they had no notice ? — A. Yes, I suppose so. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. And although a good many were absent. What was the idea of having a strike 
 at that particular time ? — A. There was no idea of declaring a strike at that particular 
 time— no particular reason. The handling of the unfair stuff was purely and simply 
 the cause of the strike. 
 
 His Lordship. — How do you expect employers are going to have any faith in you 
 as a union if you union people don't observe your own regulations ? That is a point 
 on which you should set yourself right before the public. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. I understand your position to be that the C. P. E. should not discriminate 
 against the U. B. K. E. ?— A. The U. B. E. E. did not bother us at all. It was this 
 disagreement with the company that made us strike. 
 
 Q. If there had been no strike with the TJ. B. E. E., you would have no agreement ? 
 —A. No. 
 ;. Q. So that in the last analysis that is the v/ay it happened ? — A. I suppose so. 
 Q. Your action would increase the power of the union there in its fight. That is 
 what you wanted ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. If you had an agreement with the C.P.N, people, how would you guarantee 
 that they could rely on your good faith if you people yourselves don't regard your con- 
 stitution ? — A. When we were ordered out by one of the telegrams we didn't take any 
 notice. Our agreement was kept with the management until they broke it. 
 
 Q. You give the public the idea that you don't care anything about contracts ? 
 — A. If the public looks at it right they see where the company did not hold to their 
 contract. 
 
 • Q. What reason has this commission to thinlc that the real feeling of the whole 
 160 men is in favour of your action, and you tell us that the whole 160 were bound, 
 notwithstanding the fact that they got no notice, although you carried this resolution 
 at only one meeting, and trampled on the constitution ? — A. It is evidently the case. 
 Assuming the strike to be declared, no one ever went back to work. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Were there not a good many of the men who wanted to go back to work ? — A. 
 There was one. I don't know of any others who wanted to go back. 
 
 Q. Have there not been many of your men complaining about the strike and say- 
 ing they would like to be back at work ? — A. They never said anything about it to me. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. If the union lived rigidly up to the contracts with employers and to their con- 
 stitutions they would have a much better show in the estimation of the public ? — A. 
 But suppose the C. P. E. forced you as they did us— you cannot do anything else. 
 
 SHEFF THOMPSON— Victoria, May 14. 
 36a— 124 
 
180 •■ MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSlOlt 
 
 S-4 EDWARD Vlt.,'A. I9b4 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. You were not bound to strike^other unions were handling the business ?;— A. 
 We were the only union handling the stuff. 
 
 Q. Is there not a baggageman's union on the trains ? — A. I don't know how it is 
 on the train. 
 
 By Mr. Bodivell : 
 
 Q. Mr. Estes said his grip \vould have been scab if he had got any one to bring it 
 down ? — A. The crew of the Charmer was handling express and baggage iip to t|ie 
 date of the strike. • 
 
 Q. That wharf was unfair, every ton of freight that stood on it was unfair, apd 
 doesn't that lead you to the conclusion that I am right that you picked out two or three 
 pieces of baggage for an excuse ? — A. No, we did not pick it out. There were 15 or 
 20 tons of freight. 
 
 Q. How did you disting-uish ? — A. We know where this stuff comes from. 
 
 Q. There was other freight on the wharf besides the 15 tons ? — A. Maybe the man 
 that owned the freight took it on. 
 
 Q. It would have to be handled by somebody ? — A. By the crew very likely. The 
 crew used to go right to the train and get the baggage and mail. None of the Van- 
 couver people touched that. 
 
 Q. What about the local freight taken from Vancouver to Victoria ? — A. It would 
 be taken down to the wharf and put right on the same boat. 
 
 Q. Your idea is the same as Mr. Estes ? — A. I know that 40 or 50 tons of freight 
 was on the Charmer. I know where the freight came from. 
 
 Q. Then, if the crew went up and got the freight it would not be scab ? — A. It 
 would be all right if the crew went up to the cars and took it out. 
 
 Q. What would you do with local freight from Vancouver to Victoria ? How 
 would you manage that ? — A. Where it was brought. down by somebody who was f£^iT, 
 and none of these scab men touched it, it would be all right. 
 
 Q. But all the teamsters were out, so that it would have to be a man's own team ? 
 —A. Yes. ' , , , 
 
 Q. So that means that the C. P. N. would be nearly impossible to carry any freight 
 without its being scab freight ? — A. It would be pretty hard. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. Do you remember a difficulty with reference to Mr. Alfred BuUey and a demand 
 made by the union concerning him ? — A. He had already belonged to the Steamship- 
 men's Union. ^ ' ' 
 
 Q. Was he to come out or you would strike ? — A. He had already belonged to the 
 Steamshipmen'a Society in Vancouver before we organized, and he was behind in dues. 
 I notified him, and his brother told him. and he got a little hasty about it. I Went to 
 him and he got hot-headed about it. It got so that the crew decided they would hot 
 go with him on that boat unless he paid his dues. They decided to walk ashore. 
 
 Q. They were violating the constitution in that case ? — A. That was how it was. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. He was a good man and the captain wanted to keep him ? — A. Yes, he was a 
 good man. The engineer did not want to lose him. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Is your union incorporated ? — A. We are a local union — not incorporated.- 
 Q. The whole organization is not incorporated ?— ^A. It is incorporated under the 
 Friendly Societies Act— only the Victoria division, 
 
 SHEFF THOMPSON— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDU/STMIA-L, DWPVTES IN BRITISH GOLUMBIA 181 
 
 SESSIONAL. PAPER No.. 36a 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. In discussing a strike in meetings have you ever heard the interests ,of the 
 public discussed ?-^A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you never considered the interests of the travelling public over the C.P.K. 
 when you were considering as to what was scab freight ? — A. Our agreement about 
 scab freight was not to delay the mails, passengers, baggage or anything like that. 
 That was our agreement — that we would keep the boats running. 
 
 Q. The term scab only applied to freight — not passengers' baggage ? — A. Passen- 
 gers' baggage could be handled without any outsiders touching it. It came in on the 
 train and the crew go and get the baggage. 
 
 Q. And if it were handled in that way that kind of freight was not objected to ? — 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. That is the custom, is it ? — A. Yes, the crew always go up to the train. 
 
 Q. If that had not been the custom — supposing the crew did not bring the baggage 
 over from the train to the boat and there was a strike, the crew would not then be able 
 to do that ? — A. No, I should not think they would. 
 
 Q. They would be acting as substitutes ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you worked in other places than British Columbia ? — -A. In 'Frisco. 
 
 Q. How do the wages compare with here ? — A. Better down there. 
 
 Q. For longshoremen ?■ — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How are the hours ? — A. Shipping coal is 50 cents an hour, carrying grain 55. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. What is it here ? — A. Here it is 40 cents. 
 
 Q. Do you belong to the Longshoremen's Union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Can you work at either occupation ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. There is nothing to prevent you ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Would you be allowed to work in San Francisco if you went down ? — A. I 
 would have to transfer my book to another local there — from here to there. 
 
 Q. Is there an international organization ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What per capita do you pay to the international ?— A. Two bits per member 
 every quarter. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Who is putting up the funds in this strike ? — ^A. We are doing it ourselves. 
 I am working at something else. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. How many men are on strike — the whole 160 ? — A. Quite a number are work- 
 ing in some other occupation. 
 
 Q. How many do you think ?-^A. About 50 or 60. 
 
 Q. What do you make a month — men in your crafts ?— A. Deckhands' wages are 
 $40, and $50 for firemen. 
 
 Q. So that the men represent about $45 a month or $50 ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. If you do not succeed in bringing the C.P.E. to time, what are you going to 
 do ? — A. Work at something eise. We are not asking every union to go out in sympa- 
 thetic strike. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. What amount has been contributed to the support of the strike ? — A. I have no 
 idea. We have been out now about two months on the 16th. 
 
 Q. That represents about- $4,500 wages lost ?— A. I suppose so. 
 
 Q. I suppose there has been nothing like that contributed ?^A. No. 
 
 SHEFF THOMPSON— Victoria, M^y 14. 
 
182 IIINUTES Ol" EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 190* 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. You pay these men. Where do you get the money from ? — A. We are not pay- 
 ing them. 
 
 Q. Tou have been giving them something — you pay for their meals ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Do you get any assistance from the international body ? — A. No, none' "that 1 
 knovc of. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. The U.B.E.E. are not givng you anything ? — A. I don't know. 
 Q. You are the secretary ? — A. I am not acting in that capacity. The local 
 unions of this town are helping us. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. All unions are making contributions. I would like to know if there is any 
 fixed sum ? — A. I don't know as to that. 
 
 Q. You speak in the constitution of the use of arbitration. Do you think strikes 
 can be settled by arbitration. — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Where the state insists that the parties should come together ? — A. I don't know 
 as to that. 
 
 Alfred H. Bullet, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You are the treasurer of the Seamen's Union ? — A. I am. 
 
 Q. Have you been distributing money to the strikers since the strike was on ? — A. 
 Yes, we have. 
 
 Q. Where do these funds come from ? — A. They come from the outside unions 
 here. They give us contributions at different times. 
 
 Q. Get anything from the U.B.E.E. ?— A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Not since the strike started ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Nothing from Vancouver at all ?— A. We have had contributions from the 
 headquarters — our own headquarters of the B.C.S.S. in Vancouver. 
 Q. Not the headquarters committee of the strikers ? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Any money from any points in the States ?— A. I think this money that came 
 from the headquarters came from the United States, but I could not say exactly where 
 it came from. 
 
 Q. Where are the headquarters of the U.B.E.E. ? — A. I could not tell you. 
 
 Q. What proportion of the money you have received comes from the hgadquartera ? 
 — A. I should say about $200 since the strike. The majority of our members here have 
 been able to get work, and some had a little saved to tide them over. 
 
 Q. You at one time were not a member of the union ? — A. Since June 1 last year 
 in the Vancouver union. I had not got my transfer to this union. We are practi- 
 cally one body, but our book there is just the same as over here. If we paid here it is 
 the same as over there. 
 
 ALFRED H. BTJLLET— Victoria, May 14. 
 
Oir INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 183 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. What was this difficulty about your employment on the Charmer ? — ^A. I ran 
 behind on my dues and was a little stubborn and refused to pay. The dues to the 
 Vancouver society. 
 
 Q. There was a little difficulty between you and them ? — A. Yes, a sort of family 
 squabble. j 
 
 Q. And the men here threatened to walk out unless you were discharged ? — A. 
 If, I refused to pay my dues. 
 
 Q. They threatened the officers of the ship to walk out unless you were discharged ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That was when ? — A. The first of February this year. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. The captain had to put you oil that night ? — A. The captain laid me off, 
 
 Q. What time of the night was it when they made this demand on the captain ? 
 — A. I could not say that. They had been at me all day and several times that even- 
 ing. 
 
 Q. The captain came down to the engine-room to see if it was true ? — A. I cannot 
 say as to that. I was in the firemen's room at the time. I was let out about a quarter 
 after two, before the boat sailed. 
 
 Q. Don't you know they came down just H)ef ore the boat sailed and made this 
 demand, that if you were not put out the boat could not go out ? — A. They were 
 around there all evening. 
 
 Q. They didn't go to the captain ? — A. I cannot say about that. 
 
 Q. Didn't they come down and tell the captain a little while before the boat sailed 
 that she could not sail, and as a matter of fact he had to put you off ? You know the 
 captain did not want to dismiss you ? — A. I cannot say as to that. All I know is 
 that the engineer came and told me that the captain had orders to let me out. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What position were you in ? — A. Fireman. 
 
 Q. What time of the night was it ? — A. About a quarter after two in the morning. 
 
 Q. Who was the man who was leading this movement against you ? — A. I don't 
 Icnow any particular man was leading the movement against me. I presume it was 
 the union itself against all men not paying up their dues. 
 
 Q. Who was the most prominent party in getting you off the boat ? — A. The Van- 
 couver headquarters had instructed Sheff Thompson to see about it. 
 
 Q. He had charge of these eviction proceedings ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And he was secretary of this local union ?^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How was the quarrel settled up ? — A. I still refused to pay and got off. I 
 finally settled up with them. They held a meeting and they held out that I would 
 have to pay up, and finally I did pay up. It was practically settled by myself. I 
 felt that they were right in demanding that I should pay up. 
 
 Q. But you didn't feel that until you were out of work for a good while ?— A. 
 That did not bother me. 
 
 Q! How long were you out of work ? — A. I suppose about three weeks. 
 
 Q. Was it through your brother's persuasion that you gave in ? — A. No. I 
 thought the thing over myself and thought it was foolish of me. 
 
 By Mr. A. B. Bulky : 
 
 Q. Was this the first intimation you had of the trouble — that you would be ex- 
 pected to leave the boat ? Nothing ever said before that ? — ^A. About two months 
 before thai), I guess. 
 
 Q. And was the matter of the dues the only thing in connection with you and 
 the union ? — ^A. Certainly. 
 
 . ALFRED H. BULLEY— Victoria, May 14. 
 
184 MINUTES OF. ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll.^ A. 1904 • 
 
 Q. Was it that date, the day of the strike on the boat, was that thefirst intima- 
 tion that the . Charrner got that yon would be expected to quit that boat ?^ — A:.: About 
 Sunday afternoon. . , , ,,,,,,,,, 
 
 Q. For twenty-four hours before the official action was taken ? — ^A. About thiirty- 
 iiix hours. . , , , 
 
 Q. Was there any conversation between yourself and Sheff Thompson and the 
 second engineer of the Charmer before the final action was taken ?— -A. No. 
 
 Q. None whatever ? — A. No. : 
 
 Q. And were you aware at the time that the second engineer knew unless yo,u- paid 
 your dues you would have to leave the boat ? — A. I don't know as he did. ; 
 
 Q. You don't remember any conversation between you and Sheff Thompson ?-r-A. 
 Well, yes, that was on the next Monday. i 
 
 Q. Then you know there was a conversation took place that the engineer,, tjjft, 
 officer that hired you, knew the fact that 'f you ditl rot pay the dues, you would be 
 aeked to leave the boat ? — A. Now that I remember, that is right. 
 
 Mr. A. B. BuLLEY. — Mr. Bodwell has brought out that none of the officers kneW be- 
 forehand about this trouble until the last minute — they were notified 24 hours, at all' 
 events. The second engineer hired all the men, and he was aware of the fact that Ve ' 
 were going out on Monday night, 36 h^urs previous. ' ''' 
 
 His Lordship. — ^Better get the second engineer here. 
 
 Mr. Howe. — The point I think the commission is interested in is to know whether 
 the men would take action of that kind. 
 
 Mr. BuLLEY. — As near as I can make out from Mr. Bodwell's questions, he is try- 
 ing to bring out the fact that the union would leave the steamship company in the hole 
 any time they felt like it. I say in this case they had 36 hours' notice — the second 
 engineer had — George Brownley is his name. 
 
 His Lordship. — You might have him here. 
 
 By Mr. Bulley : 
 
 Q. You were working on the steamer Danube at the time of the strike ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Could she have left the port of Victoria that night ? — A. Certainly not, because ' 
 ber engine broke down just as they were ready to start. 
 
 Q. Was that the fault of incompetence on the part of the crew ?— ^A. I cannot say 
 as it was. I was not there at the time that it happened. When I went on watch St' 
 twelve o'clock the engine was out of working condition anyway. 
 
 Q. You are prepared to swear that the strike had nothing to do with the delay to' 
 the Danube f — A. Certainly not. ■ ^ i ! 
 
 Q. Can you give us the name of the chief engineer of the boat ? — A. Bethune — I 
 don't know his first name. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : ., : 
 
 Q. I see from the constitution that any member expelled shall not be reinstated tO' 
 membership. Is it intended that he shall never be eligible again ? 
 
 Mr. Bulley. — ^You see in a case of this kind there are always loopholes we can get| 
 through. I might say it is not our intention to oppress any man or deprive him of hi;^ 
 livelihood, but rather help nim gain it. If the man is in any way a decent man. the 
 rules would cover that. 
 
 His Lordship. — That rule is applicable only to people who offend against criminal' 
 law ? 
 
 Mr. Bulley. — ^Yes. 
 ALFRED H. BULLEY- VictorU, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRlflSB COLUMBIA IK 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By His Lordship ; 
 a Q. We heard this morning that this was a division of the society — is that ti 
 eeparate lodge hy itself ? — A. No, they are all supposed to work as one body. 
 
 Q. The entire body is not incorporated as one body — only the local division incor- 
 porated by itself ? — A. The B.C.S.S. is an incorporated body. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : ■ 
 
 Q. This branch cannot be incorporated. It is the society which is incorporated ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And this is a division of that society ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. It has not the same jurisdiction as the Vancouver part ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Vancouver is the headquarters and the officers live there ? — A. We have a presi- 
 dent and secretary there, and then we have our chairman and division here.. 
 
 Q. You are subject to the orders of the Vancouver union ? — A. Yes. That is 
 governed by the votes of all the members of the society. 
 
 Q. 160 members — that is the number of members of the Victoria society ?^— A. 
 Yes, that is their number now, but that w^s not the number at the time of the strike. 
 It increased a little after the time of the strike. I should imagine there are about 120 
 there. 
 
 Q. How many are there in Vancouver ? — A. About 120. 
 
 Q. So that at the present time this branch is larger than the headquarters ? — A, 
 —Yes. 
 
 Q. About 280 men all told ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Arthur Marion, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are a member of the Plumbers' Union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I understand there was. a statement made by Mr. Wilson about being posted 
 in the Labour Hall, and that you wish to say something about that ? — A. According to 
 the statement made by Mr. Wilson, the Plumbers' Union coerced a man to leave his 
 shop. They called a meeting and took me as the man to come and refute this state- 
 ment. 
 
 Q. He says somebody posted him up in the Labour Hall in letters big enough 
 for the blind to feel ? — A. It is posted up in the Labour Hall — shops that are unfair. 
 I never saw it, but it might have been there. 
 
 Q. Shops that are unfair are posted in the Labour Hall ? — A. Yes. He iiuulc a 
 statement that the Plumbers' Union coerced one of his employees to leave the shop. 
 
 Q. You say that is not so ? — A. Yes. The ' Colonist ' has it : ' This man came 
 back to him in less than a month and wished to be employed again, as he could get 
 only three days a week work (to the best of the witness' recollection) at the union shop 
 where he had found employment.' That is false altogether— no such thing ever hap-, 
 pened. Then he made a statement : ' He could not say whether it was the Journey- 
 men Plumbers' Union that posted his firm, but he thought it was done by Colbert, the 
 secretary of that body.' Colbert was never secretary of the Plumbers' Union. 
 
 Q. Did soine one post him up ? — A. Well, that might be so. Then he said that 
 his firm paid the same wages as under the union scale. How could the Plumbers' 
 Union call his shop unfair if he paid the union wages ? 
 
 Q. That is what is meant by an unfair shop ? — A. Yes. That would be an un- 
 fair shop, and he made the statement that he paid $2.50, $3 and $3.50. If he paid the 
 union scale how could the shop be unfair ? That is all we want them to do. 
 
 ARTHUR MARION— Victoria, May 14. 
 
186 MmVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Doesn't it mean more than that a man should pay the scale ? — A. No, and 
 eight hours a day, and that was the scale of wages. 
 
 Q. You say no shop would be posted as unfair that paid the union rate of wagis? 
 — A. Certainly not. That is if they employed labour that was not union. 
 
 Q. Have they got to employ union men ? — ^A. If he made his shop a union shop 
 he would agree to the rules of the Plumbers' Union. 
 
 Q. But we want to get at the unfair shop. You said that was one that did not 
 pay union wages. It appears he has got to have union men as well ? — A. Of course, 
 the shop is supposed to have union men or otherwise it is an unfair shop, but you must 
 understand that we use every kind of friendly means to give the men a chance to join 
 the union before we call it an unfair shop. 
 
 Q. What interested us most was the fact that he was posted in the Labour Hail, 
 which is a public place, as a man who ran an unfair shop ?— A. It is not exactly « 
 public place. It is the place where most of the union men meet. It is to let thorn 
 know which are unfair shops. 
 
 Q. Would it not be better to have a white-list — men who employ union men, in- 
 stead of singling out men who don't, and posting tliem up as a black-list ? — A. We 
 cannot compel them to employ union men. 
 
 Q. But when you do that sort of thing you are engendering a certain amq^unt of 
 ill-will towards these people ? — A. It is one of the union's proper means — it is legiti- 
 mate. 
 
 Q. But the legitimate purpose could be effected by posting up men who do employ 
 union labour ? — A. It would be the same thing. 
 
 Q. It might be the same thing, and it seems to me a less invidious way ? — A. 
 Which is the easiest way to get over it ? There are so few shops that are unfair. 
 
 Q. I don't know how you look at it, but people are not entitled to take all kinds 
 of liberties with other people's names any more than you have a right to put up a 
 photograph of any man there ? — A. We don't propose to take liberties with any man. 
 All we want is to do what is right, and keep within the law. 
 
 Q. There are only some 11 or 12 shops in the city, and it would not take much 
 more space to post up the men who employed union men and leave the others severely 
 alone 1 — A. If it were so that that would be the best, of course I can only leave that 
 to the union to judge. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. What was the real reason — that he did not pay union wages or pay union men? 
 — A. He does not pay union wages or employ union men. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Doesn't he pay that rate quoted there — $2.50, $3 and $3.50 ? — A. He does not 
 pay union wages. That is the union scale, and he doesn't pay that. He may pay some 
 $2.50, but he does not pay $3.50. 
 
 By Mr. Bodiuell : 
 
 Q. How do you know that ?— A. I cannot say how he keeps his books, but I have 
 spoken to his men. I am acquainted with his plumber, and he has told me that he 
 does not get $3.50. 
 
 Q. Would he be entitled to $3.50 under the union scale ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You don't think Mr. Wilson would make a statement of that kind without its 
 being correct ? — A. He has made three statements here 
 
 Q. You cannot say, except from hearsay ?— A. I can only say from the man who 
 works for him. 
 
 Q. He may be paying it now. How long ago did you speak to that man t— A. 
 That was two or three months ago. He might be paying it now. 
 ARTHUR MARION— Victoria, Maj 11. 
 
Oy INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 187 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Is it an open shop ?^A. Yes. 
 Q. Always has been ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. -You- complained about him, saying the union got one of hig men away ?— A. 
 I don't know the man's name. I have never heard of anything. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. This man is in business for himself in the city. His name was not given ? — A. 
 I don't think there was any such a thing done by the members. 
 
 Q. You can only say of your own knowledge it did not occur ? — A. How could he 
 be coerced away from a union shop — if he was in a union shop. 
 
 Q. Don't you allow men who are not union men to work in a union shop ? — A. [f 
 a man goes into" a shop and he is not a union man, he is met by the men in the shop, 
 and they try to get him to join the union. If he does not join the steward goes to 
 the boss, and then the boss will have to fire that man. 
 
 Q. This man might not have been a union man when he came to the shop. He 
 could beconje one after he came to the shop ? — A. I don't think there ever was such a 
 man — that it ever occurred. I would surely know. 
 
 Q. How would you find out ? — A. He said this man worked for a year after that, 
 and the union was not in force then. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. I think the mistake is this. This man is not a plumber but a tinsmith — 
 ' Some seven or 8 years ago I had trouble with the union. One hand left and joined 
 the union through the pressure of the Tinsmiths' Union ?— A. Yes, but it goes out to 
 the public in tlie Colonist — — 
 
 Q. The Colonist is responsible for that. Mr. Wilson said he understood it was 
 the Journeymen Plumbers Association that posted him. He was asked the name of 
 the president and he said he did not know. He was asked the name of the secretary, 
 and he said he thought it was Colbert — he did not say it was the secretary who posted 
 him ?— A. Certainly the Colonist gives that impression to the public. We have al- 
 ways gone by the Colonist 
 
 His Lordship. — Even members of Parliament are seriously misquoted. 
 
 John Russell, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You are the president of the Bricklayers' Union ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. Is your union incorporated in British Columbia ? — A. No, sir. 
 Q. How many men are in it ? — A. Forty. 
 
 Q. How long has it been in existence ? — A. Off and on ten years. 
 Q. Do the members take an oath or sign an obligation ? — A. They take a pledge. 
 Q. Wliat is the nature of the pledge ? Have you a copy of the constitution here ? 
 — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (Copy of Constitution produced and marked Exhibit J.) 
 
 Q. Are you affiliated with any other union? — A. Not now — we were at one time. 
 Q. What union ? — A. International Union of America. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. You had a local in that ? — A. Yes, we were a local union, affiliated with tha 
 International Union of America. 
 
 JOHN RUSSELL—Victoria, May 14. 
 
188 UmVTES OP EVIDENCE OF R07A.L COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll.) A; 1904 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. The International Union of Bricklayers ? — A. Yes, and masons. 
 
 Q. Where are the headquarters of that ? — A. Well, I cannot say from, memory 
 just now where the headquarters of it was. At that time when we were affiliated with 
 them it was so long since. It is fully ten years since. , . ., • 
 
 Q. You started out as a subordinate branch of that institution ? — A. Yes. , 
 
 Q. And then you separated from that ?— A. We disorganized and reorganized as 
 it local union about a year ago. 
 
 Q. Are you now affiliated with any organisation ? — A. No, we have made applica- 
 tion for affiliation with the National Trades and Labour Congress of Canada. 
 
 Q. You have applied to the National Trades and Labour Congress ? — A, Yes, 
 the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada. 
 
 Q. That is a new institution ? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. About how long has that been in existence ? — A. It is not very long since I 
 saw their constitution and by-laws for the first time. I only had a glance at it — J. can- 
 not tell you how long. It is in recent years. 
 
 Q. The headquarters are in Montreal ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Has your union ever had any difficulty with other unions or brotherhoods 
 here on account of separating from this international union ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Had you any dealings with the Trades and Labour Council in Victoria about 
 this question of leaving the international ? — A. No, we acted on our own initiative. 
 
 Q. What was your reason for leaving the international ? — A. Probably the union 
 became disorganized on accovmt of depression in trade — men were leaving, and so on. 
 When we took up the matter of the union again, we took it up on the local plan. 
 
 Q. How long did it remain disorganized? — A. Several years. 
 
 Q. Any pressure brought to bear on you from any source to join the international 
 tinion ? — A. No, not officially. 
 
 Q. Any pressure of any kind? — A. No, none." 
 
 Q. Have you ever been asked to join the international union? — A. Not officially. 
 There was some notice appeared in the papers — in the labour column of the Colonist — 
 to the effect that the Trades and Labour Council were considering the advisability of 
 its affiliating any union that was not affiliated with any international, but we were not 
 officially notified, but that was one of the reasons why, I think the only reason why, 
 delegates were withdrawn from the Trades and Labour Council. 
 
 Q. You don't belong to that body now ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You are about the only union in the city that does not ? — A. The only one that 
 I know of. 
 
 Q. Is it the policy of thfi local Trades and Labour Council to have all local unions 
 here amalgamated or affiliated with some international union ? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Would you consider that joining a Canadian organization is enough for your 
 purpose ? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. What is the reason given why these people join American or international 
 organizations ? — A. Well, there is a card system, and if you belong to the Internationial 
 Union of America, and you go to any city in America where that organization would 
 be, all you have got to do is to show your card and you ar^ allowed to work by con- 
 forming to the rules of the organization there. Otherwise you are not. 
 
 Q. That is the chief advantage? — A. That is the leading advantage. 
 
 Q. How is it you people are satisfied to belong to a Canadian organization ?^ A. 
 That is one of the circumstances that has influenced our joining our organization, be- 
 cause, if we go to any place in Canada where that organization exists. or a local union 
 holds a charter from that organization, we are allowed to work without any trouble. 
 
 Q. Why not the international? Your right to get work would be enlarged?— A. 
 We think that Canada is good enough and large enough for us. 
 
 JOHN RUSSELL— Victoria, May U. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL -BISrSTES .IN BRITISH (;0L11UB^A 1£9 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. I suppose, joining an international organization means giving up, a certain 
 amount of control over yourselves ?— A. It didn't in our case. We had the power to 
 say whether we would go on strike. If we did desire to go on strike and wished finan- 
 cial assistance from headquarters, we would require to submit the matter to them, and 
 if they decided against a strike and we decided to go on with it, we would not get any 
 allowance, and if they decided to call a strike, we were assessed for the other men on 
 strike. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. If a strike were called in the United States, you would we assessed ?— A., Yes, 
 according to this. 
 
 Q. You could not be compelled by the headquarters to go out on strike? — A. No. 
 
 Q. How would it be if the headquarters advised you to come out on strike, and 
 you would not adopt the advice? — A. They might suspend the charter, if we acted 
 contrary to their advice. 
 
 Q. In .that case, you would forfeit all the money you had paid in previously ? — A. 
 We only paid in a per capita tax to the headquarters, and that carried us on from 
 quarter to quarter. 
 
 Q. You didn't pay anything to insurance or benefit fund? — A. No, that was in 
 the per capita tax. Of course, they levied assessments on us for strikes in other 
 districts. 
 
 By His Lordship : ' 
 
 Q. Are there any non-union bricklayers in town ? — A. None that I know of. 
 Q. This includes masons as well ?— A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Boive: 
 Q. You made provision in your constitution for a board of arbitration?^ — A. Yes. 
 Q. Has there ever been occasion to use t^at ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. Has it worked satisfactorily? — A. All right so far. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. On how many occasions have you used the machinery ? — A. Twice. 
 Q. And you found them satisfactory ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You found the employers quite willing to deal with you ? — A. We Lave always 
 found our employers willing to deal with us. 
 
 Q. In looking through your constitution, there does not seem to be any provision 
 for a strike? — A. None whatever. 
 
 Q. What is the idea of that? — A. We go on the principle of considering matters 
 end discussing them first among ourselves, and then interviewing the employers, and 
 it creates a good feeling. There is no ill-feeling that I know of. We don't find there 
 is any need for it, as far as we are concerned. 
 
 Q. I notice here that the committee of the arbitration shall consist of three mem- 
 bers on one side and three on the other. If they fail to agree, they shail appoint a 
 seventh man, and if they cannot agree, the matter shall be brought before the uiiion _ 
 'for adjustment. Have you had anything about that ? — A. It has always been settled. 
 
 Q. What is the idea of bringing it before the union for adjustment? Is it that 
 their act might override the arbitrators ? — A. No. If the arbitration conimittee aild 
 those of the employers could not agree, the matter would be brought by the arbitration 
 committee before the whole, and get their opinion on it as to what was best to do. 
 
 Q. Then, you believe that strikes are prevented sometimes by having this provision 
 for arbitration? — A. We have always got along without a strike in this town for four- 
 teen years now. 
 
 Q. Are the wages paid to your craft here equivalent to those paid in the east — 
 what wages are paid to bricklayers? — A. $4.50 a day of eight hours. When I came 
 here at first, it was ten hours a day and $5. 
 
 JOHN RUSSELL— Victoria, May ]<. 
 
190 MWUTES OF ETIDimCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII.. A. 1904 
 
 Q. I suppose there has not been much cutting of wages in your craft? — A. Dur- 
 ing the depression in trade there was quite a lively and. unhealthy competition in ;that 
 Tespect. During that time the union was disorganized, though there was a generally 
 recognized scale of wages paid by employers. Still, the men who were working were 
 very few, and quite a number of them took small jobs on their own account. 
 
 Q. I see you do not allow a man to take a contract for over $300 ? — A. Yes, now. 
 Not then. 
 
 Q. Do you think the union is liable to disorganization in hard times ? — A. It is 
 always a severe test for a union when hard times are prevailing. It has a tendency 
 to disrupt them somewhat. They are not so good as in a rising market. Some men 
 cannot stand adversity so well as others, probably on account of having larger families, 
 and from being improvident themselves during good times. 
 
 Q. What do you say about outside agitators ? — A. If an outside agitator came 
 along to me or my union we would consider very carefully what he said, and if it was 
 not reasonable and likely to be nearly correct, we would not have them at all. 
 
 Q. There would be no need for outside people coming and talking to you about 
 your relations with your employers ? — A. No need for that in any union. 
 
 Q. What remedy would you suggest against the outside agitator coming in ? — A. 
 The remedy I would advocate is to consider everything that comes up, no matter what 
 it is, that affects the members of the union — consider it on fair, reasonable lines, and 
 if a man comes along with a suggestion or a proposition that is not reasonable it 
 would not be good either for the men or the employers to disorganize the course of 
 trade. We would just simply turn him down. 
 
 Q. You don't consider you are in need of outside intervention ? — A. No ; we can 
 settle OUT own affairs. We can judgo of our own affairs better than any one, and we 
 do it. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : ^ 
 
 Q. Does your union believe in sympathetic strikes ? Supposing the teamsters 
 were on strike here — would you handle bricks they hauled ? — A. The union would 
 decide that. If the conditions under which the teamsters came out, or any other 
 organization, appealed to us strongly as being right we would very likely support 
 them. 
 
 Q. That is refuse to handle the bricks ? — A. I don't know that we would go that 
 length, but we would say that they were quite right in going out on strike and might 
 contribute to the strike fund. The other question would require to be decided by tho 
 union. There are a number of Chinamen employed in the making of bricks now, and 
 we are against that — not that we have any antipathy to them, but we think that 
 Chinamen don't live as we live and the competition would be very unfair. They can 
 afford to work for less wages than we can, and living of course being very much less, 
 and there are few white men who would care to live as Chinamen do. 
 
 Q. Don't you use Chinese helpers ? — A. No, we agreed to have white labour 
 instead of Chinese labour many years ago, and that has been acted upon since. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. What do you do with the brick where Chinese labour is handled ! — A. Wo 
 used them. 
 
 Q. You don't refuse to handle bricks in that way ! — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. What means do you use then for impressing your principles upon the em- 
 ployers of labour ? — ^Nothing more than argument ? — A. Just reason with them. In- 
 terview them and get their view on the subject and give them ours, and it creates a 
 feeling of confidence and worlcs nicely. Wo have never had difficulty with our 
 employers. 
 
 Q. And you expect gradually your views wiU prevail with omployers with refer- 
 ence to Chinese help ?— A. Yes. In the making oJ bricka it is a hard job. There is 
 JOHN RUSSELL—Victoria, May 14. 
 
OJV UfDUSTRIAL DI8PVTE8 IN BBITI8B COLUMBIA 191 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 a good deal of trotting about and hot work, and white men are not mindful abqut 
 doing it, and I think that has something to do with it. One of the brickmakera tried 
 white men but they did not seem to care about the job. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. And if you employed white men exclusively in making brick that would be 
 followed by an increased price and would affect your employment ? — A. The impres- 
 sion is that bricks could be made with white labour so that the same price as they arc 
 selling now could be maintained, and yet there would be a profit to the manufacturer 
 of bricks. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. The suggestion is that bricks are too high then ? — A. Well, bricks bring a good 
 fair price. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. There is money in brick ? — A. Yes, there is quite a competition, but there is 
 a combine. 
 
 Q. You think, then, that there is no occasion for strikes — that conciliation would 
 cover the whole ground ? — A. That clause was struck out of our constitution and 
 by-laws, acting on the principle that we had proved by experience in our case that it 
 was not necessary. I don't think any of the trades have had more to contend with 
 in that line than we have, because in the first instance we had 10 hours a day to work. 
 That was gradually reduced. Some of course advocate 8 hours and the same wages, 
 but the wiser plan was adopted to take 9 a day instead of 8. Now we have 8. 
 
 Q. Will a man ordinarily lay as many brick in 9 hours as 10 — day in and day out ? 
 A. Yes, I think so. I think he would probably lay more. That seems strange, but it is 
 true. Ten hours is too long — eight is enough for any man to work. 
 
 ^y Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. And at the end of the year he would have been able to lay more ? — A. Yes, I 
 think so. It appears to be the case in the experiments tried in Great Britain, on gov- 
 ernment jobs and other matters. 
 
 Q. Do you think it is in the interests of labour generally that the hours of labour 
 should be reduced ? — A. Yes, I thinlv 8 hours is plenty, and if a man cannot do a good 
 fair Hay's work in that time I think anything more would be unfair. When you con- 
 sider the amount of mortar a man has to lay and the weight of the bricks he has to 
 lift, sometimes with two hands and always with one, it is quite a job. 
 
 Ey Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. What amount of bricks can a man lay in a day ? — A. It depends on the class of 
 brick — 2,000 brick a day would be a fair day's work. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. And the average brick weighs 5 and 6 pounds ? — A. Yes, then there is the mor- 
 tar to set these bricks in. 
 
 Q. Do you work the same number of hours a day, or do you arrange for a half- 
 holiday ? — A. We stop at four on Saturdays. Eight hours a day five days and 7 hours 
 en Saturday. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^It seems to me, Mr. Bussell, that if the presidents of other labour 
 unions were as honourable as yourself we would hear of very few strikes. 
 
 JOHN RUSSELL— Victoria, May 14. 
 
192 -IIINVTES OP ^TIDflNCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD V|l., A, 1904 , 
 • A. T. GowARD, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Tou are the manager of the street railway company here I? — A. I am, the Tiri- 
 tish Columbia Electric Railway Company, Limited. 
 
 Q. How many employees are there ? — A. It varies somewhat — about 100 regular 
 employees. 
 
 Q. Are they formed into a union ? — A. They are. 
 
 Q. These are the by-laws and constitution ?: — A. Yes. 
 
 (Constitution and by-laws Victoria Capital Division Street Railway Employees, , 
 109— Exhibit K.) 
 
 Q. Has the company any profit sharing arrangement ? — A. They have. 
 
 Q. You will explain what it is ? — A. The arrangement has only just been entered 
 into with the men. It is a profit sharing scheme by which, after a dividend at the rate 
 of 4 per cent is paid to the ordinary shareholders, any money available for dividends 
 is divided into three parts, two parts being paid to the ordinary shareholders and the 
 third part is divided in equal portions amongst the employees. A regular employee of 
 the company gets an equivalent of this third division. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. How long has he to be employed ? — A. One year. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Each man gets an equal part ? — A. Yes, no matter what his position is. 
 
 Q. Of a third over 4 per cent ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you find that induces satisfaction with their work? — A. It has only just 
 been tried. No payment has been made yet. The company's year ends on the 30th 
 June, when the first payment will be made. They appear to be very satisfied with it. 
 
 Q. Have you entered into a signed agreement? — A. I think, probably, the general 
 manager in Vancouver did, but there is no signed agreement here. 
 
 Q. Have you had any strike on the line ? — A. No, never had a strike. 
 
 Q. To what do you attribute that ? The men have come to you with grievances ? — 
 A. Oh, yes. We are always •frilling to meet the men and try and investfgate any 
 grievances, but there has never been anything of a serious nature brought up. 
 
 Q. In discussing grievances, do you meet a committee of the men ?— A. There is a 
 grievance committee appointed by the union, and we meet the grievance committee. 
 
 Q. How often has tnis grievanace conunittee had a grievance? — A. In the last 
 year I don't think we have had the grievance committee more than about three or four 
 times, and these were of no serious nature. 
 
 Q. Is it the experience of the officials of the company that some grievances arc 
 turned down before they reach the management? — A. Yes, it is. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. There is provision made for that in the constitution ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. This union has been in existence since 1899 ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Previous to that time, were the relations of the men with the company the 
 Bame — were they changed through the union being established? — A. No, I think not. 
 It was just about 1899 or 1898 that I was appointed manager. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Do you find, as a general rule, that th* men are reasonable in discussing these 
 grievances? — A. Extremely reasonable, 
 
 A. T. GOWARD— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 193 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. As a rule, are they capable men on the grievance committee ? Are they middle- 
 aged or young men?— A. Younger men, I think, rather than middle-aged. The offi- 
 cials of the union a;re principally composed of the younger men. 
 
 Q. How many are on the grievance committee ? — A. Three. 
 
 Q. Have you an agreement for any length of time as to wages? — A. Yes, up to 
 the 30th June, this year. 
 
 Q. When was that agreement entered into? — A. 30th June, last year. That is 
 the first yearly agreement. 
 
 Q. Do you find that the union keeps its side of the agreement ? — A. So far, yes. 
 
 Q. How long have you been unionized— A. Since 1899. 
 
 Q. How does the experience of the company with the men unionized compare with 
 them not unionized — A. I was only appointed just about the time the union was 
 formed, and I don't know very well how they got on before. I think that our relations 
 are exceedingly amicable. 
 
 Q. You found no difficulty in getting along with them as a union? — A. We have 
 not, 60 far. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. What does the union include ? — A. All regular employees of the company other 
 than foreman or the management. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I suppose if employers and union men were both reasonable there would be very 
 few strikes ? — A. Yes, I think so. 
 
 Q. Hardly any strike that could not be settled by conciliatory methods ? — A. If 
 both sides were reasonable. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. In engaging men — new hands — has the committee of the union any voice in 
 such matters ? — A. No, no voice. 
 
 Q. Is it necessary for the men you engage to join the union ? — A. Not compelled 
 to by the management, but they practically all do. 
 
 His Lordship : 
 Q. Are they affiliated with any other body ?^A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What body ? — A. Amalgamated Association of Street Eailway Employees of 
 America^ 
 
 Q. Where has that body got its headquarters ? — A. Indianapolis, I think it is. 
 Q. Have you the constitution of that body ? — A. Yes. 
 
 (Constitution of Amalgamated Association of Street Kailway of America — Exhi- 
 bit L.) 
 
 Q. Is there any provision under which the headquarters can call out the men here 
 on strike ? — A. No, the head department of the union have no authority to call the 
 men here out on stike. 
 
 Q. That is settled by the men themselves ?— A. Not entirely. If the local division 
 •wish to go on strike they have to refer to the head office of the American association. 
 
 Q. If they wish to participate in the funds ? — A. When they wish to go out on 
 strike. They are not allowed to go out on strike in any event without referring the 
 matter to headquarters. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. What is the penalty if they do ? — A. Expulsion from the Amalgamated Asso- 
 ciation, I believe. 
 
 A. T. GOWARD— Victoria. May, U. 
 
 360—13 
 
194 MINUTES or EVrDHNGE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That is in the constitution is It ?^-A. I believe so. 
 
 Q. There is no provision for assistance ?^— A. I don't know whether there is a pro- 
 T ision or not. ' 
 
 Q. There is a section here which seems to secure complete autonomy to the 
 men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Do you know the result of the recent street railway strike in Seattle — have 
 you any knowltdge of the circumstances ? — A. No. 
 
 (^ Don't know what brought it about ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you kn it/ th? local body are bound to refer to the headquarters if they 
 wish to strike — do you know anything a-bout the course pursued at headquarters ? — 
 A. Tliey send out the international president to look into the matter, I believe. 
 
 Q. Doj's ho interview the employers or simply go among the men ?— A. We have 
 had no actual experience. 
 
 Q. I see the executive board of the local division shall appoint a committee of not 
 less than three to investigate the case and wait upon the employers and try and settle 
 it at a first meeting. I should think that would imply he must see the management 
 and endeavour to settle the dispute. Was there not a strike in Vancouver ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Do you think it would facilitate such agreements as you have if unions were 
 incorporated ? — A. I really could not say as to that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. When you enter into an agreement with these people, do you enter into it 
 with the union or with individuals ? — A. I think with the union. 
 
 Q. On all your roads the same condition exists as here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How many employees are in the company altogether ? — A. There would be 
 800, or 350. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Perhaps you had better state where your company operates ? — A. In Vancou- 
 ver, Victoria and New Westminster. 
 
 By His Lordship : ' 
 
 Q. How many men altogether ? — A. I should say about 350. 
 
 Q. What are the monthly receipts of the road ? — A. About $20,000. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. I understood you to say there never was any strike on your lines ? — A. Not 
 with the present company. There was a strike in Victoria 8 or 9 years ago under 
 the old management. As to whether we dealt with the union a notice of the general 
 manager says — 'In accordance with an agreement made with your committee — ' that 
 is the way he puts it. 
 
 Q. That is members of the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In this participation in the profits the matter is entirely administered by tlio 
 management ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you not some other organization than this in connection with the union ? 
 — A. We have a sick benefit association which we have just organized about a week 
 ago. That is entirely amongst the employees. 
 
 A. T. GOWARD— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDVSTRTAL DISPUTES IN BRITISB COLUMBIA 195 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What are the chief features of that — so much a month ?— A. Fifty cents a 
 month is taken from each member of the association and put into a fund, and any 
 member who shall by reason of sickness or accident, be prevented from attending to 
 his usual duties shall be entitled to $1 a day up to and not exceeding $100 in any one 
 year under certain provisions. The company donated $200 to form a fund so that 
 the association could be started. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 
 Q. Do the company's officers handle the funds and do the collecting ? — A. Only 
 two, one of the clerks in the office and myself. I am president and he is the treasurer 
 and we look after the funds, but as members of the sick benefit association, not as 
 members of the office. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You are entitled to share in the fund ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe ; 
 
 Q. I understoood you to say the company are not connected with this as a com- 
 pany — they don't make any payments — regular payments ? — A. No, they just gave 
 a donation to start it. The association is the British Columbia Electric Railway 
 Sick Benefit Employees Association, run by the employees themselves — the local Vic- 
 toria division. 
 
 Q. Have you any agreement with the union as to hiring of non-union men ? — A. 
 No agreement. 
 
 Q. Recognition of the union does not involve that in this case ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. The practical effect is if a man is employed he joins the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Naturally it is in his interest to do so ? — A. I think it is. 
 
 Q. Could he be a member of this association and not belong to the union ? — A. 
 Yes, this association has nothing to do with the union. 
 
 Q. Do you know about the wages paid to street railway men in other places in 
 Canada — how it compares ? — A. I think we pay about the best or as good as any. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How do they compare with Seattle ? — A. I don't know just what they are 
 paying. I think they made some raise the last few weeks. I imagine Seattle are 
 paying a little more now, but Seattle carry 1,000 passengers to our 10. 
 
 Q. What is the amount per hour ? — A. 20 cents the first year, 22 cents the second 
 and third, 23 the fourth and fifth, and 25 cents after the fifth. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. I think in Toronto it is 14 cents an hour ? — A. I think that is the minimum. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Of course rents are a good deal higher in Seattle than here ? — A. Yes, cer- 
 tainly. 
 
 E. N. McMiCKiNO, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. You are the manager of the Telephone Company ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 Q. How many men do you employ? — A. The number varies from about 12 to 14 
 altogether, inside and outside. It varies according to circumstances. 
 
 36a — 13J R. >f. McMICKING— Victoria. May 14. 
 
196 illNUTES OF E7IDENVE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Your company operates only in Victoria? — A. Yes. We connect with a line 
 to Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. Are these men unionized ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. How many women employees have you? — A. Twenty-two. 
 
 Q. Ever have any strikes? — A. No. 
 
 Q. How do you account for that? — A. Well, I don't know; fair dealing, I pre- 
 sume, and good sense and judgment on both sides. We have always found, so far, the 
 golden rule to be a sufficient guide. 
 
 Q. Live and let live? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you enter into wage agreements for certain terms with the employees? — 
 A. Of course, they understand what their agreements are. There is no written engage- 
 ment, just a monthly hiring^some by the day — outside men, m fact they are engaged 
 by the hour. The inside men are all by the month. 
 
 Q. When the employees have a grievance, do they see you by a committee or in- 
 dividually ? — A. They have never had one so far. 
 
 Q. Never had any complaint ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. How long have you been manager of this company? — A. Twenty-two years — 
 that is, since the organization in 1880. It is going on twenty-three years. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. You had some trouble recently? — A. Not here. 
 
 Q. Were your linemen not ofE work? — A. Yes, out of sympathy for men in Van- 
 couver. There is no disagreement here between the management and the ihen; ' 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. They went out in sympathy with the men in Vancouver ? — A. Yes, otir com- 
 pany belongs to the same company, but is operated separately. All the telephones in 
 British Columbia are under the' saine general management, although they are operated 
 as separate systems. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. They have a number of separate charters for different places ? — A. Yes, they 
 have been acquired by them. 
 
 Q. And operated from a general management ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Yet each corporation is distinct as a corporation, and has its own particular 
 officers? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. What they call a merger — a sort of capitalistic combine. You say these men 
 went out in sympathy with the Vancouver men— was that after the merger took place ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. They regarded themselves, evidently, as employees of the one concern ? — A. No, 
 so far as employment is concerned, they have nothing to do with the company beyond 
 the office here. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. Are they in a uoion? — A. Some are, I think. 
 
 Q. How did the matter end here ? — A. It took quite a time to end here. They 
 went out in sympathy with the Vancouver employees, under the impression, I under- 
 stand, that they had been asked to go out. They were asked for sympathy, and they 
 thought the only way to extend their sympathy was to quit work, although they had 
 no grievance. The men in Vancouver went back to work in about a fortnight, or a 
 little more, and they were out here about five weeks. 
 
 Q. Why? — A. When they went out in Vancouver, there was no reference to the 
 men here at all, and I suppose the Vancouver men did not think they had anything to 
 
 R. N. McMICKING— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 197 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 do with the men down here. • For some reason, they were not included in any arranage- 
 ment that was made with the Vancouver company. They were out about five weeks. 
 
 Q. Why did they stay out ? — A. There was nothing very much to do, and the com- 
 pany did not feel like taking them back. 
 
 Q. They were locked out? — A. No, not locked out. They went out of their own 
 accord, and came back in the company's time. It v/as in winter, and there was nothing 
 really to do much, and of course the company did not want to furnish labour unless 
 they have it to furnish, although, had they not gone out, they could have worked on. 
 
 Q. So your work of installation was not hindered any ? — A. Not particularly. We 
 had some men on all the time, but not all. We had two outside men on. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. It was the union men who walked out — not the non-union men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did they notify you before they walked out? — A. Yes, we got notice about 
 noon, I think. They went out at two o'clock. 
 
 Q. They went out at two? — A. Yes. They were just finishing a job, and that was 
 really about the last work that was on. They finished that up, and then quit. 
 
 Q. How many of them were there? — A. Five. 
 
 EiCHARD Hall^ sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are a coal merchant here, Mr. Hall ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That is, you have the handling of what is called Dunsmuir's coal ? — A. Yps. 
 
 Q. The sole handling of the output of those companies of which he is manager ? — 
 A. Yes, we are agents for T)unsmuir coal. I should not say agents, because we buy 
 the coal. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. The company only sells to you ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. You are the sole dealers ? — A. We are the only ones who sell Dunsmuir's coal 
 in the city here. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Up to what time have you been able to get all the coal you required this year ? 
 — A. Until shortly after the strike occurred at Extension mines. 
 
 Q. What date ?— A. Up to about the first of April. There was a small quantity 
 came down after the strike was started. 
 
 Q. After that date what happened to your business ? — A. We have been short. 
 
 Q. Short since ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Can you give us an idea of the average amount youJiandled before April 1 ?— 
 A. Five months in the year we handled 700 to 800 tons a month for the winter months. 
 In the last of the season it drops off very materially. 
 
 Q. Since April 1 what have you got from the company ? — A. It is a very sjnall 
 quantity since April 1, not perhaps over 100 to 150 tons. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Altogether ? — A. Since April. That is household coal. We had a little coal 
 from Comox to supply the Driard House and others who can use that coal. It is not 
 a good coal for consumption-^it requires a considerable draft. 
 
 RICHARD HALL—Victpria, May 14. 
 
198 MINUTES OF EYIDHFUE OF'ROTAL GOMMISSlOlf' 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Household coal is the Extension coal ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. Not more than 150 tons ? — A. No, not more than that since April 1, 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you estimate to be the loss to your business by the strike ? — A. I 
 don't know as we have lost anything much by it. We had to get one car from Seattle. 
 
 Q. How much ? — A. Ninety tons. I think that car will yield us an Irish divid- 
 end from the looks of it. It is poor stuff. It is not properly screened — the run of the 
 mine. 
 
 Q. Did you have to pay as much or more than the Dunsmuir coal ? — A. About; 
 the same. 
 
 Q. It is a poor quality ? — A. It is not screened. They screen it at the mines on 
 the island. 
 
 Q. Neither you or the consumer gets as much for his money ?— A. The consumer 
 gets as much — we have to screen it. We sell it for the same price as the Dunsmuir 
 coal. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Has the price of coal increased since the strike ? — A. Yes, fifty cents a ton. 
 We increased it 50 cents. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Do you make as much profit on the increase ? — A. We make a less percentage 
 of profit, because we pay bigger prices and only make the same market. The capital 
 invested is larger, with no greater margin of profit. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. You just hand over the increase to the consumers really ? — A. That is tho 
 idea. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. They have to burn the coal, and you have not ? — A. Yes, we burn some our- 
 selves. 
 
 Q. Wliat is the price of coal now ? — ^A. $6,50. 
 
 Q. If this strike continues, where do you propose to get your supply of coal — from 
 Seattle 1 — A. Yes, we will have to go to Seattle for it — either there or Comox. We 
 will have to investigate and see if we cannot do better than we have done. 
 
 Q. Are the Fernie mines too remote ? — A. Yes, too expensive. 
 
 Q. I saw by the paper the other day that coal was coming from Japan ? — A. Yes, 
 to be used on two big freighters on the C.P.R. 
 
 Q. Is coal likely to come from there if the strike continues ? — A. I don't think 
 g^ — not far house purposes.^^We can get it better from the ot-er side. 
 
 Q. The coal mines of ^feshington would have the chief hold on the situation ?— 
 A. If the strikes continue here they will have the supplying of all the coal on the 
 co-st, including British Columbia — that is the cities of Vancouver and Victoria. 
 
 Q. Washington coal will have the call ? — A. Yes. The Nanaimo mine has been 
 running right along and they have been sending their coal here as before. They have 
 raised the price. Their agent here is selling coal at $0.50. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Doesn't want to be put on the unfair list 1 
 RICHARD HALL— Victoria, May 14. 
 
OAT INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 193 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q Do you handle some coal from the Wellington collieries ? — A. That ia the 
 Comox coal ? 
 
 Q. Yes, Comox coal ? — A. Yes, we handle steam coal from some of the indus- 
 tries in the town. Perhaps I might say our sale is confined to the Driard House, the ' 
 Gas Works, \iio Chemical Works and other industries of that kind. They buy the coal 
 generally direct from the collieries. 
 
 Q. Could you tell us the quantity of steam coal coming in per month when things 
 are going properly ? — A. No, I could not say. 
 
 Q. Could you give us an idea of that ? Most of it comos from Union ? — A. 
 Yes, and Nanaimo steam coal as well. 
 
 Q. The Union coal is stopped on account of the strike at Cumberland ? — A. The 
 last advice I had was they were turning out 400 or 500 tons a day. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Can you tell us the effect on business generally ? — A. Coming on after the 
 cool weather it has not had much effect. The people have not felt the effect as they 
 vould have in the fall when the winter season is coming on. Of course the strike at 
 Extension has increased the importation from Seattle, and has taken the place more or 
 less of the local coal. 
 
 Q. What about the merchants who have business in Ladysmith ? — A. It is going 
 to seriously affect them. The difference in the expenditure — of the money paid miners, 
 $70,000 or $75,000, is going to make a difference and is making itself felt among 
 the merchants at Ladysmith and Victoria. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. There is a good deal of jobbing trade done ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What would have been the situation if this situation had taken place in the 
 fall ? Would it have been really a matter of difficulty to furnish coal to the consu- 
 mers here ? — A. I think it would have raised the price of coal to more than what it is, 
 because the Settle mines and Comox would have been taxed to their utmost in sup- 
 plying the local markets as well as California. The California market is a market 
 they all seek. That is where they make theij money. These towns of Seattle, Victoria 
 and Vancouver, so far as household consumption goes, are not big consumers, only in 
 the way of coal for cooking. We have short winters here, and in the summer time no 
 coal is used to speak of. In fact our yard runs behind in the summer time. There is 
 not much profit for the 4 or 5 months of summer. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. How is it the California marlcet calls for so much coal ? — A. There is a great 
 deal of coal used in the industries throughout the state, and there is a large popula- 
 tion. They have no coal down there. San Francisco has a population of 300,000 alone, 
 and is a big consumer. Then there is a fair quantity of wood used in Victoria. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. You think »he probability is that if the strike occurfcd in the fall the price of 
 coal v/ould have been higher than $6.50 a ton— probably $7 ?— A. I think it would 
 likely have been. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Have you any suggestions to make as to how a strike should be settled ? — A. 
 That is getting into the political arena now, is it not ? 
 
 Q. It could not very well be settled by politicians ?— A. Well I think it willbe 
 eettled either through the Dominion House— the Dominion House is the one I think 
 
 RICHARD HALL— Victoria, May 14. 
 
200 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 should take hold of it and deal with the matter fairly and impartially both as regards 
 capital, and labour. Of course I am a believer in the Bill which has been brought in 
 by Mclnnes, in the first instance, conciliatory arbitration. I think that should be 
 followed by a compulsory arbitration Bill. I think capital and labour should be put 
 on the same level, and treated both fairly and equitably by the people who have the 
 administration of the affairs of the country. If labour has right on its side it should 
 be redressed, and capital is entitled to the same protection. I don't know that I am a 
 believer in small pay. I don't object to paying first-class wages. In fact, I am in 
 favour of that for a good day's labour. I lived in this country before we had 5-cent 
 pieces, and I am not used to it yet. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Two bits is your limit ? — A. Sometimes make the limit a little higher. 
 
 Joshua Kingiiam, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are in the coal business ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You buy your coal from Nannaimo ? — A. Yes. I represent the Westerii Fuel 
 Company, successors to the New Vancouver Coal Company. 
 
 Q. This strike does not affect your business ? — A. Not so far ; it has rather 
 increased it. 
 
 Q. It has helped you ? — A. A little, yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Has it increased both output and price?— A. Well, I don't know. The price 
 was increased by the management of the company. We in Victoria were selling our 
 coal 50 cents less than other agents and cities in the province, and they decided to 
 put us on the same level as the other cities. In Vancouver and New Westminster 
 coal has been $6.50 right along. All the dealers there were paying more than we 
 were. I don't think the strike has anything to do with it — simply with the manage- 
 ment of the company. Whether there will be any reduction when the strike is over 
 I could not say. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Who gets that extra profit ? — A. The company charge us the same as is charged 
 to the dealers in the other cities. 
 
 Q. The company, then, get the advantage of the rise in price ? — A. They were 
 practically making a concession to the consumers of Victoria — that was what it 
 amounted to. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. As they are charging less for coal sold here ?^A. Yes, than they were 
 charging in Vancouver and New Westminster — the dealers less. Of course^ if the coiii- 
 pany raise their prices we are limited to a certain margin and must increase accor-d- 
 ingly. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Have you been supplying Mr. Hall with coal during this strike ? — A. I helped 
 him out a little — not much. ■..■'■■ 
 
 JOSHUA KINGHAM— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITIsn COLUMBIA 201 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Do you know what amount of coal was being consumed for manufacturing 
 purposes ? — A. In ttis city ? 
 
 Q. Yes ? — A. Not a great deal. The Chemical Works are the largest consumers 
 from our company's mines, and they would consume probably 2,000 tons a year. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I suppose one effect of the strike would be to stimulate the output at Nanaimo ? 
 — A. I don't know. I understand they are not putting out as much as formerly, but 
 how much less I don't know. I think that it has not stimulated it very much. 
 
 Q. Have you been getting as much ? — A. I think slightly more than usuaL I 
 could not get sufficient to supply the demand that I have for outside parties. Take 
 for instance the Gas Works or other industries in the city. They applied to us for 
 coal, and we were not able to supply them, but we have been able to supply every 
 demand for domestic purposes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Would you be able to supply the demand for domestic purposes existing in the 
 winter time ? — A. No, I don't thinii we could. Of course I Suppose it would depend 
 upon the demand of the California market. 
 
 Q. It is more profitable for the company to sell there than here ? — A. I could 
 not say ; I don't know the California prices. 
 
 Q. I wanted to know why that market should have the preference ? — A. It is the 
 largest consumer, and would give big contracts. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Here it is a bt of small sales ? — A. Tes. 
 
 James D. McNiven, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. You are a member of some union her6 ?— A. Of the Typographical union, 
 
 Q. Do you hold any office in that union ? — A. No office. 
 
 Q. That is an international union ?— A. Yes, sir. I am vice-president for British 
 Columbia for the Dominion Trades and Labour Congress. 
 
 Q. Have you ever had anything to do with strikes ? — A. Very little. 
 
 Q. Strikes are not frequent in the newspaper business ? — A. In the offices 1 have 
 worked in we have had very little trouble. 
 
 Q. When you have a grievance, do you have a grievance committee ?^A. No, 
 sir. Each union office has a committee. I have always been in union offices. They 
 don't call it a grievance committee. Each office has a chapel, and they appoint one 
 member of the office as chairman of the chapel. If any difficulty arises, the chapel is 
 called together and the matter discussed. If they find it is going to cause trouble, the 
 chapel refers the matter to the union. The chapel is a small body, composed of mem- 
 bers of the Typographical Union employed in that particular office— the same thing as 
 
 a shop committee. , i , , , , , • • j- 
 
 Q. When the chapel considers a grievance should be looked into, it refers to the 
 
 unionand takes its opinion?— A. Yes. ,. , „ , 
 
 Q. What is done with regard to the employer — who interviews him? — A. J lie 
 
 union appoint a committee to interview the employer. 
 
 JAMES D, McNIVEN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
232 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. So grievances are sifted through two bodies ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The chapel composes all the union men employed in one office? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The union embraces all the men in all offices in that district? — A. Yes, it may 
 be a city or particular area of country. In some cities there are two unions ; in Mont- 
 real there is an English union and a French union. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. The chairman of the chapel is really the representative of the union in that 
 office? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. At all events, any grievances go to him first? — A. Yes, and he is supposed to 
 see that the laws of the union are observed in the office. It is his duty to report any 
 violation of union law to the union^violations either by the union men or employers. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. I suppose he could deal with the employer in minor grievances, himself? — A. 
 In a small matter it is sometimes done. 
 
 Q. Is the foreman included in the union ? — A. Yes, he is subject to the same regu- 
 lations as the men working under him. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. The printing business has got to be now that there are practically no non- 
 union printers? — A. None in the city, and very few along the coast. 
 
 Q. So that business or trade is pretty well unionized? — A. Yes, very well. 
 
 Q. Suppose an employer employs non-union members, what happens ? Can he do 
 that? — A. It is not usually the custom to do that where union men are available. If 
 an employer employs a non-union man, and there are union men available, the union 
 men in the office would probably quit work. Of course, before doing so they would 
 require to lay the matter before the union. They have not pov/er to quit work on their 
 own initiative; they must get the consent of the union. 
 
 Q. Any reference required to the international body? — A. Yes, if a grievance 
 occurs, the matter must be referred to the international union. If that is not done, 
 — of course, the international has a strike fund, and when the sanction of the executive 
 is given, the union participate in the strike fund. If not, they have the privilege of 
 striking, but they receive no st.ike funds from the international. 
 
 Q. Is there any penalty attached, except withholding the funds? — A. That is all. 
 
 Q. Does th. international body undertake to compel local unions to keep their 
 contracts ? — A. Well, no ; the usual trade agreements drawn by the typographical 
 union are subject to strikes. That is, a certain notice is required to be given. The 
 agreement is drawn up, and it is provided that to change the agreement they require 
 Tc give thirty days' notice. 
 
 Q. And the employers are expected to give them thirty days? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Is an oath administered to the men on joining the union? — A. I would hardly 
 call J an oath — a promise, an obligation. 
 
 Q. More in the nature of a pledge ? — A. Yes, that he will stand by the rules of the 
 union. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. With reference to that thirty days' notice : Supposing the union does not 
 ■comply with that condition, will there be any penalty imposed by the international 
 body? — A. I never saw a case tried; I don't know how it would work. There is no 
 law that I know of inflicting a penalty for such an offence. 
 
 Q. I noticed a letter from a prominent employer in the printing trades, in which 
 it was said that the international body enforced a contract by the local union. Is 
 there any provision in the constitution for that ? — A. iNot that I know of. It is 
 possible. 
 JAMES D. McNIVEN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DiSPVrES IN' BRITISQ COLOMBIA 203 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. It would be a very great sense of Security in making a contract with the local 
 union, if it were known by an employer that the constitution would have to be ob- 
 served in reference to that contract in order to escape a penalty? — A. I don't know of 
 anything in the constitution. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. As a rule, the unions stand by their agreements ? — A. As a rule, yes. 
 
 Q. What power has the headquarters to order a strike ? — A. In some cases, I be- 
 lieve, the executive or international has power to order a strike. 
 
 Q. Have you the constitution ? — A. I think I have a copy of the constitution. 
 This is a copy of the International Constitution — the last one. 
 
 (Constitution of International Typographical Union put in, marked Exhibit M.) 
 
 In reference to strikes I might read a clause: 
 
 ' When disputes arise between subordinate unions, or subordinate unions and 
 employers, which cannot be adjusted after conference between the parties at issue, 
 the matter may be settled by arbitration. 
 
 ' No local union shall sign a contract guaranteeing its members to work for any 
 proprietor, firm or corporation, unless such contract is in accordance with Interna- 
 tional law and approved by the International President. 
 
 ' It is imperatively ordered that the executive officers of the International Typo- 
 graphical Union shall not submit any of its laws to arbitration.' 
 
 Suppose, for instance, that the laws of the local union or the International Union 
 arc being violated, and the local union did not observe the conditions. Suppose it 13 
 brought to their notice, and they vote on the matter and decide not to strike, and tlift 
 executive of the International decide that there should be a strike, they have the 
 power to order it over the vote of the local union. They can order the loca' uriioi) 
 out. 
 
 Q. Not without thirty days' notice ? — A. If there is a contract thirty days' notice 
 would be required. 
 
 By Mr. Bothwell: 
 
 Q. Section 123, page 73 — ' The aggrieved union may make an appeal lo the ex- 
 ecutive council, and if, after being furnished with statements from all parties con- 
 cerned, all of the members of that body believe the inauguration of a strike abso- 
 lutely necessary, the president shall, in person, or by proxy, again attempt to effect a 
 settlement with employers, and if unsuccessful, shall, through the officers of the 
 various unions, order a general strike of all members of the International Typo- 
 graphical Union employed by the firm or firms interested, and those disregarding thk 
 order shall be k rthwith expelled ' ?— A. Tes, that is the clause. 
 
 Q. They get expelled from the union? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Does iK.t that rot the Canadian workmen to a certain degree ? — A. It certainly 
 does. But of course if a member of a union joins a union and promises to obey the 
 law there must be some penalty inflicted if he fails to pay up, _ 
 
 O There are other unions brought before us in which the unions have no special 
 power," where the executive has control. What do you say as to this?— A. I don't 
 like to give too much power to the executive. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Do I understand that the executive would have power to call out the printers 
 of say one city in which there was any agreement in order to help the printers in 
 another city?— A. No, I would not consider they had power to do that. 
 
 JAMES D. McNIVEN— Victoria, May H. 
 
204 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Where one union complains of the action of another union, and the matter 
 is brought before the executive by the complaining union. That, is to say, one union 
 complains that the other union is allowing the law to be broken in some respect. lu 
 that case the executive can enforce its authority over the other union ? — A. They caa 
 if it is a violation of law. 
 
 Q. But it cannot call out a union in sympathetic strike ? — A. No, I don't think it 
 has such power. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. I think so under this clause. Suppose that a union in Victoria should decide 
 to strike in sympathy with a union in Vancouver, the course of business would be 
 that the union would refer that matter to the executive ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The executive would send their officer here, either in person or by proxy to 
 investigate. Suppose Re approved of that strike and recommended under section 123, 
 the executive would call you out ? — A. Yes, if he approved of it. 
 
 Q. So a sympathetic strike would not be different from any other strike; all that 
 would be required would be the consensus of opinion of a majority of the executive, 
 and you could be ordered on strike under section 123 ? — A. Yes, that is correct. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Is there any special advantage to Canadians to belong to international organ- 
 izations ? How would it be if the whole Canadian printers were organized into an 
 organization of their own ? — A. They are not strong enough yet numerically. 
 
 Q. One disadvantage would be if you wanted to go to the States you would have 
 difficulty in getting a job ? — A. Suppose we had a national union. I think an ex- 
 change of cards could be arranged. But of course belonging to the International 
 Union at the present time, they maintain a large fund for the purpose of assisting 
 unions in struggles. Then there is a benefit in connection with the home for invalid 
 printers and a burial fund. 
 
 Q. There are these kind of funds ? — A. Yes. There is a benefit fund and a home 
 for invalid printers. 
 
 Q. In a good many of these organizations that we have had before us apparently 
 the local union has the sole power to initiate a strike ? — A. Usually the case. 
 
 Q. In many cases without the consent of the headquarters. Would that not be u 
 sufficient power in a case of this sort ? — ^A. I think so, and I have never yet known an 
 international to interfere with the action of a local union — have never known them 
 override the union. ' 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. 1 suppose if the interests of the local union are properly protected, that is 
 all the international wants? — A. That is all. I think the object in putting that law 
 is that the laws shall be observed. That is, if the local union should fail to maintain 
 the laws, the executive of the international would have the power to step in and en- 
 force it. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Suppose that a policy should be established among the international union of 
 combining labour forces for the purpose of affecting unionism in the United States 
 and the executive approved of that, they could order you all out ? — A. I believe ac- 
 cording to the reading of that section, they have the power. 
 
 Q. The abstract power or authority is there ? — A. I should think so. 
 
 By Mr. Mowi : 
 Q. Who approves amendments ? — A. They are approved at the annual convention. 
 The laws are made at the annual convention, but before they become law they have to 
 be supported ^oy the referendum of the members. 
 JAMES D. McNIVEN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 205 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Do you send representatives to the international ?— A. We had a representa- 
 tive once — about ten years ago. 
 
 Q. Are they usually representatives from Canadian unions? — A. Not very many. 
 Each union has to pay the expenses of its own delegate. There is no provision out 
 of the general fund. 
 
 Q. The convention is held at different points ? — A. Yes, it has been held in To- 
 ronto and Montreal. I think we have had two sessions in Canada. The last I think 
 was in 1881 or 1882. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. They have a meeting every year ? — A. Yes. I think the one in Toronto was 
 the last one. It was held once in Montreal. 
 
 Q. We are to take it then that the headquarters have power to order out on sym- 
 pathetic strikes ? — A. They have the power, but it has never been used to my know- 
 ledge. That particular section has never been used that way. I may say in connec- 
 tion with the international that a Canadian has been president of the International 
 Typographical Union on two different occasions. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Who was that? — A. Both these gentlemen were from Toronto, John Arm- 
 strong and W. B. Prescott. Prescott held the office, I think, for seven consecutive years. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. They are elected every year ? — A. Every two years. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us how many Canadians are in this union — what is the member- 
 ship ? — A. No, I could not say. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Where could we get that information? — A. There is a journal published, but 
 that information is not in it. It could be obtained from the secretary of the Interna- 
 tional Union at Indianapolis. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe^ : 
 Q. What is the basis of representation of the unions ? — A. To the convention 
 the basis is one delegate — every union is entitled to one delegate, a second on 100 
 members, a third on 200, and so on. I think that is the basis of representation. I 
 am not quite sure. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. How many delegates could go from this city ? — A. One. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. You said you were vice-president of the Dominion Congress — is that the 
 Dominion Trades and Labour Congress ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. There is another national federation — what is it called ? — A. The National 
 Trades Congress. 
 
 Q. That is a new body ? — A. Yes, it is the body which broke away from the Do- 
 minion Trades and Labour Congress at the last session. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q What was the cause of that rupture? — A. The occasion was that the uniohs 
 
 represented by certain delegates were not affiliated with the international unions. 
 
 There was a law passed at the last session of the Dominion Trades Congress that 
 
 unless these unions affiliated with the . international they should not be entitled to 
 
 representation that i?. no union having an international head and not affiliated with 
 
 it, could be represented at the Dominion Trades Congress. 
 
 JAMES D. McNIVEN— Victoria, May U. 
 
206 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904- 
 
 Q. If that is the case, what is the object of the Trades Congress ? — A. The object 
 of making such a law was to consolidate them. Those who refused to affiliate could 
 not join. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. The National Trades Congress is organized by those who don't wish the local 
 union to be forced into international affiliation ? — A. Yes^ that is so. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What fraction broke off from the other body ? — A. I think the fraction was 
 small — probably one-third or less. Of course I cannot give definite information con- 
 cerning it. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Could you express an opinion as to the relative position of the two bodies ? — 
 A. My opinion would be that the Dominion Trades, Congress would be three-fourths 
 just at the present time. 
 
 Q. I had reference to their policy ?— A. Well, I don't know the policy of the 
 National Congress. 
 
 Q. In respect to the international union. What is youT opinion as to the merits 
 of the one organization as against the other ? — A. I am in favour of nationalism if it 
 were advisable at the present time. I think it is a little premature. 
 
 Q. You would be in favour of Canadians having their own organization, provided 
 they were sufficiently strong ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And then they could have an interchange of cards ? — A. Yes. I think also 
 that if the amount of money that is sent out now to international unions were kept 
 in Canada and devoted to the betterment of the labour people here a much better result 
 would follow. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. They would have entire control over their own funds ? — A. They would, and 
 I think better results would be accomplished. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. That is on assumption, of course, that they would be strong enough to protect 
 the different members ? — A. Exactly. 
 
 Q^The advantage of an international affiliation is the strength ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. And to keep out scabs ? — A. Yea. 
 
 Q. I suppose the scab question could be settled by an understanding — an inter- 
 change of cards ? — A. I think it would work the same way as in the present system. I 
 would like to see national trade unions affiliated with the others in that way — to stand 
 on the same level. The Canadian card would be recognized in the UnitM States and 
 we would recognize theirs. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Would there be any trouble with the American unions in making that arrange- 
 menet ? — A. I am led to believe that they recognize British Columbia cards in that 
 way. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Do you know if there are any unions in Canada with headquarters in England ? 
 —A. I think the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters has headquarters in England. 
 That is the only one I know of. 
 JAMES D. McNIVEN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
Q-N INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 207 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 3:a 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. If a law were passed by the Parliament of Canada as to incorporation of 
 unions, that would have a tendency to encourage the existence of national unions, 
 would it not ? — A. I think it would. If unions were compelled to incorporate, no 
 doubt a certain power of the international would be gone. 
 
 ■ Q. But Canadians would be as well governed? — A. Well, they would, I suppose, 
 as far as the law goes. 
 
 Q. A model constitution might be drawn up which would suit all of them ? — 
 A. It is hard to draw a constitution to take in the different trades. A general prin- 
 ciple could Le drawn up. I think it is quite possible that a congress could be formed of 
 the different trades and workmen in Canada. 
 
 By Mr. Howe : 
 
 Q. Are there any national organizations that you know of in Canada ? That is, 
 any trudcs in national work ^ — A. There is a letter carriers' and postal employees' 
 union. That is about the only one I know of. It is called, I think, the Federated 
 Association of Tetter Carriers. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What would you say as to the merits of incorporated unions ? What do you 
 think the difficulty would be ? — A. Well, it is rather difficult to say just what the 
 advantages might be. 
 
 Q. It occurs to me that employers would feel more confidence in dealing with such 
 bodies ? — A. They certainly would. I think if unions were compelled to incorporate 
 it would be a death-blow to the boycott, and that is what I think the employers most 
 fear. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. That would be taking the union's chief weapon away ? — A. That is their 
 chief weapon. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Supposing the union were incorporated and allowed to use a registered union 
 label, that would do away with the necessity of a boycott to a large extent ? — A. No, 
 I don't think so. The registration of the union label would merely protect the union 
 holding it. It gives them legal power to protect their label. 
 
 Q. People who had sympathy for the union would naturally patronize union 
 goods, and would be able to tell the goods by the label, and in that way it would be a 
 reasonable substitute for the boycott ? — A. There is no reason why. But there would 
 certainly be on no open boycott if unions were incorporated. I think to advocate the 
 union label would be perfectly legitimate. 
 
 Q. People could tell for themselves whether they would buy union goods, and 
 would know which were union goods or not ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. There is nothing to prevent a man using, for instance, the printer's label, even 
 if he does not comply with the union rules ? — A. Yes, I know of no law to punish for 
 that. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. The men would strike, if they did ? — A. I guess they woiild. I saw an account 
 of that in a paper, of the improper use of the union label. It was used by certain par- 
 ties to give the impression that they had had their printing done in a union office. 
 
 O If the union were incorporated, it would make the men careful in the selection 
 of the officers ? A. Yes, I think that would be a good thing all round. Harm is some- 
 times done by the injudicious selection of officers. Of course, it doesn't follow that It 
 occurs very frequently, but I have noticed it. 
 
 JAMES D. McNIVEN— Victoria, May 14, 
 
203 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What would you say as to outside agitators being allowed to come in ? Do you 
 th^nk there should be a law against those kind of people ? — A. That is difficult to say. 
 I have no use for the agitator. I think the agitator should be suppressed, but I think 
 it should be left with the different unions to suppress him. I think it would be a good 
 idea to make a union responsible for their acts, and if they allow the agitator to come 
 in and influence them to do these illegal acts, I think they should be held responsible. 
 I think, if such a law were enforced, they would be more careful. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. It would be difficult to define that term, agitator ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. The best way would be to judge the union by the results, and they could tell 
 who the agitator was then — if he persuaded them into rendering themselves liable for 
 damages ? 
 
 Mr. Eowe. — There might be some things they did not know of; 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. As a rule, they know what they are. The workingman is doing a lot of 
 thinking. — A. I hardly think he is doing enough thinking. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. He has started other people thinking now. — A. He may be thinlcing along a 
 wrong line, but I think, if he were given a legal responsibility, that it would compel 
 union men to think out these problems a little better, and to be careful who they put 
 in office, and also careful who they put in Parliament. 1 think, instead of studying 
 the boycott and the strike in our union meetings, we should be studying who would be 
 the best representative in Parliament, and I think by that means, if a union's. local 
 status was defined, and they knew how far they could go, they would adopt other and 
 better means to accomplish the ends. I think it would be done in tlie legislative halls 
 more. If unions would devote the energy that they now devote to strikes to more legi- 
 timate means, it would accomplish a much better result. 
 
 Q. Why don't they do it now ? — A. I don't know. They have the weapon; 'They 
 are making it very interesting now for certain people. 
 
 His Lordship. — Many Irish would prefer fo use the club to the ballot, I think. 
 That is human nature. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Does it strike you that the workingmen start off oii the wrong hypothesis, that 
 everyone is allied against them? Don't you think so, as a body? — A. No, I don't think 
 so. I don't think that the average intelligent union man has such an opinion. , 
 
 Q. I don't say the leading men. Don't you think that a body of men gathering 
 into trade unions begin with the assumption that they are the injured party, that the 
 rest of the community is against them, and that they must be aggressive and fight in 
 order to be recognized? — A. The fact of them organizing into a union is evidence of 
 that — that they are getting the worst of it. 
 
 Q. I would not think so, because combination might be useful, even if they were 
 being treated very well. It is the trouble, is it not, that the labour man comes with 
 biased mind to the consideration of all these questions? — A. No, I think he is con- 
 sidering the question, and he finds he is getting the worst of it. Then they enter into 
 a combination to see if that action will accomplish something better. 
 
 Q. Yes, but he assumes that he is being oppressed. Do you think that is really 
 true of the labour class in Briti'^li Columbia? — A. I think the labouring class in Bri- 
 
 JAMES D. McNIVEN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BlilTISH COLUMBIA 2(9 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 tish Columbia are fairly well treated, but they don't get any more than they are en- 
 titled to. I would not call them an oppressed class. 
 
 Q. Does not labour agitation start with the assumption that the labouring men 
 are an oppressed class? — A. No, I would not start with that assumption. 
 
 Q. Don't you think that idea permeates the body ? I am not speaking of the best 
 men or the worst men — I am speaking of the average man. Don't you think the atti- 
 tude of trade unions, the literature circulated, the tirades against capital, all go to 
 lead a man to start with the idea that the labouring class is an oppressed class ? — A. I 
 would not take it in that way. I don't think that such a state of affairs exists. You 
 often hear individual members expressing such opinions as that. 
 
 Q. Is that not the view of the agitator, as a rule? — A. Yes, now you have given it. 
 
 Q. Doesn't the agitator control the mass? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. How do you account for strikes like the Wellington strike, if the agitator does 
 not control the men? — A. I would not like to discuss that — I know nothing about that. 
 
 Q. We cannot come to any other hypothesis but that men are starting from the 
 presumption that they have a grievance, and therefore strike without properly con- 
 sidering the conditions around them — A. I would not say so. 
 
 By Mr. Bow.e: 
 Q. Would you say whether the working-people would be oppressed, if they had 
 no unions ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. The real situation is that the labour man thinks he is in a bad position with- 
 out a union ? — A. That is it. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. And about the first thing he does with a union is to strike ? — A. Well, it 
 
 leads up to that. Men don't organize unions for pleasure; it is for the bettering of 
 
 conditions, and if they have to resort to strikes they are prepared to do it. I think 
 
 unionism has a good eSect upon men ; it improves a man in morals and intelligence. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What effect has it on the drink question ? — A. Unionism teaches sobriety ; 
 they encourage it in every way they can. 
 
 Q. Are union officers generally temperate men ? — A. As a rule I think they are. 
 
 By Mr. Howe : 
 Q. Do you know of any instances where men who have not been union men 
 formed a union, and were improved by that in every way ? I heard, for instance, of 
 a class of workmen in the city who were careless about their habits and dissolute, and 
 after a union was formed and a hall provided, and after they met there and transacted 
 business, their habits and methods were very greatly improved. Do you know of any 
 instances of that kind ? — A. I cannot mention any instance, but I think such a result 
 would follow. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. What would you say with reference to a statement like this (quoting from 
 ' The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science,' January, 
 1903, page 4Y) :— 
 
 ' The condition that does exist, and the cause of the struggle to-day is this : The 
 wage workers have formed combinations called unions, representing each separate 
 class of labour, and by persuasion or force gathered into such combinations all those 
 ■who are identified with the employment represented, except only such as elect to br 
 
 36<t— 14 
 
 JAMES D. McNIVEN— Victoria, May 14, 
 
210 MINUTES OF EYIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 free men and refuse to join the union. While the written laws of most unions provide 
 for certain standards of skill in the craft, as a basis of admission, the facts are, that 
 the only requirement is the payment of fixed dues, the obedience to all rules which 
 may be made, and the total extinction of individual right ; even to the extent that 
 there is no means provided by which a member can withdraw when he ceases to be in 
 hai-mony with the plan and purpose. The union having been formed, its first and 
 apparently only work seems to be to make demands upon the eijiployer. . . . 
 
 ' It is this spirit of defiance ; this spirit of determination on the part of the 
 employee what should be his without reference to the conditions of business, that 
 leads to the antagonism of the manufacturer at the start. Until the labour unions 
 will refute this idea, and give as a reason for their being the harmonizing of interests 
 between employer and employee, there can be little hope for settlement in the near 
 future of the many differences that exist.' 
 
 I am speaking of the general body of unions, the general spirit that actuates them, 
 and the apparent reason for their existence, and it seems to me that is a very correct 
 estimate of the situation ? — A. In my opinion it is a very exaggerated statement. 
 
 Q. Tou are speaking from your experience as a member of the Typographical 
 Union ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I am asking you to lay aside your experience with your organization, and look 
 at it from an independent standpoint ? — A. In regard to the rights of individuals it 
 often occurs in these trades that the rights of certain individuals are trampled upon. 
 In a general strike such as is inaugurated very often somebody has got to suffer. 
 
 Q. Don't you think that the literature circulated among trade unions and the work 
 done by the professional agitator is the reason they are being led along that line ? — 
 A. No, I don't think so. I think the agitator has a certain influence with some^ut 
 I don't think he influences the majority of the union. 
 
 Q. Is there any attempt, as far as you know, on the part of say the Dominion 
 Trades and Labour Congress, to put a stop to the circulation of this sort of literature 
 among trade unions— the extreme socialism style, or the strong articles that are 
 written against capital ? — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. Would it not be a good plan ? — A. I don't think it would. I think that the 
 more restrictions you place on trade unions the more you stimulate them. I find that 
 trade unionism is embracing socialism more than it has ever done before, just for the 
 reason that their employers are trying different means to oppress them, and it only 
 cements them more closely. 
 
 Q. Is that the way you account for socialistic opinions permeating unions ? — A. 
 I think if it continues as it is that socialism will grow, and that it won't be many 
 years when socialism will control. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I suppose no one in a union ever takes up cudgels on behalf of employers ? — 
 A. I have heard it. In unions that I attend the employer's interest is certainly 
 looked after. 
 
 Q. Is it your impression that the majority of labouring men feel that the interest 
 of employer and employed are or should be identical? — A. I don't know that the 
 majority do — I do myself. I feel that they have a common and not a hostile interest. 
 
 Q. The doctrine of socialism is that it is a hostile interest ? — A. I have no sym- 
 pathy with such a doctrine. That doctrine is spreading very rapidly. 
 
 Q. And it exists to a large extent through the western portion of America? — ^A. 
 Yes. I account for that by the unwillingness of the employer to meet his men. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Suppose a body of men or employers refuse to recognise the union, and sup- 
 posing these men have no resources, they cannot form a union or work elsewhere what 
 
 JAMES D. McNIVEN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 211 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 is likely to be the effect politically ? Does it tend to make them socialists ?— A. Well, 
 I don't know, I am sure, along the line, what would be the effect. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 ^ Q. Do you think the incorporation of unions would have a tendency to stop 
 socialism ? — A. No, I don't think so. I have thought that it would have a tendency to 
 make members of unions think more politically, and in that way it might draw them 
 pway from the extreme socialist idea. There would be less yielding to the agitator. 
 
 By Mr Bowe : 
 
 Q. Take a number of men who are refused the right to organize. These men con- 
 sider that one way they protect themselves is by a union ? If it is impossible for them 
 to exercise that power or have that weapon, would the tendency be to Suggest to them 
 that they should use their influence politically ? — A. Yes, I think so. 
 
 Q. So the effect of suppressing a union would be to make the men ardent advocates 
 of the destruction of capitalistic influence ? — A. Tes, I think so. 
 
 Q. And they take the position that there is no common ground between employers 
 and employees ? — A. I believe the socialist does. 
 
 Q. What has been the general result of the use of strikes and the use of the union 
 upon the position of the men? Have settlements usually been in favour of labour 
 or against ? — ^A. A little in favour of late years. 
 
 By Sis Lordship: 
 
 Q. That is on a rising market ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What will happen on a falling market? — A. If there is a fair prospect it will 
 continne so. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. In your mind, does this increased power of lalbour indicate that their demands 
 ore more reasonable or the powers greater ? — A. The powers are greater. 
 
 Q. Are the demands more or less reasonable than before ? Is there a tendency 
 to increase the demands beyond the power of reason ? — A. There is that possibility, 
 but I think the men usually are reasonable. 
 
 Q. What is your opinion as to the method of settling strikes ? — A. I favour com- 
 pulsory conciliation. 
 
 Q. Describe the method? — A. When a dispute arises, I would have an employer, 
 or a person interested on the employer's side, appoint a representative ; the union 
 employees, a representative, and I think the Govemor-in-Council should appoint a 
 third person — the Dominion Governor-in-Council. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That would be machinery applicable to large strikes? — A. That would be, of 
 course, a large strike. It could not very well recognize any iittle trouble. 
 
 Q. You are in favour of compulsory arbitration ? — A. I mean by that, conciliation. 
 In case the conciliation board could not effect a settlement, I would favour compulsory 
 arbitration, with a binding award. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. When you speak of conciliation, you mean each party would reach a settlement 
 by mutual consent? — A. Yes, the matter would end there. 
 
 Q. First attempt to conciliate, and, failing in that, it would have power to arbi- 
 trate? — A. Yes. 
 
 JAMES D. McNrVEN— Victoria, May 1*. 
 36a— 14i 
 
212 MINUTES OF EYIDEWCH OF ROYAL COMMISSIOlf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Assuming the cdse of a decline in prices, and these arbitration boards began to 
 give decisions against union people. Do you think they would be loyally observed, the 
 same as if in their favour ? — A. I rather think so. 
 
 Q. Supposing an employer makes out a good case to the satisfaction of the board, 
 that there is not sufficient profit in the business to justify a change ia prices? — A. 
 They would probably not accept it as loyally, but I thinli they would accept it., If it 
 is proven to a body of employees that an employer cannot pay a certain rate of wages, 
 I think they should accept what he can pay. I think they would obey such a decision. 
 
 Q. It would be difficult to enforce a decision agains't a large number of men? — A. 
 Of course, there are difficulties in the way of enforcing awards, but I think it could 
 be fixed. 
 
 By Mr. Boive : 
 
 Q. Would public opinion have anything to do with it ? — A. It would have a great 
 deal to do with it. In the present struggle just now trade unionism depends very 
 largely on public opinion, and unions that have not got public opinion don't usually 
 succeed. Public opinion enters very largely into the matter. It has a large influence 
 in the settlement of these strikes. I think, in the case of troubles resulting in strikes, 
 the great difficulty is to bring employer and employed together; that seems to be the 
 chief difficulty. It is a case of misunderstanding, and I think, by compulsory concilia- 
 tratiou, if they were compelled to come together on the start, matters would be more 
 readily adjusted. 
 
 Q. It could be done under trade ag-eements between unions and employers? — A. 
 I hope it will come to that. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Who would you have as conciliator — special boards, such as the Board of 
 Trade? — A. Of course, I have never thought of that very thoroughly, but I think a 
 permanent board might be appointed, or a permanent officer. That would be the idea 
 — a permanent officer appointed to act in conjunction with representatives of the two 
 parties. 
 
 Q. Failing that, in large strikes, compulsory arbitration? — ^A. Compulsory arbi- 
 tration, yes. I find that that is a popular sentiment among trade unions — compulsory 
 arbitration. 
 
 Q. That is the most popular method? — A. I have never heard of a substitute for it. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. Is the general consensus of trade unions against strikes? — A. I think so — to 
 avoid strikes wherever possible. 
 
 Q. Does a labour leader's power depend upon his success in conducting strikes, or 
 in keeping his craft out of strikes? — A. The successful unions have kept their crafts 
 out of strikes. I think more success will accrue to a leader by keeping his men out of 
 strikes than by successfully winning strikes. 
 
 Q. How does the pay of printers here compare with the pay of printers in other 
 parts of Canada? — A. Between here and Toronto — I suppose the rate here would be 
 probably 20 per cent higher. 
 
 Q. Is there that difference in the- charge for printing and publishing ? — A. Yes, 
 I think it is about equal. 
 
 Q. Is there a maximum wage law in your union ? — A. No maximum. 
 
 Q. May a man earn as much as he can? — A. Yes, there is no limit to the output 
 of his capacity. 
 
 Q. Supposing he is paid by the day, working a typesetting machine, is he allowed 
 to set as much type as he pleases? — A. Yes, as a day's worL Some set more than 
 others. 
 
 JAMES D. McNIVBN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DI8PVTE8 IN BRITISH VOLVMlilA 213 
 
 .SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Supposing an award has gone against the men. The arbitrators think their 
 demand for a certain wage is impossible, and it is a less award than they feel inclined 
 to accept. Would there likely be complaints with the award? — A. Such a tendency is 
 possible. 
 
 Q. Suppose all the men combined to defeat the award by doing as little work as 
 they could? — A. I suppose if a man's business could not stand the work, he could not 
 pay for a man who soldiers. 
 
 Q. Supposing they all soldiered— they would be a combined union of soldiers? — 
 A. The only remedy he would'have would be to replace them, I suppose. 
 
 Q. "When we are considering the possibility of introducing a system of compul- 
 sory arbitration, we must consider the consequences. If the awards are not observed 
 by the men, or they show a spirit of disobedience, how is the employer to be protected ? 
 It is easy to enforce the award against the employer? — A. Of course, the only way I 
 can see, if they found the men were not doing the work, would be to replace them. 
 
 Q. I am assuming the case where the men think the award is not fair to them, 
 and they say, we will defeat it by soldiering round. They force the employer to dis- 
 charge them in that way, and if the employer cannot get any other workmen, how is 
 the business to go on? No men would work in place of the discharged men? — A. The 
 great fear now is, there is an established rate of wage and certain conditions in a 
 union, and union men refuse to work or leave employers; for these reasons, it is very 
 difficult to get men to take their places, for the reason that they fear the action of the 
 union. They are branded as scabs and unfair men. 
 
 Q. I am assuming a case where the union forces its own discharge because they 
 say the award is unfair. Then the employer would have to employ new men. They 
 would take the places of these men who were discharged. In that way they could vir- 
 tually defeat the award by enforcing the discharge of the men ? — A. I don't think they 
 would be likely to act in that way. 
 
 Q. They could discover if they soldiered— there is a minimum? — A. Yes, there is 
 a minimum. International law forbids such a law, but still the office has a right to 
 say how much a man can do, and it is easy to detect him, if he fails to come up to the 
 mark. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Would that not be equivalent to a violation of the award? — A. Yes, I suppose 
 it would be. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The sum and substance of it is, you cannot force men who are unwilling to 
 work ? — A. There is a difficulty there. There is also a difficulty in forcing an em- 
 ployer to continue his business. There should be a law, I suppose, against the lock-out. 
 
 Q. Any man could close down his shop for a few months until the men left, and 
 then fill it up with non-union men ? — A. Yes, of course I have not thought the matter 
 out fully enough to fix up all that. 
 
 J. W. BoLDEN, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What is your occupation, Mr. Bolden ? — A. Carpenter. 
 Q. Are you a member of the Carpenters' Union ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 Q. Do you hold any office ? — A. I am delegate to the Trades and Labour Council. 
 
 J. W. BOLDEN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
214 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. How many men are in the Carpenters' Union ? — A. There are between 80 and 
 90 — ^probably a little more. There are 90 at present, but on account of prospective 
 members I should say close to 100. 
 
 Q. How many non-union, carpenters are in Victoria ? — A. That is very hard to 
 judge — probably about 35. 
 
 Q. Is the Carpenters' Union affiliated with any other union ? — A. The carpenters 
 are a branch of the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners, with head- 
 quarters in Manchester, England. 
 
 Q. They are a branch ? — A. Tes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of the constitution ?^A. I have not a copy with me. I 
 thought probably the secretary would be examined in regard to the union. , The 
 secretary is Mr. Hammond. 
 
 Bi/ Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. The secretary of the local branch ? — A. Yes. I have here with me one of 
 their monthly reports which contains a good deal of information. It is published in 
 London. 
 
 (Journal of Carpenters' Union— Exhibit N.) 
 
 Q. They have a correspondent here ? — A. Tes. I might state that it is the duty 
 of every branch to make out a monthly report as to membership, state of trade in that 
 locality, wages and hours, which is all reported and tabulated in this monthly report. 
 
 Q. Is there any other large organization of carpenters besides the Amalgamated 
 Society ? — A. There is the American Eederation of Carpenters and Joiners. There 
 is no branch in the city of Victoria. 
 
 Q. There are branches in Canada ? — A. There is a branch in the city of Vancou- 
 ver. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long has the Victoria union been in existence ? — A. I think about ten 
 years — from ten to twelve years. 
 
 Q. Was the American Federation of Carpenters in existence then ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. Was there a discussion then as to which organization to join ?-^A. No doubt, 
 at that time. I was not a member of either at that time ; I cannot tell. 
 
 Q. What do you consider the advantage of belonging to the English association ? 
 — A. The advantage is no doubt derived from the fraternal benefits attached to it, 
 which accounts for its existence in Victoria, and the other society being out of exist- 
 ence here. There was once a branch of the American Federation. 
 
 B2/ Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. What are the fraternal benefits you refer to ? — A. Sick benefits and a very 
 important benefit — that if a man loses his tools he has them replaced by the society. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. He could get a new set of tools ? — A. Tes. It is a sort of insurance. 
 
 By Mr. Bows : 
 Q. He pays monthly dues for these benefits? — A. I might state that there are 
 two sections in the society — a section known as the ordinary section, which takes in 
 men from 21 to 40. These men pay twenty-five cents a week and receive these bene- 
 fits. Then, there is another section which takes in men of forty years to sixty. They 
 don't, of course, reap the same benefit. They don't have the old age benefit or the 
 sick benefit. We have other benefits so that in case of strikes or lockouts these men 
 are provided with a weekly sum. The men over forty pay eight cents a week. The 
 moo. over forty cannot belong to the other section of the union. 
 J. W. BOLDBN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTBIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 215 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What is the position of the central body as to strikes? — A. The only power 
 they have is in case of any dispute, it is the duty of the local branch to give three 
 months' notice before we enter into any dispute at all as to rate of wages or hours of 
 work. We have to give them three months' notice, and we have got to get permission 
 from headquarters first, and in any event we cannot go out on strike without permis- 
 sion. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Is the executive in England ? — A. Tes, in Manchester. We have what we call 
 a local district for the management of local affairs. The head office is in New York. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. Has it power to deal with strikes? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Without reference to Manchester? — A, Yes. 
 
 Q. Where are the funds administered, in Manchester or New York? — A. Each 
 local branch keeps its own funds, with the exception of the levy which is collected semi- 
 annually, which goes to headquarters. 
 
 Q. What do you consider headquarters. New York or Manchester? — A. Under 
 the present arrangement. New York. 
 
 Q. Is there a convention of the society ?— A. Yes, held at Manchester. 
 
 Q. Could your union send a delegate to that? — A. No. He is sent by districts. 
 All the one order is divided into districts, and each district sends delegates. The 
 districts are named by means of the referendum. There are 16, I think. Those re- 
 ceiving the highest number of votes in the district are sent to the general convention, 
 which takes place every four years. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. How many districts in Canada? — A. There is only one district on the Ameri- 
 can continent. 
 
 Q. Out of the whole sixteen? — ^A. Yes, the others extend over all English-speak- 
 ing countries. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. What is the membership? — A. Somewhere about 70,000. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Do the members take an oath when they join the order? — A. No. They are 
 recommended, and are expected to obey and abide by the constitution and by-laws. 
 
 Q. What kind of machinery is there for altering the by-laws? — A. Each local has 
 its own by-laws. That is what we would call, probably, the rules. That simply refers 
 to local matters, with regard to matters between the employers and the men, but really 
 our by-laws, of course, are made by the district in convention. 
 
 Q. How is that convention convened? — A. I am not very familiar with the work- 
 ings of it. 
 
 Q. By action of the locals ? — A. I think the district meets once a year. Not 
 always in New York, but in a place that has been arranged at the last meeting. The 
 delegates from each district are nominated by means of the magazine which is sent 
 out. Their attention is called to the fact that they have the power to nominate, and 
 when the nominations are all in, they are submitted to the members, who vote on them 
 — the members of each individual branch. 
 
 J. W. BOLDEN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
216 MINUTES OF EVrDmCH OF B07AL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EOWARD VII., A. 1904 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. Is there any test of fitness for the men of your union? — A. Firs.t, a candidate 
 must have been five years at the trade, must be of good moral character, and able to 
 do a good day's work. 
 
 Q. How do you distinguish between contractors and journeymen ? — A. It is some- 
 times very hard to distinguish. The trouble is, some of our men are contractors and 
 some journeymen. 
 
 Q. I notice in one of the constitutions, that if a bricklayer takes a contract for 
 over $300, he is classed as a contractor ? — A. We have a provision like this : If a man 
 goes contracting, he simply does not attend the meetings or take any part in the dis- 
 cussions. He is refused the right to vote. His presence is not requested at any meet- 
 ings until he refuses to contract. He is in receipt of all the benefits. 
 
 Q. He is just excluded from participaliOn from the meetings when he is con- 
 tracting ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. There is no definite sum involved in the contract ? — A. I might state that 
 some of the largest contractors in England are among the members of the society, 
 and some of the men in this province. Some of them have already obtained the old- 
 age pension. There are some in British Columbia enjoying the old-age pension. We 
 have one in ours. 
 
 Q. What is the amount of the pension ? — A. I could not tell yon. 
 
 Q. And this 25 cents provides for sick benefit. What is it 1 — A. I think it is 
 $2.50 a week for 26 weeks, and then I think it is $1.50 a week. We have also an 
 out-of-work benefit. 
 
 Q. It would be available at time of strike, or any time? — A. Any time when em- 
 ployment is not to be obtained in any of the cities. If there is work in Vancouver, 
 we will send a man over and pay his expenses or bring a man hera It is the duty of 
 the branch at that end to send men here. 
 
 Q. Men are permitted to work in the jurisdiction of other lodges ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Does it require that there shall be no non-union men working on jobs ? — A. 
 It makes no differece. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That is not a subject of contention between employers ? — A. Not yet. I might 
 state that under our rules we could go on strike against any non-union men. 
 
 Q. You were on strike recently ? — A. We are out on strike at the present moment, 
 but it is not the action altogether of the union. It is the joint action on the part of 
 both union and non-union men. The trouble is as to a raise in wages. 
 
 Q. Are the carpenters in the city on strike now? — ^A. With the exception ^of a 
 few non-union men. 
 
 Q. It is a wage trouble ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What is the trouble ? — A. The demand is for $3.50 a day and Saturday after- 
 noons off, or $3 for 8 hours. 
 
 Q. $3.50 for 9 hours, including Saturday, but you only want to work half a day 
 on Saturday ? — A. Or, in other words, $3.50 for 8 hours and 44 hours per week. 
 
 Q. You don't ask them to pay the $3.50 on Saturdays ? — A. No, $1.75. 
 
 Q. That is practically the same you would be getting under the old arrangement, 
 only you would not work Saturday afternoon ? — A. About the same. 
 
 Q. In fact you earn as much a week with the exception of Saturday off ? A. It 
 
 amounts to about the same thing. 
 
 Q. How long have you been out ? — A. About two weeks. 
 
 Q. What is the prospect of settlement ?— A. I think it will be settled in probably 
 a couple of days by compromise. 
 
 J. W. BOLDEN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDV'&TRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 217 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Who are the parties who would arrange the terms — a committee of the men ? 
 — A. There is a committee. It is composed of an equal number of union men and an 
 equal number of non-union men. They have got the matter in hand to deal with. 
 
 Q. The employers are dealing with that committee ? — A. There have been meet- 
 ings, but I don't know ■vvhether they have got recognition. I might state that our 
 secretary is present and will probably answer these questions. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Would work on Saturday afternoon count as overtime ? — A. That is the latest 
 proposal that has come from the contractors, that if the men work overtime they should 
 be paid 50 cents an hour when they are working. If they wish to work on their owii 
 accord they should be paid 40 cents an hour. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Is this the first strike the carpenters have had here ? — A. Practically it is in my 
 time, for the last thirteen years. 
 
 Q. I suppose you are in favour of the principles of unionism ? — A. Well, I gene- 
 rally advocate thorn. 
 
 Q. Do you think they should be incorporated ? — A. No, I would not say I was in 
 favour of incorporation. I might say that the Trades and Labour Council would like 
 incorporation. That is, incorporation under the local benevolent Act. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. You are president of the Trades and Labour Council ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. You approve of the action of the council in that matter ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. One effect of incorporation would be the selection of good men for officers ? — 
 A. No doubt it would have that effect. 
 
 Q. And it would be easier for an employer to deal with an incorporated union ? — 
 A, Speaking for the Trades and Labour Council, we have very little dealings with any 
 employer. The position we stand in for labour is something about the same manner 
 that the Chamber of Commerce does to the merchants. It simply discusses matters 
 that tend to the betterment of the conditions of the working class. We have no power 
 to either order or stop anything. We can only endorse their action or probably assist 
 them as individuals. 
 
 Q. Take an incorporated union as against one that was not— there would be a 
 greater incentive on the part of the employer to deal with the incorporated body ? — A. 
 iiimployers, as a rule, advocate that trade unions should be incorporated. I would 
 begin to feel suspicious that there might be something behind it. When they advo- 
 r-^te it there might be some reasons to oppose it. One of the principal reasons is that 
 t!icy might attack the funds. 
 
 Q. They could do that without incorporation ? — A. Probably that is so. 
 
 i}. The way I understand it is that an employer feels he is not entering into a 
 contract with responsible parties ? — A. My experience is that trade unions usually 
 L'tand by their contracts. 
 
 Q. Well, we see the other thing happening ? — A. I think there was only one union, 
 and that was a union that had practically no experience. A union with probably a 
 couple of weeks' experience is not to be expected to have the same understanding as 
 a union in existence for a number of years. 
 
 Q. If a body of men were incorporated a better class of men would take more 
 interest in the' proceedings and see that good men were elected as officers ? — A. My 
 experience with trade unions is that the best men are taken as officers. 
 
 Q. Do any agitators ever come into unions ? — A. I don't know what is meant by 
 agitator. That is a term I have heard often. 
 
 J. W. BOLDBN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
218 MINUTED OF EVIDENCE OP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. I am sure I cannot enlighten you if you yourself don't know. Have you any 
 suggestion to make about the settlement of strikes when the parties cannot agree ? — 
 A. Personally, I am in favour of compulsory arbitration myself, but I don't think 
 that the time is ripe for it yet. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. You are probably aware that Mr. Mulock has brought a Bill out 
 dealing with this question with regard to railways, and that BiU has been discussed 
 in almost every trade union from one end of the country to the other, and I think I 
 am safe in saying that Y5 per cent of the trade unions have turned it down. 
 
 Q. That was for compulsory arbitration ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. They are trying a new remedy ? — A. I am speaking about the first Bill. 
 
 Q. That Bill was withdrawn ? — A. I know, but the principles of compulsory arbi- 
 tration were embodied in that Bill and discussed, and from the sentiments expressed 
 by the different unions on that Bill I have come to the conclusion that trade unions 
 were against the principle. 
 
 Q. What do they want ? — A. I think the trade unions would be more inclined to 
 conciliation. 
 
 Q. If the parties won't conciliate — ^what then ? — A. Compulsury arbitration then. 
 There is a great deal of difference between conciliation and arbitration. 
 
 Q. But what is to be the final opinion of the majority where the parties cannot 
 be got to settle by conciliation ? — A. I think that remedy is to be found in the Bill 
 which is at present before the local House. I think it is in the third clause of that 
 Bill where it compels both the employer and employee, before resorting to any strike 
 or lockout, that they shall submit their differences to a board of conciliation. In that 
 ease, I think the principle is good. In certain cases, before the ordering of a strike 
 the matter could be settled. 
 
 Q. A strike having been inaugurated, what would you do if the parties won't con- 
 ciliate or settle ? — A. Compulsory arbitration, in my opinion. I know the majority of 
 unions are against it. 
 
 Q. What do they propose ? — A. There is no doubt that is the object of this com- 
 mission to find out. 
 
 Q. We are not getting much assistance from the leaders of trade unions 1 — A. I 
 cannot help it. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe: 
 
 Q. The first step is compulsory investigation ? — ^A. That, in my opinion, should 
 be the first step. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. The first thing is to conciliate, then if they won't, compulsory arbitration. 
 You say the majority of the unions are opposed to compulsory arbitration ? — A. I 
 think the remedy has not been found yet. That, I think, is the purpose of the Com- 
 mission. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 ■ Q. What do you think is the ground of the unions' objection to compulsory ar- 
 bitration ? You said the time was not ripe yet ? — A. In my opinion it is an untried 
 remedy yet. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. It has been in operation for five years in New Zealand ? — ^A. Yes, but the 
 results from that country have been confl^icting. Only lately we have had cases cited 
 to show that compulsory arbitration is not what it is represented to be. 
 
 Q. Is it not a fact that prices are falling there, and that decisions are going 
 against the working-people, and that they don't like that kind of decision, and here- 
 
 J. W. BOLDEN— Victoria, May U. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH VOWMlilA. 219 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 tof ore they have been in favour of the working-people ? In other words, that the ar- 
 bitration has been held on a rising market, and now, with the turn of the tide, the 
 working-people object to the awards ? — A. To return to your first question, I say that 
 I consider conciliation should be attempted first. I am of the opinion that if the two 
 parties are brought together to discuss matters there will be no need of any further 
 action. 
 
 Q. Speaking generally, but there are cases where the parties will keep apart, and 
 therefore there must be machinery provided, espfecially when the public is being in- 
 jured. My question is, what machinery would you provide ? — A. It is hard to find 
 out what machinery would be effective in that case. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. Do you think the government should take on itself the power of intervention 
 after the request of either party ? — A. In certain cases it would be well to do so. It 
 (has proved beneficial in the Fernie strike. The government certainly benefited by 
 intervening there. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. It showed the government had the power. That strike was finally settled by 
 a committee of investigation. It was settled by conciliation ? — A. Yes. I might 
 state that in our constitution we have got a rule which has been a great deal of good 
 in the settlement of strikes — (Art. IX., sec. I., Constitution of Trades and Labour 
 l/ouncil) : ' so as to obtain a more thorough unity of action, it is recommended that 
 the several unions consult with this council before entering upon a strike. Sec. 2. 
 The avoidance of strikes, and the substitution of arbitration as a means of settlement, 
 is strongly recommended whenever practicable, and the dignity of organized labour 
 will permit.' It is the custom of unions, as pointed out there, before entering on strike, 
 to send a notification of the fact that they are entering on it, and asking the good 
 offices of the Trades and Labour Council, and the executive generally takes it in hand, 
 and in some cases have effected a settlement before it came to a strike. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. What are the conditions of membership in the Trades and Labour Council ? 
 What unions may be represented ? — A. Any union that has a national or international 
 connection — that is, if there is an international union in their craft. Otherwise they 
 miist have a charter from the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada. 
 
 Q. Either a national or international charter ? — A. Yes, either one will do. 
 
 Q. Is the Letter Carriers' Association represented in the Trades and Labour Con- 
 gress ? — A. Yes, they have a Dominion charter. It is a national institution, not 
 international. 
 
 Q. So you don't bar unions on the ground that they have international charters ? — ^A, 
 We bar them from joining if there is an international and they refuse to join. From 
 the evidence given yesterday the bricklayers intend to take a charter out from 
 the Trades Congress of Canada. As a matter of fact, they will be unable to do so be- 
 cause there is an^International Bricklayers' Union. 
 
 Q. If there is an international union, then a charter from a national organization 
 won't do ? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Why is that ? — A. There are many reasons for it. It is to reduce, no doubt, 
 the large number of small bodies that are in existence, bringing them into the one 
 lodge — ^unity of action. 
 
 Q. Would not the Canadian workmen be as well off by consolidation into Cana- 
 dian organizations ? — A. In my opinion, the Canadians have the best end of the handle 
 under the present arrangement. 
 
 J. W. BOLDEN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
220 MINVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. You mean they get more than they give ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 
 Q. In what way ? — A. Some of the very largest offices are held by Canadian peo- 
 ple. They practically almost control the largest number of unions on the American 
 continent. They live on the other side. I could not say whether they are citizens 
 of the other side. 
 
 Q. Take your organization, Mr*. Bolden, where you have districts. Supposing 
 there was a Canadian district and a district in the United States, would your lodge 
 suffer any disadvantage in that respect ?— A. No, just the same. 
 
 Q. Your relation to the whole would be just the same ? — A. There is no doubt 
 that when we are large enough our organization will have a district of its own. 
 
 Q. Then you would be debarred from the Trades and Labour Council ? — ^A. We 
 would still be affiliated with them, but we would simply be another district. The 
 charter comes from the old country. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Do you think it advisable, in the interests) of Canadian labour, that they should 
 be liable to be called out by United States organizations ? — A. I don't think it is wise 
 myself. In our union it is impossible. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. You have three months' notice ? — A. Yes, three months before you wish for 
 any raise of wages. We have also, before we can go out, to have permission from our 
 district. Three months' notice was given in the present strike. 
 
 Q. You think Canadian workmen should decide their questions of strike without 
 being called upon to strike by outside influence ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. Has your union ever been out on sympathetic strike ? — A. Not to my lojowl- 
 edge. There has been no necessity for it in this city, I don't think. I question whe- 
 ther we have power under our rules to come out on sympathetic strike. That is, as 
 I interpret the rules — I may be wrong. We have got to give three months' notice. 
 It is likely the strike may be over by that time. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Do you think there are any circumstances in which sympathetic strikes are 
 justified ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What are they ? — A. I notice that a large number of strikes do not arise out 
 of questions of hours or wages, but very often by the arbitrary action of some indivi- 
 dual. It may affect not only the men directly affected, but others who are working 
 in an indirect way for the same thing. Therefore, I think the others are justified in 
 going out in sjmipathy with the others. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Could you name any class of trouble in which it is justified ? Do you thinlc 
 it is justified in the case of demand for recognition of the union ?— A. Yes, if, that is 
 legal and the men are working for the same firm. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Suppose there was no connection at all between employers, would you say a 
 sympathetic strike was justified ? — A. I would consider that a long while. I would 
 have to know the actual circumstances. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. I suppose the circumstances where a craft of a higher order of skill come out 
 
 for a craft of a lower order of skill, and thereby help them to get their demand ? A. 
 
 Yes. 
 
 J. W. BOLDEN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INMlSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 221 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Have you ever known of a strike of Canadian •workmen being instigated on 
 account of trouble in the United States ? — A. It has not been my experience to be 
 connected with a case like that. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Have you paid organizers in your association ? — A. Not to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. Who organized the lodge here ?— A. I was not here at the time, I don't think. 
 I am unable to answer the question. 
 
 Q. Are you affiliated with the American Federation of Labour ? — A. I am not 
 certain. I think we are. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Is there anything else you would like to say ? — A. Only to say, as far as the 
 Trades and Labour Council is concerned, we have the best interests of not only our own 
 men at heart, but of the whole community as well. A certain class of people seem to 
 understand that we are trying to push socialism, and I would say that nothing is 
 farther from our thoughts. We are simply discussing these questions, and have come 
 to some opinion upon the merits of the question as it may appear to us. We are watch- 
 ing any legislation that may be presented to the public. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Tou had candidates in the field at the municipal elections ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q, Were their platforms pronounced ? — A. We did not decide on any platforms. 
 Our society is composed of men from all parties. I believe some are Conservative, 
 Liberal, and I think there was a socialist, so we could not decide on any platform. We 
 recognized certain principles which we could agree on. 
 
 Q. What were they ? — ^A. The 8-hour movement and day labour. 
 
 Q. What was the referendum at the time ? — A. That was on the 8-hour day for 
 the city labourers. It was carried by about fifty per cent. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Can you tell us what proportion of the labouring population of the city hold 
 socialistic views ? — A. A very small proportion. 
 
 Q. I mean the union people ? — A. I think the labour people are not affiliated with 
 any party at the present moment. 
 
 Q. Wliat proportion of the union men hold socialistic views, as near as you can 
 judge ? — A. Well, judging by the representatives upon the Trades and Labour Council, 
 1 should say about one-seventh. That is, of extreme views. They all have more or less 
 socialistic views, but I mean extremists. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Those who take the view that capital and labour are irreconcilable ? — A. Yes, 
 I think you are safe in saying that. 
 
 Q. Tou ran several school trustees — the Trades and Labour Council nominated sev- 
 eral school trustees this year — did they have a platform ? — A. Well, they had and they 
 had not. The convention called to nominate candidates did not decide on any particu- 
 lar platform, but the platform advanced by the candidates was to a certain extent 
 formulated. 
 
 Q. What were its chief features ? — A. Equal wages, if I am not mistaken, to all 
 the teachers in certain grades. It also took in technical education, a subject which the 
 Labour Council has taken up and is pushing very much. 
 
 Q. Anything else ? School hooka ? — A. Tes, that is another thing — free school 
 books. 
 
 J. W. BOLDEN— Victoria, May 14. 
 
222 MINUTES OF EYlOENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Have you any objection to technical education ? — A. No. I must qualify my 
 statement. The system as adopted in the United States is objected to by different 
 members very much, but the Ha very system is very much approved of. The system 
 adopted by the United States is a trade school and manual training. Their system 
 is to give a boy an education along the theoretical side. 
 
 Q. The union would be opposed to manual training schools ? — A. Tes, for this 
 reason : There is no boy or young man could learn a trade without practical experi- 
 ence, and such experience must be obtained in practical work. The knowledge received 
 at schools must be superficial. 
 
 John Hammond, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Tou are a member of the Carpenters' Union ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. What office do you hold ? — A. Secretary. 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of the constitution of the union ? — A. Tes, sir, 
 
 (Constitution of Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners. — Exhibit P.) 
 
 There are a few subjects I have made notes on' in regard to the benefits : The 
 amount Qur employees are allowed in sick benefits comes to $48 in one year, at the 
 rate of $2.50 per week for the first 12 weeks, and $1.50 for the remaining 12 weeks, 
 making a total of $48 for one year. 
 
 Tool Benefits. — If I happen to lose my tools by fire or water or theft, I get reim- 
 bursed to the extent of $100 and $5 for my tool chest. 
 
 Sick Benefits. — $3 for 26 weeks and $1.50 so long as sickness continues. That is 
 with regard to the ordinary members. There is a clause that if they are not likely 
 to recover they are allowed this sick benefit as long as they live, and are allowed to 
 supplement their sick pay by working at their trade. If their wages don't exceed half 
 of the wages of the district, their sick pay is not taken from them. 
 
 Accident Benefit. — If I happen to meet with an accident while following my em- 
 ployment, if I am totally disabled, I am entitled to the sum of $500; if partially dis- 
 abled, I have to pass a medical examination, and this is forwarded to Manchester, the 
 head office, and they investigate the case, and if it is decided that I am unable to 
 resume work within a few years, I am allowed $250. 
 
 Funeral Benefit. — I am entitled to $60. If my wife should die first, I am entitled 
 to $25 for her and $35 remains for my funeral expenses when I die. 
 
 Superannuation Benefit. — If I have been a member for 25 years and am over 50 
 years, I am entitled to $2 a week for life. 
 
 There is another clause with regard to a contingent fund we have. Each member 
 pays what we call a levy of six cents per member per quarter. That goes to a con- 
 tingent fund. That is to pay any one who is in distressed circumstances, or the 
 widow of any member who is in distressed circumstances, or the children. There is 
 no special sum. It is left to the officers, and they allow what they think is right. I 
 have known as much as £10 to be allowed to children. 
 
 Q. Is that in the constitution of the main body ? — A. Tes, sir. This — [Monthly 
 Report of the Carpenters' Society — Exhibit Q] — is the monthly report of the society, 
 showing the progress made by it since formation. It also shows the rate of wages and 
 number of hours in the places where the society has branches. There are branches in 
 the United States, Canada, South Africa, New Zealand and Australia. For the gov- 
 ernment of this society we have what is called a general council, which meets every 
 JOHN HAMMOND— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 223 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 three years. The society as a whole is divided into 17 districts, 14 in the United King- 
 dom, the American district and Australia. The districts send in delegates, and each 
 branch in the district nominate any member whom they think proper. He is taken 
 on a vote of the whole in the district, the man having the highest number of votes 
 being sent as representative. Every three years the rules can be altered by amend- 
 ments or suggestions coming from branches. If the society has any rules to alter 
 they send it in to the general council at Manchester and they alter if they see fit. I 
 might mention that there is a suggestion to go into the council that Canada should 
 have a representative district of its own, separate from the American district, and 
 have a representative in the government of the society in Manchester. 
 
 Q. What is meant in -the rules by the E. C. ? — A. That is the Executive Council. 
 That is the next governing body to see that the rules are carried out. 
 
 Q. That means the Executive Council situate in Manchester ? — A. Yes, outside 
 of members residing within twelve miles of Manchester and within fifty miles of 
 Manchester, 
 
 Q. The Executive Council also have to sanction a strike ? — A. If we wish to strike 
 we have to write to the district ofiice. If they see anything that might require urgency 
 they could give permission temporarily until the sanction of the executive at Man- 
 chester. 
 
 Q. I see that the executive have power to declare a strike closed whether the local 
 people like it or not ? — A. Yes, in a good many cases they have done so. If informa- 
 tion comes to the executive that the strike has been hasty, they send a representative 
 and declare the strike closed. 
 
 Q. That is a power that so far we have not seen taken by any other executive ? — 
 A. My opinion is that it is a very good one indeed. I would also say that each month 
 the secretary of each branch has to send in a monthly report as to the state of trade, 
 the number of men within the branch, number of branches, number of men receiving 
 sick pay, number of men receiving out-of-work benefit — a monthly report. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to compulsory arbitration ? — A. I am against it. 
 
 Q. Do you believe in conciliation ? — A. Yes, in conciliation between the two par- 
 ties interested. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to compulsory investigation of disputes ? — A. I believe in 
 conciliatory measures — that is, to bring the two parties together. I am of the opinion 
 that the two parties interested should come together themselves, and I don't know of 
 any case where two men have come together where they have not come to some mutual 
 agreement. Arbitration will never do any one any good. It makes a feeling when 
 you are beaten that you will have your turn sometime, and you don't go to work with 
 the same satisfaction as if you agree. Instead of dragging solicitors into a dispute, 
 I am satisfied that if the parties would meet together it would alter an employer's 
 position with workingmen. 
 
 Q. You think employers should meet their men ? — ^A. Yes. In our own dispute 
 they were -averse to meeting or discussing, and letters have been passing to and fro. 
 The first time we got together we came as near as could be to settling matters. I might 
 say in reference to what my brother workman has remarked, that with regard to the 
 three months' notice, that is only a local rule. Manchester and London and large 
 districts have to have 6 months' notice from either side ; such notice to expire on 
 May 1. Here in Victoria, we give 3 months' notice. 
 
 Q. What would you suggest where the employer won't meet the employees ! — A. 
 Compulsion to raake him to meet the employees. The number of members in Canada, 
 as well as on the American side, is given in the monthly report handed in. 
 
224 MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSIOTf 
 
 SA EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 J. W. Troupe, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. You are tlie manager of the C.P.N". Company in Victoria ? — ^A. Yes, sir. 
 Q. That company is being operated in connection with the C.P.R. ? — A, Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Another case of merger ? — A. Soon will be. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. And there was a strike in progress which has aifected the C.P.N Company ?— 
 A.— Yes. 
 
 Q. Will you just state how you came into possession of that paper ? (Exhibit 8.) 
 — A. It came from Juneau. It was brought back by the purser on the Princess Maf 
 Brought back on the last trip of the Princess May. 
 
 (Document read by Mr. Bodwell.) 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How did you get possession of this ? — A. I don't remember. The date the 
 jmrser got it was, I think, May 6. He turned it over to me on May 7. I have no idea 
 when the first copy appeared. I may say that we had an agent there and he said that 
 when he was up against a proposition of that kind, it was pretty hard for him to get 
 business. 
 
 Q. Where did you get this ? — A. At Juneau, one hundred miles this side of Skag- 
 way. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You were managing the affairs of the C.P.N. Company during the period of 
 the trouble when Mr. Estes was here ? — A. ^es. 
 
 Q. The Steamshipmen's Union did not join in the strike for some little time ? — A. 
 No, they did not take part at first. 
 
 Q. There was a strike at one time before. How long was that before the 6th 
 March, that was the day the Charmer was stopped ? — A. On March 5 the men refused 
 to handle what they termed ' scab freight ' — the men on the Charmer — and gave me 
 to understand that it would be applied to all the steamers, although it was so difficult 
 to tell what scab freight actually was and was not, that it was difficult for me to tell 
 how far it applied. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Who told you this ? — A. The first notice, I think, came to the captain of the 
 Charmer; it didn't come to me. It came from Mr. BuUey, I think. He was the repre- 
 sentative of the B.C. Steamshipmen's Society, and he was working on the Charmer 
 at the time, and took the most active part. 
 
 By Mr. Bad well : 
 
 Q. And in consequence of that did you have a meeting ? — A. In consequence of 
 that notice, we went along without handling non-union freight. In fact, it meant 
 that we were handling practically no freight at all. The freight was falling off in 
 Yancouver 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You quit putting non-union freight on the Charmer ? — ^A. Yes, from that 
 time up to the time of the strike of March 17. 
 
 J. W. TROUPE— Victoria, May 14. 
 
02f INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES rU BRITISH COLUMBIA 225 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPfeR No. 36a 
 
 ByMr.BodweUi • 
 Q. What I want to know is, if you had a meeting of the jnen or some of them in 
 consequence of. that first notice ? — A. Yes. About that time I had a meeting one night 
 on bqard the Charmer with Mr. Bulley and Mr. Sheff Thompson, and we had a very 
 nice talk over tT}§ situation, and they felt disposed 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What nigtt' was that ? — A. J could not tell what night it, was — after the 5th, 
 perhags along about the 10th of March. I don't know; the exact date, but it was really 
 the first talk I had with' them over the situation. I told tliem the' record would show 
 tii^t I had ireateii them fairjy, and that tte 0. P. i(. liad done fairly by these men ; 
 that I did not see why they should become involved in this afEair. It was purely a 
 railway strike, rnd that if these men w^re striking in Victoria, why didn't they call 
 on the raily'ajy men who were right alongside of them, and who would bring the issue 
 to a, close in a shorter 'time than they could. They, I ttink, rather saw the matter in 
 my light, and said they hoped it would gp along without any trouble, but they had, as 
 I understood it, pledged, themselves ttat they would not, handle, seal; frei^lit, and inas- 
 much as they were union men they would have to stand by union principles and handle 
 nothing that was scab. The night we had this talk the Yosemite was fitting up to 
 go to Vancouver, and they were rather suspicious of her going. T understood from 
 their talk that she was to load up with freight, . and .that J;hey were going to relieve 
 the situation in that way. I told them J did jaot intend, to break faith with them, 
 and that when I got ready to handle scab freight I would-let Ijheni.know, and I would 
 expect that they would, not' quil;. . That was the threaj;^ they, made. Tl^at was the talk 
 we, had on tha,t occasion., , i ! : - ■ . - :. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell ': 
 . Q. Was there jiot a .itieeting at which a remarjc wa^ made by *)ne of the men ? — 
 A. That was later. The thing ran along for a few days, but in the meantime the 
 Princess May was going i^orth, and she went ii;itQ .Yapepuver, and^.there was some diffi- 
 culty there tbsit night, ,whi|le,the boat was not loading any ireight, as. I remember. 
 In fact, I, was here. , -I gave the captain ,orde;i;s th,atvhe/.was not to, take anything as 
 scab £r6igh,tT:-that I did not want to precipitate tfp^iblp at. that time. ^ My own reason 
 was that if I could get along without being drawn into it I ifpuld aypid trouble until 
 this,, affair at Yancouver -would straighten out.. However, there was some dispute about" 
 a lot of baggage that was being brought- down. from the station to the steamer. It was 
 a very fine point as to what really was scab baggage. , 
 
 Q. Explain. that ? — ^A... If baggage qame in by the train and. was handled from 
 the train to the steamer by the steamer's crew that was not regarded by them as scab 
 baggage, but if by any means, this baggage got into the baggage-room where noji-union 
 men were employed, then it was. Suppose" the train, got in after the arrival of the 
 Eteamer, if the baggage went to the baggage-room it became unfair baggage. If it 
 was carried straight to the boat it would not have been. It was a difficult point to 
 settle. At any rate, there was some dispute about this particular lot of baggage on 
 the Princess May, going to Skagway. I , would not be positive as to any bging handled 
 from the through train. Possibly some pf it was from the train. At any rate, it was 
 baggage checked through to Skagway. With the second load some one called attention 
 to the men belonging to^ the steamer that they were handling scab baggage, at least 
 told them they were, and I think Mr. Noonan went down on board and told them they 
 were doing wrong and must come out. They quit work, and the. officers of the ship 
 had some talk with them, and they went up-town, I believe, to discuss the matter there, 
 at least some of them. They had some argument about it back and forth, and finally 
 concluded to come on the ship, and the ship did sail, but in the meantime Mr. Noonan 
 wired over to 
 
 J. W. TROUPE— Victoria, May 14. 
 
 36a— 15 
 
226 MnrUTES OF EVIDEJ^CE OF ROYAL COMMJSSKym- 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. We have this telegram here: 'March 14. — To S. Thompson from George 
 Noonan. War declared, order out the G. P; *N. £eet-^^-^' ■ ■ : : » 
 
 hy His Lordship .■ 
 Q. What did you gather was meant by the expression, .'War declared'?— A. I 
 gathered that every member of the B. O. S. S. was to leave the employ of-H3le C P. N. 
 Company, and that they were to do everything, in rtheir power ttf>ptev«nit us Tunning 
 theship.- - .r .. ... : .-. ■ ■ ■ I [ ■' <• -.r: -,..;i, ,..;,. . . ', : 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : ;. . . : .;. . : 
 
 Q- How did you cometo see the telegram ?^-A*- That game night I -heard of Ais 
 trouble at Vancouver, I received a telegram that I had-.better come over, that.ihexrew 
 of the Princess May had struck, .alleging that scab baggage was on board, and that I 
 had better come over and see what I could do. I had then gone doWn on; board the 
 Charmer and hud gone to bed about 11.30, aiid just aboirt ten minutes -before the boat 
 sailed the telephone of the steamer was i-utig and the night cleric was told to g» and 
 call me and tell me the matter had been decided and the steamer had sailed. I turned 
 over and went to sleep, but the next morning when we came into V^^^couver, Mr. Bulley 
 and Mr. Sheff Thompson appeared at the door and asked me if I had heard that the 
 crew of the Princess May had gone out. I said, yes I had. They asked me what I knew 
 about it. My telegram was lying on my table, and I turned the telegram over to them, 
 and they handed me theirs. I said, ' Did you do anything last night ? ' And they said, 
 ' No, we came on over to see albout it,' — that they did not act on the telegram, that 
 they went to see about it. From what I could gather, they rather congratulated them- 
 selves on coming over to see about it, as their information was not complete. That 
 \\as the last intimation they got, though I had information that the freight had sailed. 
 The freight would have been tied up that night if we had not succeeded in getting 
 them out. They went to see about it, and' the matter was discussed then. 
 
 Q. When did you make the arrangement about the twelve hours ? — A. It tvas after 
 that. It had run along for a couple of days after that, and finally one day just when it 
 came sailing -day for the Charmer, the captain told me that they had given notice they 
 were all going to quit that night. So I said, all right we will see about it. I west 
 down and got held of Mr. Bulley, who was working on the Charmer, and had a long 
 talk with him. I talked with others of the crew of the steamer, and asked them' what 
 the trouble was — why they wanted to strike. Well, they didn't know. I asked therh 
 if they had a grievance. They said, no, we have no grievance, but you kno*f.how'it is, 
 and we have got to go into this thing. I talked with Mr. Bulley, and I got him to 
 agree to hold this. They were going to have a meeting. They wired from Vancouver 
 calling for a meeting that night. That was some time before the IGth. It was between 
 
 the 14th and 16th. They arranged for a meeting down here that night, and I 
 
 Q. Here it is March 13 — ' Call special to-night. Charmer loaded \ -ih scab freight, 
 yll going out to-night ? '■ — A. I would not be sure as to this, but I am giving them in 
 consecutive order, I think. I met Mr. Bulley and had a talk with him after he knew 
 he had called a meeting for that night. I asked him to use his influence with the 
 society that night — with the union — and see if he could not prevent it. ^ I said there 
 was no reason for this strike — I would not bother about this thing. Inasmuch as it 
 seemed so unreasonable, I thought he ought to use his influence to stop it. We had thi^ 
 conversation in the chief engineer's room. I talked to other members of the crew. I 
 said, ' What is the matter with these men anyway ? What's the kick ? ' He sSys, 'I 
 don't know ; it's no use ; it is a disease.' One of the other members of the crew of the 
 Charmer said this. I thought I could get him to use his influence also, but he said, 
 ' It is no use ; it is like a disease,, and you can't do anything.' At any rate they did 
 have the meeting that night, and we arranged that if they decided to go On with their 
 work that they would notify me before 9 o'clock that they were coming back. They 
 
 J. 'W TROUPE — 'Victoria, May 14. " 
 
OW INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA m 
 
 SESSIONAL' PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ;iK)*iigd ms a few minutes- bef are- 9 tbat-.tiiey had a meeting and desired to stay with 
 me. The entire crew of the Charmer went up, had a meeting, and decided to come 
 back with the understanding that we were not to handle scab freight. 
 
 Q. What arrangement did you make with them as to that ?^A. On- that account 
 there was no special arrangement, but on another day— it was on Sunday morning be- 
 fore the strike, we arrived in -Vancouver, and I had a meeting, in. .Mr. McGowan's office 
 ia Vancouver with Mr. Shefi Thompson, Mr.Bulley and Mr. ;Noouan, the three heads 
 of the organizations in the two places, and on that occasion we made an arrangement, 
 that is to ssy, I wanted to know — I told them I was rather tired of the way things were 
 going, and I wanted to know whether they were going on or not. They said they were 
 tioing on with their work, but that there must be no scab freight handled, and we 
 finally agreed that they would give me twelve hoiirs' notice before they went out, and I 
 would give tbem twelve hours' notice before I commenced handling freight. By this 
 time you might say we had no freight whatever, everything was scab. The agreement 
 was that they would give me twelve hours' notice, and I would give them twelve hours' 
 notice. I said I did not want to be treated like I was in the case of the Princess May. 
 I said I would issue instructions not to handle scab freight, but if anything comes 
 on board that is scab, say soj and don't let it get on board, and then say she is loaded 
 with scab freight and cannot start. I said, ' Play perfectly- fair about it, and call the 
 cjiptain and call his attention to it, and he will not have it come on ooard if there is 
 going to be trouble aiDout it.' They said, all right. 
 
 Q. You issued instructions accordingly ? — A. I issued instructions accordingly. 
 On the Sunday night that I got here, that night the Princess Louise, Captain Mc- 
 Closkey, was due to leave. I explained to him about the matter, so that there would 
 bo no trouble the next day at Vancouver-^Monday, the 16th— and I should say, how- 
 ever, on the Sunday previous when these men, Messrs. BuUey and Sheff Thompson, 
 Tsaid, ' Are you going back to Victoria to-night ?' I felt: if they stayed in Vancouver 
 we were going to have troubre. I sort of hinted for them to come back. 
 
 Q. What did they say ? — A. They said no, we are going to stay here. I asked 
 what the reason was. I intimated they had better come back, but they stayed. I had 
 assurances from Captain :MoCloskey that he was very particular about his instructions, 
 that nothing should come on which would make any trouble, and he went so far as 
 to get Mr. Sheff Thompson and bring him over to the wharf and showed him the 
 freight, so as to settle whether it was scab freight before it went on, as I understand 
 from him. I am not sme but that Mr. Estes was on the wharf at the time — this was 
 on the 16th — they were all there together, and they agreed that it was all right, the 
 freight that we were taking on, and she finally got away- with all of the delegates and 
 Mr. Estes on board. But on the way down they discovered a barrel of oil or some- 
 thing that must have become scab, because some fault was found with it. What it 
 was I don't know, but Captain McCloskey tells me he thinks it was a barrel of oil, 
 but at any rate when they got down here the boat came in as usual. I had so much 
 confidence. I knew that Mr. Estes was coming — ^I was wired that he was coming, 
 and warned to look out for mischief. That was the word wired me. Of course, I 
 knew what the errand must be, but I had so much confidence in the assurance the men 
 gave me about twelve hours' notice, so that when the Louise landed I went home and 
 went to bed. About 11 o'clock or 11.30 there was a man came up who had come from 
 Vancouver and said there was likely to be trouble, and that he had notice of what was 
 going on. He says, ' Mr. Estes came over on that boat to-night. I heard them talk- 
 ing on the way over, and they are going to strika' I said, ' Yes, but I don't think 
 there is any danger to-night for they promised to give me twelve hours' notice, they 
 might strike to-morrow, but they won't do it to-night.' He said that was all he knew 
 about it, and the next call I got was about 12.30 or 1 o'clock, when I was told that all 
 the crews had struck, and there was not a man left on any of the boats. The only 
 notice I got of the strijie was from our ^ent, Mr. Briggs, on the wharf wiring me that 
 
 86a — 15i J. W. troupe— Victoria. May 14 
 
228 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL C0MMIS8F0J 
 
 .3-4 EDWARD .VH^, fii. 4901 
 
 Mr. Bulky had come in and told him that the men >would all (Juit, and that- be 'had 
 better tell me, which he did. . ' ' " . 
 
 Q. That was after the men had struck. What did you do ? How did you get 
 the Charmer out ? You did not get the Danube out, or any .other boats ?^A. Ko, 
 the Danube was due to sail that night, and it was impossible to do inythijig- to get 
 her out. It was after her sailifig time then. - . . ^ ; m,; , 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : _, - i: . !■ ;: .., 
 
 Q. Could she have gone if she had a crew ? — ^A. Yes, sic., •- 
 
 Q. It was not a question of machinery ?^-A. No; sir. - ^ ■ , - ; < ! 
 
 By His Lordship : i ■ , . : ■:,:•; 
 
 Q. We haVe had given in evidence that she could not go- out,, anyway ? , That 
 the machinery had broken: down ?^-A. If; there, was I don't know it. 
 
 By Mr: Bodwell : ■ . : , ; 
 
 Q. That was not the fact, anyway? — A. As fiar as I know, it was not the fact. I 
 did not go into the' Mgine^rodtn of the Danube^— it would have been reported to me. 
 
 Q. Now, about the Charmer — ^how did you get her out ?^— A. Before I dressed 
 myself I telephohe&fdrcertaih men on the wharf to get carriages and go to the various 
 parts of the town and get the captains, the mates and engineers who I knew were in 
 the city, and ask them to come down and lend me a hand. We had no particular 
 difficulty in getting men except in the stoking-room. - 
 
 Q. They were not filling theiT proper positions ?-^A. No, they were Officers of the 
 ship. They were ptit where they were niost useful. - "; . , 
 
 Q. You could not get men for the stoke-rtfora f^ — A. I was the chief stoker myself, 
 1 h.Td me or two men who would stay with me, and there were about enough of the 
 officers who volunteered to help us, and between us we fired the Charmer from Vic- 
 toria to Vancouver that night. "We" got to Vancouver a little late, and when we 
 reached Van-couv^r we managed to secure enough men to dd the work out of a reserve 
 crew of nien that were on th6 dock at Vancouver, not steamboat- men, but men who 
 were truckers, &c., on the wharf . • , , ; ■ ^ „ 
 
 Q. The Commission will sit in Vancouver, I understand. Captain; Troupe ean. give 
 a lot of evidence, and I suppose thfey can get that evidence there. • I Want'you te tell 
 us something about the condition of things with reference to intimidation *of your 
 men, and thb efForts you had in getting tnen to take the places of - striker s^ as fijJly as 
 you can ?— A. From the very start we had trouble- in that respect, although I must 
 say that night I was called and rushed down I expected to see the men all assembled, 
 but there were practically none. Before we got away with the Charmer more or less of 
 the strikers came down to see how we were going to do it; and tried to come on board, 
 
 Q. What were they coming on board for ? — A. I think for no good, of course, and 
 jjerhaps curious to know who we had secured to do the work. I stopped them myself. 
 I was feeling pretty warm, and I took possession of what I felt was our own property. 
 I thought I would not be interfered with. The next night we were bothered with men 
 about the wharfs trying — men who were there evidently for the purpose of seeing who 
 was doing the work on board, and as far as I could see, in some cases to persuade them 
 to leave, and in some cases they did persuade them to leave — evidently persuaded men 
 from going to work for us, for on several occasions we got men to state that they would 
 go to work on the boats, and they would come down on the wharf and that woulibe the 
 last we would see of them. The second night on board the Charmer I did police duty 
 myself up to twelve or one o'clock, and I then found one of the strikers down in the 
 stokehole talking to the new firemen we had there, and I had to drive him out. I sent 
 a watchman down below. As it went along it was more aggravating. They seemed 
 more determined ihvA v,e should not get men,: and tiiey made threats and intimidated 
 
 J. W. TROUPE— Victoria, May 14. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRiriSS COLUMBIA 229 
 
 BE-SSIONAL PAPER No.;36a 
 
 the men,- so that reaUjy it wft§ difficult to get men. We would get men ia Vancouver, 
 and they would go for them, and we would lose them. 
 
 Q. Did you, have any reason to know there was some persuasion used on the men f 
 —A. Not, at first.- It got getting worse when, the Tees and Queen City were ready to 
 sail. . Tie chief engineer of the T^fis came and, said, 'We are going to have trouble 
 to-night. I have met some of the strikers uptown, an,d they say they are going to have 
 the crew out of the Tees to-night, whether or not.' They said it did not make any 
 difference ; they were going to have the crew out. 
 
 Q. Any men actually^ assaulted ? — A.; I went to the chief of police then, after I 
 thought we were going to have trouble and asked him to give us extra help on the wharf 
 that night. He treated it lightly, but said he would send more men down there. 
 He did send some, but they did not prevent the men from being assaulted. One man 
 lost two of' his teeth, and another man came running on the wharf with his face cov- 
 ered with blood and every sign of being used up. - -I adsed the police why they had not 
 stopped them. They said, ' they are too many, and we cannot do anything with them.' 
 The sergeant of police was there, and was doing all he could with them, but needed 
 more help. I went to the sergeant and; said, 'give us, help ejiough. If, the city can't pay 
 for them, we will pay for enough police to maintain law and, or4erJ. i .They -^yould even 
 molest passengers, thinking they were going to work. 
 
 Q. Do you remember an incident in which Mr. SheS Thompson himself was con- 
 cerned ?— A. Qne occurred shortly after the strike. , , ; : , 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What date was this Tees afiair, .^A. I eould,;not,.say exactly. We, could get 
 the record from the police records. Qne of, the men was punished', 
 Q. Have you ; any men here whoi were aissa,ult!ed-?, 
 
 By Mt. Bodwell : , ,.,-., 
 
 Q. There were a good many, men who were assauiltedran^i^bused 'i—K. I saw a 
 man with a bloody nose. I did notseejiim str.Tiek. He c^ime running along the, wharf. 
 
 Q. Could you state from your knowledge of the, circumstances whether there was 
 a general intimidation going on, so that the men wer« afraid to work for you ? — A. 
 That was. absdlutely the case. There was intimidation so that men were afraid to 
 work on the steamers until these cases were tried in .the police court. After that it 
 was not so bad. I - 
 
 Q. T«ll u& about Sheff Thompson himself H^-K. To explain that I may say this : 
 that one morning shortly after the strike — I could not say which morning, the captain 
 of the OWer reported that Thompson had been on the Offer and had taken one of the 
 iiremen on shore, a man who was disposed to stay. That is, he either got him ashore 
 by persuasion or threats ; at any rate, he went ashore with Thompson. I heard of 
 this, and along about noontime I was along the wharfs watching things myself and 
 I met Mr. Thompson coming along between the ships and wholesale houses. I told 
 him that he would have to get off the wharfs or there would be trouble. One of the 
 captains felt that if he came near his boat he knew there would be trouble, and I made 
 up my mind that I would invoke the law, and that is what I meant when I said there 
 would be trouble if he persisted in coming on the wharfs. I recited to him his visit 
 to the Otter, and he said that was something he had a right to do. I told him I didn't 
 think he had. I told him he would have to leave the wharf and stay off. I said 
 * During all the time this is going on I have been as nice as I could — ^have done every- 
 thing to prevent this strike, and you folks persisted in bringing it on. You have got 
 to stay off this wharf.' And he did. 
 
 Q. Will you tell us about the incident of Bulley's brother, I think, being put off 
 tl'.e C/iflrnier about two o'clock one morning — you got reports as to .that ?^A. Yes, on 
 February 3 I received a letter from the captain of the Charmer telling me 
 
 J. W. TROUPE— Victoria, May 14. 
 
233 MINUTES OF EYIDEVim OF M07AL COMMISSION^ 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A- 1904,. 
 
 Q. Tou might just read; that correspondence, ,cq,ptain. , _ . , , 
 
 (Witness reads correspondence. — ^Exhibit 9.) 
 
 I might say that the man mentioned in this corre^ondence di4 join /thei unipp, 
 although he did not want to. He told me that he had been forced- to do it; that he 
 was sorry he had to quit. He had a family here, and as far as I know he has been 
 driven out of the town. He could not work on the boats pnaccouiit, of;tt(e.,situfition, 
 and had to look for work somewhere else. H« was a good, steady man, a:;;d.ha,d be.ep. 
 there a long time. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : , . . , , .... , 
 
 Q. The man you put in Bulley's place was not so good ? — ^A. No, we had to get 
 incpmpetent men. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : ■ 
 Q. I suppose that is just a mistake about the firemen's union ? — 4-. Yes, they, are 
 all in together here, all called the B. C. Steamshipmen's Society. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Do you remember anything else of importance, captain ?— A. 2^6. 
 Q. Here is a pajier — do you happen to know anything about that paper ? 
 
 {Copy Eailway Employees Journal, dated April 9. — ^Exhibit R.) 
 
 A. It is generally understood to be Mr. Estes' paper — most of them by him per- 
 sonally. 
 
 Q. From the number of articles signed by Mr. Estes ? — A. It is full of exag- 
 geration and some absolute untruths. 
 
 Q. It shows the kind of literature that was circulated among the men the time 
 the strike was on. The whole strike is taken up. It is headed ' Strenuous Life on the 
 C.P.R.' ' Strikers standing firm,' and so on. There are numerous paragraphs similar 
 to the circular. Here is a manifesto from ' the president's headquarters in the field,' 
 and there are a great number of paragraphs word for word. 
 
 His Lordship. — Tou want us to draw the evidence that "Mr. Estes drew tip every- 
 thing ? ' ' ' >,.:,, 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — I think he wrote that circular. The suggestion I make is that.it 
 will come out clearly in Vancouver that Mr. Estes was the whole thing all the tipie. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You understand, Captain Troupe, that the contention of the men is that this 
 was only a verbal arrangement about the twelve hours' notice to you. given by one of 
 their officers on his own responsibility ? — A. Given by three of their officers, Sheff 
 Thompson, Mr. Bulley and Mr. ISToonan on the one side, and Mr. McGowan, our 
 superintendent and engineer was with me at the time. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Is part of the agreement embodied in that? (exhibiting document. Exhibit 
 5). — ^A. I never saw this before. 
 
 His Lordship. — My recollection is that Bulley said you saw that. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. There was a resolution which was published— that was the document you 
 saw ? — ^A. I saw one. I think they sent me a copy of the resolution. It was only ^ 
 verbal agreement, and the arrangement was published by them. 
 J. W. TROUPE— Victoria, May 14. 
 
02^' INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES Ilf BRITISB COLUMBIA 281 
 
 S:SSiONAli'>ApeR Uo. 36a 
 
 Q. Does that correctly state the agreement ? — A. Excepting about the twelve 
 hours' notice here — that came afterwards. The agreement ta ^ve , me twelve .hours' 
 notice came after this was published. This was published after the meeting that night 
 when they turned down the strike question. That is the meeting following upon the 
 declaration <if war. It was two or three' days before Bulley and Thompson came to 
 Vancouver. . . 
 
 Q. That is dated the 14th April ?'— A. It was aftfet that. The twelve hour arrange- 
 ment with me was made on Sunday the 1 5th at Vancbuver! - 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — This was Saturday the 14th. Bulley said in his evidence in the 
 police court that he took it around. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Tou made the twelve hour arrangement with him in Vancouver on Sunday ? — 
 
 A. Yes. - -^ 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Tou might give us a little more fully what measures you tppji io carry out the 
 arrangement ?^A. I took each of the captains who were being affected and, gave them 
 exhaustive instructions verbally. In the case of the Charmer I v^as in Vancouver 
 frequently during that time myself, and on two or three toccasiony I, instructed the 
 mate himself to be most particular to stop s.cab freight coiping on board. They did 
 not regard freight hauled to the wharf by rnaster teamster of' by owners of teams— 
 they did not regard that as scab freight, and did not treat it that way, but it got so 
 there was qiiite a little of that sort coming, then they pronounce(i that scab freight, and 
 that must be stopped. That question came up with the mate, and I told him particu- 
 larly that I did hot want any trouble — 'Don't take anything of the kind— no matter 
 who forces it on you.' 
 
 Q. After the inception of this agreement was there some one of these union men 
 on the wharf watching the freight ? — A. No, I think not. 
 
 Q. Who was to determine whether it was scab freight ?^A. They were all mem- 
 bers of the crew and they were members of the union. , 
 
 Q. You took it for granted that unless some objection was made to the freight 
 that it was all right ? — A. I thinlc so. Although I went over and said not to take any- 
 thing he thought' was scab freight for the reason that I did not want to be trapped, I 
 felt that they might take some freight on board purposely and then quit. But after I 
 had this Sunday meeting — ^this last arrangement with them, I thought that they would 
 not allow that to happen. 
 
 Q. You had an arrangement with Bulley and Thompson and Noonan that the 
 crew were to look out for all scab stuff ? — A. Yes, and as a matter of fact the captain 
 stood by himself and referred the freight and baggage coming on board to Mr. Shelf 
 Thompson himself and, I believe, Mr. Estes. I would like to see McCloskey put on the 
 stand to verify that. That was on the trip that caused the trouble. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — Sheff Thompson, Bulley and C. H. Thompson were all on board 
 that day going down to hold a meeting in Victoria. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How did this barrel of oil elude these men ? — A. I really don't know. 
 
 Q. You say there were Sheif Thompson, C. H. Thompson, Bulley and Estes on 
 board when this freight was being put on ? — A. Yes. I would not say but what there 
 was something put on before that time. There was no question raised until that 
 particular time, perhaps half an hour before she sailed. Captain McCloskey can give 
 details as to that. 
 
 J. W. TROUPE— Victoria, May 14. 
 
B2 MISCJEH OF ETIDEyCE OF ROYAL COMMISSIOTi 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VM.-, A.^1904 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. What about the statement with regard to threatening the men on the Princess 
 May with impriionmf-.it ? Were you there at the time? — A. No. I was in Vancouver 
 at the time. I don't know exactly what took place. 
 
 Q. How would the company have hoped to do business^ iinder the agreement %— 
 A. We did not hope to do business except passenger businiess. I thought we could 
 keep the mails and passengers going and spar for time. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. And you were piepared to go to tlie length of delaying freight for three or 
 four weeks ? — A. Xo, not as long as that. 
 
 Q. The men thought you were .sparring for time to get a crew so fhai you could 
 dismiss them ? — A. That was not the case. My hope was that the strike would work 
 itself out in Vancouver. At that particular tiine the Board of Trade were acting as 
 a conciliatory body, und it looked as though it might be brought to a tefminatibli, and 
 we v/ould coi.tinue doing l.'dsincss in the same way, and would have escaped any diffi- 
 culty over the matter. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Where do you attribute the influence that produced your conflict with the 
 strikers ? — A. 1 attribute it to Mr. Estes — no dpubt about it in my mind at all. If 
 those represent ntives had not been persuaded to stop in Vancouver that Sunday night 
 and Monday, and if this B.C.S.S. on its own advice and without oatside pressure or 
 influence had been allowed to go on, they would not have struck, because after they had 
 been practically directed to so ike they came here and had a meeting of their own and 
 turned it down, and said ' No, we won't strike.' 
 
 Q. You say there was no resolution at any meeting except the one which took 
 place at the one you have just meijtioned ? — A. Well, they did turn it down, because 
 they were to give rne notice lifore nine o'clock, and they told me they had put the 
 thini; to a vote, and voted dov;n the question, even although they had promised to 
 strike at Vancouver. The point I want to make is that as long as the men were left 
 to their own judgmrent they had no inclination to strike. 
 
 By His Lordship : . 
 
 Q. Where is Estes now ? — A. I heard he was still in Vancouver. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Did nothing happen at the longshoremen's meeting on Wednesday night ? — 
 A. That must have beeen some days later. I had a meeting with the longshoremen in 
 their hall, but tliot is another organization entirely. 
 
 Q. They are stOl on strike, are they n,ot ? — A. Not exactly. They had not 
 Bcriously deliberated the question whether they would refuse to work for the CP.N. 
 Company or not — so they told me in their note — they invited me to come — they to]d 
 me the steamboat men had no occasion for the strike, and they had decided to work 
 for us when we required them, but inasmuch as they were a union body, all they 
 wanted was that we would not ask them to work with non-union men during the hand- 
 ling of the trouble, and wanted to know if I was willing to enter into an arrangement 
 of that kind, and I said yes, we had a verbal agreement, and I kept my word with 
 them, just as I did with the other people, and we have had no trouble from that day 
 to this. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. You never violated the agreement ? — A. Never knowingly violated the agree- 
 iHfent. 
 J. W. TROUPE — Victoria, May 14. 
 
OiV INDESTRIAL DliSI^VTEJS IN BRITISH. OOLVMlilA 233 
 
 ^SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By His Lordship ; 
 ,Q. Why, woyld the steawtioatmeii go put on strike wlien the engineers and fire- 
 , men did not ?-^A. That was what I conU not nnderstand, and I put it to the men 
 before they struck. I said ' What gopd can you do, going on strike with a lot of rail- 
 way men ; if they want help,, why don't they call on the men beside them. If they have 
 a just cause yavL can rest assured that the trainmen,, telegraphers and firemen and the 
 strong organizations will stand by them, and it will be settled in a short time indeed.' 
 But these organizations won't have anything to do with them. As a matter of fact I 
 don't believe that one-half the men know why they did go out.^ 
 
 Q. It appears that some 40 of them have imdertaken to bind the action of the 
 160; that there were but 40 who resolved to go on strike ? — A- I don't understand why 
 there were npt more at the meeting, excepting for this : there were many men who did 
 not want to go on strike; men who were forced into the union. For instance, there 
 were two men 'who were mates' o:^cers duri,ng last summer, but i^ winter there were not 
 enough boats to go around and they had to seeic other, work in order to be employed. 
 They did not want to have anything to do with the union, they said we are officers, and 
 could not belong to the union. They said, you are not officers now, you are doing our 
 work. They forced these two men to join their union. They sent in their names and 
 initiated them, I suppose. They did not go to the meeting that night ahd many others. 
 I don't think the crew of the Danube went up — men who. did npt want tp see a strike; 
 consequently it was brought about, as it often is, by men who hftve least tp Ipse. Good 
 men who are well regarded by their emi)loyers don't take pajit in these things„ It is 
 these men whio stand a ciance of bettering tkeir position -by_ a strike by getting some 
 better men out. It shakes them all down tp the same level when they. get. a strike- 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : ' ' . , 
 
 Q. Did you send written instructioils to any of the captains' regarding the hand- 
 ling of this baggage ? — A. 1, did to one, 'beeauie it was the only way of reaching him 
 that night. I wfote to MeCloskey, captain of the iowise. 
 
 Q. These instructions were nevet amended ?7-- A. No,, sir. , 
 
 William McKay, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What is your occupation, Mr. McKay ? — A. I am a stonecutter by trade. I 
 am caretaker of the post pffice at the present time. 
 
 Q; Are you a member of any union? — A. T*o, the Stonecutters' Union, and a 
 member of the Labourers'. I am not an active member. Of course I am not working 
 at the trade. There is a benefit connected with it, and you pay a per capita tax and 
 assessments, arid if you keep that up you can return to the union at any time as a 
 Ttieinber in good standing. 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of the constitution ? — A. Yes, this is a copy of the constitu- 
 tion of the Stonecutters' Association of North America, with headquarters in Washing- 
 ton, D.C. 
 
 (Exhibit S.) 
 
 Q. What power has that organization over local unions in the matter of strikes ? 
 
 ^. No power. If there is going to be any trouble, the union of course, has to refer 
 
 the matter to the head office, and in some cases to the whole general union of America 
 by referendum. 
 
 Q. That is, the, local union has to get the consent of headquarters ? — A. Yes. 
 
 That is to say in some cases, if they were violating any §trike by-law or anything in 
 
 tho constitution. 
 
 WILLIAM McKay— Victoria, May U 
 
234 MINUTES OF EVIDENCTe OP ROYAL QOMMISBIOW^ 
 
 .3fA EDWARD VIU. A,. 1904. 
 
 Q. Have the headquartera power to order a local union out .()».■ ^strik&j^r such a 
 violation ? — A. If they did not uphold the by-laws and constitution there would ba 
 some action taken. ; ' ■' • > 
 
 Q. You are aii officer of some labour body here ?— ^A. Well;-^e3,'''-I atn a' tostee 
 of the Labourers' Union, and vice-president of the Trades and Labou* Obiiucii.-'-.- 
 
 Q. Have you ever been concerned' in any strikds? — A^ Yes, Ofi'ein Vi'dtoriSi ' 
 
 Q. A stonecutters' strike ? — A. Yes. ' """'•' 
 
 Q. How was that settled ? — A. By conciliation. 
 
 Q. How long were they out ^ — A. One week. • ' ^ • 
 
 Q. What was that — a wage difficulty 1-^A. Not in fegarti to increase oi-'deereasa; 
 It concerned a man who had injured a stone he was 'working on and tidiflereffeeai'SSe 
 with the contractor who thought he should pay a certain amount of dama'^e. Biis 
 man was dismissed. The foreman sent hirrl to the office for his pay. At thetiHie the 
 man went to the office he was informed that the foreman had 'been: toM'not to give him 
 his pay. The contractor thought that a certain amount should be deducted ■ tiut of 
 his pay for the damage done to the stone. He appealed to the union, and he was told 
 to make this request and if not paid within 24 hours they would leave the work. The 
 contractor paid no attention to it. A day was appointed, giving notice, and when the 
 time came the men refused, to work. Then the , committee had several meetings and 
 they tried to interview the contractor and he ordered them off the ground. He would 
 not speak to them or give any promise. At that time there was" a conciliation law iii 
 the province of British Columbia. The late A. B. Gray was commissioner, and *3 
 applied to have the Conciliation Act enforced. According to that we appointed our 
 man and requested them to appoint their men. He appointed a third, and they took 
 evidence, and it was decided in favour of the .men, on account of .a case .never having 
 been known where a man had been knovpn to-pay for the damage done to the stone. 
 
 Q. And the decision of the board was accepted by the contractor ? — ^A. There was 
 no decision — merely evidence, and the evidence pointed out where this contractor was 
 trying to force something that had never occurred in stone-cutting before. 
 
 Q. The contractor gave in 1 — A. Yes, he gave in, and the men went to work. 
 
 Q. Have you anything to suggest about the settlement of strikes? — A. Well,, no. 
 There is tallc of that matter in our discussions. I happen to be upon the legislative 
 committee of the Trades and Labour Council,, and the Provincial Secretary of the 
 province here has brought in a Bill for conciliation and arbitration for the, prevention 
 of strikes and lockouts by arbitration. We had considerable discussion over, that and 
 it was looked at in this way: That while a law with regard, to strikes" anci.lopi^outs 
 may be desirable, we think it is rather strange that ihe law should step in ancf.say that 
 a man's work should be arbitrated upon, while others throughout the country can 
 manufacture and sell without any person to come in and saying anything about it 
 at all. 
 
 Q. Then youare opposed to the principle of compulsory arbitration ?— A. Yes, for 
 a compulsory decision. 
 
 Q. You think the parties should fight it out if they cannot settle by conciliation ? 
 — A. I think something might be effected without going that far. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. Still it would be better to settle by compulsory arbitration than by lengthy and 
 disastrous strikes ?— A. It might be. There is nothing pointed out where it would be 
 fair to the men. The public might receive some benefit. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. That would be the chief justification for interfering— that the public were 
 interested? — A. In cases where the public was not, what about it then? No justifica- 
 tion in that event. We have a large number of cases where there are 10, 15, 25 men af>- 
 fected, and where it is practically immaterial to the public. ' ., 
 
 WILLIAM McKAT— Victoria, May 14. 
 
OJf INDUSTBIAL DISPUTES m BRITISH COLUMBIA 235 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 -■■'■- By Mr. Rome : ■ 
 
 . ™jslit be, for instance, that there are 30 people in the telephone service em- 
 ployed in this : city, and it would tie a serious matter if that business were tied up ?— 
 A. Suppose a man was building a house, and those men came out on strike. It would 
 not ma^e ^ny difference if he came out this summer or not. To my mind, it should 
 be only specified for certain industries. 
 
 Q. Do you think if there was a compulsory arbitration law that it would facilitate 
 the settlement of disputes by concilia.tion — that people would rather settle ithat way 
 than go to court ?t— A. It is a question whether they would or not. That matter was 
 discussed very fully by some able men in Winnipeg in 1898. I happened to be a dele; 
 gate from the Trades and Labour Council, and they had in their platform a planjj as 
 to compulsory -arbitration. What they thought was that there should be some means 
 whereby the parties could be compelled to come together, and they thought after the 
 ividenoe went to a judge that the feeling, would be strong enough — that public opinion 
 would cause the employer or the men to give in. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you say about outside agitators ? — A. I don't know what a man calls 
 an agitator. It is hard to know what is meant exactly. People have called me an 
 agitator. I deny the charge. I am an educator. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. You would sooner have the term of educator ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Probably you thiitik it is Hot possible to educate until you have agitated ? — A. 
 I don't know. I don't believe in shaking things up, but I believe in using propev* 
 judgment. There is one matter I would like to mention that has not seemed quite 
 clear before the court. With regard to the status of international unions, that is the 
 executive or head, of the American Federation of Labour,' and of the Trades and 
 Labour Congress aiid local unions, I don't think this is very clear, and I would like 
 to go over it brifefly.' It seems to be the- impression that the Trades and Labour 
 Congress is looked upon as a national organization. It iS in on« sense, but their duties 
 ore Only in regard to legislation, -while an interiiational organization is a union. The 
 Trades and Labour Congress does not make any laws like a constitution of the others 
 governing any particular union. 
 
 Q. I think the Commission understand that, Mr. McKay. Would you consider 
 the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada the Canadian equivalent for the American 
 Federation of Labour ? — A. Just so. 
 
 Q. There are many trades nationalized in Canada? — A. I don't know of any 
 except the letter carriers. 
 
 Q. What would you say as to Canadian workmen confining themselves to Canadian 
 organizations ?^A. It might work out provided we had some interchange of cards. 
 In the absence of that I prefer to have the international connection. 
 
 Q. If they had Canadian organizations they could settle their strikes without 
 interference? — A. That is true, but there is always a certain amount of assistance 
 to be had from these head organizations which would not be available in the case of a 
 small number of men. Whether the men would be able to carry on without this is 
 something to be considered. I would consider it impossible to carry out nationalism 
 in all trades and callings. Take for instance in the stone-cutting trade. There are 
 several hundred in Canada. If Montreal, where there are some 200, chose to have 
 their men come out on strike the fund would not' be sufficient to support them by the 
 number of men that would be in the Dominion of Canada, where they would have the 
 support of the unions in the United States. 
 
 WILLIAM McKAY— Victoria, May 14. 
 
236 MINDTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROT At UOVMimiON ' 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vti.,'"X. 1904 
 ' By His Lordship : '•' •' ' ' 
 
 Q. 'That is the chief advantage, in the numbers ? — A. Ye^, it means that tnip 
 expense is proportiotiateiy reduced. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe . ' " ' ' . ' 
 
 Q. Have the larger organizations a less or greater iluni])er''pf strides ?— A. 'Less. 
 
 I find in my experience that where there is a small npmbet eUii>l<5y^<J— J have felt thai 
 
 the employer would impose on them more than if thej^ \vefe lirger— -I'might not say 
 
 impose probably 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. That he would deal more carefully with a large than a small body ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Eotve . 
 Q. A union associated, with a large federation has to get the conseiht of the exe- 
 cutive to stj;ike ? — A. Yes, in some cases. As I said befor^ if the constitution or by- 
 lav(;s are violated. If we were asked to accept a reduction in wages that matter has 
 to be put before them. 
 
 (Witness puts in copy of Constitution of Victoria Branch of Stonecutters' Union 
 —Exhibit T.) , 
 
 , Mr. BoiDE?r.—^Might I ask the witness a question or two ? , 
 
 His Lordship. — ^Yes, there is no objection to that. 
 
 By Mr. Bolden . ' - " 
 
 Q. You are vice-president of the Trades and Labour Council? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You are acquainted with the views of the executive committee in regard to 
 strikes and lockouts ? — A. Well, when the matter of any trouble with a union is 
 brought before the members of the Labour Council, I think the case is referred to the 
 executive to act ^s a conciliatory board between the union and their employer. 
 
 Q. And in the past, I believe, they have stopped a great many disputes, and have 
 prevented many strikes ? — A. Yes. ■ j _ • 
 
 Q. Do you know any similar organization in this city that has done the same 
 class of work ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. None among the employers ? — A. No. /' :-l w 
 
 . By His Lordship.: 
 
 Q. I understand that the executive of the Trades and Labour Coiincil has 
 frequently acted as a conciliatory body between employers and employees I — A. Yes. 
 When the case has been stated by the men they have made negotiations with the 
 employers. 
 
 Q. Have they generally been received ? — A. I don't know of any case, where they 
 have not. I could not say of any where they have not been received. 
 
 By Mr. Bolden: 
 
 Q. That you think that the trade unions of the city of Victoria as a body, repre- 
 sented by the Trades and Labour Council, has done more to settle disputes than any 
 )ther body in this city ? — A. Yes, as far as I know. They settled the Longshoremen's 
 stril«. 
 
 Q. That seems to point to the fact that workingmen az a rule are opposed to 
 strUies, and only take up a strike when necessity warrants it? — A. Of course I cannot 
 say in regard to that. I have never met what is termed union men — the ordinary 
 majority of whom but are opposed to strikes, and they are quite willing to act in a con- 
 ciliatory manner. 
 WILLIAM McKAY— Victoria, May 14. 
 
01^ INDUSTMIAL 'DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 287 
 
 SjE&SIONA^ PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You heard the evidence of Mr. Seabrooke ? Mr. Seabrooke said the men had 
 nothing else to do at the meetings biit consider matters of strikes, and troubles, as a 
 nlle, arose between the employer and his men simply because the men had nothing 
 else to think about. Is that a fact — have nothing to do but think of strikes? — A. No, 
 I never had any experience of that kind. 
 
 Q. It js a feict .that ,when men unite in a trades union that the first thing they 
 do is to consider strikes ? — A. No. - . - 
 
 Q. .Tlieii you thiiik the article read by Mr. Bodwell is not the fact ? — A. I have 
 not heard that. 
 
 His LoRDSHip.^I don't think Mr. Bodwell gave that as the opinion of any labour 
 man. 
 
 By Mr. B olden: 
 
 Q. The reason I asked this question of this gentleman is that he has had experi- 
 ence. Probably the writer of that article has none. — A. I pay very little attention to 
 what a man may write. ;: He has a right tb his opinion as w€il as 1 have to mine. If 
 people came before- this court and gave fevideiice to that effect I would'feel it miy duty 
 !0 contradict It . 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : ' ■ - < ;_ i ■ ■ - •■ 
 
 Q. What is your idea of the purpose and aim of trade unions ? — A. My experi- 
 ence is that they educate them as a society and help them in their liviiig-^to improve 
 their conditions in every respect. . . 
 
 Q. Do you think they have had a tendency to improve the morals of the men and 
 their economic condition ? — A. I do. 
 
 , .; Ij/ApysiiiTH, May 18, J903. 
 James Dunsmuih, sworn. : , / . 
 
 By Mr. bodwell ': 
 
 Q. Mr. Dunsmuir, how many years have you been connected with coal mining on 
 Vancouver Island ? — A. About thirty years. 
 
 Q. Since when did you assume the active management of the collieries at Welling- 
 ton ?— A. About 1872. 
 
 Q. The Wellington collieries were closed down in what year, Mr. Dunsmuir ?— A. 
 I really forget now — some four years ago, I think. 
 
 Q. At that time you began to open up the Extension mines ? — A. We commenced 
 before the Wellington closed down. 
 
 Q. The Wellington closed down after Extension was ready to operate ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. During the period with which you have been connected with the active man- 
 agement of the Wellington mines, what has been the course adopted in dealing with 
 
 the men and what way do you ?— A. I did not have the active management in the 
 
 collieries for thirty years. Mr. Bryden had the management, though I have been 
 connected with the collieries all my life. 
 
 Q. Mr. Bryden was the manager for a number of years ? — A. Yes, until he went 
 
 Q. When he ceased to be manager, did you take charge then ?^A. No, I did not 
 
 take charge. 
 
 Q. Mr. Little, did he ?— A. No, Mr. Sharp, and then Mr. Andrew Bryden. 
 
 JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
233 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3^ EDWARD VII., A.' 1904:; 
 
 Q. What was the manner of dealing with the men when any difficiilty,' if any, 
 arose between them and the managemeat-^^what was the :syst3m. adopted; ?-^A.;J^« 
 would have a committee of our own men. 
 
 Q. Appointed how, generally ? — A. By a meeting of thfr whole of the men. . 
 
 Q. There were some ditriculties at Wellington some ten years ago ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That difficulty lasted for how long, Mr. Dunsmuir ? — ^A, About five moijtlis. 
 
 Q. Was it found necessary by the men to form a:;uniOTi. in- consejuencs ef that 
 trouble ? — A.. That was the trouble, 'ihey wanted us to recognize a union, That was in 
 '90. To have a pit committee and 8 hours from bank to hank, Thoaa were thpir,. 
 grievances there. . . 
 
 Q. You did not think it wise to have a union formed, and did not give way on 
 that point ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. The men finally agreed to go back to work— that was the upshotiof that ?— A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. The difficulty lasted about five months ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. From that time until the mines closed was there any difficulty ? — A. No. 
 We never had any union at Wellington. i ' 
 
 Q. I suppose at times there were negotiations between you and the men as tp 
 matters which arose between 1390 and the time Extension was opened ?^ A. Not in 
 Wellington — ^never had any trouble there. 
 
 Q. When you started at Extension was there any union there ? — A. There was a 
 so-called union, but we never recognized it. There Was one at Alexandria. 
 
 Q. What kind of a union was that^was it allied with any foreign body, or just 
 among the men themselves ? — A. Just among themseives. 
 
 Q. And the management took no official notice o^ the union ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. No dealings were carried on with the men as a union ? — A. No. It was sup- 
 posed to be a committee of my Own men. 
 
 Q. Have you at any time ever refused to treat with a committee of your men 
 when they canie as such to you ?^-A. Yes, I did. They have come for a lot of triffing 
 things that the manager can settle. I told ihem I did not want to see them any more 
 — ^that they could treat with the manager. 
 
 Q. When was' that, Mr. Dtmsmuir ?-^A. That was before the Alexandria closed — 
 over a year ago. 
 
 Q. It was a committee from the Alexandria miners ? — ^A. Yes. ■' - ■ .. ■' ■,' 
 
 Q. The reason for that was the matters were not important enough ? — A, Yes, 
 they should have been settled by the manager. . ...,■■ 
 
 Q. And would you refuse to meet them now ? — A. No, that is a committee from 
 my own men. 
 
 Q. The objection you have is to meeting a committee representing some foreign 
 body or union ? — A. "ies. I don't say re:gn ; I say any union. I can get along 
 with my own men without having any union. 
 
 By His Lordship :. 
 Q. You object to the men coming before you as union men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell . ' 
 Q. You did not object to their baring their union which they did have' at Alex- 
 andia ? — A. Understand it was not a union. That was my understanding with them. I 
 told them in the first place that they were not to call it a union. It was a committee 
 from my own men, which I recognized as such, but not as a union. I think they 
 called it a union, but I never took any notice of it as a union. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Then I understand that you have never recognized any committee as coming' 
 from a union ? — A. No. 
 
 JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladyamlth, May 1». 
 
ON mnusxJiTAE nrmwTEs in britisb Columbia 2S9 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. Z6st 
 ; '-Byi Mr Bodwell : ' - 
 
 Q. There was a committee waited on you a short time ago since this strike began ? 
 — A. Yes, two. 
 
 Q. Tell us about them — ^what stand you took in the matter ? — A. The first com- 
 mittee that came down; there were three,. Mottisliaw, Jeffries and Jones. 
 
 Q.' About when was that Mr. Dunsmuir ? — A. Sometime in April. 
 
 Q. You said there were three ^ of them came. ?— 7A. Yea, Jeffries, Mottisliaw and 
 Jories. ' Jones was a coloured man. They sent in their card and said they wanted to 
 see me. I sent diit to ask.iif they represeli ted the- Western Federation of Miners, and- 
 they said they did, and I sent word back that I could not see them. That was the end 
 of that committee. The next committee-^ — ^ 
 
 Q. When was that next committee, a week or two weeks after ? — A. It might have 
 been two or three weeks. The next committee that carne down was Jeffries, Mot- 
 tishaw, Malone and Robertson. 
 
 Q. What happened then ?— A. They sent in their card and said they represented 
 the Extension mine as a committee. I told them to come in, and when they came in 
 1 told them I would give them an interview anyway, if it Wfis a committee represent- 
 ing the Extension miners. I asked them if they belonged to the Western Federation 
 and they said they did, and I told them I would have nothing to do. with the Western 
 Federation in any shape or form. I told them that I would hear a; eoiximittee of my 
 own men if they would withdraw from the Federation, that I would -meet a committee 
 from my own men. Or the men in a body, and treat with them. 
 
 Q. What did they say to that proposition ? — A. There was 9 lot of talk then. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. I think it would ba just as well to tell us as much as you can of the conversa- 
 tion ? — A. I asked them where the nigger was. They said he had not come this time. 
 I said I had heard there were objections going, around tha,t,I would not see the deputa- 
 tion because there was a nigger on it. I told theitn I did not care whether it was com- 
 )osed of niggers, Chinese, Japanese, Indians or whitemen — I would see them as long 
 as they were my own men. I went on and told them. about the union, and about all 
 ",hese agitators who were only sucking the blood out of tliem, that it was better to fol- 
 ow me than a man like Baker. He was not giving them bread. 
 
 Q. What were the reasons, if any, why your decision- should nqt.be acquiesce >1 in ? 
 What arguments did they advance in favour of the. union ?-^A. I do not knovi' that 
 they advanced any. They said that they did not want me to recognize the union, but 
 I neecfnot recognize the union or the Western Federation. 
 
 Q. But with the idea that it was to exi.t among the men ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. But you were not officially to notice it ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Something the same as the Alexandria business I — A. Something the same. 
 N"o, the Alexandria was different. I always met a committee of the men from Alex- 
 andria until it got so that I could not stand it. They came with the most trifling 
 things that could be settled by the manager. They would come down to Victoria to 
 ece me on little trifles that did not amount to anything at all. 
 
 Q. Could you give an illustration? — A. There was one dispute where they said the 
 manager told them to fill the rock, and they would get paid for it. 
 
 Q. Fill the rock — I don't quite understand? — A, Instead of filling coal, they were 
 to fill up with rock or dirt, to fill the car with dirt, so as to get the waste out of the 
 mine. I told them there was always two sides to a story. I met them in Extension, 
 and there was nothing in it at all. 
 
 Q. Nothing of importance? — A. Not to nie. 
 
 Q. Did you explain to this committee why in particular you objected to the West- 
 ern Federation of_ Miners, or do you object to the Western Federation more than you 
 would to any other kind of a union? — A. I object to all unions, federated or local, or 
 
 JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladysmith, May 1» 
 
240 MINUTES OF EYID'B'NV'E OF EOYAJL COMMISSION 
 
 Z-A EDWARD, yil^A-jlW 
 
 any other kind. I think I can treat with my own men without the- interference of a 
 union. 
 
 Q. What is the difficulty which you think would arise if imions were formed 
 among your men? — A. There is always a committee appointed to interfere with the 
 management of the work. It is called a pit committee. They come around and say 
 the men should have this, they should have that. They siniply take the management 
 of the mine. , j . . 
 
 Q. Do you think the men themselves have as much freedom where unions are in 
 existence, as where they are not? — ^A. No, I do not. , , 
 
 Q. Why? — A. He is dictated to by agitators or heads of the union, the prfesideiit 
 or Secretary, and whatever they say the men have got to do. They talk about Jseing 
 slaves — they are slaves to the union, these three or four heads, or what they call the 
 executive. . . 
 
 Q. Do you know of any real cause for difficulty which the men have now in these 
 mines ? — A. No, I do not. The only trouble is because I won't let them belong to the 
 union. They can belong to the union if they like — I don't pare. I have my rights; 
 I can hire them if I like, and they can work if they like. 
 
 Q. On the other hand, if the men persist in joining the union? — A. I can't stop 
 them. 
 
 Q. Then, they do it at the peril of leaving your employment, at any rate ? — A. 
 Yes. ,,' 
 
 Q. And you think these rights ought to be reciprocal? — A. YeSi 
 
 Q. And you consider that it is not in the interests of the business that the men 
 should belong to a union I — ^A. I do. 
 
 Q. You have no other motive for refusing to recognize except — -^? — A. Except 
 that I want the management of my own works, and if I recognize the union, I cannbt 
 have that. Then we are dictated to by a committee of the union as to ■Nyh-"t should be 
 done, and what should not be done, 
 
 Q. You think these pit committees interfere with the rdanageihent Of the business ? 
 —A. I do. ^ ■ " ' ■" " -'■'•'■' ■■ ' ■,_ ' " 
 
 Q. Gould you give any illustration of that — ;iti what way? For itiscariCt, sup' 
 pose there were a pit CommitteC'^what would be the interference you' widuld expect— ^ 
 what kind of interference? — A. They come around the min«s and put their pi*ice on 
 whatever they think the men should get. They put the prices on the difFereint stalk, 
 so much a ton and so miich a yard. , : . i i ',.'-,:■ >■■■•; 
 
 Q. Instead of allowing the management to fix the price with the individual miflfel'? 
 — A. Yes, the committee wants to fix these prices. . ; ' 
 
 Q. And the individual miners may be willing to work at the old terms, and would 
 work, but the pit committee would not let them ?— A. No, he has to take the price the 
 pit committee dictate. ' 
 
 Q. Your idea is, that the pit committee would fix their prices — ■riot to reduce the 
 good man to what the poor man would earn, but to bring the poor riian up to what the 
 good man earns ? — A. Yes, exactly ; that is what they intend to do. That is what 
 they call the weak man. They would not allow a good man to make a fair wage. 
 That is their idea. 
 
 Q. There is a union at the New Vancouver Co. collieries. Do you know anything 
 about the way business is managed there? — A. I do not know, but I know they have 
 had a lot of trouble in Nanaimo. The union there has Caused a lot of trouble. - 
 
 Q. Now, for the benefit of the Commissioners, you might explain something of 
 the way in which the work is carried on. The work in a coal mine is divided into 
 stalls? — A. Yes, stalls, levels and places. There is a level, and the stalls run ofi the 
 level, and these are called places, and some stalls. 
 
 Q. When a coal miner has a place assigned to him by the management, there is a 
 price fixed for the coal in that place? — A. No, there is a standard price for the coal; 
 then, if the place is deficient, they are allowed for that. 
 
 JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladysmith, May 18, 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 241 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No.- 36a 
 
 ' ' Q. The pit committee would go around and inspect that place and the prices and 
 want to change things ? If a man were making good wages, they would want to bring 
 the poor man up to the level of the good man?— A. Yes, to reduce the good man to 
 the poor worker. There would be a great deal of discontent about it, trouble all the 
 time. 
 
 Q. And a man would not be free who would have to observe the union rules ? — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I am going to ask the Commissioners, after a while, to receive a detailed state- 
 ment, but just in a general way — is there any reason to say that the men working in 
 this Extension mine have any cause for grievance in regard to their wages?— A. No. 
 
 Mr. Senklsr. — ^I do not think there is any question of wages raised. There is no 
 suggestion as to wages in the statement. 
 
 Mpc. BoDWELL. — For the general information of the Commissioners, I intended to 
 put in a statement of the averjige wages made. 
 
 His Lordship. — I think the question of wages is relevant in considering their 
 reasons for forming a union. They could say they were not satisfied with their wages. 
 That was suggested at the first meeting.. 
 
 M». Senkler. — That is possibly so, but in this statement there is no suggestion as 
 to wages, being the reason of the recent troubles. I should think that a statement as 
 to what the wages are in general would have notliing to do with it. 
 
 His Lordship.^ We have got to report to the government, and want all the facts. 
 I, would like to knqw how the wages here compare with other mines in the immediata 
 vicinity. , , . ' 
 
 Mr. KowE. — ^It should be taken into account that the original meeting was alleged 
 to have been called to consider an increase of wages, and presumably the union pro- 
 ceeded from a desire to have an increase of wages. 
 
 His Lordship. — The wage question is a large feature. 
 
 Mr. Bod well. — All I' want Mr. Dunsmuir to say was vdiether there had been 
 any complaint as to wages Up to this time, and he said no. 
 
 Witness.— That is as far as I know. 
 
 - By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. When you opened up Extension mine you first began at what is called No. 
 1?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And then you moved to the tuimel from No. 1 ?-^A. No, we commenced at No. 
 l^he first place opened up; then No. 2 and No. 3. No. 1 is a slope, then there is 
 No. 2 slope and then No. 3 slope. We call the tunnel the tunnel. 
 
 Q. The tunnel is at Extension ? — A. Yes, they are all at Extension. 
 
 Q. Yes, but where the Commissioners went up to see — that is the tunnel? — A. 
 Yes, the tunnd. ' 
 
 Q. We had some evidence given us with reference to moving the men from Ex- 
 tension to Ladysmith. I would like to have you say, in the first place, what allusions 
 you made as to where the town was to be? — A. I told them the town was to be at 
 Ladj'smith. I told a lot of the meii myMf, and told the managenient to tell the men. 
 That was right at the beginning. 
 
 , By His Lordship: ; ! 
 
 Q. That would be five years ago ?-^ A. I have the dates. ' 
 
 ' ' ' By Mr. Bodwell: .' ^ • . , 
 
 Cj,^ All right, let us have the, dates. — A. (Reads, from .memorandum, Exhibit 8.) ; 
 
 3g(j 16 JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladysmith, May IS. , 
 
212 MmXJTE8 OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMrSSIOy '^ 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII.. A. 1904 : 
 MEMORANDUM. ';;: 
 
 Stqirted to work No. 1 slope, November, 1895. 
 
 Started to work No. 2 slope, January, 1898. ■• ' W? :v', 
 
 Started to work at Main Tunnel, January, 1898, ■ , ' ■ C 
 
 Started to build wharfs at Ladysmith, September, 1898. ■ ■ i . 
 
 Purcbased land for town site at Ladysmith, April, 1896, cost of $6,340. .'■[ i , ,, 
 Started to ship coal from Extension, September, r899, about 200 men working; • 
 
 ]\Ir. BoDWELL. — ^Ilere you have a statement of the taonthty pay-rolls' from April, 
 1902, to February, 1903 : , . ' 
 
 (Exhibit 9.) ^ - •■ . 
 
 WJ5LLIXGX0N : lime. . '. ,.:--... ,!..:..: 
 
 Total of Pay Sheets. v 
 
 1902. ' / ■ ,. ■"■■ ' 
 
 April.. ..........'.,.. ...... $73,549 85/ "■'"' 
 
 May. '..-':..: ::.:-:-^..' .:..\v.. 76,71044 -"^'^^ ■■ 
 
 June.. :... .....:.. .:.. '.:.■ 65,11652- ,-=":;; 
 
 July ■..':.. ..;. '... 65,44t) M ''■'■"•'^-■■' 
 
 August 71,723 21' ^'•.^''' 
 
 September .....:.... .... . . . . ' .■. . . . . . . 64,172 '50 ' ''■' , 
 
 October.... ..';...'.'?....... 69,695 45' " '" 
 
 November V '. . ■6S,287 78 _'"'"'■; 
 
 December '. .. ....'.... mM^ 4S^'\^"''^'l 
 
 1903. ' --■■■■ ■ ■'■' ■ ' i'- 
 
 January . .71y527r 32. ;»--;■- J 
 
 February..,.. ..;•. .:;......'.... ;v. :i. .' ^65,000 e8Ft U 
 
 His Lordship. — Could you give us the average daily wage for that time ? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I am goiiig to. give you that., , . , ,, ; ; ,. ,^ ..j, -^,, ,.T.-,o'ii! •; 
 By Mr. Bodwell: ' ' ' " ^:---:::f'.P ,:.;:-•■; -; >i- » 
 
 Q. There was a committee of the men came to interview you 6ft one' occasio-i as 
 to whether the town site was to be at Extension ? Hav? y6u any Way • of fixing the" 
 date when that committee came to you? — A. I forget; probably two years ago.' ''^" ^^^ 
 
 Q. Who was on that committee? — A. I don't remember. "' '';" '■'' 
 
 Q. It was said to be composed of George Johnston, McClpsIiey and Spence-?^^A. I 
 remember Johnston. ' ' ' ' '•' ■'■'"■'^ '^P' ' 
 
 Q. They say they went down to meet you, had a conversation' with you, an'd that ' 
 you said you did not care where the men lived, giving the inference that they would 
 be hired just the same, whether they lived at Extension or Ladysmith ?^A! I toldi 
 them they could live where they liked, but I would hire them'where 1 liked. Of course' 
 that was some years ago, and I cannot go into details. * '■ '■' '- '" 
 
 Q. What was the substance of the conversation? — A. That is two' years ago, I 
 forget what was said. ' ■- <". qr; 
 
 Q. You can tell us what it was in substance? — A. No, I could not. ""' '' ^'- • 
 
 Q. You ti-lil ihom fhr-y could livr. where thfy liked ?— A. Yes,; but that the'towri" 
 site was to he at Ladysmith. ' ■ ' ' ' , i t iTfjoi,, 
 
 Q. Then they Said they wanted to stay at Extension? — A. I don't rem'dmber.' '•'" '"* 
 
 Q. What did you say about their living at Extension? — A. Well, I don't know. 
 It was understood, and they knew it perfectly well, that Ladysmith was to be'the town 
 site. I made the remark that they could live where they liked, but I could hire tliem 
 if I liked — the same as I have always said about unions. ^ ' \ 
 
 JAMES DUNSMUIR— Lad/smith, May 18. 
 
OmrnDUSTBIAL' DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 243 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. That you don't feel bound?t6" employ men who lived at Extension? — A. That 
 was the meaning of it. 
 
 By His Lordship : -■-■- , ' 
 
 Q. How do you account for thei men coming back and reperting^ to these other 
 men to the contrary ? — A. 'Th& same as they hare reported 'lots of things that I have 
 said. They said I wbnM recognize' the Tihion; I said the reverse. ' '» / '): 
 
 Q; Eithe* they must bei very' defieieilt in understahding, or you cannot convey 
 your ideas, in ?i way, that they may be understood ? — A. Probably I cannot convey 
 my ideas. ' ' ' '' ' ' ' " ' ■ -■ . • ■ ,--..■; 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. At any rate, you did not give them to understand that? — A. They all knew 
 they were to live at Ladysmith. They dirktfeW." This was all of two years ago. 
 
 Q. Tell me the reason why, f rprn >oiir standpoint, as well as the standpoint of the 
 men? — ^A. My standpoint was: In the first place, we were too near to Nanaimo; that 
 was the rea:gon of a lot of trouble between ^our workmen. In the next place, it was no 
 at place ip which to live. I thought it would be far better for th'eih to live down 
 bere. If 'there were no worlc, they could' go ' boating, st^p on' the train and go to 
 I^anaimo pr yictoria. It ■would I'ae oh the main line; ' Another thin^, there was no 
 water at Extensiojn. 
 
 Q. Explain that fully ?^ — A. There *is a lake, and in the suilimer time it is filled 
 with a sedimenl and people cannot drink it^ In the next plSifce, all the works will bo 
 coming towards Ladysmith, as the field extends this way. I was commencing just 
 before the^ strike, .-to sink a shaft about two and a half iniles from Extension this way 
 towards Ladysmith, arid another shaft I Was boring four miles from Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Was the other place two miles from Ladysmith ? — A. No, two miles from Ex- 
 tension coming this way^ 
 
 Q. How long do you expect it to be before you will move away frgpi Extension, 
 in the same way as you moved away from No. 1 and No. 2 slfipes ? — A. Probably, ten 
 years yet from Extension mine. We had the experieiice ef that at Welllngtori.' In 
 my father's time he would not sell any lots, knowing' that some day the whole thing 
 would be worked out. At the time of the strike we had ten years, ago, the papers took 
 that,'vip.^ ^?he. ' Free Press ' in Nanaimo said^w:e would not sell town lots, that we 
 w^nte4;to.ieep, the to'wii lotSj aiid It' made njeiarigry, thaia survey made and sold 
 so many lots to the miners. .Now, as .sooii as "the mines work ou^ tliey lose everything.^ 
 That was another thing I explained to tliern. 
 
 Q. Tp the committee ? — A- No, to the, men. . That if the riien came do-wn here, 
 they would always get value here, but at Extension tliey would ha-ve the same ejttieri- 
 ence;they had at.'W^ellingtori. 
 
 Q. Th? largest, life that Extension can hope for is ten years ?— 7A. Probably that. 
 J ■, ,Q. The works will be coming towards Ladysmith ?— A. Yes, right away. We' 
 Wftvild. h^ve taken the men.dpwn to these new shafts we are giving up, and it was 
 far tetter to take them from here than Extension, jExtension was not a fit place for^ 
 artown. Mr., Bramley said I offered him $5,000, that I wanted to place the townsite 
 up there. I had no intention of that whatever. I offered him $2,000, through his son- 
 in-law, Hodson, aixd liodson told me that Mr. Bramley saw Robins in Nanaimq arid, 
 hea,4yis|ed him to, ask for $10,000. I would not give it to him, and if I had got the 
 property for $2,000 1 would not have fouilt there at all. I wanted to get the propertv 
 80 as to,fceeji the men from being aroi^ind th^, mines,, close tq Ijlie pit. . ,. ,; ,- ,•- 
 
 ,,. Q. Mr., Bradley said he had some conversation with, you in reference to; a .road. 
 No^, explain that.fully.— A. jWhere the railroad ran,.. it put ,9il; a ro4,d coming down,- 
 tq.Us plfce, so I told BramleyJi-wouJd bujld: a ;road for him,, whjch . , 
 
 Q. bid you tell him where you, would: build the road? — A. We built it adjoinipg 
 the other road, where it branched from where we had destroyed it by the railroad. We 
 
 gg^j -^Qi JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
244 illNVTES OF EYIDEXCE OF ROYAL COMUISSWHT 
 
 ' 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 made it to connect down to his part. He was quite satisfied at the time. Then he 
 wanted to make a road and a bridge to the property he owned. It was after we agreed 
 on $10 an acre for the land. I met Mr. Bramley, and I asked Bim what he wanted, and 
 he said: 'Is $10 an acre too much?' I said I was satisfied. This was. verbal, and he 
 has not taken the money yet. I have offered the money to him, and he would not take 
 it. I never offered to build the road across the track. I built the road away around by 
 the lake. Mr. Bramley was not satisfied with the road. He wanted one across, but I 
 would not do it; it would interfere with the cars. I was looking after the' Government, 
 too. It would cost $10,000 to build that bridge across. It would not pay — a bridge 30 
 or 40 feet high across the ravine. A deputation came down and saw the government 
 about building it. I told them no, they could not spend that amount of money, that 
 there never would be any town there. 
 
 Q. Mr. Bramley told us that at one time he came to you with a proposition which 
 involved the creation of a town site at Extension, that he would give you a certain 
 amount, and you would divide it into lots? — A. There was some proposition, but I 
 would have nothing to do with it, because I did not want the town site there.' That 
 might have been three years ago, probably. 
 
 Q. Now, Ladysmith has some advantages as a place of, residence? It has water- 
 works ? — A." Yes, we are putting in waterworks. 
 
 Q. Have you any objection to telling the Commissioners, in round numbers, what 
 has been the cost of establishing the town ? — A.* I could not do that without going into 
 the books. 
 
 Q. Could you give us an idea ? — A. I have spent about $40,000 on the waterworks, 
 and then there is the clearing of the land. I had to buy this. A "Mr. Kemp had it first. 
 He bought it from the E. & N. Company, and I bought it from him. ; ' 
 
 Q. ■ How many acres did you buy, Mr. Dunsmuir ? — ^A. About t-w/o blocks — 320 
 acres. It belonged to the E. & N., and a man named Kemp. We bought it from him. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: ; , 
 
 Q. How much did you say was in it? — A. About 320. acres, I think. Kemp had 
 160, and another man, named Nicholson, I think, had 160 — 320 altogether. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. These men who had built houses at Extension and wanted to go toXadysmith, 
 what did the company do for them ? — A. Brought their houses down^ — ^brought the lum- 
 ber down. They hauled it up to their lot and built it. . 
 
 Q. You sell lots on easy terms? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What are they worth?— A. $100 for a lot. 
 
 Q. How do they pay for it? — ^A. So much a month. I forget the term?. Esisy 
 terms. Can have easier, if they wanted it. 
 
 Q. In your judgment, it was in the interests of the men to live iii Ladysmith?— 
 A. Of all the men and everybody, and a great many of the men told, me afterwards 
 that they were satisfied that they had come down to Ladysmith, and I thinlt every pne 
 of them here will say that here now. I do not say every one — rthere may. be some sore- 
 heads. ■ , , 
 
 Q. You have had no serious complaint on that score from the men ? — A. No. The 
 biggest agitation was from Nanaimo. Of course, it interfered with business there. 
 
 Q. Was that the real trouble, in your opinion ? — A. They could drive frorii Exten- 
 sion to Nanaimo in three-quarters of an hour — the merchants in Nanaimo us^ to take 
 their express carts and trade with the men at Extension. i' 
 
 Q. I see that A. E. Johnston has built a big place at Extension? — ^A. I -told him 
 not to do it. I told him to come down to Ladysmith. I told Hugh Bate. I said f Bate, 
 it is far cheaper to build at Ladysmith, because Ladysmith is going to be the town.; I 
 want him to come and say that. I said: If you do t)uild, put up a small building ; it 
 will only have to come down. He said he would take the chance. Bailey,' one of our 
 firemen, came the same way, and I advised him not to build up thfere, that LWysmith 
 JAI^ES DUNSMtriR— Ladysmitlr,' May 18. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 245 
 
 SESSIONAL, PAPER No. 36a 
 
 .^■would be the town, but he insisted on doing it. That was Mrs. Bailey, the Temperance 
 : Hotel. , . 
 J Q. This was :the Mrs. Bailey who kept the boarding house ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Py Mr.'Bowe: 
 Q. When was that built? — A. It might be probably three years ago. I told him 
 he was only throwing away his money to build at Extension. After he had got the 
 house pretty nearly built, he came to me and wanted an advance of $200, and I gave 
 it to him. He paid it off before he died, poor fellow. He said he did not have enough 
 money to paint it and paper it. I let him have an advance of $200. 
 ; Q. You personally told a great many of the men yourself I, — A. I told a great many 
 
 of the men myself not to build there. There has been a strong point made of this case 
 of Mrs. Bailey. It was his fault. He was a fireman, and said there would probably 
 always be a few of them up there, anyway. I said: All right, you will have to stand 
 the brunt of it. He seemed to he, quite satisfied., , He, did not pay anything for the land. 
 I never charged him anything for the lot. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. How long since Bailey is dead?— A. Over a year. He was one of the firemen 
 in the mine who got killed. 
 
 ,Q. A fireman? — A. .Yes, the man who tests gas. 
 
 By Mr. Bpdwell: 
 
 Q. He said there would always, probably, be a few men at Extension, and he would 
 be one of them? — A- Yes, he would be one of them. He' had put up his place as a 
 boarding house. His wife kept the boarding house, and he was working in the mine. 
 
 Q. I believe she, could not make it a success, and went to Nanaimo? — A. That 
 was when most of the men came down here. 
 
 Q. Is the rate of living here in Ladysmith, for a man, any greater than it would 
 be at Extension, supposing Extension was growing? — A. I think it should be cheaper 
 here. I do not think it Svould make any difference. 
 
 Q. Boarding would be about the same, and rents the same ? — A. I cDuld not say. 
 
 Q. Most of the men with families have their . buildings ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What size are the lots you sell ? — A. 120 by 160; I think. There are some 
 smaller. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Those are the $100 lots ? — A. That is what we charge the men — that is, ou» 
 -iwdrlcmen — ^$100 a lot. They buy the lumber themselves ; we have no mill. 
 
 - . By Mr. Bodwell: . . , 
 
 Q; You graded the streets— you made the streets as they are ?-^A. Yes. We diti 
 hot t)ut dowii the sidewalks. We put in the waterworks. , 
 
 - (J. Is there a drainage system ?— A. No, they will have to do that when the> 
 incorporate tTie town. 
 ■■ Q. Is there good natural drainage, anyway ? — A. Yes. 
 
 , ■ (Mr. Senkler, .on behalf of the men, objects to going on with , cross-examination, 
 desiring time to receive further instructions. After gome discussion, it is arranged 
 that Mr. Dunsmuir will attend for cross:examination om Wednesday, the 20thj 'an 
 :; evening session to be held, if necessary.) 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL.— I uiiderstand.Mrr Dunsmuir, that a committee of the men wish tc 
 have an interview with you while you are here. 
 
 ! 'lir.'T)uNSii;um.— If it is representing iny own workmen, I will meet them. ' = 
 v.. His, LoBDSiUP.— Simply as, representing themselves, 1 understaiid. 
 
 JAM,ES Dl/NSMUIR— LadysjnUh, 'iS.a.y 18. 
 
246 MmVTm OF ETWmCE^F- nOTAL "COMMISSroVO 
 
 , 8-4 EDWAR1> VII„*A;'1S04: 
 
 ."■ Mr. BoDWELL.— I have a statement herb in writiog; This ii What^ttsejf'hacveMd in 
 
 writing :— ' "■ - -'-i '■■^■••■i^':'^ :^.'A ?.r.^i' ;ja ;r ^r ;i,., 
 
 ,,'/ 'We, the undersigned miners residing at iadyMaitK- arB-'wi'Mng itfihave 
 an interview with Mr. DuHsmuir in conneptio^ with -the pieis^ttt), difficulties 
 '.,..., .between him and- the miners.- ,, ; - •■. 5. - .•..vj . ;::r-.vi- ;■ 
 
 ' It is distinctly understoqd that \ye aretnptjXep^eeefnliijg ajjys A^ipjoii in thi^i 
 ^, 1 , interview, ;but are. only, ifepresenting the mipCTs^herej,^^ 
 
 not to be understood that w,e,, ip dpip^ so, a,i^: loreg^^^pg ^£(,pj j;r^§|ii^;jt}jat ,]sra 
 
 have, or ought to have, in connection. with prgamzed I labou^v. r, „,/, 
 
 '""'" ■' ' "' " ' ''' '(Signedy '''■■■' A'A^ildlSfBAMM' ' "., 
 
 ..'Mr. PuNSMiiiB.^WelVI wOja'^,jiieet them; - I.have.tf^Jd th^^.ppmn^ittee.tbfit I»jron"t 
 ni«t them until they withdraw from, .lie JTederatian, then,,!ap4not ujitil|,th£!p,. ^ .Jh^l^ 
 is my stand. I will treat them as my own men, but nothing ,tp d9,,with the T^^der^tlon. 
 I will meet a conitnittee of my own men. ;,-..- . , , ;/ ,,. 
 
 Mr. BoDWE^^^.-f^It seems a pity that th^re cannot jbe a, :pieetJfi^graiCti,c^lyi,^itJiQVif, 
 
 pregudice, an arrangement in some. way. , ,. _. , , ., ...,.-, -,,,- 
 
 ;-, . Mr. RowB. — I understand that is all the men ask, without pfejjjdice. r^ <pdii ,,; j,-, 
 ;■ Mr. BoDWELL. — ^Perhaps we might— let rtie see — 'We, the- undersigned 'i^ainers 
 residing at Ladysmath, are willling to have an jnterviey with Mrv Punsnj^j iUiCQijj', 
 nection with the present difl&culties between him and the miners. Jt is , distine^ly, 
 understood that we are not "representing any union in this, interview, but are only re- 
 presenting the miners here' — I suppose if it stopped with those words i,1;-W^nl(^,]|e;g^ 
 "S'lt. • ,..,.,,.„ ^,,. 
 
 Mr. DuNSMuiB. — Read that again, please. .. ;. _,. : .....v/- ,,;.-; ' ;, 
 
 - Mr. BoDWELL. — (Reads same :passage as before, ending with the wO?ds-y'.Wt!We> 
 only representing the miners hp'-p ') :.:' . (., „., , .u-..;.' ;. .', .,•;;,'■; !!',i>i.;,-'-i 
 
 Mr. DuNSMUiB. — Yes, that is all. jight. that, far. , vt. ,-.;,,; ',;i — .-(;:.,.!;:!.■.; s.Ii 
 
 - Mr. BoDWBLL.^r-The men haye added, and. I do:not know why'-jfjlniititbiit f-fll^ther, 
 it is not to be understood that we, in so doing, are -foregoing any right* thai1;.,:??e.biavej. 
 or ought to have, in connection with organized labour.' . . j .-,jj.;.,)- :,t ,;;j! 
 
 Mr. DuNSMUlR. — ^No, take that out. ■:._, ..., ...,,._. ,-,.; .,,- . ,, .;■. ^,,, ,,.-; ,-. ,.,. .,.r.!:-.i;r.>a 
 
 His Lokdship. — I do not see that the clause has any force either way.,- ; ; It jadds 
 nothing and subtracts nothing. _ I don't see that that proviso helps theni.qr hurt^ jl^em. 
 
 Mr. Senklek. — The reason for putting that in, is that they dp not wish it to be said 
 now, or ever said afterwards, that they have not the right t^ organiz^. -^ It ij^ay be 
 said they would be giving in to Mr. Dunsmuir. : ... 
 
 His Lordship. — The probabilities are that Mr. Dunsmuir will,mak<j a ppintofthat 
 anyway if he receives them. ., ;, 
 
 •; Mr. DuNSMUiR.^ — ^Why should I.give.in any ;]3jiore than, they should,?. ,1 -jvon't give 
 in one inch. . I will meet tliem as my men, arid not in connection with any federatio,?. 
 or organization. ,,,Tf,ke, out that .clause^ _and I will. meet them. We are, not fixing, that 
 up now. I am here to give my evidence as to the cause of the strike. 
 
 Mr. Bod WELL. — I don't see how anyone could understand that they were waiyin,g 
 anything by appointing a committee to meet Mr. Dunsmuir. If they come to an agree- 
 ment, all right ; if not ' ' ^ • .; . 
 
 Mr. Dunsmuir. — ^It is just the same. ... "' "-'-'' "■' ' ' 
 
 His Lordship. — I cannot see how the ineii are going to" prejudipe tjieniiseives.by, 
 meeting Mr. Dunsmuir in this way. 
 
 ■■'■ ' - '-^ ■■■';..<>■-: ;.J 01; ^,' -J ^ l.n^AJ- 3-- ■ir,-:^::^S'.A ^iH 
 JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladysmith, May 18. ,...;< 
 
ONIWDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLVMBIA 247 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER, No. 36a 
 
 ■> Mr.. xSenju-^R,^— I doa't suppose so, as Itmg as they understaad it that -way, but 
 where it is put as Mr. Dunsmuir puts it . , : ■ 
 
 His .LonbsHiP.*— He is meeting them as a committee from these men. When they 
 inefet tfifey will ptobahly have a' discussion about that. * 
 
 Mr. Senklek. — Why need there be any written agi-eemtot at all in connection 
 with this matter; T Sih in' a position to state this^-that a committee of the men will 
 be very glad to meet Mr'. Duifsmulr, and in seeing him tTiey \vould not represent any 
 organizatiOii of atiy kiQd, simply the miners here: • : , n 
 
 Mr. DUNSMJJIR.— Put' it iii' writing; leave the balance of that olit; thehT will meet 
 them. ■ , ' " ■ ,",,■. 
 
 His LoimsHiP.-T^Th^ 'qupition in dispute will probably be discussed at the inter- 
 view. 
 
 '". Mr. EcWE.— H seems to me a •superfluous statement. No riian foregoes his rights 
 by having an interview where a question involvings — ' 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Mi-. Bdter'has heen here and insisted that Mrl'Duhsniuir should 
 recognize the union. This is a public meeting — the reporters ate here — it in ay' go' 
 otit Id %e wotM that lie had uhdertHceh to i-feco^ize the t)%a* 
 
 Mr. DuNSMum. — I am not here to settle this in the court here. T Can do -that' out- 
 side. What I ineati'tb' say is, I ain' goiilg to have the right to 'catry on tiiy business 
 With&tft the iht-e'rf-e^eitCfe' of anybody. ■ If the men -like to meSt- me as a committee of 
 ray'o^n naen I \VJ11 see them, hut not, as I have always said, from the union or ifedeKi- 
 fionii ■ That is what I haVe always said and that is my standpoint. • 
 ,' Hia, IJORDSHiP.^Suppose ~we -put it this way : 'It is agreed that Mr. Dunsmuir 
 will meet a coinmittee of the ininers, representing the miners of Extension, and not 
 any union.' 
 
 Mr. Dunsmuir. — What I told the men wsis'^ that I would not recogiii^e a meeting 
 until they withdrew from the' Federation.- They cannot force- me tc recognize that 
 Federation any more than I can force them to go to "worki > . - , , 
 
 His Lordship. — The first point is to- :g'et the meeting.' ■ '/ 
 "'-Mr; Dtn!rskuiR.--^Your Honour; I came here to give my evidence as to the cause 
 of the strike— hot ill any 'way to try and settle this dispute.- 
 
 His Lordship. — ^I think you mtist agree, Mr. DunSinuir, that in 'the public iffterest 
 something ought to be done to try and settle. ' . • :i ' . ■-'- -,'. 
 
 -'■ 'Mt. Dunsmuir. — Well, I don't give wdy. - ' '; 
 
 His !L6rdshi^.^ — If there is siny one giving way it is the ineri. They agree to see 
 you'in-their indiTidual capacity. The poiht^is to have theimeetiiig. 
 
 Mr; Dunsmuir.— I will'iheet 'a' committee of my own wCrkmen, not in any way 
 connected with the union. 
 
 ' His LeftDSHiP^.— A-s I uhderstatid it, they don't wish to see you as' representing the 
 union. 
 
 ' 'Jtr.'DuNsMUUj.— And let the co'nimittee ibe picked otit of this room; I don't want 
 tlic executive;- They can have one or two of theih. Who have signed that roqiiest? 
 ' Mr. SENKLER^^-^e have the names of Barnes, Jeffries and Doherty. 
 
 Mr. DuNSMUiR.^They belong to the executive, and that would be recognizing the 
 union. /' ' , ' , , , ,,/,-,,,..,.,.,,,. 
 
 Mr. Senkler.^I am instructed that Mr. Barnes arid Mr. 'Jeffries do 'not belong 
 to the executive. . , 
 
 M^. Dunsmuir. — WeU, if you don't belong to' the executive 1 will meet you. I 
 vt-bn't have Sti'ything to do with the executive. ' ' ,, "' 
 
 Hia Lordship. — ^I think we should be able to get a coriimittee outside of the execii- 
 tive. '"" "" -.--■■— -■''.':-•' 
 
 JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
248 MIXUTES Of EVIDE^'CE OP BOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Mr. DuNSMUiH. — Get the committee outside of the executive. • 
 
 Mr. Barnes. — We will make a selection. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — How will this do for the request : 
 
 ' It is understood that the committee will meet Mr. Dunsmuir as repre- 
 sentatives of the individual miners and not as the executive or otherwise as 
 officials of the union.' 
 
 Agreed to. 
 
 Sittings adjourned and conference held. 
 
 Henry Carroll, sworn. 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Your full name, Mr. Carroll ?— ^A. Henry Carroll. 
 
 Q. Where do you live ? — ^A. Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. How long have you heen living at Ladysmith? — A. Ahout a year and a half. 
 
 Q. You are a coal miner ? — A. Yes. - ' 
 
 Q. Where did you live before coming to Ladysmith ? — A. Nanaimo4 
 
 Q. You worked in the New Vancouver Co. ? — A. Yes. i 
 
 Q. How long had you been there ? — A. I think about eleven years, ten or eleven. 
 
 Q. Where did you come from before that \- — A. Washington State. : , 
 
 Q. Did you work in the coal mines in that state — in Eossland? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How long were you at Rossland? — ^A. I was not very long there. I worked 
 one winter, and was back there again. I do not know how long I worked. 
 
 Q. Is there any union at Rossland ? — A. I don't know whether there is any there now 
 or not. I believe the Knights of Labour were in existence at the time I was there. 
 
 Q. The Western Federation of Miners were not operating there ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You came to Ladysmith about a year and a half ago ?— A. Yea. 
 
 Q. You have always been living at Ladysmith since you have been working here ? 
 —A. Yes. , -: ■: 
 
 By His Lordship : . 
 
 Q. Were you a union man at Nanaimo ? — A. Yes. ' ' 
 
 Q. What union did you belong to ? — A. The Nanaimo Miners and Mine Labour- 
 ers' Protective Association. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You were here when the agitation for a union at. Ladysmith began, were you ? 
 — A. I was here when this last agitation began. : - 
 
 Q. Yes, that is what I mean. Did you go to any meetings held J^A. Yes, one. 
 
 Q. What was the first meeting you attended ? — A. The first meeting that I 
 attended was the meeting when word was sent to Mr. Baker to come and organize. 
 
 Q. That was the meeting at which they passed a resolution asking Mr. Baker to 
 cc3e and organize ? — A. Yes. ' " ' ' 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What date was that— the 8th. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — If 1 had the minutes I could tell. (Minutes produced by secretary 
 —Exhibit*.) That would be March 8. 
 
 A. I don't know the date, it was on a Sunday. • O^ 
 
 Q. I see that at a mass meeting held on March 8, a motion was put and carried^ — 
 'that the secretary notify Mr. Baker, the organiser of the West£;vu Tederation of 
 Miners as quickly as possible, to establish a branch of that organizfitionj^ — that is tho 
 meeting ? — A. Yes. ' ' .,, '. | 
 
 HENRY CARROLL— Ladysmitb, May 18. 
 
ON JNBVSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COWMSIA 249 
 
 SESSIONAL, PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. What notice did you have of that meeting being called ? — A. I had no notice, 
 except the notice that was posted up on the post office stating that a meeting would be 
 — I think it was on the post office. I am not sure. 
 
 By His Lordsh ip : 
 Q. Posted up in the po94 office ?— A. I think so. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. At the first meeting there was a motion to demand an increase of wages, and 
 that motion was changed into a motion to organize, was it not ? — A. That is the meet 
 ing when they decided to send for Mr. Baker. 
 
 Q. Well, we have the minutes of that meeting here, and I suppose the minutes will 
 give everything as far as that is concerned. What was the next meeting you attended? 
 — A. The next meeting I attended was an open meeting when Mr. Baker arrived on 
 Sunday. 
 
 Q. Mr. Baker made a speech at that meeting ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us, in substance, what he said. What he said about organization, 
 what vvould happen if the men were not organized, and so on ? — A. No, I do not know 
 that I can. He said he came here on the invitation of the men, and led me to under- 
 stand that he had full power from the executive of the Western Federation to deal in 
 the situation. ' ' , -m, 
 
 Q: That so far as organization was concerned, that he camei with full power to 
 open a local lodge here ? — A. That was my impression. 
 
 Q. Did he say anything as to the advisability of the men joining an organization 
 of- that kind •? — A. That I don't remember. 
 
 Q. Did he say it at any of the meetings ? — A. No, I don't think I ever heard Mr. 
 Baker use such language as that. 
 
 Q. Did he say anji:hing to that effect or of that nature at any tirue J-^A. I can- 
 not tax my memory with any such expressions coming from hini. 
 
 Q. You had an idea, at any rate personally, that if the men did not join they 
 would be bladilisted ?^— A. That impression prevails everywhere. I got that from 
 what Mr. Baker said, and from the situation of the Federation. 
 
 Q. What did Mr. Baker say along that line ? I want to know anything that Mr. 
 Baiter said that would carry out that idea ?— A. I cannot remember anything he did 
 
 say* ^',- ^ -■-■,_■■,.-. ; ■' 
 
 Q. Did you go to any of the other meetings ? — A. I have been to meetings, yes. 
 
 Have been to all of the meetings, with the exception of probably two or three. 
 
 Q. Were you at a meeting when a motion was made, or suggestion made, that 
 
 you should ask the union men to come out in Sympathy with this strike heire, the men 
 
 at Cumberland ? — A. I was. , ; 
 
 , Q. Was Mr.:Baker. at that meeting ?— A. Yes. 
 
 By jSis Lordship : ■ ■ , , • - '; 
 
 . Qj WJtien,:5va,s that meeting «— A. J could not fix the date. 
 Q. Was it a week or a month after the first meeting^^when ?— A. It was more 
 than two weeks after. 
 
 Q. About the last of April ?— A. I would not be sure. 
 
 His IX)RDSHiP. — Where, are the minutes of that meeting ,? , 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : . ■ ■ ^ 
 
 Q. That was a secret meeting, was it not ?-^A. Yes. Why shotild you ask me 
 about ;it if it was secret. 
 
 ' His X6kdsh11».— This Commission js here fo? the express purpose of uneartlimg 
 all the facts in connection with this strike. There is nothing secret from the Com- 
 mission. 
 
 :. HENRY GARROLt/— Laaj^sinitli, Mi^' 18. 
 
250 .MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION v 
 
 3^ EDWARD Artl^A.ISMa 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : ; :-;,; .y 
 
 - Q. I do not propose to be bound by the factithat any meetings wBre secret^r other- 
 wise. I am asking this question, and shall insist on the> Commissioners getting tie 
 answers, if necessary. What was the sugrgestion with reference to<allinff out thfr 
 Comox men in sympathy with the- strike here ?— t-A. As you stem to alresady-knDw.i-a 
 motion was passed that the men should a^ them to come out in Sympathy!.- -jMr. Bakep 
 was at the meeting. : ■ - • . '''.' ['• 
 
 Q. That was held about the end of April or the first of May ? .v/ >) ,t..:K , ! -. ' 
 
 His EoHds^iP. — Let miB understand this ■' •- '-0!,(! •is-t •,-■ 
 
 Mr. Bqdwell;^— A motion wa^'mkde that the iitiibn at tlnioii miriei,''at Combr,' 
 should be asked to borne out in' ^ftnpktiiy with the strilce here. |'' " '• , '" ' 
 
 ; ^Byjilr. liQwe : -. ..- ,..-;.,,,,- ,. , ,, . ; , . ., ■._■■.! -_•:: ' i;.:. ■ ;. 
 
 Q.i Had they been organized at, this itiiaet.?— A. I dou'tknpw; J r^thei!, ^biot they 
 
 were. .'.-, •- - . -' .."- -.;■ ■ •; -^1 [■■• ; •; .; :r, >j^jj ••:;" ^ic"vi ••.cd 
 
 By His Lordship : . ,, . ;ii.: ' ,i; 
 
 Q. A motion was made-^^ho ' made the' motion ?— ^A. I dan'ti know :/ hh'C-'.' ,f<<^ 
 
 By Mr. Bodweli : -. ,. "* . ./^_ "' '■'." 
 
 Q. I asked if Mr. Baker was at the meeting, and he said yes. You knew that 
 according to the constitution the men at Union could not come out unls^ tjifeir strike 
 was approved of by the; executive at Denver ?— ^A. According to the eongtitutioiV;yes. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Baker make any statement with referenoe to that matter? IHd.he 
 say that he had power to represent-the.executive, or 'that if, you passed, the m^tign he 
 would see that it was all right as far as the executive was concerned ?-7-A. I believe 
 he did ; he did not say he had power to represent the executive in so many \*6'rds. He 
 sj»id, to' the best of my -understanding,' that if that motion' vi'a.s rha'de he wa^ stire it 
 would be eudorsed' by the executive. - That -is the' seiise,' as I' understood' iti ' -■ ' ■••■' 
 
 Q. Didn't he tell you that the executive had sent him here with full pow^'-to ac%: 
 — the president of the executive at Denver ? — A. He said so publidysey^yal; times. 
 
 Q. He understood, if you would pass the motion, . that the executive would 
 approve h — A. That was the impression... . ' - . ' 
 
 Q. Where was the objectioji among the men for, passing a vote to strike at tJnion ?. 
 — A. There was a little opposition to it. 
 
 Q. What was the objection ? — A. Not from a constitutional stan^oiht at all. 
 The main objection raised to calling those inen' out was the fact that .w,e, had inofthing 
 to help them with, if they did come out. 
 
 Q. Baker said he would undertake that the executive at Denver would see to that ? 
 — A. Baker said, when the constitutional point was raised, that if the motion- carried, 
 that it would be endorsed by the executive, or words to that effect. - ^-- ■...■; '■>.,': i 
 
 Q. At any of these meetings did Mr. Baker give you to understand that if- you 
 struck here the executive would give you financial assistance ?— A. No, I do not know, 
 that he did. I could not tax him with it. ' , - ;, - ,. i^-jy 
 
 Q. That subject was discussed, was it hot ? — A. Yes. i • - , ■ *^ 
 
 Q. What did Mr. Baker say when the matter came up for discussion |— A'iTho 
 question has been asked point-blank to Mr. Baker, and he has never answered it. Never 
 heard anything in a public meeting. 
 
 Q. Has the local lodge here ever been able to get a statement from the executive at 
 Denver, as to whether they would aid them, and to what, extent ? — A. Not to niy knowl- 
 edge. . . . ' 
 
 Q.. Is it likely that anything would have gone on without your knowing 9^ it ? — A. 
 Not likely to. 
 
 ;!Q. The situation to-day is that you are out ou strike at the request of the Federa- 
 tion, in order that the Federation might be recognized, and ^et you have no definita 
 assurance or assistance from the Federation ? — A. I'hat is the situation to-day. 
 HENKT CARROLL— Utdysmitb, Mar IS. '- " ' ' ' '- ' " *-'"^ 
 
OJf IXDVSTBIAC DISPUTES /AT SRITI8B COLUMBIA SSL 
 
 SESSIONAL ; PAPER N-q^ 36a 
 
 Q. And it is not because you have not made efiorts to get that assurance?— A. No. 
 ..2r.,r' y°"^'^«y y°" «>■« a union man, Mr. Carroll. As to the question of the 
 ^afi jist, bow do you suggest that you got that imptession— tiiat men v^ho did not joia 
 thkt imion-t^fcen.it^was first formed.. t^oxild be blacklisted ?-A. I got that from 
 actaatta^eMenee, not here alerie. AltMs-the experiehce all over the country. If a 
 arneA- is- teganized.and a' man does not come in, he is looked on as an Unfair man. 
 
 y. Of course, you are a member of the union?— A. I am a member of .the Western 
 i! ederation of MmerS. ■/ ' ?■'! 1.. :.•.■.: :,,.-, ].....,, ., ... .;, , , ..^ , _, ^,_ ^_ 
 
 Q. Now, suppose you were willing, to deal with Mr. Dunsmuir and to go back to 
 W>r^^you wijr^ j^ilJiDg to settle, and .the rest ^ere not, ?— A. .You are, not defining my 
 position. My position is, if this Western Federation, ^ticks' to us, andare willing to stay 
 with us, i am willing to stay with them. • ■■ .- • ' ■ , 
 
 Q. I don't mean you as an individual, but as representing all the cra:fts. Suppose 
 *:eeHam' number o*f .the'union are dissatisfied wJth .this arrangem^t, and wish to "3 
 back to work. The union has not decided to go back yet ?— A. Not to my knowledgk, 
 
 Q. Suppose you want to go back to work, and the union -dbh't declare the strike 
 off, would yownot; be oA the ^soab list ?^A. J should think so. :. ,, , , 
 
 Q. So, although you cannot be sure that you are supported by th,a Federation, 
 '^.?T.^''%¥.?^'. if .you go back you will be a scab ,?— A. Yes. '- • 
 
 By Kis.Lffrdshipi: ■ -r,n i-'.,, ,:,,:;! .-ii! .• .,! ■ > n,.. ■ '- 
 ;'',Q. Would you- be drojjped out of the Federation ?— A. Well, if you went bade- to 
 work here now*ithout a majority Vote, you 'would bevdisohal^ed from the Federation. 
 ■'■ 'Q. He would be iexpelled ?---A. He would be pretty near expelling himself. 
 
 ,;;"" J fy Mr. BqdweU : ' _._ . '''' ''■"■ ';.' -■ '■" \ ''■■- '■'■'■;- ■''- '-- 
 
 :\^ Q.: Now,,has;not Mr. Baker used that ^^j-gunient^ that, if .any of ypu.gp ,back you 
 will be blacklisted all over Anaerica. 1—A.. No, t .have not heard him use any .such 
 arguments. ,:.;,, 
 
 , ' By His Lordship : ' 
 
 Q. Perhaps you do not think it neceSs'ary. It was well understood among the 
 lyen th£it that is what would happen ? — A. Yes,'tha't is well undetstobd.' Not aloaa 
 \*itii this orgahization,' but with any other. ' - - 
 
 - ' Q. Is it common to any union ? — ^A. Yes< '; 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: ... 
 
 Q. But. the; posting of names, the blacklisting of names is not common ? — A. Not 
 with this organization.' - ; , ,.. . 
 
 r ! -? Q. That is- the point I make^-^the fact that he threatens to publish, the names. 
 HaTeiyou- seen that number (e^ibitiihg. Exhibit II,) of the ' ]\Iiners',Magaz},ne»' Did, 
 you see this scab list ? — A. I did, I think it is at page 55. . 
 
 Q. This is from a union. at liayden Hill, Cal. — Hayden Hill Miners' IJnion, No. 
 180; at p»ge.52^-this is. the way it is-done.: (Quotes from Exhibit IJ.) : — 
 
 ■^ • ■ '■ - 'HATOEk- Hill, Oal., March 18, 1903-. 
 
 'E.ditor. Miners' Magazine, — Please publish the following list of "scabs" 
 
 • . in your columns : , :• • •. 
 
 '''"' ■ •"'^•"' ""'Samuel Hafvey, timbernian.' He'tirice niatle applicattoii to the^ GrippK 
 
 ; ,. Creek W- E. M. Union for membership ^bout a year ago. Tom Eddy, of Iron 
 
 '' ' Mountain, is his uncle. George' Deplel*,.' miner; Orie Wiare, ifliner; William 
 
 ij Terrill. engineer, a, memb^r of the Lumber Filers' Union of Stockton; Dudley 
 
 .*' Abernathy, labourer, a member' of the St. touis Street" Car Men's Union; 
 
 Henry iLevington^ foreman, a dangerous man to oi-ganiized labour,' — • ■ 
 
 and so on with tie nainea 
 
 HENHT OARROL,I>— L/aarsmith, May IS. 
 
252 MnWTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSTON : 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll-i A. 1904 
 His Lordship. — Can you tell us what circulation that magazine has ? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL.^'We tried to get that from Mr. Baker. This is the official orgaa 
 for the month of May. It is a monthly, the official organ of the Western Federation of 
 Miners. Now, while we are on this, it a convenient time to call the Commissioners' 
 attention to several other matters in this same numher. The stenographer can take n 
 note of them. Page 51. It shows how these labour organizations attack everything 
 and everyone who don't agree with them. This is an article written on the arbitration 
 committee named by the British Columbia Mining Convention, which actually settled 
 the coal strike at Fernie. Here is an illustration : — 
 
 ' They take evidence on oath, investigate the books, weigh and measure 
 the contents of the cars, &c., and are in a fair way of establishing a precedent 
 and demonstrating the power of that most viperous and misleading, crafty, 
 cunning scheme ever invented to pull wool over the eyes of labour — the B. C. 
 Mining Association.' 
 
 Here on page 48 is a glimpse of some of the methods this organization has in 
 view : — 
 
 ' Don't organize in spots. Fill up the gap^. Organize workers^ and 
 then organize the workers into voters. Agitate first, then educate. Make the 
 officiul organ compulsory and the battle is won. Affiliate every union in an 
 assembly. ....... 
 
 ' Don't you know that the next serious strike must be won by a national 
 or international strike, to show capitalists and ourselves how ' omnipotent 
 unified, consolidated labour is ? Stop every wheel in America; silence every 
 telegraph; stop every train; hold every ship at anchor; close every market; 
 silence every press for ten days ! Europe will follow our example, and it will 
 be the last strike of labour. The next Strike will occur at the ballot-box, and 
 the war will be over forever.' 
 
 At page 31 is a letter from the president of the Western Federation of Miners 
 to the United Brotherhood of Locomptive Engineers asking sympathy from them, 
 and Mr. Arthur's reply is given at pages 31 and 32. At pages 32 and 33 is the presi- 
 dent's answer. These are interesting as showing the way they love each other — it 
 commences with ' My dear Brother.' At page 20 is an article on the situation at "Van- 
 couver, but really referring to "Vancouver Island and this present strike. At page 21 
 it says : ^ 
 
 ' The Western Federation of Miners plays no favourites among employers 
 of labour. Wherever the Federation has unfurled its banner there^ becomes 
 the battle-field to challenge and halt injustice. Dunsmuir and. the members 
 of the copper trust are " birds of a feather," and are recognized by the Federa- 
 tion as fortifications of private ownership which must be bombarded by the 
 political power of organized labour before monopoly capitulates , to collective 
 co-operation.' 
 
 That is just a sample. 
 
 His Lordship. — What is the cost of that periodical a year ? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — One dollar a year. Then there is a report from Nanaimo in the 
 May number also. The date is not given. It is signed by Thomas Brooks, Nanaimo 
 Miners' Union 177, W.F.M. He says : 
 
 ' I have taken upon myseK to forward a report of our doings here. I 
 am pleased to tell you that this local of the W. ,F. of M. has just drawn up a 
 constitution and by-laws for our government, and they were adopted at our 
 last regular meeting. There is only one thing omitted in the order of busi- 
 ness that I am sorry was left out, and that is political discussion. We still 
 have some amongst us who seem scared to touch political discussion in the 
 iiENRT CARROLL— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
OF MBVSTBIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLVMBIA 253 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 union.^ Now, comrade, I think at the next convention this should be one of 
 the things disc-ussed, and see if it could not be determined that it should stand 
 on the order, of business, as it is the only thing that can do any permanent 
 good. It will help to educate the workers along the proper lines, and is the 
 only way to make them see that they cannot get any good results from any 
 of the old parties, but if thoy are ever to get the shackles off their limbs they 
 will have to do it by themselves by electing their own class into power on a 
 straight clags-conscious ticket.' ...... 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Can you tell us anything about the circulation of this magazine amongst the 
 men ? — A. I have not the slightest idea. It has just only come into this town. 
 
 ' • Bp Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. When was the Western Federation organized in Nanaimo I — ^A. Not long ago ; 
 I don't knoTy just how long. 
 
 Q. That was' the first — at Nanaimo ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. What do you thin^ about this Western Federation anyway ? Of course, you 
 are a membei; of it, but what do you think about it as a union ? Do you think it is 
 a good thing for the nien in this country to belong to ? — -A. I do not; not as a coal 
 miners' union. I think it would be a failure. 
 
 - Q, It is not a coal miners' union to begin with ? — A. No, metalliferous miners; 
 their interests and ours are not identical. 
 
 . Q., Don't you think that by belonging to this union you are apt to be governed 
 according to the state of affairs in tha United States ? — A. Well, from the nature of 
 things,; you can.be if you, wish it so. 
 
 Q. Explain how that isJ^A, On account of the large number of the lodges in 
 the United States and the small number here— the number of the executive in the 
 United States, and only one here. 
 
 Q. Now, you heard Mr. Baker say that there were certain things the constitution 
 required of the union, and that its charter could be suspended or dealt with, if it did not 
 act ih accordance with the constitution, but as long as it acted in accordance with the 
 cgnstitutiton, no harm Can come of it. Now, is it not possible, according to the con- 
 stitution, to call out a union in a sympathetic strike ? — A. I cannot see where the 
 constitution forbids it. ' • 
 
 Q. But the constitution does not exactly provide for it ? — A. I don't think that it 
 is mefttioned at all. . 
 
 (j. Supppse the executive should want you to come out in a sympathetic strike, 
 and you did njot want to do it — do you think it would be safe for this lodge to refuse ? 
 — A. I .doil't think so. 
 
 Q. Even if they* did not want to go ?— A. Yes. 
 
 ' Q. That is to' say, tlie majority is against you ? — ^A. The majority is against us 
 as working in Canada. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You think that the majority of the men here would yield to the request of the 
 tkecutive on the other side to. come out on sympathetic strike ?— A. That would be a 
 hard question to answer. You could not answer that except by actual experience; th^y 
 might and they might not. ,| 
 
 - By Mr. Bodwell : 
 " ^. Whaf would your own opinion be. The executive wanted you to strike, and 
 you -would' rather not strike/ Su|)i>ose you wanted to stay in the organization, what 
 would. you think it advisable to do ? — A. If the exeeutite made the request that any 
 iocar should come out on strike, I tihiilk it Would" be pretty hard for the local, if they 
 did iiot do so. 
 
 HEJNBY .CARROLL— Ladysmith, M.^y Ijg. 
 
254^ kmUTES OF EflbENCE OP ROTiL ddMM^StOjf'O 
 
 Q. So although' a strike cann6t be declared ex<»pt -with a three^quartera Vote/ that 
 vote is influenced in the right direction by the'boaTd'oi 'the'exeeiilite^thatis'^atVou 
 think, Mr. Carroll' ?^^--A/Tes, it loolis'tliait'Vt'aytO'm^ ■ •■' '^'■'U r :.,' ,..!■ s.-,? J, 
 
 Q. You would favour a union which was 4lto^ethSr"doat#ell6^ty'OaisaditoiauHior-:i 
 ity, would you not. Provided you were living in Canada ?-^A,nYes, owjog to tho 
 peculiar situation on thp other side,,I would., I cannot gp ixito,tl}?(t v«ry miic^. .-.Our 
 local union here have k,ept conditions pretty good. W-^ always have had .hice pay, and 
 the coiidjtipus no worse than anywhere else. They Hstv^e, P-Ot lnrp^OY^(l.,^i'^°§,-^R^ West- 
 ern Federation took hold of it. There seems to have been strike after strike '.wljiefever, 
 they have got a foothold. . ; ., , ,. ,. ,, „,.,,, , ,. •: ^„,. i . ,, . .^, i ; ' ., 
 
 By His Lordship :' ~" " " " ' ~" ■ ■ '-• ' - ■ ■! : -j ■- . i'>..i :., 
 
 , ' Q. Y-ou say the conditions h^ye not inipi-pyed Q^^tH^" in^jferencepf j^^ 
 Federation of Miners ? — A. I.dpn't see that they liay^.iroprpygd.., 1 Imgw at' N"aiiaimo 
 thiiigs; w^re satisfactory. ,, The. main argument .r^isiejl by ,co](iverlS; to the "Western " 
 Federatipn ;was that we wpuld have some one be]^ifid u?. tp. help us Qut in.case of , heed. 
 That has not materialized as yet. . . . ,. ' ' ' " 
 
 "■''' ''' By Mr. Rome:' " -''"' '""*' ■'""'■'' <-!'''^'', ^ "- ■ ■-"'■•^ -.-^-> y^:t ovuil .Q 
 Q. I suppose you think it is better tq be kepj; out of , trouble t^iankept in.lroBi'ble t' 
 — rA. Yes, it, would be. _ , .' . 
 
 -.,,, , By Mr. Bodwell : .■!■"' .r.-.-.H T - .'.•.•■:„!;/ 
 
 Q. The fact of having a local union in Nanaimo was that iher^ .was no'cbnSider- 
 able trouble serious enough to result in a strike ? — A. Never has been.' ' ' ' " '"" -"'■ 
 
 '''''''] By His I^dfd^ip : ■' ^"' - ■>'i---i^.; ■■' ^^tri; ;■•>•;<..- -i. i /..'!>of. V, ^3s.,rtT <j 
 
 Q. TIow long has the union^lasted' tjiere^^before the Federatioii Came' in f— A. 
 About ten. years, it may be more, . . ' ,■ " ' ' - isi 
 
 "' By Mr. Bodwell :' '■ '■- •' ■' -' •:'^'-^ ''>^i -^ ':^~!r. -> ^r--- •;!: ;t., - -y : '-llrrt^ .■■ -/t 
 
 Q. Don't you know, or have you not heard, that there is a great deal of di'sturbanca 
 since the Western Federation got hold of it? — A. Yes, that, has becohi6'publi'cJ)roperty'- 
 ^that the Western Federation is losing its hold in all the coal mines of Canada— on 
 this side of the line. ' ■> r .; , 
 
 Q. Was there any real grievance for the men to come out on strike at Ladysrtifth ?' 
 — A. Well, men have a right to organize if they feel like it. ' .' ■ . '■-.: 
 
 Q. Outside of that one question ? — A. Well, I don't know. ' That is the T)nly ques- ' 
 tion, as I understand it. '" ' '"-■- "■■'.■'.'' . r .i, 
 
 Q. Have you considered the question'of 'the 'relative merits bf^iadysmith tod- Ex- 
 tension as places in which to live— having regard to the Wdrrt'dotie'tliBr^'i^ — A.' Persdiii'- 
 ally, I would prefer to live at Ladysmith. I moved there voluntarily froni 'Na'naJttiol' 
 That is my personal feeling. But 1 would not want anyone to.ctjine lo tayi^ytri^th'-irho 
 did not want to. _ '", _. ' ,] ', " ■ [''■ ;" ■ ' -' - ^•''■- .';'-•■■.>*•! -1; .;• •;-•;!■.■,■ 
 
 ■' ' ' ■ 'By Mr. Rowe : :■;''■'/ ;-'!'-~i-'^ k.;!,! -;■, ,. ...':<:,■,;.,-,. ,,i <„.-,,,.., ,.' ;^-. 
 Q. Did you ever live in Extension ?— A. I never did. I have worked there,' 
 
 though. r ,, i . ,, , ' ''"■'■■•'' ■- ';!,' ■%:■'. .•■''I: l;! 
 
 Q. You' mean you would rather travel' from here to Extension than t'b' live at 
 Extension and work there ?— A. That is what T mean. I would not want to live at' 
 Extension under any consideration. ' ' ' ' " • .^ . , 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Why do you say that ? — A. I don't like the place. 
 
 HENR¥'GARROIjLr-Lad->smith, May 18. 
 
 ■..::-h- 
 
Olf'lWDmTRlALiDISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 255 
 
 S^'lbr^U'^A^iRi No.' 3'6a 
 
 ' n' ^V^T."" ^'^^°^^^'°^ the watpr ?— A. I dan't know anything about the water. 
 
 . ;Q* .We have heard it said that tibe conditions at Extension are unhealthy. What 
 do you say as to that ?— A. I don't know whether they are unhealthy or not. I don't; 
 Hfce;tbe;sHa&tion"'of the place to make a home. 
 
 '''• '-^ By Mr. S-enMer : ■ '? ;- -'-^ 3. . ' ,_ ' , 
 
 I .^' -^^ regard, Mr. Carroll, to this statement that you would rather lire at Lady- 
 smith tliau Extension. At the time you taoVed here' from Nanaimo, you knew there' 
 was a general order that the men were not to live at Extension ?^A. -No/ J di^'t' 
 know'that.' ' ' ' " ■ ' '' ■^"■' "- h;:;-,!,;- -■..■, ': u 1 \ . :i':. • ,:. Jsj^.f-h-Z-t >!v 
 
 Q. When did you move down ?— A. I think it was in Becertih^, I-am'n&t positive 
 Q. Last December ? — A. A year ago. It might be November, I moved down be- 
 fore .(^hf^stmas anyway,, the year, before last. " - - -J. x 
 
 ■ ^^:,^.f^P^^j:j^,^oved'dp^^ makfe a^i-an^gmerits ?-^A."Nb, I' did 
 
 no^. ''^ilwas working" in ATexa^ 1' . 't ; ''. 
 
 : Q. And you did not know any tiling' '^boti^ the'gfeflerd brder' lieft to live lip there ? 
 
 — ^A."i^o, rdld'nofkri'ow'about that' at '^tl! Tdo'not kiioU"ihat'-I heard anything about' 
 
 it, except hearing it discussed in the mines. ' ' ' ' ': • i • ' '• . i '''" 
 
 Q. Have you ever worked in a camp where there was a lodge that you did not 
 belong to ?^A- No, I have not unless you would except South Wellington, and I 
 don't think I Worked there over a month, 'or' i)rbb&bly- six weeks; ' "^ ofe<.-..!! -, .v. 
 
 Q. Tou have always been £l union man wherever there was a union ?^— A. Always, 
 wherever I have been. 1 , , 
 
 , ,Q. Tou have always joined the union of your own free will ?— A. I never joined 
 on any other conditions. ' ' ■' ' ' 
 
 Q. Always thought it a good thing to belong tb a utiion ?^— A. Yes. ■ ^'*'- -'■■''■ •" 
 Q. Then, of course, you joined this Western Federation of Miners in the same 
 way.. : Since then you say you: have come to the conclusion that the Western Federa- 
 tion is not a good union for the miners ?— A. That is correct.. '" ,''^ 
 
 Q. Tou give as your reason, what V — A. The Western Federatioii, to begin with, 
 is controlled over en the other side of the line. It has in its ranks very few coal min- 
 ers, very few. 'The class of men belonging to ^ the Western Federation are not; in 
 sympathy with us as coat miners. Ten, weeks' experience h?s proved that. 
 
 . ; Q.,W,e will go a .little further, Mr. Carroll, in connection vs'itli that. Have you' 
 ever been at a lodge of one of the Western Federation of Miners, oth^r ijian the one 
 at Ladysinith ?^A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you ever seen any of the correspondence as to. the i>ositionof the lodge 
 hfsce.?— rA. I have heard of it. ■, . , ^ 
 
 Q. You have never seen it ? — A. No. 
 ,'f Q. Is it not a fact that your objection is that they have not given out as mu6h ' 
 money, up to the present, as you expected .?— A. Yes, that, is a fact, that is one of the 
 objections to it. • ^ .,,,,, . . 
 
 Q. Wonid your objections not cease to exist if satisfactory financial arrangements.' 
 were made between the head office and the local ?— A. No, they would not. 
 
 Q. Why is that ? — A. I don't think myself that the Western Federation' of Miners 
 will ever amount to a row of beans in this country. We find that those who have been 
 longest in. it are throwing it overboard.- The Crow's Nest Pass. people, you will find, 
 are throwing up the Federation. 
 
 Q. Whei;e 4id.yoii get that . information ?— A, That inforniation has bepn cir- 
 cu^tpd 1 freely this, week , . r ,. .;,..;, .., •.■.->.■/ ■ .... .. „. ;.,,. ' .... , 
 
 Q. Verbally ? — A. verbally, from a party who cariie from there. ' . '" ' ' ;, 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Tou mean the Femie coal miners are getting tired of it ? — A. That they had 
 abandoned it. That is the report,"! believe"; Ferhie, Michbl and M6rrissey; I think. 
 
 HEN^IT CAREOLI/— LadFsmith, May 18. 
 
256 MINUTES OF ETWEliCE OF ROYAL COMUISSIOW 
 
 3^ EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. You don't know this as a matter of fact, only what you have heard on the 
 
 street ?— A. Yes. - ' 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : ■ .t 
 
 Q. You got the information from a man from Fernie ? — A. I do not know the 
 man. ' ' ■ . 
 
 Q. Were the reasons given ? — A. The reasons have been given. I saw lettets in 
 t*.e press that they claimed the Western Federation had sold them because they effected 
 a settlement. '■ 
 
 Q. I think you stated that if proper financial arrangements were made you would 
 stay with them I— A. I will stay with them whether financial arrangements are. made 
 or not, until the majority says not. That is my position. I don't do- anything, mone;^ 
 or no money, until the majority say so. 
 
 Q. In other words, then, you thinlc that the majority of the men are capble of 
 judging whether this Western Federation is a good thing or not ?— A. 1 don't believe 
 they are all capable, but I allow the majority to rule.- I never change my opinion 
 because I am in the minority. I am going to keep fighting until we are in the ma- 
 jority. That is what we will do here, anyway. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I understand, Mr. Carroll, that you are in favour of unions ?— A. I always 
 have been. 
 
 Q. Will you tell us what you consider the advantages of oi-ganizations ? — A. 
 Well, most of the men working in the nlines are not able or hot willing -to take the 
 trouble of looking after their interests individually, and many times the union can 
 make a settlement, if they are organized, and get better terms than a single individual 
 can. That has been my experience. ; . ,- — 
 
 Q. What are the disadvantages, if any ? — A. One disadvantage is hot-headed men 
 who do not know when to use reason, probably going too far. We are all liable to do 
 that — to make mistakes. . • 
 
 Q. What do you Say as to outside agitators being allowed to come into the country 
 and stir up these strikes ? — A. Well, I don't know that th«re is any law to prohibit 
 them if they feel disposed and have the means to travel.. , . 
 
 Q. Do you think there should be such a law ? — A. It would depend on how you 
 define the agitator. A man who goes around stirring up strikes should' be prohibited 
 from doing so*. . ; , - , - •, , 
 
 Q. You think the men are quite capable of judging their own grievanoep without 
 interf erene© from outsiders ?- — A. I think so, 
 
 Q. Would there be any advantage in having unions incorporated. ? — A. Yes, I 
 believe there would. , ■ : -, 
 
 By Mr. Bowe ; „ 
 
 Q. The Nanaimo union is incorporated, is it not ? — A. It was at one time, I sup- 
 pose it is yeti . 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I suppose if a union were incorporated,! it would be an advantage to an em- 
 ployer; would it not ? — A. I shouM think it would be. ; , ' 
 
 Q. He would have a more responsible body to deal with ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Is there not this disadvantage about unions — that there is a tendency to bring 
 down the good man to the level of the Weak man' ! — ^A. No, I d<Jn?t think so. ^'j 
 
 Q.'Well, when the union demand a standard or minimum wage, and the employer 
 con^piders that minimum wage is too high; to pay poor men, he would, have to deduct 
 that much out of the good man's wages t^^A. Thkt 'would hdt work in thef coal fields. 
 
 HENRY CARROLL— Ladysmith. May 18. 
 
02f mDVBTRIAL DISPUTJJS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 257 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. Most of that business has been between the mine management and 
 the workman himself, except there is a standard price for coal. 
 
 Q. The majority of the coal miners are paid by the ton ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So it is up to them to determine how much they make according to how fast 
 they work ?— A. Well, yes, but sometimes they are held back by obstacles. It is up to 
 the pit boss then to make arrangements ? 
 
 Q. I understand that a complaint of the employer is that instead of settling his 
 wages himself, it is virtually the pit committee, and that that is the chief objection 
 to having a union ? — A. I will tell you the way wc worked that at Nanaimo. I think 
 that is a little exaggerated, for this reason : the committee do not interfere with any 
 toss until the man and the foreman have tried to settle it themselves. The miner 
 tries to make a settlement with the overman in all cases. He cannot bring a complaint 
 to a committee unless he does so. 
 
 Q. That is different from the Typographical Union. In that union all grievances 
 are taken to the chairman of the committee, and never directly to the employet ? — A. 
 That is the way we did things in Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. First, the miner had to state his grievance to the overman ? — A. If he had not 
 done so, he could not state his grievance to the committee. The men are supposed to 
 try and settle it in the first place — ^to deal with the foreman, and failing that he goes 
 to the committee. 
 
 Q. And then the committee, I suppose, inform the employer or the foreman ? — A. 
 The foreman. I never had any experience down here. I am telling you about the 
 Nanaimo union, the way they used to do it. 
 
 Q. When the committee could not settle the matter with the foreman at Nanaimo, 
 what did they do then ? — A. Well, the committee went in and looked at the place along 
 with the foreman, and if he could not fix the price, then the place became day's 
 wages, or else stopped. 
 
 Q. When they disagree as to the price per ton, it is then done by day's wages or 
 the place abandoned ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. How often would that occurrence take place — this discussion between the com- 
 mittee and the foreman ? — A. Very seldom. In the majority of cases, the miner can 
 always settle his own grievances with the foreman. 
 
 Q. That is assuming that men are reasonable on both sides, a reasonable fore- 
 man and a reasonable miner ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. Could you tell us from your experience at Nanaimo how often the committee 
 had meetings with the foreman about this matter ? — A. No, I have not the slightest 
 idea.. It was very seldom any case ever went to a committee. 
 
 Q. Would you say once in six months ? — A. I could not fix any time. It was a 
 very rare occurrence anyway. 
 
 Q. Were you ever a member of the committee ? — A. I believe I was. 
 
 Q. For how long ? — A. I could not say just now for how long. I can remem- 
 ber, anyhow, that we went without eases so long that we forgot who were the pit com- 
 mittee. That will give you an idea of how the thing worked out. 
 
 Q. Was the committee appointed every year ?— A. Half yearly, I think. 
 
 Q. Were the members of a committee always changed, or were they generally the 
 same men ? — A. They were appointed just as the meeting felt disposed. 
 
 Q. How many were on that committee ? — A. Three, I believe. 
 
 Q. And that is the committee hy which all grievances are considered ?— A, No, 
 that is a committee specially appointed for that purpose— the pit committee. 
 
 Q. What about the grievance committee ? — A. I do not know what you would 
 call a grievance committee. 
 
 Q. When there were grievances felt by the men ?— A. I suppose that would go to 
 the executive of the union. 
 
 HENRY CARROLL— Laaysmith, May 18. 
 
 36a— 17 
 
258 :MINVTE8 OF ETIDKNCB OF ROYAL COUMISSIOIf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q, Was it expected that a man should try and settle his grievances first before 
 he went to the executive ?-^A. The executive never dealt with individual cases like 
 that. 
 
 Q. You mean he would take his grievance first to the foreman ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And then if he could not get a settlement of that ? — A. It would go to the pit 
 committee. The pit committee were constituted to settle disputes in regard to the 
 places.: 
 
 Q. And that is really where the principal disputes arise ? Other disputes rarely 
 arise ? — A. Very rarely. 
 
 By Mr. Roive : 
 
 Q. Do you find any diflierence in the conditions of work between the miners at 
 iSTanaimo and those here ? — A. In what respect, sir ? 
 
 Q. As to allotment of places, earning good wages and so on ? — A. No, I have 
 made good wages since I was here. 
 
 Q, How do the earni'ngs in British Columbia compare with those in Washington ? 
 —A. I believe that Washington is below British Columbia, but I could not say authori- 
 tatively as to the exact figures. I have worked there, but it is a long time ago. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Have you thought anything about how strikes and difficulties between employ- 
 bts and employees should be settled ? — A. No, J have given but little attention to that. 
 
 Q. What do you think of compvilsory arbitration ? — A. I would not favour com- 
 pulsory arbitration. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. I don't really know that I could give a sufficient reason, but I don't 
 look on it with favour. 
 
 Q. What method would you suggest should be adopted ? — A. I would be jn favour 
 of that Conciliation Bill of Parliament. I think that would about cover the ground — 
 that Bill of Mr. Mclnnis'. 
 
 Q. Is it your opinion that most strikes could be settled by intercourse between 
 employers and employees ? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Supposing they won't conciliate, what then ? — (No answer.) 
 
 By Mr. Howe : 
 Q. It was given in evidence that the Nanaimo Union was no good, that it had no 
 strength behind it. Is that your experience ? — A. That has been given as a reason 
 for supporting the Western Federation — that we would have unbounded wealth behind 
 us. The Nanaimo Union kept conditions very good in Nanaimo. We had good men 
 at the head of it, and I found conditions there as good as any place. 
 
 William Smith^ sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You live at Ladysmith, Mr. Smith ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Where did you live laefore that ? — A. In Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. How long were you living at Nanaimo ? — A. Somewhere about twelve years, 
 
 Q. Where did you work before that ? — A. In Indian Territory. 
 
 Q. You came from the United States ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Worked in Nanaimo about twelve years, and have been here how long ? — A, 
 About twelve months. 
 
 Q. How do conditions at the mines here compare with those in other places where 
 you have worked ? — A. How do you mean ? 
 
 WILLIAM SMITH— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
Olfr INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISB COLUMBIA ^9 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. I mean the conditions of the men, the amount of wages paid, the places of 
 workT— general conditions ? — A. For my part, the conditions have been as good here 
 as any place I have been at. 
 
 Q. You were thoroughly satisfied yourself ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And so had no occasion for a strike ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did you join the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why did you join the union ? — A. Well, the reason I joined it was — ^I don't 
 like a body of men to do business that I may either gain or lose by without having a 
 voice or a vote in the matter. 
 
 Q. Would you have felt it necessary, as far as you were concerned, to have a union 
 at Ladysmith ? — A. Not as far as I am concerned. 
 
 Q. But after a union was formed you thought you^ had better join it, because you 
 would have a vote in it. Have you had any experience with the Western Federation 
 of Miners as distinguished from other unions '( — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you any opinions generally as to whether it is a good kind of union to 
 belong to, for coal miners ? Have you any opinion on that subject ? — A. Well, my 
 opinion is that I should think it would be best for the men to have a union and be 
 organized. 
 
 Q. As a general thing you believe in unions ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. But I ask you if you have any opinion as to the Western Federation, distin- 
 guishing it from other unions. Is it the kind of union you would choose if you had 
 your choice in the niatter ? — A. No, I would not choose it. 
 
 Q. Why would you not choose it if you had a free choice ? — A. Because the ma- 
 jority of the Western Federation is outside of the boundaries of Canada. 
 
 Q. And you feel that that majority controls ? — A. That is what I feel. 
 
 Q. You live at Ladysmith, instead of Extension ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why do you live at Ladysmith instead of Extension ? — A. Because I prefer 
 Ladysmith before Extension. 
 
 Q. You prefer Ladysmith — why ? — A. Well, I don't like the look of Extension to 
 live in; I would not like to live there. 
 
 Q. When you came here you came from Nanaimo, and the work was going on at 
 Extension, and you said you would not live at Extension, and came to Ladysmith of 
 your own choice ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You have a house and lot here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And a family ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What objection is there to Extension as a place of residence — it is close to 
 the work ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What objection is there to living there ? — A. For my part I would not think 
 it would be a healthy place to live. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. I think from all the nuisances that would be thrown out — I would 
 be afraid of it causing sickness. 
 
 Q. Do you find any inconvenience in getting to work under the arrangement they 
 have here — from Ladysmith to Extension ? — A. Well, it is quite a little distance to 
 come and go, yet things are made as comfortable as can be. 
 
 Q. How far did you live from your work at Nanaimo ? — A. I guess it would be 
 about four miles. 
 
 Q. How did you get there in the morning ? — A. Went on the cars. 
 
 Q. Now you have to go about 13 miles on the cars ? — A. Somewhere about that 
 
 Q. How far is it supposed to be when they get the short line finished ? — A. I don't 
 know. 
 
 Q. Did you understand anything about the way the coal fields were working — 
 in which way they were going ? — A. Yes, I understand the work is coming this way, 
 towards Ladysmith. 
 
 WILLIAM SMITH— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
 36a— 17i 
 
260 MINVTES OF ETIDMCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. When you came here a year and a half ago was it pretty generally understood 
 that the men were all to live at Ladysmith ? — A. I was not told that. I heard some 
 men talking about it — that is not why I came down here. 
 
 Q. But that was not the reason why you came to Ladysmith ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Senhler : 
 
 Q. When you joined this Western Federation of Miners you knew that most of 
 the executive and a majority of the members lived outside of Canada ? — A. Well, I 
 take it from the locals that there are more local unions outside of Canada than in 
 Canada. -At least, that is what I understood. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you consider to be the advantage of unions ? — A. I think, from my 
 experience, that wherever there has been a union there has been less trouble than where 
 there was none. 
 
 Q. What do you man by less trouble ? — A. Well, less strikes. 
 
 Q. Less trouble where there was a union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In order to have a strike there must be some kind of union or understanding 
 among the men ? — A. No, you don't need that all the time. 
 
 Q. You don't think that is necessary ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. How do you think a union reduces trouble ? In what way do they keep away 
 trouble ? — ^A. By getting together and discussing the business of the work they are 
 in with the executive before meeting with the management, and I think they work 
 more harmonioTisly by that than as individuals. 
 
 Q. Are some individual grievances killed by the committee ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You think, therefore, the management have less grievances presented to them 
 than if there were.no committee ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If the men are satisfied with the wages paid, what is the object of having a 
 imion ? — A. Well, I don't think it is a bad thing for the men to come together. 
 
 Q. You thinli it is a good thing for the men to meet together — that it promotes n 
 better understanding among the men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to outsiders being allowed to come in and stir up strikes « 
 ■ — A. I say if a man comes into the country to stir u.i strikes, there ought to be some 
 way of stopping him. 
 
 Q. You think the men should be allowed to find out their own grievanios, without 
 the assistance of outsiders ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The effect of a union is to practically exclude non-union labour wherever there 
 is a union ? — A. That is the understanding, that they should try and get all the men 
 together. 
 
 Q. There are no non-union miners in Nanaimo ? — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. A non-union man could not get work there ? — A. Yes. I guess he could. 
 
 Q. How could he get work ? — A. I don't see much to stop him. They might stop 
 him after he got work. 
 
 Q. But that is the general understanding — that where the men are unionized no 
 non-imion men need apply ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. A non-union man would have some difiiculty in maintaining his ground if he 
 did not join the union ? — A. He would be persuaded 
 
 Q. Would anything more than persuasion be used ? — A. No, I don't think so ; not 
 by reasonable men. 
 
 Q. What, in your opinion, would be the effect if the Western Federation aiked you 
 to come out on sympathetic strike, and you did not want to do it ? — A. My own opinion 
 
 WILLIAM SMITH— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
02V INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES JN BRITISH COLUMBIA 2Sl 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Is, if any local was to be called out by the executive board, I think they would come 
 out. That IS what I think. 
 
 Q. That is on sympathetic strike ? — A. Yes. 
 A- A 9'o^ suppose the fear would be that they would be published as scabs if they 
 didn t ? — A. Oh, I don't know. I guess they would be. 
 
 Q. At all events, there would not be very good feeling between the union and the 
 executive if they did not comply with the request ?— A. Yes, at least that is what I 
 think. 
 
 Q. Do you think a Canadian union or federation of coal miners would be enough 
 to meet all purposes ? — ^A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Are you a Canadian ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. An American, are you ?— A. Well, I am not a born Canadian; that is what I 
 mean. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. A Canadian citizen now ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you think is the best method of settling strikes ? — A. Well, I would 
 think to try conciliatory measures. 
 
 Q. You are in favour of conciliation ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And if the parties won't conciliate, what then ? — A. Well, I should think there 
 ought to be a law to make them arbitrate. 
 
 Q. You think compulsory arbitration would do ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Well, the majority of opinions among union men seem to be against com- 
 pulsory arbitration ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Then, if we don't have compulsory arbitration, the weaker party will have to 
 yield, if they won't conciliate ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the strike may go on indefinitely ? — A. Yes, that is it. 
 
 Q. And the general public injured ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bo we : 
 
 Q. When you joined the union, Mr. Smith, did you receive the impression that 
 the forming of the union would result in trouble ? — A. Yes,' I did. 
 
 Q. You believed the management would not tolerate a union ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you get the impression at all that it was for the purpose of creating trouble 
 that the union was formed ? — A. No, I could not say that. 
 
 Q. Or that it was promoted by any outside influence or not ? — A. Well, sometimes 
 a man has got an opinion of his own that he cannot put his finger on; something he 
 cannot give facts for, and yet that does not stop him from having his own opinion. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You think that this agitation for a union here came from the outside, rather 
 than from the inside ? — A. Well, I think there were men here who wanted it,, or else it 
 would not have happened. 
 
 Q. But the suggestion came from the outside ? — A. That is my opinion, but I 
 
 cannot prove it. 
 
 Q. I suppose quite a number joined the union here rather unwillingly, didn't 
 
 they ?— A. Well, I don't know. 
 
 Q. If the majority of the men were in favour of a union it would take some deter- 
 mination to stand out against that, would it not ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I suppose it is safe to say that quite a number joined it unwillingly ?— A. I 
 
 could not say that. . ^ , ,. , 
 
 Q. Have you any doubt about that ,? — A. I believe there were quite a number 
 
 joined it in the same way as myself. 
 
 ' WILLIAM SMITH-Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
262 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Because you didn't want to be in the hopeless minority ? — A. "We wanted to 
 know how things were going, and to haTe a voice in the matter. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Do you think the formation of a union has a good effect upon the habits of 
 the mien ? — A; I think so, if they are rightly handled. 
 
 Q. Their habits are likely to be improved , and their intelligence increased ? — ^A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Speaking generally, you believe for the all-round benefit of men they should 
 be organized ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Was not the real reason why you left Nanaimo because you wanted to get away 
 from the Western Federation ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Was there not a dispute over there between some of the labour leaders, and 
 was not Ralph Smith opposed to the Western Federation ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You were of his party — you were a supporter of his in the labour union ? — A. 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And after you came to Ladysmith ? — A. I think I was in Ladysmith when 
 they organized there. It was talked of at the time I was there, and I voted against it. 
 My opinion was, that it would not do us any good. 
 
 John Bryden, sworn: 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. You live in Victoria? — A. res. 
 
 Q. How long were you manager of the Wellington collieries? — A. From April 
 1881, until July, 1894. 
 
 Q. Were you connected with the company when the Extension mine was opened 
 up? — A. Not in connection with the active management. I continued to visit the col- 
 lieries and grounds at Extension while it was being opened up. In fact, I was there 
 before any work was done. I advised them and tallied over matters with Mr. Dunsmuir. 
 I had nothing to do with the active management. 
 
 Q. You formed an opinion as to the advisability of the men living at Extension? 
 — ^A. Yes, that is a matter that Mr. Dunsmuir and I talked over, and I told Mr. 
 Dunsmuir that I did not think it a desirable place for the men to live, that it would 
 i.ever make a good camp. The water was very poor. I had experienced that, before 
 there was any work there. I had been around there and had great difficulty in getting 
 water fit to drink. There is a lake there, and in the summer time, when the tempera- 
 ture of the water becomes very high, various vegetable matter arises. That vegetable 
 matter is all through the water — not on the surface alone. I suppose the cause of that 
 is that the vegetable matter expands when the water is hot, and while it is cold, it con- 
 tracts and remains at the bottom. When the water becomes hot. it expands; some 
 rise to the top, and some will rise near the top — in fact, it is in suspension. 
 
 Q. Can you drink it? — A. You can get it down, but I don't think it would be 
 very good. 
 
 Q. What efftict has it on the boilers and engines ? — A. It is not good for them. 
 At Wellington we had that experience. In the dry season, and again in the spring, it 
 leaves a deposit in the boiler — forms a crust, and causes a foaming in the boiler — what 
 we call foaming or frothing. 
 
 JOHN BRYDEN— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
Olf INDV8TRIAL 'DI8PVTE8 IN BRITISE COLUMBIA 263 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. How about the wells up there ?— A. I don't think it would have been a suit- 
 able place for wells. It might have been for a few houses, but for a large number the 
 wells, I don't think would be advisable. 
 
 Q. It is a place that could be drained easily ? — A. It might be drained, but there 
 is no supply of water. What water they do get in the wells is not good. 
 
 Q. Ton had some experience with men living in a bad place at Union ? — A. That 
 happened up at IJnion, they had an attack of typhoid, and I thought the same thing 
 might occur at Extension. I told Mr. Dunsmuir I did not think that Extension would 
 be a desiraible place to reside in, especially for men with families. 
 
 Q. And you knew that Mr. Dunsmuir made an order for the men to live at Lady- 
 smith, acting in good faith and for what he thought was in their interests ? — A. It 
 Vv-as long debated as to whether they would have the shipping point at Departure Bay 
 CI Ladysmith. If they could have succeeded in getting Departure Bay they would not 
 have gone to Ladysmith, but they could not get through there. 
 
 Q. Tes, they were restrained by the injunction. Then the choice was practically 
 brought down to Ladysmith ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Extension you thought was impossible ? — A. Well, not what you would call 
 impossible, but undesirable. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Where would you have had the men live if you had shipped from Departure 
 Bay ? — A. A great many of the men had their houses at Wellington. I knew that 
 Wellington would soon be exhausted. I thought if they shipped to Departure Bay 
 the men could retain their houses there and be carried to and fro same as here. I cer- 
 tainly favoured Departure Bay. 
 
 Q. The men would not have been changed ? — A. They would have retained their 
 property and lived in their houses. Wellington was a good camp. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Do you know the way the coal fields are working, the direction of the face, and 
 so on, in this camp ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You heard what Mr. Dunsmuir said about that yesterday ? — A. I am aware of 
 Ihat too, from a knowledge of the field, that the present base of operations can only 
 be so long. My own opinion is that ten years is the extreme. In time it cannot but 
 gradually work this way. 
 
 Q. And then Extension would have to be abandoned at any event ? — A. Or 
 they would have to carry the men from Extension in this direction. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What is the average life of a camp as far as you can tell ? — A. That depends 
 altogether upon the extent of the field. The extent of the field at Extension is consi- 
 derable. It is one of those fields broken up into what you might term detachments. 
 
 Q. Patchy ? — A. Yes, there is no very large area in one place. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q How long did the Wellington camp last ? Do you know when Mr. Dunsmuir 
 first opened the Wellington mine ?— A. That I forget. I know he was working there 
 
 Q. The camp was finished when you left in 1894 ?— A. Yes, I went to the camp 
 in 1881. I was in Nanaimo previous to that. ,,..,-,. i, ,, 
 
 Q Then the Vancouver Coal Company's camp has really not shitted at all— the 
 men have of course lived in Nanaimo ?— A. Yes, because the field you may say is 
 adjacent to Nanaimo. They have some little distance to travel but not far. What 
 was known as the south field was about three miles distant. 
 
 JOHN BRYDElN^Ladysnaitli, May IS. 
 
264 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. The north field ? — A. That was close by Wellington, just on the boundaries 
 
 of Wellington. They had a camp there ; it was a very good site for a camp. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. How far is Wellington from Nanaimo ?— A. About six miles by the road. 
 
 By Mr. Senlder : 
 
 Q. Mr. Bryden, you know that Mr. Dunsmuir allowed a certain number of the 
 men to get property and build houses at Extension ? — A. To what extent I do not 
 know ; that is a matter I have no knowledge of. 
 
 Q. The general order that Mr. Dunsmuir gave for the miners not to live at 
 Extension was given after some of them had acquired property there ? — A. I don't 
 know as to that. I know it was common conversation that Extension would not be a 
 'desirable place to live. I have seen the camp after it was built, and I have thought it 
 was a most undesirable place. The whole camp seems to be built up in higgledy-pig- 
 gledy manner. 
 
 Q. You do not know then how many miners built there ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Of course it was understood that some of the men would always be at Exten- 
 sion — firemen and certain other classes ? — A. It is necessary to have certain classes 
 near to the works. 
 
 Q. What class ? — A. There would he the firemen and some of the bosses. In fact 
 you could go further and say the manager should be adjacent to the mines. Tou have 
 - to have some one there in the event of any explosion or accident in the mine, so as to 
 be able to go at once. 
 
 By Mr. Senhler : 
 Q. From your experience in mining, Mr. Bryden, don't you find the miners like 
 to live as clese to the mine as possible ? — A. Many do, personally I would not. The 
 men like to congregate around the mines, but I would say if I were the owner of the 
 mines I would not desire it. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. What would be the objection ?— A. There is a certain amount of objection to 
 men gathering around the works. 
 
 Q. It would prevent discipline if the men congregated around in that way ? — 
 A. It is a thing we try to avoid, people being around the pit-heads or dumps. 
 
 By nis Lordship : 
 
 Q. Do you object to unions, Mr. Bryden ? — A. I don't know that I would object 
 to them if properly conducted. Still at the same time I do not see the use of unions 
 myself. 
 
 Q. Tou would not object to them if properly conducted, but you do not see the 
 use of them ? — A. I fail to see the use of them. As a means of getting large wages 
 I think they are a failure. If you increase the price of coal the butcher increases the 
 price of meat, and so on, it simply reduces the purchasing power of the dollar. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. How did you get along with the men at Wellington ? They were not organized? 
 — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. How did you manage for the ten years there ?— A. We got along very well. 
 We had difficulties once in a while, but when they were over we were as good friends 
 as ever. 
 
 JOHN BRYDEN— Ladysmlth, May 18. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 265 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. When difficulties arose, what method did you employ ?— A. The method usually 
 was individually, but sometimes they would send a committee. 
 
 Q. The men could go and see you personally if they wanted to ? — A. Yes, and 
 when they knew it was dinner hour, that was the hour they came. On one occasion 
 they did ask if we would recognize a body, that is the Knights of Labour, and their 
 grievance committee. I asked them the nature of this body— the Knights of Labour. 
 I understood the Knights of Labour was a branch of what was known as the ' Molly 
 -Maguires,' and we had a good deal to do with the 'Molly Maguires.' I asked 
 them the nature of the Knights of Labour and the grievance committee. They 
 told me the nature which was virtually to run the mines. I told them if Mr. 
 Dunsmuir has engaged you to run the mines you can do so, but if I am to run the 
 mines I want to run them. As to your Kiiights of Labour and grievance com- 
 mittee running the mines, I will dig clams for a living first. I had no more trouble 
 about the Knights of Labour. 
 
 Q. The questions raised are usually simple ? — A. There is seldom any difficulty in 
 arranging matters at the mine. If the pit committees of the miners are unable to 
 settle any little difficulty themselves they usually go to the manager, and I have never 
 experienced any difficulty in that way. 
 
 Q. It is usually a question of allowance i — A. In these mines here you have 
 always to make allowance becavise the places are not of a uniform nature. You might 
 have very good coal in one stall, and the adjoining stall would be very poor, and you 
 have to make an allowance. You cannot have a luiiform rate per ton, but wherever 
 there is a difficulty you must have an allowance. It is not a sliding scale exactly. It 
 is agreed upon by the man working in that place, and the pit boss. Then there is a 
 great difference in men. You will find as much difference in men as in the places. 
 The men are not always of the same efficiency. 
 
 Q. How would that work out in a union ? — A. I don't know ; I have had no 
 experience with unions. 
 
 Q. There would be a tendency to bring the scale up so that an inefficient man 
 would earn the efficient man's pay ? — A. That is if there was an effort to make them 
 all alike, but I don't think that was the case in the camps here. I think the men them- 
 selves recognize that — that some men are better than others. 
 
 ny His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Under your system where these differences have been settled, who acts as the 
 manager ? — A. Well, if the pit boss, the underground manager, if they did not settle 
 it, it would be referred to the manager and he would usually settle it. 
 
 Q. Supposing a man was dissatisfied with the manager, would he appeal to Mr. 
 Dunsmuir or the company ? — A. Certainly, but if you could not come to terms, you 
 would tell the man to go on day work until you got through with the difficulty. 
 
 Q. Who fixes the minimum for day work?— 'A. That is a standard wage; it has 
 been usually $3. 
 
 Q. What would settle that from time to time — the condition of the market^— A. 
 That has been the fixed rate. When I came to the country, it was $2.75, and remained 
 at that for many years. Afterwards it was raised to $3, and remained at $.% 
 
 Q. Can you tell us how that raise came ? Was it by a demand of the miners ?— 
 A. I really cannot recollect how that came about. I think it was as much as anything 
 at a time that there was a more than an unusual demand for men. 
 
 Q. As I understand it, one of the contentions of the men is, that there is a lialility 
 to favouritism in the matter of allotting places, whereas under the union system lliere 
 is no favouritism?— A. I don't know as to that. I think there is liable to be favourit- 
 ism just the same as between the commiltees of the men. The man on the grievance 
 committee is not infallible. _ . , , 
 
 Q. Their contention is, that if they arc formed into a union, they have greater 
 strength with the boss, and that when they deal as individuals, they have prnetically 
 
 JOHN BRYDEN— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
266 MINUTED OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSIOVf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VM., A. 1904 
 
 to yield ? — ^A. Well, for myself personally, I know I would rather do my own business 
 than get a second party to do it. I think, between the master and the pit boss is just 
 as good a way. These grievance committees are not always the best men for the , 
 purpose. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it would be better for an employer to deal with an incorpor- 
 ated union ? — A. I think, if there are to be unions, it would be all the^better to be in- 
 corporated. 
 
 Q. If an employer had a time contract with an incorporated union, he would feel 
 some kind of security ? — A. Certainly, if I was an employer, I would know what to do. 
 
 Q. And he would feel safer with such a contract with an incorporated union than 
 with a lot of men separately? — A. Well, suppose you are incorporated and have a union, 
 you have the same difficulties to contend with, just the same as if there were no union 
 — ^that is, these difficulties in regard to places, &c. You cannot make a contract that 
 men will work for a certain rate on the ton for a certain length of time. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether Mr. Dunsmuir gave an order to vacate Extension? — A. 
 That I do not; but I know he frequently told me to tell the men, and also gave in- 
 structions to the managers and bosses to tell the men, that there would be no camp at 
 Extension — it would be at Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Mr. Dunsmuir told us here that frequently a number of grievances were 
 brought to him of a trifling character, or at least what he considered to be such, and 
 gave it out that he would not receive such committees, and left them to deal with the 
 manager ? — A. Yes, or the pit bosses. I have no doubt that such might be the case. 
 
 Q. Does that not give some colour of reason to the contention of the men, that 
 they should be unionized — that the employers won't meet them? 
 
 ■ Mr. BoDwELL. — I don't think that is quite fair. He said he was quite willing to 
 meet the men, but he said they were bringing trifles to him. 
 
 His Lordship. — What might be trifling to Mr. Dunsmuir may be of considerable 
 consequence to the men. 
 
 Brj His Lordship : 
 
 Q. But that is the position? It depends on the employer whether he will receive 
 the men or not with these grievances? — A. If the men were passing the pit boss and 
 the manager, and going to Mr. Dunsmuir, then I don't think they were taKng the 
 right course. 
 
 Q. Supposing they could not get a satisfactory adjustment from the manager. 
 We will assume that some manager is unpopular, that he lacks tact, and they go to the 
 employer, and he refuses to see them. Is not that good ground for the men wishing a 
 union? — A. I cannot conceive of that. ' 
 
 Q. But that is what is happening here? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — That is not what happened. Mr. Dunsmuir did not refuse to see 
 the men at all. The men were going over the manager's head, and he said, as the 
 ordinary conduct of business, that it was the manager's affair. 
 
 His Lordship. — I have it down here, ' that I told the men, over a year ago, that 
 I could not be bothered with trifling little matters.' 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Yes, but it was because they were going over the manager's head 
 and going to Mr. Dunsmuir. 
 
 Witness. — My experience in handling men has been a long experience. I find 
 that men would go with a grievance past the pit boss, and not try to deal with him at 
 all. When I laid it before the pit boss, he would be ignorant about it. These things 
 should always be brought to the pit boss. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. What are the men to do, when they cannot get satisfaction out of the pit boss ? 
 Supposing a man found by experience that t^^ere was no use going to the pit boss. I 
 JOHN BRYDEN— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 267 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 am trying to find why a company, for its own reasons, chooses to keep an employee 
 who has no tact in dealing with men. What are the men to do in that case ?— A. ' It 
 .may be that one ar two men may be at variance with the pit boss, whereas the others 
 might be working in harmony, and you could not discharge the pit boss because 
 one or two men are opposed to him, and perhaps one hundred working in harmony with 
 him. Tou have all these difficulties to contend with. 
 
 Q. It appears to be a general thing that the effect of a union is to wipe out minor 
 difficulties., and that the employer never hears of them, and tha"t that is one of the 
 advantages of having a union ? — A. Well, I could not say as to that. I remember once 
 having a serious dispute in regard to some measurements. The pit boss measured it, 
 but they were not satisfied. They came to me and asked me to measure it myself. I 
 measured it, and made it less than the pit boss had. The men said they were quite 
 satisfied. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. Proving they had no confidence in the pit boss ?— A. Yes, and yet the pit boss 
 was doing them full justice. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Did you ever find, in the history of your administration, that you had to get 
 rid of any pit boss on account of difficulties with the men? — A. Not on account of 
 difficulties with the men. We have had to get rid of them, but for other reasons. Of 
 course, if a pit boss becomes generally disliked, then it would be a question as to 
 whether it would not be better to discharge him or not. 
 
 Q. Tou would not consider it good policy to keep a pit boss who could not keep in 
 harmony with the men ? — A. Certainly not. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Have you formed any opinion, Mr. Uryden, as to the method of settlement of 
 labour disputes ? — A. That is a thing which has occupied the attention of the best 
 men, and they have found no remedy yet. Disputes have been from the beginning, 
 and I am inclined to think they will be to the end. 
 
 Q. Do you think there are no measures that would tend towards a settlement ? — 
 A. A conciliation board might do something. The matter in dispute, at any rate, 
 would be made known, and to a great extent the public has a considerable influence on 
 such matters. 
 
 Q. Then compulsory inquiry ? — A. I think there should be some power that mat- 
 ters of that kind could be submitted to. 
 
 Q. The board would have the power to take up a matter and inquire into the cause 
 of la;bour disputes ? — ;A. Yes, I think the relation of the facts would have a large 
 share in the settlement. 
 
 Q. Failing that, would you approve of compulsory arbitration ?.^A. I don't think 
 compulsory arbitration would work well, especially among the men. I thinic there 
 would he a great want of confidence in compulsory arbitration. I really don't think 
 it would work well. 
 
 Q. They say that has not been the case in New Zealand. There is a form of com- 
 pulsory arbitration there ? — A. We get different accounts in regard to that, some that 
 it works well, and others that they have grievances. I think this Inst affair in Victo- 
 ria, even with government employees, shows the thing is not working satisfactorily. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. The difference in New Zealand, as I understand it, has been that the award 
 has always been made on a rising market, and generally in favour of the men, but the 
 position has not been tested when the market is a falling one, and therefore against 
 the men ?— A. That is just the difficulty. 
 
 JOHN BRYDEN— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
2e8 MINUTES OF ETIDENOE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. There might be great difficulty in enforcing it against the men, whereas it is 
 easy enough to enforce it against the employer ? — ^A. I don't see ho'W you can force 
 men to work. I don't think you can compel a man to carry on his work if he thinks - 
 it is not warranted. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. You spoke of the fact that when wages are raised the price of coal is raised, 
 and other commodities similarly, so that the purchasing price of a man's wage is no 
 greater than formerly ? — A. If a branch of wage-earners are united, and say they 
 force the wages up twenty per cent, you reduce the purchasing price of the dollar 
 twenty per cent. You must talie into consideration the cost of the union. Where they 
 have paid officers you have to contribute to the support of these men. They have to 
 pay 20 per cent more for anything they buy for the support of these men. I don't see 
 the benefit of a union. You arrive just where you started. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it- is possible for them to get a larger proportion ? — A. If 
 all trades are united, I don't see how you can. The result is such that of manufactured 
 goods produced here the price is raised, and the dealer will deal with the foreign market 
 to the exclusion of goods here, so that you drive the manufactured goods out of the pro- 
 vince. 
 
 Q. Is not the proportion of profit as large here as in other provinces for the 
 manufacturer ? — A. I am not sufficiently posted on that. I know labour is high 
 compared with other provinces. 
 
 B2/ His Lordship : 
 Q. Coal is pretty high compared with other provinces ? — A. It is. Not as high 
 here as in the city of London. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. I know we get anthracite coal delivered in Toronto for the same price Oomox 
 coal is delivered in Victoria ? — A. Of course labour is a good deal higher now. Five 
 or six years ago I was through Nova Scotia and Cape Breton, and I found the wages 
 there very much lower than here. Of course goods were lower also, but if you went 
 into a hotel to get a meal, I could get a better meal here in Victoria for the same 
 money. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : • 
 
 Q. Perhaps they have a better bar trade ? — A. That might be so. If you do away 
 with the bar you will find the workmen will be in a better position. 
 
 Q. Do you thinlt the bars produce disputes ? — A. Well, no, but they take away 
 a great deal of the workmen's money. 
 
 Q. Have you ever formed an estimate of what proportion of wages goes into the 
 bars ? — A. I have not, but take Victoria and see the number of men who run saloons 
 there and you can find an idea of what the workmen pay. 
 
 Q. You think that workmen contribute mo^t of the support to saloons ? — A. 
 Well, a great deal. 
 
 Q. Do you remember the date of that injunction in reference to Departure Bay ? 
 — A. No, I do not. I was out of active management. Of course I did feel disap- 
 pointed when Mr. Dunsmuir was not able to reach the bay, because I thought it would 
 have been the best place for shipping. It is a very good harbour, and very well known. 
 It is of easy access, to get in and out at any time. 
 
 Q. I suppose it would have bc?e;i more advantageous to the management to have 
 shipped from there, instead of establishing the new town ? — A. Well, they would have 
 had new wharfs to build, so that the expense might have been about the same. 
 
 Q. It was after that injunction that the evacuation was ordered from Extension" ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 JOHN BRYDEN— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
ON INDVSTHIAL disputes in BRITISH COLUMBIA 269 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 Moses Woodburn, sworn. 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Do you live at Ladysmith, Mr. Woodburn ?— A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You are a coal miner ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How long have you lived here ? — A. Since last August. 
 
 Q. Where before that ? — A. Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. How long were you there ? — A. About 14 years. 
 
 Q. You never worked at Wellington ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How long there t — A. Probably about 4 or 5 months. 
 
 Q. Then you went to Nanaimo ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And after you came to Ladysmith ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You have a wife and family ? — A. I have a wife, but no family. 
 
 Q. You have a house and lot ? — A. I am purchasing one on the instalment plan. 
 
 Q. You came to Ladysmith — you were not ordered from Extension ? — A. Oh no. 
 
 Q. Why didn't you go to Extension to live ? — A. I didn't think that would be a 
 desirable place ; I would rather live in Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. What objection have you to Extension ?— A. Well, I have lived in Nanaima 
 where everything is nice, Jvhere the cottages are laid out nice. I thought I had got 
 into a cattle pen when I got on the south side of Extension. ■ Of course on the other 
 side a man could make a nice little building if he had the opportunity. 
 
 Q. Did you form any opinion about the sanitary conditions there? — A. I could 
 not see how there was a possibility of any sanitary conditions, because I understood 
 the majority of people were paying ground rent, and where that is so, people are not 
 going to urge for a sewage system. You take property owners — people who own the 
 land and are going to reside there for some time — they generally agitate for some sys^ 
 tern of sewage, or a sanitary system. 
 
 Q. How about water? — A. No, I don't Icnow much as to that. Only I heard the 
 talk pretty frequently around there that the men in the summer time drank beer. 
 
 Q. You didn't want to take any chances on the water? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did you join the union here, Mr. Woodburn, when it was formed ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When it was first organized, or later? — A. I joined — let me see — the Monday 
 after Mr. Baker made a public speech down on the green. He made a speech on Sun- 
 day, and on Monday I went up and deposited my dollar. It was probably two weeks 
 afterwards before I was initiated. ^ 
 
 Q. What was your idea in going into the union ? — A. I could see all the men going 
 in, and I was not going to be left alone. 
 
 Q. Did you have any opinion that you ought to join for any reason? — A. No, I 
 don't know that I had. 
 
 Q. Had you any difficulty in adjusting questions which arose ? — A. Not the 
 
 slightest. 
 
 Q. Who is the boss of your shift? — A. You mean the foreman of the mine which 
 
 I work in ? 
 
 Q. Well, is there not a separate boss on each of the shifts during the twenty-four 
 hours— a pit boss?— A. Yes, sometimes. 
 
 Q. Who has been the pit boss most of the time you have been working ? — A, Well, 
 it is the mine foreman who goes around. He is called the overman. 
 
 Q. Who is that in this case ?— A. Mr. Wilson. 
 
 Q. You never h^d much trouble with him?— A. No, not any. 
 
 By Mr. Senlder: 
 
 Q. Do you remember when it was you went up to Extension ? When did you first 
 go up there to work ?— A. I went up somewhere about the 19th or 20th of August. 
 
 Q. And it was at that time you thought it an undesirable place in which to live? 
 —A No. I visited it a month prior to that. 
 
 °- ' MOSES WOODBURN— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
270 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3^ EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Were you ordered not to niove there ? — A. No. • 
 
 Q. Hear anything about that? — A. I heard a common rumour that the men had 
 to go to Ladysmith> but not officially. 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact, had you liked the place, you would have gone up there to 
 live? — A. I suppose I vfouH, along with the rest. 
 
 By Mr. Howe: , 
 
 Q. Are you a union man? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Tou believe in labour unions? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What do you consider to be the advantages in reference to coal mines ? — A. 
 To prevent trouble and strikes. I know they have in Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. How long were you a member of the union at Nanaimo? — A. From its incep- 
 tion until I left; I think it was formed in '89 or '90. 
 
 Q. During that time was there any strike ? — A. Not in Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. Any suspension of labour through grievances? — A. Probably, one or two days, 
 that is all. There was practically nothing. 
 
 Q. Do you have any benefit fund in connection with that union ?— A. No, not any. 
 
 Q. How do you arrange for payment of dues? — A. That is attended to from the 
 company's office. 
 
 Q. The office administer the funds? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Just collect the money from the union? — A. That was separate entirely from 
 the union. 
 
 Q. Was the union incorporated? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Under what Act? — A. Under the Dominion Trades Union Act. 
 
 Q. There is a provision for incorporation, is there ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you think it is to the benefit of owners of collieries that their men should 
 be in a union? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Why? — A. There is a great number of men who have grievances, and that is 
 brought into the body and discussed. It is often found that there is nothing tangible 
 in it, and the man just imagines he has a grievance. And when he gets among his 
 bellows and hears his case thoroughly discussed, he comes to the conclusion that he 
 might put himseK in a ridiculous position, if he tries to make trouble over his case. 
 
 Q. With reference to the union here — you joined it? — A. Yes, 1 may say at the 
 beginning. 
 
 Q. Were you at the first meeting? — A. No. There had been a meeting more than 
 a week ago. I was at the second meeting, when the organization took place. 
 
 Q. Did you know there was to be a meeting before it was held ? — A. Yes, I heard 
 it talked around. 
 
 Q. 'Vfere you consulted as to the advisability of holding the meeting? — A. Well, 
 I talked to one or two about it. I didn't approve of the suggestion. 
 
 Q. Why? — A. I was under the impression that the Western Federation of Miners 
 was going to be organized to it, and I did not approve of that organization being 
 brought in here. 
 
 Q. Was the Nanaimo Union part of the Federation, when you belonged to it? — A. 
 No, the Nanaimo Union joined it last January. 
 
 Q. When wa'fe the vote taken in reference to it? — A. Probably, September or Octo- 
 ber ; after I left anyhow. 
 
 Q. Did you think the formation of a union here was being promoted by the West- 
 ern Federation people? — A. Well, I don't know. . 
 
 Q. Did you think that influence was exercised from Nanaimo for the promotion 
 of a union here? — A. I could not say for certain. I had that impression, but I could 
 not prove it. 
 
 Q. What reason was given for calling the meeting that you were consulted about? 
 — A. I did not say that. 
 
 MOSES WOODBURN— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 271 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You heard about the meeting feeing called ?^A. Yes. 
 , Q. What was the reason ?-7-A. I never heard any. 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear anything about a request for increased wages ?— A. No, I 
 can't say that I did. 
 
 Q. Was there a general talli that there ought to be a demand for a 15 per cent 
 increase ? — A. I had heard people say there ought to be a probability of getting ten 
 per cent advance, owing to the duty being taken off. I did not hear that assigned as 
 a reason. 
 
 Q. You understood that the meeting was to be called for the purpose of forming 
 an organization ? — A. No, I could not say for certain. 
 
 , . 9' ^^^ ^°^ thought that would not be wise ? — A. No. I am^ not favourable: to 
 bringing the Eederation against Mr. Dunsmuir. 
 
 Q. Why are you not favourable to that ?— A. Well, Mr. Dunsmuir has always led 
 us to believe that he is opposed to unions, and I should think the Western Federation 
 ought to be the last to run against a man who is a little bad-tempered about it. 
 
 Q. You thought the formation of a union would result in trouble ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you thinlc it was promoted in order to make trouble ? — A. Well, I could 
 not say as to that. Probably some of them had a grievance. Probably the organizer 
 thought it would be a good field to work on. I could not say anything for sure. 
 
 Q. Are you in favour of conciliation ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you favour compulsory arbitration ? — A. No. I cannot see how it will 
 work-out satisfactorily on a case of increase or decrease in wages. What will the 
 arbitrators decide on ? Will they decide on the amount to be paid on capital invested, 
 or the selling price of coal in the market ? What are they going to decide on ? 
 
 Q. Because of the difficulty of reaching a conclusion you oppose it ? — A. That 
 would be the difficulty. 
 
 Q. Were you a coal miner in the old country ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Are the coal miners organized throughout there ? — A. Where I resided. 
 
 Q. Are the methods employed there the same as here ? — A. No, not the same. 
 
 Q. In the union, I mean ? — A. They have conciliation boards there. Where I 
 resided there was a coal owners' association and the miners' association, and they 
 had six men picked from each side, and when a dispute arose the question was taken 
 before one board, and failing a settlement then it was discussed as to whether we 
 should go to arbitration. Sometimes if they agreed it would go to arbitration. When 
 they failed to agree it would be a strike. 
 
 Q. Was there any method in assigning men the different places in the mines ? — 
 A. The coal seams there, are more uniform. It is not the same as here at all. It is 
 all jumbled up here. To-day it may be favourable and to-morrow unfavourable. The 
 coal seams are more uniform in the old country. 
 
 Q. And yet there is a system of allocating the men ? — A. Well, no, they fix the 
 price per ton. They do not work on the men at all there. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You said you don't like the Western Federation, and thought it should be 
 about the last union to be started here. Why is that ?— A. Well, the leaders of that 
 organization are adopting the principles that they will never accomplish anything 
 until they seize the management, so that I cannot see how any employer should fancy 
 an organization which wants to seize his works. 
 
 Q. Socialistic in the extreme ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you have any suspicion that there might be some politics in it ?— A. I 
 was aware that there was politics in it. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What do you mean by that ?— A. Having candidates upon the line they think 
 most suitable to them. They propose to form a sect or party. 
 
 MOSES WOODBURN— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
272 MINUTES OF ETIDEICH OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Bp Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Take Nanaimo. They are controlled by the socialistic party ?— A. I could 
 not say for that. 
 
 By His Lordsliip : 
 Q. The majority of the members of the Western Federation approve of the doc- 
 trines of socialism ? — A. Yes, the members of the executive board. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. And the socialism which, as you say, looks to appropriate the works of the 
 employer and divide them among the men ? — A. Mailing them become public property. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. This question of entering the Western Federation of Miners — was that decided 
 by open ballot, or how ? — A. There was never a ballot taken on it that I know of. 
 
 Q. I mean this first meeting, this resolution to join the Western Federation ?— 
 A. I was not at that meeting. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — The minutes say, first a ballot was proposed, aifd afterwards a 
 show of hands. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I suppose the effect of the formation of a coal miners union is to virtually 
 compel all to come in ? — A. Yes, that is it. 
 
 Q. Men who did not belong would be gradually frozen out ?^A. The diiEculty 
 is you cannot go with the same fellows and feel sociable. You do not feel the same as 
 if you were along with them. 
 
 Q. I suppose I am safe in saying that a good many men join unwillingly ? — 
 A. Well, probably men join on the same ground that I would join. I recognized when 
 this organization started it was going to make a condition, and I must either gain or 
 suffer by the condition, and I wanted to have some share in the control of the move- 
 ment. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Have you any reason to believe that there was any money paid to any person 
 to work up this organization here ? — A. Well, I don't know whether there was or not. 
 
 Q. That is to say, you liave no knowledge on the subject, only a suspicion ? Is 
 that right ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did that go far enough with you to cause you to charge a certain person with 
 having been connected in that transaction ? I mean to say, was your suspicion strong 
 enough to induce you to mention it to the man you thought was connected with it, 
 on one ocasion ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What did he say to it ? — A. Well, I don't know whether he took it seriously 
 or not, or in the way of a jok«. I asked him to throw his commission into the service 
 of all these people who needed something to eat. 
 
 Q. And he did not see it that way ? — A. Oh, yes ; he said he would do that and 
 more, but I don't know if he said it for a joke or meant it seriously. 
 
 By Mr. SerMer : 
 
 Q. I want to ask you one question. I think just about the last question, you 
 made some reference to a man whom you had spoken to in connection with being paid 
 by the Western Federation to organize a lodge here, that you had your suspicious, 
 and you had spoken to a man. Who was that man ? — A. I spoke to him on the street 
 corner, his name is Thomas Shenton. 
 
 Q. What answer did he give ? — A. He said he would do that and more. I don't 
 fay the man took that seriously. 
 
 MOSES WOODBURN— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 273 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Do what and more— divide what money he had made out of the Federation for 
 the support of needy people ?— A. Yes, that he would do that and more for the 
 people. 
 
 Q. You don't know whether he said it in earnest, or as a joke ? — A. No, I have 
 not spoken to him since. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Mr. Shenton has taken a prominent part in getting up the union ? — A. He fills 
 the position of deputy organizer for the Western Federation of Miners. That is what 
 T understand. 
 
 Q. By organizer you mean Mr. Baker ? — A. Something similar to Mr. Baker ; 
 he is the superior officer. 
 
 Q. Has Mr. Shenton ever been among the men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How many times ? — A. Only once that I am aware of. 
 
 Q. When was that ? — A. Two or three weeks ago, I think. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Shenton ever requested 'oy the men here to go anywhere on their 
 behalf ? — A. Not that I am aware of. 
 
 Q. You say he was here about two or three weeks ago ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Not before that ? — A. I could not say ; that is the only time I know. 
 
 Q. So far as you know this idea of forming a union here was suggested from the 
 outside, and not from the men themselves ? — A. Well, I don't know for a certainty, but 
 that is my supposition. 
 
 Q. What reason have you for thinking so ?— A. Well, I always knew that the 
 men at Nanaimo have always been anxious to organize these mines. 
 
 Q. Is that since the men at Nanaimo became members of the Federation ? — A. 
 No, I am speaking prior to the time they joined the Federation. 
 
 Q. I suppose there have been frequent visits from Nanaimo men here ? — A. No, 
 I cannot say that there has. There may have been for anything I know, but I cannot 
 Bay there has. 
 
 Q. You have only had one conversation with Mr. Shenton since you have been 
 here ? — A. That is in Ladysmith, yes. 
 
 Q. Have you had any conversation with any other Nanaimo union men ? — A. 
 Not in Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. At Nanaimo ? — A. You can scarcely go there since this trouble arose without 
 hearing something about. In fact you can scarcely get through the street without ;thcy 
 want to know how affairs are down here. 
 
 Andrew Eobertson, sworn : , 
 
 By Mr. Bodu-ell : 
 
 Q. You live at Ladysmith Mr. Eobertson ? — A. Yes, sir, 
 
 Q. How long have you been here ?^A. Nearly a year. 
 
 Q. Where did, you come from,, here ? — A., I was living up at No. 1 for about, five 
 weeks before I came here. 
 
 Q. Where before you went to No. I ?— A. :Nana,imo. , 
 
 Q. Did you ever work at Wellington ? — A. Yes. , ;. , . 
 
 Q. When ? — A. Over fifteen years ago. , , , . 
 
 Q. How long did you stay ?it T^ellingtop ?— A. I hsve been off and on to Wel- 
 lington pretty much all the time Ipr fiiteen years, t lived at Northfield for, a little, 
 while, but off and on for the last :^teen years at the Wellington collieries. 
 
 qg^j jg ANDREW ROBERTSON— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
274 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COUMISSIOW 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. You went from Northfield to No. 1 ? — A. I went to board at No. 1. I was 
 workiug at No. 3. , , 
 
 Q. How long were you up there ? — A. Four or five weeks. 
 
 Q. And then you came to Ladysmith to lire ? — ^A. Yes. , . .; ■ , 
 
 Q. What do you think about living at Extension, or living at Ladysmith, as a 
 matter of residence ? — A. I would not want to live up there. . 
 
 Q. Would not live at Extension? — A. No, I don't think you could pay me to live 
 there. , ... 
 
 Q. What is the reason? — A. Well, I don't think it is a health resort. 
 
 Q. You had some experience, didn't you? Your wife was not very well at No.,1? — 
 A. My wife was living at Northfield at that time. 
 
 Q. You came to Ladysmith voluntarily becaiise you preferred it ? — A. Yea. , , 
 . Q. Did you ever belong to any union before you, joined this one here ?— A. I 
 belong to the union in town. 
 
 Q. Yes, but before that ? — A. Yes, the Knights of Labour vhen I was in the 
 States. . , , 
 
 Q. But in this counliry ? — A. I belonged to the Nanaimo union. 
 
 Q. But you did not belong to a union while you were working at Wellington ? — ■ 
 A. No. 
 
 ' Q. When did you join this one ? Were you one of the first or later on ? — A. It 
 was two or three meetings before I was initiated. 
 
 Q. You have not been to many of the meetings of the union, have you ? — ^A. I 
 think pretty nearly all with the exception of the first one or two. 
 
 Q. Did you ever have any trouble on your own account while you were working 
 at Wellington — anything you could not settle with the bosses ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. So far as you were concerned then, you did not feel the need pf a union per- 
 sonally ? — ^A. Not so far as I am concerned. 
 
 Q. Why then did you join the union here ? — A. I joined it like the balance— for 
 the Support I would get out of it. 
 
 Q. It was represented as a strong financial concern ? — -A. I understood that. 
 
 Q. And that if the men needed any financial support they wouM get it from them ? 
 — A. That was the impression I got. 
 
 Q. Most of the men thought that ? — A. It seems so. 
 
 y. It has not worked out in that way so far ?-^A. I am afraid not. 
 
 Bp Mr. Senkler : 
 
 Q. When you went up to Extension from No. 1, you were there about five weeks ? 
 — A. Somewhere like that. 
 
 Q. Were you boarding up there ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You didn't build a house for yourself ? — A." No. 
 
 Q. How long were you working at Nanaimo ? — A. Four months the last time. 
 
 Q. And how long ago was it you were working there before ? — A. I don't know ; 
 about 7 or 8 years ago. 
 
 Q. Was there a union there at that time ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you belong to it then ? — A. Yes, you had to. 
 
 Q. You belonged at any rate ? — A. Yes. 
 
 XJ. And you belonged to the union the last time you were working there tf»n ? — A. 
 Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You joined this local union here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You were not forced to any way, were you ?^=-A. No. 
 
 Q. Are you in favour of unions Ss a rule ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. You don't wish to qualify that in any way ? You are certainly in favdur of 
 them ?— A. Yes. .! . ' " 
 
 ANDREW ROBERTSON— 'Ladysmith, May IS. 
 
ON INDU8TRTAL DISPUTES IX BRITISH COLUMBIA 275 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you say as to Canadian unions, as opposed to American unions ? — A- 
 I prefer it to be Canadian. 
 
 Q. Who asked you to join this union ? — A. Nobody asked me at all. 
 Q. Did you ever ta:lk with anyone, before you joined, about the advi8a:bility of 
 joining ?— A. Yes, I did, a little. - 
 
 Q'. With whom ?— A. With Martin Woodbum. 
 Q. Anyone else ? — A. No, sir. 
 Q. Ever have a talk with Shenton ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Suppose you had a' talk With Baker ?^A. No, I never had a tklk^ with Baker. 
 Q. What do you consider to be the chief advantages of a union ?^A. I think it ia 
 a pretty hard question. It hsls disadvantages too. 
 
 Q. I would like to hear both ? — A. I don't Imow that I am prepared to give it to 
 you. One thing, in having a union you can have a committee, 'ivhich you cannot 
 individually, to look after the work. 
 
 Q. What sort of work ? — A. Anything in connection with the work in the mines. 
 Q. In the way of allotting deficiencies ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you think the men have their grievances adjusted better by meians of a 
 committee than individually ? — A. Yes, I believe so. 
 
 Q. You have experienced both systems ? — A. Yes, I have had a lot of experience 
 with both classes. 
 
 Q. Did you ever feel the need of a union ? — A. Not personally. 
 Q. You feel that you can paddle your own canoe, if necessary ?— A. I have always 
 had to do it, anyway. 
 
 Q. What do you say are the disadvantages? — A. Sometimes there is a little fric- 
 tion between the committees and the pit bosses. 
 
 Q. I suppose, when a man becomes a member of a union, to a certain extent he 
 Surrenders his own freedom ? — A. I have not surrendered mine. 
 
 Q. Is not that a necessary result of joining a union that is bound by the will of 
 the majority? — A. Yes, certainly; you are supposed to go by the majority. 
 
 Q. If the majority are unreasonable, that forces you to be unreasonable ? — A. Yes, 
 certainly. - 
 
 Q. So that the union is a good thing, if the men who run the union are reasonable 
 men; if not, it is not? — A. It cannot be good in that way. 
 
 Q. Everything depends upon the officers? — A. Yes, sir. A good deal of it does, 
 anyway. 
 
 Q^, What do: you say as to outsiders coming in and agitating and stirring up 
 strikes ? — A. I thinlt they had better stay at home. 
 
 Q. Do you think there should be a law to keep them out ? — A. I would not like to 
 say anybody should be kept out of the country. I think they should be allowed to 
 come in, as long as they behaved themselves. , 
 
 , . Q. That is the point. Do you ,t)iink an agitator should be allowed to coine in and 
 stir up a strike? — A. No, I don't. 
 
 Q. You think the men are quite competent to find. out their own grievances? — A. 
 Yes, I think so. 
 
 Q. Have you ever known of grievances being quashed by the committee, and not 
 get to the ears of the employers ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What proportion? — A. I have seen it in lots of cases where the pit committee 
 was called to adjust a grievance with the pit boss. 
 
 Q. Have you ever heard of grievances which were turned down by the committee 
 and never brought to the attention of the manager ?— A. I believe I have, but I would 
 not say for sure. , , . , ■. , 
 
 Q. I suppose it is practically impossible for a non-union man to get Work %vhere 
 the men nre unionized in the mines? — A. Not all the time. 
 
 gffl 18i ANDREW ROBERTSON— Laayismlth, May 18^ 
 
276 mi:nutes of etidexce of royal commission 
 
 3-4 edward vii., a. 1904 
 
 Q. Do you know of any case where pressure is used to induce men to join the 
 union ? — A. I know it has been used on the other side, in Washington. 
 
 Q. What kind of pressure was used ? — A. You had either to belong to the Knights 
 of Labour or get out. That was all that was used. 
 
 Q. I suppose unionism depends chiefly for its success upon practically all the men 
 belonging to the union? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If any considerable number stay out, it is practically useless?- — A. If there is 
 a division there, you cannot work very well. 
 
 Q. What would you suggest as to the method of settling strikes ? — ^A. Conciliation, 
 
 Q. And if that doesn't work, what ? — A. I suppose you have to fight then. 
 
 Q. I mean, how would you settle a strike, if the parties won't agree? — A. Well, I 
 suppose you will have to fight. 
 
 Q. Until the weaker party gave in ? — A. That would be the natural result of it. 
 
 Q. You would not favour compulsory arbitration? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. "VVhy would you not favour that ? — A. I don't think the law should be made so 
 HB to compel men to go to work, if they don't feel inclined. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. Are you a member of the Nanaimo Union now? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Can one retain his membership, working in another collieij'? — A. I believe he 
 can, but he would have to take his withdrawal card from the Nanaimo Union and put 
 it here. 
 
 Q. Suppose there was no union here? — A. I don't know about that; I believe he 
 could, though. 
 
 Q. You say you prefer Canadian unions — why? — A. I think the headquarters of 
 unions are a little too far away. You cannot do business with them-; it takes too long. 
 
 Q. You said one of the disadvantages of a union is the difference between the pit 
 committee and bosses ? — A. Sometimes. 
 
 Q. Are these difficulties likely to be greater than between individuals without a 
 union ? — A. Well, I don't know. 
 
 Q. Is the tendency not rather to reduce the number of grievances, if there is a 
 committee? — A. That is the idea of the committee being there, though they don't 
 always do it. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. I suppose the idea of a committee is as a sort of conciliatory body? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. The pit committee at Northfield fixed the price at the places, didn't they?— A. 
 Well, no, they did not fix it that way. 
 
 Q. Was it not the result of what the pit committee did that the mines would not 
 pay ? — A. I believe the company claimed it was. 
 
 Q. The company shut down, didn't they ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And it was not until after the pit committee had been engaged in fixing 
 prices ? — A. We had a pit committee up there for a long time before the cbmpany 
 diut down. 
 
 Q. They insisted on a good many changes ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And as a result of that the company shut down ? — A. I don't know, I heard 
 it claimed. 
 
 Q. The fact was, they shut down ? — A. Yes, they shut down all right. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : . 
 
 Q. Were the prices demanded there higher than for other mines ? — ^A. It is differ- 
 ent work, and it requires a different price. 
 
 ANDREW ROBERTSON— Ladypmith,, May 18. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 277 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. The pit committee was simply asking prices at which the men could make the 
 prevailing rate of wages ? — A. I think so. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do the men here gain by joining the Western Federation of Miners ?^ 
 A. I don't know that we have gained anything yet. I don't know what we will gain. 
 I don't know that we have got anything so far. 
 
 Q. You have asked for aid, have you not ? — A. Yes, I have got $4.40. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. What would you earn in the same period in your district ? — A. A couple of 
 hundred dollars. 
 
 Q. Your initiation fees are pretty high then ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How do j(fa expect to make up tliat loss ? — A. I will never make it up. That 
 time is gone. 
 
 Q. You don't expect to make that by demanding a raise in wages ? — A. You 
 would not get enough to get that. 
 
 Q. I suppose if you were to withdraw from the Western Federation at the present . 
 time you would be blacklisted, would you ? — A. I expect so. 
 
 Q. What would be the effect of that ? — A. I don't know. It would cause a lot of 
 hard feeling anyway. 
 
 Q. Would it be a difficult matter for you to get employment as a coal miner any- 
 where ? — A. I suppose where there was organized labour it would. 
 
 Q. You would see your name in this magazine ? That would be the effect, would 
 it not ? — A. I don't know. I have never seen a copy of that myself. I don't know 
 what it is like. 
 
 Q. What do you know about the calling out of the Cumberland miners ? — A. I 
 know that there was a request made that they should come out, but I don't know much 
 about it. 
 
 Q. There was a resolution passed by the men here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you know when that was ? — A. I could not tell, three or four weeks ago. 
 
 Q. Do you know who moved it ? — A. I could not tell you. 
 
 Q. Were you there when it was moved ? — A. Yes, but I don't know the man who 
 moved or seconded it. It was not carried unanimously. 
 
 Q. There was a ballot on it ? — A. There was a show of hands. 
 
 Q. What proportion of the meeting was in favour of it ? — A. I guess there must 
 have been 75 per cent in favour of it. 
 
 Q. Then there was a telegram sent to Cumberland, embodying this resolution ?— 
 A. This part, I don't know anything about. 
 
 Q. Who is the secretary ? — A. Mr. Mottishaw. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I think we had better have him called. 
 
 Mr- EowE.^ — The minutes are all in. 
 
 Mr. Bod WELL. — Not of these meetings, I don't think so. ;., 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Was Baker at that meeting ?— A. Yes, sir. _ , , - , , 
 
 Q. What did he have to say about it ? — A. There was considerable diiscussion on 
 
 the motion. Some thought it could not be done according to the constitution, and 
 
 Baker seemed to favour the idea that he could do it. ■ " '■■ 
 
 Q. Did he say anything aboutlautharity being igiven by the .executiv^^ ?-rA. Yes, 
 
 I guess he did make some kind of promise of i some kind, but I don't know; what ithey 
 
 are really worth. : ■,., ,■ . , , i ... .,- 
 
 ANDREW ROBERTSON— Laaysmith, May 18. 
 
278 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 i 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Baker speak in favour of the resolution ? — ^A. No, I don't think he 
 did. 
 
 Q. Did he say what would happen if the resolution passed ? — A, I think he said 
 that the executive would approve of it — something to that effect. 
 
 Q. And that thfe executive would lend assistance to carry it out ? — A. That was 
 the understanding I got of it. ; • ' 
 
 Q. That is what you understood from what he said ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Baker ever state in your hearing what the consequences *6uld be if 
 the men withdrew from the organization, or went back to work without permission? — 
 A. If he did I don't remember it. > . ^ 
 
 Q. How long did he speak at this meeting? — A. I think he spoke more than once, 
 but I could not say how long he did speak. 
 
 Q. What else did he talk about besides the executive sanctioning this union? — 
 A- I don't remember. 
 
 Q. You were not interested in his remarks ?- — A. I don't remenvber. I was not in 
 favour of calling the men at Comox out. 
 
 Q. Why not ?---A. I thought they would fill up the mine with Chinamen, and that 
 the other men would lose their places and not get back again. 
 
 Q. What was to prevent the company from filling the places of the men here with 
 other men ? — A. You will have to ask the company ; I could not answer that. 
 
 Q. You knew when you joined this union that you stood a chance of being dis- 
 charged from your employment? — A, Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You knew that the company was opposed to unions? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If that is the case, why were you so eager to join the union ? — ^A. It was time 
 to join after all hands were in it. 
 
 Q. You felt you had to join because most of the men joined? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. And it was not with your own free will that a union was formed — so far as 
 you are concerned? — A. As far as I was concerned, I didn't care whether it was formed 
 or not. 
 
 Q. I suppose others thought the same as you ? — A. I believe there were. 
 
 Q. You have had talks to that effect with some of the men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How many others? — A. Quite a few, possibly twenty. 
 
 Q. Were you at that first meeting ?^A. No, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. While you were working in these mines, Mr. Eobertson, did you hear much 
 complaining about the men having to live at Ladysmith? — A. Yes, you would hear 
 the general remark that was around. I have heard a great many talk — just a general 
 report. I don't know whether it was a fact or not. 
 
 Q. That men were forced to live in Ladysmith against their will? — A. That was 
 the general talk. 
 
 Q. You would regard that as a» existing grievance among the men? — A. Well, 
 I don't know. ' 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. I gather, Mr. Robertson, that you think it was a good thing the ttien were not 
 allowed to live at Extension ?— A. Well, they can suit themselves; I would not. 
 
 Q. Well, but if the conditions are as you say they are ?— A. Well of course some 
 people can live anywhere. , , - , - 
 
 By Mr. Eowe: 
 
 Q. What I wanted to know was whether thait feeling was pretty widely spread 
 among the men, judging; by what you heard?-A. I did not hear men say anything 
 about it myself. ' - . . ' •' ,r 
 
 ANDREW ROBERTSON— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
ON INDV8TBTAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA £79 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Did you ever discuss with any mea the relative merits of the two places as a 
 residence, Ladysmith and Extension ? — ^A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 By His Lordship ." , , , 
 
 Q. ! I gather that you would have been satisfied if no union had been formed here ? 
 — A. Perfectly satisfied, for myself. 
 
 ; By Mr. Benkler: 
 
 Q. At this meeting where the resolution was passed in connection with. the Cum- 
 berland men, are you quite sure that Mr. Baker said that he would see th?it the; ex- 
 ecutive would endorse it? Are you sure you ieard Mr. Bakersay that?— A, I jvould 
 not be certain, I think so. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Shenton at that meeting? — A. I don't think so; I would not be 
 certain though. 
 
 Q. If he was at that meeting, what was he doing there? — A. No, Mr,' Shenton 
 was not there. , ' , 
 
 Q. I suppose nobody but members of the union had any business there ? — A. Well, 
 he is a member of the union. 
 
 Q. Not of this local union ? — A. Well, he can visit anyway. 
 
 Q. Not without invitation? — A. Yes, as long as he is in good standing, and has 
 the password. 
 
 Q. Any member then in the States could come in without permission? — A, Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. But could not take part in the proceedings? — A. He would have no vote. 
 
 Q. Just bear the same relation as any visiting member of an organization ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 By Mr. SenTcler: 
 
 Q. Didn't you hear Mr. Baker say a good many times that he had no right to say 
 anything or suggest anytting to the men — that all he was there for was to give in- 
 formation when asked for it ? — A. He was asked for that information at that meeting. 
 
 Q. Have you not heard him state that he was not there to give views of his own, 
 but simply to give information? — A. I would not be sure, but I don't think he has 
 done anything except when he was asked. I would not positively gay I did not hear 
 him say that. 
 
 Saiiuel Lauderbach, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. When did you first work for the Wellington Coal Cojnpany ?— A. About 15 
 year agp. ' . ■ : 
 
 Q. You worked at Wellington first ?-— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And then from Wellington you went to Ladysmith^— or, did you go ?— A. I 
 went to Extension. 
 
 Q. To No. 1 ? — A. No, I first worked at No. 2, about five years ago this fall. 
 
 Q. And when that was worked out you came t(^ JLadysmith ?-^A, No, it is not 
 worked out yet. It was stopped for a short while. Some trouble with Mr. Hobbs, I 
 believe. I worked possibly a year at No. 1 and then came back to No. 2. I worked 
 almost continuously at Extension for the last five years. 
 
 SAMUEL LAUDERBACH— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
280 UIXVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL. COMMISHIOy 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. When did you begin to live at Ladysmith ? — A. About two years ago. 
 
 Q. You were one of the first men at Extension, were you not ? — A. Yes, one of 
 the first men at No. 2 slope. 
 
 Q. What was your understanding, and how did you get it that the men were to 
 live at Ladysmith — it was understood ? — A. I was told by Mr. Haggerty, who was in 
 charge then, that we would have lumber to build a temporary 'shack there and move 
 our families if we cared to dp that, but the town was to be at Oyster Harbour. 
 
 Q. But that was only to be temporary ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. When was that ? — A. In the fall of 1898. It was in September, I believe, the 
 first levels were started in No. 2 slope. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Was there any doubt but that that was the general understanding among the 
 men at the t-nie ? — A. No, not in my mind. I think all the English-speaking men 
 at least understood that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That was in the fall of 1898 ?— A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. With whom did you have any conversation — Haggerty, did you say ? — ^A. Yes, 
 sir, James Haggerty. 
 
 Q. What explanation was given as to why the town should be at Ladysmith ? — ^A. 
 He said Mr. Dunsmuir did not care to have anybody living there, except fire bosses 
 and engineers, that all the other men he wanted to live at Oyster Bay, or Oyster Har- 
 bour it was then. 
 
 Q. Mr. Dunsmuir only wanted firemen, bosses and engineers ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Any reason given why he wanted that ? — A. I don't remember any particular 
 reason at the time. 
 
 Q. Nothing said about water or bad conditions ?— A. The water was poor then. 
 We did discover a pretty good spring in the woods that we got drinking water from, 
 but the water in the wells was poor. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. How long did you live there ? — A. I was about 9 months there at that time, I 
 beliei/e. My family was in Wellington ; I was batching. 
 
 Q. Would you have lived there from choice ? — A. Well, if I just considered my- 
 self I would have stayed there but I never considered it a place to take my family. 
 
 Q. Why ? On account of the poor water ? — A. Well, yes, but on account of tho 
 school. I think the school at Wellington was better. During that time there was no 
 school, it was later than that. 
 
 Q. As far as you know, did any of the men own the ground they had their houses 
 on ? — A. No, I don't think there was any ground rent at that time. 
 
 Q. None of the men owned smy land at that time ? — A. No, as far as I know. 
 
 Q. How many men were living there at that time ? — A. Well, there were 8 pr 10 
 houses at the outside, not more than that. There were only about three families I 
 think, three or four families. I mean just at the tunnel. There were some families, 
 1 believe at No. 2 slope. 
 
 Bx^ Mr. Bodwell : ' 
 
 Q. No. 2 is how far from the tunnel ? — A. About a mile, I believe, that is to No. 2. 
 
 Bii Mr. Rowe : i . 
 
 Q. That is farther away from Ladisrsmith'?— A. YeS, it is aboui three miles 
 farther the other way. , ; i i ; 
 
 SAMtlEL LAUDERBACH— ta^ysmith, May 18; 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 281 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. The works have been moving this way ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The place called the tunnel is right at Extension ?— A. Yes, when we say 
 -Extension we mean the tunnel, that is understood. 
 
 Q. You say in 1898 there was no school there ?— A. I think not. 
 
 Q. When the men did build there did they buy the ground or rent it ?— A. I think 
 It was usually ground rent paid to Mr. Bramley. There were some members paid out- 
 right, I think. I am not certain about that. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell ; 
 
 Q. Why is it necessary for the firemen and fire bosses to be close to the mines ?— 
 A. Well, I don't know that it is exactly necessary, but in case of an explosion or fire 
 it would be better to have some men on the ground. 
 
 Q. Don't they have to go through the mines about 2 o'clock in the morning? — A. 
 Well, there are men at Extension all the time. They stand their eight hours all the 
 time, each shift. 
 
 Q. But before the shift goes to work, is not the fireman sent around to look for 
 gas ? — A. Yes, they make the rounds for the shift. 
 
 Q. What hours are the different shifts? — A. Three, eleven and seven in the 
 morning. 
 
 Q. What was the first you ever heard about this union at Ladysmith, when did 
 you hear it, and what took place? — A. Well, I should like Mr. Mottishaw's evidence 
 read. He mentioned my name in connection with that. I was not here at the time. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — I don't think the notes have been extended yet. 
 
 His Lordship. — All I see about it is that ' Lauderbach and I had a talk about 
 organization. I thought it was a hopeless case.' 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. My recollection of his evidence was, that he said Lauderbach was one of the 
 first to speak to him. — A. Yes, there is the point that I have reference to — that I was 
 one of the first. The only conversation I remember with Mottishaw occurred possibly 
 three days before the first meeting, held on Sunday, March 8. He came to my house, 
 he and his son, for the purpose of renting a room, so he said, and in the course of con- 
 versation he told me there was to be a meeting on the following Sunday at Finn's Hall. 
 That was the first intimation I had that there was to be a meeting. The question, I 
 think, that he iasked my advice on was, what I would consider the best thing to bring 
 forward, whether to ask for an advance, or bring forward the question of organization. 
 It was discussed between the three of us. I don't remember all, but I am positive that 
 when they left, we were of the same opinion, that the best thing to do was to ask for 
 a 10 per cent advance. 
 
 Q. Up to that time you had heard nothing of organization ? — A. Oh, it was talked 
 f.everal weeks before that in the train, but I didn't take much interest in it. 
 
 Q. Didn't he also want you to be one of three or four to arrange a programme for 
 the meeting ? — A. One of them mentioned they would like to get about six men together 
 and draft a programme for Sunday. He asked me to be one of the men. I told him I 
 was sick. I was sick at the time— I was in the house with the grippe. , , 
 
 Q. Was that the real reason ?^A- Well, it did. I didn't care to have anything to 
 
 do with it. T T ■ t nr 
 
 Q. Then, I understand, as far as you are concerned, durmg the Mteen years you 
 have been wording for the Wellington Company, you have never felt the need of a 
 union to support your rigifs?— A. No, I have never had any trouble,' as far asT have 
 
 SAMUEL ,LAUDERBAPH-'IiadyBmlth,, May X8. 
 
282 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF E07AL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. You have always made good wages? — A. Never had any complaint about my 
 wages at all. 
 
 Q. And any other matters were always arranged between yourself and the persona 
 *n charge, without difficulty? — A. Yes. I may have had a little argument about the 
 price of deficiency work, but never had any trouble nlaking a settlement with the mine 
 boss. 
 
 Q. And you would have been just as well pleased if no union had been formed 
 here! ?^ A. Well, I was,, and am yet, in favour of a Ioca.1 union., - . 
 
 Q. What do you say about the Western Federation of Miners?— A. I don't know 
 much about it ; I would rather not give any reason. I am not a member of the organ- 
 ization. 
 
 Q. You are not a member— didn't you join ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Well, you might say why you didn't join? — A. Well, I can give as one reason, 
 that I didn't think any man should go into a thing that he is not prepared to stand by. 
 I knew there would be trouble, and I did not intend to go into it. I intended to go 
 some place else and get employment. For that reason, I did not think I had a right to 
 go into it. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. Wliy did you know there would be a strike, if there was a union ?— A. Well, if 
 Mr, Dunsmuir was correctly reported, he had said at different times that he would 
 have nothing to do with it, even before they were organized here. At least, he was so 
 reported in the press. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 , Q. Did you go to any of the m^tings, when Mr. Baker was here^ Mr. Lauderbach ? 
 — A, Yes, I was at the meeting on Sunday, when Mr. Baker addressed the open-air 
 meeting. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. The organization meeting? — A. It waa the open-air meeting on the green. It 
 was after that they organized. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. It was after the preliminary meeting, but before the meeting for organization? 
 Mr. Senkler. — ^Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 Q. Can you recall any of his remarks at that open-air meeting? What line did he 
 take?— A. No, I could not quote anything he said. I don't think he talked unreason- 
 ably; that he understood he was sent here to organize, and that the men were all in 
 favour of it. He didn't make much of a speech. He seemed to speak as though the 
 men were anxious to get into the organization. 
 
 By Mr. Senlcler : 
 
 Q. Did you ever build a house here or in Extension ? — A. I built a cabin in com- 
 pany with my partner at No. 1 to batch in. 
 
 Q. You never took your wife up there ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. At the time you went up you say there was a remark going around that the 
 town would be at Oyster Bay ?— A. Not a rumour. It was understood positively. At 
 least I had it from Mr. Haggerty that Mr. Dunsmuir said he wanted to make the town 
 site at Oyster. Bay. 
 
 Q. And for that reason he would like the men to come down here to build ? 
 
 A. Yes. . ; 
 
 SAMUEL LrAUDERBAOH— LarfjrsmlCh, Jtay 18.' 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 283 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 . Q. But was there any positive order that if they did riot eome down here, he would 
 not give them work ? — ^A. No, I never heard anything of that kind. . .; - 
 
 Q. It was just a wish of his that they should come down here ?— A. That is the 
 way I understood it. 
 
 Q. You say you don't belong to the Western Federatioli Union here ? — A. No. - 
 
 Q. You have no very great fear of being boycotted ? — A. No, it has not troubled^ 
 me mudh. - i . . ... - , 
 
 Q. Since this strike, or this lockout, you have been working ?^^A. Yes. I worked' 
 a month at Union. 
 
 Q: Wlieii did you quit work-^when did you come down to Ladysmith ? — A. I came 
 down a week ago last Friday. I quit when the men all quit, after the mines wfero- 
 closed. Last Saturday, or two weeks ago last Saturday was my last shift. 
 
 Q. You say at this meeting you had with Mottishaw, you considered the ques- 
 tion as to what reason you should advance at the meeting, and you considered the 10 
 per cent advance was the correct one ? — A. Yes> that is right. ' .^ 
 
 Q. Did you go to the meeting ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you know that that was the question raised ? — A. No, I was not at the 
 meeting. I understood so. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Has aiiy pressure been used to try and get you to join the union ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Any one ask you to join ? — A. I have been asked. 
 
 Q. How many times ? — ^A. Not more than once, I think. 
 
 Q. Has any consequence been stated as to your not joining ? — A. No, I have never 
 understood anything of that kind at all. 
 
 Q. Nothing suggested as to your being a scab ? — A. No. I have not been told 
 that to my face at least. I suppose these suggestions have been made; I have heard so. 
 
 Q. Do you feel the position at all uncomfortable ? — A. No, I don't. 
 
 Q. You don't care what they think ? — A. No, it is what. I think of myself ; it is 
 not what other men think of me that bothers me. 
 
 Q. You say you are in favour of a local union V — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why do you object to joining the Western Federation ? — A. Well, I would 
 rather not give my principal reason. 
 
 Q. It won't hurt you to give it ? — A. I don't know as it will do me any particular 
 good, but I have been informed on what I consider good authority, that it is controlled 
 by a party I have no sympathy with. 
 
 Q. That is to say they hold socialistic views ? — A. Exactly. 
 
 Q. You think it better for Canadian workmen that they should maintain control 
 over themselves without having outsiders control them ? — A.' I think they are capable 
 of conducting their own affairs, yes. 
 
 Q. You understand the chief argument that is used for joining this federation ? 
 — A. Well, I heard it as a matter of common report — that it was the strongest organiza- 
 tion, both in numbers and financially. 
 
 Q. And that it would be much stronger than a local union ? — ^A. Yes, so I believe. 
 
 Q. That does not seem to have worked out so far, does it ? — A. No. 
 ' Q. What do you say as to outsiders coming in and stirring up strikes ? — A. I don't 
 'think there has been very much of that. I think perhaps it is overrated. 
 
 Q. Have you ever heard of a man called Fates ? — A. I have read of him. 
 
 Q. He is an outsider, is he not ?— A. I believe so, 
 ' Q. You think tho men are competent to judge, of their own grievances without 
 outsiders coining in to' tell them about it ?— A. Y'es, t think so. 
 
 Q. Do you think there should be a law to reach these gentlemen ?^A. Well, it 
 would be pretty difficult I should think. I don't know that it would be necessary 
 hardly. 
 
 SAMUEL LAUDERBACH— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
284 MIXVTES Of ETIDENCE OF EOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 a-^-" EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. Well, I don't think there has been very much of that. In thia case 
 1 don't think the trouble has been brought about by outside agitation. I mean from 
 agitation from across the line. I don't think there is anything like that here. 
 
 Q. It is the Nanaimo men who are at the bottom of this ? — A. Well, I am not 
 in a position to state who is at the bottom of it. 
 
 Q. What is your opinion ? — A. Well, I know that Nanaimo men always have been 
 anxious to have the men in Mr. Dunsmuir's employ, in a union. That has always 
 been understood. 
 
 Q. What do you consider to be the chief advantage of a union ? — A. One of the 
 advantages that we had here. We had a local union here for a couple of years sin03 
 Extension started and we had an agreement signed with Mr. Dunsmuir for a year. 
 That was one of the things I liked about it. While that agreement was in force you 
 felt sure of a year's work without any bother. 
 
 Q. Well, the men could have an agreement of that kind without having a union, 
 could they not ? — A. Tes, I suppose so. 
 
 Q. That could be just as satisfactory to the men ? — A. Certainly, but it is not so 
 easily got at. Perhaps it is hard to get the men together. Then, generally with a 
 local union there is a better feeling among the men. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Did that agreement make provision for a pit committee ? — A. I think not. 
 
 Q. Did it make provision for any kind of committee to represent the union ? — A. 
 Well, the local union had a committee of their own, but they never went around the 
 mine to inspect the places. 
 
 Q. They took up grievances ? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : ' 
 
 Q. Then in regular unions the so-called pit committee has the right to inspect the 
 jjlaces in the mines ? — A. I never saw that in force here. 
 
 Q. That is the custom ? — A. It is in some places, I believe. 
 
 Q. What is meant by pit committee — a committee of men who have the right td 
 inspect the places and adjust difierences ? — ^A. Well, if there is a dispute about a 
 place that a man could not settle with the boss, the committee went to look at the place, 
 and gave tneir opinion about it. 
 
 Q. The contention of the company is that if they allow a union to be formed, the 
 management is virtually given over to the pit committee ? — A. Well, I am not ac- 
 quainted with any trouble that ever arises over a pit committee. 
 
 Q. Can you give us some definite idea of exactly what their powers are— what 
 rights they have ? — A. I Should simply think they would look at the places and report 
 to the meeting, whether they considered the man was being treated right or not. 
 
 Q. Apd if they report that the man is not being treated right, that is ground for 
 a strike ? — A. Well, thej take action on it generally. 
 
 Q. And then the pit committee sees the manager ? — A. Or the committee ap- 
 pointed by the union— by the meeting. 
 
 Q. Have you ever heard of grievances being turned down by the pit committcs, 
 or do they always take up grievances ? — A. Well, we never had much experience with a 
 pit committee around Extension,, and I never worked much in Nanaimo. I believe 
 they had a pit committee there, but I don't know much about the working of it. ' 
 
 Q. What are the disadvantages of a union to the men,' that you know of ?-— A. I 
 have seen in some cases where some unreasonable men would get control of affairs, 
 they would run things to extremes. That is about the only disadvantage that I'know 
 :of. , , , 
 
 Q. And if that is the case, better not have a union? — A. Oh, no. I think the men 
 are reasonable enough as a general thing to conduct the affairs without trouble: ' 
 
 SAMUEL LfAUDERBACH-r-LadysmUh, May 18, . 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 285 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You thinli on the whole that it is in the interests of the men to have a union ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to the interests of the employer? — A. I believe, for in- 
 stance, that if our old union had been in force here that we would not have had this 
 present trouble. We would have had an r.greement signed for a year, and there would 
 have been no occasion for this trouble. That is what men usually like, as I understand 
 it — an agreement signed for one or two years for a certain price, and they don't expect 
 any change during the life of that agreement. 
 
 Q. What became of that union ?' — A. The men were careless about it. They let ii 
 die of their own accord, I think. , 
 
 Q. Any action taken by the management ?— A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. I suppose no one has a copy of the agreement? — A. I don't know of any. 
 
 Q. When the men let it die that would indicate not much of a desire for a union ? 
 — A. Well, a great many men were living down here at Ladysmith, and the head- 
 quarters were at Extension. That was one of the reasons, I think, it died out. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. You say that Mottishaw went to you about renting a room? — A. Yes, he stated 
 that as his reason. 
 
 Q. Do you mean for a meeting ? — A. No, for a daughter of his who had 'been 
 married. 
 
 Q. What reason did you give him for asking for an advance of ten per cent? — A. 
 Oh, it was generally talked that we should have an advance of ten per cent. The duty 
 had just been taken off 67i cents a ton, and it was the general opinion. 
 
 Q. What reason did you give against unionizing? — A. The reason was we thought 
 we might have trouble over it. We thought if we went coolly and worked for an ad- 
 vance we might get it. 
 
 Q. You say you are against the Western Pederation of Miners? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You say you would not join a union of that Federation? — A. No, I have no 
 intention. 
 
 ■Q. Supposing the union won this fight, woulJ you join it ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Have you heard any general complaint among the men about having to live 
 at Ladysmith? — A. Well, no. Certainly there was talk among the men at Extension 
 ■who did not care to leave, but a great ma'ny men came of their own free will. That is 
 before this last big move. I thought they came of their own free will. ■ 
 
 Q. You came here of your own free will? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. Would you have come under compulsion? — A. That is a pretty hard questioii. 
 I hardly think I would. If I did not care to live here I had the privilege of quitting; 
 and I suppose I would have done that rather than go against my will. 
 
 By Eis Lordship: 
 
 Q. You say you were at Union just before they struck up there. Were you at a 
 meeting held by miners there ?— A. I was only at the open meeting that Mr. Baker ad- 
 dressed there. 
 
 Q. Tell us the substance of his remarks? — A. I could not tell you a great deal of 
 what he said. 
 
 Q. Tell us what you can recollect ?— A. I recollect one thing he said that I thought 
 he was mistaken. He told the men that they were practically the last camp without the 
 pale of the Eederation, and 1 understand the state of Washington is outside of the 
 Federation. . 
 
 Q. He didn't refer to British Columbia ? — A. No, it was just in general terms that 
 he used the expression. _ ' _ "'.''' ".'' 
 
 Q. Did he say what aid the Federation would give if they went on strike? — Ai 'I 
 never heard him mak^ any stateihent of that kind. I iieve* heard him say that the 
 Federation would support theni. ' I didn'^t hear him make^ariy statements of that kind. 
 
 SAMUEt, LAUDERBACH— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
286 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSIOV 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. You were there when the union was formed at Cumberland? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Were you invited to join there? — A. No, I was never asked to join. 
 
 Q. How did Baker come to explain his presence there? — A. He siatedjxe came 
 there to organize. There was some trouble in the meeting. That is, some of the . men 
 ivished to postpone the vote on the ^questiai for a week. He stated tljat he came to 
 organize, and that he was going to organize, a minority, of the men. . ., 
 
 Q. Was the question as to whether there should be. a union submitted to a ballot, 
 or was it an open vote? — A. I don't know that there was a vote taken on that. Not 
 while I was there. 
 
 .Q. All those who were opposed to joining the meeting were asked to retire, that 
 was it ?— A. Yes, that was it. 
 
 Q. What proportion of the men retired? — A. Very few, only four or five, I think. 
 
 Q. Out of how many ? — A. There were possibly 150 in the hall. 
 
 Q. That wias hardly £i fail- way 6f putting the qu6s'tioii'?-— A. It put a mah up 
 against it pretty hard. 
 
 Q. If it had happened to be a ballot, there might have been a different result ? — 
 A. Yes ; or if it had been left for a week, I think there might have been a different 
 result, but the question was forced right then. 
 
 Q. Did Baker make any allusion to any other strikes, that were on in .the pro- 
 vince at the time ? — A. Not at that meeting in Cumberland. 
 
 Q. At any other meeting ? — A. At this meeting here he made some allusion to 
 strikes — a strike in California, some mill or smelter there that had been on strike for 
 .some months. 
 
 Q. Did he made any allusion to the railway strike at Vancouver ? — A. No ; I 
 don't remember. 
 
 Q. Or to the Femie strikes ? — A. No ; I don't remember him mentioning the 
 Femie strikes. 
 
 Q. You say the men went out at Cumberland — how many went out on strike ? — 
 A. I could not give you figures. I suppose 200 white men, or in that neighbourhood. 
 
 Q. How long were they out on strike ? — A. I believe they are out yet. 
 
 Q. The majority are still out ? — A. I believe so — the white men. 
 
 Q- Can you tell us what date Baker went up there — what date that meeting 
 was held ? — A. About the first Sunday in April. 
 
 Q. Was there any communication received up there from the meeting here ? — A. 
 There was some communication read in the open meeting, before Baker addressed, 
 from this union. 
 
 Q. Was it a resolution asking them to strike ? — A. No ; I think it fras asking 
 them to form a union, or join the union, or something of that kind. 
 
 Q. Your recollection is that it was a resolution asking them to form a union ^.— 
 A. Yes ; I could not hear the correspondence that was read. I was in the back of the 
 hall, and the man read very low, but it was something to that effect, asking them to 
 form a union, or assist the men here. Something about having sympathy with the 
 men here. . , 
 
 ' Q. Was that read before or after Baker spoke ? — A. It was read before Baker 
 spoke ; just at the beginning of the meeting. 
 
 Q. How long did Baker talk at that meeting ? — A. Not a long while, probably 15 
 minutes. 
 
 Q. What do you say about the best way of settling strikes ?— ^A. Well, I think a 
 public inquiry is a very good thing. . , . 
 
 Q. Anything else ? — A. For instance, if there is a public, inquiry and either one 
 of the f«des object to it, public opinion generally settles the matter if it is drawn out 
 for any length of time. , - 
 
 SAMUEL LAUDBRBACH— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
OJV rNDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ITf BBITISE COLOUBIA ^ 
 
 SESSIONAL F*APER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Howe : 
 
 Q- In thkt agreement you had with the Extension union, who signed on behalf 
 of the men ?— A. A committee of the men who went to interview Mr. Dunsmuir, I 
 believe, signed it. 
 
 Q. Did they sign on behalf of the union ?— A. I would understand that. 
 
 Q. What was the union called ?— A. I cannot tell you that. 
 
 Q. I wish we could see that agreement. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. When was that agreement madfe ?— A. The last agreement must have ^been 
 made about two years ago now. 
 
 Q. I suppose there is a copy in the office here ? — A. I eipect so. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — I think we wiU be able to get a copy of that agreement. 
 
 Thomas McMillan', sworn: 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. You are living at Ladysmith just now ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Where did you live before you came here — where did you work? — A. In Alex- 
 andria the last. 
 
 Q. And before that?— A. South Wellington. 
 
 Q. How long were you in South Wellington? — A. About a month. 
 
 Q. And before that? — A. Wellington. 
 
 Q. How long did you work there? — A. In the neighbourhood of twelve years. 
 
 Q. How long, altogether, have you been working directly for this same company? 
 — A. In the twelve years since I came, I have worked for this same company. 
 
 Q. Have you ever belonged to a union before you joined this Federation. You 
 did join, didn't you ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you ever belong to a union before that in this country? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. When did you join the Federation — how long ago ? — I was initiated about 
 three weeks ago, but my name was in about two months ago. 
 
 Q. Were you at any of the meetings ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you get along all right before you were a union man ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. I suppose there were questions coming up that had to be settled? — A. I always 
 tried to settle my own grievances. 
 
 Q. And were always alble to do it ? — A. Yes^ sir. 
 
 Q. Then, why did you join the union? — A. Well, I could not hardly tell you. I 
 didn't give it much thought. I was away, down the line, enjoying myself. When I 
 got back, every man had joined, and I thought it left me by myself. I sent in my 
 name — I was in doubts as to whether they would take me — and they accepted it. I 
 should have been there one meeting sooner, but they had too much business. They told 
 me to come the next time — they could not attend to rrie. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Why were you in doubt? — A. Bacause of my not joining with the rest.. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 Q. Did you work at Extension ?— A. I woijked in the tunnel and No. 2. 
 Q. Did you live at Extension at any time? — A. No, sir. 
 Q. Why not ? — A. Well, I would not like to live there at all. 
 
 ■irilbTSEA's McMillan— Ladysmith, May is. 
 
288 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Why would you not like to live there?— A. Well, I like to live by the water. 
 I don't like to live there at all. I had people — my own neighbours — who asked me to 
 go up and be neighbours, and I said I would not move unless I had to. 
 
 Q. This was your free choice — coming to Ladysmith? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. Is Wellington beside the water ? — A. Only about two and a half or three miles. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 Q. What would you say, speaking of your knowledge of things, would be the gen- 
 eral opinion of the men? Would they just as soon live at Ladysmith as Extension — 
 the bulk of the men? — A. I think, if the thing had been put to a vote in the whole 
 mines, the Ladysmith men would have carried it. 
 
 By Mr. Boive: 
 
 Q. That is, you mean the men living at Extension, that a majority of them would 
 have voted to move to Ladysmith ? — A. No, all the men in the mine — if all the parties 
 had been put together. 
 
 Q. There would have been a majority in favour of Ladysmith? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Has there ever been any trouble with the men who did not want to work with 
 Mr. Dunsmuir? There has always been work at Nanaimo and Northfield, and places 
 , like that, for men who do not care to work for Mr. Dunsmuir? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. No hardship on them — they could always find work? — A. I always find men 
 travelling back and forth. 
 
 Q. So the men who don't want to live at Extension could go to Nanaimo and get 
 work? — A. I have known men to go from Extension to Nanaimo, and Nanaimo men 
 come to Extension and get work. 
 
 Q. I suppose you don't profess to be an expert on unions — you would rather go 
 
 fishing? — A. I can live without it, and I can live with it. 
 
 « ^ 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. If it had been put to your vote, would you have had a union formed here, or 
 would you not ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You don't see the need of it? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You feel more freedom being without a union than in it? — A. I always like 
 my own freedom. I told the men I would not be compelled to join it, or not be kept 
 from joining it. 
 
 Q. But, under the existing circumstances, you thought it wise to join ? — A. Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 Q. I suppose if you had not joined it would have been made uncomfortable, for 
 you ? — A. I don't think it. I have not many enemies among the miners that T am 
 aware of. 
 
 Q. What was your object in joining ? — A. Well, I have never given it much 
 consideration at ail. 
 
 Q. You don't really know why you joined ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. How much assistance have you had from the Western Federation since you 
 joined ? — A. I believe there was an order lying in the house for $3.20. 
 
 Q. How much would you have made in the time you have been out ? — A. The 
 time I have been out, oh, about $.300. ' ■ 
 
 Q. That is not a very good speculation ?— --A. No. 
 
 Q. I suppose the other men are out similar amounts, between $200 and $300? 
 
 A. There will be some men out as much as I am — sonie not so mueh, ' ■ ■' . i 
 
 THOMAS McMillan— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
OA" INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 289 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You see no chance of getting that back ?— A. Never. 
 
 n ^^?'* ^^* ^* ^^ ^ ^^^^® °^ ^^S®® •~-^- ^™'* ^^P«<^*^ i*- 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear Mr. Baker talk on the subject of unions ?— A. Never did. 
 
 y. Ever have a talk with Mr. Shenton ?— A. Don't know the gentleman. 
 Q. Did you attend the meeting here which asked the union men to come out ?— 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Did you say you lived at South Wellington ?— A. Yes, I batched there about 
 a month. 
 
 Q. Were there some men living at South Wellington who were compelled to move 
 to Ladysmith ?— A. No, I cannot say. I don't interfere with any person's business 
 at all. I have heard it talked over, but I could not say whether it was so or not. 
 
 Q. You didn't know of anyone who was boarding in Ladysmith and working at 
 the mines— his family living at South Wellington and he working here ?— A. Yes, 
 there were cases like that. 
 
 Samuel Mottishaw, Jr., sworn. 
 By Mr. Bodwell. : 
 
 Q. Were you the secretary of the meeting at which the request to the union 
 miners was passed ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Any minutes kept of it ? — A. I am the financial secretary — not the recording 
 secretary. 
 
 Q. Who is the recording secretary ? — A. Joseph Jeffries. 
 
 Q. Where is he ? — A. In Ladysmith, I believe. 
 
 Q. Will he have the minutes of that meeting ? — A. I expect he will. 
 
 Q. There were minutes kept ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you remember what was done ? — A. You mean with regard to the resolu- 
 tion asking the men at Cumberland to go out ? There was a resolution of that des- 
 cription passed, asking the men at Cumberland to come out, and I was instructed to 
 write to them, but I did not ask them to come out. 
 
 Q. You did not do it ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Any reason for that ? — A. I wanted a little more information from Mr. Baker. 
 I did not like the idea of taking the responsibility on myself of asking them to come 
 out. 
 
 Q. Was it Mr. Baker who brought up the question of asking them to come out ? — 
 A. No, sir. I could not say who was the person who made the resolution ; I could 
 not say that. 
 
 Q. What did Mr. Baker have to say about it ? Did he speak to the resolution 
 in the meeting ? — A. Not to my knowledge ; he may have, but I don't remember. 
 
 Q. You say you wanted some more information from him — what kind of informa- 
 tion ? — A. With regard to how it was done from headquarters. 
 
 Q. Did you speak to him about that ? — A. Yes. He said he would inform the 
 headquarters of the resolution after it had been passed, and await a reply. Before the 
 reply came, the union went out of their own accord. 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact, no official notice was sent to this lodge at Cumberland ? — 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Any telegrams sent ? — A. Not to my knowledge, no. 
 
 SAMUEL, MOTTISHAW, Jr.— Ladysmith, May IS. 
 
 36a— 19 
 
290 MINUTES OP EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3A EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. I understand they came out on their own grievance ? — A. As far as I know. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. That cannot be so, Mr. Mottishaw, because Mr. Lauderbach said there was a 
 communication read at this meeting ? — A. There was no communication from toe. 
 Q. It might not have come from you, it might have been BaEer himself. 
 
 Mr. Lauderbach. — I said the communication was read at the open meeting on 
 Sunday, before they organized at all. That was a month before they came out. 
 
 His Lordship. — But you mentioned something in your evidence about sympathy? 
 
 Mr. Lauderbach. — It was something about forming a union, as there was nothing 
 said about strike. That was before the men were organized. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. There was a resolution passed, asking the men to come out at Cumberland? — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You were asked to send that, but didn't ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. It seems to me, the recording secretary would be the proper person to send that 
 information? — A. Well, I always did the correspondence. 
 
 Q. Are you sure he did not send one ? — A. I don't know, but I don't think so. He 
 never did any corresponding for the union — that was left to me. 
 
 Q. How many people were there at that meeting ? — A. I should think about 300. 
 
 Q. Wlicn was it held ? — A. I could not give you the exact date. 
 
 Q. About when? — A. I have no idea as to that. 
 
 Q. Was it passed by a standing vote, or by ballot? — A. By a standing vote. 
 
 Q. Was it unanimous? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How many people spoke before the resolution was put? — A. I should think 
 about ten or twelve. There was quite a discussion on the proposition. 
 ■ Q. You say Mr. Baker was present? — A. Mr. Baker was present. 
 
 Q. What did he have to say about it? — A. To my knowledge) I could not say what 
 he had to say. I don't think he spoke on that question at all. He left it with the men 
 to deal with as they thought best. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. About how long ago was this? — A. I think, somewhere about two or three 
 weeks before the union came out. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. What did Baker speak about ? — A. Well, I could not even tell you that. I can- 
 not remember what he did speak about. 
 
 Q. You were not at all interested in his remarks ? — A. Well, to some extent I 
 was. I could not really say what ho did speak about. Of course, he discussed the 
 condition of affairs — not a very Icng siic-ceh. 
 
 Q. You felt very little interest in what he said ? — A. Well, yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Did he advise the men at any of these meetings to try and settle their diffi- 
 culties here with Mr. Dunsmuir ? — A. Yes, he advised them. 
 
 Q. On what lines ? — A. On recognition of the union. He advised the men— of 
 course, he did not dictate the strike in any shape or form — and he always advocated 
 the men making a settlement. 
 
 Q. But he always told them not to settle unless the union was recognized ? — A. 
 Yes. that is so. He wanted recognition of the union. But he never interfered with 
 
 SAMUEL MOTTISHAW, Jr.— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
OTff INDUSTRIAIj DISPUTM in BRITISH COLOMBIA 291 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 the men if they thought fit to use their own opinion, never tried to deviate the men 
 from their opinion in any shape or form. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Were there any people to talk against this resolution ?— A. Well, I think there 
 were about two talked against it. 
 
 Q. What were their reasons ? — A. Their reasons were if the men of Cumberland 
 had grievances of their own, they should be ruled by those grievances, and act on their 
 own responsiijility. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. There was objection to the idea of a sympathetic strike ? — ^A. Tes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What was the reason given in favour of the resolution ? — A. That a strike 
 there would help us considerably down here. 
 
 Q. It would force the employers ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I suppose you are in communication with these people up there from time to 
 time-^I mean the union here ? — A. I did send one communication and a copy of the 
 ' Miners' Magazine,' with the directory of what different locals are in the magazine. 
 I sent them a communication authorized by this local, expressing our sympathy with 
 them and congratulating them on forming an organization. That was the full text 
 of the communication. That is the only communication I have sent to Cumberland. 
 
 Q. You have been having communications with headquarters at Denver recently 
 about assistance ? — A. Yes, I have had one or two about assistance . 
 
 Q. How much did you ask these people for ? — A. Fourteen thosand dollars a 
 month. 
 
 Q. With what result ? — A. I have no definite answer back yet. 
 
 Q. When did you send the telegram ? — A. Last Saturday, on May 16. 
 
 Q. When you say definite answer — have you had any at all ? — A. Yes, sir ; they 
 are awaiting the arrival of Mr. Baker at Denver. 
 
 Q. How much money has the Federation given to these people up to date ?— A. 
 $790. There is also a draft for $1,000 on the way. 
 
 Q. How long has that been on the way ? — A. It has not been on the way long, or 
 I suppose it would have reached here. 
 
 Q. My impression is that it was on the way when the last sittings were here ? — 
 A. Well, it might have been. 
 
 Q. That is still on the way, then ? 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Won't they have a pretty heavy call from Cumberland as well ? — A. I should 
 
 think so. 
 
 Q. Do you think their call will be as large as Ladysmith — I mean supposing they 
 ask the same proportion of wages, would the amount be as large ? — A. fNo, I don't 
 think so. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. What is the basis of computation ? How did you arrive at the sum of $14,- 
 
 000 ? A. By giving a single man $16 a month; $4 for each child. If a married man, 
 
 $8 for his wife and $16 for the husband. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Can a man live on $16 a month ?— A. Well, he cannot board on that ; he 
 
 might batch it on that. ^^^^^ MOTTISHAW, Jr.-Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
 36a— 19i 
 
292 MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION, 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. What is going to be the consequence if this money is not forthcoming ? — A. 
 Well, now, I could not say that. It is for the men to use their own opinion as to 
 what they will do if the money is not sent. 
 
 Q. I suppose the only thing they can do is withdraw from the Federation ? — A. 
 Well, without they have a pretty good bank book in their hands. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Well, they joined it so they might have financial assistance, did they not ? — A. 
 Well, personally, for myself, I did not join it for that at all. Of course, I had really 
 no intention of joining it. I didn't intend to stay here, because I was thrown out of 
 employment, and I didn't see any use of my staying here. But finally, after the reso- 
 lution of the men that they would stand by any man who was discharged for taking 
 an active part, I was bound almost to stay here. It would not look right for men to 
 come out in sympathy with men and for me to go away and leave them. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. I understand the men, as a whole, thought they would be stronger by joining 
 the Western Federation of Miners ? — A. Well, that was the idea. 
 
 Q. Well, if that assistance doesn't come, the ground of their preference for that 
 Federation would be removed ?-r-A. I should think so. 
 
 Q. Then it might be said in making a selection of the different unions, they have 
 not chosen wisely ? — A. Well, of course they did not know the congequences. 
 
 Q. So that they did not accomplish the object that they sought to accomplish by 
 joining the Federation ? — A. Well, not so far. 
 
 Q. I am assuming, of course, that the equivalent of their demand is not granted. 
 So there would be nothing to be hoped for in retaining that relationship ?— A. Well, 
 personally, I cannot see whether there will be anything at all, because a man has got 
 to live, but at the same time I do not see where the Western Federation is going to 
 do anyone any harm. 
 
 Q. It is taxed beyond its powers, we will say ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. But was it not the impression of the men that it was a strong financial institu- 
 tion ? — A. Well, I could not say. I heard remarks myself that there was a large 
 amoimt of money behind it. But one often hears remarks that are not true. 
 
 Q. Have you had any definite assurance from the Western Federation that you 
 will get any money ? — A. Only the telegram I got to say that $1,000 was on the way. 
 
 Q. There was no implied or real undertaking to furnish you with anything? — A. 
 Apparently not. 
 
 Q. And you do not know where you got the impression that thsy would ? — A. 
 Well, I never had that impression. I didn't look for it. I was the same as anybody 
 else. I had to live, but as regards joining the Western Federation for the financial 
 benefit, I didn't do that. 
 
 Q. When were you told that this draft for $1,000 was sent — you say you got a tele- 
 gram ? — A. I think it was a week to-night, or a week to-morrow night; I would not be 
 quite positive. 
 
 Q. From Denver ? — A. *Yes. 
 
 His Lordship. — Didn't you tell us at the last sittings that this $1,000 was prom- 
 ised ? 
 
 Mr. EowE. — I think it was Mr. Baker who told us that $790 had been given, and 
 that he had asked for $1,000. 
 
 Witness. — I suppose that would be the $1,000. 
 
 SAMUEL MOTTISHAW, Jr.— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
0^ INDV8TRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISB COLUMBIA 293 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I suppose the men would have been better off to have drawn $70,000 out of the 
 company for those two months ? — A. I think so myself. What a man loses it will 
 take him a long time to gain. 
 
 Q. Would it not have been a good thing to have inquired into the Western Federa- 
 tion before joining ? — A. Well, the men seemed to think it was all right, and would 
 be a good thing. 
 
 Q. Why did you select the Western Federation ? — A. Because it was thought to 
 be the strongest organization. 
 
 Q. Did the men examine the constitution before joining it ? — A. I don't think 
 they did. 
 
 Q. Do you think the men have the right to organize, and that it is their interest 
 to do so ? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Do you think it is likely to be any damage to their employers to have them 
 do so ? — A. Well, if the body of the organization and the employers can agree, I think 
 it will be a benefit to both of them, but, of course, if they cannot agree, that is a differ- 
 ent problem altogether. 
 
 Q. Don't you think a local union would be quite sufficient for all purposes ? — A. 
 No, I don't think it would. 
 
 Q. Experience has shown that the Western Federation is not of much advantage, 
 fO far at all events ? — A. That is a certainty. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. In making this estimate upon which you based your request, you put a figure 
 that you thought it was necessary to supply the bare necessities of life ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Not an estimate that could stand any reduction ? — A. No, I don't think it 
 could stand any reduction. 
 
 Q. Would this be sufficient to ena)ble men to pay off the instalment on their pro- 
 perty ? — A. A single man who was paying $12 a month for a house could not. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. There was no inquiry made as to how far the Western Federation would assist 
 them before they joined ? — A. I made none whatever. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Have you heard of any men having trouble in regard to the instalments on 
 their houses, purchased from the company since the strike began ? — A. No, sir. 
 Q. As far as you know there has been no pressure ? — ^A. As far as I know. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long will the men be able to stand out before they get this $14,000 a 
 month ? — A. It all depends on how much they have of their own. 
 
 Q. How long do you anticipate they will be able to stand out ?— A. Well, I could 
 not say. I have not given that my personal attention, as to how the men are fixed. 
 
 Q. Well, that is a subject of frequent conversation, as to how long they can pos- 
 sibly stand out ?— A. It is a subject of frequent conversation as regards money com- 
 ing in I have heard men say they did not know what they were going to do if there 
 was nothing coming in. Of course, that is a matter for their own consideration. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q The circumstances are such, however, that a man would appear to be justified 
 in seeking work unless he got at least $16 a month ?-A. xes 
 
 Q. Would a man be blacklisted if he did ?— A. He would not be looked on with 
 
 favour, SAMUEL MOTTISHAW, Jr.— Ladysmith, May 18. 
 
t 
 
 294 MINUTES OF EYIDEWUB Of ROYAL GOMUlSSldTf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vli., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. It would be a pretty big order for the Western Federation to blacklist all these 
 men here, wouldn't it ? — A. Yes, a pretty big order. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. And Cumberland too. How can tha blacklist affect you very much ? They 
 have no union in the other coal mines, except Fernie. It could pot affect you in the 
 United States, could it ? — A. Well, I could not say that I am sure. 
 
 Q. Would that prevent you getting work at Nanaimo at any time if you were 
 blacklisted ? — A. Oh, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. I don't see where they can hit. What power have they ? Supposing you with- 
 draw, what could they do to you, how could they hurt you ? — ^A. I don't suppose they 
 would give us anything. 
 
 Q. They are not giving you anything, anyway ; but outside of the money question, 
 supposing you withdrew now from the Western Federation ? — A. I don't know really 
 the workings of the headquarters, what system or method they have in dealing with 
 cases of that kind. 
 
 Q. Suppose the miners were to say, under the constitution as it stands to-day, we 
 have decided to stand as we were before and give up the idea of the Western Federa- 
 tion, I don't see what harm they could do you ? — A. There may be some method we 
 don't know anything about. 
 
 Q. You tallied over that subject with Mr. Baker ? — ^A. No. 
 
 By Sis Lordship : 
 
 Q. Have the men over considered the question of contribution from each man in 
 the event of large disputes in the western states ? For instance, it is probable that 
 the whole state of Colorado will be on strike. Have the men ever considered how 
 much they will be called on to contribute to that ?— A. I don't think they have. It 
 is quite likely we would be asked to contribute to any strike on the other side, the 
 same as we are here. 
 
 Q. Well, if the men lose a good portion of their time here, and have to contribute 
 to strikes in the United States, they won't have very much money at the end of the 
 year, will they ? — A. Well, lo, they won't. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Have you ever computed how much $14,000 a month would be from the alleged 
 membership of the Western Federation ? — A. No, I have not; I don't know the total 
 amount of members in good standing. 
 
 Adjourned. 
 
 Nanaimo, May 20, 1903, 
 S. M. EoBiNS, sworn : 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long have you been connected with the Vancouver Coal Company, Mr. 
 Eobins ? — A. About forty years. 
 
 Q. In what capacity ?— A. First in the capacity of secretary, and then as super- 
 intendent. 
 
 Q. How long as superintendent ! — ^A. About twenty yeara. 
 
 3. M. ROBINS— Nanaimo, May 20. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 295 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. How long has any union been in existence among the men ? — A. A completely 
 organized union, I think, about twelve or thirteen years, but tliere was a semblance of 
 "a union from the time I came here, twenty years ago. 
 
 Q. What has been your policy with respect to unions ? — A. I have always recog- 
 nized the union. I may add one %vord to that — that in the early days before the union 
 was completely organized I. urged the men to form a union. 
 
 Q. To what union or order did these men belong when you were superintendent ? 
 — A. The title of the union was ' The Miners and Mine Labourers' Protective Asso- 
 ciation.' 
 
 Q. Was this a union by themselves, or was it connected with any other labour 
 organization ? — A. I am not aware that it was connected with any other organization, 
 though I believe, on recalling the circumstances, that there was some connection — I 
 don't think it amounted to affiliation — with the Knights of Labour at an early stage, 
 but I have not heard anything about that for a very considerable time. 
 
 Q. What was the average number of men belonging to the union ? — A. It varied 
 "very greatly. I should say, when the union was first organized, not quite 1,000 men, 
 but afterwards it was considerably more. 
 
 Q. Were all your employees union men ? — A. Not all belonged to this organiza- 
 tion. This organization comprised the men working underground — not surface men. 
 
 Q. How many surface men would there be on the average ? — A. From 100 to 150 
 on an average; at times many more than that. 
 
 Q. These men were not union men ? — A. They did not belong to this. They had 
 something which was termed a club more than a union, but to all intents and purposes 
 1 should say it was equivalent to a union, though T don't think they were organized. 
 
 Q. It was a purely local organization ? — A. Tes, purely so. 
 
 Q Were there any non-union men below ground ? — A. Not one. It was part of 
 OUT agreement when the union was first organized, that we should employ no one below 
 ground who was not a union man. 
 
 Q. Could we obtain a copy of that agreement ? — A. By all means. 
 
 (Witness produces copy of agreement — Exhibit 9.) 
 
 Q. Since the inception of the union, how many strikes have you had ? — A. Wo 
 have never had a strike. 
 
 Q. Would you just outline to us the mode of communication between the men and 
 the manager of the mine, regarding any wage difficulty or other grievance ?— -A. 
 Under ordinary circumstances, there would be a meeting of the executive of the union 
 aiid myself about every six months to discuss general questions. 
 
 Q. Just at that point, Mr. Eflbins, what do you mean by general questions ?— A. 
 Specified, perhaps I should have said — whether the time would admit an advance in 
 wages, or whether we thought there might be any grading or reduction. I used to 
 refer— I think the union did also— to the condition of the market, and I was always 
 very pleased to give them all the information that I possessed. The executive being 
 
 Q How many ?— A. They varied from eight to twelve. And having the confi- 
 dence of the general body of the miners, I used to go into details that I would hardly 
 have cared to discuss in public with the union in general. I should not have wanted 
 these, myself, to have become public property. , a Ai i + i 
 
 6 Then the basis of your relationship was mutual confidence <— A. Absolutely 
 so, and that confidence, I think, was unbroken from the first to last. 
 
 Q In discussing these matters, did you ever allow them access to your books of 
 account, or anything of that kind ?-A. On one special occasion when we had a diffi- 
 culty in regard to the working of the mine, I found it was very difficult to show the men 
 what the exact cost of producing the coal was. My figures that I submitted to a com- 
 Stee of the union- may mention that it was the Northfield union becat>se it was 
 
 S. M. ROBINS— Nanaimo, May 20. 
 
296 Ain^UTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSIO}^. , 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 more or less distinct from the Nanaimo union. — the figures I submitted to a committee 
 of that union they thought could not possibly be correct, and they apopinted some 
 members of their own branch union, and members of the Nanaimo union, to examine 
 the books — the books of wages and cost, I should say. The result was that it confirrned 
 my figures, and the question was settled accordingly. 
 
 Q. Was the Northfield mine ever closed on account of any demands made by the 
 men ? — A. Not absolutely on that account. The coal was a thin seam, very difficult to 
 mine, and we found that even on the wages we had consented to pay the men, that the 
 mine could not be worked at a profit. 
 
 Q. In your management of the mine, was it left to your discretion as to what. divi- 
 dend you would try to work out of the mine for the shareholders ? — A. That was not 
 in my discretion. 
 
 Q. A fixed dividend was given you to work up to ? — A. No; for years, in fact 
 when the market was exceedingly depressed, we scarcely paid any dividend, but wa paid 
 an average of about 5i per cent, bad times and good. 
 
 Q. I mean the shareholders left it in your discretion as to the fixing of wages ? — 
 
 A. In regard to wages, yes. 
 
 Q. That would be practically leaving it to your discretion as to what dividend you 
 would jjrovide ? — A. It would result in that way, but it was not put that way— that I 
 should fix the dividend. 
 
 Q. In these discussions that you had with the men, did they ever consent to a 
 reduction of wages ? — A. Most assuredly so. On one special occasion, I may mention 
 that the business of our principal market was so utterly demoralized that it was almost 
 impossible to dispose of any coal at all — when this matter was clearly explained to the 
 men, in a mass meeting of the union, they voluntarily agreed to accept a reduction of 
 twenty per cent without a single dissenter. 
 
 Q. Did they have any promise from you as to how long that would last ? — A. No. 
 One condition voluntarily made' on our part was that the officers would submit to the 
 same reduction as long as the men submitted to theirs. In a month after we revised the 
 situation — revised the figures, I should say — and the twenty per cent was made ten per 
 cent, and that continued in operation for six or seven years until the market justified 
 reverting to the old figure. 
 
 Q. During that time did they wait on you with a number of demands, to try and 
 get an increase — in that six or seven years ? — ^A. I think, now the question has been 
 suggested, but I could hardly put it a number of times. When we had our half- 
 yearly meeting the question was asked at the time, if we could afford to revert to the 
 old figure, but it was never, in any sense urged upon us in the face of the statement I 
 made to the executive committee. 
 
 Q. And you did have half-yearly meetings to consider wages ? — A. Yes, and these 
 half-yearly meetings during the latter part of this period I mention, during which the 
 reduction was in operation — these half-yearly meetings were arranged tlie six months' 
 contract, a renewal of the agreement for another six months, so that there was no re- 
 quest in the meantime for any change in the situation whatever. 
 
 Q. How long would these meetings last on the average ? — A. Say an hour or two. 
 Sometimes other matters would be discussed at these meetings., 
 
 Q. What other matters besides wages did you consider with the executive ? — A. 
 Matters in regard sometimes to the methods we adopted in regard to the working of the 
 coal. They were more in the nature of conferences than arguments between one side 
 or the other. 
 
 Q. At these half-yearly meetings ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you have any meetings besides the half-yearly meetings ? — A. My answer 
 to that would come within the scope of your question just now, my Loi-d, that is, that 
 generally as to the operation of the union, if any matter went wrong in the mines, in 
 the first instance it would be adjusted by the underground boss, as he is termed^— the 
 
 B. M. ROBINS— Nanaimo, May 20. 
 
ON INDVSTRJAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA SXfJ 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 3€a 
 
 overman would, perhaps, be the proper term — ^between the overman and the individual 
 miner who had the grievance. If it were not adjusted between those, then it would 
 be brought to the notice of the underground manager. Then if the matter was not 
 amicably settled, probably the committee would meet me. 
 
 Q. How many times would this occur during the year on an average ? — A. Some- 
 times not at all in a year, and very infrequently at all times. 
 
 Q. You were not always engaged in meeting eommittises ? — A. Oh, no, not at all. 
 The men made it a point of honour to try and settle their affairs in the earliest stage, 
 add to use their own efforts. They bothered the management as little as possible. 
 
 Q. Is there any distinction between what is called a pit committee, and the execu- 
 tive of the union ? — A. Yes, the pit committee is a specially appointed body by the 
 union primarily to examine as to the safety of the mine, both in regard to ventilation 
 and in regard to any method of getting the coal that might be considered unsafe. 
 
 Q. That was a separate body from the executive ? — A. Yes, though there was no 
 reason why one of the committee could not be a member of the other. 
 
 Q. Would the same men act as a pit committee ? — A. That would remain between 
 the union; they could if they chose. I think they were usually chosen for a year, 
 though I am subject to correction on that. 
 
 Q. Respecting differences to be allowed for a poor place to work in — how would 
 those differences be settled ? — A. Generally the scale was agreed upon between the 
 mine manager and the executive. 
 
 Q. Are these scales in writing^any of them ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Could we have'a copy ? — A. I think as a rule they very rarely come before me. 
 Thsrt could be more properly found from Mr. Russell, the manager. 
 
 Q. Then the scale was agreed on between the executive and not the pit committee ? 
 — A. Between the executive and the manager. 
 
 Q. That would be at these half-yearly meetings ? — A. No, that was not discussed 
 at the half-yearly meetings. Sometimes the question might arise, but generally they 
 were settled between the manager and the executive without being mentioned even. 
 
 Q. What has been the standard wage for day labour ? — A. Per day — there is on 
 standard wage with a miner; he gets what he earns; that is, paid by the ton. 
 
 Q. The same price allowed each man per ton ? — A. The same price throughout 
 the mines, yes. 
 
 Q. What would be the wages given on the average in good times ?— A. I don't 
 absolutely know as to that, but speaking off-hand, I could say that would vary frcwn 
 $3 to $3.50; occasionally the wages would be as high as $4 and $5, but that would be 
 under very favourable circumstances for the miner. 
 
 Q. Some men would earn more than others, of course ? — A. Yes, of course they 
 
 would. 
 
 Q. What would be the highest point that would be reached in the way of wagefi. 
 by a good miner ? — A. Perhaps in isolated cases the men might make — I have known 
 men make as much as $130 or $140, but that ought to be greatly cut down. That would 
 be a special case entirely, where the coal would be exceptionally easy to mine— would 
 
 almost mine itself. -r, , n i i, , ^. , , n t 
 
 Q An unusual thing ? — A. Oh, very. It should hardly be mentioned at all. I 
 
 suppose about $85, $90 or $100 a month would be the highest wages that the best men 
 
 would have in good times. o a ^t . v i * i i * -jr j i • 
 
 Q There was no minimum wage ?— A. JNot absolutely, but if a good man working 
 well did not mvize what we call wages, he would be allowed $3 a day. 
 
 Q That is on account of deficiencies in the place ? — A. Yes, a bad place — a poor 
 ijlace ' We have always wanted a miner to earn at least $3, and it would be more satis - 
 factorr to us if the minimum were $3.50 instead of $3. A man earning from $3.50 to 
 84 doing a fair day's work, we should think would be about the right thing. 
 ' Q. What were the hours «-A. Eight hours. 
 
 S. M. ROBINS— Nanaimo, May 20. 
 
298 MINUTES OP EVIDENCE OF R07AL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VI 1., A. 1904 
 
 Q. How long has that been in vogue — ^the eight-hour system ? — A. That has always 
 been in force practically. Though at one time the men worked eight hours, latterly it 
 is understood to be eight hours from bank to bank. 
 
 Q. In fixing these wages, I suppose you were to some extent necessarily governed 
 by what your competitors were doing ? — ^A. Sometimes we knew what they were paying, 
 and sometimes not. It would be diiEcult to know what they were paying. I think we 
 were governed by our own view as to what would be fair wages for the miners. 
 
 Q. Well, if your competitors used a different class of labour, such' as Chinese 
 labour, how did that affect you ? — A. That would most assuredly affect us, and they 
 would be able to compete in markets we could not compete in. 
 
 Q. That was the fact, was it not ? — A. That has been the fact. 
 
 Q. I have that down elsewhere, Mr. Robins, that it has been a fact that the use of 
 inferior labour by some of your competitors has driven you out of some of the markets? 
 — A. Yes, it has done so. It is right that I should mention that until 1887 we em- 
 ployed the same class of labour in the mines — Chinese labour. 
 
 Q. How did you come to cease employing Chinamen ? — A. By mutual arrange- 
 ment between our neighbours and the white miners and ourselves. It was an arrange- 
 ment very skilfully engineered by the white miners. Our neighbours and ourselves 
 were not brought into contact. This occurred after a very sad accident of ours in '87. 
 Although no one, I believe, attributed that accident to the employment of Chinese, but 
 after the accident, in recovering the bodies and doing other work below ground, the 
 Chinese refused to go below. Therefore, the feeling was intensified to endeavour to 
 get these men out of the mines. We have never employed Chinamen in the mines from 
 that day to this. 
 
 Q. That is, below ground ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. How was the arrangement carried out by the other side ? — A. I think they car- 
 ried it out for a considerable time, and I think all the time at Wellington mines. We 
 are speaking of our neighbours, I may as well mention the name. At the Wellingtou 
 mines I don't think they ever employed Chinese labour underground until the mines 
 closed. I understand, though, I don't know from my own knowledge, that they were 
 employed at Cumberland. That mine was just in existence at that time, or in a very 
 embtyo condition. 
 
 Q. And the arrangement was only to include existing mines ? — A. Tes, I don't 
 think the question of future mines was thought of at all. 
 
 Q. What is the nature of your dealings with the miners as to their houses and lots? 
 You have sold the men lots ? — A. Yes; they have always bought our lots in Nanaimo. 
 A fair proportion have done that. A great many of the men do not buy lots or put 
 up houses. 
 
 Q. What was the average price charged for these lots ? — A. It varied very much. 
 I think the lowest price was about $150. I don't remember any sold for less than that, 
 and not many at that. 
 
 Q. What was the highest price ? — A. Fancy lots — that is, corner lots, and in busi- 
 ness parts of the town — on specific occasions I think we got as much as $600 or $800, 
 but very few were sold at that price. The bulk of the lots sold in the miners' resi- 
 dential part of the town would run from $350 to $500. 
 
 Q. What terms of payment ? — A. Nominally the terms of payment were one-third 
 down and one-third in a year. I should say one-third in six months, and the balance 
 at the end of the year, but I don't think in one case out of fifty did we insist on these 
 terms, and in fact to-day there are a few lots that were bought fifteen years ago that 
 were not paid for, but very few of these. I only mentioned that to show that we did 
 not use any insisting on payment. 
 
 Q. Can you give us how many lots were taken back by the company for failure to 
 pay ? — A. We have taken lots back. Perhaps they came to us and say : ' We cannot 
 complete the purchase; we aro sorry we bought the lot; we put so many dollar's worth 
 
 S. M. ROBINS— Nanaimo, May 20. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 299 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 of improvements on the lot.' In many cases it would depend on the people themselves. 
 I have taken lots back that way and allowed them for the improvements, but there 
 has been very little of that done. The bulk of people who have bought lots have paid 
 for them, and built comfortable residences upon them. I should add in regard to that, 
 perhaps, in justice to the company, that during the last three years I declined to sell 
 lots on this ground : that the outlook of the market was so gloomy that I thought it 
 was not quite fair to encourage men to lay out money further than had already been 
 done. But they would not be debarred from acquiring land on that account, because 
 there were always private sellers of lots ready to dispose of theirs. That was one of 
 the reasons, to give those who had lots to sell a chance to sell them. 
 
 Q. You have sold both town lots and five-acre lots : ? — A. I have been speaking 
 up to this moment of town lots. There are lots termed homesteads of five acres. 
 
 Q. About these five-acre lots — they are payable by instalments ? — A. Yes. Per- 
 haps I had better explain in my own way these arrangements. The person taking a 
 homestead — a five-acre homestead — takes it under a lease for twenty-one years. He 
 has the option of buying at the end of ten years. A few of the homesteads in the early 
 days were on different conditions, but the bulk of the homesteads were leased for 21 
 years with the option of purchase in ten. These lots being adjacent to the town, I 
 was obliged to fix rather a fancy price on the land itself and on the rent, otherwise 
 it would have depreciated the value of city property. People holding city property 
 that they bought of the company years before, for which they would have paid $200 
 to $400, these lots being one-fifth of an acre. Otherwise, I would have been willing 
 to have sold these lots for something like $50, but if it had been $50 a lot everybody 
 would go to live outside the town limits, and city property would have depreciated 
 instantly. So it was not only that I wanted to do as well for my company as I could, 
 but in fairness to the holders of city lots, I had to fix a very high price on the lots. 
 These were the terms : a rental of half a dollar per acre per annum. That would mean 
 a man taking a five-acre lot would pay the first year $2.50, the second year the same, 
 the third, fourth and fifth years he would pay $2.50 per annum per acre. That would 
 bring his total payments for the first and the second year to $2.50 ; for the other three 
 years he would pay $12.50 per annum for the whole five acres. After that he would 
 pay $50 per year for his five acres. It was calculated that after the first five years, 
 when he was paying a nominal rental, that the place would be cleared, and that he 
 would be deriving an income from the acreage he had under cultivation. That will 
 explain the matter. 
 
 Q. Have there been many of these lots fallen back into the company's hands ?— A. 
 Several have, chiefly on account of the owner. 
 
 Q. What was the price at which they were allowed to buy at the end of ten years ? 
 —A. That varied from $125 to $200 per acre, the high prices mostly being land 
 quite adjacent to the city. 
 
 Q. Speaking generally, Mr. Eobins, what do you say as to your experience with 
 the union, in the way of diacipline and management of the mine ?— A. As to interfer- 
 ing with the management of the mine ? ...,,. 
 
 (.) Yes ' A. We have never experienced any difiiculty or friction with the miners 
 
 as a union, that we might not have experienced had there been no union. 
 
 Q Have there been any threats made, either directly or indirectly, to come out on 
 
 g^j,jj^g '? ^ J think only on one occasion in the v/hole period of the existence of the 
 
 union was anything like a hint of going on strike brought to my notice. 
 
 O What led to that «— A. That was by a member of the executive, who was at 
 once called to order by the rest of the executive That is the only case. _ 
 
 O That had not the sanction of the executive ?— A. No, that was just simply by 
 an i-idividual member who was called to order by the rest of the executive. That wa3, 
 r:erhaps, more a hint at what the result might be, than a threat. It was not put 
 in the form of a threat exactly. ^ ^ ROBINS-Nanaimo, May 20. 
 
300 MIirVTES OF ETIDEVCE OF BOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. The men did not belong to this Western Federation of Miners in your time l— 
 A. Not that I am aware of. 
 
 Q. That has taken place since your time ? — A. It has, yes. 
 
 Q. And so you cannot say from experience what the effect is upon a union of 
 CanaCiian workmen belonging to an organization outside of the country ? — A. No, I 
 cannot. 
 
 Q. Can you suggest any reason why they should have joined the Western Federa- 
 tion ? — A. I have not gone into that matter as closely as I should have done, had I 
 been still connected with the company. It would largely depend upon the situation of 
 the foreign union, and I should want to know how its operation has been conducted 
 before I would like to give an opinion upon that. I can sse how a foreign organization, 
 if it got into the hands of unscrupulous capitalists or trusts, might be used to injure the 
 industry here, but not necessarily so. It might be used legitimately ; it might be used 
 merely to strengthen the hands of a small local union, and as far as it merely did that 
 I, individually, would not oppose affiliation with a foreign union. 
 
 Q. Yes, but had you continued manager there would not have been any real good 
 reason for them joining an outside organization ? — A. I presume their reason would 
 be merely that they would feel that whenever any question or difference arose, they 
 could negotiate with greater strength behind them. 
 
 Q. But having a satisfactory experience with you for years, what excuse could 
 there be for joining a foreign organization ? — A. I could not say that the men would 
 have an excuse, but I can see that they might be creating safeguards against a condi- 
 tion of things that might arise. I thinli it has been the experience in England, and 
 I have watched things there a little from time to time— that the affiliation between 
 local unions and unions in another district, has had a good effect upon the operation of 
 unions, but I don't think that with regard to mining unions that they have ever affili- 
 ated with a union outside of the country, but the larger body of men that are united in 
 a labour union, of course their voice has much more effect in discussing matters with 
 employers. There is no question about that, and in this country there is no 'body of men 
 sufficiently large to give strength to the union, and it may be they would find it neces- 
 sary to associate with outside men. That necessarily, from the men's point of view, 
 would cease, when the population of this country made the numbers large enough, so 
 that in the case of a depression in a single instance, the rest could contribute to the 
 relief of this number. 
 
 Q. Supposing this movement to join the Western Federation of Miners had taken 
 place in your time, and you had discovered it was within the power of the executive, 
 situate at Denver, to call out your men on sympathetic strike, what action would you 
 have taken ? — A. That is a very difficult question for me to answer. I should want 
 to know a great deal more than I know to-day in regard to the outside strike, and the 
 position of the men. As a rule, sympathetic strikes do a frightful amount of injury, 
 but all strikes do injury, and we should not contemplate here conditions arising where 
 f\ strike would be seriously thought of by either the employers or the men. 
 
 Q. Suppose you found, on examining the constitution, that socialistic doctrines 
 were promulgated — would you take any action in that event ? — A. No, I should not 
 take action. I should point out to the union the dangers I apprehended, but I feel, 
 and always have, that our workmen are perfectly free to join any organization they 
 please. I might regret it, but I should take no steps in the shape of warning the men 
 that if they did they might not expect employment of us. 
 
 Q. That is you would not try to prevent it ? — A. The only way I should try would 
 be to point out to the local union the danger I apprehended in joining a body that I 
 thought was not a satisfactory body. 
 
 Q. If the effect of belonging to a foreign body was in large majority to subject 
 your men to the orders of the executive, would that not give you cause for action ?-- > 
 A. If I understood clearly that the fortigni organization was in the position of master 
 S. M. KOBINS-Nanaimo, May 20. 
 
02V INDUStEIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 301 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 or authority over the local organization, I should consider that the greatest danger of 
 all, but if the foreign organization was merely a body that would refer to the local 
 union, for assistance in case of trouble brought about by the local union, I should 
 not look on that as a cause for interference. If the foreign organization could call 
 out our local body in sympathetic strike whether they themselves had no trouble on 
 hand with the employers at all, then I should warn our men what a dangerous course 
 they were taking, but beyond that I would do nothing. 
 
 Q. But if they did go on strike ? — A. We would have to pay for the trouble. 
 
 Q. Would you wait until they went back to work, or employ other men ? — A. In 
 my individual case, I think I should wait, unless the thing was prolonged indefinitelj, 
 but in an arrangement such as is set forth in that document which you had in. your 
 hand — that arrangement between the men and ourselves — there could not be, I think, 
 a sympathetic strike here. 
 
 Q. Well, now I understand, so far, that the chief argument that is advanced in 
 favour of permission to join a foreign organization is, in the event of a strike, to 
 prevent the introduction of what is called scab labour from the other side. That is 
 an advantage that workmen use in its favour ? Supposing a system were arrived at 
 by which the local union could have an interchange of cards or aifiliation, but should 
 not become in any way subject to their authority, would that not meet all reasonable 
 demands of the men ? — A. I am not sure that I understand the full text of your ques- 
 tion. 
 
 Q. (Question repeated.) — A. It is a matter outside of the scope of my experience, 
 because we have stated in the first instance that we will not employ outside labour ; 
 we only employ union men. If we had trouble and under that agreement should men 
 come and offer to work for us, I should not have accepted their help. I should have 
 waited to settle the thing with the union. 
 
 Q. [Leaving your case out of consideration, the ordinary employer, when a strike 
 takes place, will endeavour to procure substitute labour ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Their argument is that to join other organizations prevents that. If that 
 could be effected in any other way than by joining these organizations and becoming 
 subject to their authority, would that not meet all reasonable demands ? — A. Presum- 
 ably it might, but I should not like to pronounce on that. The reason of a demand 
 on the part of men in joining an outside affiliation must be for the purpose of making 
 them a stronger body financially, and if these incidental disadvantages are inseparable 
 in joining that body, that is a misfortune. 
 
 Q. It seems to me, Mr. Eobins, that if our workmen are permitted to join out- 
 side organizations which have authority over them to order them out on strike, that 
 raises a serious question as to how far our industries are liable to outside interference. 
 What I want to get at is this : there is a difference between affiliation and being part 
 and parcel of a foreign body. Under a system of affiliation they get an interchange 
 cf cards; that is to say, a bricklayer here, if his union was affiliated with a bricklay- 
 ers' union in the United States would get all existing advantages, and would be able to 
 prevent the introduction of scab labour ? — A. That operates in precisely the same 
 way in- England, where they are able to prevent the introduction of scab labour from 
 
 other districts. . i -r. t 
 
 Q. In England all these unions are subject to a common law. Farliament has 
 power over them, but our Parliament has no power over organizations outside; there 
 is no law which can reach them ?— A. That, of course, is a legal question. 
 
 O What I want to get at is whether affiliation would not answer all reasonable 
 purposes of .organization ?— A. That is a question I should like to think a great deal 
 on to see the operation of it, and the nature of the relation of the foreign union, and 
 th^ home union before I could say very much about it. I have not gone outside the 
 simple issue of our men joining a foreign union for the sake of getting financial assist- 
 ance in case of trouble. I think it is a perfectly legitimate method on their part. , 
 
 S, M. ROBINS—Nanaimo, May 20. 
 
302 MINUTES OF EVIDE¥CE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Do 7on think an employer ouglit to bo left to his choice as to whether he should 
 employ union or non-union men ? — A. I think so ; I cannot see how that can be inter- 
 fered with. 
 
 Q. Do you find that the agreement you have entered into compensates you for the 
 surrender of your right to employ non-union men ?^A. I think it has been wholly 
 beneficial to all parties concerned. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I see under the fourth clause of this agreement they reserve the 
 right to employ such men as they choose. 
 
 B]/ His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You see the 4th clause ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Has that the effect of giving you the right to employ non-union men ? — A. The 
 first article says we must employ none but iinion men. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — The 4th clause must mean the discharge on other grounds. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Now, in the event of a strike which cannot be settled by conciliation, what 
 remedy would you suggest ? — A. The case seems to me to be hopeless. I think it is a 
 matter for persuasion by the legislature, or the people in power. We have the New 
 Zealand business ; it would result in a situation something like that. 
 
 Q. Would you think compulsory arbitration would be of any service ? — A. No, I 
 don't like it. I cannot say how it would work. I never did like it. 
 
 Q. Would you favour compulsory investigation at the instance of the state ? — ^A. 
 If matters got to a deadlock, possibly that would be a wise step to take, but the only 
 effect of that would be to publish the exact state of affairs before the public at large. . 
 
 Q. What, in your opinion, are the objections to compulsory arbitration? — ^A. I 
 should, first of all, have a very grave doubt of the acquaintance of the board of arbitra- 
 tion with the inner merits of the situation. I am afraid I should not have confidence 
 m a board of arbitration appointed with power to give an absolute award for one 
 side or the other, and, in the second place, I cannot see how the award could be en- 
 forced. 
 
 Q. Then, in the event of conciliatory methods failing, it seems that the weak party 
 must give in, after a long struggle, which is disastrous to the public ? — A. Perhaps I 
 might say that one or the other would come to their senses, because I think most of 
 these troubles in the history of nearly every strike that I have noticed, has been of 
 something of this kind. 
 
 Q. I suppose you are aware that the anthracite strike cost both sides something 
 in the neighbourhood of one hundred millions ? — A. No doubt. 
 
 Q. Is that not a state of affairs which should be stopped by the state in some way ? 
 — ^A. Perhaps had the state stepped in it would have provided some temporary remedy, 
 but I don't think it would have been an absolute cure. There would have been a smoul- 
 dering fire all the time. Things would have been working most unsatisfactorily. The 
 public might not have known of it, but the parties chiefly concerned would have suf- 
 fered a great deal more. 
 
 Q. How do your men compare on the average with other coal miners as to intelli- 
 gence ? — A. I have always regarded our men as far above the average in intelligence. 
 
 Q. Perhaps that accounts, rather than the system of unionism, for your getting 
 along with them ? — A. I think the chief reason that we have got along so well, that we 
 have had men of character at all times to represent the union. The men have felt a 
 sense of the responsibility of their position. 
 
 Q. Well, that would have been the same if there had been no union — ^if there was 
 simply a committee of the men ? — A. There are ways which, from my point of view, 
 things would not have been so satisfaitory. Grievances are very easily known hut a 
 
 S. M. ROBINS— Nanaimo, May 20, 
 
ON IJfDUSTRlAL DISPUTES JN BRITISH COLUMBIA 303 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 well organized union will repress anything in the shape of unfair demands. Where 
 there is no union, separate bodies of the men might get together and give trouble. 
 
 Q. Then you mean to say there would be cliques ? — A. Yes, there might be. Things 
 get ventilated and brought down to business form before they go before the manager 
 where there is a well organized and well managed union. 
 
 Q. I suppose it inspires a certain amount of confidence among the men to have a 
 union I — A. Undoubtedly. 
 
 Q. And you get the average view of the whole by means of a union ? — A. You do 
 that, yes. 
 
 Q. Would you favovir incorporation of unions ? — A. I think it would be good. 
 
 Q. This one was incorporated ? — A. I think it is incorporated, yes. 
 
 Q. Do you think incorporation has any effect upon their sense of responsibility ? — 
 A. It would have a tendency that way, undoubtedly. 
 
 Q. Have you any reason to suppose that this experience of yours is exceptional — 
 that is to say, it would not work well in other mines ? — A. I cannot see under what 
 conditions a well managed, respectable union would not. work to the advantage of the 
 owner of any mines. I know of no reason. The reason generally found against a 
 union is that the union wants to boss everything, but I have not found it so. 
 
 Q. What proportion of the men in your employ were of foreign nationality ? — A. 
 I don't Icnow the exact proportion, but I think we must have about 25 per cent of the 
 total body foreign. Perhaps that is too high a figure. I might safely say from 15 to 
 20 per cent. 
 
 Q. What particular nationality ? — A. There are Belgians, Italians and Russian 
 Finns. 
 
 Q. Who are the most numerous — the Belgians ? — A. I think the Eussian Finns, at 
 this moment, but I speak without figures before me. At one time the Italians were 
 the greatest number. 
 
 Q. And the other 75 per cent were of British extraction ? — A. I think it will be 
 85, 80 to 85 per cent would be English, Scotch, Welsh, Nova Scotians, and a few 
 Irish — ^not many. 
 
 Q. That might explain something — that there were no Irishmen there ? — A. It 
 
 might, possibly. 
 
 Q. Did you ever exercise any control over the men as to where they should live ? 
 ^_ jfo, we have no control over the men as to where they should live. 
 
 Q. You have had men outside of these mines at Nanaimo ? — A. Yes, we have. 
 
 Q. At what place ? — A. Southfield and Northfield. Southfield includes what is 
 generally known as No. 5, and for a little time we worked at Fairview, but chiefly at 
 
 Northfield. t, j „ a ^r 
 
 Q Did you allow the men in these mines to live where tiiey liked ?— A. Xes, we 
 sold the men lots at Northfield, but did not wish to sell lots at Southfield, the men 
 live so near at hand. In fact, the men prefer to live at Nanaimo. It was a short 
 run They were taken in rough cars, which the men called Pullmans, but they served 
 the purpose and there were no complaints about them. At Northfield most of the 
 men lived there. I never heard any complaints about the sanitary conditions at South- 
 
 Q Did they live together in huts, or were plans laid out ?— A. At Northfield they 
 lived in comfortable houses, mostly along the Wellington road. 
 
 Any cases of typhoid up through there ?— A. I don t know of any. 
 
 o' When you closed up Northfield did you compensate the men for any loss as 
 to their property «— A. No, that was a thing that has been a grievance with me, as I 
 Mt that I had allowed the men to build. I should say some forty or fifty men had 
 hoiiffht lots and put up houses. Lots of these have been sold by the men, and some 
 are occupied. They travel back and forth on bicycles and buggies. 
 
 S. M. ROBINS— Nanaimo, May 20. 
 
304 mia'otes of etidi:.\ce of royal commission 
 
 3-4- edward vii., a. 1904 
 
 Q. Would it be right for an employer of coal mines to prohibit the men from 
 building around the mines ? — A. That depends on the life of the coal. If a short 
 life, I should advise them not to, but if there were other mines in the neighbourhood 
 I should not advise them against it. 
 
 Q. If the sanitary conditions were bad, that is to say, no good drinking water, 
 would you discourage the men from building at that place ; would you sell them land ? 
 — A. I should certainly discourage them, and I would not willingly sell them land if 
 the place were unhealthy. 
 
 Q. How far is Northfield from here? — A. About four miles. 
 
 Q. And Southfield ?— A. About three and a half. I may say with regard to Northr 
 field, we tried to make a price of $100 for the lots. In certain cases people there took 
 up small lots. There was no reason why we should have closed Northfield. We did , 
 not pretend that there was any risk on the part of the men because our men had said 
 there were other mines in the neighbourhood. The Wellington mines were in force, 
 and I thought they would likely last for a generation at least. 
 
 Q. The average life of a coal mine in this province is how long ?^A. Depends 
 on the nature of the ground. We have been working at Nanaimo for forty years. 
 
 Q. And other camps may give out in five ? — A. I would not like to put a shaft 
 down, unless it was a very shallow one, if I thought it would be only five years. This 
 mine may last for fifty years yet. 
 
 Nanaimo. "Way 21, 1903. 
 William Neave. sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. What is you occupation, Mr. Neave ? — A. Coal miner. 
 
 Q. In what mine were you working ? — A. No. 1 shaft. 
 
 Q. What company does that belong to ? — A. The Western Fuel Coiapany, for- 
 merly the New Vancouver Coal Company. 
 
 Q. Are you a member of any body of organized men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. To what do you belong ? — A. To the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. The local union to which you belong is a branch of the Western Federation * 
 — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How long has it been a branch of the Western Federation ? — A. A little over a 
 J oar. 
 
 Q. Formerly the union to which you belonged was a purely local organization with 
 no affiliation ? — A. Well, it was affiliated with the Trades Congress of Canada — the 
 Trades and Labour Congress. 
 
 Q. And you preferred to affiliate with the Western Federation of Miners ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. As being an organization more in touch with the class of labour to which you 
 belonged ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. For how many years have you been a member of the union, so as to speak of its 
 workings ? — A. Of this present union ? 
 
 Q. Of any body of organized labour ? — A. I was a member in the old country be- 
 fore I left there. 
 
 Q. For how long ? — A. Thirty years, pretty near. 
 
 Q. How long have you been a member of this union ? — A. About twelve years, 
 something like that. 
 
 Q. Have you been working here in Nanaimo any large part of that time ? — A. AH 
 of the time. 
 
 WILLIAM NEAVE— Nanaimo, May 2L 
 
ON lif DUST RIAL DI^sPVTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA SC5 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Speaking from your experience as a member of the union, are you able to tell 
 the Commissioners the effect and the result of organization, both upon employer and 
 employed. You are at liberty to put that in your own language. Do you conceive it 
 to be beneficial or otherwise to the employer ? — ^A. I consider it is a benefit to both the 
 employed and employer. 
 
 Q. Can you tell the Commissioner in what way you would conceive it a benefit to 
 the workmen ? — A. Well, I believe it helps them to settle certain difficulties that might 
 cause serious trouble if there were no union. 
 
 Q. Can you tell the Commissioners in what way you would conceive it a benefit to 
 the employer ? — A. Well, just about in the same way ; by coming together and discuss- 
 ing grievances they can arrive at an amicable settlement. 
 
 Q. You think in discussing these matters you have a governing body that deals 
 with the employer on behalf of one organization ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In addition to the governing body of the union, do you have committees to 
 regulate or investigate conditions under which men work in different places ? — A. Yes, 
 v/e have a committee for that purpose. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Is that what you call a pit committee ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Will you tell the Commissioners, if you please, what are the advantages of the 
 pit committee — in what way they operate as between employer and employees ? — A. In 
 the first place, if a man who is working in a place has a grievance, he acquaints the 
 manager or underground boss with the grievance, and if he cannot get it adjusted 
 with him, he then makes his case known to the pit committee, and then the pit commit- 
 tee see the underground manager, and if they cannot decide on the remuneration for 
 the place, they go with the executive and interview the superintendent. After the pit 
 committee does its work, and they cannot arrive at a satisfactory arrangement with the 
 underground management, then it goes out of the pit committee into the hands of the 
 executive committee, and then the executive committee and the superintendent meet. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. And failing settlement there, what happens ? — A. Then it is taken back to the 
 union — the decision which they arrived at, and they deal with the question. 
 
 Q. That is, if the executive and the superintendent are unable to agree, what is 
 done then ? — A. It is taken back to the union, and they decide. 
 
 Q. And I suI)pose, if necessary, they go out on strike ? — A. Well, it seldom comes 
 to that. 
 
 Q. At all events, the union would have that right ? — A. Yes, they would have 
 that right. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. That is, if the grievance is sufficiently serious ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So far as your experience goes, has there been anything of that kind in the 
 mines here — you have been working under that system for a number of years past ? — 
 A. Not to cause any trouble like that. 
 
 Q. You have succeeded, under a system of organized labour, in bridging over your 
 difficulties without a strike for a number of years past ? — A. Yes, for fourteen years 
 there has been no strike here. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. For how long ? — A. Fourteen years. 
 
 WILLIAM NEAVE— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
 36o— 20 
 
306 UINVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-A EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. There was a strike recently ? — A. I don't call that a strike; it was a misunder- 
 standing. 
 
 Q. Tell us about that; what was the trouble ? — A. Well, it was really because 
 they would not allow the 25 cents on the safety lamps, which they had been allowing, 
 and it was just a stop to have that 25 cents paid which had been paid. 
 
 Q. How was that strike brought about — by the action of the union ? — A. It was 
 brought about by the management telling the miners that he would not pay longer for 
 the lamps, and they called a meeting and discussed the matter, and thought it would 
 be better to have an investigation into it, and they stopped until the thing was settled. 
 
 Q. Did the union give the management notice that unless it was restored by a 
 certain time they would strike, or did they quit immediately ? — A. iThey stopped 
 shortly after. They did not give any notice, because the management had not given 
 any notice. 
 
 Q. As soon as the union met they declared they would quit work until they 
 restored the price ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Tou say they did not give the management any notice because they did not give 
 ktny notice ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you any agreement with the management ? — A. Yes, we have an agree- 
 ment. We had an agreement at that time, but I think the agreement calls for thirty 
 days' notice on either side. 
 
 Q. Is it the same agreement as existed formerly between the New Vancouver Coal 
 Company ? — A. The very same. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long did this strike last ? — A. About two weeks or ten days, I think. 
 
 Q. There is no provision for notice to the company before going out on strike ? 
 — A. There is thirty days required, I think. 
 
 Q. Hdw did you get around that ? — A. Well, we looked at it that he had broken 
 his agreement, and we thought we had a right to ; that if there is any change in the 
 conditions there should be thirty days' notice given by them. 
 
 (Agreement — Exhibit 9. Identified by witness as the one worked under.) 
 
 Q. You say under that agreement there is to be thirty days' notice before any 
 change ? — A. Yes, that is the understanding. 
 
 Q. There is nothing here about wages ? — A. Well, the thirty days' agreement is 
 generally understood by the company and the men. 
 
 Q. What is the object of joining the Western Federation of IVJiners ? — ^A. Well, 
 we thought we would be a little stronger. 
 
 Q. You say this was done about a year ago ? — A; It is not quite a year yet. It 
 is about — it was in last October or November — something like that. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Robins notified of the intention of the men to join the Federation ? 
 — A. I don't think so; not to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. There has never been any complaint about inability to adjust wages with him ? 
 — A. Not Mr. Eobins, no. 
 
 Q. What was the object of joining the Federation in his time ? — A. That is the 
 only thing that I know of — to make them strong. They thought they could not get 
 the support they would need from the Trades and Labour Congress. 
 
 Q. Experience had shown them for twenty years that they did not need increased 
 strength as far as he was concerned. Is that not so ? — (No answer.) 
 
 Q. Perhaps you can tell us why they needed increased strength; can you tell us 
 that, Mr. Neave ? — A. Why they needed increased strength ? 
 
 Q. Why they considered it necessar" at that time ? — ^A. It is alwajn woU to be 
 provided with a good strong force. 
 
 WILLIAM NEAVE— Nanalmo, May 2L 
 
ON mDUSTRlAL DISPUTITS IN BRITISB COLUMBIA 307 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Why did you support this movement in October of last year rather than any 
 other time ? — A. I could not really tell you why they commenced it; I know that was 
 the wish of the majority of the men in Nanaimo, that it should be done. 
 
 Q. How was the question decided ? — A. By secret ballot. 
 
 Q. Was there notice given of the meeting to all the miners ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. It was not a general meeting; it was a special meeting ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. The vote was taken at the pit-head ? — ^A. Yes, so that every one could vote. 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. It was by secret ballot ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was the majority in favour of it ? — A. I could not remember that from 
 memory just now. 
 
 Q. Was it a close vote ? — A. Yes, I believe it was closja I do not think there was 
 much difference in it. 
 
 Q. Had there been any discussion of the question at meetings, or was there simply 
 a ballot taken at the pit-head ? — A. Oh, yes, it was discussed during lots of meetings — 
 in fact, not only as to joining that organization, but it was discussed with the advisa- 
 bility of afBliating with other large bodies, the United Mine Workers and so on. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Was there much discussion with regard to international affiliation ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. When you say there was a -desire to have increased strength,- in what way do 
 you mean — that there was a larger body of men working to a common end ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I suppose more powerful financially ? — A. Yes, that also. 
 
 Q. Has the Western Federation power to call your men out on strike ? — A. I don't 
 think so. 
 
 Q. You never considered that question ? — A. Yes, I have considered it myself, 
 personally; I don't think they can call us out. 
 
 . Q. You understood the position to be that the men here decide if there is any ques- 
 tion of strike ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And are not subject to the executive from Denver ? — A. There is nothing in 
 the constitution that would lead me to believe we are. 
 
 Q. There being nothing in the constitution, assuming that the members at Denver 
 requested you to go out on strike, would the members here feel bound to come out ? — 
 A. They would take a secret ballot on the question. 
 
 Q. And assuming that the question was determined adversely to the people at 
 Denver I — A. They would not come out. 
 
 Q. Would the people of Denver have any power, by influence of any sort, to cause_ 
 the suspension of the branch here ? — A. I don't think so-^not if they decided against it. 
 
 Q. It would put the people in bad odour with the people at Denver ?^A. It might. 
 ]f they took it in that light, we would just have to go to some other organization. 
 
 Q. You would be quite ready to quit if you thought they were disposed that way ? 
 A. Yes, by an action of that kind. 
 
 ; Q. If the Western Federation asked you to go out on sympathetic strike, would the 
 clause in the agreement about thirty days' notice bind you people ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You would have no power to go out without giving the thirty days' notice ? — A. 
 That is as I understand the argeement, yes. 
 
 Q. You would consider the obligation of that contract paramount to your obliga- 
 tion to the Western Federation of Miners ? — A. Yes. 
 
 WILLIAM NEAVE— Nanaimo, May 21, 
 
 36a— 20i 
 
308 UINVTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION^ 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Are contracts of that nature subject to the approval of the Federation, such 
 as we have here ? — A. I believe they are. 
 
 Q. Is there a clause in the constitution to that effect ? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Then the freedom of you men to enter into a contract is to a certain ext^pt 
 restricted ? — A. That is already — we were living under that before we joined the 
 Western Federation. 
 
 Q. Yes, 'but the freedom of you people to enter into a contract — not this particular 
 contract — is restricted by your belonging to the Western Federation of Miners ?■ — A. 
 Well, don't see it in that light. I think we can enter into an agreement here, of course. 
 
 Q. You see the contract is subject to their approval ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. That means that you are restricted to a certain extent. If they do not approve, 
 what then ? — A. Well, we are not able to stop them; v;e would not be able to stay 
 with them. 
 
 Q. That would be the result ? — A. We would, I think, have to abide by them or 
 withdraw from them. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. I understood that referred only to questions_affecting the constitution, and not 
 to agreements — have you a copy of the constitution ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Has the constitution of the Federation been read carefully by the majority of 
 the men, do you suppose ? — A. I could not say as to that. , 
 
 Q. Has the constitution been discussed in open meetings ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. Of course, you didn't retain the constitution you had when you were the Miners' 
 and Mine Labourers' Protective Association ? — A. No, it is changed. 
 
 (Witness produces copy of constitution — examined by Commissioners.) 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Now, I see there is a section here which says any contract or agreement entered 
 into Ijctvieen members of any local union or their employers as a final settlement of 
 any difficulty that may occur between tkem, shall not be considered valid or binding 
 until the same shall have the approval of the executive board of the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners ? — A. That is the clause I had reference to. 
 
 Q. It is quite clear that the executive of the Western Federation have the power 
 to deal with your agreements with your employers, and that you ha\e not a free hand 
 in the matter ? — A. Well, we settled the other dispute. 
 
 Q. Well, but under this section they interfere ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. It is not considered binding until they approve. Are you-not giving up a large 
 measure of freedom when you subscribe to a clause of that sort ? Somebody a thou- 
 sand miles away is judging for you as to whether the settlement is right or not. Is 
 that not the case ? — A. I don't understand it that way. 
 
 Q. Well, what meaning do you give to it ? — A. I understood it thoroughly that 
 we have power to settle our own difficulties at home. 
 
 Q. What do you make out of that language — ' It shall not be considered valid 
 unless the same shall have the approval of the executive ?' The agreement is so much 
 waste paper if you are bound by an obligation of that order until that approval is got 
 — is it not ? I suppose that must be so if language has any meaning ? Is it not ? — 
 (No answer.) 
 
 Q. Now with r^ard to the. present settlement — the settlement of the last difficulty 
 about the 25 cents — was that settlement approved at Denver ?-^A. No. ' 
 
 Q. It was never referred to Denver ? — A. No, never referred. 
 WILLIAM NEAVK — Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
02f INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 309 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No; 36a 
 
 Q. Then which of these clauses are dead letters and which are alive ? — A, When 
 we got the 25 cents we commenced work. 
 
 Q. But you take an oath to abide by the constitution, and it says that that agree- 
 ment shall be binding only when it is approved at Denver, and that evidently is a dead 
 letter or was treated as such. Then I suppose it means this, that the men here are 
 judges whether they will submit anything for approval ? — A. Yes, they are the judges. 
 They are the ones who are affected by the trouble, and I think they are the ones who 
 should judge. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. I understand, Mr. Neave, that the result of your difficulty did not have the 
 effect of changing the agreement with your employers^the agreement remained the 
 same as before — -the employer attempted to change the rate for lamps and you resented 
 it ? — A Yes, it remained the same. We were allowed so much for handling lamps, 
 and he took it off. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. However, you seem to be the judges whether you will abide by it or not ? — A. 
 I think the local has that power to settle all difficulties. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — Might I be permitted to suggest article 2, section 5. 
 His Lordship. — The language is plain. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. I did not understand this as a strike ? — A. Well, we would not call it a strike. 
 It was a stoppage of work. | 
 
 Q. Was it a strike in the sense that it should be passed upon by the union ? Had 
 your local union formally determined whether they would quit work or not ? — A. Yes, 
 they had decided to stop. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I did not understand that. 
 
 Mr. BowE. — They did not refer the question to the Western Federation and they 
 did not refer the settlement. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — That was why I suggested it. It does not seem that the central 
 authority has to be appealed to. 
 
 His Lordship. — It seems an employer here has to deal virtually with the executive 
 at Denver. 
 
 Mr. Wilson.^ Yes, and if we may believe that is true we may believe that the " 
 executive at Denver insisted on the union at Fernie adopting a course in favour of 
 the employer. 
 
 His Lordship. — That does not alter the principle; it is sometimes settled to the 
 disadvantage of the employer. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did you ask the Federation for any assistance in this strike ? — A. No; 
 Q. Did you communicate at all with the people in Denver about the matter ? — A. 
 The organizer was here, Mr. Baker. 
 
 Q. Was he here when the strike commenced ?— A. No, I don't think he was; I 
 , think he was at Fernie. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. When was that trouble — ^what was the date of it ? — A. I have not got it down ; 
 I can't remember the date. 
 
 "WILLIAM NEAVE— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
310 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL C0UUI88I0N 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Now, this local union severed its connection with the Trades and Labour Con- 
 gress ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was the reason for that. Can you tell us any reason ? — A. No. I don't 
 know any reason. 
 
 Q. Were you in favour of withdrawing ? — A. Well, I was not altogether in favour 
 of with(^awing from them. 
 
 Q. Now, you must have heard some argument advanced in favour of withdrawing 
 from them ? — A. I was not here when the question was discussed. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Was it necessary to withdraw in order to belong to the Western Federation — 
 could you belong to both ? — A. Well, I could not say as to that; I think we could 
 though. 
 
 Q. In fact, I think the regulations of the Trades and Labour Congress won't per- 
 mit the affiliation of a local body which is not part of an international union, if there 
 is such a union — is that the case ? — A. I could not say as to that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Who organized this branch of the Western Federation ? — A- M!r. Baker, I 
 think. 
 
 Q. Was that on the invitation of the members ? — A. Yes, he was asked to come 
 here and organize. 
 
 Q. Had there been any communications between this union and the men at Lady- 
 smith relative to organization ? — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. The majority of the Western Federation, taken as a whole, are in favour of the 
 doctrines of socialism, are they not ? — ^A. I could not say as to that. I believe they 
 lean that way. 
 
 Q. And that body is affiliated with the American Labour UnionT-the Western 
 Federation ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the American Labour Union has declared for socialism, has it not ? — A. 
 The Western Federation of Miners ? 
 
 Q. No, the American Labour Union ? — A. I don't think the Federation declared 
 for socialism. 
 
 Q. I asked about the American Labour Union — it has declared for socialism, and 
 the Western Federation is affiliated with the American Labour Union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you ever read the official organ of the Western Federation of Miners ? — 
 ' A. No, I have seen a copy. 
 
 Q. Is that much read among the men here ? — A. I don't know anyone who sub- 
 scribes for it here. 
 
 Q. You don't know anyone who subscribes for it here ? — A, No. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Do the union give any guarantee as to promising the circulation of that organ ? 
 — A. It has not been done by this union. 
 
 Q. Do they promote its circulation as a matter of fact — do they facilitats sub- 
 scriptions in meetings and urge members to subscribe ? — A. Not in this union. I 
 never heard of it here. 
 
 By His Lordship :. 
 
 Q. I suppose it is practically impossible for a non-union man to get employment 
 in these mines ? — A. I don't think so. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — The agreement between the conjpany and the union is against it 
 
 WILLIAM NEAVE— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 311 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Where the majority of any men are union men, that practically mean8 ex- 
 clusion to a non-union man, does it not? — A. Yes, after a little time. They come to 
 work and join the union, just as they can make it convenient to come in. 
 
 Q. Would I be right in saying that a great many men join unions because they 
 are in a measure compelled to, I mean from the fact that he would be an object of 
 dislike, but a union man could not get work unless he joined? — A. I would not say 
 that. 
 
 Q. You don't think, there are many cases of that kind? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you know of any cases where men have joined from a sense of compulsion? 
 — A. No, I don't know of any; not to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. I suppose there are internal squabbles in unions as in other bodies? — A. Some- 
 times we have a little hot-headed workmen in the mines. 
 
 Q. Now, it is often said against unions that the tendency is to reduce the wages 
 of a good man to the level of a poorer man. What do you say about that ? — A. I think 
 it is the opposite ; I think it is getting the poor man up to the good man. 
 
 Q. Then you think an employer is virtually forced to pay a poor man more than 
 he is entitled to be paid, by means of a union? Is that the position? — A. The union 
 man tries to get all he can. 
 
 Q. If a poor man is getting more out of an employer than he really , earns, the 
 employer has to deduct that amount out of the good man, has he not ? — A. Well, I 
 don't think that is so in these mines here. 
 
 Q. You think there are no poor men in these mines ? — A. Oh, yes, but if a man 
 is working by the ton he makes that much more. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. What is the minimum fixed here ? — A. $3. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. That is day work ?— A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. How much coal does a man have to handle to earn that forking by the ton ? 
 — ^A. It is at the rate of 68 cents a ton. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You think that is a fair sample agreement between the company and the union ? 
 — A. It is probably as good as we can get. 
 
 Q. You are always prepared to get more where you can ? — A. It could be made 
 better on both sides. 
 
 Q. Could you suggest in what way I What do you say is the difficulty in it ? — 
 (Witness handed agreement.) — A. Well, there are lots of things we could have on the 
 agreement which we have verbally. 
 
 Q. As for instance — ? — A. There are several things we get paid for which are 
 not on here. 
 
 Q. It should be fuller as to wages paid ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that notice of any change ought to be put in there ?— A. Yes, in fact, 
 we have an agreement with the management now without being signed. It is more 
 icW than that. It is worded a little deferent, I suppose. 
 
 Q. Sometimes it is alleged against unions that the effect of an employer allowing 
 the men to unionize is to virtually hand over the management of the mine ?— A. I 
 don't think it is so. 
 
 Q. You think an employer has as free a hand as if the men were not unionized ? 
 ^ Well, he has not such a free hand, but I know of instances where there haye been 
 
 WILLIAM NEAVE— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
J|i2 MIXVTES OP EVIDENCE OF ROYAL -COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A- 1904 
 
 disputes, and the committee has decided against the men who had the dispute in favour 
 of the company. 
 
 Q. The committee decided against the man? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. They have turned down a grievance, and the result is the grievance does not 
 get past the committee? — A. Yes, it reaches the ears of the underground manager. 
 They have gone into the case and found that the man was wrong. 
 
 Q. So that the employer is saved from being troubled with minor grievances? — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to incorporating \inions ? — A. I .believe in them being in- 
 corporated. 
 
 By Mr. Boive: 
 
 Q. The present local is not? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. The old organization was? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. It is defunct now ? — A. Well, we have never wound it up ^et. I guess until 
 we wind up the afEairs we are still incorporated. 
 
 Q. So you really have two organizations, in fact. Being a member of the old 
 organization was not sufficient to constitute organization in the_ new organization? 
 Before your members joined the new organization they had to take the oath to the 
 Western federation? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the Western Federation provides a model constitution for locals, under 
 which they must organize? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So the old organization is really in existence? — A. (None.) 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. What do you say as to the best method of settling strikes when the parties can' 
 not agree? — A. I believe in conciliation and arbitration. 
 
 Q. By that you mean compulsory arbitration, do you — that is, an arbitration whose 
 finding and award is binding on the parties ? — A. No, I would not go that far. 
 
 Q. What you mean is what I would call friendly arbitration ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Leaving the award to be enforced by public opinion? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. But would you propose as conciliators a body of the men? — A. Part. 
 
 Q. And have conciliators representing the employer?— A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. The price here is 68 cents a ton, is it, by contract work? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you know what they pay at Ladysmith ?— A. No, that may be the rate. 
 
 Q. Would you be surprised to know that they paid 75 cents? You know they do 
 pay 75 cents ? — A. I didn't know ; 68 cents is net. 
 
 Q. You get allowances for bad places? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You have not heard that they pay 7§ cents at Ladysmith, with allowances?— 
 A. No, I don't know what tonnage they have there. 
 
 Q. How long have you been working in Nanaimo? — A. Fourteen years. 
 
 Q. Miners get $3 per day for day work ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What do runners get?— A. $2.60. 
 
 Q. And timbermen? — A. $3. 
 
 Q. What is the lowest day work that is paid here — the lowest class ?— A.. Chinan 
 men, I think. 
 
 Q. I mean white men, of course. What class of day work among the white men 
 is the class that gets the lowest pay — door-boys? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What do they get?— A. They get from $1. 
 
 Q. They get $1? — A. 1 could not say exactly. 
 
 Q. Who will know about that? — A. (None.) 
 
 Q. Who was it started the agitation for the Western Federation ? Were you here 
 at the time? — A. No, I was up in the mountains when it was commenced, 
 
 "WILLIAM NEAVE— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA Sl3 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You were not one of the committee that counted the ballots at the pit-head J-^ 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Ever hear anything about the way that ballot was had? Did you ever hear 
 that when they counted the ballots and found there was a majority against the West- 
 ern Federation, and then went out and got a few more men to vote? Ever hear that 
 story? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Don't know whether it is true or not? — A, Don't think it is true. 
 
 Q. Well, I would like to know. I have heard that for a long while. Have you 
 ever considered whether the relations of quartz mining are so intimately connected 
 with coal mining as to make it desirable that a union composed chiefly of quartz- 
 miners should control the coal miners? Have you ever considered that question — the 
 relation which quartz mining has to coal mining with a view to unionism ? — A. I have 
 never considered that question. 
 
 Q. So you would not be prepared to pass an opinion on that? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You know, as a matter of fact, that the Western Federation is composed prin- 
 cipally of quartz miners? — A. No, I don't know that. 
 
 Q. I see the constitution is printed by the Sandon Paystreak. That is in the 
 quartz district? — A. The codl miners might be in the majority. 
 
 Q. Do you think they are in the majority? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. You never asked? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Mr. Baker told us the quartz miners were the people who controlled — the 
 majority ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Do you think it is a good thing for the coal miners at Nanaimo to be under 
 the domination of the quartz miners of the Western States, or have you ever thought 
 about that at all ? Do you know that you are, by reason of you belonging to the 
 Western Federation? — A. I don't think we are. 
 
 Q. Well, now you would be. Your body is governed by the majority — that is a 
 principle of it? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see a copy of the official magazine? — A. Yes, I have seen a copy. 
 
 Q. Have you ever looked through at the local lodges in British Columbia ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it would be well to look into some of these thnigs? You hold 
 the office of president, and you don't know these things about the body. You don't 
 know that the Western Federation is controlled by quartz miners? — A. No. 
 
 Q. And you never looked at the official organ to see? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Have you ever thought -whether it is a good thing or not that it should be so? 
 Don't you know that in the Western States the quartz miners outnumber the coal 
 miners by a very large majority? — A. In the United States, no. 
 
 Q. Don't you know that the coal miners of Washington don't belong to the West- 
 em Federation? — A. I have heard it. 
 
 Q. Mr. Baker told us it was true, and I suppose it may be taken for granted. 
 Why do you suppose the coal miners of Washington refused to join the Western Fed- 
 eration? — A. Probably they have never had an organizer among them. 
 
 Q. You think they have never had anybody there trying to get them to join ?■ — A. 
 I could not say; they might not have. They may not have had an opportunity. 
 
 Q. You think they would leave Washington, although this is an American or- 
 ganization, without asking them to come over and organize Nanaimo? Do you believe 
 that? — A. There are a number of reasons why they don't join. 
 
 Q. Can you give me one? — A. Well, they have had a little trouble there. 
 
 Q. What is it? — ^A. They have large strikes. 
 
 Q. Well, that is right in line with the Western Federation. For what reasons ? — 
 A. Probably the same as at Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. What is that ? — A. If they decided to organize they will all be stopped. I 
 have never heard that, but it might be so. 
 
 Q. Then why should employers in the Western States be so down on the Western 
 Federation, because unionism in the States is generally recognized ? 
 
 WILLIAM NEAVE— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
314 MINUTES OP EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. Is that a fact? 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. He says he thinks so?— A. I could not tell you why the employers should be 
 down on them. 
 
 Q. You know it is a socialistic organization? You know it preaches revolution- 
 ary socialism, don't you ? — A. Never heard any in the local here. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man named Brooks ? Is that not his name^-rather prominent 
 here 'i — A. No, I don't know him. 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear socialism or revolutionary socialism advocated in the local 
 lodge here ? Will you say that ? Is it not a fact that you have a large body of socialists 
 in your union here, and have you not got a socialist party here ? — A. There is a socialist 
 party here. 
 
 Q. A socialistic political party? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. What do you think? You know by common report? — A. That is the body. 
 
 Q. And they belong to your union, don't they? — A. Some of them. 
 
 Q. What percentage of your union is composed of that class ? — A. I could not tell ; 
 I don't know who they are. 
 
 Q. Have you any idea about it at all ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Will you undertake to say there are not fifty per cent of your union advocating 
 these views? — A. You say fifty per cent? 
 
 Q. Will you say there is not fifty per cent of your own union men? — A. Yes, I 
 think I can say that. 
 
 Q. Are there thirty per cent? — A. I could not say; I would not say any number; I 
 could not say who they are. 
 
 Q. Perhaps they don't all like to admit it? — A. Probably not. 
 
 Q. You think the sentiment is so strong against that class that they don't like to 
 admit they are guided by these principles, but that they are secretly in favour of those 
 views and ane secretly promulgating them ? — A. (No answer.) 
 
 Q. Will you undertake to say that that is not the case in your own union here in 
 Nanaimo, and will you undertake to say that that is not the real reason why the West- 
 ern Federation was brought in, and your local organization changed, into a branch of 
 the Western Federation — what do you say about that? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Will you say you don't think that is so? — A. I don't know what these men's 
 intentions are. 
 
 Q. Will you say in your own honest opinion that is not the reason of the intro- 
 duction of the Western Federation? — A. It is my opinion that it is not. 
 
 Q. On what do you base that opinion? You know they are a socialistic body; 
 you know you had a good union which was taking care of the men's interests — that 
 there was no reason on account of any disagreement with your employers, and yet 
 the system is changed from a good local union to a socialistic organization. Those are 
 the facts? — A. It is not a socialistic organization. 
 
 Q. But you said before it was; I understood you to say that it was a body which 
 advocated socialistic tendencies? — A. Do you mean the Nanaimo union? 
 
 Q. Didn't you say that in your evidence in chief ? — A. No ; it was the American 
 Federation of Labour — not the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. Suppose it to be true, what their organizer Mr. Baker tells us, that that body 
 is one which holds socialistic views — don't you think it a singular thing that here in 
 Nanaimo, where you had a good union, that you should suddenly change it for an 
 
 institution which advocates socialism — is that not a singular thing to begin with ? 
 
 A. It is not singular if the majority would wish it. 
 
 Q. Is it not singular that you have a large body of revolutionary socialists— 
 doesn't that strike you as having some connection with the Federation? I suppose 
 
 WILLIAM NEAVE— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 315 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 you have never thought about these things, have you ? — A. Socialism don't bother 
 me very much. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it was about time it began to bother you ? — A. I don't think so. 
 
 Q. Don't you know you are president of the organization, and it may lead you 
 and beyond these things. You are not a socialist yourself, are you ? Are you a so- 
 cialist ? — A. (None). 
 
 Q. Why don't you want to answer — are you afraid to answer ? — A. I am not 
 r.fraid to answer. 
 
 Q. "Well, are you a socialist ? — A. I'm not a Kingsley socialist. 
 
 Q. What's a Kingsley socialist ; what distinction do you make between a Kings- 
 ley socialist and an ordinary one ? — A. I am not a revolutionary. 
 
 Q. But you have socialist views ? — A. Sonae. 
 
 Q. To what extent would you go ; Where would you draw the line ? — A. I don't 
 believe in taking away from the party who has got property without recompensing 
 him. 
 
 Q. But up to that limit you are a socialist ? Up to the limit where it comes to a 
 forcible confiscation of a capitalist's property, you are a socialist, are you ? — A. I 
 would not say that either. 
 
 Q. Where do you draw the line ? 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Perhaps it is evolutionary, rather than revolutionary I 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. How soon do you expect to arrive at the point where you will divide up the 
 capitalist's property and distribute it among the men 1 How long will that take ? — A. 
 Il will come all right. 
 
 Q. Well, don't you think that having this view you are in favour of 1;he Western 
 Federation of Miners, and is it not because it is a body which advocates these prin- 
 ciples or at any rate countenances them, if it doesn't advocate them ? — A. I don't 
 believe it advocates strikes. 
 
 Q. I didn't say that. I say they countenance socialistic doctrines, and is that 
 not the reason why you have joined the Western Federation as a good union for men to 
 belong to ? — A. No, I don't say that. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. In your recent trouble with the company, when you approached them in regard 
 to the lamps, was any question raised about your belonging to the Western Federation ? 
 — A. Not that I can remember. 
 
 Q. They did not refuse to recognize the Western Federation ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. And that was not in question at all ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. You were asked about your old union and your amalgamation w'ith the West- 
 em Federation of Miners, and as to a'bandoning the old union. Was that matter much 
 discussed before you finally afiiliated with the Western Federation ? — A. It must have 
 been because it was discr.ssed before I left, and I was away seven weeks. 
 
 Q. Were you not discussing afiiliation with the United Mine Workers of America ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Then the question of affiliation with some international body was much dis- 
 cussed before you joined the Western Federation ? — A. Yes, it was. 
 
 Q. So that what you did was the result of careful thought and consideration ? — 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Among the majority of the miners { — A. Yes. 
 
 WILLI IM NEAVB— Nanaimo, Ma7 21. 
 
316 mlNVTEIi OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. And the majority finally agreed to join the Western I'ederation of Miners. It 
 was not, as I understand it, because of any desire to advance socialistic doctrines, 
 was it ? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. In speaking about, socialism and socialistic doctrines, are you quite sure that 
 you and Mr. Bodwell are of the same mind? His ideas and yours may be very differ- 
 ent? 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — I don't think it is a good thing, and he does. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson: 
 
 Q. Do you know what socialism is, Mr. Bodwell ? I should like to examine you 
 on that? Are you quite sur3 you and Mr. Bodwell understand this? — A. We may 
 differ. 
 
 Q. You were asked a question concerning a remark about the ballot taken at the 
 pit-head. Did that not refer to a totally different transaction outside altogether of 
 joining the Western Federation, or are you able to say anything about that? — A. I 
 could not say anything more that I have said. I did not just happen to 
 
 Q. Do you know? You were asked about a remark with respect to the use of the 
 ballot boxes. Did that remark not affect some totally different question than joining 
 the Western Federation? — A. I could not swear to that. There have been so many 
 pit-head votes taken. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Was there more than one pit-head vote taken on the subject of joining the 
 Western Federation? — A. Yes, but whether that was the one that Mr. Bodwell has re- 
 fcrcnoi to I cannot just place it. 
 
 Q. What check had you to prevent duplicate voting? — A. I did not take it. 
 
 Q. What check was taken? — A. There were two men checking the ballot; that is 
 all I i,now. They were there collecting the votes as the miners went down, and as 
 they came up. 
 
 Bp Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. Who worn they?— A. I believe Richard Booth was one, and I think William 
 Jones was the other. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Did these men represent the different views — those in favour and those against ? 
 — A. I could not say as to that; I would think so myself. 
 
 Q. They were intended to act as scrutineers? — A. Yes, they were the ones to 
 receive the ballots — to see they were right. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson: 
 
 Q. You were asked some questions about the manner in which the central authority 
 of the Western Federation governed the local union. Have you familiarized yourself 
 with the powers and authority of the central authority over the local union ?— A. Just 
 from the constitution. 
 
 Q. And it is limited to what is contained in the constitution? — A. As far as I 
 know, 
 
 Q. In other words, it comes to this: that the quartz miners exercise no more 
 authority over the coal miners than the people in Ontario do over the people of British 
 Columbia? — A. That is the way I look at it. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — That is the way I look at it, too. 
 
 WILLIAM NEAVB— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISB COLUMBIA 317 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 KiCHARD Booth, sworn. 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. You are a member of the Western Federation of Miners? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Were you one of the scrutineers at the talking of the ballot on joining this or- 
 ganization ? — A. I was at the first ballot — the one they spoke ofi when they found it 
 was carried against the Federation they were opposed to it. That is the ballot I am 
 referring to. 
 
 Q. When was that ballot taken? — A. I could not give the date. I never expected 
 to be called, until this morning; sometime just previous to joining the Federatiori. 
 
 Q. How long before the decision to join? — A. It perhaps might be probably a 
 month before that. It might be more, I could not say exactly. 
 
 Q. How was that ballot taken? — A. We took No. 1 shaft and No. 5 and also at 
 Haywood. , 
 
 Q. How many ballots reported ? — A. I could not say. I might be a long way astray. 
 
 Q. And the result of that ballot was a decision against joining the Federation? — 
 A. I might explain that. We took a ballot at the pit-head. Some of the men were 
 not at work — simply because they were in the mountains at the time, and did not 
 know about it, and the majority of the committee did not think it right that these 
 men should not have their vote. They were allowed to give their vote away from the 
 pit-head. There were about five votes that were taken outside away from the pit-head. 
 There was a dispute arose over these votes being taken on the street. 
 
 Q. What was the result of that ballot? — A. We found that the number of votes 
 that were taken on the street was just the number of votes that turned the tie — the 
 majority — and there was opposition raised over it. 
 
 Q. How did the ballot go? — A. The idea some of them have got is before we took 
 the five votes it was a tie, and that we rushed around after these people who had not 
 given their votes, and the story is that pressure was brought to bear. That was simply 
 the majority in favour of the Federation — five votes ; that was the occasion of, the 
 first ballot. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. Was the condition of the ballot known before they voted ?^A. Not unless it 
 was to the committee. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Then they counted the ballots before they went for the men? — A. No, sir. 
 The reason we knew that was wh^n the votes were counted we knew how many ballots 
 we had taken on the street, and we knew from the very men how they had voted, but 
 the ballots were sealed until the whole thing was over. Then the feeling got around 
 that these men had voted in favour of the Federation, and the union decided to cast 
 out the five ballots, and that necessitated the taking of another ballot. 
 
 Q. The result of the other ballot was what? — A. The other ballot was taken in our 
 hall, and the majority was in favour of the Federation. That was a secret ballot. I 
 don't know what the majority was. 
 
 By Mr. Eotve: 
 Q. Were there as many votes cast as before? — A. No, I don't think so; the vote 
 was not large at all 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. How many men would you say were at the hall? — A. I think I would be safe 
 in saying there were not 300 ballots cast; I could not give exactly the right number. 
 Q. There are abowt 800 men in the union? — A. I don't know what the number 
 would be; it might be 500 or 550. 
 
 Q. All men in the old local union? — A. Yes; I could not say to fifty. 
 
 RICHARD BOOTH— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
318 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COUUISSIOV 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. You say you don't know how many votes were first taken ?^-A. No, I don't 
 know just now; I paid no attention to it after. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. How do you account for the fact that there was such a small vote the second 
 time? — A. Because it was on Saturday afternoon, and a fine da^. A large number 
 would go fishing, and other ways. 
 
 Q. What notice was given of the second ballot? — A. It was first decided in the 
 union that they should take a ballot ; then the notice was put up at the pit-head. 
 
 Q. And the men had to come down to the hall to vote? — A. Yes it was taken in 
 the afternoon. 
 
 Q. What was the objection to the pit-head vote; you certainly would have got all 
 the men there? — A. The objection was that there was some influence against the men. 
 
 Q. Would there not be influence at the hall? — A. I don't think the canvassers 
 would go to the same trouble. When you get a whole body of men around they will 
 do it then more; they would not take the trouble to go up. 
 
 Q. Could you not prevent canvassing? — A. You don't control men individually. 
 
 Q. Didn't you have canvassing at the Hall ? — A. Not that I am aware of; I did 
 not see anybody. 
 
 Q. What took place at the pit-head? — A. Some men were walking around among^ 
 tbe other men; I don't know how much that was done at all. 
 
 Q. It was a close vote, anyway, only five men? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Who was on the committee who took the vote at the hall — how many? — ^A, I 
 think it was three. 
 
 Q. Were they all in favour of the Western Federation ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. How many were in favour, and how many against? — A. I know there was 
 one against it, but I don't know about the other two. I think one was in the stand 
 this morning ; I think Mr. Neave was one. 
 
 Q. He was in favour of the Western Federation? — A. I never asked him; I was 
 not at the hall; Mr. Ralph Smith was there; he was against the Federation. I think 
 the other was Mr. Jones ; I believe he was in favour of the Federation. 
 
 Q. What method did you adopt in taking the ballot? — A. The ballots were sup- 
 plied; you went to the desk and they gaye you your ballot, for or against, and you 
 deposited the part in the ballot box for the mjin you wanted to vote for. 
 
 Q. How did you know the same man was not voting twice? — A. There was a man 
 there watching the ballot. When a man tore his ballot off there was a man there to 
 see the other part destroyed. 
 
 Q. Suppose he gave a different name? — A. I don't think it would be possible to 
 do that. The men are too well known, and the votes were so few. 
 
 Q. Could that have been done at the pit-head? — A. I don't think so; the men are 
 too well known. 
 
 0- Are you .in officer now in the local lodge ? — :A. No, sir. - 
 
 Q. Have you made any particular study of the Western Federation ? — A. No, I 
 have not. 
 
 Q, The men here generally don't know nuich about the organization ? — A. I don't 
 suppose they do. 
 
 Q. How do you account for the men going into it; what argument was used ?— 
 A. Well, I believe one of the reasons was they thought it would be a bigger source 
 of power in case of any difficulty they might have. 
 
 Q. Who started that idea here ? — A. I cannot tell you. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Baker come before this ballot ? — A. No, I don't think he had any- 
 thing to do with it. 
 
 Q. Any of the executive here before the ballot ? — A. No. 
 
 RICHARD BOOTH— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSTBTAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 319 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Anybody from the outside working the thing up ? — A. Not that I am aware 
 of ; no more than the general feeling in the union. . 
 
 Q. Do you thinlt you would have known ? — A. It is just possible that they might 
 be working others in, and I would not know of it, but I hardly thinlc it is possible 
 for that to be so. 
 
 ' Q. It strikes me as such a singular thing. We had Mr. Robins, who said he had 
 always favoured unions, and that you had one for about twenty years ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you never had any trouble, and your executive had worked without any 
 friction, and then you suddenly decide to go into the Western Federation of Miners. 
 There must have been some powerful influence exercised on the men ? — A. I don't 
 think there was any more influence than the men thinking it would be better to belong 
 to an outside organization that ha^l some strength behind it. 
 
 Q. You have plenty of strength ; you never had any diificulties the union could 
 not settle ? — A. INo, we always managed to settle them. 
 
 Q. You were not joining for the purpose of going on strike ? — A. No: 
 
 Q. You mean financial strength ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If you were not contemplating a strike, that was not a matter of importance ? — 
 A. Of course contemplating a strike would depend on circumstances ; there was no 
 strike in Wiew. 
 
 Q. Can you give some reason for the change ? — A. Other than financial streng^th ? 
 Well, I don't know that I can, other than that it was the general feeling among the 
 men. 
 
 Q. Was there not a large socialist party among the men ? — A. There is a socialist 
 party — I don't know how strong. 
 
 Q. They were advocating for the Federation ? — A. Yes, I believe they were. 
 
 Q. And don't you think that was the argument used ? — A. It was not a question 
 of socialism. 
 
 Q. The socialists as a body wanted to join the Federation, and the argument they 
 used with the men was you would have more financial strength if you needed it ? — A. 
 They did not put forth their socialist reasons ; I don't know their real reason. 
 
 Q. Don't you think there was a reason behind that ? — A. I am not supposed to 
 give other people's reasons. 
 
 Q. I am asking you for your opinion ? — A. I might be astray in my opinion. 
 
 Q. You would rather not express your opinion? — A. If I thought that was the 
 reason I would tell you. 
 
 ■ Q. Let me suggest a reason; that there was a socialist party here, who wanted 
 to get control of the union, and they thought they would have more influence over the 
 union if they got it incorporated with an institution which advocated socialism, and 
 that is the reason why they wanted to change the state of affairs, and get you into 
 the Western Federation? — A. That might be their own private reason. I am not here 
 to say positively that that was the reason. If I had to give my own private opinion, I 
 would say, certainly, that is what some of them thought, but I don't wish to involve 
 other people by giving my opinion: 
 
 Q. I am just asking you what you thought. I notice in a communication from 
 Nanaimo the other day in the Miner's Magazine, that there were some people in the 
 union' advocating you should put politics on the order of business in the lodge. la 
 there any considerable number of the union in favour of that? — A. I don't know as to 
 that; I don't remember that. 
 
 Q. Do you suppose that that idea would b& held by many of the members of the 
 union? — A. No, if I wish to express an opinion I certainly would say it is my opinion 
 that so far as party politics are concerned, everything should be kept out; that is out- 
 side of the union. 
 
 Q. But, I want to know whether you think there would bo many of the men who 
 would have this opinion? — A. I think the general opinion would be to keep out of party 
 
 RICHARD BOOTH— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
320 MiNVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 politics, excepting things that might afiect them, for instance, things introduced in 
 the local house. 
 
 Q. You know the Western Federation have politics in view in the Western States; 
 that they wish to organize the men into unions, and then organize the unions into 
 voters? — A. I suppose that would be natural for them to do. 
 
 Q. Do all labour unions have that? — A. I suppose all labour unions would like 
 to use their votes for the general welfare. 
 
 Q. I understand this to be something different altogether. I understand this to 
 be, first organize a union of workingmen, and as soon as the union of workingmen is 
 established, to make them a union of voters, for the purpose of shaping a certain am- 
 ount of legislation in the country, and that legislation to be of socialistic tendeiicies. 
 Do you know whether that is the scheme ? — A. I could not say that I am acquainted 
 with what they would do. 
 
 Q. That is the trouble, Mr. Booth, that the men joined the organization without 
 knowing its real objects and aims. They look on it as an organization to better them- 
 selves in regard to employment ( — A. I believe that is the idea that some of us have. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it is worth while for the heads of the union to look into the 
 objects of this Federation ? — A. I may tell you personally so far as I am concerned, 
 that I am opposed to the Federation, and always was. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson: 
 
 Q. Before deciding to be affiliated with the Western Federation you appointed a 
 committee to examine the constitution and by-laws of different labour organizations 
 of international character? — A. Yes, I think there was a committee appointed. 
 
 Q. For examining into the by-laws and constitution of the American Federation 
 of Labour, the Mine Workers, and so on ? — A. I may say I was not at the meeting 
 when that came up, but I understand that to be so. 
 
 Q. Of whom did that committee consist? — A. I was not there. 
 
 Q. They were not necessarily holding a socialist view ? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Anyway, they reported unanimously in favour of the Western Federation of 
 Miners? — A. I believe so. 
 
 Q. And the minds of the organization, or the members, would be influenced to 
 some extent by the report of the committee ? — A. Generally it is so. 
 
 Q. Are you able to say of your own knowledge that the views of the Western 
 Federation arc of a socialistic character ? — A. You mean the executive, or the whole — 
 
 Q. The whole organization? — A. I am not sufficiently conversant with the whole 
 organization to know. ' 
 
 Q. Other than those expressed in the constitution — you would not look for any- 
 thing beyond the constitution ? — A. I would expect them to live up to the constitution, 
 and not go beyond it. 
 
 Q. And unless you found socialist doctrines expressed in the constitution, you 
 would not expect that the organization held any ideas of that kind, unless in the con- ' 
 stitution? — A. As far as individuals are concerned I would. 
 
 Q. Of course they might hold any doctrines they pleased. For instance, a member 
 of the Property Owner's Association might be a socialist and hold the views of Henry 
 George? — A. Oh. ycp. 
 
 Q. And you know there are property owners' associations existing? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So that there would seem to be no reason why labour organization should not 
 exist for the same purpose? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. You say you were opposed to the Western Federation of Miners ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. Did you join under a sense of compulsion? — A. No; I generally like to fall in 
 line with the majority. 
 
 RICHARD BOOTH— Nanaimo, May 21, 
 
ON INDVSTIUAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 321 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You felt bound by the action of the majority? — A. Oh, no; I felt we had to 
 have a union of some kind, either in it, or aa we have in the past. 
 
 Q. You were quite satisfied with the old union ? — A. Yes, only it was not quite 
 large enough, scarcely. 
 
 Q. It was sufficient to cope with any difficulties that had arisen? — A. Yes, of 
 course; but there were other reasons why. Lots of times we have been put to disad- 
 vantage from surrounding conditions. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwcll: 
 
 Q. That is because the Dunsmuir men were not organized ? — A. Yes, because they 
 were not organized out there. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. How are you affected by that? — A. Years ago, we were working with a com- 
 pany here who would not employ Chinamen in the faces, because the men objected. 
 We preferred to work, if only for $2.50 a day, rather than take on Chinamen, even if 
 we could have made $4 a day. The other company was working with Chinamen, and 
 it placed this company at a serious disadvantage. 
 
 Q. Why did the men drop the Knights of Labour? — A. The membership fell off 
 and gradually went down. The comrnunity was small. 
 
 Q. Why did they select the Knights of Labour instead of the Federation of 
 Labour ? — A. We had the Knights of Labour and this union running at the same time. 
 
 Q. The old union was affiliated with the Knights of Labour? — A. No, they were 
 intending to organize — ^no more than this, that those who belonged to the EJiights of 
 Labour were allowed to come to our meetings. We thought they had a right to have 
 some share. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Why did they take up the Western Federation, instead of an organization such 
 as the Knights of Labour ? — A. I could not tell you that. 
 
 Q. You have no suggestion to make, outside of what has already been stated, that 
 is to say, that a large body of the men were holding socialistic views and wanted to 
 join on that account ? — A. I believe some preferred it on that account. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. Is there any very strong feeling against the Federation in the union ? — A. I 
 believe there is ; I could not say how strong. 
 
 Q. No men left Nanaimo because of the fact? — A. No, sir; I don't think so. 
 
 Q. What is the objection urged against joining? — A. I believe some think it is 
 apt to create more trouble than what we had in our own union. They think there will 
 be a bigger power and more friction. 
 
 Q. That would not be considered a good objection to joining them — the fact that 
 they would get more power? — A. Well, of course, the more power the better, provided 
 it is properly controlled. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 Q. You mean, more power to stir up trouble ? — A. N6, more financial power. 
 There was a change of companies, and we don't know what conditions may be after the 
 old company ceased, and we thought better to have more strength hehind them, in case 
 the new conditions created trouble. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. Was the change of ownership anticipated at the time you went into the Federa- 
 tion? ^. I think so — about the same time, I believe. So far as the Federation was 
 
 EICHARD BOOTH— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
 36a— 21 
 
322 miNUTES OF EVIDENOS OF ROYAL COMMISSION ' 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 concemx;(l, it was a thing which iiad been- talked of for years^bining some Other 
 organization, I know, had always been voted down and put off. 
 
 Q. Did your local union evei'-try to induce Ladysmith union to organize ? — A. I 
 don't remember anything like that. There was a movement that the men push their 
 own cause to affiliate with Nanaimo, and Dunsmuir shut down South Wellington. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Thst agitation to organize the Dunsmuir men in 1890 started here in Nanaimo? 
 — A. No, sir. - 
 
 Q. Was there not a man named Keith ? — A. That is thirteen years ago you 
 
 refer to. There was a union, I believe, at that time. 
 
 Q. There was an agitation for a union in South Wellington, and I always under- 
 stood that agitation started in Nanaimo? — A. There was a number belonging to the 
 Knights of Labour, although it was unknown to the company. 
 
 Q. And these men, together with some men here, started an agitation in Welling- 
 ton to have a union established there? — A. I am not aware of it. 
 
 Q. Were you here at the time ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. It Was common report at the time that that was the fact — you don't know it? 
 — A. I think, if there was any agitation, it would be from the men at Wellington. 
 
 Q. Tully, Boyce and Keith belonged to Nanaimo ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. They were the men at the head of the agitation, were they not ? — A. Yes, but 
 1 understand they were asked to go out. . I don't think the men would have gone out 
 ijnless they were asked. 
 
 Q. Don't you thinlc the men had a good deal to do with getting the invitation ? — 
 A. No, I don't think so ; I was at the meetings and in close touch with the organiza- 
 tion, and took as prominent a part as any man in the union. 
 
 By His Lord 
 
 Q. I would like to hear what reason there was for so many objecting to join the 
 Federation ? — A. One of my reasons was that we ought to have a national organiza- 
 tion through Canada — coal miners and quartz miners — I would not object to them, 
 nnd then if they felt like having an international, all right. There would not be the 
 same objection raised by governments and corporations about foreigners coming in to 
 stir up agitation, although foreign agitation is overdrawn to a very large extent. 
 
 Q. That means that some of the men object to surrendering their freedom to out- 
 siders ? — A. I think a good many men would like a national organization. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. In other words your idea would be a national organization and a possible alli- 
 ance with your friends on the other side ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Just the same as two states ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You have been here a long time, Mr. Booth ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And it has not occurred to you that the personality of the management — an 
 employer who has the welfare of his workmen at heart has a large influence in the 
 prevention of labour disputes ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. That is, if everybody else in the country had shown the same disposition that 
 Mr. Eobins has shown, there would not have been any trouble ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Bu Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Always supposing they had the same sensible men to work under them ? — A. 
 I think a bad employer makes bad workmen. There is a feeling deep down in work- 
 ingmen, which will respond to a keen touch cf consideration and good feeling. 
 
 Q. But there must be good sense also among the men who are employed — A. 
 Yes, certainly ; it depends largely on that. 
 
 RICHARD BOOTH— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH OOLUMBIA 323 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 " Q. It is not all on one side ? — A. It seems strange that it should be all on one 
 side. I believe there is as good a class of men at Extension as at Nanaimo. 
 i Q. In the majority ? — A. Yes, I believe the majority. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Do you know of any experience in which an outsider came in and endeavoured 
 t(^ induce the men to strike, or raise any difficulties ? — A. I cannot call any to mind. 
 
 Q; Do you remember any outsider speaking iii your unioh meetings. Mvocating 
 such a course ? — A. No, I don't remember anything of that kind. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 : Q. I suppose, as a rule, these outsiders come in only when invited ? — -A. They 
 fannot come in until permitted by the union themselves, and are not allowed to speak 
 iinless permitted by the local. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us whether there have been any communications between this 
 body and the U.B.R.E. relative to sympathetic strike ? — A. I don't know of any. 
 
 Q. Has the question of the U.B.E.E. been brought up at union meetings ? — A. 
 Not when I was there. I have been to nearly all the meetings and no reference was 
 made. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear this : That Mr. Estes threatened the Board of Trade in 
 Vancouver that he would call out the Western Federation, if the C.P.Il did not give 
 in, and shut every coal mine on Vancouver Island ? — A. I only saw the newspaper 
 report. 
 
 Q. That never came to your notice in any authentic way ? — A. No 
 
 Q. Do you thinli he could do that ? He said he had a bunch of telegrams about 
 it — some of them from the Western Federation of Miners agreeing to go out, and 
 that he would close every coal mine on Vancouver Island. Do you think he could do 
 it ? — A. I question whether he could. 
 
 Q. Suppose, in response to a telegram from Estes, the executive at Denver should 
 ask this union to strike in sympathy with the U.B.E.E., what position would you be in ? 
 Would you think it safe, in the interests of your union, to disregard that request ? — 
 A. I could only answer for myself. 
 
 Q. Individually I quite believe you would oppose the strike ? — A. I don't know 
 about opposing it ; it all depends. 
 
 Q. I don't want to get your individual opinion, but the effect on the union. 
 Here is Estes carrying on a fight against the C.P.R. In order to stop their coal he 
 wants to call out the coal miners on Vancouver Island. He makes a request of the 
 executive, and they ask the Nanaimo union to strike in sympathy with the Estes 
 strike. What would be the decision of the union here? Would they do it? — A. I 
 believe as far as Nanaimo is concerned that the majority would oppose it. 
 
 Q. We will suppose that the executive at Denver requested it. Do you think that 
 the union could refuse, assuming that the executive had promised financial support? — 
 A. As far as expecting to remain in the Federation, I don't know ; they might want 
 to throw us out. 
 
 0. Say that Estos requests the cxocutivo and the executive requests you to strike, 
 and offer you financial aid if you do, don't you think the Nanaimo union would strike? 
 A. It would all depend on the justice of the case of the C.P.E. 
 
 Q. Would they not take the opinion of the executive at, Denver on that point?— 
 A. Not necessarily. 
 
 Q. Don't you think they would act on the assumption that the executive had pro- 
 perly decided that question? Don't you thinlc they would go out? — A. I think wo 
 would discuss that question purely on its merits. 
 
 RICHARD BOOTH— Nanaimo. May 2t. 
 
 36(1— 21J 
 
324 MINUTES OF ETIDEXCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3A EDWARD Vli., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. But the difficulty is you would only hear one side of the case; you would only 
 hear the grievance of the men?— A. Before we could go out there would be the thirty 
 days' notice. I would feel that contract as binding as the oath I have taken this morn- 
 ing, and 1 believe the majority of the men would regard it in that sense too. 
 
 Q. Assuming that the Western Federation would not want you to disregard that 
 agreement, but would call you out on strike and promise financial support, is it not 
 likely that they would call you out ? — A. I think the course would be to try and find 
 out all information on the C.P.E. side. We would have to use all means possible to 
 get it. 
 
 Q. But that is always the difficulty about these sympathetic strikes— you only hear 
 one side of the case? — A. We generally have those in our union prepared to discuss 
 both sides. 
 
 Q. How would you get information as to the C.P.E.'s side? — A. The only way 
 would be to appoint a committee to look into the matter, and we would have to decida 
 on the merits after. 
 
 Q. And you consider it a right thing to encourage a sympathetic strike under some 
 circumstances ? — A. I think that should be used with a great deal of discretion. There 
 might be some cases where a great deal of power was used, and I think it should be used 
 with a great deal of caution. I would justify it under some circumstances, but there 
 would be very few. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson: 
 
 Q. You cannot point to anything under the constitution or by-laws of the West- 
 em Federation which justifies the supposition that the central authority has any 
 power in dealing with the strike, other than in an affirmative way? — A. No, I think 
 the constitution is all right. 
 
 Q. In other words, what the constitiition does is this, the local union decides itself 
 whether a strike shall be ordered, and the power of the central authority is to, ap- 
 prove or disapprove of the conclusion which the local union has arrived at? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Mr. Baker did not say that. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — That was not the supposition that was involved by the question. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Estes said that request had been approved by the executive, and 
 he had a telegram to prove that. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. The gist of it would be this : Assuming that the central authority had ap- 
 proved of Mr. Estes' telegram, and you were willing to have a sympathetic strike, and 
 you received any instructions or request to that effect, would you go out? — A. No, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Suppose the Western Fuel Company had a contract with the C.P.R. to supply 
 coal for a certain length of time; would you consider you had a right to force the 
 Western Fuel Company to break its contract by way of sympathetic strike? — A. It all 
 depends on the provocation. It is difficult to justify a sympathetic strike sometimes. 
 
 Q. Then the union would take on itself to judge whether it had the power to de- 
 cide whether the strike should be carried out? — A. That seems to me 
 
 Q. Why should you punish the Western Fuel Company, or any employer with 
 whom you had no difficulty, in order to punish the C.P.R. ? — A. There might be a 
 difficulty on the other side; the C.P.R. might turn around. 
 
 Q. But in this case you would have no difficulty with your employers, and yet 
 you take on yourselves to say whether or not your employers shall be allowed to carry 
 out their contracts? — A. Well, of course, I think they would use every power to get 
 over it. 
 RICHARD BOOTH— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 325 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. I understand, of course, that you and every honourable man would not do 
 that ; but it means, in some cases, that you can break contracts as between your em- 
 ployer and other people? — A. Well, by giving thirty days' notice we keep to our 
 contract. 
 
 Q. But don't you see the position — j'ou force your employers to break their con- 
 tracts with other people ? — A. Yes, I see the point all right. 
 
 Q. I would like to know the limits of their right to do that? — A. I admit that is 
 a difficult point. 
 
 Q. You understand that if the Western Fuel Company break their contract with 
 the C.P.E., they are liable for heavy damages. Why should you punish them in this 
 way? — A. I think the men should go as far as possible to prevent that. 
 
 Bij Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. I understood Mr. Baker to say that the AV^estern Federation would never ask 
 these men to enter into a sympathetic strike, except in cases where employers were 
 going out of their way to break any strike ; that they would never ask the men to 
 violate an agreement, but that they might ask the lodge to come out to prevent their 
 employers from taking contracts of another employer. For instance, if the Dunsmuir 
 Company had a contract with the C.P.R., and the C.P.R. men were on strike, if the 
 Western Fuel Company took over the Dunsmuir contracts, that then it might be a 
 case in which the local union would be called out. I think we should have a clear un- 
 derstanding on that. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. That leaves the Western Federation as judge of its own case ; they assume to , 
 decide whether the Dunsmuir people are doing these things ? — A. I think that would , 
 be governed largely by the locals in many cases. 
 
 Q. What the public is interested in knowing is, what are the limits of sympathetic 
 strikes; because, if there are such things as sympathetic strikes to be permitted by the 
 law of the country, it seems to me no man is safe in his contracts. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson: 
 Q. Have you a copy of the by-laws of your local union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 (Put in as Exhibit V.) 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. It was given in evidence by a witness, that their union would consider their 
 obligation to the international union as paramount to their obligation to their em- 
 ployer ; that is to say, when the union had entered into a contract with their employers, 
 and if the international executive thought it necessary to break that contract, the 
 local union would do it? Does that sentiment prevail in the local union here? — A. I 
 don't think so; I think the majority of the men would consider the agreement aa 
 signed by the company. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Do you think there are any circumstances under which a contract signed by 
 the union with the companay could be broken by the intervention of the headquarters 
 at Denver ? — A. I would not think so ; I think such a thing as that would be the break- 
 ing up of the union. 
 
 Witness. — I wish to correct a statement I made this morning with regard to the 
 votes taken. I said two votes were both taken in connection with the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners. I found out afterwards that one was talcen in reference to the Trades 
 and Labour Congress — the first one, in which there was such a narrow majority-^the 
 one at the pit-head. This morning, I said it had reference to the Western Federation 
 of Miners. That was incorrect ; I just wish to explain that. 
 
 RICHARD BOOTH— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
326 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. Was that vote accepted as final? — A. No, sir; they took another vote. Then 
 the question of the Federation came after that. 
 
 Nanaimo, May 21, 1903 
 Thomas J. Shenton, sworn. 
 
 By Mr, Wilson: 
 
 Q. You are the secretary, I believe, of the local union? — A. Yes. 
 Q. How long have you been connected with the local union? — A. I have been 
 connected with it some four or five years. I came to Nanaimo in 1893 first. 1 was 
 there a period of some three years, I think. Then there was an interval. Since that 
 I have been connected with it continuously for about four years. 
 
 Q. And as a result of your acquaintance with organized labour and trade unions, 
 do you conceive it beneficial to both employers and employees ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Will you kindly tell the Commissioners in what way you conceive it to be 
 beneficial ? — A. To state briefly, it is beneficial to the employers and employees from 
 the fact that matters can be arranged among the men as a body; the men can deal 
 with the company as a body. There would be no individuals or collection of persons 
 in the minority who could raise any trouble that would be unfavourable to the com- 
 pany in any regard. 
 
 Q. In other words, the company are dealing with an organized body, having its 
 committee elected from the members, and the others are bound by that authority? — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you remember when the local organization became a branch of the West- 
 ern' Federation of Miners ? — A. In December of last year, December 20, I think. 
 
 Q. Antecedent to that had there been any, and if so, how much discussion on the 
 subject? — A. For years, two years, I should say — the question of affiliation with some 
 large international body. 
 
 Q. And is it proper to ask you to tell the Commissioners the reasons the miners 
 had for desiring affiliation with a large organization ? — A. Yes: the reason was, in the 
 first place, as a local union we considered ourselves somewhat a small power, in deal- 
 ing with any other company than the company we have been dealing with up to ja 
 recent date. Our reason in this connection, too — why we affiliated witli an inter- 
 national body was simply from the fact that we were driven to that position in th<i 
 absence of there being any national body. 
 
 Q. There is in Canada, I believe, no national organization, for the purpose of 
 material support and strength, with which you could affiliate ? — A. We are not aware 
 of any national organization. 
 
 Q. Was the local union here ever affiliated v/ith the Trades and Labour Confess 
 of Canada ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What were the reasons for disassociating themselves from that body?— A. 
 Simply to give you an opinion, as I understand it, and as the men understand it, it 
 is not a pure labour organization. It was looked upon as being a political rather 
 than a labour organization. 
 
 Q. And the conclusion you arrived at, I suppose, was that small unions, like small 
 
 states, are liable to attack, and ultimately become absorbed by others? A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In other words, they have to join other bodies for mutual comfort and pro- 
 tection? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And before joining the Western Federation of Miners, did you discuss the 
 relative psopriety of joining other organizations, as the American Federation of 
 Labour and the United Mine Workers and others?— A. Yes, that was well threshed out. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSmiAL DISPUTES IN BltltlSB COLUMBIA 327 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. There was, I think, a committee appointed to inquire into the relative merits 
 of these international organizations ?-^A. Yes; I was a member of the committee. 
 
 Q. That committee reported unanimously in favour of the Western Federation 
 of Miners? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Who were the other members of the committee? — A. I am almost at a losa( 
 to call to merporj,' the namcfs; we have so many committees. 
 
 Q. How many were on it ? — A. About seven of us. 
 
 Q. How long were you inquiring into the matter ? — A. It covered a period of 
 time, say about — that is definitely, when we had proposed to affiliate with somebody — 
 we passed a resolution favoiiring affiliation 
 
 Q. When was that passed? — A. I think that was passed in the latter part of 
 November, or the beginning of December, 1902. 
 
 Q. It was on December 20, 1902 ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You passed a resolution in favour of affiliation, leaving the name of the or- 
 ganization blank? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And then there was a committee struck to inquire into the relative merits of 
 the organization it would be suitable to join? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How long did that committee act in that capacity? — A. About three weeks or 
 a month, to look into the various constitutions, the American Federation of Labour, 
 the United Mine Workers of America^ and the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 By Mr. Wihon: 
 
 Q. You cannot remember the names of the members of the committee? Can you 
 remember any of them? — A. I think our president was one, Mr. ISTeave. 
 
 Q. Mr. Ealph Smith? — A. No, I think not; I will have to look the matter up — 
 I just forget. 
 
 Q. You would have to refer to the books? — A. Yes; I can produce that evidence 
 afterwards, if necessary. 
 
 Q. You had before you the constitution and by-laws and methods of management 
 of the different organizations? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you inquired into them ? — A. Yes, we read them carefully, and we arrived 
 at a decision in favour of the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. That conclusion was arrived at from a perusal and study of their methods of 
 management? — A. Yes, that is so. 
 
 Q. Were you influenced at all in your decision to join the Western Federation by 
 reason of its freedom in admitting socialists within its ranks ? — A. Well, no. If my 
 memory serves me right, while there may have been one or two of our socialist bre- 
 thren who were members of our local union on the committee, they were, I think, in 
 the minority. We were in no way, so far as I know, decided by the views oT these 
 members who were socialists, to affiliate with this body at all. 
 
 Q. Do you know the attitude the Western Federation assumes towards socialists? 
 — A. There is a recommendation passed by the executive board of the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners, that class-conscious socialistic lines in a political sense be observed, and 
 I may state now that previous to our affiliation with that body, previous to the time 
 also that the thing had been under way for some time to join this body, previous to this 
 time I had met Mr. Baker. He accidentally dropped into town — I don't know what his 
 errand was — and I approached him. In view of the fact that we were about to affiliate 
 with some body — not that we thought of affiliating with this any more than any other 
 liody — and I asked him whether it would involve that we should be under obligation, 
 as a local order, to socialism in any regard, and he said no. And that is the under- 
 standing we had. 
 
 Q. As I understand it, while not propagating socialism, it supports it ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Does it go further, and recommend socialistic views? — A. Yes — that is, the 
 executive. 
 
 ^THOMAS J. SHBNTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
328 illNUTES OF ETIDEXCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Does the executive, when recommending this particular principle — is it as the 
 executive of the organization, or simply as individual expressions of opinion on the 
 part of the members? — A. Well, it veas the expression of the executive board in their 
 official capacity. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. You said you were driven into an international organization because there was 
 no national one. Do I infer that, had there been a national one, that that would have 
 been your preference? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. }Yilson : 
 
 Q. To follow out the line of that suggestion — your preference would be a national 
 organization, and then a possible alliance with other bodies ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So securing to yourselves the complete control of your own internal arrange- 
 ments? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. What decided you in your choice of the Western Federation? — A. As stated 
 by previous witnesses this morning, one vital matter would be that it was the most 
 convenient body — the body that stood in near connection with us. That was one 
 reason. 
 
 Q. Near geographically? — A. Yes. Well, no, the branches of its body, anyhow^ — 
 we have 24 unions in this province. That is one reason that influenced us. 
 
 Q. At that time there were no coal mines in it? — A. Yes, I think the Fernie coal 
 mines were. Anol^er reason was, we thought it was a body that was not so cosmopoli- 
 tan as, for instance, the American Federation of Labour, which takes in all trades and 
 branches of trade and workmen. 
 
 Q. Of course, your relations would not be the same ? — A- No. 
 
 Q. You would be part and parcel of the Western Federation, and only an affili- 
 ated body with the American Federation of Labour? — A. I don't iust understand. 
 
 Q. I understand the American Federation of Labour includes various crafts — a 
 sort of parliament of unions. Now, the Western Federation of Miners is a single 
 organization, having locals over which it has authority. The American Federation of 
 Labour is the same sort of thing as the American Labour Union, with which you are 
 now affiliated; the Western Federation is an affiliated body with that union. I was, 
 wanting to know what your preference would be for it, above, say, the United Mine 
 Workers? — A. There was really — I don't think there was any particular preference, 
 only the thing took that form — that geographically they were in their branches nearer 
 to us. They were not so cosmopolitan as the American Federation of Labour, and we 
 put it down that we were a body of miners, but instead of being quartz miners as coal 
 miners. We regard the quartz miner as our brother, the same as the coal miner. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Have you acquired sufficient familiarity with the methods in which the West- 
 ern Federation transacts its business to tell us the exact amount of influence that it 
 exercises over the local organizations ? For example, take the matter of sympathetic 
 strike; does it exercise any control over you in that respect ? — A. Well, that exercise 
 of control is dependent upon the vote of the local unipn. 
 
 Q. In other words, the local union decides whether or not a strilte shall exist ? 
 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And all the central authority can do is to approve or disapprove of the action 
 of the local union ? — A. Constitutionally so. 
 
 Q. In other words, the central authority has no power to direct you to go out on 
 sympathetic strike ? Suppose the central authority were in sympathy with the 
 U.B.K.E. the central authority of the Western Federation of Miners has no jurisdiction 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON lyDUSTBIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 329 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 to order a local out on strike, lias it ? — A. Well, it is rather a delicate point. It is an 
 open question as to whether they could do that. We have as much right to vote un- 
 favourably against them in a ease of that kind as they have to try and put us into the 
 position. And if it were decided to do anything of that nature — it would have to 
 take into consideration all contracts and all agreements recognized by the local lodge 
 in connection with employment which would be involved on our part to them — any 
 connection with which our men were concerned, and also any contracts the company 
 might have. 
 
 Q. In other words, you would not say the direction of the Western Federation — 
 the central authority — woiild justify you in breaking an agreement. For example, 
 there is an agreement with the Western Fuel Company. Do you, or do you not say 
 that the central authority would justify, you in breaking that agreement ? Which 
 would you regard as the more binding on you ? — A. They are involved in the respon- 
 sibility of considering this the same as we are. 
 
 Q. Assuming a request from the Western Federation for you to come out on 
 sympathetic strike, would that necessarily involve breaking your agreement with the 
 
 Western Fuel Company ? — A. The possibility is nothing would be done without thirty 
 days' notice. 
 
 Q. In other words, would you not regard that thirty days' notice as an essential 
 part of the agreement with the Western Fuel Company ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. Which would you regard as the more binding, the contract you had made, 
 
 calling for thirty days' notice should be given, or the central authority ? — A. We would 
 
 regard the contract with the company. 
 
 Q. In other words, you say that the central authority would be bound to respect 
 
 the contract of the Western Fuel Company with the local union ? — A. In connection 
 
 with the small grievance we had of recent date, our position in connection with any 
 
 settlement of these grievances were through Mr. Baker and endorsed and approved by 
 
 him as representing the Federation. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. And if they had not been ? — A. In the absence of their not requiring these 
 rules to be inspected before they were approved we took it for granted that their 
 silence meant consent. 
 
 Q. Supposing there was no provision for notice — supposing it was a time contract 
 of a year — would the same position be correct ? — A. Yes, or three years. We would 
 keep to our agreement in spite of the request of the central authority. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Suppose the central authority at Denver requests you to come out in sympa- 
 thetic strike in order to assist the U.B.E.E. The Western Fuel Company have a three 
 years' contract with the C. P. R. The effect of your going out on sympathetic strike 
 is to compel the Western Fuel Company to break its contract ? — A. As I have said 
 previously, that would be involved in the agreement covering botli sides. In any 
 arrangement of that kind we would feel bound to live up to any such contract. 
 
 Q. Then I gather that if the Western Fuel Company had an arrangement with 
 you not to go out on strike for three years, you would respect that ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. And if there was any request you would not feel bound at all to prevent the 
 Western Fuel Company fulfilling that contract ? — A. So long as that is possible, that 
 seems to me — that' all these matters are as agreed on both sides. In a case of that 
 kind, the company would have itself thoroughly protected, as in any other matter, 
 with the union, that they would not strike for that period on account of these strikes. 
 
 Q. Then it would be possible for the Western Fuel Company to get a contract 
 from you that would free them from any -danger of a sympathetic strike for iiiroe 
 years if they wished to do so ?— A. I believe so. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanalmo, May 21. 
 
330 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF R07AL COMSISSIOV 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Assuming, Mr. Shenton, that the Western Fuel Oonipany had a contract with 
 the O.P.R. for supplying coal for three years. Knowing that they were about to enter 
 into such an agreement as that they made a contract with your union for three years. 
 Suppose, these conditions existing, you were called out, or asked to come out in ,sym- 
 pathetic strike by your central authority, which would you respect — your contract with 
 the Western Fuel Company, or the request of the central authority of the Western 
 Federation of Miners ? — A. We would have to respect our contract with the company 
 first. 
 
 Q. If the majority of the iinion were of the opposite view, what would happen 
 then ?^A. I think that rarely occurs, and I think, at the same time it is hardly 
 possible, because that is thoroughly understood by the men when we arrange these 
 matters — that no breach can be made — that we must be liable right through and live 
 up to the contracts. 
 
 Q. That is the feeling generally among the men ? That when they enter into a 
 contract they propose to respect it ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Do you think the executive would inquire about such a contract before making 
 the request ? — A. The possibility is they would. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Do you know Mr. Estes ? — A. Na 
 
 Q. Have you had any correspondence with him ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. It is stated he said to the Board of Trade in Vancouver that he had communi- 
 cated with the executive of the Western Federation at Denver, and that they had en- 
 dorsed his request, and that if the strike were persisted in he would call out all the coal 
 liiiners on Vancouver Island. Could he do that ? — A. That would be a questionable 
 position. 
 
 Q. Mr. Estes is a prominent man in labour circles ? — A. I don't know the gentle- 
 man. 
 
 Q. He is president of the U.B.E.E.. ? — A. I don't know the gentleman ; I heard 
 from report that he is. 
 
 Q. You know by report that he is prominent in labour circles ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. From reports you know he is prominent, then ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you suppose he is familiar with the methods of the Western Federation of 
 Miners ? — A. I would take it for granted 
 
 Q. Don't you think he knows what he is talking about when he makes a statement 
 of that kind in Vancouver ? — A. I should say so. 
 
 Q. He produced a telegram which he said he had from Denver that if that strike 
 was persisted in he would call you all out. Do you think he could do that ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You think he was stating what was not true when he stated that the executive 
 at Denver had endorsed his application ? — A. No, if the Western Federation had as an 
 executive board representing the whole body approved of that, then it has to be sub- 
 mitted to the local union, and I am pretty sure 
 
 Q. Then it is possible that on Mr. Estes' application a request could be made by 
 the executive from Denver that this union should go out on strike in sympathy with 
 the U.B.E.E. — that is possible ? — A. It could make the request^I don't know- 
 
 Q. Mr. Estes says it is possible, and that he had a telegram to show it. Is he 
 right or wrong ? — A. If he is right, then we don't know it. It is not in the constitu- 
 tion. 
 
 Q. Then if Mr. Estes is right, it must be that, while the constitution makes a gen- 
 eral statement, the executive can interpret it!, in particular instances, the woy he men- 
 tions ? — A. It might be that. 
 
 Q. What do you think about it ? — A. Well, I simply think little about it. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 331 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You don't believe Mr. Estes' statement then ?— A. Well, I would not like to 
 discredit the statement exactly of Mr. Estes, but we have not been made responsible 
 for that statement through the Federation. 
 
 Q. That is not the point. I am simply asking you if, under the constitution, and in 
 accordance with the manner of its interpretation, at Mr. Estes' request, could the execu- 
 tive make that callon you ? — A. Well, there is nothing in the constitution saying 
 so. ■ 
 
 Q. Then you don't know whether it could or not ? — A. No, I am not just exactly 
 Etfware. There is nothing to inform me in the constitution that he could do that. 
 
 Q. Well, is there any reason at all why Mr. Estes would not know better than you 
 what the Western Federation could and would do ? — A. Well, Mr. Estes may know- 
 a good deal. I don't know what he knows about the Western Federation. 
 
 Q. It is not revealing a statement of things which is a surprise to you ? — A. Well, 
 I feel like this regarding that matter. Supposing it may be possible— we are not sure 
 what Mr. Estes says is correct — well, in the absence of anything to the contrary that it 
 is correct we would not like to say it is not, but so far as I know we are not aware of 
 the fact that he could do that, and if a request of the executive board of the Western 
 Federation of Miners was made, it Would have to be endorsed or rejected in accordance 
 with the local union's vote. 
 
 Q. Then supposing that state of things to be true — the executive could not call 
 you out constitutionally unless you voted to go out ? — A. No, I think not. 
 
 Q. I want to ask you as a matter of opitiion what position you thinli your local 
 lodge would be in, if, at the request of Mr. Estes, the executive made that call on you, 
 and said they would support you if you came out ? What would be the moral effect, 
 if you say they cannot legally bring you out ? Assuming they cannot legally call you 
 out, what would be the moral effect on your body if a request like that came from Den- 
 ver, with an offer to support you if you went out. Don't you think they would go out ? 
 — A. I don't think they would go out. 
 
 Q. Why would they not ? Tell me why the local lodge would disregard what is 
 practically a command from the executive ? What guarantee is there that the local 
 lodge would disregard that request ? — A. We have no information that they have that 
 power. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The assumption is that they cannot legally call you out — in fact, the constitu- 
 tion provides they cannot — ^but suppose the executive represented to you that there 
 is a possibility of the U.B.E.E. succeeding in their contest with the C.P.K. if you 
 come out, anl they offer you financial support, the question is, would you come out ? 
 — A. I don't think we would. 
 
 Btj Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. What guarantee is there that you would not ? You would expect to lose the 
 good-will of th^ executive if you did not ?— A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. They would not make a demand on you that they would not think in their int^- 
 ests ? — A. I don't think they would. 
 
 Q. Something was to be gained by doing so ; the general interests of the order were 
 to be advanced— that is right ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. We will say you disregarded it. You would expect to put yourself in opposi- 
 tion to the central governing body of the Western Federation of Miners ?— A. By 
 refusing ? Certainly. 
 
 Q. And the result is you would lose the good-will of the executive. You would 
 expect that ?— A. If the matter interfered with any local arrangement in any way 
 
 Q. Never mind that. You would expect tb lose the good-will of the execiitive if 
 you refused to accede to their request ?— A. We might. That has not been proved. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
332 MINUTES OF e: IDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Would you not, as a reasonable man, expect to lose their good-will ? — ^A. No, 
 not if wc could prove that their request was not reasonable. 
 
 Q. That means if you could get them to withdraw their request. That is not the 
 point. They make a request; they persist in it; and you refuse to accede to it. You 
 expect to lose their good-will ? — A. We might. 
 
 Q. Then when you get into trouble, and wanted help from the executive, do you 
 think you woiild get it in that state of affairs ? — A. Well, it would be a matter whether 
 our position was reasonable or not. If they did not directly tell us and they were not 
 reasonable, then I consider we could afford to lose their support. 
 
 Q. For purposes of policy they consider that you should 'be out on strike; they 
 make a request and you disregard it. I am putting a supposititious case. You dis- 
 regard that request. Then if this union got into trouble and wanted the executive to 
 help them, do you think they would ? You put yourself against the policy of the con- 
 cern, as formulated by their executive board; you have opposed this lodge against the 
 whole policy of the Western Federation of Miners. Having done that, do you suppose 
 tlicy would help you when in trouble ? — A. I don't know that we are made responsible 
 for opposing the policy. 
 
 Q. That is the actual result in the case I put, that this local lodge has opposed 
 itself to the considered policy of the central body ? — A. If that is the policy 
 
 Q. That is not the point. I am putting a case to you — a case Mr. Estes said was 
 going to happen — where you would either have to act with the central authority or put 
 yourself in opposition. I am asking you whether you would expect the central body 
 to assist you when you were in difficulty. You would not, would you ? Won't you 
 say that ? — A. I could not expect the central body 
 
 Q. You could not expect them to help you in your trouble if you set yourself up 
 against them ? — A. Well, no, I expect we could not. 
 
 Q. Don't you think that line of argument would drive your lodge out on strike 
 every time the central executive refused it ? We will suppose a case — ^that Mr. 
 Estes was not dealing with the matter — that the request had come to you from the 
 executive, don't you thinls the line of argument I have proposed to you would be suffi- 
 cient to send this union out on strike is sympathy with the U.B.R.E. ? — ^A. Well, if 
 that had transpired, possibly it might be so. 
 
 Q. It is a state of things that is possible — you stated that thing might be done ? 
 — A. That the request might be made — not done. 
 
 Q. You get a request from the executive — would not that policy almost certainly 
 put your men out on strike ? — A. It is like I have repeated. It would involve all the 
 necessary consideration that could be given by the Western Federation to our body. 
 In the second instance, it would involve our vote. 
 
 Q. Well, under the constitution they cannot order you out, but the fact is just 
 the same, by reason of the moral force they can bring to bear on you ? — A. I don't 
 think so. 
 
 Q. Here is Mr. Estes says, I send to Denver and I get the consent of the executive, 
 and I am going to call out every man on Vancouver Island. He says, I have a tele- 
 gram here. You say it is possible he might have had that answer. That being so, 
 the executive request you to come out. I say that the moral effect of that request is 
 just the same as an order ? — A. I don't see it. 
 
 Q. If you tell me you would not go out, I would like to know how you support 
 your statement. I ask you if you think that this local lodge is going to oppose itself 
 to the executive ? — A. As I have stated, the local lodge would be in a position to take 
 into consideration all the circumstances, and if they were not what they should be, 
 in the opinion of the local lodge, to support the idea of the executive in asking us to 
 come out, the position of the local lodge would be just as strong as possible. 
 
 Q. Don't you see that you don't answer my question ; you get away from the posi- 
 tion. I put you in the position oi the local lodge opposing the will of the central 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21, 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH GOLUMBI4. 333 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 authority at Denver, and I asked you if you thought they would do it ? — A. Well, 
 they would do it under the circumstances I have stated, where it would not mean in 
 any way an infringement of anything that was loyally agreed to by the local lodge 
 affected. 
 
 Q. You think they would not disregard the contract under those circumstances ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That is to say, for the sake of your contract with the Western Fuel^Company 
 you would expose this local lodge to the whole power of the Western Federation of 
 Miners ? — A. Not necessarily so; your case is optional. 
 
 Q. It is clear enough. We assume that in order to get an agreement you must 
 oppose the central authority. You have to put one lodge against the whole executive 
 — ^would you have the courage to do that ? — A. The responsibility rests equally upon 
 the Federation regarding these strikes. 
 
 Q. Yes, but I put the case vs-here the executive has made the request ? — A. How 
 3ould they put the request to a local when they would be violating a contract of the 
 local lodge ? 
 
 Q. You said they would not, but Mr. Estes said they would. Assuming, for the 
 sake of argument, that Mr. Estes is right and that they would — what would you do ? 
 • — A. I have stated, in contracts of that nature, we would have to oppose it. 
 
 Q. And do you think the Western Federation would stand by you ? — A. If they 
 did not we could not help it. The possibility is they might not. 
 
 Q. Now, you said the principal reason that you joined the Western Federation was 
 to get their strength in case of trouble ? — A. Their strength in funds ? 
 
 Q. I suppose you meant strength in funds, you did not say it ? — A. No. We have 
 simply stated ovir reasons for joining the Western Federation of Miners, as we might 
 have joined the other organizations had the vote gone that way — simply for mutual 
 help and moral assistance. Our chief object ki doing so was for mutual and moral 
 assistance, of course involving financial assistance if ever required. It has always been, 
 hoped that it would not be required; we don't want strikes. 
 
 Q. You only wanted the union for the moral effect ? — A. No moral effect on the 
 members ; the moral effect it would have with the employers regarding arrangement of 
 matters in connection with employment. 
 
 Q. That is to say, supposing you wanted a better condition of affairs in your mines 
 jou would have the moral support of the Western Federation ? — ^A. That would have 
 some weight. 
 
 Q. That you would have the weight of their numbers in support of conditions 
 relating to your employment ? — A. That is part of the reason. 
 
 Q. Do you think they would interest themselves in your little local lodge here, 
 when they made a request on you involving the whole policy of the Federation, that 
 they would bother about you very much. We understand that the Western Federation 
 of Miners are organizing themselves into a political body in the United States, for the 
 purpose of carrying out legislation. We will suppose, in connection with the move- 
 ment, that the Federation think it would be wise to have you out, together with all the 
 other men in the Western States, and the executive make a request on you accordingly. 
 This is just putting a case. You refuse — you could legally refuse — the moment that 
 you get into a dispute with your overmen as to places and rates to be paid, do you sup- 
 pose the moral weight of the executive is going to be given to you in your contention, 
 after your action ? — A. It is one thing to ask a question and another to reply. 
 
 Q. You are there to answer questions, and I am here to ask them ? — A. I still 
 maintain, as I havs already repeated, irrespective of what it may mean — that is so, as 
 far as the executive board is concerned — if our position is straight we have the right 
 to protest and protest by refusing — and if that protest comes we were right, we would 
 have a right to their sympathy. On the other hand, like I have said, we could not help 
 
 that. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
334 '' ailNUTES OF EVIDmceVF'WOYAL eOMMWSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VI f;, A. 1904 
 
 Q. At any rate you would lose this moral force, and you wouM not "expect to get 
 any financial support in the same stat6 of affairs ? — A. If they refused one, they would 
 refuse the other. _, 
 
 Q. The result is you have tied yourself up ,to;.a body which, may control you 
 against your will ?— A; Well, I don't know that. Simply from the fact, as I have'said, 
 that it has not been proved 
 
 Q. I am taking the statement of a man as prominent in labour circles as you are, 
 who claims to have the authority of men in Denver. Of course if you tell me Mr. 
 Estes was making a false statement to the Board of Trade in Vancouver, that is a 
 different proposition altogether ? — A. He might be making a bluff; I could not say, 
 positively. 
 
 , - Q. Do you say that he was not telling the truth ? — A. No, I would not say he was 
 not telling the truth. 
 
 Q. He was not very indefinite in his statement that he would call out every coal 
 miner, that the Western Federation were going to do it — that he had a telegram to 
 that effect. Of course if you say it is impossible I suppose the argument will end. 
 Will you say it ? — A. No, I cannot say it. 
 
 Q. Then there is where you are — that the executive might make that request ? — 
 A. We are aware of the fact that they might make the request. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Without a request from another local union ? — A. No, with a request from a 
 local union. Supposing this district was formed into three unions, that we were a 
 district union. In that case they might call upon us. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Supposing the statement made by Mr. Estes was true — that he had that power 
 with the assurance that he would call out the miners on Vancouver Island — would that 
 surprise you ? — A. Yes, it would, to some extent. 
 
 Q. It would present the Western Federation in a light that you did not conceive 
 it possible to be viewed in. Do you think your local is subject to a possible call of that 
 ]\ind ? — A. It is a case that does not affect your wages or your work, simply the general 
 caiise of labour ? — A. I hardly think they would do it, nor I don't think if a request 
 ot that nature was made, it would certainly on our part be opposed. 
 
 Q. Supposing tliere was a proposal to give power to the executive to do that, would 
 you continue in the union ? — A. Well, that is a pretty hard question; that covers a 
 large area. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. It seems to be an important point. Suppose the constitution gave the executive 
 power to suspend the charter of a local union that would not respond to the call for a 
 sympathetic strike. I may say that Mr. Baker assured the Commission that such power 
 lay, aud thaJ it would not be used. It is important to knov/how the power would be 
 by the local union ? — A. I would think it would be viewed in an unfavourable way. I 
 think our men would be against the position talien by the Federation. So far as con- 
 ditions existing with the U.B.xi.E. people are concerned, they would utterly repudiate 
 it, but that they might do in conditions on the Island. As I have always said the 
 Western Federation are responsible for every local contract with this company, and 
 cannot order a strike or ask for assistance without the carrying out of these contractlj. 
 
 Q. I have to say that if I thought the organization could be subject to that power 
 from an external source — that it would be forced to take such action, I think it import- 
 ant that such an organization should be pronounced illegal. The contractor would 
 have no security in his contracts, and would be menaced by a power which could not 
 be controlled or reached. I was under the impression that the Western Federation did 
 not take that position ? 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON mDmriiiAE mspuTEsiif BRiTmn Columbia sjj 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By Mr. Bodiv&ll : 
 
 Q: You know this ^Miners' Magazine ? '—A. A little. 
 Q. What do you think of this :— 
 
 (Quotes). ' Miners' Mdgazine,"May, 1903, p. 49 :— 
 
 ^ 'Don't you know that the next serious strike must be won by a national 
 or international strike to show capitalism and ourselves how omnipottent uni- 
 fied consolidated labour is ? Stop every wheel in America ; silence every tele- 
 graph; stop every train; hold every ship at anchor; close every market; silence 
 every press for ten days ' — — - 
 
 What are you going to do when that demand is made upon you ?— A. I don't know. It ' 
 is a colossal demand. 
 
 Q. Does that represent the idea of the Federation ?— A. I cannot say that it does. 
 
 Q. Are you going to come out when they order this international strike ?— A. 
 Well, we will have to see. It has not come yet. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man named Thomas Brooks, Nanaimo Miners' Union, ISTo. 17Y ? 
 — A. No, I don't know him— not Brooks. 
 
 Q. Then your official organ does not print your names correctly ? — A. Lots of 
 others do not know. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. I suppose they print them correctly in the scab list ? — A. Well, I don't know. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. I want to ask you here if these are the views of any of your members. (Quotes" 
 from ' Miners' Magazine,' May, 1903, p. 45) : — 
 
 ' I have taken upon myseK to forward a report of our doings here, I am 
 pleased to tellyou that this local of the W.F.M. has just drawn up a constitu- 
 tion and by-laws for our government, and they were adopted at our last regu- 
 lar meeting. There is only one thing omitted in the order of business that I 
 am sorry was left out, and that is political discussion. We still have some 
 amongst us who seem scared to touch political discussion in the tmion ' ■ 
 
 Is that right, are there only a few ? — A. There are a large number. 
 
 Q. ' Now comrade, I think at the next convention this should be one of the 
 
 things discussed, and see if it could not be determined that it should stand on 
 the order of business, as it is the only thing that can do any permanent good. 
 It will help to educate the workers along the proper lines, and is the only way 
 to make them see that they cannot get any good results from any of the old 
 parties, but if' they are ever to get the shackles off their limbs they will have 
 to do it by themselves by electing their own class into power on a straight 
 class-conscious ticket.' 
 Does that represent the view of any considerable number of your lodge here ? — ■ 
 
 A. So far as I am concerned, it doesn't ; not any considerable number. 
 
 Q. Is it the purpose of your union to organize politically for the purpose of getting 
 
 a class-conscious party in power in this province ? — A. Well, we do not- propose to go 
 
 into politics in the union. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 4 
 
 Q. You want to keep clean ? — A. Yes. 
 His Lordship. — What is meant by class-conscious ? 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : ' 
 Q. It is a name given to a certain section of the socialist party, is it not, or to the 
 ideas which they repaesent — that is so, is it not ? — A. I think that is so. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
333 MINUTES OF ETIDE^~CE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Is tlieir chief tenet the belief that there is an irreconcilable gulf fixed between 
 labour and capital ? — A. Yes, I believe so. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwcll : 
 
 Q. And the thing they have permanently before their minds in their existence as 
 a party. They are ' class-conscious ' — their views are always to the front ? — A. I 
 would like to say that I don't want to be held responsible as to explaining their views. 
 I don't want to make statements here that might annoy some of our brethren. There 
 are some of our brethren here whom these statements might annoy. 
 
 Q. But that is the popular idea of what they are ? — A. I suppose so. 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact, every officer in your local lodge here holds socialistic 
 Fiews ? — A. That would depend on what you understand to be socialistic views. 
 
 Q. I am using the popular understanding of the term. You yovirself wOuld be 
 3lassed as a socialist — if not an extreme socialist ? — A. I might be. 
 
 Q. Is it not a fact that every other officer would be classed as a socialist ? I don't 
 use that term in any offensive sense, and I don't mean an extreme socialist ? — A. No, 
 I don't think they would be classed as socialists, supposing they held views parallel 
 with the socialists. 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact, are they known to be socialists ? Mr. Neave says he was, 
 and you say you are ? — A. I didn't hear Mr. Neave say so, and I don't say so. 
 
 Q. You are not a socialist ? — A. It depends on what you mean. 
 
 Q. I said in the popular meaning of the word — I don't mean the extreme sort ? — 
 A. The modem socialist do you mean, revolutionary socialist ? 
 
 Q. Well, I don't mean the anarchistic kind. What do you call a modern social- 
 ist ? — A. The modern socialist is a revolutionary socialist, I guess — the evolutionary 
 socialist. 
 
 Q. There is wliat is called the socialist party in Nanaimo — do you belong to that \ 
 —A. No. 
 
 Q. You don't hold their view ? — ^A. I may hold views similar to theirs, but I can- 
 not hold theirs. 
 
 Q. There is no party can monopolize a view ? — A. Simply from the fact that they 
 may be my views. 
 
 Q. Then they hold yours — is that right ? — A. You can put it that way if you like. 
 
 Q. Do they hold your view ? — A. They may, in part. 
 
 Q. I think you are very far along when you said you were not a socialist ?^-4.. I 
 may be a socialist. 
 
 Q. Is not every officer of your lodge on the same plane politically as you are ?— 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Then there are some who do not hold socialist views ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. Who are ? Any of your officers ? — -A. There is Mr. Neave. 
 
 Q. Then you don't agree with him, because he says he is ?— A. Well, there are 
 different kinds of socialists. 
 
 Q. Well, we will leave it at that. You said in your examination-in-chief that one 
 of the reasons you joined the Federation was that if you had dealings with other com- 
 panies yon would be stronger than without it. What companies were you referring 
 to ? — A. The possibility «f any company. I mean the possibility of another company 
 being formed to take over this property. 
 
 Q. You had no connection with the agitation and organization at Ladysmith ? 
 — A. None whatever. 
 
 Q. You never suggested to any person that they should go to Ladysmith to organ- 
 ize ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You had no communication with Mr. Mottishaw on that subject ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. No talk with him on the subject of organization at Ladysmith ? — A. No. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDVSTIilAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLVUlilA 337 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. No suggestion that someone should go to Ladysmith and bring about organi- 
 zation ? — A. No, I don't remember. 
 
 Q. You had no conversation with Mr. Mottishaw which in any way bore on tho 
 question of organization at Ladysmith ? — A. Since then, since the organization. 
 
 Q. But before the meeting was held— the meeting to call on Ladysmith ? — A. I 
 was going to say I did not know anything about the meeting that was called. 
 
 Q. When did you have a conversation with him, and what was it about ? — A. 
 Well, the only conversation I had with Mr. Mottishaw — I had a talk with him prior 
 to that — just previous to that meeting— I don't know anything about the meeting. 
 
 Q. Did you know that it was being talked of prior to the meeting ? — A. Yes, 
 representations had been made in several instances to Nanaimo that the men down 
 there were wishful to organize. That is about the sum and substance of the conver- , 
 sation that transpired. ' Then I had no conversation until afterwards. 
 
 Q. The first conversation was before the meeting, and it was to the effect of the 
 communication from Mr. Mottishaw that the men were anxious to organize at Lady- 
 smith ? — A. No, none by letter. 
 
 Q. I mean the statement by Mr. Mottishaw to you that the men at Ladysmith 
 wanted to organize ?— A. It was commonly repeated by men passing to and fro from 
 here to Ladysmith that that was so. 
 
 Q. What did Mr. Mottishaw say about it to you ? — A. Mr. Mottishaw simply 
 repeated the statements made by other parties. 
 
 Q. Did he volunteer the statements or did you ask some questions ? — A. Mostly 
 volunteered. 
 
 Q. What part was not volunteered, or what part was not brought out by you ? Did 
 he begin the conversation, or did you ? — A. He began the conversation. 
 
 Q. And what did he say ? — A. I am open to tell you exactly what he said. It 
 will help my case. Mr. Mottishaw has been in the habit of coming into town. He has 
 a home here. He said that the men were feeling disposed to be organized at Lady- 
 smith. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That is what he told you ? — A. Yes, and other men prior to me. That was the 
 common report. 
 
 Q. How long ago were you first informed that they desired to organize there ? — A. 
 Possibly this thing took place most of all after oiir affiliation with the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. At the first of the year ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you were informed by Mottishaw and others that there was such a disposi- 
 tion ? — A. Eepresentations from Ladysmith were made through the person of Mr. Mot- 
 tishaw and other parties coming, constantly stating to me, I considered, talking among 
 themselves down there that the men would like to organize, and we have always said — 
 the Nanaimo union has always said, without any deviation, as far as I know, thdt 
 whatever Ladysmith or Mr. Dunsmuir's men might do they must do it voluntarily, that 
 we could not have any official connection with them in any decision to organize, for - 
 this reason — that it has been thrown in the face of Nanaimo heretofore that Nanaimo 
 waated to show a desire to reach Dunsmuir's men, and to create trouble amongst them, 
 and that is the reason why no matter was accomplished upon our part in that regard — 
 to take any notice, officially or otherwise, until they had initiated steps themselves iii 
 this matter, and asked our sympathy or our advice regarding matters of that kind. 
 
 Q. What did you say to Mr. Mottishaw when he came to you ? — A. The sum and 
 su?bstance of what I did say to Mr. Mottishaw was to the effect that if the men desired 
 organization, they had better line up ; that wp could hot interfere oiirselvcs with them, ' 
 that they would tave to take action themselves, befcause I said, as expressed' td Mr. 
 36a — 22 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. ' 
 
338 unfWES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSlOlf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Mottishaw, that it is an afiair in which Nanaimo doefbot Want to interfere, and that 
 I had no authority officially to do anything of the kind owing to the feeling existing 
 among the men. 
 
 Thomas J. Shenton — (recalled) : 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. What position have you, Mr. Shenton — are you an organizer for the Western 
 Federation ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. As deputy organizer ? — A. No. Mr. Woodburn of Ladysmith referred to me 
 as an organizer, and I would like to know just what he said. 
 
 Q. He said he had a conversation with you, and he said that you should con- 
 tribute a portion of the fee you were paid as deputy organizer of the Western Federa- 
 tion to the support of the Ladysmith men, and he didn't know whether you took his 
 statement in a joking way, or as a serious one, but that you said you would. He said 
 that these remarks passed, and then went on to suggest that you might have taken it 
 as a joke, and that you were not serious ? — A. I never intended to be serious, simply 
 because he never told me any such thing. The whole story is entirely untrue, and I 
 say to this Commission that the responsibility he has taken upon his shoulders to make 
 this statement — that he be informed by this Commission that he has made false state- 
 ments. I think I can prove^ that the story is entirely false in word and detail — that 
 he and I never had a conversation on that subject. And further, I was never deputized 
 by the Western Federation to do any such thing. I am no paid servant of the Westerij 
 -Federation. I have never done anything at the instructions of Mr. Baker to assist 
 or agitate the men at Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Then you didn't have any conversation with Mr. Woodburn on the subject 
 of organization at Ladysmith ? — A. No, I have had none whatever on the subject of 
 organization. 
 
 Q. When were you at Ladysmith — did you go to Ladysmith ? — A. That is as 
 stated by Mr. Woodburn. 
 
 Q. But you did go to Ladysmith ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When did you go to Ladysmith ? — A. I went to Ladysmith possibly three 
 weeks last Saturday. 
 , Q. Did you see Mr. Woodburn ? — A. Yes, and talked to him. 
 
 Q. And you talked about the subject of organization ? — A. Well, very little, if it 
 (vas talked about at all. I recollect very little regarding the conversation. 
 
 Q. Can you undertake to swear that some statement like that might not have been 
 made, and you treated it lightly ? — A. I am prepared to swear I never made any such 
 statement. 
 
 Q. You say you don't remember anything about the conversation. I think I can 
 reconcile your differences. You went there and had a tallc with Mr. Woodburn, and 
 the subject of organization must have come up, Mr. Shenton ? — A. I will admit this, 
 that if it were possible that some such reference was made, that any statement coupling 
 my having anything to do with the Federation never took place. 
 
 Q. You and Mr. Woodburn are not very far apart, because Mr. Woodburn says it 
 is quite possible you might have understood it as a jovial remark ?— A. Well, I never 
 made it. 
 
 Q. Well, you say you were not down there getting up that organization; you say 
 , you are not a deputy organizer of the Western Federation, might not Mr. Woodburn 
 have made a statement of that Irind which you ..might have takep as a joke ?— A. He 
 , oeyer did. 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 335 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Tell us what the conversation was, if you can ? — A. We had no conversation' 
 Dn that. If any references were made, to the organization, it was made in the sense* 
 of its existence at present, and the real position among the men. No conversationj 
 jutside of that. 
 
 Q. You are undertaking to swear positively that a certain thing was never said, 
 which might have been a joke and may have passed away from your recollection ? — ^A. 
 It was never said. 
 
 _ Q. How can you be sure? — A. I told you distinctly that the whole of the conver- 
 sation that we had w^s to the effect of the position that was running somewhat among 
 the men regarding the Western Federation of Miners not being as vigilant as it should 
 be. 
 
 Q; Ton were conversing on the subject that the Western Federation had not sub- 
 scribed much to the miners ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And do you mean to say that a joking remark such as he says you made might 
 aot have been made ? — A. It never was made. 
 
 Q. Do you say it might not have come up ? — A. Not without my knowing it ; 1 
 would have remembered that. 
 
 Q. I know you would, had it been a serious charge against you, but cb you mean 
 to say you remember every joking remark made in the course of conversation ? — A. I 
 would have protested. 
 
 Q. Are you so sensitive as that ? — A. Yes, it is necessary that I should be. 
 
 Q. Is your dignity such a tender thing that no man can even joke with you ? — 
 A. Well, jokes sometimes are not always seasonable, and a joke of that nature I would 
 not take to be a joke. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. The nature of the remark was to the effect that he would contribute half of 
 the fee that he was to get as organizer to the support of the men, women and children. 
 A man would not say anything like that even in the way of a joke ? — ^A. No, it was 
 not a joke. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. How long have you known Mr. Woodbum ? — A. A number of years. 
 
 Q. And he would not dare to take that amount of liberty ? — A. If he did he took 
 too much liberty. 
 
 Q. But if he said it as a joke, then you are going to resent it ? — -A. A joke had 
 no right to come before this Commission as evidence. 
 
 Q. But the question is whether or not a joke of that kind could not have been 
 made ? — A. It never was made. 
 
 Q. It is your recollection against Mr. Woodburn's ; he might be as positive as you ? 
 —A. I am prepared to meet him and argue the question. 
 
 Q. Have you ever known an instance in your life when you have been equally 
 positive and been absolutely wrong ? Have you never had an experience of that kind ? 
 — A. Well, yes. 
 
 Q. Could it not have been possible in this case ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Let me show you your inconsistency. I asked you if there had not been other 
 Dccasions when you could not remember, and you said yes ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Then why could it not have been so in this case ? — A. I didn't intend to say 
 it was not possible. It did not take place ; it is not a fact at all. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that Mr. Woodbum would go into the box and deliberately 
 manufacture that story ? — A. I would have thought he never would have done it. 
 
 Q. Is it not possjible that you are mistaken ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Well, you are a remarkable man. I think the Commission should have your 
 photograph as one of the eJchibits— a man who could not make a mistake ! 
 
 gg^ 22* THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, MaJ- 21. 
 
340 MiyVTES OF ETIDEKCE OF ROTAL COMMISSIOTf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are secretary of this branch of the Western Federation ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us, Mr. Shenton, speaking generally on behalf of the union, as 
 to what cases it is permitted to go out in sympathetic strike ?^A. Well, at present — 
 speaking at present, I don't know. 
 
 Q. Do you approve of sympathetic strikes ? — A. It is hard to answer correctly. 
 We wish to avoid — so far as I know, the feeling of the men generally — we wish to 
 avoid them. We are loth to do anything of the kind in that regard. 
 
 Q. Por what purposes do you approve of sympathetic strikes ? — A. We do not 
 approve of them so long as they can be avoided. If it is possible for them to be avoided 
 in the sense that companies can make contracts, and these contracts must be observed. 
 When a company makes an agreement with a union, it must be observed, and a sym- 
 pathetic strike could not occur. 
 
 Q. Would it be necessary in the interests of your employers that they should have 
 an iron-clad agreement with you in order to protect themselves against a sympathetic 
 strike. Supposing the Western Fuel Company have a contract for three years with a 
 company like the Canadian Pacific. Would it be necessary, in order to guarantee the 
 carrying out of that contract to secure a contract from you men that there would not 
 be any sympathetic strike for the space of three years ? — A. It would be a wise pro- 
 vision on the part of the company to do that. 
 
 Q. Or there might be some danger that a sjTnpathetie strike which you would be 
 in some sense prepared to inaugurate ? — A. That is dependent on the vote of the union 
 — of course approved of by the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. Then I gather the position is, that unless your employers have a clear under- 
 standing that you are not to go on sympathetic strike, it is open to you if you see fit ? 
 — A. Well, it is possible. They may be leaving this open in that regard somewhat. 
 
 Q. And you think the general opinion of the men is that sympathetic strikes are 
 not desirable ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Do you mean that it would be necessary for the employer to have in express 
 terms as to sympathetic strikes in order to be safe ? — A. I think that is possible, and 
 that it would be a wise course on the part of the employer. Supposing there is an 
 organization — at present we are open to all these questions in connection with our own 
 company — whenever they wish us to consider and agree to anything arising we are 
 open to agree, if reasonable, and intend to live up to that agreernent. 
 
 Q. Suppose you -had an agreement with your company, and the terms of that 
 agreement were such that a strike would violate it, without expressly stipulatitig 
 against a sympathetic strike, would you feel at liberty to come out on sympathetic 
 strike ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. So it does not need the express provision in language in the agreement in order 
 to protect the company ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I think the witness has answered that clearly when he said that it would be wise 
 provision to have a clause covering sympathetic strikes inserted or they would be liable 
 to occur. The result of the thing is this, that unless there is an agreement against 
 pympathetic strikes that possibility is open to the union. — A. I simply say it would 
 b€ a wise provision on the part of the company. 
 
 Q. And the reason why is because if they did not have that, there would be a pos- 
 sibility of a sympathetic strike taking place ? — A. Their ground would be the same as 
 curs, and that ensures their side of the question. If they had this agreement between 
 themselves that would prevent a strike. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 341 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. I gather, of course, that if the Western Fuel Company had an agreement with 
 you that you would not go out on sympathetic strike, that you would live up to it. I 
 suppose there is no doubt about that. That the union, so far as they can, at all events, 
 live up to the contracts. 
 
 By Mr. Bowi : 
 
 Q. The reason I asked the question was that I did not see the force of his answer. 
 ^It would imply that if there were no such a clause in the agreement they would go 
 en strike in the face of a trade agreement ? — A. In the face of a trade agreement ? 
 
 Q. Yes. Supposing you had a time agreement, and nothing said about sym- 
 pathetic strikes, would not the union feel under obligation to adhere to the terms of 
 that agreement despite the fact that there was no clause against sympathetic strikes ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. It is clear that if there is no clause as to sympathetic strikes, there is nothing 
 to prevent you going out on sympathetic strikess — so long as you work for the com- 
 pany ? — A. Unless there is some alteration in the price 
 
 Q. Is it necessary in the interests of the employers to secure this by a positive 
 guarantee — that there will not be sympathetic strikes ? — A. It would be a good thing. 
 
 By Mr. ^Yilson : 
 
 Q. Did your local union ever hear anything about this alleged threat of Mr. Estes 
 to call out all the coal miners on the island ? — A. Not a word. 
 Q. Never was discussed ? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You did not see any circular purporting to be signed by Estes ? — A. In the 
 nature of a threat ? 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Was that circular, or anything in connection with it, ever brought before the 
 local union ? 
 
 (Circular, Exhibit 8, handed to witness.) 
 
 A. Without waiting to read it, no. 
 
 Q. Eead that part underlined ? — A. ' The Western Federation will be asked to 
 
 stop the mining of coal on Vancouver Island ' we have no knowledge of that. That 
 
 is the first of that I have seen. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — -And yet Mr. Dunsmuir's mines, which have the contract with 
 the C.P.E., did strike within a few days of that. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Do you know whether it was ever brought before the local union at Ladysmith ? 
 — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : , , ; 
 
 Q And the fact that that strike is made was a nieTe coincidence, and had no con- 
 nection with the circular ?— A. As far as we are concerned no such proposition; was 
 fver mentioned or intimated. I have been with Mr. Baker in Nanaimo, and I, know 
 just as much about what he spoke of concerning Ladysmith, and I say Mr. Baker has 
 never intimated any idea so far as I know, nor has it come with our union. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
342 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF R071L COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vlf., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Now, you were asked a lot of supposititious propositions — I want to put one 
 myself. If the central authority required you to do something which was not war- 
 ranted by the constitution, would you feel yourself bound to do it ? — A. Not at all. 
 
 Q. In other words, if the central authority acted in an unconstitutional way, you 
 would not expect to obey an authority which could not obey its own rules ? — A. -Not at 
 all. 
 
 Q. You were asked as to the moral effect of such a demand. Would you consider 
 the moral effect of an unconstitutional demand upon you at all — w;ould you consider 
 that ?— A. No. ■ ■ • 
 
 Q. Would your union take into consideration the moral effect of an uncoristitu- 
 tional demand ? — A. Not at all. 
 
 Q. How does your local union regard the matter of political discussion — do you 
 admit politics into your union as part of the order of business ? — A. No, we are sup- 
 posed not to deal with politics. Of course that is a large subject. We are allowed to 
 discuss anything along the line that tends to the interests of labour, but it must be in 
 the interests of labour. We discuss the candidates who shall run for us. 
 
 Q. In other words, purely political matters not usual with labour men are not dis- 
 cussed by you ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Of coursi3, you would be obliged to consider the relation of any questions which 
 arise in relation to the political aspect ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell ; 
 
 Q. When you were giving instructions to the delegate who has just gone to the 
 convention, did the question of the stand he would take on the subject of politics como 
 up in giving him instructions ? — A. Well, that is a matter — in- the first place, ours is a 
 secret organization. I don't know whether if I answer something to that it would 
 annoy a large number of the members. 
 
 Q. The view of the majority is that politics should be discussed at lodge meetings ? 
 ■-^A. No, it is not the judgment of the majority. 
 
 Q. And you decline to answer whether or not the stand your delegate was to take 
 at the convention was discussed at the meeting where he got his instructions ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I suppose the delegate will represent the view of the majority on that question ? 
 — A. Well, he would be representing a majority of the men who were present at the 
 time the vote was passed. Of course that majority might be a minority of the whole 
 union. 
 
 Q. I fancy we can gather, very safely, how the delegate was instructed ; so that in 
 that particular instance, he is not representing the view of the majority. What 
 ' method would you propose, Mr. Shenton, to put an end to* strikes if the parties won't 
 conciliate ? — A. Mediation or conciliation. 
 
 Q. If the parties won't conciliate ? — A. Arbitration. 
 
 Q. Would you favour compulsory arbitration ? — A. Well, not exactly, I don't 
 think I could. 
 
 Q. You would leave it to public opinion to enforce the award ? — A. I believe that) 
 the board might be constituted by law to deal with these matters, something similar 
 to the one we have at present. 
 
 Q. You think compulsory investigation would be the thing ? — A. Yes, compulsory 
 investigation. That is, in the event that the parties could not agree. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Is your objection to compulsory arbitration partly because of the difficulty of 
 enforcing the award ? — A. That is one real objection. . 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 343 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. And that involves the proposition of compelling the vporkman whether he will 
 or not ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And if some means could be devised by which that objectionable feature could 
 be avoided, would compulsory arbitration then be objectionable to you ? — ^A. That is 
 Bompijlsory investigation^ — : 
 
 Q. As far as the employer is concerned, there is no question but what he could bo 
 reached. The workman cannot be reached for the simple reason that compelling him 
 to carry out the award would be to compel him to work, which would be against all 
 Liberty. Supposing a means could be had of enforcing the award on the part of the 
 ivorkmen — would compulsory arbitration be objectionable then ? — A. I am hardly able 
 to say. 
 
 Thomas Eussell, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q, You are the manager of the Western Fuel Company ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And before that you were what ? — A. Manager for the New Vancouver Coal 
 Company. 
 
 Q. How long have you been in the position of manager ? — A. About four years 
 ind a half. 
 
 Q. When did you receive any intimation that the men here had joined the West- 
 3rn Eederation of Miners ? — A. I don't remember exactly; it was after they connected 
 themselves and appointed a deputation to see us. I could not say exactly that I was 
 in favour of the Federation. 
 
 Q. They did appoint a committee and you were informed by the committee ? — A. 
 They did appoint a committee and told me that they were representatives of the West- 
 ern Federation of Miners — not in any other way. 
 
 Q. There was a strike of about two weeks' duration a short time ago ? — A. There 
 was a dispute; I don't know that it was a strike. 
 
 Q. The men ceased work ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us the difference ? — A. I considered it was a strike, but they did 
 Qot consider it was. 
 
 Q. A distinction without a difference ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was the cause of that ?— A. Certain alterations were made in the rates, 
 and the men objected to these alterations. 
 
 Q. An allowance for safety lamps was kept off ? — A. Yes, that was one thing. 
 
 Q. Why was that done ? — A. We supplied a lamp that we considered superior to 
 the old one, on which we used to allow 25 cents. 
 
 Q. What was it allowed for ? — A. For a deficient light. The men cannot produce 
 the same amount of light with an inferior lamp. 
 
 Q. The company replaced that with a better lamp ? — A. Yes, and the men did not 
 3onsider it was good enough, and they demanded that tlie 25 cents be kept up. 
 
 Q. Did the company consider that an unreasonfible demand ?^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Then tliey must have got to view it as a reasonable demand when they settled ? 
 
 j^ They did not consider it worth while disputing about and shutting down the 
 
 mine ; they thought it better to settle than shut the mines down. 
 
 Q. How was that dispute settled — by conference between you and the committee ? 
 ^_ Yes. 
 
 Q. Has the company raised any objection to the men joining the Western Federa- 
 tion ?— A. No. '.■;',■■ : . ' ; 
 
 THOMAS RUSSELL— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
344 Ain'UTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. What provision, if any, is being made against sympathetic strikes ? — A. There 
 LS no provision made. 
 
 Q. Have you got a copy of the agreement now in force between you and the men ? 
 — A. There is no written agreement in force between the company and the men at all. 
 
 Q. Is that a satisfactory condition of affairs ? — A. 'No, I don't think it is exactly. 
 
 Q. There have been written agreements in the past ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How is it there is no written agreement at present ? — A. One reason is that 
 the men have drawn up a form of agreement, and there are several things in it that the 
 management consider it would be unwise to endorse, and the thing is lying in abey- 
 ance in the meantime. 
 
 Q. Can you give us a copy of the proposed agreement ? — A. Yes. 
 
 (Agreement put in as Exhibit 10.) 
 
 Q. Is that clause 3 not satisfactory to the company ? — A. No, I don't thinlj so. 
 
 Q. What I want to know is are there any clauses unsatisfactory outside of the 
 question of prices ? — A. It is a matter of prices. 
 
 Q. Have you anything to suggest as to how strikes should be settled when the par- 
 ties cannot agree ? — A. I cannot say that I have. I have never given that the con- 
 sideration that I should have. We must take troubles as they come ; they are generally 
 enough. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — And bear other people's troubles with resignation ! 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How many times a year do you have conferences with the pit committee ? — A. 
 Sometimes three times a week; sometimes not for a month; usually they are much 
 more frequent when a new committee is appointed. 
 
 Q. Like a new municipal council ? — A. Something like that. 
 
 By Mr. liawe : 
 Q. They get busy ? — A. Yes, more frequently under these circumstances than others. 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How much of your time is taken up by conferences with committees ? — A. I 
 would save probably an hour a week ; I don't think it would average any more than 
 that. 
 
 Q. The pit committee system seems to work well ? — ^A. As far as I have found it 
 does, 
 n By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Would that much time be consumed in disputes if there were no union ?— A. I 
 don't know that it would. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you say are the chief advantages of unions as far as employers are 
 concerned ? — A. I don't think there are any advantages as f^r as employers are con- 
 cerned at all. 
 
 Q. No advantages ? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. It has been frequently stated. that one advantage is that an employer has been 
 able to deal with the union as a whole and not with small bodies or clubs ?— A.,I find 
 that men, if they are properly dealt with, whether members of a union or not, there is 
 not much trouble at all. I have had twenty years' experience without unions and some- 
 thing like four years with unions, and I don't think there is much in that. 
 
 Q. \ou would prefer if there were no unions ?— A. As far as I am concerned as 
 superintendent, it is immaterial. I don't think it m^kes much difference. 
 
 Q. What are ihe disadvantages, from the, point. of view of the employer ?^A. In 
 tome cases I think it is easier enforcing discipline. 
 THOMAS RUSSELL— Nahaimo, May 21. 
 
Oiy INDVS'fltlAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 345 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. It weakens discipline ?— A. Yes, it has a tendency to weaken discipline in 
 some cases. 
 
 Q. Is that the only disadvantage ? — A. As far as I know. 
 
 Q. Ton mean by that that employers would have to submit to demands which they 
 would not otherwise have to submit to ? — A. They have to submit to demands which 
 they woiild not have to submit to at all. When they have a weak executive it gives 
 considerable trouble. 
 
 Q. But if the officers of the union are reasonable men there is no trouble ?— A. 
 No, but -if the executive is weak there is trouble. 
 
 By Mr. Roiue : 
 
 Q. Because they cannot control the union ? — A. It is either that, or that they are 
 catering for support or votes, or something 'like that. 
 
 Q. Like a weak government ? — A. Yes, like a weak government. 
 
 Q. Where were you formerly ? — A. I was ten years at Union previous to being 
 here. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. I suppose employers have to be a little more careful with the men when they 
 are unionized ? — A. I think that is a benefit to the men. If I were a workman I would 
 consider it a benefit to be a member of the union. 
 
 By Mr Bowe : 
 
 Q. You think it is necessary to their welfare ^— A. I think it is an advantage. 
 
 Q. Do you think if they had not a union they would suffer some disadvantage ? 
 A. I think they would. 
 
 Q. That all things considered they are exercising a reasonable protection ? — ^A. I 
 think so. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. But from an employer's point of view they sometimes get things that don't 
 really belong to them ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You were ten years at Union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. There was no union there ? — A. Attempts were made twice in my time, but 
 they failed in both cases. 
 
 Q. You never had any serious difficulty with the men there that could not be 
 adjusted without a union ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. If a man came to you he generally knew he had something you 'would talk 
 about, or else he kept on with his work ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Don't you think these pit committees come more with the idea of raising a 
 difficulty instead of settling one ?— A. No, I cannot say that I think so. 
 
 Q. Is it not more so with a pit committee than with individual men? If you 
 were dealing with an individual you would let him go ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. But you cannot dismiss a pit committee ?— A. No, and that is just where the 
 benefit of the unions comes in as far as the men are concerned. 
 
 Q. As a manager you would aim to do what was right by the men. You would 
 not refuse to redress a man's claim unless it was a 'bad one ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. And yoU would not want any pit committee to force it on you ? — A. No. ' ■ 
 
 Q And the only thing a pit committee does is to get something from you which 
 you do not think would I'oe right ?— A. I have admitted as much as that. 
 
 Q Not that it is a protection to the men, but an advantage to the men ?^A. It 
 [<= a protection to the men in some cases. 
 
 Q But it enables them to get advantages ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And these advantages are not always in the nature of just demands ?-^A. In 
 
 some cases they are not THOMAS RUSSELl^Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
316 ' MlifUTES OF ETWrnfCE OF ROYAL COMMISSIOTT 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. In this matter of the lamps you had to submit ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you thinlc you would have had to submit had thfere heen no' union? — A. I 
 ion't think so. 
 
 Q. And you would not have had to give the allowance ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. The question of whether the union is workable or not depends altogether upon, 
 the character of the executive ? — A. To a great extent. 
 
 Q. With a weak executive, or a lot of hot-headed men, the tendency of unionism, 
 would be to close down the works — their demands would become so excessive ? — A. It 
 might come to that. 
 
 Q. Is the tendency not in that direction ?-^A. In my opinion I cannot exactly 
 say that. ' 
 
 Q. Is it not a tendency of unionism to bring into prominence the agitator among 
 the men ? — A. There is a tendency in that way. 
 
 Q. You get a man on the pit committee; he wants to become president of the 
 anion — ^you will have a lot of grievances, won't you ? — ^A. I cannot say that we are 
 troubled with very many. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I suppose you find more tact is necessary in dealing with union men than 
 (vith those who are not unionized ? — A. Decidedly more. 
 
 Q. And one of the chief qualities required in a manager of mines is taci ? — A. 
 Yea, tact. 
 
 Q.' I suppose it is no doubt an advantage to have an agreement' with a body of 
 men ? — A. I believe it is beneficial. 
 
 Q. Do you find that they will live loyally up to the agreement ? — A. That is my 
 experience. 
 
 Q. Are they given to picking holes in the agreement and finding ways out of 
 3omplying with it ? — A. To a certain extent, but I cannot say that it would be worse 
 than with no union as far as that particular phase is concerned. We would have diffi- 
 culties with men under any conditions. There are men who would make difficulties 
 out of any circumstances, and these men are some of them members of a union and 
 some not. 
 
 Q. I suppose it is practically impossible to employ non-union men in a union 
 mine ? — A. With the arrangement we have here it would. It is mentioned in the 
 written agreement. The dues are kept off in the office. 
 
 By Mr. Boive : 
 Q. You say the dues are kept off in the office ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. And in that way you organize the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Roive : 
 
 Q. Has that anything to do with sick benefit or doctoring ? — A. Nothing at all. 
 Q. You also handle that ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Would it be an advantage to have unions incoi-porated ? — A. I think so. 
 
 Bi/ Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. There is a sense of security in making contracts ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. All things considered, Mr. Eussell — you have had experience, having regard to 
 a desire to do the fair thing to all parties, would you sooner manage union men or non- 
 union men ? — A' Well,, I d»on'tknow that it would make very much difference. 
 THOMAS RUSSELL— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 347 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Depends on the character of the men themselves ?— A. A good deal. 
 
 By Mr. Roive : 
 Q. And something on the character of the board of directors, the interest on divi- 
 dends and so on ? — A. I have had no difficulty as far as the employers are concerned. 
 I have been vporking with employers who would not recognize unions, and other^s who 
 would, but of course when men are united they can look better after each others' 
 grievances better. If a manager is so disposed, where there is no union, he can get rid 
 of them much easier, perhaps for some trifling offence, and I think, perhaps, taking 
 everything into consideration, that it would be better for men not to have that power. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Don't you think a man who is always malting grievances gets into disfavour 
 ■ with the union, and is silenced^by them ? — A. I don't know about that. Sometimes 
 it gets him into favour. That is where the weak executive comes in. When a new 
 executive is appointed, of course there are generally some persons very anxious to show 
 how much they take the interest of the men so much better than the previous one, that 
 we are troubled to a certain extent. That belongs, I suppose, to society at large. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — We have the same thing with reference to the municipal council. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^New brooms. 
 
 Arthur Spencer, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Tou are a coal miner ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How many years have you been mining ? — A. About twenty years. 
 
 Q. What union do you belong to ? — A. The Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. The local union ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you are working for the Western Fuel Company ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you ever work at Wellington ?— A. For over four years. 
 
 Q. Did you belong to a local union there ?— A. To the Knights of Labour tliere. 
 
 Q. Was that a labour organization which the management of that mine recognized ? 
 
 A. They didn't recognize it as the Knights of Labour, but they recognized a pit 
 
 committee and allowed us to put on check weighmen. 
 
 Q. And during the time that the organization existed there, had you any difficul- 
 ties with the management ?— A. Only one time the pit committee was called on, and we 
 ■went to see Mr. Bryden about it. He would not speak about it at first, and then we 
 'settled it with old Mr. Dunsmuir. He permitted us to go around and examine the 
 place, and as things turned out we had to decide against the man. That is the only 
 
 difficulty we had. „ . ^r ,i tit- > j Tir- t i . 
 
 Q. Did you belong to any other unions ?— A. Yes, the Miners' and Mine Labourers 
 
 Protective Association. ,, j. ^. x <ct *. 
 
 Q Had there been any agitation for any length of time to affiliate or ]om any 
 lareer organization ?— A. Yes, for several years. About two years ago there were steps 
 takeii to join the American Federation of Labour, but for some cause it dropped 
 . tliere It has been discussed for years. , , . ... 
 
 O Then it was finally determined that as the result of the investigation of a com- 
 mittee' appointed to join the Western Federation of Miners ?-A. Yes. 
 
 ARTHUR SPENCER— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
348 MII^'UTES OF EVIDENCE OP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Was the question of socialism considered in connection with that ? — A. Not 
 to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. Did you know anything about the alleged socialistic views held by the great 
 many of the Western Federation ? — A. No, only just before affiliation. 
 
 Q. What did you know about it then ? — A. It was represented that was the action 
 of t.ie executive, and before affiliation the question was asked distinctly, whether by 
 affiliation we would be adopting the socialist platform, and we were distinctly told no; 
 that although socialism was recognized to a certain extent in the Federation we did 
 not necessarily become socialists by joining it. 
 
 Q. In other words, in all your views, except as far as organized labour was con- 
 cerned, you were at liberty to follow your own fancies ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. At times the union men at Nanaimo have gone to Wellington and Alexandria 
 to assist in organization there. Under what circumstances did they go ? — A. I don't 
 think they went to Alexandria. They were asked to, but as far as I recall, they were 
 distinctly told that the Alexandria men had to take the initiative and organize them- 
 selves, and when they were organized we would talk affiliation with them. 
 
 By Mr. Bodivell : 
 Q. When did you say you were at Wellington — what year ? — A. In 1884. 
 Q. How long were yoii there ? — A. Until the spring of 1SS9. 
 
 Q. And you say that during that time a pit committee was recognized ? — A. Not 
 all the time ; during the year 1888, only in one year. 
 Q. Mr. Bryden was manager then ? — A. Yes. 
 
 His Lordship. — We would like to get the official statement of the result of the 
 ballot on the question of joining the Federation; the number for and against; the 
 number present at the meeting; the number of men entitled to vote; what length of 
 notice was given of the meeting; and how it was given. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — ^I will take a memo, of the particulars desired and hand them in 
 later. 
 
 Ladysmitii, May 22, 1903. 
 
 (Upon the opening of sittings of Commission, Mr. Wilson handed in the informa- 
 tion asked for at Nanaimo relative to vote re Western Federation of Miners, &c.) 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL.— Mr. Woodburn is anxious to put himself straight on the matter 
 which arose between him and Mr. Shenton, and I have told him that I think the 
 best thing he could do would be to make his own statement to the Commissioners on 
 the subject. 
 
 Mr. Wilson.— Before that happens, is it proper to mention that one object of 
 coming here was that Mr. Dunsmuir might attend, and I am informed by Mr. Bodwcll 
 that it will not be convenient for Mr. Dunsmuir to attend here to-day. Is it proper 
 to ask what course is intended to be adopted to secure his attendance ? 
 
 His LoRDSHii?.— The Commissioners have wired Mr. Dunsmuir to the effect that 
 he should be here either to-day or to-morrow. If he does not clioose to be, here theij, the 
 Commissioners will fix a day on which he will have to attend. 
 
 Mr. WooDBURX.— I would like to hear the stenographer's report; in regard to tlie 
 matters of Mr. Shenton's pvidence in reference to a conversation between Mr. Shenton 
 and myself. ; ,, 
 
 AHTHUR SPENCER— Nanaimo, May 21. 
 
OiY INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 349 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 His LoEDSiUP. — I understand the stenographer has not transcribed the evidence 
 j'ct, but what Mr. Shenton said was to the effect that he denied having a conversation 
 with youto the effect that he was a deputy organizer of the Western Federation and' 
 that he was going to receive any money. 
 
 Mr. WooDBUEN. — If I remember correctly I suggested to him that owing to the 
 trouble here and the suffering caused to the women and children, that he turn in a 
 part of his commission to alleviate this distress, and he said he would do that and more. 
 I don't want to take up the time of the Commission to bring witnesses, but I can bring 
 witnesses to prove that he made this statement. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^If you wish witnesses called, they may be called. 
 
 Mr. WooDBURN.— I have two or three I will call 
 
 Benjamin Forcimer, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Did you hear any conversation between Mr. Woodburn and Mr. Shenton ? — 
 A. I happened to be at the corner when it transpired, but there was so much talk that 
 I could not recall anything that I could give as a definition of what was said. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Woodburn say to Mr. Shenton anything to this effect, in a joking way 
 or otherwise : that he hoped, in view of the distress here, that Mr. Shenton would 
 divide whatever commission he made out of the organization here among the men 
 who needed the money ? — A. No, I didn't hear it in that way. I think that Mr. Wood- 
 burn said it would be — I don't think I heard anything in that connection at all. What 
 I did hear was in a jocular way — what I did hear Mr. Shenton say was ' he would do 
 that and more,' but what it was I don't think I was sure at the time. 
 
 Q. You didn't know to what that was a response ? — A. No, I could not say. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. .Has anybody been making any threats to you about giving evidence here ? — 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Are you a miner ?^A. No, a business man here. 
 
 By Mr. Woodiurn : 
 
 Q. Did you come here this morning and tell me you heard that conversation ? — 
 A. I didn't hear that. I tried to correct you when you told me I heard it the same 
 as you did; I said I am not sure. What I did say was that I was at the corner, and 
 he said, ' he might do that and more,' What it was an answer to I could not swear. 
 You remember you corrected me this morning when I made that statement. I would 
 not be sure to what fact it was an answer. That is all I did hear, and that I am pre- 
 pared to swear. 
 
 Henry Oahroll^ sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Woodburn : ' 
 
 Q. What took place at the corner ?— A. I was taking part in tlie conversation 
 between Mr. Shenton and Mr. Woodburn at the time, and jtfr. Woodburn asked hiinj 
 among other things, if he was prepared to give half of the commission that he received 
 
 HENiiV CARROLL— Ladysmith, May ial 
 
^ MINUTES OF ETIDhTTCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 for organizing Ladysmith towards the help of the strilcets down here, and he said he 
 would do that and more. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : . 
 
 Q. Was it said in the way of a joke or serious conversation ? — A. It was a serious 
 conversation. It was in regard to the support of the men down here. There was no 
 joke on the subject as far as I could see. He kind of smiled, as if it were at Mr. Wood- 
 burn knowing that he had received any commission. That is the way I took it, He 
 didn't ask, what commission, or anything; he said he would do that and more. 
 
 Joseph McMurtry, sworn: 
 By Mr. Woodhurn : 
 
 Q. Mr. McMurtry, you were at the corner on' Saturday evening when the conver- 
 sation took place ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Will you recite to the Commissioners what you heard ?— A. There was a 
 general conversation going on about the position of the miners in Ladysmith here. Mr. 
 Woodburn put the question to Mr. Shenton, was he prepared to give half of his com- 
 mission to support the men that were needy, and he said he would do that and more. 
 But I understood they were joking all the time ; I took it as a joke. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Why did you think it was a joke — ^because of the smallness of the amount ? — 
 A. It was a general conversation that was going on — they were laughing and talking 
 about it. It was said in such a manner that I thought it was a joke. 
 
 Q. Are men liable to joke about how their wives and families may starve during 
 a strike ? Do you think they usually joke about such subjects ? — A. They generally 
 don't. 
 
 Q. Still, you think on this occasion it was a joke ? — ^A. That was the way I took it. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. That is,«it was a joke that Mr. Shenton was receiving a commission — that 
 seemed to be said in a joking way ? — A. That is the way I took it. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Was it generally supposed among the men that Shenton was doing the organiz- 
 ing ? — A. I never heard any word of it before. 
 
 Mr. Woodburn. — ^I could get some more witnesses, but people don't seem to like 
 to come up and give evidence. There were some here, but they appear to have dis- 
 appeared. 
 
 His Lordship.— Why ? 
 
 Mr. WoODBUBN. — I know one man has made himself scarce; one man who drew 
 my attention to the fact that he had heard the same thing as I had given in the box. 
 
 Mr. BoDWEU.. — Has there been anything said to men who have been giving evi- 
 dence lately. 
 
 Mr. WooDBURN'. — ^I have been called foul names myself. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell.— By whom ? 
 
 Mr. Woodburn. — Samuel Mottishaw, senior. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — What for ? 
 
 Mr. Woodburn.— ^In regard to this particular evidence, I suppose. 
 CJHAKLBS McMUBTT— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
OTT mDUSTItlAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 351 
 
 SESSlOI^AL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 , ' His Lordship.— It may be proper for me to say that if it comes to me as Com- 
 missioner, or as a Judge of the Supreme Court, that any man, or body of men, are 
 being intimidated, the law will be enforced to the full extent. If there is one thing 
 the judges of this province are determined on, it is that law and order shall be kept. 
 This is a free country, and if there is any blackguarding done, or anything of that 
 sort by anybody, those people will find the jails and penitentiaries gaping for them. 
 Now, let this be a warning. If you want that man you spealc of subpoenaed, you can 
 have him subpoenaed and brought here. 
 
 Mr. WoODBUBN.— I am not anxious about it. 
 
 Aaron Barnes, sworn. 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Where do you reside, Mi-. Barnes ? — A. Ladysmith. 
 Q. What is yofir occupation ? — A. Miner. 
 
 ,Q. How long have you been engaged in that occupation ? — A. Off and on, I have 
 betjn engaged in it for almost ^3 or 25 years. 
 
 Q. Where have you worked ? — A. I have worked at Wellington, Southfield and 
 I^anaimo, and I have worked at East Wellington, at Oomox and Extension. 
 Q. When you worked at Wellington, did you have a union there ? — A. No. 
 Q. Had you any union at Comox ? — A. Well, no, but we attempted at one time 
 to form a union, or we did form a union, at Comox, and the result was that the officers 
 of the union were discharged immediately. 
 
 Q. You were at South Wellington ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you form any union there ? — A. At that time there were no unions; that 
 is a long time ago. There was no union in this country to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. Were you one of the officers who received your dismissal at Comox ? — A. Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 Q. As a result of that dismissal^ what effect did that have upon your working ? — 
 A. The result was that I was victimized for about seven years. 
 
 Q. Did you afterwards work at Nanaimo ? — A. No, I afterwards worked at East 
 Wellington and Northfield. 
 
 Q. Had you a union in all these places ? — A. At Northfield. 
 Q. Who had the management of the collieries at Northfield ? — A, Mr. Bryden ; 
 Mr, Robins was superintendent. 
 
 Q. That v^as one of the New Vancouver Coal Company's collieries ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. In your relation, as to the union with your employers, how did you find the 
 method work ? — A. It was friendly from beginning to end. Sometimes we had a little 
 friction, but it was always amicably settled. Whenever we met Mr. Robins it was 
 clways settled amicably. 
 
 Q. Do you attribute that to the result of your organization ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 Q. And perhaps something to the tact and skill with which the manager treated 
 bis men ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 . Q., The two things, combined ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You are a member of the present union ? — A. Yes, sir. _ , 
 
 Q. Have you had much experience ,as a member of organized labour ?-;:'A. Yes, I 
 have had a little. 
 
 Q. Do you think from your experience that it is beneficial io the employer as well 
 as employed ? — A. I do. 
 
 Q. Will you tell us in what way you think employers derive advantage ? — A. From 
 the fact that whenever * question affecting -the interests of either of the workingmen 
 
 , AARON BARNES— Ladysipith, May 22. 
 
352 MnUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 or the operators comes up, they get together and discuss questions from a reasonable 
 standpoint. It is usually settled amicably and the work goes on in the usual way. 
 
 Q. You think it is better for an employer to deal with an organization than 
 with individuals ? — A. I certainly do. 
 
 Q. And you think it is also an advantage for the employee ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What are the circumstances under which this union here was formed ? — A. 
 Well, I was not at the first meeting, but of course like the balance of the men I heard 
 considerable talk pro and con, going back and forth, and from that I thought there was 
 something likely to take place. In fact I heard it was thought that it would be an op- 
 portune time to work for an advance in wages, and they went to work to organize prior 
 to that time, and in my opinion it was a proper course to pursue from the experience 
 I have had with the gentlemen whom we are. dealing with now. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Which was the proper course ? — A. To organize in the first place. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. And when you organized, why did you organize in such £t way as to become a 
 member of an international body ? — A. Because a local organization is no good. We 
 have tried that in this country, and we found it no good; that we must have an inter- 
 national organization to hold the ground. 
 
 Q. You might tell the Commissioners why that is ? — A. From an international 
 standpoint ? 
 
 Q. Yes. — A. Well, it would be from the idea of obtaining support in case we should 
 make a reasonable demand on employers, and they would be unwilling to grant it. If 
 you were not connected with a body prepared to support you, why of course he would 
 not in any way listen to your proposition. It is from that consideration, in my opi- 
 nion that we should have an international organization. 
 
 Q. You think strength is derived from numbers in matters of that kind ? — A. Yes, 
 numerical strength. 
 
 Q. And I suppose that brings a certain amount of financial strength also ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 B2/ Mr. Rowe ■: 
 
 Q. Would it have the same advantage if it was national with the same strength ? 
 — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. The international would be so much larger and consequently we 
 have to assume it would be so much stronger. 
 
 Q. Suppose there was a national organization have the same numbers as the West- 
 em Federation, would you consider that as good ?^A. We could not have that in 
 Canada, for the reason that the numbers are not suiBcient. 
 
 Q. I am supposing that to be the case. Is there anything in the international part 
 of it aside from the numbers ? — A. Yes, I presume there is. 
 
 Q. What is the advantage of being international, apart from its strength in num- 
 bers? — A. I could not possibly say in relation to that, but at any rate it would be an 
 advantage this way; that what affects one part of the country necessarily affects other 
 parts of the country. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Did you ever have any conversation, or were you ever told anything by any of 
 the officers or the management with respect to forming a union ? — A. Yes, at the time 
 I refer to, a little time ago, that was at Comox, when, we organized that union there 
 Mr. Ralph Smith was the agent of the Nanaimo Miners' Union — the 3Iiners' and ]\{ine' 
 Labourers' Protective Association. He eanie up there to organize, with the j-csiiit as I 
 have said, that five men were discharged — officers .of the union.. We ascertained frpm 
 AAHON BARNES— Ladysmith, Ma? 22. , : ; ■ ! 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 353 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a- 
 
 the superintendent, Mr. Franlt Little, that he would have no unio^ whatever.. That 
 was the reason of our dismissal. 
 
 Q. In the working of coal mines there are locations which are more advantageous 
 to work than others — in which higher rates of wages can he obtained ? — A. Yes, there 
 are different kinds of work. 
 
 Q. Without a union how do you find that the working of these favourable places 
 is regulated ? — ^A. In some eases it is regulated by favouritism. It is always in the 
 interests — I am taking the operators' view of the matter now — it is always in their 
 interests to have a number doing well, in order to keep the balance quiet. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — This point has not been made before, and if it is to be gone into 
 it may be necessary for me to call evidence. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You say it is the policy of the company to pay a few men well in order to keep 
 the balance quiet ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Can you give a specific instance of that ? — A. I can. I can state instances 
 where the men have always been engaged in good work ; and some men get paid for 
 deficient work ; others don't get paid for it at all. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Can you mention the names of any of those who are in receipt of these favour- 
 rble places ? — A. Yes, I can, there are Fred Grieves, Tom Spratt, Martin Dunsmuir, 
 Andrew Robertson and the other gentlemen who gave evidence here; Martin Wood- 
 burn, Harry Carroll and William Smith. All these men are working in what we call 
 narrow work, which from our standpoint is the best work in the mine. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You say these are favourites of the boss ? — A. Yes, I say that. 
 
 Q. Supposing these men edrn no greater than others whom you have not named ? 
 — ^A. I have not recited them all; I have only recited a few. I know there are others 
 who have made considerably smaller wages. 
 
 Q. And in your opinion just as good workmen ? — A. Some of them. It is only 
 the difference in the work, you understand, that I am calling into question. Probably 
 these men who have made smaller wages, working in other work, have not been able. 
 to make the same wages as these men. 
 
 Q. How does the union operate to prevent that ? — A. The operation of the union 
 would see to it that these men did not get the preference in any way; it would be 
 allotted more equally to the balance of the men. 
 
 Q. You think the union would make a fair proportion ? — A. Yes; where it is left 
 in the hands of the officers of the company, why of course they are the ones to de- 
 termine as to who should ha,ve these positions. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. And the union being composed of workingmen they would naturally seek to 
 assist each other, and these places would be equally divided ?— A. Yes, that would 
 be the tendency. 
 
 By His Lordship : . 
 Q Could not certain cliques in the union get all these places to themselves ?— A 
 Not by any means; there is what they call the cavil system; these places are thrown into 
 
 a hat and drawn out. „ . -cr ^^ x j ^.t. ^ i, 
 
 Q. That would seem tq be,a,fair way ?— A. Y:es, but under the system we have 
 
 HOW you cannot get that at aU. 
 
 gg^ 23 AARON. pARNES-7-Ladysm.ith, May 22. 
 
354 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTIL COMMISSION 
 
 3A EDWARD Vlt., A. 1904 
 
 Q. That is wbat they do in England ?— A. I think so— in the north of England; 
 1 am told that that is the case. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Simply determining by lot who shall have the place ? — A. Yea. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. How often would these be made? — A. When we were at Northfield it was once 
 every three months. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 Q. Did that -work satisfactorily ?— A. Well, it did not go on so very long. I don't 
 remember exactly the reason for its removal, but it gave some satisfaction at least. It 
 was thought that favouritism existed there, and in order to do away with that they in- 
 sisted on the cavil. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. And then they gave up the cavil ? — A. It was abandoned; I don't remember 
 the reason for its abandonment. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Do you know whether the like system prevails elsewhere ?^A. In the north 
 cf England, I am told by men coming from that part of the country. 
 
 Q. The government of the union is by a majority ? — A. At all times. 
 
 Q. So there could hardly be said to be such a thing as a dominating clique ? — A. 
 It is always controlled by majority vote. 
 
 Q. And the majority would see to the proper proportion of the best places in the 
 mines ? — A. That would be one of its duties. 
 
 Q. I think you were one of the committee that waited on Mr. Dunsmuir ? — A. A 
 few days ago ? 
 
 Q. No, about the time of the strike here ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Was the strike here before or after the organization of the union ? — A. It was 
 brought about before the organization of the union. 
 
 Q. The organization followed on the strike as a necessity ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Then, the real causes of the strike here before organization were what ? — A. 
 It was whispered around that owing to the duty being taken off in San Francisco an 
 increase in wages should be given to the mefl; they thought they were entitled to a 
 slight consideration in that respect. 
 
 Q. It is said that the union fixes things so that a weak and unskilled labourer 
 makes as much as a skilled one ? — A. No, the unfortunate position that workmen are 
 placed in in this country — I believe it prevails to a great extent in most mines — is 
 that men are paid and not places — that is, generally speaking. Of course, the narrow 
 work is always considered better paid from a miner's standpoint, but unfortunately, 
 as I said before, under the system we have here men are paid and not places — not work, 
 that is the position. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. What is narrow woik ? — A. It is work that goes ahead in order to open up the 
 field of coal. 
 
 Q. Is that better paid ? — A. There is yardage attached to that. In driving stalls 
 you drive them up grade, and you can always get your coal away better than you can 
 from working stalls. 
 
 Q. Does it require any more skill for that kind of vs^ork ? — A. Yes, it requires a 
 little skill in order to do narrow work; the narrow work is generally for opening up 
 the field of coal. 
 
 AARON BARNKS— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DI8PDTES 7N BRITISB COLUMBIA 355 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Bp His Lordship : 
 
 Q. If there is more skill required there should be more pay, should there not ?^ 
 A. Well, of course, in my opinion that is a great fault; we are paying too much for 
 skill in this country. , 
 
 Q. Paid too much for skill ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q.' And not not enough for what ? — A. For labour. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That seems to give some colour to the theory that the effect of the union is 
 to drag down a good man to the level of the weak man ? — A. The only case analogous 
 to that would be in the case of the work ; I believe in pay for the work, and as I said 
 before, men are paid and not labour. 
 
 Q. Don't you think skilled labour should get more than unskilled labour ? — A. In 
 certain work I woiild assume that that ought to be done. 
 
 . Q. Then if it requires a certain amount of skill to do that work, why should not 
 the boss have the selection of men to do that work ? — A. That is where the favouritism 
 comes in; I know men who are working in narrow work that could not work in wide 
 work; I know men of that description. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Perhaps you had better give these names. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. That is, some incompetent men are kept at narrow work ? — A. Tes, but there 
 may be good ones with them. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Would it not be as much as a boss's head was worth to put in incompetent men ? 
 Why is he put there ? — A. Favouritism, as I said before. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. Perhaps if I had a particular friend, if I was placed in the same 
 capacity, I might give him a lift and assist him into a good place. 
 
 Q. It is a personal regard ? — A. Yes, we all have friends. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. I understand you to say that this favouritism is part of the policy of the man- 
 agement in order to keep certain men in good temper ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And these incompetent men are men who have influence among their fellow- 
 workers, and are put there ? — A. They have, to some extent. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Then the manager ought certainly to have got you into one of these good 
 places ? A. I guess. I never happened to tumble into one; he probably made a mis- 
 take. 
 
 Q. It would look that way up to date. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Did you live at Extension part of the time, Mr. Barnes ? — A. Yes, I lived up 
 there five or six months, I suppose; then I moved down here. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You were working in the Nanaimo mines ?— A. No, at Northfield some time 
 ago ; not in No. 1 or Protection. 
 
 ^ ' AARON BARNES— Ladysmith. May 22. 
 
 36a— 23J 
 
356 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF JtOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VIU, A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Having lived at Extension for a few months, do you know anything about the 
 quality of the water there, "or sanitary conditions ? — A. Well, it was stated in Mr. 
 Bryden's evidence that the water was no good. I know that Mr. Harris, one of the 
 resident engineers of this province, told me that he had all the money subscribed to put 
 a water plant into Extension, and levels taken from some lake to Extension ; at any rate 
 he had levels taken and money was subscribed, but Mr. Dunsmuir refused to give them 
 right of way. Mr. Harris told me that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. He told you the water could have been brought to Extension ? — ^^A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Do you know where the city of Nanaimo gets its water ? — A. No, I don't; it is. 
 somewhere in the lakes there. 
 
 Q. Do you know how far Harris would have had to go to bring the water you speak 
 of ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Speaking of the relative health of the two places, what have you got to say ' 
 about that ? — A. There is one thing that has been overlooked in this camp here that 
 has never been stated, and one that to my mind should receive the consideration of 
 Ladysmith, and that is the smelter — the smoke. Last night you could cut it with a 
 knife, with the wind blowing this way. I presume Mr. Dunsmuir might be interested 
 in it, and for that reason, no objection is raised to it. But that smelter it certainly 
 a disgrace to humanity. The roasters should be kept up in the backwoods somewhere. 
 Eor my part, I would rather live at Extension any day in the week as far ai health is 
 concerned. 
 
 Q. Mr. Dunsmuir recently made a proposal to you with respect to the settlement 
 cf these difficulties ? — A. Yes, I have it here, if you wish to see it. 
 
 (Two statements produced. Exhibits 11 and 12). 
 
 His Lordship. — Are these alternative propositions ? 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Yes, alternative offers. You see this one, Mr. Barnes. (Exhibit 11.) What 
 do you say about that; the proposal is to be paid by way of 75 cents per 25 hundred- 
 weight. What was your former pay ? — A. The way I have this figured out it is an 
 increase of 450 pounds to the ton; that is the way I have figured it out. Before it was 
 — I am not positive on this — but I think it was 2,350 pounds considered to be a ton ; 
 2,350 pounds was the amount of coal that had to be filled by a miner, -Which consti- 
 tuted a ton. 
 
 By Sis Lordshi'> : 
 Q. So that would now be 2,800 pounds ? — A. I think so. 
 Q. It was formerly 2,350 ?— A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. WUson : 
 Q. So that the proposal actually involves a reduction of nearly 20 per cent in 
 your wages ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Sis Lordship : 
 Q. The same wages,. 75 cents as formerly, but an addition to the weight of coal ?— 
 A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson, : 
 Q. And that figures out a reduction of nearly 20 per cent ?— A. Nearly, so. 
 
 AARON BARNES— Laaysfflith, Mw 22. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 357 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. And there is some change made as to the price of coal at the pit-head for the 
 use of workmen ?— A. There is $1 put on that; we paid $1 before, now it is $2. 
 
 Q. In other words, so far from endeavouring to meet you, the arrangement pro- 
 poses a reduction in your wages ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What is the effect of that (handing witness Exhibit 12) ? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — That is an alternative proposition ? 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. Yes. What is the effect of that ? — A. So far as the $3 a day here is concerned 
 in this second clause, that is considered to be the recognized standard of wage paid for 
 day work, but in the event of the acceptance of a proposition of that kind, the company 
 furnishes the helper to each individual, and it is not said as to what kind of a helper 
 that might be in this proposition. He might be one of these long-tailed gentlemen — 
 he might not — ^but that is an inference from my standpoint. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What difference would it make, if you get the $3 a day ? — A. That would de- 
 orease the number of white men in the mine. That is the inference I have. I don't 
 say that is the intention, but that is my inference. I don't know whether that is the 
 inference of the union or not. It is of a very large proportion of them. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Was there not a letter accompanying these proposals ? — A. Yes, I was asked 
 to send them back, and I sent them back. 
 
 Q. And in that letter did he not say that he would employ every man who was a 
 member of the union ? — A. I can give the substance of the letter, if it is required. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. In addition to that you received from Mr. Dunsmuir a letter ? — A. Yes; I 
 sent it back to him. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. In consequence of a resolution that was passed at the meeting. 
 
 Q. So that the letter is in i\Ir. Dunsmuir's possession. Did you keep a copy of it ? 
 — A. No, I believe I could relate it, word for word though. It read as nearly as I 
 remember : 
 
 ' To the Committee of the Wellington Colliery Company's employees : Gentlemen : 
 J omitted in my letters handed to you yesterday, to state that I did not intend to dis- 
 criminate against any of my workmen ; all hands to be taken on that so desire, but with 
 the understanding that they sever their connection — withdraw completely from the 
 Western Federation of Miners.' 
 
 If we accepted the proposition. I would not swear that is word for word, but it is 
 as near as possible. That is the whole letter. 
 
 Q. In other words, the proposition of Mr. Dunsmuir involved this reducing your 
 wages 20 per cent and abandoning your union ? — A. Yes. , 
 
 By His Lordship : ' 
 
 Q. By what majority of the meeting was this r reposition refused ?-»A. The re- 
 solution was put in this way : that these documents be sent back to Mr. Dunsmujr. We 
 returned them. It was not considered at all in that shape. 
 
 Q. What was the majority ? — A. Over 75 per cent, anyway. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Well, that is the alternative proposition. Mr. Dunsmuir's proposition was 
 that you could go on at day work or contract work ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If you took up day work, it would be $3 a day and every man employed. That 
 js fair Wages ? — ^A. I stated beftfre that it was the customary wage. 
 
 • AARON BARNES— LadSrSmithi,: M&y 22. 
 
358 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF R07AL COMMI-^SION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. That is all, as a rul^, where men work by day work, and you often work by day 
 work when on contract work ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When you find a place not good enough you can go on at day work, so that is 
 practically if the men don't like prices to be paid for contract work, they can go to 
 work at a price per day, which is always considered right ?^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why should not Mr. Dunsmuir be entitled to say he thinks he has been paying 
 too much for contract work, and that he will put on day work ? — ^A. Assuming we 
 acceded to that proposition of day work, Mr. Dunsmuir would be in a position to say 
 who should go to the face and dig coal, and who should not. 
 
 Q. What difference does that make to you ? — A. The man who would go to the 
 face and dig coal would get $3. The man who would work as his helper might get 
 $2. He might 'be a good miner, and they would say, you cannot go to the face at all. 
 
 Q. What possible object could the company have in sending incompetent men to 
 the face ? — They are paying by day work, so they want to get the most. work they can.' 
 
 Q. What reason can you state for sending poor men to the faces ? — A. I have said 
 favouritism occurs. They might undertake to send a favourite in, whether competent 
 or not. There are men who are competent in the mine, but I am referring to men 
 v.'ho are not in a position to do work. 
 
 Q. Are the company going to injure their own interests and put incompetent men 
 to do the work, because they want to favour particular men ? — A. i'here might be an- 
 another reason. If we severed our connection to this extent, then we would be at the 
 mercy of Mr. Dunsmuir. 
 
 Q. You were going to get a two years' contract ?— A. Yes. Assuming that we did 
 sever our connection with the Western Federation of Miners, men that have made 
 themselves very prominent in connection with unionism — they might say, well, we 
 won't allow these men to go to the face, and those men would eventually leave. 
 
 Q. Do you believe that is the intention ? — A. Well, judging from past history. 
 
 Q. If you did, why don't you make a counter proposition to Mr. Dunsmuir; if 
 that is the only trouble you had. He sent you a letter, saying he would not discrimi- 
 nate. You assume that he doesn't mean what he says. Why did you not have the 
 decency to put a counter proposition, and have him put that in the agreement ? — A. I 
 had no authority to put any proposition. 
 
 Q. And you never advocated any such counter proposition. Does that not look 
 as if you wanted to keep up the trouble instead of settling it ? — A. That may be your 
 conclusion, of course. This proposition, as it has been submitted, conformed to a 
 former statement made by Mr. Dunsmuir himself; that he intended to look for con- 
 cessions instead of the men looking for an advance. 
 
 Q. Here is the proposition ; for all the men to go on day work at the regular 
 standard wage that has always been satisfactory. Your only reason against it is the 
 suspicion in the minds of the men that the company are not going to carry out the 
 spirit of the agreement ? — A. It does not cover other grounds. 
 
 Q. Why did you not make a counter proposilion ? — A.. Because the opinion is 
 that Mr. Dunsmuir never intended to treat his men fairly. 
 
 Q. You are simply blind with prejudice ? — A. Not by any means, but I don't 
 object to your drawing your own conclusions. 
 
 Q. Here is the proposition ; I am trying to bring your mind to this ? — A. I have 
 done as much as any other man to bring this matter to a settlement, but when I find 
 his proposition unreasonable, I say that Mr. Dunsmuir does not intend to bring this 
 thing to a settlement. One of the committee that was appointed at the same time as 
 myself made a statement that we would be surprised when we got the proposition from 
 Mr. Dunsmuir. He told me he got it from one of the officers of the company. lie 
 meant we would get something we were not looking for. 
 
 Q. Apparently you got what you were looking for. Suppose we just consider 
 the day work proposition in the first place ; the only objection you have is that there is 
 AARON BARNES— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISB COLUMBIA 359 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 no guarantee against the Chinese, and, second, that Mr. Dunsmuir will discriminate^ 
 and not give the men who have been prominent in the strikes a chance to work ? — A. 
 That is a reasonable inference. 
 
 Q. Why didn't you put that in writing and ask Mr. Dunsmuir if he would con- 
 sent to it ? Why didn't you ask Mr. Wilson to draw it out, so that your rights would 
 he protected ? — A. That would be a question for the union to consider. 
 
 Q. Well, you could have advocated the union doing that ?— A. Nofwith the under- 
 standing that the proposition laid down is that we withdraw from the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners. 
 
 Q. Will you advocate that Mr. Wilson shall put into writing a form of words that 
 will protect you on all points in dispute, and submit it to Mr. Dunsmuir ? — A. No, I 
 will not. I feel satisfied that it would not be entertained one minute by Mr. Duns- 
 muir; I feel satisfied on that point. We have a right to infer that from the attitude 
 of that gentleman in the past. 
 
 Q. Do you really want to get a settlement of this matter ? — A. I do. 
 , • Q. Then why don't you take reasonable steps to bring it about ? — A. We have 
 taken as reasonable steps as possible. 
 
 Q. What do men do in the ordinary course of business — don't they put an alterna- 
 tive proposition ? Mr. Dunsmuir's agreement does not necessarily mean he is going 
 to employ Chinamen or discriminate. Why don't you put that specifically in legal 
 words if you want to bring about a settlement ?— A. The idea is this. I see the posi- 
 tion you want to get us in. There may be this possibility — and it looks very much 
 like it to me — that he may have submitted this proposition for the purpose of leading 
 us on to further correspondence in this matter; that once we take upon ourselves the 
 responsibility of discussing this matter with him, it is from the standpoint of severing 
 from the Western Federation of Labour. That is just the position he puts us in. 
 
 Q. Then we get back to this : that there is no use discussing anything unless you 
 are prepared to stay in the Western Federation of Miners ? — A. I presume that is 
 the opinion of the majority in this camp. 
 
 Q. Then what is the use of discussing it ? The standard wage that you have 
 worked on has been $3 ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that is the way they work at Nanaimo ? — A. I guess so. 
 
 Q. Will you undertake to say that every man in this camp does not agree that 
 $3 is a fair day's pay ?— A. That is the usual rate. 
 
 Q. The only real trouble with that agreement is, you don't want to withdraw from 
 the Western Federation of Miners. Now, then, you say the other work involves a 
 reduction of 20 per cent ? 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. I understood the witness to say that the miners would not entertain any pro- 
 position involving withdrawal from the Western Federation ? — A. No, I didn't say 
 that; involving the complete withdrawal from the Western Federation. If Mr. Duns- 
 muir made a reasonable proposition there might be a possibility that they would enter- 
 tain it. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. $3 a day is reasonable, is it not ?— A. It is the stipulated wage. 
 
 Q. And the only question is the Western Federation ? — A. That is the question. 
 
 Q. And if Mr. Dunsmuir insists that he is not going to employ any men. and you 
 insist that you won't give up the Federation, what then ?— A. It will be a battle to the 
 
 end, I suppose. , t^ . .„ . , , 
 
 Q. And the result will be, as far as I can see, that Dunsmuir will simply employ 
 other men. ^The law in this country doesn't make any man employ union men. Until 
 that law is changed, you have to deal with it. 
 
 AARON BARNES— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
360 Ml^'VTES OF EVlDETflCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION ' 
 
 3^ EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. We were told in Nanaimo that the company pays 68 cents a ton on contract 
 work. Would 75 cents a ton for 2,850 pounds be more or less than 68 cents for 2,350 
 pounds ? — A. I don't know what they pay there. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Do you think that Mr. Dunsmuir, being in competition with tlie Western Fuel 
 Company, should be compelled to pay more for contract work than the Western Fuel 
 Company — do you think that would be fair. They pay 68 cents a ton there for 2,350 
 pounds, and Mr. Dunsmuir says he will pay 75 cents a ton of 2,850, or 2,800 pounds — 
 is that not fair. Why should Mr. Dunsmuir have to pay his men more than the men i^i 
 Nanaimo when he has to sell coal at the same price ? — A. Tou are drawing upoij your 
 conception of what they get there; you are assuming that they pay less than they (Jo 
 here. 
 
 Q. How much difference is there between the prices — 68 cents for 2,350 pounds^ 
 and 75 cents for 2,800 ? — A. There is some slight difference. 
 
 Q. Not very much ; I think they are about the same thing ? — A. Mr. Dunsnfuir 
 told lis that if we would sever our connection with the Western Federation of Miners, 
 and refuse to follow men like Baker, that he would deal fairly with us. 
 
 Q. Is that dealing unfairly with you — to pay you the same as at Nanaimo ? — A. 
 They get pay for deficient work at Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. Do they get more pay for deficient work ? — A. I think they do, but I have no 
 more proof than you have. 
 
 Q. Will you say that if the scale of deficiency payment is practically the sanie at 
 Nanaimo as at Ladysmith, is it fair for Mr. Dunsmuir to pay more per ton than the 
 Western Fuel Company ? Is that treating his men unfairly? — A. We are discussing 
 the question of the relative wages in these mines. I don't know what they pay there. 
 
 Q. I am telling you they pay 68 cents a ton ? — A. I don't care if they pay $1.50. 
 
 Q. Where do you make out the unfairness of it ? How is it unfair for Mr. Duns- 
 muir to pay his men here 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — Because it is 560 pounds more. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — It is 68 cents for 2,350 pounds at Nanaimo, and Dunsmuir pro- 
 poses to pay 75 cents for 2,800. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is a difference of 3 cents in favour of the Dunsmuir offer; 
 that is the way I make it out. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Yes. Now where is the unfairness of that ? He has to sell coal at the same 
 price as the Western Fuel Company. What complaint have you got ? — A. We have 
 the complaint that the coal field in Nanaimo is a little freer to mine. 
 
 Q. But you could work by day work ? — A. I understand that thoroughly well. 
 
 Q. Why don't you work at day work — there are some good places ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When you are working on contract work and get in a poor place, does not the 
 foreman always give you the option of going on day work ?^A. Not always. 
 
 Q. Where you get in a poor place and not making $3 a day that the foreman won" 
 allow you on day work ? — A. No. I can get men in this camp to disprove that state- 
 ment, I can bring men to show that they had not the option of going on '$3 a day. 
 
 Q. Was it not because they could make more than $3 a day at contract work I— 
 A. That was the assumption. The last digging of coal I did I worked for something 
 less than $2.5(3 a day. I worked 16 days and got something like $32. ^ 
 
 Q. Why did you not ask to go on day work ?— A. It was no use ta ask, I don't 
 suppose. , , ... 
 
 AARON BARNES— LaCysmlth, May 22. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 361 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. If you didn't ask you have no complaint. Tell me any competent man working 
 in a place where he could not make $3 a day at day work ?^A. I can bring you men. 
 
 Q. Will you undertake that they were good competent men ? — A. You are asking 
 me to assure too much responsibility. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Has the whole body of the miners got to accept one or other of these 
 alternatives ? Is it not an individual contract ? 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — There is no doubt about that from the way the contract is worded. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 That cannot be so from the practice of the mine. It has been the practice of this 
 management that if a man could not make wages at contract work, to allow him to go 
 on day work, and it 'cannot be assumed that that rule would be changed now, and I have 
 no doubt that Mr. Dunsmuir will say what the documents are intended to mean — thai 
 it will be contract or day work, as has always been the case — if a man cannot, make 
 $3 a day at contract work he will be put on day work. 
 
 Q. Will you object to the proposal if that is made clear ? — A. I should certainly 
 object from an individual standpoint, if it was insisted that I must withdraw from the 
 union. ' 
 
 Q. That is the $3 a day offer ? — A. Any offer. I claim the right to belong to a 
 union. , 
 
 His Lordship. — I may say that the jSTanalmo offer is more favourable. It is 34 
 pounds for one cent, and under this present offer they would have to dig 37 pounds 
 for one cent. I must have been mistaken in my former figures. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — That would be 14 pounds more in the ton. 
 
 Ilia Lordship. — ^^Three pounds more for each cent. 
 
 Bif Mri Bodwell : 
 Q. I would like the witness, if Mr. Dunsmuir would make an offer which would 
 justify him in withdrawing from the union — I would like to know what kind of an 
 offer that would be ? — A. I cannot say what kind of an offer they would expect, but 
 it would have to be better than that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. When they get an undertaking not to discriminate, and $3 a day, I cannot 
 see, speaking for myself, what more they could want, other than a two year contract ? 
 — A. There is one provision in favour of not withdrawing from the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners 
 
 Q. What is the necessity for it if they settle this for two years ? — A. We have 
 had so much experience with this man in the past that really any statement he makes 
 is not worth the paper it is 'written on. It stands as an absolute certainty in this coiin- 
 try. And if this organization was in existence and had good strong backing probably 
 they might be able to see to it that justice was done. 
 
 Q. They don't seem to have been able to do anything for you heretofore. You 
 have been out two months, and you have not got any aid to speak of ? — A. We will 
 probably have millions of dollars coming in after a while. 
 
 Q. How are you going to get a million dollars if the whole state of Colorado goes 
 on strike ? — A. I know your Lorflship is anxious to see a settlement, but that is look- 
 ing at the dark side. I can see a sunny side to every proposition ; I never look at 
 the dark side. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that Mr. Dunsmuir cannot bQ made to carry out a contract 
 that he puts his name to i — A. Not under these circumstances. 
 
 AAROrf BARNES— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
362 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Not under the laws of this country ? — ^A. He is the law of this country. 
 
 His LoEDSHip. — I don't think Mr. Dunsmuir could afford to outrage public opinion 
 By not living up to the contract. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — Apparently he does not care much for it now. 
 
 ~ By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That appears to be an ultimatum then, as far as the majority of the men are 
 eoncerried — that they will not withdraw from the Western Federation, no matter what 
 wages are offered ? — ^A. It is not that perhaps, but, as I said before, it might possibly 
 have been somewhat different, had a favourable proposition been made. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Would the men consider a proposition involving their withdrawal ? — A. I am 
 not in a position to say that. This is the proposition that has been made. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. To my mind it is rather a serious matter for the men who are in control of 
 this movement. It seems to me half a dozen men are taking a serious responsibility 
 in regard to the position of the families ? — A. If you refer to me, I have scarcely said 
 one word in these meetings in relation to any question. 
 
 Q. It is plain to see that the men have a good deal of confidence in you ? — A. 
 They know this much : that when I make a statement, I am always prepared to carry 
 it out. 
 
 Q. The position is that you have an offer 'for a two-year contract, the wages to 
 be standard wages which you say are reasonable wages. It carries out your view of a 
 uniform rate of wages. There is to^ be no discrimination as to the men on strike — 
 all shall get work. I don't see, speaking for myself, what more a man could ever ex- 
 pect, except this miserable question about joining a union ? — A. Assuming that to be 
 the case — we would withdraw from the Western Federation. We assume that Mr. 
 Dunsmuir did attempt to discriminate against any man. There is only one alternative 
 for each individual — to take what is pushed out to him. 
 
 Q. If there is any comradeship among the men, and they came to the conclusion 
 that any men were being discriminated against, they could step out and inaugurate 
 another strike ? — A. I will tell you if I thought for one moment that a proposition 
 of that kind would be carried out I would be willing to accept it, but in my opinion it 
 would not be. If we were disbanded there is no organization; there is no bond of 
 vnion. It is impossible to net together without a union. I would just as soon tell Mr. 
 Dunsmuir to his face. If we were dealing with a man we would put confidence in, 
 but we have had so much dealing with him. 
 
 Q. Mr. Bodwell says you can have your own lawyer and secure the agreement 
 at all points of the compass. It is nonsense talking about standing out for joining 
 the Western Federation. If you could not get a two-year contract there might be a 
 great deal to be said ? — A. I can assure you that if the men should undertake to make 
 a proposition of that kind I would have my opinion still. I don't want to confine the 
 sentiment to the balance of the public here ; they are at liberty to do as they please. I 
 have always refrained from saying anything for fear that it might prejudice the minds 
 of a great many of the men. When I once take a stand and I consider I am right I 
 don't move. 
 
 Q. Don't you see that while everybody concedes you the right in the abstract to 
 join any union you see fit, on the other hand the law allows an employer, if he sees 
 fit, to employ non-union men. His rights are no goeater than yours, and yours no 
 greater than his. 
 
 AAROT^ BARNES— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES lif BRITISH COLUMBIA. 363 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. I suppose it is understood that the company won't take any man into their 
 employ except under the terms of this agreement ?— A. I presume if the proposition 
 was accepted they would not employ anybody at less wages ; I would not say they 
 would not do that. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. What you call narrow work is really development work in the mines ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Is it not important, in the interests of all concerned, that that work should 
 be well and carefully done ? — A. I believe it is. 
 
 Q. And would not a good manager, in the ordinary course of business, put their 
 best men there in their own interests ? — A. I might answer that question by asking 
 another 
 
 Q. I will put it this way. If you were the superintendent or manager of a mine, 
 would you knowingly employ any incompetent men on narrow work ? — A. In some 
 instances. I inight think certain men competent unless I had a practical knowledge 
 of these things myself. Assuming the question is put this way : it is assuming that the 
 official is a man capable of judging whether he is a competent person or not. 
 
 Q. He has no business there if he is not ? — A. Well, unfortunately, there are some. 
 
 Q. Do you want to make that charge ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. I am putting you there; you are in that position. Do you mean to say you 
 are not a competent man. I am supposing you are in that position ; I ask would you 
 knowingly employ an incompetent man on narrow work ? — A. No, I don't think I 
 would, but there are other men that are just equally as 'capable of judging as to whe- 
 ther a man is competent or not. 
 
 Q. You mean that the man who is responsible for the proper conduct of the work 
 should surrender his judgment to other men who are not responsible ? — A. Assuming 
 there was a union in existence. I think there would be a lot of men who would be 
 just as familiar with the working of the mine — in relation to the competency of the 
 men, at least, and if they met together they might be in a position to determine who 
 should act and who should not. 
 
 Q. That is just the effect of unionism, to take away from a man his responsibi- 
 lity, is it not ? — A. No, that is probably an extreme case; I have referred to that before 
 as being favouritism. 
 
 Q. Favouritism may exist, but it does not necessarily exist ? — A. I know of men 
 who have been promised this narrow work for weeks. 
 
 Q. Give me an instance ? — A. I can give you one instance; a man by the name of 
 Harry Hughes. 
 
 ,Q. Where was he working ? — A. In No. 2, under Dave Wilson. 
 
 Q. Where was he promised narrow work ? — A. Whenever any narrow work was 
 to be opened up ; he has not got it yet. 
 
 Q. Has there been narrow work to give him ? — A. I don't know that there has. 
 
 Q. Then what do you mean ? — A. What is the use of asking me the question if 
 
 you don't 
 
 Q. Give me the next instance ? — A. There is new work open?;] up all the time. 
 
 Q. Tell me the names of the men who have been refused narrow work where it pro- 
 perly belonged to him ?— A. That is another question. 
 
 Q. You said you could give an instance ? — A. I gave an instance. I did not say 
 I knew of a person who refused this, though I think I could find such a person. 
 
 Q. Tell me an instance ?— A. I don't know of any. 
 
 Q. Just that one man ? — A. Yes. If I had a little time I believe I could give you 
 
 quite a number. at 
 
 Q. Do you say that Graves is not a good miner ?— A. He if^ 
 Q. Is Spratt ?— A. Yes. 
 
 AARON BARNES— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
364 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1.904 
 
 Q. Is Dunsmuir ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Mottishaw ?— A. Yes. ' . 
 
 Q. Carroll ? — A. Hs is fairly good. 
 
 Q. Do you say Carroll is incompetent to do narrow work ? — A. No, he mi^ht ho 
 competent. 
 
 Q. Why should the management want to put a man there who cannot get ahead 
 of the work ? — A. That is assuming they understand he is competent. 
 
 Q. What about Smith — is he a good man ? — A. Yes, I believe he is a fairly good 
 man. 
 
 Q. Why should the management not put these men on narrow work, and -put your 
 choice in ? — A. I didn't say we were going to have a choice of men. There should not 
 be one set or particular class of men engaged in this work all the time, making the 
 best wages. 
 
 Q. You said they should be chosen by lot ; would you advocate that ? — A. I beHev3 
 it would make a change, the cavil would be all right. 
 
 Q. Beneficial for the management or the men themselves ? — A. It might. 
 
 Q. Would you advocate putting the favourites of the management out in order 
 to put the favourites of the union in their places ? — A. Not by any means. 
 
 Q. Are there narrow places enough to go round ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Does not your proposition involve either that the favourites of the management 
 have got to be put out in order to put the favourites of the union in ? — A. Not by any 
 means. 
 
 Q. That is a matter of argument ? — A. If they had the cavil each and every indi- 
 vidual would have a chance al the work. 
 
 Q. And would have to take a chance of getting unfit men ? — A. If that were so, 
 there is remedy for that. 
 
 Q. Now, this narrow woik is paid by the ton and by yardage ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How is it that the favourite gets any advantage. He has to get out the coal in 
 order to get his money ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And if he does not get out the coal and does not make wages, they allow him 
 deficiency ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The only favouritism is getting in the place. Supposing a man were put in out 
 of favouritism — a poor man — in narrow work, he would not be able to make the wages 
 anyway ? — A. He would have a chance to make better wages than in other work. 
 
 Q. And you think that should be the policy of the management. That the boss 
 would put men in who could not do the work in narrow places where there is bound to 
 be a deficiency in the work. How long do you think a boss would last who acted on 
 that principle ? — A. Whatever policy they might have is another question. 
 
 Q. How long do you think a boss would last if he pursued that line ? — A. A boss 
 can last as long as he is prepared to work things for the benefit of the company, and no 
 longer. The men must take out other material as well as coal. 
 
 Q. You think they would be given allowances i — A. Yes, some get allowance. 
 
 Q. And the suggestion would be that there was corruption. To prove a system of 
 corruption you have to prove it in the management from the start to finish in order 
 to establish your case. You first have to prove favouritism in the boss in putting his 
 own men in narrow work, and subsequently you have to allow those above him to be 
 corrupt ? — A. A man acting in the cajMcity of boss could see that the management 
 does not know anything about it. 
 
 Q. And what does the management say when he does not get the coal out ? — A. 
 Well, they put his pipe out, I suppose. 
 
 Q. Have you the temerity to state that this is a state of affairs existing ,in this 
 mine ? — A. Favouritism is shown, certainly. > 
 
 AAROiN BAKNES— I^adysmith, May 22. 
 
ON moV^miAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBfA 335 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 • 
 Q. The only instances you can give are the names you have mentioned ?-rA. I 
 guess if I had thought of a question like that coming up I could get more. I gave you 
 a few just to shovr you how things are done. 
 
 Q. Go ahead and give the list. I will give you until after lunch or until to-morrow 
 to get your list ? — A. If you consider it essential to do that, all right. 
 Q. Do it if you can. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. The effect of that agreement is that it touches the miner alone and nobody 
 else ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the result might be to put a great number of men out of employment who 
 are now employed in the mines ? 
 
 His Lordship. — Which agreement ? 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. The one relating to the $3 a day ? — A. The agreement reads that all men will 
 be taken back who are now out, 'out there is not more than half the men here. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. That is not Mr. Dunsmuir's fault ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. The agreement, as I understand it, is with the miners and not with the 
 labourers ? — A. Yes, they can send you a labourer — whoever they wish. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Why shoulii you object to that if you get your $3 a day ? — A. Well— — 
 
 Q. Your union is composed of miners — not mine labourers ? — A. There are some 
 labourers digging coal. 
 
 Q. As I understand this proposition, it involves all these men going back at $3 
 a day ? — A. It probably might not mean that. 
 
 Q. Why don't you find out ? — A. It may mean that some would be employed at 
 $3, and others might be employed as labourers. You see the company — assuming this 
 proposition was accepted — the company would be at liberty to determine who should 
 go to the face and who should not. 
 
 Q. What difference does it make to you, if you get the $3 ? 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — The agreement does not read that way. 
 
 His Lordship. — Instead of guessing at what it means, why don't you find cut 
 exactly what it does mean ? 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — It is an agreement for the miners to dig coal and nothing else ; it 
 is an agreement with the coal miner and no one else. There is nothing in there which 
 binds Mr. Dunsmuir to anything. 
 
 His Lordship. — I understand that the effect of the letter with the agreement is 
 that all the men go back. If you are anxious to reach a settlement, surely you might 
 make a counter proposition. What you should do is to narrow down the issues, and 
 if you can narrow down the issue to that question of joining the union, the public 
 will know exactly where you stand. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 Q. There was a proposition made, was there not? — A, Notthatlknow of. , As to 
 all the men going back to work — assuming they did go to work at $3, that would be 
 digging coal at the face. Each man has to have a helper. What class of people will 
 they be ? We know nothing as to that- 
 
 AARON BARNES— Ladysmithi May 22. 
 
368 MINUTES OP EVIDENOE OF B07AL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Tou were asked a question as to the men beitig blind with prejuSice. Did it 
 ever occur to you that Mr. Dunsmuir'a mind is blind with prejudice against your- 
 selves ? — A. Certainly, he has always been. 
 
 Q. There is nothing more you want to tell the Commissioners ? — A. Not that I 
 am aware of. i 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Is it not possible to have favouritism in.' a union ? — A. I don't think so ; not 
 relative to work ; I don't think that can occur. It would have to be governed by a 
 majority of the membership, and whatever the majority determine on they would 
 have to act in conformity with them. I admit there is a probability that the majority 
 may be wrong ; they are not always right, but ' taking all things into consideration 
 I believe that if a union were treated properly they could make things somewhat better. 
 
 Q. Suppose the executive of the Western Federation assumes to call you people 
 out on sympathetic strike, what action would you take ? — A. On a sympathetic strike. 
 If we had no grievance with their employer, I don't think it would be right to go out. 
 If I made a contract with this man here, I don't care how long the term, I' would not 
 undertake to accept any request from the Western Federation in violation of that 
 contract. That contract would have to be carried out so far as I was concerned. 
 
 Q. If you, agreed to work for him for two years, assuming that there was no diffi- 
 culty between you and him, you would consider you were not bound to go on sympa- 
 thetic strike for two years ? — A. That is binding on me. 
 
 Q. What is the opinion of the men so far as you know ? — A. I believe they would 
 do it ; that is my opinion of the men, but I would not like to speak for all. 
 
 Q. The reason I ask is that there is a circular purporting to be signed by Mr. 
 Estes on behalf of the U.B.R.E. in which he says he has the consent of the Western 
 Federation to call out all the Western Federation on the Island ? — A. At the moment ? 
 
 Q. In a few days ? — A. That would not occur in my case. If I made a contract 
 I would consider it binding on me; there is no use in making a contract unless you do 
 
 Q. You thinlc that a coal miners' union of all the coal miners in British Columbia 
 would not answer all legitimate purposes ? — A. No, it would do nothing. We might 
 as well have no union. We tried that before. 
 
 Q. Tou have only had a local union ? — A. They attempted to amalgamate at 
 Alexandria and Nanaimo. They went out to a meeting at Alexandria some time ago, 
 and a meeting in Nanaimo. Extension was supposed to go, but a number didn't go. 
 When Mr. Dunsmuir learned of that he closed down Alexandria, and I believe it has 
 been closed down ever since. 
 
 Q. Now, by the constitution of the Federation, any settlement between the union 
 and employer must be approved by the executive before it is binding. That is the 
 constitution, I believe. Do you think it is reasonable that employers in this country 
 should have to consult people outside of the country before they can come to a settle- 
 ment ? — A- I recognize no boundary line from a labouring standpoint. I would just 
 as soon the headquarters were at Denver as Montreal. 
 
 Q. Cannot you see that an employer would have reason to mistrust allowing his 
 men to join a Federation having control over them outside the province and where 
 our law cannot reach ? — A. He might have that, but there is not 
 
 Q. The position is this : that any settlement, before it would be binding on you, 
 would have to be approved of by men at Denver, whom he knows nothing about, and 
 whom there is no law to reach ? — A. We can make a settlement without them. 
 
 Q. Yes, but it has to be ratified ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. iWhy should an employer have to submit any proposed agreement to people 
 outside of this country ? — A. They don't have to do that. Whenever a settlement is 
 reached the men concerned in the settlement of the dispute, they do settle it then, 
 and they just caU on the executive, I believe, to endorse it. 
 
 AARON BARNES— Laciysmith, May 22. 
 
ON mnOSritlAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 367 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 . ■ Q. ' Any contract or agreement entered into between the members of 
 any local union and their employers as a final settlement of any difficulty or 
 trouble that may occur between them, shall not be considered valid or binding 
 until the same shall have the approval of the executive board of the Western 
 Federation of Miners.' 
 
 That means the employer could not get a binding settlement with his men, if 
 they were members of this union, unless some one at Denver said that settlement was 
 a proper one ? — A. That is taking an extreme case. 
 
 Q. That is plain language ? — A. Yes, I admit that. The question has never 
 been raised, to my mind. 
 
 Q. Would not an employer be reasonable in having some misgivings in allowing 
 his men to join a Federation which had that power ? — A. Well, of course, if he under- 
 stands you feel disposed to crush him he would have that power, but I know of no 
 instance where that has occurred. 
 
 Q. At present, Mr. Barnes, I don't see how you can say any employer is unreason- 
 able when he takes the stand of not wishing to have settlements submitted to foreign 
 euthority, or authority outside the country ? — A. That is his business, of course, but 
 in order to ascertain whether this institution intends to do right or wrong is to give 
 it a test. 
 
 Q. But the point is, he does not choose to allow these people to have anything to 
 fay about it. Why should not a man have the entire and exclusive right to say that f — 
 A. That is what they have. 
 
 Q. He has not, under the constitution ? — A. Supposing we withdraw from the 
 Federation at the moment; that might involve serious consequences so far as the mem- 
 bership is concerned. 
 
 Q. There is the clear difficulty that an employer, before he can get a binding agree- 
 ment with you, has got to see to it that that settlement receives the favourable opinion 
 of people outside of the country altogether ? — A. They, of course, recognize the bound- 
 ary line. For myself, I recognize no boundary line at all. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Would it not be an objection from the employers' standpoint to have hia 
 agreement subject to the revision of a body of that kind, even in Montreal ? — -A. Yes, I 
 would agree in that case. He would raise the same question there. 
 
 Q. Why should he not have a right to object to his men belonging to such a con- 
 cern as that ? — A. He has that right. The same rule might prevail if the headquarters 
 were in Montreal, but I recognize no boundary line between me and the United States ; 
 there is no boundary line as far as the workmen are concerned. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson : 
 
 Q. Not much, either, from the employer's standpoint, when he wants to sell his 
 coal ? — A. Yes, if they would say, we don't want your coal, what would be the result. 
 
 His Lordship. — The difference is this : the man here who sells coal to a man in 
 San Francisco, does not require to have his agreement ratified in Russia before he can 
 carry on business. 
 
 Witness. — The fact of the matter is this : we are too loyal to our country, unfor- 
 tunately. I don't propose to be loyal to any institution that is not good.~ If it is not 
 good from a workingman's standpoint, I don't see that it is any good. If there is 
 poverty and distress in that country I am not loyal to that country, no matter what it 
 might be. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. I think there is only one way of looking at it — that a man who is not loyal to 
 his country should get out. Though I don't think that applies in this particular 
 instance ?— A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 AARON BARNES— Ladysmlth, May 22. 
 
368 . , MllfVTMlS OF EVIDETiCE OV ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VIK, A. 1904 
 I 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How would you suggest that a settlement should be made ? Take this case — 
 there cannot be any conciliation — what law would you suggest to reach a case of this 
 kind ? — A. Well, that proposition would require going into some things we have not 
 gone into yet, in order to consider to what we should submit in order to do away with 
 the causes of these difficulties. I neither believe in conciliation nor compulsory arbi- 
 tration, since it won't settle it. For instance, unless you are in a position to control 
 the members of the committee, compulsory arbitration will only work one way — that is 
 in favour of the operators. 
 
 Q. It has worked heretofore in favour of the men in New Zealand ? — A. We have 
 different information on that. 
 
 Q. There can be no two different opinions — 75 per cent of the awards have been 
 made in favour of the men ? — ^A. They probably have not Come to a time when they 
 might have to drop prices down, to compete in the market. 
 
 Q. That is the trouble ; the awards have been made on a rising market? — A. 
 While the operators have control of the market they can sell their goods at any price 
 they please. For instance, a board could not decide and say to the operator, you shrill 
 carry on your industry at a loss, and there is only one party who can lose on that 
 transaction — that is the labourer. Conciliation, as we understand it in this country, 
 and as it has been introduced into the House, is about the same thing. 
 
 Q. I suppose 'the only remedy is to continue to fight until the weaker party gives 
 in ? — A. Under existing circumstances that is the result, but I think if you will pass 
 a law in this country to stop the giving away of the resources of the country— the . 
 mines — ^that would be a solution of the question to some extent. 
 
 Q. It would not solve this ? — A. No, but if they would put a tax on the land that 
 is standing free of taxation it might induce the men to open it up in order to get the 
 revenue from it. While things stand there is no solution that presents itself as more 
 /.easible to me. Taxation of land values is the proper thing, in my opinion. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I should like to mention the result of the figures, and the difference 
 between here and Nanaimo. If a ton at Nanaimo is 2,240 pounds — ^the regular weight 
 is 68 cents, then, assuming the cent to be the unit, a fair price for 2,850 pounds would 
 be 81 cents. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — The actual difference in the amount of coal between here and 
 Nanaimo would be 166 pounds. For the same money, Mr. Dunsmuir gets 166 pounds 
 more in a ton. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is not as good as the Nanaimo standard. 
 
 Mr. Wilson.— It is just six cents a ton less. 
 
 His Lordship. — I make it out that they have to dig three pounds more for a cent. 
 That would make it 166 pounds. 
 
 What I would like to see would be some counter proposition from you. If you 
 people want to settle, there is nothing like making a proposition. The public will 
 very naturally assume that the real question is whether they are to be allowed to join 
 this foreign organization or not. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — Mr. Dunsmuir's standpoint is he won't have any form of union. ■ 
 
 His Lordship. — The men say they won't have anything except an international or- 
 ganization, as a local is no good, so the whole question is whether they may be allowed 
 to join this foreign organization. 
 
 Mr. KowE. — I should think a trade agreement covering a period of, years wouldi be 
 a good thing. 
 
 Witness. — We don't wish recognition of the union. All we want is to 'Inake aji 
 agreement with him, and that We leave but' the union entirely, but that is left to.; us 
 entirely ; that is our business. 
 AARON BARNES— Lady smith, May 22. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 369 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Toti won't agree to give -up the union. 
 
 Mr. "Wilson. — Surely they have the right. Mr. Dunsmuir insists on his riglit to 
 do what he pleases with his own property, and they insist on doing what they like with 
 their own person. 
 
 His Lordship. — Their position would be much more favourably considered by the 
 public if they insisted on joining a Canadian organization which the laws of Canada 
 could in some way control. If they undertake to thrust themselves on an employer as 
 members of a foreign organization, where there is no control, it is a different question. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — At the same time I think it should be taken into account that most 
 members of unions are members of an international body. 
 
 His Lordship.— Their constitutions differ very materially. 
 
 Witness. — I will tell you what would be the matter with Mr. Dunsmuir. We have 
 been asked to withdraw from the Federation in order to give the Commission a chance 
 to report in connection with the matter, and then the probability was that it would be 
 taken up afterwards. What is the matter with Mr. Dunsmuir giving up his opposition 
 for that length of time ? What is the matter with trying that ? If the Commission 
 find that we are not to be allowed to join a foreign organization, we should have to sever 
 our connection whenever the law was made. In my opinion it would be a very danger- 
 ous legislation for any government to undertake, particularly towards a friendly class 
 of people. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — ^I don't think it is necessary to go into the suggestion of favourit- 
 ism. If the Conunissioners think it well I will call witnesses upon it, but I think Mr. 
 Barnes has disposed of that question on his own evidence. 
 
 Alexander C. Thompson, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What is your occupation ? — A. I am a printer, or newspaper man; practical 
 printer, and have also worked as reporter and editor. 
 
 Q. Are you a member of a union ? — A. I am a member of the Typographical 
 Union : I also consider myself a member of the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. Are you a member ? — A. I have been dropped from the membership for non- 
 payment of dues, 'but my membership could be revived by payment of back dues or a 
 portion of them. 
 
 Q. What lodge was that union ? — A. May I ask the indulgence of the court in 
 this matter. I will give them that information privately, because that would have a 
 connection with certain evidence I expect to give. I will give the court the date and 
 name of the lodge and so on, privately. 
 
 Q. Have you made application for reinstatement ? — A. ISTo. I may explain that 
 I am not a practical miner, though in quartz mining I have done some work, although 
 I don't consider myself a practical miner. I became a member through my employ- 
 ment by the Western Federation as editor and manager of its official organ, that is in 
 the province of British Columbia. That was before it had an official organ at Denver,; 
 the ' Miners' Magazine ' was not in existence. 
 
 Q. What was the name of the organ ?— A. That was one of the things I will givo 
 your Honour. 
 
 Q. What is the objection to its disclosure ?— A. Exactly that I expect to describe 
 things that happened in this union in connection with the executive, and it might not 
 be a good thing for the organization or for the men as to what union that occurred in. 
 
 QQa — 24 ALEX. C. THOMPSON— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
370 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3A EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Well, we will have this information in private. — A. Before the executive of 
 the union considered that I should be made a member of the union, it was considered 
 advisable for me to be perfectly conversant with the inner workings of the organiza- 
 tion. So I was initiated, and as a matter of fact, acted on the executive board. I was 
 always taken into their consultations and meetings, but without a vote. 
 
 Q. Do you mean the general executive at Denver ? — A. The executive of British 
 Columbia, District No. 6, I think it is. This union — the local union to which I be- 
 longed then — I may say I have attended a large number of meetings, at Kosgland, 
 Greenwood, Silverton, Nelson, New Denver and Ymir. I also attended one conven- 
 tion of the district union and appeared before committees and before the whole mem- 
 bership at two other conventions. This paper was not owned by the local union of 
 which I was a member, but was started to a certain extent by the District Association, 
 and by contributions from the other local unions. I was simply a salaried employee. 
 At the time of my first connection with the union the membership of that particular 
 union was probably 900 in good standing. 
 
 Q. What year was this in ? — A. Well, 1900 — no, I became connected with the 
 union in the autumn of 1899, but the principal occurrences of which I am going to 
 speak occurred in 1900. The membership was about the same, though. In the spring 
 of 1900 internal dissensions arose in the union, the membership fell off — they arose 
 partly over union politics, and largely over political questions. The union became 
 weakened, and the employers in that camp commenced gradually weeding out the strong 
 men of the union. The brainy members of the union would find themselves discharged 
 for some trifling cause, sometimes without any, at one mine in the camp. He would 
 find it impossible to get employment at any other camp, and was so compelled to leave 
 and seek work elsewhere. This went on for probably three months, and we found we 
 were losing all our good men — the men we would have to depend on in case of trouble. 
 We were led to believe that it was a concerted action on the part of the mine-owners, 
 that they had an understanding to weed out these men, and to kill the iafluence and 
 the power of the union in that camp. Permission was asked of the executive to inau- 
 gurate a strike for the complete recognition of the union in these mines. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe 
 
 Q. The Denver executive ? — A. Yes, the Denver executive. By the way, I don't 
 know that it was required, but the executive of the British Columbia Association was 
 taken fully into our confidence, and they fully approved of the action which we pro- 
 posed to take. 
 
 Q. To go on strike for recognition in all the mines in that camp ? — A. Yes, so 
 that it might be impossible for the mine-owners to gradually break up the strength of 
 the union. This request was refused. 
 
 Q. The request was refused ? — A. By the Denver executive. 
 
 Q. On what ground ?— A. I could not tell you. I have an idea, but the exact 
 ground was not given. 
 
 Q. What was your idea ?— A. My idea was— I could only gather that from the 
 remarks of the president of the Western Federation a month or so later — that they 
 thought we would be entering on a losing fight. Upon the executive's refusal to 
 endorse our proposed strike, greater dissatisfaction still arose, as then there was a 
 faction supporting the executive and another faction condemning it. The membership 
 still fell off, until we had an active membership of only 250, although this was not 
 known to the public. The public still supposed we had a large membership, although 
 I have every reason to believe the mine-owners were aware of the true state of affairs. 
 Things became so bad that I think it was in either June or July of that year, at the 
 personal request of myself and two or three representative men of the union, Edward 
 Boyce, who was president of the Western Federation at that time, visited the camp. 
 He interviewed the miners' union, officials, individual miners, mine managers and 
 
 ALEX. C. THOMPSON— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA S7l 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 every one who could possibly throw any light upon the situation there. He then asked 
 for a special meeting of the union. At this meeting of the union he said that he came 
 there with full authority from the executive to act in the premises. He said that unless 
 w-e could heal the breaches in our own ranks — close up our own ranks, do away with the 
 dissension, there would be no use of our entering upon a strike. The success of such 
 a strike was doubtful, even if we were to unite our forces again, and his advice was — 
 he said he did not think as a result of his investigations that we could heal these dis- 
 sensions, and said that in his opinion matters would simply go from bad to worse, 
 until the union would become a by-word in the camp, and a source of weakness to 
 organized labour, to its individual members, if matters got much worse — and that he 
 had (I cannot say positively whether he said he had or would have) the support of 
 the Denver executive in advising us to dispose of our property — we had a large union 
 property, with considerable treasury — and making a division of it among the members, 
 or disposing of it as we saw fit, and abandon our charter — abandon our union ; let the 
 mine-owners know that we had given up the fight, and perhaps, he said, in the course 
 of a few years, or a year or two, things would become so that we could revive our 
 organization on a better plan. This advice was taken with very ill-grace by the union 
 — that is, those who had supported the executive in refusing us permission to strike 
 deemed Mr. Boyce's view was rather what they called interference. Some members 
 of the union even went so far as to ask him what business ho had to come over to 
 Canada and interfere in the private affairs of the local union. These men were not 
 aware that he had been invited to come by a few members of the union. After a full 
 discussion, in which Mr. Boyce came in for some very harsh criticism, the union, pijic- 
 tically unanimously, rejected his suggestion, and the feeling of the union was that 
 if they had to give up their organization, they would give it up fighting — only through 
 failure to win the fight. In fact, the expression was ' We will die fighting.' The 
 exedutive of that lo^cal union then commenced to stir. The result of his visit rather 
 had a tendency to heal this internal dissension, and the executive began a very care- 
 ful c6urse of strengthening the lines, getting in new members ; as fast as men were 
 brought into the camp to replace members of our union we would get these members 
 into the union as quickly as possible. We brought in all the men we could to 
 strengthen our forces, because there was no doubt there was a determination on the 
 part of the union to enter into a fight as soon as they could get in shape to do it, even 
 without the consent of the Denver executive. By the way, the headquarters then was 
 at Butte, Montana. We succeeded in increasing the membership of the union again 
 to probably 600. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Fp to 600 ? — A. Probahly ; I can only speak approximately. Simply with a 
 view of getting into a position to try and force the mine-owners to a recognition of the 
 union, and the whole energies of the union were being directed towards preparing for 
 this fight, because they had very good reason to believe that the Mine Owners' Associa- 
 tion of British Columbia had started in on a general plan of warfare against the 
 Federation, and that the Mine Owners' Association had determined as well on making 
 that the battle ground, and they were weakening our forces as much as possible by dis- 
 criminating against our men by letting them go, latterly in batches of a dozen at a 
 time, and in the course of a few days replacing them by men who came from the other 
 side, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, and, I believe, some from Nova Scotia. At 
 that stage I left the camp, but kept very closely in touch with it. My connection with 
 that union then ceased. As I quit the paper I went into other work, but I kept very 
 closely in touch with it, and I know that two months after my leaving the paper, the 
 fight which the union had expected and was preparing for was forced upon that union, 
 and a strike was ordered, despite the fact that it was discouraged by the executive, 
 and that union went before the executive and demanded financial assistance from the 
 
 gg^ 24i ALEX. C. THOMPSON— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
372 MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION. 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Western Federation of Miners, and despite the fact that they went into that fight 
 without the consent or approval of the executive. 
 
 Q. That was in 1901 ?— A. Yes, in 1901 the strike took place. 
 
 Q. What month ? — A. I should say in April — I would not he positive as to that— 
 either April or May. 
 
 Q. They made a demand for financial aid ? — A. They did. 
 
 Q. With what result ? — A. They got it to the extent, I have been informed, of 
 nearly $100,000. 
 
 By Mr. Sowc : 
 Q. For how long ? — A. I could not tell you. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How do you account for the fact that they got aid when the strike was disap- 
 proved of ?— A. I .cannot account for it except in this way — that the real breach, I 
 believe, was forced uporf the union by the action of certain mine owners. 
 
 Q. If that was the case one would naturally expect they would approve of the 
 strike ? — A. Well, they did disapprove all along of what was practically the intention 
 of the union to enter .into a fight as soon as they thought they were in the best con- 
 dition to do so — as soon as they could get an excuse to do so, and that whole view was 
 disapproved by the executive. I was^not in the camp when the actual breach occurred, 
 but I have been told it occurred from a very radical action on the part of one mine 
 manager, and that the union used .that as a reason for what was practically a general 
 strike in the camp. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : i 
 
 Q. How many men were out on strike ? — A. I can only tell you by hearsay ; I 
 understand about 1,200 or 1,400. 
 
 Q. How long did it last ? — A. I should judge the camp was tied up — no men work- 
 ing — for a period of three or four months. After that they gradually opened the mines 
 with labour from the States and Eastern Canada. I believe they opened them under 
 police protection — I am not positive ■ as to that — until the resources of the union be- 
 came exhausted, until they saw there was no possibility of winning it, and gradually 
 allowed it to die out. I don't think it has ever been officially declared ofF, with the ex- 
 ception of one mine. In one mine a settlement was made with the union, and union 
 men were allowed to return to work there — in fact, I believe, they made very good 
 terms, and the union men were favoured. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The union was not recognized ? — A. No. It was in that one mine. 
 
 Q. One mine out of how many ? — A. I should judge there were three or four af- 
 fected — that is, employing apy large number of men ; there were a dozen affected that 
 employed a small number of men doing development work. I think it was four affected 
 — employing a large number of men. 
 
 Q. There was a demand made for increased wages by the union men? — A. I don't 
 think so. They may have done so, but that was not — yes, I think there was, too. I 
 know that that was one of the causes of dissatisfaction in the union prior to Mr. 
 Boyce's visit — that a certain class of labour in these mines that belonged to the union, 
 were not getting the same rate of pay as was paid the same labour in other camps in 
 the province, and I think a demand for an increase for that class of labour up to the 
 standard rate in the province was made. 
 
 Q. That was really the pretext for the strike ? — A. I presume it was ; I dannot 
 speak positively on that. 
 
 Q. The strike took place, I believe, on July 11 ; is that correct ? — A. It may be ; I 
 was away from the camp. I was down here on the coast. That is two years ago, and 
 ALEX. C. THOMPSON— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 373 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 I could not state positively as to the date. I know there was war and rumours of war 
 two or three months before it happened, and I could not state exactly the date. 
 
 Q. Don't you think the granting of $100,000 in aid of that strike was practically 
 an approval of the strike ?— A. I don't think that it was. 
 
 Q. One would think that actions speak louder than words ? — A. It may be at the 
 time the strike took place that the executive were fully in favour of it ; I could not tell. 
 
 Q. At the time that strike took place there was a strike at the Northport smelter ? 
 — A. I could not say positively. 
 
 Q. Would it surprise you to hear there was ? — A. No, I believe there have been 
 strikes at several smelters in the state of "Washington. 
 
 Q. The Northport smelter was owned by the principal company affected in this 
 strike ? — A. I could not say that it was. I have forgotten the name of the company 
 that owns it. 
 
 Q. I may tell you for your informtion that the Le Eoi owns 999,995 shares out 
 of the million — I know that myself ? — A. That may be. 
 
 Q. So that there was an intimate connection between the Northport strike and the 
 strike at Le Roi, at all events ? — A. Possibly. 
 
 Q. You say the strike died out ; it was not settled ? — A. That is my understanding 
 — that it simply died out slowly in all the mines, with the exception of one, and in that 
 it was simply a case of getting the best terms they could for the men. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Have you made a calculation of how much the men lost by reason of that 
 strike ? — A. No, but I presume it would run in the neighbourhood of three-quarters of 
 a million dollars in the way of wages. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I suppose you have read the constitution ? — A. I was well acquainted with it at 
 that time. Since then there have been some changes made in it. 
 
 Q. Are you aware that the constitution provides that no settlement of a strike shall 
 be valid or binding unless approved by the executive at Denver ?^A. I am aware of 
 that'. That provision is made in almost the same terms of all the international unions. 
 
 Q. So that before an employer can get a settlement with his men that must be 
 approved of by a body of men who are outside the country. Is that so ? — A. Of course, 
 it is stated there in very clear terms that it is necessary, but in my own experience I 
 know of but one agreement which has been disproved of by the international executive. 
 
 Q. "What agreement was that ? — A. It was an agreement made by a subordinate 
 union of the International Typographical Union. 
 
 Q. By subordinate, you mean a local union ? — A. Yes, a local union, a branch. 
 
 Q. Just give us the circumstances of that ? — A. I must trust entirely to my 
 memory of the case, and of reading of it at the time in our official organ. I was not in 
 one of the towns affected, but comparatively near, and have worked with many men 
 who were personally interested. It seems there were four or five unions within one 
 competitive district. This was somewhere in New Jersey — I think it was Orange. 
 There were four unions in a comparatively small district. We have what is known as 
 cojopetitive districts. 
 
 Q. At all events, it is enough for our purposes to know this power has been exer- 
 cised ?-:-A. It was exercised for this reason. We will assume there were four — there 
 may have been more. The scale of wages in three unions was $16 per week by agree- 
 ment, and a nine hour day. The agreement would cover say 300 men. In the fourth 
 town the union accepted an agreement for $12 per week with a ten hour day, so as 1 3 
 enable their employers to go into these other three near-by towns and compete for that 
 work and take that work away from these other unions. The allied trades considered 
 it unfair competition, and the international being made a party to this agreement con- 
 
 ALBX. C. THOMPSON— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
374 MINVrES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll., A. 1904 
 
 eluded that it could not sacrifice the interests of these 300 members for the interest of 
 ?ay 100 — that is a small number — as a matter of fact it was only about a dozen men 
 who were in the $12 scale, and they could not jeopardize the welfare of the greater 
 number by allowing them to be a party to unfair competition, and they said, instead 
 of doing this, we will support you and put your wage up to $16 a week the same as the 
 other near-by unions. This they did do. 
 
 Q. The result ? — A. The result was that the fourth union carried the fight on with 
 the employers until the fourth union secured the $16 scale and the 9 hour day, so that 
 all the employers in that competitive district were placed on equality as regards com- 
 petition. 
 
 Q. Wliat do you hold to be the chief advantage of international unions ? — A. 
 There is no particular advantage in an international union, provided the members in 
 any given trade, in any given nation, are sufficient to control their trade. Were there 
 enough printers in Canada to justify the expenditure necessary in administering the 
 affairs of all the unions from central headquarters, and to thoroughly control the trade 
 in Canada, there would be but very little difference in international organization, as 
 we have, in a measure, international affiliation anyway. The English Typographical 
 Society recognizes the card of the American International Union. I could take out 
 a card from the Nanaimo Union and deposit it in Glasgow and become a member of 
 the union there; the same way with the English and the society in Europe. 
 
 Q. Would affiliation have the effect of preventing substitute labour coming in ? — 
 A. It would in our trade ; I don't know whether it would in others or not. 
 
 Q. That is to say, a member of the typographical union in the States would not 
 scab here where there was a strike if there was nothing more than affiliation ? — A. The 
 only thing I think he could do is this : suppose a printer comes out from the old 
 country and is not the bearer of a card of membership in either the Irish, Scotch, 
 English or London Typographical Society. We ask him why he is not a member, and 
 if he cannot give a very good reason why he was not a member, we will simply give 
 him a permit to work until we find out why he was not a member. If we find he is 
 an unfair member we refuse him work here. 
 
 Q. What I wanted more was : supposing there was a strike on this side of the 
 line, and there was no national organization, would affiliation have the effect of pre- 
 venting men coming from the States here ? — A. In our organization, yes. Provided 
 our numbers were sufficient the same result could be achieved by a national organiza- 
 tion. 
 
 Q. The chief thing with an international union is the numbers ? — A. Yes. There 
 are in our organization maybe 55,000 members. Of these in Canada I don't suppose 
 there are over 2,000. The cost of administering the affairs of these 2,000 would be 
 very great in proportion to the cost of administering the affairs of the whole. Again, 
 by our membership in the international union we enjoy several advantages which we 
 could not otherwise enjoy. We keep up a home for our aged and superannuated mem- 
 bers. We have the same rates that the organization in the United States has. It 
 would be impossible for us to spend half a million dollars in putting up a home, or 
 spending $75,000 a year in keeping up the inmates. Again, suppose a dispute arose 
 which would involve all the printers — practically all the printers — of Toronto. Now, 
 that union has the largest membership of any typographical union in Canada. Its 
 membership is, I think, about 500 or 600 — practically, I think more than one-quarter 
 of the printers of Canada. Supposing they went out on strike. At present it is a 
 comparatively small drain on the whole membership to give them strike pay, but for 
 the comparatively small number of members that we have in Canada it would be impos- 
 sible for us to support them on strike, except by assessing ourselves very heavily. I 
 must say that the figures I give are approximate and entirely from memory. 
 
 Q. So it practically means that national unionism, in the case of printers, at all 
 events, would be a failure ? — A. It would be a failure. I cannot conceive how it 
 
 ALEX. C. THOMPSON— Ladysmlth, May 22. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 375 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 could be anything but a failure with other organizations that did not have a far greater 
 membership than we have here. 
 
 Q. In the constitution of your organization has the headquarters power to call 
 out a sympathetic strike ? — A. No, sir, not as I understand it. For the simple reason 
 that the only occasion a sympathetic stril^e could arise, under our agreement the con- 
 stitution becomes part of the agreement. That is, the rules that bind us as individual 
 members become a part of that agreement. An employer attempting to force us to 
 act contrary to our constitution breaks his agreement with us. 
 
 Q. There is full recognition of the union, then ? — A. Yes, fviU recognition. 
 
 Q. If the headquarters did ask a local union in Canada to come out on sympathetic 
 strike, what would be the effect ? And promised them strike pay ? — A. The promise 
 of strike pay would make no difference. If we are on strike, no matter how we came 
 out we are entitled to strike pay. But I never knew of a case of sympathetic strike 
 in that way. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Does your constitution provide that you must not do any work from an unfair 
 bffice ? — A. Our constitution does, and if any employer asked us to take that work 
 we would be justified in refusing. In that way a sympathetic strike might occur. But 
 what is known as a sympathetic strike is impossible with us. 
 
 By iiis Lordship : 
 Q. Why ? — A. On account of our agreement. 
 
 By Mr. Howe : 
 
 Q. Does your constitution provide any agreement with regard to the allied trades? 
 -^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Could you work in a shop where there was an unfair bindery ? — A. We can, 
 yes. We don't lilie to do so, and we would do all we could to unionize that bindery. 
 
 Q. For instance, I see a case where teamsters were on strike in a city, and there 
 were substitute men driving wagons. They took a load of paper to a printing office 
 where there were union printers, and the chapel announced to the employer that if ha 
 unloaded that paper they would walk out. Would that be in accordance with the con- 
 stitution ? — A. I don't think it would. I think it was probably a bluff. 
 
 Q. It had the desired effect in that particular instance. The paper went back to 
 the freight shed ? — A. I may say that I have been interested in securing organizations 
 of other trades besides my own, and so I have found that the same section that his 
 Lordship read us in regard to agreements, as contained in the Western Federation con- 
 stitution, obtains in practically all of them, or all that I have looked up on it at least. 
 They have, I think, something like ninety international unions with headquarters in 
 America that have branches in Canada, and I think they all practically contain that 
 same section. 
 
 Q. Does your union enforce the keeping of contracts by a local ? — A. It does. 
 The contract is sacred because the international is made a party to that contract. 
 
 Q. So that an employer who makes a contract with a printer's union really has 
 behind it the international union ? — A. He has, and it forces a local union to keep 
 that contract. I laiow of one case of that. In effect it said to the proprietors, here is 
 cur branch who have broken this agreement with you. If you will simply overlook 
 the delay that a few hours' absence of work will cause you, we will fill their places, and 
 will see that our members keep their contract with you. 
 
 Q. That was in Canada ? — A. No, that was in the United States; I think, it 
 was in Scranton, Pa. The locai union there had an agreement with the employing 
 printers, and they proposed to break that agreement illegally. The employers appealed 
 to the international. The international sexit a representative to the executive there, 
 who happened to be an organizer for that district. He came there to talk to the mem- 
 
 ALBX. C. THOMPSON— Laaysmith, May 22. 
 
376 MI^■VTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROTAl COMMISSION. 
 
 3r4 EDWARD VII., A.: 1904' 
 
 loers of that union and told thepi what the result would be. They thought that the 
 international would back down and permit them to have their ^way. The organizer 
 went to the employers and said, if this union breaks that agreement it can only break 
 it by seceding from the international, and if it breaks its agreement it is no longer a 
 part of the International Union, and we will get you men of our union from Neijv 
 York, Philadelphia and fill their places twelve hours after they leave. 
 
 Q. Would the Western Federation of Miners assume that attitude in relation. to 
 contracts made by locals ? — A. It should do so. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. A good deal depends upon the character of the men appointed as executive ? — • 
 A. I will say this from my experience — that with the men at the head of the Western 
 Federation of Miners I see no reason why they should not adopt that attitude. They 
 are men, I believe, of character. 
 
 Q. They shift from year to year ? — A. So it is with the Typographical Union. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Was not Boyce one of the worst agitators in the Coeur D'Alenes ? He had that 
 reputation ? — A. Yes, many a man has had a reputation that has hanged him. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. He got into trouble with the authorities ? — A. I think he did in the early days 
 of the Federation. I may say concerning the Coeur D'Alenes that I was there on be- 
 half of the paper shortly after the last trouble in the Coeur D'Alenes, the blowing up of 
 the Standard mill. I may say that I attended meetings of the union at Gem, Idaho, 
 within a month and a half after the blowing up of the mill, and speaking as a member 
 of the Typographical Union and as a citizen, I have yet to see the first thing in the eon- 
 duet of affairs by tl?e Western Federation of Miners that I would object to. Some of 
 its methods I do — some of its doctrines I object to — 1 could not favour some of them 
 at all. 
 
 I must apologize for taking this time, but I have felt that international unionism 
 in a measure has been on trial, and I am thoroughly in sympathy with the principles 
 of international unionism in Canada. And there is one other point I would like to 
 have something to say about, and that is the subject of incorporation of local unions. 
 Am I right in assuming that there is an objection being made in Canada to inter- 
 national unions ? 
 
 His Lordship. — 1 don't know anything about that. 
 
 Witness. — Am I right in assuming that the idea prevails that in Canadian labour 
 organizations that Canadian workmen belonging to a union affiliated with the inter- 
 national, place themselves under the control of foreign bodies ? 
 
 His Lordship. — There is no doubt that it is the impression of some of the labour 
 people in Victoria. In the case of the Shipwrights' Union and in the case of the Brick- 
 layers' Union. These unions are both opposed to having anything to do with inter- 
 nationals. 
 
 Witness. — ^Does not the objection to that come from the same people who favour 
 incorporation of unions. Am I safe in assuming that ? 
 
 His Lordship. — ^I think there are a good deal more people favour incorporation 
 than those people, if they do. In fact, I find different opinions held by members of the 
 same union. 
 
 Witness. — Since this Commission commenced I have been studying the subject of 
 incorporation. Heretofore I have been in favour of it, but I am bound to say in view 
 of this feeling I certainly would not favour incorporation. 
 
 ALEX. C. THOMPSON— Ladysmlth, May 22. 
 
Oy lyDVSTRIAL- DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLVMIiJA 377 
 
 SESSIONAL- PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. What are your reasons ? — A. Because that would necessarily place every local 
 union thoroughly under the control of their executive, because by incorporation the 
 International Union would be made liable for damages under, I believe; the Taff Vale 
 decision and other decisions in the English courts, and would be made liable for the 
 actions of the local union, and its treasury would be liable for it, so that the interna- 
 tional would have to keep, in case of incorporation, a representative with each local 
 union, with power to say you cannot do this, or you must not do that, so as to protect 
 the treasury of the International Union from a claim for damages by the act of the 
 local organization in Canada. In fact it would compel the international to take away 
 the local autonomy from Canadian unions. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Would that not be a good thing in case of breaches of law, because 
 that is the only thing in which they could be liable for damages. 
 
 His Lordship. — As far as that goes the formation of any body of men here into n 
 corporation would not have the slightest effect on an international. It has nothing to 
 do with any corporation which is created by the Parliament of Canada or by the legis- 
 lature. 
 
 Witness. — Take it as a local of the Typographical Union. We could not incoi- 
 porate without permission from the international. 
 
 His Lordship. — Then it is high time that the public knew that — that a body of 
 men cannot enter into corporate union without the permission of some one in every 
 case. 
 
 Witness. — That is as it occurs to me ; I don't think they can. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — It is the same in the case of a foreign bank corporation, controlling 
 its branches here. 
 
 His Lordship. — I think it is pretty nearly time the public knew the rights or 
 limits of the public to enter into contracts without interference from the other side. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — Tou take an incorporated bank— they say what their clerks shall do, 
 whether they shall marry and so on. Look at the control of the Hudson's Bay Com- 
 pany — how they control their branches here. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^What has that got to do with it ? 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — It is a question of whether the labour of the 
 
 Witness. — If the international is to be held responsible, then it is necessary that 
 it should control. 
 
 His Lordship. — Don't you see that they might form a distinct local corporation 
 as well as being a local of the international, which would be liable under Canadian l;.w, 
 and would have nothing to do with the International ? 
 
 Witness. — Possibly. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Precisely what exists in the Nanaimo local ? — A. That may be. In my mind 
 the Western Federation of Denver could be reached through the Nanaimo union. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. It might as a local union. As a body of members belonging to that organiza- 
 tion they would not be liable by reason of their corporate capacity ? — A. They would 
 not ? Well, I had an idea that they would be. In that case, certainly, I would be in 
 favour of incorporation, because I think the local union should be held responsible 
 for their actions. I have worked as an employer myself, probably for half the time I 
 have been a member of the Typographical Union, and I know that I have suffered 
 
 ALEX. C. THOMPSON— Ladysmith, May 22. 
 
378 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 what I considered injustice at the hands of a local union, while had they bean incor- 
 porated I could have secured redress, but as it was I could not. I had to take my case 
 before the International — before their own tribunal. Of course local unions can act 
 very tyrannical when they wish, a small union particularly. Where a majority of tho 
 men in the union conceive a dislike for some one in the office they can act very 
 tyrannical towards an employer, and his only protection is by appeal to the Interna- 
 tional officials. 
 
 Q. I suppose that is the chief reason why employers refuse to recognize unions ? — 
 A. Very likely it is. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 
 Q. You stated that this union to which you referred was disturbed by political 
 dissension ? — A. Exactly. 
 
 Q. What were the nature of the political differences ? — A. There was one faction 
 wished the union to take political action as a union ; the other did not. Probably one 
 of the most important things, both from an employers' and employees' standpoint. 
 
 Q. Was whether the lodge should take such action or not ? — A. Exactly. 
 
 Q. Which side was in the majority ? — A. I really think it was compromised. 
 
 Q. What action would 'they take ? — A. They took action. 
 
 Q. I mean if the will of the majority had been carried out and that party went 
 into politics, what party would it belong to ? — A. I could not say ; there were some of 
 the cooler heads who disfavoured political action by the union. Some thought they 
 saw where that was leading the union. 
 
 Q. Where did they think ? — A. To a complete break-up. They gave it up. 
 
 James Dunsmuik (cross-examined) ; 
 
 Ladysmith, May 23, 1903. 
 
 By Mr. Wilson: 
 
 Q. You are the chief proprietor and manager of the Wellington collieries, Mr. 
 Dunsmuir ? — A. I am not the manager. 
 
 Q. No, but you are really in control ? — A. I am the head of it. 
 
 Q. In other words, all is subject to your control ? — -A. Well, I am the president 
 of it. 
 
 ' Q. Yes, but you are not a figurehead, you are the actual chief of the whole under- 
 taking ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. It was so at Wellington as well as at Extension ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I may state at the outset that I am only going to put a few questions to you, 
 which if they are answered frankly, will cut this examination pretty short. You have, 
 as I understand it, a rooted objection to all forms of union labour ? — A. I have. 
 
 Q. And your objection would be just as strong were the organization a purely 
 Canadian organization, or even a purely local organization, as it is at present ? — A. 
 Yes, I think I can get along far better without them. 
 
 Q. As to that, you regard it purely from your own standpoint ? — A. No, from 
 what has come under my observation about unions. 
 
 Q. But you are not considering the effect of that upon the workmen, upon other 
 members of the community ? You do not take them into consideration at all ? — A. 
 What effect it has ? 
 
 Q. Yes.— A. What effect it has on the workmen. I don't see any effect it will 
 have on the workmen. I think it would be far bett,er for them not to belong to the 
 union. 
 JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladysmitti, May 23. 
 
ON. INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 379 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36^ 
 
 Q. Give your reason for that ? — A. Because I think they can act with more 
 freedom and are not subject to the dictation of just a few heads of the union. 
 
 Q. Any other reason ?— A. No, I think that is all. 
 
 Q. If it could be shown that your reasons were unsound, would your objections 
 vanish ? — ^A. Well, show me. 
 
 Q. I ask you the question, if it could be shown, would your objection vanish ? — 
 A. I could not say; I don't know. 
 
 Q. You thinli that no matter what arguments could be brought forward you would 
 still have the same objection ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Then it is not a reason, but simply prejudice ? — A. Oh, no. 
 
 Q. You tell us frankly — with that degree of frankness' for which you have acquired 
 
 some credit — you tell us that if the reason were removed ? — A. I will say this, that 
 
 unions might be all right provided they would not go too far, but they all go too fai-. 
 
 Q. How would you propose to regulate them ? Would you propose to have a 
 committee of employers regulate the internal affairs of the union ? — A. I think the 
 employers and employees can get along without having anything to do with unions. 
 
 Q. You do not know what experience has taught the workmen — that experience 
 has shown them the need for it ? — A. No, I don't think it has. I have thought a lot 
 about it, and I think it is from my own and the men's standpoint, too. 
 
 Q. Having such views, do you think you are able to view it from the men's stand- 
 point ? — A. I think so ; from what I have observed, and from what we are told by 
 labouring men after they joined this union, and so on. It is only a few men that are 
 running the union — whatever way these few go. If they hold up their finger the whole 
 union has got to do what they say. 
 
 Q. You have very little idea, I am afraid, of the internal workings of unions. 
 The idea you tave is that it is in the hands of a few men ? — A. The executive runs 
 it. 
 
 Q. Is not the executive an elected body ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. By the whole body of the members ? — A. But they overstep their bounds ; that 
 is'the Way they all do. It is the heads that control. A man cannot get up and express 
 his opinion if he belongs to a union. 
 
 Q. Have y<5u ever belonged to a union ? — A. No, but I have heard a good deal 
 about them. I have not belonged to any secret society — never belonged to any organi- 
 zation. 
 
 Q. Then it is not unfair to assume that, not having had experience with any 
 organization, your experience must be limited. That is a fair assumption ? — A. It 
 might be. 
 
 Q. Holding these views — an irreconcilable disbelief in organized labour, you re- 
 fuse, as I understand it, to have any man in your employment who is in any way con- 
 nected with a union — ^you have heretofore ? — A. No, we have never done that. We 
 have, of course, refused to have an organization or union around the works, but we 
 have never refused to take men on, whether union or not. We don't ask him. 
 
 Q. Have you not, when you became aware of a man belonging to the union, got 
 rid of him ? — A. You mean fired the heads of the union ? 
 
 •Q. Yes ? — A. Every time. 
 
 Q. And you have done that in pursuance of a settled policy of antagonism to 
 organization ?— A. Yes, around the works. 
 
 Q. You recognize, surely, the right of the workmen to organize ?— A. Of course, 
 that is their own right. They can organize and belong to whatever union they like. 
 
 Q. Just on the same principle that you consider you have an absolute right to 
 handle your own property ?— A. Yes, I think that is my right ; they have their rights. 
 
 Q. You hold that you have an absolute right to dfol with your own property ?— A. 
 
 O Did it ever occur to you that wealth carried some corresponding obligations 
 with it— the possession of large riches and lands ?— A. No sir. From my standpoint 
 
 it doesn't. JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladysmith, May 23. 
 
380 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF SOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 -3-4 EDWARD Vlf., A, 1904 
 
 Q. You carry your opinion as far as this : you say you can shut up your inines 
 just as you please, no matter to whom it brought ruin or loss ? — A. No, they didn't 
 need to go to work, just in the same way that I did not need to open up the mines. 
 
 Q. The store-keeper might go broke, the inhabitants of cities suffer from want, of 
 fuel, general suffering might arise — all these things might happen, and you would still 
 think you were right ?— A. Yes, I would still think I am right. Those are my rights. 
 Then the men don't need to work, unless they like, those are their rights. I will go still 
 further; then the government could come in and say we will buy you out — what is 
 your price ? They might say that. 
 
 Q. In other words, you would force the state to get rid of you ? — A. No, they 
 would force me to sell. 
 
 Q. We will put a further view of the proposition. You might make things so 
 uncomfortable that the whole of the community would be willing to chip in and buy 
 you out? — A. I say they could. If you don't want to start your works, then we will 
 make a proposition to buy your works out. The government could go that far; but 
 they could not say to me: You have got to start these mines up. 
 
 Q. All I wanted was to get your view? — A. All right. I am giving them, as far 
 as I can. 
 
 Q. You don't recognize any third party to the social contract; it is simply you 
 and your men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And it was in pursuance of that policy — it was that policy which actuated you 
 in directing the removal from Extension? — A. My policy was, that Ladysmith was to 
 be the town, and when the men built there, I told them they were only temporary — the 
 buildings to put up there. 
 
 Q. Did you tell everybody? — A. Not everybody. I told the managers, and I told 
 a good many of them. * 
 
 Q. It was in pursuance of that same policy that you have already indicated, that 
 you directed the removal of the men from Extension. You put it this way, If I under- 
 stand it rightly : I don't tell you to live at Extension, but I can employ you or not, as 
 I like ? — A. Yes, that is the way I put it. 
 
 Q. Is not the result the same as if you directed them to live here ? — A. It might 
 be the same; that is, I wanted them to live here; not for my benefit exactly, but for 
 theirs, too. 
 
 Q. You have not given us much ground for believing that you were actuated by 
 any philanthropic purpose. You were seeking your interests, and not theirs? — A. I 
 could have been a land owner up there also. The $10,000 that Bramley wanted would 
 not have been in the way at all, if I had wanted to build the town at Extension. I 
 knew it was no place for the town, and the works were coming this way all the time. 
 
 Q. What I want to get at is, that having the line of policy and your own view on 
 certain subjects, you asked them up, irrespective of the consequences to anybody else? 
 — A. To anybody else? 
 
 Q. Yes ? — A. Yes, I have my own idea in carrying out my own" business. Other 
 people's business I have nothing to do with. 
 
 Q. And in pursuance of such a policy as that, you practically insisted on the men 
 removing from Extension to Ladysmith? — A. No, I took into consideration the place 
 for men to live in, and of course to get away from Nanaimo, and not to live around 
 the mine, and tlje works extending this way, it was far better for the men to li,ve at 
 Ladysmith than Extension. I took all these things into consideration. 
 
 Q. And the fact of your owning the Ladysmith town site ? — A. That was nothing. 
 That cuts no figure with me at all. 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact, would it have been so? You could have brought good 
 water into Extension ? — A. Not so easy as here. 
 
 Q. Did you make an examination as to it? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. By engineers and surveyors ? — A. Yes. 
 
 JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladysmith, May 23. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUUPIA- ^ 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. And ascertained its cost ? — A. Not exactly the cost, but seeing whether it could 
 be brought in. 
 
 Q. Is it a fact that the Nanaimo waterworks draw their supply from within two 
 or three miles of Extension ? — A. Yes, but it could never be put down into Extension. 
 
 Q. The source is lower than Extension? — A. Yes, they could not bring it over 
 to Extension. There are engineering diificulties in the way. They did think of start- 
 ing. They were going to bring it from the south fork of the Nanaimo river into 
 Nanaimo, but they could not bring it from Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. Did you examine it from other sources? — A. No, just from what I have been 
 told. 
 
 Q. While you were considering the removal from Extension to Ladysmith, did you 
 cause any careful examination to be made with respect to getting a water supply in 
 at Extension ? — A. Yes, I wanted a water supply for our own works, but we did not go 
 away out to see if we could get it from Nanaimo. We tried what they, called Blind 
 river. I bought a piece of land from the Vancouver Company, and put a dam there. 
 That water was not fit to drink. 
 
 Q. From what source do you supply your works at Extension? — A. Our works at 
 Extension are supplied by a dam on a piece of land I bought from the Vancouver Com- 
 pany. It is stagnant in the summer. It might be all right in the winter. As far as 
 living here is concerned, I did look to the interests of the miners. It is much plea- 
 santer to live here than in a hole like Extension. Most of the men would rather live 
 here than there. It is nothing but a hole. No one would live there. 
 
 Q. Are there not some 230 people living there? — A. No, unless they have gone 
 back. 
 
 Q. Did it not occur to you that the miner is just as competent to form an opinion 
 as to his place of residence as you are?— A. No, they have to get men to speak for 
 them and judge for them. 
 
 Q. As to their place of residence ?— A. Anything, it doesn't matter what it is. 
 
 Q. What do you refer to? — A. I am referring to accepting any position or any 
 wage. It seems they have to get outside men to advise them. 
 
 Q. In what way? — A. In every way. In where to live, probably what they eat, 
 and everything else. 
 
 Q. You don't think because a man joins a union that they shall regulate what he 
 shall eat, drink and avoid? — A. It looks like it; nothing without the union. 
 
 Q. Leaving joking apart, that is not your idea of a union? — A. To some extent 
 it is. 
 
 Q. It is soine comfort to know what kind of an idea you have got. So that, of 
 course, would be one of your objections. Your idea of a labour organization is, that it 
 not only regulates the hours of labour and wages, but that it enters into the smallest 
 details of a member's life ? — A. I believe it is. 
 
 Q. Then, I am not surprised at your objecting to it? — A. Oh yes. a great deal of 
 objection. 
 
 Q. Was there not something said to you about constructing a bridge at Extension ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And did you not make some promise in respect to that ? — A. Never. 
 
 Q. What was said about it? — A. The people there wanted a bridge put across. I 
 ■would not allow it. 
 
 Q. Did you not put a sum in the estimates for it ? — A. That was some time after. 
 
 Q. So you have changed your mind? — A. Yes, I have changed my mind; it is not 
 
 needed now. 
 
 Q. When you put the sum in the estimates, had you changed your mind? — A. I 
 did not care then. I knew it would never be done. The amount put in the estimates 
 would never build it. 
 
 Q. So, you knew, when that sum was in the estimates, it was nonsense ?^A. Yes, 
 
 that was -politics. 
 
 JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladysraith, May 23. 
 
382 MINUTES OF NVIDEIfCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Were you a party to it ? — A. Yes, I was a party to it. 
 
 Q. You are getting to be as good a politician as the rest of them ? — A. What I do 
 I don't go back on it; what I do I will admit it. 
 
 Q. Yes, I know, that is so. Your men have told me that. That makes it easy for 
 me to examine. With respect to that proposal which was made to the miners yester- 
 day, did you deliberately intend that that should mean a reduction in their wages? — 
 A. That has got nothing to do with this inquiry at all. 
 
 Q. You would rather not discuss that? — A. It is out of it altogether. The com- 
 mittee asked me for a proposition, and I gave them two propositions. I told them I 
 would meet a committee of my own men. I did, and they did not wish to accept a 
 proposal at all. 
 
 Q. Very well, Mr. Dunsmuir, we won't discuss that. 
 
 His Lordship. — Is there anyone else who would like to give evidence? 
 
 (No witnesses volunteered.) 
 
 His Lordship — ^I understand that there are some conferences now pending between 
 the parties, looking towards a settlement. For my part, I hope sincerely that a settle- 
 ment will be reached very shortly, for I understand there is a great deal of sickness and 
 misery caused by this strike. Not only that, but the general public are being seriously 
 damaged, merchants are going into bankruptcy, and the general welfare of everybody 
 interfered with. I hope that both the parties to this controversy will keep that in mind, 
 that it is not in their own interests solely, but in the interests of the public generally. 
 I think the whole public of this island would be very greatly rejoiced to hear that this 
 settlement had been reached to-day. If there is anything the Commission can do 
 towards bringing this settlement to a more rapid conclusion, we will be glad to do it. 
 
 Mr. Wilson. — I am told, sir, and I believe that Mr. King has the matter very 
 largely in hand, and has had one or two interviews with committees of the workmen, 
 and I think it rests now with Mr. Dunsmuir, rather than with them. I don't think 
 Mr. King has found the men unreasonable, in dealing with them. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I suppose we might adjourn, and let the parties get together. 
 
 (Adjourned.) 
 
 Cumberland, May 27, 1903. 
 
 Mr. G. M. Richards. '\ 
 
 Mr. John Hutchinson, !■ representing the miners. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL, K.C., J representing the Wellington Colliery Company, 
 
 Statement of men's case put in by Mr. Richards (Exhibit 13). 
 His Lordship. — Do you file any further statement, Mr. Bodwell? 
 Mr. Bodwell. — No, we take the same stand as we did before. 
 
 JAMES DUNSMUIR— Ladysmlth, May 23. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN B1UTI8H COLUMBIA 383 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Orim Wesley Barber^ sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You are a coal miner, and live at Cumberland ?— A. Yes, sir. 
 Q. How long have you been mining here ? — A. I have been mining, off and on, for 
 thirteen years. 
 
 Q. You are president of the local union of the Western. Federation of Miners ? — 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When was this union formed ? — A. On the 5th April. 
 
 Q. Who organized it ? — A. Organizer Baker. 
 
 Q. At whose instance did he come here ? — A. That I could not say; he was here 
 before I knew he was here. 
 
 Q. I suppose he came by some one's invitation ? — A. I don't know by whose. 
 
 Q. Did you have any talk with him ? — A. Yes, sir, after he had come here. 
 
 Q. Tell us what took place ? — A. Mr. Baker was an acquaintance of mine, and I 
 had not had any tallc with him until after the first meeting held. Not until after the 
 first meeting held on Sunday — the last meeting that was called 
 
 Q. What date was that ?— A. The 5th of April, I believe. 
 
 Q. You did not have a talk with him until after the meeting ? — A. Yes, until 
 after the meeting on the 5th April. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Did you say that was the last meeting ? — A. The first meeting. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. At which it was resolved to organize ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How long was Baker here before that meeting ? — A. I could not say positively; 
 I beTieve he came on the evening of the 4th ; I was told he did. 
 
 Q. How was the meeting called ? — A. I believe it was called by notice. 
 
 Q. Was that notice posted up in any way ? — A. I did not see the notice of the 
 meeting myself ; I came direct from the Lake to the meeting. I live at the Lake, about 
 a mile and a half from the camp. 
 
 Q. Did Baker address the meeting — you were there ? — A. I was at the meeting. 
 
 Q. Did he address the meeting ? — ^A. He did. 
 
 Q. Tell us shortly what he said ? — A. I could not tell you what he said ; my 
 memory is not good enough for that. 
 
 Q. You don't remember anything ? — A. Not sufficiently to make a statement of 
 what he said. 
 
 Q. You cannot give us any idea ? — A. I cannot make a statement of what he said, 
 I am sure. 
 
 Q. What subject did he talk about ? — -A. He spoke of unions and organizing. 
 
 By Mr.- E owe ; 
 Q. He advised organization ? — A. No, I would not say that he did; I don't 
 remember that he did ; I don't think he advised organizing. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long did the meeting last ? — A. I believe the meeting lasted a few hours ; 
 probably three hours, or thereabouts. 
 
 Q. There was a resolution proposed to organize, was there ? — A. I believe I made 
 that resolution myself; I made a motion that we organize. 
 
 Q. Was this after hearing what Mr. Baker had to say ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Who else spoke ? — A. There was quite a number speaking; a good many 
 whose faces are familiar to me, but whose names are not. 
 
 Q. But a good many spoke ?— A. Certainly. 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
384 illNVTES OF EVIDENCE OF liOTAL COMUISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A., 1904 
 
 Q. And the matter of organization was discussed ?— A. Tes. 
 
 Q. Were there any against organization ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Tell us how many ? — ^A. I believe that only one spoke against organization, to 
 my knowledge. 
 
 Q. Were you at the meeting during the whole time ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Only one spoke against it ? — A. I believe there was another rose, but I never 
 heard him say anything, whether he was speaking for or against. 
 
 Q. How was the matter decided, by open vote, or by ballot ? — ^A. By open vote. 
 
 Q. How many voted in favour ? — A. I believe it was vmanimous. 
 
 Q. How many men were at' the meeting ? — A. I don't know how many were at the 
 meeting; there were a few that left the hall, the top hands that were not miners. I 
 believe they all joined, nearly. 
 
 Q. Would there be as many as 100 > — A. No, I don't think so; not 100 left the hall. 
 
 Q. ]. mean how many were there at the time the resolution passed ? — A. I sup- 
 pose over 135, 135 at least. 
 
 Q. Did Baker talk about the trouble at Ladysmith? — A. I believe he might have 
 spoken of it. 
 
 Q. I suppose he told you how that affair was at that time? — A. I don't remember 
 what he said in regard to that. 
 
 Q. What argument did he use in favour of the organization? — A. The vote there 
 was — the decision of the unanimous vote in favour. 
 
 Q. But what argument did he use, incidental to organization? — A. No argument 
 he used. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that Baker addressed the meeting and did not give any 
 reason why you should organize? — A. I don't remember any argument he had. He 
 simply told us he was there for that purpose, I believe, if they wished it, and a vote 
 was taken. 
 
 Q. And no argument was required? You already meant to organize? — A. I was, 
 as I had been a member some years before of the Federation; I was a member for 
 five years. 
 
 Q. In good standing? — A. No, not at the time. 
 
 Q. Were there many others among the men also members of the Federation? — A. 
 There might have been. 
 
 Q. Where did you join ?— A. In Eossland. 
 
 Q. You joined five years ago in Eossland ? — A. Thereabouts. 
 
 Q. I must have misunderstood you, Mr. Barber, because I think you said you were 
 here something like thirteen years, at Cumberlanad? — A. I said, off and on; at times 
 I have been away. 
 
 Q. Are you a quartz or a coal miner ? — A. Both. 
 
 Q. How many men have joined this union, 135 ? — A. At the first meeting. 
 
 Q. What is the membership now? — A. I could not tell you exactly; I think it is 
 about 300— about 294. 
 
 Q. What induced you to join ? — A. I have always been of that persuasion. 
 
 Q. You have always been in favour of unions ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Give us, shortly, your reasons for that? — A. One reason is, that it is a means 
 of education. 
 
 Q. You mean by that, that the men frequently meet together and discuss matters ? 
 — A. Yes, sir; weigh up different opinions, very often forming a better conclusion by 
 doing so. 
 
 Q. How often do they meet ? — A. Once every week here. 
 
 Q. What is the average attendance here? — A. I think, over 200; sometimes be- 
 tween 200 and 250, probably. 
 
 Q. The average attendance is 250? — A. Yes, about that. 
 
 Q. What time do you have your meeting? — A. In the evening, at seven o'clock. 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberland, May 27, 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN' BRITISH COLUMBIA 385 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. How long do you stay; three or four hours? — A. Yes, some meetings are quite 
 lengthy. 
 
 Q. Are there any advantages in a union besides education? — A. Yes, I believe it 
 is a protection to a man's labour. 
 
 Q. In what way ? — A. Freedom of speech. 
 
 Q. Do you mean protection as against the employer? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What other advantages ? — A. It is helpful to its members. 
 
 Q. In what way? — A. There is a benefit fund in connection. 
 
 Q. There is a strike in existence here? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When did that strike take place? — A. May 2. 
 
 Q. How many men quit ? — A. I don't know the exact number. 
 
 Q. As nearly as you can tell us? — A. I could not give a definite answer, but I 
 believe all the union men quit that were working in l^umber Four ; they all quit there, 
 I think, but two or three men. There might have been others somewhere. 
 
 Q. How many quit altogether — about how many? — A. I think, about 200. 
 
 Q. Out of how many workmen? — A. I do not know, I am sure; I could only 
 guess at that. 
 
 Q. Were these 200 all members of the union; all the men who quit were union 
 men ? — A. There may have been men who Were not union men ; I think the most of 
 them were union men. 
 
 Q. Did you notify the employer or the company that you were going to quit? — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In what way? — A. That we had come out on strike; he was informed by the 
 committee. 
 
 Q. Who was notified? — A. The manager, Mr. Matthews. 
 
 Q. You say he was notified — when ? — A. Immediately after the result of the vote, 
 he was notified that we had resolved to quit work. 
 
 Q. You mean on April 5 ? — A. On May 2. 
 
 Q. You had a meeting on May 2 ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of that resolution ? — A. Yes, we have it in the minutes. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — May 2 was the date of the strike, Saturday ; the organization 
 meeting was on April 5, Sunday, April 5. 
 
 (Mistake made by men in their statement with regard to date. Changed to read 
 according to dates given by Mr. Bodwell, by Messrs. Richards and Hutchinson). 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. There was a resolution passed on the 2nd of May. Look at that and see if that 
 is the resolution ? — A. Yes. 
 
 (Exhibit 13.) 
 
 Q. You say that meeting was called by notice ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What length of notice, or was it one of the regular meetings ? — A. No, it was 
 a special meeting. 
 
 Q. How long notice was given ?— A. I cannot Temember the length of time that 
 the notice was put up. 
 
 Q. Who ordered the holding of the meeting, you as president ? — A. It was decided 
 by the executive board to call a special meeting for that purpose. 
 
 Q. Cannot you tell us how long notice was given, two days, one day — A. I believe 
 
 it was. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. The night before ? — A. I am not sure as to what length of time it was up. 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — Possibly up some time about the morning before. 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberlancl, May 27 
 
 36a— 25 
 
Si-4 EDVyARO VIU,.A- ^^^:. 
 
 By His Lordship : ■ . 
 
 Q. Where was it posted ?— A. In different places ;, I believe there w.^re about eight 
 or nine notices placed through the camp. , . 
 
 Q. How many men attended at the meeting ? — A. Two hundred and eight. 
 
 Q. Two hundred and eight attended ? — A. Yes. _ 
 
 Q. And all voted in favour of quitting except 12 ?^A. There were three spoiled 
 ballots. ; , 
 
 Q. And twelve against ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was the question decided by ballot ? — A. Yes, by ballot. 
 
 Q. How long was it discussed before being sent to the ballot ? — :A. I believe it 
 was discussed for probably an hour. 
 
 Q, Had the meeting any assurance from anybody .that the Western Federation 
 would financially help the men if they went out ? — A. They had no assurance except 
 the approval of the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by that — no assurance except that the Western Federation 
 would approve of the men going out ? — A. Well, they would support, them. Xk^^ is. 
 as long as it was done constitutionally and on just grounds, we had their support ; 
 only on these grounds. 
 
 Q. Who gave that assurance — Balier ? — A. I iJeiieve that he might halve put the 
 case before them ? 
 
 Q. Baker was at the meeting ? — A. Baker was not at the meeting on May 2. 
 
 Q. At all events the meeting had some kind of assurance from Baker that they 
 would be supported by the Federation ? — A. I had seen Baker previous to this meeting 
 on a trip to Nanaimo — the joint executive meeting held in Nanaimo, between the men 
 here, the men at Nanaimo, and the men at Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. When was that held ? — ^A. I am not prepared for this, and I have no dates. 
 
 Q. About when ? — A. About the week before. 
 
 Q. Then you got assurances from Baker that the Federation would stand behind 
 the men in this strike and help it financially ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. I suppose if you had not got that assurance you would not have gone on strike? 
 A. Yes, sir, we would, I believe. 
 
 Q. You would have gone out anyhow ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The constitution requires you to ask for the approval of the executive at Den- 
 ver, does it not ? — A. If you wish their support. 
 
 Q. Have you done that ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You have asked for the Denver approval ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Before or after the strike ? — A. Before. 
 
 Q. With what result ? — A. With their approval. 
 
 Q. You got their approval before you went out I — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you get that from Baker ? — A. We got it from the president of the West- 
 em Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. What is his name ? — A. Moyer. 
 
 Q. In the shape of a letter or telegram? — A. Telegram. 
 
 Q. That is in reply, I suppose, to a telegram asking for approval? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you got these telegrams here? — A. They are on file.- 
 
 Q. We would like to see them. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — They are not here, but I can get them. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long before the date o± tne meeting did the telegram telling you that you 
 could go out arrive from Moyer? — A. I believe, about ten days. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. Was it before or after the meeting of the joint executive? — A. It was after, 
 about five or six days. 
 OEIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
Oif INDUSTBiAL'blSP^TESTirBRiTiS'B COLUMBIA 387 
 
 sessional' pAPER- f>Itf. 36a 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Y'bu have been out on strike since May' 2'?— ^A. Te^.' 
 
 Q. The whoje 200 men quit work on that date?— A. Thereabouts. 
 
 Q. None of the meffhave gone back, have they? — A; Not to my knoWfedge. 
 
 Q. Have you got any assistance from ' the ' Western F^dei'atioh 1-^ A. Financial 
 assistance? ' ' ■ '-,.;, 
 
 Q. Yes ? — A. No, sir ; we have not asked it yet. 
 
 Q. When you say you have not asked for it, you mean the union, as a union, has 
 not asked for it? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You say the reason yOu quit was because some of your officers were discharged ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Which of these officers were discharged? — A. I was one — well, no — I was nol 
 discharged. 
 
 Q. Who were discharged ? — A. I don't know as any were discharged. 
 
 Q. You don't know of any officers that were discharged? — A. No, I don't know. 
 
 Q. But your resolution states that some officers had been discharged? — A. I don't 
 believe it says discharged. 
 
 Mr. BopwELL. — It saya: ' refused the privilege of going to work.' 
 
 By His Lordship; 
 
 Q. . Well, you say you won't work until you are reinstated ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Then, there must have been a discharge ? — A.. Well, the officials claim not. 
 
 Q. Tell us the circumstances? — A. Well, th^y just naturally got out of places, and 
 did not get started again. 
 
 Q. And the order had been organzied ? — A. That is the only explanation ; it ex- 
 plains to me. 
 
 Q. When did you quit work? — A. I quit at the request of the management, 
 
 Q. At the request of Mr. Matthews ? — A. No, Mr. Short. 
 
 Q. On what date ? — A. On April 3, I believe. 
 
 Q. That was before the meeting? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — It was on the 6th. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. The day after the meeting? — A. Yes, I believe it was the 6th, the day after 
 the meeting. 
 
 Q. What did he say, when he asked you to quit work? — A. I was laid off. My 
 laying-off has nothing to do with the question at all; I was laid off for disobeying 
 orders, which would have probably occurred at any time. 
 
 Q. What orders ? You mean you were laid off because you disobeyed orders, not 
 because you were a member of the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What orders? — A. I fired a shot before the shot-lighter came around. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Contrary to the rules in the mines. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. That is a breach of the rules, to do that ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You do not blame them for laying you off? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Who were the other men who were laid off? I mean officers of the union? — A. 
 'At. Halliday, I believe 
 
 Q. Well, they can tell their own story. There were other men, officers of the 
 union?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How many? — A. I just don't remember how many there were; I believe there 
 
 were nine. 
 
 Q. These nine mea were laid off before you took action ? — A. Yes. 
 
 3g^ 25J ORIM WJBSLEY BARBERj^Cumberland, May 27. 
 
388 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. It was on account of their being laid ofi in this way that you passed this reso- 
 lution at the meeting? — A. No, not exactly. 
 
 Q. Why was it you passed the resolution ? — A. The management had been asked 
 il they would reinstate them in the proper order ; ii they would accept a list of the 
 Sames, and give them their turn in starting. 
 
 Q. You mean put back in order ? — A. Yes, whenever their turn came, in proper 
 order. 
 
 Q. What is meant by that ? You understand, Mr. Barber, that the company's 
 cfficials are here and their counsel is here, and it is for your people to make your case 
 very plain. That is why we ask you these questions ? — A. There had never been any 
 rule here to my knowledge — ^no regular rule. 
 
 Q. What we would like to know in the first place is why these men were laid off. 
 The company will have their story to tell, and I want your story ? — A. My story is a 
 very short one. We formed a union, and all the officers happened to be out of work ; it 
 happened that way. There were none of them, to my knowledge, that were discharged. 
 
 Q. How would their job give out ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Is it customary for men to be laid ofi from time to time ?^A. Certainly it is 
 customary to lay a man off, whenever they feel like it. 
 
 Q. I mean can a man get continuous work at coal mining, or are there some days 
 in which he is laid off because there is nothing to do, and then be put on again ? — A. 
 — Some men can get continuous work — others can't. 
 
 Q. What is the general rule about it. Do the majority of men work continuously ? 
 — A. Yes, I believe they do. 
 
 Q. But it frequently happens that men get laid off for want of something to do ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And this has happened, by what you consider a singular coincidence, to all the 
 officers of the union ? — ^A. That is the way I look at it. 
 
 Q. What officers were laid off ? — A. Not all. 
 
 Q. How many were left at work ? — A. I believe there were one or two left; I am 
 not sure. 
 
 Q. How many officers were there ; you ought to know, Mr. HaAer, because you are 
 president ? — A. Well, I have to count them up. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — The secretary will know, better, probably. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Three officers besides trustees. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Were any officers left by the company at work ? — A. I believe there were. 
 
 Q. Then you think a sufficient number had been weeded out so as to compel you 
 to take action ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And whether rightly or wrongly, you suspected the company of laying them 
 off because they were officers ? — A. Yes, that was the position, after interviewing the 
 management. 
 
 Q. Whom did you interview ? — A. Mr. Matthews, 
 
 Q. Just tell us what took place ? — A. Myself and Richard Towe and Mr. Halli- 
 day interviewed Mr. Matthews and asked him if — HaUiday, I should say 
 
 Q. When was this ? — A. What date was it ? May 1st. We interviewed Mr. 
 Matthews; we asked him if he would start the officers; if he would extend the list at 
 least to the men who had been laid off, which he declined. 
 
 Q. So that he refused to employ any of these men at any time ? — A. No, but ho 
 told us that he could have no dealings with the union. . 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBEH— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
ON IND VSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 389 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Howe : 
 Q. Did you go as a committee of the uiiion ? — A. Tes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. And he declined to have anything to do with you as a committee of the union, 
 was that it ? — A. That was my interpretation of it. 
 
 Q. What did he say ? — A. He said that as Mr. Dunsmuir had already refused to 
 have any dealings with the union, that he could not deal with us. 
 
 Q. You asked him to take these men back or take a list and put them in order ? 
 — A. Yes, he said he would not accept a list. He would hire and discharge whom he 
 liked, and take them on as he saw fit, as he had always done. 
 
 Q. And did he refuse to take any of these men back at any time ? I mean did 
 be say he would not take any of the:e men back as long as they were officers of the 
 union ? — A. He did not say that. 
 
 Q. Did he give you to understand that he would not take any of these men back ? 
 — A. I certainly understood it that way myself. 
 
 Q. That you need not look for employment any longer with him ? — A. I under- 
 stood it that way, as long as we were in the union, from what he had said. 
 
 Q. What was it he said that led you to understand that ? — A. That he could not 
 treat with the union. 
 
 Q. But he did not tell you that he would not have th3m as long as they \^«re.' 
 members of the union ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. So it was just an inference of yours that he would not have them as long as 
 they were members of the union. I suppose, Mr. Bodwell, you admit that was the 
 position, anyway ? 
 
 Mr. BodwEll. — Not exactly with reference to this matter. The union brought 
 a list of the men to put on in order on the list, and we declined to accept any such 
 dictation as that from the union, and Mr. Matthews did say that he could not recog- 
 nize the union — that Mr. Dunsmuir refused to recognize it. 
 
 His Lordship. — You don't take the position that you are not going to hire any 
 of these men at all ? 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — We have never declared anything on that point as yet. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — ^Do you take the position that there is nothing significant in their 
 being out ? 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — Our evidence will show that every man who was not at work that 
 his place was worked out. The question of taking back has not yet come up for con- 
 sideration, because there are not places enough open for the men who would go back, 
 as I understand it. It has not been necessary to make a declaration on that point. 
 As a matter of fact, the work is going on, and every place is filled that was open for 
 men to work in. No outside people have been imported, but among men who were here. 
 
 Mr. KowE. — There has been no work yet for these men ? 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — Not in the operation of the work as it has been going on. Whether 
 or not they could provide places, Mr. Matthews will give evidence on that point, and 
 the Commissioners will draw their own inference. As a matter of fact, the output is 
 satisfactory to the management, and the work is going on. Of course, we have declared 
 against the union and refuse to recognize it, but the probability is that the men who 
 are out now would probably be out anyway at some time during the period at which 
 they declared themselves on strike. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. The present attitude of the men, Mr. Barber, is that they won't go back to 
 work unless the company recognizes the union ? Is that the position ? — A. That is 
 the position, and reinstatement of the men, as the resolution states. 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
390 MINUTES OP EVIBmGH OF ROYAL COMUISSJOy ' 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., Ai 1^04-, 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL.-T-Mr. Matthews tells me now that, at <iie time this list was handed 
 him he told them there would he no ^opportunity to fill the plaqes for a month at least 
 in the way in which the work in the mines was laid: out. , ; : . 
 
 By Mr. Richards ; - . 
 
 Q. What position was your place in — was it a stall, or a cross-cut ,?-^ A.. A stall. 
 Q. Was it in such a position that the other cross-cut could not have gone oil ?-7- 
 A. It could have gone on, in my opinion. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. You were discliarged for breach of the rules, and no man wag in your place,? 
 —A. No. 
 
 His Lordship.^ — ^You had better bring that' point out by another witness in the 
 
 box. ' 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you mean by recognition of the union ?— A. The right of men to 
 organize and form a union. 
 
 Q. But it involves raore than that, does it not? — A. Without discrimination, cer- 
 tainly; without being discriminated against. 
 
 Q. But it means more than that, does it not ? It means you have a right to 
 approach the employer with a committee ? — A. It means that we have a right 
 
 Q. The company has to deal with the men through the union, and not with them 
 individually ? — A. Not necessarily, 
 
 Q. Well, that is the impression that has been given us by the evidence given so 
 far, that the company have to deal through the union, and not with the men individu- 
 ally. Suppose a man has a grievance and cannot arrange it, does not a committee 
 of the union take it up and see the management, whenever there is any difficulty ? — 
 A. Yes, sometimes it is necessary. 
 
 Q. And they have what they call a pit committee ? — A. In some places they have. 
 
 Q. At any rate, that is so, that the employer has to deal with the union and not 
 the men individually ? — A. In case of trouble arising. 
 
 Q. Do you think it would be a right stand for the union to take that you ought 
 to be put back after disobeying orders ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. You would not ask the union to stand out for you on that line ? — A- I would 
 not. 
 
 Q. But if a man is discharged for alleged disobedience of orders then the union 
 has a right to take the matter up and see whether or not he was reasonably discharged? 
 — A. Certainly they would have that right. 
 
 Q, And if they did not think it reasonable they would have a committee wait on 
 the employer ?— A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. And if the employer does not rule according to their wishes there is probably 
 a strike ? — A. No, not necessarily. 
 
 Q. Well, what happens ? — A. Very often the man, sooner than see any trouble, 
 will leave and go to 'another place. 
 
 Q. But all men cannot do that, especially if they are married men ?— A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Now, this is the first occasion, so far as you know, to attempt to form a union ? 
 — A. No, it is not. 
 
 Q. When was there any attempt made ? — A. There was an attempt made to form 
 a union somewhere about twelve years ago. I was here at the time. It was a local 
 union. Tully Boyce came here, I believe, to form the union. 
 
 Q. Was that successful ? — A. No, sir, it was not; he was refused a ride on the 
 company's train. 
 OKIM WESLEY BARBER^-Camberland, May 27. 
 
OF InDmfJttAU DtSPVi'ES m BRITIS'S' COLUMBIA Wl 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No^ 36a 
 
 ^Qj Well, the union wa* not fefeoted' ?-^A; The ilmon was not directlj' fotened ; 
 the officerswere elected. There was a meeting ealM, but the officers -wfere discharged 
 the next day, and that broke the matter -Tip. 
 
 Q. It was broken up ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Now, the men here knew when they were starting to form this union that they 
 were going to bring on a fight with the employers, did they not ? — A. Certa;inly they 
 must have thought so. 
 
 Q. It was pretty generally understood that the company was opposed to unions 'i-i- 
 A. I think it was. 
 
 Q. That being so, what special reason was there for attempting it at this time ? — 
 A. With the opportunity of joining an o'rganization of strength — the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners. 
 
 Q. My point is this — you people knowing that the company was opposed to having 
 a union, what motive was there for attempting it at this particular time ? — A. It was 
 just an assertion of rights, in my opinion. 
 
 Q. Why did you select this more than any other time ? — ;A. I don't know why this 
 time was selected ; there was no special reasoni 
 
 Q. Do yoi* contemplate the possibility of a long fight ? — A. No, I could not say 
 that I contemplate anything myself ; I never contemplated the question very much at 
 all ; I thought of it certainly. 
 
 Q. Who called the meeting in April ? — A. I was out of town when the meeting 
 was called ; I don't know who called it. I only heard of it by word. 
 
 Q. And you say there was no special grievance led to this move ? — A. Not to my 
 knowledge. 
 
 Q. Tou must have known that it meant a fight ? — A. Not necessarily. 
 
 Q. Tou had a pretty shrewd idea, though ? 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. Tou knew what had taken place in Ladysmith ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. And what had taken place here several years ago ? — A. Tea, but we thought 
 Mr. Dunsmuir might have changed his mind. 
 
 Q. There was no attempt made to ascertain his view on that point ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. The possibility of a fight being so large, did you make any provision for finan- 
 cial aid ? How were you people going to stand it out ? — A. Well, we had the assurance 
 of support. 
 
 Q. It would have been an ill-advised move if you had not had that assurance ? — 
 A. No, I don't think it would ; of course that strengthened the movement. 
 
 Q. With only 200 men to enter into a fight of that kind ? — A. I consider a man 
 should always stand in a position to battle for his rights. 
 
 Q. Supposing he has not got any money saved up ? — A. We would certainly have 
 to put up a poor fight. 
 
 Q. These strikes cause a good deal of sickness and misery in the family, don't 
 fhey ? — A. I believe that a person has to suffer. It has always been my contention, 
 and I have expected in cases of that kind that I would have to suffer. 
 
 Q. The men can go on strike, but the women can't. It seems to me that is a thing 
 sometimes overlooked ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. I suppose you completely organized on the 5th, that is to say, you elected your 
 officers on that date ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Tou were elected president on that date ?— A. Tes. 
 
 Q. Would you be satisfied to make individual contracts with the company ? — A; 
 I believe we have always had individual contracts with them. 
 
 Q. And you are not striking because you cannot get a union contract ? — A. No, 
 sir. 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
392 MaWTEB OP ETIDEXCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VI F., A. 1904 
 
 Q. If that is the case, the company are ready to take men back on individual con- 
 tract ; I see notices posted up ? — A. I believe I could get one if I went after it. 
 
 Q. You say you could get a contract ? — A. I might. 
 
 Q. Is there any trouble about wages 'i- — A. No. 
 
 Q. Three dollars a day is the standard wage here ? — A. I believe there are dif- 
 ferent standards for different work. 
 
 Q. At all events there is no complaint on the question of wages ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Yours is a question of recognition and the right to organize ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If you are satisfied about the wages, what is the necessity for a union ? — A. 
 Everybody is not, of course ; where some will always be satisfied there are always 
 others who will not. 
 
 Q. But there is no general feeling in the camp that the wages are unfair ? — A. 
 No, I Suppose not. 
 
 Q. The chief object of a union is to keep up wages ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What is the necessity for a union then, when wages are satisfactoryj taken as 
 a whole ? — A. Wages are always considered by a union. I said there are a good many 
 wages paid that are below union prices here that are paid by most of the corporations 
 throughout the country, that are paid higher. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Can you specify a case ? — A. I believe the engineers are paid less here for the 
 hours. 
 
 Bp His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Do you think an employer has no right to employ a non-union man ? — A. He 
 has a right to employ whom he likes. 
 
 Q. If that is so, what is the object in striking for recognition ? — A. I would ask, 
 what is the object of discriminating against union men ? 
 
 Q. You think an employer has no right to discharge a man because he belongs to 
 a union ? — A. I think he has no right. 
 
 Q. That is merely because he belongs to the union, but if he is an incompetent 
 man he has a right ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. But not simply because he belongs to a union ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. I suppose you take a certain amount of credit for promoting this organization ? 
 — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Who would you say was the promoter ? — ^A. The men themselves. 
 
 Q. You think it was a spontaneous impulse on the part of the men ? — A. No, it 
 has been tried several times here on previous occasions. It has been the feeling of the 
 men at times, and they have made attempts, but they have been cut off at the start and 
 have never got a foothold. 
 
 Q. There have frequently been other attempts to organize ? — A. Not frequent ; 
 there have been other attempts. 
 
 Q. That you and others have been concerned in ? — A. I myself was only concerned 
 in one, other. 
 
 Q. What I want to know is whether it is personal knowledge or only from report ? 
 — A. There were others, I said, which were unsuccessful also. 
 
 Q. Do you gather that on these occasions the majority of the men were in favour 
 of a union ? — A. From what I have heard they were, only certain means were brought 
 to bear that changed their opinion. 
 
 Q. Who called that joint executive meeting held in Nanaimo ? — A. At the request 
 from Ladysmith and Nanaimo we sent delegates. 
 
 Q. Who were the delegates ? — A. Myself and Mr, Hutchinson. 
 
 Q. You are out now in sympathy with the Ladysmith miners ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. What do you call a sympathetic strike ? — A* Well, I don't know; I never was 
 in one. 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 393 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER; No. 36a 
 
 I Q. Was it decided at this joint meeting to come out on strike ? — -A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did yon receive assurance there if you did go out yoU would get support ?^A. 
 No, sir. 
 
 Q. Well, a telegram was sent there-f rom Moyer ? — A. That had nothing to do With 
 the executive meeting. 
 
 Q. This communication of Moyer had nothing to do with the general executive 
 meeting ?— A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. What was the purpose of that joint executive meeting at Nanaimo ? — ^A. It was 
 on business in connection with the three unions. It is not necessary to explain the 
 business of that meeting, is it ? 
 
 Q. Yes, we are here to get the facts. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — That was called for the purpose of devising ways and means to 
 relieve Ladysmith financially. At that time we were not on strike. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Then the meeting at Nanaimo was called tp consider the financial question ? — 
 A. Yes, it was a business meeting. 
 
 Q. What was it decided at that executive to do ? — A. It was decided that a levy be 
 placed on the members of Nanaimo and here to aid Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. How much ? — ^A. One dollar each member. 
 
 Q. To assist the Ladysmith men — that is a levy of one dollar on each of the Cum- 
 berland and Nanaimo men to assist the Ladysmith men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If the Ladysmith men were to have been assisted in this way, it would have 
 been better for the Cumberland men to have kept on working ; the funds would have 
 lasted longer ? — A. No, I don't thinlt it was. 
 
 Q. Why not ? — A. To continue working longer would have meant the death of the 
 union ; the officers cannot live without work. 
 
 Q. But then the men who continued to work could elect other officers ? — A. Well, 
 they would probably be afraid, or probably they might have found difficulty in finding 
 men who would fill these offices, when they found they were discriminated against. 
 
 Q. How does the company get to know who a,re the officers ?— A. We publish a 
 list of the names. 
 
 Q. And this proposed levy of a dollar, was that paid in ?— -A. Part of it has been 
 
 paid. 
 
 Q. How much ? — ^A. Well, I don't know. 
 
 Q. Could you give us any idea ? — A. No, I could not 
 
 Q. Has that money been given to the Ladysmith men — whatever has been col- 
 lected ?— A. No, sir; not yet. 
 
 Q. Why is that ? — A. It was passed at a vote of the meeting that it be credited 
 to the dues of the members here, since they had gone on strike; afterwards that that 
 should go to their dues. 
 
 Q. But I thought the idea was to assist the Ladysniith men by giving them some 
 money ? — A. They were not on strike then, and it was considered advisable to keep 
 that in case it was needed. 
 
 Q. But at the time of that meeting the Ladysmith men were on strike ? — A. Yes, 
 
 sir. 
 
 Q. I thought the idea was to assist these men at Ladysmith ? — A. It was. 
 
 Q. Why was not the money paid over ? — A. Only part has been collected. 
 
 Q. Why was not that part paid over ? That was a queer kind of assistance to 
 be giving, is it not ? — A. I told you it was passed by the union that the money be' 
 credited to the dues of its members. 
 
 Q. Anyway, the Ladysmith men have not -got any assistance yet ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. From the men here and from the men at Nanaimo ? — A. Not from the men 
 here. 
 
 OBIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
394 MIlfbfES OF EVIDENCJS OF ItOTAL C0MUI8SI0K - 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VIJ., A. 1904: 
 
 Q. From the Nanaimo men ? — A. I am not prepared to say ' from the men at 
 Nanaimo ; they have had assistance. 
 
 Q. They have had assistance from the Federation ? — A. Yes. , , ■ . , 
 
 Q, We know ab9ut.th^t. . They ha^ve, had sometliing like $790, besides $1,000. 
 How many men were at that joint meeting ? — A. I believe there were twelve or four- 
 teen, ,.•■,,•''■' 
 
 Q. How many men from here ? — A. Three. 
 
 Q. And how many from Ladysmith | — A. Two, I Relieve. 
 
 Q. So that the Nanaimo nien were in the majority ? — A. No, the Nanaimo men 
 that had a vote were not in the majority. ■-,..■ i , 
 
 Q. You say there were three from Cumberland, three from I/adysmith, an,d how 
 many from Nanaimo ?^A. There were two or three from Nanaimp. 
 
 Q. There were nine men to settle this question, is that right— nine men whb had 
 the right to vote ? 
 
 Mr. HuTCHiisrsoN. — There were two from Ladysmith, three from here, and three 
 from Nanaimo. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Was anything else done at that joint meeting besides voting this dollarin aid 
 of Ladysmith men ? — A. Yes, there was a deputation sent to Victoria tp interview 
 the members and see if they could bring about any pressure to bear upon a settlement 
 — ^the members of the House, the Legislature. 
 
 Q. There was nothing to be gained by that ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Was anything else done ? — A. That was all. 
 
 Q. Then you would say it was wrong for any one to call this a sympathetic strike ? 
 — ^A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And you cannot tell me what is a definition of sympathetic strike ? — A. No, 
 I could not. 
 
 Q. You call this a strike for recognition ? — A. And the reinstatement of our offi- 
 cers and members. 
 
 Q. If it is shown to your satisfaction that there are not enough places for all 
 the men to go back, you would not ask the company to discharge non-union men ? — 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Mr. Barber, I understood you to say that you received assurances from Mr. 
 Baker at Nanaimo at the time of the meeting of the joint executive, that you would 
 get financial help if you went out here ? — A. No, that was, we would have the support 
 of the Federation. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That is to say, you would have the approval of the head office ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. And that carried the right to get financial aid ? — A. I suppose if we wanted 
 to ; we carried the right to appeal to them. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Was the situation at Cumberland discussed at the meeting of the joint execu- 
 tive ? — A. No, I don't believe — there might have been a few questions asked. 
 Q. Was that the time you were there that you saw Mr. Baker ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That is at the joint meeting ? — A. Yes, at Nanaimo. 
 Q. He was at the joint meeting ? — A. Yes. 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
ON mDVS'PRIAL DISPUTES W BRlTlM COWMBIA 'M 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36'a 
 
 iSV Mr. Bowe :'■'■' 
 
 Q. Had your officers, been laid off previous to that joint laeeting ? — A- Yes, a 
 good many of them— a f ew of theto. \ " , ' 
 
 Q. So the occasion for the strike had been created previous to that time ? — A. I 
 believe so. - 
 
 Q. You say the meeting was called at the request of the Ladysmith men ? — A. 
 And Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. But that is the meeting ? Who vpas the man who sent out the request ? — A. 
 T^e secretary of the Nanaimo union, and the secretary of the Ladysmith union. 
 
 Q. From whom did you get the request ?— A. From the two unions. 
 
 Q. Which came in first ? — A. I don't remember which. 
 
 Q. Did the letters come the same day ? — A. I don't remember whether they were 
 both the same day. 
 
 Q. If you have these telegrams, Mr. Richards, you might put theni in tlie witness' 
 hands to be identified. , ; , : 
 
 Mr. Richards. — I might state this telegram has other private business on. 
 
 His Lordship. — It does not make any difference ; it won't be put in the paper 
 if that is what you mean. Is that the telegram sent to Mr. Moyer ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — From Moyer. 
 
 His Lordship. — Where is the one sent to him ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — I have none sent to him ; I was not secretary at that time. 
 
 (Telegram from Moyer put in. — Exhibit 14). 
 
 His Lordship. — Where is the other telegram ? 
 Mr. Richards. — I have no other. 
 
 His Lordship. — What has become of the telegram sent to Moyer, or a copy of it ? 
 Mr. Richards. — This union never sent any that I know of. I might say at that 
 time I was not here. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. It was sent from Nanaimo ? — A. This is an answer to that which Mr. Baker 
 sent from Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. During the holding of that joint meeting ? — A. I don't know what time he 
 sent it. 
 
 Q. I think the Commission ought to have a copy of the telegram to which this 
 was a reply ? — A. It will be necessary, in order to get the telegram which was sent— 
 you will have to get it from organizer Baker. 
 
 Q. Were you present, Mr. Barber, at the writing of the telegram sent to Moyer ? — 
 A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Was it shown to you before being sent to Moyer ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Was it shown to any members of the joint meeting ? — A. No, it was not. 
 
 Q. It was sent before the joint meeting was held ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. What is the date of that telegram ? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — It looks as if it might be April 5th. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^I don't see anything private in the last part of the telegram. It 
 strikes me that is part of the war that is going on ; there is no privacy about that. 
 There is no law against doing what is suggested to be done in the telegram. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Well, you labour men don't believe in working with Chinamen or Japanese, 
 do you ; you are opposed to that on principle ? — A. Not necessarily. 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
396 MIXVTES OF'ETIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Didn't it strike you as rather strange that Mr. Moyer should telegraph to 
 organize the Chinese and Japanese if possible ? This telegram says — ' Organize 
 Chinese and Japanese if possible.' Would you take them into your lodge then ? — A. 
 I don't suppose 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — Mr. Hunter, I object to this telegram to Mr. Bodwell, asking the 
 witness queutions on that. It ia private business. 
 
 His Lordship. — You must remember that this Commission is required and in- 
 structed by the government to get all the facts in connection with this strike and 
 report. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — I object to Mr. Bodwell questioning him. 
 
 His Lordship. — Both parties to this controversy are entitled to be represented by 
 counsel. You men have that right — it was exercised at Nanaimo and Ladysmith. If 
 you feel you are being taken at a disadvantage you shall have all the redress possible. 
 If you suggest them to me or my brother Commissioner, we will ask any question for 
 you. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — He will get an undoubted advantage of the witness by that tele- 
 gram; he will confuse the witness, a lawyer like Mr. Bodwell. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^You need not be afraid of that, if the witness sticks to the truth. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Then you vcould take the Chinamen and Japanese into your local union, would 
 you ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Here is the president of the Federation instructs Mr. Baker to organize the 
 Japanese and Chinamen, to organize you first, and then to organize the Chinese and 
 Japanese if possible. Is that right ? — A. There is nothing in that telegram to say we 
 are 
 
 Q. Mr. Baker telegraphed to Mr. Moyer at Denver, and he wires back, ' We approve 
 of calling out any or all men necessary to win at Ladysmith ; organize Chinese and 
 Japanese, if possible.' Now, Mr. Baker is the official organizer of the Western Federa- 
 tion, and he is telegraphed to by Mr. Moyer, president of the Federation. How were 
 you going to organize the Japanese and Chinese, unless you took them in with your- 
 selves ? — ^A. That would be left to ourselves ; it is only a suggestion. 
 
 His Lordship. — It seems to me that it is a natural suggestion for Moyer to make, if 
 necessary to win out the tight. The company could employ Japanese and Chinese, and 
 why should he not suggest that ? 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. I only ask Mr. Barber what he thinlis of going into a union lodge alongside of 
 Japanese and Chinamen. That was not the idea — ^that they would be members of the 
 Western Federation after being organized ? — A. I never asked for information on it. 
 
 Q. You would not approve of organizing the Japanese and Chinese ? — A. I would 
 think I would consider the organizing of them in a union of their ownj 
 
 Q. But you could not organize them except in the Western Federation of Miners. 
 Mr. Baker is an official organizer of the Western Federation ; he is not an organizer of 
 Japanese and Chinamen ? — A. He might be. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say he is paid 'by the Western Federation to organize Chinese 
 and Japanese ? — A. Certainly not. 
 
 Q. He could only organize them as an official of the Western Federation of Miners 
 — in no other capacity ? — A. He might assist in forming an organization of their own. 
 I think myself that was his idea. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Baker talk about organizing the Chinese and Japanese ? — ^A. He men- 
 tioned it, yes. 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumterland, May 27. 
 
ON. INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 397 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No.. 36a 
 
 Q. When and where, and to wh^in ? — A. He mentioned it to me at Nanaimo, He 
 asked me what I thought about it. 
 
 Q. What was his idea ; how Was he going to get up a Chinese union ? What was he 
 going to call it ? — A. He did not say. 
 
 Q. Where were they going to get their charter from ? — A. He did not say anything 
 about it; he did not say much at all. 
 
 Q. You did not encourage the idea ? — A. I never thought of it. 
 
 Q. Would you talie in an organization of Chinese and Japanese into a labour 
 iffi-ion ? — A. I don't know, I'm sure. 
 
 Q. How could you, with all your labour legislation against Chinese and Japanese, 
 and your prejudice against Chinamen, how could you consistently advocate that they 
 should become members of a labour union ? — A. I cannot understand it myself. 
 
 His Lordship. — Wliat difficulty would there be in forming a Chinese and Japanese 
 lodge ? 
 
 Mr. EiciiARDS. — They have them at present on the Fraser river. It might be 
 merely a branch of that that was required here. This was merely a suggestion put out 
 to organize the Chinese and Japanese if possible; to get them in an organization of 
 their own. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. I wanted to know what Mr. Barber's conversation was. Mr. Baker volunteered 
 that idea himself, did he ? — A. No, he did not express the idea to me. 
 
 Q. He asked you what you thought. Was your idea to ask for recognition of the 
 Chinese and Japanese union ? — A. Well, the fact is they were not organized. 
 
 Q. Did anyone approach them on the subject ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. K"ever heard about that ? — A. Yes, I heard something about that. 
 
 Q. What did you hear ? — A. You would hear all kinds of trash. The reports were 
 as many as they are from below. 
 
 Q. Yes, but I want to get at something definite as to the steps taken towards the 
 Chinese and Japanese on the lines of their becoming organized ? — A. There was noth- 
 ing of any consequence. 
 
 Q. Am I right in saying that Mr. Baker advocated furthering the union in order 
 to make Mr. Dunsmuir recognize the Western Federation ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Can you imagine a greater extreme than a labour man advocating the union- 
 ism of Japanese and Chinamen ? — A. That is only a suggestion, and I don't know 
 what it means myself. I think you are trying to misconstrue that. 
 
 Q. No. You tell me it was talked about. Approaches were made to the Chinese 
 and Japanese on the subject of organization ? — A. I said so. 
 
 Q. I understood you to say that you heard so — didn't you hear so ?— A. I heard 
 lots of talk. 
 
 Q. I don't mean to say that you knew, but I understood you to say that there was 
 talk of organizing the Japanese and Chinamen. Then I asked you this : whether you 
 and Mr. Baker were ready to advocate an extreme measure of that kind in order to 
 compel Mr. Dunsmuir to recognize the Western Federation ? — A. If I could assist a 
 Chinaman in getting an organization of his own, I would do so. 
 
 Q. The object you had in view was to procure the recognition of the Western 
 I'ederation ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Were you ready to join Mr. Baker in advocating the vmionism of Japanese 
 pnd Chinamen, in order to get Mr. Dunsmuir to recognize the Federation ? — A. For 
 the welfare of the Japanese and Chinamen. 
 
 Q. Since when did you, have an interest in the Japanese and Chinese ? — A. As 
 labourers, I have an interest in them. 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberlana, May 27. 
 
3199 MlifDTES OF EVYDMCEOP ROYAL OOMt^TSSWJt ^ 
 
 3-* EDWA'R'C) Vll.i' A. 1904 r^^ 
 
 Q. I understand thfelabciurmg men wanted to get thfem oiit 6f this cotHitry. Do you 
 approve of Chinese and Japanese labour ?^A. I approve, tvheii you have' to hi£tve them, 
 that they are entitled to a little liberty. 
 
 Q. You believe they are entitled to work in the country ? — A^ I believe they are 
 entitled to have a union if they wish it. 
 
 Q. You would not advocatie any tax on. the Chinamen, or aSy legislation or. any- 
 thing of that kind to prevent them working in the mines ? Would you or would you 
 not ? — A. That is getting to be a matter of politics, isn't it ?! don't think it ;s ne- 
 cessary to answer that question. ■ L 1 
 
 Q. Are you so fond of the Chinamen that you would act as a missionary among 
 them for the purpose of getting them into a labour union ?-^A.- 1 would advise them 
 certainly if I thought it would do any good; I would advise them to organiza 
 
 Q. Does not your examination show that both you and Mr. Baker were Willing 
 to take any measure you could that would compel Mr. Duusmuir to recognize the 
 Western Federation, and to go to the extreme of organizdng the Japanese and China- 
 men for that purpose. What do you say as to that ? Did not Mr^ Baker say bethought 
 that would bring Mr. Dunsmuir to time. Because, if you organized them, the first 
 thing you would do would be to call a strike, wouldn't you ? Why don't you answer 
 the question ? — A. Can that question be answered with yes Or no -t 
 
 Q. I think so. I say the first thing you would have done wduld be to'g^t the 
 Chinamen on strike. The first step is organization. That is the general rule, or have 
 the Chinamen got more sense than the whitemen, and they organize and don't strike 
 — is that right ? 
 
 Mr. RioHAKDS. — I think your Lordship that that is an insult to the people in the 
 hall. I want to call Mr. Bodwell to order. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What is the question ? (Question i-end). What answer do you wish to make ? 
 --A. I have no answer to make at all; I don't know of any intelligent answer to give 
 to it. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. I have asked you at least six questions without an answer. Now the proposi- 
 tion I was putting before you — I hope you won't think I am trying to be offensive — 
 the statement I made was merely argumentative — but the point I wanted you to an- 
 swer was whether if you had organized the Chinese and Japanese, would you have 
 called a strike as the next step ? — A. If we did organize the Japanese ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. The question is, Mr. Barber, if you organized the Chinese and Japanese would 
 you have called a strike ? — ^A. I don't know anything about it. The Japanese and 
 Chinamen cannot be organized in the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Would there be any object in organizing the Japanese and Chinamen, if not 
 to produce a strike ? — A. They would be left to their own affairs. 
 
 Q. Can you suggest that Mr. Moyer or Mr. Baker would- have any purpose in 
 organizing the Japanese and Chinese unless it was to bring about a strike, in order 
 to assist your movement here ? — A. That would be left to the Chinamen. All that 
 would be possible for Mr. Baker and Mr. Moyer would be to assist them. 
 
 Q. You refuse to draw what seems a very obvious inference. 
 
 His Lordship. — Mr. Bodwell, you assume that Moyer wanted them to organize as 
 members of the Western Federation of Miners ; he might want them organized by 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
ON'ffTfDmf^fAJj JDmPVTES-'IN' BBITl^H COLUMBIA 399 
 
 SESSIONAL ! PAPER Ha.~Mai 
 
 themselves, . Afld thatihaving, organized by: themselves he would induce- them to strike 
 in sypipathy with the Federation. That might l?e ^ fair i^ay of carrying on the v?ar, 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I put the proposition, and you heard his answer. 
 
 Q. How long have you been here this last time you ' came back here ; about a 
 year and a half ago ? — A. Yes, a little more. 
 
 Q. How long had you been away from here ? — A. I was- away from here hetween 
 four and five years. 
 
 Q. How many years would you say you have been away from this camp ? — A. 
 I believe about six years. 
 
 Q. You were down in the Kootenay country, weTe you not ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Working in quartz mines ? — A. Prospecting and working in quartz mines. 
 
 Q. And you joined the Western Federatioai of Miners while there ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What part of the KootenayS ?■ — A. Eossland. 
 
 Q. Were you in the Eossland strike ?-^A. No. 
 
 Q. How long were you in Eossland ?— A.; I generally wintered there. 
 
 Q. What mine, did you work in ?-^A. I have worked in nearly "all of them. 
 
 Q. And you joined the Western Federation while there, and became acquainted 
 with its constitution then ? — A. Yes. , : 
 
 Q. And you came back here about two years ago ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man named Higney ?-^A. I am slightly acquainted with him. 
 
 Q. Where did you meet him ? — A. Here, I believe. 
 
 Q. About a month before the organization ? — A. . Not until after the organization, 
 
 Q. Do you know, as a matter of fact, that he came here shortly before the organiza- 
 tion 1 — A. I don't know what time he came. 
 
 Q. You might as well admit these things if you know them. Do you know a man 
 named Chambers ? — A. I don't remember knowing a man of that narne. 
 
 Q. Don't you know that Higney was sent here by Mr. Baker ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Do you know where he came from ? — A. I do not. 
 
 Q. Ever hear him say ? — A. Never did. 
 
 Q. Ever hear anybody else say ? — A. I believe I have heard that Higney was from 
 Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. And you say you don't know that he came here shortly before the strike ? — A. 
 I don't know how long before the strike. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man named Chambers ? — A. Yes, I remember Chambers. 
 
 Q. How long before the strike was it you saw Chambers ?— A. I had a very short 
 acquaintance with Chambers. 
 
 Q. How long before the organization was the first time you saw Chambers at 
 Cumberland ? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. About a month ? — A. I believe — I don't believe I knew Chambers until the 
 organization ; that I knew him first when he became a member. 
 
 Q. He could not have been here very long before the organization, or you would 
 have seen him ? — A. I might have seen him, but I did not know who he was. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man here from the Crow's Nest ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Would you be surprised to hear that he came from there ? — A. I would not be 
 PUi-prised to hear he came from anywhere. 
 
 Q. It never occurred to you that Higney was here doing missionary work for the 
 union ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man named Hendricks ? — ^A. Yes; he came from the other side 
 somewhere ; I don't know where. 
 
 Q. He was not here very long before the organization ?— A. I believe he came 
 a very short time before. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man named Wilson ? — A. I know several men by that name. 
 
 Q. Thomas Wilson from Nanaimo ?; — A. I know two Thomas Wilsons. 
 
 Q. Do you know Thomas Wilson from Nanaimo ? — A. They are both from 
 Nanaimo, I believe. 
 
 OaiM WESLEY BARBER— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
40O illNVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll.i A. 1904 
 
 Q. Did they both come here shortly before the organization ?— A- I believe I 
 know the Wilson you have reference to. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man named Holden ? — ^A. I am very poor on remembering 
 names; I might have. 
 
 Q. He came here shortly before the organization of this union — you don't know 
 that ? — A. No, I can't say that I do. 
 
 His Lordship. — Suppose, Mr. Bodvvell, that this organization was organiz'ed at the 
 suggestion of the Nanaimo men, what is the point of it ? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — The point I will make is that the men here were not anxious for 
 organization. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man named Swanson ? — A. I know a man named Swanson. 
 
 Q. He came here before the organization ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man named Edwards who came, here from Nanaimo very shortly 
 before organization ? — A. No, I cannot say that I do. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man named Godrey ? — A. No, I can't say that I do. 
 
 Q. Would it surprise you to learn, from what you know of local conditions, that 
 these men were here shortly before organization, and were talking up^union and organi- 
 zation in Cumberland ? Would you be surprised to know, that, or have you not heard 
 it ? — A. I never had any one approach me and I know nothing whatever. 
 
 Q. Would you be surprised to learn that these men were here very shortly before 
 the organization, talking up organization at Cumberland ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. And that when they got together a certain number they sent for Mr. Baker to 
 come and organize the union ? — A. I don't know anything about it. 
 
 Q. And that the notice calling the meeting had no name attached to it; do you 
 know that ? — A. I don't. 
 
 Q. Did you see any of the notices posted up ? — A. I don't remember seeing the 
 notices. 
 
 Q. You went to the meeting which was held on April 5 ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Don't you remember that Mr. Bieknell made a motion there that the question of 
 whether there should be organization or not should be left to the men to decide~by 
 ballot — Mr. Thomas Bickell ? — A. He made a motion. 
 
 Q. And did not Mr. Baker say he would not allow that motion to be put to the 
 meeting; that he had come to organize and was going to organize such men as were 
 going into the organization anyway ? — A. I did not hear Baker say that ; I don't think 
 he did. 
 
 Q. Did not Baker say he had come to organize this union, and that he was going 
 to do it with such men as he could get to come into it, whether the rest came or not ? 
 — A. I don't remember. 
 
 Q. Or words to that effect ? — A. No, I don't remember. 
 
 Q. Will you undertake to swear that he did not ? — A. I am swearing to the best 
 Df my knowledge that he did not. 
 
 Q. That he did not say anything to that effect ? — A. Well, what the effect might 
 have been, I don't know. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Bicknell's motion put to the meeting ? — A. I don't know whether it 
 was seconded. 
 
 Q. Was it not ruled out and not allowed to be put ? — A. I don't know; I don't 
 think it was. , _ . . 
 
 Q. Will you swear that it was not — that that motion was not ruled out of that 
 meeting ? — A. I think it was not ruled out. 
 
 Q. That is, it was not put because it was not allowed to be put ? — A; I know the 
 motion was not put. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. Who was chairman of that meeting ? — A. Higney, I believe. 
 ORIM WESLET BARBER— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
ON TISIDVSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 401 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. And he is not here now ? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Is he a Nanaimo man ? — A. He comes from Ladysmith. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Hendricks was secretary ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Didn't it strike you as peculiar that these men, who were the last comers to 
 the camp, that one should be chairman and the other secretary of the meeting, neither 
 of them working at the time ? — A. Not so much in view that any person who had 
 formerly taken these steps in unionism were discriminated against. 
 
 Q. Is that the reason ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Will you swear that Higney did not rule out Bickell's motion ? — A. To the 
 best of my belief there was no ruling out of the motion. 
 
 Q. Is it not a fact that Higney refused to allow that motion to go to the meet- 
 ing ? — ^A. I don't know whether there was a seconder to the motion or not. 
 
 Q. Because Mr. Baker said he would not allow that motion to be put to the meeting 
 — that he was going to organize anjrway — is that true ? — A. To the best of my belief 
 it is not true. 
 
 Q. Now, what did Mr. Baker say with reference to that motion ? — A. There was 
 quite a noise and Mr. Baker could not be heard very well. I don't remember him say- 
 ing anything particular on that motion. I don't believe he said much on that motion. 
 
 Q. "Why was not the motion put to the meeting ? — A. I don't suppose there was 
 a seconder. 
 
 Q. Do you give that as an honest reason why that motion was not put to the meet- 
 ing ?— A. I give thai; as the best reason I know of. 
 
 Q. Now, Mr. Collishaw made a motion or tried to make a motion?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And his motion was that the vote as to whether there should be a union or not 
 should be taken by ballot at the pit-head ? — A. I believe he did. 
 
 Q. Why was not that motion put to the meeting ? — A. I don't know whether it 
 bad a seconder. 
 
 Q. Is that not true that Baker said he would not allow either of these motions to 
 go to the meeting — that those who did not want to organize could get out ? — A. In the 
 best of my opinion, I believe he said nothing of that kind. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Did Mr. Baker speak at all concerning these motions ? — A. I don't think he 
 spoke on the motions at all. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwelt : 
 
 Q. And you tell me the only reason no motion went to the meeting was there was 
 no seconder to either one of them ? — A. I don't knew whether there was a seconder ; 
 it was not stated from the chair. 
 
 Q. Was that the reason it was not stated from the chair ? — A. I don't know". 
 
 Q. Did you form any opinion at the time from what you heard ? — A. No, I cannot 
 say that I did. , 
 
 iQl As,a matter of fact, did 'not a number of men leave after this — didti't James 
 Keid second Bicknell's motion ?— A. I doii't know. 
 
 Q. Will you swear he did not ? — A. I won't swear he did. '■ ' ' ' 
 
 Q. Didn't a considerable number of men leave the meetiii^ wheii these iriotidns 
 were made, ^nd not allowed ?^A. There were men left the hall after that. - • i i 
 
 Q. And before 'a motion to organize was put to. the meeting ?— A. I think the 
 motion to organize was put to the meetijig befftre they left. Are there alify minutes ' 
 of that meeting ? — A.' Yes, there are minutes of th^t mepting. , ;; . 
 
 36a — 26 ORIM WESLEY barber— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
402 MINUTE^ OF' EVIDENCE OF R07AL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. I suppose the minutes don't c(5ntain any reference to these motions that I 
 have mentioned, one moved by Bickell and the one by CoUishaw? — A. I don't think 
 they did. 
 
 Q. Now, you say there were 135 men joined. There were about 700 men at work 
 altogether at that time on all the shifts ? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. How many were at work then ? — A. We have got them all pretty nearly in the 
 union, and they are about 300. 
 
 Q. How many men -were working here at the time that these 135 joined the union ? 
 ■ —A. Mr. Matthews can give you a better idea as to that. 
 ' Q. Have you any idea ? — -A. Somewhere over 300. 
 
 Q. So that 135 — do you say there were 135 at that meeting when that resolution 
 •was passed ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did they join that date ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. After the meeting ? So that is the way you fix the number ? — A. That is the 
 way we fix the number of members who joined. 
 
 Q. So 135 were the people who formed this union, without allowing a motion to 
 have a ballot at the pit-hoad ? (No answer.) 
 
 Q. You say you have been holding meetings every week since of the union ? — ^A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. And that 250 is the average attendance at these meetings ? — A. Probably. 
 
 Q. Now, these motions were both made and neither one of them put to the meet- 
 ing ? — A. I don't think the motions were seconded. 
 
 Q. You will say this at least, that these motions were both made and neither one 
 put to the meeting ? — A. I would further say in regard to that, they were put to the 
 meeting by a man who has always taken a stand against unionism^ 
 
 Q. Were these resolutions ^put to the meeting; you mean they were moved in the 
 meeting. The men who moved them were opposed to unions ? — A. Men who always 
 opposed unions, and always 
 
 Q. And you determined that you would not hear the other side, that the men who 
 opposed the union had no rights in a labour meeting to consider a question of organi- 
 zation ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Why was the motion refused; you see you have suggested the answer. You 
 said these men were opposed to unions. Was that the reason why their motion did not 
 go to the meeting ? — A. What I meant to suggest was that they were men that were 
 always willing to take a stand against the men. 
 
 Q. Who wanted to organize. You don't concede the right to take the opposita 
 view to you ?— A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. Why didn't you allow them to exercise their right and argue for their motion, 
 and put it to the meeting ? — A. I had nothing to do with it. 
 
 Q. You said in your examination in chief that you had been holding these meet- 
 ings with an average attendance of 250. Do you want to pledge yourself to that pro- 
 position ? — A. I was only giving an estimate. 
 
 Q. Where did you hold these meetings ? — A. In the city hall. 
 
 Q. How many will that seat comfortably ? — A. About 180 comfortably. 
 
 Q. Would you be surprised to know that by actual count you have not had an aver- 
 age attendance of over 70 ?— A. I don't believe that at all. 
 
 Q. What means did you take to estimate the numbers ? — A. Well, I was not giving 
 any 
 
 Q. But you gave a positive figure, and now you tell us it was an estimate ? — A. I 
 did not give a positive figure. 
 
 Q. You said between 200 and 250, and do you still think that ? — A, I still, think 
 that. 
 
 Q. How many meetings have you had ? — A. Do you mean regular meetings t 
 
 Q. Yes ?— A. Eight, I think. - ; i . 
 
 OR IM WESliEY BARBER— Cumberland, May 27. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 403 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr.- Hutchinson. — One every week for two months. .,- 
 
 Q. Tou formed this committee and came to Mr. Matthews on Friday evening, 
 didn't you, about four o'clock — that is, Friday the 1st May, about four o'cloclc in the 
 afternoon, and handed him your list ? — A. No, we did- not hand him any li^t: v/e did 
 not have the list with us. We asked him if he would accept a list-. 
 
 Q. That was about four o'clock in the afternoon; was it not ? — A. Yes, I don't 
 know what time it was. 
 
 Q. Abovit that time when you got his answer, four o'clock in the afternoon ? — A. 
 I believe it was about that. 
 
 Q. And the next day you came there about what time ? — A. I was not therj the 
 next day. 
 
 Q. Who did come the next day with a notice? You were not with the' comlni^itee 
 the next day ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. When they came to notify Mr. Matthews that they had struck, you wera not 
 there then ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. What time did you strike ; did you go to work the next day ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. So that all the notice Mr. Matthews had of the strike was what could be in- 
 ferred from your actions after four o'clock in the afternoon before you struck — that is 
 right ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Now, as to the discharge of these men — you understood you were laid off as a 
 matter of discipline 1 — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you have any reason to believe that you were going to be permanently oat 
 of employment, so far as this management was concerned ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was your reason ? — A. For the reason that this company had acted m 
 that manner on previous occasions. 
 
 Q. Were you here on previous occasions? That was the time of the Tully Boy<3e 
 affair ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Tully Boyce was very obnoxious to these men. That was shortly after the 
 strike at Wellington, which he engineered ? — A. I was not acquainted with the man. 
 
 Q. You knew him by reputation ? — A. His reputation was not very largely cir- 
 culated. 
 
 Q. Were you in the country at the time of the strike at Wellington ? — A. That 
 was shortly before my time. 
 
 Q. Then the only thing you had to go on was that Tully Boyce came to organize, 
 and that the officers of the union wh'ch he tried to organize were dismissed — were dis- 
 missed permanently ? — A. Yfls, sir. 
 
 Q. And that is the only occasion you know anything about yourself ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was there anything Mr. Matthews said to you, or any official of this mine said 
 to you, which would justify you in stating that you had expected from what their con- 
 versation was to 'he permanently out of employment at these works ? — A. No doubt, 
 it would mean to be laid off. 
 
 Q. Tell me anything that Mr. Matthews said, or any official of this mine said to 
 jou which would justify you in drawing that inference ? — A. He would not deal with 
 the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. He said he would not recognize the union ?— A. Would not recognize a list. 
 
 Q. The list was that they had to take back such men as you men ordered, not 
 such as they chose to ask, in the order which you would place them on the list ?— A. In 
 the order in which they were laid off. 
 
 Q. That is the order in which they would be put on the list handed Mr. Mat- 
 ihews ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So that your proposition came to this: that he was to take a list from you 
 which was to show the men he would employ, and the order he would employ ? — A. No, 
 
 sir.' ' ' 
 
 Q. That list contained the mode, and the order ?— A. There was no list. 
 
 36a — 26 J ORIM WESLEY BARBER— eiujnberland. May 27. 
 
404 M1NUTE8 OF EVIDENCE OF EOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 Q. If you had a list ? — A. The list would have- 
 
 Q. That list would contain the names of the men to be employed, and the order 
 in which they were to be employed ? — A. It would contain the dates they were laid 
 ofE — each man, and the time his place was finished, and the date. It would be handed 
 to him so that he would see it, and if he wished to start them on their regular dates — 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say if he had recognized your committee and had taken that 
 list that would have been treating you right, and according to your understanding, if 
 he employed the men in any other order except that mentioned in the list ? — A. They 
 could have been employed difierent. 
 
 Q. Would the union have understood that that was what the management ought 
 1o do when they took that list from them ? — A. They would be expected to show some 
 fair disposition in starting the officers. 
 
 Q. That was what you insisted, a fair disposition of the work — ^the list would 
 contain ? — A. That would just simply be a record of what time they were out of 
 places. 
 
 Q. Don't you suppose the company knew the time they were out, as well as the 
 union ? What need was there for the union to give a list if the company knew ? Why 
 don't you come to the point, and let us get on ? Can you give me another reason for 
 handing that list in ? If it was simply a record of dates, the company have these 
 dates ? — A. Well, it would have been showing a fair disposition towards the Federa- 
 tion. 
 
 Q. Now, that is the only thing you can put your finger on. Has the statement of 
 any official justified you in inferring that you would not be employed on these works 
 cr the fact that Mr. Matthews said he would not accept that list. You cannot tell me 
 anything else, can you ? — A. Only that we were walking around town out of work, and 
 ethers were going around getting work. 
 
 Q. Will you undertake to say, Mr. Barber, that there were places for you men who 
 were walking around ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. So you cannot say anything aToout that then ? — A. I cannot say. 
 
 Q. Have you never been out of work temporarily before during your employment 
 with this company ? — A. I believe I did have to walk around a month one time for 
 psking for an advance. 
 
 Q. How long have you worked for the company altogether ? You worked here 
 about two years this last time. When did you work for this company before ?-^A. I 
 could not tell you. 
 
 Q. How long ago ? — A. Altogether, I believe, between 6 and 7 years 
 
 Q. When did you begin, and where ?^A. I began work in the old No. 1 mine at 
 Union. 
 
 Q. How long did you work there ? — A. I believe about 14 months. 
 
 Q. Then where did you go ?— A. Well, I think I went away from here then, some- 
 where about a year. 
 
 Q. How long ago was that ?— A. That was in 1890; I think it was then. 
 
 Q. Then you came back here, did you ? — A. Yes, I came back. 
 
 Q. And you went to work here again ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How long did you work then ? — A. Really, I don't know; I believe a couple of 
 years or so. 
 
 Q; It is only ten years. How do you account for not being able ta go on ? — A. 
 I have never kept a diary. 
 
 Q; Are we to believe that a man does not know where he has been "working in the 
 last ten years ? — A. It is a thing I do frequently — ^how long I have worked in certain 
 places; I have been in a good many places. 
 
 ' Q; In the last ten ye'drs ?— A. No, but fdUowing up prospecting inthe last ten 
 years, and one thing and another. ; ' ; ■ . r ; ,; .-i 
 
 ' ■ ORlM ■VirESL!BY BARBER— cimb'erlaiid, iiii ' 27. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 405 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. During the last five years, what has your principal business been— prospecting ? 
 — A. Not in the last five years. You hardly give a man a chance to make a statement. 
 Q. I would like to get some kind of a statement. 
 
 By His Lordship .• 
 Q. You have been working for the company five or six years ? — A. I told about 
 that; that can be found out from the company's books. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : • 
 
 Q. Didn't you know that the men around here were anxious for a union, when it 
 was organized first ? — A. I had heard some talk of it — not very much. I had been 
 living at the Lake and heard very little. 
 
 Q. You know in a general way that the men around here would have liked to have 
 had a union, if possible ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When Mr. Baker came here, did he not say, or did he say, that he had come 
 to organize here, and that if you wanted to organize, or wished it, he was ready to 
 organize ? — A. I believe he did. 
 
 Q. He did not force it or advise it, but merely said he was here to organize, and 
 if you wished it he was ready to organize ? — A. That was the statement, I believe. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Did he say he was going to organize anyway ? — ^A. No, sir ; I never heard that 
 statement. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 
 Q. That if the men wished it he would organize; that he was not going to force 
 it on anybody ? That the Western Federation never cared to force their organization 
 on anybody ? — A. Yes, he said that. 
 
 Q. What occurred after that ? Have you any recollection ? Did not some one 
 make a motion to organize ? — A. I asked if a motion would be in order. 
 
 Q. And did not the chairman tell you it would be ? — A. Yes; I made a motipn 
 that we organize. 
 
 Q. And did not hear Eeed say something ; don't you remember Eeed saying some- 
 thing, but that he did not exactly oppose the motion ?^A. I did not hear Reed's 
 motion; did not hear what he said. 
 
 Q. You remember what Bickell said ? Did Bickell make any personal remarks ? 
 Instead of making a motion did not Bickell pass remarks which caused a hubub ? — 
 A. Yes, Bickell made a remark that I was a single man, and had nothing at st^ke 
 here. 
 
 Q. He passed personal remarks on other men besides yourself ? Was it not in 
 amendment to the motion that it was of necessity out of order ? Bickell did Hot get 
 his amendment seconded, but he started to make personal remarks ?-^A. Yes, I think 
 that was the case ; I never heard a seconder or heard the motion stated. 
 
 Q. Had there been an amendment would it hot have been out of order the way he 
 was putting it ?— A. Yes, it would. ' ■ 
 
 -Q. Were there calls for a motion to b6 put whether he would organize or. iiot 1 — 
 A. There were. , i 
 
 Q. What occurred then, do you know ? — A. I believe at that time Baker jrose up 
 and said that any that did not wish to stop and become members^-those thati did not 
 wish to become members of the Western Federation, he^ekqd them to, please retire. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 .; ;: ,Q. ..Tha,t was befpre thje motign was -put ? — A,, I could not say ^ J believOj iit was 
 before the motion was put ; 1 am not sure. ,," . i , ; ., . 
 
 , ;OR,IJ« WFSI.;E|Tf. BAR|;]B.B— fiumlferlftnil, „^ay ^ 27. 
 
406 MINUTE 8 OF EVIDENCE OF R07A.L COMMlSStOlf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII.,' A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship ': ' • ■ 
 
 Q. How many retired ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Fifty ? — A. There were a few men on top ; I don't think there were more than 
 a dozen probably. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. They were not miners ? — A. Not with the exception of three or four. 
 
 By Mr. Richards ; >• 
 
 Q. There were a lot of other men that were not workmen of the company that 
 went out ? — A. I believe there was. 
 
 Q. So that the men that stayed were all willing to be organized ?— ^A, Yea. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Who administered the oath. Baker ? — ^A. Baker. 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 
 Q. Then after that what occurred ? You were discharged or laid off, were you 
 not ? — A. I was laid off. 
 
 Q. For what length of time were you laid off ? — A. Two weeks. 
 
 Q. What happened when your two weeks were up ? — A. My place was finished. 
 • Q. What did the manager say to you ?— A. It was the underground manager. 
 
 Q. You were in a stall ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Had it any more ground to go, or was it turned into the next stall ? — A. Of 
 course I cannot see ahead in the stall, but coal was there when I stopped. 
 
 Q. Have the other stalls gone farther than your stall ? — A. I don't know that; 
 they were probably one staff farther up. 
 
 Q. Is it not usual, when your two weeks are up that you go to work ? — A. Yes, 
 that is the custom. 
 
 Q. Is it the custom that you go on, after you are laid off two weeks ? — A. Yes, 
 It is customary. , 
 
 Q. Were there any men put on during that time ? — A. I heard there was ; I 
 don't know. 
 
 Q. What conclusion did you come to wheu your work was stopped like that ? — A. 
 Well, I came to the conclusion that there was no more work for me. 
 
 Q. When you interviewed Mr. Matthews about being placed on again, didn't Mr. 
 Matthews say that he could not recognize the union under any circumstances, as Mr. 
 Dunsmuir would not recognize it ? In fact, he meant it was the desire not to recognize 
 the union ?— A. That is the way it appeared to me. 
 
 Q. That is the way you understood it. That has been the way it Tras in the past. 
 About that telegram. You did not think that this telegram was what we went out 
 on strike for — ^to organize the Chinese, or to approve of Cumberland being called out ? 
 — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. That is not the telegram, is it ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Baker say when he formed the organization, that should the mem- 
 bers be discriminated against, or if they would in any way try to break up the union, 
 that the Federation would stand by them ? — A. He did. 
 
 Q. Was that iix)t the understanding we went on ? The telegram has nothing to 
 do with the strike ? — A. Nothing whatever. 
 
 Q. That is business apart from this strike,, is it not ? — A. Yes. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^It seems to me the telegram speaks for itself. The object of ask- 
 ing for the telegram is to see if they could get support. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — What the witness means to say is that we did not go out on strike 
 by reason of the telegram. 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER^-Cumberland, May 27. 
 
ON. INDUSTRIAL DISPVTJES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 407 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Was there anything said about this place going out in sympathy with Lady- 
 smith ? — A. Nothing. , , , ■.. 
 
 Q. Pid the telegram sug;gest that we went out in sympathy with Ladysmith ? — 
 A. No, there was no suggestion. 
 
 Q. According to that telegram — it reads — ' to win at Ladysmith' ? — A. That tele- 
 gram has nothing to do with the strike situation. 
 
 Mr. JlowE. — The question was asked the witness if the strike was with the approval 
 of the executive, and he said that they had received the approval of the executive by 
 the telegram from the president in reply to a telegram asking for approval. ' 
 
 Mr. KiCHARDS. — I am asking these questions to clear up the matter. There is a 
 misunderstanding; this telegram was prior to the strike. ' ' 
 
 His Lordship. — That is the telegram from Evans. 
 
 Mr. EicHARDS. — I am seeking to prove that that telegram has nothing to do with 
 our strike, or calling us out here. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — Then the question would arise, when was the approval of the executive 
 obtained ? 
 
 Witness. — It is not necesary to have the approval of the executive, only for the 
 support. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 
 Q. Is that the understanding we went on, that should we be discriminated against, 
 if we should go on strike, the Pedpration would Support us ? — A. If you are attacked 
 you can go on strike at any time. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. There is no doubt, Mr. Barber, that it was on the strength of this telegram that 
 you went out ? — A. No ; it was on the strength of that telegram that we based our idea 
 of support. If we went out without the approval of the executive board, they mi^ht 
 not give us support. 
 
 Q. This telegram was the day before you had the mesting here ? 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — No, that cannot be, it must be the 14th. 
 
 Witness. — ^It was the Saturday previous to May 2, the 24th. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — That telegram was given to you to show you conclusively what 
 Mr. Baker said at the beginning. I mean what Mr. Baker said as to the fact that 
 should we be attacked for organizing, the union would support us. That is the situa- 
 tion; it is not the telegram, that telegram is not shown to back the statement. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — How did the telegram come into the possession of this local ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — It was given to Mr. Barber by Mr. Baker, I think. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — If it was given to this local it would appear to be given for the pur- 
 pose of influencing the executive ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Yes, it was given in that way ; it would be then given to Lady- 
 smith or Nanaimo; it would be shown around; it was given to show that we would 
 have backing. The telegram would read that we should go out in sympathy, but that 
 is, not so. . 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You got this telegram at the joint meeting ? — A. No, I got it from him irt 
 Nanaimo. 
 
 ORIM WESLEY BARBER-^Cumberland. May 27. 
 
403 MIXVTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Previous to the joint meeting? — A. Before that, I believe; it was not in 
 connection with the joint meeting. 
 
 Q. Was it read at the joint meeting ? — A. No. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — What date is the telegram ? 
 
 His Lordship.— It seems to be the 22nd or 24th. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — Would the 24th come on Saturday ? 
 
 His Lordship. — The 24th of April was on Friday. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson.— Then we had the meeting on Sunday, the 26th — was it Saturday 
 or Sunday ? 
 
 Witness. — It would be Sunday. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — So that in that case the telegram would arrive before the meet- 
 ing. 
 '' By Mr. Richards : 
 
 Q. This telegram did not influence the actions of that meeting ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. It had no effect at that joint meeting whatever ? — A. It was not known in the 
 joint meeting. 
 
 Q. So therefore you came out on strike according to the constitution, and that 
 the Federation, in observing the constitution would give you support ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So, therefore, it is not in sympathy. About the Chinese and Japanese. Did 
 Mr. Baker say he was thinking of organizing them, or getting them organized by some 
 Chinese organizer ? — A. I had not discussed the Chinese question with Baker ; it 
 was just a suggestion. I don't understand anything about the question at all. 
 
 Q. You would not be in favour of them joining the Federation ? — A. Certainly 
 not ; they could not comply with our constitution and by-laws. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Why ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Don't you think Chinamen could discuss socialistic questions I 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 Q. Would it be the scale of wages that would stop them ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. They could not earn the wages, you mean ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 Q. Would you be willing that they should have the same scale of wages ?^A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Why not ? — A. They could not discuss, intelligently questions coming before 
 the union. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : , , . ;i 
 
 Q. Because they could not speak the language ? — A. Yes. ' •■ 
 
 Q. How do you do with the Belgians or French ? — A. We would have interp't-y- 
 
 ters. " ' •* 
 
 Q. You could not have Chinese interpreters ?— A. There is no one here can uiider- 
 
 stand the Ghiiiese language "outside of the Chinese and Japanese. ' ' ■ -•' 
 
 ORIMWESJLiBy BARBEB-rGuiaberJana, Msy<2^ 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 409 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. "Would there be any objection to their having a lodge of their own ? — A. I 
 would not object. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 
 Q. Don't the Japanese and Chinese have unions in different parts of British 
 Columbia — they have on the Fraser ? — A. I believe they have. 
 
 Q. Would you have any objection to them having a branch of that union here? 
 —A. Not at all. 
 
 Q. Was that not what Mr. Baker meant ? — A. I think that was so, 
 
 Q. Could you say that you had any information to that effect ? — A. No, I could, 
 not say that I had any information ; it was merely a suggestion. 
 
 Q. You state conclusively that this is not a sympathetic strike ; it is a strike 
 for reinstatement of the men and recognition of the Federation ? — A. Certainly it is 
 not a sympathetic strike ; I believe I made a statement on what I considered recogni^ 
 tion of the union. 
 
 Q. What would be the reason why you would want the union recognized here ; 
 so that you could have freedom , to speali on diffefent questions? — ^A. I have already 
 gone through that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did Baker show you this telegram in the presence of anyone else ? — A. No, 
 sir. 
 
 Q. He gave it to you ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What did he say to do with it ? — A. He did not say to do anything ; I might 
 read it before the lodge if I liked — might ask their opinion — some suggestion of that 
 kind. 
 
 Q. You read it, and asked their opinion ? — A. I did. 
 
 Q. When was that ? — A. At one of our regular meetings sometime since. 
 
 Q. Would it be the next regular meeting after the 24th ? I suppose it would ; 
 you would not keep it in your pocket without saying anything about it for two weeks ? 
 — A. I gave it to the secretary. 
 
 Q. When was your meeting ?— A. Wednesday — Tuesday at that time, I believe. 
 
 Q. At any rate, it was read at either the first meeting or the next meeting, after 
 the receipt of the telegram ? — A. The first meeting, the secretary says. 
 
 Q. What action was taken by the meeting ? — A. It was discussed for a Short 
 time, and we came to the conclusion that we did not know anything about it. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : -' 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact, the officers of this lodge wanted the men to go out in 
 
 sympathy with this lodge, and the men would not do it ? — A. No. i 
 
 Q. Did not you advocate that yourself ? — A. No. 
 Q. None of the officers of the lodge ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Mr. Baker did ? — A. I never heard hinr. , 
 
 i^. tlow do you account for Mr. Moyer telegraphing to him that he approves .of 
 
 calling out enough men to win at Ladysmith ? — A. That is correspondence between 
 
 themselves that I know nothing about. , - .. :;,_ 
 
 Q. Was there not a telegram re§.d at one of your lodge ineetings frpm Ladyspaith, 
 
 a^OMt going out in sympathy with them ?— A- N<?,, sir. , , ., ; 
 
 ' Q. Someone said that ?— A. There was not. ' , , 
 
 Q. Nothing of that kind: done ?— A. No. , \, _ .^ . ,j 
 
 Q. Then you did pot discuss :th§. question. of sypipathetie strike with Ladysmith,?; 
 
 — A. No, sir. 
 
 ORIM'WESLEY^'BARBEH-Miumbei'lahd, 'Wk'f St. 
 
410 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3^ EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship ; 
 Q. This telegram was read, I understand, at a meeting on April 29, the regulai* 
 weekly meeting ? — A. Yes, I believe that would be the meeting probably. 
 Q. And you say there was no particular action taken on it i' — ^A. No. 
 Q. But the question of going out on strike was discussed at that meeting. ? — A. 
 No^ sir. 
 
 ' Q. Was not discussed at aU ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 By -Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. When was the committee appointed that went to see Mr. Matthews in regard' 
 to the taking back of the men ?^A. I would have to look up those dates. 
 Mr. Richards. — ^It was on the 9th. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. So you did not know that you had a grievance until the refusal of Mr. 
 Matthews to reinstate the men ? — ^A. Yes, we knew we had a grievance. 
 
 Q. But that established the grievance ? If he had taken back the men there 
 would have been no strike ? — A. Leaving a reasonable length of time. 
 
 Q. Supposing Mr. Matthews had assented to your proposition, there would have 
 been no strike ? — A. Yes, no strike. 
 
 Q. It was upon his refusal that the meeting was called, I understand ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So that was to prove that your men were being discriminated against, and you 
 took action on that on May 2 ? — A. Yes. 
 
 His Lordship.— When did you go to see Mr. Matthews ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — May 1. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Friday was the day they came, Saturday they called the strike. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The meeting was held on May 2; you say notices were posted up here and 
 there ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I don't quite understand the closing up of the stalls. You might explain that 
 a little more. You are giving us the impression that the company, when they want 
 to get rid of you some way or other, close down your place ? — A. I think that can 
 probably be explained better in some other cases than mine. Although I know that' 
 the stall I was working in was going somewhere near the surface, I don't understand 
 the geographical survey of the mine, and it might be in a short distance 
 
 Q. It might be an unfounded suspicion ? — A. It might be. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 : Q. But you did not expect it to terminate so soon ? — A. No, I did not expect it. 
 
 Cumberland, May 28, 1903. 
 David Halliday, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are a coal miner, Mr. Halliday ?: — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How long have you lived here ?— A. Since the 10th or 11th of January the 
 
 second Monday in January, anyhow. 
 
 Q. Where were you before that ? — A. I was in Texada ; I was there six months. 
 DAYIB HAULIDAY— Cumberland, May 2S. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 411 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Where before that ? — A. I was in Extension, B.O. 
 
 Q. How long there ? — A» One year. 
 
 Q. Where before that ? — A. Hamilton, Scotland, 
 
 Q. Ton are a Scotch coal miner ? — A, Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Not quite two years in the country ?, — A. I am just about two years in the 
 country. ,-^ 
 
 Q. What office do you hold in the local union ? — A. I am treasurer an4 * member 
 rf the executive board. 
 
 Q. Were you a union man in the old country ? — A. I was a meniber of a union 
 in the old country — a coal miners' union. . . •;, 
 
 Q. Tell us shortly the affairs leading up to the strike here ? — 'A. I don't knowj 
 the circumstances were pretty bad, seeing that a man could not say union, or if ha 
 said union, I could see that he would not hold his job long. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by saying union ? — A. That he could not exercise the right 
 of freedom of speech; that is what I mean. 
 
 Q. On what subjects ? — A. I suppose on the trade union movement, or politics. 
 
 Q. Could not say anything about unionism or about politics ?: — A. Or about poli- 
 tics, provided you were on the opposing side to the employers. 
 
 Q. If he did so he was in danger of losing his job ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know of any cases where that happened ? — A. Yes, there was one man 
 ?ince I came here was fired, as they term it, discharged for saying something. 
 
 Q. Who was he ?— A. Walter White. 
 
 Q. Is he still in the place ? — A. I understand he is; I saw him last week; I could 
 not say distinctly. 
 
 Q. Just tell us how he came to be discharged ? — A. Well, there were two members 
 sent here from the Enterprise Union, No. 181, W.F.M., by the executive board of that 
 union. 
 
 Q. Where is that ? — A. Ladysmith — by the executive board of that union. 
 
 Q. Was it by their wish or 'by request from here ? — A. No, sir, they were sent 
 by the executive board to 
 
 Q. Not in response to any invitation ? — A. So far as I am concerned, no invita- 
 tion. 
 
 Q. Who were they ? — A. One was James Higney, I think, and another was an 
 Italian ; I don't know his name ; I never met him. 
 
 Q. When did they get here ? — A. I could not exactly state; it was a week after 
 they came here before I saw them. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us — as nearly as you can ? — ^A. About two weeks before the 5th 
 April. 
 
 Q. I suppose it is in your interest to have this man White subpoanaed; if it is 
 not we will not take the time ? 
 
 Me. Bowell. — It does not matter whether he is called or not, we will explain in 
 our evidence. 
 
 His Lordship — I think we had better have him here. 
 
 Q. These men came here about two weeks before; did you have any conversation 
 with them ? — A. A conversation with one of them a week previous to the 5th of April. 
 
 Q. Tell us what that was about ? — A. He asked my opinion as to how it would be 
 to form a branch of the W. F. M. in this town — if the men would like' to become' mem- 
 bers of that organization. I said I could not state, that I had only been here a;bout 
 two months previous to that, and that he had a pretty hard nut to crack to form any 
 branch of a union under the conditions that were existing here previous to that. 
 
 Q. 'When you said something about conditions, to what did you allude ? — A. The 
 conditions I have alluded to before — that a man could not exercise the right of free 
 speech, or he is liable to forfeit his' emploirment. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY;, Cumberland. May 28. 
 
412 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Yes, -what did he say ? — A. He said lie came to investigate individual opinion 
 as to whether or not they wished to form a branch of that organization. 
 
 Q. What was the result ? — A. The result was that he found out most of the- men 
 were in favour of forming a branch of the W.F.M. 
 
 Q. Most of them. Can you give us some idea of the numbers ? — ^A. I could not 
 give you an idea of the numbers. 
 
 Q. That was your honest opinion? — A. That was his opinion, not mine; I told 
 him I could do nothing to aid him, and he would have to do his own work investigat- 
 ing matters. He only asked my opinion. 
 
 Q. Were you in favour of joining the W.F.M. ? — A. Certainly, I was in favour if 
 they were forming one to join it. 
 
 Q. Had you looked at the constitution before you came to that conclusion ? — A. 
 No, I had not had a look at the constitution, but I understood it was conducted on 
 fairly democratic principles. 
 
 Q. You knew, of course, that the central authority was in the United States ? — A. 
 I knew the central authority was in Denver, Colorado. 
 
 Q. And didn't you stop to consider the question of how far you were surrendering 
 your freedom to the people in Denver ? — A. No, I did not think I was surrendering 
 any freedom ; I thought if a union was formed I might have a little freedom to exer- 
 cise the right of freedom of speech, as a f reeborn British subject. 
 
 Q. You had a meeting on the 5th ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How was that meeting called ? — A. It was called by notice; I saw the notices 
 on some of the telegraph posts around the town. 
 
 Q. How many were posted up before the meeting ? — A. I could not state exactly; 
 I remember seeing one the night previous, but I guess they were out before that. 
 
 Q. About 48 hours' previous ? — A. I could not say how long they were out. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Higiiey tell you that he had an interview with Mr. Baker ?^A. I 
 cannot recall. 
 
 Q. Did he tell you he had an interview with people in authority belonging to the 
 Federation ? — A. Certainly, that he was sent here by the executive board of the tady- 
 smith union. 
 
 Q. Had he communicated with the central authority at Denver ? — A. Not that I 
 know of. 
 
 Q. They would have something to say about the forming of a union ? — A. I pre- 
 sume they would. 
 
 Q. Would it be right to conclude that he had the approval of the Denver people 
 before he started on this investigation ? — A. It might be right to conclude so; I sup- 
 pose he would, but I cannot state. , 
 
 Q. How many men were at the meeting ?^A. About 150, I guess. You mean pre- 
 vious to organizing ? 
 
 Q. I mean April 5th ? — A. There wfere over 160 in the meeting when it was 
 opened. 
 
 Q. How many would have had a right to go to the meeting; how many white 
 coal miners ? — A. I suppose about 250. 
 
 Q. About 100 stayed away, then? — A. Yee. ■ , ■ ■, ,, 
 
 Q. How long did the meeting last ? — A. About four hours, I think, or a little more 
 perhaps; somewhere aroimd four hours. , ■ 
 
 Q. Who wias' chairman ? — A. James Higney, if James is his name. , Higney any- 
 way, y- '.!•-,).; „■„■. , :., , , 
 
 Q. I suppose he addressed the meeting and 'explained the object of it. ? — rA, J was 
 not there at the opening of the meeting. . ^ / : - l.i- ., 
 
 ■ Q. During* the tipe that you wete there who addressed the meeting ? — '^. Mr. 
 "Baker was addressihg'the meeting when Tentered the hallif '-. ; - ;. i, : <; 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DTuPVTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA. 413 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. What was he talking about ? — A. I cannot recall what he was talking about 
 exactly. 
 
 Q. No recollection at all ? — ^A. No recollection. 
 
 Q. His subject was not interesting ? — A. I never heard much of his speech 
 
 Q. Too much noise ? — A. I came in about the end of his speech. 
 
 Q. You came in about the end of his speech. Did he say anything about organiza- 
 tion ? — A. I cannot recall what he said. 
 
 Q. How do you account for that; did you feel no interest in what he said ? — A. 
 I. cannot account for it; I suppose my memory just fails me on that particular point. 
 
 Q. Were there any resolutions put to the meeting ? — -A. There was a motion moved 
 by Orim Barber that we form a branch of the W.F.M. in this town, seconded by a man 
 named Swanson, I think. 
 
 Q. Was that motion discussed ? — A. Immediately after there was an individual 
 tried to move an amendment; Eeed, I think, by name. The amendment was that we 
 do not form a branch, so therefore, it was not an amendment, and Bickell tried to 
 second it. It was no amendment because it was a negative of the motion, and there- 
 fore, it was out of order. Bickell got up and tried to say something. 
 
 Q. A discussion then arose, and this proposed amendment was ruled out of order ? 
 — A. I understand it would be. 
 
 Q. Were there any besides Eeed and Bickell who spoke in favour of having no 
 union ? — A. A man named Nelson got up and tried to say something, but there was 
 a lot of noise at the time. 
 
 Q. I gather that the feeling of the meeting was in favour of the motion ? — A. 
 Unanimously in favour, with the exception of about four dissenters, I think. I couldi 
 see about four that got up and tried to object to forming the branch. 
 
 Q. What number were in favour of the motion ? — A. I could not tell you. 
 
 Q. Some went out, I suppose ? — A. After the motion was declared carried, those 
 who did not wish to become members of the W. F. M. were requested to retire. 
 
 Q. And how many went out ? — A. I could not tell you. 
 
 Q. Could you give us any idea — twenty ? — A. I cannot recall how many went out. 
 
 Q. About 100 remained, when he proceeded to organize ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. How many would you say ? — A. 147, I understand. 
 
 Q. Remained for the purpose of organizing ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Were the whole 147 sworn in that day ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Signed the roll, did they ? — A. Not exactly. 
 
 Q. What did they do ? — A. Simply gave their names to the secretary pro tem. 
 
 Q. At this meeting was there any communication read from any person in Lady- 
 smith relating to the strike ? — A. It might have been read previous to my coming, but 
 I cannot recall that it was read in my presence. , 
 
 Q. You did not hear any communication read ? — A. I don't think it. 
 
 Q. Did you hear any communication at all read to the meeting ? — A. I cannot 
 recall that part of it. 
 
 Q. What- was done after organization? — A. We proceeded to elect officers,' I 
 suppose. ■ , , , - ' ,. 
 
 Q. Was the question of joining the W. F. M. decided by open vote,, or by ballot V 
 — A. It was decided by open vote. 
 
 Q. Was there any suggestion that it should have been decided by ballot ?— A. 
 Yes, there was a suggestion^ made by one J3ollisha:W; it was previous to the W. J*, lit. 
 being organized. We left it over for a week's consideration. 
 
 ' ■ Q. I mean the question as to whether you should join, pr not. YpvL say tha,t Was 
 decided by vote ? — A. The motion to join the Federation was by open vote. _ 
 .'■'!:' Q. Was there any suggestion that -that should be by ba,l]ot ?7^A. At some part 
 of the meeting Collishaw tried to. make a .suggestion ,tha,t we le§,ve, it for a weel? for 
 consideration, and then we decide by secret ballot. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY, Cumberland, May 28. 
 
fl4 UtnVTES OF EVIDSNCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION ' 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. No attention was paid to that ? — ^A. That was simply an objection, and we 
 did not see any motion called for. 
 
 Q. ^t any rate, it was not seconded ? — A. I don't think it; I remember him. mak- 
 ing it as a suggestion. 
 
 Q. Don't you think an important question of that kind should be settled by ballot? 
 — A. Under certain conditions, yes. I believe in deciding everything by ballot. 
 
 Q. "Why was' it the ballot was not used at this time ? — A. I guess they had, not 
 made preparation for it ; I was not conducting the meeting, so I don't know anything 
 about it. 
 
 Q. Would you just tell us shortly what you consider to be the advantages of a 
 union ? — A. "Well, it is a means of educating the working class. They have discussion 
 in their union as to their position in society. 
 
 Q. The position of the workirigmen in society is frequently discussed ? — ^A. I 
 understand it is. 
 
 Q. I suppose it brings about a condition of mutual confidence ? — A. I don't under- 
 stand what you mean by mutual confidence. 
 
 Q. I suppose one condition of a union is that the men have more confidence in 
 each other than if they were not organized ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. What other advantages would you say there were ? — A. Well, if you are get- 
 ting at the Western Federation, its political policy as denoted at its last convention. 
 
 Q. I was first getting at the advantages of unions generally, and then I was going 
 to see what special advantage there was in the Western Federation ? — A. Well.^ there 
 are sick benefits and so on attached to it. 
 
 Q. Well, now, you can tell us what are the particular benefits in joining the West- 
 ern Federation ? — A. As I said before, its political policy as defined at its last conven- 
 tion. It takes up the whole problem; its 10th annual convention at Denver, Colorado. 
 
 Q. Can you give us a copy of its declaration on that point ? — A. I have no copy. 
 
 Q. Could you provide us with one ? — A. It might take some while to provide you 
 with one. If you send to Denver you might get a copy. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us what it was ? — A. Well, it was decided by a majority vote to 
 support the socialist party. 
 
 Q. That is, you say socialism was declared for at the last convention ? — A. It was 
 decided to support politically the socialist party. 
 
 Q. Could you tell us shortly, Mr. Halliday, what you exactly mean by socialism ? 
 — A. I don't think that I could define it here. It would take a long time to define 
 it" so as to understand it. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us the leading features ? — A. It is a scientific analysis of human 
 society and capitalist production. It is the favoured emancipation of the working 
 class. 
 
 Q. What is meant by that is that all workers are to be put in a favourable posi- 
 tion ? — A. It means that the working classes will control the machinery of wealth 
 production, and use it to their material benefit. 
 
 Q. "What is the mode proposed by which they will accomplish that end ?— A. By 
 Ihe ballot; the only way they can do it. 
 
 Q. Supposing they got a majority of people to think that way, how are they 
 poing to effect that ? — A. By capturing the reins of government. It means that the 
 people ^ill 'ce the government, and that all natural resources will be owned and con- 
 'trollcd by the people. 
 
 Q. All natural resources to be managed by the government ? — A. By the people. • 
 
 Q. The government of course representing the people ?— A. By the people, I will 
 
 Q. I suppose the government would be a committee of the people ? — A. It might. 
 
 ; Q. We are anxious to know just what workmen feel jabout this question ? A. 
 
 There are various books published on the subject, and if you want to. o)5tain a scien,-. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
OW INDlfSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 415 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 tific analysis of the situation: you could procure a copy of Carl Marx's ' Capital.' I 
 have stated it briefly; it might taice a considerable time. 
 
 Q. You say that Carl Marx's book is the text book? — ^A. It is the groundwork 
 of modern socialism. 
 
 Q. That is the work that is most in favour with the Western Federation ?-^ A. 1 
 don't know anything about that. 
 
 Q. I understand the Western Federation declared in favour of socialism ? — A. 
 Possibly, to support socialist candidates, but I say that Carl Marx's is the groundwork 
 — a scientific analysis of capitalist production. 
 
 Q. Tou have read this ' work, have you ?— A. I have not read the original 
 work; I have read the students' Marx by Doctor Aveling. The original work is writ- 
 ten in German; it is a summary of the whole matter. 
 
 Q. Is that work much read among the men ? — A. I guess so. By many people 
 who are investigating the present conditions in human society, I suppose it is read. 
 
 Q. That is one object of the Western federation — to take an active part in the 
 politics of the time ? — A. Certainly; it is only by politics that they can obtain their 
 final emancipation. 
 
 Q. That is, to secure their ends through the medium of the ballot t — A. Through 
 the ballot — apolitical machinery. 
 
 Q. What is the view of the majority about these matters, in the Western Federa- 
 tion? — ^A. I cannot tell you; I never inquired. 
 
 Q. Do they discuss these matters in their convention ? — A. I don't suppose they 
 do ; I was never in their conventions, but I presume they discuss their material condi- 
 lions. 
 
 Q. Is it considered that the workingmen would get a larger share of the country's 
 wealth by this means ? — A. It is considered that labour produces all wealth ; there- 
 fore, to labour that wealth should belong. 
 
 Q. Would you consider it sufficient for the purposes of the men to have a coal 
 miners' union in British Columbia, without belonging to an international organiza- 
 tion ? — A. No, I believe in international organization. 
 
 Q. Would you state briefly why you prefer international organization ? — A. Be- 
 cause capitalism is international. Therefore, the only effective way of annihilating 
 tliat is by international unity. 
 
 Q. Has the Western Federation power to call the men out on sympathetic strike? 
 — A. Not according to the constitution ; they have no power to call anyone out on 
 strike unless by a three-quarters majority vote of any particular branch of the mem- 
 bers of the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. Do you think sympathetic strikes ought to be resorted to on some occasions ? 
 — A. I don't believe in sympathetic strikes. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. I don't believe in strikes at all, unless by striking at the ballot 
 box. 
 
 Q. Do you think the boycott is a fair weapon to use ? — A. With reference to 
 what ? 
 
 Q. As a weapon in aid of strikes ? — A. Boycott who ? 
 
 Q. Anyone having dealings with the employers ? — A. No, I don't believe in the 
 boycott. 
 
 Q. You think it is not effective ? — A. It depends under what conditions — I don't 
 know. The only way out of the dilemna is by the ballot box, and that is my position 
 Aa briefly as possible. Politics are the only lawful means, and not by means of strikes. 
 
 Q. Do you consider that an employer has the right to employ non-union men ?— - 
 A. He has a right to do as he pleases as long as the workers give him the lawful power. 
 
 Q. You think he is nftt wrong in employing non-union men ? — A. No, because the 
 whole thing is wrong. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY, Cumberland, May 28. 
 
416 UISVTE8 OF ETIDET;!CE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 190+ 
 
 Q. I suppose you think there ought to be no employer ? — A. As I said before, 
 the working class are to run the machinery of wealth production in their own interests. 
 They run it now, and they can run it without employers ; employers don't run them. 
 
 Q. Would you say that a non-union man has a right to get employment ? — A. 1 
 don't know what you mean by ' a right.' 
 
 Q. I suppose he has a right to live ? — A. Yes, if that is what you mean. 
 
 Q. Then if he has the right to live, he has a right to get employment under exist- 
 ing conditions ? — A. I suppose if he has to get employment to live, the logical deduc- 
 tion is that he has a right to get employment. 
 
 Q. And dp you think it should be left to his own free will whether he should join 
 a union or not ? — A. I guess so. 
 
 Q. The only way to exercise that free will is by ballot, is it not ? — A. What free 
 will ? 
 
 ^. Whether he should join a union or not ? — A. He can join a union whether he 
 likes or not ; that has nothing to do 
 
 Q. That comes back to the old question. You bring a body of men together and 
 decide as to whether they should be a union ; the only way is by the ballot, is it not ? 
 — ^A. Certainly, if that is what you mean. 
 
 Q. Then, if an employer has a right to employ a non-union man, and he has the 
 right to get work, that destroys any argument in favour of sympathetic strikes, does 
 it not ? — A. I simply stated my opinion of sympathetic strikes. 
 
 Q. You don't believe in that at all I — A. I stated that previously. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe: 
 
 Q. You say, Mr. Halliday, that there was no freedom of speech previous to the 
 formation of the union here, that there was a curtailment on the liberty of speech in 
 reference to political matters. What political doctrines were they that men could not 
 mention without danger to themselves ? — A. I stated that trade union talk or political 
 talk could not be discussed without forfeiting your employment. If you took opposi- 
 tion to the employers — that is the position. 
 
 Q. In referring to politics you probably thought of the doctrines of socialism 
 particularly ? — A. Well, any politics that would make the position of the capitalist 
 uncertain, and I suppose the socialist political party is the only party to do that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You had no reference to local politics ? — A. Provided it was opposing the em- 
 ployer getting into power, certainly. 
 
 Q. Could you tell us the process by which the men are discharged ? Is at a 
 gradual process ? — A. Simply discharged, I presume. 
 
 Q. Are a body of them laid ofE at one time ? — A. I understand there was a body 
 laid, off at an election a few years from now. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : - . i 
 
 'Q. At the meeting on the 5tb April you say there, were 150 present ?— A. About 
 that. . ' : - - , , ' 
 
 Q. And there were about 250 who could have been present — white miners. Were 
 there any men on their shift at tliat.time ? — A. I suppose , there are a few men working 
 on Sundays, but I cannot tell ; the meeting was held on Sunday at two o'clock. When, 
 there are two shifts running thpt is the best time. 
 
 Q. What do you understand by recognition of the union I— A. That the meri^had 
 a right to organize the union ; that is all. . - . ' 
 
 Q. Not sediins- .any intexference in the management of the mine? — A. Simply 
 seeking tlie right to organize -as a branch pf the W.F.M. ? 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— Cumberland, May 28. ' ■ '' ' ' 'V- •' ,i;>.',fi i;it -.. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 417 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Would that involve the appointment of a pit committee ? — A, I presume the 
 executive board attends to these matters, and that it is for the organization to 
 decide on all their conditions. 
 
 Q. But in asking for the recognition of the union it may mean only asking for 
 the right of the men to join an organization, or it may mean for the recognition of the 
 appeals of the union by the management, and the conduct of its affairs by the manage- 
 ment. I think the Commission would like to know which is meant ? — A. So far as I 
 know, it is simply the right to organize a trade union or a branch of the W.F.M. 
 
 Q. When you ask that a union be recognized, that does not mean you are asking 
 an employer to enter into a contract with the union ? — A. Yes, with the union as a 
 body and not as individuals. 
 
 Q. It would not satisfy the men to have an opportunity of making individual con' 
 tracts ? — A. For the simple reason that they cannot. 
 
 Q. That the men shall be permitted to make them as a body and not as individuals ? 
 — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. And that involves, of course, pit committees, and a committee of the union to. 
 see the manager about grievances ?— A. It involves a committee to see the manage- 
 ment about these matters, I understand. 
 
 Q. Does it involve the exclusion of non-union men from the works ? — A. That is 
 for the union to decide. 
 
 Q. Would they have that power under the proposed arrangement ? — A. Would the 
 union have that power ? Perhaps they would try to take the power. 
 
 Q. It virtually means the exclusion of non-union men to have the union recog- 
 nized ? — A. In many cases that is what it does involve. 
 
 Q. Speaking of the international relationship, Mr. Hallidey, you stated the inter- 
 ests of workers were one in all nations, or in two nations are they international ? — A, 
 The interests of all workers of all countries are identical. 
 
 Q. And their interests demand the abolition or destruction of the present political 
 system ? — A. Of the present economic system. 
 
 Q. That would involve the destruction of the present political institutions ? — A. 
 Yes, as they exist. 
 
 Q. What is the relation of men holding that view to the national institutions of 
 their respective countries ? — A. I don't quite understand the question. 
 
 Q. Are they loyal to the political institutions under which they live ? — A. Cer- 
 tainly, they are trying to change them. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. He means can you be a good Canadian and belong to the Western Federation 
 of Miners ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Bii Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. No retriction upon his service in the militia ? — A. You mean if- 
 
 Q. If he is a member of the Western Federation ? — A. Not as an individual; he 
 would be left to his individuality still; no restriction connected with that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. The idea of any members joining the militia, either in the States or Canada, is 
 disproved of by the Federation of Miners, is it not ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. According to your view there can be no situation arise that would separate or 
 antagonize the "interests of the workers in different countries. No question outside of 
 the economic question — that would put them in hostility one nation with the other ? — 
 A. I faid the inte:ests of the workers of all counl-ic>3 are identical, and I stand by that 
 statement. 
 
 ogg 27 ' DAVID HALLIDAY, Cutoberland. May 28. 
 
418 MINVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL C0MMI88I0V 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Then the relalionship of a n.-aii to the wfiTkcrs cf another country is closer thaa 
 the relationship to his own state ? — A. It is, perhaps, closer than his relationship to 
 the f.ipitalistic merVoers of society. 
 
 Q. Or to the political institutions of his own country ? — A. I don't quite under- 
 stand what you mean. His relations to the political institutions of his own country 
 are to try and capture them. There is nothing to prevent a man being a law-abiding 
 citizen ; he is the law-a'biding citizen. There is nothing to prevent him ; he is the 
 most peaceable man there is. 
 
 Q. Y"ou say the socialist is the most peaceable man there is ? — A. Certainly, he 
 understands the position, that is all. 
 
 Q. You regard trade unionism as an imperfect instrument for the object to be 
 attained ? — A. Pure and simple trade unionism, I regard as imperfect; that is pure 
 and simple trade unionism without political machinery. 
 
 Q. I suppose that you consider necessary for their interests is political revolu- 
 tionary organization ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that is the ground of your judgment of the Western Federation ? — A. 
 My judgment of them is their political policy. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What is the position of the Western Federation regarding breaches of the law 
 by any of its members ? — A. It ought to condemn them for breaking the law. 
 
 Q. Your view is that the members ought to obey the law, but try and change it ? 
 — A. To change it ; that is the. exact position ; change it by lawful means. 
 
 Q. You don't believe in compulsory arbitration ? — A. 'No, I don't. 
 
 Q. What do you say about conciliation ? — A. There is no conciliation and can- 
 not be any between employers and employed ; that is impossible. 
 
 Q. There is a fixed gulf between the employer and employed ? — A. A fixed gulf 
 that is here before us. 
 
 Q. Would you go so far as to say that the employers are natural enemies of the 
 employees ? — A. Well, I don't blame any individual employer ; it is the capitalist 
 system that I blame ; it is the system ; it is not the individual that I am thinking 
 of. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. But as an intermediate step for the purpose of present cases, would you not 
 approve of conciliation ? — A. I stated there could be no conciliation. 
 
 Q. Not perhaps as a radical cure, but in any particular dispute could there not 
 be some ground of settlement discovered by mutual concessions that would be useful 
 in the meantime ? — A. There might be. 
 
 Q. You would consider that better than striking ? — A. I don't believe in striking, 
 I said previously. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How would you suggest that these strikes should be settled ? — A. I am not 
 in favour of strikes, and I cannot state an opinion as regards that. 
 
 Q. You did not vote for the strike then ? — A. I voted for the recognition of the 
 Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. You were a member of the joint executive at Nanaimo ?— A. I was on that 
 joint executive. 
 
 Q. When was that held ? — A. The Sunday previous to May 2nd, I think ; there 
 were two meetings of that executive, one Saturday and one on Sunday. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. The 25th and 26th of April, I fancy ?— A. That might have been it. 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DiSPVTm IN BRITISH COLOMBIA 419 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. While there, Mr. Baker was present ? — A. Mr. Baker was present. 
 
 Q. Did he show you any telegram from Moyer ? — A. Not at that meeting of the 
 executive. 
 
 Q. At any time ? — A. I guess I did see a telegram from Moyer ; I cannot recall 
 when ; sometime when I was in Nanaimo ; I cannot recall whether it was after or 
 before the meeting. 
 
 Q. Who asked Moyer for. approval of this step ? — A. I don't know; I cannot say. 
 
 Q. Did you see the telegram he sent ? — A. That he sent ? 
 
 Q. Yes. — A. No, I never saw the telegram that he sent. 
 
 Q. We have been told that it was agreed by the executive that an effort should be 
 made to assist the Ladysmith men ? — A. It was agreed by the joint meeting of the 
 miners. 
 
 Q. That a levy of one dollar should be made ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Has any money been sent to the Ladysmith men ? — A. Where from ? 
 
 Q. From either here or Nanaimo ? — A. I guess from Nanaimo ; there was none 
 sent from here. 
 
 Q. The advisability of organizing up here and going out on strike was discussed 
 at the joint executive? — A. It was never discussed; the Cumberland situation was not 
 discussed. 
 
 Q. What was discussed ? — A. The meeting was called for the purpose of consider- 
 ing the most effective method of relieving the distress of the Ladysmith members of 
 the organization. 
 
 Q. Was it not considered that one way to aid them was to have a strike here ? — A. 
 It was not discussed. 
 
 Q. Were you present at both meetings, during the whole time of the meetings ? — 
 A. Yes, during the whole time of the meetings. The situation at Cumberland was 
 discussed in so far as the position we were in. 
 
 Q. As to the advisability of forming an organization ? — A. No, we had formed 
 previous to this ; we were just relating our position. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. As to the advisability of a strike ? — A. No, simply relating our position. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You informed the joint executive as to your position here ? — A. Certainly, 
 they knew we were organized. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. How did you describe the situation ? — A. I described that certain officers of 
 the union had been discriminated against. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Your only remedy against that was a strike, was it not ? — A. The only remedy 
 was to try and see if they could be reinstated. 
 Q. Tailing that, then a strike, I suppose. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Was it suggested then that you should request their reinstatement ?— A. I 
 don't know that it was much discussed; the situation was simply detailed to them. 
 
 Q. There was no suggestion that an ultimatum should be issued to the manage- 
 ment in reference to that ?— A. No, I don't think it. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAT, Cumberland, May 28. 
 
 36a— 27} 
 
420 MIXVTES OF ETIDE^CE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VIL, A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Don't you ttink it a little singular that the matter of what Cumberland should 
 do was not taken up and discussed .by your joint committee ? — A. I don't think it was 
 necessary to discuss it. The position was before us, the same position as the Lady- 
 smith men. 
 
 Q. It was plain that the only thing the Cumberland men could do was to ask for 
 reinstatement, and failing that, go on strike ? — A. That was the position. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Why was there no money sent from here to Ladysmith ? — ^A. After that meet- 
 ing we had a meeting here previous to going out on strike, and we decided to hold the 
 money here, as we might require it. 
 
 Q. That would be the meeting at which the strike was declared ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. Before the meeting — it was the meeting previous ? — A. The Wednesday follow- 
 ing that Sunday we met and decided we should retain the $1 ourselves. * 
 
 Q. And you decided also to send your committee to see Mr. Matthews ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you decided that pending the issue of that action you would hold the 
 money ? — A. No, we did not decide that; we decided that later on. 
 
 Q. You did not discuss the question of holding the money then ? — A. Not at that 
 particular meeting. 
 
 Q. When did you discuss it ? — A. Later on at another regular meeting; at a meet- 
 ing following the strike. 
 
 Q. That would be money which would have been sent to Ladysmith supposing 
 there had been no strike here ? — A. I can hardly tell; I suppose it would be sent to 
 Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. When ? — A. I could not exactly tell that; perhaps after pay-day. 
 
 Q. You were one of the committee that waited on Mr. Matthews ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What did you ask him to do ?— A. The principal point at issue was if he would 
 accept a list of the names of the men that had been laid ofi work, and would he rein- 
 state them in the order in which they were laid off — the order of time, the order when 
 they were re-employed which would correspond with the order they were laid oS. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Barber's name in that list ? — A. I could not say. We had not a list 
 in our possession; we only asked him if he would accept a list. 
 
 Q. That is, you asked him to take the men back in the order of the dates at which 
 they were laid off ? — A. Yes, that has been the custom in ether places I have been in, 
 and I suppose it is here. 
 
 Q. You simply asked the management to do in relation to these men what was 
 done with other men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was said ? — A. He refused to take the list of the men, I don't know why. 
 I cannot recall what he said: I am satisfied that he refused, and that is all that is 
 necessary. I don't think he gave his reasons. 
 
 Q. You understood him to say that he would not reinstate these men in the order 
 which they had been laid off ? — A. We took it as a refusal. 
 
 Q. Did you tell him what the result of his refusal would be ? — A. No, we could 
 not tell him that before a meeting of the majority voted to decide on it. 
 
 Q. Were you laid off ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Under what circumstances ? — A. My place was stopped. 
 
 Q. Was it necessary ? — A. Not quite necessary I worked my last shift on April 
 9, four days after we organized. I was on shift, and my partner told me I could not 
 go to work that afternoon, that our place had been stopped ; the boss stopped the place, 
 and said it could not go any further. My partner was laid off also, until the following 
 Tuesday. 
 
 Q. Was he an officer of the union ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Was he a meniber ? — A. Yes. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— Cumberlaoa, May 2& 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISE COLUMBIA pi- 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. .36a 
 
 Q. He started on the following Tuesday ? — A. Yes, I think the 14th. 
 
 Q. How long were you out of work before you went to Mr. Matthews as a member 
 of that committee ? — A. Three weeks. 
 
 Q. And your partner was only out of work three days ? — A. Started on Monday, 
 that was only two shifts. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Has this place been worked by anyone else since ? — A. No; it has not been; 
 I was there to get my tools. 
 
 Q. And the only reason you can assign is your action as an officer ? — A. Cer- 
 tainly. 
 
 Q. I suppose there were some informal discussion between parties at Nanaimo 
 outside of the meeting ? — A. I suppose we would converse freely. 
 
 Q. And the matter of the whole situation discussed between you? — ^A. It might 
 have been; I cannot recall all that I said, or that everybody said to me. 
 
 Q. Referring to your view of what the workmen should do, you say they should 
 capture the resources of the country ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Would you compensate the present owners, or would you confiscate ? — A. I 
 would neither confiscate nor recompense the owners. They are doing the confiscating 
 now. 
 
 Q. Take the present position — the property of the Wellington Colliery Company; 
 how would you do that ? — A. We would take it over. 
 
 Q. You would not give any compensation to the owners ? — A. No, it is simply 
 taking over what we produced. 
 
 Q. If that doctrine were logically followed out you would owe something to the 
 men ahead of you ; the men who worked in the mines before you came in ? — A. Well, 
 they were the members of our class. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. What class do you include among the workers ? What do you mean by work- 
 ing class ? — A. No more than this: there are two classes, the exploiter and the ex- 
 ploited; the working class are the exploited, and the owners would be included as ex- 
 ploiters. 
 
 Q. In this case, referring to the Wellington Colliery Company, the working class 
 would be all those except the owners ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Supposing a man worked five years, and had not worked since the five years 
 — he would have some share ? Would you say, when the time came to assume these 
 lesources, that he should be compensated ? — ^A. When we assumed these resources he 
 would be living elsewhere — a citizen of there, not here. He would be somewhere on 
 this earth where action was being taken in the same manner. 
 
 Q. And you would include in the working class all those who work for wages or 
 liire — that is the dividing line, is it ? — A. Yes, that is the dividing line. 
 
 By Mr Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Is it right to assume from what you have said that the primary object of or- 
 ganizing the Western Federation at Cumberland was to assist the socialists in their 
 political fight in British Columbia ?— A. Not their primary object. 
 
 Q. Was it one of their objects ? — A. It is the final object. 
 
 Q. What was one of the other objects? — A. The object of forming this organiza- 
 tion in Cumberland was to exercise the right of freedom of speech. 
 
 Q. Was one of the objects to assist the socialist party in politics in British Col- 
 iimbia? — A. I presume that the giving to the members of that organization 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY, Cumberland, May 28. 
 
422 MINUTES OF EVIDEyCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. You said that the reason you approve of the Western Federation of Miners 
 was that they were politically supporting the socialist party; is that right? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say or will you say, that one of the objects in forming the. 
 Western Federation at Cumberland was to assist the socialist party in politics in Bri- 
 tish Columbia? — A. Politically, yes. 
 
 Q. Was that object discussed 'by Mr. Higney when he came here to do the mis- 
 sionary work? — A. Certainly not. 
 
 Q. That was not disclosed to the men? — -A. He might have disclosed it; he did 
 not disclose it to me; I understood it previously. 
 
 Q. Mr. Higney came as an emissary from Mr. Baker, and you understood that 
 as part of his business ? — A. His business was to organize. 
 
 Q. And for the purpose of assisting the socialists ? — A. His purpose was to or- 
 ganize a branch of the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 Q. Now, I ask you if that was disclosed to the rest of the men ? — A. I don't 
 know. 
 
 Q. You never heard Mr. Higney discuss it ? He never discussed it at the meeting 
 on Sunday ?— A. Mr. Higney was chairman of the meeting. 
 
 Q. He was the first man to come here, and was chairman of the meeting, and he 
 did not disclose that object to the members of the meeting on Sunday ? — A. I did 
 not hear him. 
 
 Q. Did you hear anybody else say anything that would indicate that he had dis- 
 closed it ? — A. I cannot say. 
 
 Q. How did you come to be selected as treasurer of that organization ? — A. Be- 
 cause I was proposed. 
 
 Q. Who proposed you ? — A. A man of the name of McAllister. 
 
 Q. Who arranged the programme of officers before the meeting was called ? — ^A. 
 Nobody arranged it. 
 
 Q. You did not talk it over with anybody ? I suppose you must have been sur- 
 prised when you were proposed as treasurer to that society ? — A. Certainly, I was 
 surprised. 
 
 Q. Had never thought of such a thing before ? — A. No, I never had talked to 
 anybody about it before. 
 
 Q. Nobody had talked to you ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Who proposed you ? — A. McAllister, I said. 
 
 Q. Where is he now ? — A. At Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. He was not working here at the time ? — A. Yes, he had been working here 
 for thirteen months. 
 
 Q. Who proposed the secretary ? — A. I did. 
 
 Q. You had not spoken to anybody about having him secretary ? — ^A. It simply 
 came into my head. 
 
 Q. A sort of intuition ? — A. Yes, that is it. 
 
 Q. What other officers were elected ?— A. There were president, vice-president, 
 recording secretary, secretary, treasurer, executive board, board of trustees and finance 
 committee ; I think that was all. 
 
 Q. How many more of them did you propose ? — A. I don't know that I proposed 
 any more. 
 
 Q. You were satisfied when you got the secretary in ? — A. I proposed the man, 
 and I must have been thinking he was a good man for the job. 
 
 Q. You didn't propose any more. When you proposed the secretary your work 
 at that meeting was over ?— A. No, I had to vote for other people afterwards. 
 
 Q. But you did not have any further names to propose ? — A. No, because I knew 
 few people in the hall. 
 
 Q. Why did you not propose some member of the executive board— because it was 
 not arranged that you should. You are a man working in, Cumberland about a year. 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— Cumberlaud, May 23. 
 
ON IJfDnSTRlAL DISPUTES IN BRITISU COLUMBIA 423 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 There were about 150 men who had been working from five to six years in this camp, 
 were there not ? — A. Yes, I suppose so. 
 
 Q. And you, a new-comer, were suddenly proposed as treasurer much to your sur- 
 prise ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And then you, much to your surprise, proposed the secretary who was also — 
 how long had the secretary been living in this camp ? — A. I don't know ; he was 
 here before me ; he was a young man too. 
 
 Q. Does it not strike you as peculiar that none of the older men who had been 
 here a number of years were proposed for any of these officers ? 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — ^I might say the secretary worked for twelve year's for Duns- 
 muir's company. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You did not know that ? — A. I knew he was here at least a year, and had 
 lived at Wellington. 
 
 Q. And you say there was no amendment before the meeting ? — A. None, so far 
 as I was concerned. 
 
 Q. Mr. Barber is president ? — A. Mr. Barber is president. 
 
 Q. Do you know how long he had worked here ? — A. He said off and on for 
 thirteen years ; I did not know him ; I had not seen him. 
 
 Q. You say a man was dismissed on account of exercising freedom of speech ? — 
 A. He had stated his opinion — he had told another man that he was working for less 
 wages than he ought to get. 
 
 Q. Was that all he said to the other man? — A. That was all, I was informed. 
 
 Q. The other man quit work ? — A. Yes, some time after that. 
 
 Q. And this friend of yours was dismissed for interfering with the discipline of 
 the mine ? — A. He is not a friend; he is simply a workingman here. 
 
 Q. You have got pretty advanced opinions yourself ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And are in the habit of expressing them ? You worked here for a year ? — A. 
 No, I said a little over two months. 
 
 Q. You were in Extension for a year under the same management, and under the 
 same conditions as existed at Cumberland as to freedom of speech ? Did you curtail 
 vour speech at Extension ? — A. A little; I was afraid I would be dismissed; yes, fur- 
 thermore, I was dismissed. 
 
 Q. After you joined the organization, not before — ^you were not laid off ? — A. I 
 was dismissed at Extension, I mean. 
 
 Q. What did you do there ? — A. The boss might tell you ; James Sharp was 
 the boss. 
 
 Q. Why were you dismissed at Extension ? — A. Because I would not go to Lady- 
 smith, I was informed. 
 
 Q. That has nothing to do with free speech ?— A. Of course I had said I was not 
 going to live at Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Did you say that ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You said that to Mr. Sharpe, did you ? — A. I did not say it previous to being 
 discharged. 
 
 Q. He told you you would have to live at Ladysmith ? — A. No, he dismissed me 
 without notice. 
 
 Q. Who did you say that to ? — A. I may have said that to many people. 
 
 Q. And you knew when you said it that the policy of the mines was that the men 
 should live at Ladysmith and not at Extension ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Were you living at Extension ? — A. I was. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY, Cumberland, May 28. 
 
^ MINVTES OF EYIDEXCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION . 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 19Q4 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. Where were you boarding ? — A. I was not boarding. 
 
 By Mr Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Aiid you had said you would not go to Ladysmith ; you told everybody that you 
 would not live at Ladysmith ? — A. I did not know e.eryone ; I told some whom I 
 knew. 
 
 Q. And you had been saying that over a considerable period of time, and were 
 trying to get other people not to go to Ladysmith ? — A. Let everybody act for them- 
 felves. 
 
 Q. You said no free man would leave Extension and go to Ladysmith — no one 
 who was not a slave? — A. I simply stated that it was any man's right to live in Lady- 
 smith or live there;. 
 
 Q. And that no man who had any regard for his rights, would submit to that 
 dictation from the management and go to Ladysmith ? — A. I said it was a matter of 
 choice whether I lived at Extension or Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. And that it was an act of tyranny and oppression on the part of the manage- 
 ment to compel men to go to Ladysmith ? — A. I don't know as to that. 
 
 Q. It was words to that effect ? — A. I don't think I stated that. 
 
 Q. But the words had that meaning or conveyed that impression ? — A. I would 
 Eimply state that as long as a man is owner of the mine he can dictate where they shall 
 live. 
 
 Q. But you said that no man should have to submit to that dictation ? — A. I 
 said they would have to submit as long as they kept these people in power. 
 
 Q. And you subsequently found yourself discharged ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why did you come to Cumberland ? — A. I had to look for employment. 
 
 Q. You went to Van Anda ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. And came to Cumberland ? — A. I was not long employed; a shift had been 
 laid off and I had to look for work. 
 
 Q. And two montlis after you get to Cumberland there is a strike ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And your speech was curtailed ? — A. Certainly; I did not express my opin- 
 ions in Cumberland. 
 
 Q. But the strange result is that there is a strike and a union formed — a singular 
 coincidence ? — A. Yes, a singular coincidence. 
 
 Q. Somebody must have been talking ? — A. After the W.F.M. was organized. 
 
 Q. Not before ? — A. 'Ihey were afraid to talk. 
 
 Q. You were afraid to talk ? — A. Yes ; I was afraid as long as I had to work 
 here ; I had to live. 
 
 Q. And in order to live, you had to curtail some of your rights as a British sub- 
 ject ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. Why, having submitted that far, didn't you go one step further, and refrain 
 from joining the union in order to live ? — A. I joined the union because I wished the 
 right of freedom of speech. 
 
 Q. You had submitted for, say a year, to the deprivation of that right, in order to 
 live, and then in order to live you joined the union, is that right ? Why did you not 
 in order to live, step out of the union ? — A. In order to better my condition. 
 
 Q. In what particular respect did it better your condition ? — A. It would allow 
 me freedom of speech; the freedom of speech is the basis of the whole thing. 
 
 Q. You had been willing to do without it ? — A. I had not been willing; I was 
 forced to submit to it. 
 
 Q. You knew by refusing to submit to it and joining the union, you knew that 
 the means of living were going to be shut off ? — A. I did not know that at all. 
 
 0. You expected that every man who became piMi.iinfiit in the union was going to 
 lose his job ? — A. I anticipated as much, but I did not know. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 4S$ 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Then you did not want to live very badly at Cumberland, did you ?: You did 
 not think you ought to live,at Cumberland ? — A. Did not think I ought to Ijve-^ 
 
 Q. Because you were voluntarily giving up your right to live ? — A. How f 
 
 Q. You knew if you joined the union you were going to lose your job ? — A. I did 
 not know exactly ; we were forming the union to protect our mutual interests, 
 
 Q. And you knew the first result to happen from that step would bs that would 
 lose your job, and secondly, your means of livelihood at Cumberland ? — A. I was tak- 
 ing my chance on that in order to form an organization to better our conditions. 
 
 Q. You are not a philanthropist ? — A. No, I am no philanthropist. 
 
 Q. You don't believe in the common good ? — A. It all depends on what you call 
 a philanthropist. 
 
 Q. Now, until your coming the workers were quite satisfied to live without a 
 union. Why did not you let them alone ? — A. They were not satisfied. 
 
 Q. Can you tell me any grievance they had, except the nominal one about freedom 
 of speech? — A. That is the thing; the most of people like to state their opinion. 
 
 Q. And there was such a state of oppression here that they could not state their 
 opinion? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And in order that they might have that privilege of stating their opinion, you 
 started a union ? — A. We started a union. 
 
 Q. You disturbed their peaceful relations. The result was plain. You simply 
 formed a union in order to give these men the right of free speech? — A. That is the 
 main object I had in view. 
 
 Q. And you did not care whether they starved, and their families starved, while 
 they were accomplishing that object? — A. I wished to see everybody live as well; they 
 are half-starved now. 
 
 Q. Are men who make $6 a day half-starved ? — A. From $1.50 up ; I heard a man 
 state that he made $1.50. 
 
 Q. What is the man's name ? You had instruction to get the names of all the 
 men who earned small wages and bring them before the Commission ? — A. From whom ? 
 
 Q. From the men who were running this strike — from Mr. Baker? — A. We had 
 instructions from this union. 
 
 Q. You had instructions that Mr. Baker said to get all the men who were making 
 small wages — that was Mr. Baker's advice to you ? — A. Not that I am aware of. 
 
 Q. Well, the fact would be that the only men who will be called here are men who, 
 for some reason or other, have not made over $2 a day ; that is the programme, is it ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — How does Mr. Bodwell know the programme ? 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 Q. I am asking if that is not the programme; I am asking Mr. Halliday if that 
 is not the programme, and that that programme was not decided on the advice of Mr. 
 Baker ? — A. I don't know that it was decided on from advice from Mr. Baker. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — We are going to save you all the trouble; we are going to put in 
 all the wages of the men, and we will show the average to be ,$5 a day. We will save 
 you all that bother. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. You only worked during March and April, didn't you ? — A. February, March, 
 and a little of April, a few days in January. 
 
 Q. Who were you working with in February ? — A. With my partner, Williamson. 
 
 Q. How much did you make in February ? — A. Somewhere around $90. 
 
 ■Q. How much a day ? — A. Somewhere around $4. 
 
 Q. And in March ? — A. Between $3.50 and a little over $3.50. 
 
 Q. It was $3.90, was it not, for the time you worked in March ? — A. It may have 
 been around that. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
426 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. And in April ?— A. Under $3. 
 
 Q. $3.10 in April. Did you work full days for the time you were on shift ? — A. 
 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. So that you had no complaint as far as wages were concerned ? — ^A. Not so 
 far as wages were concerned. 
 
 Q. Your only complaint was the one you gave before we adjourned ? — A. I stated 
 that already. 
 
 Q. Now, do you say that it was not arranged when you were on that joint execu- 
 tive at Nanaimo, that you should come back here and get up a strike ?— A. No, it 
 was not arranged. 
 
 Q. Was it not arranged that you should come back here and make a demand on 
 Mr. Matthews, which you knew he would not grant ? Was that the excuse ? — A. I 
 don't know that it was arranged by any executive committee; it might have been talked 
 over. I don't think it was tallied over by the executive. 
 
 Bij His Lordship : 
 Q. It might not have been talked over, possibly, as an executive, but in your pri- 
 vate capacity ? — A. It might have been. That was my private opinion, that we should 
 see about the reinstatement of these men. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. And then if they were not reinstated ? — A. Then we should have to take action 
 accordingly. 
 
 Q. And that was why Mr. Baker telegraphed to Mr. Moyer to know if that action 
 would be approved by the executive ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. You know he telegraphed ? — A. I expect he telegraphed. 
 
 Q. And he got an answer back to even organize the Japanese and Chinese if neces- 
 sary to carry out the plan ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q; When you found you could not organize the Chinese and Japanese, did not 
 your union send to Victoria and get the mining inspector up here, so as to try and 
 put the Chinamen out of underground, if you could, by asking him to enforce the law 
 with reference to Chinamen ? — A. I g^ess that is so. 
 
 Q. Don't you think that is rather hard on the Japanese and Chinese ? In the 
 first place you were going to organize them and put them out on strike; tlien you were 
 going to have the inspector up ? — A. That was simply a suggestion in the telegram. 
 
 Q. Will you swear that no steps were taken by any member of the union, or any 
 one acting in concert with them to endeavour to organize the Japanese ? — A. I will 
 swear there were no steps taken by the Cumberland branch of the W. F. M. I heard 
 of a man being here to organize the Japanese and Chinese. 
 
 Q. At any rate, he did not belong to this camp ? — A. No ; I was led to understand 
 he came from Vancouver. 
 
 Q. Who will be able to tell us about that ? Any one in your organization ? — ^A. 
 There might be. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — There was a man named Johns from Vancouver. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Was he a Western Federation man ? — A. T could not say. 
 Mr. Hutchinson.— I think he belonged to the Brotherhood. 
 Mr. Bodwell. — He was connected with them — the United Brotherhood strike in 
 Vancouver ? 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — I could not state. 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Do you know Chambers ? — A. Yes, at least I saw him the day we organized 
 here. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY — Cumberland, May 23. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA ' 427 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. He came from where ? — A. I did not know anything about him previous to that. 
 
 Q. You did not hear anything about him ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you know Hendricks; did you know him at Extension ? — A. No, I never 
 saw him until we organized that day. 
 
 Q. He was an outsider anyway, was he not ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And he was secretary of the meeting the day before the union was organized ? 
 — A. Yes, secretary pro tem. 
 
 Q. How do you account for the fact of the men holding permanent positions in 
 the organization being, comparatively speaking, strangers to the camp ? — A. I don't 
 account for the fact, because the fact is not there. 
 
 Q. Here is Barber, the president— — - A. He is an old-timer. 
 
 Q. He had only been here a little while ? — A. He has been here about two years. 
 
 Q. And before that time he had been away for five or six years, and Higney — a 
 man who did not belong here — Hendricks, Chambers and yourself. You had only 
 been here a few months ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was it not an organized movement on the part of the socialist party to cap- 
 ture this camp ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. It does not look like that to you ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. And yet every one of them are socialists ? Are not all the men who hold a 
 permanent position in that organization socialists ? — A. No 
 
 Q. You are one ? — A. I am one. 
 
 Q. What is Barber ? — A. He is not a socialist. 
 
 Q. His ideas are socialistic, are they not ? — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. According to your opinion ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. Mr. Kingsley was here and held socialistic meetings ? — A. Yes, he held social- 
 ist meetings — not socialistic. 
 
 Q. What is the difference ? — A. Socialistic means a tendency towards. 
 
 Q. He has been holding meetings here last week ? — A. Yes; I was chairman at 
 two of his meetings. 
 
 Q. Did you make any speeches yourself ? — A. No, simply acted as chairman at 
 two of his meetings. 
 
 Q. What was he doing here ? — A. He was trying to educate the people of Cum- 
 berland to an appreciation of their material conditions. He had nothing to do with 
 the strike. It just so happened that, he was never here before. He would have been 
 here anyhow. 
 
 Q. And they did not convey any information to your mind ; you did not draw any 
 inference from them at all ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q I understand you built a house at Extension ? — A. No, I rented a house. 
 
 Q. What year did you go there? — A. Two years ago; the summer of 1901, July. 
 
 Q. When you asked for employment at this time was it suggested you should live 
 at Ladysmith ?— A. No. 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Who employed you ? — A. David Wilson. 
 
 Q. You were one of the men brought out from Scotland ?— A. No, I beg your 
 pardon, I came out from Scotland; that is exactly how I came out from Scotland — I 
 paid my fare out. 
 
 Q. You came out with the Scotch party ? — A. I did not come with them. Would 
 Mr. Bodwell kindly supply the date that these men came ? I came by no invitation; 
 I came of my personal wish. 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Was anything said to you at the time you got employment at Extension about 
 where you were to live ? — A. No, nothing was said where I had to live. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
428 MmTES OF EVIDENCE OP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3^ EDWARD VI l>, A. 1904 
 
 Q. Was anything said subsequently ? — A. I believe later on there was, 
 
 Q. By whom ?— A. The current conversation went that we would have to go to 
 Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. None of the bosses said anything to you about it ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. How were you laid off there ? — A. I was simply respectfully dismissed,- with- 
 out the option of cleaning up my place, or anything else. The fire boss said, ' Were 
 you not told this morning that this place was to be stopped ? ' I said I was told 
 liOtliing of the kind. He said you can take a day to square it up and timber it Up.' 
 On my road home I saw the boss, Mr. Sharpe, and asked him what was the reason my 
 place was being closed, but all he said was that my place was being stopped. I asked 
 him would I be allowed to square out the place. He said ' You can talte your tools 
 out.' I said ' Thank you.' That was the kind of dismissal I got. 
 
 Q. To what do you attribute that ? — A. I cannot tell exactly; that was the begin- 
 ning of the enforcement of the people going to Ladysmith. I considered I was the 
 first victim. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What date was that ? — A. In the beginning of June, 1902, about a year ago. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. Would you have gone to Ladysmith to live ? — ^A. No, I refused to go, so I 
 shifted my duds. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. Because I would not like to travel any fourteen miles in an old 
 box car to work in pit clothes, sometimes damp going home. I considered it would 
 perhaps be a detriment to health, &c. 
 
 Q. Had you any sickness in your family when living at Extension ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Any difficulty in getting good water ? — A. No, we had good water where I 
 lived. 
 
 Q. Where did you live, which side of the camp ? — A. I lived in the part they call 
 Finnland; where the Finnlanders lived, up from the powder magazines. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did you men at Nanaimo have any negotiations with any member of the 
 U.B.K.E. ?— A. The executive at Nanaimo ? 
 
 Q. Yes ? — A. Not that I know of, as a joint executive. 
 
 Q. In your private capacity ? — A. No, I never heard of anything. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear that the U.B.E.E. said that the Western Federation was 
 going to call out the miners on Vancouver Island ? — A. No, I never heard it. 
 
 Q. Did you hear that the president of the U.B.E.E. had made such an announce- 
 ment ? — A. I never did. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Do you know whether there were any communications going between any offi- 
 cers of the Western Federation and the U.B.E.E. ? — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. Then Estes is wrong when he stated there was an understanding that the 
 Western Federation would be called on ? — A. I don't know ; he might have been right 
 for all I know. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. Was there any communication to this union in reference to that ? — A. Not that 
 I know of. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES Ilf BRITISH COLUMBIA. 409 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did you have any talk with Baker about the U.B.E.E. ? — A. Never had much 
 talk with Baker at all. 
 
 Q. There is a circular here signed by George Estes, president of the U.B.R.E. 
 Did you ever see this, or a copy of it ? — A. No, I never. 
 
 Q. In it he says that the Western Federation of Miners will be asked to stop the 
 mining of coal at Vancouver A. I never heard that. 
 
 Q. So Estes was speaking without authority when he said that ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Would it surprise you to hear that he did say that ? — A. Not as far as I am 
 concerned. 
 
 Q. Tou knew of no understanding between any U.B.E.E. officer and any officer 
 of the Western Eederation of Miners ? — A. No, I am ignorant of it — of any commu- 
 nication. 
 
 Q. It is not likely that a labour leader like Estes would make that statement 
 unless he had some ground for it ? — A. I suppose he may have had some ground, or 
 he would not have said it. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Do you think the executive of the Western Federation would undertake to call 
 out these men at the instance of another organization ? — A. You mean the executive 
 at Denver ? They must have a three-quarters majority vote before they could come out 
 on strike. 
 
 Q. Then, if it were said that the executive at Denver had made such an arrange- 
 ment, it would be contrary to the constitution ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. And therefore, not likely to be true ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. And the circular says that the Western Federation will be asked to call them 
 out ? — A. They could not call them out unless there was a three-quarters majority vote. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Each local lodge has that power ? — A. Yes, absolutely, according to my" knowl- 
 edge of the constitution. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Would the local union consider they had a right to come out on strike in sym- 
 pathy with the U.B.R.E. ? — A. I don't know the opinion of the local on that. 
 
 Q. What is your view personally ?— A. I said previously I did not believe in 
 sympathetic strikes. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 
 Q. If you were here as an agitator, as Mr. Bodwell tried to make out, why did you 
 bring your wife and child here ? — A. Because I did not know of anything of the kind 
 going to turn up. 
 
 Q. That shows you did not come up as an agitator ? — A. That is proof against 
 his assertion, surely. 
 
 Q. And what you said about the strike, that you did not believe in it; you be- 
 lieved in it under the present circumstances ? — A. It could not be avoided. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. You mean by that, that the men would have to quit the Federation or quit work I 
 — ^A. It was, a case of quit the Federation or not; that was the question at issue. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— Cumberlana, May 28. 
 
430 MIN0TE8 OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VFI., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. You heard a telegram read yesterday from Mr. Moyer to Mr. Baker. That 
 telegram was read at a meeting of the lodge on April 28 or 29 ? — ^A. I guess it would 
 be read then. 
 
 Q. Had that telegram any effect in determining the action of the lodge in refer- 
 ence to the present strike? — A. I don't think it had any effect. 
 
 Q. Then, you consider the present strike in no way sympathetic? — A. In no way 
 .<iympathetic. It is a strike of the Cumberland miners brought by them between repre- 
 sentatives of the Wellington Coal Company. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. "Was there much discussion about Moyer's telegram at that meeting? — A. I 
 don't think there was, or I would have remembered it. 
 
 Q. How long was the matter debated ? — A. I cannot recall. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. Tou said you had a conversation with Joseph Higney ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In which he urged the advantages of unions? — A. No, he simply pointed out 
 that he was here to investigate the position, and if the men were in favour of forming 
 a imion, he would send for Mr. Baker. 
 
 Q. Did he indicate that the desire here to form a union was to strengthen the 
 hands of the Ladysmith miners ? — A. I don't know ; I don't remember his saying any- 
 thing to me about that. 
 
 Q. At the meeting of April 5, was that matter referred to ? — A. Not from what I 
 heard myself. 
 
 Q. Did you hear, yourself, any reference made to that? — ^A. I cannot recall hear- 
 ing any reference. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. How do you find conditions here generally, compared with Hamilton, Scot- 
 land? — A. In Hamilton, Scotland, I could always exercise my freedom of speech. 
 
 Q. How are the conditions of living generally — wages? — A. Living is much the 
 same. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. Could you earn as much money value there ? — A. Yes, before I left. Of course, 
 the wages fluctuate with the law of supply and demand. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Could the workmen live as well here as they had there? — A. I suppose they 
 live about the same all over. There is no material difference. We may have a differ- 
 ence here, and they may have a difference there, and vice versa. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. How about the surplus earnings of a man here and there? — A. I think they 
 are about the same; the relative wage here is no better than there. 
 
 Q. What is the actual wage there? — A. When I ^eft, the actual wage was seven 
 fhillings per day, that is, $1.Y5, but it possesses value there greater than here. 
 
 Q. Would you consider $1.75 there had the same purchasing value as $3 hero? — 
 A. Certainly, perhaps more. 
 
 Q. Was the mine whore you worked there unionized? — A. Yes, we were all union 
 men. 
 
 Q. Had they any federation outside of England and Scotland? — A. No, it was 
 simply a county union, Lanark county union. It was independent and conducted its 
 own business, but was federated with the British Federation, I understand. All ques- 
 tions of strike were decided by the county union, without outside interference. 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
ON INDUSTRrAL DISPUTES IN BUITISH COLtJMBIA 431 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. What was the membership ? — A. I could not tell you ; I did not investigate the 
 particulars, but it went into thousands. 
 
 By Mr. Rotve: 
 
 Q. Would you consider that clause in the Western Federation which requires that 
 the executive must approve of any settlement made by the local lodge, as an injurious 
 feature ? The constitution requires that any settlement made by the local union with 
 its employers, must have the approval of the central authority before it is binding. 
 Don't you think that disturbs the autonomy of the local union to some extent? — A. 
 Not altogether; I think it is a good clause — to submit it to them. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it is an objection on the part of an employer, that he has to 
 deal with a body of men he has nothing to do with? — A. It may be quite enough for 
 him to object to, but that has nothing to do with it. 
 
 Q. You don't think it is reasonable ? — A. It is reasonable from his standpoint to 
 object. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You don't thinlc it is reasonable in an employer to object to the ratification of 
 p. settlement in Denver ?— A. It is immaterial to me. Mr. Dunsmuir sells the most of 
 his coal in the United States. I don't see why he should not do it in another form. 
 
 Q. He does it only so long as the United States permits him to do it. But under 
 your proposition he would have to deal with pec pie in Denver before he could go on 
 with a proposition pending here ? 
 
 Witness. — Before I retire I would like to correct the statement made by Mr. Bod- 
 well. He stated that I came out with a crowd of Scotchmen. I would like you to 
 answer me when that crowd of Scotchmen came out ? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I asked you, and you said you were not with them. 
 
 Witness. — ^Well, it is not the case. 
 
 William Anthony, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What office do yoii hold in the union ? — A. I am one of the executive officers. 
 
 Q. How long have you been mining here ? — A. About four years. 
 
 Q. Were you one of the men laid off ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Why did you join the union ?— A. For my own benefit. 
 
 Q. What 'benefit do you think you derive from being a union man ? — A. Self- 
 protection — one thing, 
 
 Q. Self protection against the employer ? — A. Self protection for myself. 
 
 Q. Against the employer ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. In what way ? — A. In many respects; in the first place we have a little more 
 freedom 
 
 Q. Freedom of speech ? — A. Yes, freedom of liberty, too. 
 
 Q.. What was the occasion for forming a union at this time ? No trouble about 
 wages, was there ? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q Don't know of any particular reason why the union was formed at this time ? 
 ^A. N«. 
 
 WILLIAM ANTHONY— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
iS2 MINUTUB OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION ■ 
 
 3A EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. The last witness has stated that a man came from Ladysmith to find out whe- 
 ther the men wanted a union ? — A. I know nothing about it. 
 
 Q. Who asked you to join ?— A. I just came to the meeting to see what was 
 going on. 
 
 Q. Had you ever been a member of a union before ?— A. No, sir— I beg your par- 
 don, yes; in a union some years ago, seven years ago. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Did you say seven years ago ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You have been mining here four years ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship ; 
 
 Q. What were you doing here seven years ago ? — A. I was fire boss at the time. 
 
 Q. Was that local union started here some years ago ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How long did it live ? — A. About seven days. 
 
 Q. How was that ? — A. Because the company would not allow it. 
 
 Q. Knowing of this, you men who formed a union here knew that you were going 
 to start a struggle with the company ? — A. This time ? 
 
 Q. Yes ?— A. Not exactly. 
 
 Q. You did not expect that the company would sit down quietly and see a 
 union formed, after all these years ? — A. I believed if everybody was of the same mind 
 as me they would recognize it. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. Because we didn't ask for anything, only what is fair ; and I 
 didn't think, if Mr. Dunsmuir would look at it in the proper way, that he would object 
 to a union, so long as we didn't interfere with his business. 
 
 Q. You think a good deal depends on the character of the heads of the union ? — 
 A. Certainly, the way they conduct the union. 
 
 Q. Why are you out on strike now ? — ^A. I want to be recognized as a union ; the 
 men want to get these men who have been discriminated against back to their employ- 
 ment. 
 
 Q. What, exactly, do you mean by recognition ? — A. To get freedom. 
 
 Q. Do you mean by that that an employer must enter into a contract with you as 
 a union ? — A. Oh, no. 
 
 Q. You mean you are not to be discharged because you are a member of a union ? 
 — A. Yes, I mean that. 
 
 Q. If you want a union recognized, does that mean that the employer has to recog- 
 nize a conunittee from the union ? — A. He has not got to, but I think the company 
 could transact the business better through a committee than through one individual. 
 
 Q. Do you think an employer has the right to employ a non-union man if he sees 
 fit ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. And that the man has the right to work without joining the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That is, you would accord a non-union man the same rights as you have your- 
 self ? — A. Yes, certainly. 
 
 Q. And leave it to his own option whether he would join or not ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If the company recognized the union, they would have to recognize a pit com- 
 mittee ? — A. They would not have to unless they wished. 
 
 Q. Do you think it is more to your advantage to be a member of the Western 
 Federation than a member of the local union ? — A. Yes, I believe I do. 
 
 Q. What are the advantages of belonging to the Western Federation ? — A. More 
 strength, in one sense of the word ; the local organization does not amount to anything. 
 
 Q. It has not sufficient strength ? — A. Not sufficient strength. 
 
 Q. If all the miners in British Columbia were organized, would not that be a 
 sufficiently strong body ? — A. I would be satisfied. 
 
 WILLIAM ANTHONY— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 433 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. I understand that there is a clause in the constitution of the Western Federa- 
 tion which requires settlements to he approved of by the executive at Denver ? — A., I 
 have not studied much of the constitution myself. 
 
 Q. Don't you think that is surrendering a good deal of your liberty to people in 
 Denver ? — A. I have not studied the situation ; I am not able to answer that question. 
 
 Q. Do you think an employer is unreasonable if he objects to have his contracts 
 revised by people in Denver ? — A. I don't know about that. 
 
 Q. Do you approve of a union going into politics ? — A. To a certain extent. 
 
 Q. To what extent ? — A. Well, in case of trouble. 
 
 Q. Just explain a little more fully ? — A. Suppose we have any grievance between 
 us, and the company won't recognize the committee; supposing the government had 
 power to arbitrate on that question, so as to avoid all these strikes. 
 
 Q. Tou are opposed to strikes ? — A. I am opposed to strikes. 
 
 Q. Do you think compulsory arbitration is a good thing ? — A. Yes, so far as I 
 can understand. 
 
 Q. How would you appoint the arbitrators ? — A. Elect men into the House cer- 
 tainly. 
 
 Q. When you say you think the government should step in to settle strikes, how 
 would they do it — ^by a board of arbitrators ? — A. A board of arbitrators from the 
 government. 
 
 Q. By government officers ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Were you at the organization meeting here ? — A. Yes, I was. 
 
 Q. Did you hear Baker's address ? — A. Yes, I heard his address. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us what he said ? — A. Well, I could say some. 
 
 Q. Tell us what you can ? — A. So far as I can remember he said he had come 
 up here for the purpose of organizing a local union here, if possible. 
 
 Q. That was the desire of the majority of the men here ? — A. I could not say ; 
 I knew nothing about it until ten o'clock Saturday night previous to the meeting. 
 
 Q. Was there much opposition to organization ? — A. I don't know anything at all 
 about it ; but I heard there were two men up from Ladysmith, but I did not knew for 
 what purpose. 
 
 Q. Was any mention made by him of the U. B. E. E. organization ? — A. Not to' 
 my knowledge. 
 
 Q. You did not hear that ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. It was suggested by Mr. Estes in a circular here that the Western Federation 
 of Miners would be asked to call out A. I know nothing about it. 
 
 Q. Do you think Estes was speaking with no good ground for saying that ? — A. 
 1 don't know ; I am not interested in strikes at all ; I don't believe in strikes. Never 
 took part in a strike in my life until this one. 
 
 Q. What was the urgency for forming a union at this time ? There was no diffi- 
 culty about wages ? — A. Well, because we wanted freedom of speech ; freedom ol 
 speech, certainly. 
 
 Q. Had there been any discussion among the men for some time past ? — A. 1 
 never heard a word about it until ten o'clock Saturday previous to the meeting on the 
 5th of May, I think it was ; I never heard a word about it. 
 
 Q. Have you had any assistance from the Western Federation ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Have not asked for any ? — A. I have not. 
 
 Q. I mean the union as a union ? — A. I don't think so ; not to my knowledge. 
 Q. Was the question as to whether you should strike by ballot ?^A. By secret 
 
 ballot. 
 
 Q.' What, was the majority in. favour of striking ? — A. I believe there were about 
 192 ; I cannot be positive. 
 
 Q. How many opposed to it ? — A. I believe it was twelve. 
 
 Q. Was, the matter discussed, for some time before the motion was put ?— A. 
 
 Yes, quite a while. 
 
 gg^ 28 WILLIAM ANTHONY— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
431 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL C0MU188I0V 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII'., A. 1904 
 
 Q. It was not done hastily? — A. No, I guess they discussed it for nearly two hours. 
 Q. I suppose there have been a number of men leave the camp since ? — ^A. I 
 believe there has been quite a few. 
 
 Q. Could you tell us how many ? — A. No, I could not. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Tou say that you believe in a man's right to refuse to join a union if he wishes. 
 Do you think it right to blacklist men who don't join ? — A. No, certainly not. 
 
 Q. You don't approve of printing a blacklist ? — A. No ; I had a good dose of 
 that myself. 
 
 Q. How was that ?^A. With this company ; I was blacklisted by this company — 
 not a union. 
 
 Q. Were you cut out of employment ? — A. I was. 
 
 Q. On what account ?^-A. For organizing a union here. 
 
 Q. How long were you out of work ? — A. We cirganized a union here seven years 
 ago. So that at that time I was elected secretary of that union, and the first notice — 
 I was instructed to put up a notice to call a special meeting to appoint committees 
 for this union. This notice called for a meeting Saturday night. On the following 
 Monday, when I was at my work, the boss came and told me to take out my tools. I 
 asked him what was wrong. He said he did not know, that I had better go and see 
 Mr. Little. So I went out. I went to the office and saw Mr. Little and told him that 
 the boss had told me to take out my tools, and asked him what was the trouble^ Mr. 
 Little said he understood I had joined the union. I said, yes. Well, he said, So long 
 as you have joined the union you can't get any employment with this company. This 
 company has made up their minds not to recognize any union, and as long as your 
 name is on that roll book, you cannot get any employment with this company. So I 
 had to go out of the camp and leave my family here^ I could. , get no work any- 
 where. I tried in Nanaimo. I had to leave this side to go to the American side against 
 iny will. When I went to the American side I travelled there about six weeks. I 
 happened to get work on the other side, and so soon as they learned I was victimized 
 under this company they forced me out of that. They put me where I made $1, where 
 I was making $3.Y5 previous to this trouble. At that time my family w^s over here, 
 and I had to live in an old butcher store, without windows, in the dead of the winter, 
 arid that is the way I was back and forth with one company and another for three and 
 a half months. After I would get work in one company, as soon as they found out 
 why I left work here, they would either discharge me, or put me some place where I 
 could make no money. 
 
 Q. Have you any reason to think that the company blacklisted you with these 
 other companies ? — A. I have. 
 
 Q. What reason ? — A. I was working in a stall in Carbonado, and making $3.95 
 a day. The boss came to me one day and said, I'm going to stop this stall ; he capie id 
 to me, and told me he was going to stop that chute. All right, I -said, where is my 
 next place ? He said, you can go down to the slope, you can go down there. I was 
 batching at the same time with a man who was working in this place, and I knew 
 exactly what kind of work it was, and I did not care much for going there anyhow. 
 He said there was no more work unless I went to that place, so I had to take it. As soon 
 as I took my tools out, in two days after I started that place there was another man put 
 in my chute, and that chute was driven right up to the surface. 
 
 Q. When did you come back here ? — A. Three years ago. 
 
 Q. You have seen notices put up on the company's buildings that if a man wants 
 work he can get it under contract — have you seen this notice ? — A. I saw one at the 
 company's office. 
 
 Q. Did you make any inquiry ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You say there was considerable discussion about the proposal to strike at the 
 meeting ?— A. Yes. 
 
 WILLIAM ANTHONY— Cumberlana, May 28. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 435 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. What were the arguments used in favour of striking ? — A. I could not exactly 
 say. 
 
 Q. What did you hear said. Do you remember anything said in favour of the 
 strike ? — A. Well, the only grounds I can remember — there was a committee sent to 
 Mr. Small to ask him if he would accept a list to replace these men in their turn, and 
 when they fetched back the result that he would not accept, it was put to the meeting 
 what we were going to do with it, and I believe somebody made a motion that if he 
 would not accept, that we go out to protect these men. 
 
 Q. Was it said you could get the approval of the central authority at Denver ? — 
 I could not say. 
 
 Q. Were you told you would get financial assistance ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. What wages were you getting in February ? — A. I don't kick about the wages. 
 Q. Is this right — $4.25 a day ? — A. I guess so. . , 
 
 Q. Were you making $4 a day in March ? — A. I don't kick at all against the 
 wages. 
 
 Q. That is right, $4 a day in March, and $4 in April ? — A. I am satisfied with the 
 wages. 
 
 Q. You gave up $4 a day for the sake of this strike. Don't you think you were 
 rather foolish to give up $4 a day for the sake of this strike ? — A. No. Because 1 
 might be working next month for $2. 
 
 Q. Why do you think you might be working next month for $2 ? — A. Because my 
 place might be deficient. 
 
 Q. Do you know of anybody working for less than $3 a day. Had it not been the 
 practice to make their places pay $3 ? — A. In some cases. 
 
 Q. Had you any reasonable expectation that you would have to work for less than 
 $3 a day in these mines ? — A. Yes, I have worked for less than $3. 
 
 Q. What has been your average. You have been back here about three years ? — ^A. 
 I guess about $3.25. 
 
 Q. How do you average it ? — A. About that. 
 
 Q. How do you account for making less than $3 ? — A. Yes, and I worked two 
 years for $3, that is the standard wage. 
 
 Q. How do you account for making so much more these last few months ? Were 
 you in a good place ? — A. Yes, I would not have made the money. 
 
 Q. Was it so much better than other places ? Have you not had good places ? — 
 A. I have no kick on the wages. 
 
 Q. If you had thought you were being used by means of this union to help the 
 socialistic party in the next election, would you have joined the union if you thought 
 that was the game that was being put on ? Suppose you thought the socialistic party 
 in Nanaimo were coming here to organize this Western Federation, so as to help them 
 in the next election, would you have joined the union ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Why didn't you find out whether that was so ? Didn't you see all these 
 Nanaimo men here working up the union ? — A. That was a surprise to me. 
 
 Q. Didn't you hear what Mr. Halliday said this morning, or were you here ? — A. 
 I was here. i 
 
 Q. Was that not rather a surprise to you ? — A. Yes, it was rather a surprise. 
 Q. Do you think the men here would have gone into that union if you had known 
 what was going on ? — A. I don't know that I would have gone in. 
 ' Q. You didn't think you were being used to help a few ambitious socialists in this 
 
 Country ? — A. No, I didn't think that. 
 
 Q. And this strike coming on, and all these people out of work, that is not a very 
 good idea ? — A. Well, I don't know. 
 
 Q. There are a lot of men in the camp who didn't know ? — A. I could not say. 
 There might be. 
 
 38^ — 281 WILLIAM ANTHONY— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
i^ MlNVTEii VF ETIDEiiCE OF ROYAL VOMMISSIOIf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 fi. And of course when they got you in, then the rest of the men had to come in 
 after the union was started ? — A. Well, I don't know. 
 
 Q. Were you at the meeting on Sunday, April 5 ?-^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Didn't you hear Mr. Eeed try to make that motion that you should not join 
 the union ? — A. I believe he did make a motion. 
 
 Q. Didn't you hear Mr. Baker say anything when that motion was made ? You 
 know Mr. Baker ? — A. I have seen him. 
 
 Q. Didn't you hear him say something when that motion was made ? — ^A. .No, I 
 could not say exactly what he said; I was not interested at the time. 
 
 Q. You say j'ou think a man should not be deprived of work because he doesn't 
 belong to a union. Didn't you know at No. 7 the lioisters and engineers did not go 
 into this union ? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. The lioisters and engineers would not strike — you did not know that ? — A. I 
 did not know. 
 
 Q. Do you know that your executive sent a committee out to Mr. Priest, in charge 
 of that work there, and told him if he did not dismiss these hoisters a:nd engineers that 
 none of the rest of the men would work ? — A. I am not one of the executive com- 
 m,ittee, and I don't know about it. 
 
 Q. So you thought it was better to join the Federation because it was stronger 
 and would give you strength ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Cumberland, May 28, 1903. 
 George Eichards, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are secretary of the local union ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you been secretary since the commencement of the organization ? — A. 
 Yes, I was, except for the time I was away for two weeks. 
 
 Q. How long have you been in this camp ? — A. About a year and six months. 
 
 Q. And before that ? — A. I was at Extension a while ; I lived most of the time at 
 Wellington. 
 
 Q. How long were you employed in the Wellington Colliery Company altogether ? 
 — A. About twelve years. 
 
 Q. Tell us shortly what led up to the formation of this union ? — A. Prior to this — 
 how it was organized ? 
 
 Q. Yes, who promoted the organization ? — A. I guess Baker was the organizer 
 who organized it. 
 
 Q. Who invited Baker to come here ? — A. I did not take any active part prior to 
 this, so I could not say who it was sent him up. 
 
 Q. Do you know Higney of Ladysmith ? — A. I have seen him: that is abo\it all. 
 
 Q. Ever have a conversation with him about forming a union ? — A. No, I did not. 
 
 Q. When Baker came here did you see him before the organization meeting ? — A. 
 I saw him, but I never spoke to him. • ;. . 
 
 Q. Who was Baker doing business with most of the time before the organizatioil ? 
 — A. I could not say who it was. 
 
 Q. You were present at the organization meeting ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Higney was chairman ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did Higney give a speech ? — A. He said something, but he seemed to have an 
 impediment in his speech, so that I could not undertstand; I could not tell what he 
 said, in fact. ' 
 
 GEORGE RICHARDS— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPTITES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 437 
 
 SESS;ONAL PAPER Np, 36a 
 
 . Q. Could you tell us how long he talked ? — A. It was very short indeed. 
 
 Q. Did you hear Baker's address ?^A. Yes. 
 ^ Q. What did he talk about ? — A. He said something about organization. The 
 main thing in his speech was that he came up to organize, if the men at Union wishsd 
 it, he was ready to organize. 
 
 Q. Did Baker explain anything about the nature of the Federation ?— A. Well, I 
 can hardly say what he said ; I cannot recall what he said. 
 
 Q. Would not the men be naturally anxious to kuovv what kind of organization 
 they were joining ? — A. I think the Federation was known around here ; it seems to be 
 known. 
 
 Q. Did Baker say anything about the U.B.R.E. strike in his address ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did he teU you anything about what was going on in Ladysmith ? — A. I don't 
 recall Baker sajdng anything about Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Did he say that the Denver executive had approved of the men joining. Did 
 he read any communication, or say there was any communication from the Denver 
 executive ? — A. No, he did not read any. 
 
 Q. The men knew that this would likely provoke a struggle with the company 
 when they organized ? — A. Previous occasions had shown that, but there was every 
 chance of them changing their minds. 
 
 Q. But no attempt was made to find out what their position was ? — A. No, I could 
 not say that they did make any attempt. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. This was after the strike at Ladysmith had begun ? — A. The organization 
 here ? Yes. 
 
 Q. Would that prove that the company was still of the same mind ? — A. It might 
 have in that district, but it might not hera 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did you have any conversation with Baker after the organization ? — A. I 
 spoke a few words with him. 
 
 Q. About the Ladysmith strike ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Would that not be a very natural subject of conversation ? — A. No, I was more 
 interested in my immediate surroundings here. 
 
 Q. It must have been obvious to your men that the men at Ladysmith had been 
 locked out on account of the Federation. Didn't it occur to you that the same trouble 
 would take place with you ? — A. Yes, but I never discussed it with Baker. 
 
 Q. I should think that would be a very live subject of discussion as to what was 
 going to happen. What did you talk about to Baker ? — A. I spoke about the organiza- 
 tion ; that was what I was taUiing about. 
 
 Q. How many men belong to the Federatio'n here now ? — A. Two hundred and 
 ninety-three (293). 
 
 Q. How many men are there in the camp — white men. Tell us as nearly as you 
 can ? Who are not members ? — A. I could not say ; there are some men here since 
 we have opened ; I could not say. 
 
 Q. Are there 100 men in the camp — whites ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Fifty ? — A. I could not say what the company have ; I have not been across 
 
 the line to see. 
 
 Q. What was the reason of forming the union at the present time ? — A. I suppose 
 it was the best opportunity they would have. 
 
 Q. The men thought this was the best opportunity ?^A. I myself should think 
 so ; the Western Federation is a strong organization, and it would be a good chance 
 
 to join. 
 
 Q. Why was this the best time ? — A. I suppose Baker happened to be around 
 this part of the country, and took the chance. 
 
 GEORGE RICHARDS— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
433 MINUTES OF ETIDEJfCE UP ROYAL COMUtSSIOV 
 
 3^ EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. You mean around this part of the country because he happened to be at Lady- 
 smith ? — A. It might appeal to the men that it would be a good chance when he was 
 in this district. 
 
 Q. Does it require an active organizer to form a union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did Baker promise any assistance from the Federation ? — A. No, biit the con- 
 stitution provides for it ; I could not exactly say whether he made anything of that 
 or not. 
 
 Q. You have seen that telegram from Moyer to Baker ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What would you say about that ? — A. Ithink.it was merely some inforpiation to 
 Mr. Baker in his capacity as organizer. He is a member of the executiye board of 
 the Federation, so that is all it is. . 
 
 Q. The telegram says, in effect, that the Denver executive would approve of the 
 ■ Cumberland men going out in order to win at Ladysmith ? — A. Well, I guess that is 
 just information to Mr. Baker. 
 
 Q. Did you see the telegram that Baker sent ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You were not at Nanaimo at that time ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you approve of sympathetic strikes ? — A. There may be occasions arise 
 for it ; I could not exactly say. It is a pretty wide question. 
 
 Q. You knew the position of the Western Federation with regard to socialism 
 before you joined ? — A. I had not heard that they had positively given their support ; 
 I had not exactly heard that. There were remarks that they were on that line. 
 
 Q. Did you know that they favoured political action ? — A. Well, I had not been 
 in the union before myself, so I could not say ; they might have favoured it. 
 
 Q. What was your idea in joining the union 1 — A. It would give me a chance to 
 vent my thoughts and feelings and hear others on the same subjects. 
 
 Q. What do you understand by striking for recognition ? — A. Well, allowing us 
 the privilege of having a union here. 
 
 Q. Does that involve the necessity of the employer entering into a contract with 
 the union ?— A. It would involve recognition of the union, its inembers and all. 
 
 Q. Does that involve the union contract ? — A. That would be left between them 
 afterwards. If he would recognize the existence of the union, afterwards he could 
 make contracts with them. We are not requiring it at that time ; we merely required 
 the right to exist as a union ; the other matters would follow. That would embrace 
 all questions, I should think. 
 
 Q. If an employer recognizes the union, is it not necessary for him to have a 
 union contract ? — A. Occasions may arise when it would be necessary. 
 
 Q. Would he have to recognize a pit committee ? — A. Some unions, as far as I 
 have heard, do not have pit committees, and others do. That might be left with the 
 union. 
 
 Q. Has an employer the right to employ non-union men ? — A. To the detriment 
 of a union man ? 
 
 Q. Yes ; has he a right to exercise his discretion as to whether he will have union 
 or non-union men ? — A. Yes, I suppose so. 
 
 Q. Had there been much discussion in the camp before Baker was sent over as 
 to whether it was- desirable to form a union ? — A. I heard quite a lot of discussion 
 about here. 
 
 Q. How long back ? — A. I could not exactly state when it was. They were talking 
 union or Western Federation of Miners ; I heard it discussed sort of quietly. ' 
 
 Q. Have you got any correspondence between you and. Mr. Baker with reference 
 ; to that ? — A. Yes, I have two or three letters here. It is pertaining to this one ques- 
 ' tion of strike ? Is it necessary to have them all ? , 
 
 Q. You might just let me have them and I will see what is necessary; you might 
 hand them to Mr. King. 
 
 (Correspondence handed in. Exhibit 15.) 
 GEORGE RICHARDS— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
Olf INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 439 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By Mr. King : 
 
 .Q. This includes everything that has passed between you and Mr. Baker and any 
 officials or members at Nanaimo and Ladysmith ?— A. Yes, that is all. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Where are the copies of the letters you wrote to Mr. Baker ? — A. I never wrote 
 any to him. 
 
 Q. Are there any in your possession as secretary ? — A. I have not written any 
 letters to Baker since I came here. 
 
 Q. Have you any correspondence between yourself arid the Ladysmith men and 
 the Nanaimo men ? — A. No, I have not written to Ladysmith, except this last one ; I 
 have written inquiring about the Commission. 
 
 Q. There is one thing in which Mr. Baker is right — that the Federation is on trial ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the best thing the Western Federation can do is to help the Commission 
 discover all the facts ? — A. I have nothing, because Mr. Baker left here; he wrote he 
 was on the way. I have not written to Mr. Baker since. 
 
 Q. Have you any copies of any telegrams passing between your union and any 
 other Western Federation union ? — A. I had that one at Ladysmith about the rejection 
 of Dunsmuir's offer. 
 
 Q. Any to Mr. Baker ? — A. No, I have not written any to Baker. 
 Q. Or in your possession as secretary, written by any other secretary or officer of 
 the union ? — A. I have just the matter of sending bills or something like that; simple 
 matters. 
 
 Q. Where is the correspondence conducted by Mr. Higncy ? — A. I never had that. 
 I took it up after we organized. 
 
 Q. Didn't you have any correspondence ? — A. I had no correspondence left to me 
 as secretary from Higney. 
 
 Q. You have no other telegrams besides the ones produced yesterday ? — A. No, 
 i had one from Baker just to say he would be up, and I destroyed it. These letters are 
 apologizing for not coming. 
 
 Mr. Halliday. — I suppose that you are the members of the Commission. Mr. 
 Bodwell was permitted to read that telegram, and I understand that he is not a member 
 of the Commission, so I would like to make a request 
 
 His Lordship. — You people are labouring under a misapprehension. This Com- 
 mission has been instructed by royal authority to discover all the facts relating to the 
 strike, and the Commission would utterly fail in doing its duty if it left any stone 
 unturned. We don't care whom the facts hurt; it is our duty to find out the facts 
 relating to the strike, and the correspondence of the union must be brought forth. 
 
 Mr. Halliday. — The point at issue is, we don't mind the Commission investigating 
 it, but it is the company's counsel 
 
 His Lordship. — The company have a perfect right to find out what is going on, 
 and you have a perfect right to do the same. We have ordered the company to pro- 
 duce all correspondence. I expect Mr. Bodwell has it here and will produce it. We 
 ar^ determined to get at the facts ; that is what we are here for, and the sooner it is 
 tinderstood the better. 
 
 Q. You say these are all the documents in your possesssion ? — A. There was very 
 little business transacted ; I thinli that is all ; I have no letter press copies of these, and 
 I would like to have copies of them. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^If you want copies of these, of course you can have them. We 
 will have copies made and handed to you. 
 
 GEORGE RICHARDS— Cumberland, Mar 28. 
 
440 MINVTE8 OF EVIDEVCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A; 1904 
 
 Q. I notice there is no correspondence in the list relating to the joint meeting at 
 Nanaimo— no telegrams or letters ? — ^A.. No, I never had any that I know of. ■ 
 
 Q. Of course, you understand that telegrams could be got at in the office ? — A. 
 Well, you see I was away at the time, and I did not have any handed to me. 
 
 Q. There is no other officer who would have them ? — A. Mr. Halliday ' took my 
 position for the time being; I don't know of anything being handed over to me. - 
 
 Mr. Halliday. — I have nothing; I handed over everything to the secretary. 
 
 Mr. King. — All of the correspondence in this part is from May 11 to May 14. 
 There is nothing in that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. There must be some correspondence after that ? — ^A. No, I didn't have any 
 correspondence with Ladysmith at all; I cannot recollect having any on file from 
 Ladysmith. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — ^It seems to me the position ought to be clearly understood.. Action 
 is taken because of the disturbed industrial conditions to examine into these strikes. 
 They were ordered by the various unions, and the government wants to know why these 
 strikes were, why they were permitted, what were the causes that lay at the bottom. 
 of them, and the assumption is that the unions' action were taken for good reasons 
 which would justify their course, and everything that will throw light on their pur- 
 pose will do good to the cause they represent, so long as those reasons were good Ones, 
 and the asking of the documents is simply to arrive at a correct conclusion in this 
 regard. We did not assume that these documents contained anything injurious, but 
 rather that they would justify their position. 
 
 Witness. — ^I have no reluctance to produce the documents. The fact is, we had 
 very little correspondence. Baker stayed here a while and then he went away; I did 
 not have any correspondence with him. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did you get any correspondence from any other officer, turned over to you ? — 
 A. I had some ; they were mostly by-laws from different unions. 
 
 Q. No, but correspondence ? — A. There was correspondence with them, sending 
 their by-laws. I have those. Every union was to send their by-laws here for us to 
 draft by-laws from. That is all the correspondence I had with them. 
 
 Mr. Halliday. — I may say that I received that correspondence, and they were all 
 congratulatory letters and nothing else ; inclosing copies of the by-laws of the dif- 
 ferent organizations. 
 
 His Lordship. — It cannot be too well understood that unionism is on its trial. Mr. 
 Baker never said truer words in his life, than that the right of the Western Federation 
 to exist in this country is on trial. If the public get it into their heads that the 
 Western Federation is moving in a secret waj^, and by devious means, to accomplish 
 their purposes, the Western Federation of Miners will be like chaff before the wind, 
 and it is incumbent on the officers of that organization to bring forth all the means 
 by which it seeks to accomplish its ends, and to justify its relation to these strikes. 
 The whole matter will be dealt with by public opinion anyway and it is up to the 
 Western Federation of Miners to satisfy public opinion that their methods are what 
 they should be. 
 
 What occurs to us, as rather curious, is that there is very little correspondence 
 about this joint executive board at Nanaimo. Now, that joint committee at Nanaimo 
 never met without some correspondence cither with Cumberland or Ladysmith ? 
 
 Witness. — I was not here at the time it was, effected ; , I was away.nayseK. ■ i ) ! 
 GBOHGE RICHARDS— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
Oy INDUSTRIAL BISPVTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA ML 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. You left the files of the lodge ? — A. Yes; these are the files ; that is all the 
 correspondence between Baker pertaining to the strike. 
 
 By Mr. King ; 
 Q. No letters from Mr. Shenton ? — A. Yes, I have one from him, but that has no 
 bearing. 
 
 His Lordship. — Just pass up what you have. We will see whether there is any- 
 thing worth while. 
 
 Mr. Halliday. — I think there was a letter, a request to send a delegation to Nanai- 
 mo to hold a joint meeting and consider the situation at Ladysmith. 
 
 Mr. King. — Who was the letter from ? 
 
 Mr. Halliday. — Parker Williams, recording secretary. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Have you a copy of your own by-laws ? — A. We have not printed any. That 
 is the reason these other organizations sent their by-laws to us, to pick out the best 
 we could. I have had numerous correspondence in that way. 
 
 His Lordship. — I think it would be the best plan for the secretary of the Com- 
 mission to go through the documents with you yourself, and see just what is necessary 
 in his judgment for the Commission. 
 
 Witness. — Yes, I agree with that. 
 
 His Lordship. — Have you any documents or correspondence, Mr. Bodwell ? 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — I will bring it forth when I put in my first witness. I will reserve 
 my right to cross-examine this witness ; I may not have to examine him at all ; I 
 don't want to take up the time. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Is there anything you would like the Commission to know ? — A. I might find 
 something to tell you while you are here. 
 
 Bjj Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Would your union have struck, do you think, if Mr. Matthews had granted the 
 request of the committee ? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. Would the union have struck if they had not suspected that the men were be 
 ing discriminated against ? — A. No, that is what was strucK for, unless something 
 came up. The situation was all standing on that. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether there is a deputy organizer of the Western Federation lu 
 this district ? — A. No, I don't know of any. 
 
 Q. .Does tlie constitution require that an organizer shall be present to give the 
 oath ? — A. Or a member of the executive. 
 
 Q. The executive at Denver ? — A. That is as I read the constitution. 
 
 Q. Where is that ? — A. Article 3, section 11 — ' Each member of the executive 
 board shall act as an. organizer in his district, and he shall also be required to make 
 such investigation relative to the condition of each local imion in his district as in 
 his judgment may be necessary, and make a report ' thereof to the president of the 
 Federation on or before the 10th day of April in each year. In case of trouble arising 
 in^ the jurisdiction of a union, the member of that district shall be summoned and given 
 full charge in the direction of negotiations until' the arrival of the president, who 
 shall be summoned, if necessary '—— ■• m • i.v ir v r! i ... ■ 
 
 Q. You infer from that that only' the organizer can administer the TDath ? — A. 
 That is as far as I understand it. . 
 
 GEOBGE RICHARDS— Cmnberland, May. 28. 
 
4^ UlNUTES Of EMDEA'VJ^ OF JtOYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll., A; 1904 
 His Lordship. — Do you wish to cross-examine, Mr. Bodwell ? 
 Mr. Bodwell. — ^I don't know; as far as it stands now, I would not cross-examine. 
 His Lordshii". — You can come back again, Mr. Richards, if necessary. 
 
 John Hutchinson, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. You are a miner 'i — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How long have you been here ? — A. I came here about four years the 16th of 
 last January, but I have been away in the interval. I think I went away two years 
 ago last April, and came back a year ago last January again. 
 
 Q. So you have been here a year last January ? — A. Yes, the last time. 
 
 Q. In the employ of the company off and on for four years ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Where were you working in the interval '( — A. I did not work very much. I 
 did a little work in Washington and Wyoming. 
 
 Q. What wages did you get in Washington ; — A. I was working there in a certain 
 shift where the regular rate is $3 a day ; that it what I got. 
 
 Q. In Wyoming ? — A. I worked a little iu a coal mine; I made about $4 a day. 
 
 Q. Are you an officer of the present union '. — A. Yes, I am on the executive board. 
 
 Q. When was the first that you heard of a proposal to form a union here ? — A. 
 The first I heard of the proposal was when llie notice was stuck up, but I had heard 
 it discussed before. . " 
 
 Q. Was there a pretty general desire for a union ? — A. As far as I could gather. 
 
 Q. The first you saw was the notice of the meeting of April 5 ?^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you attend that meeting ? — A. I did. 
 
 Q. You heard the addresses delivered there ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What were the •arguments used in favour of the union? — A. I can't exactly 
 state; I don't exactly remember the words siiid, 
 
 Q. A general statement of the case ? Was tKe Ladysmith situation referred to ? 
 — A. No, I don't think it was referred to nuuh. 
 
 Q. Was it at all ? — A. I cannot say. 
 
 Q. You heard Mr. Baker's speech ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did he describe the purpose of the Federation ? — ^A. I could not be positive. 
 He must have satisfied us as to his intentions, but I could not be positive as to what 
 he said. 
 
 Q. How many men do you think were picsoiit at that meeting ? — A. I would esti- 
 mate it to be about 160; something like that at the first. 
 
 Q. Was the motion put when the meeting numbered 160 ? — A. Well, I don't know 
 about it being put; it was made. 
 
 Q. It is alleged there was one point of the m^-eting when a number left the hall ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was that before or after the motion was put to the meeting ? — A. I could 
 not Exactly say ; it is a fact that a number did leave. 
 
 Q. Was there anything said suggesting that they should leave the hall ? — A. No 
 more than that, those not wishing to organize were requested to leave the hall. 
 
 Q. How many would you estimate did leave the hall at that time — a considerable 
 jnumher ? — A. No, I think there was about twenty. 
 
 Q. Do you know what the real number of the members was that night they or- 
 ganized ? — A. I don't know positively, l)iit T have heard that it was somewhere about 
 147 ; I have heard that. 
 JOHN HUTCHINSON— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 443 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Did you approve of forming the union ? — ^A. I did. 
 
 Q. Why? — A. Because I thought it would strengthen my position in society. 
 Q. In reference to what ? — A. In reference to everything. I had an idea that I 
 would not be unjustly oppressed, and thought that in' joining this union it would help 
 me along a little. Where I was being oppressed as an individual, I would not be in a 
 union. 
 
 Q. Have you ever felt that you have been oppressed ? — A. I believe I have, and 
 do now. 
 
 Q. In what respect ? With reference to your wages ? — A. In reference to the 
 prevailing conditions. 
 
 Q. Would it have reference to the conditions here specially, as compared with 
 other places ? — A. Not exactly that ; in reference to conditions on the whole. 
 
 Q. Outside of Cumberland, as well as inside ? — A. As a whole. 
 
 Q. Tour relatiohship to the union as a coal miner, and also as a citizen desiring 
 the improvement of your class ? — A. Yes, I suppose so. I am a British subject. 
 
 Q. Your allegiance is to that first — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You know the political doctrines of the Western Federation ? — A. Well, I 
 have a slight idea ; I could not say I know them in their fulness ; I approve of them 
 as far as I know of them. 
 
 Q. You approve of the political purpose of the Western Federation, if it can be 
 said to have one ? — A. I do. 
 
 Q. In joining the union were you influenced in your selection of the union by the 
 fact that it had political aims ? — A. No, I was not. I don't think 1 thought about it 
 at that time ; I was just joining the union. 
 
 Q. Did you feel there were any grievances here ? — A. Well, I suppose that some 
 of the brethren had grievances. 
 
 Q. Did you feel personally that you had not ? — A. Not in regard to the employ- 
 ment I had at the time. I did feel that it might be possible I would have a grievance 
 in that respect. Consequently that is one great reason I had in joining the union. 
 
 Q. You think it enables a man to provide for his future ? — A. Yes, that is what 
 I think. 
 
 Q. You say you are a member of the executive. Were you laid off ? — A. Yes, I 
 was. It was on Saturday, I don't know whether it was the 18th of April or not. Proba- 
 bly Mr. Matthews can tell you. Yes, it was the 18th April. 
 
 Q. To what do you attribute the fact that you were laid oS ? — A. To being an 
 officer of the union. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. Well, of course, there were certain reasons why I thought that. 
 In the first place, I did not think that my place ought to have been finished at the time 
 it was. I think there was a little more work in it than that. I may be wrong in that, 
 but I think so. Another reason is that it has been the custom, when the laid a man 
 off, to put him on if there is another place for him. It so happened there were two men 
 working in the next stall, and the next stall but one, and the day I went for my tools 
 T found they had finished the place, and one had started to cross-cut in my stall, and 
 another had a cross-cut marked off a little lower down in the same stall. So from that 
 I concluded I was discharged. 
 
 Q. Were these men who had work provided, were they union men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Officers of the union ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. How do you account for the fact that William Anthony was not laid off ? — A. I 
 don't know anything about that at all ; I didn't account for that. 
 
 Q. Do you approve of the affiliation of this union with an international union ? 
 —A. i do. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. Because, in my opinion, it adds strength to the cause. 
 
 Q. Is that strength due to the international part of it, or the fact of its num- 
 bers ?— A. The fact of its numbers. 
 
 JOHN HUTCHINSON— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
444 MINUTES' OF EVIDENCE OF JiOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. If the same numbers were available in Canada, would you approve of the 
 organization ? — A. If there were the same number- in Canada, there would be the 
 same number elsewhere, and consequently double the strength than would be possible 
 in one country. 
 
 Q. You would have internationalism at all times ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Would not an affiliation, rather than being members of the organization itself, 
 answer the purpose as well ? — A. Well, I don't know about that ; I never studied it out 
 very much in that light. I think it is very good the way it is. 
 
 Q. Do you approve of that part of the constitution which requires that the execu- 
 tive shall review a contract made between the local union and an employer I — A. I 
 believe that the constitution reads that each local can fix its own standard of wages. 
 
 Q. The constitution reads as follows : ' Any contract or agreement entered into 
 between the members of any local union and their employers as a final settlement of 
 any difficulty or trouble that may occur between them shall not bs considered valid or 
 binding until the same shall have the approval of the executive board of the Western 
 Federation of Miners.' — A. Yes, I approve of it. 
 
 Q. Would you, if you were an employer ? — A. I would not believe in the doctrines 
 I do if I were an employer. 
 
 Q. We were not talking about ideal conditions; we were talking about the condi- 
 tion of things as they are ? — A. I beg your pardon, I understand. 
 
 Q. I wanted to know whether you thought it was a reasonable objection on the 
 part of the employer ? — A. In my opinion, they are obliged to do this — the employers. 
 
 Q. Whether they like it or no,t ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That is one of the reason^ alleged by employers to crush out the union ? — A. 
 That is to his interests to do so. 
 
 Q. That is one of the reasons; that the executive at Denver assume to say whether 
 or not the settlement shall be a good settlement; an employer in this country has to 
 submit his grievances with these men to foreign authority in Denver. Now, the ques- 
 tion is for the public and parliament to say whether that objection is a good objection 
 or not, because action will be taken one way or the other in all probability on that. 
 
 By Ml*. Bowe : 
 
 Q. This might illustrate the situation : this local union might enter into an 
 arrangement with the Wellington Collieries Company satisfactory to the local union, 
 giving the right wages and conditions of employment, and unless that was approved 
 of by the central authority the local union could be expelled, their charter suspended, 
 or any other punishment that the central authority might administer, unless they 
 reviewed that contract ? — ^A. If that is the case, it should suit the employer. 
 
 Q. Would it suit the men then ? — A. It would have to, I suppose. 
 
 Q. Of course, I am simply trying to get your view, whether you thought that 
 clause was fair or not ? — A. I have not thought much about it. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is the position — that the Canadian employer is obliged to 
 submit his grievances to people living in Denver, and out of the reach of the law of this 
 country. Is that a reasonable objection for an employer to raise ? 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — One member of the executive is in British Columbia. 
 
 His Lordship. — But the constitution says the executive at Denver. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — There may be more on the Canadian side. 
 
 His Lordship. — The headquarters would be on the American side. 
 
 Mr. Eich.^rds. — They might ballot to come to British Columbia for that matter 
 
 Mr. EoWE. — ^We know that the headquarters might change. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is not altogether likely. 
 JOHN HUTCHINSON— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
ON IJfDVSTIilAL DISPOTSS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 4i5 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. KiCHARDS. — ^Do you think it would satisfy employers should they hold their 
 convention in Canada. Would it satisfy that part of it ? 
 
 His Lordship. — They might hold a convention here one year in ten. The point is 
 that the men who settle the figures between employer and employed are away beyond 
 the reach of our law and our courts. That is the difficulty the employer raises. We would 
 like to hear what answer the union have to make. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — They hold that an employer goes into international trusts — he 
 might belong to a company. Could we get at them ? 
 
 His lyOKDSHip. — There is no doubt about thfit. Parliament may have to see about 
 that, too. But you cannot say on your own account what shall be done ; you have to 
 get the approval of the Denver people. 
 
 Witness. — ^I think you will find if he settles with a local union of the Western 
 Federation that it will come very near how it is agreed to be. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What is the object of that clause in the constitution then ? — A. Does it say 
 ' approve ' or ' review ' ? 
 
 Mr. EowE. — ' It shall not be considered valid or binding ' — Article 5, section 2. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — They might be doing something unconstitutional ; therefore it 
 would be submitted to the executive to see if that were so. 
 
 His Lordship. — The point is an employer say he cannot get a binding settle- 
 ment until some people in Denver say he can. They are outside the authority of this 
 government. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — There would be an objection to having an outside authority anyway, 
 even in the same country — outside of the organization which the men entered. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Would it not be the same as we have it here, in the case of a 
 legal decision. If a man doesn't like it he can take it to England, to the Privy Council, 
 and they will declare it ultra vires ? This should not be so. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^But the point is it involves the freedom of the contract. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — We might be making that contrary to the constitution. 
 
 His Lordship. — Then you have to go to Denver to find out. The, employer says, 
 I don't want anything to do with men outside this country which prohibits me from 
 making contracts with men in this country. The question is, who has the right. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Did you attend the joint executive meeting at Nanaimo ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was the purpose of that meeting ? — A. To devise ways and means to 
 assist Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Anything else ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. What questions were discussed there ? — A. The financial part of the business 
 was discussed. 
 
 Q. Anything else ? — A. No, I don't think there was. 
 
 Q. Did you see a telegram from Mr. Moyer to Mr. Baker ? — A. Yes, I did. 
 
 Q. When did you see it ? — A. I believe Mr. Baker showed it to me the day of 
 the meeting. 
 
 Q. Was it in reply to, a telegram sent by Mr. Baker ? — A. It must have been, I 
 suppose. 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about the contents of the telegram to which that was 
 a reply ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. What comment was made by Mr. Baker when he showed you the telegram ? — 
 A^ I could not say. i , ,, , 
 
 Q. Who brought the telegram to Cumberland ?7— A. I suppose the president ; I 
 don't know ; it was not there myself. 
 
 JOHN HUTCHINSON— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
446 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII.. A. 1904 
 
 Q. Thie telegram was read at a subsequent meeting of the union, here ?-^A. I 
 think so. 
 
 Q. You heard it read ? — A. I don't know, I forget. . 
 
 Q. Did that telegram influence the action, of the local union in reference to this 
 strike ?— A. No. 
 
 - Q. It was not intended to do so ? — A. I don't think so. I can safely say it did 
 not, as far as I was concerned. 
 
 Q. Why do you think the telegram was sent here ? Why was it not left at 
 Nanaimo ? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. You could not suggest what the purpose was in sending it here ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. It might have been because it had a meaning to either Nanaimo or Cumber- 
 land ? — A. It might have ; I don't know. 
 
 Q. To help win the fight at Ladysmith what would be necessary ? Would the 
 calling out of the men at Nanaimo help Ladysmith ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. You would not think it would ? — A. No, I hardly think so. 
 
 Q. Did you think a strike at Cumberland would help the cause at Ladysmith ? — 
 A. I must not have thought that, because I was not in favour of sympathetic strike. 
 
 Q. You are not ? — A. Not in this case. 
 
 Q. The suggestion is this : here is a telegram which says the Western Federation 
 proposes calling out all men necessary to help win the Ladysmith strike. That tele- 
 gram is sent to the one place where such a call would have that effect. The inference 
 suggested might be that it was sent here for the purpose of prompting such action on 
 the part of this local union ? — A. It might have been, but I don't think it, so far as 
 I am personally concerned. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Are there any officers still in the employ of the company, outside of Mr. 
 AnthJony ? — A. I could not say. Your Worship. 
 
 Q. Do you know of any, Mr. Kiohards? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — There was Anthony and myself. 
 
 His Lordship. — Are there any of the officers employed at present that were not 
 laid ofE ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Anthony and myself; that is all I recollect. 
 
 His Lordship. — Out of how many ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Nine of an executive. 
 
 His Lordship. — Only two out of nine that have not been laid off, is that right ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — The executive board is composed of nine, three ofiicers. 
 
 His Lordship. — How many were laid off out of the nine ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — All except two. 
 
 Mr. Halliday. — Mr. Richards here was away about two weeks. I was out of the 
 employ of the company, and I was requested to go in his place, but I did not have that 
 opportunity, so that if Mr. Richards had worked any time before the strike he would 
 have been laid off too. He refused the right for anybody to go in his place. 
 
 His Lordship. — You are still at work, Mr. Richards ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — No, I was called away suddenly. 
 
 His LoBDSiiiP. — They had not begun to operate on you ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — No. 
 
 His Lordship. — Practically Anthony was the only man left ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — That is all, I think, who was left. 
 
 His Lordship. — I understand that the contention of the union was that they went 
 out because their ofiicers were being weeded out ?— A. That is the contention exactly. 
 
 JOHN HUTCHINSON— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPVTEB IN BRITIBB COLUMBIA 447 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. EiCiiARDS. — Then others were trustees, and it amounted to about fourteen 
 members altogether. 
 
 His Lordship.— What about them ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — There were four left on. It was a gradual process. 
 
 , By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You say you were not in favour of sympathetic strikes. When was a Sympa- 
 liietic strike discussed ? — A. I never said it was discussed. 
 
 Q. You said it could not be so, because you were not in favour of sympathetic 
 btrikes ? — ^A. I never said it was discussed. 
 
 Q. Was not the question of a sympathetic strike with Ladysmith discussed hero 
 lat. all ? — A. Not as far as I am concerned. 
 
 Q. You did not hear it discussed ? — A. Not to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. If it was discussed at all you never heard of it ? Did you know of it being 
 yjiscussed 1 — -A. It is possible for a man to have an opinion without discussing it. 
 
 Q. The matter was not discussed in Cumberland at all ? — A. As far as I am con- 
 K3i^rned, I don't know that it was discussed. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether that question, outside of any conversation with you 
 personally, do you know whether the question of sympathetic strike was discussed ?— 
 A. Not tp my knowledge; I cannot recall anything like that. 
 
 Q. How did you come to form an opinion on the subject if it did not come up ?-^ 
 A. Quite easily. Did you never form an opinion without discussing it ? 
 
 Q. What was it led you to think about a sympathetic strike here if there was no 
 discussion at all? — A. Well, the natural trend of circumstances. 
 
 Q. What was there to bring about that thought in your mind, if there was any 
 itihought ? — A. I cannot tell you. 
 
 Q. You cannot account for the fact that you formed that opinion ? — A. I know I 
 formed the opinion. 
 
 Q. What was Mr. Shenton talking about when he came here ? — A. I don't know 
 that he talked about much, except matters pertaining to the thing at that time; they 
 were on strike when he came up here. 
 
 Q. Didn't you tallt to Mr. Shenton when in Nanaimo ? — A. Not much. 
 
 Q. Didn't you talk about having a strike in Nanaimo to Mr. Shenton ? — A. I 
 could not say I mentioned the word strike, but I believe I said we could not go along 
 much longer without taking some action. 
 
 Q. Without any reference whatever to the situation at Extension ? — A. No re- 
 ference whatever. 
 
 Q. Mr. Baker, just at that time, sent a telegram to Moyer and gets an answer 
 back to do everything to win at Ladysmith. How do you account for this subject of 
 Ladysmith not being discussed by anybody ? — A. It is no business of mine to account 
 for it. 
 
 ■ [. ^ Q. Here is the situation : you and Halliday and somebody else go down to Nanai- 
 imo, in response to a request to have a joint executive meeting there, and while you were 
 there of course you discussed tilings. Just at that particular time Mr. Baker sends 
 a telegram, and he gets an answer that shows there must have been something in the 
 lelegram about this place — ' We will approve of anything which will assist to win the 
 light at Ladysmith.' How do you account for that ? Could you give me any reason 
 why that answer should have been sent unless Baker said something about Lady- 
 smith ? — A. I am not Mr. Baker; I don't want to give any reason. 
 
 Q. 'We approve of calling out all men necessary to win at Ladysmith.' Where 
 was the calling out to be which was going to help win at Ladysmith ? Where was 
 the calling out to be ? — A. Well, I don't suppose there were many places it could bo. 
 There were only two camps on the Island besides Ladysmith. 
 
 JOHN HUTCHINSON— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
448 MINUTES OP EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Could that refer to any place except calling out Cumberland ? — A. I don't 
 suppose it could. 
 
 Q. That is in answer to a telegram from Mr. Baker, of course ? — ^A. It must have 
 been. 
 
 Q. Can you say that nobody at that joint executive meeting proposed the calling 
 out of Cumberland in order to assist Ladysmith ? — A. I can say, so far as my knowl- 
 edge goes, that nobody proposed that. 
 
 Q. Tou did not hear Mr. Baker speak of it to anybody ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Nor Mr. Shenton ?— A. No 
 
 Q. No word out of the executive ? — A. I cannot recall anything. 
 
 Q. Could you forget it if it had been ? — A. It might be possible. I don't say 
 that I would try; it is possible to forget anything. 
 
 Q. What Nanaimo men were at the joint executive ? — ^A. Mr. Shenton, Mr. 
 Neaves and Mr. Holt. 
 
 Q. What Ladysmith men ? — A. Mr. Pritchard and Mr. Jeffries. 
 
 Q. And Jeffries, you say, never, during that whole meeting, suggested a sym- 
 pathetic strike at Cumberland ? — A. I say not to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. Were you there ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What did you do ? — A. You know what we did in the previous evidence. We 
 decided to assist — Nanaimo and Cumberland — to aid Ladysmith financially; that is 
 ell we did. 
 
 Q. That is all you tallied about ? — A. Practically speaking. 
 
 Q. What was the other part ? — A. That was about all we tallied about, I think. 
 
 Q. You want this Commission to think that you nine or eight men met with this 
 situation as it is, and that the question of whether the men at Cumberland should come 
 out was not discussed, or not even mentioned ? — A. As far as my knowledge goes in 
 recalling the various facts, I don't recall anything of the kind. 
 
 Q. You have been here about a year, or did you say two years this last time ?— 
 A. I came here a year ago last January. 
 
 Q. Are you a member of the socialist party, so-called, at Nanaimo ? — A. Yes, 
 I nm a member, but I may say that I have only been a member since this strike. 
 
 Q. You were in sympathy with them before the strike ? — A. Yes, but I had never 
 been amongst them. 
 
 Q. Have you had any communication from any member of that party ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Mr. Shenton, for instance ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You were not working in connection with them before that time ? — A. Not 
 at all. 
 
 Q. How do you account for these men from Nanaimo appearing on the scene 
 shortly before this strike ? Did you know they were here ? — A. No, I did not. 
 
 Q. Did you know anybody was here, working up the question of organization at 
 Cumberland ? — A. No, but I knew that Baker was going to come. 
 
 Q. Then this matter was sprung suddenly on the men at Cumberland, you among 
 the rest ? — A. Well, the matter of organizing or entering into a union was not ex- 
 actly sudden to me; I was always prepared to enter into a union. 
 
 Q. I mean the question of forming this socialistic organization at Cumberland 
 was sprung suddenly on the men, you among the rest ? — A. The question of forming 
 the Western Federation at Cumberland was sprung a little suddenly probably on m?, 
 but as I said before, the thing had been discussed. ' 
 
 Q. The Western Federation had been di-cussel ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Who discussed it ? — A. I believe it was discussed before these men came in. 
 Action had been taken in Ladysmith in connection with the matter; people see what 
 was in the papers. 
 
 Q. If you had known that the principal idva of fretting the Western Federaticn 
 here at this time was to help the political aspirations of the socialists' party in lifana- 
 
 JOHN HUTCHINSON— Cumberland, May S8. 
 
OiV mnVSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 449 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 imo, woiild you have approved of it ? — A. It would have been the more incentment to 
 me to join it. 
 
 Q. And you think it is the real reason of the agitation ? — A. No, I don't know 
 whether that is one of the reasons. 
 
 Q. Do you think the men who went into that union, as a whole, understand that 
 situation ? — A. I think they understood that they were joining a union. 
 
 Q. Did you think they were being practically drawn into a political club for the 
 benefit of a few ambitious parties ? — A. I thinlc in regard to joining a union to protect 
 their rights they could not join a better union. 
 
 Q. I am asking you if it was explained to the men generally when that meeting 
 was called on Sunday, or before, that instead of joining a union for the protection of 
 their rights, they were practically being made members of a party caucus — a party 
 club ? — A. I understood they were joining a union to protect their rights. 
 Q. Tou think it was the best thing they could have done ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. Tou are one of the men who insist on the right of free opinion and free speech ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why didn't you, then, before you entrapped the men into this organization, 
 give them an opportunity to look into these things ? — A. There is no trap about it. 
 
 Q. Then it was fully explained to the men that on the ground of being asked to 
 join the union they were made members of a party club ? — A. I cannot answer that ; 
 I know as far as I am concerned, that I was joining something to help me. 
 
 Q. You think the socialists represent the best interests of the working-people ? — A. 
 They represent the people — the working-people. 
 
 Q. Then I am right in saying that, according to your idea they represent the 
 thought of the working-people ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Are these men in Cumberland satisfied that you and Mr. Halliday, and a few 
 others, should do their thinking for them ? — A. You had better ask them. 
 
 Q. Are they satisfied ? — A. I will go around to-morrow and ask each individual. 
 You know very well I can't answer that question. 
 
 Q. Well, from your conversation here, you think these men are satisfied that you 
 and Halliday and two or three others should form their opinions, and lead them where- 
 ever you go ? — A. I think they would be very foolish to follow anybody. 
 
 Q. That being so, you had to put up a game on them ? — A. No, we didn't put up 
 any game at all. 
 
 Q. You have been doing pretty well ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In February you made about $4.50 a day ? — A. Yes, I guess so : I am a pretty 
 good man, you know. 
 
 Q. I think you are, and a very good witness, too. Then in March you made about 
 $3.90 ?— A That is about right. 
 
 Q. Now, don't you think it is a kind of foolish thing for a good man like you, who 
 can make that kind of money, to get out on strike for the benefit of the Nanaimo socia- 
 lists ? — A. I don't think that is a correct way to put the question. I think it is a wise 
 thing for me to go out on strike for what I have done — for the reinstatement of the 
 men who have been discriminated against, and the recognition of the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners. 
 
 Q. These men knew, and you all knew, that the policy of this company was not to 
 have unions. You knew you had no real cause of complaint, and that when you 
 formed the union you must have expected to be discharged. You knew that was against 
 their policy. You call out for free speech and free thought, but you intended that the 
 company should go your way ? — A. I think we had just as much right to form a union 
 as the company had to disallow one. 
 
 Q. What wrong was done you if the company did not choose to employ you without 
 the union ? — A. They denied me the privilege of earning a living. 
 
 Q You could earn a living where this socialist party is ? — A. I don't know 
 
 36a — 29 JOHN Hutchinson— Cumberland, May 28. 
 
iSO MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. You knew the policy of this company was not to have a union ? — ^A. Tea, and 
 I knew it was wrong. 
 
 Q. But have they not a right to their own opinion ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you were going to force them to your opinion ? — ^A. Yes, I suppose So, in 
 regard to forming a union. 
 
 Q. How do you reconcile your position in that regard ? You call for free speech 
 and free thought, and yet you start out by forcing the company to adopt your opinions { 
 — A. I think that any question at issue to-day ought to be settled by the majority, 
 and I think that the working-people are in the majority. 
 
 Mr. EicHAKDS. — I would like Mr. Bodwell to show some of these wages statements ; 
 there are many men whose figures will not show as high as some he quotes. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^I don't see that the wage question is raised at all. The question is 
 as to the right to form this union. I don't think that the time of the Commission 
 should be wasted on wage questions, if there is no question raised about them. Look 
 at the list, and if you think it is incorrect, you can say so. 
 
 Rev. L. W. Hall, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are a missionary here, Mr. Hall ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you know a man named T. J. Shenton, of Nanaimo ? — ^A. Yes, I am ac- 
 quainted with him slightly. 
 
 Q. When did you see him here last ? — A. I have forgotten just when it was, per- 
 haps eight or ten days ago ; I have forgotten the date. 
 
 Q. You had a conversation with him ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. With reference to the organization of Chinese and Japanese, was it not ? — A. 
 I had a private conversation with him about some matters that I consider altogether 
 private, that could have no bearing on this question here just now 
 
 Q. There is nothing private from this Commission. You might as well under- 
 stand that, and everybody else within the sound of my voice. All the facts relating 
 to these troubles have to be divulged. — A. Well, it seems to me, as I have read, and 
 heard your statement with regard to the business of the Commission here, that any- 
 thing that might have been said to me privately as a missionary would not have any 
 bearing at all as far as affeoting you in regard to the matter in hand. 
 
 Q. You are largely mistaken in that. — A. It seems to me that I am the best 
 judge. 
 
 His Lordship. — No, you are not. Did you have any conversation about organizing 
 the Japanese and Chinese ? 
 
 Witness. — I am still of that opinion. If you can give me anything under the 
 law that I am compelled to give my confidence to you, I am prepared to do it. State 
 me the statute. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is no doubt, Mr. Hall, that this Commission has all the 
 powers of a court of record, and in consequence of refusal to 'answer questions, the 
 Commissioners, if they think it necessary, have the same power as the courts, with 
 respect to any jierson so refusing. Now, did you have a conversation with Mr. 
 Shenton ? 
 
 Witness. — Still — if I had counsel here — ^perhaps then I would be able— it is a 
 matter altogether — as a missionary, I think 
 
 REV. L. W. HALL — Cumberland, May 28. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 451 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 . His Lohdship. — I may tell you, Mr. Hall, that no clergyman or minister has any 
 privilege at all in a court of law ; that anything said to a clergyman or priest is not 
 regarded by the law as a privileged communication in any sense whatever. 
 
 Witness. — Does that fall to the Commission also, your Honour ? 
 
 His Lordship. — Yes, as I told you, this Commission has all the powers of a court 
 of record. If you wish to see counsel we will give you until to-morrow morning, on 
 undertaking to appear here at 10.30 ? 
 
 Witness.— I would like to have that. 
 
 Albert H. Peacey, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are a telegraph operator here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. To what company do you belong ? — A. The Dominion Government service. 
 
 Q. You have been subpoenaed to produce any documents in your possession relating 
 to any of these strikes ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you got them ? — A. Yes, sir. Might I ask one question ? Will you 
 undertake that I am not prejudiced by so doing ? 
 
 Q. You have to do it, Mr. Peacey, when you are subpoenaed. We understand that 
 all officers object to disclosing these things. When you are subpoenaed, that is the end 
 of it. 
 
 (Telegrams put in as Exhibit 16.) 
 
 Q. Does the correspondence produce all you have in your possession ? — A. Those 
 are copies, I have the originals. 
 
 Q. You have kept nothing back ? — A. Nothing back. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — The company's telegrams are not there ; there are in the office being 
 translated. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 Q. How is the telegraph office reached ? Have the company a distinct line ?^ 
 A. The company take their own messages and I manage the checks ; I could take them. 
 They practically go through, but the company have their operator and do their ovm 
 work. I am agent and do their checking. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. You retain copies of all messages in the through office down town ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 Q. Will you have copies of the company's telegrams produced ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. These are true copies of the telegrams ? — A. Yes, those are true copies. 
 
 Cumberland, May 29, 1903. 
 Kiev. L. W. Hall, recalled. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. The Commission was asking you yesterday about a conversation with Mr. 
 Shenton. Can you tell us what that was ?— A. It is not very pleasant for me, but I 
 suppose I will have to. 
 
 gg^j ^291 REV. L. W. HALI,— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
452 MINUTES OF UTIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll., A. 1904 
 
 Q. If you wish to give the evidence in private the Commission will do that ? — A. 
 Without counsel for Mr. Dunsmuir ? 
 
 Q. Both sides are entitled to be present. — A. Well, in that case, I don't see that 
 it will affect the matter. 
 
 Q. We regret very much to force any one to give evidence, but that is our duty. 
 Will you tell us what it was ? — A. Our talk was rather extended, something like two 
 hours, and therefore it would be 
 
 Q. Just give us the conversation about the organization of the Japanese and 
 .Chinese ? — A. Well, Mr. Shenton, he came here and we had a talk about the town, 
 ajid then he told me that he had been, at the request of Mr. Baker and the executive 
 of the Nanaimo union — that they requested him to act for him in his capacity as 
 organizer, and also to transact some business that he had up here in town. 
 
 Q. What I understand is that he should be sent here in the capacity of organizer ? 
 — A. Yes, to represent Mr. Baker, as he was engaged at Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. What was the date ? — A. I cannot give the date. I have not got 
 
 Q. Well, about when — ten days ago ? — A. It might be two or three weeks. 
 
 Q. That he should be sent in Baker's place ? — A. Yes, and he said that he called 
 on me to discuss conditions at present growing out of the strike, and the previous 
 conditions which led up to it. He said he had learned that I was in sympathy with 
 the men, and he asked if I would go before this Commission, and I did not reply imme- 
 diately. 
 
 Q. He asked if you would go ? — A. Yes, before this Commission. Of course we 
 discussed the previous conditions and the present conditions, which led up to the 
 strike, and he asked me my opinion with regard to the relation of the men — my opinion 
 with regard to the relation of the men towards the Chinese, and the possibility of 
 pointing a way to lift up the Chinese to a higher level than they had previously been 
 in the province — particularly here in Union, from the standpoint of labour. You 
 simply want what he said to me, not what I said to him ? 
 
 Q. We want both sides of the conversation ? — A. Well, I told him one could only 
 judge by the past, and how labour here, and in other parts of British Columbia where 
 I have been, had viewed the Chinese. My standpoint was altogether from a mission- 
 ary standpoint, and also I tried, and would endeavour to do the very best I could to 
 uplift them, and that I had come to the conclusion as far as the government was con- 
 cerned, that they could not look to it for help from them, and as far as my experience 
 went that the company in this particular town, was that we might not look for social 
 betterment, or betterment of conditions from them, and the past history of the men 
 was likewise the same — that they violated, to my opinion, both the company and the 
 men — the men less than the company — violated the rights of the Chinese according 
 to their ovm idea of labour. I thought from my study of the union organizations, both 
 in England and America and here that the groundwork was, that regardless of colour 
 or creed, no matter what a man might be, they should give him, as long as he might 
 be a producer, the title of labourer, and give him, if they were true men, the going 
 equivalent in a given place, whatever that might be for the amount he worked upon. 
 Then I cited the conditions here — that as a matter of fact, a Chinaman — a skilled China- 
 man — would go into the mines, and would do the work which, according to the scale 
 of wages in British Columbia and other places, is considered to be worth $3, or may be 
 $3.50, and he would be paid from $1.25, $1.50 and $1.'75, and I asked him, how about 
 the balance. Well, he said, he acknowledged in the past that labour had not treated 
 the Chinese as they should, but now they were learning, and had learned that they 
 must, if they hoped to uplift themselves — they had to uplift the Chinese also. I told 
 him I was willing to use my best endeavours to bring about an end of that kind. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — Mr. Shenton came here in the place of Mr. Baker, you say ? 
 Your Lordship, I would like to question the witness 
 
 His Lordship. — Make a note on this point and then examine afterwards. 
 
 REV. L. W. HALL— Cumberland, May 20. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA. 453 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You suggested then to Shenton the advisability of organizing the Chinese ? 
 — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did he suggest to you the organization ? — A. The conversation led up to the 
 ways and means, and the tenor of the conversation, as I remember it, led up to the 
 question of the best way to meet the present conditions. 
 
 Q. When you say, the best way of meeting the present conditions what do you 
 mean ? — A. I mean this : the conditions that have prevailed here in the last nine 
 years with regard to Chinese, and with regard to the effects — the far-reaching effects 
 to both church, coroners' juries, the law and general treatment of the Chinese — the 
 repressive atmosphere that has existed and does exist, and even now exists in this town 
 with regard to the present management of the mines. I have not come here willingly, 
 and this conversation — we discussed it from christian social standpoint, and I feel that 
 some of the managers and others are my friends, and it is hard for me to give this 
 testimony. I don't want to be misleading upon it, but this thing has borne on my mind, 
 and has worked so much detriment to all concerned, that I think that viewing this as 
 the highest tribunal to-day, that they should know my view, as it effects me and the 
 men, both white and Chinese, should be brought out. The answer to the question you 
 gave me — you asked me just now — was the outcome of how to meet those conditions. 
 He asked me my opinion of the strike, of the Federation, my opinion of the union 
 being organized here, and he asked my opinion in regard to the strike. I gave him my 
 thought. Of course I told him that I thought unionism was simply an expedient, and 
 e poor expedient too. 
 
 Q. Why a poor expedient ? — A. Because, in the nature of unionism it is only one 
 step towards — you take my point — is this — that if capital and unionism get together, 
 it eventually — they will, unless some other condition arises, we will have two masters 
 in place of one, and that is my thought. Therefore, I think, it is inexpedient, but the 
 best expedient to relieve present conditions in this place and in Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Your idea was that the Chinese and Japanese should be organized, in order to 
 raise them to the same condition as the whites ? — A. That is my thought — that they 
 tsould be. 
 
 Q. You communicated that idea to Mr. Shenton ? — A. Eventually I communi- 
 cated that idea to him. Of course, it all grew out of that thought. 
 
 Q. Did you take any steps in pursuance of that idea, towards organizing the 
 Chinese and Japanese ? — A. No. The Japanese were not under consideration. 
 
 Q. How was that ? — A. For this reason : that the Chinese as they are now, with- 
 out any guarantee from the federated union, or any other union, it would be a suicidal 
 policy, and I could be no friend of the Chinese to ask them, under the present condi- 
 tions, witnout guarantees from the federated union, that it would be possible for me 
 to act conscientiously along a line of that kind. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Shenton say that there would be any such guarantee given ? — A. He 
 suggested that he thought that the Federated executive at Colorado — ^I think it is — ■ 
 would be willing to make a guarantee, and I told him that whenever proper guarantees 
 were made and given that I would do all in my power, that I would do all in my powei* 
 to help along the union — not active organization work — but I would use my influence, 
 and do all I could, to uplift the Chinese, and lift the onus against the Chinese in thi^ 
 province as being altogether out of the pale of either pity or accommodation, the odium! 
 that rests in the eyes of most of the labour men in this country. 
 
 Q. Did you suggest what the nature of the guarantee should be — how it should 
 be furnished ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Did he ? — A. He could give no decisive answer with regard to the matter, but 
 he felt certainthat guarantees could be given, but he would have to see Mr. Baker first. 
 
 Q. How many Chinese are there here ? — A. Eoughly speaking, between 900 and 
 1,100, counting everybody, storekeepers and all combined. 
 
 Q. You are a missionary for the Chinese — you have nothing to do with the Japs ? 
 ^A. Yes. I have nothing to do with the Japanese. 
 
 Rev. L. W. HALlr— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
454 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll., A. 1904 
 
 . Q. You were not interested in the Japs in this matter ? — A. Of course, I ami 
 interested in all men. 
 
 Q. You did not include the Japs in this ? — A. No. Of course, my influence 
 would not reach in their direction. 
 
 Q. Did you understand from Shenton that the executive of the Western Federa- 
 tion at Denver would approve of the idea of organizing the Chinese ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you said you would do all you could in that direction ? — A. Yes, I thought 
 I would conditionally, of course 
 
 By Mr. Route : 
 
 Q. Your idea was it would improve the condition of the Chinese and help the cause 
 of the workmen ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And not do any damage to any other intergsta ? — A. Yes, and not only that, 
 hut to the whole community. My thought is that this thing — we have heard so much 
 about federation being an evil in its consequences, and so far as my experience goes, 
 not with this particular Federation, but with others — that it has been the contrary. 
 I have had nine or ten years' experience of the evil effects — ^I have been at coroners' 
 juries where men have been killed, where it was impossible to get freedom of speech. 
 I have seen it at elections — in so many different phases of social life and of church 
 life, and all forms. It has become really pregnant with all that an American or an 
 Englishman dislikes 
 
 Q. You mean that men on coroners' juries do not give evidence because of the 
 fear of results ?— A. I mean in one case that came under my observation, where an 
 inspector neglected to do his duty. It was brought out as clear as could be that the 
 
 man was killed — he was a Chinaman — and the outcome was simply . If you want 
 
 me to go into that case — has it a bearing on this ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I don't think there is any particular idea in going into that, but you gather 
 from all this that Chinamen are considered more as beasts than men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you think the scope of unionism should embrace a man irrespective of 
 creed or colour ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And therefore you were not willing to have the Chinamen go into this Federa- 
 tion ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Did you discuss the manner in which that could be best carried out ? — A. No, 
 we didn't go into that. I have forgotten now whether we did adopt that ground or not. 
 
 Q. Was it suggested by either of you that the best way would be to have a sepa- 
 rate union for the Chinese ? — A. It was suggested to me that if — I think it was sug- 
 gested that they have a separate union. 
 
 Q. With a separate charter from the Western Federation ? — A. No, it was sug- 
 gested that they should be organized themselves, and that they would come in for all 
 the privileges that the federated union gives to all its members. 
 
 Q. They were to be a separate lodge of the Western Federation ? — A. I believe he 
 suggested something to that effect. 
 
 Q. I suppose it would be unreasonable to suppose that whites would want to asso- 
 ciate with Chinamen in tlie same lodge ? — A. I don't suppose they would. 
 
 Q. Had you many discussions with Shenton about this ? — A. We just had one 
 talk. We thrashed the thing out. I, myself, after we opened up on the subject, 
 I had grave doubts with regard to — I had no doubt about his good faith, but I had 
 doubt with regard to the good faith — of the ultimate working out in British Columbia. 
 Therefore, we had some discussion on that, until we got to the question of guarantees, 
 and I thought if sufficient guarantees were given and were admitted under the con- 
 stitution, I had no doubt at all in my mind that once they were admitted that they 
 would keep their word — that they would carry out all their promises made to the 
 
 REV. L. W. HALL— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
Ojr TNDVfiTRtAL DISPUTEIS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 455 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Chinamen, but in the beginning, when he jrave me what information he could to an 
 outsider 
 
 Q. You mean they would be admitted to the full privileges of unionism ? — A. Yes- 
 Q. The consequence of that would be that the Chinamen would get the same wages 
 as the whites ? — A. Yes, the same wages. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. How long have you been here, Mr. Hall ? — A. About nine years. 
 
 Q. How long have you known Mr. Shenton ? — A. I met him but once. 
 
 ^. How long ago ? — A. About two or three weeks ago. 
 
 Q. Never saw him before ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. How long have you known of him as an active labour organizer ?— A. I know 
 of him more in the capacity of a local preacher. 
 
 Q. How long have you known of him in that capacity ? — ^A. Not long. 
 
 Q. He is a local preacher of the Methodist Church ? — A. I believe so. 
 
 Q. Have you ever known hini to take an active interest in organizing Chinamen 
 before the present strike ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Ever had any reason to suppose that he was considering any practical method 
 for uplifting the Chinese before this missionary visit to Cumberland ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Didn't it strike you as a singular coincidence that he should come here at this 
 particular time on that particidar mission ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did he say anything as to the benefit it would be to the union in this fight to 
 have the Japanese and Chinese organized ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What did he say about that ? — A. He said it would not only in this, but in tho 
 other — that it would make it more sure and more certain to relieve all the conditions 
 that existed, as he saw them. 
 
 Q. Didn't he say, and didn't you gather that his primary object at this time was to 
 get further assistance in the present strike in favour of the labour union ? — A. I 
 gathered merely this ; that he had learned that he was reaping what he had sown, in the 
 way they had treated the Chinese, and therefore coming to that point where, though 
 he might not have have had any sympathy before or any interest, that I saw distinctly 
 that — and I see now, that they might not hope to succeed without making their weakest 
 point their strongest. 
 
 Q. That is all theoretical, Mr. Hall; I am trying to have a practical application. 
 t hold a telegram from Mr. Moyer to Mr. Baker, dated April 24. That was not very 
 far away from the time of your conversation ? — A. I have forgotten the date. 
 
 Q. That telegram says, 'We approve of calling out any or all men necessary to 
 win at Ladysmith. Organize Chinese and Japanese, i£ possible.' Now, Mr. Shenton 
 told you he had come here as a representative of Mr. Baker ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. For the purpose of endeavouring to effect organization with the Chinese ? — A. 
 No, he did not say. He said he came up representing Mr. Baker. 
 
 Q. And the subject of his conversation with you was the organization of tho 
 Chinese. He came here as the representative of Mr. Baker ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the first business he spoke of was the organization of the Chinese ? — 
 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. In what order did that business come up ? — A. In this way: the first order, 
 that he came here primarily to prepare the way for getting some persons to go before 
 this Commission to give their view with regard to present conditions here. 
 
 Q. That was the first thing he said ? — A. No, the first thing he said was your 
 previous question you asked me, saying he came as the representative of Mr. Baker. 
 
 Q. Didn't he request your assistance in getting evidence before the Commission ? 
 —A. Not getting, giving evidence. 
 
 Q. He wanted you to give evidence yourself ? — A. Yes, on the general conditions 
 that have prevailed in this town. 
 
 Q. With respect to Chinamen ? — A. With respect to all conditions. 
 
 REV. L. W. HALlr-Cumberland, May 29. 
 
456 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. With respect to labour matters generally ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You declined to do tliat ? — A. I waived it ; I did not decline. 
 
 Q. The next order of business was the organization of Chinese ? — A. It was simply 
 talk ; it was not a question of business. 
 
 Q. You stated he came here and told you he was the representative of Mr. Baker ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Then to assist you in getting evidence before the Commission ; then the next 
 qiiestion of discussion was the case of organization of some Chinese, and you under- 
 stood him as well to be the representative of Mr. Baker when speaking on that subject 
 — ^that is right, is it not ? lie was representing Mr. Baker and the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners — was that not the way you understood it ? — A. There is duplication 
 there. He did not absolutely say that he was acting 
 
 Q. His credentials to you were, he came here as Mr. Baker's representative, be- 
 cause Baker could not come ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you have any reason to believe from the tenor of his conversation that he 
 ceased to be the representative of Mr. Baker when he talked about the organization 
 of the Chinese ? — A. From the tenor of our talk, I would think, in fact, I knew, that 
 he had no authority to act on the subject. 
 
 Q. That he had no authority to give you guarantees ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. But that he had authority to discuss the ways and means ? — A. Probably. 
 
 Q. You were holding a confidential talk ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Didn't he tell you in some form of words that the organization of the Chinese 
 would help to win at Ladysmith ; just as Mr. Moyer tells Mr. Baker in the telegram ? 
 — A. No, he did not. He told me that unionism could not hope to win eventually un- 
 less the Chinese were 
 
 Q. That is true enough, but those are generalities. You and Mr. Shenton were 
 talking as practical men with a practical end in view. Do you mean to say that there 
 was nothing in the conversation about that ? — A. That is where we differ ; our talk 
 was along the line of theory. 
 
 Q. With the idea of organizing the Chinese at Cumberland ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Didn't you talk about the strike at Ladysmith ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You didn't refer to the fact that the strike at Cumberland would assist the 
 strike aj; Ladysmith ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. And that the organization of Chinese would assist the strike at Cumberland ? 
 —A. No, I am not sure that he put it in those words. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did he say, if we organize the Chinese we will likely win the fight ? — A. No, 
 I think not, but the inference would be that. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Didn't you understand from the whole of that conversation that Mr. Shenton 
 came to organize these Chinese, in order to win that strike if possible ? — A. No, how 
 could I understand that ? The man would have to speak Chinese and know the cus- 
 toms of Chinese to state the question. 
 
 Q. Did not you understand from the whole conversation that Mr. Shenton's object 
 in coming here was the organization of the Chinese, if possible, and in that way to 
 win the fight at Cumberland ?^^A. No, I don't think he had that thought. He could 
 not have been in a position 
 
 Q. I see you are taking issue with me because I used the word organization. 
 Didn't you infer from the whole of the conversation that Shenton's object in coming 
 here was to take steps to organize all the Chinamen in order to win the strike at Cum- 
 berland ?— A. Well, I don't 
 
 EEV. L. W. HALL— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
ON INDUSTItlAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 457 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER, No. 36a 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You would scarcely ask anyone to believe that Shenfon's object in coming up 
 here to get these Chinamen organized was not for the purpose of winning the strike ? 
 — A. I have not yet said that he came here for that purpose. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. From the tenotr of the conversation did you honestly believe that that was 
 his principal object ? — A. I really think that his principal object was to prepare the 
 way for the Commission. That is my thought. 
 
 Q. We will leave that part out of the question. I ask you if you did not infer 
 from his conversation and the surrounding circumstances that his idea was to procure 
 organization of the Chinese in order to assist this strike ? — A. Suppose you change 
 that word ' procure.' 
 
 Q. Put it any way you like, Mr. Hall, I won't quarrel about the words. — A. It is 
 like this with me. I don't know what was in the man's mind, and really I don't know. 
 
 Q. I want your honest conviction as to what that conversation was about. I want 
 you to tell me, if you think, after talking with him a couple of hours on the lines you 
 did, that his object was not to take steps towards procuring the organization of the 
 Chinese for the purpose of assisting this strike ? — A. I would infer that he wished to 
 break ground, but to take any active steps that is beyond me to say. How can I 
 answer that ? 
 
 Q. Because he told you that he could not give you any guarantees on behalf of 
 the Federation ?— A. No, because that is practically impossible; one reason is the bar 
 of the language and the customs. 
 
 Q. I am not talking about complete organization; I am talking about steps to 
 get them into an organization that would assist the strike. Don't you think that is 
 •why he came, or one of the principal reasons ; in other words, to carry out the instruc- 
 tions in this telegram. Reading this telegram now, in the light of that two hours' 
 conversation with Shenton, have you any doubt but that he came here partly, at any 
 rate, to carry out the instructions in that telegram from President Moyer ? — A. You 
 ask me to pass judgment on the state of mind that man had when he came here. 
 
 Q. I am asking you to give your opinion on his state of mind from the conver- 
 sation which he held with you ? — A. It seems to me that any man in the hall might 
 answer that question as well as myself, if he belongs to that organization, and if he 
 had a telegram to that effect, why the natural inference would be that being an officer 
 of the union and having at heart the interests of the men, that he would do all he 
 pol^bly could. 
 
 Q. "Would not his conversation with you justify the statement that he came here 
 in pursuance of the instructions contained in that telegram, to carry out the purposes 
 stated in the telegram ?— A. Well, does my opinion— is my opinion necessary ? 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS.— Does he need to answer that question ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. The point of the thing is this : did Mr. Shenton come up out of any friendly 
 legard for the Chinese, or to carry out the instructions of the telegram ?— A. I can- 
 
 Q The point is, did Mr. Shenton come up here out of friendly regard for the 
 Chinese or simply to' help out this strike ?— A. My reading of that man is that he has 
 learned his lessson, and that with him it is a question of evolution, and that he has 
 come to the conclusion that it is for his best interests and the best interests of his order 
 to do what he can to place the Chinese on a higher level than they are at present. 
 
 It is rather singular that he should select a time for doing that when there are 
 two strikes on «— A t'o my mind, it would be this : that when the men found that 
 this previous policy had been wrong, and whenever he is willing to do the right thing, 
 xrhether in strike time or peace time, that is the time to do it. 
 ^viicLiit-i j^^y ^ ^ HALL— Cumberlana, May 29. 
 
458 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VH., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. You think the condition of war has revealed to him the mistaken position 
 he had formerly taken ? — A. I do. It is getting to be the general consensus of opinion 
 that they have been working along the wrong line. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. And that means if the Chinese and Japanese were organized they were going ^ 
 to win ? — A. I would not add that. 
 
 Q. Do you think they are inspired with any more affection for the Chinamen than 
 they ever had ? — ^A. I don't think they are particularly inspired with any more affec- 
 talont, but I think they have learned, as all men learn along these lines, that they can- 
 not continue in the same 
 
 Q. Your idea is that they have got to consider the Chinese properly or they can- 
 not win themselves ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How do you account for the fact that having failed to organize the Chinese 
 here, they have now got the inspector here, trying to put them out of the mine alto- 
 gether, on the theory that they are actuated by this good feeling for the Chinamen ? 
 Don't you know that the inspector is here now at the request of this labour union, try- 
 ing to put the Chinese underground out of the mine — don't you know that ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. Seeking to find cause for enforcing the law which says no men who cannot 
 speak English shall work in the mines ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Supposing that a fact, that Shenton was here for the purpose of uplifting the 
 Chinese, how do you aceofunt for the fact that the same people are trying to put the 
 Chinese out of the mines altogether ? — A. You see you start with an hj^othesis — ■ — 
 
 Q. That is an actual fact. You can assume that the inspector is here now at 
 the request of this same labour union, seeking cause for enforcing the law as to people 
 working underground who cannot speak English, and that he is going among the 
 Chinese for that purpose, and that the result of his action would be to put the Chinese 
 out of work altogether. I aslc you now. on the further assumption that Mr. Shenton's 
 visit here was for the purpose of uplifting the Chinamen — I ask you on what theory 
 you reconcile these two positions ? — A. Would you think that any theory I might ad- 
 vance would be relevant to questions of opinion ? 
 
 Q. If you say you don't want to answer tbe question, I will take that for an 
 answer ? — A. It might take me about two hours. 
 
 Q. Supposing Mr. Shenton came here then with instructions -to organize the 
 Chinamen, and suppose he could not organize them, and that the purpose of organiz- 
 ing them was to put them out of work in order to help the strike, would you infer as 
 a reasonable man that having failed on that line — having failed to get the Chinamen 
 out on strike — they were trying to put them out under the statute ? — -A. You see you 
 start with the assumption that they had commenced to organize the Chinese. You 
 t.'ll me they failed in one case, and now they have taken the other. 
 
 Q. They failed because you would not help them unless they gave certain guaran- 
 tees, and Mr. Shenton was not in a position to give guarantees ? — A. There was no 
 action taken. 
 
 Q. I am assuming ? — A. Well, don't you see — ^you are assuming again. 
 
 Q. I see one thing, and that is that you don't wish to answer the question and I 
 won't take any more time on that line. 
 
 By Mr. Eichards : 
 
 Q. You have been here quite a long while, Mr. Hall ? — A. Yes, a number of years. 
 Q. You have the conditions here down pretty fine — the conditions of the work- 
 men ? — A. Well, I have tried. It did not require a great deal of study. 
 Q. The facts were open to you ? — A. Yes. 
 
 REV. L. W. HALL— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
on- INDUSTRIAL orSPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 459 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ;.pr;a,,.A T *^^^ ^^'^^ gnevances to one another J— A. From mv ex- 
 
 perience here I cannot see that there could be any (xther way ^ 
 
 W. ;«o other way out of the difficulty ?— A. Yes 
 footing ?Sr?^ ^ *^' Chinamen : do you mean that all labour should be on the same 
 r^^? iJ?^ earners-you mean that labour has recognized the time when all work- 
 men should be classed together ?-A. That is what I have inferred from the ml Tn 
 the past whom I have talked with, and also from Mr. Shenton. 
 wnUnt Ar"" '"'?. ^ ^'"^^ """^ come-to change present conditions ?-A. I am 
 
 Illf ,• f r ''. """"^ ''r^^' ""'^ ^^'''^^' ^"^"'^^^'^ ^° ''^'^ this end-I am willing to 
 accept It, but as far as I can see there is no other. 
 
 did ^ot^'"' ^^^''^°'' ^'^ "^"^ ^^'^ ^h°"t the Ladysmith strike at all here ?-A. No, he 
 Q. Or that the Chinamen would help here ? He spoke something about that, if 
 
 llZ °%T ~.tJ^^ '^"'■'^''^ ^""^^^ h« something along the line of helping 
 to. There would be no reason for them being organized if it were not for mutual 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Shenton tell you whether his credentials were sufficient to take 
 Bakers place or not ?-A. He saw me before he went to the union-before he met you 
 people. •' 
 
 1, J ^".^i*^,.^^ ^"^ ^^ "^^^ ^°*'''^ ^""^ ^^^^ union 2— A. No. He said that Mr. Baker 
 iiad asked the executive of the Nanaimo union to request him to take his place at 
 Union while the Commission was going on. 
 
 Q. And the conversation he had with you would not be from information he got 
 from this union ?— A. No. It would seem to me that he came and saw me shortly 
 after he arrived. 
 
 Q. I might state to you that his credentials were not sufficient to be accepted in 
 Mr. Baker's place for this union, and that anything he did could not be done in con- 
 nection with this union. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How many conversations did you have with Shenton altogether ? — A. One. 
 
 Q. Was that the interview when the Chinese question was discussed ? — ^A. It 
 was the same time. 
 
 Q. Did Shenton say anything as to the feeling among the white men about tha 
 organization of the Chinese ?— A. He told me in substance what I said before. Judge; 
 that the men felt now that the time had come when they would have to change their 
 position towards the Chinese, and treat them the same as they would another person. 
 
 Q. That they would have to get them into an organization ? — ^A. Tes. 
 
 Q. And I suppose he said it would be necessary to do that to win the fight ? — A. 
 Well, I don't think he used those words, but he did state it would be necessary for tho 
 ultimate success of the workingmen in British Columbia that they should. To the 
 best of my recollection I don't think he particularized at all. 
 
 Q. Did you see, yourself, any reason for him coming up at that particular time, 
 when there were two strikes on — one at Ladysmith and one at Cumberland ? — A. Well, 
 he gave me the reason that I gave before. 
 
 Q. You seriously don't expect the Commission to believe that Mr. Shenton came 
 here purely out of consideration for the Chinamen and not because there were these 
 two strikes on ? — A. As I told you before, it is simply a question of learning so far 
 as they are concerned^that is simply an object lesson. I think it is simply an object 
 lesson to Mr. Shenton and others. 
 
 Q. I gathered from the tone of your evidence that Mr. Shenton w^s trying to ask 
 you to bring the Chinese together, and that he was keeping the true motive behind ? 
 Would that be a right inference ? — A. Is that a question, or is it a remark ? 
 
 REV. L. W. HALL— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
460 MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. . It is a question. Do you want the Commission to infer from the conversation 
 between you and Mr. Shenton, that Shenton had come here for the purpose of up- 
 lifting the Chinese, or for the purpose of winning out in this struggle between the 
 Western Federation and the Company ? — A. I sincerely believe, and I would wish the 
 Commission to believe also, that that man came here with the best interests of the 
 workingmen and the Chinese, and that there was no question, as you put it in slang 
 phrase, of exploiting the union. I am sorry you find it necessary to make a pun on 
 this matter 
 
 Q. Mr. Hall, you will kindly forbear from making any remarks of that sort. What 
 we want to know and what we want a frank answer to, is what Mr. Shenton's real 
 object in coming here and talking to you about organization of Chinese was. We want 
 a frank answer ? — A. I have given you a frank answer, and I have told you plainly 
 and distinctly that he told me he came here for preparing the way for the Conmiission 
 — that is his part of it — and on the other hand, I think his intention was to pave the 
 way for organization, but not to make any direct organization — to pave the way. From 
 his language and saying he had no power or authority to state what might be done, 
 it followed: that it was simply a talk, a talk of preparation, if you will. 
 
 Q. And that it never got any further ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. So far as I am concerned, I am inclined to believe, from what passed between 
 you and him, that his real object in going to see you was, that he came for the purpose 
 of getting the Chinese organized to win this strike. I don't believe that he came for 
 any friendly interest in the Chinese. If you think there is anything which passed in 
 has conversation to rid me of that idea, I shall be glad to hear it ? — A. He said it 
 seemed to be the condition in the States and in British Columbia — as to the Chinese — 
 and that he thought the time had come when workingmen should treat the Chinese 
 along such lines as they wished to be treated themselves, and that it would not be pos- 
 sible — it seems to me that no man would change,, no matter what his previous views 
 were — ^no man would admit the position to be altogether wrong — and seeing the con- 
 ditions of the present, and willing to change — I don't think, as a Christian man, that 
 he despised the Chinese before— but he worked against them, as workingmen as a rule 
 have done in the past. I think his thought was altogether sincere, and that his reasons 
 for changing were logical, and that the whole tenor of his talk was that of an honest 
 man. That is my conviction. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe: 
 
 Q. Was any reference made to the policy of excluding the Chinese from the coun- 
 try ? — A. I believe this remark was made : that now that an Act was passed, that it 
 would be — I think it just to say — the inference would be, now would be the time to 
 move labour, as far as placing .them altogether, the Chinese and Japanese on one level, 
 because the conditions had become changed, and there would be no more probably com- 
 ing in, and the men here now could be more easily dealt with — that is the inference, 
 you know. One of the great fears of the past was a large influx, greater than the de- 
 mand for labour, but that now the matter could be treated all right. 
 
 Q. That is, the objection to organizing the Chinese before was, that it could not 
 be done, owing to the influx of new men, but it would be a practical measure now that 
 their importation was being resiricted, where it would not have been before? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What did he suggest should be the line of your evidence before the Commis- 
 sion?— A. He made no suggestion; he just asked me if I would go before the Com- 
 mission. 
 
 Q. Feeling that your sympathy lay with the workmen? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That you felt they had grievances ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What grievances? — A. The grievance in the past seems to me to have been 
 this: that the individual workman himself had no freedom of expression or thought 
 even; that, having done his day's work, his freedom of talk was always, to my mind, 
 in a repressive state — on the subject of voting, for instance. 
 REV. L. W. HALL— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 461 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Do you know any case in which a man has suffered because he voted contrary 
 to the wishes of the management ? — A. I think at least — there were a large number — 
 I could not tell you just the number who left or felt they had to leave after the elec- 
 tion of Mr. Dunsmuir. I know one man, Mr. Eussell, who felt he had to resign. 
 
 Q. The present manager at Nanaimo ? — A. Yes, he felt he had to resign. He 
 told me that. I had a convei-sation about what occurred in the office when Mr. Duns- 
 muir came up — that is all hearsaj-, is it to the point ? 
 
 Q. Well, it is not hearsay if a man says he had to leave the employment of the 
 company because of his view. It seems to me it is a serious matter if a man is 
 pressed into voting one way or the other, but it would be a serious charge to malve 
 unless the facts were undoubted ? — A. I am giving you my impressions and what 
 occurred. Then after that election there was another question about the leading men 
 who took part in that having to go. 
 
 Q. It is a little risky to mix up in politics in British Columbia anyway ? — A. If 
 you lived here as long as I have you would know that for a fact. 
 
 Q. It is a game that is not worth the candle — so far anyway. 
 
 By His Lordsliip : 
 
 Q. How long have you known Shenton ? — A. Not long. 
 
 Q. A year ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Have you had other interviews with Shenton besides this one — I mean not in 
 relation to this subject generally ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. I am rather inclined to think, Mr. Hall, that Mr. Shenton did not disclose his 
 fuU mission to you. 
 
 James Eeed^ sworn. 
 Bjj Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You are a coal miner, Mr. Eeed ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. fiow long have you been here ? — A. Eight or nine months. 
 
 Q. You have a house and lot here ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. When did you first know anything about the meeting held on Sunday, April 5, 
 for the purpose of organization ? — A. From the notices posted around town. 
 
 Q. What did that notice say ? — A. It called for a mass meeting of miners in 
 Cumberland Hall on April 5 in the afternoon at two o'clock. 
 
 Q. Did it state the object of the meeting ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Did you happen to know what subject was likely to come up ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Had you any idea of what was going to be discussed at the meeting ? — A. 
 Yes, according to information I heard around the town and amongst the r^en a few 
 weeks previous to the calling of the meeting. 
 
 Q. What did you hear ? — A. I heard, that Baker was expected up, and that there 
 were quite a number of men from Ladysmith going around trying to see if they could 
 get sufficient to form an organization in Cumberland. 
 
 Q. Did you hear the names of any of the men ?— A. No sir, just reported around 
 
 the town. , , ^ , , , , . „ 
 
 Q. Did you make inquiries from any one' as to whether Baker had been sent for ?— 
 
 A. No sir. 
 
 Q. Did you know Baker ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. The meeting was held on Sunday ?— A. Yes, I went to the meeting. 
 
 Q.' For the purpose of supporting or opposing organization ?— A. To oppose 
 
 organization. jAMES reed— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
468'' MINUTES OF EYIDENCE OF ROtAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VH., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Now, what time was the meeting held ? — ^A. Two o'clock in the aftemoooi. 
 
 Q. Will you please tell the Commissioners exactly what happened, as nearly as you 
 can remember, from the beginning to the end of the meeting. When the meeting was 
 assembled did anybody go on the platform ? — A. There were four or five different 
 men ; I only knew one man, an Italian. 
 
 Q. From what you have since learned, do you know ? — A. One of the men was 
 Higney. 
 
 Q. He was from Ladysmith ? — A. Yes, and the secretary, Mr. Henderson, Peter 
 Barazoni from Ladysmith and Mr. Baker went on the platform. 
 
 Q. Then Higney, Henderson and Barazoni went on in the first place ? — A. Yes, 
 Mr. Higney took the chair. 
 
 Q. There was no one voted in the chair ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Who was secretary ? — A. Henderson. 
 
 Q. He was not proposed or voted ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Then there was not a Cumberland man on the .platform ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Mr. Baker was invited from the back of the hall to the platform, by the chair 
 man ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was the first thing the chairman did after asking Baker to come to the 
 platform ? — A. The first thing Mr. Higney did was to read a communication from the 
 executive board of the Ladysmith men addressed, to the brother workers of Cumber- 
 land. 
 
 Q. Where is that letter, why has it not bean produced ? Mr. Higney read it at 
 the meeting ? — A. "^es, from the executive board of the Ladysmith union addressed 
 to their brother workers in Cumberland. The letter related the circumstances leading 
 to the trouble at Ladysmith, and part of the letter stated that their trouble was our 
 trouble here. It was a pretty long letter, two sheets of it altogether. I remember 
 that part of it very well. 
 
 Q. Wlien the chairman had finished reading the letter did he say anything ? — A. 
 He introduced Mr. BaEer to the meeting. He was not able to say much ; he excused 
 himself on that accovint. 
 
 Q. And Mr. Baker made a speech ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was the purport of his speech ? — A. It was leading up to unions and the 
 benefit to be derived from it, and that he was going around British Columbia, and 
 that he had organized twenty-four unions altogether. He intended to travel through 
 Manitoba, and also take in Ontario and that practically speaking Cumberland was 
 the last place. I took from that, that Cumberland was the last place on the Western 
 continent not organized. 
 
 Q. And that he was here for the purpose of organizing ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did he say how he came up here ? — A. Mr. Higney said that he had, during 
 the short stay he had in town, he had received sufficient names to enable him to send 
 for Mr. Baker to come up. 
 
 Q. The men ready to organize Justified Mr. Baker in coming up here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Did he state the number ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. But that it was sufficient to justify him in sending for Mr. Baker ? — A. Yes, 
 I heard it was eighty. 
 
 Q. You have heard that it was eighty ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When Baker finished his speech, what happened next ? — A. After he got 
 through with his address, Mr. Barber, the president of the union rose up and moved a 
 motion that we join— that we form a branch of the Western Federation of Miners.' 
 JAMES REED— Cumberlana, May 29. 
 
02V moVSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITI8S COLUMBIA 463 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Who was this ?— A. Mr. Barber. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Where was Barber ?— A. He was sitting back about three or four seats from 
 the front^ of the hall— this hall. He made just a few remarks in reg'ard to the 
 organization. I think he said he had been a member in the Kootenay country. 
 
 Q. And that motion was seconded ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Then what ?— A. Well, Mr. Higney was going to put the motion without 
 giving anyone a chance to speak, and I saw that the motion was going through without 
 opposition, and I rose and moved an amendment to the motion, that we don't form a 
 branch of the Federation in this place. I added to it also that if the Ladysmith men 
 were out on strike that had nothing whatever to do with us here. 
 
 Q. How were you received ? — A. They started to hiss considerably, and shouted 
 to put me out. That was the response I received when I moved that amendment. 
 
 Q. Did anybody follow you? — A. Yes, Eichard Collishaw, senior, made a* few re- 
 marks. I believe they were deprecating the insulting attitude on the part of the 
 audience towards me. 
 
 Q. Did anybody follow him ? — A. Mr. Hunden; he also got up" and spoke in 
 support of freedom of speech. 
 
 Q. Did anybody support your motion ? — A. Yes, by Bicknell. Mr. Hunden got 
 up and deprecated also the attitude of the audience about hissing and shouting to put 
 me out. He considered it was right to give every person in the hall fair play. The 
 next gentleman who tried to speak was Mr. Collishaw. 
 
 Q. What did he have to say ? — A. He suggested that we leave this matter for a 
 week ; that it was a serious matter, and that we should consider it and take a secret 
 ballot at the pit. He asked if Mr. Sangster was in the hall. He says, is that not the 
 way you did at Nanaimo. Every vital question at Nanaimo is voted by secret ballot. 
 Replying, Mr. Sangster said that things had changed there now, wo have the Western 
 Federation there now, and we usually get what we want. 
 
 Q. At this stage did anything happen ? — A. Mr. Baker stepped to the front, ex- 
 cused himself to the chairman, and said that the motion and the amendment was out 
 of order. He was here to organize a branch of the Western Federation in Cumber- 
 land, and all those not willing to join the organization he would request to leave the 
 hall. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Baker said this — not the chairman ? — A. Baker, not the chairman. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. That he was going to organize, no matter how many were taken in ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. What did the chairman do — was the motion put ? — A. No, the motion was not 
 put, nor the amendment. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. He said the motion was out of order, that the meeting was for the purpose of 
 organizing, and that those who did not wish to organize could retire ? — A. Yes, your 
 Honour. 
 
 Q. You say both motion and amendment was out of order ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. How was the meeting called ? — A. For a mass meeting of miners ; no object 
 was stated in the notice. 
 
 Q. Was the notice signed ?— -A. No. 
 
 JAMES REED— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
4SI MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 190-V 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How long notice was given of this meeting ? — A. I believe it was posted on 
 Saturday. 
 
 Q. And the meeting was on Sunday ? — A. Yes ; the notice might have been on 
 Friday night or Saturday ; I believe it was just one day. 
 
 Q. I gather that what Mr. Baker said was that both the motion and the amendment 
 was out of order, as the meeting was for the purpose of organizing, and that those 
 who did not want to organize should retire ? — A. Yes, these are about the words ho 
 used. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. What struck you at the time that Baker should intemapt ? — A. I came to the 
 conclusion that what he said was correct ; that he was there to organize and came for 
 that purpose. 
 
 Q. Why should he interrupt at that stage of the proceedings ? — A. There were 
 likely to J)e expressions of opinion. There were quite a number of people in the hall 
 who were not favourable to the organization at the time. 
 
 Q. You knew that to be the fact ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. After Baker said that. Some went out, you among the rest ? — A. Yes, I waiter 
 a couple of minutes, and then went out. 
 
 Q. Do you know as a matter of fact whether all the people who had expressed 
 themselves as being opposed to the union went out ? — A. No, some of them did not 
 go out. 
 
 Q. Do you luiow why ? — A. I came to the conclusion that the men were afraid, 
 when they saw the treatment I had received by being hissed and shouting to put mc 
 out, that they were afraid of expressing their opinion. 
 
 Q. Now, you didn't join the union ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You went to work ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You did not stay at work ? — A. Eight up to the strike ? 
 
 Q. Not after the strike ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. The strike was not called until the 2nd of May. After the strike was callerl, 
 did you work ? — A. No, I worked one day after the strike. 
 
 Q. Why didn't you work after that ? — A. Well, I did not want to be branded as 
 a scab or a blackleg. 
 
 Q. Were these reraaiks made generally to people who were classed that way ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. Were they made to you ? — A. No, I cannot say personally by any person in tlin 
 organization; 
 
 Q. Where do you live ? — A. In Cumberland. 
 
 Q. In what part ? — A. Outside of Cumberland. 
 
 Q. In passing to and fro on the streets around your house have you anything to 
 say about what has been occurring ? — A. I have seen one or two men that have been 
 working insulted on the streets, and naturally if I was to work I would receive the 
 same treatment, and I consider my life in the town would not be worth much, so far 
 as mixing up among people. 
 
 Q. That you would be socially out of it ? — A. Tcs. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You would not consider your life would be worth much ? — A. No. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell.- — ^Not in danger of his life, but the comfort of living, socially ostr* 
 cised. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Insulted on the streets, is that what you mean ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. Called a scab and other foul names ? — A. Yes, your Honour. 
 
 JAMES REED— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 465 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. How long have you been working in the mines here ? — A. I have been continu- 
 ously in the mines except two years and six months — ^nine years and eight months. 
 
 Q. Where were you before that ? — A. In Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. What had been the condition here, in so far as wages and general comfort of the 
 mines were concerned, without the union ? — A. Well, I think that everything was go- 
 ing along very peaceably here. There might be some men who had complaints, but we 
 find that in all mining communities; we find that same trouble existing. 
 
 Q. Were things any better from your experience in Nanaimo where they had x 
 union than in Cumberland where they had no union ? — A. Not the slightest. 
 
 Q. Any more difficulty in dealing with the bosses and getting allowances than you 
 had at Nanaimo where the union was ? — A. Very little difference in that respect. I 
 have worked for as small a wage in Nanaimo as here. I have worked for $2 a day in 
 Protection shaft. I have made from $5 to $6 at the same time. 
 
 Q. What is the lowest wage you have made at Cumberland ? — A. I believe I have 
 made as low as $2.50 and $2.75 here. 
 
 Q.' So your rate of wages is higher than in Nanaimo ? — (No answer.) 
 
 Q. Can you suggest any reason why a union would benefit the men at Cumber- 
 land, from your experience as a practical miner ? — A. I think the formation of this 
 union was premature at this time. I think the men here took the wrong time for form- 
 ing this union, seeing that they had formed the Western Federation at Ladysmith and 
 Mr. Dunsmuir would not recognize it. In my opinion it would have been much better 
 to see how Ladysmith would get along before we ran into the same difficulty. 
 
 Q. There was nothing pressing on the men which required immediate action by 
 way of organization ? — A. Nothing pressing. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 
 Q. You stated something about Mr. Baker saying about the ' western continent.' 
 I would like you to explain what is meant by that ? — A. He stated that this was prac- 
 tically the last place. I took from that that he meant in the western continent. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by that ? — A. The Western States. 
 
 Q. This is a pretty big country, to take that inference from it ? — A. Those are 
 the words used; he said that this was practically the last place. 
 
 Q. Did he mean in the western continent ? — A. I didn't say he did. 
 
 Q. How could you gather that inference ? — A. I gathered that. 
 
 Q. Did he say that this was about the last place? — A. No, he did not say that; 
 he said that this was practically the last place. 
 
 Q. Then you have got it wrong by making the statement as to the western con- 
 tinent. Did he say the western continent or not ; I want you to recall that ? — A; I 
 did not say he said that. I took my view from what he said. The inference was that 
 he meant that this was practically the last place in this western continent. 
 
 Q. You might just as well have said the world, for that matter ! When you said 
 the motion was going through without opposition, what harm would there have been 
 in letting it go ? — A. I always like to have amendments made before a motion goes 
 through so as to have it discussed. The question was going to be put without any op- 
 position. 1 1 J , J. . 
 
 Q. It is not usual when a motion comes up that they don t care to discuss it, and 
 if not in favour of it they vote contrary to it ?^A. Whenl am in a meeting I never 
 like to believe that. If a motion is allowed to go through without amendment, natural- 
 ly it carries. , . , , a ^^ i. 
 
 Q. Well, a man is voting on what he thinks ? — A. Yes, but you have expressions 
 of opinion on what you are going to vote on. 
 
 gg^ 3Q JAMES REED— Cumberland. May 29. 
 
4^ MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. There was time enough if a man wanted to say anything ? — A. I did not con- 
 sider there was time. The chairman would have put that motion to the meeting, and 
 it would have been carried if I had not made my amendment. 
 
 Q. How was the motion ruled out of order ? — A. For the simple reason that Mr. 
 Baker was afraid to take the motion for fear it would show a considerable number 
 against it. 
 
 Q. How could that be ? — A. There was quite a number who would have voted 
 against it. 
 
 Q. You must have known some ? — A. I could give you the names of the executive 
 that asked me to be there to vote against the union — some of your officers, two hours 
 before the meeting. 
 
 Q. Why didn't they object ? — A. They were afraid, I guess. 
 
 Q. You went there to object ? — A. I had a perfect right to go. 
 
 Q. How could you go there to votj against it ? You said you knew it was not 
 called for the purpose of organizing ? — A. No, but we knew Baker was here. 
 
 Q. You went there for the purpose of stopping organization ; still at the same 
 time, you did not know it was for the purpose of organization ? — A. Yes, it was known. 
 Baker was here. The notice was misleading. 
 
 Q. You mean you had heard enough to know ? — A. Yes, we knew that they were 
 going to capture the camp if they possibly could. 
 
 Q. Could you not have given the other men the same opportunity to express their 
 views ? — A. They were calling out for it — ^I suppose the men were frightened to give- 
 their opinion. 
 
 Q. When this was over and the strike came out, were you frightened then ? — A. 
 I don't know anything about it ; I was not there. 
 
 Q. How could they be frightened when it was by secret ballot ? — A. I was not 
 there. 
 
 Q. You must have known that that motion was out of order, and that the amend- 
 ment you made was out of order ? — A. The chairman never ruled that motion out of 
 order. He put the motion to the meeting and called for the question. The chairman 
 never ruled that motion out of order and neither did he rule my amendment out of 
 order. The chairman never interfered with the motion nor the amendment ; it was 
 Mr. Baker. 
 
 Q. What caused the commotion ? — A. What caused the commotion in the hall 1 
 Because I had talked upon and moved an amendment that we don't join the Federation. 
 Then they started to hiss me. 
 
 Q. Was that hissing not for the seconder ■ — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Do you knew who was your seconder ? — A. Yes, it was Mr. Bickell. 
 
 Q. Didn't he get up and pass personal remarks ? — A. He called attention to the 
 gentleman who was hissing. 
 
 Q. What did he say ? — A. Of course he said this man was not working here. They 
 were hissing to call their attention. 
 
 Q. Did the man say he was working ? — A. Yes, the man was working. 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about unions at all ? — A. I should think I do. 
 
 Q. Are you in favour of them ? — A. I know more about unions than you do. Were 
 you ever in a union before ? I have been in a union all my days. 
 
 Q. Explain why you don't belong to it here now ? — A. There never was a union 
 in my time. 
 
 Q. Well, now ? — A. Don't I have the same privilege as you for not becoming a 
 member of the union. 
 
 Q. Because you don't feci like it ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Is this union agnin.st your principles ? — A. Yes, it is against my principles to 
 join a union at the present time, of the Western Federation. 
 
 Q. Would it affect you in any way if you did join the union? — A. Yea, I consider 
 it would affect us greatly. 
 JAMES REED— Cumberland, Ma? 29. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 467 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Have you ever had your political opinion curtailed in this place ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Have you held any political opinion that would oppose the employer's 
 opinion ? — A. No, I don't say I would. 
 
 Q. Would it not strike you that that is the reason you have had no difficulty ? — 
 A. There never was any person discharged, all the time I have lived in this town, for 
 political opinions. 
 
 Q. I was asking you which side you were on ? — A. I voted according to the candi- 
 date that suited me; that is the side I was on. 
 
 Q. Did you ever give opinions opposite to the opinions of the employers ? — A. No, 
 no occasion ever arose during the time I was here. 
 
 Q. Supposing you had an opinion opposite to the employers, do you think you 
 could express it ? — A. The occasion never arose all the time I have been here. 
 
 Q. You said you had no grievance particularly ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Your freedom of speech was never curtailed ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Mr. Halliday says that nine years ago freedom of speech was curtailed ? — A. 
 I was not working here ; I heard of it. 
 
 Q. Were you not here when Mr. Russell had a little trouble ? — A. No, I was living 
 about three miles away ; I heard about it. I never had any conversation with Mr. Rus- 
 sell; I heard it discussed. 
 
 Q. And that would show you what he left for ? — A. I have never heard it dis- 
 cussed, that is all. 
 
 Q. About that meeting here; you spoke of strangers being on the platform ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. From past experience, why did you think it strange ? — A. I didn't think it 
 strange. 
 
 Q. As the men were discharged here before, I should think it would be nothing but 
 the proper course to take, to have strangers on th<> platform ?— A. It was immaterial to 
 me who was on the platform. 
 
 Q. Supposing that union had been formed and Cumberland men were on the plat- 
 form, they would have to go, would they not ? — A. I don't know anything about it. I 
 was not here when that political trouble was. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Baker say he was going to organize at all costs ? — A. He never men- 
 tioned costs. Something to that effect. I will repeat the words : that the motion and 
 amendment was out of order, as he was here to organize, and all those not wishing to 
 join would be requested to leave the hall. 
 
 Q. Was he not coming to organize anyway ? — A. Yes, he came for that purpose. 
 
 Q. Didn't he say he was going to organize if the people of Cumberland wished it ? 
 — ^A. The people of Cumberland never got the chance of wishing it. 
 
 Q. But he said that if the people of Cumberland wished it he would organize ? — 
 A. There was a motion made that we do organize, and Mr. Baker turns around and 
 says the motion is not in order, and we did not get the chance. 
 
 Q. Then Mr. Baker said he was here to organize ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If the people of Cumberland accepted it. And they accepted it and organized ? 
 
 A.. I beg to differ. Where did they accept it when there was no motion carried to 
 
 form the organization ? 
 
 Q. They stayed to organize ? — A. Those that went out didn't accept it. If the 
 motion had been carried as it was put, then we would have accepted it, and would have 
 to abide by that decision. 
 
 Q. The motion was called out of order. You don't say it was in order ? — A. My 
 freedom of speech was curtailed; I was not allowed to speak. 
 
 Q. They called order, did they not ? — ^A. No, the chairman did not call order, or 
 Mr. Baker either. 
 
 Q. Was there any order ?— A. There was order after. 
 
 Q. Could you not have spoken again ?— A. With the same treatment as before. 
 
 gga 30J JAMES B.EED— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
468 MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q "Xou had no guaraatco cf thai; '?- A. I had no guarantee of any better treat- 
 Jment. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by calling a scab here? — A. The very children here — a man. 
 cannot go along the street without being called a scab. I could give you an account of 
 school children calling scab. We have Nelson and Bickell working, and they have 
 been called names. 
 
 Q. Have you heard of them being called scabs ? — A. I have seen Mr. Nelson go 
 up the street one Saturday night, and a crowd of men on the other side of the street 
 hissed him. Mr. Bickell the same. The expression was not used. 
 
 Q. Probably they might have been hissing at something else and Mr. Nelson camo 
 along at that time ? — A. Possibly. 
 
 Q. You must be open for that kind of suspicion ? — A. No, it is daily conversation. 
 
 Q. Was it conscience or anything that troubled you ? — A. I have nothing to 
 trouble my conscience. 
 
 Q. And you never sought work for fear you would be called a scab ? — A. Yes, I 
 had not the freedom of my actions. 
 
 Q. You say this is a free country and you were right in going to work ? — A. The 
 country is not a free country. Freedom of speech was corralled. 
 
 Q. That is what I am trying to get at. It is curtailed on all sides. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Can you give us any special reason why you objected to the Western Federation 
 as opposed to, say, a local union?— A. Youn Honour, I ,had studied the matter for 
 some time. I saw what was coming. I had studied the question this way — that we 
 were just going to have a repetition of the same trouble at Ladysmith if we formed 
 a union at the present juncture. 
 
 • Q. You mean to say it was an ill-advised movement ? — A. Yes, at that time. 
 
 Q. I gathered, rather, that you had some special objection to the nature of the 
 Federation ? — A. No, I had no great objection in that respect, only I thought that they 
 started at the wrong time here. 
 
 Q. Was the constitution read at the meeting ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Was it explained to the meeting ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. If you had your choice in the matter, would you be a union man or a non- 
 union man ? — A. I would be a union man. 
 
 Q. Would you join a local union or an international union ? — ^A. I would join a 
 local union. 
 
 Q. Do you consider that sufficient ? — A. Quite sufficient, if it embraces a certain 
 area of country. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. The Nanaimo union was found to be effective for the purpose of its organiza- 
 tion ? — A. No, I don't think it was. During the time I was in Nanaimo, ten years 
 ago, the majority of the men nearly had no use for it at that time. In fact they had 
 H meeting in the opera house there, and it came very nearly being broken up ten years 
 ago. But the pressure from the company at that time kept it going. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you mean by that ? — A. Well, Mr. Eobins was in favour of the union. 
 
 Q. He persuaded them to keep up their union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When you say the union at Nanaimo did not benefit, because you only made 
 $2, how can any other union benefit you ? — A. The places were valued, and you could 
 have a certain wage, say $3 a day. 
 
 Q. I gather from your evidence that you could get along just as well at Nanaimo 
 without a union ? — A. I worked in Nanaimo before we had a union, aiid I got along 
 without it. 
 JAMBS REED— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 469 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Why do you say you would now like a union ? — A. It would allay a certain 
 amount of irritation, and in cases where disputes occurred with the management such 
 as deficient work, it would have a tendency to have these men remunerated according 
 to a fair day's wage. 
 
 Q. But still, when a member of the union at Nanaimo you only got $2 ? — A. Not 
 permanently. 
 
 Q. I thought one of the chief advantages of a union was to provide a minimum 
 wage ? — A. Not in all eases. In some cases they pay no attention ; you must just 
 take what you get. 
 
 Q. From your experience of unions, do the executive control, or the majority ? — 
 A. All of the men control as a rule. That is one thing I have against the Western 
 Federation ; there are too many officers in it. 
 
 Q. Are the men given to expressing their view in open meetings ? — A. I have 
 never been to any of the Federation's meetings. 
 
 Q. I mean local unions ? — A. Yes, there is absolute freedom of speech. 
 
 Q.. Are no views hissed ? — A. No, sir. I have been in a great number of unions 
 now in my experience, and I never received, nor saw anyone receive, the same treat- 
 ment as I received that Sunday. I started mining when I was ten years of age, and 
 I am now over forty, and I have never seen the same treatment afforded anyone. 
 
 Q. Discussions as a rule are freely made, and everyone has a right to say what he 
 thinks ?— A. Yes- 
 
 Q. And if his opinion is not received with favour, there is no attempt made to 
 bully him ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 George Eich.\rds, recalled. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You identify these telegrams, Mr. Eichards ? — A. Yes, sir. (Exhibit 16). 
 
 Q. These telegrams have been produced by Mr. Peacey. I see one to Samuel Bur- 
 dette, 423 New York Block, Seattle, dated 2nd May, — ' Strike still on ; don't send 
 anybody; only Chinamen workinc' Signed, L. Irvine. Who is he ? — A. He is a 
 coloured fellow who came here. 
 
 Q. Where is he now ? — A. I don't know where he is. 
 
 Q. Was he a Western Federation man ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 Q. A man who came here to get work ? — A. I think he is a man who came here 
 to work, or something, thinking there was no strike on. 
 Q. He was not a Western Federation man ? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Why should he send such a telegram as this, unless he was a union man ? — 
 A. He came here thinking that there was no strike on here, and when he came here 
 he found that the strike was on, so he telegraphed back. 
 
 Q. Have you seen him ? — A. Yes, he spoke to me. 
 
 Q. You say he is a coloured man ?— A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Who was the man he telegraphed to ? — A. I think he is an agent. He told me 
 he was- an agent; An employers' agent, and that when this man came up here he said 
 ' write- or telegraph back the situation.' So after he came here and found how thjngs 
 were be telegraphed back. 
 
 JAMES REED— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
470 MINVTES OF EYIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did you tell him it would not be advisable for him to attempt to get work 
 here, or bring people over from the States ? — A. No, I never told him it would not be 
 advisable at all. He spoke about the question and said he had been misinformed. 
 
 Q. Why should he care if he was not a union man ? — A. Well, he said he would 
 not care to work where they were on strike, anyway. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. That is the same block as the headquarters of the Pederation at Seattle are in ? 
 — A. I don't know ; I know that has nothing to do with the Federation. 
 
 Q. What is room 512, New York Building, Seattle ? — A. I could not tell you. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Do you know J. F. Sanden? — A. No, I don't know what these telegrams are; 
 they were prior to the formation of the union. 
 
 Q. Don't luiow anybody of the name of J. F. Sanden ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you know Sarvell ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. What was the object in sending this telegram to Baker : — ' Cumberland union 
 decide to go on strike ; come up if possible ' ? — A. It is in the constitutioH, if there is 
 an organizer, or a member of the executive in the district, he has to come up. 
 
 Q. What for ?— A. To look after affairs. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. It was not quite agreed — it was not a unanimous vote ? — A. Well, it was 
 almost a unanimous vote. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Do you know Pritchard ? — A. No, I only know that he is president of the 
 association at Ladysmith. I have never seen the gentleman yet. • 
 
 George Eichards, recalled. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I understood you to say that you were opposed to sympathetic strikes ?— A. 
 No, I said there might be circumstances arise for sympathetic strikes. I was not 
 entir?]y in favour of them. 
 
 Q. In what cases would you suggest a sympathetic strike would be justified ? — A. 
 Maybe there would be at times it would help the cause. It might materially help both 
 parties. 
 
 Q. ¥ou would not call the strike here at Cumberland at sympathetic strike ? — A. 
 No, in fact it is not a sympathetic strike. 
 
 Q. What would be your position if you were convinced that it was a sympathetis 
 strike, engineered by Baker ? — A. If it was ? 
 
 Q. Yes ? — A. Well, I could hardly say to that ; I know it v/as not. 
 
 Q. Was there any discussion at the meeting on May 2nd as to whether there should 
 be a sympathetic strike here or not ? — A. No, I cannot recall any discussion of that 
 kind. 
 
 Q. Did Baker say anything about sympathetic strike at the meeting ? — A. I can- 
 not remember him saying anything about sympathetic strikes at all. He said, wa 
 deplore strikes ; I remember nim saying that in his speech — as a Federation we deplore 
 strikes. 
 
 JAMBS REED — Cumberland, May 29. 
 
0-N INDUSTRIAL DISPVTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 471 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Can you tell us what is the opinion of the majority of the members here ou 
 the subject of sympathetic strikes. That is to say, if they had thought this was a 
 sympathetic strike engineered from Denver or Baker, whether they would have con- 
 sented to come out ? — A. I could not say how they would feel on that. 
 
 Q. If that were the true fact, that this strike was a sympathetic strike, engineered 
 by Baker, would you have gone out on strike ? — A. I would have had a lot of discus- 
 sion on it, and have seen the pros and cons of it. 
 
 Q. Would it surprise you to hear that it was a sympathetic strike ? — A. Oh, yes; 
 I know it is not, so it would surprise me. 
 
 Q. Then if it appeared that it was a sympathetic strike, called at the instance of 
 Baker, the inference would be that the men had not been taken into full confidence ? — 
 A. If it was a sympathetic strike, you say ? 
 
 Q. The inference would be the men had not been taken into full confidence ? — A. 
 Well, I cannot see that it is a sympathetic strike. 
 
 Q. Assuming that could be shown, that would be the right inference, that the men 
 had not been taken into full confidence — that they had no chance of discussing it ? — A. 
 No, they didn't discuss any sympathetic strike. 
 
 Q. They would not have been taken into the full confidence of the union? — A. 
 No, I suppose not. 
 
 Q. You were one of the leaders here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You were not given to understand that this was a sympathetic strike ? — A. No. 
 
 iQ. You had no notion of that ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You were not at Nanaimo — the joint meeting ? — A. No. 
 
 John Hutchinson, re-called. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Do you believe in sympathetic strikes ? — A. Well, I can't exactly say I do, 
 your Honour. 
 
 Q. Didn't you sec the telegram sent by Baker to Moyer ? — A. Yes — no, I beg your 
 pardon, I did not. I thought you meant by Moyer to Baker. 
 
 Q. If you had known that this was a sympathetic strike engineered by Mr. Baker, 
 would you have been a consenting party to it ? — A. Well, it never entered my head 
 about anything like that. I don't think it was a sympathetic strike. 
 
 Q. If you had known that that was the real reason as far as Baker was concerned, 
 would you have been a consenting party ? — A. Such a thing as that would have to have 
 due consideration, I suppose. 
 
 Q. You were not given any chance to discuss that feature of it ? — A. I can't 
 exactly say that. 
 
 Q. You discussed as to whether it should be a sympathetic strike or riot ? — A. 
 Not that I am aware of. 
 
 Q. Then if it could be shown that this is a sympathetic strike, called at the in- 
 stance of Mr. Baker, the inference would be right that the men had not been taken into 
 the full confidence of the leaders, would it not ? — A. Assuming that it could be shown, 
 but I don't think it could be shown. 
 
 Q. But that would be the right inference ?— A. I guess it would be. 
 
 Q. Do you think the majority of the men would have approved the proposition to 
 go out on sympathetic strike ?— A. I don't think anything about it; I cannot. 
 
 Q. You cannot tell us what the feeling of the majority is ?— A. No. 
 
 q'. At any rate, that subject was not discussed at ths meeting on May 3, as to 
 whether it would be right to go out on sympathetic strike ?— A. Not to my knowledge. 
 
 JOHN HUTCHINSON— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
472 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF liOrAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Bowe ; 
 
 Q. Was it ever discussed at any other meeting ? — A. No, I cannot recall anything. 
 
 Q. Was it never suggested that it vcould be a good thing to come out in sympathy 
 with Ladysmith ? — A. I comld not say. I could not recall anything like that. 
 
 Q. Was it suggested to you any place, say at Nanaimo, that Cumberland ought 
 to come out in sympathy with Ladysmith ? — A. No, I don't think it was. 
 
 Q. And you had no idea that any such proposition was being considered ? — A. 
 No, I had not. 
 
 ' Q. So that if it was being comsidered it was being considered entirely without 
 your knowledge ? — A. Yes. 
 
 David Halleday, recalled. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I think you have already stated that you did not approve of sympathetic 
 strikes ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You were at this joint meeting at Nanaimo ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was the subject of sympathetic strike discussed there ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. If you had understood there was any idea on the part of Mr. Baker or other 
 leaders at that time to call out Cumberland in sympathetic strike, would you have 
 approved of it ? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. At all events, .you were given no opportunity ? — ^A. No, it was never discussed. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Either in public or private ? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Then, if it could be shown that that was the intention of Mr. Baker, that would 
 go to show that the men here had been deceived, would it not ? — A. I don't think the 
 men were ever pointed out anything ab _ at sympathetic strike. 
 
 Q. No mention made of it at the meeting on May 2 ? — ^A. Not that I know. 
 
 Q. And the men here have never been given any opportunity to discuss whether 
 they go out on sympathetic strike ? — A. Not that I remember. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us what the views of the majority of the members of the union 
 are on that question of sympathetic strike ? — A. I do nat know; I could not state 
 exactly. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Did you see the telegram from Moyer ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. Who showed it to you ?— A. I saw it at the meeting, I think. 
 Q. It was passed around ?— A. No, I was sitting beside the secretary of the regular 
 meetings of Cumberland union. 
 
 Q. You did not see it at Nanaimo ? — A. No. 
 
 By Sis Lordship : 
 
 Q. Who brought it up here from Nanaimo ?— A. The president, Mr. Barber. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. You did not know anything about the telegram to which that was a reply ?— A. 
 No, I did not know anything about it. 
 
 DAVID HALLIDAY— CumbeTl^nd, May 29. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA ^ 173 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Oeim BarbeKj recalled. 
 
 By nis Lordship : 
 
 Q. What is your opinion about sjrmpathetic strikes ? — A. I never considered sym- 
 pathetic strikes. 
 
 Q. Was the subject of sympathetic strikes discussed at the joint meeting in 
 Nanaimo ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Did you see the telegram from Baker to Moyer of which the telegram pro- 
 duced here was an answer ?— A. No, I did not. 
 
 Q. You did not see Mr. Baker's telegram ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Had you known that Baker's intention was to call out the men at Cumber- 
 land on sympathetic strike, what would you have done ? — A. If it had been his inten- 
 tion, I believe, I would have known it. 
 
 Q. What would you have done ? — A. I am not considering the question ; I don't 
 know what I would have done. 
 
 Q. If he had any such intention as that he should have confided in you and the 
 other officers of the union ? — A. If he had any intentions he would have done so ; 
 it would have been his duty ; he would have done so. 
 
 Q. It would have been his duty to do so ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Why would it have been his duty ? — A. He is our district member. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. I suppose he is bound not to mislead you ? He would have no right to mislead 
 you ? You are entitled to be taken into his full confidence, are you not ? — A. I would 
 gay that I am. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. In all matters affecting this lodge you think you should be taken into his 
 confidence ; as president of the lodge, you think you should have known of his inten- 
 tions so far as they relate to this lodge. That is what I understood you to say ? — A. 
 (None). 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Do you think he would have a right to keep back from you, as president of 
 this union, anything relating to the union ?— A. I don't think he did. 
 
 Q. That is not the question. Would he have any right to keep anything back 
 relating to this union from the officers ? — A. He would have no object. 
 
 Q. Would he have any right ? Would it be a proper thing for him to do ? — A. 
 
 No. 
 
 Q. Then if Baker did intend to call Cumberland out on sympathetic strike, the 
 men have been kept in ignorance of it ? — A. Baker had nothing to do with calling out 
 the strike. 
 
 Q. If it was, his intention was not disclosed ? — A. If that was his intention he 
 had no right. 
 
 Q. At all events his intention was not disclosed either to the officers or the men ? 
 —A. He could not call the strike. 
 
 Q. Did he disclose any intention about calling out the men on sympathetic strike ? 
 —A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Did he ever suggest that it Would be desirable, or that it might be necessary 
 to call out Cumberland in sympathy with Ladysmith ?^A. No. 
 
 ORIM BARBER— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
474 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You did not see the telegram that Baker sent to Meyer ? — A. No, I did not ; I 
 saw the one that came in reply. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Where did you see it first ? — A. In Nanaimoj Baker showed it to me. 
 
 Q. Did he say anything about the telegram that that was a reply to ? — A. No, 
 he did not. 
 
 Q. Did you form any opinion as to what it was a reply to ? — ^A. It was in reply 
 to a telegram that he had sent. 
 
 Q. You never thought of what the substance of the telegram was ? — A. No, I 
 I never gave it any consideration. 
 
 Q. Did he tell you to bring it here ? — A. He told me I could keep it and put it 
 in my pocket. 
 
 William Anthony, recalled, 
 
 iBy Sis Lordship : 
 
 Q. What is your view about sympathetic strikes ? — A. Well, I don't know ; I have 
 no sympathy with a strike at all. 
 
 I Q. If it had been proposed to you as an officer of this union to come out in sym- 
 pathy with the strikers at Ladysmith, what would you have said ? — A. I would have 
 paid not to come out so long as I was not in sympathy with them. 
 ! Q. If it were proposed by Mr. Baker, or any one in authority, to you as an officer 
 bf this union to come out on sympathetic strike ? — A. I would say no. 
 
 Q. AVere you present at the meeting on May 2, the meeting where they resolved 
 to come out on strike ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was the subject of going out in sympathy with Ladysmith discussed ? — A. No. 
 
 His Lordship. — Now, the Commission proposes to take it as proved and for granted 
 that none of the members of the meeting or of this union, when they went out on strike 
 on May 2 understood that they were going on sympathetic strike with the miners at 
 Ladysmith, unless someone wants to come forward and say the contrary. 
 
 Now, the Commission has secured the telegram to which the telegram produced 
 here was an answer, that is to say, a telegram sent by Mr. Baker to Moyer, and the 
 Commission prc^oses to ask Mr. King to go into the box and produce that telegram. 
 It will then be for the members and officers of this union to draw their own conclusions. 
 
 W. L. Mackenzie King, sworn. 
 
 His Lokdship. — You might just make your statement, Mr. King. 
 
 Witness. — On Wednesday afternoon, acting under instructions from the Commis- 
 sioners, I sent this telegram to Mr. Archibald, agent of the C. P. E. at Nanaimo : — 
 
 ' Please wire immediately to Eoyal Labour Commission copy of telegram 
 from Chas. A Baker to Charles Moyer at Denver, to which the following 
 telegram from Moyer to Baker was the answer : ' We approve of calling ;Out 
 
 W. 1". MACKENZIE KING — Cumberland, May 29. 
 
02y INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IW BRITISH COLUMBIA 479 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 any or all men necessary to win at Ladyamith ; organize Japanese and Chinese 
 if possible' — dated during ApriL Please keep original asked for by Com- 
 mission.' 
 
 gokdon huntek, 
 Elliot S. Eowe, 
 
 Commissioners. 
 
 The next morning at 10.30, calling in at the telegraph office for a reply, and receiv- 
 ing none, I sent this telegram to Mr. Archibald : — 
 
 ' Commissioners desire to know immediately why no reply has been re- 
 ceived to their request of last night. They desire an immediate reply.' 
 
 About noon the same day I received this answer from Mr. Archibald : — 
 
 ' Message of 2Yth only received late last night ; have referred matter to 
 superintendent. Awaiting his reply.' 
 About an hour later, acting under instructions, I sent this telegram to Mr. 
 Archibald : — 
 
 ' Copy miist be wired this afternoon, otherwise Commission will take mea- 
 sures to enforce the order, which must be obeyed.' 
 
 Gordon Hunter 
 Elliot S. Eowe, 
 
 Commissioners. 
 
 This morning at about twenty minutes after ten I received this telegram from Mr. 
 Archibald : — 
 
 ' Am I to understand that the Commission order production of the copy, 
 and that the original is to be produced later under a regular subpoena ? This 
 refers to copy requested on 27th. 
 I replied ; — 
 
 ' Yes, send copy immediately, original will be asked for under subpoena 
 later ' * 
 
 At one o'clock to-day I received the following telegram : — 
 
 ' Herewith copy asked for on 27th.' 
 The telegram is in cipher. The first word is ' Yuglfzvgn,' the next is ' nfxf,' the 
 next ' phzoreynag,' the next ' bhg,' the next word is ' va,' the next ' flzengul,' the next 
 ' V,' the next ' nccebir,' the next is ' unir,' followed by ' jr,' then ' Ibhe,' and finishes 
 with 'pbafragn,' signed J. A. Baker, and the signature of the agent, Mr. Archibald, 
 is at the bottom. 
 
 After receiving this telegram I endeavoured to make out a translation, and it did 
 not take very long to discover the number which was the key to the telegram. My 
 translation of the telegram is as follows : — 
 
 ISTanaimo, April 21, 1903. 
 ' Chas. N. Moyeb, 
 
 625 Mining Exchange Building, 
 
 Denver, Colorado. 
 Ladysmith asks Cumberland out in sympathy. I approive; have we your 
 consent ? Ans.' 
 
 J. A. BAKER. 
 
 His Lordship. — Now, the Commission thought it proper to find out, if possible, 
 where that telegram was, and the Commission are satisfied that that translation is a 
 correct one, and they have felt it to. be their duty to bring the whole matter befoTe the 
 members of the union, as well as the public, because the members of the union were 
 
 W. L. MACKENZIE KING— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
476 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 entitled to know what was going on. If the members of the union are not now satis- 
 fied that it was Mr. Baker's intention to call them out on sympathetic strike, I should 
 think they would be difficult to convince of anything. However, it is now for the 
 officers of the union to make any explanation they see fit. It seems to me when a man 
 assumes the position of a labour leader like Mr. Baker, that the first thing he should 
 do is to give them his confidence, and unless .3ome explanation is given by Mr. Baker 
 to the officers of this union, I don't see how he is a man in whom they can have any 
 confidence. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — As far as I can gather about that telegram it must have been a 
 request from Ladysmith asking Baker 
 
 His Lordship. — That was the telegram sent by Mr. Baker to Mr. Moyer. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Mr. Baker says, ' I approve.' 
 
 Mr. Richards. — It seems as though he did not carry out the telegram. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — He gave you that telegram that came in reply. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Barber. — It was never acted upon. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is for the officers and the members of the union to consider how 
 far they have the confidence of Mr. Baker. You will notice the answer does not say 
 anything about sympathy. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — ' We approve of calling out any or all to win at Ladysmith.' 
 
 His Lordship. — ^But nobody, Mr. Barber, or any one else, reading the answer would 
 not think it was a sympathetic strike. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — I should think ' to win at Ladysmith ' would mean sympathetic 
 strike. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is for the men to discuss that among themselves, and come lO 
 Ihtir own conclusion. We thought it our duty to bring out the facts, and it was no 
 thanks to either the miners or anybody else that we got these facts. We are going to 
 get all the facts, no matter whom it hurts'. 
 
 Mr. Barber. — I would ask that you recall Mr. Hall, and have him give that portion 
 of his evidence that was turned away. 
 
 His Lordship. — What evidence was that ? 
 
 Mr. Barber. — In regard to the killing of the Chinaman. 
 
 His Lordship. — I don't see that that has anything to do with the case. 
 
 Mr. Barber. — It has something to do with freedom of speech and action. 
 
 Tl).«' Lordship. — I suppose we can have Mr. Hall again, if it is necessary. If there 
 is anybody here wishes to make a suggestion about the telegram, or throw any light on 
 it, we would be glad to hear him. What we desire is to see if the men have been 
 fairly treated in this matter; that there has been no deception practised. 
 
 David Hundpm, sworn. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us what took place about the sympathetic strike ? — A. As far as 
 sympathetic strike is concerned. We can say that it is a sympathetic strike, but not 
 in the view that it is — that we tried to get it up in sympathy with the Ladysmith men. 
 
 Q. What is your idea of a sympathetic strike ? — A. It is a sympathetic strike in 
 one way, and that is in sympathy with the officers that have been discriminated against. 
 DAVID. HUNDEN— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA. ^ 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Is that what you understand by a sympathetic strike ? — A. Yes, but as far as 
 any other way, there is nothing been done whatever in sympathy with any other place. 
 If Mr. Baker sent any communication in that way I don't believe that affected it. I 
 can take my oath, and am ready to sacrifice my right hand that it is not so, that this 
 strike was decided on — that it is in sympathy with the officers. 
 
 Q. You don't think this case about the officers was trumped up to cover up the 
 tracks of this sympathetic strike ? — A. No, sir ; I don't. 
 
 Q. I suppose you are glad to learn what kind of telegram was sent to Mr. Moyer ? 
 — ^A. I don't know anything about that telegram. 
 
 Q. You are satisfied that the telegram is as it purports to be ? — A. I am satisfied 
 that this telegram has no effect whatever upon the present strike at Cumberland. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. The president said in his evidence yesterday, that that telegram was "what gave 
 the union its authority to strike, or that assured it of the approval of the central 
 authority the strike in connection with the discrimination against the officers ? Is 
 that correct ? — A. Yes, that is in the light in sympathy with them — that they had the 
 power of taking this action, that is, in sympathy with the officers. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — That is not the meaning that is generally applied to the term ' sym- 
 pathetic strike.' The president said that the union received the approval of the central 
 authority by means of a telegram from Mr. Moyer to the president. The president 
 thought that this telegram justified the union in calling the strike on May 2, in 
 order to provide for the reinstatement of the officers. Apparently that telegram ap- 
 proved of a sympathetic strike, and not at all in reference to the officers. So it leaves 
 the union in one of two positions ; either that it did come out in sympathy with 
 Ladysmith, or it did come out without the approval of the central executive. 
 
 Mr. Barber. — ^It is the approval of the central authority if we came out constitu- 
 tionally, as we did. We were therefore entitled to the support of the Western Federa- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. Rowe. — You will admit that the approval came by that telegram. 
 
 Mr. Barber. — The telegram says, ' we approve.' 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You say you did not see the message from Baker ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Now that you have seen the message are you satisfied that Baker was en- 
 gineering a sympathetic strike ? — A. I am satisfied that Ladysmith had asked for it, 
 and that Baker had wired, but that was in answer to something else. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — You remember Mr. Baker said that the constitutional way was 
 for one union to request the executive and they would request the other. That is the 
 course that has been, followed. 
 
 Mr. EicHARDS. — Whenever there is a strike declared, a member of the executive 
 has to come at once to that district and take hold of negotiations. Ladysmith being 
 on strike, Baker had hold of negotiations. Ladysmith instructed Baker as a member 
 of the executive, to wire and see if they had permission to call Cumberland out in sym- 
 pathy. They had permission, but they did not call them out. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^But the answer is handed by Mr. Baker to Mr. Barber and shown 
 in the union here. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — Then after — Ladysmith would have to ask, us to come out. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is a straight request from Baker — 'Ladysmith asks Cum- 
 berland out in sympathy. I approve ; do you consent ' 
 
 Mr. Richards.— They never asked Cumberland. 
 
 His Lordship. — No, but the approval was iianded with the original telegram to 
 Mr. Barber, 
 
 "^ David HUNDEN— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
478 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Mr. ^Richards. — That would approve of it should Ladysmith send in for it. It 
 would approve of it. 
 
 His Lokdship. — There is a straight inquiry by Baker on April 21 of the head 
 office at Denver, whether they would be allowed to go out in sympathy, and the 
 answer is — ' We approve of calling out all men necessary to win at Ladysmith.' That 
 answer is given to Mr. Barber and he is kept in ignorance of the messages sent. The 
 answer says nothing about sympathy. It is given to him by Mr. Baker to bring up 
 here. Of course it is for you to ask j'^ourselves the question why Baker did not show 
 you the telegram he had sent. He sent it in cipher. He had some reason for not 
 showing it to you. You can figure that out for yourselves. 
 
 John Matthews, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. You have here an abstract of wages paid per man for the months of February, ' 
 March and April — the average — A. You will notice some of the amount is for three 
 mouths and others for five months. 
 
 Q. They are all averaged ? — A. With the exception of one. 
 
 (Abstract of wages put as Exliibit 17.) 
 
 Q. Just give the averages ? — A. The average in No. 4 mine for March, 1903, is 
 $4.J3, and in April — it is not totalled here. It can be totalled in a few minutes. 
 
 Q. Can you say whether it would be likely to be less or more ? — A. I could not 
 say. In No. 5, for April, it averages $3.45, and in No. 6, for April, $3.76. I might say 
 that if Mr. Richards or anyone doubts it they can have access to the books. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — I would like to see the books. 
 
 Witness. — This is really an estimate, and I will tell you in every case we have 
 given the miner credit with having a Chinaman for every day's work. As a matter of 
 fact they don't regularly, and we don't know whether they are absent. If a man here 
 work 25 days we will credit his Chinaman with 25 days, though it might only be 20, 
 There might be, on the other hand, a few slight arrears where the men have worked in 
 rock. The only way. we have is to take the coal dug and see how many tons the miner , 
 has produced actually, and it occasionally arises that he may be working on rock one 
 day or so, but it is a very exceptional case. The other case will balance it ten to one. 
 Of course there are a few who work by the ton, like Mr. Anthony who stated he had 
 a good place. He is paid by the yard for driving in rock. The average for February 
 in No. 4 will be $4.15. Some men are paid by the day. Some of 'the timbermen have 
 $2.75, some $3.00 ; fire bosses have $3.25. 
 
 Q. The hoisting engineers have not been on strike ? — A. No, one out of the eight 
 came out, but they never struck. 
 
 Q. Has anything happened with reference to the hoisting engineers at slope No. 
 7 ? — A. Yes. There are six white miners underground, two white hoisting engineers 
 and a fireman. A committee of four, I think, waited on Mr. Priest. 
 
 Q. It was decided that it was not necessary for the men who were not under- 
 ground to go out on strike with the union ? — A. They are not working on coal. 
 
 Q. So the union gave them permission to work — A. I understood that. As a 
 matter of fact, one of the men said they were not called out, but they might be. There 
 was a committee, I think, of four who waited on Mr. Priest, the man in charge as fore- 
 man, and told him that unless he dismissed the hoisting engineers, who were not union 
 men and had refused to join the union at the solicitation of Mr. Barber, that they 
 
 JOHN MATTHEWS— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IK BRITI8B COLUMBIA 479 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 would Strike. He told them he could not dismiss them and they struck. They went 
 down and put the hoists in order and left. Whether they were called out by one in- 
 dividual, I don't know. Five out of the six told Mr. Priest that they were opposed to 
 going out. 
 
 Q. Will you explain the case of the man White who is referred to in Mr. Halli- 
 day's evidence, who was dismissed because he was not allowed to say what he thought ? 
 — A. I think it is about two months ago. There was a man named Arthur Warring, 
 and he complained to the foreman that Mr. Walter White had insulted him by calling 
 him a black sheep for working as a timberer for low wages. Wirring wanted to fight, 
 so he told me afterwards, and Warring said he was going to quit in consequence. I 
 said I won't allow that, no man has a right to boss the men. I went to White's place, 
 and he denied it. I told him I believed the other story for this reason, that Warring 
 had no object in insulting him, and I told White he could go. Of course that might 
 be a temporary lay-off or permanent. I simply laid him off. 
 
 Q. Now reference has been made here to the fact that you bring pressure to bear 
 on men as to how they shall vote ? — A. I do nothing of the kind. There was an elec- 
 tion here three years ago, and anyone I approached I simply said I would be pleased 
 to have their votes, but they could vote as they liked. There was no pressure in any 
 manner. 
 
 Q. Was any man ever dismissed or laid off since you have been here on account of 
 politics ? — A. Not in any election I have been in ; I have been here five years. 
 
 Q. Now as a matter of fact, how many men have you actually dismissed since 
 you have been here in the last five years ? — A. I don't think there has been more than 
 half a dozen in the last four or five years, and that was in every instance for good 
 cause except in one instance, that was in connection with the union. That was in 
 connection with a, man named Dunsmuir about three years ago. 
 
 Q. What were the circumstances connected with him ? — A. There was a steady 
 unrest at Extension mine at the time they formed a local union there, and there was 
 a man named Maley who was postmaster at Extension, and a man by the name of 
 Wacklin, a Nanaimo man. They came up and stayed here about two weeks. I did not 
 know they were doing anything. As a matter of fact they were getting men to become 
 members of that union, or getting men to consent to form a branch of that union here. 
 They came back a few weeks afterwards and called a meeting at the school house. I 
 lived next to the school house, and I saw who came out. I told a few of the men that 
 I would not have a union in connection with Nanaimo and Extension mines, and when 
 Monday morning came I made it a point to see most of these men myself. I told 
 them they could take their choice, but I would not have a branch of that union here. 
 I said they were preparing for a strike at Extension, and they would call on this place 
 in sympathy. I met Mr. Maley, and said, if you organize these men we will dismiss 
 them. He said, well I am sent up to form a union here, I am simply doing my duty. 
 I said they don't want a union here, and I don't propose to let you force a union on 
 them. He said they told him they did not want a union as long as I was here. He 
 said they were being rightly treated, but that if Falls came they might need one. I 
 told them Falls was not likely to come. Most of the men told me they would tear up 
 the cards and give it up. With the exception of Dunsmuir I told tliem, all right. He 
 was the leader and I let him go. Mr. Maley deceived me somewhat ; he told me the 
 men were in favour of it. 
 
 Q. You have been here how long ? — A. Five years. 
 
 Q. Have you had any difficulty in getting along with the men ? — A. No, if out- 
 siders would keep away from here. 
 
 Q. Has it been necessary to refer any matters to the head office for adjustment ? 
 >— A. No, I never heard of anything, at any rate. 
 
 Q. What is your course in dealing with the men in reference to places ? — A. My 
 course is this: if I think a man is a reasonably good miner and doesn't make $3 a 
 
 JOHN MATTHEWS— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
480 MIXUTES OP ETIDE^TE OP ROT Ah COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 day, I give him $3. I can quote a score of oases where I have, and that is the stand- 
 ard rule. He may he in a place that is deficient, and I pay him what I think is right. 
 In Anthony's ease he is getting as high as $4 or $4.50. If I pay him less than $3, if 
 he shows me his statement I immediately give an order for the balance. 
 
 Q. A man who is a good miner, you never let him work for less than $3 ? — A. With 
 one exception. An occasion arises sometimes when they don't get a sufficient number 
 of cars. Of course, in that case I don't. Should I dO' so it is not necessary that the 
 pushers and drivers would work. If a miner does not get cars he raises an objection 
 to the foreman, and I make an investigation, and when they are not receiving cars I 
 complain too. These are rare instances ; only in No. 4. 
 
 Q. What course do you pursue in reference to paying men when they are laid off 
 from time to time on account of their places being worked out ? — A. To explain that 
 matter fully : We had a fire here two years ago the first of August next, and we were 
 obliged to flood all the places in No. 4, where some 400 men were employed. The mine 
 was about one and a quarter miles down, and we had to flood about three-quarters of a 
 mile of that. Since then we have had some trouble in keeping the men working. Until 
 then very few men were laid off. In other words, I don't propose to keep more men 
 than I can permanently employ. 
 
 Q. Was your policy with reference to the union well known here? — A. Yes, I 
 think it was known pretty well. 
 
 Q. So the attitude that you and the management assumed with reference to unions 
 was known among the men ? — A. It certainly is no fault of ours if they don't. 
 
 Q. You knew this union was being formed ? — A. Yes, and did all I could to pre- 
 vent it by conversations with the men. I told them that it would be a mistake. 
 
 Q. Did you know the influences that were at woi-k, and where they came from ? — 
 A. I knew that there was an agent stationed at practically every hotel. Mr. Higuey 
 was here, Mr. Henderson was at the Union Hotel, and Mr. Chambers, who, I think, 
 came directly from the Crow's Nest here, was at New England, and they were canvass- 
 ing the town. When they got a sufficient number to warrant inviting Mr. Baker they 
 invited him. 
 
 Q. Were the majority of the men really in favour of the union ? — A I believf 
 that nine-tenths of the men were opposed to the union. 
 
 Q. How do you account for their going into the union ? — A. They will canvass 
 a man, and if he does not assent they will simply call him names. They will simply 
 tell him he is a ' company's man ' to say the least. They really intimidate men ; 
 there is no denying it. 
 
 Q. And a man has not the moral courage to stand up against that ? — A. Yes, 
 they simply insult them. There was evidence of that in the hall when Mr. Eeed got 
 up. That is their policy. 
 
 Q. Of course you communicated these facts to Mr. Dunsmuir or the management ''. 
 — A. I don't think I did before the night of the meeting. I don't think I commu- 
 nicated much. 
 
 Q. Did you have communication later ? — A. Yes, not with the head office. First 
 with Mr. Dunsmuir and after that with Mr. Little who was at Victoria. 
 
 Q. These were principally by telegram ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Code telegram ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You have had them looked up ? — A. Yes, the agent said the court would have 
 to order them. 
 
 Q. It would take some time to translate them ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Could you tell us in a general way what the substance of them would be ? 
 
 Mr Richards. — Your Lordship, you informed them these telegrams should be here. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL.— Wait a minute. The operator wants to be called here with them. 
 He does not want to give them up without an order. 
 
 Sis LoRDSHiP?^He was given a subixsna to bring all the telegrams here. 
 JOHN MATTHEWS— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
02\r INDUSTRIAL DISTVTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 481 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. BoDWEEL. — I asked him this morning if he had brought ours up and he said 
 no. They are in the a.b.c. code. There is no attempt to keep back anything from the 
 othe* side or the Commission. I did not know that it would take so long translating 
 them. 
 
 His Lordship.— You had better get at them. 
 
 Mr. BODWELL. — That was the reason I was asking Mr. Matthews now to give a 
 general statement of what they were. I think that is the most convenient course. 
 
 Witness. — The first telegram to Mr. Dunsmuir was the night of the formation of 
 the union here. I . wired that they had organized, the members enrolled being 
 about seventy. Afterwards I wired several times to Mr. Little as to the progress of the 
 union, and advised him what I was doing. I told him when the officers had finished 
 their places I would not put them on again. I laid them off as fast as I could. The 
 places were all finished in the natural order of events. 
 
 Q. Did you actually close any place without finishing it ? — A. Only one place I 
 know of. That is Hutchinson's place. It was near the rock. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Tou say you told Mr. Dunsmuir that you would lay these men off on account of 
 their connection with the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What else did you say in the telegrams ? — A. Hardly anything else; pretty 
 much along that line. The- others were practically all reports of what was going on. 
 I told Mr. Little to make sure that Mr. Dunsmuir would not close down the mines, as 
 I could continue to work the mine whether the whites struck or not. I told him we 
 could carry the strike through and win it. 
 
 Q. Are the mines working ? — A. Yes, they are producing as much as in one shift 
 before. There are about TOO tons coming out. 
 
 B2J Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Do you find the output per man is greater or less than before the strike ? — A. 
 About the same. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How many officers were laid off ? — A. I think about nine. 
 
 Q. You laid off all you could lay yoifr hands on ? — A. Yes, as quickly as the 
 place was finished. 
 
 Q. The explanation given by Mr. Barber for his discharge was the sole reason ? — • 
 A. I would have laid him off every time under the circumstances. I may say I have 
 laid Chinese off for the same cause. 
 
 Q. You say you would have laid the officers oil anyway ? — A. Yes, because I 
 meant to break up the union. I think it was bad for us and bad for the men. 
 
 Q. You had a committee wait on you with a list ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That was on Friday May 1, I think ? — A. Yes. In the afternoon about 4..30 
 there was a committee waited on me, Mr. Barber, Mr. Coe and another. They asked 
 me if I would accept a list of those who were laid off, and put them on in the order 
 in which they were laid off. I said no, that would be a virtual recognition of the union. 
 One of them remarked that Mr. Dunsmuir had refused to recognize the union, and I 
 said I would 'not. In leaving Barber said, we will have to take action. I said that 
 rests with you. Mr. Haldane says, Mr. Dunsmuir is doing one good thing for the 
 country. I said, what is that? He said, he is taking means fast to help the men take 
 over the mines. I said, that will be a few generations yet. He said, no ; they are 
 joining fast in Nanaimo. I said, I am not surprised at that, at what they do up there. 
 As a matter of fact, all our trouble comes from there. 
 
 I am thoroughly convinced, your Lordship, that this is a sympathetic strike. I 
 knew it would come when they went out at Ladysmith, knew it was bound to come 
 
 36(1 31 JOHN MATTHEWS— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
4m MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL OOMMISmON 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 when they went out at Ladysmith, because the officers in these cases always control 
 the men. The men certainly did not want it, but they were asked to stride in sympa- 
 thy with the officers and of course could not do much else, from their point of view. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. A very natural thing to do ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Yes, but there is quite a difference in striking in sympathy with discharged 
 officers here, and striking in sympathy with another crowd of discharged miners at 
 Ladysmith ? — A. Yes, quite a difference. 
 
 Q. When were these men laid ofi ? — A. I could not say exactly. Barber was laid 
 ofi on April 6. The others folloM'ed subsequently, I do not know when. 
 
 Q. If the men should come to consider that they were in any way misled over 
 this thing, and agreed to come back, would you take the officers back? — A. I could 
 not take them all back now. I explained to them that we could not take them back 
 for five or six weeks. We didn't have places at that time. 
 
 Q. Have you been getting any more Chinamen in ? — A. There were no Chinamen 
 digging coal in No. 4 at that time. 
 
 Q. I understood you to say to Mr. Bodwell that you had been getting out as much 
 coal now as before. Who has been taking the plac^ of these men ? — A. Yes, they are 
 digging now; I misunderstod you. I could not take them back now. I went to the 
 Japanese town and asked them why the.v were not working. They said they were afraid. 
 They said, we are afraid they will bum the town down. I said, I will have watchmen. 
 I went in both Japanese tovsms and they called the men together and had a meeting. 
 After that they went to the faces, and made one request, that if they went on, they 
 would be retained in their places until they were finished. That might last in some 
 cases for days and in others for months. I assured them they should remain in their 
 places until they were finished, so I could not give them the work now. 
 
 Q. You say for five or six weeks at any rate ? — A. Yes. I may say we expect to 
 clean up a portion of the mine which will make room for quite a number of men. 
 
 Q. Is there any good reason why all the men could not be provided with work ? — 
 A. That is the reason, because we have not the places. I had to promise to let the 
 Japanese stay. I may say the Japanese were paid just the same wages before the 
 strike and at the present time with regard to tonnage. 
 
 Q. Are there any Chinamen who work places ? — A. Yes, they are paid the same 
 per ton. 
 
 Q. What is a day's pay ?— A. They have less. They are paid $1.25 or $1.50, that 
 is pushers and labourers, whereas whites are paid $2.Y5 and $3 for the same work. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. How many orientals have you now underground ? — A. I think, off-hand, about 
 325 or 350. 
 
 Q. How many had you before the strike ? — A. Perhaps about 350 or 375 before 
 the strike. We have about the same now, not much difference. 
 
 Q. Who are doing the work now ? — A. I don't say there is as much coal coming 
 out. Previously we worked two shifts. Now we work one shift. 
 
 Q. So the mines are operating half time ? — A. Yes, for one shift. *They are pro- 
 ducing fully as much coal for the one shift. 
 
 Q. Is it possible to work more than one shift now ? — A. We don't have enough 
 officers at present. It is fire bosses we require, and shot-lighters. They are the men 
 who inspect each shot before it is fired, and see that it is safe. Some of these came 
 out with the miners, and some did not. They did not strike, but came out in sympathy, 
 and therefore we have not a sufficient number to run two shifts. We run two shifts 
 in No. 6 but no others. 
 
 JOHN MATTHEWS— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
02V INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 483 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Why do you object to unions ? — A. I would not object so much to a local union, 
 but I don't think it could live here, and it would not assist them very much. I object 
 to affiliation with outside unions for this reason — not only with Denver, but any 
 others. They may have troubles, and in every case we would be likely called out in 
 sympathy. Supposing there was a strike on the C.P.R. and the Federation approved 
 of the strike. They would refuse to let these mines supply coal to the company. 
 Something might occur to cause a seamen's strike. They might refuse to allow coal 
 to be loaded on ships, and so on. 
 
 Q. You understand that a local is supposed to govern itself ? — A. There is no use 
 having a central authority if it has no control. A request from the central authority 
 is practically an order. I would not view it otherwise. With other forces outside 
 there is this influence brought to bear on local men which tends to disrupt the har- 
 monious relations. Take Nanaimo. In that strike in 1889 or 1890 they did the 
 administration. Our men did not know anything about the strike. They met about 
 a mile outside of Wellington. TuUy Boyce was president of the Nanaimo union. At 
 that meeting held outside of Wellington they made an immediate demand on the 
 Wellington company, that they have eight hours. We had as a master of fact, but we 
 made the mine stand to feed the mules, which made about eight and a third of a shift. 
 They wanted recognition of a pit committee and eight hours from bank to bank. They 
 sent three men who did not work for the company to make that request. It was refus- 
 ed, and they came out on strike. Four-fifths of our men were opposed to it. 
 
 Q. Did it occur to you that if the men were unionized they would have so much 
 time to think the matter over ? — A. I would not be afraid to deal with a local union. 
 I think there would be no trouble whatever. 
 
 Q. Have you ever managed a mine where there was a union ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Have you considered the matter of union operations ? — A. Yes, watched it very 
 closely. 
 
 Q. And your judgment is that if the local union is left to itself that it is not a 
 menace to the proprietor's interest to have such a union ? — A. No, I don't thinlc so. 
 They are less likely to be influenced by outsiders. 
 
 Q. Take the present situation on this Island. The one mine that has a union is 
 operating^ and the mines where there are no unions have shut down. If the men are 
 (not organized at all they are more susceptible to outside influence than if they had 
 their own working organization, and certain benefits which give them a vital interest ? 
 — ^A. We have benefits here in connection with these mines. 
 
 Q. You think the local union would die out for want of something to do ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You proceed on the assumption that its only office is to fight ? — A. No. I will 
 give an instance. They had a checkweighman here and paid him to see that the 
 weights were correct. Of course, out checkweighman laid off. They saw they were 
 fairly used, and they did away with their man. I think they are thoroughly satisfied 
 that they are getting fair treatment. 
 
 Q. Speaking of the general conduct of the men in relation to grievances of this 
 kind, do you think there is any disturbing influence produced by the local union ? — A. 
 Not here. All this influence has been sent from the outside — Baker's influence. At 
 Ladysmith there would have been no strike, and none here, and no union here. That 
 can be conceded by all. It is outside influence that caused the strike. There are a few 
 from Nanaimo, and they came to town and got a certain number to consent to join, 
 and these men got after them, and since that there has been a virtual reign of terror. 
 1 can point out in the hall the men who have called men blacklegs, &c. 
 
 Q. Is there any reason in the suggestion by the men, that they were restricted in 
 their rights? — A. There is not. There is no place where men have more freedom. It 
 is not true, absolutely not true. Since I came here — since four or five years, only four 
 or five men have been dismissed for cause — about five to seven men in the four and 
 three-quarter years I have been here. I can give you the reasons why in every instance. 
 
 gg^ 3J1 JOHN MATTHEWS— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
484 MISVTES OF ETIDEyCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII.; A, 1904 
 
 Q. Do you recognize a committee of the workers? — A. Never had any occasion 
 for one. If one comes here with a grievance that he is not making $3, I invariably 
 give it to him, and the fact that they told Mr. Maley that they had no cause for griev- 
 flnce, I think proves that. There is no favouritism here, because I would check it if 
 there were. Occasionally, where you want a place to go along quickly, you may select 
 fast workmen who can drive the work fast. 
 
 Q. That is what you call narrow work? — A. Yes, the steady men usually get that 
 kind of work. They make probably 50 cents a day more. I think the men will say 
 there is no favouritism. 
 
 Q. Your position is, that the men have all the rational advantages that could be 
 enjoyed by a union? — A. Yes, and the fact of the relations being unbroken would 
 prove that, and the fact that no complaint has gone from here. 
 
 Q. Doesn't that suppose the idea that a local union would prove harmonious? — 
 A. Yes, I think so. 
 
 Q. Do you think this would have happened, if the officers had been left alone ? — A. 
 No, they would have struck. I knew they would strike, because they were bound to 
 come out in support of Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. Because the officers usually control the men in these matters, and I 
 know they would have gone out. 
 
 Q. They say it is the laying-off of their officers? — A. They really have no cause 
 for saying that ; they fell out naturally. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. I think you gave us to understand you laid them off because they were 
 officers ? — A. Well, I would not have laid them off otherwise. 
 
 By Mi: Boive : 
 
 Q. The men whose cases had not been reached, would have been reached shortly? 
 — A. Well, perhaps not. I discriminated against the active members, those I thought 
 were prolonging tlie situation, and forcing the men along. 
 
 Q. Do you think unions should be incorporated? — A. Yes, I do, and I think 
 that legislation should provide that the mine owner should give at least three months' 
 notice before he closes down, without there is some real cause for it, and the men 
 should give due notice. That would virtually destroy the sympathetic strike, I think. 
 
 Q. Is it not your judgment that a mine owner with a good trade agreement is in 
 a safer position when it comes to a strike ? — A. I think such an agreement with a local 
 union, with a provision for one or three months' notice to be given before any strike 
 would be a good thing, provided they were incorporated. 
 
 Q. You would favour incorporation? — A. Yes. These locals are not now in a 
 position to live up to their contracts. Take John Mitchell in the coal strike of three 
 years ago. He did not hesitate to call out those who had contracts in sympathy with 
 those whom he called out. In the steel strike President Schaffer did the same, but 
 one firm in Chicago refused to come out. The locals have not the power to say they 
 will or will not. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. In reference to the settlement of industrial disputes, Mr. Matthews, have 
 you formed any opinion as to what should be done in that matter ? — A. Yes, I have 
 thought a great deal over that, and it is hard to determine upon. 
 
 Q. Here is the situation on this island : the most important industry is tied up, 
 and a hundred different industries are suffering, and there is nobody who has any 
 power to intervene looking for a settlement ? — A. I think conciliation is the only 
 means. You could have compulsory arbitration, but that would not be fair to the em- 
 ployers. If it went against the men they would get up and go. 
 
 ■JOHN MATTHEWS— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISP0TE8 IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 485 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You cannot enforce the award ? — A. No, I think public sentiment would have 
 something to do in the way of settlement. , ■ 
 
 Q. Of course, I suppose there is no means of settlement where the question of 
 recognition of a union comes up ? — A. No, it is a difficult position for a conciliation 
 board. There is no place to start; the issue is definite. 
 
 Q. Supposing these men would give individual contracts with the company for a 
 term of years, leaving the question of a union out entirely, would the company feel 
 safe in accepting that arrangement 'i — A. Yes, I would accept that arrangement. 
 
 Q. The point is, if you would agree with these men to make individual contracts, 
 without reference to whether they are members of this organization or not, whether 
 they make contracts with you as individuals and not as a union ? — A. Yes, I never 
 ask the men whether they are union or non-union. 
 
 Q. You have insisted on individual contracts — would that exclude the officers ? — ■ 
 A. It says nothing as to' that, so that must include the officers. 
 
 Q. You have had people making inquiry ; would you mind saying what the terms of 
 the contract are ? — A. The same terms as they are working under ; that they were 
 when they left. 
 
 Q. No discrimination to be exercised ? — A. No, cannot be according to that notice. 
 
 Q. Would you include the officers ? — A. Yes, under that notice. 
 
 Q. First come first served ? — A. I cannot consider it otherwise. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. So the question is that there is work waiting for every man who will sign a 
 contract to work for the company ? — A. Yes, 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. For how long ? — A. For two years. 
 
 Q. For less if they wish ? — A. Well, for a year. We intended having two or 
 three, the longer the better. I think, when you look over the statement, you will be 
 satisfied the prices are good. 
 
 Q. Then, I understand the position to be this — that you will not recognize a 
 committee of the union ?— A. No. , 
 
 Q. And that you will deal with the men as individuals ? — A. Yes, or a committee 
 representing the men. If the men send a committee at any time we will deal with 
 them over any grievance. 
 
 Q. I am not yet clear about these men being laid off — how many ? — A. Nine 
 altogether. Of course there were more who were not officers. 
 
 Q. Ho'W many ? — A. About fifteen or sixteen. Some of these were taken back, the 
 officers were not. They got back as soon as we had places for them. They fell out 
 naturally. 
 
 Q. Do you want us to infer that it was because these men were officers ? — A. I 
 said they fell out naturally, and I did not intend to put them back. 
 
 Q. But you said, and you wanted us to know that you would not take them bade 
 on the ground that they were officers of the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Now the position is that they would be treated the same as anybody else if 
 '.hey came along and asked for contracts ? — A. Yes, individually. 
 
 Q. So you have changed your view ? — A. No, so long as they are in connection 
 with the union we could not. 
 
 Q. You say you will take them back on signing an individual contract ? — A. With 
 the understanding that they will drop the union or don't intrude it upon us. 
 
 Q. You make that exceptional in the case of these men who are officers ? — A. Well, 
 not more than the others. 
 
 Q. If a man were asking for work to get that individual contract he would be 
 required to drop his connection with the union ? — A. With the Federation. 
 
 JOHN MATTHEWS— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
486 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL C0UMI88I0N 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. How would you secure that ? He might drop it for a week and secure it after- 
 wards? — A. I find men pretty honourable. 
 
 Qv Still he might drop it and then join the union again? — A. Well, as long as he 
 did not intrude it on me. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. It seems to me that if a man makes individual contracts in his own person, it 
 does not matter to what union he belongs any more than to what society or church, or 
 anything? — A. As long as they are members of that Federation, notwithstanding that 
 individual contract they may be called out. I claim they don't have full autonomy 
 when they belong to an affiliated union. They would have to go out in sympathetic 
 strike. That is why I object. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. If any one of these men came to you and wanted to sign an individual contract, 
 are you going to ask them whether they are members of the union? — A. We have not 
 in the past. 
 
 Q. Never mind the past; we are dealing with this notice you have put up. We 
 want to understand the true position. Supposing anyone of these men came back, 
 oflScer or member and says, I want a contract, are you going to ask him if he is a 
 member of the union ? — A. I don't think I would ; I have not weighed that position. 
 
 Q. Because you said you did not care so long as they did not intrude the union on 
 you? — A. Yes, but I may say I am opposed to affiliation with outside unions for the 
 reasons I have given. 
 
 Q. If they sign a contract for two or three years that means they won't come out ? 
 — ^A. No, that is the reason I object. 
 
 jBj/ Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. When a man makes a contract in his own person, don't you think he feels more 
 bound by it, than if made for him in some way ? — A. I would think so. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — There might be a difficulty in enforcing the contracts. Some of 
 these men who have individual contracts might be levied in damages. A great many 
 might have nothing. 
 
 Mr. KowE. — When a man breaks a contract he damages himself more than any- 
 body else. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — It depends on who it is. They cannot be held responsible in 
 damages, and, as Mr. Matthews says, notwithstanding individual contracts the union 
 might be still ordered out. 
 
 His Loudsi-iip. — Mr. Matthews says the relations are so harmonious, and if he gets 
 a three years contract he need not fear the Western Federation. 
 
 Mr. KoWE. — It seems to me that a man's life depends upon getting work, and if 
 he breaks his contract 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — There are other places. They only have to go a few miles to 
 Nanaimo or a little farther across the Sound. 
 
 Q. I presume there is not much difficulty in getting work? — A. I may say I don't 
 think I would ask them the question. I would not care personally whether they be- 
 longed to a union or not, as long as they did not intrude the union on me. That 
 would apply to all. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. If that is so, Mr. Matthews, if you simply say nothing, but take each man as 
 he comes forward, it seems to me the men have really nothing more to ask ? — A. That 
 is all. I may say, as far as the leaders are concerned, they are all good workers. 
 JOHN MATTHEWS— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 487 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. EowE. — And good talkers. 
 
 His Lordship.— What is the difficulty now, Mr. Eichards? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — I could not see any difficulty. If any member would go there he 
 would still be a member. 
 
 His Lordship. — I presume if you signed a contract for three years you would stick 
 to your contract? Would you regard your contract as paramount to your obligation 
 to the union, or would you suffer yourself to be called out, contract or no contract ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — You see now we have it in our own hands whether we will be called 
 out or not. 
 
 His Lordship. — Yes, but it was given in evidence by Mr. Balcer that if one local 
 union requested one local union out in order to help another local union, and the 
 general executive made that request, that the second union would be expected to act 
 on that request, and would be regarded as unfair if they did not ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — They have to have a three-quarters majority of the votes beforo 
 they act on it. That is the position we stand in on the constitution suppose we are 
 called on sympathetic strike. We can decide ourselves. 
 
 His Lordship. — Mr. Baker said if they requested you to go out on strike and you 
 did not, you would be regarded as unfair men. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — That is the understanding of Baker, but according to the consti- 
 tution we would not be so regarded. 
 
 (Mr. Peaeey produces telegrams sent by company, and received by company, re- 
 lating to this present strike. Exhibit 18.) 
 
 Francis Dean Little, sworn. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I have iio questions to ask Mr. Little. I simply bring him here, 
 if the Commission wish to have information from him. 
 
 His Lordship. — You might ask him what he is prepared to do in this matter. 
 
 Q. Will you state the view of the company at the present time? — A. You have it 
 pretty clearly by Mr. Matthews. So long as they don't ask for the recognition of the 
 Western Federation, we will give individual contracts with everyone. We cannot take 
 everybody. We have no room for all. 
 
 Q. Could you appoint a time when they will all be taken back? — A. No, it is a 
 question of pumping water. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 Q. But as fast as in the ordinary course of business the places become vacant, you 
 will take them back, on signing individual contracts ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rome: 
 Q. Have you a copy of that contract? — A. Not here; it is the same contract. 
 The price is not changed in any way. 
 
 Q. Was there an individual contract before? — A. No, no written contract. 
 
 Q. Have you a proposed contract now ? — A. Yes, we want to have it for two years. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwoll : 
 Q. These telegrams that have been put in — what code is used? — A. The a b c 
 
 code. 
 
 Q. Without any number ? Just the ordinary word ? — A. We have some of our own. 
 
 FEANCIS DEAN LITTLE— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
4S8 MINUTES OF ETIDENOB OP ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. But is it just the a b c code, no number added or subtracted? — A. N6i just 
 the straight code. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I understand, Mr. Matthews, that if the officers come first, you will take them 
 on first? — A. I have no objection to that. There will be no discrimination, if they 
 don't intrude the union. 
 
 Q. If the men send their officers first, they will be sure of work? — A. Yes. It is 
 understood, of course, that they must not force recognition of the union in any way. 
 We won't receive a deputation from the union. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. But what the men are probably considering is, supposing the officers do go to 
 you, and you turn them aside and take some of the men instead. What we want to 
 know is, whether the company is prepared to take the men in the order in which they 
 L-ome? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. Recognition of the union involves the recognition of the pit committee? — A. 
 Fes, as long as that is not asked for. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. The question is, whether these men who have been officers of the union come 
 forward as individuals, in no way mentioning the union, they will get work ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. They won't be left out in the cold, and the men taken ? — A. No. 
 
 His Lordship. — As far as I am concerned, speaking as one of the Commissioners, 
 1 don't see where there is any difficulty at all. As I understand it, the men went out 
 because their officers were discharged or discriminated against. If these officers can 
 get contracts the way the men can get them, as they come, the cause of war is gone. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — That would exclude the union. 
 
 His Lordship. — In what way? You don't mean to say you are going to thrust a 
 union on these people? If you can get contracts, and officers are not discriminated 
 against simply because they are officers, you have got all, according to the evidence, 
 that you struck for. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — And recognition of the union. That was the reason they were dis- 
 charged — because they were forming a union here. 
 
 Mr. Rowe. — Mr. Barber said they were not striking for a union contract. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — He might have misunderstood the question. 
 
 Q. Mr. Little, could we have a union committee go and see you? — A. No, not a 
 union committee. 
 
 Q. Supposing there was a union in town, and the members of that union came to 
 you individually as a committee? — A. Yes, I would listen to them. As a committee 
 from the men, not from the union. 
 
 Q. The fact is, you will not recognize a union in any shape or form? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Would you discriminate against them if they were members of the union? — 
 A. No. We never asked the men yet whether they belonged to a union. 
 
 Q. You found out when you laid them off ? — A. Not before they came here. There 
 were lots of union men before they came here. 
 
 Q. Well, it is the union in the place? — A. Yes, that we don't propose to treat 
 with. We want this to be a non-union towm. 
 
 By Mr. Hutchinson : 
 Q. How can it be a non-union town ? — A. I mean a non-union works. 
 FRANCIS DEAN LITTLE— Cumberland, May 29. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DITlPVTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 489 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. Matthews. — ^I understand this is what I am prepared to do. They caii meet 
 and have their union as long as they don't send a union committee to me as a union 
 committee. I think the men know when I promise that I will live up to my promise. 
 The contract will prevent any trouble in the near future. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — The endeavour of the union is to overcome all friction or anything 
 between employers, to get as much as they can and be on peaceable terms. 
 
 Mr. Matthews. — There will be no friction. 
 
 His Lordship. — Well, you can meet the management with a committee, provided 
 you don't have a union committee, or as a union, but at the same time you could have 
 a grievance and appoint a committee just the same as if you were not a union.. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — How would it be if that was not accepted? 
 
 His Lordship. — I understand the management is prepared to receive a committee 
 from men as a body of men. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson.— Suppose their grievances were not supported, you would have 
 to settle those as you have in the past. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — What would be the case in the union ; how would you settle it, then ? 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — ^Tou have it before you to-day. 
 
 Mri. RowE. — You would not do that if you had individual contracts. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — That is the point I want cleared up now. Should you have 
 individual contracts an^i went with any grievance, the contract is binding. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — You could not have a grievance unless the company were not 
 living up to the contract. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — What remedy would we have against the company, if they did not 
 live up to the contract? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — You wouM have legal action, the right to sue the company. 
 
 His Lordship. — The company want good workmen, and have plenty of coal to 
 dig, and there is no reason to suppose that they want to get rid of good men. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — Your Honour, in regard to good workmen, they must have good 
 workmen because they must have a certificate of competency before they go in. 
 
 His Lordship. — I don't see where the fear of discrimination comes in. Mr. Mat- 
 thews says he has no quarrel with the men as workmen. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Well, there is a little trouble about the wages I would like fixed 
 
 up. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^You had better have an interview with Mr. Matthews and thrash 
 all that out. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — ^Does not the contract cover the wage question ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — He says it will be similar to the present arrangement. 
 
 Mr. Little. — Yes. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — I understand that under the present system there are men who 
 are underpaid. 
 
 Mr. Matthews. — I think Mr. Richards will acknowledge that they are men who 
 are much under the average workmen, and there are not more than four or six in the 
 whole mine that are below $3 a day. I think I may say that there are men who run 
 well over that, men who have not dug coal and are not competent to earn that much, 
 men Vfko have been digging coal for twelve months. 
 
 Mr. Rowe. — ^In any event you are paying these men that wage because you think 
 they are earning it? 
 
 Mr. Matthews. — ^Perhaps men may be working on similar work, one making 
 $2.50 one $4, one $4.50 — ^men making big wages on the same work, and with the same 
 chances. These men don't ask it. You cannot give aU the men the same wages. 
 There is no ground in that respect. 
 
490 MrKVTES OF EVIDMCE OF ROYAL COUUISBIOV 
 
 i-A EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Cumberland, May 30, 1903. 
 
 His Lordship. — Have you any more evidence, Mr. Kichards, that you want to call? 
 
 Mr. EicHAKDS. — There was Mr. Hail we wanted to give a little evidence. Would 
 you like to hear anything about our decision ? 
 
 His Lordship. — Yes, very much. 
 
 Mr. Eiohauds. — That proposition was put before the meeting last night, and was 
 rejected. They would not bind themselves to individual contracts at all. They could 
 not see their way clear at all. 
 
 Plis LoKDSHip. — They did not want to bind themselves to individual contracts ? 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Of no kind? 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — Of no kind. It is somewhat similar to the old iron-clad system, 
 binding a man for a year, so that he could hardly do anything. 
 
 His Lordship. — There would be the same difficulty about signing any contract. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — In a contract with the union they would have a better chance 
 than one with individuals. 
 
 His Lordship. — The difficulty is, the union is not incorporated, and there would 
 be no one to enforce the contract against the men. The company would be bound, but 
 the men would not. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — They reject the contract and stand by the Federation. 
 
 His Lordship. — That means you are determined to look for recognition, and to 
 stand by the Federation. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Did the men know that the workmen at Ladysmith were prepared to 
 sign this agreement? 
 
 Mr. Eichaeds.— I could not say. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — All those who were in the hall yesterday knew. , 
 
 His Lordship. — The men at Ladysmith, last Saturday, were prepared to sign in- 
 dividual agreements. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — The fact of the matter is, they don't care to take ah individual 
 contract. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Of course, it is left for the individual to do as he pleases. 
 
 His Lordship. — Tou are putting yourselves in rather a difficult position. Nearly 
 everybody admits the employer has the right to employ non-union men, and if you aay 
 you won't enter into employment except as a union, you are virtually forcing the em- 
 ployer to introduce non-union men. If there is a certain notice agreed upon, there is 
 nc objection to that. That is the arrangement of the Nanaimo union. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — That is, the union fixes up the contract. 
 
 His Lordship. — Yes, but there is thirty days' notice required. 
 
 Mr. Eicpiards. — ^You see, it is left between the miner and the manager. He may 
 take one miner and make a contract different with another man. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — How? 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — It is stated here. There is different kinds of work. There is 
 narrow work — development work, and that is left between the miner and the manager. 
 
 His Lordship. — That is the position that has always been maintained by the com- 
 pany : that they won't enter into contracts with the union, and the men practically all 
 admit that the employer has a right to employ non-union men. If they have the right, 
 you are fighting for a principle that you cannot maintain. 
 
Oy INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 491 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Would the union, as a union, be prepared to enter into a contract 
 having these terms, supposing that proposition was made to the union ? 
 
 His Lordship. — There is no object in going into that, because the management are 
 determined not to recognize the union. 
 
 Mr. Eg WE. — I wanted to know whether the men would be prepared to work for 
 these wages, and not individually. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — That is about the standing of the union, as far as I can learn, 
 that they are willing to take a contract. 
 
 His Lordship. — The ground of your difSculty now is, not that you object to the 
 wages or terms proposed, but that you want this contract entered into with you col- 
 lectively, and not individually. Don't you see that there is no, way of enforcing this 
 against you? The thing is a jug-handled proposition, and you cannot expect any man 
 to accept that contract, when it cannot be enforced against the union. As I under- 
 stand it, the company are not trying to force the men into what you call an iron-clad 
 contract for a certain length of time, that is to say, compelling you to enter into an 
 agreement for two years. 
 
 Mr. Matthews. — I would think that a man could quit just as he quits now, and 
 get his pay whenever he leaves; but if they choose to go out in numbers, they must 
 give us a month's notice. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — What number would you put ? 
 
 Mr. Matthews. — Say one-third of the members. Just enough to prevent a strike, 
 in other words, without due notice. 
 
 His Lordship. — There can be no objection in that case. The Nanaimo men give 
 thirty days' notice. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Certainly, if the Federation would be recognized. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — The Federation won't be recognized. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Certainly, then, I think the matter will have to stand. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^I don't see how you can blame the company if they go to work and 
 put in non-union men. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — The stand is now, have we a right to have a union? 
 
 His Lordship. — That is a different thing. The company don't care two straws 
 whether you belong to a union or not, but they are not going to enter into a contract 
 with you as a union. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — The position of the men is, they want a union. 
 
 His Lordship. — Well, you have it, but the company are not going to recognize it. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Well, the Western Federation calls for it to be recognized. 
 
 Mr RoWE. — It seems to me that the men ought to take such action in which they 
 will be justified before the public. It is not reasonable to demand that the managers 
 shall recognize an institution, but they are prepared to pay the wages that this insti- 
 tution wants for its men, and certainly the public would not justify the men in inter- 
 fering with other men. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^Don't you see there are two insuperable difficulties. The one is 
 that it is a jug-handled proposition — there is no way of enforcing this against you as 
 a union. You are not incorporated. The second is, that in the event of any trouble 
 he has to deal with Denver as well as yourselves. No member of the public will say 
 for a moment that that is a right which should be forced on them. And if you are 
 going to succeed in the battle the first thing you have to do is to get the public on 
 your side. The moment the public understand the real situatioai, that moment you 
 aro going to be lost to the public. 
 
 Mr. RoWE. — I think the men ought to take into consideration the recent strike at 
 Montreal. The management said they would not object to the men belonging to the 
 union, but would not enter into a contract with them as a union. 
 
492 MIIWTES OF ETIDEilCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 190* 
 
 His Lordship. — There is only one case in which a company has recognized the 
 union, and that was at Fernie and Michel, and I understand that word has arrived tor 
 day that the men have surrendered their charters. The trouble was fought out in 
 Montreal, and the men were defeated, and they were a much larger body of men than 
 you could ever be. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Well, the proposition is that they want to stand by the Federation. 
 
 His Lordship. — As I S"y, the first thing, if you want to succeed, is to get the 
 public on your side, and the public must see that your proposition is a fair one, and 
 it is not a fair thing to enter into a contract with an unincorporated body for the 
 reason that it cannot be enforced, and it is not a fair thing that the employer should 
 have his contracts submitted to the people at Denver. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — If the local takes a contract they merely look for them to see if it 
 is constitutional. We take it back to England now if we don't like it here. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — Here is the case : the management for some reason or other don't 
 choose to deal with the union. You men come here and say, we want work as mem- 
 bers of the Federation, and the management won't give it to you. Can the men make 
 any objection to that 2 
 
 Mr. Richards. — It is for them to say. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is in their right to make objection. The Western Federation 
 is more or less a public body, and has to depend upon public sentiment. If that senti- 
 ment sets in against it it could not continue to exist. It seems to me the question of 
 the Federation is how to accomplish their work without going contrary to public 
 opinion, and at the same time acquire for its members reasonable conditions of wages 
 and labour. I don't know that the management here are insisting on the men signing 
 contracts of any particular kind, but I understand that the terms of these agreements 
 are the same upon which the men have been working heretofore. Is that correct? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Yes, the same conditions, excepting that they will be bound to 
 stay to those conditions. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — Bound to stay as long as they want to. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — As long as the contract calls for. You see they have found in the 
 past there are some things not satisfactory — — 
 
 Mr. RowE. — Are there any other conditions to be included in the agreement? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — They cannot bind themselves to sign any agreement with the 
 union. 
 
 His Lordship. — The whole point in this fight is, that it has been fought out in 
 Montreal and other places, and I think, if you consider the whole matter further, if 
 you once recognize the right of an employer to employ non-union labour, that cuts the 
 ground from under your feet. You cannot force him into a contract with a union, 
 especially an unincorporated union. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Well, I suppose the position remains the same. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — You say the men have a right to form a union ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Yes. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — Has an employer the right to say he won't engage a union ? 
 
 His Lordship. — That is the po^nt at issue. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — Has an employer the right to say he won't make a contract with a 
 union? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — That is the question. 
 
 His Lordship. — If you admit that a non-union man has a right to make a living, 
 you must admit the employer has a right to employ him. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — It would better his chances to join the union. 
 
 His Lordship. — That is for him to decide. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA *93 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Has an employer the right to engage anybody — to close his works 
 down ? 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — Under present conditions. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — ^We are dealing with present conditions — ^not theories. I should judge 
 that the men's complaint in the first instance was that the management discriminated 
 against officers of the union. Now, the position they take is they will not discriminate, 
 so one item has been removed. The second item is, they want recognition of the 
 union. The company say they will not deal with the union as a body. They agreed 
 to give you the wages you required in all respects, except that they will deal with you 
 as individuals and not collectively. That is the position up to date. They will give 
 you the wages, conditions of labour, terms of agreement you want as their workmen, 
 but they will not make a contract with the "Western Federation of Miners. It seems 
 to me they have just as much right to do this as they have just as much right to do 
 business with other corporations. The public could not insist that they could not do 
 business with a corporation they don't want to do business with, that the public will re- 
 spect your rights just the same as they would with any incorporated body. If the men 
 had been suffering injustice as to terms of wages or conditions of labour, and found 
 that it would be safe for them to do business in that capacity as a union, the public 
 might say that the men were wise in talking that position. But when it comes out that 
 you get the wages and other conditions you want, but that you stand out on the techni- 
 cality that you simply want recognition of the union, I judge that the public will not 
 bt favourable. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS.' — The management could say to the individual, if he did not like 
 it, he could get. 
 
 His Lordship. — That is the case in life generally. If I have some land and want 
 a thousand dollars for it, and you want to buy it for seven hundred, you cannot make 
 me sell it for seven hundred. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — Suppose it is a case of yardage. He says, I will give you $2.75, 
 and he wants $3, and he says you won't get it. You will have to leave. That is deal- 
 ing with the individual. The union is formed so that they can deal collectively. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is no complaint against the wages. This question of the 
 recognition of the union is the question. It is not a wage strike. You are going to 
 injure yourselves with the public. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — How can we talk about wages until we have a union ? 
 
 His Lordship. — Then, you expect to hold up the management, when you have a 
 union? 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — Well, we can't tell what might happen with a union. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^Your position would be much stronger with the public, if you were 
 being ground down on the matter of wages, but not in the matter of recognition of the 
 union. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — ^Your Honour, I would like to have these telegrams all translated, 
 so that I can get through them all. There are just a few translated, the rest are in 
 cipher. 
 
 His Lordship. — I understood they were to be translated. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — There are only just a few. We could arrange that without taking 
 your time up. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — Your Honour, in regard to the telegrams, Mr. Matthews could 
 give his word to you that they would be translated, and they could be put into the 
 hands of the local operator, Mr. Peacey. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — We would like to know a little about the telegraph system the 
 company have. 
 
 His Lordship. — I understand it is under Dominion government service. 
 
494 MINUfES OF EVWENCE OF ROYAL OOMUISSIOV 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Mr. EiCHAKDS. — ^Yes, but the company have a telegraph office, and if we send 
 anything, it goes over the company's wire. 
 
 His Lordship. — That is a matter which we, as Commissioners, would not have 
 •anything to do with. The best thing you can do is to pass that up to the department 
 at Ottawa. 
 
 Mr. KiCHARDS. — I thought it might slip into your report, and come out in that 
 way. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — It is quite a common thing for large hotels and public offices to have 
 'lines. It does not follow that everything is repeated. It is the option of the office as 
 to whether that happens or not. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — It is possible that it may be. 
 
 Mr. Hutchinson. — Would your Honour mind asking the operator if it were pos- 
 sible to send a message without the company knowing of it ? 
 
 Mr. Peaoey. — ^Regarding the sending of messages, the line first goes through the 
 company's office. They can hear every message sent or received. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — ^Tou have no power of shutting them oii{ 
 
 Mr. Peacey. — No, sir. 
 
 His Lordship. — You had better file a complaint at Ottawa. 
 
 Mr. Halliday. — 1 would like to ask Mr. Rowe — ^he said we would not be discrim- 
 inated against. That is a vital point with us as individuals. What guarantee would 
 we have of that, Mr. Rowe ? 
 
 Mr. Rowe. — The guarantee in your contract. 
 
 His Lordship. — Mr. Matthews has also pledged his word that there won't be any- 
 thing of that kind. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Yes, but Mr. Matthews won't always be in that position. 
 
 His Lordship. — I don't think the company can afford to oppose public opinion. 
 If it gets to be known that the company is doing that kind of thing, and you have pub- 
 lic opinion on your side, they won't want to challenge you. Public opinion is going 
 to do a great deal in this case. If the company do that, they will get into such bad 
 odour all over the country that they will be very glad to quit it. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Public sympathy might settle on our side, but it can't settle the 
 side of the management. Mr. Dunsmuir states outright that he won't do anything. 
 
 His Lordship. — Well, we went out because the men were weeded out. 
 
 Mr. Richards.- — If they weed us out, we will be out again. 
 
 His Lordship. — I don't think the company want that any more than you. 
 
 Mr. Rowe. — Why would they agree to this arrangement, if they did? 
 
 His Lordship. — The company want a guarantee they won't be on strike, and it is 
 as good a guarantee as they could have. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — If they leave us alone and don't discriminate against us, that will 
 do. That will be as good a guarantee as they want. 
 
 His Lordship. — They will have had their lesson, and you will have had yours. 
 You will both respect each other after this. 
 
 (Mr. Matthews agrees to translate the telegTams.) 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — ^I arranged with Mr. Richards that I would translate a certain 
 number of them, so that they could see the character of the telegrams. I have arranged 
 now to hand the telegrams back to the local operator. We will translate them all, and 
 they can have access to them. 
 
 His Lordship. — They had better be left with the local operator. That is satis- 
 factory ? 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Yes. 
 
ON moUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITI8B COLUMBIA 495 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Eev. L. W. Hall, recalled. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — Your Lordship, Mr. Hall mentioned an affair here about a China- 
 man being killed and an inquest that was held. Several men would like to hear some- 
 thing further on that. We would like to have a few questions on it. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you say about that affair 2 — A. Well, I — I think I was asked — the 
 Kjuestion, I think, came with regard tJ — in regard to ths repressive inflaenceo that 
 were paramount here in my experience, and I named this as a case where fear seemed 
 to me and to others, to have governed the jury in its findings, as they seemed to be 
 altogether contrary to the evidence given. Not only to me, but I had a friend, a 
 barrister up in Vancouver, and I asked him to come up and listen to the evidence, 
 and his opinion was the same. If you agree for me to go into the matter, I will give 
 you the grounds 
 
 Q. That is a case where a miner was killed ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. By explosion ? — A. No. He was in the act of pushing a car loaded with cogs, 
 I think they call' it, and the car was piled up, quite full — it was at night — my atten- 
 tion was called to the case in this way 
 
 Q. How was the Chinaman killed ? — A. The driver of the engine thought he 
 heard the signal, and the man was pushing the car on — the man himself I suppose — 
 of course no one can know now — thought the cage was there, and he pushed it on, and 
 the cage had started down, and he went with the car and was killed. He dropped to 
 the bottom of the shaft, and the jury exonerated everybody in connection with it. 
 
 Q. You thought, having regard to the evidence, that the verdict was an unfair 
 lone ? — A. That was my judgment. My interest in the case came in this way : the 
 Chinese were very much excited about the man being killed, and rightly so. They 
 wanted me — one of the men asked me — ^he happened to be one of the boys that was 
 going to school for a number of years, and when they had trouble they usually came 
 to me. I thought I would see Mr. Matthews with regard to it. I asked the question, 
 was there any light by which this man was able to see where the cage was — whether it 
 was up or not, and I was told, no. That immediately interested me, and I thought I 
 would ask Mr. Matthews if there was a light, so I asked him and he told me there was 
 a light. I 'then came up again to town, and I heard farther that this engineer had 
 previously, while driving an engine in his shaft, a Chinaman was killed previously, so 
 the Chinamen in their ignorance put both together — thought perhaps this Chinaman 
 was killed deliberately. That was the reason I asked this lawyer to come up and listen 
 to the evidence. I went up to the coroner's jury, and I listened very attentively to 
 the evidence being given, and it seemed to me that the questions asked did not bring 
 forth the facts of the case, and I waited for the inspector, and he asked three or four 
 simple questions. 
 
 Q. If you thought an injury was being done, and the man was deliberately killed 
 by the fault of the engineer, why didn't you lay it before the authorities ? — A. I 
 
 asked ' 
 
 Q. How long ago was this — about a year ago ? — A. About a year ago. 
 
 Q. The finding of the coroner's jury does not amount to anything. — A. I asked 
 the judge if I might examine the witness, and he told me I might. I asked the wit- 
 ness these three facts : first, that there was no light, second, no bell, no light or bell 
 to signal with. That he could not tell in the noise and the dark the voice heard. I 
 also drew out that the safety gate that ought to be shut according to law, I believe 
 the moment the cage goes dov/n — I found from his evidence that these three things 
 were neglected. I also learned during my examination — Mr. Matthews would ask the 
 witness on the stand questions, and these questions were suggestive questions. He 
 would say ' Are you sure you could not see,' and he would tell the witness he could 
 
 REV. L. W. HALL— Cumberland, May 30. 
 
496 MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OP R07^L COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 see and the leading direction of the questions led me to believe that it was not alto- 
 gether fair. 
 
 Q. Didn't this barrister tell you the proper way was by laying a complaint before 
 the authorities ? — A. He said ' Mr. Hall, it is no use, these men are being — ' I had 
 spoken nothing about the conditions of this town — he says ' These men are afraid to 
 do their duty, they seem to be so — ' I have forgotten just the expression he used — he 
 meant that they were afraid to do their duty as citizens, and that is my thought with 
 regard to that same thing. My line of thought was that the company — ^I don't say 
 they do it with malice or intent — ^I say that the present system has a tendency to make' 
 every man think — rightly or wrongly I won't say — if he comes in conflict with any of 
 the company, that that means for him discharge, which in some cases is a serious 
 matter. That is not only my feeling, but it is the feeling of many of the people of 
 this town. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is a very simple remedy. There was no necessity for it 
 resting with the coroner's jury. If you thought any injustice was being done you 
 could have laid an information before a justice of the peace, had a primary investiga- 
 tion and had the man sent up for trial, or if you found the justice of the peace was 
 being intimidated by any local influence, you could have referred the matter to the 
 Attorney General at Victoria, and if you found there that the Attorney General would 
 not act, you could have gone before the grand jury at Nanaimo, and taken it there 
 yourself. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Who was the barrister you had over? — A. He was up on a case-^he was one 
 of Mr. Wilson's partners, I think. 
 
 Q. Was it Mr. Senkler?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Mr. Bloomfield? — A. Yes, I think that is the name. 
 
 Q. You asked him to come? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And he did not advise yoti there was anything to be done ? — A. He told me he 
 thought it was hopeless. 
 
 Q. Don't you think that is rather ridiculous ? The Chief Justice has just pointed 
 out what the course of law was, and you tell us that he says there was no remedy? 
 
 His Lordship. — All I can say is that that barrister did not know his business. 
 
 Witness. — That is what he told me. If I had known that remedy I would have 
 undoubtedly have gone along with it, but I thought — ^the jury's verdict was this — they 
 should have recommended the company to have a bell, which the law provides they 
 must have. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Did not the engineer swear that he heard the signal to hoist the cage? — A. No. 
 
 Q. He heard him shout all right ? — A. He said he heard a voice, but could not 
 swear definitely. 
 
 Q. The evidence was not contradicted ? — A. Well, granted that 
 
 Q. Was that not the reason the lawyer told you the case was hopeless— the en- 
 gineer said he heard the signal and hoisted the cage? His evidence was not contra- 
 dicted, and you don't mean to say that it was not possible for the Chinaman to have 
 been careless himself? — A. I mean to say this and nothing more, that this man said 
 that had there been a light there that man would not have been killed. 
 
 Q. Who said that ? — A. The witness, the engineer. 
 
 Q. What is his name ? — A. You can get the whole evidence, I believe, of the 
 coroner's jury. 
 
 Q. And you say the engineer said if there was a light there the man would not 
 have been killed? — A. Yes. My point is that the company had not made ordinary 
 precautions. 
 REV. L. W. HALLr-Cumberland, May 30. 
 
02f INDUSTRIAL DI8JTTES IN BRlTlSB COLUMBIA 4S7 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 B]/ Hi& Lordship : 
 Q. Where was the injustice ?— A. That the coroner's jury brought in this verdict, 
 that the verdict was injust in so far as they brought it in, saying death was accidental 
 and simply that. 
 
 Q. Do you blame the company ? — A. Undoubtedly. 
 
 Q. Why didn't you have them indicted before the grand jury? — A. I took what 
 he told me 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. What do you think about the coroner's jury, they were sworn to return a true 
 verdict? Who was the foreman on the coroner's jury? — A. Mr. Coombs. 
 
 Q. And you say these men were so intimidated by the company that they would 
 go against their oath and return a verdict not in accordance with the evidence? — A. 
 No. I mean this : that this repressive influence had the tendency to make men tem- 
 porize with verdicts. 
 
 Q. Did the coroner's jury give a verdict according to the evidence ? — A. According 
 to my opinion they did not. 
 
 Q. You make this statement : that these men were so intimidated, were so re- 
 pressed by the action of the company here, that they would not give a verdict accord- 
 ing to their oath? — A. No, I don't. 
 
 Q. What do you say? — A. That it has been a factor, and was a factor in their 
 judgment. 
 
 Bi/ His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Had it been a white man do you think the verdict would have been the same, 
 or different ? If you thought that, you should have seen that the company were 
 prosecuted in the manner I have stated. You could have had it brought before a 
 justice of the peace, before the Attorney General ? — A. Can it be done now? 
 
 Q. I pointed out the course that could be adopted. You told us you thought that 
 was the wrong verdict, and contrary to the evidence, and yet you did not take any 
 steps to have the matter brought to the attention, of the authorities. Your duty was 
 to have brought it to the notice of the authorities if you thought in that way, and you 
 did not do it ? — A. I would have done it, if I thought it was a workable proposition. 
 
 Q. You didn't try?— A. No. 
 
 Q. You and everybody else must understand that there is only one criminal law 
 in this country. The Chinaman is protected by the law just the same as others. You 
 did not follow up the remedies that the law gives you. Your last resort could have 
 been to the press? — A. I will grant you that. I will take your censure. It does not 
 alter my view that the conditions that pertain here are at all altered by your censure. 
 
 Q. If you had such an interest in these Chinese, and thought that a wrong had 
 been done through the intimidation of the company, without attempting in some way 
 to bring the matter to the attention of the authorities, then you put yourself in a 
 position to invite censure. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 
 Q. Do you mean with the conditions prevailing then that it would be necessary 
 to have a union formed, so that men could give some expression to their feelin-gs? — A. 
 That is my thought. 
 
 Q. The whole thing is freedom of speech ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you think that things were in such a way that these men might lose their 
 jobs by giving their verdict contrary to the company? — A. As a Christian I don't wish 
 to hold that thought at all. I came here unwillingly to give my evidence. I simply 
 group^a certain number of facts before me, these matters are laid before you and you 
 take them for what they are worth. 
 
 „n on REV. L. W. HALLr— Cumberland, May 30. 
 
498 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 His Lordship. — All the Chinese have to do is to get a small fund, secure the 
 services of a good lawyer, an^ if he cannot bring it to justice then aU I can say is that 
 lawyer does not know his business. 
 
 Mr. EicHAUDS. — Mr. Hall has stated this as an istance that there is no freedom of 
 speech here. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 Q. In view of the fact, Mr. Hall, that only four or five men have been dismissed 
 by the company for any cause, don't you think it would appear that the fear of being 
 dismissed was an unreasonable one? — A. You will excuse me from answering that 
 question. I am answering a number of questions that are prejudicing me. I can 
 answer a number of questions here 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I wish you would, and get down to business ! 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. The reason I ask is you say you don't know whether that feeling was justified or 
 not ? — A. I don't think the intensity of the feeling is justified, but the feeling in the 
 minds of these people — you must take them as they are — and they carry it further 
 than it would be by a logical or by a fair-minded man be carried, and I don't suppose 
 for a moment that Mr. Matthews or Mr. Little, or the heads of this company are 
 dishonourable men, and in my relations I find them very good fellows altogether, 
 those are my personal relations with them, and it hurts me to say things I have done 
 here. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — One of our purposes, I think, is to remove false impressions, and if 
 it could be pointed out that that feeling on the part of the men is an unreasonable one, 
 it would be accomplishing a good result. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 
 Q. You have been here quite a while, Mr. Hall ? — A. Yes, I have been here nine 
 years. 
 
 Q. When Mr. Dunsmuir was elected, was it prior to Mr. Matthews taking the 
 management over here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What occurred after Mr. Dunsmuir was elected, in connection with freedom 
 of speech ? Were there not a lot of men discharged or laid off ? — A. Yes, there were 
 a number of men laid ofF. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it would frighten the men here after these five years ? — A. I 
 think there is no question. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — They learned by experience it would not do for them to talk out. 
 
 His Lordship. — What were they talking about ? 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — Politics. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Of course, we could go into these things and explain them. These 
 things are merely idle matters, as far as our management is concerned. This Mr. Hall 
 comes here and makes insinuations. I just challenge him to name an instance and we 
 will explain it. 
 
 Witness. — You ask me to name an instance ? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Yes. 
 
 Witness. — What sort of an instance do you like ? 
 ' Mr. BoDWELL. — Make your statement. I challenge you to give an instance. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — Mr. Hall in his evidence gave the instance of Mr. Russell. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Do you want us to go into the case pf Mr. Russell ? Does Mr. 
 Hall take up the Russell charge 'i 
 
 REV. L. W. HALL — Cumberland, May 30. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL orSPVTES IN BRITISE COLUMBIA 499 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. Richards. — The Commission are here to investigate, and they would like to 
 have things cleared up. Mr. Hall gave in his evidence before that Mr. Eussell thought 
 he had to leave his position on account of his political position being opposite to that 
 of ]y]r. Dunsmuir. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Is that your statement, that Mr. Eussell left his place here because he waa 
 obliged to leave ? — A. At least he thought that he had to sacrifice himself. 
 
 Q. Because he had different political opinions from Mr. Dunsmuir ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. That is your statement ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. On account of his political opinions ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. That is the charge ? — A. It is not a charge; it is a statement. Do you want 
 to know how it grew up to that ? 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — I am not asking any further questions. 
 
 By liis Lordship : 
 
 Q. You had better say what you have to say shortly ? — A. Mr. Eussell told me 
 that Mr. Dunsmuir came up here to arrange for his canvass, aat he came up to the 
 office from the works — ^I forget what time it was. He said that Mr. Dunsmuir, and I 
 think Mr. Little, and think Mr. Clinton, were in the office. Mr. Dunsmuir vsaid as 
 he entered the office, ' Who knew something about this man McAllan.' Mr. Eussell 
 says, in a joking way, ' He is a better man than you ' 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. You had better not say anything you cannot pledge your oath to ? — A. The 
 whole thing is hearsay — what Mr. Eussell told me. Then it went on from that that 
 Mr. Dunsmuir had counted on Mr. Eussell being his electioneering agent up here at 
 the time, and Mr. Eussell, as I remember the conversation now, refused to be his agent, 
 and said he was going to support McAUan. After that he took a very active part in 
 the campaign. As far as I can see, there was no hard feeling, but the last night at his 
 home I had a long conversation with him, and from that conversation I drew that he 
 left here simply for that reason, and one of the things he said was that he was sorry 
 to go - ./ay with unfinished plans. He went into a lot of matters of that kind. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Did he tell you what the company dismissed him for ? — A. No. lie did not 
 go into that. He sent in his resignation; he was not dismissed. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Didn't he say he was ashamed of himself, and went away for that reason ? — A. 
 Well if you have any conversation with Mr. Eussell, you would know he would not be 
 a man likely to say that. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 
 Q. Do you know William Holt ? — A. No, I don't know tlie man. 
 
 Q. Do you know John Eowan ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you know Matt. Mitchell ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. They were gradually laid off or gradually weeded out ? — A. I don't know 
 by what process they had to go, but they went. 
 
 Q. You know their political opinion was opposite A. It v^as the general opinion 
 
 of every man who entered into the matter actively that he had to go, and that is the 
 
 36a — 32J REV. L. W. hall— Cumberland, May 30. 
 
560 HmVTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMUISSWJf 
 
 3<.4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 general opinion regarding anything in this camp to-day. If the Commission is in 
 doubt of it, they can take a hundred men out of this camp, and you will find eighty 
 per cent will substantiate what I say^ — union or non-union men. 
 
 Q. You mean it is patent to everybody that all men who took any political interest 
 opposite to Mr. Dunsmuir's by some means or other they all went ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. Were any men laid off who opposed Mr. Mounce in the last election ? — A. E 
 was awiay at the last election. 
 
 Q. How many were laid off after the election of Mr. Dunsmuir ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 John Matthews, re-called. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Have you got the statistics we wanted ? — A. Yes, roughly. They are fairly 
 accurate, within one or two per cent. You want the number of men ? 
 
 Q. I want the number of men, the proportion of Chinese, Japanese and whites, the 
 number of men out on strike, and the number of men that have gone back ? — A. There 
 were three coal mines in operation : No. 5 slope, No. 5 shaft and No. 6 shaft, and No. 
 7 slope — the prospect slope, driving through the measures to the coal. In No. 4 slope, 
 there are about 300 men underground, about half white, and the other half — perhaps 
 150 whites and about 125 Chinese and about 25 Japanese. In No. 5 pit there were 200 
 underground. There would be about 10^9 whites — from 90 to 100, and about 80 
 Chinese, and I would say 20 Japanese. In No. 6 shaft there were about 120 men alto- 
 gether. There would be about 30 whites to 35 — and the others would be Japanese and 
 Chinese — Chinese rather; there were no Japanese in No. 6. 
 
 Q. These figures don't include any men above ground ? — A. No. There are about 
 150 on the surface, roughly speaking. 
 
 Q. That is near enough. That is including all of the whites ? — A. No. There 
 would be about 100 whites on the surface, about 125 for all round the works, that is car- 
 penters, engineers, &c., and there would be perhaps 50 Chinese in addition on the sur- 
 face, apart from the regular work. At the new mine. No. Y, there are 8 whites and 
 foreman — 9 whites and about 40 Chinese, and 33 in addition to that constructing a 
 lailway out to that mine, 33 Chinese and one white man. 
 
 Q. The men who went out on strike were all underground men ? — A. Yes, no top 
 hands struck. I would say 300 whites went out. 
 
 Q. How many have gone back ? — A. About three have gone back. 
 
 Q. When you .say 300 whites struck, they are all union men ? — A. Nearly so; 
 there are about eight or nine not. Of course, I don't know — that is what I hear. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us what amount of wages have been lost by reason of this strike ? 
 — A. About a month lost now would be about $30,000, roughly speaking. 
 
 Q. Wages that would have been earned by the strikers ? — A. There are a number 
 of the works shut dovm — about $30,000. 
 
 Bjj Mr. Rome : 
 Q. What is the full pay under normal conditions? — A. Must I give that ? My 
 orders were not to divulge the pay roll, but it runs around $50,000 a month when the 
 mines are working normall 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. I gather there would be about $1,000 a day paid to the underground workers ? 
 — A. Yes, about that. That gives about $3.50 a day. 
 JOHN MATTHEWS— CumBerland, May 30. 
 
ON INDVSTRIA.L DISPUTES IN BMITISU COLUMBIA fiOl 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You say there is $30,000 lost in the strike?— A. That is about 25 working days; 
 $25,000 would probably cover.it in that respect. 
 
 Mr. EicHARDS. — It looks rather strange about so many Chinese coming out in the 
 mine inspector's report. 
 
 His Lordship. — I suppose that report was made several months ago. 
 
 ^T. EiCHARDS. — No, when we struck. 
 
 Witness. — ^I think I can explain that. I think in the local House when that 
 question was asked tlie person who gave the figures gave those who had been granted 
 certificates as underground miners — Chinese and Japanese. There is close on 200 who 
 have miners' certificates, and I think that number was given. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — That was given out as Chinese working underground. I would 
 like to have it made plain. We have a population of 1,100 Chinese here, and you say 
 there were 150 whites, and the rest were Chinese in No. 4 ; in .No. 5, 80 Chinese, and 
 in No. 6, 95 Chinese. That would hardly square with the figures given in the report, 
 about 137 all told. 
 
 Witness. — There were about 175 given in the report. The inspector's report gives 
 the number correctly, or nearly so. 
 
 George W. Clinton, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. How long have you been here ? — A. Ever since the beginning of the work— 
 15 years past. 
 
 Q. Were you present at the conversation mentioned by Mr. Hall ? — A. I was. 
 
 Q. You might tell the Commission what the story is ? Mr. Kussell occupied the 
 same position as Mr. Matthews ? — A. Not quite the same. Mr. Little was manager 
 and occupied the position that Mr. Mathews holds. During that time we had con- 
 siderable trouble getting Mr. Dunsmuir to stand. He said he didn't want it. We 
 were going over the list of names in the ofiice about noon. Mr. Kussell was coming 
 along, and Mr. Dunsmuir says : How is Eussell on this campaign V I said, ' I don't 
 know, but I will tell you how you can find out. He is an honest man and will tell 
 you exactly how he stands — ask him to be your agent. Russell came in and Mr. Duns- 
 muir said, ' Russell, I am going to Jun for parliament, and I would like you to be my 
 agent.' Russell said : ' Mr. Dunsmuir, I cannot vote for the present government in 
 power, and if you are going to support that government I cannot support you.' He 
 said : ' I consider that the Turner government is all right, and if I go in I intend to 
 support them.' He says, ' Mr. Russell, I don't want to influence your right to vote as 
 you please, but I don't want you to say anything to the men one way or the other, 
 because the authority you hold over the men you derive from me.' Russell said he 
 would not, but he did. 
 
 Q. Wiat did he do ? — A. Well, he was a Scotchman, and he had to go into it 
 a little. We got up a petition requesting the people to support Mr. Dunsmuir, and Mr. 
 McCall's name was at the top of the line, pledging his support to Mr. Dunsmuir. 
 Afterwards they had a meeting and Mr. McCall then came to Mr. Short and asked him 
 to withdraw his name from the petition, because he had been nominated to run against 
 Mr. Dunsmuir. 
 
 Q. What happened after the campaign was over, as far as Mr. Russell was con- 
 cerned ? A. I was present, and Mr. Russell did not exercise his right to vote. He 
 
 gave in his resignation, and Mr. Dunsmuir told Mr. Russell that he did not want him 
 to go, and Mr. Dunsmuir will bear out what I am saying— he did not want him to go. 
 
 GEORGE W. CLINTON— Cumberland,, May 30. 
 
502 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 There were a number of these men laid off, but the unfortunate Trent iRiver bridge 
 accident happened within two or three weeks afterwards, and it caused the mine to 
 be shut down on account probably of that, and to prove it was not on account of dis- 
 crimination I may say a lot of the men went away and came back and got work after- 
 wards. 
 
 Q. Has there been cny attempt on the part of the company to coerce the men 
 on accoimt of their political opinions ? — A. No, not that I know of. They might, but 
 I don't think so. 
 
 Q. You would know — you were here all the time ? — A. Well, I don't think so. At 
 the last election of Mr. Mounce they voted as they liked. There was not a man dis- 
 charged. The officers of the company might have passed over the matter, but I know 
 there would not be any man discharged or laid off on account of the matter. 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about this Chinese incident ? — ^A. No, Mr. Matthews 
 knows about that. 
 
 By Mr. Richards : 
 
 Q. Do you know how it was that William Holt came to be laid off at that time ? — 
 A. Unless it was on account of the Trent Eiver bridge — I don't remember. The 
 election was the last of June, and the Trent Eiver was in August, I think. I thinlc 
 it was about five or six weeks afterwards. 
 
 Q. Ton were not acquainted with the political situation at that time ? — A. The 
 political situation was over a week after the election. 
 
 Q. It has been remarked around that any man who took an active part in that 
 election was quietly laid off ? — A. At the election' of Mr. Mounce he did not poll half 
 the number of votes that Mr. Dunsmuir did in his favour. TherQ were twice as many 
 men against Mr. Mounce at the last election as there was against Mr. Dunsmuir. 
 
 By Mr. Huichinson : 
 
 Q. The men must be getting more sense ? — A. Men always do. Tou know as I 
 do that up to the time Mr. Baker came here there was no more peaceable camp than 
 this. There was no pressure exerted on you, Mr. Richards. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS. — No. I have said nothing about politics. 
 
 Witness. — There has never been the slightest complaint go down to Mr. Dunsmuir 
 concerning the workings or treatment of any men in his employment. Mr. Dunsmuir 
 has often remarked that when he came up to Comox he never had men before him. 
 
 John Matthews, recalled. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. You might explain about this accident to the Chinaman ? — A. I must say 
 that there was a mistake made by someone, but whose mistake the evidence did not 
 disclose. There are two landings at the place where this occurred, one higher than the 
 other, for the pui-pose of hoisting the coal. There is a lower landing 26 feet below. 
 At the landing there are two gates, one on each side. These gates are always closed. 
 These Chinese workmen ought to keep them closed. In this case, the Chinamen took 
 oS a car which went to the top and came down again, and the Chinaman came along 
 with the car loaded with cogs, and when ho pushed the car the gate was open, and the 
 cage not being there the car fell down the shaft and took the Chinaman with it. The 
 engineer said there was a light in the distance and it is the practice for the men to 
 have a lamp in his cap which these Chinamen have, and it is the Chinaman's duty to 
 
 JOHN MATTHEWS— Cumberland, May 30. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 503 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 see 'that the cage is there before he pushes the car on. The gate is about three feet 
 high and is covered with plating. You can see it 100 feet away. When the car is 
 shoved on he shouts ' all right,' and the engineer starts the cage. 
 
 Q. What did the engineer say about this ? — A. He said he heard the call ' all 
 right.' Of course, the Chinaman was dead and the evidence was in favour of the 
 engineer. The jury put in a rider that we put in a bell. There is a difference of 
 opinion about that. In some of the mines we have no bell and in some we have. There 
 is no law in regard to the matter. One bell is ringing from the bottom of the shaft, 
 another from the top, and another might cause confusion. I am not much in favour 
 of the lower bell, although that is a matter of opinion. There is no regulation about 
 it. We have a bell at the higher landing and there is a bell at the bottom of the shaft. 
 From the lower landing we don't have a bell. It was clearly a mistake on the China- 
 man's part. That is his work, pushing the cars off and pushing them on, and it is his 
 duty to see that the cage is there. It was a mistake of the engineer's, no doubt, hear- 
 ing someone's voice, or at least he thought he did, and dropped the cage. 
 
 By Mr. Bichards : 
 
 Q. The evidence proved there was a mistake, and the jury did not make it out a 
 nuistake ? — A. Not whose mistake it was. It was that of the engineer or Chinaman. 
 
 Q. The evidence given showed there was a mistake, but that was not the verdict ? 
 — A. So there was, or there would not have been an accident. I may say that these 
 mines are always safeguarded to the best of our ability. We do all we can to protect 
 the men, but mistakes will happen with these precautions. 
 
 His Loedship. — Speaking for myself, I would be glad to see the men find a way to 
 come to some settlement. Men should remember they have families to consider as well 
 principles. As far as I can see the position is that they are virtually saying to the 
 management, ' You must either employ us as union men, or you cannot employ any- 
 body.' That is the position as I see it in a njutshell, and that is a position that neither 
 the law or public opinion will maintain. If the men don't want to work as individuals, 
 they cannot force employers to take them either by law or public opinion. There is 
 only one way of showing that an employer should deal with the union, and that is by 
 putting a right class of men into the union — in other words, a union can only get a 
 contract with an employer by persuading an employer to see that it is in his interest 
 to have a contract. They cannot force that, and public opinion won't support them in 
 that. That is really your position — either you must employ us as a union or not at all. 
 I think further, you should consider carefully everything your labour leaders say to 
 you. To my mind, from that telegram sent by Baker to Moyer, he was quite ready 
 to call you out whether you had a grievance or not — that it was not your interests he 
 was consulting. Whose interest it was I leave you to judge. By that telegram he was 
 quite ready to call you out on sympathetic strike whether you had a grievance or not. 
 If you go hunting for troubls and endeavouring to take up other people's troubles, you 
 will have too much on your hands. If you have grievances of your own, it is probably 
 right that you should take some means to protect them, but for a body of men to cease 
 work with no regard to their employers or the public, because of a strike elsewhere, is 
 a position that the public will not stand for, apd I have no doubt that the parliament 
 of Canada will take means to stop it. 
 
 Mr. EiciiAEDS. — When they have, in the past, so that a man could not speak his 
 mind, it is up to the men to form a union so that they can. 
 
 His Lordship. — Certainly tucy have a right to form a union, but they have no right 
 to force a union on the public. I don't think that public opinion will support you 
 in endeavouring to force a union contract. That was fought out in Montreal. rThere 
 were some four thousand engaged in that and it was against a street car company, and 
 you know that a street car company is about as unpopular a company as you could 
 
 JOHN MATTHEWS— Cumberland, May 30. 
 
504 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EPWABD Vll„ A. -ISCH 
 
 have. Tou cannot force an employer. Ton take the people down at Nanaimo — so 
 long as Mr. Eobins was there he was quite satisfied to enter into contracts, and the 
 reason was that the men acted reasonably. If the union would follow its example, and 
 put good men into the union and keep away the agitators, the time would soon come 
 when employers would enter into contracts. 
 
 Mr. EiCHAKDS. — They have taken the stand that they won't have anything to do 
 with the union at all. Now we have a contract in front of us. It doesn't suit us at 
 all. There may be occasions arise when we might come to a settlement. We are not 
 standing up bull-headed. They don't wan't to accept the union at all. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — I understand the position to be that you won't accept anything but a 
 union contract. 
 
 His Lordship. — That is a position the public won't sustain. 
 
 Mr. Richards. — We don't stand that we won't do anything except on one line. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — It should be stated, I think, that the men at Ladysmith agreed to a 
 contract which seems to me to be exactly the same as this. That is my impression'. 
 They had the alternative proposition, I think, to work at $3 a day or a contract such 
 as this. I am not sure but that the contract was a little less favourable than this. 
 
 Mr. EicHARDS. — The contract said $3, and they would provide them with labourers, 
 but did not say what labourers, Chinese or Japs. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Perhaps it is not important to take it up. I only want to say that 
 the counsel agreed to that, but they were not prepared to do that. I was not using it 
 as an argument that you should accept it. I merely cited the case. I understand the 
 trouble began by the management discriminating against the men and refusing to have 
 union men. Tou asked for the reinstatemenifc of your men, and you asked for the re- 
 cognition of the union. The management say they will reinstate your men, and they 
 won't discriminate against members of the union. Now that promise not to discrimin- 
 ate against the union is half way towards recognition of the union, and it would appear 
 to my mind as if the men had an opportunity to settle without sacrificing their inter- 
 ests. Of course, their relation to the Western Federation in the case of individual 
 contracts is a matter for them to consider themselves. I don't see that it should be any 
 objection to the Western Federation to have a group of its members employed at good 
 wages. The men are held together by their oath, and if there is any attempt to dis- 
 criminate against the members of the union, they have the same power as the union. 
 These are the reasons that seem to me to justify a settlement. I am speaking for my- 
 self in saying what I have said about the matter. 
 
 Mr. EiCHARDS.— We don't want the Commission to have the impression that we 
 are standing on one dead-set line. 
 
 His Lordship. — It strikes me, Mr. Eichards, that this has simmered down to a fight 
 for recognition of the union, and that is a position a body of men cannot take when 
 it comes to the last analysis. You have to show that it is to an employer's interest to 
 take you as a union — you cannot force him. And when a body of men start out to 
 fight a man who has large wealth and able to stand a fight for years, they are entering 
 upon a long fight. If it were a wage strike, you might have public opinion with you, 
 but not for recognition of the union. You must do it by persuasion^not force. 
 
 Mr. Eichards. — Well, I guess the condition of things is that I cannot change it 
 by talking any more. I think we will just have to let it go. 
 
 (Adjourned). 
 
OW INDVSTRlAL DISPUTES' IN BRiTISn' COLUMBIA 505 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Ladysmith, June 1, 1903. 
 Wallace Bowes, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You are the telegraph operator of- the 0. P. E. ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 Q. You have been subpoenaed to produce some telegrams in your possession ? — 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you got them ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (Telegrams produced, marked Exhibit 19.) 
 
 His Lordship. — Of course you will all understand that the object in having these 
 telegrams produced in this way is to lay all the circumstances in connection with the 
 strike before the Commission. Our first duty is to have all the facts, no matter in 
 whose favour they are, set forth, so that the public can judge of the true merits of the 
 situation. If there is any member of the committee would like to make any explana- 
 tion about any of these telegrams, or to say anything, we are quite ready to listen to 
 him. 
 
 H. T. Porter, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are the agent of the E. & N. Eailway Company — the telegraph agent ? — 
 A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Have you been here since the commencement of this strike ? — A. I have. 
 
 Q. How long before ? — A. I think it is the third year I have been here now. 
 
 Q. As telegraph agent ? — A. Yes, or rather it has been transferred for the last 
 six or eight months into the C. P. E. department. I don't take any messages from the 
 C. P. E. 
 
 Q. How long have you been handling the E. & E". messages — how many months 
 past — at this point ? — A. Ever since I have been here — about three years. 
 
 Q. So that the messages from the E. & N. Eailway Company would come throvigh 
 you ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You were instructed on Saturday by telegram to look up any telegraphic cor- 
 respondence relating to these strikes ? — A. I got the message Sunday morning. 
 
 Q. Have you searched ? — A. I have no messages at all in connection with it. 
 
 Q. Were any messages received by you ? — A. No, no messages received by me. 
 
 Q. In any way relating to this strike ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. That seems rather remarkable, does it not ? — A. I don't know. I don't think 
 there has been anyone here to receive any messages. Mr. Dunsmuir has not been here, 
 r.or anybody. No official of the company has been around here very much that I know 
 
 of. 
 
 Q. At all events you pledge your oath that you have received no message from any 
 company official relating to this strike ? — A. Not that I am aware of. 
 
 Q. You ought to know ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Boive : 
 Q. Were any message in cipher ? — A. Yes, I have taken two or three cipher mes- 
 sages. 
 
 H. T. PORTER— Laaysmith, June 1. 
 
506 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You know nothing about the contents ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. And they may have related to the strike for anything you know ? — ^A. They 
 may or they may not; I could not say at all. 
 
 ,Q. Who were they addressed to ? — A. To Robert Bryden. 
 
 Q. Who is Robert Bryden ? — A. He is one of the officials of the Wellington Col- 
 liery Company. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us when they were sent ? — A. About three weeks ago. 
 
 Q. Anyone else ? — A. No, only to him. 
 
 Q. Who did they come from ? — A. From Union — from Mr. Little. 
 
 Q. Where is Bryden ? — A. He is at Union now. 
 
 Q. lYou are sure that all these messages came from Cumberland ? — ^A. All the 
 cipher messages. 
 
 Q. Between Little and Bryden ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If that is the case, we have already got possession of these at Cumberland. 
 You are certain there were no cipher messages between any other persons that could 
 relate to the strike ? — A. I don't remember any of them. I kept no copies of them. 
 They were just handed in. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Do you keep a copy of your messages ? — A. Not of that kind. It was taken 
 off the wire and generally handed to them while they were there. 
 
 Q. Would you not have a copy of these messages to check with the Government 
 Itelegrams ? — ^A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. We got some fifty telegrams at Cumberland — they should be among them ? — . 
 A. They probably would. I got these from the agent at Wellington. All the com- 
 pany's business is handed in at Wellington and does not come by C. P. R. 
 
 Q. AU the cipher correspondence took place between Little and Bryden ? — A. Yes, 
 to the best of my belief. I don't remember any from anybody else. 
 
 Q. If that is so we have already got them aU. 
 
 Nanaimo, June 1, 1903. 
 W. F. Archibald, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are the telegraph operator in the Canadian Pacific Company ? — A. Yes, 
 sir, I am manager of the office. 
 
 Q. You have been subpoenaed to produce certain documents — telegrams ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you the telegrams ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Just produce them, please ? — A. Well, before doing that, your Lordship, I 
 suppose I may ask a question or two. I am governed by a regulation of the company. 
 
 Q. I have seen the regulation you refer to ? — A. It is of no account ? 
 
 Q. Not as far as I am concerned. You have to obey the orders of the commission 
 — you cannot help it. — A. Yes, I want to do that, and at the same time be on the right 
 side with my company. 
 
 Q. I understand that, and the company understand perfectly well that where an 
 operator is ordered to produce telegrams he cannot help himself ? — ^A. Might I ask 
 for an order of court ? 
 
 W. F. ARCHIBALD— Ladysmith, June L 
 
ON INOnSTRIAL DISPUTES INBRITISB COLUMBIA .597 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. The subpoena is the best order you could have. It is not only an order of court, 
 but it is from the Sovereign as well. You keep the subpoena — that will satisfy you ? 
 — A. I suppose I had a right to ask these questions, at all events ? 
 
 Q. Yes, certainly. 
 
 (Telegrams produced. — Exhibit 20.) 
 
 Q. These are all the telegrams you produce during March, April and May ? — A. 
 No others, except after May 30. 
 
 Q. Are there any others in your possession before March 30 ?— A. I did not look 
 for them — ^I did not consider it necessary. 
 
 Thomas Shenton, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I see a telegram here, Mr. Shenton, from you to Mr. Baker, ' Urgent request 
 for your presence. Come to Nanaimo, if possible immediately.' It is dated March 9. 
 Can you explain that telegram ? — A. I guess I can, but I would like to ask whether 
 this Commission expects to make me responsible for everything connected with our 
 consolidated organization ? 
 
 Q. It -may be as well to understand first as last, that the public has put a large 
 sum of money into this Commission to find out all the facts to enable the government 
 to judge upon the merits of the dispute ? — A. I am hardly in a position to undertake 
 to make myself responsible in that connection alone. 
 
 Q. You are simply asked to explain that telegram ? — A. Well, I simply ask the 
 Commission whether I am allowed to have an adjournment of this matter, until I have 
 conferred with other meuk 
 
 Q. You were notified on Sunday that you would be recalled ? — A. Yes, just yes- 
 terday. I have no opportunity to make arrangements. 
 
 Q. Is there anything in the matter that you have reason to be ashamed of ? — A. 
 No, I don't think so. These things are connected between our union and the Federa- 
 tion, and I might be committing myself in regard to the secret and private affairs of our 
 organization. If I have to give this I would like an adjournment until I can consult 
 with the parties and confer with our lawyer in the matjter. 
 
 Q. How long would you want ? — A. Only such time as I can get Mr. Wilson. I 
 guess he could get here to-morrow. 
 
 Q. This Commission is being held at great expense, and we will be delaying mat- 
 ters one day if we allow it to stand over until Mr. Wilson comes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Would it meet your case if you had an opportunity to consult Mr. Wilson in 
 Vancouver and give your evidence there ? — A. Yes, I might be able to do that. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. I suppose that would be satisfactory ? — A. How long do you expect to stay in) 
 Vancouver ? 
 
 Q. Probably a week — not longer. Could you be there Wednesday ? — A. Yes, I 
 
 guess I could. 
 
 Q. You will undertake to appear before the Commission on Wednesday ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I think it only right to tell you, Mr. Shenton, that Mr. Hall gave evidence at 
 Cumberland. You probably noticed that? — A. Yes. I don't k:|Dw what he said. 
 
 THOMAS SHENTON— Nanaimo, June 1. 
 
5^ Ml'KVTES OF EVIDEXCE OF ROYAL ■.COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A; 1904- 
 
 Q. The drift of his evidence was to the effect that you. went up there and had an 
 interview with him; that you informed him you were there as the representative of 
 Mr. Baker, and that you came up for the purpose of seeing what could be done in the 
 way of organizing the Chinese and Japanese. Would you like to make any statement 
 as to that ? — A. That I came up with the idea of organizing the Chinese and Japanese. 
 That cannot be his statement. If it is, it is untrue. 
 
 Q. Would you tell us what the conversation was ? — A. Well, he introduced the 
 idea of educating the Chinese. 
 
 Q. Tou went up there ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you tell him that you would see what could be done in the way of organiz- 
 ing the Chinese ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Or words to that effect ? — A. No, not words to that effect. 
 
 Q. Tell us what you did tell him. Give us your account of the interview ? — A. He 
 probably introduced the idea to me, if my memory serves me right, in connection with 
 the elevation of the Chinese to an appreciation of organization. He perhaps did say it 
 might be brought abotit, provided they were made to understand what organization 
 meant. He stated, I think, that he had an idea that if constitutions and by-laws of 
 any organization now in existence could be printed in their language to educate them 
 up to an appreciation of organization. 
 
 Q. He suggested that the constitution should be printed in their language ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you tell him what you went up there for ? — A. Well, I told him that what 
 I went up for was just in the place of Mr. Baker, as I have said, in the sense of inform- 
 ing the men that Mr. Baker could not be present. 
 
 Q. Is that all you went up for — ^to tell the men that Mr. Baker could not be pres- 
 ent ? — A. Just to look into matters regarding the situation there. 
 
 Q. You were commissioned by Mr. Baker to act with full power ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you were to take charge of the strike ? — A. Not exactly take charge of 
 the strike. I was there to act in his absence for three days. 
 
 Q. That would include the right to advise the men I suppose ? — A. Well, yes. It 
 gave me the authority to advise them as an officer of the Western Federation of 
 Miners, as a representative of Mr. Baker, that their position was approved of. 
 
 Q. You were there to tell them their position was approved ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you were to act in his place as organizer ? — A. No, not as organizer. It 
 was already organized. The most important part of my duty was simply to inform 
 them that Mr. Baker could not get there, and as I have already stated, informing them 
 that their position was approved. That is all I did there. 
 
 Q. What conclusion did you come to about the Chinese ? — A. I don't know that 
 I came to any particular conclusion. I don't know that that bothered my mind at all. 
 
 Q. What understanding did you and he arrive at about the Chinese ? — A. That 
 is, Mr. Baker and myself. 
 
 Q. No, Mr. Hall ? — A. No understanding that I am aware of ; nothing more than 
 what I have stated. 
 
 Q. That you were going up on a mission to elevate the Chinese ? — A. No, I didn't 
 go on a mission; he introduced the idea of the elevation of the Chinese to the ap- 
 preciation of organization. 
 
 Q. Well, instructions came from Moyer to organize the Chinese and Japs, didn't 
 they ? — A. I cannot say ; I don't know. 
 
 Q. Were you one of the men present at the joint meeting held here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was there not a telegram from Mr. Moyer to Baker to the effect that he ap- 
 proved of calling out any and all men to help the men at Ladysmith to win, and if 
 necessary to organize the Chinese and Japanese ? — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. You don't know anything about that ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. So that Baker did not communicate to you this telegram ? — A. No. 
 
 THOMAS SHENTON— Nanaimo, June 1. 
 
N 
 
 ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA ,1509 
 
 SESS;ONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Did you know that Baker was going to inquire from Moyer about that ? — A. 
 No. I saw it in the paper. In order to show clearly what I am stating, I asked Mr. 
 Baker if that was possible^-whether there would be any truth in that statement — some- 
 thing to the effect that they thought of arranging for the organization of the Chinese 
 and Japanese, and he said that he did not know. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Qj That was when ? — A. I cannot just remember the date. About the time they 
 appeared in the newspapers here in the province. 
 
 Q. Can you fix the date at all ? — A. I guess it must be nearly two months ago — 
 about six weeks or two months ago. I cannot remember now. I remember very well 
 asking him if that could be true, and he said he did not loiow. That is all I know 
 about it entirely. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did you know that Baker was inquiring from Moyer as to the advisability of 
 calling out the men at Cumberland ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Was that ever discussed between you ? — A. No, not that matter, with me. 
 Q. Was it discussed between anybody with you present ? — A. No. 
 Q. You heard no discussion about that at all between any persons ? — A. No, no 
 discussion whatever. 
 
 Q. So, as far as that part of the strike is concerned you were not taken into their 
 confidence ? — A. If there was any confidence in that regard, I was not 
 
 Q. Tou know nothing about what Baker was doing about that ? — A. No, not a 
 thing. 
 
 Q. Would the calling out of the men at Cumberland in sympathy with Ladysmitli 
 have met with your approval ? — A. Well, of course we were not consulted in the matter 
 at all — I was not — in anyway regarding it. 
 
 Q. Tou evidently had Mr. Baker's confidence to some extent, otherwise he would 
 not have put you in his place at Cumberland ? — A. I have an opinion — I would say 
 my own private opinion — not my opinion of Mr. Baker. I had no dealings with Mr. 
 Baker in that connection at all. My own private opinion before the time that that 
 did occur was that it was not wise to call them out. 
 Q. You thought it was not wise ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Would you have thought it wise to organize the Chinese and Japanese if you 
 had been consulted ? — A. Well, no, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. So far a$ you can speak for the union here, they would not approve of the 
 organization of Chinese and Japanese as members of your order ? — A. No, they would 
 not. 
 
 Q. So that to that extent you disagree with the president of the order ? — A. Yes. 
 I Q. Then Mr. Hall was mistaken when he says you suggested to him that the 
 Chinese be organized into a separate branch of the order ?— A. Yes,- he is mistaken. 
 Q. You made no suggestion of that sort ? — A. As I said, I think he made the 
 suggestion along that line. 
 
 Q. Well, you appear to a^ee that there was a suggestion made, but you differ tf, 
 to who made it ? — A. Well, yes, there was a suggestion made. But the whole conver- 
 sation regarding that suggestion made was not in connection with organization of 
 them at this time. It was a matter of looking forward to a future time on the part 
 of Mr. Hall, and if I did agree in any sense whatever, the greatest objection I had 
 Hvbujd be, of course, that they are aliens to a large extent, and they are a people whom 
 the white people cannot compete with, and to endorse the idea of their being put on 
 a level to some extent with us would be detrimental, I think. That was the difficulty 
 in the way of all tliis. It was a mere matter of conversation, tallying over the possibili- 
 ties of the thing. 
 
 THOMAS SHENTON— Nanaimo, June 1. 
 
510 MINUTES OF EYIDMCE OT ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 19D4 
 
 Q. The whole tone of this matter seems peculiar. We first have Baker getting 
 Instructions to organize the Chinese and Japanese. We find that you are the trusted 
 agent of Baker, and you go up to Cumberland and have a conversation with the mis- 
 sionary of the Chinese about organization. It seems to me the public will readily 
 draw their own conclusion unless you distinctly negative it ? — A. I say I don't know 
 .anything about any such mission in that connection. I am stating the fact. 
 
 Q. You have read this telegram, I suppose, or have heard it read ? — ^A. I would 
 like to hear it. 
 
 Q. Telegram from Charles Moyer to J. J. Baker, Nanaimo : ' We approt'e o:^ 
 calling out any or all men necessary to win at Ladysmith. Organize Japanese and! 
 Chinamen if possible ' ? — A. I never heard it read, I did not know that it was iri 
 existence. 
 
 • Q. You see what I am getting at, Mr. Shenton. Here is a telegram, now iu 
 evidence, from the president of this organization in Denver to the trusted agent and 
 organizer, Mr. Baker, instructing him to organize the Chinese and Japanese if pos-! 
 sible. You are the representative of Mr. Baker ; you are sent to Cumberland for three! 
 days, and you have a conversation with the missionary of the Chinese, in which it is; 
 [evident that the subject of organization of the Chinese was discusseid. It seems toi 
 "me the public will very readily draw their conclusion that you went up for that pur- 
 jipse, to organize the Chinese ? — A. I cannot help that, Mr. Hunter. . I deny it ; that, 
 is all I can do. '• ' 
 
 Q. You deny that you went up for that purpose ? — A. I deny that — emphatically 
 dpiy it 
 
 Q. If not for that purpose, for what purpose did you go up ? — A. I think I have 
 stated the purpose for which I went up. 
 
 Q. Well, it won't hurt you to repeat it ? — A. Well, I went up, first, as I have said 
 already, to laok into the situation there, and to instruct the union in the name of Mr. 
 Baker, representative of the Western Federation, that their position was approved. 
 
 Q. You went up to instruct them that their position was approved ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When did you go up ? — A. I forget the date. I cannot just recall the date ; 
 about the middle of last month. 
 
 By Mr. Howe : 
 
 Q. About the middle of May ?^A. Yes; just about a few days after they came 
 out on strike up there. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. It was necessary for you to go up and tell the men that their position was 
 approved, was it ? — -A. Well 
 
 Q. The difficulty with that is that Mr. Barber was given this telegram up here, 
 and showed it to the people up in Cumberland ? — A. Mr. Barber was given that tele- 
 gram ? 
 
 Q. Yes, that Mr. Barber took that telegram up there. So that explanation seems 
 to be somewhat feeble ? — A. Well, I am only responsible for what I know, and I am 
 trying to state what I know. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Had Mr. Baker intended going up himself ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why didn't he go ? — A. Because he went up to the Commission. Of course, 
 a telegram was sent up, telling the union at Cumberland that he would be there at 
 such a date. Then, of course, we persuaded him to stay for the Commission, and he 
 finally did. Then he called upon me — upon the executive — to ask them if they would 
 allow me to go. 
 
 Q. That is your executive ? — A. Yes. 
 
 THOMAS SHENTON— Nanaimo, June 1. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 511 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Mr. Hall said you suggested that he should appear before the Commission and 
 give evidence — that is correct i — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. He says he got the impression from you that the Western Federation of Miners 
 would approve of the idea of organizing the Chinese. Was he correct in that ? He 
 says he understood that. Was he incorrect ? — A. That they would approve of that ? 
 
 Q. Tes ?^-A. I cannot recollect that I made those statements. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. If your conclusion of the whole affair is correct you could not be correct in 
 that case — you say you knew nothing as to what was going on between Baker and the 
 headquarters ? — A. I might have said that, while I do not recall anything said. It 
 would be inconsistent with my own mind and view to have made a statement of that 
 kind. 
 
 Q. It seems to be somewhat peculiar that Mr. Hall would make a statement of 
 that kind unless there was some foundation of fact for it ? — A. Well, I cannot be 
 responsible for what Mr. Hall may say or what he may not. I don't want to say he 
 would see to say anything wrong, but still I am trying to say to the best of my memory 
 what I did say, and to deny what I did not say. 
 
 Q. How can you suggest that Mr. Hall should get such an idea ? There was only 
 one conversation between you ? — A. I don't know, unless possibly he saw something in 
 the papers regarding it the same as I had. I don't know hardly anything as to how 
 it sprung up. 
 
 Q. There was nothing in the papers as to the Western Federation proposing to 
 organize Chinese and Japanese ? — A. There had been a little time before that — in the 
 papers as I have stated. 
 
 Q. It seems to me, Mr. Shenton, you owe it to yourself to thoroughly clear up the 
 whole situation. First, there is a telegram from Mr. Moyer instructing this organiza- 
 tion. You are sent up as a representative of Mr. Baker; this telegram is shown these 
 men at Cumberland and you have a conversation about the matter ? — A. I have already 
 said that I have not seen the telegram. I did not know that such a one was in 
 existence. 
 
 Q. You don't mean to say you have been used as a blind instrument by these 
 people at Denver ? If there is anybody in whom they would have confidence it would 
 be you ? — A. Well, I don't know exactly. I think they would put the same confidence 
 in me as they would in other men. 
 
 Q. Don't you think you are entitled to be taken into confidence on important 
 questions such as the taking of Chinese into your order ? — A. Yes, I should think, as 
 part of the Western Federation they should do so. 
 
 Q. As the man who had been selected as the local organizer you were entitled to 
 be taken into their confidence ? — ;A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And yet it appears you were not taken into their confidence — on that subject 
 at least ? — A. Not on that subject, anyhow. 
 
 Q. Can you explain this telegram of March 30, from F. B. Craig to you : — ' No 
 settlement in sight ; tell men not to move.' — A. That is a public matter, I guess. That 
 came to me — it is not considered to be a secret in any sense of the term. That was 
 handed over to the press to be published at the time. 
 
 Q. What is the meaning of the expression — ' tell men not to move ' ? — A. The 
 meaning of that, as I understand it, would be for men not to go up there. There were 
 quite a number of men waiting, and if it was given out that it was settled they Imew 
 these men would be returned. I know nothing more than I could find out from the 
 'fact of having received the telegram — only what I may think. 
 
 Q. You mean to say that there were men here who would have gone to Fernie, 
 if it had not been for this telegram ? — A. Yes, they were waiting for a settlement and 
 were waiting to return. 
 
 Q. Men who had worked there before and were here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 THOMAS SHENTON— Nanaimo, June 1. 
 
512 MINUTES OF EYJDENCE OF JtOTAL COMMISSION , , 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VIU, A. i90+ 
 
 Q. How many of such men were there ? — A. I don't know that X know all. I know 
 John Hough was one man. I would say there were one or two anyhow, there may be 
 more. I say that is what I would surmise in connection with the telegram that was 
 referred to. 
 
 Q. You understood that the men who were here at that time were being requested 
 not to go back to Fernie ? — A. That is what I would think. 
 
 Q. Who is Craig ? — A. All I know is from communications to our lodge. He 
 used to be secretary of Fernie lodge, No. 76. 
 
 Q. Secretary of the Fernie lodge ? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Tou have heard that the men at Fernie and adjoining places have given up the 
 Western Federation ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Any truth in that ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What is the ground for that ? — A. I don't know the whole of the reasons. I 
 heard the opinion expressed that it was due to the fact of the dilatory methods pursued 
 in connection with the difficulties there on the part of the Western Federation — that 
 is, in rendering necessary support and so on. 
 
 Q. They have joined the United Mine Workers ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The support given by the Western Federation to Ladysmith and Cumberland 
 has been very meagre up to date ? — A. I believe so. 
 
 Q. Not more than about $1,800 — A. I don't know exactly, but I guess that is 
 I'retty near. 
 
 Q. Does it not occur to you that a man has a great responsibility on his shoul- 
 ders, who will undertake to call out a large body !of men, without providing for their 
 Support ? — A. It is a great responsibility, in the first place. 
 
 Q. You see what this telegram says — ' We approve of calling out any or all men 
 necessary — ' That is a pretty serious responsibility ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And from a man in Denver, whom you can only communicate with by letter 
 !and telegram ? — A. Well, I don't think that the idea — that that should be a weakness 
 of the Federation if it is what it is represented to be. It ought to be equally strong. 
 
 Q. If the facts are not fully and fairly laid before the executive at Denver, they 
 might make an order which would be disastrous to the welfare of the men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So that the welfare of the men here practically w^ould be determined by what 
 goes on between two or three leaders here and the executive at Denver ? — A. Yes, in 
 a very large measure. 
 
 Q. And yet it has appeared that in an important matter, such as the organization 
 ?f Chinese and Japanese, you, as one of the local men, were not taken into the con- 
 fidence of these people ? — A. I don't know anything about it. I don't desire it, and 
 it does not hurt my feelings at all. 
 
 Q. You don't mean to say you are willing to be a blind instrument in the hands 
 of these people on an important matter of that sort ? — A. Well, I would not like to 
 be, so far as that is concerned, provided everything in that connection is straight. 
 
 Q. That is a matter about which you would like to be consulted as one of the local 
 leaders, is it not ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. There was some evidence given by Mr. Hall which, perhaps, I had better call 
 your attention to. Where he says that the question of ^arantees is concerned, be 
 said : ' He (that is you) could give no decisive answer with regard to the matter, but 
 he (meaning you) felt certain that guarantees could be given, but that he would have 
 to see Mr. Baker first' ? — A. Guarantees ? What does he mean ? 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. In reference to guarantees he demanded for the Chinese before they would 
 enter a union ? — A. Yes, I believe that is true. He mentioned something about guar- 
 antees. 
 THOMAS SHENTON— Nanaimo, June 1. 
 
OJ^ INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 513 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Further back he says : 
 
 ' He suggested that he thouglit that the Federated executive at Colorado' 
 — ^I think it is — would be willing to make a guarantee, and I told him that 
 whenever proper guarantees were made and given that I would do all in my 
 power to help along the union — ■ not active organization work — but I would 
 use my influence, and do all I could to uplift the Chinese — '. ' He could 
 give no decisive answer with regard to the matter, but he felt certain that 
 guarantees could be given, but he would have to see Mr. Baker first.' 
 — A. No, I did not say — that is enlarged upon. 
 
 Q. What is your recollection of the conversation ? — A. He spoke something about 
 a guarantee — that is, along the line of organizing the Chinese and Japanese. I 
 remember that very well, but I am pretty well sure I did not say that guarantees would 
 be forthcoming, even if he did see Mr. Baker. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. He says that you. said you would have to see Mr. Baker before you could do 
 Anything. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. ' But that you would have to see Mr. Baker first.' — A. I may have said I could 
 not take any responsibility in 'the matter of guarantees, and that I would have to men^ 
 tion the matter to Mr. Baker, that had reference directly to what I have already stated, 
 the publication of constitution and by-laws, on the occasion when he thought some- 
 thing of that method ought to be adopted to educate these people. It seemed to be a 
 hobby with Mr. Hall about elevating them. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Did you ever speak to Mr. Baker about it afterwards ? — A. I spok© to Mr. 
 Baker regarding the constitution and suggestion made by Mr. Hall, but the matter 
 dropped right there. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. The question of organization of Chinese was discussed in a general kind of 
 way ?— A. Yes, ina generalkind of way. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. I think the suggestion was that now, since the head tax had been raised to 
 the sum where it now is, that the number comiijg in would be limited, which kept them 
 from being a menace to labour if they should be organized ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. He gave us to understand that the Western Federation were, prepared to take 
 the matter up ? — ^A. Well, I deny that statement, because I could not have stated that. 
 The great obstacle to the question I pointed out was the fact that these were an alien 
 race, and that we, as vcorking-people, had opposed them, their presence being a menace 
 to the white man's interest. That was the great objection. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe,: 
 
 Q. You -understsind why the Commission is going into this matter, because if it is 
 proposed to unionize the oriental rjaces, jt v?ill affect very materially the industrial 
 situation here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I notice that Mr. Baker, under date of May 12, writes to Mr. Richards, in 
 which he says, ' that he got Brother Shenton to go in his stead, as he would not be able 
 to go .' That would be about the time you were there — about May 12 ? — A. Yes. 
 
 THOMAS SHENTON— Nanaimo, June 1. 
 
 36a— 33 
 
514 MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION >• 
 
 3-4 EDWARD V^l., A. :1904 
 
 Bi/ His Lordship : 
 Q. You say you want to see Mr. Wilson before answering the question about' this 
 first telegram ? — A. Yes, I would like an opportunity of doing so. 
 Q. And you will be ov€r in Vancourer on Wednesday ?^— A. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Shenton's examination deferred until Wednesday. 
 
 Vancouver, June 2, 1903. 
 Open sittings of the EoyaL Labour Conimigsion; ' 
 Mr. E. P. Davis, K. C, for the Canadian Pacific Eailway. 
 Mr. J. Edward Bird, for United Brotherhood of R^lway Employees. 
 
 (Commission read by Secretary.) 
 
 His Lordship. — Now the Commission is here for the purpose of investigating the 
 . Btrike which is known as the TJ.B.E.E. strike. I understand that both parties to that 
 dispute will be represented by counsel. For my part, I sincerely hope that it is so. 
 Notwithstanding all this that we hear in some newspapers and by people who seem to 
 have a chronic dislike for lawyers, it is found, at all events by judges, that to properly 
 conduct an inquiry before a tribunal having judicial power, it is absolutely necessary to 
 have counsel. They can bring out the points very much better than the ordinary lay- 
 man, and can advise their clients from time to time as to the proper way in which their 
 case should be conducted. 
 
 I would like also to say that this Commission is being held at considerable expense, 
 and to the prejudice of litigants in the courts. At present our court is labouring undei 
 the difficulty of having some of the judges in rather serious ill-health, and it is neces- 
 sary that the parties should assist the Commission, so that no time will be unduly 
 wasted. I hope that both parties will feel the responsibility upon them of coming for- 
 ward voluntarily, and that no attempt will be made to conceal anything on either side. 
 The intention of the Commission is to get at the facts, anid that will be done if it is in 
 Our power to do so, for the purpose of bringing them to the notice of the government, 
 and for the purpose of enabling the public to judge of the real grievances in this dis- 
 pute. In order to assist that purpose, speaking for myself, I think it would be well to 
 adopt the practice that is adopted as a matter of course in the Supreme Court, that 
 each party should file an affidavit of documents which they may have in their custody, 
 together with a statement of their case. If either side wish to set up questions of privi- 
 lege — that is to say, if either party thinks certain documents should not be ecxposed, 
 counsel can say so; then it will be for the Commission to decide whether such docu- 
 ments will be made public. We would like also each party to file a statement of its 
 side of the case. The men should file a statement of their grievances for which they 
 went out on strike, and the company deal with the situation set for by the men, as 
 shortly as possible. 
 
 There are other matters which have come to our attention in the city of Van- 
 couver; that is to say, auxiliary strikes. We propose shortly to investigate these. At 
 the same time we would like to have any parties belonging to the merchant class, who 
 feel that the actions of the unions have afiected them, for good or evil, come forward 
 and state their views. I do hope that parties will come voluntarily forward and' give 
 these facts, and that nothing will be concealed. - 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Do you suggest that these statements you speak of and the affidavits 
 should precede the giving of evidence ? 
 
ONJTfDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BltlTISH COWMBIA 515 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 His Lordship.— Yes, I think it would be just as well. '■ • . .'• ,"; 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I think some direction should be made- as to the time in whioh the 
 statement we will have to answer should be filed. i _ 
 
 His Lokdship. — How long would you like, Mr. Bird, to make a statement of your 
 case. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I appear for the U. B. R. E., that is practically all. I understand my 
 instructions come generally from the committee of striking eoi^Joyees, but more par- 
 ticularly with the portion of it respecting the TJ. B. E. E.. I understand it is not a 
 case where counsel alone might be heard, and I have asked the assistance of an old 
 and respected labour man of the province — Mr. Foley. 
 
 His Lordship.^ We will be very glad to have Mr. Foley's assistance. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — So far, your Lordship, as the, position of the IJ. B. E. E. is concerned, 
 and as to the presentation of the case before the Comrnissioners, I would like just 
 shortly, to make a statement to the effect that the TT. B. E. E. have in'fact no demands 
 before the C. P. E. . - 
 
 His Lordship.- — We would like to have a short statement from the men as a body, 
 why they went out on strike. We want that in writing, signed by responsible parties. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I understand that the position the Commissioners desire to take would 
 suggest a course on the part of the U. B. E. E. similar to filing a statement of claim. 
 Now, the fact is this organization was of such a nature that the Canadian Pacific Eail- 
 way, fearing that there might be trouble by reason of the size of the international 
 organization, sought to throttle the movement before it obtained strength. That they 
 forced conclusions upon the U. B. E. E. by taking the initiative, virtually locking the 
 men out from their employment. That is the position they have taken from the begin- 
 ning — that this is a lock-out, not a strike. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^It is not a question of initiative; it is a question of convenience 
 of procedure. It occurs to me that the status quo has been altered by the men rather 
 than by the company, and that is the position which was taken in the anthracite coal 
 strike in Pennsylvania. The men there were in the position of plaintiffs and 
 were represented by nine counsel. I think it must be apparent to everybody that it is 
 the action of the men that has altered the status quo; it is a mere convenience of 
 procedure. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I will, on the suggestion of the Commissioners, prepare a statement 
 and affidavit of documents. I will be prepared to go on this afternoon. I understand 
 it is the desire of the Commissioners to proceed with as little delay as possible. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^Tes, we cannot allow these proceedings to dwadle; the courts are 
 being kept back. 
 
 Mr. BiED. — I understand from the officers of the U. B. E. E. that they have made 
 some endeavours to bring a committee before the C. P. E. for the purpose of discussing 
 settlement negotiations, that may possibly have some effect upon the deliberations 
 before this Commission. I am informed by this committee that a meeting may take 
 place to-day or this morning, but it is no desire of the union, at any rate, to delay the 
 proceedings. If it is the desire of the C. P. E. to consult with a committee we will 
 he willing to meet them. 
 
 His Lordship. — Of course the Commission would be only too glad to hear the 
 matter had been settled, but that will not affect us so far as finding out the circum- 
 stances. We are required by the government to report on the strike. If you think it 
 would be better to adjourn until to-morrow in order to have this statement filed, that 
 can be done. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I don't see any way of avoiding that unless the men can undertake 
 to let me have that statement within an hour. To meet this afternoon that will be 
 necessary. 
 
 36a— 33J 
 
518 MINUTES OF ETIDEyCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 His Loedship. — ^If you are going to have any conciliatory meeting I expect you 
 ■will find all your time taken up. 
 
 Mr. DA\as. — I presume my learned friend can let me have that statement by two 
 o'clock ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I will undertake to do so. If I am to file my statement by two o'clock 
 I would request that my learned friend be asked to furnish me with a statement and 
 affidavit of documents, that I may deliberate on them to-night. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — As to the affidavit of documents, I doubt very much whether we could 
 get that ready. We will get that at the earliest possible moment. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is no particular hurry about that, of course. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I would like to ask my learned friend who will make the affidavit on 
 the other side ? 
 
 His Lordship. — The members of the executive of the U. B. E. E. 
 
 Mr. Davk. — The U.B.E.E., as I understand from Mr. Bird, does not cover all the 
 strikers. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — Perhaps if we knew what the term ' striking committee ' covers we 
 would understand. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I understand that the strikers consist of the U.B.E.E., the 'Longshore- 
 men and the Teamsters' and the British Columbia Steamshipmen's Society. Fvirther, 
 I understand there are now on strike, by reason of this trouble, *939 emplpyees out at 
 the present time — not including some who have gone back to their service since the 
 strike was declared. That includes, as far as I know, up to Winnipeg — all Canada as 
 far as the U.B.E.E. is concerned. There are, I understand, in Vancouver, practically 
 498 members of the U.B.E.E. 
 
 JIis Lordship. — In British Columbia ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — No, that includes Vancouver, Nelson, Eevelstoke, Calgary and Winni- 
 peg. That is the total membership now out on strike, and practically the total mem- 
 bership. I think the affidavit of documents should be from the manager or head officer 
 of the local union — I think that would be the proper affidavit to file. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I understand that there is a headquarters committee or an executive 
 which covers everybody concerned in the strike. Is that correct ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I believe that is correct. 
 
 Mr.. Davis. — If that is so I would say that the secretary or chairman of that com- 
 mittee, or someone on the committee would be the proper person to make the affidavit. 
 
 His Lordship. — Better have the affidavit from the secretary of the striking com- 
 mittee, whoever he is. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — As a matter of fact the chairman of that committee happens to be the 
 manager of the U.B.E.E. That is Mr. Brooke. 
 
 His Lordship. — I suppose, Mr. Davis, that Mr. Marpole will make your affidavit. '^ 
 
 Mr. Davis.^Ycs, Mr. Marpole, I suppose. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^You might give us the names, Mr. Bird, of the presidents of thes3 
 four organizations. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Mr. Brooke is the manager of the U.B.E.E., and I am just informed 
 now that it is for that organization alone that I appear, and that the officera would have 
 to consult the leaders of the other organizations before distinctly saying whether they 
 would be represented here. • 
 
 Mr. Eg WE. — ^Does that relate also to the affidavit of documents ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Yes. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Mr. Brooke undertakes to produce only the documents affecting the 
 TJ.B.E.E. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 517 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I imagine those will be all tlie documents required to be produced. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — There may be other documents. 
 
 His Lordship. — We will have to get at that by means of subpoenas. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Mr. Fred Johnson is president of the Longshoremen, C. H. Thompson 
 of the British Columbia Steamshipmen's Society, and J. C. Kerr of the Teamsters. It 
 has just occurred to me that it might be well, if the C.P.E. are willing to meet that 
 committee, that we would like to know it, otherwise we desire to prepare our documents. 
 If they desire to meet us, the committee are gentlemen who have more intimate know- 
 ledge of the whole strike, and I would wish them with me. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Well, you can go on with the preparing of your statements anyway, 
 and the C.P.E. matter can be discussed outside. That is a matter that we had better 
 not discuss here, I think. 
 
 His Lordship. — There can be no harm in the parties meeting anyway. By the way, 
 Mr. Davis, it was arranged in Victoria that Mr. Troup should come here to present him- 
 self for cross-examiniation. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Then, I suppose, we had better leave a date open. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I imagine Mr. Wilson is here in the city. I know nothing whatever 
 about the matter. 
 
 His Lordship. — He was to be cross-examined in the interests of the Longshoremen 
 and the B.C.S.' Society. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I understand that can be arranged. 
 
 "Vancouver, June 3, 1903. 
 Statement of case for TJ.B.E.E. put in by Mr. Bird (Exhibit 21). 
 Statement of case for C. P. E. put in by Mr. Davis (Exhibit 22). 
 
 His Lordship. — Shall we go on now, Mr. Bird ? I understand that some attempt 
 Las been made to settle. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Yes, and the main witnesses are out of the room, but I am prepared to 
 offer a witness who will keep matters going for a while. I will call Mr. Laverock. 
 
 His Lordship. — No danger of the settlement being affected by that ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I will try and not offer any testimony in peril of the situation. 
 
 David Laverock, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Are. you one of the ex-employees of the C. P. E. here ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How long have you been in the service of this company ? — A. Over five years. 
 
 Q. What particular part of the service do you work in, Mr. Laverock ?— A.' I 
 belong to the freight handlers' department. - 
 
 Q. When did you go on strike ? — A. On the 2nd of March; that was a day and a 
 half after the first batch went out. 
 
 Q. Do you belong to any secret organization ? — A. No, except that' organization 
 to which I belong, the IJ. B. E. E. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. They are bound by an oath ? Do you take an oath ? — A. Yes. 
 
 DAVID LAVEROCK— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
518 MINUTES OF ErwmCTJ OF ROTAL COMMISSTON 
 
 3-4 HDVMRD VII., A, 1904 
 
 By Mr. Bird ; 
 Q. What are you asking in this particular strike; Mr. Laverock ?— A. We are ask- 
 ing nothing in the shape of extra money, nothing extra, nor are we asking shorter hours. 
 All we ask is to be let alone in the union with which we have become associated ; that 
 is all ; not to be molested in any way. ' 
 
 (Mr. Davis objects to examination going on in the absence of Mr. Marpole.) 
 
 His Loedship. — How long are these settlement negotiations likely to., be ? 
 
 Mr. DA\as. — They are supposed to be very long. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I am ready to let Mr. Laverock's examination stand until I can get 
 Mr. Brownley. I did intend to call him first. He is not an employee of the C. P. E. 
 and not a striker. The object is just to show that on railways where there is no or- 
 ganization the employees are subjected to great indignities, and that the labour unions 
 prevent that. 
 
 His Lordship. — I think myself, it would be advisable to allow this matter to rest 
 if there is to be a settlement. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — It is absolutely impossible for me to go on in Mr. Marpole's absence. 
 
 His Lordship. — I don't think the Commission should go on. if there is likely to be 
 a settlement. If there are any merchants or others who have nothing whatever to do 
 with this strike and want to give evidence, we could hear them. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — This Mr. Brownley has no connection with the strike. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — The only trouble is, that if Mr. Bird goes on with the evidence I 
 will have to bring Mr. Marpole out. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is a matter of more importance to the community that this 
 thing be settled, than to spend a few hours here tating evidence, if it is going to create 
 friction. 
 Mr. Bird. — I quite agree with your Lordship 
 
 (Witness leaves box). 
 
 Thomas J. Shenton, sworn. 
 
 By Sis Lordship : 
 
 Q. Are you prepared to go on, Mr. Shenton ? — A. Yes. 
 
 His Lordship. — I might explain for the benefit of those here that it is intended to 
 complete the taking of this gentleman's evidence which was started at Nanaimo. It 
 has no immediate connection with the matters in which you gentlemen here are inter- 
 est<-d. The Commission will probably be engaged for some little time with this witness, 
 and I don't see any reason why anybody should be present unless they wish. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Probably your Lordship would say when we might return. We are 
 prepared to go on at any time, and are anxious really to expedite mattets now that it 
 .'ills lome to that point. 
 
 His Lordship — Better say a quarter to four. You could resume your negotiations 
 in the meartime. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — As far as I understand, my Lord, there is no possibility of any negotia-. 
 tions l«eiug continued with any expectation of success. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — From what Mr. Bodwell says, Mr. Shenton's examination v/ill prob- 
 ably take a little while, and I would suggest that as far as our people are concerned, it 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES 'IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 519 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 would be much more convenient to come back in the morning. It is now nearly three, 
 an4 probably tjjis evidence will take a couple of hours, or so. Probably it would be 
 more convenient for my learned friend and his people also, and we would not be losing 
 any time in the meanwhile. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — In reply to my learned friend, I may say my instructions are to urge 
 the matter on. We have been negotiating for nearly two days with the hopes 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I have not been responsible for that at all. We have made a proposi- 
 tion and apparently your people won't accept it. But I merely refer to our mutual 
 convenience. ' 
 
 Hts Lordship. — Have you your- documents ready '( 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Yes, my Lord. We have not yet got the affidavit of documents of my 
 learned friend. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I am prepared to give my learned friend the affidavit of documents 
 to-night; I have it nearly prepared. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I have mine ready. I will put it in and give rny learned friend a copy. 
 (Copy put in — Exhibit 25.) 
 
 His Lordship. — ^We would like very much to have all these documents before the 
 evidence begins. ;. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I assume that my learned friend will produce the documents ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Yes. 
 
 His Lordship. — You can spend the time looking over the documents. Then we 
 will be prepared to go on in the morning. If anyone wishes to give evidence on ques- 
 tions not directly concerned with this strike we will be glad to hear him Etfter this wit- 
 ness is through, but the matter of the tT.B.E.E. strike will be adjourned until to- 
 morrow. 
 
 Mr. Davis.— I may say in connection with the affidavit of documents put in-, there 
 are a number of documents put in a bundle marked A, with reference to which wo 
 claim privilege. We have no objection to showing these to the Commissioners, and if 
 they say that any or all of them are to be produced, of course we will produce them. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are still under oath, Mr. Shenton ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Now just tell us what took place at the joint executive meeting at Nanaimo ? — 
 A. At the joint executive board meeting that we had, it was called for the purpose of 
 gaining an understanding as to how things were at the different towns, both Nanaimo, 
 Ladysmith and also Cumberland. 
 
 Q. I suppose you met to discuss what measures you were going to take in aid of the 
 strikers at Ladysmith ? — A. Yes, that was one of the propositions. 
 
 Q. They met to discuss what aid should be rendered to the strikers at Ladysmith, 
 and I suppose generally, what measures should be taken in order to secure the success 
 of the strike ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What else was suggested besides the assessment of the different unions in order 
 to aid the strikers ? — A. There is no other method — that is, regarding finances— further 
 than looking into the Western Federation of Miners and general support for Lady- 
 smith. 
 
 Q. I mean outside of financial aid. What measures were discussed in order to 
 ensure the success of the strike at Ladymith ? — A. Matters were mentioned regarding 
 taking up subscriptions. 
 
 Q. Outside of that ? — A. No other matters that T am aware of. 
 
 Q. Was it suggested by any one, or was the matter suggested as to the organiza- 
 tion of the Chinese and Japs ?— A. No. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
520 MINVTEE OF EVIDE'SCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Nothing said about organizing the Chinese ? — A. Not to the best of my 
 memory — there was nothing said. 
 
 Q. Was there nothing said about organization of the Chinese by any two or more 
 members of that executive independently of the executive meeting ? — A. I am not able 
 to say ; I have no knowledge of that taking place. 
 
 Q. There was nothing said about the organization of Chinese in your presence ? 
 — A. Nothing in my presence. 
 
 Q. By any person ? — A. By any person. 
 
 Q. At any time- — I mean at Nanaimo ? — A. In connection with the meeting ? 
 
 Q. Or in connection with the men who met there ? — A. No, nothing in connection 
 with the men we met there. 
 
 Q, Was the matter discussed iii the Nanaimo union ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Was it discussed by any member of the Nanaimo union ? — A. All the discus- 
 sion that I have any knowledge of is what might have transpired on the street — general 
 talk or conversation, 
 
 Q. Were you a party to any such conversations ?^-A. Not in any special way that 
 I can remember. 
 
 -Q. Then you were a party to the subject of organization in conversations coming 
 up on the street ? — A. I have heard it discussed on the street. 
 
 Q. Who were the parties that discussed it ? — A. I don't know that I could point 
 to any individuals. I referred in a general way to the whole of the men. 
 
 Q. Were any of them members of this joint executive ? — A. No, I never heard 
 them discuss it on the street that I know of — that is the general board. 
 
 Q. Then I am to understand that as far as you know, there never was at any time, 
 in any place, a discussion between any two or more members of that joint executive 
 upon the subject of organization of Chinese ? — A. Not to my knowledge — not that I 
 am aware of. 
 
 Q. I am to understand that no other measure, outside of financial measures, was 
 suggested at that meeting, or between any two or more members in order to ensure 
 the success of the strike at Ladysmith ? — A. No, that was not all that was discussed 
 by the board — neither was it all it was called for. 
 
 Q. What other matters were discussed ? — A. Matters regarding something being 
 done in a joint form regarding trying to show our approval at the House at Victoria 
 of the conciliatory bill which was being brought forward. That was one object we had 
 in view. 
 
 Q.. A deputation from the executive did go to Victoria ? — A. Yes; 
 
 Q. What day was that ? — A. I am at a loss to tell. 
 
 Q. Did they go to see the government, or any member of it ? — A. Yes, the gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 Q. Did they go to see any member of the government about enforcing the pro- 
 visions of the Bill then passed ? — A. They waited on Mr. Mclnnis. 
 
 Q. Did they go to see him about sending up an inspector to see that the Chinese 
 were taken out ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did they suggest to him that the inspector should be sent up ? — A. Nov 
 
 Q. Were you a member of that deputation ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was the subject of the interview ? — A. The subject of the interview was 
 tj try and get — we were instructed to inform Mr. Mclnnis — he had introduced a con- 
 ciliation bill, and we approved as a union of that bill — and also to try and arrange a 
 settlement at Ladysmith. That was the more particular business of the joint com- 
 mittee. Still, all tilings -were the business of the committee. 
 
 Q. The question of sending the inspector was not mentioned ? — A. Not at all. 
 
 Q. About this telegram on March 9th to James A. Baker, Slocan — ' Urgent request 
 for your presence, come to Nanaimo if possible immediately—' Just explain what is 
 meant by that telegram ? — A. As near as I can remember that telegram for the calling 
 on Mr. Baker was in connection with — was simply sent from Nanaimo as forwarded 
 THOMAS J. SHBNTON— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
Oy INDJJSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 521 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 en from Ladysmith in connection, I think, with the organization of the miners at that 
 town — as a request. I believe that is the same telegram. 
 
 Q. Then the object of this telegram was to come and organize the miners at Lady- 
 smith ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Wiy did you send it ? — A. I think I am mistaken, your Lordship; there are 
 sc many telegrams. I thinly I am siibstituting that telegram in the wrong place. 
 That is the telegram that was sent rather — I remember now- — that is the telegram that 
 was sent — there were two sent — in connection with the possible trouble that we had 
 in sight at our own place, and we wanted Mr. Baker there in connection with our own 
 trouble, and I was requested to send for him immediately. That is the telegram. 
 
 Q. What trouble was in sight ? — A. That was in connection with the local dispute 
 that occurred there ; in the month of February, I think it was. 
 
 Q. When was that local dispute settled ? — A. That was settled about the latter end 
 of February. 
 
 Q. I think you must still be mistaken, Mr. Shenton, because this telegram is dated 
 March 9, so it cannot have anything to do with that dispute ? — A. Yes, your Lordship, 
 but the matter was under way for three or four weeks, pending. 
 
 Q. But you told us the dispute was settled the end of February, and here is the 
 telegram sent on March 9, asking Mr. Baker to come immediately. You also say there 
 is an, urgent request for his presence ? — A. Yes, it is in connection with the matter on 
 hand then; it extended over a period of three or four weeks. 
 
 Q. But you tell us that particular trouble was settled at the end of February. I 
 am reminding you that this telegram is dated March 9, and the strike at Ladysmith 
 took place on March 11. In view of that, is not your first answer the correct one ? 
 — A. (None.) 
 
 Mr. EoWE. — I think it muSt be, because Mr. Baker said he was called about March 
 10; he said that in his evidence. 
 
 A. I am not able to recall ; I am not clear. I am sorry. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Is it not clear that the object of the telegram was to request him to come and 
 organize the men at Ladysmith — this telegram on March 9, sent by you ? — A. I cannot 
 recall the matter clearly. 
 
 Q. It is the reasonable and obvious conclusion that that is the meaning of the tele- 
 gram, is it not ? — A. It seems so, although I thought — I know there was a second tele- 
 gram urging Mr. Baker to come immediately in connection with our trouble. I have 
 forgotten the date. 
 
 By Mr. Howe : 
 Q. Did he come ? — A. Yes, he was at Nanaimo during the dispute, as speedily as 
 he could be got there. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Qi He answered on March 10 that he would leave Fernie for Nanaimo 'to-morrow 
 morning ' and he himself says in his evidence that he was sent to organize. I suppose 
 there is no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that this is the telegram ? — A. Yes, 
 I guess it. must be. I cannot just recall all the telegrams. We had our own trouble 
 somewhere about that time. 
 
 Q. Who requested you to send this telegram ? — A- The request of Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Who at Ladysmith requested you ? — A. I think it was Mr. Mottishaw, if I am 
 
 mistaken. 
 
 Q. Why should they not have sent the telegram direct, instead of through you ? — 
 A. Well, I don't know that they have any telegraph office at Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Yes, there is a telegraph office at Ladysmith ? — A. Yes, that is right; I don't 
 
 know why they did that. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
5^ MINUTES OF EVWmCE OF ROTALGOMMISSIOir 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Who paid for this telegram ? — A. The Ladysmith — Mr. Mottishaw. 
 
 Q. They paid for it .?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Didn't you pay fpr it at the Nanaimo office ?-^A. Not that: I am aware of i ■ 
 
 Q. How did you get the telegram from Ladysmith ? How were you instructed to 
 send this telegram — ^by letter ? — A. If my memory serves me right, Mr. Mottishaw came 
 into. town on the day. - 
 
 Q. Why didn't you ask him to send it himself ?-^A. Well, usually as men knowing 
 each other, we will help each pther in that regard. He simply asked m^ to send it for 
 him. , . 
 
 Q. If that is the case, why should you ask Baker to come to Nanaimo, rather than 
 Ladysmith ? — A. I cannot see that there was any special reason why, Mr. Hunter. 
 
 Q. Is it not the obvious inference that it was intended to discuss the matter before 
 proceeding to Ladysmith ? — A. No, I think not. The only connection I have with that 
 Icircumstance is the fact of my being called on, and that was to suit his convenience 
 in regard to sending that telegram ;, thfit is all. , 
 
 Q. And you say it is a wrong inference to suppose that Mr. Baker should have a 
 discussion with you and other Nanaimo leaders before he proceeded to Ladysmith. Is 
 that correct or wrong ? — A. I thinlv that is correct simply from the fact, as I have 
 stated previously in my evidence, that we always tried to keep out of the matter because 
 the Ladysmith men, or Dunsmuir's employees, had been feeling a little sore with Nana- 
 imo men having anything to do with the matter, and we tried to keep out of it as much 
 as possible. 
 
 Q. If that is the case, why didn't you tell Mottishaw to send the telegram himself ? 
 — A. In the first place, he is a poor writer; it was only a matter of convenience. 
 
 Q. But you could have signed Mottishaw's name to the telegram ? — A. Yes, I 
 could have ; I cannot just say now why I signed my own name. I am willing to con- 
 fess my name was signed. ' 
 
 Q. I don't see why you make so much mystery over the matter, Mr. Shenton. You 
 would naturally like to see a union at Ladysmith, as a union man ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you would naturally do all you could with Mr. Baker to suggest the best 
 way of doing it, would you not ? — A. Well, that was not the reason why he was sent 
 for to come to Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. What was the reason why he was asked to com.e to Nanaimo ? — A. As I have 
 said, I don't know that there was any special reason that I could give. 
 
 Q. Then you don't want us to infer that it was the intention that you and he 
 should have a talk over the matter before he proceeded to Ladysmith ? — A. No, I don't. 
 
 Q. Yet, it is the obvious inference, is it not ? Is that not so ? — A. Well, it may 
 appear to be so, but at the time, as far as my knowledge goes, that was not so. 
 
 Q. Why was he to come immediately to Nanaimo ? What was the urgency ? — A. 
 Well, of course that meant immediately to Ladysmith I guess 
 
 Q. What was the urgency ? — ^A. The only urgency that I know is that the men had 
 stated they wanted to organize at Ladysmith, and they wanted him there to organize 
 them. 
 
 Q. Now, did Mr. Baker show you a telegram which he sent to Moyer asking Moyer 
 to come to Nanaimo? — A. Yes, I believe I have seen the telegram. (This telegram 
 was in cipher.) 
 
 Q. So that Mr. Baker and you were discussing this matter together evidently ? — 
 A. Well, at times of course, naturally so. Mr. Baker and myself talked the matter 
 over; that was only natural. 
 
 By Mr. Bowc : 
 Q. Did you see Mr. Baker before he went to Ladysmith, when he came to Nanai- 
 jQo? A. If I did see him it was just on matters of his business there. I don't re- 
 member having any conversation with him at all when he came to Nanaimo. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
Oir INDUSTRIAL DIS'PVTES Iff BRiTISff VOlVMbIA 523- 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. He would naturally want to know why you sent for him ? — A. Of course the 
 Ladysmith men — that is Mr. Mottishaw — knew he was coming ;and the time he would 
 be there, and wo waited and received him there, to conduct him down to Ladysmith. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Baker show you a telegram dated March 14, in which Moyer tells 
 him he has full power to act for the Federation ? — A. Yes, I thinli I have seen that. 
 Q. So that there is no doubt that Mr. Baker and you were consulting frequently 
 about the organization of these men at Ladysmith, 'and about the strike generally ? 
 — A. Mr. Baker often came to me with either letters, communications or telegrams 
 from Moyer, and would read them to me. 
 
 Q. And Baker was taking advice from you as to how to conduct the affair ? — A. 
 Not that I am aware of. 
 
 Q. He Would naturally take advice from somebody on the subject ?— A. I don't 
 know as to advice; we simply had talks over the matter. 
 
 Q. He was consulting with you from time to time ? That is the evidence by this 
 correspondence, is it not ? — A. Well, if he took advice from any discussions that we 
 had. Of course I don't know anything about it. 
 
 Q. Well, he was discussing the matter with you anyway ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Who else did he discuss it with ? I mean of the Nanaimo men ? — -A. He had 
 a few conversations with the president; I cannot say how many times they met. 
 
 Q. That is Mr. Neave ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And I suppose you and Mr. Neave had discussions about the situation ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. He is president, and you are secretary of the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When did Baker get to Nanaimo ? — A. I don't remember the date of that 
 either. 
 
 Q. About the 11th or 12th of March, was it not ? Because he sends a telegram to 
 Moyer on the 13th from IJanaimo, and you asked him to come on the 9th, so he must 
 have come between the 11th and 12th ? — A. Yes, somewhere between those dates. 
 
 Q. Were you at Ladysmith about that time ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. How long before that were you at Ladysmith ? — A. I don't know how long 
 before that. 
 
 Q. You had a conversation with Mottishaw about the advisability of organizing 
 the Ladysmith men ? — A. He had a conversation with me regarding the matter, yes. 
 
 Q. When was that ? — A. Previous, I think, to the time of organization ; I cannot 
 just remember the date. He had a conversation with me. 
 
 Q. I suppose you suggested it would be a good idea to organize the men ? — A. I 
 simply did not volunteer the suggestion that it would be. 
 
 Q. You coincided in the view that it would be ? — A. That was dependent on the 
 fact of their seeking for organization. As I stated in my evidence previously, there 
 had been several representations made to Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. You were favourable to the idea of them organizing, were you not ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you discuss the matter with anybody besides Mr. Mottishaw — I mean 
 among the Ladysmith men? — A. No person that I know of outside. I may have dis- 
 cussed it once with the son — with the father and son ; I don't remember any" individual 
 in particular. 
 
 Q. Did you have any correspondence by letter or telegram with anybody in Van- 
 couver about the strike here, or about the strikes on the Island ? — A. I had one about 
 a strike here. 
 
 Q. With whom ? — A. We had one in connection with the union — J. H. Halton, 
 I think, is the agent. 
 
 Q. Who is J. H. Halton ?— A. Agent for the U. B. E. E. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
524 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Whiat was the nature of that communication ? — A. As near as I can remember 
 — Of course as I stated before, I would like to say that I am taking the responsibility 
 of doing what our union has really forbidden we should dO. 
 
 Q. We understand all that. We understand that you are giving evidence under 
 compulsion, but it is in the public interest that the whole matter should be set forth. 
 What was in that communication ? — A. The communication was to the effect that coal 
 was coming from Nanaimo to Vancouver. 
 
 Q. Yes, what else ? — A. Well, simply asking that we look into the matter, that is 
 all. 
 
 Q. Have you got that telegram you have been subpcenaed to produce here ? — A. 
 Tes. 
 
 Q. These are all the papers you are producing under the subpoena ? — A. Tes. 
 
 (Papers produced marked Exhibit 24.) 
 
 Q. Just read that please — ' Coal coming to Vancouver said to be from Nanaimo ; 
 please say.' — A. Tes, that is it. 
 
 Q. What reply did you make ? — A. The reply I gave is underneath — well, the 
 reply I did not take a copy of. The reply is contained in the r6port given to the meet- 
 ing there. It follows in the report. 
 
 Q. You informed them of the fact that no coal was coming from Nanaimo ? — A. 
 Tes. 
 
 Q. Had the Nanaimo mines been supplying coal to Vancouver, what would you 
 have done — I mean to the C. P. E. ? — A. Well, all I could say is, to take the responsi- 
 bility in that connection — all I could say was that the feeling was of course to per- 
 suade the company from sending coal by reasonable methods. 
 
 Q. Tou would feel it your duty to endeavour to dissuade the company from 
 Supplying coal ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. And I suppose if the company didn't fall in with your view you would have 
 considered it a proper thing to strike, on a certain length of notice ? — A. It is hard to 
 relate what would be done under that circumstance. 
 
 Q. Would you consider your union would be justified in doing that ? — A. I don't 
 think they hardly would. That is the feeling of the men. 
 
 Q. Why don't you think so ? There is a difference of opinion among union men 
 as to that ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. Would you say it would not be justified ? — A. Well, locally it is looked upon 
 by a large body of our men that it would be injuring the local industry to some extent, 
 assuming they were consistent with us — that we had no right to injure the local in- 
 dustry in that regard. 
 
 Q. Did you have any further correspondence with any of the strikers in Van- 
 couver ? — A. No, I have no other ; that is all the correspondence at present. 
 
 Q. Did you have any correspondence with Moyer ?— A. Tes, it is there. 
 
 Q. Tou got this telegram: 'March 3, T. J. Shenton — Use your best efforts to 
 prevent the C. P. R. from getting coal at Vancouver. Assist strikers all you can ' ? — 
 A. Tes. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. What is the date of that, your Lordship ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. It is probably March 3 or March S— it may possibly be March 6. And you 
 answer that on the same day ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. So it was agreed March 6 — ' We will render all assistance possible — .' That 
 is right ? — A. Yes, that is correct. 
 
 Q. Now, what did you do ? — A. That is contained in the report. We approached 
 the cmpaiiy and asked them if that was so, and they stated they had not supplied any 
 coal to the C.P.R. for the last four or five years. Of course, the matter dropped riglit 
 there. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
OiY INDUSTRIAL DTSPDfEiS IN BRITISH GOWMBIA 525- 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 _ Q. There is a telegram here from Craig, of March 30. Who is Craig ? — A. T 
 think I replied to that in Nanaimo; he is at Ternie. 
 
 Q. Oh, yes : that is where you say there were some men in Nanaimo whom it ad- 
 vised not to go to Fernie looking for work ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Can you explain why that telegram should have come to you. I notice that 
 Mr. Baker wired that same day to Fernie, March 30, the date before the Strike ap- 
 parently was closed ? — A. Why that telegram was sent out by Mr. Craig ? 
 
 Q.. Tes ? — A. Well, I could not answer that, Mr. Eowe. It was simply sent to me. 
 It was just as much a surprise to me. I have had very few communications with Mr. 
 Craig at all in any way. 
 
 By His Lordsliip : 
 
 Q. Was this a matter of the supplying of the coal, about which you reported, dis- 
 cussed in the union meeting ? — A. The matter was laid before the executive at first. 
 
 Q. Discussed before the executive ? — A. i es. 
 
 Q. In an open meeting ? — A. That is where I got my instructions to see the com- 
 pany. 
 
 Q. The matter was not discussed in an open meeting of the union ? — A. It was 
 laid before the meeting in a report, as stated there. 
 
 Q. Was the matter discussed at, the general meeting ? — A. No lengthy discussion 
 passed upon it to the best of my memory, any further 
 
 Q. When the request came to use all efforts to prevent coal from being supplied to 
 the C.P.E., was that request submitted to the men in open meeting, or was it acted on 
 by the executive ? — A. That was submitted to the men. That came after the letter 
 from here, I think. 
 
 Q. No, that telegram of Moyer is March 6, and your report is March 28 ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The telegram of Mr. Moyer was laid before the union or just the executive ? — 
 A. Before the union. 
 
 Q. I mean before the executive took action on it, was it laid before the union ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. At a meeting specially called ? — A. No, a general meeting. 
 
 Q. And was there discussed. Were the executive instructed by tlie meeting to do 
 anything ? — A. Not in regard to the Moyer telegram. Simply the action was initiated 
 by the executive regarding the reply given. 
 
 Q. Did the executive go to see the management with the sanction of the union ? — 
 A. Yes, they sent me to see the management. 
 
 Q. Did the union deal with the matter without consulting the union as a whole ? 
 — A. They simply advised me that I ought to see whether that was true. 
 
 Q. You say, Mr. Shenton, that when you got this telegram the executive instructed 
 you to see the management ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you got your instructions from the executive without the union having 
 first been called to consider the matter ?— A. Yes, the executive suggested that I had 
 better approach the management, and then it could be introduced to the meeting on the 
 following Saturday which was closely following. That was what was done. 
 
 Q. I understood you to say that this telegram from Moyer to Baker of April 22 
 instructing the organization of the Chinese and Japanese was not shown to you ? — 
 A. No not at all. Until you showed it to me, I never saw it before I was at Nanaimo. 
 
 Q. Well, Barber told you in confidence about this telegram ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did you have a conversation with Eichards up at Cumberland about organizing 
 the Chinese ?^A. No. 
 
 Q. No conversation whatever with him on that subject ? — A. No. , 
 
 Q. You gave an account to Eichards of your conversation with Baker, didn't you ? 
 A Gave an account to Eichards ? 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver,, June 3. 
 
526 MINUTES OT EriBENCE OF R&TAL COI^MISSION ' ' 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vrr., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Yes — of your conversatioii with Baker at Nanaimd ? — A. I did in the con- 
 nection of being sent there, the reason why I was sent, &c. 
 
 Q. You state you gave Baker a full report of how matters were coining up in 
 Cumberland? — A. Yes. :' 
 
 Q. And you say you had no conversation with Eichards about the Chinese ? — 
 AiNo. 
 
 Q. And thaf hf, didn't think the idea of orgaiiizing the Chinese a good one ? — 
 A. I cannot remember any expression of opinion from him along that line at all. 
 
 Q. Did you have a conversation with anybody else besides l^r. Hall up there about 
 the CJimesc ?— A. A'o, I sia not aware t)':;t i had any conversation, there with any; one 
 outside of Mr.. Hall on ihat sul.xct. 
 
 ■Q. Have you confidence in Baker, as a leader of this union ? — A. Well, up to the 
 present time I cannot say that I have had anything to tempt me to feel that I could 
 not have confidence in him. 
 
 Q. Do you think he is a safe man to be entrusted with the powers that he ha? ? — 
 A. Yes, I think he is a fairly safe man, as far as I know Mr. Baker. 
 
 Q. I think you told us that you knew nothing of his intention to organize the 
 Chinese or Japs ? — ^A. No, I don't know anything. 
 
 Q. You were never consulted about that at all ? — -A. No., 
 
 Q. There is no one in the Nanaimo union who has a better right to be consulted 
 on such matters than you, is there ? — A. No, I guess there is not, , 
 
 Q. So that it is not likely that he would consult anybody if he didn't consult you ? 
 — :A. Well, he didn't consult me; I cannot say whether he consulted anybody else. 
 
 Q. You saw this telegram from Baker to Moyer of 13th March, which is in cipher 
 — ' Can you come here, important, answer ' — that is what it means when translated ? 
 — A. I never saw the telegram. 
 
 Q. You never saw the telegram of March 13 ? — A. Not in connection with his 
 asking him' to come. He informed me regarding the matter. 
 
 Q. He told you he had sent a telegram ? — A. He told me he had asked Mr. Moyer 
 to come; I don't know whether by telegram, letter or how. 
 
 Q. He didn't show you the telegram he sent ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did you see any telegram from Eussell to Baker of May 9 ?— A. Russell ? 
 
 Q. Yes ?— A. What is the initial ? 
 
 Q. F. J. Eussell ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. I suppose you kept yourself posted in relation to what was going on in rela- 
 tion to the TJ. B. R. E. strike ? — A. Well, I don't know that I have, your Lordship; 
 I don't just exactly know. 
 
 Q. You felt an interest in the struggle, did you not ? — A. I felt an interest this 
 way — the same as any man would be as a union man. 
 
 Q. Naturally desirous of seeing them succeed, I suppose ? — -A, Yes. 
 
 Q. Is this all the correspondence you have had with any of the TJ. B. R. E. men ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you had any correspondence of any account with Estes ? — A. We had a 
 letter at the commencement, I think — the commencement of the strike — from Mr. 
 Estes — just one, to the union. 
 
 Q. Where is that letter ? — A. I have not got it here. I looked it over. I could 
 have brought it if I thought there was anything in it, but there is nothing relating to 
 the situation, no more than to intimate something about the strike, giving the men 
 encouragement, &c., anything in the form of working for encouragement. 
 
 Q. Mr. Shenton, that letter is distinctly covered by the subpoena ; that letter, should 
 be here ? — A. I can send it on. There is nothing more in it than any of the letters 
 tihat I have brought. 
 
 Q. You had better telegraph for that letter, Mr. Shenton, and any further corre- 
 spondence that you have. I don't understand why you came to. consider that that 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
ON JWnUSTBIAL DflffOTES IN BEITISH COWMBIA 527 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 letter was not required. We will have to allow this examination to stand until you 
 can produce that letter. You had better get it by wire ? — A. I can get it 
 
 Q. And any further correspondence that you have 1 — A. There is no more. 
 
 Q. What time does the boat come in to-morrow ? — A. Between; ten and twelve, I 
 expect. ■ ■ ' i' . , •• ■"-■'■.■■'. 
 
 Q. Then your examination will have to stand until you produce the letter. You^ 
 wiU send a wire for that to-night, Mi;. King wiU pay the expense of the telegram ? — 
 A. Yes, I can send for it. 
 
 Mr. BofiWELL. — Might I ask Mr. Shenton one or two questions ? 
 
 His Lokdship. — Very well. 
 
 By Mr, Bodwell ■ 
 
 Q. I understand you to say that Mr. Baker was in Nanaimo in FeBrttary ? — 
 A. Yes, I believe so. < r , 
 
 Q. You will know. Was he not in Nanaimo in February ? — A. I am not clear 
 upon the dates. 
 
 Q. I mean generally— a week or ten days, or as long as that ? — A. Yes, two or 
 three weeks. 
 
 Q. And he came from Sandon to ISTanaimo ? — A. I don't know -what pbitit in 
 particular he came from. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether he came by way of Vancouver to Nanaimo ?— A. Yes, 
 I think he did. 
 
 Q. And do you know whether he stayed in Vancouver for any length of time on 
 his way to Nanaimo ? — -A. Well, I could not answer; I don't know, Mr. Bodwell; I 
 don't remember. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether or not he saw Mr. Estes in Vancouver, didn't he tell you 
 he did ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Didn't he talk to you about a strike in Vancouver ? The strike in Vancouver • 
 was in February ? — A. Yes, in February. 
 
 Q. Didn't Mr. Baker talk to you about the situation of afPairs in Vancouver when 
 he was in Nanaimo in February ? — A. I had the least of taUv with Mr. Baker regard- 
 ing the situation in Vancouver. 
 
 Q. Here on March 6, you get a telegram from Moyer to use all your efforts to 
 assist the strike in Vancouver. Did Mr. Baker talk to you about the strike in Van- 
 couver when he was in Nanaimo in February, and don't you know of communications 
 between him and Moyer on the subject ? — A. He talked the least to me about the 
 strike in Vancouver it was possible to talk at any time. 
 
 Q. Yes, but didn't he talk to you about it, and about the plans of the Western 
 Federation in regard to it ? — A. Not at all. 
 
 Q. You mu^'t have known the plans of the Federation when you got this telegram 
 on the 6th of March ? — A. I didn't know their plans. 
 
 Q. That is all you got ?— A. Yes, that is all I got. 
 
 Q. You had no conversations ? — A. No conversations. 
 
 ■Q. Is that reasonable ? Here is Mr. Baker, the organizer — By the way, why didn't 
 you tell me aljcut this telegram from Moyer, when I was asking you in Nanaimo about 
 Estes ? — A. I said that — that does not refer to Estes. 
 
 Q. Yes, but if you had said you had a telegram from Mr. Moyer it would have 
 opened this vhole thing up ? — A. If you had asked me about it I would have pro- 
 duced it. 
 
 Q. Didn't you know about this telegram at that time ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And didn't you know this was in consequence of a commimication from Estes 
 to Moyer, askr'ng him to call out the Western Federation that you got this telegram ? 
 —A. No, I dirin't know that. 
 
 Q. Don't you know it now ? — A. I would have to surmise it. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 3 
 
K8 MiyVTES OF ETIDE^'GE OF ROYAL C0MMIS8I0Jf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Don't 5GU remember that I asked in Nanaimo whetlier Estes' statement tliat 
 he had co.'niniiiiiiated with Moyer or the "Western Federation as to calling them out 
 w.'is true or not '^— A. Yes, I remember that quite well. 
 
 Q. And. JO II said you didn't loiow anything about it ? — A. Yes, I did. 
 
 Q. Di5 you think that was a frank answer, in view of the fact that you have this 
 telegram nskin^r you to assist the strike in Vancouver ? — A. The question you placed 
 before me was in reference to the telegrams produced by Mr. Estes. 
 
 Q. Didn't I ask you if you believed it were true that Estes had communicated with 
 Moyer or the Western Federation, asking them to come out? What answer did you 
 give to that ? — A. If you asked me if it was true ? 
 
 Q. I asked you if you believed it was true. Wliat answer did you give? — A. I 
 recollect you asking nie if I believed it was true, if he had power given him by the 
 Western Federation to call out tlie men, and I said, no. , 
 
 Q. I asked if you believed it was true that Estes had communicated with the 
 Western Federation, asking them to do this. Do you believe it is true that Estes com- 
 municated with Denver, asking them to call out the Western Federation in sympathy 
 with the strike in Vancouver ? — A. It looks as though he must have done it. 
 
 Q. Don't you know, outside of anything you have told us yet, that this is the 
 exact state of affairs ? — A. No, I don't know from real facts. 
 
 Q. You want us to believe that, having all these communications from Mr. Baker, 
 and having all these conversations with Mr. Baker, he never alluded to that subject? — 
 A. No, he never alluded to that subject, that I know of. 
 
 Q. What are you keeping back now ? — A. I am keeping nothing back. 
 
 Q. But you kept this back? — A. Did you ask me that? 
 
 Q. I am asking you now whether you are pursuing the same line you did before? 
 Are you simply answering questions, and keeping back all the necessary information ? 
 — A. I am answering questions. 
 
 Q. I am asking you to tell this Compiission what you know about the actions of 
 Estes towards the Western Federation in connection with the Vancouver strike? — A. 
 I am telling this Commission everything I know to be true and the fact. I cannot 
 remember every detail and every point. 
 
 Q. You had several conversations with Mr. Baker when he was in Nahaimo in 
 February, you telegraphed Mr. Baker when he came to Nanaimo in March, you were 
 sent by Baker to Union when he left Nanaimo, and you had conversations with Baker 
 during the time he was in Nanaimo, after this Commission began to sit, and before 
 he went to the convention at Denver. Now, I want you to tell us if, in any of these 
 conversations. Baker did not allude to the situation at Vancouver ? — A. I am not 
 aware of any allvisions being made in my presence. 
 
 Q. I want you to. tell the Commission whether you discussed with Baker the sub- 
 ject of this telegram from Moyer to you of March 6, to assist the strikers all you 
 could ? — A. No, I think not. 
 
 Q. You never mentioned it to Baker ? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. And you had no instructions from anybody as to what policy was to be car- 
 ried on by you in carrying out these instructions ? — A. From nobody. 
 
 Q. Then it was left entirely to your discretion as to how you were to assist ? — 
 A. Our own executive. 
 
 Q. I am speaking a'.out the executive oiScers of the Western Federation — Baker 
 or some other executive officer ? — A. I say I had no instructions whatever. 
 
 Q. And did you at no time know what the plan for assisting the strike at Van- 
 couver was ? — A. No, outside of financial support, which they might be expected to 
 ^ive in due season. 
 
 Q. Don't you know that Estes said the Western Federation had promised him to 
 call out all the coal miners on Vancouver Island ? Didn't you have any conversation 
 with Baker on that subject ?— A. None whatever, at no time. 
 
 Q. Never heard that that was the plan ? — A. No, from Baker or any one else. 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES Of BRITISH COLUMBIA 529 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Well, on Marck 6 Moyer telegraphs you to assist the strikers at Vancouver all 
 you can; on March 9 you telegraph Baker to come to Nanaimo; on March 10 Baker 
 arrives at Nanaimo; on March 13, 14 and 16 he organized the miners at Ladysmith, 
 and there is a strike; on March 16 the Steamshipmen's Union are called out and the 
 C.P.E. steamboats are tied up, or an attempt made to do so. Did you know nothing 
 about the relation which these movements had one to the other — A. None whatever. 
 
 Q. And prior to that Estes had said in Vancouver that he was going to close all 
 the coal mines on Vancouver Island, so as to stop the O.P.R. getting coal, and on 
 March 25 F. J. Halton telegraphs from Vancouver, asking you where coal is coming 
 from that the O.P.R. are getting. I want to know what you know about all these 
 coincidences, and the relation they had from one to the other ? — A. I have simply 
 stated what I know. 
 
 Q. Then we are to understand that Baker was treating you in the same way as 
 he treated the men of the joint executive, when they met in Nanaimo, and did not dis- 
 close to you, as he did not disclose to them, the fact that the union miners were to be 
 called out in sympathy with Ladysmith. Are we to understand that; that Baker was 
 (deceiving you or misleading you in the same way as he misled the joint executive ?^ 
 A. Well, you may put whatever construction upon it you may ; my answer is still the 
 same. I knew nothing whatever and neither did the executive board know anything to 
 that effect. 
 
 Q. Don't you believe now, from what you have seen in the correspondence, that 
 Baker was acting under instructions from the Denver executive in conjunction with 
 Estes, and that the plan was to prevent coal coming to the 0. P. P.. Don't you believe 
 that now ? — A. Well, it has a likeness to that. But, why should I be made responsible 
 for believing that ? 
 
 Q. I ask you if you don't believe it from what you have seen, and from what you 
 loiow — if you don't believe that Baker and Estes were acting together ? — A. I prefer 
 to believe not, until I have had an opportunity to approach the proper quarters — in this 
 case of being misled. While things point to that possibly being true, yet up to the 
 present time we have had no opportunity of getting particulars in that direction, I 
 won't take the responsibility of saying I do believe. 
 
 Q. What steps will be necessary on your part to ascertain whether your belief is 
 well founded or not ? — ^A. The necessary steps of course would be to approach the 
 Western Federation or Mr. Baker himself. 
 
 Q. Did you write anything to Mr. Moyer in response to this telegram of March 6 ? 
 Did you make a report to him ?— A. The report is there. 
 
 Q. ' We will render all assistance possible ' — A. That is all. 
 
 Q. Didn't you have any letter from him ?^A. No more than we have there ; I pro- 
 duced all the letters. 
 
 Q. When you stated you would render all assistance possible, what did you refer 
 to ?— A. I referred to just the action taken. 
 
 Q. But your instructions were to use your best endeavours to prevent the O.P.R. 
 frotn getting coal at Vancouver; you said ' We will render all assigtaince possibl e ,., ' , 
 What did vou intend to do to prevent the O.P.R. getting coal at Vancouver ? — 
 A. Simply to ask the company to abstain from sending coal. 
 
 Q. Didn't you intend to organize the Oumberland and Ladysmith miners with what 
 end in view ? — A. Not at all. 
 
 Q. Is it not a strange coincidence, that you were engaged ip, prganizing tljie Lajdy- 
 smith- miners?— A.- Me?: No. , ' 
 
 Q. You say Mr. Mottishaw came to you with reference to organization at liady- 
 emitli ?--A. , H& came to .ipe, an^ ipdicate^ to m,e— — - , , ; . ■ '. 
 
 Q. When did he come— about March' S or Ma'rch'6'? I waiit'you to note these dates. 
 On, March 6, you got a tel^grar^i frpm Moyer, to use your best effdi'ts to prevent the ' 
 C.P.R. getting coai at Vancouver. Gn March 6 you answer':' 'We will render all 
 
 tHOiMAS J. SHENTON— VaiicouVer, June '3. 
 
 360—34 '• ' ^ ^ 
 
530 klNUTES OP EVIDENCE OF ROYAL C0MMIS8I0W 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904- 
 
 assistance possible.' On March 9 you telegraph to Baker: 'Your presence urgently 
 needed at Ladysmith.' Now, was that telegram sent to Baker in pursuance of your 
 promise to Moyer in the telegram of March 6 ? — A. Not by any means ; no connection, 
 as far as I can see. 
 
 Q. Then, when Mr. Mottishaw came to ask you to telegraph to Baker to organize 
 Ladysmith, you did not think that that move would prevent the C.P.R. from getting 
 coal ? — A. Irrespective of that or not. That was not the idea or thought at all. It had 
 no connection whatever. ■ ■: 
 
 Q. And the fact that on the 16th the Ladysmith miners were organized and in- 
 sisted in pressing a demand on the company which you knew the company would not 
 accede to — you knew the company at Ladysmith would not recognize the Western 
 Federation, didn't you ? — A. I didn't know. 
 
 Q. Were you not sure of it, with all the experience you have had with Mr. Duns- 
 muir — were you not sure he would not recognize it?— A. There was still a possibility. 
 
 Q. Were you not thoroughly convinced he would not recognize a union? — A. No. 
 
 Q. And didn't you know that if you got the Western Federation organized at 
 Ladysmith, they would demand recognition, and there would be a strike immediately 
 —didn't you believe that? — A. I believed these things were possible in the trend of 
 things. 
 
 Q. Didn't you think that was going to happen? Didn't you think in your own 
 mind that that would be the result of the action? If the Western Federation was 
 organized, they would demand recognition, Dunsmuir would refuse it, and there would 
 be a strike— didn't you think that was the course? — A. I foresaw that was possible, 
 but we didn't expect that. 
 
 Q. Will you swear that you did not expect that result would follow ? — A. Well, we 
 were hopeful it would not. 
 
 Q. Did not you expect it — that is the answer I want from you ? 
 
 By Sis Lordship: 
 Q. If I were you, Mr. Shenton, I would give such an answer as would commend 
 itself to the intelligence of the audience ? — A. I am trying to do that, but I don't want 
 Mr. Bodwell to argue it into a position where I shall make a false statement. I did 
 not expect that Mr. Dunsmuir, under these circumstances, would, so long as the men 
 continued at their work, that he would do as he had done in the past. We were hope- 
 ful that he would do better. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Well, you have not answered my question. Tou have been in Nananimo how 
 many years? — A. I was away some four years; I came early in '93. 
 
 Q. Tou knew Mr. Dunsmuir had refused to recognize the union when it was started 
 at Wellington, from common report anyway? — A. Yes, common report. 
 
 Q. You knew, as a matter of history, that he had refused to recognize a union at 
 Union mines? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And at Alexandria mines? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you knew that he had expressed himself, over and over again, to the effect 
 that he would not have a union among his men ?^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Now, I ask you, if you did not expect, when you organized the union at Lady- 
 smith, that they v/ould demand recognition ? — A. Yes, I expected they would demand 
 recognition. 
 
 Q. And didn't you expect that Dunsmuir would refuse it, as he had always done 
 in the past — did not you look for it? — A. It was most likely, of course. 
 
 Q. Well, if the union was organized at Ladysmith, and demanded recognition, 
 !and it was refused, there would be a strike — did you not expect that ? If they de- 
 manded recognition and Dunsmuir refused, there would be a strike ?^A. . I don't know ; 
 
 THOMAS J. SIIENTON— Vaacouver, June 3. 
 
ON IJfDUSTRTAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 531 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 if Mr. Dunsmuir preferred to allow the men to work without demanding recognition 
 of the union. 
 
 Q. You know the kind of man Mr. Dunsmuir is, so you know it would be refused, 
 and didn't you expect a strike would follow ? — A. Well, of course, I did. 
 
 Q. And would not a strike at Ladysmith shut off the C.P.R. supply of coal, to the 
 best of your knowledge and information ? — A. Yes, it would. 
 
 Q. And would that not be carrying out your promise to Moyer that you vyould do 
 all you could to prevent the C. P. R. getting a supply of coal ? — A. As I say, it was 
 irrespective of that — that was not the intention. Organization alone was the inten- 
 tion. 
 
 Q. Does it not strike you as singular that it works out in that way ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And now you tell us that subject was never mentioned or discussed between 
 you and Baker ? — A. Never. 
 
 Q. What did you discuss with him as to the steps you would take to carry out 
 'your promise to Moyer to do all you could to shut off the C.P.R. coal ?^A. Did not 
 discuss anything. / 
 
 Q. Then this was a plan originated by you — is that right ?— A. No, it is not a 
 plan originated by me with regard to the organization. 
 
 Q. Well, but the organization at that particular time, to produce that particular 
 result was a plan originated by you ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. It was not suggested to you by anyone else, or if so, who suggested it ? — 
 A. Representations were made from Ladysmith asking for organization. 
 
 Q. Yes, but the plan of organization at Ladysmith just at this particular junc- 
 ture — who suggested that ? — A. No one. 
 
 Q. Then it was a plan originated by you ? — A. No, it was not. 
 
 Q. You and Mottishaw were the two men who consulted between you as to how the 
 thing was to be done in Ladysmith ? — A. It had its origin long before that. 
 
 Q. Well, we know not so very long ; but the conversation between you and Motti- 
 ^aw occurred at this particular juncture ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And Mottishaw came to Nanaimo to ask you to get the organizer there just at 
 this particular juncture ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Well, he came on March 9 ? — A. It was decided at a meeting in Ladysmith to 
 send for Mr. Baker. 
 
 Q. It was not decided at a meeting at Ladysmith until after the 11th or 12th ? — 
 A. That is, of the telegram. 
 
 Q. But the telegram is on the 9th, so it could not have been that time — it could 
 not have been on the 9th. I think the 15th is the date. The meeting was on the 8th. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — Sunday, the 8th. 
 
 Q. So that was simply a coincidence tlien ?— A. So far as I know. 
 
 Q. You say there was a great deal of soreness in the Dunsmuir mines about 
 organization being started in Nanaimo ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Mottishaw is practically a Nanaimo man ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. He lives there, but has not been really working in the mines much in the last 
 year ? — A. I don't know whether that is true or not. 
 
 Q. You at any rate are a Nanaimo man. Now, who else was taking an active 
 part in the preliminaries leading up to that organization ? — A. I cannot tell you. 
 
 Q. You would know, would you not ? — A. I have stated previously, quite a ntimber 
 of men came from Ladysmith reporting the fact that the men felt desirous of 
 organizing. 
 
 Q. Who were they ? Can you tell me the name of any man who was permanently 
 fixed in Ladysmith, and had been working in the mines for any considerable time, who 
 came in and made that report ? — A. I said there were men who had been down there, 
 and they were informed to come in and report. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Higney one of therh ? — ^A. I don't know the gentleman at all. 
 
 2Qa 34} • THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
532 MINUTES OF ETIDEKCH OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. When did this report begin to come in, in February ? — A. Probably earlier 
 than that — I am not sure. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it was in Pebruary ?— A. It might have been before that time. 
 
 Q. But was it before that time to the best of your recollection ? — A. I cannot 
 say exactly. 
 
 Q. And was it not during the period that Baker was in Nanaimo that you began 
 to get these reports that the men at Ladysmith were desirous of organizing ? — ^A. Sev- 
 eral reports came in during that time, yes. 
 
 Q. And that is another coincidence ? — A. Yes, that is another coincidence. 
 
 Q. And your recollection is that Baker stopped at Vancouver on his way over to 
 Nanaimo, when he came in February ? — A. I cannot say that; I cannot recollect. 
 
 Q. You think it is so, as a matter of fact? — A. I cannot think so ; I don't re- 
 member. 
 
 Q. Who sent for Baker, when he came to Nanaimo on that occasion in -February ? 
 — A. That is the point regarding the dates of the different telegrams that I got con- 
 fused on, and I am sorry to say I don't clearly recollect, but I know there was a tele- 
 gram sent from ourselves asking, in almost similar words, for Mr. Baker to come re- 
 garding the dispute that was on. 
 
 Q. You can't remember how he came, or what route he took to get there? — A. I 
 don't know the route he took. 
 
 Q. You saw Mr. Hall at Union and had a conversation with him ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And didn't you tell him you were deputized by Mr. Baker to organize the 
 Chinamen and Japanese? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Although he says so, you deny that ? — A. If he says so, yes. 
 
 Q. Let me call your attention to one or two further coincidences. Here is a tele- 
 gram from Moyer to Baker, telling him ' we approve of calling out any and all men 
 necessary to win at Ladysmith^organize Japanese and Chinese, if possible." That is 
 on April 24 ? — A. I asked to be excused from the responsibility of saying that I saw 
 that telegram, when I have declared 
 
 Q. I mean you have seen it in court. You say you didn't see it at the time? — 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. Apparently, as far as the evidence goes, it was received in response to a tele- 
 gram from Baker sent to Moyer at the time of the joint meeting of the executive at 
 Nanaimo, of which you were a member. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — It would have to be earlier ; the joint meeting did not meet until the 
 24th. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — It is the 22nd they had the meeting at Nanaimo. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — As a matter of fact, the meeting was on Saturday and Sunday, April 
 25 and 26. , 
 
 Q. On May 12, Mr. Baker writes to the secretary of the union at Cuniberland: 
 ' It was owing to the circumstances above mentioned that I did not go to Cumberland, 
 as I wired you, I would get Brother Shenton to go instead.' So, you went to Cumber- 
 land in pursuance of a request from, Mr. Baker? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Didnr't he request you to go there, to carry out the instructions from Moyer to 
 organize the Chinese and Japanese, if possible ? — A. Not at all — never mentioned. 
 
 Q. Well, you had a conversation with Mr. Hall, the missionary among the Chinese 
 and Japanese? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. But he has sworn that you requested him to assist you to take preliminary 
 Fteps to organize the Chinese and Japanese at Cuinberland ?^A. I have stated pre- 
 viously, and state again, that there must have been a mistake. It is untrue. 
 
 Q. He says you talked to him as if you had got a sudden excess of zeal to uplift 
 the Chinamen, and that he considered the, best way was to get thie Chinamen into a 
 union? — A. Place the responsibility on him; I say we had a conversation. 
 
 Q. What was the conversation, aqcprding to your idea?— A. He introduced the 
 idea of the, elevation of the Chinese by giving them the benefit of organization, and 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouveri, June 3. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 633 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 I said also that it seemed to be a hobby with Mr. Hall. We were speaking generally — 
 not as applied to the situation at all. 
 
 Q. Did you make a report to Baker of your trip to Cumberland? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In writing ? — A. No, verbally. ^ 
 
 Q. When and where ? — A. I gave it to him in the Windsor Hotel. 
 
 Q. What did you say about the steps which had been taken to organize the Japan- 
 ese and Chinamen ? — A. I didn't say anything regarding that; I could not say any- 
 thing. 
 
 Q. You did not mention the fact of your conversation with Mr. Hall? — A. Yes, 
 I mentioned my conversation with Mr. Hall. I gave him the idea of Mr. Hall regard- 
 ing the organization of the Chinese, and also that Mr. Hall suggested that copies of 
 some constitution be printed in the Chinese language, in order to get them to under- 
 stand and to get an appreciation of what organization meant. 
 
 Q. Then, we are to understand that, although Mr. Hall made the suggestion, you 
 approved of it? — A. No, my own opinion is as stated. One serious objection that I 
 have is, that they are an alien race and a menace to the white man in general. 
 
 Q. At what other time did you discuss the organization of Chinese, except in the 
 conversation with Mr. Hall? — A. Well, as I have stated now. In Nanaimo I have 
 heard the men, and possibly I have said some few things regarding organization of 
 Chinamen. 
 
 Q. Did you think that if the Japanese and Chinese could be organized at Cumber- 
 land at this juncture that they would assist the strike at Cumberland ? — A. Well, if 
 they had been organized it would have assisted. 
 
 Q. That is another coincidence. That the idea of organizing the Chinese should 
 come to your mind at this particular juncture ? — A. The reason, as I have stated, that 
 it was really through the papers, that the Western Federation of Miners had taken up. 
 the idea of organizing the Chinese and Japanese. 
 
 Q. And you went to Cumberland as a representative of the Western Federation of 
 Miners, under Mr. Baker's instructions and you took up the subject of organization ? 
 — ^A. It was suggested to me. 
 
 By His Lordship .• 
 Q. Did you go to Mr. Hall's house, or did he come to you ? — A. I went to Mr. 
 Hall's house. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. What did you go to Mr. Hall's house for ? — A. He was recommended to me by 
 some friends I had, and I went to see him. 
 
 Q. Mr. Hall says the first thing you asked him to do was to give evidence before 
 the Commission— is that true ? — A. That is not true. 
 
 Q. And the second subject of discussion was to organize the Chinese and Japan- 
 gge ? — A. That was not true— the first thing I said was that I advised Mr; Hall to go 
 before the Comrnission. Mr. Hall had gone on discussing the Chinese and uplifting 
 them by organization, and I said the Comnlission is coming up here, and I would 
 suggest, as you understand the Chinese, that you go before the Commission and give 
 them the henefit of your view. _ , 
 
 Q. That is another coincidence. That at this particuW time you' went to Cum- 
 berlancl to call on Mr. Hall, that he should suggest the elevation of the Chinese ? — 
 
 A.'Y'es!,'.' ' ", ; " ;, .;, ; \ ,.;',„."'' ;,' .'.'/'' " '■' '■'■ ■ ■" ■' ■" 
 
 Q. Xnd you approved in ybux conversation; of the elevation of th& Chinese ? — 
 A. I'd some«xteni„,yes: ; ' " ' ' ,',.,'/' ■•■:■- ^ 
 
 Q. To wWt e^ieiii ?^A. To tlie fexteht that as thSy are iii the country" we will 
 Jiave to deal with. them. ' "['.[. ' <,•..,. ... 
 
 Q. "the. first step, in uplifting'them was to organize them into some kind' of body 
 which a latbur union couti use. Is'ihat tight 1— A. Well, "we didn't organize them. 
 
 ■ THOMAS' Ji'SHENTON-^Vancouyer, I June 3. 
 
534 MINUTES OF BVIDHNCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARO VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Was that not the line along which your conversation proceeded ? — A. The-, 
 conversation proceeded along the line of uplifting the Chinese to an appreciation pf 
 organization. 
 
 Q. That was the line then ? And you approve of uplifting the Chinese to such 
 an extent that they could appreciate organization ? — A. Referring to the future. 
 
 Q. At what time in the future was this process to begin ? — A. J^s soon as they 
 came to an appreciation of it. 
 
 Q. When were you to begin educating them ? — A. There was no time stated. 
 
 Q. When were you to begin educating the Chinese and Japanese at Cumberland ? 
 — ^A. I don't know that that referred to Cumberland at all — it is the Chinese and 
 ■Japanese of the whole of the country. 
 
 Q. You were talking in general terms of the whole of British Columbia ?— A. Yes, 
 their presence as affecting the white men. 
 
 Q. Did not charity begin at home, and was it not to begin in the field of the 
 Reverend Mr. Hall ? — A. Not as far as I am concerned. 
 
 Q. You didn't approve of that process of education and elevation ? — ^A. Yes, I 
 approved of it. 
 
 Q. Why should not Mr. Hall begin immediately to educate the Chinese at Cum- 
 berland to an appreciation of the benefits of organization ? — A. He was quite ready 
 to do that. 
 
 Q. He says the only thing that prevented him doing it was that you would not 
 give a sufficient guarantee on behalf of the Western Federation ? — A. Something was 
 said about guarantees. 
 
 Q. He wanted you, on behalf of the Western Federation of Miners, if he organized 
 the Chinamen to help your strike, that you would see that they got union wages ? — 
 A. Some such guarantee was mentioned. 
 
 Q. That if he organized the Chinamen to help your strike there you would guar- 
 antee on behalf of the Western Federation that the Chinamen would get union wages 
 — is that not so ? — A. I told him I could not be responsible for that. 
 
 Q. Is that not the condition that he wished to impose ? — A. That is the condition 
 he wished to impose. 
 
 Q. And you would not give it on behalf of the Western Federation ? — A. I could 
 not give it — certainly not. 
 
 Q. You didn't think the Western Federation wished to elevate the Chinamen to 
 that extent ?^A. I was not responsible in that regard. 
 
 Q. You told Mr. Hall you were there representing the Western Federation ?-— A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. And he asked you on behalf of the Western Federation to guarantee union 
 wages to the Chinamen? You stated you had no authority to do it? — A. He said, if 
 the Japanese and Chinese were to be organized, it would be a natural thing they would 
 have to get support. 
 
 Q. And if they were organized at Cumberland for the purpose of helping the 
 strike, you should guarantee them union wages — is that right? — A. Well, yes. 
 
 Q. And you, on behalf of the Western Federation, were not authorized to give 
 that guarantee? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And consequently the negotiations for organization fell through? — A. Not 
 consequently; I knew nothing of it. 
 
 Q. The negotiations between you and Mr. Hall did fall through ? — A. Certainly 
 ihey did. 
 
 Q. They were broken off at the stage of the conversation when you refused to give 
 that guarantee ? — A. They never began, as far as Cumberland is concerned. 
 
 Q. You are contradicting yourself. Five minutes ago you said, in answer to a 
 question from me, that Mr. Hall made it a condition of helping the strike, that they 
 Bhould be guaranteed union wages, and you could not give that ? — A. Yes, I said that 
 and more ; I said I was not authorized to deal with that question at all. 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
ON JKDUSTRlAh DISPOTISS.IN BIUTIHU COLUMBIA. 535 
 
 SESSIONAL. PAPER No. 36a 
 
 His Lordship. — Then, he is mistaken. The question was : ' Did you understand 
 froin Shenton that the executive of the Western Federatioij of Miners at Denver would 
 approve of the idea of organizing the Chinese ?' And Hall said, 'Yes.' 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 Q. And that Moyer had telegraphed to organize the Chinese and writes that you 
 were there to represent him, and yet we are to understand that you told Hall you had 
 no instructions whatever on the question ? — A. I told him I had no instructions what- 
 ever. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. Then, Hall was wrong when he said ' Yes' to that question ? — A. Yes, he must 
 have heen. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 Q. Then, why did you proceed with the negotiations? — A. I didn't proceed.. He 
 said that nothing of that nature should transpire ; he took the whole matter in his own 
 hands regarding the organization and uplifting of the Chinese. He said that if any- 
 tliing transpired in that direction, that the Chinamen would have to be treated right. 
 I said I had no responsibility, and that I was not sent there for that purpose. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. Then, you say, Mr. Shenton, you went to Hall; he did not come to you? — A 
 Certainly I went to Hall. 
 
 Mr. Bodwell. — ^I suppose we have got all the light on the subject we can. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Mr. Shenton, you will see that any documents you have in relation to these 
 matters are sent over ? — A. I thought I had collected all. I remember the one I spoke 
 of ; it does not really seem to relate to the situation. 
 
 Q. We will be the best judges of that. Please go with Mr. King and send that 
 telegram. 
 
 Mr. ToLEY. — I would like to ask a question or two. My learned friend tries to 
 make it appear, as far as I can see, that the organization or their officers in Nanaimo 
 are receiving instructions from an alien organization in this matter. Now, I desire 
 to disprove that. 
 
 His Lordship. — If you are going into that, perhaps you had better wait until the 
 whole examination is concluded. There will be some evidence coming from Nanaimo 
 which may throw light on this question. 
 
 Mr. Foley. — I wish only to ask two questions. 
 
 Q. You received your telegram from Moyer after you had effected organization; 
 that is, this telegram to use your influence to prevent coal going to the C.P.E, ? — A. 
 Yes, before organization on December 20. 
 
 Q. Then, your purpose in organizing was not for the purpose of obeying the alien 
 organization; your purpose was not to obey them and assist the TJ.B.R.E. in prevent- 
 ing coal from coming in? — A. No idea at all. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — You refer to the organization at Nanaimo ? 
 
 Mr. Foley. — I refer to the Western Federation. He receives a telegram from 
 Moyer, president of the Western Federation, requesting him to use his influence to pre- 
 vent coal from coming here. This was after they had been organized at Nanaimo, 
 which goes to show that they did not organize with the deliberate purpose of following 
 instructions from Denver. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL.^It was after they organized at Nanaimo, but before they organized 
 a% Ladysmith and before they organized at Cumberland. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
536 MINUTES OF EYIDEI^CE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Mr. Foley. — ^It struck me that my friend here was trying to conyey the impres- 
 sion that they organized in obedience to instructions for the purpose of assisting the 
 U.B.E..E. instead of their own interests. 
 
 His Lordship. — Of course it was in their own interests too. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Of course Mr. Foley understands that that telegram was previous to 
 the Ladysmith organization and the Cumberland organization. 
 
 Mr. Foley. — I did not understand that. 
 
 Vancouvee^ June 4, 1903. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I file an aflSdavit of documents and an affidavit of F. J. Halton. 
 
 (Exhibits 25 and 26.) 
 
 I presumed yesterday, Mr. Commissioners, that when an order was made that each 
 party file an affidavit of documents that such affidavit would conform practically to the 
 rules of the Supreme Court. The document filed as a declaration by Mr. Richard 
 Marpole does not pretend to conform to the practice of the Supreme Court. 
 
 His Lordship. — Let me see the document. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — That is a declaration, your Lordship, that purports in clause 1 to set 
 out certain documents referred to in schedule 1 of tHe declaration. It includes all 
 other documents in the possession of the C.P.E. in schedule 2 as they stand together 
 in a bundle marked ' A.' 
 
 His Lordship. — It certainly does not comply technically with the rules. 
 
 Mr. Davis.— I would urge upon your Lordship what I said yesterday, that there 
 were certain documents which we objected to produce, that we would produce them to 
 the Commission and they could look them over and decide. My learned friend objects 
 id producing certain documents. I think it is not necessary to argue about it, but I 
 would suggest as to both the correspondence that the same course be adopted. 
 
 His Lordship. — The difficulty is you don't tell us under oath what you have got ; 
 you don't show that. Tou say you have a bundle of correspondence and telegrams, but 
 there is no way of identifying them. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — The same is in their affidavit; you can set out the documents in a 
 tundle. 
 
 His Lokdship. — Provided you give the dates. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — It is not a matter of any importance. But what I suggested was, and 
 I suggest that the same course be followed by, the other side, that these documents we 
 object to produce, on both sides, be put before the Commissioners, and for them to 
 decide whether or not they are to be produced. 
 
 His Lordship. — Yes, that is all right, but I want the oath of some competent' person 
 that the documents brought before the Commission are all the documents. 
 
 Mr. Davis.— You have that. It states that the documents set out in the affidavit 
 and referred to under bundle ' A ' are all the documents. I would suggest that t))c 
 other side put the documents which they object to produce,, in r the hands of the; Com- 
 mission, and if the Commission thinlcs that any should be produced^ i^H right; the sfinje 
 as our own. 
 
 His Lordship. — You had better put in that bundle, Mr. Bird. -The Commissioners 
 will look over that; ■ ^ ^ , , .. 
 
 Mr. Bird.— What I particularly want ia the blacklist of , the Q.P.R. against em- 
 ployees, and I want special service reports^ of special rOonstaWeg. -I S3t out.ip ^the 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 637 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 affidavit of Mr. Halton that these special service reports are not prepared under any 
 groiind that would ordinarily obtain privilege for them. They are not prepared for 
 the advice of solicitors or in any way that would entitle them to privilege. 
 
 His Lordship. — You want what ? 
 
 Mr. BiKD.— The C.P.E. blacklist. 
 
 Mr. Davis.— The O.P.E. never had a blacklist. 
 
 His Lordship.— What else besides the blacklist ? 
 
 Mr. Bird.— I want the special reports of the special constables and watchmen ; all 
 telegrams with relation to proposed settlements between Mr. Marpole and his officials 
 here, and Mr. McNicholl and Mr. Leonard, and the general officers of the company. I 
 want the production of the appearance book from the local freight office, and way-bill 
 book between February 26 and March 1. I think, Mr. Commissioners, up to the pre- 
 sent time that is all I know that we require, but it may be necessary to ask your Lord- 
 ship to get other documents. 
 
 His Lordship. — Have you got your bundle? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I will have them; they are on the way down. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — In reference to the way-bill book, that cannot go out of the posses- 
 sion of the company very long, as it is being used. If my friend will state any par- 
 ticular time, we will have it up, so that it can be looked at, or it can be seen at the 
 office at any reasonable times. 
 
 His Lordship. — You would allow them to inspect it ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — ^Yes, my Lord. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I understand there are tissue copy books which could be produced. 
 
 His Lordship. — If you find there is anything you want to bring before the Copi- 
 mission, we will see to that. What about that appearance book? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — That will be gotten. 
 
 His Lordship. — You don't object to produce that ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — No. 
 
 (Mr. Bird hands in bundles of documents for which privilege is claimed— six 
 bundles.) 
 
 His Lordship. — There are six bundles there ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^Yes, they are all marked separately. 
 
 His Lordship. — There seems to be a large amount of work, even in connection 
 with a strike ! 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I think there is a good deal of correspondence that is absolutely use- 
 less to anybody — mere acknowledgments of payments, but they may bear on the 
 strike. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Are there any letters from Estes produced? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I believe so. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — They are all that have passed. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — As far as I know, yes. • , . , 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Because in this affidavit there are only one or tw(), and you mu?t have 
 had a great numebr. 
 
 Mr. BiRD.^I doh't know as to that, I am sure. I am informed that the comrnuni- 
 cations from Mr. Estes are not a great nuntber. He was either h^re or in Victoria, 
 and the communications were mostly verbal. He was kept so busy by the C.P.E. that 
 5ie" had MO 1;ime to write more than a f e\y iletters. , ■.,'.: , 
 
 His Lordship. — ^Is it intended that Mr. Estes shall be here to give evidence ? 
 
 Mr. Bird.— I'understaiKl', my Lord, that Mr, Eates is attentling a convention at 
 't>enver. If your Lord^ip desires hini here, be Bhallbahere. ,■ 
 
538 MINDTES OF Eyit>ENOE OF ROYAL COMUISSWIf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 His Loedsiiip. — We certaiijly would like to have -him here. 
 
 Mr. BiED. — The secretary of the organization, I undertake, w'iU wire for him at 
 once. He will be here by the close of the Commission. 
 
 His Lordship. — How long before the convention concluded ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^It is a convention of the American Labour Union, with which the 
 U.B.R.E. is affiliated. I could not say exactly when it concludes. 
 
 His Lordship. — Is it being held at Denver ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Yes, it is in session there, and I understand the convention will last 
 Iii'obably ten days longer. 
 
 His Lordship. — You had better find out just when it is likely to end, because we 
 would like to suit his convenience as much as poss'ible; and when he can get here. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^Yes. 
 
 His Lordship. — Because it seems to me that it is of prime importance to the 
 proper presentation of the case of the men, that the leader should be here. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — As a matter of fact, I think the evidence will disclose that he was no 
 leader in connection with this strike. 
 
 His Lordship. — I understand he had a good deal to do with it. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — He had something to do with the working of it, and advising, as un- 
 der the constitution he was bound to do. I understand he had no part in the direction 
 oi the strike, except in an advisory capacity. He had no authority to take any part 
 whatever, and he did not sit on the executive and had nothing whatever to do with the 
 strike ; it was in the hands of the local union. 
 
 ■ His Lordship. — There is a danger that the public may misinterpret some of the 
 movements of the men, unless a leader like Estes, whose counsel and advice was taken 
 from time to time, is not here to give evidence. It is only fair to the men, I think, 
 that he should be here. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I agree with your Lordship. 
 
 His Lordship. — You can find out when he is likely to be here ? 
 
 Mr. BiRD.-^Yes, we will wire at once. 
 
 His Lordship. — I suppose we had better go on with the evidence. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I did start with one witness, my Lord, but he is not here. I was really 
 v*aiting until the conference was over. I will go on in tie ordinarv course, and will 
 call David B. Johnstone. 
 
 David B. Johnstone, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Have you formerly been in the employ of the C.P.R. — A. Yes sir. 
 
 Q. In what capacity ? — A. I have been weigh-master for the C.P.R. 
 
 Q. What particular division of the service is that called ? — A. With the weighing 
 of cars. 
 
 Q. Is that among the freight handlers ? — A. Exactly. 
 
 Q. Have the freight handlers had a union heretofore, prior to the inauguration 
 of the U.B.R.E. ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And as such you made arrangements with the C.P.R. ? — A. Yea. 
 
 Q. You had a wage schedule with the company ?— A. Yes. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4, 
 
ON INDUSTBIAI, DISPUTES IN BKIflSB COLUMBIA 539 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I will file the wage schedule if my learned friend will produce it 
 (Exhibit 27.) 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You are out on strike at present ? — ^A. Tea, sir. 
 
 Bv Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. When did you join the TJ.B.K.E. ?— A. I personally joined the U.B.E.E. to the 
 best of my knowledge in August, 1902, but I would like to explain that the freight 
 handlers as a body did not join the U.B.E.E. at that time. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. When did they join ? — A. Tour Lordship, I cannot give you the date definitely, 
 but I think it was during the month of November, the same year. 
 Q. You were the pioneer in joining ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Is that what you call your wage schedule ? — A. Yes, I identify that as the 
 wage schedule — a copy of it at least — between the freight handlers and the C.P.E. 
 
 (Exhibit 2Y.) 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. That is the wage schedule of the freight handlers ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. Is that the wage schedule in force ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What time ? — A. If my memory serves me rightly it should expire on June 21, 
 1903. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Article 8 says that this schedule shall come in force in three weeks from date, 
 and May 21 is the date of the document, and three weeks from that date would be 
 June 21. 
 
 Q. According to this document you appear to have received concessions as a union 
 — I mean increased rates ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. An increase of pay all along the line — to everyone ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Of Course when I refer to all along the line, I mean to the members of the 
 union ?— A. To the members connected with the Freight Handlers' Union. 
 
 Q. Did the freight handlers join the U.B.E.E. as a body later ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When ? — A. To the best of my knowledge during the month of November, or 
 the early part of December; I could not give the date positively. 
 
 His Lordship. — Just let me understand this — this so-called freight handlers' 
 schedule. Was that a request which was acceded to, or is it an agreement? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — It is ordinarily spoken of as an agreement, but I understand it is 
 nothing but a wage schedule. 
 
 His Lordship. — I want to know whether it is a document or a memorandum. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Apparently there is no signature of the union there ; I have not got the 
 original. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — It is an agreement, your Lordship, binding on both parties. 
 
 His Lordship. — As between the company and the United Brotherhood of Eailway 
 Freight Handlers ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Yes. 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. You had a conversation with Mr. Beasley early this year ? — A. On the first day 
 of March, I believe I had. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
540 MIXUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By' His Lordship : 
 Q. Who is Beasley ? — A. He is the Divisional Superintendent of the C.P.K. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. What was the substance of that conversation with Mr. Beasley? — A. Well, he 
 approached me in the shed. It was the last day I worked for the O.P.K.— with refer- 
 ence to the outlook which appeared at the present time to exist between the freight 
 handlers and the C.P.E. with regard to working in connection with what are commonly 
 called scabs. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What date was this ? — A. On the 1st March this year. And he inquired of 
 me if we had had a meeting the night previous to decide on some way of getting over 
 this deadlock, and I told him I did not know whether a meeting had been held or not 
 — that I had not been present. Our conversation then drifted to the TJ.B.R.E. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Before going to that conversation, you referred to a deadlock; what did you 
 mean by that ? — A. Your Lordship, the freight handlers refused to work, as I have said, 
 with what they called ' scabs.' The office men were out on strike, and their places were 
 being taken by scabs, and in the local freight sheds a man who acted as foreman was 
 not a member of our organization and was out on strike, and our men could not take his 
 place without acting as scabs, or yet could not consent to working with a man taking 
 his place as a scab. 
 
 Q. Why could you not do that, Mr. Johnstone ? Why covild you not work with a 
 man you call a scab ? — A. It is contrary to all the rules of unionism. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What is a scab ? — A. A scab, in my estimation, is a man who refuses to go on 
 strike when a strike is declared, or who takes the place of a union man when he is on 
 strike. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. When you say a man who refuses to go on strike after a strike is declared — a 
 man who is not a member of the union would not be a scab ? — A. Possibly not. 
 
 Q. That is, a union man who refuses to obey union methods would be a scab 1 — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. A union man who refuses to be bound by the action of the majority ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. But a man taking his place, whether a union man or not, would be considered 
 a scab, would he not .? — A. Yes, he would be considered a scab in any case. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : ' ; j 
 
 Q. Then wiU you proceed with the conversation with Mr. Beasley ? A. And 
 
 Mr. Beasley assured me that he did not want to have any trouble with the freight 
 handlers' organization. He wanted us to go on as we were at the present time, but 
 that the company was entirely opposed to the U.B.E.E., in fact it would hot stand for 
 it, because they considered the organizatfon impracticable; and at the same time said 
 that the company would not stand to have a man like Estes , interfering with their 
 business. ^ , ; , - , . 
 
 Q. Did he explain whaf; he meant by impracticable ? — A. No, he did hot. ■ 
 ' DAVID B. JOHNSTOME^^Vancouver, June 4. ■ • , .; 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 641 
 
 SESSIONAU PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. That was the substance of the conversation that took place? — A. Yes, there 
 might have been other remarks passed, but those are the facts that have been impressed 
 upon my memory. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — I have not got it clear in my own mind as to the condition at this 
 time. Had the strike been declared by the U. B. E. E. ? 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. When did the Brotherhood go on strike ? — A. The Brotherhood, as repre- 
 sented by the clerks and office men, bagagemen and office men generally, and the men 
 at the stores also, went on strike at noon on the 27th day of February. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You say the clerks, office men and baggagemen went out on the 27th February. 
 Did any of the U. B. R. E. men remain ? What about the freight-handlers ? — A. I 
 wish to explain that : the freight-handlers, working with this schedule with the com- 
 pany, decided that, so long as conditions were such that we should live up to our 
 schedule, and we were prepared to hold up our agreement so long as it was possible for 
 us to do so, notwithstanding that the others went on strike. 
 
 Q. Do you mean giving 30 days' notice, by living up to the agreement ? — A. No, 
 we did not give 30 days' notice. We were prepared to leave it open until the end of 
 the term, if possible. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. You felt, however, that you could not live up to that agreement at the expense 
 of working with scabs ? — A. Certainly not. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you mean by being unable to work with scabs ? How near must a 
 scab be to you before you will take offence at his presence ? — ^A. Not very close. 
 
 Q. Yes, but what do you call working with a scab ? — A. I mean handling goods 
 that have been handled by a scab, coming directly in contact with a scab. 
 
 Q. That is, goods that have been handled, immediately before you handle them, 
 by scabs, you would consider scab freight ? — A. Yes, my Lord. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Would you have the same objection to delivering goods to those who were 
 acabs ? — ^A. For myself personally I would; that would depend on conditions, I pre- 
 sume. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Suppose the stuff had been handled by a union man immediately before you 
 handled it, and handled by a scab before the union man handled it, would you consider 
 that scab freight ? — A. Well, I would have a poor opinion of the union man. 
 ' Q. YjBS, but he might have a different opinion of the nature of his agreemant with 
 the company ?-^A. Well, I suppose if they were handled by a scab and purified by 
 being handled by a union man, I would think I should handle them. 
 
 By Mti Rome : ■ 
 "Q. You *ouM think they would be^purified ?— A- Yes..,. 
 
 , ByHisZo.rdship: 
 
 Q. And-that the infection would, not reach you ?— ^A. Possibly not. 
 
 By Mr. iird.- ' '' ' - • ' i •. ■ , 
 
 Q. Ihej): after the sstrike was^ declared by the U. B. R. E. the freight-handlers 
 stayed at their work by reason 'of ffiissc^hediilef— A.' Yeg; • 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver. Jub^ 4. 
 
542 MINUTES OF ETIDENGE OF ROYAL COMUISSIOy 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A., 1904 
 
 Mr. EoWE. — Would the witness tell us what different class of employees are under 
 fthis union ? 
 
 Mr. BiED. — I was coming to that in a moment. 
 
 Q. I was asking you when the TJ.B.E.E. declared a strike you stayed on by reason 
 of your agreement with the C.P.R. ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What was the occasion of the freight-handlers going on strike ? — A. Our com- 
 mittee was sent for by Mr. Beasley, the divisional superintendent, and it was reported 
 at a meeting of the freight-handlers that this committee had been told that Mr. Eeasley 
 w'ished to draw up a new agreement with them, and surpris?. of course, was expressed 
 at wishing to draw up this agreement when the old agreement had some length of time 
 to run, and not only this, but the fact of having this agreement renewed was coupled 
 with the stipulation that we should withdraw from the U.B.R.E., and these were factors 
 which caused the repudiation of this agreement. Then the discharge of one of our 
 members for refusing to handle what had been handled already by scabs, as we con- 
 sidered it. 
 
 Q. Who was this man who was discharged? — A. Edward Eowler. And the fact 
 that men had been brought to the city and placed between the station and the wharf in 
 cars, as we were informed by them, to take our places immediately we went out. We 
 saw that the situation was up to us, when these men were there to take our places. 
 
 Q. You mean to say the C.P.E. had brought in men to fill your places in antici- 
 pation of your going on strike ? — A. These men arrived here on the morning of the 
 28th day of February. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. How many men ? — A. I could not give you the exact number. 
 Q. About how many ? — A. I should say 20 or 25. 
 Q. You thought they were brought to take the places of the freight handlers ? — 
 
 A. So I was informed by some of the men, that they were truckers and checkmen. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. They did not, then, belong to the class of employees out on strike at that time, 
 the clerks or the others you have mentioned ?- — A. No; I don't think they belonged to 
 any class at all. 
 
 Q. That is your personal opinion; but their alleged occupation was such as yott 
 have mentioned ? — A. That was to be their occupation as they understood it, from 
 what they told us. 
 
 Q. Did they go to work when they arrived ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. When did they go to work ?— A. Not until after we went on strike. 
 
 Q. That was on the 2nd of March you told us ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The freight handlers went out on the 2nd of March because of scab freight 
 and the discharge of one of their men — those were the causes ? — A. The importation 
 of the men and the demand that we withdraw from the U. B. E. E.; they would not 
 have our contract renewed ; and the discharge of one of our men. 
 
 Q. You went on strike for four reasons — the demand to withdraw from the U. 
 
 B. E. E„ the discharge of Fowler — what office did he hold ?— A. He was night car 
 checker; he was not an officer in the union to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. The third ground was what ? — A. Working with scabs. 
 
 Q. By that you mean that this freight was handled in the baggage room by non- 
 union men ? — A. You mean the freight that Fowler was asked to handle ? 
 
 Q. Yes. — A. No, it was his duty to send out freight trains, to make out bills for 
 conductors, and these bills were made by men who had taken the places of strikers 
 in, the office. He was discharged because he refused to co-operate with these men. It 
 was his duty to take the bills when the other men were through with them. 
 DAVID B. .TOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
ON moVSTBIAL DISPVTETS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 543 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. So there is not only scab freight, but scab bills ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. And scab bills would infect the labour men ? — ^A. Yes. 
 Q. Have you got the constitution of the TJ. B. K. E. ?— A. I have. 
 
 (Copy of constitution identified by witness, and filed as Exhibit 28). 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Is this the last edition ? — A. That is the only edition in existence, my Lord, 
 so far as I know. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I might give you a better copy (handed in). 
 
 Q. What are the objects of your organization ? — A. They are plainly set forth 
 on the first page of the constitution. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Where are the headquarters ? — A. In San Francisco. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. The objects you say are set forth in the preamble ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I see by this that you are a fraternal organization ? — A. Truly. 
 
 Q. Having, as one of your principal reasons of existence, the helping of members 
 in sickness and distress ? — A. Well, fraternally in this regard, that we have means of 
 recognizing our brotherhood, and therefore it is a means of assisting the brotherhood 
 if they should be travelling. 
 
 Q. Have you no other benefits ? — A. Our organization is beneficial in this way, 
 that it establishes a sick and death benefit fund for the members. 
 
 Q. You have an insurance department ? — A. We have. 
 
 Q. And that covers accidents, and — ? — A. Death from natural causes. 
 
 Q. And a sick benefit similar to other fraternal societies ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you ever declared a policy in connection with the operation of the organi- 
 zation? — A. The policy of our organization is to be found on page 5 of the con- 
 stitution. 
 
 Q. I see by this that you are forbidden to have any connection with any political 
 party ?— A. Truly. 
 
 Q. Have you any connection with any political party ? — A. Not as a brotherhood. 
 
 Q. Have your members as a body pledged connection to any political party ? — A. 
 No, sir. 
 
 Q. It is alleged by my learned friend that you are socialists — revolutionary socia- 
 lists ? 
 
 Mr. Davis.— When did I say that ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — In your statement of case. 
 
 A. I positively deny that statement. 
 
 Q. So as an organization you have no connection with any revolutionary socialist 
 party ? — A. Not as a society. If any of our men see fit to become socialists or an- 
 'archists, or anything else, they have a perfect right to do so. 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact, have you many members who have attached themselves, to 
 the political party known as the socialist party ? — A. We have three, to my knowledge, 
 who have ever been, as far as I know, attached to any socialist party. 
 
 Q. That is the nunierical strength of the socialist party among the IT. B. E. E. ? 
 — A, Who are or have been connected with the IT. B. R. E. in this city, as far as I 
 know. 
 
 Q. How many men are there in the city belonging to the Brotherhood ? — A. I 
 believe whek we went oh strike we had 2l5. Since then we have had some black sheep 
 in the fold, so that we are pdssibly a little short of that now. 
 
544- M1NUTE8.0F EYIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VU., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Can you tell us what the total membership of the U. B. E. E. is— the inter- 
 national organization ?— A. I could not give you that information with any degree 
 of accuracy. Approximately, I should say, we have in the neighbourhood of 30,000. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. That leads up, then, to a clause here called a strike clause. Sec. 19, page 24 
 of the constitution; sections 19, 20, 21 and some following clauses. Are these the 
 only provisions made whereby a strike can be declared ? — A. Those are the only pro- 
 visions provided in our constitution for a strike. 
 
 Q. Now, who are eligible for membership in this order ? — A. All white persons 
 over the age of eighteen who are actually employed in railway service, or men who are 
 not at present employed on railway service, who have served three years on a railway. 
 The latter are not allowed to vote on matters pertaining to business with railway 
 companies. 
 
 Q. Is that crystallized in any section of the constitution ? — A. Yes, section 7, 
 page 48. 
 
 Q. That .section declares the people who are eligible for membership ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. It is substantially as declared by you ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. 1 don't see the form of oath given here ? — A. The form of oath is not included 
 in the constitution; it is in the ritual. 
 
 Q. We would like to have the form of oath. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I will put this in as having come into my possession. The men feel 
 bound under an obligation. 
 
 His Lordship. — We don't care anything about the creed; we only want the oath; 
 we want a copy of that. 
 
 Mr.^iRD. — I shall file that. 
 
 (Exhibit 29, ritual of U. B. E. E.). 
 
 Q. Now, in this organization here, are there many alien members ?^A. No, I 
 believe that they are practically all British subjects ; so far as I know. 
 
 His Lordship. — What was that question ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — He says they are all British subjects in this local division, so far as 
 he know^. 
 
 Q. How is your business conducted here ? — A. I don't just understand. 
 
 Q. Well, is it conducted by a board or manager — what are your officers ? — A. The 
 business of the organization is conducted by the executive, I think that is— — ■ 
 
 Q. Consisting of whom, and how many in number ?^— A. The executive, according 
 to our constitution, consists of one member from each department of railway service 
 represented, or subdivisions thereunder, provided there are fifty members of that sub- 
 division. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Divided into classes ? — A. Twelve classes in alL 
 
 Q. Yes, I see, at page 13. , .- , 
 
 Mr. Bird.— That wpl answer Commissioner Eowe's request. 6f some time ago— 
 
 at page 13. _ , ,,.,.,",',''." .'i . • 
 
 Q. According to that your organization takes in twelve distinct classes of railway 
 
 employees ?— A. Yes. k , i , ; i . , , 
 
 -Q. And I beli«ve these twelve practicably constitute the tptaj ori^anization ? — A,- 
 
 Yes, the total men employed upon the railway. ' 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
ON INDVSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRI118H COLUMBIA 545 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Are there any exceptions at all to that ?^A. It does not include official^ of 
 railways. 
 
 By Mr. Rome . 
 
 Q. Are all these different departments represen jed in your union ? — A. Not in this 
 city. 
 
 Q. In other places ? — A. In, other places ; on the Southern Pacific, I believe, all 
 these departments are represented, and possibly on other roads in the United States. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. But here that did not include the engineers? — A. Our membcirship here is 
 taken almost exclusively from the men who had no other organization unless possibly 
 a local organization, prior to the introduction of this brotherhood — nearly confined to 
 these departments. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. What are the classes here ? — A. The freight-handlers, the clerks and office men, 
 baggagemen, and the men from the stores, and the labourers. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That would not include switchmen ? — A. No, sir. The switchmen, as I under- 
 stand it, are included in the Brotherhood of Railway Trainmen. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Are there any other international organizations represented in Vancouver ? — 
 A.. The majority of the labour organizations in Vancouver are international in their 
 nature. 
 
 Q. Can you tell me the names of international organizations in connection with 
 the railway — that would include railway men ? — A. The Brotherhood of Railway 
 Trainmen, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, Brotherhood of Locomotive Fire- 
 men, Order of Railway Conductors, Order of Railway Telegraphers, the International 
 Order of Machinists, and the Brotherhood of Boilermakers, I believe, also is an inter- 
 national organization. These are all, at the present time, that I can remember who are 
 connected with the railway. 
 
 Q. What about the Maintenance of Way men ? — A. Yes, truly; they are inter- 
 national. 
 
 Q. So that, in addition to your organization, there would appear to be eight or- 
 ganizations having affiliation with brotherhoods beyond the line ? — A. Exactly. 
 
 By Mr. Roiue : 
 Q. Did I understand you to say that your order was affiliated with the American 
 Xabour Union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship ': 
 
 Q. Can you explain exactly what is meant by affiliation ? — A. Well, I cannot 
 dxplaiq ; I don't know, my Lard, that I have ever looked into that closely, but as I 
 understand the term it means that we are connected with the American Labour Union, 
 and would have in our power to render financial aid or otherwise to any other body 
 affiliated with the American Labour Union. 
 
 Q. That is, the American Labour Union is a sort of parliament of unions ? — A. 
 Yes, on the same ground as the American Federation of Labour. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Does that institution have a constitution ? — A. I think I have seen one. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4 
 
 ' 36a— 35 
 
546 MINUTES OF EVIDEWCE OF R07AL COMUISSWy 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VM., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Do you pay anything to its support ? — A. So far as we are concerned, as a 
 division of the U. B. E. E., we pay nothing. Whether the central office of the organi- 
 zation, or the general division, as it is called, pays anything into the treasury of the 
 American Labour Union, I could not say, but we as a division do not. 
 
 Q. What do the locals pay into the general division ? — A. Our dues are 50 cents 
 a month ; 25 cents of this goes to the general division and 25 remains in the local trea- 
 sury. Of course, the benefit department of our organzation we handle exclusively 
 oui'selves. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. That has no connection with the general division?— A. No. 
 
 Q. So far as benefits derived by the general division from the local, how does it 
 compare in money benefits sent away from here and received up to date ? — A. I believe 
 that the United Brotherhood of Kailway Employees has expended $100 in the Dominion 
 of Canada for every dollar they have received from the Dominion, since my member- 
 ship in the brotherhood. 
 
 Q. So you have got $100 for $1.00 in this city thus far ? — ^A. I believe so. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Do they contribute it in support of the strike ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q What amount ? — A. I could not give you the amount, I am not a member of 
 the executive. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. We don't need the exact figures ? — A. I was told by a member of the executive 
 sxbout $4,000. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. How many men have been on strike ? — A. In our organization — 215 went on 
 strike. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. That $4,000 has been received by this local division ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. From San Erancisco? — A. I presume from divisions of the U.B.K.E. in the 
 United States. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. How long has the strike been in existence ? — A. Three months the 27th of last 
 month. 
 
 Q Could you give, roughly, the average wage of the strikers ? — A. They would 
 receive if working — ^the average wage, my Lord, would not exceed $50 per month, in 
 my estimation. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. That is something like $15,000 lost by the strike to the men so far ? — A. Yes, 
 sir. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. Now these figures given by you — have you any certain knowledge of these 
 matters — of the finances? — A. No, I have not the slightest positive knowledge. I am 
 speaking approximately, and speaking of information which I have received. 
 
 Q. I propose to call further evidence which will give it correctly. I think the 
 figures will show $8,000 or $10,000 received ? 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DrSFVTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 547 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ^ His Lordship.— We had better get tliese, so that the men will see what tlie organi- 
 zation is doing for them. 
 
 Bp Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. When you say they average $50, does that mean all the men are in constant em- 
 ployment on the C.P.R. Tali:e your own organization — ^how many gangs have you at 
 your disposal. You work in gangs ? — A. Yes, a certain portion. We include delivery 
 clerks in our organization, myself for instance, I didn't work in a gang, but I should 
 say we have about six gangs. 
 
 Q. N'ow, how many of these are constantly employed ? — A. It is impossible to tell, 
 because the work is at times irregular, and depends on the traffic and business doing. 
 
 Q. Can you average it up in any way. I have not the slightest doubt my learned 
 friend will take the figures you may give. How many gangs would you say averaged 
 employment ? — A. I could not give you the average of that ; it is very difficult. Gangs 
 are working sometimes eight hours a day, sometimes 9, sometimes 10, and sometimes 
 15. It is almost impossible to strike an average. Our men are there if they are 
 wanted, and when not wanted they are sent home. 
 
 Q. Is there fairly continuous employment for these six gangs ? — A. Well, I could 
 not answer that question with any accuracy. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. I was going to suggest that it might be possible to find what the earnings of 
 these men were from the corresponding period of last year. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I may be able to get that information from officers of the C.P.K. My 
 learned friend may voluntarily furnish it. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — ^We will furnish that, if necessary. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I thought I could get it from this witness. My instructions are that 
 there are a great many gangs, and that they don't get anything like continuous employ- 
 ment. I should think a comparative statement of last year would show. 
 
 His Lordship. — I should think the best way would be to see how much they were 
 entitled to under this agreement. 
 
 Mr. EoWE. — That is only in relation to permanent employees ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^Yes. 
 
 His Lordship. — The company could give us a very close estimate ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Either that or the corresponding figures for the three months of last 
 year, whichever you prefer. 
 
 Mr. EowE.- — ^In that statement, Mr. Davis, I suppose it could be determined by 
 the amount paid out since the strike for the work. I suppose you would find out the 
 amount lost in wages by learning the amount the company has paid for the work paid 
 to the substitutes ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — We could give you the amount paid out last year in the same three 
 months, and we could give you this year. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — I was going to suggest, in connection with the latter statement, say 
 the numlter of men employed ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — That covers the pay-rolls for the present year during the period of the 
 strike. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Yes, I just asked for the number as well as the amount. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I suppose the pay-rolls may be produced in corroboration of the state- 
 ment prepared. 
 
 Q. Now, as to declaring strikes, you have 12 different classes of employees in your 
 local union, all connected with the general division. Supposing one class of employees 
 had a grievance, how would you proceed to get it remedied ? — A. According to our 
 
 36a — 354 DAVID B. JOHNSTONK— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
548 UlNVTES OF E71DEXCB OF. ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 constitution we have what is called a board of adjustment, which has three mepibers 
 elected from each branch of the railway service represented in our order. These men 
 are elected by men who belong exclusively to that branch of railway service; that is, 
 no one outside of that branch of service would be entitled to vote for these men. In 
 discussing matters arising between that branch of the service, this board of adjustment 
 would have the matter brought before them, and they would be asked to call upon the 
 official in command of their department, and make an effort to adjust this grievance. 
 Failing to effect an adjustment, after they have exhausted all their efforts, tl^e matter 
 is referred to the executive of the whole division — all of the branches of the division. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. What does the division mean ? — A. The division means the organization, the 
 members, the lodge room, the officers having any connection with the lodge of the 
 U. B. R E. 
 
 By His Lordship 
 Q. Then there is one division in' the city of Vancouver ? — A. Exactly. 
 Q. And one at Kamloops? — A. Yes. The specific divisions are as you find them 
 classified in the constitution. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Yes, but what do you call them ? — A. Departments. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You say there are three men elected to the executive ? — A. No, not the execu- 
 tive, the board of adjustment, and after they have exhausted all their efforts to produce 
 a settlement with the official who is in command of their department, it is placed be- 
 fore the executive. They have it in their power to refer this back to the board of 
 adjustment, or if they deem it advisable, they may place it before the entire division 
 at a full meeting, and it is passed upon by a full metting of the division as to whether 
 this grievance is just or not. And after that, it would in the course of time be passed 
 up to the president or vice-president in command of that district. 
 
 Q. What constitutes a district ? — A. Well, a vice-president is appointed; there 
 is no practical rule for a district. 
 
 Q. How many districts are there in British Columbia ? — A. It forms one district, 
 and Manitoba. We have just one district in Canada. The matter would be handed 
 up to the president of the district, and possibly by him referred to the other divisions 
 in the district, and before any action could in any way be taken by him, the vote of 
 the membership of the entire system would have to be taken — the entire system of the 
 railway, provided it is affecting one division of the railway system. According to the 
 constitution the vote would require to be taken for the entire system, and if two-thirds 
 of the membership on the entire system voted in favour of a strike, and due notice 
 was served on the president — after this had been the case, he would be compelled to 
 order a strike. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. That is the president of the — ?— A. Of the organization. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. At San Froncisco ? — A. At San Francisco, yes. He has no power to order a 
 strike unless the power becomes mandatory on him by a two-thirds vote on the railway 
 system. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. WTien the freight-handlers joined the U. B. R. E. had they lost their connection 
 with the Brotherhood of Freight-handlers ? — A. Our United Brotherhood of Freight- 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
ON mOVSTBIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISB COLUMBIA 549 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ' handlers was a purely local organization. We had no other connection, except that 
 we had a charter from the Dominion Trades Congress as a local union. 
 
 Q. Was there more than one union on the' C. P. R. ? — A. Just one, as far as I 
 know. 
 
 Q. Under the constitution of the U. B. R. E. is it possible for any separate craft 
 to have connection with an international organization other than the U. B. E. E. ? — 
 A. You mean, could they be members of the U. B. R. E. and also members of some 
 other organization ? 
 
 Q. Yes ? — A. I don't know anything to prevent it. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Referring to the question again, has the president the right to say over what 
 area a strike should extend ? — A. No, sir, only the railway system. 
 
 Q. That would be a district — could more than one district vote on it ? — A. I pre- 
 sume it would, as a matter affecting them. 
 
 Q. Supposing one district passes a two-thirds majority vote as required, and sends 
 in a request to San Francisco, has the president to declare the strike generally, or can 
 he confine the strike to any district ? — A. According to the constitution it says, ' entire 
 railway system.' 
 
 Q. He is only the mouthpiece ? — A. Yes, of the organization. 
 
 Q. He has no power to direct over what territory the strike shall extend ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. If a strike is commanded over the whole system, it must go in force over the 
 whole system whether he likes it or not ? — A. Yes, but there is a clause in our con- 
 stitution at the present time which states that the president shall not declare a strike 
 until the membership reaches 100,000 strong. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — That is at page 25, section 21. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How are you people out on strike ? — A. The president did not order our strike. 
 There is nothing in the constitution for our going on strike. We went on strike because 
 we saw the necessity of it. We felt that we were up against a hard proposition, and 
 that we would rather die fighting than die without fighting. 
 
 Q. How is it you are getting money from headquarters if you went out against 
 the will of the president ? — A. We didn't go against the will of the president ; he 
 sanctioned our action when he arrived here. 
 
 Q. Who — Estes ? — A. Yes. He stated that he thought we had done right — that 
 there was nothing else for us; he agreed with us. 
 
 Q. Then, to that extent the constitution was overlooked ? — A. Well, it was not 
 overlooked, my Lord, but I presume it was the intention of the framers of that con- 
 stitution that no contention should arise on the railway systems until the membership 
 was perhaps 100,000 strong. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Did you have votes in your locals in regard to the matter — on the question of 
 going on strike in the division? — A. We did. 
 
 Q. With what result ?— A. To the best of my knowledge there was one person dis- 
 senting, and I believe that he afterwards withdrew his dissent. 
 
 Q. So that it was unanimous ? — A. Practically so. 
 
 Q. Was the matter of going on strike referred to the other divisions in the Cana- 
 dian general division — the other divisions in Canada ? — A. Not previous to going on 
 strike, so far as I know. 
 
 Q. The divisions here took—? — A. The initiative and took the burden of going 
 out on themselves. 
 
 Q. Had they any compulsion or power of control over the other divisions ? — A. 
 None whatever. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
550 MINVTE8 OF EVIDENCE OF B07AL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. So that each division in going on strike acted independently 1— A. Truly, 
 Q. So that at Nelson, Revelstoke, Calgary, Winnipeg, votes must have been talien 
 and a two-thirds majority obtained ? — A. I presume they were. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did the divisions here have any correspondence with the president before they 
 went on strike ? — A. Not so far as I know, relative to going on strike. 
 
 Q. And you ignored him and the constitution both ? — A. He had been wired to, 
 but he did not arrive until some time afterwards. 
 
 Q. Then the men acted independently of the president and the constitution both? 
 — A. Truly. As I said, there is nothing in the constitution to govern the fact of our 
 going on strike at the present time. 
 
 Q. Tou are not an officer of the union? — A. I am not. 
 
 Q. Was it necessary to obtain the sanction of the president before any funds from 
 the foreign jurisdiction could be available, or did you take that risk — that you would 
 stand alone ? — A. We took the risk on ourselves. 
 
 Q. You had no guarantee or assurance ? — A. We had no guarantee of anything, 
 my Lord. 
 
 Q. In fact, the president had not been communicated with before the strike took 
 place ? — A. He had been wired for. I presume he was wired for the night before the 
 strike, and he arrived here about six hours after the strike took place. 
 
 -Q. Did you have a three-quarter vote in favour of the strike over the whole sys- 
 tem? — A. This division, as I said, took upon itself the initiative and went on strike 
 without consulting any other divisions. The other divisions, as I presume, felt like- 
 wise. 
 
 His Lordship. — Have you any objection to the other side seeing the ritual ? ■ 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I put it in for your Lordship personally. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^I think the oath should be made public, but not the ritual. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I leave it in the hands of the Commissioners. Perhaps if I read the 
 oath it may cover the niatter. 
 
 His Lordship. — We will look through it, and if there is anything we think should 
 be brought to the attention of the government or the public we will do so. 
 
 (Witness reads the oath from Exhibit 29, ritual of TJ. B. E. E. as follows.) 
 
 'I do most solemnly and sincerely swear (or affirm) freely and volun- 
 tarily, upon the holy bible, and my sacred honour, that I will never reveal 
 any of the secrets of the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees, which 
 have he/w. heretofore, shall be at this time, or may at any future time, be im- 
 parted to me as such, to any person whomsoever, unless under lawful authority 
 of the Brotherhood; that I will never write, indite or print, or allow to be 
 written, indited or printed, if in my power to prevent it, any of the unwritten 
 work of the Brotherhood; that I will uphold and support its constitution and 
 by-laws, and will obey and abide by all regulations and mandates issued 
 through its various official channels, and will respect and comply with all 
 decisions of its tribunals, when in accordance with its constitution and laws; 
 that I will not knowingly wrong, cheat, nor defraud any member of this 
 Brotherhood, or speak ill or slightingly of any member thereof; that I will 
 assist all destitute worthy members of the Brotherhood who may apply to 
 me for relief, as far as lies within my power; that, other things being equal, 
 I will gi\o employment to a member of this Brotherhood in preference to a 
 siriiugor; that I will give members due and timely notice of any danger that 
 I mu.v know of, threatening them or their families; that I will recognize all 
 HJKH.i, passwords, grips or signals which may be given me by members of the 
 limllu'rhciad; ihiit I will endeavour at all times to uphold and maintain the 
 
 DAVin U, .lOllNSTONlQ- Vancouver, June 4. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA SSI 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 dignity of the Brotherhood; that I will not recommend any candidate for 
 membership therein, whom I have reason to believe would prove unworthy. 
 All this I most sincerely and faithfully swear (or affirm), and will stead- 
 fastly keep and perform without the least equivocation or mental reservation 
 whatsoever, and will consider this obligation binding, whether I remain a 
 member of the Brotherhood or not.' 
 
 His Lordship. — The Commissioners will examine the balance of the book, and if 
 there is anything of public interest to be brought out, we will do it, not otherwise. 
 
 Q. You say this strike was ordered by the division on its own initiative ? — A, 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. So that section 20 of the constitution was apparently disregaj-ded. It says : 
 
 ' Strikes cannot be declared unless two-thirds of the members in good 
 standing on that railway system vote by proxy or otherwise in favour of a 
 strike, such vote to be certified to the president over the signatures of the 
 managers and agents, and with the seals of the divisions affixed, which certi- 
 ficates may be transmitted by telegraph or in such other manner as the presi- 
 dent directs.' 
 — A. Yes, but the section of the constitution stating that no strike shall be declared 
 by the president until the order has reached 100,000 strong, I think, has some bearing 
 on that also, 
 
 Q. It seems to me that both sections 20 and 21 were disregarded in this case. You 
 see the difficulty, in which the public is interested in considering, is this, that if the 
 unions don't abide by their own constitutions, the public may feel in doubt as to when 
 they will act under their constitution — don't you see the idea? — A. Yes, I understand, 
 my Lord. 
 
 Q. If the unions are trying to get public opinion on their side, and I have no 
 doubt that is what they are trying to do, it would be wise to abide by the constitution, 
 especially when their constitutions are put in a reasonable way ? — A. I agree with 
 you there, but there was no other course open for us but to strike ; there was no course 
 laid down in the constitution which would govern the situation, as I see it, and as I 
 saw it at that time. 
 
 Q. Would it not have been the best way if you had got your constitution amended 
 before you went into this strike at all ? — A. My Lord, it was a hurrying time with us. 
 In my opinion there would have been no U. B. R. E. on the C. P. R. inside of ten 
 
 Q. You mean you would have all been discharged on one ground or other ? — A. We 
 would have been discharged, or our members intimidated to such an extent that we 
 would have had to withdraw from work, as some had already done. So had we waited 
 there would have been no U. B. R. E. to cause trouble to the C. P. R. had we waited 
 until the time we were ready. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. You say by the terms of the oath, Mr. Johnstone, that you are not to 
 reveal any of the secrets of the union — does that apply to revealing what takes within 
 the lodge ? — A. I presume that it does if the nature of the transaction is such that it 
 requires to be kept secret. 
 
 Q. That is if the nature of the transaction is such that it would be to the disad- 
 vantage of the union to have it published ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What would happen supposing I asked you about occurrences which took placo 
 in the lodge in reference to this matter. Are you going to reveal them or not ? — A. 
 Well, I should use my own discretion in that respect, and if I saw fit to reveal them 
 I would not reveal them without I had authority to do so from the constituted authori- 
 ties under the constitution. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
562 MISITE^ OF ETIDEyCE OF ROYAL rOMill.^HIOy 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1S0+ 
 
 Q. I see. Thf y also require you to adhere strictly to the provisions of the by-laws? 
 ^ Yes. 
 
 Q. Apparently about the first thing your lodge did was to disregard the provisions 
 of the constitution by declaring that strike. Is it not so ?— A. I don't agree with you 
 altogether on that point. There is nothing in the constitution to govern the ordering of 
 strikes at the present time. 
 
 Q. You say there is, Mr. Johnstone. How do you get over section 20, which states 
 that no strike can be declared except on a two-thirds vote ^— A. Except by the advice 
 of the president. 
 
 Q. In this section 20 it must be two-thirds of the people on the railway system. 
 Whereas, on your construction of the matter a strike could be brought on by a vote of 
 one small division ? — A. My reason for saying it otherwise is the fact that it is not 
 always possible to live up to the constitution when you are opposed to a power as great 
 as the O. I'. It. As the noted leader, Eugene V. Debs, said, he would trample on any 
 c(/i]Hlitu(io]i in order to observe the rights of the people. That is sufficient excuse. 
 
 Q. You don't pretend to say any longer that it was in accordance with the constitu- 
 tion ? — A. No, not according to the constitution as it stands there. 
 
 Q. So wlio has to decide whether the circumstances are such as to warrant a viola- 
 tion of your oath and the breaking of your constitution ? — A. Who has to decide. The 
 iiicmberHliip have the right to decide. 
 
 Q. The majority in an individual lodge could settle that ? — A. Not in every case. 
 
 Q. Well, you considered that was correct, did you not? That was what you did 
 here '< — A. In this case, up to the time we went on strike there was very little discri- 
 mination against other divisions of the brotherhood outside of Vancouver. I am not 
 aware that there was any at Nelson, Eevelstoke or even Winnipeg. 
 
 Q. Then your idea is that the lodge have it within its power to violate the oath of 
 the nicnibei's and violate the provisions of the constitution ? — A. No, I don't consider 
 in all cases that they have a right to do that. I consider that desperate means are 
 required in desperate cases. 
 
 Q. That is putting the judge of the desperate case, the individual lodge ? — A. No, 
 I don't agree with that; what I call a desperate case is where the life of the union is 
 in the balance. 
 
 Q. Who is to judge of that ? — A. There is no one except the members of the organ- 
 ization. 
 
 Q. All the members of the particular lodge, because it was not the members of the 
 organization. You only consulted one lodge ? — A. No, I don't agree with you in all 
 cases; circumstances alter cases entirely. 
 
 Q. And any particular lodge, if in its opinion the situation is so serious, can 
 tramiilc on its oath ? — A. Do you find anything in the constitution to warrant that ? 
 
 Q. I nin asking you if, in your opinion, that is correct. Estes evidently thought 
 tlint was the idcn, did ho not, «'hcii ho sanctioned this strike ? — A. Well, I cannot give 
 ycU n (Icciilci! answer (in that poinl. 
 
 Q. '1 luit wiiH <'lnirl,v I'lshs' idea of what the constitution is for — evidently to be 
 briiken ?— A. No, 1 dun'l, llunU it is. 
 
 (>. ^\^'il, lie 1 aiielituieil a vi'rv llafi'vant breaking of it ? — A. There is nothing in 
 llie eeiiMlilutieii In eever (hat partieular eireuuistancc. 
 
 (> N'eN, ;lii"e in. Sei'liiui :!(• provides that no strike can be declared except by a 
 Ixvo Ihinlii vole i>( all llic> inenilwrs of tlio railway system? — A. Yes, but if we had 
 ail njiieeiui-iil w illi llie (' r. K, it' we bad been a reeos'uized organization at that time, 
 iinti bad an ar.ieeni>, (, llial ini(;.lil be possilile; under conditions as they were at that 
 linie, it ^Mi" ini|ioMiiMe. 
 
 {.). TiuN einittlilnlion tloes iiol make any piwisimi for that clause applying until 
 
 liiere w lin an MKrvenielll 1 \ No 
 |iAVU> II. .UlllNMri'NIO V.uiM'uv.M. Ji\i\o I, 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BlilTlSB COLUMBIA 663 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. So that it is clear that under this constitution, as it stands, the strike could be 
 only legal after there has been a vote of two-thirds of the members of tlio railway sys- 
 tem affected ? — A. Yes, according to the constitution. 
 
 Q. Consequently, according to the constitution, a strike could only be legal aflor 
 the brotherhood had a membership of 100,000 ? — A. In section 18 there is a consider- 
 able procedure to be gone through before there could be a strike by reason of a griev- 
 ance; that is, the grievance must first be submitted to various people ? — A. Yes, that 
 is true. 
 
 Q. And that was not done in this case ?— A. I believe that the grievance was pre- 
 sented to the chief officials of the 0. P. E. in this city. 
 
 Q. Was the grievance submitted to the parties provided for by this constitution 
 and passed on by them before a strike was declared ?— A. This grievance was not a 
 grievance in a single department. It was practically in every department, and there- 
 fore came to a head much more quickly than had it existed only in one department. 
 
 Q. So this grievance must be submitted to and passed upon by the parties who 
 are made imperative in that respect by the constitution ? — A. I cannot answer that 
 positively. 
 
 Q. Look at section 18 and you can answer it. There is certainly a procedure 
 which must be gone through. It goes from one to another, and so on until it gets up 
 to the highest executive ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And before a strike can finally be declared the president must be on the ground 
 and use his personal influence to adjust the matter. Now, scarcely any of these things 
 were done ? — A. A great many were overlooked. 
 
 Q. So far as the paper constitution goes, this strike is about as flagrant a viola- 
 tion of its provisions in carrying out a strike as one could have ? — A. No, I don't 
 think so. 
 
 Q. In spite of that the president, Mr. Estes, came here in response to a telegram. 
 What was that telegram ? — A. I could not say that; I did not send it. As I under- 
 stand the telegram, it was a call requesting him to come and assist us. 
 
 Q. As president ? — A. I presume. According to the constitution we have a right 
 to call on him. 
 
 Q. And having violated the constitution in every possible way under the circum- 
 stances, the next step was to ask Mr. Estes to come and assist you in accordance with 
 the constitution, and he came. And he approved of what you had done ? — A. lie 
 would not have been here if he disapproved. 
 
 Q. Did he or did he not approve ? — A. He certainly approved. 
 
 Q. And he subsequently called out the other divisions in British Columbia, the 
 Territories and Manitoba, did he not ? — A. I don't agree with you. 
 
 Q. Is it not the fact ? — A. I don't know that it is. 
 
 Q. Did they come out without an order from him ? — A. I am telling you I cannot 
 give that information positively, because I don't know who callcld the other divisions 
 
 out. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — We will produce the secretary to give this information. 
 
 Q. Who did you understand called them out ? — A. I don't know; I could not 
 answer that question. 
 
 Q. This was an illegal strike, as shown. Did the president take any action in the 
 way of dismissing the people who had been responsible for this strike, for calling it — 
 expelling them from the association ? Did the president expel any one? — A. lie has 
 not the power to expel anybody. 
 Q. Look at section 24 : 
 
 ' Any member who does not comply with the president's strike order when 
 legally given, or who resumes service in any department on the railway sys- 
 tem when a strike is declared before officially called off by the president, or 
 who incites an illegal strike, or commits any acts of violence during a strike, 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vanrouvor, June 4, 
 
554 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 ehall be expelled forever from this brotherhood, and the expulsion shall appear 
 in the " Eailway Employees' Journal".' 
 ^A. Yes, but who expels him ? It does not say that the president shall expel him, 
 
 Q. You think it does not mean that ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. And the president, you say, sanctions the matter. Who is the person who 
 malces the call for money in a case of this sort, what official does that, whose order is 
 it ? — A. A call for money for the other organizations ? 
 
 Q. I am speaking of the U. B. R. E. For instance, you people want money, and 
 you ask for money, but who decides whether the money is to be sent ? — A. I presume 
 the request comes from our executiye. 
 
 Q. Who decides whether or not that request shall be granted ? — ^A. The members 
 of the division who are sending it. 
 
 Q. But don't you send to the head office for funds ? — A. I cannot say as to 
 whether funds come from the head office or not. 
 
 Q. That is where they would come from, would they not ? — A. Not necessarily; 
 they could come from individual members. 
 
 Q. Yes, they would be voluntary contributions, but the money of the brotherhood 
 would necessarily come from the head office, would it not ? — A. I don't know ; I cannot 
 answer that question. 
 
 Q. Well, you have the constitution ? — A. Yes, but I believe it provides for the 
 fact that the president may declare what funds shall be used for that purpose. 
 
 Q. That i.i in the hands of the president ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And did the president send any money in this case ? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Do you know, as a matter of fact, whether any money has come from the head- 
 quarters of the U. B. E. E. ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Cj. Do you know if any money has come from anywhere from the IT. B. E. E. in 
 the United States ?— A. What do you mean by the TJ. B. E. E. ? 
 
 Q. I mean any lodge or division ? — A. Yes, that is what I am speaking of. 
 
 Q. Has any money come from them ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What placee ? — A. I know that plenty of money has come from the division 
 in San Francisco and other places; I have heard the letters read at the meetings. 
 
 Q. Is that the head — San Francisco ? — A. No, a division, just as we are here. 
 
 Q. How much have you received of this strike money ? — A. Five dollars ; I would 
 like to say I have not required any more. 
 
 Q. What have any other of the individual members received ? — A. I could not 
 answer for anybody except myseK. 
 
 Q. Have they received the amount provided for by the constitution ? — A. I could 
 not answer that. 
 
 Q. What has been done with the money that has come from the outside to the 
 treasury of the U. B. E. E. ? What has it been spent on ? — A. I could not answer the 
 question ; I am a member of the lodge, but not of the executive. 
 
 Q. Well, are not these things reported to the lodge ? — A. Well, for me to enter 
 into details would be impossible. 
 
 Q. It has been spent chiefly in the way of giving it to the members ? — A. I pre- 
 sume in the way of assisting the individual members. 
 
 Q. When you say you presume — do you know positively ? — A. No, I don't. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Have you had any inquiries in your lodge as to how it was spent ? — A. I have 
 heard statements read by the agent — monthly statements. 
 
 Q. Accounting for how much has come in, and how much disbursed ? — A. Exactly. 
 
 Q. Have you had any audits ? — A. Wo have an auditing committee and I presume 
 they have gone over the work. You must remember I am not as well posted on this 
 strike as I might be, for the fact that I have been away for some weeks working. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 555 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Where have you been working ? — ^A. I have been working in a shingle mill, in 
 Vancouver. 
 
 Q. Is there a union there ? — A. There was after I left, my Lord ; I saw that they 
 were union men before I left. 
 
 Mr. Bird.— I think possibly, I might raise an objection in connection with the 
 funds of the TJ. B. E. E. I understand the object of the Commission is to inquire into 
 the causes of strikes, and I think, to go into the distribution of the funds is only satis- 
 fying the private curiosity of the C. P. E. It does not assist your Lordship in deter- 
 mining the cause of the strike. 
 
 His Lordship. — We are not simply confined to the cause of the strike; we are in- 
 vestigating the workings of the union generally, because it is expected that the Com- 
 mission will make recommendations as to what legislation should be passed in this 
 connection. In order to deal intelligently with the subject, we should know what the 
 workings of the union are. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — There is no desire to keep back anything.. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is in the interests of the union to see that the public get a right 
 impression that they are really a beneficial thing. The only way to judge of that is 
 to have all the workings disclosed. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — It might be a desire on the part of the 0. P. E. to measure the strength 
 of this organization. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — You remember speaking this morning with reference to a blacklist, 
 and I stated at the time that the company had none. That is correct, but if my learned 
 friend means certain reports issued at the end of every month by the general superin- 
 tendent showing the names of men within his jurisdiction who have been discharged, 
 and stating the cause, I may say there are such. The object is apparent; the same 
 institution do not wish a discharged man on again. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^What I particularly desire, if it is not in the nature of a blacklist, is 
 an agreement between all the railway corporations of North America, agreeing that 
 they will employ no man who has been in the employ of a railway company, unless he 
 produces a document in the shape of a clearance from the corporation he has pre- 
 viously worked for. I believe there is such an agreement in existence which has been 
 sanctioned, if not signed, by all the railways in North America, so that a man, if he 
 leaves here without such a clearance will apply in vain to any railway for employment. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — ^If there is any agreement such as that, we have no objection to pro- 
 Kluding it. 
 
 His Lordship. — If there is such an agreement it should be brought to the attention 
 of the court. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I have a witness here who will prove the statement made by an officer 
 of the C. P. E. as to the existence of such an agreement. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. I see, Mr. Johnstone, under section 23 of the constitution, that each member 
 who is out on strike, after the expiration of ten days, shall be paid the sum of $40, so 
 long as that is not more than the salary he has been receiving. Has that been com- 
 plied Willh ?— A. It has not in all cases. 
 
 Q. In any case, as far as you know ?^A. I am not aware of the fact. 
 
 Q. You don't know ? — A. Perhaps they have received more than that. 
 
 Q. Do you know of any case ? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What section is that ? — ^A. Section 23, page 25. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, ^une 4. 
 
553 MINUTES OP EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By' Mr. Davis : 
 Q. What was the extremely urgent necessity for the strike which you spoke of, 
 which led the brotherhood to override all the rules and regulations ? — A. Do you 
 wish me to go into that in detail, my Lord ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Yes; you see, it seems at present as if tl^is strike was outside the constitution 
 altogether ? — A. You wish to know the urgent cause. The fact that some of our mem- 
 bers had been removed to Montreal. Some had been sent there apparently permanent- 
 ly, some temporarily. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. Give the names ? — A. Mr. Wilson and Mr. Dick had been sent apparently per- 
 manently, and Mr. Halton and Mr. Foulds temporarily. Keports were continually 
 coming in of members being called before officers. 
 
 Q. The names, please ? — A. I am not able to give all the names in this connection. 
 
 Q. Whatever you can ? — A. I will state these cases as clearly as I can, and then 
 if the counsel requires the names of certain .individuals let him ask me. 
 
 Q. Where you know them, please mention them ? — A. The fact that members of 
 our organization had been called up by superior officers, and the fact intimated to 
 them that the IT. B. R. E. would stand in the way of their promotion. 
 
 Q. Do you know the names of any of these ? — A. No, I cannot remember the names 
 just now. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. I suppose the names could be got ? — A. From our officers, certainly, my Lord. 
 And they had been told that they would require to get out of the U. B. R. E. or else 
 get out of the company's service; the fact that we as a body of freight-handlers had 
 heen told that our agreement would not be renewed 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. Told by whom ? — A. By Mr. Beasley, so our committee reported. Would not 
 have our agreement renewed unless we withdrew from the TJ. B. R. E., and the fact 
 that ,it was apparent to anybody and everybody who was conversant with the facts of 
 the case, that the company was preparing for a strike. 
 
 Q. For what reasons ? — A. From the fact that we had reports of men being en- 
 gaged to come here; from the fact that we had been told by men who had been 
 secured as special constables; that they would likely be called as special constables. 
 The name of one of them was Squires. He was afterwards, I believe, employed. 
 
 Q. Who made these reports to you ? — A. Is it necessary to mention these names 1 
 
 His Lordship. — Yes. 
 
 A. I am relating what took place, in our division meetings, and I don't consider 
 it altogether in compliance with my oath that I should reveal these names. 
 
 Q. You see, Mr. Johnstone, the public are putting a large amount of money into 
 this Commission, an4. its intention is to get at the facts. In order to do this, we must 
 get at the reasons that actuated the men in going out on strike ? — A. I know that, and 
 I am anxious to give all the information I can, but I don't like to divulge what took 
 place in secret meetings of our organization. Besides the C.P.R. might be prejudiced 
 ogainst these men on account of these very things. 
 
 Mr. Davis.— We will undertake that that will make no difference. The fact would 
 be very apparent that if the names of any men were given to the C.P.R. and anything 
 was done to prejudice those men, that as officers of a corporation they would not dare 
 to do such a thing, and would not. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, Juae 4. 
 
UN INDUSTRIAL pJSPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 557 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ^ His Lordship. — Would you undertake to the Commission that no men. would be 
 prejudiced ? 
 
 ^ Mr. Davis. — Yes, I am authorized to give an undertaking that no man will be pre- 
 judiced by reason of any evidence which he gives here. 
 
 Witness. — If you will excuse me, I have had some experience in railway service, 
 and I know that an excuse can easily be secured to discharge a man without apparent 
 discrimination. No man is perfect ^t his work, and it is very easy to secure an excuse 
 for dismissal against a man who has made himself obnoxious to an official of a railway 
 company with apparent good cause. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — ^What, exactly, is the object in getting these names ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — We want to follow it up. He says reports have been given from 
 people he does not know. 
 
 Mr. EoWE. — He gives the name of the men to be engaged as a special constable. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — The question is whether or not the men had been engaged. 
 
 Mr. EoWE. — Have you got a man who would state as to that ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — In that particular case we have got a man. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^Perhaps, in order to avoid this witness divulging anything, I could 
 have particulars of discrimination handed in to the Commissioners and to my learned 
 friend. 
 
 His Lordship. — What is sufficient for our purpose is that you have a certain num- 
 ber of men, whom, in your opinion, were discriminated against on the ground of be- 
 longing to this organization, and taking an active part in its organization. These 
 ought to be sufficient for the purpose. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Quite sufficient, so long as this evidence does not go further than that. 
 
 His Lordship. — Of course any mere testimony without mentioning names could 
 not amount to anything with the Commission, anyway. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I think I can furnish the Commissioners and Mr. Davis a complete 
 statement of the men who claim to have been discriminated against. 
 
 His Lordship. — You are getting it down to a definite issue ; I am very glad of that. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 Q. Were there any further reasons besides those you have stated ? — A. I am just 
 trying to think; I have been considerably cross-examined, and I am just trying to 
 collect these facts if I can. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Had the U.B.E.E. as a body made any demand on the C.P.E. at any time ? — • 
 A. Not at that time ; the only demand that was ever made on the C.P.E. was in Janu- 
 ary. A request was made. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. I was going to ask him about that in a moment. It is rather a long story, and 
 will interrupt this. No demand had been made prior to that time except the one in 
 January? — A. That is the case of men being called in by their superior officers and 
 asked to withdraw from the U.B.E.E. 
 
 Q. These are all the reasons you have for saying that the men went on strike. 
 These are all the reasons ? — A. All I can remember at the present time. 
 
 Q. I suppose the sum of the thing is, you are striking for self-preservation ? — A. 
 Truly; I look on this more in the nature of a lock-out than a strike. 
 
 Q. Now, why, Mr. Johnstone, was it necessary to strike at that particular time, 
 rather than ten days later. You said the Brotherhood would have been destroyed if 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
558 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION ' 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 the strike had been allowed to stand for ten days longer ? — A. Tes, from the fact that 
 some of our members would have been forced by their position, I believe, to "withdraw 
 from the organization, rather than sacrifice their position, and others would have been 
 discharged, and others transferred. 
 
 Q. That is what you think would have happened within ten days ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. But you would have had, if you had waited the ten days, a lock-out, which 
 would have been no worse than a strike for you, and I should think, better. Why 
 didn't you -wait the ten days and make it a lock-out instead of a strike ?^A. In other 
 words you would advise the U. B. E. E. to allow the C. P. E. to crush them out, rather 
 than make an effort in their defece ? 
 
 Q. I am asking you why you did not do that ? — A. My reason is, as I told you, 
 that our members would have been discriminated against, and some of them forced to 
 withdraw, others removed, and our forces would have been generally disorganized. 
 
 Q. Then it was absolutely necessary for the life of the Brotherhood that they 
 should strike on the very day they struck ? — A. As I see it, and as I saw it then. 
 
 Q. There was nothing in these suggested reasons that they struck because Forrest 
 had not been properly treated ? — A. No, that is a case I did not mention. So far as 
 his case is concerned we have always been willing to take his case up on its merits. 
 
 Q. But you didn't ask that ? They were willing to investigate it ? — A. I don't 
 know about that. 
 
 Q. You know their rule is that whenever any charge is made against an employee, 
 they suspend him temporarily, investigate the charge, and if he is found guiltless he 
 is reinstated and paid for the time lost ?— A. That is supposed to be the rule, but I 
 have never experienced it. 
 
 Q. Did you understand that to be the rule ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The U.B.E.E. did not allow that course to be pursued with Forrest, did they? 
 — A. There is always a point at which things culminate. This case of Forrest's was 
 the last thing that broke the camel's back. 
 
 His Lordship. — We know nothing about this Forrest case. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — The details are not of any particular importance. 
 
 Q. But you understand they set out in their statement of case that the reason 
 they struck is because Forrest was suspended? — A. That is not as I stated it. 
 
 Q. Did the U. B. E. E. allov/ the C. P. R. to follow the usual course in the case 
 of Forrest? — A. The TJ.B.E.E. was not considered in the case. 
 
 Q. Is that your answer ? — A. The C. P. E. have never agreed to recognize the 
 U. B. E. E. in that respect. 
 
 Q. Is that your answer ? — A. Does that answer satisfy you ? 
 
 Q. Is it the best answer you can give ? — A. What answer do you wish ? 
 
 Q. Whatever other answer you can give ?— A. If you mean that the U. B. E. E. 
 did not consent to suspension you are perfectly correct in believing that they did not 
 consent to it. 
 
 Q. They were not willing that his case should be investigated in the usual way, 
 but they required his immediate reinstatement ? — A. That is one of the requests, I 
 believe. 
 
 Q. They said that unless that were done they would go on strike ? — A. Coupled 
 with other clauses. 
 
 Q. But unless they reinstated Forrest the employees would go out on strike, would 
 they not ? — A. That was one of the clauses, I believe. 
 
 Q. In fact, it was the only condition given, was it not ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. I will read you a notice — you recognize it, I presume ? — A. Tes. 
 
 (Exhibit 30 read). 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
02V INDUSTRIAL DISPVTBiS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 559 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 VancouveKj February 26, 1903. 
 
 ' E. IJJVRPOLE, Esq., 
 
 General Superintendent, 
 
 Canadian Pacific Railway, 
 Vancouver. 
 
 ' Dear Sir. — We, the undersigned committee of employees, have been in- 
 structed to write you requesting the immediate withdrawal of the suspension 
 of H. P. Forrest of the local freight staff issued subsequent to your cancella- 
 tion of his suspension by Mr. Beasley. 
 
 ' We further request a cessation of the policy of intimidation lately pur- 
 sued against the employees of various departments by your various officials 
 because of their membership in the United Brotherhood of Railway 
 Employees. 
 
 ' A satisfactory reply hereto is requested by 11.30 o'clock to-morrow, 27th 
 instant, otherwise the employees represented by this committee will cease 
 work at 12 o'clock, noon. 
 
 ' Yours truly, 
 
 (Signed.) Robert Brooke, 
 F. J. Walker, 
 David Laverock, 
 A. G. Denison, 
 
 Acting ' 
 
 Q. That is the notice ?— A. Yes. 
 
 His Lordship. — That letter is dated February 26th, the strike took place when ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — The clerks went out on the 27th, and the freight handlers on the 2nd. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. This committee of employees mentioned in the notice were U.B.R.E. men ? — 
 A. I presume they were. 
 
 Q. The people striking were the U.B.R.E. ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Unless Forrest were immediately reinstated the U.B.R.E. would immediately 
 strUce — is that not a fact ? — A. I presume. I want to draw your attention to the fact 
 that Mr. Forrest's case was supposed to have been fuUy investigated previous to that 
 by the O.P.R. or else how could they arrive at the decision to suspend him. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. When was the suspension in the first place ? — A. Five o'clock on the 26th. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — The ordinary procedure is to suspend a man, and then investigate the 
 charge. If the charge is not proved, he is reinstated and paid for all the time he is 
 suspended. 
 
 His Lordship. — I would like to get these dates in order. The same day the letter 
 was written to Mr. Marpole, on the 27th, the clerks went out; then on March 2 the 
 freight handlers went out. Now, who else went out, if anybody ? 
 
 Witness. — That was all in the city, I believe, in connection with that. 
 
 Mr. Rowe. — I understand that the clerks, the office men, the baggagemen and shop 
 men went out on February 27, and the freight handlers on March 2 ? 
 
 Witness. — ^Yes, the total number of men being 215. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. From what you say the U.B.R.E. would have struck Irrespective of this Forrest 
 question ?— A. No. 
 
 His Lordship. — We would like to get the chain of events, and the dates. 1 suppose 
 we can get these. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Yes. David B, JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
560 MINUTEi^ OF ETIDEXCE OF liOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 His Lordship. — ^What about the teamsters and longshoremen ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I think these facts will come out in due course with the examination 
 of the other witnesses. 
 
 His Lordship. — We would like to get the dates now. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Could not a list be put in for the use of the Commissioners by to- 
 morrow morning ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^Tes, I can do that. 
 
 B2/ Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. Now the strike would have taken place at the same time apart from this ques- 
 tion of Mr. Forest ?— A. No, I think not. 
 
 Q. If it were necessary for the Brotherhood to strike exactly then, why would it 
 not ? — A. I cannot say positively in that case; that is a circumstance that I have not 
 considered. 
 
 Q. That is the best answer you can give to that ? — A. Yes; I cannot say whether 
 it would have taken place or not. 
 
 Q. The U.B.R.E. had held the company up in a similar way in the preceding Janu- 
 ary ? — A. I don't know that you could call it a hold-up. 
 
 Q. That was what Mr. Marpole called it at the time ?-— A. Possibly, I don't know. 
 
 Q- How much notice did they give them ? — ^A. I could not say as to that, 
 
 Q. Both occasions were picked out with a -^oecial view — the Empress was com- 
 ing in ? — A. No, I thinlc not. 
 
 Q. It was a mere coincidence that the demand was made within 24 hours of the 
 arrival of an Empress ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Do you think it was a coincidence or intentional ? — A. I suppose it was a coin- 
 cidence. 
 
 Q. What notice was given in January — January 6, I think it was 1 — A. I could 
 not give the date. 
 
 Q. Do you know the details of that January meeting ? — ^A. Partly, I do. 
 
 Q. They demanded there again that a certain man should be reinstated without 
 investigation, did they not — Halton ? — A. Yes, I remember the circumstance. 
 
 Q. That is true, is it not ? That he should be reinstated without investigation? 
 — A. Yes, certa,inly, reinstatement was requested. 
 
 Q. And it was not denied that what he had been suspended for had taken place — 
 that he had left his emplojonent without giving notice ? — A. That is denied. 
 
 Q. That he went to Seattle without permission ? — A. That is denied. 
 
 Q. He claimed to get permission to stay at home because he was sick ? — A. When 
 I ask for leave of absence from the C. P. R. or my employer at any time, I claim I have 
 a perfect right to use it as I see fit, so long as I don't exceed the absence which I have 
 obtained, and I consider no man in the employ of the C. P. E. can do more. 
 
 Q. So that is your idea of things as a straightforward way of dealing with your 
 employer, to obtain leave on the ground of sickness, and then go to Seattle ? — A. I 
 don't know that he asked that. 
 
 Q. I am putting this fact to you ? — A. I don't know they are facts. 
 
 Q. If they were, would you consider that honest or straightforward way of deal- 
 ing ? — A. I don't consider it any business of an employer how an employee spends 
 his leave of absence. 
 
 Q. Would you consider it was honest dealing with his employer ? — A. I think he 
 was perfectly within his rights. 
 
 Q. Now, the TJ. B. E. E. then demanded his reinstatement ? — A. Yes, I think it 
 was requested ; I don't know about demanded. 
 
 Q. Well, or they would strike ? — A. I don't remember whether that clause was in 
 the request or npt. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BlilTISH COLUMBIA B61 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. And that was a day or two before Mr. Marpole was going away, in addition to 
 this other trouble ? — A. I believe it was shortly before he went away. 
 
 Q. Ton heard what Mr. Marpole stated at the time — that he would have to give 
 way and reinstate this man because a pistol was being held at his head ? — A. I think 
 that was another occasion, when the pistol was held at his head. 
 
 Q. What was that occasion ? — A. That was during a little controversy in the 
 freight office with reference to an increase of pay. 
 
 Q. Tou are in error as to that. But you jvould think that Mr. Marpole could 
 properly use such language ? — ^A. No, I think not. 
 
 Q. When did Mr. Estes first come into this country 1 — A. The first time, I think, 
 was on November 15, 1902. 
 
 Q. He was here in January at the time of the threatened strike ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And he interviewed Mr. Marpole ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you are aware that he was told by Mr. Marpole that if the TJ. B. E. E. 
 were going to treat him that way that he would have to protect himself ? — A. I am not 
 aware of that. 
 
 Q. You think it wise that they should make some provision against a similar thing 
 happening — Shaving been held up that way before ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Do you think any company or business man could run his business with dis- 
 cipline in that way ? — A. The question is who decides the discipline, the O.P.E. ? 
 
 Q. Now, this U. B. E. E. were going to strike in January. In January, had the 
 necessary steps been taken to have a strike of the U. B. E. E. ? — A. What do you refer 
 to 8 
 
 Q. I am referring to just what I ask. On January 6, at the time that the U.B.E.E. 
 threatened strike, had they put themselves in a position to strike legally under the con- 
 stitiition ? — A. They did not strike. 
 
 Q. Please answer the question that I ask ? — A. If you mean, did they carry out 
 the constitution as it is laid down, no. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. That was in connection with the Halton case ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. The constitution seems very much like the proverbial pie-crust. You say, Mr. 
 Johnstone, that there are only two or three socialists among the U. B. E. E. You are 
 not, I presume, a socialist ? — A. I am not a member of any socialist party, but if you 
 ask me if I believe in socialism, probably I will tell you I do to a certain extent. 
 
 Q. Perhaps this would be your idea. I am going to read you an extract, and ask 
 you what you think of the sentiments expressed in that, whether or not you would 
 approve of them in your president, Mr. Estes ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^What is that extract from ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — It is an extract froin a letter written by Mr. Estes, the president of 
 the TJ. B. E. E., to Mr. Harold Poore, the organizer of the U. B. E. E. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I suppose my friend will produce the letter ? 
 
 Mr. Davis.— I may say, for my learned friend's benefit, that we are taking &teix3 
 to have the original here. 
 
 His Lordship. — If he undertakes to have the letter here, that is enough. At anj' 
 rate the witnees can give his answer conditionally, on the hypothesis that that was the 
 letter. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — (Quotes from Exhibit 31). 
 
 ' In all your writings carefully word your articles so as to develop a public 
 sentiment for the U. B. E. E. — the Industrial Union Plan — the A. L. U., and 
 against the reactionary and capitalistic party now temporarily in control of 
 
 36a 36 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June i. 
 
562 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 the A. F. of L. and not against the masses of members comprising the A. F. 
 of L. Continually separate the administration of the A. F. of L from the 
 A.F. of L. itself, and give all possible praise to the masses of the A.F. of L., 
 but without being personal or vindictive, condemn the temporary capitalistic 
 administration of the A. F. of L. in the shortest terms you can possibly em- 
 ploy.' 
 
 'In this way you will constantly stimulate and augment a great public 
 sentiment for the IJ. B. R. E., for the Industrial Union, for the A. L. U. and 
 for socialism (but don't use the word) and against the capitalism and Gom- 
 pers faction which is working in harmony with Marcus A. Hanna, and th§ 
 infamous civic federation to keep down the masses of the people.' 
 
 Q. Is that in accordance with your own idea ? — A. Well, I could not say. I have 
 not looked into that question thoroughly. I have my own idea of socialism, and I am 
 not prepared to judge Mr. Estes' idea of socialism, as I don't know what his idea may 
 be. 
 
 Q. Tou don't disapprove of socialism so long as the word is not used ? — A. Not 
 necessarily that the word should not be used, or that I should entertain his idea. 
 
 Q. You don't then object to the word being used ? — A. No, I don't. 
 
 Q. And you have no objection to what Mr. Estes says ? — A. As I said before I 
 don't object to the word, nor so far as I can see, to the general tone of the letter. 
 
 Q. I understand from you that the freight handlers who went out on the 2nd 
 of March had an agreement in writing with the company binding them to work for 
 the company at certain agreed wages, up to the 21st June, 1903, and not to leave that 
 agreement without 30 days' notice ? — A. That agreement is not binding as I understand 
 it, it is merely a schedule of prices, and that these prices shall not be departed from 
 without thirty days' notice, as I understand it. 
 
 Q. When did you arrive at that understanding ? — A. I have always had that un- 
 derstanding. 
 
 Q. That is not an agreement to work for the O.P.R. ? — A. No, because we were 
 employed by the hour, and we had a right to terminate our employment at the end of 
 any hour. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I understand there is no document signed by the union; that it was 
 intended to be a mere memorandum of schedule of rates. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — What took place was that there was an agreement arrived at verbally. 
 They agreed to it, and a letter was written by Mr. Marpole setting out the terms. 
 
 His Lordship. — As I gather, it was simply a notice agreeing as to the wages paid. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — ^But really in force until the 21st June unless notice is given. It 
 means, I think, that the men should remain working, otherwise it would amount to 
 nothing. 
 
 His Lordship. — It seems to me that the length of notice which the men must give 
 is provided for so that as long as they are at work, the wages are not to be cut down 
 without thirty days' notice. There is certainly no agreement. I don't suppose there 
 could have been any agreement, because this body is not incorporated. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — There are written agreements with all these assoeiations. As a rule 
 they are made with a committee of the m^n signed by the committee and binding on 
 the men. 
 
 Q. Then do I understand from you that this was not considered to be an agreement 
 v/hich required the men to remain working for the company for any particular length 
 of time ? — A. Not as I understand it. 
 
 Q. I want to know what your understanding was then? — A. As I have always un- 
 derstood it, that schedule is merely a schedule of prices. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
OW INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 563 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Was it binding on the C. P. E.?— A. The C. P. E. had a perfect right to dis- 
 charge me at any time if they saw fit, or any member of the freight-handlers' associa- 
 tion. 
 
 Q. That is your understanding of the arrangement ? — A. Perfectly. 
 
 Q. I understood you to tell my learned friend Mr. Bird that the freight handlers 
 did not wish to go out at first on account of that agreement. What did you mean by 
 that ? — A. I meant just what I said ; that although we did not consider the agreement 
 actually binding, that the agreement was there. 
 
 Q. Was it an agreement or not ? — A. The agreement there is with regard to prices. 
 We did not wish to terminate that or interrupt the harmonious relations which had 
 existed between ourselves and the company, without we were compelled to do so. 
 
 Q. And the mere striking of the U. B. E. E. was not sufiicient ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Then what was sufficient ? — A. From the fact that we as freight-handlers had 
 decided to continue at our work. 
 
 Q. The striking of the U. B. E. E. was not sufficient to induce the freight-handlers, 
 who were members also, to go out ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What then was sufficient to induce you to come out? — A. As I said already, 
 this morning, the fact of our being placed in contact with scabs. 
 
 Q. In what way ? — A. The fact of our members having to handle bills which' had 
 been made out by scabs, men who had taken the places of strikers. 
 
 Q. That is, the U. B. E. E. men, on strike two or three days before ? — A. Exactly ; 
 and from the fact that men were there, as I said before, waiting to take our places, 
 and that one of our men was discharged — Fowler, and from the fact that I myself, the 
 last day I worked there — it has been my duty for some years to take charge of the 
 freight office on Sunday — the last Sunday I worked I was shadowed by a scab from the 
 time I entered the office until I left it ; that man was at my elbow all the time. 
 
 Q. Who was the man ? — A. I don't know, and I don't care to know him. 
 
 Q. Any other reasons? — A. No, I think those reasons are sufficient. There was a 
 reason from the fact that the company wished to force on us a new agreement before 
 the old one had expired, coupled with the amendment that our agreement would not be 
 removed unless we withdrew our membership from the U.B.E.E. 
 
 Q. What difference would it make? You say the old agreement was not binding 
 at all ? How could there be a question of it expiring ? — A. I don't know what was the 
 reason of bringing that up. 
 
 Q. How could it make any difference? — A. If that agreement was not renewed I 
 expect that our wages would be reduced. 
 
 Q. Why did you object to their wanting to renew it ? — A. Because the old one had 
 not expired. I assure you it is a new procedure on the part of the C.P.E. to try and 
 rush agreements ; they usually stand them off. 
 
 Q. Did not they want to make that agreement with you prior to the strike? — A. 
 They knew it was coming. 
 
 Q. Was it not prior to the 27th ? — A. It was on the evening of the 26th, I believe. 
 
 jQ. That could not Jiave been the reason why ? — A. Yes, it was. 
 
 Q. Well, what was I going to say ? — A. You were going to say that was th© reason 
 why they did not want to renew it. 
 
 Q. No, I was not going to say anything of the kind. If that was the reason for 
 your striking, why didn't you strike with the rest of the IJ.B.E.E.? — A. We had not 
 been shoved up against scabs. 
 
 Q. How could anything else result after these went on strike? How could any- 
 thing else happened, but that somebody else should take their places and do that work ? 
 — A. That is not our affair. 
 
 Q. You might just as well have struck with them? — A. Possibly. 
 
 Q. Then it looked as though you were looking for some technicality to get over 
 this agreement? — A. I don't look at it that way. 
 
 36a — 36i DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
56a MINUTES OF HT7DENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact this constitution requires you to take the position which 
 you did take? — A. I don't -think that it does. 
 
 Q. I will read section 25. I think it goes a great deal farther even that you 
 would go: (Quotes) 
 
 'Whenever a reasonable satisfactory adjustment of grievances of a member 
 or of members of the Brotherhood, or of the Brotherhood, or any division or 
 department thereof, is refused by the management of any railway, notice of 
 refusal to adjust grievance may be given by the joint order of the president 
 and Board of Directors, and upon the same being made, and until the same^s 
 revoked no member of the Brotherhood shall perform any labour or service in 
 or upon any such railway or upon or in connection with any of the business, 
 property, freight or passengers thereof cither while actually upon said rail' 
 way, or upon premises owned by the corporation owning the same, i or under 
 the control or direction of such corporation or its management, or that may 
 be destined for or to be carried upon any such railway or any part thereof, or 
 that may be coming from or to be transported from the same or from any part 
 thereof, and while such notice is in effect and until the same is 
 • lawfully revoted by the authority issuing the same, no member 
 of the Brotherhood shall in anywise handle, transport, or be in any way con- 
 nected with the handling, transmission or transportation of any of the 
 freight, or passengers or property of said railway or of the railways affected 
 by and specified in said order, under penalty of exptilsion. 
 Q. That would cover pretty nearly everything? — A. It covers a good systematic 
 strike. 
 
 Q. For instance, lumber that was being brought over the O.P.E. for the building 
 01 houses — no member of the U.B.R.E. would have anything to do with that? — A. I 
 presume not. 
 
 Q. It is about as sweeping as anything possibly could be, in brief. 
 Q. Ton have spoken of the discharge of Fowler. What was he discharged for ?— 
 A. As I understand it, for refusing to accept bills made out by scabs. 
 
 Q. Do you consider the travelling agent, Mr. Bell, a scab ? — A. I consider any 
 man or official who goes outside of his own department to perform labour, a scab. 
 
 Q. Do you consider the travelling agent a scab ? — A. Yes, if he went out of his 
 own department to scab. 
 
 Q. And the land agent, Mr. Forrest, a scab ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And because Fowler was dismissed for refusing to handle bills made out by 
 these old officers of the C. P. E. they would go on strike ? — A. One of the grounds ; 
 I don't know that it would be a ground by itself ; I won't say that it would not, cither. 
 
 By Mr. Rome : 
 
 Q. These are documents that would not usually be made out by these officials ? — 
 A. Yes, these men were outside their own department ; came into that department to 
 take the place of men on strike. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — My learned friend is proceeding on the assumption that these bills 
 were made out by Messrs. Forrest and Bell. I am informed that they were made' out 
 by the scab employees who were put in substitution and not by officials of the com- 
 pany. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I am not putting that in as evidence. As I understand, my instruc- 
 tions are that the document which Fowler refused to have anything to do with was 
 made out by Bell and Forrest. I put it as hypothesis. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 Q. The official paper, as I understand it, is the Eailway Employees' Journal ?— 
 A. Yes. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE — Vancouver, June 4. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 665 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Published where ?— A. In Frisco, I believe. 
 
 Q. Do the members of the U.B.R.E. subscribe to it, as a rule ? — A. Every member 
 of the TJ.B.E.E. gets a copy of it. I believe there is a copy once a week. 
 Q. Then you have been taking it yourself ? — A. Yes. 
 
 (Copy of Railway Employees' Journal dated May 28, 1903, handed in, identified 
 by witness. Exhibit 32.) 
 
 Q. This contains, among other items, the following : — 
 
 ' The U.B. of E.E. has established a strong union in Great Palis. Some 
 of the hardest workers in the new union are old members of the A.E.U. An 
 ice-cream social was given on the west side, where the aims and objects of 
 the new union were explained to the railway men. It is thought the U.B. of 
 R.E. will shortly extend over the entire system. The plan of organization 
 appeals to the workers. It embraces every employee of the railroads, from 
 the man on the track to the clerk in the auditor's oifice. It believes in politi- 
 cal action on the part of the unions; is affiliated with the A.L.U. and the 
 Western Federation of Miners; has a membership of over twenty-five thou- 
 sand, and is in a better position to give protection to its members than any 
 other railway organization in existence.' 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I believe that statement is absolutely correct. I would like to see if it 
 is an editorial or not. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I put in the issue of May 21, which contains, among other things, the 
 following :— (Exhibit 33.) 
 
 ' The strike of the Comox miners, at instance of Western Federation of 
 Miners, and really in support of the U.B.E.E., shuts off the O.P.E. coal supply 
 at the coast, as the company got 15,000 tons a month from this source.' 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Is that the official organ of the U.B.E.E.? — A. That is published in San 
 Francisco. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — That is the official organ in the constitution. At page 36, article 12, 
 section I., ' the Railway Employees Journal shall be the official organ of the Brother- 
 hood.' 
 
 Q. That is the issue of March 19, is it not ? — A. Yes. 
 
 (Put in, marked Exhibit 34.) 
 
 Mr. BiED. — ^Is that an extract from any newspaper? The former was only an ex- 
 tract from a newspaf)er, without comment. 
 
 By Mr. Davis: 
 Q. This is the issue of March 12, is it not ? — A. Yes. 
 
 (Exhibit 35.) 
 
 Mr. Davis. — My learned friend cannot take any exception to what I am going to 
 read. It is an editorial of the first water, headed : ' The American Labour Union 
 Takes a Hand:' 
 
 ' The United Brotherhood has not been prone to boast of its power or its 
 achievements, but it has gone steadily forward, and has so brought its mem- 
 bers together that the spirit of fraternity and brotherhood is firmly engendered 
 in their hearts and, if this fact has ever been questioned, the manner in which 
 aU are interesting themselves in the cause of their brothers in Canada would 
 prove the contrary. Within a few hours after the members in Vancouver 
 had severed their connection with the C. P. E., other divisions in Canada 
 had signified their willingness to lend every aid to the cause.' 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
566 MINVTES OF EYIDEVCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 ' The American Labour Union has thrown its weight into the balance 
 
 of justice's scales ia favour of the United Brotherhood. On the 6th instant, 
 a telegram was directed to the American Labour Union requesting that the 
 Western Federation of Miners stop handling coal on Vancouver Island for 
 the Canadian Pacific Railway. Within a few hours every member of the 
 powerful Western Federation of Miners in Vancouver had ceased work.'' 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — That is the same date that Mr. Shenton telegraphed to Mr. Moyer, 
 
 and the U. B. E. E. publish it as showing the connection between them and the 
 
 Western Federation. 
 
 By Mr. Davis: 
 Q. That is the edition of April 23, is it not? — A. Yes. 
 
 (Exhibit 36.) 
 
 Q. It is more with a view of showing the light in which they treat this question 
 of a strike. You have seen Mr. Estes' sheet ' from headquarters in the field ' on the 
 27th? — A. I don't know that I have; I could not say that I have seen it. 
 
 Q. Just take a look at it? — A. Yes, I presume that is his circular, although I 
 could not be positive, because I don't remember having read it before. 
 
 (Put in as Exhibit 37.) 
 
 Mr. Davis. — It is headed ' Executive Ofiice, President's Headquarters in the 
 Field,' and also ' General Offices, 210 Parrott Building, San Francisco,' and is ad- 
 dressed ' To all unions affiliated with the American Labour Union.' I am putting 
 this in to show that Mr. Estes was practically at the bottom of this strike, practically 
 from beginning to end. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^It seems to be a fairly truthful account of matters up to date. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Yes, with the exception of a certain amount of exaggeration. ' The 
 
 Trades and Labour Councils at Vancouver, Winnipeg, Nelson, Calgary, Revelstoke 
 
 and Victoria have endorsed the strike and are doing all in their power to help the 
 
 movement, morally and financially. . . . There are one thousand men out (Of 
 
 course, that is a little stretched), . . . Make all remittances to Fred. J. Halton. 
 
 Your for industrial unionism, Geo. Estes, President U.BR.E. We approve 
 
 and endorse the above appeal.' — Signed by the officers of the American Labour Union. 
 
 Mr. BiED. — I understand, Mr. Commissioners, that this document is' not in yet. I 
 
 am not prepared to admit that that was prepared by Mr. Estes. In fact, it appears on 
 
 the face of it that it is not so. That was prepared by Mr. Halton, the secretary of the 
 
 union here. He signed Mr. Estes name to it. If that is sought to be put in as capital 
 
 against Mr. Estes I cannot admit the document. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is nothing in the document you repudiate ? 
 Mr. Bird. — I repudiate the fact of the authorship of George Estes. 
 His Lordship. — It is supposed to embody the true facts ? 
 Mr. Davis. — With the exception of 945 instead of 1,000 out. 
 
 His Lordship. — Is there anything in it you wish to repudiate on behalf of the 
 U.B.R.E. ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — It is sought to be put in by counsel for the C.P.R. from George Estes, 
 representing the fact that he has controlled and managed the strike from the be- 
 ginning. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Mr. Halton will be in the box, and we can see if he has his authority. 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — A copy of this circular has already been put in as an exhibit at 
 Victoria, I think. It is marked Exhibit E. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 567 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. Have you ever seen this (Exhibit 38, Letter from Committee of Employees to 
 K. Marpole, dated 5th January, 1903) ? — A. No, I believe that is the first time I have 
 seen it. 
 
 Q. Will you swear to that ? — A. I will swear that I have no recollection of it. 
 
 Q. Or this sheet by Estes ? — A. I know nothing about that circular. 
 
 Mr. Davis.— That is all. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. All communications, some of which have been filed by my learned friend, did 
 they emanate from your union, or how were they presented to Mr. Marpole previous 
 to the strike ? — A. They would emanate from the executive under instructions from 
 the union, I presume. 
 
 Q. Was there any necessary connection between that committee of employees who 
 signed, and the union ? — A. That would be acting on and by authority of the union. 
 
 Q. Did all the members of the TJ. B. E. E. come out on strike at the first instance 
 on the 27th February ? You told us the clerks — were there any exceptions ? — A. Yes. 
 There was, I believe, a man by the name of Burns, who did not go out, a man named 
 Eerris, and a man named Dangerfield who did not go out at that time. 
 
 Q. Where there any members who were not called out ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How is that ? — A. Because we had some members, one in particular whom 
 I have in my mind, who was past the age of retiring according to the C P. E. pension 
 scheme, and for him to desert his employment would expose him to the penalty of 
 losing his pension. 
 
 Q. Were thereany more besides this one man who were allowed to stay in, although 
 the union men went out ? — A. Yes, there was one, a C. P. R. police officer. 
 
 Q. I don't want the names, but how many were there, do you know, members of 
 the union allowed to remain at the present time ? — A. Pour I have in my mind at 
 the present time. 
 
 Q. Why was an exception made in their case — you have told us one on account of 
 Ege? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Any circumstances in connection with the others? — A. Two of them were 
 on account of being the only two men in their department, I believe, and the other 
 one was a police officer, and they did not want to interfere with him. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Do you approve of sympathetic strikes, Mr. Johnstone ? — A. I do not, my 
 Lord. 
 
 Q. Then so far as you had any view or opinion in the matter you would not have 
 approved of calling out the miners at Vancouver Island in sympathy with the U. B. 
 E. E. ? — A. No, I could not say that I would approve of it. 
 
 Q. Do you approve of the boycott ? — A. I do, my Lord, where it becomes neces- 
 sary. 
 
 Q. I notice a statement in to-day's paper that a woman keeping a boarding house 
 was forced to exclude scabs, as they are called by union men, in this way — that the 
 union men threatened to leave unless the other people were expelled ? — A. I would 
 ■consider that would be perfectly right. I would be sorry to sit at the same table as 
 a scab. 
 
 Q. You cannot sit at the same table as a scab ? — A. No, sir; not if I know it. 
 
 Q. And you think it is right to bring pressure on this woman to expel these people? 
 ' — ^A. I consider that a scab is nothing more or less than a murderer, pure and simple. 
 A scab comes and takes the bread out of my mouth and my children's mouths. 
 
 Q. Would you say that a man has a right to belong to a union or not, as he 
 pleases ? — A. I don't believe in forcing a man into joining the imion. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
568 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. You think he should have the privilege of joining or not, if he sees fit? — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Then if he sees fit he need not belong to a union ? — A. Not in my opinion, so 
 long as he lives up to union principles. 
 
 Q. Supposing he does not approve of union principles ; he has a right to his opin- 
 inon ? — A. He is a traitor to his class. 
 
 Q. But I am talking of non-union men ? — A. I would not approve of forcing a 
 man to join the union. 
 
 Q. And there are plenty of men who don't approve of joining unions ? — A. Not 
 reputable workmen. 
 
 Q. You think the great majority are in favour of joining a union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. A non-union man, or scab as you will call him, has a right to live, has he not ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If a non-union man has a right to get work, has not another man a right to give 
 him work ? One involves the other, does it not ? — A. Well, yes. 
 
 Q. Then, if an employer has the right to employ a non-union man, the union has 
 no right to force an employer to employ union men; is that right ? — A. My Lord, 
 that is a very broad question. It is almost impossible to force an employer to employ 
 union men, but on the other hand it is not impossible to educate employees into join- 
 ing the union. 
 
 Q. We can grant that the men have a right to form a union, but have they the 
 right to force it on an employer? — A. If it is found necessary; in a great number of 
 cases it is necessary. 
 
 Q. But you have admitted that an employer has the right to employ non-union 
 men ? — A. The position is this ; I would not like to discriminate against a man because 
 he objected to becoming a member of the union, or see him forced out of his position. 
 I would go that far. 
 
 Q. If an employer has the right to employ a non-union man it follows that tlie 
 union has no right to force an employer to employ them to the exclusion of everybody 
 else, because if that principle were adopted a non-union man could not get work ? — 
 A. He could easily become a union man. 
 
 Q. Yes, but he might not want to. It is a free country ? — A. Yes; the sooner he 
 becomes a citizen of some other country the better. 
 
 Q. Now the position a union takes when it tries to force an employer is this : you 
 must either do business with us or nobody else ? — -A. Well, the effort, I presume, is 
 along this line, to prevent, if possible, an employer doing business with somebody else. 
 But at the same time it cannot always be done. 
 
 Q. But that is the position which the union virtually takes ? — A. To prevent, if 
 possible, the employer doing business with anybody else. 
 
 Q. So that the right of choice with the employer to employ union or non-union 
 men is stopped. That is, you don't concede the right to an employer to employ non- 
 union men when you strike for recognition ? — A. That is in the limit of the union. 
 They might permit an employer to employ non-union men, and still be treated with an 
 employer as a union. 
 
 Q. At all events the object of unionism is to force employment to employ union 
 labour to the exclusion of non-union labour ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. I understand you would not refuse work to non-union men ? — A. No, I would 
 not, but I would endeavour to see that they became union men as soon as possible. 
 
 Q. What do you understand by sympathetic strike ?— A. As I understand, it 
 means that one organization goes out in sympathy with another, without having any 
 direct interest or connection with that organization. A sympathetic strike is a strike 
 purely from sympathy. These men are fighting for what they consider their rights, 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE^-Vancouver, June 4. 
 
OiV INLUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BlilTISB VOLVUBIA 569 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ";Lnd another union stands by and says, that is not right, we are going to get in and 
 assist these men. 
 
 Q. When there is no connection between the two, how can a sympathetic strike 
 do any good? — A. It might do some good by hampering the man wlio is employing 
 them to such an extent that they would insist on the party causing this strike to settle. 
 
 Q. Would you consider, for instance the British Columbia Steamshipmen's Society 
 justified in striking with the U.B.E.E. ? — A. Not if they had no other occasion, but of 
 course, as we know they had connection with our action in being asked to handle scab 
 freight to and from ships. 
 
 Q. Why would the railway societies that had to deliver freight to substitute men, 
 feel bound to strike? — A. I could not answer that question. 
 
 Q. Do you think the obligation upon them to strike, from the union standpoint, 
 was as great as the steamship men ? — A. There is, I understand, a difference in the 
 position of the organization. 
 
 Q. A difference in-their sensitiveness to the needs of the union ? — A. Possibly. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. There are a large number of railway employees that do not sympathize with the 
 U.B.E.E. ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And did not approve of this strike ? — A. Yes, that is correct. 
 
 Q. And were requested to assist in this strike ? — A. Possibly they may have been ; 
 T don't know. 
 
 Q. Would you say that these people were not good union people ? — A. I would say 
 that men who took the places of our strikers were not good union people, although 
 they belonged to a union organization. 
 
 Q. And suppose they, on the other hand, considered that you had no justification 
 for going out, from their standpoint it would be right for them to take their places ? 
 — A. No, I cannot see any reason that will excuse a union man scabbing on his fellow 
 workmen. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. To refer to another matter, I am not quite clear upon in reference to the For- 
 rest case. You say there had been time given to investigate the case of Forrest before 
 action was taken by the U.B.E.E. ? — A. What I said was this : that the company must 
 have already investigated the charge against him, or they would not have been in a posi- 
 tion to suspend him. 
 
 Q. The company say the custom is to suspend, investigate and reinstate with pay 
 for loss of time, if the charge is not founded ? — A. I think you will have evidence to 
 show that Mr. Forrest was not only suspended, but also threat'Sned with pressure in the 
 courts. 
 
 Q. Do you assent to the statement that proceedings were taken against him on the 
 morning of February 26, by the company — that was the time ? — A. Yes, on the 26th, 
 as I remember it. 
 
 Q. Do you think unions should be incorporated ? — A. No, my Lord, I don't. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. That is a very sore point with union men — the suggestion of incor- 
 poration. If a union is incorporated, it becomes immediately a target for legal actions 
 by corporations such as the C.P.E. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Don't you think were a union has power it should have corresponding responsi- 
 
 jjjjj^y ? A. Yes, but the question is, that corporations like the C.P.E. who engage 
 
 their solicitors by the year, it costs them practically nothing to be in court all the time. 
 What society could stand up against actions brought on possibly the most trivial 
 charges, and we would have to fight these and spend a lot of money which we would lay 
 bv for sick benefits would be spent and used. 
 
 ■' DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June i. 
 
570 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. The anthracite mine workers had nine counsel in their strike ? — A. My Lord, 
 it costs money. 
 
 His Lordship. — I guess it does. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Would it be good business for the transportation company to be constantly at 
 litigation with its employees ? — A. I ijon't know. The public seem to have consider- 
 able confidence in the C.P.E., although they have been in trouble with their employees 
 here for three months, and we have had considerable difficulty with them. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You think the C.P.E. should be got at in the courts, but that the union should 
 not ? — A. No, I don't agree with you altogether. The reasons which I have stated I 
 think are good. 
 
 Q. How do you expect that an employer is going to recognize a union which can- 
 not live up to its contract ?— A. I believe it is the intention of the members of a union 
 frenerally, when a contract is made, to live up to it, and I believe as a rule they do, but 
 there is no contract, your Lordship, which I would consider should ever bind a union 
 itian to work among scabs. 
 
 Q. The obligation of the union is higher than the obligation to a contract ? — A. 
 Not necessarily, but if you bind a man down to a contract that he is to work a certain 
 length of time, and a body of men go on strike, and he may be forced to work along 
 with a scab. 
 
 Q. Yes, but the object of unionism is to prevail on employers to make a contract 
 with them as a union, and not as indivfduals. How do you expect them to do this, 
 unless it is shown by experience that unions will keep their contracts ? — A. I believe 
 that experience has shown that unions do keep their .contracts as a rule. 
 
 Q. No one can tell when an exception is going to occur ? — A. That is quite true. 
 
 Q. The difficulty is that there is no redress in the courts for the breaking of con- 
 tracts. That is a proposition you cannot reasonably expect ? — A. In the matter of 
 incorporation the advantage is all on the side of the employer. He has the advantage, 
 especially a large corporation. He has the advantage of being in the courts without 
 it costing him a particular amount of money, and suppose something trifling occurs 
 he has the option of entering action against the union for damages, and as we know, 
 these cases go up from court to court and cost money. If an action of that kind could 
 be settled in the county court it is a small matter, but if it goes to the Supreme Court 
 or the Privy Council, it takes money to follow it through. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. But the company cc^uld not attack a union for the acts of its individual mem- 
 bers, unless in violation of some form of contract ? — A. I don't know, why not. 
 
 Q. How do you think disagreements or strikes should be settled between employers 
 and employees ? — A. That is a serious question, and if some just means of arbitra- 
 tion could be arrived at, it is the proper course to pursue, to my mind, in settling 
 these matters, but, to my mind, the difficulty is to secure an impartial board of ar- 
 bitrators. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. Well, in a controversy between say a transportation company and 
 its employees, the company have so many means of showing favours, which could not 
 be considered as such, or perhaps even intended that way. If it were in the hands of 
 an arbitrator for any length of time, I would fear of him continuing impartial; for 
 instance we will say, transportation across the continent in a private car, a few months 
 at a summer hotel, and things of that kind. I would be. very loth to put my case be- 
 fore an arbitrator who had been taking advantage of anything of that kind. 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 571 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You feel that the difficulty in arbitration is that there is not enough moral 
 stamina in the race to pro.duce men immune to bribes ? — A. No, there are such men, 
 but the trouble is to find them. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. They are very scarce ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. I suppose until we get a higher moral development we will have to go on strik- 
 ing ? — A. I hope not. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — The socialists say that private profit is at the root of the evil. 
 
 His Lordship. — Well, it is remarkable, the very few socialists that are rich! 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I would ask my learned friend to give particulars of the intimida- 
 tion that is mentioned in this list. He alleges that we have intimidated certain men, 
 mentioning them. There is not a date whatever, by which we can get any evidence. 
 
 His Lordship. — Probably the best thing would be to put your men in the box. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — The most of these men whom I have mentioned will be witnesses be- 
 fore this Commission. 
 
 I have been instructed by the committee of the U. B. E. E. who are engineering 
 these proceedings on behalf of their organization, to state that, so far as the arbitra- 
 tion is concerned, that we are content and have confidence in the present Commis- 
 sioners arbitrating the matter, if it was thought well by the C. P. R., to allow them 
 to sit as a board of arbitrators as well as Commissioners in regard to this investigation, 
 subject to the action of the executive in this regard being sanctioned at a meeting to 
 be called to-night. I might add that the case of the U. B. R. E., should my offer be 
 accepted by the C.P.R., may be left with your Lordships to deal with as a board of 
 arbitrators, and the U. B. R. E. will agree to be bound by such award as you will agree 
 to. 
 
 His Lordship. — I understand the difficulty is that the C. P. R. won't recognize this 
 union. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — We don't ask that. We are not before your Lordships to ask recog- 
 nition at the hands of the C. P. R. All we ask is the privilege to work, and the privi- 
 lege after working hours, of being left alone by the C. P. R. or any body of employers 
 for whom we agree to work; to use our spare time just as we please, and as long as 
 we give the company faithful service and they treat us properly there will be no trouble. 
 But out of these hours we don't want to be called on the carpet and given to under- 
 stand that advancement will be postponed, if not completely blocked. That is the posi- 
 tion of the U. B. R. E. to-day. And in all fairness such an offer as is now made might 
 well be accepted by the C. P. R. if they desire to appear before the public as fair- 
 minded men. I ask that the offer be considered by them, and that they let us have an 
 answer to-morrow. It was suggested yesterday that an offer of settlement was to be 
 submitted to the general manager of the company. We have heard nothing in reply. 
 The company have not condescended to give us any reason as to whether the matter 
 would even be considered. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Mr. Marpole has not received any answer. There is no question of 
 ;discourtesy about that. 
 
 I will just simply say that the suggestion of your Lordship hits the trouble exactly. 
 My learned friend chooses to take a different meaning out of the word recognize. There 
 is no use of our quarrelling about words. He takes a different position than his 
 clients took originally. Things have got in such a position that the men can go back, 
 but they must withdraw from the U. B. E. E., and a number of men have gone back 
 in that way, and the company would not feel that they were acting fairly to these men 
 if they did not continue to insist on the same conditions as to any other men going 
 
 DAVID B. JOHNSTONE— Vancouver, June 4. 
 
572 MINDTES OF ETIDENCE OP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 back. That 'being so, practically, as your Lordship says, leaves nothing for the Com- 
 mission to consider, because my learned friend says they are not complaining about 
 anything. 
 
 Mr. EovvE. — That is to say, that men belonging to the U. B. K. E. cannot get 
 employment on the C. P. R. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — At the present time. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — That seems to me to be very strong. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — We have been forced into that position. That was not the position 
 taken at the time the men struck. At that time it was sought to have the union recog- 
 nized in a still higher sense than now. They are not pressing that now, but things 
 have got into such a shape, and we have seen so much of the workings of the U.B.E.E. 
 it would create interminable confusion on the C. P. R. with the other unions, and the 
 company have decided that the other unions and this union could not work together. 
 Our experience has been — well, I don't want to go on and say what conclusions we 
 have drawn — we are going to put the evidence in, and at the close of it we think any 
 reasonable man will draw the conclusion we have drawn, that it is an absolute impos- 
 sibility for the U. B. R. E. — for reasons which we think wil|l be patent, and which I 
 don't want to state at the present time — and the company to get along, and there has 
 been no railway in the United States or in Canada that has been able to get along with 
 that organization. The O.P.R. feel that the public good of Canada itself would bo 
 threatened by that organization, and I think we will be able to satisfy your Honours of 
 that from the evidence. 
 
 His Lordship. — Sufficient appears, Mr. Bird, to show that the C. P. E. are not pre- 
 pared to submit anything of that sort to arbitration. As far as I can see, it is a matter 
 very difficult to arbitrate ; it is a question of policy. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — My learned friend says, at the conclusion of the evidence any reason- 
 able man will come to the conclusion of the C. P. R. I don't know whether my 
 learned friend wishes to imply that the Commissioners are not reasonable men. If it 
 is shown that the life of the C. P. R. is in danger, they are prepared to drop out of 
 •tiie organization, that is, if the members of the U. B. R. E. may go back. If my 
 learned friend is willing to say that any reasonable man will agree with the proposi- 
 tion of the C. P. R., I say that they should submit it to reasonable men and substan- 
 tiate it by evidence in the box. I believe the points of difference are not very great. 
 By the kindness of certain gentlemen who acted as an absolutely independent com- 
 /rrJ^ittee, the U. B. R. E. side and the C. P. R. side were put down in writing, and there 
 is very little difference between the one and the other; practically, it is a mere matter 
 or whether these men if they go back will be allowed to remain members of the order 
 of their choice. That is substantially the only difference. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is, of course, a very clear distinction between the union 
 ^demanding recognition by a committee of the union and simply desiring to be left 
 alone as far as the union is concerned. It is one thing to try and force an employer 
 to recognize a union by means of a committee, and another thing to ask an employer 
 not to interfere with them by reason of their being members. As far as I can see, the 
 demand for recognition is not susceptible to arbitration. That is taking away from 
 the employer the choice of who he shall employ. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — That would, I presume, have to be left in the hands of the C.P.R. ? 
 
 His Lordship. — And allow the U. B.R.E. to remain in existence as heretofore, 
 unrecognized ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — We ask that the status quo, which was disturbed by tl^e C.P.R. be 
 replaced. It was disturbed without justification, we say, and we propose to show it. 
 It was disturbed by a committee only, and not as a committee of the U.B.E.E. We ask 
 that that condition be replaced. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — You took action as a union ! 
 
ON INDUSTBIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH VOLVUBIA 573 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Only as a committee of employees, and this action of the committee 
 L.f employees was sanctioned by the union, and the union went out. I understand the 
 constitution does not allow any strike really, and this strike was owing to the life of 
 the union being at stake. The constitution does not allow a strike until it is 100,000 
 strong. It is only 25,000 now, and I think the prospects are, with the relations 
 heretofore existing, that these men may be at peace for years. I propose to show that 
 this body of clerks have been imposed upon in a manner which will explain the neces- 
 sity of organization in employees of such a body as the C.P.R. 
 
 His Lordship. — Of course both sides must consent before we could even consider 
 this proposition. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — There is another thing. The C.P.E. are a corporation which a few 
 hundred dollars does not weigh an ounce to. To the U.B.E.E. a few hundred dollars, 
 such as the expenses to which Mr. Estes might be put in coming here, amounts to a 
 good deal. They are out of employment ; they have been seeking funds, and have been 
 getting them in no stinted amounts. At the same time it will cost a large amount of 
 money to bring Mr. Estes from Denver. And if the C.P.R. want a full disclosure, I 
 ask that his expenses be paid, and that he be granted protection. I ask that with the 
 knowledge of certain proceedings that have been instituted. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — ^I am surprised at my learned friend taking that position. There is 
 no more desire to have the facts brought out here on the part of the C.P.E., than there 
 is on the part of his client. The only desire is that the facts be placed before the 
 Commissioners. Anything we can do to present our side of the case, we consider it 
 our duty to do, and we will do. I think if my learned friend's clients do not vnsh the 
 expense of bringing Mr. Estes here, they should appeal to the government for that 
 purpose. 
 
 His Lordship. — I think it would be a good thing for the government to pay the 
 expenses. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Mr. Estes ran away from here about the time the Commission was 
 expected to be here. 
 
 Mr. Bird.— I don't believe that to be a fact. We had no idea of when the Com- 
 mission would be sitting here, and I think my learned friend should retract that. 
 
 PIis Lordship. — Do you think Mr. Estes will come back if his expenses are guaran- 
 teed ? 
 
 Mr. Bird.^I do. I understand he is a very busy man, and that he is worth a good 
 deal to the TJ.B.E.E., and has dates ahead of importance. 
 
 His Lordship. — If Mr. Estes has got the welfare of the U.B.E.E. at heart he should 
 not leave them in the lurch; you must know the U.B.E.E. is on trial here. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I do believe that, and I believe if he does come across the line he rony 
 te on trial himself. 1 would ask safe custody as under subpoena might be granted him. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — We will undertake that we will not proceed against him criminally, 
 ;f that is what you mean. 
 
 His Lordship. — Mr. Estes may unwittingly have committed some breach of Cana- 
 dian law, but I don't suppose anyone wants him prosecuted for anything of that sort. 
 Certainly, the Commission think he should be here, if for no other purpose than to see 
 ihat the men's ease is put properly before the Commission. He is certainly one of the 
 leaders of this party, and knows a good deal about its workings. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — That is so, but as your Lordship has been apprised by the evidence, the 
 U.B.E.E. is 25,000 strong, and he has other duties to perform. 
 
 His Lordship. — The order has been established there, and it is a fight for its 
 existence going on here. This is really the place where he should be. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Have you heard from him ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — We have no reply yet. 
 
574 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Yanoouver, June 5, 1903. 
 
 (Mr. Bird puts in document showing dates of strikes of U.B.E.E. at Vancouver 
 and other striking unions, and dates at which the branches at Nelson, Eevelstoke, 
 Calgary and Winnipeg went out.) 
 
 (Documents for which privilege not claimed put in by both sides.) 
 
 William J. McMillan, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 ,Q. What is your occupation, Mr. McMillan ? — A. Wholesale grocer. 
 
 Q. Carrying on business where ? — A. In the city. 
 
 Q. Do you ever remember, during the progress of the present strike, having a 
 conversation with any of the officers of the company in regard to a black list ? — A. 
 Not in regard to any black list. 
 
 Q. Just tell us — had you a conversation with any officers of the company in regard 
 to this strike ? — A. I had a conversation somewhere about the 10th of June with Mr. 
 Greer — the 10 of March I mean. With Mr. Greer and Keith, with regard to the 
 condition of the company as to freight. They came down to my office, and we had a 
 general conversation on their ability to carry on business. 
 
 Q. What was said there in recjard to the strike ? — A. They said that as far as the 
 city here was concerned, they had sufficient force to carry on their business, and could 
 look after it all right. I expressed doubt as to the other unions not joining the U. B. 
 R. E. and put the company practically out of business. They said there was no danger 
 — ^that they had agreements, the effect of which would be, if the other unions went on 
 ^rike they could not get a situation on any other road in North America. That is the 
 only conversation I had. 
 
 Q. That the company had an agreement the effect of which would be if these men 
 went on strike, they could not get positions in North America ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. With whom was this agreement supposed to be ? — ^A. I did not question them 
 any further. Mr. Peters made the statement. I did not question as to who the agree- 
 ment was made with. I just took the statement as given to me. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. Which one was it said this ? — A. Mr. Peters. 
 
 Q. Mr. Peters was reassuring you that there would be no difficulty as to freight ? 
 — A. Yes, certainly. 
 
 Q. And you don't remember anything more of the conversation than what you 
 have stated ? — A. The conversation was general. , 
 
 Q. The general effect of it was that you need not be concerned — the C. P. E. would 
 be able to handle the freight ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The strike was causing considerable anxiety to business men in the city here ? 
 — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. At that time what bodies had struck ? — A. I am not in a position to state 
 as to what bodies had gone on strike. I understood that the freight handlers and the 
 teamsters had refused to take C. P. E. freight. I think that was about the condition. 
 
 Q. Did the builders strike in sympathy ? — A. I don't know. 
 WILLIAM J. McMillan— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
ON n:DVSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 676 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. To tie up all the 0. P. E. offices for a short time would be a serious thing for 
 Vancouver ?^A. Their purpose in visiting me was — we had been delivering some 
 freight by tbe Great Northern, fearing they would be tied up in some way, and that 
 was the occasion of their visit. 
 
 _ Q. That if there was a strike on the C. P. E. the result would be a diversion of 
 business to the American railway ? — A. Entirely, yes. 
 
 Q. If the O.P.E. really was tied up it would be a very serious thing to the city 
 of Vancouver ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. To the whole of Canada ? — You see the O.P.E. runs through territory yo\i 
 cannot reach by any other route. 
 
 Q. And it would be not only for Vancouver, but the whole of Canada ? — A. Cer- 
 tainly. 
 
 Q. It would be a very good thing for the American roads ? — A. I suppose they 
 would reap some benefit from it. 
 
 Q. It is an ill wind that blows nobody good ! We have had a great deal of trouble 
 with reference to strikes, in British Columbia lately ? — A. Seems to be. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What is your idea as to the method of handling these things ? — A. That is a 
 pretty serious question. 
 
 Q. Have you ever considered it ? — A. I really do not care to express an opinion. 
 I don't think I am competent enough to do that. 
 
 Q. You don't know anything about the U. B. E. E. yourself, I suppose ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Can you give us any idea of the losses of the wholesale trade by reason of the 
 strike which commenced on February 27 ? — A. I don't think there has been any serious 
 loss occasioned by it. Business has moved right along. There has been some loss, 
 but business has gone on just the same. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. If the C.P.E. had not been able to handle it, the loss would, of course have been 
 very heavy. Can you give any approximate idea of the loss that would result to the 
 wholesale business of the city if the C.P.E. were tied up for, say, two weeks ? — 
 A. Two weeks, I don't suppose, would occasion a very great loss, because the supplies 
 would tide us over for that time. 
 
 Q. Well, say a month ? — A. The trouble would be occasioned by the points that 
 the C. P. E. touched — the interior. Business would be naturally shut off, and what 
 the loss would be it would be hard to estimate. Several points where other railroads 
 touch could be handled by other roads. 
 
 Q. The loss would be greater where the American roads don't touch ? — A. Yes. 
 It would be a hard thing to estimate. 
 
 Q. Did the merchants agree to handle their own stuff from the wharf in order to 
 get over the teamster's strike ? — A. There was no different arrangement than before. 
 
 Q. Didn't the merchants make an agreement among themselves that they would 
 go down and handle their own freight, or by non-union labour ? — A. There was an 
 lagreement that was drawn up, but that was not the scope of the agreement. It was 
 that the merchants would support the master teamsters as against the striking team- 
 sters, 
 
 Q. There was such an agreement as that ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the reason was what ? It was, in the first place, they considered the 
 teamsters had struck without a grievance — is that not right ? — A. I don't think that 
 
 iWas so. 
 
 Q. But the teamsters did not pretend to have any grievance — it was a sympathetic 
 strike ? — A. It was a sympathetic strike. I don't I^now of any grievance which they 
 liai 
 
 WILLIAM J. McMillan— Vancouver, June 3. 
 
57g^ MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COM MISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. And tlie merchants had to come to that conclusion for their own protection ? 
 — A. Well, there is a difference of opinion there. 
 
 Q. They thought they had ? — A. Some did, I suppose. 
 
 Q. What would be the result if one merchant got a non-union man to handle his 
 freight, so far as the striking unions were concerned ? — ^A. They have been handling 
 their freight with non-union teamsters, and I have not seen any results. 
 
 Q. You thinli there would be no resentment shown if a single merchant had got 
 non-union men to handle the freight ? — A. The non-union men have handled the 
 freight, and I have seen nothing. 
 
 Q. What was the case of Davidson & Woodward being blacklisted ? 
 
 (Mr. Bird objects.) 
 
 His Loedship. — We want to get a thorough appreciation of the exact condition of 
 affairs as affecting all classes of the community. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 Q. What was the reason of Davidson & Woodward being blacklisted ? 
 His Lordship. — What do you mean by being blacklisted ? 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 Q. You understand what is meant ? — A. There is what they call an unfair list. 
 I saw in some of the papers an unfair list printed, and I don't know anything further 
 than that list has been printed. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. An unfair list of grocers ? — A. Whatever particular business they are em- 
 ployed in — different trades. 
 
 Q. What paper is it printed in ? — A. I think in the union paper, the ' Indepen- 
 dent ' or the ' Clarion ' — I don't remember which. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 , Q. You understand what the publication of that unfair list means. For instance, 
 you will see a list of people published as unfair, like Davidson & Woodward, also men 
 who went back to the C. P. E. have been published as unfair. You understand what 
 that means ? — A. I understand it means they are unfair to union labour. 
 
 Q. And the result of that you understand, don't you ? — A. If your shop were put 
 on the unfair list would you expect union people to deal with you ? — A. Naturally 
 I would not. 
 
 Q. So, that being put on the unfair list means to establish a boycott against that 
 individual ? — A. I suppose so. 
 
 Q. You know that Davidson & Woodward were put on the unfair list — by whom ? 
 — A. I suppose by the unions of the city. 
 
 Q. Do you know what unions ?— A. I don't remember. I did not read the article 
 with sufficient interest. 
 
 Q. You know Cook the contractor who was building a departmental store — was 
 there not some trouble with him over Davidson and Woodward — that is correct ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 His Lordship. — Had we better not get this from Cook ? 
 
 Witness. — I could not give my evidence on a matter of that kind. 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q.- Have you ever been threatened with blacklist yourself ? — A. No, sir, 
 
 Q. Was the agreement between the merchants in writing ? — A. Yes, between the 
 merchants and the master teamsters. 
 
 Q. Where is that agreement ? — A. I don't know. They sent it for my signature 
 and I did not sign it. 
 
 WILLIAM J. McMillan— Vancouver, June 6. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA . 677 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. How many merchants did sign it ? — A. Quite a number. 
 
 Q. Where is that document — can you give us any idea ? Who would be likely to 
 have it ? — A. It was presented to me by Mr. Pilkington, I think. 
 
 Q. Had the merchants any secretary or officers acting for this purpose ? — A. I 
 think it was drawn up in the establishments of the merchants, without any organiza- 
 tion at all. 
 
 Q. Can you give us any information which would lead us to discover where this 
 document is ? — A. I think it must be with the master freight handlers. 
 
 Q. How was this freight handled ? — A. It is handled by union teamsters, and by 
 some non-union teamsters. 
 
 Q. What master drayman could you get this agreement from? — A. I think the 
 transfer company will be able to furnish you with a copy. 
 
 Q. Can you give us any estimate of the consequence of men being put on the 
 unfair list ? — A. I cannot give any opinion on it at all. I cannot see any consequence 
 "in it very much. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. If you refuse to employ any class of labour yourself, Mr. McMillan, would you 
 expect as a merchant that that class of labour would deal with you ? — A. I would ex- 
 pect they would not. 
 
 Q. Supposing you singled out any class of this community and let it be known 
 that you would not employ them, you could not expect to see their names on your 
 books, or theiii to deal in your store ? — A. Certainly not. 
 
 Q. Now, if John Smith refused to employ union labour, would you expect that 
 union labour would not take notice of that fact and let it be kno-.vn among themselves 
 that he was considered unfair? — A. Certainly, I think such a procedure would be 
 reasonable. 
 
 Q. So that if Messrs. Woodward & Davidson let it be known that they would not 
 employ union labour you think it would be reasonable for union labour — that it would 
 be well for union labour to recognize that fact ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. And such a statement to the public as an unfair list is a statement of fact to 
 union labour — ^By the way did you see the list published in any but recognized labour 
 papers ? — A. No 
 
 Q. Tou say that such a statement appearing in the paper would be an announce- 
 ment of the fact that these men had refused to employ union labour ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that is what constitutes an unfair list ? — A. I could not express an 
 opinion as to that constituting an unfair list. I am not conversant with the matter. 
 
 Q. The C. P. R.'s position here in this province, is practically that of a monopoly, 
 is it not ? — A. Yes, practically. 
 
 Q. That is to a certain territory in this province at all events, the 0. P. E. can 
 dictate what rates they please ? — A. Well, I think it is subject to some legislation. I 
 don't know how far they can go, as to what rates they can charge, but I suppose they 
 make the rates as much as the people can stand. 
 
 Q. Now, Vancouver has a certain competitive system. There is a possibility of 
 getting freight in here without bringing it over the C. P. E. ? — A. Prom eastern points, 
 
 yes. 
 
 Q. Has that been taken advantage of ? — A. Yes, all the time. 
 
 Q. So that the mere fact of your shipping over the Canada Northern or any line 
 does not necessarily indicate a condition of strike ? — A. Oh, no, we have done that 
 heretofore. 
 
 Q. And you have altered your position materially by reason of this strike ? — A. 
 I did regarding the difficulty occasioned by the strike. 
 
 Q. Por how long ? — A. It has not hardly changed yet very much. 
 
 Q. How do you mean — changed much ? — A. That we are shipping both ways — 
 over the C. P. E. and the Great Northern. 
 
 gg^ 3*^ WILLIAM J. McMILLAN — Vancouver, June 5. 
 
578 MINUTES OF ETIDKNCE OF JtOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 , 3-4 EDWARD yij., A.: 1904 
 
 Q. And the strike has not altered your arrangements in regard to shipment to a 
 great extent ? — A. No, sir. . - ,- ^ 
 
 Q. I understand -you stated to His Lordship that you refused to, sign this 
 agreement in regard to upholding the master draymen in regard to the striking team- 
 sters ? — A. Yes. - ■ ,' , . ; 
 
 Q. And did. you, ii^d that , it, was. absolutely necessary,, for y^ou ..to.makQ^.a stand 
 against labour in order to get your goods transhipped ? — A. No, J did, not. . 
 
 Q. You found the union men reasonably fair ..in, connection with handling your 
 goods ? — A. We found them more fair tha;i, the, pthers-7-the .non-union labour. , , 
 
 By Mr. Davis: 
 
 Q. Why did you refuse to sign the agreement ? — A. We wished to allow any firm 
 to control their own business. 
 
 Q. What was your reason ? — A. Simply that we did not wish to sign it., 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. That was the reason — that we took upon ourselves the right to con- 
 trol our own business. Simply that we wished to control out own biisiness without 
 interference from the outside. 
 
 Q. Signing the agreement would not interfere ? — A. Certainly it would, because 
 we would agree, to. emplpy. certaiji draymen., 
 
 Q. V/as that agreement to employ certain draymen ?— A. The agreement was be- 
 tween certain master draymen and the merchants, and you had to employ these dray- 
 men set forth in the agreement. 
 
 Q. And the reason you refused to sign it, you wished to be free to employ, any 
 draymen you pleased ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you believe that the strike was intended in any way to advance the interests 
 of the American railways against the Canadian interests ? — A. I don't think so. 
 
 Q. Do you think it had any connection with a desire on the part of the U. B. E. E. 
 to curry favour vath the American railway intereste or otherwise? — A. I don't thinli 
 so. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You say you found the union men more fair than the non-union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How did you get your freight handlers ? — A. After the strike occurred we 
 had to employ certain non-union teamsters. They charged us double rates, where the 
 union charged regular prices. 
 
 Q. How did you get them to handle the freight ? — A. They handled anything that 
 did not affect the C. P. E. 
 
 Q. You say that non-union men took advantage of the trouble to charge double 
 rates as far as the C. P. E. was concerned ?^A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. Can you tell us a little more specifically what the rates were ? — A. The re8n.ilar 
 rates charged upon drayage is 50 cents. They charged us $1.00. 
 
 Q. Was this charged to the people who entered into the agreement with the mas- 
 ter draymen ? — A. I don't know what effect it had with the other merchants; I only 
 know what effect it had with ourselves. 
 
 Q. What proportion of the merchants of the town entered into this agrecipcnt ? 
 • — A. The agreement when it was presented for my signature possibly had about 
 fifteen names on it. It was an agreement between the merchants and the master dray- 
 men. I may say that the names of the merchants attached to the agreement were about 
 fifteen, I think. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : , 
 
 Q. Did any refuse to sign that agreement except yourself ? — ^A. I can^iot answer 
 that question. 
 
 Q. Don't you Imow as a matter of general note that you are the only merchant ? 
 — A. I have not heard that. I cannot answer that queation. 
 
 Q. Did you ever hear of any other merchant whp did not sign ? — A. I did not 
 
 WILLIAM J. McMillan— Vancouver, June 5. .?■■' 
 
ON mDUSTRIAL DI8PUT:B8 IN BRiTISti COLVMBIA ' 579 
 
 SESSIONAL PAf'ER No.- 36a 
 
 _ _ Q. You say you were' charged double by the non-union men' to liaiul for the 0. 
 P.K. ; that was on account of the strike ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Men werfe takirig a certain amount of risk ? — A. I Could not see what risk they 
 •Were taking. ' ; , ■ ., ., , , , 
 
 Q. Don't you think that a union man who is handling freight for the C. P. K. 
 *as takiiig a certain- ambiiiit' of risk ?— A.' If'a man 'treated me unfairly 1 would not 
 care to deal with him. ' ■ : 
 
 ' Q. I am asking yoti whether they were not taking a business risk apart from any 
 other reason ? — A. I know of no other risk.' ■ ' 
 
 Harry WiiiSON^ sworn. 
 
 By Mr.- Bird : . . 
 
 Q. Are you one of the ex-employees of the 0. P. E. and a member of the F. B. It. 
 E.?— A. Yes. ■ • " ■ 
 
 Q. What position did you hold in the company's service ? — A. Chief clerk in the 
 car service department. 
 
 Q. Are you a striker ? — A. I am not ; I was dismissed from the service. 
 
 Q. How long have you been in the employ of the company ? — A. Seven years at 
 two different periods. Of Course the first service does not count; three years up to 
 the time I was dismissed. 
 
 Q. And where ? — A. In Vancouver. 
 
 Q. When did you join the F. B. R. E. ?— A. In June, 1902. 
 
 Q. Were you an officer of the Brotherhood ? — A. Not at that time. I was a mem- 
 ber of the first adjustment, as they called it. 
 
 Q. As a member of the committee you were brought into contact with the officers 
 of the C. P. E. ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When ? — A. In January of the present year. 
 
 Q. Please relate the circumstances that brought you there ? — A. The adjustment 
 committee was formed to appear before the general officers of the company with regard 
 to a case of two clerks. 
 
 Q. What were their names ? — A. Mr. Halton and Miss Code. 
 
 Q. Whom did you see on behalf of them ? — A. Mr. Marpole. 
 
 Q. How many members were there on that committee ? — A. Sixteen of them. 
 
 Q. You made a_ demand on Mr. Marpole at that time ? — A. Y'es. 
 
 Q. Was it in writing ? — A. Yes, in writing. 
 
 Q. I would ask my learned friend to produce the demand. 
 
 (Produced Exhibit 38.) 
 
 Q. There was another matter brought up by this committee as to another em- 
 ployee besides these two mentioned, was there not? — A. There was some reference 
 made to it, but I think it was not expected to have any adjustment with regard to that 
 matter at the time. 
 
 Q. Now, as the result of this interview what occurred ? — A. Well, the demands 
 we made were acceded to. 
 
 Q. And I see by the letter from Mr. Marpole that it is stated that he has inquired 
 into the matter, and on hearing the explanation of Mr. Halton, he is reinstated ? — A. 
 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. So doubtless there was no opposition at that time to an inquiry being made 
 into Mr. Halton's case; the inquiry was made and he was reinstated ? — A. Yes, that 
 is correct. 
 
 Q. Did anything happen to you as a consequence of tliis^ — of your acting on this 
 committee ?— A. Nothing directly at that time. 
 
 og_ o>ri HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
583 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF R07AL COMMISSION > 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Anything directly or indirectly subsequently ? — A. I had reason to think so. 
 
 Q. Just explain ? — A. Well, on February 25, a message was received by my chief 
 here from the head of our department in Montreal, to send me east, and the state- 
 ment was made that it would be a permanent position. 
 
 Q. Might I ask my learned friend for the production of that telegram; I don't 
 see that it is produced. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Look among the papers. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — They are not produced in your documents. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Tou say there was a telegram sent from Montreal to your chief officer here ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You saw the telegram ?— A. Yes, I asked to see it. 
 
 Q. Did you see it ? — A. I did see it. 
 
 Q. Well, give the contents of it ? — A. As far as my memory serves me it read like 
 this : ' Send Wilson east at once. Have position for him here. Will advise you later 
 reasons for change.' That is about the way it read. 
 
 By Mi: Bird : 
 
 Q. How soon did you leave Vancouver ? — A. About two and a half hours after 
 the message was received. 
 
 Q. Was that at the request of the company that you should leave on that notice ? 
 • — A. It was insisted upon. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Who insisted on it ? — ^A. My chief officer, Mr. Miller. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. This was February 25, the strike was declared on the 2Yth ?— A. So I believe. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What was your answer to Miller's demand that you go east? — A. I asked for 
 at least a day's notice in order to make some preparation. I understood the situation 
 was to be permanent, and required me to sever connection here altogether. 
 
 Q. Are you a married man? — A. No. 
 
 Q. How long did you want? — ^A. One day, the following day, Thursday; it was 
 on Wednesday, just«.bout two and a half hours before the train left. 
 
 Q. That was refused? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. You went that same day. And upon arrival in Montreal whom did you see? — 
 A. I reported to Mr. Cantlie according to instructions; he is superintendent of the 
 car service. 
 
 Q. That was your department in Vancouver ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What did Mr. Cantlie say? — A. He told me in the first interview that we had 
 that he was not then in a position to place me in the position he had promised, owing 
 1o recent changes in his staff, but that he expected very shortly to be able to do so. 
 After this he discussed my connection with the TJ.B.R.E. 
 
 Q. Did you tell him you were a member of the TJ.B.R.E. ? — A. No, he knew of it; 
 he did not ask me directly if I was a member. 
 
 Q. What did he say about your connection with the TJ.B.R.E. ? — A. He discussed 
 it from a friendly, and as he put it, unofficial standpoint, and pointed out how my con- 
 nection with that organization would be detrimental to my advancement in the service. 
 Bud endeavoured to induce me to sever connection. 
 
 ' Q. Any promise made by you that you would ? — A. None whatever. 
 HAKRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
O.A^ INDUSTRIAL DISI>VTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 581 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Did you get a job with the company?— A. Not immediately; about five days 
 from the first interview, five or six days. 
 
 Q. Did you have any further interview with Mr. Can the ? — A. I had every day 
 following , r think, until he left for England, practically going over the same ground. 
 
 Q. Of advising you to leave the U.B.K.E. '< — A. Exactly. 
 
 Q. Did you get to work at Montreal at all? — A. Yes, in the car accountant's de- 
 partment. 
 
 Q. Under whom? — A. Mr,. Gascoygne. 
 
 Q. Prior to this time before you went to work, did you see anything about the 
 strike having occurred in Vancouver ? — A. Yes, I saw different reports. 
 
 Q, Did you ^ee any particular report in any of the Montreal papers. Have you 
 got any clippings from any Montreal papers in your possession ?^-A. I have one. 
 
 (Witness produces clipping from Montreal ' Daily Star ' of March 18. Exhibit 39.) 
 
 Q. This is a reported interview in the Montreal ' Star ' : 
 
 (Exhibit 39.) 
 
 'C.P.R. STRIKERS RETURNING TO WORK. 
 
 ' The strike on the Canadian Pacific steamer Charmer, plying between 
 Vancouver and Victoria, is not considered serious by the officials here. It 
 seems that some few firemen and deckhands, five or six, left the ship at Van- 
 couver with a view of preventing her sailing. These men, says an official, 
 have no grievance whatever against the company, and simply refused to work, 
 to show their sympathy with the clerks whom the company refuse to rein- 
 state. However, their desire did not succeed, as the Charmer not only left 
 Vancouver on time, but also reached Victoria on time. These men made no 
 demand for any increase of their wages; they are now earning $60 a month 
 and the cost of board, and are simply acting in this manner to endeavour to 
 compel the company to recognize the union. Mr. Estes, president of the new 
 organization known as the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees^ is back 
 of the whole thing, but will not succeed any better in the future than he has 
 in the past. The service has not been greatly affected so far. Many of the 
 strikers are returning to work, and many who wish to return are being re- 
 fused re-employment.' 
 
 * ■ CLERKS DISMISSED BY CANADIAN PACIFIC. 
 
 ' A sensation was caused on Monday by the dismissal of eight clerks ii^ 
 the department of the auditor of statistics of the Canadian Pacific Railway 
 at Windsor Street Station, and two, in the office of superintendent of car ser- 
 vice. These gentlemen say that the reason the company gave for discharging 
 them was that the staff had to be reduced, but they claim that the real reason 
 is because they had become members of a union of railroad employees.' 
 
 ' Mr. A. A. Goodchild, auditor of statistics, said to-day : There is no 
 foundation for the statement that these men were discharged because they 
 belonged to the union. I was instructed to reduce my staff, and did it in the 
 best interests of the company. There is no rule forbidding a clerk belonging 
 to the union.' 
 Q Were there other members of the U.B.R.E. at Montreal at this time — members 
 of Division 81 from Vancouver? — A. At the time that appeared yes, one other, Mr. 
 
 Dick. 
 
 Q. Did you make any reply, or publish anything by reason of this statement in 
 
 the paper?— A'. Yes. ~" 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of it?— A. I have. 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
582 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSlOlf 
 
 3-4 EDWAftD VllV A. t904 
 
 (Copy of letter published in Montreal ' Witness,' signed by H. Wilson and James 
 Dick, put in and marked Exhibit 40.) - ' 
 
 (Exhibit 40 read.) 
 
 THE VANCOUVER STKIKE, 
 
 The following. letter explains itself : : • ;. ,■ : . , . ,.,- -, ■ 
 
 To the Editor of the 'Witness': ■,:.,.■ 
 
 Sir, — In the issue of the Daily 'Star' on Wednesday ifarch 16, some 
 prominence was given to a report purporting to come' from V^ancouver, stating 
 that a number of the striking members of the tlnited fcdtherhoodof Railway 
 Employees were returning to work at thae place, also that a number of others 
 desirous of doing so, could not, from the fact that the railway company refus- 
 ed them re-employment. 
 
 We are glad to be able to state that there is no truth whatever in the 
 report quoted, and that not a single item enumerated has any foundation in 
 fact. Emphatic denial has been received from the executive committee of 
 the Brotherhood in Vancouver, and it is entirely vs^ith a view, of removing any 
 false impression created by this report at the present status of the strike, that 
 we desire you to give publicity to this denial. 
 
 Trusting that you will find space for. this, and thanking you in anticipa- 
 tion, we are, sir, yours, &c., 
 
 (Sgd.) H. Wilson, 
 Cert. 87, Vancouver Division, No. 81, TJ.B.E.E. 
 
 (Sgd.) James Dick, 
 Cert. 22, Vancouver Division, No. 81, TJ.B.E.E. 
 Bjj His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What office do you hold, if any, in the union ? — A. None whatever. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. You had received communication from Division 81 to the effect that these 
 statements were wrong ? — A. Yes, sir. " 
 
 Q. And that document written by you — did you believe what you State there ? — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the reports from this division corroborated your belief? — A. They did. « 
 
 Q. That in fact there were no men being refused employment who desired to return 
 from the TJ.B.E.E. ?— A. That is what I believe 
 
 Q. And that they were not going back in the wholesale manner indicated ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. What took place on the morning after that appeared? — A. I was told that I 
 was dismissed from the employment of Mr. Gascoygne, on March 23. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The day after the appearance of the letter ? — A. No, two days after. . That 
 appeared on Saturday, March 21. I was told on the Monday morning following that I 
 was discharged. 
 
 Q. Did you have to go immediately? — A. 1 was discharged at noon on that date. 
 
 Q. And what cause was assigned for your dismissal ? — A. Publishing that denial. 
 
 Q. Did you receive any pay for your time— — ^? — A. Up to that time, and two 
 weeks in lieu of notice. 
 
 Q. Did you receive any voucher ? — A. It was paid by time check. 
 
 Mr. EiED. — I ask for the production of Mr. Wilson's time cheek. 
 
 His Lordship. — Does anything turn on that ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I think so; I would ask for the time check. 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 V,, , By Mis Lordship ; ., i 
 
 Q. Did it make any statement of the reason?^— A. ' Dismissed for publiBhing false 
 nnd lying reports detrimental to the company's interest.' As nearly as I can remember 
 those are the words. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. During any interview with Mr. Gascoygne, did he give you any idea why you 
 had been brought there ? — A. Yes, he said I^ad^been brought the?e to be out of the 
 v>'ay, to be kept out of trouble. 
 
 Q. And did he say that there was a permanent position such as _you had been 
 promised when you left Vancouver?^ — A. He doubted very much if there was. 
 
 Q. "W^hile you were working down there was there anything to indicate that there 
 w?is a job there for ybii ? — A. ISTo. 
 
 Q. Did yoii ever "get a clearance from the company, or have you one?— A. I had 
 at that time; it is a certificate of service., 
 
 Q. In accordance with this agreement that is supposed to exist, a man could not get 
 on another railroad unless he produced a clearance from the last company he worked 
 for; so this clearance that you asked for was for the purpose of getting work in an- 
 other company? — A.T. presume so. 
 
 (Clearance produced and put in as Exhibit 41.) 
 Q. The reason assigned is ' Dismissed for publishing without the authority of the 
 
 company, incorrect statements damaging to their interest ' ? 
 His Lordship. — That is the certificate of character he got ! 
 Mr. Bird. — Might I ask that this certificate be handed out, and not filed — it might 
 
 be necessary to get employment ! 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Did you object to that being inserted? — A. No, I asked particularly for the 
 clearance. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Did you object to that reason being assigned? — A. Certainly, I objected to the 
 officer who gave me the clearance, Mr. Gascoygne., 
 
 Q. Did you attempt to get anything ? — A. I attempted to get an interview with 
 Mr. McNichol and failed. 
 
 Q. What did Gascoygne say? — A. He told me he had instructions, in ease I v/anted 
 a clearance, to give that reason ; although he told me personally he did not like to put 
 that on the clearance, he had instructions to do so. 
 
 Q. Have you tried to get employment on any other railroad since ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Have you ever been at work on other railways '. — A. Yes, four years on tha 
 Grand Trunk system, previous to coming to Vancouver. 
 
 Q. Did you get a clearance from the Grand Trunlc ? — A. No, they did not issue 
 clearances. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. That is a recent scheme of the companies — this issuing clearances ? — A. Yes, 
 that form particularly.. It came into effect the latter part of 1901, I thinlc. 
 
 Q. Prior to your joining this union, were the clerics in this western division suf- 
 fering any grievances? Take, for instance, as to hours? — A. They had a good deal of 
 overtime to do, and I believe they considered that a grievance. 
 
 Mr. Davis.— I understand my learned friend does not allege any grievance what- 
 ever except the recognition of the union. 
 
 His Lordship. — We are not going to confine either of you to what appears in the 
 statements. 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver. June 5. 
 
584 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Mr. Davis. — ^It is rather a wide inquiry when they allege there were certain 
 prievances of the company which in any way contributed to the strilie, when they state 
 they were not striking on account of grievances and had no grievances that they wished 
 fo discuss. 
 
 His Loedship. — I think, Mr. Bird, you should confine yourself, as far as possible, to 
 the grievances you have stated. It means of course that the other side would have time 
 to answer. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I desire to do everything fairly, and to give ftotiee of every intended 
 objection to the service of the company being brought out. 
 
 His Lordship. — The real issue is the recognition of the body. 
 
 Mr. Bird — Tes, and the necessity for unions on the C.P.R. These men are 
 fighting for the life of their union. They say it is absolutely essential to their wel- 
 fare on the road. They say that sometimes they have to work whole nights and some- 
 times have to go without meals absolutely by the command of their superior officers, 
 and that they have never received one dollar for the time they have worked. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — These statements are absolutely incorrect, as far as our instructions 
 go. Let him give instances, and we will be prepared to offer witnesses on the subject. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I will give written instances and prepare particulars. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Did you get in Montreal the same rate of wages as in Vancouver? — A. Exactly 
 the same. 
 
 His Lordship. — We had better let this witness stand down ; we want to go on with 
 another witness. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I have asked for the appearance book; that will give particulars of 
 overtime; all the company have to do is look in that appearance book, and they will 
 find particulars. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — ^If you want the appearance book, we will agree to produce it, as I 
 have said, at any reasonable time, for inspection, but I believe it is in use. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I understand that this particular book has not been in use for twelve 
 months. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^Tou had better utilize this recess to go down and look at the books, 
 as we have to examine a witness from Nanaimo. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — ^We will produce it after lunch. 
 
 (Witness stands down.). 
 
 Vancouver, June 5, 1903. 
 Thomas J. Shenton, sworn. 
 
 By His LQrdship : 
 
 Q. Please identify and describe these documents, just briefly what they are ? — 
 A. (Exhibit 42.) This is a document in connection "with a committee appointed by 
 our union for the purpose of looking into the merits of the different organizations. 
 (Exhibit 43.) This is a report of the joint board, Cumberland, Nanaimo and Lady- 
 smith, that met in Nanaimo on April 26. 
 
 Q. That is the meeting which has been referred to so much in your evidence ? — 
 A. Yes, and the names of the committee are there. (Exhibit 44.) This is dated 
 April 29. It embodies a report of the three delegates chosen from that joint board to 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
ON INDUSIWAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA. 585 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 wait upon the govermnent and ask their assistance in regard to trying to arrange a 
 settlement at Ladysmith. (Exhibit 45.) This is a letter from Mr. Estes, received at 
 our lodge, dated March 1, 1903. 
 
 Q. Now, just describe this bundle. I understand, Mr. Shenton, that bundle con- 
 tains all the documents in your possession in any way relating to the matters before 
 this Commission ?— A. (Exhibit 46.) This bundle contains all the documents relating 
 to all the matters being investigated by the Commission — the whole of them. 
 
 His Lordship. — These will be returned to you after the Commission is through with 
 them. 
 
 Q. Would you like to make any statement regarding anything you have said 
 before ? — A. I understand that during my replies, I think to Mr. Bodwell on the last 
 occasion — on Wednesday — I misstated — or else I did not hear the question correctly — 
 it was something regarding my mission when I went to Cumberland, relating to the 
 arrangement of things necessary for the Commission while there, and I thin]?;, and I 
 am told that I replied — ' No, I did not do anything when I went there.' I wish to 
 right that. I did not hear the question ; I must have replied in connection with some 
 previous question. I did not remember the question, and I wish to state in that con- 
 nection that that was one — I was not authorized by Mr. Baker who sent me up there 
 for that work. 
 
 Q. You mean to say you were not authorized to go and organize the Chinese ? — 
 A. No, not authorized to get up there case for the Conunission, to make any arrange- 
 ments regarding the Commission going there. But I was authorized in connection 
 with the joint board, and in connection with our own lodge, to make a statement to 
 the effect of what had been done between the other two lodges — Nanaimo and Lady- 
 smith — to the effect that we had arranged certain conditions and also that we had 
 decided to employ counsel, and ask them to fall in line. That is what I wish to say. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. What is the significance of the fact that Mr. Richards before the Commission 
 stated you were not authorized by the local union to do anything ? — A- I conclude 
 that that is from the treatment I received there. The significance lies in the fact that 
 they disputed my authority, simply because I had no written credentials from Mr. 
 Baker. They refused to admit me to that meeting as the proper representative of Mr. 
 Baker until a late hour in the evening, and I had not time to get any word. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. What date were you there, Mr. Shenton ? — A. I think I started for there about 
 the 12th, I think. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. On the 12th Mr. Baker writes — ' Owing to circumstances I could not come to 
 Cumberland as I wired you I would, but got Brother Shenton to go instead — '? — A= 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. ' I considered this necessary for the reason that all these men were too new in 
 the organization to be well enough posted to defend it against the bombardment they 
 were preparing for us.' That has reference to the sittings of the Commission ? — A. I 
 suppose so. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Who are meant by ' they ' ? — A. I cannot say, your Lordship, who is referred 
 
 to by ' they '- 
 
 Q. Do you gather, from what you now know of all that has taken place, that you 
 have been treated with full confidence with which a labour leader should haA'e been 
 treated by the officers of the Eederation? — A. No, I have not; far from it. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
686 MINUTES OF E7WENCS- OF ROTAL'OOHrmSSION^ 
 
 3A EDWARD VII., Ai. 1904 
 Bg Mr. Roilie : ' ' ■ 
 
 Q. That is true' also of your tr^tmeht" in CUmberlaJid ? — A. Yes. ' ■' 
 Q. How do you aceoiint for yoUr treatment in Cutnberfand ? — A. Possibly I may 
 have, in some matters, felt disposed tO'fli'ffei' "with titem. ' ' ■'■' 
 
 ■ Q. What matters?-— A; Well,' oiie iWattei' was rekting 'to' the-^^he; -Mr.' Baker, for 
 instance, knew very well in connection with the men up there, about the time that the 
 trouble was on — ho\v much I pressed that* it should be the last thiiig we should do to 
 call the men out up there. He was well aware that I was disposed to feel that only 
 xuider extreme circumstances should we call- the meri Out;' - ' ' ■; ■■'■■ .' 
 
 Q. Do you think that was in reality a sympathetic strike? — A. Well;! do&'t think 
 so. I don't think that the lodges u.nderstood it so. I don't see how they really could 
 Understand it so. At lesst our lodge, as f^r as I know, and all the men in connection 
 with our lodge, have not understood anything of the kind. ^ ' ' 
 
 By His Lordship : , ... ,, ,:,,. .,. , ^ , ^. ,. 
 
 Q. You unders'.ood that the strike was caused by laying off the officers of the union 
 — ^the strike at Cumberland? — -A. Yes, it is proposed that that is the reason. 
 
 Q. At all events, you had- no idea. that the strike was ibeing engineered ^s a sym- 
 pathetic strike? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Do you think now that it was so engineered? — A. I am rather afraid it was. 
 That is the reason I feel that my position- has been so awkward. Possibly Mr. Bodwell 
 has not been able to understand, thinking that I knew these things were so, why I did 
 not know. 
 
 Q. So you think you were kept in the dark regarding the purpose of the Western 
 Federation as to calling out the Cumberland men, and as to the organization of the 
 Cliinese and Japanese? — A. Yes, certainly. 
 
 Q. And that you would have objected to both of these things had you known? — A. 
 Yes, certainly. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You see, I suppose, Mr. Shenton, that this telegram was shown to some of your 
 leaders but not to you? — A. I realize that. 
 
 Q. Because it was given to Barber and taken up to Cumberland? — A. That, is the 
 most convincing thing I have. 
 
 Q. And you were the secretary and the most active officer of the Nanaimo union, 
 and if the matter was being managed correctly you are one. of the men who should 
 have been taken into his confidence ? — A. Yes, there is no doubt about that. I may 
 say further, that the same feeling prevails among our own men regarding these mat- 
 ters which have developed before this Commission. We are opposed in every regard 
 to being practically deceived. 
 
 Q. The men should have a meeting shortly to consider their decision with refer- 
 tnce to the Federation? — A. Possibly that may be one of the questions taken up. It 
 has a special meeting Saturday. 
 
 Q. What was the object of calling it ? — A. The object was to hear, of course, the 
 reply to a telegram asking the Federation what they were going to do in this crisis, and 
 that is one of the questions to be taken up. We have also the matter of the agreement 
 with the company. That is now about expired, and that is another matter. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : ■ . . 
 
 Q. In your conversation with Mr. Hall at Cumberland, did he say to, you thatjhe 
 had a conversation with Mr. Baker ? — A. Not that I remember. . ; 
 
 Q. You don't know whether he had a conversation with Mr. Baker when he was 
 in Gumberlana? — A. No. 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
ON MDUSTRTAL DISTVTB8 IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 587 
 
 SESStONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Baker mention Mr. Hall's name to you when he was sending you to 
 Cumberland ?— A. The way I came to, know Mr. Hall was through a recommendation 
 from my friend Wilkinson up there.,;,. I.^ent down to seetiMj. Hall in a, friendly way. 
 They said they went to see him and I was persuaded to go down» 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Wilkinson say to you that Mr. Hall had an idea about Chinese union ? 
 
 —A. No. , , , ■; 
 
 Q. But he said, gejjerally speaking^ , that Mr. Hall was friendly to labour, and 
 advised you to ijiavO; .a conversation with him? — A, Yes.. . , 
 
 Q. When you went there had you .any idea o| taking iip tlje question, of unioniz- 
 ing the Chinpse.?— :^.- N,o, I was not, aware at that time that he: was interested, in the 
 matter,. ... ., , . , ,. , , - " 
 
 .Q.,That had nothing to, do with .your visit to Cumberland? — A. Ko thing 
 whatever. , , , 
 
 Q. Were there any other reasons, a difference of opinion between the Cumberland 
 men and yourseK that would account for their treatment of you as a representative of 
 Mr. Baker ? — A. Yes, a differencse of opinion regarding the present system of govern- 
 ment; its powers and what it might do for us, and especially referring to the delegation 
 that I' spoke of that went down to Victoria, as authorized by that joint board, to 
 approach the government to use their power to get an arrangement at Ladysmith. 
 
 Q. Was there a disagreement on that delegation ? — A. Well, yes, on the delegation, 
 certainly. . There were three of us, two against one. 
 
 Q. Did these men who objected to 70U at Cumberland, hold different views from 
 jourself as to whether unions should be a political power or not ?^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And do you think their objection to you was because you were not a socialist? 
 — ^A. I believe so. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. There is a considerable struggle going on internally in these unions as to this 
 question of socialism? — A. Yes, a serious struggle. 
 
 Q. It is coming up all the time in discussions? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In fact it looks as if the struggle was now between legitimate trade unionism 
 and revolutionary socialism? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. Did it ever occur to you that the action at Ladysmith was taken in order to 
 help the strike of the U.B.E.E. at Vancouver — ^I mean previous to the meetings of 
 this Commission ? — A. I could not say that I thought of it at all. Of course it may 
 have been, but I don't think so, for the simple reason that had we known that we 
 would have opposed it. I speak for the union I represent. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. They don't approve of that kind of thing ? — A. 'No. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe: 
 
 Q. You had several conversations with Ladysmith men previous to the unioniz- 
 ing of Ladysmith ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did any of them suggest that this would be the proper time to take action in 
 view of coflditions at Vancouver? — A. I^o, I cannot say that I heard any one say that- 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Then if you were satisfied that the idea of the leaders at Denver was to en- 
 gineer these strikes ka sympathetic strikes to assist the U.B.E.E. strike, you would 
 have set your face against it ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. And the majority of the union would have opposed it ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June' 5. 
 
588 MINUTES OF EriDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll., A. 1904 
 
 Q. You can see how the Commission was regarding some of your evidence as sus- 
 picious; it was natural that holding Mr. Baiter's confidence as you did, that he should 
 have take you completely into it? — A. Yes, I realize that. 
 
 By Mr. Botve : 
 
 Q. Was it ever proposed to the Nanaimo union that there should be a strike in 
 sympathy with Ladysmith ? — A. I could not say officially; it is only by hearsay. I 
 heard it was proposed in Ladysmith by some individual there that Nanaimo should go 
 cut in sympathy. 
 
 Q. Did Nanaimo ever consider that question as a union ? — A. No, it never would 
 have got consideration. 
 
 Q. Are the socialists, so-called, in the majority in your union? — A. There may 
 bo 50 out of 850. 
 
 Q. In reference to the Meyer telegram of March 6, concerning the bringing of 
 coal to Vancouver, that was put before the lodge ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What action was taken by the lodge officially in reference to it ? — ^A. The 
 action that was taken was to the effect of rendering any assistance that we could, in a 
 legal way, of course. 
 
 Q. How could you render assistance ? — A. By the method carried out that was 
 stated and reported to the meeting. We approached the management and inquired 
 whether there was coal going from that point. 
 
 Q. You were instructed by the union to approach the management in that 
 manner ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Supposing you had learned that the management were furnishing coal to the 
 C.P.R., would the matter have been further admitted in the union then ? — A. Well, 
 there might have been action taken in regard to asking them to desist. 
 
 Q. You have asked the company to desist ? — A. Yes, I think so. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. And if they had refused ? — A. Well, we would have considered we had gone as 
 far as we could. 
 
 Q. You would have been really subjecting yourself to "an unnecessary injury, 
 without doing the other people much good ? — A. In the agreement that we have with 
 our company the paramount issue would be whether this would affect the industry 
 that was employing our men that was not reasonable; that would be the question. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Would you consider your obligation under the union contract such as could 
 not be broken merely by reason of the fact that your employers were supplying coal to 
 the C.P.R. ? — A. I should not think so. Our agreement with the company we would 
 regard as being binding thoroughly. 
 
 Q. And you would not think of breaking a contract of that kind simply because 
 your employees were sending coal to the C.P.R. ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Is there anything further you would like to say, Mr. Shenton ? — A. I don't 
 know that there is any further statement to make. I might say before this Commis- 
 sion that I saw a report in the ' Colonist,' I think of yesterday, regarding these tele- 
 grams that is not hardly right. I would like to have it corrected. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Which telegrams ? — A. Regarding both these telegrams that were turned in 
 here. 
 
 This is the article : — 
 
 ' Vancouver, June 3.— At the sittings of the Labour Commission here 
 to-day, Shenton, secretary of the Nanaimo union of the Western Federation, 
 was further examined. In the course of his evidence he produced a telegram 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA, 589 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36.a 
 
 from Moyer, president of the Western Federation at Denver, dated Marcli 6, 
 asking Nanaimo to do all they could to prevent the C.P.E. from getting coal 
 on Vancouver Island.' 
 
 The latter clause of that is not correct; it veas to prevent coal coming from Na- 
 naimo, not Vancouver Island. It goes on further : — 
 
 'It was also shown that on March 9 that Shenton wired for Balcer to 
 organize at Ladysmith, and the strike there was immediately precipitated.' 
 
 I disagree with the language that ' Shenton wired.' The only part I took in that 
 was to write the telegram out. 
 
 Q. I suppose it was a natural desire on your part to see Ladysmith and Cumber- 
 land organized from the standpoint of a union man, but that you did not take any 
 part in it for the purpose of engineering a sympathetic strike ? — A. Yes, that is my 
 position. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. I understood you to say, Mr. Shenton, that you did not take any active part in 
 the organization at Ladysmith at any time or any place ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You told us when Mr. Baker was there Mr. Mottishaw was there to meet him. 
 Had they met previous to that time ? — A. Yes, many a time. 
 
 Q. When? — A. They met a number of times during the time that Mr. Baker was 
 there, in February. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether they had discussed the question of organizing Ladysmith 
 then? — A. Yes, I believe they must have, but I have never heard much of the discus- 
 sion itself. 
 
 Q. How do you account for the fact that Mr. Baker left the strike at Fernie, 
 which was in operation at the time your telegram was received, and came to Nanaimo, 
 without having any idea of what he was wanted for? There was a strike at Fernie, 
 which he was managing, and you sent him a telegram saying he was urgently required 
 at Nanaimo, without any further explanation. Is it not strange that he should leave 
 under those circumstances? Had there been any previous correspondence? — A. I 
 could not say. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 Q. He probably Iniew, from what might have been between Mottishaw and Baker, 
 without your knowing? — A. I would not know of the arrangement there might be 
 between them at all. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. Did you know where Mr. Baker was, when you telegraphed ? — A. The telegram 
 went to Slocan, and was forwarded I suppose; we did not know. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. What I cannot understand is, what reason did Mottishaw give you for asking 
 you to send the telegram ? — A. The only reason I have already expressed. He is a poor 
 writer, and he asked me to write it. I asked him to write it, and he said he was a poor 
 writer and he would rather I fixed it up. 
 
 Q. It might come out afterwards that he had been the one to get Baker here? — 
 A. There might be something in that. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. You acted merely as a friend of Mr. Mottishaw ?— A. Yes; I never asked any 
 
 question. I know, from reports that had passed, that it was proposed to send for Baker' 
 
 and he dropped into town and asked me to assist him. He asked me if I would do 
 
 that work for him. 
 
 THOMAS J. SHENTON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
590 MINUTES OF EYIDENGE OF ROYAL 00MMI8SWN. 
 
 3-4 EDWARa Vll.j, A. IQOI;;. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — He and Mr. Baker must haye had an understanding, because Baker 
 came immediately. 
 
 By His Lordship: ,,, , 
 
 Q. I think you must feel gratified, Mr. Shenton, that you havg had an opportunity 
 of setting yourself right before the public? — :A. Xes, I did not do justice to mystjlf the 
 last time I was here.: The feeling prevailed, I felt,,, that there was. some ; connectiou 
 between these things. . ■■ 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I hope Mr. Shenton will understand that I withdraw any sugges- 
 tion contained in any previous questions of mine, as to t^o . effect ofhis, nttt giving 
 truthful evidence. i . . , . -. ' 
 
 His Lordst-iip. — That will do, Mr. Shenton. You will have the papers back; when 
 the Commission is through with them. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I would ask the Commission to have inserted, as paragraph 5a, a memo- 
 randum, a copy of which I have handed in, for the purJDOse of covering the points 
 raised just before the adjournment. 
 
 (Statement handed in — -5a — as appendix to statement already put in.) 
 
 His LauDspiP. — That will be added. ' 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I just le^rn that instead ,of 9 o'clock, as mentioned in the statement, it 
 should be 8.30 in the morning. 
 
 Harry Wilson^ recalled. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I have just been consulting my learned friends and they desire that 
 I should recall this witness as to the question of overtime, furnishing particulars of 
 which I expect to be able to do by to-morrow morning. We are working at it. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. You understand there is an arrangement between the different railway com- 
 panies by which they will not receive a man discharged for cause? — -A. I understand 
 that. 
 
 Q. And that when a man is dismissed a clearance is given him containing the 
 cause of dismissal, all over the railway systems? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Where did you get that opinion ? — A. It is just a matter of general knowledge 
 — the fact that I was given a clearance. 
 
 Q. The fact of the clearance itself does not prove anything. Where did you get 
 the opinion that this arrangement exists between the different railway companies ? 
 What authority have you for that belief ? — A. I have no special authority, except the 
 fact that I got a clearance of that nature, and I have a general understanding. 
 
 Q. What is the general understanding founded on ? Do you know of any fact or 
 circumstances which justifies that general understanding ? — A. Yes; the fact that a 
 clerk dismissed from the C. P. R. employ, a member of this Brotherhood applied for a 
 position in Seattle on the Northern Pacific, and I believe was turned down for that 
 reason. 
 
 Q. What was the clerk's name, and where did he come from ? — A. His name is — I 
 cannot recollect it. 
 
 Q. When did this happen ?^A. I think about three weeks ago. 
 
 Q. And they asked for his clearance from the. C. P. E. ? — A. They did. 
 
 Q. Who told you that? — A. A friend of thp gentleman in question. 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
oji*- iNDmirRrAZ DtSPOTES nr britiss Columbia 691 
 
 segSioMAL'PApEf! (^6? 36a 
 
 ' Q. Does the triaii who told you live iii Vancouver ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What is his name? — A. I could not state his name; I don't know him in- 
 timately ; he told me he was a friend. 
 
 Q. You didn't ask for his name? — A. I had no particular ' curiosity. ' 
 • <3. Do yoii know the man to sefe hira^ — A. No; I don't. - ; , 
 
 Q.' Tell me how he came = to give you this opinion? — A. I naet himhere casually 
 aitid asked him, as I unde^f'stood he Was a friend of this 'gentleman. 
 
 Q. You must be able to tell me the name of the man he v/sis the friend of? — A. 
 I- don't know tli«^ gentleman; '• v, ,■;:,-, a t,. 
 
 Q. How long ago did you have' aeonva-satien wi<ii!his^'friend?-^A. It would be 
 less than three weeks ago. - ■ 
 
 . : Q.: And you have forgotten sinee that time the name of the man about whom you 
 were asking the information ? — A. I would know it if I heard it ; I caiyio.t recollect it. 
 
 Q. You knew, it .three: weeks ago, fand,. don't k^O'vy it, to-day ?^A. Yes, that, is so. 
 
 Q.. Did you have jany memorandum ?^A. No. , , 
 
 Q. Where did you get the information about the man not being able to get em- 
 ployment, because you knew it when you spoke to the friend? — A. No, I didn't know. 
 I asked hinl how this gentleman was progressing, and he toH me what I have said. 
 
 Q. I understand you to say you went to this friend and that you understood he 
 knew the circumstances why this mfin did not get employment ? — A. No^ I simply 
 asked about the rftan bcsjause he was a member of the organization. ' ■ 
 
 Q. Are you an officer of the organization ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. No duty to look after these? — A. No, not necessarily. 
 
 Q. So your interest must have been in the man as a friend ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How long had you known him ? — A. Possibly since I joined the organization. 
 
 Q. Was he working for the C. P. E. ? — A. Yes, in the stores department, I believe. 
 
 Q. Where did you meet him — in the lodge? — A. Yes; I did not meet him very 
 often. 
 
 Q. What was there about the man that induced you to take an interest in him? — 
 A. Nothing particular. 
 
 Q. Why did you ask about his welfare? — A. I don't know; I knew he had gone 
 to Seattle, and I liked to know what the chances were and how he had succeeded. 
 
 Q. How did you know he had gone to Seattle ?^A. I heard it casually. 
 
 Q. Who toM you? — A. I cannot tell who told me. 
 
 Q. Did that person who told you he had gone to Seattle know his name? — A. 
 Yes, he mentioned the name, but I have forgotten it. 
 
 Q. Who was the man who told you his name ? — A. Well, as far as that goes, there 
 were quite a number. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Is this a circumstance that was well known to the Brotherhood here? — A. I 
 think it is. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. I could give the name — -A. Harriday is the man I refer to. 
 
 B21 Mr. Bodwell : 
 
 Q. Harriday is the man who could not get employment at Seattle ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Had he no clearance ? — A. I think not. He gave references as to previous 
 employment, I believe ; but he did not have a clearance. 
 
 Q. Well, if there is this arrangement between the different railways, how do you 
 account for this nian having no clearance ? — A. The fact that he was out on strike. 
 
 Q. Had he asked for it ? — A. He would not get it if he did aslc for it. 
 
 Q. Why would they not give him a clearance ? — A. Well, I can give no reason for 
 that. 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 6. 
 
592 MINVTE8 OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Can you give me any reason why a clearance should be refused this man, be- 
 cause a clearance is simply a statement of why he left the employment ? — A, Yes, 
 that is so. 
 
 Q. Tell me any reason why they should not give a statement saying the real reason 
 he had left ? — A. Simply from the fact that he had left on strjjje. 
 
 Q. Could they not give him a clearance saying that ? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. Is not the real reason that the man who went to Seattle had no references as 
 to previous employment ? Is that not the real reason ? — A. No, I think not. I think 
 the real reason was that when he referred to his previous employment they asked him 
 where he worked, and he said the Canadian Pacific Railway. 
 
 Q. And he said he was on strike I — A. I am not sure about that 
 
 Q. He said he was a member of the U.B.R.E. ? — A. I don't know that. 
 
 Q. And they refused to employ him because he was a member of the ir.B.E.E., 
 8S far as your friend told you ? — A. Tes, I should think so. 
 
 Q. Assuming, for the purposes of my question, that you are perfectly right — ^that 
 there is an agreement of this kind between the different roads, the railroads would 
 expect from each other that the real reason why a man left should be stated in the 
 clearance ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And when you went to get your clearance you could not expect the railway to 
 put any statement in except the right reason ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Now, the real reason, as stated here, is ' Dismissed for publishing without 
 aathority incorrect statements damaging to their interests.' As a matter of fact, you 
 v/ere dismissed ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the reason given for your dismissal, that you had published a certain 
 statement in the newspaper ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Over your own signature, and you published it voluntarily ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That statement consisted in a denial of certain other statements in the Mont- 
 real ' Star ' ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So the question is, whether the statements in the Montreal ' Star ' were cor- 
 rect or not ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Now, here is the item — Exhibit 39 — in the Montreal ' Star ' : 
 
 ' The strike on the Canadian Pacific steamer Charmer, plying between 
 Vancouver and Victoria, is not considered serious by the officials here. It 
 seems that some few firemen and deckhands, five or six, left the ship at Van- 
 couver with a view of preventing her sailing ' 
 
 You did not know whether that is true or not, as a matter of fact ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. ' These men,' says an official, ' have no grievance whatever against the com- 
 pany, and simply refused to work to show their sympathy with the clerks whom the 
 
 company refused to reinstate ' Is it true to state they had no grievance — is that 
 
 statement true ? — A. I cannot tell you. 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact, the Commissioners have had some evidence on that point 
 already. We will take the next statement — 
 
 ' However, their desire did not succeed, as the Charmer not only left 
 Vancouver on time, but also reached Victoria on time. These men made no 
 demand for any increase of their wages ' 
 
 Is that statement true ? — A. I have no means of knowing. 
 
 Q. ' They are now earning $60 a month and the cc^t of board, and they are simply 
 
 acting in this manner to endeavour to compel the company to recognize the union ' 
 
 Is that true ? Is it true that the men on the Charmer were acting as they did to com- 
 pel the company to recognize the union ? — A. I cannot state of my ovm knowledge. 
 
 Q. ' Mr. Estes, president of the new organization known as the United Brother- 
 hood of Eailway Employees, is tack of the whole thing, ' Is that true— that Mr. 
 
 Estes is back of the whole thing ? — A. "Would you mind defining ' back ' I 
 HARRT WILSON— Vancouver, June 6. 
 
ffN INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 593 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. How would you define it ? Here is the statement : 
 
 ' Mr. Estes, president of the new organization known as the United 
 Brotherhood of Railway Employees, is back of the whole thing. ' 
 
 Now, is that statement true ? It is no use to fence with the answer. — A. I would give 
 a qualified yes to that. 
 
 Q. What qualification do you put on the word yes ? — A. That he was undoubtedly 
 ' interested in such a procedure, but that he was not the instigator of the action. 
 
 Q. The man who would profit by it — the one individual who would reap material 
 benefit from this strike — is Mr. Estes ? — A. No, I don't mean to infer that. 
 
 Q. Well, is it not true ? Mr. Estes is president of the U.B. ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. He wants to make that a large and powerful organization ? — A. I believe so. 
 
 Q. In order to do that, it must be recognized by the railway company ? — A. Yes, 
 that is so. 
 
 Q. The strike here was for recognition ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the scheme was to make the Brotherhood 100,000 strong at any rate — that 
 is right, too ? — A. Yes, they wished to do that. 
 
 Q. So that, if the organization were 100,000 strong and were recognized by the 
 railway companies, Mr. Estes would be a very powerful man, as the head of that 
 organization ? — A. Not necessarily. 
 
 Q. The strike here was for recognition, and nothing else ? — A. You might add to 
 that, leave to organize. 
 
 Q. It is all included in the word recognition, and recognition of the union is a 
 great benefit to Mr. Estes, is it not ? — A. Do you mean of material benefit ? 
 
 Q. I should think it would be very material to satisfy the ambition of an ambi- 
 tious man — that is right — and the salary, too ? — A. It is hardly worth mentioning the 
 salary. 
 
 Q. One hundred and fifty a month, though ? — A. I don't think he has drawn that. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it is a very satisfying thing to an ambitious man to have his 
 organization recognized by an institution like the C.P.R. ? — A. Yes, I should think it 
 would be. 
 
 Q. Can you tell me any corresponding benefit that would ensue to you as a mem- 
 ber of that Brotherhood — ^by the fact of its recognition here ? — A. Well, yes, I think I 
 could. 
 
 Q. Did you expect that it would get you greater wages than you had before ? — 
 A. I thought it might help to that end. 
 
 Q. Are we to understand that the next step, after recognition, on the part of the 
 organization, was to be a demand for increased pay ? — A. No, not the next step. 
 
 Q. So that was not before the Brotherhood at the time they struck ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Well, for shorter hours ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Well, pay for overtime ? — A. Not at that time. 
 
 Q. Did they intend to compel the C.P.E. to make any change in their discipline ? 
 — A. I think not. 
 
 Q. Tell me what benefit there was accruing to the members of the organization 
 from the strike here ? — A. The power and freedom to organize the entire system. 
 
 Q. Has the C.P.R. ever refused class organization among its employees ? — A. They 
 did in the present instance. 
 
 Q. Has the C.P.E. ever refused to recognize a union formed among its different 
 employees — elasr unions ? — A. Yes, the trackmen's union. 
 
 Q. Do I understand you to say that the trackmen's organization is not recognized 
 by the C.P.R.— A. No. you don't. 
 
 Q. Under what circumstances was it that the C.P.R. refused to recognize their 
 union ? — A. Under the circumstances that the trackmen wanted a schedule of wages. 
 
 Q. But r.he track^nen did'nt have a union composing the majority of their body ? 
 
 — A. I think so. 
 
 HABRY WILSON, Vancouver, June 5. 
 
 36a— 38 
 
594 UlifVTES OP EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 SA EDWARD VII., A.. 1904 
 
 Q. Well, you are mistaken. That is the only instance you know ?— A. It is only 
 from hearsay. Take the O.E.T.— Order of Eailroad Telegraphers— on this C.P.E. 
 system. 
 
 Q. Did they have a union comprising the majority of the telegraph operators on 
 the line ? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. Where did you get that information ?— A. Well, from no special source. 
 
 Q. How long have you been working for the C.P.E. ?— A. Seven years altogether 
 — three continuously. 
 
 Q. At that time, did the C.P.E. refuse to recognize a union of the class to which 
 you belonged ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. I ask you if during the period you were working for the C.P.E. they had re- 
 fused to recognize a union of the class to which you belonged ? — A. Yes, just previous 
 to the time I was dismissed — not otherwise. 
 
 Q. So you had no reason to believe that if the employees of your class desired 
 to organize and got a majority of the members that the C.P.E. would refuse them ?— 
 A. No, I had no reason to believe that. 
 
 Q. I am still at a loss to know what material benefit was to accrue to you from 
 the organization of the U.B.RE.?— A. I have told you already. 
 
 Q. Simply they sould be allowed to have that organization ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you thought that was better than any other organization ? — A. That was 
 the only organization I could have belonged to. 
 
 Q. Was it not possible to have organized the class to which you belonged as a 
 separate union ? — A. It might be possible. 
 
 Q. Well now, there is no use going any further with that. The statement here 
 is that : 
 
 ' Mr. Estes is back of the whole thing, but will not succeed any better 
 ' in the future than he has in the past. The service has not been greatly 
 
 affected so far ' 
 
 Is that statement true ? — A. I think not. 
 
 Q. To what extent can you tell us about the service being affected ? The state- 
 ment is that the service of the C.P.E. — and I suppose it may mean service only on 
 the steamer Charmer — has not been greatly affected so far. Was that statement true ? 
 That the service had not been greatly affected up to that ? — A. No, I don't think it is. 
 The freight service, for instance, has been affected to some extent. 
 
 Q. We have had the evidence of a merchant in Vancouver who said he did not 
 think business was affected at all ? — A. I think he was speaking of his own business. 
 
 Q. Tell us how you think freight was delayed ? — A. The fact that freight was 
 being delayed en route and also undelivered. 
 
 Q. What information on that point did you have when you made your statement? 
 — A. General information — newspaper information. 
 
 Q. From what newspaper did you get the information — from the U.B.E.E. 
 journal ? — A. No, I was not in receipt of it at that time. I think the Montreal 
 '• Gazette ' was one, the ' Herald ' and some others. 
 
 Q. And you undertook to contradict this statement on what you saw in the news- 
 papers ? — A. No, I didn't. 
 
 Q. Well, tell us what information you had to contradict that statement in the 
 newspaper. This is what you say — Exhibit 40 — 
 
 'We are glad to be able to state that there is no truth whatever in tl.e 
 report quoted, and that not a single item enumerated has any foundation in 
 fact.' 
 — A. Will you repeat the report that we quoted ? 
 
 Q. 'In the issue of the daily ' Star,' on Wednesday, March 18, some prom- 
 inence was given to a report purporting to come from Vancouver, stating that 
 a number of the striking members of the TTnited Brotherhood were retum- 
 HARRT WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 595 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ing to work at that place, also that a number of others desirous of doing so 
 could not, from the fact that the railway company refused them re-employ- 
 ment. 
 
 .' We are glad to be able to state that there is no truth whatever in the 
 report quoted, and that not a single item enumerated has any foundation in 
 fact. Emphatic denial has been received from the executive committee of 
 the Brotherhood in Vancouver, and it is entirely with a view of removing 
 any false impression created by this report at the present status of the strike 
 that we desire you to give publicity to this denial.' 
 
 — A. Yes, that report that we quote. 
 
 Q. You want to limit it now to that portion of the report which related to the 
 employees returning. Why did you write that not a single item in the report was 
 true? — A. There is more than one item. 
 
 Q. Do you think that it was necessary to say ' not a single item ' of that report ? 
 — A. Yes, that is the way it struck nle at the time. 
 
 Q. Here you have a report in the Montreal ' Star.' 
 
 ' Some prominence is given to a report purporting to come from Van- 
 couver, stating that a number of the striking members of the United Brother- 
 hood of Eailway Employees were returning to work at that place, also that 
 a number of others desirous of doing so, could not, from the fact that the 
 railway company refused them re-employment. We are glad to be able to 
 state that there is no truth whatever in the report quoted — ' 
 
 That plainly refers to the men? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why could you say that not a single item enumerated has any foundation in 
 fact? — A. There was more than one item quoted. 
 
 Q. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Is that extract from the ' Star ' of March 18 ? 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Yes, Wednesday, March 18. 
 
 Q. I don't think your explanation will be borne out by the document. Listen to 
 it again A. I have it off by heart. 
 
 Q. Do you say, when you refer to a report containing about half-a-dozen items, 
 when you say that not a single item of that report has no foundation in. fact, that you 
 do not mean what you say? — A. No, I meant exactly what I said. 
 
 Q. Give me a reason for putting in that additional statement ? — A. The fact that 
 it was an item to contradict. It was not intended to contradict everything in the report 
 quoted. 
 
 Q. You won't admit it meant th'at not a single item had any foundation? — A. 
 *rhe report quoted. 
 
 Q. And you contradicted part of it expressly, and part of it generally — is that not 
 60 ? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. Did you draw that letter up yourself? — A. I did. 
 
 Q. And settled it with the other men before you signed it ? — A. Yes, he perused it. 
 
 Q. And you did not want the people in Montreal to believe that the men on the 
 Charmer had not struck work for a good cause? — A. I did not want the people to be- 
 lieive any more than what we contradicted^ — the report quoted. 
 
 Q. What an unfortunate man you are, not being able to express yourself in better 
 language? — A. It is too bad. 
 
 Q. Who asked you to put that letter in? — A. The acting agent in Vancouvea at 
 that time — Garnham. 
 
 Q. In what way did he make the request? — A. He telegraphed. 
 
 Q. Have you the telegram? — A. I have. 
 
 Q. Will you produce it? — A. Yes. 
 
 (Telegram produced and read — Exhibit 48.) 
 
 HARRY "WILSON— Vancouver, Juna 5. 
 
 36a— 38i 
 
596 MINDTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VU., A. 1904 
 
 'To H. Wilson, 
 
 ' Y6 Mackay St. 
 
 'From Vancouver, B.C., Mar. 18. 
 
 ' Deny report emphatically ; all firm and figbt going in our favour. 
 
 ' (Sgd.) S. Garnham.' 
 
 Q. Did you telegraph to him? — A. Yes, for confirmation of the report. 
 
 Q. That is what you telegraphed to him? — A. No, that is the reply — in response 
 to the telegram I sent. 
 
 Q. From whom did Mr. Garnham take his instructions? — A. I understand, from 
 the executive committee. 
 
 Q. How is the executive committee formed? Do you know anything about that? 
 — A. I think I could give you a little information. 
 
 Q. By the executive committee you mean the headquarters committee? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How was the headquarters committee formed? — A. It was formed by a mem- 
 ber in good standing who represented different divisions or departments of the railway 
 service — a man from each department, say — representing each individual department. 
 
 Q. Were there not on that headquarters committee representatives from the other 
 striking unions? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you know how many compose the headquarters committee? — A. I could 
 not tell you. 
 
 Q. Can you tell me what proportion the U.B.E.E. had, as compared with the other 
 unions ? How many came from the Brotherhood on that headquarters committee ? — A. 
 I am not certain, but I think two. 
 
 Q. How many from the Longshoremen's? — A. Only one. 
 
 Q. How many from the Steamship's Union? — A. One, I think. 
 
 Q. And those were all the unions represented, were they not ? — A. No, I think not. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. The Teamsters' Union — one from that? — A. I believe so. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Two from the Brotherhood, one from each of the others acted on the committee? 
 — A. I believe so. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Who was president of the committee? — A. The chairman would be — ^I am not 
 certain who was acting at that time; I was not here. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Mr. Bird says these numbers are not correct. We will have to get 
 that from somebody else. I won't take any time over that. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I just produce to my learned friend a telegram which I asked him to 
 produce this morning. It is the original, which this witness had in his possession an3 
 handed to me. 
 
 His Lordship. — The theory is, Mr. Bird, that you have no papers— that they are 
 all in the possession of the Commission. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Well, all in the possession of the executive have been before the Com- 
 mission, but this witness had this in his pocket, and handed it to me to hand to the 
 Commissioners, and that my learned friend might have the benefit of the cross-exami- 
 ation. 
 
 (Exhibit 4Y.) 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 Q. Now, you say you were told after you got to Montreal that the reason you 
 were brought there was to keep you out of trouble? — A. One of the officials said that 
 to me. 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPVTHS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 597 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You left here on the 25th?— A. Tes. 
 
 Q. The strike took place on the 2Yth? — A. So I believe. 
 
 Q. So, if you had stayed here until the 27th, you would have been out on strike ? 
 — A. Very likely. 
 
 Q. Or else in trouble vpith the union ? — A. Naturally. 
 
 Q. So you would have been in trouble either way ? — A. I suppose so. 
 
 Q. Now, you don't want — seriovisly — the Commissioners to believe that it was a 
 hardship to ask you to leave on two hours' notice? — A. Yes, it was, for the reason 
 that I was told, and fully believed at the time, that I was leaving here for good; and 
 you can understand that after three years' connection with this place I would have 
 various things to attend to. Two hours is a short time. 
 
 Q. Yes, but the service requires it? — A. Well, they usually give him a little 
 longer than that. 
 
 Q. Well, what was in that telegram that you spoke of this morning? — A. As 
 nearly as I can remember, it read : ' Send Wilson east at once ; have permanent 
 position here for him ; will write you reasons for change ' something to that effect. 
 
 Q. What makes you think it said they would have a permanent position; what 
 put that in your mind? — A. Well, if the message didn't state it, the chief did. 
 
 Q. The man who told you when you got to Montreal? — A. Yes, and here before 
 I left. 
 
 Q. This is the telegram, is it not (exhibiting document) ? — A. Yes, that is it. 
 
 Q. There is nothing there about ' reasons later ' or ' permanent position ' ? — A. 
 Permanent is not mentioned, nor reasons. 
 
 Q. ' Owing to change in staff I have position here for Wilson. Would like 
 you to send him east at once. Will send good man Thursday to replace. 
 Answer.' 
 
 That is the telegram ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you reason to believe that you would not have a permanent position if 
 you had kept out of the papers? — A. Only the statement of the official of the com- 
 pany. 
 
 Q. Here are the facts — you were sent for to go to Montreal? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You arrived there and reported to the proper officer. Who was the man who 
 spoke about the Brotherhood? — A. Mr. Cantlie. 
 
 Q. He talked about that in a friendly manner? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. He said it was in your interest? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. But he didn't say that they would not employ you? — A. No. 
 
 Q. And as a matter of fact, although this conversation was going on over several 
 days they did employ you — gave you a position? — A. They gave me no position — they 
 gave me work. 
 
 Q. Within five days after your arrival? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you were paid for the five days while you were there and doing nothing? — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you were charged nothing to go to Montreal? — A. No. 
 
 Q. So the position is they sent for you to go to Montreal. Mr. Cantlie was a 
 friend of yours besides beins lin official of the company? — A. Well, yes, I would 
 regard it that he had a friendly interest in my welfare. I never met him outside of 
 the office. 
 
 Q. You did not think he intended to be unfriendly when he advised you to go out 
 of the Brotherhood ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. But nevertheless you were taken into service and no conditions made that you 
 should leave the Brotherhood? — A. No, nothing stipulated. 
 
 Q. So your position was as good, as far as salary was concerned, as the one you 
 left?— A. Yes. 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June B. 
 
598 MINUTES OF EYIDENOE OF ROYAL COMMISSIOHf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Would not the same money be wortli more in the east than in Vancouver?— 
 A. There is very little difference. 
 
 Q. The cost of living is not as much in Montreal?— A. It cost me as much. 
 
 Q. Tour family and your home is in Montreal? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Now then, don't you think there is something in that statement that they took 
 you away at the time that you were going to get into the strike — took you to Montreal 
 and give you a good position ? — A. They didn't give me a good position. 
 
 Q. It was as good as far as money was concerned as here, and you were living at 
 youi own home? — A. There was nothing assured. No satisfactory conclusion was 
 arrived at ^ was told to work there temporarily. 
 
 Q. Did they say temporarily? — A. They did. 
 
 Q. They said to work in that position until they could give you something better ? 
 — A. Yes, that is correct. 
 
 Q. Why did you say temporarily? — A. In that position temporarily. 
 
 Q. Yes, until a better one could be given you?— A. A better position was under- 
 stood, but it was never stated that I could get it. 
 
 Q. At that time you had every reason to believe you were taken from Vancouver 
 to Montreal to get a position there as good as the one here? — A. That is correct. 
 
 Q. And in addition to that you were with your own home? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And away from the influence of Estes and the combination surrounding him? 
 — A. I don't know that Mr. Estes or a combination around him had any influence 
 upon me. 
 
 Q. Is there not some justification for the statement- that they' took you away to 
 keep you out of trouble? — A. You m.ean a friendly interest would justify them doing 
 that. 
 
 Q. Do you thinic that under these circumstances discipline could be maintained if 
 you, being in the position you were, rushed voluntarily into print, writing letters to 
 the papers with reference to a strike with which you had no interest and occurring 
 three thousand miles away ? — A. No, had I had no interest. 
 
 Q. Well, we will leave that out. Don't you think the company could assume that 
 you were employed inadvisedly? — A. No, I don't thinls so. 
 
 Q. And that it was detrimental to the service to permit a man to do that sort of 
 thing ? — A. No, not under the conditions. 
 
 Q. The conditions were these: that you had been removed to Montreal; that 
 you had a good position, and that you had no reason whatever, from the company's 
 point of view, for interfering with the position here. You are not an officer of the 
 Brotherhood? — A. I am a member. 
 
 Q. But they had no local lodge in Montreal at that time? — A. No. 
 
 Q. And you knew the company were opposed to the Brotherhood? — A. Yes, per- 
 fectly well. 
 
 Q. And would not favour the inauguration of that society then ?— A. I knew that 
 also. 
 
 Q. Suppose you were an employer and the men treated you in the way you treated 
 them, what do you think you would do ? — A. It is very difficult to say. 
 
 Q. Of course it is, for the boot is on the other foot. Suppose you had several 
 thousand of men among- whom you had to maintain discipline — how do you think you 
 would act? — A. I certainly would not regard it as a breach of discipline. 
 
 Q. Wliy ?— A. For the reason that in the statement we made there was no wish or 
 intention to bring the railway company into it. It was merely a contradiction of a 
 press despatch. 
 
 Q. Don't you think that loyalty to the service is one part of discipline ?— A. Yes, 
 I think so. 
 
 Q. And do you tliink a man could be loyal to the service and do the things you 
 were doing? — A. Yes, I think so. 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
02V INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 5S0 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You don't think it was detrimental to the company's service to do what you 
 did? — A. No, not to any extent. 
 
 p. To any extent at all? Was it in any sense detrimental to the company's 
 interest to do what you did? — (No answer.) 
 
 Q. Well, suppose the company honestly thought it was detrimental to their service, 
 do you think they should retain you there ?— A. Yes, I think so. 
 
 Q. I say, suppose the company thought that your action was detrimental to the 
 service, should they keep you employed? — A. Not if it was detrimental to the service. 
 
 Q. Not if they thought it was? — A. Well, they think a good many things. 
 
 Q. Suppose the management bona fide came to the conclusion that your action 
 was detrimental to the service, what ought they to do ? — A. Well, if they came to that 
 conclusion, I should say they took the proper course. 
 
 Q. You were taking the whole risk of the company coming to that conclusion 
 when you wrote that letter to the paper? — A. I did not consider there was any risk 
 attached. 
 
 Q. Should you not have considered it, because the company were tlie persons to 
 judge whether it was detrimental or not — that is right? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. No one asked you to write the letter? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Well, the executive here asked you. Did you think your duty to the executive 
 was greater than that to the company? — A. I did at that time. 
 
 Q. What do you think now? You are in the company's service and the Brother- 
 hood requires an act of you which the company may think detrimental to the service. 
 Is your loyalty to the Brotherhood greater than your loyalty to the companay? — A. 
 Cinder the same circumstances? 
 
 Q. I mean the same circumstances — that you are in the employ of the C. P. R. 
 and that the U.B.E.E. make a demand which the company may take as detrimental 
 to the service— to which organization are you going to be loyal? — A. Under the same 
 circumstances I would be loyal to the organization. 
 
 Q. Then, can you object if the company turn you out of employment? — A. I 
 can object to the manner they did it. 
 
 Q. How can you? You prefer the organization to the company and the company 
 prefer some other man to you — what complaint have you got? — A. You are speaking 
 very broadly when you say I prefer the organization. You mean probably with the 
 company in their treatment of me. 
 
 Q. Well, I put you in this position : you are in the service of the 0. P. E. ; the 
 U. B. E. E. make a demand on you to perform an act which the company may think 
 detrimental to their service. You have got to choose between loyalty to the company 
 and loyalty to the service right ihrough ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Under these circumstanaces that I have stated you choose the organization? — 
 A. Tea. 
 
 Q. Why can you complain if the company do not choose to employ you? — A. I 
 have no complaint to make except with regard 
 
 Q. You were a member of the Brotherhood, and the executive asked you to con- 
 tradict a certain statement. They meant in the paper, didn't they? — A. They did not 
 state, but I understood it that way. 
 
 Q. Had you no reason to believe that the company would object to your writing 
 letters to the paper about this strike of the U. B. E. E. ? — A. Well, no, I had no reason 
 to believe they would object. 
 
 Q. Did you think they would approve of it— A. No, naturally. 
 
 Q. Then, why did you do it?— A. I didn't do it subject to their approval. 
 
 Q. You did it because you thought your first duty was to the organization, didn't 
 you? — A. Yes, I did. 
 
 Q. Do you understand then that the oath which you take when you join the 
 
 U.B.E.E. compels you to take that position when the emergency arises? — A. Well, I 
 
 have not given that consideration. 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
600 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Do you consider that the obligation which the oath of the membership places 
 on you compels you to take that position when the emergency arises? — A. When the 
 emergency arises, yes. 
 
 Q. Do you think that an organization of that kind is one that should be incor- 
 porated? — A. I see no reason why it should be discouraged. 
 
 Q. You see no reason why the organization should not act in this way? — A. In 
 emergencies, yes; but you must admit there is a certain fault in the railway company 
 in allowing the emergency to arise. 
 
 Q. What would you call an emergency? — A. The present state of affairs; — previous 
 to the lock-out. 
 
 Q. And in such a trivial thing as that the company is to be set aside for the inter- 
 ests of the Brotherhood? — A. I did not consider it trivial. 
 
 Q. That a common telegraphic despatch in the newspapers should go unanswered? 
 — Not at that time. 
 
 Q. Are we to understand that you represent, in your way of looking at things, the 
 opinions of the majority of the persons in the U.B.E.E. ? — A. I could not tell you that. 
 
 Q. Would you, for instance, say that Mr. Brooke in the same position would have 
 done the same as you did? — A. I don't know I am sure. 
 
 Q. What do you think ? Is that the principle which is inculcated in the lodge ? 
 — A. Loyalty to the organization, yes. 
 
 Q. And loyalty to the organization first, and loyalty to the employers second? — A. 
 Well, I could not express an opinion which one comes first. 
 
 Q. But you have given us an opinion as far as you are concerned. We will leave 
 that to be argued by somebody else. I cannot take all day, much as I would like to. 
 Did you form one of a deputation which waited on Mr. McNicholl in April in reference 
 to the U.B.E.E. ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. At that time was there a local lodge in Montreal — A. No. 
 
 Q. From whom did you get your instructions to go? — A. From the executive, I 
 believe. 
 
 Q. Did you get it by wire? — A. I didn't. 
 
 Q. Who got the instructions? — A. Our agent, Mr. Halton. 
 
 Q. Who got the instructions here? — A. He got it from here — he was in Montreal 
 at the time. 
 
 Q. Did you see the telegram? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Can you tell the date ?— A. No. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — We wish that produced. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I believe it is not in existence. It was over the O.P.E. wires. 
 
 Witness. — The date might be about March 11; it was signed by members of the 
 organization. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Would they act on their own initiative in demanding recognition of the Broth- 
 erhood in Montreal? — A. No. 
 
 Q. These instructions would come from the president? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. And you know that Mr. Estes gave the order under which you ultimately 
 acted? — A. No, I didn't know. 
 
 Q. He must have given the instructions to the executive here? — A. Very likely. 
 
 Q. The demand you made was for recognition of the order in Montreal? — A. We 
 made the demand in Montreal. 
 
 Q. Mr. Marpole could not recognize them until they were recognized in Montreal 
 — that was said? — A. I believe so. 
 
 Q. You were one of a committee that waited on Mr. Marpole some time about 
 January 10? — A. I was on a committee appointed by the local lodge. 
 
 Q. With reference to the case of Mr. Halton and Miss Code?— A. That is correct. 
 HARRY WILSON — Vancouver, June 5. 
 
OV INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA £01 
 
 SESSJONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. How did the case of Mr. Halton come up in the lodge. Who brought that 
 forward? — A. If I remember correctly, he reported the action of the company to the 
 lodge. 
 
 Q. You say Mr. Halton reported the circumstances to the lodge — to the whole 
 body of the lodge or to the executive? — A. To the lodge, I think. 
 
 Q. What did Mr. Halton say as to the fact — what statement of fact did he give 
 you? — A. I cannot recall the exact words he used. 
 
 Q. Did he tell you that he had requested leave to stay at home on the ground 
 that he was sick, and had gone to Seattle without leave on his own business ? — A. No, 
 I think not. 
 
 Q. Well, he did not tell you that? — A. I don't know exactly what he stated. 
 
 Q. If he had stated that he went to his superior officer and got leave of absence 
 on the excuse that he was sick and had used that leave of absence for the purpose of 
 making a trip on his own business, and had been dismissed on his own account, would 
 the lodge consider it a grievance? — A. I am not prepared to tell you the view of the 
 lodge. 
 
 Q. What would you yourself have done? Would you think he had cause for 
 complaint? I am asking you what your opinion would be as an individual? — A. 
 Well, I would think that the penalty was a little too harsh for the offence. 
 
 Q. You would admit that Mr. Halton had committed an offence, and the only 
 thing would be whether the punishment was not too great? — A. I didn't say he had 
 committed an offence. 
 
 Q. Well, you said you thought the punishment was too great for the offence?— 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That must mean that an offence had been committed? — A. Well, that follows 
 naturally if I had stated there was an offence committed. 
 
 Q. I ask whether you think in that case Mr. Halton would have a legitimate 
 ground of complaint? — A. Yes, he would. 
 
 Q. And you said you thought the punishment was too great for the offence. You 
 think he would have cause for complaint on the ground that the punishment was more 
 than he deserved? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That implies that there was an offence? — A. Not necessarily. 
 
 Q. Will you say he did not commit anything for which he should have been pun- 
 ished at all? — A. That is my opinion. 
 
 Q. Your opinion of the duty of an employee to his employer is that he has liberty 
 to deceive him for his own purposes?— A. I am not aware that he did deceive his 
 employer. 
 
 Q. But the statement — ? — A. You are making the statement, you know. 
 
 Q. I am putting the case that Mr. Halton went to his superior officer and said he 
 would like to remain at home because he was sick. He got leave of absence on that 
 ground and used that leave of absence for the purpose of going to Seattle on other 
 business? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I am asking you if that is not an offence from the employer's point of view ?^ 
 A. I never looked at it from the employer's point of view. 
 
 Q. Well, I want you to look at it that way. Do you consider that man was doing 
 the right thing? — A. I don't consider the man was doing anything wrong. 
 
 Mr. KowE. — Was the man really sick ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — He vvfent to Seattle. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 Q. The position is tlais, that he made the excuse that he was sick for the purpose 
 of getting time to go to Seattle 
 
 (Mr. Bird objects— overruled.) 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June E. 
 
632 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. I suggest to you the case that the man, for the purpose of getting time to attend 
 to his own affairs, goes to his employers and gets leave of absence on the ground that 
 he is sick. I ask you if that is right, in your opinion?-— A. If it were proven as an 
 absolute fact that the circumstances were exactly as you state, I should say that it was 
 not exactly right. 
 
 Q. Supposing, then, believing that state of facts to be true, the employer sus- 
 pended the employee, do you think it is right to demand that he should be taken back 
 without an investigation of the facts? — A. No, there should be an investigation. 
 
 Q. Then, why did you demand that Mr. Halton should be reinstated without 
 investigation? — A. Because I did i^jt believe the facts were as you state. 
 
 Q. You say you believe in fin investigation? — A. If the facts were as you state. 
 
 Q. Why did you demand reinstatement without investigation? — A. You are ask- 
 ing me to state definitely what action I would take in an entirely suppositious case. 
 
 Q. Here is the demand. I put you the question why did you demand Mr. Halton's 
 reinstatement without investigation? — A. I told you because I had reasoh to think 
 the facts were not as you stated them. 
 
 Q. Do you know? — A. I had reason to believe. 
 
 Q. Then what use was there of investigating? — A. I don't know that there was 
 any at all. 
 
 Q. How do you know there was nothing to iiivestigate ? — A. From what I know 
 of the facts of the case. 
 
 Q. What do you know of the facts of the ease? Did you have anything beyond 
 Mr. Halton's statement? — A. No, I had nothing but my own statement. 
 
 Q. Then you did not have Mr. Halton's statement? — A. We had it in the general 
 lodge room. 
 
 Q. You mean wha* he said in the lodge? What did he say in the lodge? — A. I 
 itold you before, I was not in a position to exactly state. I am not certain, as I was not 
 at the lodge meeting. 
 
 Q. Then you had no statement at all of the facts ? — ^A. I had the statement drawn 
 inp in the agreement, I think. 
 
 Q. In the letter to Mr. Marpole you mean, but I am asking you what evidence you 
 had of the real facts of the case? — A. We had Mr. Halton's statement. 
 
 Q. But you had not heard it? — A. Well, it v/as put to the lodge. 
 
 Q. You had not heard the statement at all ? — A. I am not sure that I did hear it, 
 I don't think I did. I don't think I did, from his lips. 
 
 Q. As far as you were personally concerned you had no real knowledge of the fact? 
 —A. Yes, I did. 
 
 Q. You had no evidence — you had no statement from anybody ? — A. ^es, we had 
 a statement. The question was discussed. 
 
 Q. But you were not there? — A. I was there when it was discussed by the com- 
 mittee. 
 
 Q. Then what knowledge did you have of the facts?— A. From the facta that I 
 was present at the discussion. 
 
 Q. I suppose at that discussion they stated what the facts were? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Now, what did they say?— A. As nearly as I remember, the facts were that Mr. 
 Halton had applied for leave of absence, and had, during his leave of absence, taken 
 a trip to Seattle, and that the company had dismiseed him for, as he stated, being 
 absent without leave. 
 
 Q. There was no investigation or statement as to why or on what ground he got 
 leave of absence?— A. I cannot remember that any definite reason was given for 
 obtaining his leave of absence. 
 
 Q. And it never occurred to you that there might be a ground upon which he had 
 obtained his leave of absence? Now, what did Mr. Marpole say? Did he not tell you 
 his side of the story?— A. No, he refused to discuss it at that time. He said if we 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
ON INDVfSTRIAL DISPUTES Hf BRITISH COLUMBIA 603 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 intended to come before him as a committee of employees and so on he would discuss 
 the question and give his reasons. 
 
 Q. Then you refused to appear before him as a committee except as a committee 
 of the U.B.E.E. — A. Except as a committee of the employees. 
 
 Q. And you demanded from Mr. Marpole that he should reinstate Mr. Halton, 
 and that he should do it on your request acting together and as a committee of the 
 U.B.R.E.?— A. That is about the size of it. 
 
 Q. Without any actual reference to the condition of the affair ? — A. Oh, no. 
 
 Q. You have just said that Mr. Marpole would discuss the position if you would 
 appear before him as a committee of your own men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So the fact is you demanded Mr. Halton's reinstatement without any discus- 
 sion ? — A. No, we certainly wanted a discussion if we could get it. 
 
 Q. You demanded that he should discuss it with you as a committee of the 
 Brotherhood ? — A. We requested that. 
 
 Q. You demanded it ? — A. Oh, I don't know. 
 
 Q. You demanded that Mr. Halton be reinstated immediately ? — A. If my mem- 
 ory serves me correctly there was a clause in that which allowed investigation or dis- 
 cussion. I think there was. 
 
 Q. Why did you say that the reasons given in the case of Mr. Halton and Miss 
 Code were not adequate ? — A. Because we considered them in that light. 
 
 Q. ' It is the firm belief of our membership at large that the Company's 
 action in the cases quoted are really because the parties mentioned are mem- 
 bers of the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees, and to prevent any 
 further trouble in the matter we beg to request that Mr. Halton be reinstated 
 and that Miss Code be also reinstated ' 
 
 You also requested a statement. What did you tell Mr. Marpole would be the 
 result of refusing ? — A. I am not aware that we told him what action would be taken 
 in the face of refusal. 
 
 Q. Didn't you give him reason to know that if that request were refused the staff 
 would strike ? — A. We made no statement of that kind. 
 
 Q. Was Mr. Marpole willing to reinstate Mr. Halton ? — A. Evidently so. 
 
 Q. Why then did he say, you are holding a pistol at my head ? — A. I cannot tell 
 you that he said that. 
 
 Q. Your idea would be the same way that a man would give up his purse 
 to a highwayman ? Is that the kind of willingness ? — A. From outward appearances, 
 yes. 
 
 Q. Don't you think that Mr. Marpole knew that if he refused the staff would 
 strike ? — A. I cannot tell you that. 
 
 Q. How did he act. Like a man who had that impression ?-^A. Yes, I should say 
 he did. 
 
 Q. And was it not as a matter of fact decided in the lodge the night before you 
 made that request that if the request was refused the staff would strike ? — A. No, I 
 am not certain that it had been definitely decided. 
 
 Q. Had it not been practically decided ? — A. No, I cannot admit that. 
 
 Q. What did you intend to do after the demand ? — A. That would come up for 
 discussion later. 
 
 Q. Will you swear that it was not decided, if not formally, practically, to strike, 
 if Mr. Marpole refused. Was it not practically decided — A. I am trying to think. 
 I am not certain one way or the other. 
 
 Q. Was it not understood that this was a demand, when you went there, on which 
 you were going to take a firm stand ? — A. We certainly intended to take a firm stand. 
 
 Q. If Mr. Marpole refused, didn't you intend to strike ? — A. I cannot say that 
 definitely. 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
604 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII.. A. 1904 
 
 Q. Is it not a fact that Wilkinson who didn't happen to know the result of the 
 meeting actually — did strike that day ? He didn't know that Marpole had decided to 
 take Halton back. Ever hear about that ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Would you be surprised to know that that was a fact ? — A. Yes, I would be ; it 
 is the first I have heard of it. 
 
 Q. Was Wilkinson present at the interview you had with Mr. Marpole ? — A. No, 
 I think not. 
 
 Q. What would you have done if Mr. Marpole had refused to take Halton back ? — 
 A. I cannot tell you. 
 
 Q. Did you have any intention at the time ? — A. No, no decided intention. 
 
 Q. In what way did you know that Mr. Marpole was willing to take Halton back — 
 you thought that ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In what way did you propose to enforce your demand if Mr. Marpole refused ? 
 — A. That would have been decided later. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say you had not discussed it and thought of it before you went 
 to Mr. Marpole's office ? — A. I certainly had not discussed it to any great extent. 
 
 Q. Can you tell me any way in which you could enforce your demand without a 
 strike if it had been refused. It must have been give up or a strike ? — A. Yes. I 
 don't know 
 
 Q. Is it not a fact that just about that time the Empress steamer was due ? — A. 
 Yes, I believe she was. 
 
 Q. And that there were other conditions in the service which practically made it 
 impossible for Mr. Marpole to dispense with the staff ? — A. I don't know that there 
 was. 
 
 Q. Mr. Marpole was about to go to Montreal ? — A. Yes, I heard that. 
 
 Q. Do you think he could let the whole staff go and still make this journey ? — A. 
 I didn't think of the question at all at that time with regard to that particular point. 
 
 Q. Were any of these circumstances discussed, or some of them, before you went to 
 Mr. Marpole's office ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And they were known to the committee, some of them, at any rate ? 
 
 Q. Mr. Marpole acted as if his mind was on that same subject ? — A. Oh, well, I 
 cannot tell you 
 
 Q. And that he was practically forced to take Mr. Halton back against his own 
 will ? — A. He gave us to understand that. 
 
 Q. He said, ' You are holding a pistol to my head ?' — A. Yes, words to that effect. 
 
 Q. Did you think Mr. Marpole would have acted as he did if he had not thought he 
 had some good reason for dismissing Halton ? — A. Well, that I cannot say. 
 
 Q. I am asking you what you think. You have known Mr. Marpole for a good 
 many years ? — A. I know very little about Mr. Marpole. 
 
 Q. You know him as head of the service ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you think, or did you think, that Mr. Marpole would show that unwilling- 
 ness to take Halton back if he had not thought there was a good reason for dispensing 
 with his services ? — A. Yes, I would think so. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. Well, I might have thought that he had reasons against taking him 
 back for the reason that he was a member of the U.B.E.E. 
 
 Q. I am asking if you don't think that he thought he had a good reason ? — A. 
 That is getting a long way off. 
 
 Q. That is an awkward way of putting it, but you know what I mean ? 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Did you think he was acting bona fide in the matter ? — A. Yes, I think he was. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell : 
 Q. In your opinion, do you think a union has a right to force on an employer the 
 service of a man whom he bona fide thinks it is not in his interest to employ ? — A. 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 6. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 605 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Well, I should think it would be necessary for the employer to state his reasons against 
 employing him. 
 
 Q. But you did not give him any chance ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You said Mr. Marpole would discuss the question with you if you came to him 
 as a committee of his men — that is right ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You said you would not appear in that capacity ? — A. Yes, we told him we 
 could not. 
 
 Q. And that he must reinstate Mr. Halton. That is written, so there is no ques- 
 tion about that. So you told him to reinstate a man whom you say you think he bona 
 fide objected to having. Now, do you consider that a union has the right to force upon 
 an employer the service of a man whom he bona fide does not wish to have in his em- 
 ployment ? — A. If the employer could give a good reason, I think not — a satisfactory 
 reason. 
 
 Q. Do you mean a reason that is satisfactory to the union ? — ^A. Certainly, in a 
 case like that. 
 
 Q. So the only person to judge is the union — the employer has no voice at all ? — 
 A. Oh, yes, he has. 
 
 Q. I am giving you the case of an employer who has what seems to him to be a 
 good reason for not wishing to employ a man. You tell me he has no right to force 
 that upon him unless it is satisfactory to the union. Therefore, it is true that the 
 principle of unionism is that the employer must take every man into service whom the 
 union thinks he should take ? That is right ? — A. I would not put it as broadly as 
 that. 
 
 Q. Where are you going to draw the line ? — A. Well, you must admit that men 
 on the union side are liable to be as fair-minded and impartial as an employer. 
 
 Q. Suppose I do admit that'. You must admit that the employer is liable to be 
 as fair-minded and impartial as the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Yet you say his reason may not be satisfactory to the union ? — A. In a case 
 of that kind, yes. 
 
 Q. Therefore, the employer has no voice in the matter at all ? — A. Yes, he has 
 considerable. 
 
 Q. His voice is only this : that he can persuade the union, if he has a good reason, 
 but he has no capacity to act as judge ? — A. Just as much as the other side. 
 
 Q. You say you have a right to force a man upon an employer, a man he does not 
 want to employ, unless his reason satisfies the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And he can only argue the question ? — A. Well, the union is in exactly the 
 eame position. 
 
 Q. Is that not the exact position that this union took in reference to the case of 
 Mr. Halton ? — A. They hardly arrived at that situation. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. That is, the union objected to the dismissal of its members for cause ? — A. 
 Not for satisfactory cause. 
 
 Q. I thought it was only when the dismissal had some connection with the per- 
 son's membership in the union. Was it on account of this man's membership in the 
 union ? — A. Yes, that was considered a part of the reason. 
 
 By Sis Lordship : 
 
 Q. Why did you not give an opportunity to the management to investigate the 
 matter ? — A. Well, the opportunity was not discussed. They arrived at a satisfactory 
 conclusion. 
 
 Q. The trouble appears to me that the union heard only one side of the story ? — 
 A. Mr. Marpole evidently, under the existing circumstances, was not prepared to give 
 his side of the question ? 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June B. 
 
606 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Certainly, I think it would have looked better if you had offered the manage- 
 ment an opportunity of investigating before you threatened to strike ? — A. We offered 
 them opportunity. 
 
 Q. You didn't by that letter ? — A. We did on the discussion following on the 
 delivery of the letter. 
 
 His Lordship.— On the other hand, I don't see how you make out that this man 
 was justly dismissed for sending this letter to the paper. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — That is a question of argument. Suppose that is not borne out 
 by the facts. The company may reasonably object to any of their employees writing 
 about the strike. 
 
 His Lordship. — It seems to me that what took place was this : that there was a 
 press despatch sent to Vancouver to the effect that some reporter had a conversation 
 with some official and set out what that conversation was. That ofBcial may have had 
 no authority to make any such statement. These people are simply stating in a Mont- 
 real paper the position taken by their order. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Suppose the officials read it the same way I did, without Mr. 
 Wilson's explanation ? 
 
 His Lordship. — But this is a statement over the signature of Wilson and Dick 
 that this statement is denied by the Brotherhood in Vancouver. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — They pledged themselves to it. 
 
 His Lordship. — They say 'emphatic denial has been received.' 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — They say that the thing is not true. 
 
 His Lordship. — They say that because of this reason. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — They undertook to be responsible for the statement from Van- 
 couver. 
 
 His Lordship. — Suppose the company had rightly considered that there was a 
 breach of discipline, it seems to me, having regard to what we heard here, that em- 
 ployees of railways when they go to other roads, are asked for their previous where- 
 abouts and what they have been doing in previous years, and are asked for a certi- 
 ficate of this sort, it seems to me only justice to the man to state exactly what took 
 place. By reading this certificate any man might get the impression that he was be- 
 traying the secrets of the company and therefore rightly dismissed. If they turn a 
 man loose with a clearance of this sort they should state what had been printed in the 
 papers and let people judge for themselves. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Well, Wilson could have requested that at any rate. 
 
 Witness. — I had no way of knowing that they would grant the request. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is a stiff thing to have that in any way. If you had that pre- 
 sented to yourself you would naturally get the suspicion that this man was betraying 
 the secrets of the company. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — I don't think I would. It is a serious thing to say that the com- 
 pany should be condemned for doing what they did in their own interest, and to say 
 they were wrong because a statement which Mr. Wilson could have put on it was not 
 put on it. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is a statement which had no imprint of authority at all. 
 He may have had no authority to make that statement, and these people told the peo- 
 ple in Montreal their side of the story. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL.— Mr. Wilson goes into print to contradict a statement which might 
 have been made by the company. Suppose the report is really true and that was 
 an official statement given out for the purpose of informing the public ; would you 
 consider it a breach of discipline for an employee to go into the case ? 
 
 HARRY wnLSON— Vancauver, June 5. 
 
OiV INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 607 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 His Lordship. — I am discussing the cause of the dismissal of this man. It is 
 brought before us as one of the reasons for which the men want a union, and this 
 is given in evidence in support of that view. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Your Lordship is assuming that this statement is not an official 
 statement. 
 
 His Lordship. — There is no authority for it. It is simply a newspaper statement. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Suppose it was an official statement given out by way of an inter- 
 view? What right has Mr. Wilson to assume that it is not? 
 
 His Lordship. — By what right does the company prevent him from informing 
 people in Montreal? One would think the company had the sole right of access to 
 the newspapers. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Have not the company the right to say their employees should not 
 go into the papers to contradict that statement? 
 
 His Lordship. — I don't think a man should be turned loose with ambiguous state- 
 ments of that sort, especially if it hurts him in getting another job. They might have 
 printed the full statement. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Did Mr. Wilson request it? 
 
 His Lordship. — I think they could have done it. without a request. 
 
 Mr. BoDWELL. — Mr. Wilson should have pointed out the matter, and then, if the 
 company had refused, there might have been some cause for complaint, but anparently 
 that has not seriously affected Mr. Wilson. As a mater of fact these clearances only 
 refer to different parts of the company's work. When a man leaves Halifax and 
 comes to Vancouver that shows that he left the other appointment. It is only prima 
 facie evidence, and the evidence can be substantiated. 
 
 His Lordship. — On the other hand, Mr. Wilson, I don't think you were at all justi- 
 fied in going to these people and saying they had to keep this man in a position whether 
 they like it or not. I think you should have given them opportunity for investigation. 
 
 Witness. — The opportunity was offered. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. When you say that Mr. Marpole was acting bona fide in stating he had reason- 
 able cause for suspending Mr. Halton, or dismissing Mr. Halton, you mean to say in 
 making that statement Mr. Marpole gave you the real reason? — A. No. 
 
 Q. That letter you think correctly states the reason for dismissing Halton — that 
 he was a member of the U.B.R.E? — A. I think it does. 
 
 Q. And that was the solid truth behind the statement of Mr. Marpole? — A. I 
 thought so at the time. 
 
 Q. What would you now say? — A. I have not changed my opinion. 
 
 Q. You mean to say that your opinion has always been that this matter of the 
 TJ.B.E.E. was always the trouble in Mr. Halton's case? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that is why the U.B.R.E. took the determined stand they did, because the 
 real excuse was that he was a member of the U.B.R.E., and that the existence of the 
 U.B.R.E. was at stake, while on the other hand this flimsy exciise was put forward? — 
 A. Yes, that is the position. 
 
 Q. Do you consider there is anything in your obligation to the U.B.R.E. that 
 would make you a traitor to the interests of the company ? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. Is there anj^thing, from start to finish, either of the ritual or the constitution 
 that would make you betray the secrets of the company while in the employ of that 
 company? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say if you were sent a report from the executive here and 
 ordered by that executive to make a statement which to your Iniowledge was untrue, 
 to contradict a true statement, would you feel that you had a right to publish an un- 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
608 MINUTES OF EVIDENCTE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 truthful letter because the interests of the TJ.B.E.E. were behind it?— A. No, cer- 
 tainly not. 
 
 Q. So it is not a fact that you have taken an oath that makes you a traitor to the 
 obligations of the company? — A. 'So. 
 
 Q. The objects of the organization are for the purpose of encouraging the mem- 
 bership by every legitimate means, to obtain a higher standard of morality and to 
 make you better servants in every department of the service. These are all the prin- 
 cipal objects of the organization? — A. They are. 
 
 Q. JSTow, in a strike of this kind why do you resort to the public press at all? 
 •There is a great deal said in the press about strikes, for and against? — A. Simply as 
 ■a means of acquainting the public with facts. 
 
 Q. Of influencing public opinion? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. I suppose the success of a strike depends on public opinion? — A. To some 
 extent. 
 
 Q. Have the C.P.E. Company any advantage over the TJ.B.E.E. in relation to 
 press despatches? — A. Well, I cannot state for a fact that they have. 
 
 Q. Have the papers of Vancouver given, in your estimation, a fair statement of 
 the position and the respective interests involved in this strike? — A. Some of them. 
 
 Q. As to the others? — A. They are not given impartially. 
 
 Q. Now, was there any statement made by Mr. Marpole on January 6 about this 
 pistol being put to his head, or was that a statement made on another occasion ? Did 
 you hear such a statement made by Mr. Marpole? — A. I have no recollection of it 
 being made at the time. 
 
 Q. Have you any recollection of hearing Mr. Marpole say that? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Were you the only person at the meeting on January 6? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you never heard Mr. Marpole make such a statement? — A. Not at that 
 time. 
 
 Q. Nor any other time? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you consider a man has a right to work if there is work to be had? Do 
 you consider a man has any right at all to demand employment ? — A. Yes, I do. 
 
 Q. And you think a company such as the C.P.E. have an absolute right to refuse 
 him employment if they have employment to offer him ? — A. Not if they have employ- 
 ment to ofEer him. 
 
 Q. You believe there are thousands of men in this country who have the right to 
 demand employment and have not got it 
 
 His Lordship. — Do you mean to say, Mr. Bird, that the C.P.E. exists for the 
 purpose of providing people a job who have not got a job? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I say it is a crying shame that the employers feel no responsibility in 
 regard to labour. 
 
 His Lordship. — Do you think that the C.P.E. should give a man a job simply 
 because he is the first one who goes and asks for it? 
 
 Mr. Bird.— I was merely trying to point out to the Commissioners that such a 
 state of things exists; that everything is in favour of the employer and that labour 
 has no rights whatever. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — In what respect? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I mean he has no right to demand employment. He may be starving, 
 but he has no right to demand it. 
 
 His Lordship.— Surely you must admit that employment is a matter of contract 
 between people? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — It is a matter purely to be bought and sold. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Just that a man has something to sell, and if nobody wants it he can- 
 not live. 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June B. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BBITISE COLUMBIA 609 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. Bird. — But -who is to provide the mar''iet. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^Do you suggest that something should be provided ? 
 
 Mr. Bird.— I merely state the case. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — I suppose we have to deal with facts as they exist. We cannot hold 
 one party responsible more than the other. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What benefit is there in belonging to the U.B.E.E. more than a local organi- 
 zation ? — A. No more than a local organization. 
 
 Q. What is the reason that so many men want to belong to the U.B.E.E. ? — A. 
 Well, possibly it would offer more strength of numbers than a local organization com- 
 posed of a few. 
 
 Q. Have you ever apprehended the difficulty which an employer feels in employing 
 men who belong to organizations controlled in the United States ? — A. No, I have not. 
 
 Q. It is alleged by employers that one reason they don't like the men to belong to 
 these foreign organizations is that their movements are directed and controlled from 
 various points in the United States ? — A. Well, I can hardly take that as a fact. I 
 cannot say 
 
 Q. Then it is quite' clear from some of the constitutions that any settlements come 
 to between an employer and the men must be ratified by people in the United States 
 before it can bind the men ? — A. I believe that is so. 
 
 Q. Is that not a highly objectionable state of affairs, that our Canadian people 
 should be subject in any way to the dictation or control of a few men in the United 
 States ? — A. Yes, I should think it would be where it existed. 
 
 Q. Don't you think that the incorporation of unions of railway employees in Can- 
 ada would meet all necessities of the situation ? — A. No, I don't think so. 
 
 Q. You think it is a necessity to belong to an American organization ? — A. Under 
 certain condition, yes. 
 
 Q. Now, I understand that under this constitution there is to be no strike until 
 the membership has reached 100,000 ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Does that mean there is to be a strike when they get to 100,000 ? — A. Not 
 necessarily. 
 
 Q. It rather looks to me as if they were preparing for a strike of considerable 
 dimensions when they reach 100,000 ? — A. How would you gather that, my Lord ? 
 
 Q. I don't see why any limit should be placed on the number unless they had the 
 intention of creating a strike when they reach a sufficient number ? — A. It is usual, 
 I believe, that a certain limit should be placed on the membership with regard to vot- 
 ing for a strike for or against, or any matters of that kind which may come up. Some 
 organizations place it a little lower. Not that it is intended to follow that line of 
 action when the membership reaches that point. 
 
 Q. Do you think the U.B.E.E. have a right to force the C.P.E. to employ thorn 
 to the exclusion of other people ? — A. No, and I don't know that they are seeking to 
 do that. 
 
 Q. Your position is, you simply want to be left alone ? — A. Exactly. 
 
 Q. You wish to be free to join this organization without interference from the 
 management ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. But you are intending to force yourselves on the management as a body — to 
 have dealings with the C.P.E. as a union ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. Do you think it is a sound position ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Does that not virtually mean you are telling the C.P.E. they must deal with 
 you as a union or deal with nobody ? — A. Not necessarily. The fact that the U.B. 
 E.E. as a union made no demand on the C.P.E. would only be with reference tn i'.s 
 own members. 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
 360—39 
 
810 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Yes, but jou are endeavouring to force the C.P.R. to recognize you as a 
 union and to deal with you by means of a committee of the union, and that involves 
 the exclusion of people who don't belong to your organization. In other words, you 
 are virtually telling the C.P.E., as far as you can, that you must deal with us or 
 with nobody ? — A. Of course such a situation as that would exist were the U.B.R.E. 
 to take in all employees of the company. 
 
 Q. That is no doubt their purpose ? — A. Well, as I understand it, that may be the 
 programme in the future, but I don't knov/ that there is any definite proposition now. 
 
 Q. There is no doubt, it is the purpose of this order to bring all railway labour 
 into one organization ? — A. Not already organized. 
 
 Q. That is the purpose, to consolidate the railway labour ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If all railway labour were consolidated on the C.P.R. it would have the power 
 to stop every wheel from turning from one end to the other ? In the power of two or 
 three men ? — A. I would hardly limit it to one or two or three men. 
 
 Q. Well, in the power of the executive ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So the action of a dozen men might throw thousands out of employment and 
 paralyze business of the whole country ? — A. It might. 
 
 Q. What guarantee is there that such a thing would not happen if all the railway 
 employees of the C.P.R. are allowed to get into one organization ? What guarantee 
 is there that such a state of things would not happen ? — A. There is only the guarantee 
 that the men would act as men of some judgment and reason. 
 
 Q. You see as Commissioners we have to look to the aims of organizations, and 
 we understand that the aim of this organization is to embrace all forms of railway 
 labour, and the consequence of that would be to place the power in the hands of a fcv 
 men called the executive, say a dozen men, and it would be in their power to bring the 
 whole railway system to a standstill from one end of the country to the other. It 
 wouli be in their power ? — A. It would be under such conditions. 
 
 Q. What guarantee would the public have that such a thing would not happen ? 
 — ^A. Well, 110 guarantee that I know of except that you would expect men holding 
 that office to exercise some common sense and judgment. 
 
 Q. If you had hot-heads ?— A. I doubt if they would have hot-heads nominated 
 for such positions. 
 
 Q. I may say we have had an instance of labour leaders coming before us already 
 whom we were not very favourably impressed with, who seemed to have gone so far n,; 
 to have deceived the local leaders ? — ^A. Were such leaders in control of such pows^' 
 as you speak of ? 
 
 Q. They were certainly supposed to be high up in labour circles. Is there not a 
 danger that an order such as this might lead to confusion among the various classes 
 of employees ? — A. I think not. 
 
 Q. The interests, I should think, are widely opposed ? — A. They are, but then 
 separate interests would be looked after and controlled by members who are perfectly 
 acquainted with the different conditions under which certain members work. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. I suppose the idea is there would not be enough variation of interest to prevent 
 that extreme harmony of interest which the Chief Justice has just suggested might 
 develop ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Well, the order would either act harmoniously, or it would not. I am assum- 
 ing that it is working in harmony. It would certainly be in the power of a few men to 
 bring the whole thing to a standstill ? — A. Yes. 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. I presume that would not be likely to happen unless the members of the order 
 thought sucli action was desirable ? — A. Certainly not. 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 5. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 611 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Are any of the other brotherhoods organized in international unions? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. Are they all? — A. All that I know of. All I know of without exception. 
 
 Q. Has there been any opportunity for the organization of railway clerks before 
 the institution of this Brotherhood? — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. No international organization of railway clerks? — A. I am not aware of any. 
 
 Q. Has there been any of the other classes of workmen represented in the local 
 union here? Baggagemen? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Or shopmen, or freight-handlers or labourers? I understand these have never 
 had separate organizations? — A. The freight-handlers have had a local organization. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — The railway clerks have. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I underststand it was started and smashed up. 
 
 Mr. Davis.^How can the C.P.E. smash an American institution? 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. What I want to get at is this : whether this class of workmen have an oppor- 
 tunity of belonging to a union unless they belong to this? — A. Not at the present time. 
 
 By Mr. Bodwell: 
 
 Q. Did you make any complaint when Mr. Gascoygne entered this cause for your 
 leaving the service? — A. I did. 
 
 Q. What did you say? — A. I told him that I thought that was a very poor reason 
 to give me for dismissal, and asked him if he had any idea of the effect that would 
 have upon my endeavours for future work in railroading, for instance. 
 
 Q. What did he state? — A. That gentlen-.an admitted that it was a very scurvy 
 reason to give ,but that he was instructed to i'it it on by Mr. McNichall. 
 
 Q. ,So then, it is not correct to say jSsu didn't make any objection? — A. No, I 
 did make an objection. 
 
 Q. You intended to contradict the news in your letter? — A. Just so. 
 
 Q. Did you know whether this item in the ' Star ' of March 18 was a despatch or 
 not ? — A. From the way it was inserted, I had reason to believe it was a press despatch. 
 
 Q. There is no date or place mentioned ? — A. No, but the first wording of it would 
 give that impression. 
 
 Q. It didn't occur to you that it might have been prepared in Montreal? — A. No, 
 it did not. 
 
 Q. Well, from the fact that the cities of Vancouver and Victoria are mixed up here 
 and the statement as to the Charmer would infer that the official who gave the inter- 
 view didn't know much about the circumstances, because the strike occurred in Vic- 
 toria, I understand, and not in Vancouver. The statement has it that ' the Charmer 
 not only left Vancouver on time, but also reached Victoria on time.' I assume the 
 meaning is, left Victoria on time and arrived at Vancouver on time. I thought per- 
 haps you thought it was not an authoritative despatch at all? — A. I supposed it was. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Have you ever asked for re-employment? — A. Not since my return to Van- 
 couver. 
 
 Q. Were you give ntransportation back to Vancouver? — A. I was, transportation 
 only. 
 
 Q. You preferred to come to Vancouver rather than stay in Montreal?, — A. I 
 did. I would prefer to be stranded here than in Montreal. 
 
 Q. Have you applied to afty other railway for employment ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You had better experiment with this document? 
 
 HARRY WILSON— Vancouver, June 6. 
 
 36a^39i 
 
612 MINUTES OF BVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 S-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 Mr. RowE.— Try it on the C.P.E. 
 
 By nis Lordship: 
 
 Q. I would suggest that you keep both the newspaper clippings and paste them on 
 tJie document as a commentary. — A. I did intend doing that in the event of using 
 them. 
 
 Vakcouvek, June 8, 1903. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I file particulars of paragraph 5a. 
 
 (Exhibit 21 B. Appendix.) 
 
 I just notice, Mr. Commissioners, that some of these items in the particulars of 
 5a specify that the work was without extra pay. Now, that applies to all these para- 
 graphs. Every one of these instances which I have been able to quote — twenty 'in 
 number, I think — are all instances of working overtime and Sundays without extra 
 remuneration. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — In all cases, no pay for overtime? 
 
 Mr. BiED. — Yes. I am in receipt of a letter of the U.B.R.E asking me to bring 
 to the attention of the Commission the one-sided and improper statements that are 
 appearing in th& ' Daily Province.' I don't know to what extent the Commissioners 
 have anything to do with the matter, but I have been requested to bring the matter to 
 their attention, and thus publicly protest against the misrepresentation of the ' Daily 
 Province,' in particular certain paragraphs appearing in Saturday's issue. 
 
 His Lordship. — I don't know that it makes any difference what appears in the 
 papers. We all get our share of abuse. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I think the reports in the ' Province ' are very fair indeed. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — It looks as though they have passed under C.P.E. supervision. 
 
 His Lordship. — What would you say about what has appeared in the ' Clarion ' ! 
 That is your organ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — It is supposed to be the organ, but as a matter of fact there is no con- 
 nection between the ' Clarion ' and the U.B.R.E. 
 
 His Lordship. — The ' Clarion ' seems to think fit, in its wisdom, to strike at the 
 Commission. 
 
 Mr. Bird.— It is certainly by no prompting of the U.B.R.E., as far as I know. I 
 will call Mr. James Dick. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — If it would not be any inconvenience to hold back witnesses with 
 reference to the particulars, I wish he would, as those particulars were only served this 
 morning. 
 
 His Lordship.— You are entitled to time. You cannot expect him to meet these 
 things off-hand. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I didn't wish to take them at any disadvantage. It has been taken 
 from their ovm books. 
 
 His Lordship. — Is this witness on this branch of inquiry? 
 
 Mr. Bird.— He was intending to depose in regard to that, but more particularly 
 as to discrimination as an employee of the company. 
 
 James Dick, sworn: 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. How long have you been in the service of the C.P.K.?— A. Almost seven 
 years. 
 JAMES DICK— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPVTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 613 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Prior to February of the present year what was your position in Vancouver ? 
 — A. Chief elerli; of the claims department. 
 
 Q. When did you join the U.B.K.E. ?— A. In August, 1902, I think. 
 
 Q. Are you an officer of that organization ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did you ever appear on any committee ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What committee ? — A. On the committee that approached Mr, Marpole in 
 reference to Mr. lialton's reinstatement. 
 
 Q. In that spolven of heretofore as the grievance committee ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. As a member of that committee did you see Mr. Marpole ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The details of that have all been gone into before by other witnesses. I want 
 you to tell us briefly what happened to you by reason of your connection with the 
 U.B.E.E. ? — A. On February 23 I was called to Mr. Marpole's room, and he told 
 me he had a telegram from Mr. Bosworth stating that I was to go to the claims depart- 
 ment in Montreal — Mr. Eiddell's office — 
 
 Q. Was that on the same day that Wilson got notice ? — A. No, that was before. 
 
 Q. You are a married man ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. When did you leave Vancouver ? — A. On the 26th February. 
 
 Q. What was the nature of this move to be ? — A. I really didn't know. 
 
 Q. Was that stated to you ? — A. Just that I was moved to Mr. Eiddell's office 
 in Montreal — the claims department there. 
 
 Q. Was it a temporary arrangement ? — A. No, Mr. Marpole told me I must go 
 down there prepared to stay. 
 
 Q. Had you been established here and bought property ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Inform Mr. Marpole to that effect ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Any protest lodged by you ? — A. I said, I thought that was rather a big move ; 
 that I could not understand it. 
 
 Q. You went to Montreal ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Who did you see on arrival? — A. I first went to see Mr. Eiddell but he was sick, 
 and then I went to Mr. Bosworth, who was supposed to have sent the telegram to Mr. 
 Marpole, telling him who I was. He said : I don't know anything about the telegram 
 being sent to Mr. Marpole. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. What is Mr. Bosworth's position ? — A. He is fourth vice-president of the C.P.E. 
 
 Bu Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Did you subsequently see Mr. Eiddell ? — A. Mr. Bosworth referred me to Mr. 
 Mclnnis. Mclnnis is general traffic manager, I believe, of the C.P.E., and he asked 
 me to see Mr. Eiddell another day. I did so. I had met Mr. Eiddell before and after 
 shaking hands with him I told him I had been sent down to report for work, and his 
 reply was, I'm damned if I know why you were sent down here, as there is no vacancy 
 in my office. 
 
 Q. Was the U.B.E.E. ever mentioned in the course of this interview ? — A. It 
 was mentioned by Mr. Marpole previous to my going down. He said, I was surprised 
 to see you amongst that committee the other day, Dick. He said, I would not have 
 minded you belonging to a union of clerks, but a union going along the road picking 
 up the rag-tag and bobtail and cannot get any others into the union and fellows with 
 the bottom out of their trousers. I didn't say anything to that. Previous to my going 
 to Montreal, when we were talking over matters he said he was sorry to see me con- 
 nected with that union, but that when I went to Montreal it would be an opportunity 
 to shake my feet of it. 
 
 Q. Were you put to work when you went to Montreal ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In what capacity ? — A. I wrote up the commodity book, and did general work 
 Buch as marking off files. I started shortly after I got there. 
 
 JAMES DICK— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
614 MINDTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Was this commodity book an important feature in that office ? — A. It would 
 have been all right if it was kept up to date, but that book was not kept up to date. 
 It was six months in arrear when I took it over. 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What is the commodity book ? — A. The commodity book is an index of the 
 overs and shorts on the division; of the commodities that are over and short at each 
 station under classified heads. 
 Bi/ Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Would it appear reasonable to you to take up these books ? What would have 
 happened to the overs and shorts during that period ? — A. A great chance that they 
 would have been placed together, that the overs would have been placed to fill the 
 shortages. 
 
 Q. Was this work then an excuse for employment ? — A. Mr. Eiddell asked ma 
 what I thought of the commodity book. I told him it would be all right if kept up to 
 date, but at the present time I didn't think it was much use. 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. What did Mr. Riddell say in reply to that ? — A. He asked me if we used it 
 on the Western Pacific Division, and I told him we did not. He said he thought 
 it was a good book, handy for picking out the different parts that were short. For 
 instance if you wanted to look for a stove, you would look for that source ; if you went 
 by the register you would have to go through the various pages to find the date at 
 which the piece was lost. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. You remember seeing in the paper certain statements purporting to have been 
 press reports in regard to the strike at Vancouver ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Are you the James Dick who signed that letter with Mr. Wilson ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Were you in court when the circumstances were related by Mr. Wilson ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. And what about Mr. Wilson's statement of these matters ? — A. Well, it is all 
 right. 
 
 Q. Now, when you went back to work on the Monday morning — that appeared on 
 Saturday ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What occurred on Monday ? — A. I was called aside by Mr. Hiddell ten minuses 
 to six on Monday night, and he asked me if I had come there with the intention of 
 blocking his office. I asked him what he meant. ' Well,' he said, pointing to a long 
 list, ' these are errors in the commodity book. Now, I expected something better 
 from you after being in the service such a long time,' I said I did not believe these 
 were errors. He said, ' Well, I have gone over the book myself and looked it up.' I 
 said, ' Mr. Riddell, it would be impossible to tell they were errors until you had every 
 file to which you refer in your hands.' ' After that we went on and discussed matters. 
 He took up the point of a stove, I think it was. Stoves would be headed under stoves 
 and parts. It might also be railway supplies, and also household effects, and after I 
 had discussed that matter he said, ' What you say may be true.' He pointed to the 
 bottom of the page, where I think the number carried was household effects, from pagj 
 7 to page 9. I had omitted to mention I had carried it to page 9, but I had entered it 
 in the index, which was the proper place. That seemed to be all the things he could 
 find. 
 
 Q. Were you discharged ? — A. After that. I referred to Wilson having been 
 
 discharged in the morning 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Was this the same morning ? — A. The same day. Wilson's took place in the 
 morning and mine at night. And I asked him if it was his intention to treat me the 
 JAMES DICK— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 615 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 same as Wilson had been treated,, and he said, ' Well, we will see.' Nothing particular 
 passed from that time until a fortnight after that, when I was presented with my time 
 book, which was marked discharged. 
 
 Q. You were not allowed to return with Wilson? — A. No. 
 
 Q. What reasons were given for your leaving — A. I got no reasons. 
 
 Q. Did you ask for a clearance? — A. I did. I told Mr. Kiddell I would require 
 a clearance paper. He said, ' Oh no.' Then I said, ' If I apply for another position, 
 how about that V He says, ' You don't need it. I said, ' What am I discharged for ?' 
 He says, ' Don't be too inquisitive.' That was all the reply I could get of him. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. What was the date of your discharge, Mr. Dick ? — A. The 3rd of April, I think. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. You worked until the end of your month — was that the idea ? — A. And a fort- 
 night afterwards. I arrived there on March 3 and left on April 3. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. You worked only a month? — A. Yes, but a fortnight from the termination 
 of 
 
 Q. You got paid for six weeks ? — A. No, I got paid for the month, but that month 
 included a fortnight which was evidently meant for a fortnight's notice. 
 
 Q. Did you ask to get back? — A. Yes, I asked for transportation back to Van- 
 couver. I asked via Toronto, but they would not give it to me. They gave it to me 
 via the main line. 
 
 Q. Did you have to pay for your own meals? — A. Yes, my Lord. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. Have you tried to get employment since ? — A. Yes, I have. 
 
 Q. Have you been asked for your clearance? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you know how the C.P.R. operate this alleged blacklist ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Davis: 
 
 Q. What salary did you get in Montreal? — A. Seventy dollars a month. 
 
 Q. The same as you were getting here? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You received transportation down? — A. I did. 
 
 Q. Did you receive your expenses? — A. I did. 
 
 Q. Would seventy dollars a month in Montreal be worth more than it would here ? 
 — A. From' what I could find out it would not. 
 
 Q. You think living is dearer in Montreal than in Vancouver? — A. I think it is 
 just as dear. 
 
 Q. Then, as it turned out, you were just as well off as if you had remained here? 
 — A. Yes, except as to climate. 
 
 Q. You would have gone out on strike with the rest of the U.B.R.E. if you had 
 remained in Vancouver ? — A. Yes, I would. 
 
 Q. So that you were better off financially than if you had remained in Vancouver ? 
 —A. Slightly. 
 
 Q. Your idea is that the company dismissed you on account of the letter published 
 in the paper? — A. That is my belief. 
 
 Q. Do you see any reason why they should not give that reason to you the same as 
 Wilson?— A. No. 
 
 Q. Your action in connection with the matter was the same as his? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. There was a change in the running of the ciaims department when you were 
 moved to Montreal ? — A. Yes. 
 
 JAMES DICK— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
616 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Formerly, the claims department had been under Darcy of Winnipeg? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. And you were a clerk under him? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. At the time you were removed there was a separate claims department estab- 
 lished independent of Darcy? — A. No. 
 
 Q. What was the change then? — A. Mr. Larmour was appointed assistant claims 
 agent, but Mr. Darcy 
 
 Q. Your position was a different one from the one which Larmour filled. He 
 came out in connection with the claims department? — A. Yes, certainly. 
 
 Q. And when you came back from Montreal to Vancouver, you got your trans- 
 portation. Did you have to pay your meals and sleeper ? — A. I did coming back. 
 
 Q. You say you had property. Do you mean you had a house? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You didn't bring your family? — A. No. 
 
 Q. So that you were at no expense of moving or anything of that sort? — A. No. 
 I would have got transportation for them anyway. 
 
 Q. I understand you got your position in the C.P.E. and have been holding your 
 position largely through the influence of Lord Strathcona ? — A. That is not so. 
 
 Q. Is that what you refer to in getting transportation ?— A. Certainly not. It 
 is the common practice. I mean for my wife and family going east. 
 
 Q. You say Mr. Bosworth knew nothing of the telegram. Did not Mr. Bosworth 
 tell you the telegram was sent by Mr. McNicholl ? — A. No, I am not positive. 
 
 Q. Have you got the telegram ? — A. I have not. Mr. Marpole would not let me 
 see it. 
 
 Q. In '97 you were in the paymaster's office ? — A. Yes, at Winnipeg. 
 
 Q. And there you were receiving from $30 to $50 ? — A. Yes, up to $55. 
 
 Q. I think you are mistaken about the $55. Fifty was the highest you got at 
 Winnipeg ? — A. Fifty-five. * 
 
 Q. You got $30, then $45, and then $50 ?— A. I believe it was $55. 
 
 Q. You then came to Vancouver and got $60 ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And then increased to $70 ? — A. I was. 
 
 Q. In the position you occupied here, say the head of the claims department here, 
 you should not belong to an association at all, should you, according to the rules of ithe 
 C.P.E. ? — A. As a clerk I claim I had a right to belong. 
 
 Q. Is it not a rule of the C.F.E. that any head of any department, and I mean a 
 person at the top of any particular division, is not to belong to a union ? — A. I believe 
 it is a rule that officials are not. 
 
 Q. Is not the top of the department an official ? — A. Certainly not. 
 
 Q. You were the head of the claims department here ? — A. I was chief clerk for 
 Mr. Darcy. 
 
 Q. And that was head of that department here ? — A. On the Pacific division it 
 was. 
 
 Q. And doesn't it strike you as an anomalous thing to have the head of the claims 
 department a member of the union ? — A. Not as long as he was serving as chief clerk. 
 
 Q. I am talking of you as you were ? — A. I was chief clerk. 
 
 Q. In that position, doesn't it strike you as at all peculiar that you should belong 
 to a union ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Do I understand you to say that the work at Montreal was entirely unneces- 
 sary — that it was simply to fill in time ? — A. No, I would not swear to that. I reported 
 there, and I got that work to do. 
 
 Q. Do you think it was unnecessary work ? — A. I claim that the commodity book 
 when it is left for six months is .not necessary. 
 
 Q. I asked you if you considered the work you were doing to fill in time, back 
 work ? — A. Some of it was not back work. It was not all. 
 
 Q. Was any of it ? — A. No, I don't think it was back work. 
 
 JAMBS DICK— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 617 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Well, wliat did you tell us this long story about the work if you did not con- 
 sider it necessary work? — A. I consider it was unnecessary to write a book that had 
 been neglected for six months. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. You thought it was useless work? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you had any black marks against you by this company ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. No complaints as to how you did your work? — A. Just the ordinary thing. 
 You get called down for certain things you do, which is not quite according to what 
 they think should be done, but that happens to every official on the road all the time. 
 
 Q. When you had this interview with Mr. Bosworth did he object to your joining 
 the U. B. R. E. on the ground that you were an official? — A. He said I enjoyed the 
 privileges of an official, but I deny that. 
 
 Q. What do you understand to be the privileges of an official? — A. One of the 
 priviliges, to start with, would be the salary. 
 
 Q. What about that? — A. The present assistant claims agent chief, the position 
 I would probably have been in if I had been in my position at all — as chief clerk the 
 position I could possibly have would be Mr. Darcy's assistant on the Pacific division, 
 and the present man, Mr. Larmoiir, gets $125 a month to start with, whereas I had 
 only $70. 
 
 Q. You say that a man to rank as an official ought to have at least $125 ? — A. 
 That is the salary they paid the official in my position when they appointed one. 
 
 Q. Were your duties supervised by this man Larmour? — A. For a short time 
 prior to my going to Montreal. 
 
 Q. Who would be the man who would instruct you in your duties? — A. Previous 
 to Mr. Larmour's arrival ? 
 
 Q. When you were in the service? — A. That would be Mr. Darcy, in Winnipeg. 
 
 Q. Would you have to ask him for instructions? — A. Yes, he was the nearest 
 officer I could report to. 
 
 Q. And Darcy at Winnipeg was your chief? — A. Yes, my Lord. 
 
 Q. Why did you join the U. B. E. E. ? — A. Because I thought the clerks required 
 a union as much as any other of the departments in the service. 
 
 Q. Why didn't you go about the promotion of a clerk's union without joining this 
 union? — A. Well, naturally any person forming a union like that would look to the 
 nearest position for sympathy as much as — just in the same way as a company like 
 the C.P.R. would look to the state for their co-partners in an agreement to protect 
 their rights, or anything else. 
 
 Q. I understand the engineers and firemen and other employees of the railway 
 are not in sympathy with the position talten by the U. B. E. E. ? — A. So I believe. 
 
 Q. How is that ? — A. I really could not tell you ; I have not gone into that suffi- 
 ciently. 
 
 Q. They have refused to belong to this union? — A. I don't know that they were 
 ever asked. 
 
 Q. How many clerks do you estimate there would be on the C.P.R. system eligi- 
 ble for a clerk's union? — A. Really I could not say. 
 
 Q. Are there any clerks who have not joined the U. B. R. E. ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What proportion? — A. You refer to the Pacific division? 
 
 Q. Yes? — A. I could not tell what proportion in the outside parts who have not 
 joined. I don't know how many clerks they have at Nelson or Revelstoke. 
 
 Q. How many clerks have joined? — A. I could not even tell you that, my Lord. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I will call the executive officers of the union as to that. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Has it not occurred t-o you that there may be some reason in the objection by 
 the company that their employees are belonging to a union controlled from San Fran- 
 
 JAMES DICK— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
618 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-A EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Cisco ? — A. No. I see no reason why we should not have our headquarters there. The 
 other unions, I understand, have theirs. 
 
 Q. The other railway unions? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The chief aim of the union is to bring in all railway employees? — A. Yes. we 
 would like to. 
 
 Q. If all the employees of these unions were organized it would be a pretty for- 
 midable body? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Practically run the railway ? — A. Not as long as the officers were just. 
 
 Q. It would really run the railway? — A. No, I don't think so. If the employees 
 demanded too much it would be killing tJie goose that laid the golden egg, and that 
 would not be in their interests. 
 
 Q. If the men at the head of the union were ill-advised in their movements a 
 great disaster might ensue to the public? — A. If the heads of the union or the execu- 
 tive were like that, then these are the men that the C.P.E. are looking to have as 
 officials, and if they were like that tliey would be apt to make just as big a mess. I 
 believe the officers of the union are just as capable men as the officials. 
 
 Q. What advantages would you say clerks would have if they were allowed to 
 join this union? — A. The social benefits which accrue to the members of other unions; 
 they would have improved conditions; they would have a chance for bringing their 
 grievances properly before the company ,and they probably would have a schedule 
 signed for a certain time, which would leave them to a certain degree in security. 
 
 Q. This strike is really for recognition of tliis union, is it not? — A. I call this a 
 persecution — a lock-out. 
 
 Q. Leaving aside the phrase the gist of tlie matter is that the C. P. E. won't recog- 
 nize tlie union ? — A. So I believe. 
 
 Q. And you thinlt they should recognize it ? — A. I do, certainly. 
 
 Q. And the men have quit work for that reason ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Does it not occur to you that it is a difficult position to maintain to endeavour 
 to force a railway to recognize a union ? You see the position you take is to force 
 the railway into recognizing the union ? — A. Yes, but I maintain th;>-i the company 
 have forced our hands. Had they not done so we certainly would not have taken the 
 step we have. 
 
 Q. But you undertook to interfere with the management, as a union, in the case 
 of Halton, didn't you ? — A. I understand Halton's case to be that he got leave of 
 absence and went to Seattle. 
 
 Q. -^ut the point is, you undertook to take up Halton's case as a union, and in 
 that way you brought up the case of recognition ? — A. Because we believed that the 
 management was dealing with Halton on account of his connection with the union. 
 
 Q. They affii-m it was on accoimt of some contravention of duty ? — A. I don't 
 know as to the truth of that. 
 
 Q. And you, having heard only one side of the case, came to the conclusion that 
 he was being persecuted, and took it up as union men and endeavoured to force the 
 C. P. E. to discuss it ? — A. I don't thinli we made any demand. We only asked them 
 to discuss the matter with us, probably as a union, because we believed that one of our 
 brothers in the union was being persecuted on account of his connection with the 
 union. 
 
 Q. Had you ever, before this, made a demand as a union in connection with any 
 person ? — A. Not that I can remember. 
 
 Q. You did in connection with, this same man Halton, in January ? — A. That is 
 the one I refer to. 
 
 Q. But that January matter had nothing to do with this ? — A. Oh, no. 
 
 Q. So that there was a case where you came into collision with the railway man- 
 agement as to the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you endeavoured to take up the Halton case as a union at that time ?— 
 A. At that time. 
 JAMES DICK— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 639 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. So that was really an attempt to force the railway into recognition of the 
 union ? — A. I cannot see it in that light. We wanted to discuss it as a body of the 
 union, and Mr. Maxpole said he would not deal with us as a committee from the TJ.B. 
 R.E. 
 
 Q. But you in your turn then threatened to strike then? — A. I believe they were 
 determined to refer the matter to the body again. 
 
 Q. That was the up-shot of it ? — A. I suppose tlie conclusion is that after we 
 were taking attitude like that that most likely we would go out on strike. 
 
 Q. From your point of view Halton was being persecuted, and the union saved 
 him on that occasion ? — A. I believe so. 
 
 Q. From their point of view it was an undue interference with the management? 
 — A. I believe that is the way they looked at it. 
 
 Q. You would not go so far as to say, I suppose, that the railway had not the 
 right to employ people to take your places outside of the union ? — A. Well, during 
 trouble like this I thinlt any person who would do that would be liable to get them- 
 selves called an ugly name. 
 
 Q. Such person would have a right to get a job and make a living? — A. Yes, cer- 
 tainly. 
 
 Q. You really have no abstract right to say to the railway that you must employ 
 me on such and such terms or employ nobody ? — A. No, I don't think we have, but 
 we can ask the management not to do so. 
 
 Q. But when you asked the management not to do so, you took all means to pre' 
 vent them doing so ? — A. Yes, after we have been unjustly treated we take all moans 
 in our power to prevent it. 
 
 Q. I want to get at the real nature of the demand. You say unless you receive 
 so and so we will go out, virtually saying to the railway company, you must employ 
 us on our own terms or you cannot employ anybody ? — A. That is virtually the posi- 
 tion taken by all unions. 
 
 Q. As far as they consider it necessary to take that position ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you think that is a tenable position for a union to take ? — A. Well, of 
 course, if it is governed by 
 
 Q. You say to tlie management you have to pay us so much wages or we go out. 
 That is virtually saying you must employ us and no one else. .1 am getting at the 
 justification for the strike. That is virtually going out on strike, saying to the com- 
 pany you won't employ us for the wages we ask, then you won't employ any one ? — ■ 
 A. If we had a schedule we would give the company timely notice, and they would 
 have opportunity of knowing exactly what we were going to do. We would employ 
 all the best efforts we could to obtain our purpose. A strike means where a union is 
 forcing the company's hand, and a lockout is where the company is forcing their hand. 
 
 Q. A strike virtually means, if you won't employ us you won't employ any one 
 else — that is what it means ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Thij question is whether the circumstances justified the strike ? — A. Yes, they 
 did ; in my belief their demand is just ; then I suppose they would feel justified in 
 adopting the strongest means they possibly coul-d to obtain that piirpose. 
 
 By Mr. Row^ : 
 
 Q. Has anything been said to you by Mr. Eiddell concerning the letter in the 
 'Witness' ? — A. No, I referred to the matter myself. 
 
 Q. Do you believe that the complaints regarding the alleged errors in the com- 
 modity book were fictitious ? — A. I believe that Mr. Eiddell was asked to find some 
 fault other than the publishing of that letter, and that he went to that commodity 
 book and took up a lot of things which he supposed to be errors and submitted this list. 
 
 Q. Was any attempt made to find out whether they were really errors or not ? — 
 A. Not beyond discussion and the reference to the book which Mr. Eiddell made of 
 the books with myself The result of that investigation was that he said, supposing 
 
 JAMES DICK— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
620 MItiVTBS OF ETIDENCE OP ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 SA EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 that that is the explanation, you cannot get over this, and that was the fact that I 
 had omitted to carry from page Y to 9 where I had carried that distinguishing class 
 over from the one page to the other. I had omitted to put at the bottom of page Y 
 that it was carried to 9. I carried it in the index, and I went over the work after- 
 wards, and I could not see that there was anything to justify Mr. Eiddell's contention 
 that I had come down to botch his office. 
 
 Q. You say you cannot account for the different treatment accorded you and 
 Wilson ? — A. No. I cannot see that I had done anything more than Wilson. 
 
 Q. In the matter of clearances and in the matter of being kept two vreeks after- 
 wards ? — A. Yes, but Wilson was paid for the fortnight, and I was kept to work mine 
 out, so that the two of us could not go home together. I got no statement of the cause 
 of my dismissal. 
 
 Q. You swear that you don't know from anything the company said why you were 
 dismissed ? — A. I do. 
 
 Q. When you were chief clerk here was your relation to Mr. Darcy the same as 
 you would be to Mr. Larmour ? — A. Yes, I would be simply chief clerk to both. I 
 would have the same duties and the same relation to the rest of the staff. 
 
 Q. Had you anything to do with the payment or recommending for employment 
 of the staff ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Had you the same powers in that regard as the head of the department would 
 have for that division ? — A. Well, yes, I would have that, certainly. The powers are 
 very small, as far as that is concerned. 
 
 Q. Does the chief clerk have the same powers imder Mr. Larmour, in reference 
 to the staff ? — A. No, Mr. Larmour would appoint them. 
 
 Q. Do railway clerks genexally get the same pay as is given for work in other 
 employment ? — A. I don't believe so. From what I can learn the most of the book- 
 keepers in Vancouver are paid at the rate of $Y5 per month for chief bookkeepers. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. One reason for that would be the permanency in the case of the railways ? — A. 
 There was no permanency in my position. 
 
 Q. I mean to say there is not much danger of a railway bursting up, and there ia 
 of the merchants ? — ^A. Yes, of course there is that. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Is there any provision for superannuation ? — A. I believe there is, but it is 
 very poor, I consider — the conditions of it. It is just left to the committee whether 
 they will give it at the end of service. Left to their discretion, I believe. 
 
 Q. Do chief clerks generally belong tp the union ? — A. We have sereral chief 
 clerks in the union, I believe. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Have you tried to work elsewhere ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. On a railway ?— A. No. 
 
 Q. With what result ? — A. Well, I didn't happen to strike it. 
 
 Q. You are still without work ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Who organized this union here ? — A. I believe it was started by the clerks in 
 the freight office. 
 
 Q. Did somebody come over from the other side to organize it ? — A. Not so far as 
 I know. 
 
 Q. Who started the thing moving ? — A. I think it was several of the clerks in the 
 freight office combined together and discussed the matter, but I really could not say. 
 I was not there at the beginning of the unon ; it was considerably after I joined it. 
 
 Q. Did they send for an organizer from the other side ?— A. I really could not 
 say. 
 JAMES DICK— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON mOVSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 621 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 Bij Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. With reference to strikes : Do you know of any other means by which workmen 
 can secure increases in wages unless by organizing into unions and striking ? — A. That 
 seems about the only means by which the labour men can get their demands. It is 
 really the only power they have after they have made every just effort to get what they 
 want. 
 
 Q. Would you say that the union is a sort of trust to force up the price of labour ? 
 — A. Trades unionism, I believe, is about the only solution of that problem. 
 
 Q. Do you think the clerks have suffered by reason of the fact that heretofore they 
 have had no union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. In the matter of wages ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And would one purpose of the U.B.E.E. be to increase the wages of the clerks ? 
 — A. We would naturally seek to get similar wages at the coast here as was being paid 
 across the line in other parts where the conditions were alike. Take Seattle, I believe 
 the rate of wages is a great deal higher than they are here, yet the living is very much 
 the same. 
 
 Q. Is the rate of wages higher in Seattle than say Chicago ? — A. I was only taking 
 Seattle with this, because it is coast town nd very much similar. 
 
 Q. How do wages in Vncouver compare with those in Montreal ?— A. I believe 
 they are much less in Montreal than they are here in certain groups. In Montreal a 
 great many of the clerks employed by the C.P.R. are living at home with their own 
 people. They get small wages and live at home, and in that way don't require the same 
 pay. 
 
 Q. That would refer to junior positions ? — A. Yes, and up to pretty nearly chief 
 clerks. 
 
 Q. How about chief clerks ? — A. They are paid much the same as here. 
 
 Q. That is about the same ? — A. Yes, about that. The chief clerk in Winnipeg 
 is paid a little higher than I was here, and the chief clerk in Montreal was paid a little 
 higher than I was here. 
 
 Bij His Lordship : 
 
 Q. How many men were there under you — ^I mean who would have to take orders 
 from you ? — A. There was only a stenographer and a lost freight tracer who had to 
 take orders from me out of 65 employees. The present man has a staff of five people. 
 Q. Would you regard a man who has five under him as an official ? — A. He has 
 an official title. It was assistant freight claims agent, and now it is claims agent. He 
 got promoted within one month. 
 
 Q. I suppose that is their position, that a man who gives orders to others is an 
 official and not eligible for a union ? — A. Yes, but I claim that that would not be 
 practical. 
 
 Q. I don't suppose it would be, because a conductor gives orders ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. You don't hire or discharge the men ? — ^A. I would not discharge anybody 
 without referring it to the superintendent. 
 
 Q. You have got no power ? — A. I really don't know. I never had anything, but 
 before I would discharge a man, I would have certainly reported to the general super- 
 intendent and taken instructions from him. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. At the time the strike took place there was no complaint about wages of the 
 elerks ? — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. Why do you say the clerks suffer on account of wages by having no union ? — 
 A. That does not refer to that time. I think if we had a union and it was recognized, 
 that we would have had a schedule and a better class of prices. 
 
 Q. So there was no complaint about wages ? — A. No. 
 
 JAMES DICK— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
C22 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 19045 
 
 Q. Then if there was no complaint, the wages were satisfactory ? — A. Well, wages 
 were not mentioned at all. 
 
 Q. Why do you say that the clerks suffer over the question of wages through 
 having no union ? 
 
 Mr. BiED. — I was going to take up all this, hut in deference to my learned friend's 
 request not to go into these questions, I have not. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I didn't understand that this man is to be recalled. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Certainly he is to be recalled in that very connection. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — If that is so, I have nothing to say about it. 
 
 Q. Do you pretend to state positively that you say it is left to the discretion of 
 the company whether pensions are given or not, because, I don't want to discuss it 
 if you don't know ? Do you know yourself, or are you merely stating that as some- 
 thing you have heard ? — A. Mprely as something I have heard. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Just in that connection : Is this a copy of the pension scheme that is sent 
 to each employee of the company ? — A. Yes, I believe it is. 
 Q. You have a copy of that ? — A. Yes. 
 
 (Copy put in. Exhibit 49.) 
 
 W. H. Browne^ sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Are you a member of the U.B.E.E. ? — A. Yes, I am. 
 
 Q. Were you previously in the service of tlie C. P. E. ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. For how long ? — A. Since January 9, 1889. 
 
 Q. That would be 14 years. What position were you in, say in January of the 
 present year ? — A. Revising clerk in the local freight oflSce. 
 
 Q. You are one of the men who v^ent out pursuant to the decision of the U.B.E.E. 
 in February ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you tried to get a job since you left the employment of the company ? 
 — A. Several places. 
 
 Q. Where did you go among others ? — A. Seattle. 
 
 Q. How long ago ? — A. About six weeks ago. 
 
 Q. Where did you apply for a position ? — A. Both with the Northern Pacific and 
 Great Northern. 
 
 Q. What position did you apply for then ? — A. There were two positions, one in 
 the general freight office and another in the local freight oiSce, and I had the choice 
 of the two. 
 
 Q. How do you mean — you were sent down there ? — A. I had a complimentary 
 pass from the Great Northern. 
 
 Q. Who did you see there 1 — A. I met several of the boys belonging to tlie 
 U.B.E.E. and I said I was dovm to take a position. One of them said, I bet you a new 
 hat you don't get one. I said, I am not like you, I am on the inside. I thought I 
 would go to the assistant of the traffic department. After I made myself known the 
 first question was, you are from Vancouver. I said, yes. He said, you were mixed 
 up in that U.B.E.E. business. I said, does that make any difFerence. He said, we 
 understand one another, and I said, well, there is no use discussing it further. He 
 says, not particularly. I says, how about these two positions, I am to have the choice 
 of one of them. He says, I don't know anything about them. I said, there is a posi- 
 
 W. H. BROWNE— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 623 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 tion vacant in the local freight office, would you mind giving me a letter. He said 
 no, so he gave me a letter to Mr. Mackenzie, the agent there. He was not in, and I 
 left it with the chief clerk. He says, 5'ou are from Vancouver, and I said, yes. Well, 
 he says, I don't know, you had better come around about two o'clock. I said, where 
 is Mr. Mackenzie. He said, he is not in. I went down to the Pacific coast dock and 
 met Colonel Brinker. He says, what are you doing here. I said I was looking for a 
 situation. He srts, oome over here and I will introduce you to Mr. Mackenzie. I 
 conmieneed to discuss the matter with Mr. Mackenzie. He says, I got your letter all 
 right. I says, how about giving me a position. I showed him a " tetimonial. He 
 said, that is no good. I said, what do you want. He says, get me a good clearance 
 from the C. P. E. and I will give you a position. I rang up the C. P. li. and asked 
 if I could get a clearance. They said they would give me a clearance with the word 
 strike in it, or something like that. I asked what was the matter, and they said I was 
 picketing or something of that sort. I don't know what they meant by picketing. 
 
 Q. Did you further attempt to get employment ? — A. I tried other places around 
 town. I tried tlie Pacific Coast Company, and when I went to Mr. Talbot, of that 
 company, he said, you are just the man we want. I said, when can you find an open- 
 ing. He said, I will let you know. I wrote him, and have received no reply. 
 
 Q. Can you recognize that as an official document of the C. P. E. (exhibiting 
 Exhibit 50) — A. Yes, I have seen one or two of them on the corresponding list — 
 similar documents. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. I may say that the signature is not that of Mr. Downie ? — A. No. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I don't see how it can be a genuine document. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — It is a blacklist. Documents sometimes get into waste-paper baskets. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — And sometimes are taken from places not waste-paper baskets. I think 
 it would be a good thing to explain how you got possession of it if it is a 'genuine 
 document. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^Perhaps my learned friend will explain where he got Mr. Estes' letter. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — We got it from your organizer Poore, if you want to know. Now, 
 will you explain where you got that ? It was given also, it was not stolen. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I doubt very much if Mr. Poore Imew what he was doing when he did it. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — ^I don't suppose any of your organizers know what they are doing. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What do you make this out to be, a copy of a letter sent to the superintendent 
 of the Northern Pacific ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Is it a common thing for clerks in the superintendent's office to .sign the 
 superintendent's name ? — A. I have seen it that way. 
 
 (Document put in, marked Exhibit 50.) 
 
 His Lordship. — Where did that come from, Mr. Bird ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — That was handed in by an officer of the U.B.E.E. T think it. was 
 picked up in the waste-paper basket. 
 
 His Lordship. — It had better be traced. It might be a forgery. If nocessnr.v we 
 might hold a sitting at Nelson. You had better trace it up the best way you knoM' how. 
 
 . By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. Now, what was Hie outcome of jqur attempt to get work at Seattle ?— A. T 
 gave it up as a bad job, 
 
 W. H. UROWNE — Vancouver, June S. 
 
624 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Did you make any attempt to get a clearance ? — A. When I found what waa 
 going to be put in I didn't insist on having it. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. What you call a clearance is really a refereace, a certificate of good character ? 
 — A. I suppose something to show that you left your last position in good standing. 
 I made sure to get that. 
 
 Q. Do you. think a persMi who has been just on strike would be entitled to that ? — 
 A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. Then the fact of being on strike is nothing against an employee, is it ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q.. Then why should you object to the word ' strike ' being put in ? — ^A. I objected 
 to nothing further. 
 
 Q. Why should you object to the fact of your being on strike going in ? — A. I 
 objected to other things. 
 
 Q. What did you say besides ? — A. I said strike, agitators and other things were 
 going in. 
 
 Q. But the party over the phone told you it was picketing ? — A. No, that was a 
 person on a newspaper here told me that. 
 
 Q. Who was the person that interviewed him. You had a conversation over the 
 phone ? — A. About an hour after this gentleman saw Mr,, Beasley. 
 
 Q. Didn't you have a conversation with Mr. Beasley ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And that was the one in which you asked him if he would give you a clearance) 
 — A. Yes, I asked him if he couldn't cut out that I was on strike. 
 
 Q. What did he say ? — A. He said he was not going to get himself into trouble in 
 Montreal. 
 
 Q. The reason why he would not keep out that you were on strike was for that 
 cause ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Putting in that you were on strike would only be a statement of fact ? — A. Yes, 
 but the other things 
 
 Q. What Mr. Beasley told you was that he would put in that you were on strike ? 
 — A. He said he was going to fix it to suit himself. He said he would put in what he 
 liked. 
 
 Q. But he told you that he would have to put in the clearance that you were on 
 strike ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. But all that he told you he put in the clearance was that you were on strike ? — 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Now that was only a statement of fact ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. And you don't think that the fact that you were on strike should interfere 
 with you ? — A. I don't mind- if he would lift the blacklist. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by that ? — A. When I went to secure employment I knew 
 that there was some advice ahead of me. 
 
 Q. When you went in and asked they naturally inquired whether you were mixed 
 up in the U.B.E.E. ? — A. They knew I was coming. The first question asked me was 
 whether I was on strike. 
 
 Q. Certainly it would be. Do you think they would want to get any man from 
 another road on strike ?— A. I was forced out. _ 
 
 Q. Oh, no, you were not. ' There was nothing remarkable that they should not 
 wish to employ a man on strike ? — A. When they first inaugurated the blacklist they 
 should not take a man from employment after once placing him on the blacklist. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by that ? — A. It was inaugurated on the American systems, 
 I believe. It is a list of names furnished to all railways in all parts of North America, 
 I suppose. 
 
 Q. What you meant is that the C.P.K. furnishes a list of men who have got into 
 trouble with them to all railways in North America ? — A. That is my opinion. 
 
 W. H. BROWNE— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 625 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. And when you talk of the blacklist you are referring to that — this supposed 
 document? — A. Yes, that is correct. 
 
 Q. If it is merely a case of another railroad asking for references and wanting to 
 get the history of a man's employment there is nothing in that? — A. No. It is only 
 a system inaugurated in the last four years. 
 
 Q. For instance, if I employ a man in my law office and ask for references, that 
 would be natural? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And if I found he had been dismissed for carelessness or taking money I would 
 not employ him? — A. Yes, I suppose that is the rule. 
 
 Q. And it is very necessary for a bank to ask for references? — A. Yes. 
 Q. The strike of the U.B.E.E. was very well known? — A. Not very well known 
 there. 
 
 Q. If this blacklist as you call it has nothing more than these things, just asking 
 for reference, you would not object to it ? — A. They may believe it was all right to 
 
 take a position 
 
 Q. Where is there anything in the shape of blacklist about this ? — -A. This pre- 
 vents a man seeking employment elsewhere. 
 
 Q. What prevents a man seeking employment elsewhere 2 — A. A man takes mn- 
 brage at him, I suppose. 
 
 Q. You say the blacklist prevents it ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. As you understand it, a list is sent out ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. But if there is no list sent out, and if it is only a case of one employer re- 
 quiring a reference from another — there is no objection is there ? — A. I suppose that 
 is the ordinary course. 
 
 Q. In every business, would it not ? — A. I suppose that is right. 
 Q. It is a question of whether or not there is any such thing as what you call a 
 ^ilacklist. Does this (Exhibit 50) bear out your idea of the blacklist ? — A. I have seen 
 some similar documents to that. 
 
 Q. Where is there anything in the shape of blacklist about it? — ^A. This, the 
 record, Ihat means publishing a blacklist if it prevents a man working. In a certain 
 v-ay 1 cons-:der that a blacklist. 
 
 Q. And that is your idea ? — A. No, it is not my idea entirely. 
 Q. All this is, is a letter from Mr. Downie to Mr. Eussell, superintendent of the 
 Northern Pacific Railway at a point in the States, stating that a certain man has 
 applied to Mr. Downie for a position in the railway and asks Mr. Eussell for the refer- 
 ences of that man. That is all ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And Mr. Eussell sends back the record that the man had?— A. Yes. 
 Q. On the whole it would look as if that clearance were given with the view of 
 not hurting the man? — A. Not given directly. 
 
 Q. It was on account of reduction of force? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The facts were not discovered until Mr. Downie wrote to Eussell making 
 inquiries? — A. Was the man in the employ of the C.P.E. when that was given ? 
 
 Q. This man never worked for the C.P.E. He worked for the Northern Pacific? 
 — A. Why should the agent at Nelson ask for it ? 
 
 Q. Benjamin Franklin Wood goes to Mr. Downie at Nelson and applies for a job 
 <n the C.P.E. Tells Mr. Downie he has formerly worked on the Northern Pacific. 
 Mr. Downie thereupon writes to Mr. Eussell, superintendent of the Northern Pacific, 
 asking for his record — that ie a reference of character. Mr. Eussell writes back and 
 says his clearance was on account of a reduction in force and gives certain information ? 
 — A. And lets a man out on account of reduction in staff. That is railroad practice. 
 
 His Lordship. — Why should the C.P.E. make inquiry at all, when the reason is 
 given on the clearance ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I take it that it is a rule when a man goes to the C.P.E. stating ho 
 has worked on another road that that form is sent to the other road to find out what 
 
 they think about him. 
 
 gg(j JQ W. H. BROWNE— Vancouver, Jiine 8. 
 
626 MINUTES OF ETIDENOE OF ROTAL C0UUI881UN 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 His Lordship. — Why should the C.P.R. man go to work and inquire as to what 
 (he real cause of dismissal was when the clearance shows that it is made for cause 
 that would not excite suspicion. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I would understand that naturally, irrespective of anything that man 
 brings, when he goes to the C.P.Il. stating he has worked on another road, they send 
 to the other road to find out what they have to say about him. 
 
 Mr. Howe. — If not the clearance has no value ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — It may or it may not. The C.P.R. have established a policy irre- 
 spective of the clearance. The man may not have a clearance. 
 
 His Lordship. — This man had, according to that letter. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — A man may be dismissed and there may be no trouble, but it may be 
 ■very useful indeed to find out what sort of a man he was. If I am employing someone 
 surely there is something more to be found out than that the man worked for somebody 
 else and dismissed, or any cause given. References usually go a great deal further 
 than the mere statement that a man worked for somebody. 
 
 Mr. RoWE. — Then you understand that a man may leave a company with ap- 
 parently a perfectly clear record, and still another road not want to employ him on 
 account of something contained in his earlier character? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — There may be half a dozen different applications for one position. 
 They send these out and pick out the man they want from these reports. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — Apparently when this man left the company he left it at a time when 
 there was not a strike, but that he had previously been engaged in a strike, and evi- 
 dently the strike was over for he returned to work with this record against him. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — It was not against him until sent for. That proves on the face of it 
 that there is no such thing as this blacklist; that the company sends out a list; that 
 they are down on some one. All this shows is that it is the practice of the C.P.R. 
 before they employ a man engaged on another road to get a certificate of character, 
 whatever it may be. 
 
 Mr. RowE. — And I suppose you will put in evidence before the Commission that 
 the C.P.R. does the same thing with other roads upon request? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I don't know what the practice is, but I assume that if asked, they 
 would state the facts. For instance, some one writes and asks me about my clerk, 
 and I write and tell him. It is the same thing. There is no agreement about the 
 matter. 
 
 His Lordship.— I don't see why the C.P.R. should be so curious to inquire into the 
 record of switchmen. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — That is one of the most important situations on the road. 
 
 His Lordship.— I would not think so, judging by the salary he is paid. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I thinli; they are very well paid. 
 
 His Lordship.— If this man was to be a chief detective or an official of some high 
 grade, one could understand, but where a man's clearance shows that he was dismissed 
 on account of reduction of force, and is only a common switchman, it seems to me 
 there is something behind it all. 
 
 Mr. Da-sis. — If a switchman were to drink, for instance ? 
 
 His Lordship. — The clearance would show that, I should think. 
 
 Mr. Davis.— It might not be sufficient for that. Tour Lordship cannot draw from 
 that document any particular system that I can see. That only shows that it is the 
 practice of the C.P.R. to inquire about railway employees before they employ them, 
 and it seems to me that it is a good business precaution. 
 
 W. H. BROWNE— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
0» INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 627 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 His Lordship. — Then it seems to be a ground of offence to the companies that a 
 man is a strike agitator. Because a man took part in a strike and walked out he is 
 debarred from being employed by any other road. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — An agitator is a very different thing, but I can understand that if 
 two or three men were applying for a position, any company would prefer a man who 
 was not an agitator to a man who was. The chances are there are several applications 
 for this position, and they naturally want to get the best man. 
 
 His Lokdship. — Evidently this man did not get the job because he was in the 
 habit of getting drunk, but because he was an agitator. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Evidently the companies have the same objection to strikers as unions 
 have to scabs. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — ^We have not applied such strong language to them. But a striker 
 is one thing and an agitator is another. 
 
 His Lordship. — This man was apparently at the top of the list of crimes because 
 he apparently was a sworn strike agitator and took part in the strike. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — They are statements of fact. I don't know anything about that. We 
 are not responsible for the Northern Pacific. What we are responsible for is that before 
 employing a man they get a report from the other lines he has worked for, and that 
 report is acted on accordingly. It does not mean that they will not employ a man 
 because he is a striker, and I cannot see the objection. Any ordinary business man 
 would do it, and why any offence was ever intended should be supposed to be lurking 
 behind it I cannot see. , 
 
 Q. Did you do any picketing? — A. No. 
 
 Q. What do you understand by it? — A. I don't understand it at all. 
 
 Q. How do you know you didn't do any? — A. I simply went out and interviewed 
 people. 
 
 Q. What people? — A. To keep track of McLeod. 
 
 Q. He is not people. Where were you stationed — on the street going to the O.P.E. 
 depot? — A. Once in a while. 
 
 Q. And you were interviewing people you thought were going to work for the 
 C.P.E.? — A. No, I accosted several people I knew. 
 
 Q. And tried to persuade them not to work for the C.P.E. — A. They told me they 
 would not. 
 
 Q. You tried to persuade them and you did ? — A. I didn't know I made a siiccess 
 of it. 
 
 Q. Will you say you did not ? — ^A. Well, after I talked to them. 
 
 Q. You say you were not able to get a job from the Pacific Coast Company? — A. 
 No. 
 
 Q. Do you blame the C.P.E.? — A. I have an idea, that is all. 
 
 Q. That they were at the bottom of that? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. What makes you think that? — A. As I told you before, I was of the opinion 
 that there was something behind everythiug down there. When I went there every- 
 body knew all about it. 
 
 Q. You think the C.P.E. had been sending around to all employers of labour in 
 the TJnited States? — A. I surmised that. I had secured a position, and when I got 
 there I could not enter upon the duties at all. 
 
 By His LordsMp: 
 Q. Who had you secured it from — some official of the Great Northern? — A. Yes. 
 he gave me a pass to go. 
 
 Q. You went im.mediately? — A. Within three days after I got the pass. 
 
 By Mr. Davis: 
 Q. Did you tell any one that you were going— any railway people ?— A. Yes. One 
 of the fellows in the freight office who went back to work knew about it. 
 
 2Qa — 40i W. H. BROWNE— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
628 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. You found -when you went to Seattle you could not get it? — A. Tes, 
 
 Q. Tou went to tlie same man who asked you to come? — A. I went to J. E. Even, 
 I was directed to go to him. 
 
 Q. Did you apply for the position? — A. Yes, I was told there were two positions; 
 one in the general and one in the local freight office, and I had the choice of the two. 
 The man who was to appoint me was J. E. Even. 
 
 Q. You had made a general application? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What about Even? — A. He would not discuss the matter at all. The Srst 
 question he put to me was, you come from Vancouver and were mixed up in the 
 U.B.R.E., and I said there was no use in denying it. Then I asked for a letter to 
 Mackenzie. Even is assistant general freight and traffic manager. I got a letter from 
 Wurtle. 
 
 Q. The Great Northern agent here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How did you come to apply to him — did he advertise? — A. No, I went to him 
 direct. 
 
 Q. Did you know the positions were open ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did he give you a letter when you saw him? — A. No, he went to St. Paul from 
 here. I got the letter before he went. 
 
 Q. How long after you first spoke to him did you get the letter? — A. In the 
 course of four days. 
 
 Q. Did you leave the next day after you got the letter or the same day? — A. I 
 left Sunday morning at nine o'clock, and I got the letter Saturday evening. 
 
 Q. Is it not altogether likely that he would write down reporting to the head office, 
 and would state that you had been one of the U.B.R.E. strikers? — A. I don't know 
 what he stated. 
 
 . Q. Is it not reasonable that he should do so? — A. I supposed he would try and 
 oblige a friend and not mention these things. I don't know what he said. 
 
 Q. There is nothing unreasonable about reporting that? — A. No, 
 
 By nis Lordship: 
 Q. You are a freight clerk? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why should he say anything about it at St. Paul ?^ A. I don't know. 
 Q. The man felt an interest in your behalf — he got you transportation? — A. Yes. 
 Q. Did that come from St.^Paul? — A. No, I think it was issued in Seattle and 
 sent up here. 
 
 By Mr. Davis: 
 
 Q. In sending you down it would be necessary to say if you had been in rail- 
 way service before? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And he would say where, would he not? — A. I cannot understand why h 
 would send the pass. 
 
 Q. He would naturally say what road you had been working on? — A. Yes, i 
 suppose so. 
 
 Q. And he would have to explain why you were not working on it, and the ex- 
 planation would be that you were on strike ? — A. I don't know what conversation they 
 had at all. 
 
 Q. How much have you been paid by the U.B.E.E. since the strike commenced ?— A . 
 About $25 or $30. 
 
 Q. Is that altogether ?— A. I could not give the exact amount. That is altogetlicr. 
 
 Q. You don't believe— or do you complain of the company obiecting to employ 
 TJ.B.R.E. men? — A. I don't see why they should object to employ them. 
 
 Q. Do you complain that the company are not willing to employ TJ.B.E.E. men? 
 — A. Do I complain about it? I don't see why I should not. 
 
 Q. Do you complain? — A. In what respect? 
 
 Q. In any respect. Is it a complaint on your part against the company that they 
 are not willing to employ U.B.E.E. members? — A. No. 
 W. H. BROWNE— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISE COLUMBIA 629 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You admit that the company has a right to employ anybody they like — A. If 
 they are going to buy an article they should buy the best 
 
 Q. What has that got to do with the C.P.E. being bound to employ them or not? 
 — A. No one is bound to employ anybody, as far as I can see. 
 
 Q. Have they a right to employ or refuse to employ members of the TJ.B.E.E? — 
 A. They can use their own discretion. 
 
 Q. And there is no reason why they should not use their own discretion? — A. I 
 don't see why they should not. 
 
 Q. Have they a right to dismiss a man because he is a member of the TJ.B.E.E. ? — 
 A. I don't think that has anything to do with the question. I don't think they have a 
 right to dismiss a man because he belongs to an order. 
 
 Q. They have a right to dismiss a man if they don't approve of his habits? — A. 
 Certainly they have. 
 
 Q. Would they have the right to dismiss a man who belonged to an organization 
 which was injurious to the company? — A. In what respect would an organization be 
 injurious to the company? 
 
 Q. Well, an organization which they think injurious to the company. Do you 
 consider that the company have a right to dismiss a man who belongs to an organiza- 
 tion which they deem dangerous to their interests ?— A. The company consider every 
 organization dangerous. 
 
 Q. What is your answer? — A. I don't think they have any right. 
 
 Q. Your idea is that no matter how dangerous the company may consider the ex- 
 istence of an organization is to their interests they still have no right to dismiss a 
 member of that organization? — A. They consider all organizations to be dangerous. 
 
 Q. They must regulate their own actions according to their own idea of things ? 
 — A. Not until the company is brought into subjection can they regard this idea. 
 
 Q. What do you mean by that? — A. As I have said before, they have objected to 
 other organizations on tbeir system. 
 
 Q. Do the company object, or have they ever objected to class organization? — A. 
 They have, yes. 
 
 Q. In what case? — A. In the conductors' case. 
 
 Q. What is your information? — A. When I was car-checker, Mr. Downie was 
 assistant superintendent, and I used to come up at 9 o'clock to turn in my reports, 
 and they had the conductors' book there, and Mr. Barnham I think was the conductor 
 and he asked whether he was a member of that organization, and he said yes. Well, 
 he said, you cannot take that train out. I said, what is the matter ? He says, I am 
 going to get my time check. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. When was that? — A. About 8 or 9 years. 
 
 By Mr. Davis: 
 
 Q. Do you swear that Mr. Downie ever told this conductor that because he was 
 a member of the conductors' union he could not take the train out? — A. Yes, I was 
 there at that place. In their office there — in Mr. Downie's office. 
 
 Q. Here in Vancouver? — A. Yes. They were in the dispatchers' office. 
 
 Q. What time of the year — you say 8 or 9 years ago? — A. I could not give the 
 exact date; I only remember the particular case. 
 
 Q. If he was in the dispatcher's office someone would be present? — A. I thinlc 
 Walter Miller was prepent. 
 
 Q. In what other instance ? — A. I only heard newspaper reports. I don't know of 
 sny other. 
 
 Q. That is all you have for saying that the C.P.E. have refused to recogniz(j r.ll 
 unions? — A. Newspaper reports and the case of the trackmen. 
 
 W. H. BROWNE- Vancouver, June t 
 
630 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF R07AL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Don't you know that the C. P. K. have agreements and recognize unions of all 
 class organizations ? — A. Tes, after having been compelled, I suppose, to submit to 
 them. 
 
 Q. To como back to the question I asked you : Have or have not the company a 
 right to refuse to employ or discharge a member of a union which the company con- 
 siders dangerous to its interests ?— A. They have a right to discharge anybody. They 
 do it. 
 
 Q. Don't you thirJt they would be foolish not to discharge an employee of a union 
 which they considered, rightly or wrongly, to be dangerous to their interests ? — A. They 
 have the right to discharge anybody,! suppose. 
 
 Q. Is that an answer to the question? — A. I think that will do. 
 
 Q. It is the best answer you can give ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Will you swear that eight or nine years ago the conductors' organization was 
 not recognized by the C.P.E. ? — A. No, I won't say eight or nine years. I don't know 
 the time. 
 
 Q. Will you swear that ten years ago — ^ten or twelve ? — A. There is no use binding 
 me dawn to time. It was only shortly after I was employed in Vancouver, and I won't 
 let you bind me down to time. 
 
 Q. Well, there was nothing of that kind? — A. I was sent by Mr. Abbott with a 
 letter to Gavin to take out the train, so I know. 
 
 By His Liordship : 
 
 Q. You complain of the blacklist? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You approve of unions speaking generally? — ^A. I think they are a benefit to 
 men at the present age. 
 
 Q. They have blacklists, have they not? — A. I don't know of any. 
 Q. Have you heard of unfair lists? — A. I have read of them in the newspapers. 
 Q. That is the same thing as a blacklist? — ^A. I suppose it is something similar. 
 Q. It seems to be horse and horse? — ^A. I suppose so. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Do you think you were reasonable, Mr. Browne, that your 14 years of service 
 with the C.P.R. should outweigh the fact of your being connected with the present 
 strike? — A. It ought to. 
 
 Q. Did you have letters of recommendation as to your ability and as to your 
 character and so on ? — A. About three months ago I received information that a strike 
 was about to be brought on and took the precaution to get a letter of recommendation. 
 
 Q. Did you use this letter of recommendation in connection with your employ- 
 ment? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That was not sufficient? — A. That was not sufficient. 
 
 Q. Can you get us your letter of recommendation ? — A. I have it here. 
 
 (Copy handed in, marked Exhibit 51. Eead by Mr. Bird.) 
 
 Canadian Pacific Railway Company, 
 
 Vancouver Station, 
 
 January 10, 1903. 
 To whom it may concern : 
 
 This is to certify that the bearer, W. H. Browne, has worked in the freight 
 office of the C.P.Ey. for the last twelve years and is a competent clerk and is 
 steady and reliable. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 (Sgd.) J. MoCreery, 
 
 Agent. 
 W. H. BROWNE — Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 631 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mi: Davis : 
 
 Q. Why did you get that letter of recommendation ?— A. Because various things 
 had gone to show that something was going to happen, and I tooli the precaution. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. By the way, had you ever been a striker before?— A. No 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. When you asked for that didn't it seem curious that the man should give it to 
 you ? — A. I told him the company were premeditating to bring on trouble and I wanted 
 to be prepared. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Who did you say that to ? — A.- To McCreery, the agent. In ordinary conversa- 
 tion with the men at various times. One young man brought out from Nelson said 
 the C.P.E. told him to call around in March, that they were going to give him a job. 
 Another gentleman told me he was going to get a position in the freight office. I said, 
 there is nothing there. He said, my brother is going to get one in March. It is an 
 unusual thing to get an advance of $10 and one of the clerks wanted to get an advance, 
 find the agent told him he would give him a position with the $10 in March. Every- 
 thing pointed to March, so I knew we were going to get a shaking up and for this 
 leason I went after a letter of recommendation. 
 
 By Mr. Davis: 
 
 Q. We have heard a good deal from unions about scabs. A man who took the 
 place of you men who went out would of course be a scab? — A. Under that heading I 
 suppose he would, taking the place of a striker. 
 
 Q. Would you go back and work with these men supposing this strike were over? 
 — A. I don't know about that. There is always provision made in a strike for this 
 kind of people. 
 
 Q. Would you go back to work with them? — A. I suppose I would have to work 
 with them if I had to go back to my position. 
 
 Q. Would you be willing to go back and work in company with these men who 
 bad been willing to work in your place? — A. I would rather they would 
 
 Q. Would you or would you not? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Would you go back and work with a number of these men who had taken 
 positions formerly occupied by strikers? — A. I suppose they would have been white- 
 washed some way or other. 
 
 Q. Answer the question? — A. Well, I would go back if the rest did; I would not 
 go back alone. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. You don't approve of the unfair list? — A. I don't know much about it. 
 
 Q. You know the object of it; for instance, a srocer is put on the unfair list? — 
 A. Yes, it is not to patronize him, or something like that. 
 
 Q. Well, the grocer may have children depending upon him for a living? — A. 
 Yes, I suppose so. 
 
 Q. Why is it unfair that the C.P.R. should have a blacklist and the union have 
 theirs?— A. Not if it didn't strike home, I guess. 
 
 Q. AU depends on whose ox is gored. 
 
 S7. H. BROWNE— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
632 MINUTES OF EYIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 George H. Smith, sworn : 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. You are the Western Union Telegraph agent here? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You were subpcenaed to produce some documents in connection with matters 
 before the Commission 'i — A. Yes, I have tliem. 
 
 Q. All of them?— A. As far as I know. It is a difficult matter for me to judge 
 what pertains to the Commission or not. I have brought what I believe are pertain- 
 ing to matters before the Commission. I object to the production of these telegrams, 
 because telegrams are of a private nature, and I further object on the ground that 
 the summons calls for a list of telegrams from one date to another of all telegrams, 
 some of which might be private aud some not. 
 
 Q. The subpoena protects you. — A. I will require an order of the court. 
 
 Q. The subpa3na is a good enough order. — A. I am instructed by my company to 
 ask an order of the court to file with them. 
 
 Q. You may keep the subpcena. — A. Why not an order? 
 
 Q. The subpoena is better than an order; it is a command of the Crown. — A. I 
 would like to have an order. The regulations of my company require it — that I should 
 have that to file with my report. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I don't know how far the members of the Commission may be affected 
 by this. It is certainly in the nature of a search warrant. 
 
 His Lordship. — To a certain extent that is necessary. We don't propose to be put 
 off with part of the facts. We want them all. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Certainly, as far as I know, the facts will all be brought out. Do I 
 understand these documents will be for the perusal of the Commission alone? 
 
 His Lordship. — 'ilie Commission will go through the documents and if there is 
 anything in them that we think ought to be made public we will make them public. 
 We will look through them first. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I understand that the C.P.E will not be allowed to inspect these docu- 
 ments tbat the Commission desire. 
 
 His Lordship. — They will have no right to access to them neither. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Might I ask if the Commissioners have decided upon the documents 
 for which privilege is claimed I 
 
 His Lordship. — 'No, we have not. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — There are many matters I would like to bring forth had I access to 
 these documents. The existence of certain documents I am not aware of. If I am 
 allowed a search warrant in connection with the C.P.E. papers I can soon find what I 
 want. 
 
 His Lordship. — We will look through them first. 
 
 Q. Have you got those telegrams ? — A. I have not yet received a copy of the order. 
 
 Q. You will get the order. (Documents put in — Exhibit 62). 
 
 II. T. QuiGLEY, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. You are the agent of the Canadian Pacific Telegraph Company here?— A. Tes. 
 Q. You have been subpoenaed to produce all documents relating to the matters in 
 question before this Commission ? — A. Telegrams, yes. 
 
 M. T. QXIiGLEY— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
Oy INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH (JOLUMIllA 633 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Have you got them? — A. I have as many as I have been able to get. I nm 
 afraid the task set out for me is rather a large one. I have not been able to give more 
 than about a third of it. I have not had time yet. It is a physical impossibility to do 
 so with the time at my disposal. 
 
 Q. How long would it take you? — A. Our business runs about 1,000 telc,i;Tams a 
 day, and it will tal^e from forty minutes to an hour for each day. I am askel to give 
 from four months — ISO hours. 
 
 Q. If you require any assistants the Commission will provide them and pay the 
 expense? — A. I have been doing it alone. ' Although I have several clerks in the office 
 I did not think I should make them responsible for going through them. I have m:in- 
 aged to get as far as March 4 by throwing everything aside and doing a little hard 
 w ork. 
 
 Q. Up to March 4 <— A. Yes. 
 
 (Telegrams put in — Exhibit 53.) 
 
 Q. You can arrange with Mr. King in the meantime ? — A. All right. 
 
 Q. If you want a receipt for these you can have it ? — A. Yes, I would like to have 
 one. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I presume these telegrams will all have to bo proven. They are not 
 intended to be proven. 
 
 His Lordship. — Do you insist on technical proof of all these telegrams? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I must say that some of them I don't know anything about. Of course 
 I understand the large jurisdiction of the Commissic.U, sitting in the way you gentle- 
 men are ; but certainly I never saw telegrams put in in this way. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is this way, Mr. Bird : The Commission propose to go through 
 this material themselves and if they find any telegrams that will throw light on any 
 subject before this Commission the Commission will notify both parties. You seem 
 to be labouring under the misapprehension that we are investigating purely as between 
 you and the C.P.R. We are here in the interests of the public and not in the interests 
 cf the U.B.E.E. or the C.P.E. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I can understand that, but I find that in trying to prepare this case I 
 am labouring under great diiSculties in getting production from the C.P.R.. 
 
 His Lordship. — Any evidence we find in these documents which may aifect your 
 case for good or evil we are quite content to have them produced. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I have asked several days ago in regard to documents. I askej for 
 special service reports, and I want particularly the communications between an ex- 
 member of the U.B.R.E., a man named Barron, and the secret service reports from a 
 man named Leslie, also of the U.B.E.E. I ask for communications from Seattle. T 
 ■"TOuld like the production of secret service reports from Montreal. I want every re- 
 cord book kept in Montreal which has a blacklist, in other words. It contains a history 
 of each employee of the Canadian Pacific Railway for three years prior to entering the 
 service and during the whole of his service. I want assistance in getting these docu- 
 ments 
 
 Mr. Davis. — ^You had better let us have a list. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^Yes, let us have a list. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — The secret service reports are among the bundle. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I will try and have a list ready to-night, or by to-morrow morning at 
 the latest. 
 
 Mr. Eov7E. — Can you name the dates of the secret service reports ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I can give as much as that subpoena states. 
 
 His Lokdship. — Just give us a list of these. 
 
 M. T. QUIGLEY— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
634 MINUTES QF EVIDENCE OF BOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I understand there was a daily report from each special service detec- 
 tive in the service of the company during that whole time, and there were nearly 30 
 special men — during the course of the strike and prior to the strike. 
 
 Mr. Dams. — In that connection, I would like to have all the documents in the 
 possession of Mr. Estes. If Mr. Estes is not able to get here, his documents can be got 
 here, and as yet we have had no communications between Mr. Estes. There are one 
 or two documents referred to, but they are of a public nature. And in connection with 
 getting Mr. Estes here, I have asked j\Ir. Bodwell if Mr. Dunsmuir would undertake 
 not to prosecute Mr. Estes criminally in case he came back, if Mr. Estes did not wish 
 to come and take chances. Mr. Bodwell told me he would see Mr. Dunsmuir, and went 
 to Victoria for the purpose of getting that undertaking, and he wires nie Mr. Duns: 
 muir tells him to say that no prosecution will be taken against Estes, if he returns to 
 give evidence before the Commission. So that, I think, all obstructions have been 
 removed. 
 
 (Telegram from Mr. Bodwell to Mr. Davis put in as Exhibit 54.) 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I do not know how far that undertaking would give protection to Mr. 
 Estes, if the technical wording of the telegram is to be looked at ; it is no undertaking 
 whatever. 
 
 His Lordship. — What has Mr. Estes to be afraid of 2 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Mr. Estes is afraid that one or other of these corporations will take 
 some action against him for the purpose of harassing the men here. 
 
 His Lordship. — Does he want to leave the men in the lurch here ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — No. Mr. Estes was here up to ten days before this Commission com- 
 menced sitting here. 
 
 His Lordship. — He was not being prosecuted then ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — No, he has fear of being harassed similarly to the manner he was in 
 Victoria, and being put to expense such as it cost him there at a time when the funds 
 of the U.B.R.E. needed to be husbanded, instead of squandered. I have a telegram 
 from Mr. Estes that he will be here to support the U.B.R.E. case the minute he can 
 get away. I don't know how soon that will be, but I really believe that Mr. Estes de- 
 sires to go before this Commission, had he no reason to expect harassing prosecutions. 
 
 His Lordship. — I don't think he need fear anything on that score. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — One knows the power of railway companies, and when they undertake 
 to conduct a prosecution, they don't spare expense, and the harassing of the enemy is 
 a part of their strong plan of operations. 
 
 His Lordship. — We fully understand that there is a steady war being prosecuted 
 ■on both sides, and it is our business to find out to what extent these methods are 
 being pursued, and, if necessary, to abate them. 
 
 P. G. Dexnison, sworn 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. You are one of the ex-employees of the company ? — A. I am. 
 
 Q. How long had you, previous to your dismissal, been in the service of the com- 
 pany ? — A. Off and on for about ten years. 
 
 Q. Tou are a married man ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What position did you hold in the union ? — A. No position at all; associate 
 member. 
 
 Q. What was your employment with the company ? — A. Chief bill clerk. 
 
 p. G. DENNISON— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLVUBIA 635 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. What was your first connection with unionism on the O.P.E. railway 1 — 
 A. Some time prior to last June, a year ago, some of the clerks in the local freight 
 office thought it would be a good idea to have a little local union without affiliation 
 with any other body. The object in forming that organization was to obtain from the 
 loeal agent some protection in the amount of overtime we had been working, and fail- 
 ing that, to obtain recompense for that overtime. That was our sole object. 
 
 Q. Now I want you to explain that. Take up the question of overtime, for in- 
 stance. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — (Objects to taking up question of overtime.) I had this morning 
 a list of forty different charges of overtime put in my hands. I immediately handed 
 this over to the company to have these looked into. It is absolutely impossible to have 
 these looked into immediately. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I will only take up clause 15. 
 
 His Lordship. — Will you look through that list, Mr. Davis, and see if there are 
 any that you can go on with ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I understand there is a lot of other evidence and that that could be 
 gone on with now. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Mr. Dennison is one of the men who knows the foundation of the 
 strike and its causes from the beginning, and he is a man who can give a great deal 
 of information from start to finish. I have held him off. He is one of the chief wit- 
 nesses for the present time. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^It does not inconvenience him to have his evidence postponed ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I think it would take a whole day to get his evidence. 
 
 His Lordship. — Is there some general witness ? 
 
 Mr. Davis. — ^If my learned friend wants to go on we can go on, and we will look 
 it up afterwards. 
 
 His Lordship. — Ton say Mr. Dennison is not an officer of the union and yet he is 
 cognizant of everything ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^Yes, he is cognizant of everything. He has been acting by courtesy as 
 a member of the executive, although not a member, and in that way many things have 
 come within his knowledge. 
 
 Q. Will you explain what the conditions of your employment were prior to your 
 forming this local freight union ? — A. At that time my salary was $60 a month. I 
 had charge of the billing which consisted of forwarding freight, that is, making the 
 invoices which accompany the freight. My staff at that time consisted of two night 
 Lillers besides myself. I was on in the day time. It was necessary to work a good deal 
 of overtime. On the arrival of the boats from Australia or China I have had to work 
 as much as 28 or 30 hours without any interval except for lunch which I generally 
 carried with me. 
 
 Q. Was that at a stretch, without any sleep ? — A. Oh, yes. On. several occasions 
 I tried to have that condition changed to make it more satisfactory to me, and to give 
 more satisfaction to everybody, for the reason that if a man has sufficient rost he can 
 do his work properly. I always maintained that a man who works for 28 or 30 hours 
 at a stretch was totally unable to handle responsible work, and the company was 
 always making a man who does this work responsible for any mistakes lie made. I had 
 been to the agent on a great many occasions with the idea of trying to get additional 
 help. I maintained that had I one or two men I would be able to carry on the work 
 with satisfaction to the company and comparative ease to myself, being sure of doing 
 accurate work. I was told that it was impossible to give more help, that the superinten- 
 dent would not allow ii^Mr. Beasley. 
 
 Q. When was this ? — A. Prior to June of last year. This condition of affairs 
 kept up and gradually became worse inasmuch as the cargoes from the Orient weio 
 
 P. G. DENNISON— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
636 MINUTES OF EYIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII.. A. 1904 
 
 becoming heavier all the time, and work at the general freight office had been going to 
 the local freight office. A slight change was made in the amount of help given to me. 
 A man was put on to help me for three or four hours at a time, but there was not 
 enough difference to counterbalance the additional work. I continually kicked about 
 it for the reason that I was not able to do the work satisfactorily. However, it was 
 impossible to get the help and we dragged along as it was. 
 
 (Mr. Bird asks for production of appearance book.) 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. Was this the usual thing, this working for these long stretches when the 
 Empress boats were in ? — A. Yes, at this time it was usual for those connected with 
 the billing desk to have the long hours. 
 
 Q. So that this was not just one individual instance ? — A. No, that was customary 
 on the arrival of the Oriental cargoes. They would arrive every week or ten days. 
 
 Q. And the Australian steamers? — A. The Australian steamers didn't amount to 
 very much. About ten hours overtime fixed that. 
 
 Q. What would your overtime average during the month? — A. I figured it up 
 for months at a time and it averaged 30 hours a week. That is about 5 hours a day 
 overtime counting Sundays. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. For how long have you been in the service? — A. Eighteen months at that 
 work. 
 
 Q. You have asked for assistance or shorter hours? — A. I have asked for assist- 
 ance in preference, and failing that I have asked for pay for the overtime worked. 
 
 Q. What were these hours? — A. From 8.30 in the morning until 18.00 o'clock. 
 An hour off at noon. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. Now, I would like you to inform the Commissioners as to what time that ex- 
 tends over, and show them as well as you can, what your time amounted to, where 
 there is any note of it (producing clearance book.) — A. This book commences on 
 November 19 last, and goes up to February 27, the day I left the freight office. 
 
 Q. What does it show? — A. It is the appearance book. The object of this book 
 is to have a record of the attendance at the office of every man employed at the de- 
 partment, showing the hour he comes and the hour he leaves. 
 
 Q. Who keeps it? — A. Every individual as they report for duty and from duty, 
 notes the time and the name in this book, and it is revised by the time-keeper. In my 
 opinion the only reason that book is kept now is that the agent may know which of 
 the staff attend to their duties or not. He can come out to the book and find out if a 
 man is around or not. He is out a good deal of his time. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. There does not seem to be any mention of the hours worked? — A. There are 
 only a few instances there. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. Why does it not appear in every case? — A. As far as my case is concerned 
 I noted the time when I left the office and the time I arrived. My object in doing 
 that would be that the agent would know I would not be around the next morning. 
 
 Q. You noted that you had worked late. You would enter the time so that he 
 might not expect you down early? — A. Yes, I had a great deal of dealings with the 
 agent, and he could find out by going to that book whether I would be there or not. 
 
 p. G. DENNISON— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 637 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q; ^f^ you enter in this book when you worked overtime? — A. When the agent 
 came in in the morning then I did not bother entering it, because I had a conversa- 
 tion with him. Sometimes I got away before he reported, and in entering the time 
 there I did so with the object of enabling him to ascertain whether I would be down 
 that morning at a later hour. 
 
 Q. You went over that book the other day when we had the production of it from 
 Mr. Beasley and you took out extracts did you, Mr. Deunison ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Just explain this date (indicating) what hours you worked overtime — that is 
 a memorandum you personally made from the books, is it not ? — A. On December 10 
 last, I went to work at five minutes after eight in the morning, left at eight o'clock 
 next morning, had my breakfast and came back again. 
 
 Q. And worked that whole day ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That would show how long a day at a stretch ? — A. It would show 32 hours, 
 but 'of course out of that there has been at least two hours for meals. 
 
 Q. That is the period during which you were working and supposed to be atten- 
 tive to duty ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Are there any other instances ? — A. Yes, they run something the same. Here 
 is another one : December 30, 8.30 in the morning to 2.30 the following morning. 
 On December 31, from 13 o'clock to 5 o'clock 
 
 Q. Five o'clock in the morning of New Year's Day ? — A. Yes. Then I came down 
 at 8 o'clock the following morning on January 2 and left there at 18 o'clock. Here 
 is January 8, from 8.30 in the morning to 5 o'clock the following morning. 
 
 (Statement of time of certain employees put in as Exhibit 55.) 
 
 Q. Do you mean to tell us that this was compulsory work ? — -A. Oh yes, certainly 
 compulsory. 
 
 Q. In your conversations, when you would lay your protest before the officers of 
 the company had they no knowledge of these facts? — A. They certainly had. I took 
 good occasion to give them the information. 
 
 Q. Do you remember any particular occasion when this matter was brought spe- 
 cially to Mr. Beasley's attention ? — A. Yes, I recollect on one occasion that I saw him 
 in connection with an increase, and I pointed out the amount of overtime, and I was 
 informed at that time that the man who was there before me had the same amount of 
 overtime and that the man who came after would have the same. 
 
 Q. What about your Sundays^ — you had them to yourself ? — A. I cannot recollect 
 any Sunday that I had fully to myself. Sunday was generally a verj^ busy day for 
 the reason that the Empress came in on Wednesday morning, and their cargo was 
 loaded and completed Saturday night, with the consequence that the billing clerks 
 were there until 6 or 8 o'clock Sunday morning, and we liked to sleep the balance of 
 the time to get square. The Tartar and Athenaeum have arrived on Saturdays which 
 necessitated working on Sundays. I have taken 30 hours a week, and it will run that 
 way over a whole year. There is another reason probably for so much overtime and 
 that is that during the past year for instance it has been necessary for me to break in 
 four or five new billing clerics and I have to be there in the day time and do my own 
 work and at night to post them. They no sooner would get posted than they would 
 leave the service. 
 
 By Mr Bowe : 
 
 Q. How did that happen? — A. The miserable amount of salary paid and the long 
 hours. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I would ask my learned friend to produce the statement of wages paid 
 on the Pacific Coast. It is produced in his affidavit on production. It is No. 12 I 
 think, and No. 106. 
 
 P. G. DENNISON— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
638 UINVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. How do you say the rates paid to the O.P.R. employees compare with railways 
 on the Pacific Coast — railways of similar importance? — A. From information which 
 I have gathered from time to time I thinii we are 30 or 50 per cent lower on the C.P.R. 
 than on competitive roads; roads that handle goods at the same terminus and to the 
 same destination. 
 
 Q. What particular time are you speaking of ?— A. Take the present time, if the 
 rates have not been changed at the local freight oiEce. > 
 
 Q. It would include the present unless there has been a change since you left?— 
 A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Among other information furnished you these are data prepared for the use 
 ci" the Brotherhood? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I will file a statement showing schedule of rates paid at Vancouver 
 and at Portland. 
 
 Mr. Dams. — Had you better not leave that until a man who can prove it is in the 
 box? 
 
 His Lordship. — If you undertake to prove it it will be all right. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — Yes, Mr. Hamilton will prove it. I thinlc it is fully corroborated by the 
 statement my learned friend has. 
 
 (Exhibit 56.) 
 
 (C.P.E. statement put in as Exhibit 5Y.) 
 
 Q. Eeferring back to the organization of freight clerks you say — just give us a 
 history of that organization, and how it was transferred ultimately to the members of 
 the U.B.R.E.? — A. Early in June of last year we had perfected an organization con- 
 sisting of the local freight office staff, some 25 in number, with the object of bettering 
 our conditions as far as overtime was concerned. At that time the advisability of 
 amalgamating with the freight handlers, who already had a union, was discussed, but 
 owing to slight objection on the part of the freight handlers, who did not wish, evident- 
 ly, to get tangled up with a poor gang of men such as the clerks were, that proposition 
 fell through. They said we wore paper collars and that sort of thing. It was necessary 
 for the clerks to protect themselves and affiliate with some body of men who would be 
 strong enough to take care of them. We learned at this time also that the TJ.B.E.E. 
 had a number of members in Winnipeg, and some of us being acquainted with some 
 of the officers there we communicated with Winnipeg and ascertained that Mr. George 
 Estes, the president, was in Chicago, but that our wish for amalgamation had been 
 forwarded to him and he had replied stating he would come through on his way to 
 San Francisco that month. He arrived here on the 14th June, 1902, at which time 
 fourteen of the clerks of the local freight office joined the U. B. E. E. By 
 doing so we were under the impression that we strengthened our position and at the 
 same time we were joining an organization which already had a strong foothold on 
 the C.P.E. and it was our expectation and hope that before manj' months had gone by 
 to spread the organization between Vancouver and Winnipeg, thus forming a strong 
 organization or the basis for one at any rate. 
 
 Q. This organization that was formed among the clerks — you had no charter, had 
 you, from any local organization? — A. No, no outside affiliation at all— simply a 'local 
 union. 
 
 Q. Did you present demands?— A. We did, about the 30th June; we went to the 
 company and asked for 20 per cent increase in salary. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. That was after your affiliation ? — A. We were affiliated then. 
 P. G. DENNISON— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 639 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. Was this the TJ.B.R.E. that made the demand, or just the men in the freight 
 office? — A. Just the men in the freight office. 
 
 Q. The U.B.R.E. were not behind this demand? — A. Not at all. 
 
 Q. It was just your original organization, the freight clerks in the freight office? 
 —A. That is all. 
 
 Q. Did you talk the matter over with your immediate superiors before making 
 any proposition? — A. Yes, we had meetings; the result was, that we made a united 
 demand. We did not send it by committee. Every man in the office made a round- 
 robin. That was presented to the agent, Mr. McCreery. 
 
 Q. Did you have any interview with the general superintendent in regard to the 
 matter ? 
 
 Q. Tell us shortly what was said by Mr. llarpole in regard to this demand? — A. 
 After we got a conference with Mr. Marpole — wo didn't get to him for a day or two — 
 he told us it was preposterous that we should ask for such an increase as 20 per cent, 
 that he could not think of granting that. He subsequently told us if we insisted on 
 the full amount asked for, he would grant it; .but he said, if you hold a pistol to my 
 head, I will give it to you, but that the time would come when we would have to pay 
 for it. We told Mr. Marpole that we represented the balance of the men, that we were 
 asking 20 per cent, and we thought we would have to have it, but if he could not grant 
 it, we would go back and tell the men what was done. The committee was instructed 
 to go back to Mr. Marpole and find out what he would do. Mr. Marpole told us to 
 leave it to the arbitration of a business man.* 
 
 Q. Who was to name the business man? — A. I suppose they would name him. 
 We thought so. That was dropped, and it was left to the consideration of Mr. Peters, 
 Mr. Curry and Mr. Beasley. They were to meet our committee, go over the pay-roll 
 and figure out the best increase they could give lis. 
 
 Q. Was the matter of the overtime brought to the attention of these gentlemen at 
 this time? — A. I cannot say that it was to Mr. Marpole's attention. It was discussed 
 fully in Mr. Peters' and in Mr. Marpole's office. We simply dealt with the 20 per 
 cent demand. The outcome was that we got approximately 13 per cent, some men 
 got 25 where others got 5 ; but Mr. Marpole had threatened us to a certain extent, and 
 we knew that we were not prepared to insist on the 20 per cent unless we were prepared 
 to quit the company's service, and we went back to the other men and managed to have 
 it explained. 
 
 Q. What did Mr. Marpole say at this time? — A. At that time we didn't see Mr. 
 'Marpole. We went from him to Mr. Beasley. It was not necessary to go back to him, 
 because Mr. Beasley said he had agreed to 13 per cent and would try and get Mr. 
 Marpole to agree to it. He also said that Mr. Marpole was satisfied and would not 
 make his threat good. 
 
 Q. Did you ever have a conversation with Mr. Beasley in regard to the TJ.B.R.E. ? 
 
 A. Yes. He has told us that such an organization would not be stood for, that the 
 
 company would not stand for it at all. 
 
 Q. When was the U.B.E.E. started here ? — A. June 14, was the date the men 
 
 joined. 
 
 Q. This is your charter (exhibiting it) ?— A. That is our charter. 
 
 His Lordship.— You might put in a copy. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. Signed on June 24? — A. The reason it is dated June 24 was, that it took 20 
 members and we had to wait until we got the other six, and it was June 24 then. 
 
 Q. What is the black emblem for? — A. That is to commemorate the murder of 
 Frank Rogers. 
 
 P. G. DENNISON— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
640 MII^VTES OF ETJDJENCE OF BOYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Just at that point, do you ever put emblems on charters when anyone is killed 
 through the fault of the union ?— A. As far as I can understand, there has never been 
 an instance. The C.P.E. prosecuted a number of our men, and they never proved a 
 conviction. Until the law proves a man guilty, he is innocent. I say, as far as our 
 executive has been concerned, the strike has been conducted perfectly. There has been 
 no violence on our part ; I cannot recall one instance. 
 
 Q. I may say that I know of my own knowledge that a considerable number of 
 complaints have been made by men who have alleged that they were attacked by strik- 
 ers and showed it on their persons. The only trouble was the identity could not be 
 discovered. — A. You must remember that the C.P.E. had brought in some 30 or 40 of 
 the riffraff of the Sound cities. One of our sympathizers was shot and killed from 
 the C.P.E. property. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Do you remember interviewing Mr. Marpole as a member of the committee in 
 regard to the discharge of employees in January ? — A. Yes, in Mr. Halton's case. 
 
 Q. Did Mr. Marpole make any observations in regard to unions at that time? — 
 A. Yes', he said that was the damndest committee he had ever met. He says : 
 I would sooner meet trackmen than this committee. He said, if you want to 
 deal with the company go and organize and then come to the company and see if you 
 receive recognition. He said if he could not recognize it it would go to Montreal. 
 
 Q. And you went and organized ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was the matter of the TJ.B.E.E. organization brought to his attention on that 
 occasion ? — A. No, I don't think so. We were careful in our dealings to avoid the 
 TJ.B.E.E. 
 
 Q. You were proceeding as a committee of employees and he said that he preferred 
 to deal with a union instead of such a committee ? — A. He asked us if we came as a 
 committee of employees or as respecting that hybrid organization, the TJ.B.E.E. 
 
 Q. Did he say in what manner he wanted you to organize ? — A. No, that was not 
 stated. We assumed, of course, that we would organize the unorganized men, that it 
 did not matter what the departments were. 
 
 Q. Were you an applicant for any position that became vacant under Mr. Peters ? 
 — A. I was. 
 
 Q. Just tell us about that and anything of interest in regard to it ?— A. I think it 
 was last August or September that I applied for a position rendered vacant by a 
 selling freight agent who had left the company's service. I applied for the position 
 and from the conversation with Mr. Peters I was fully led to suppose that I would get 
 the position, but a day or two afterwards he came to me and said that it was impos- 
 sible to get it on account of the stand I had taken in getting the increase in the local 
 freight office. He said, Mr. Marpole objects to your receiving any promotion for et 
 least a year, and he said, while I am able to promote you to that position it would le 
 over the advice of Mr. Marpole, and it would make them on bad terms ; that Mr. Mar- 
 pole had really nothing to do with the position, but it was his wish that I should not 
 have it, and, therefore, I could not have it. 
 
 Q. So you were to be kept as you were without promotion ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 
 Q. Because you were asking for increases in July ? — A. That was the reason 
 given. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. Do you come within the class termed officials of the company ? — A. No. 
 
 P. G. DBNNISON— Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DI8PVTE8 IN BRITISR COLUMBIA 641 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER, No. 3.6a 
 
 , Q, Would there be any secrets such as might be of interest to other railways; 
 doing business in Vancouver, come under your notice ? — A. Yes, I am fully aware 
 of arrangements that should not be known by competing lines, but I don't think I 
 should mention them; I don't think it is necessary. 
 
 Q. Would your oath to the U.B.R.E. demand that they should be made known to 
 the lodge if it was of interest to them ? — A. Certainly not. That would be sufficient 
 reason to expel me from the organization. 
 
 Q. You would be betraying the secrets entrusted to you as an employee of the, 
 company ? — A. Yes; 
 
 Q. Had you any conversation with any officers of the company with regard to the 
 previous attitude of the C.P.R. in regard to the U.B.E.E. ? — A- Yes, on February 26 
 and 25 I had conversations with two officials of the company. 
 
 Q. Just before the strike ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did they state the attitude of the company towards the U.B.RE.? — A. One of 
 the officials of the company told me Mr. Marpole had prepared his forces and was 
 prepared, to fight us, Mr. W. O. Miller, ear service agent and Mr. J. IfeCreery, freight 
 agent. Millfr said that Marpole had prepared his forces to fight us and that we had 
 absolutely no chance to win. He also advised me to withdraw from the organization. 
 Of course that was impossible at that time. 
 
 Q. When you were working these long over-hours that you have told us of, did 
 any matter ever come up that required you to be censured or dealt with in a manner 
 that would teach you a lesson in connection with your service? — A. Only one instance 
 that I can recall. I had made a slight mistake in my work which was incidental in 
 costing the company about $28 I think. I was billing a car of shingles to a point in 
 "the United States named New Canen, Connecticut, and in doing so I billed it Canen. 
 That night I was working 18 hours and the day before. I billed the car to Canen, and 
 it had to be switched to New Canen, the switching companies charging the company 
 $28. Instructions came back to charge it up to the billing clerk at fault. I have some 
 copies of some of the documents. The agent came to me and told me I would have to 
 pay this $28. I told him I would quit first. He said he would try and get it commut- 
 ed and reduced to a smaller amount. It ultimately ended up by my being fined $10. 
 The word fine is used in the correspondence by the officials. I told them I would not 
 put up with any such nonsense, that my amount of overtime should entitle me to con- 
 sideration. It had no effect. Mr. Peters told Mr, Beasley that if an employee was 
 loyal to the company a mistake of this kind should be overlooked, but if he was not 
 loyal a little discipline was a good thing. So I got the discipline. That came about 
 40 days after the interview in the freight office. 
 
 Q. It came before the U.B.E.E.? — A. Yes. It was deducted in September, but 
 the correspondence came to me in August. The error had been made about six or 
 seven months before. 
 
 Q. And that is the slip you made. In these letters ? — A. Take Mr. Peters' 
 
 letter. It is a good letter and will show just how the conipany looks at these things. 
 I asked for a receipt for the $10 and it was refused. 
 
 By Mr Davis : 
 Q. It was deducted from your salary? — A. Yfes, it was deducted from my salary. 
 
 By Mis Lordship : 
 
 Q. You got a decrease? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Where did you get these copies. Are the letter press copies ? — A^ It is taken 
 from the original correspondenoe. As a rule railway service they don't put their cor- 
 respondence through a letter book ; they use carbon copies. The file of correspondence 
 was given me by the agent in order that I might keep copies. 
 
 (rile of correspondence put in as Exhibit 58.) 
 
 36a — 41 P. (J. DENNISON— Vancouver. June «. 
 
6^ MinOTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL UOMmmiON / - 
 
 3-4'EDWARt> VII., A. 1904 ; 
 
 ' r. By Mr. Bird : ' ■ •. i.-. 
 
 Q. Then it appears to you tkat tte fact of your having made a demand as one =of 
 a cotiimittee of employees for an iticrease ill wagea of •re<k)giiiti6n, tliat'you' were not 
 properly paid or prdperly treated, was the reason you were disloyal to the coinpany ?^ 
 A. "That is 4;he way I considered it. ... 
 
 Q. You were a member of the committee that saw Mr. Marpole in regard to 
 Halton? — A. I was. , " ' 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about the circumstances" leading up f;o Mt. Hklton'a 
 case? — -A. Yes, I am fully aware, I believe. The cotnpany sent a man down' to Seattle 
 and other Sound cities on some kind of reason.' We intended to find out what that 
 reason was. We had advice from a friend down there stating this man was krranging 
 to engage men; that he was covering his tracks by pretending to get a record of the 
 xsLi^ea paid, in the Sound cities. It became necessary for us to be sure of that informa- 
 tion. Wfe wanted to' know if^they were getting men to take our places. In, order to,. 
 he exactly right we decided to send someone down, and in arranging that we looked 
 about for a man to send and decided on another man I believe, but spna^hing turned 
 up and he did not go and Mr. Halton, being our business agent took it, in, hand to 
 either go himself or get some competent man to go. In any event he got a day's leave, 
 of absence from the head of his department. When he got that leave of absence he 
 went away, and the company state he went away to Seattle to either dog the steps of 
 this man they sent down or have someone else do it, but he was discharged for absent- 
 ing himself from his office without leave. We knew he had left because his chief 
 clerk gave us the information. Therefore we were satisfied we could convince Mr. 
 Marpole that a mistake could be made. We were under the impression that his assist- 
 ant Mr. Townley had misrepresented the case. We thought we could explain matters 
 fully with the assistance of Mr Halton, and have Mr. Marpole admit that he was 
 mistaken. I think we did that, because Mr. Halton was reinstated. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. Could you explain where Mr. Halton was? — A. I believe he was at Seattle. I 
 sm not personally acquainted with the fact. 
 
 Q. What was the error in the information? In. what way did you think Mr. Mar- 
 pole was wrong? — A. We understood that Mr. Marpole thought that Mr. Halton had 
 absented himself from his ofiice without permission. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about any men having been brought in about that time, 
 and from where they came? — A. Yes, we had information brought to us that 25 men, 
 I believe it was, were coming up on the Seattle boat, the Mainlander, the night of the 
 27th, and we proved that to be true. 
 
 Q. Were no men brought from the east ? — A. Yes, 37 men were brought here, 
 arriving on Saturday afternoon. We struck on Friday. 
 
 Q. Where did they come from? — A. Some of them whom we managed to inter- 
 view came from Montreal, stating they had been engaged there for two or three weeks 
 J;rior to coming. 
 
 Q. So that this information you got from Mr. McCreery and Mr. Miller would 
 appear to have been corroborated, that the men had been engaged in Montreal and 
 elsewhere when there was really no strike ? — A. That was the case. They had it made 
 lip for men to come on March 1. 
 
 Q. How do you know that? — A. That information came to us. We had to buy it, 
 and I don't like to give it away. In fact, I am not in a position to give it away. I can 
 state that one man in the east sent us full particulars. 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about unionism in general and the number of unions 
 in the O.P.R. ? — A. I am -aware that all employees of the O.P.R., with the exception.- 
 
 p. G. DENNISON— Vancouver, June 8. j ' : 
 
OJf JNDUSTBIAL DISPUTES IW BltlTISB COLUMBIA 643 
 
 SESSIONAL. PAPER Mo.i_36a . 
 
 of the clerks and freight handlers, and probably the station baggagenken, are 'members 
 of, international .organizations recognized, by the OiP.R. mai^agemejit. ; 
 
 Q., Have they attained that high .honour without a strike?— A, No> you have to 
 have £\. strike before you will be recognized. That is generally: the hisjtoiy of ,an,,or- 
 ganizations, as far as I know. The company would not be prepared to recojgnize them 
 unless they knew their strength, and they only kpow that by a strike. 
 
 Q. And so this getting one-half or two-thirds in all classes — ^that cop-dition.; of > 
 affairs is only recognized after a fight?— A. Whenyo^ gel; a schedule, you are bound 
 to have two7l;hirds, because the inen would hardly share in the benefit and not sup- 
 port, so, as a rule, 99 per cent of the men will join the organization, on account of the 
 compensation which they expect to receive. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Why do you suggest that the C.P.E. drew the line at your organization? — A. 
 Because it is not a class organization. That is the simple reason, I believe. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. Did you ever ask for a schedule when you had your local union ? — A. We asked 
 for a revision. We did ask for a schedule, yes, and we were refused. We were told 
 before answering that to go back to work and Mr. Beasley would look into matters. 
 
 By Mr. Davis: 
 Q. That is the TJ.B.E.E. ? — A. No, they never asked for anything. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. That was when? — A. July 1, 1902, when we asked for_the increase of 20 per 
 cent. We asked them to sign that at that time. We thought, if a change of officers 
 were made, if it was signed, we would be in a position to insist on it. 
 
 Q. Tou wanted this arrangement incorporated in a written agreement? — A. We 
 drew it up and presented it. 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact, you were members of the U.B.R.E. then ? — A. Yes, we had 
 been for ten days, but we didn't go in that capacity. 
 
 Q. Had you any reason to suspect that the management would object to that 
 organization? — A. We had an idea that we got from certain people, that they might 
 object to us taking in three or four classes, because our scope was large, and we could 
 form an organization which would be a very powerful one. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 Q. What is the foundation for the statement that the U.B.R.E. is composed of 
 revolutionary socialists? — A. That is a dream of somebody's. 
 Mr. Davis has dreamed it 
 
 By Mr. Davis: 
 Q, Estes seems to have had a nightmare of that sort, too? — A. It is nothing but 
 a dream. 
 
 Bjj Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q, Are you a socialist? — A. Tou will have to define the term, before I can answer 
 
 that. 
 
 Q. Tou have been publishing a strike bulletin through the pages of the ' Western 
 
 Clarion ' ?— A. Tes. 
 
 Q. Have you any connection with that paper other than this ? — A. No ; we had a 
 strike bulletin which we published separately, but we found that we did not have the 
 facilities for mailing it, and we thought if we could have it mailed to outside points 
 at regular mailing rates we would gain an advantage. We cast about for some way of 
 
 3ga — 41 J P. G. DENNISON— Vancouver, June; 8;: 
 
644 MINVIES OF EVIBEKCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION ' 
 
 3=4 EDWARD . VI I., A. 1 904 
 
 doing that and we decided to take the ' Western Clarion.' We thought that would he a 
 good medium. They had some 3,500 names on their mailing list, and we thought that 
 we could get our paper printed. 
 
 Q. Their- suhscription list is chiefly among the working classes of people ? — 
 A. Among the labouring classes. We decided if we could get our paper mailed or 
 printed with theirs that we would reach additional readers. As it was we had some 
 3,000 or 4,000. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : ,.....< 
 
 Q. Have you got a copy of the constitution of the American Labour Union ? — 
 A. Our union has. 
 
 (Copy of constitution filed as Exhibit 59.) 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 Q. The U.B.E.E. are affiliated with this body ?— A. At the head office, yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. At the time you left work on February 27, were you affiliated with the Ameri- 
 can Labour Union ? — A. No, we were not. That did not come for at least six weeks 
 later, may be two months. 
 
 Q. So as far as the local here is concerned, had they anything to do with affilia- 
 tion ? — A. We knew nothing until we got our regular mail advice. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. I understand the American Labour Union has taken up the fight on your 
 behalf f — A. I hope they have. I have heard it stated from C.P.E. sources that they 
 have declared the C.P.E. unfair from one end to the other. 
 
 Q. Is that statement made in any of your papers ? — A. I have never seen it in 
 any. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Is your organization responsible for some criticism of the Commissioners in 
 the ' Western Clarion' ? — A. There is nothing in the ' Western Clarion' that has any- 
 thing of the U.B.E.E. except the first three columns on the left-hand side of the front 
 page. We have no editorial space. 
 
 Q. As far as you know there is nothing in the way of criticism of the Commis- 
 sioners authorized by the U.B.E.E. ?— A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. By the way, Mr. Dennison, apropos of that socialism, let me read you a little 
 from the preamble of the constitution of the American Labour Union :— 
 
 'Believing that the time has come for ■undivided independent Working 
 class political action, we hereby declare in favour of International socialism, 
 and adopt the platform of the socialist party of America in its, entirety as 
 the political platform of the American Labour Union, and we earnestly' appeal 
 to all members of the American Labour Union and the working, class in 
 general, to be governed by these provisions.' ' ' • 
 
 That would look like socialism ? — ^A. Tou must produce the platform before you 
 talk about socialism. There is such a thing as revolutionary socialism and evolutionary 
 socialism. 
 
 , p, G. DENNISON^Vancouver, June 8. 
 
ON INDVSTMIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 645 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Vancouver, June 9, 1903. 
 
 Prior to the time set for opening of sittings, counsel on both sides were called into 
 the Conimissioners' room to discuss the question of privileged documents. Subsequently 
 their witnesses are also called in and the day was taken up in discussing a settlement. 
 
 Vancou^'er, June 10, 1903. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I regret to have to report that the settlement that was proposed has 
 not yet been accepted by the U.B.R.E. ; that the further consideration of the matter 
 had to be postponed until five o'clock this afternoon, on account of the short time 
 necessary to get the men together. I trust that a full representative meeting may be 
 held this evening, and that the matter may be definitely decided, so that the further 
 prosecution, in an effective manner at all events, of this inquiry may be dispensed with. 
 ' It has been urged by my learned friend that the American Labour Union is aifili- 
 ated with the U.B.K.E., and a copy of the constitution has been filed in support of his 
 contention that this body is governed by revolutionary socialists principally. This is 
 not recognized in the constitution, but its sentiments are probably entertained by 
 some of the members of the union, and' I think it might safely be admitted that labour- 
 . ing men, particularly in the province of British Columbia, look on revolutionary 
 socialism as some means of gaining freedom which under the present system they are 
 gradually being deprived of by railway and coal companies. I propose, if it meets with 
 Tour Honour's wishes, to call a revolutionary socialist or two to explain their views. 
 
 His Lordship. — I have no doubt that would be the best thing, under the circum- 
 Btances at aU events, someone who will refrain from dealing with the matters in direct 
 issue. We would like to have the other side, too — the trade unionist standpoint. 
 
 Mr. Bird.— I think we will be able to get some information on that point as well. 
 
 George Dales^ sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. You are the editor of the 'Western Clarion' ? — A. I am, yes. 
 
 Q. What are your politics, Mr. Dales ? — ^A. I am a socialist. 
 
 Q. Have you been connected with other labour papers in Canada ? — A. Teg, I was 
 associate editor of the Winnipeg ' Voice ' for between five and six years. 
 
 Q. And you took the position of editor of the ' Western Clarion ' this spring ?— 
 A. No,, February of this year. _ 
 
 Q. There are socialists who style themselves by different names, are there not? — 
 A. Well, there are parties styling themselves by different names, but 1 should not agree 
 in the idea that they are socialists. _ _ '■ . 
 
 ■ Q. What do you understand by revolutionary socialism ? — A. My cojiception of 
 socialism is, that it is essentially revolutionary. There can be no intelligent or logical 
 conception of socialism apart from a revolution, inasmuch as it seeks to change the 
 economic structure of society, and the word is used in that sense. 
 
 'GilORGE' DALES— Vancouvel", June '10. 
 
646 umUTES OF EVIDENGE OF ROYAL OOMMI^SIO^ /r 
 
 3-4.EOWARD VIU, A, 1904 
 
 , Q.. Well, .using.the word revolution^ you don't necessarily refer to such a revolu- 
 tion aa would have to resort to arms?^A. Certainly not; the same sense as you would 
 speak of a Democrat, or any other party. In the sense of a complete change, qf. .tjie 
 economic structure of society. ., , - i vi ; 
 
 Q. it has no particular significance referring to revolution, such: as the .French^ 
 reyolution?— A. Certainly not.. That was only a partial revolution, anyway. Of 
 course, that was advancing society by a stage, but it was only between two particular 
 classes, not between the people. •..:-•• . ■ : i 
 
 Q. You say that that revolution put the reins of government into the power of the 
 middle classes 2 — A. Into the hands, of a class who now wield it — the middle class. ' 
 
 Q. So far as English society is concerned, has there been a similar revolution 
 accomplished without resort to arms? — A. To a greater or less extent. It is common 
 to all changes to society that there shall be more or less violence, hut the word revolu- 
 tion in connection with socialism is not used in that sense, though it does not neces- 
 sarily exclude it. We have to take our changes in the evolution of events. 
 
 Q. Do you distinguish between evolutionary and revolutionary socialism ?— A. To 
 my mind, it is a confusion of terms altogether, seeing that socialism anticipates such 
 a sweeping and complete change. The revolution contemplated by socialism rounds 
 off a period in history. 
 
 Q. ^Evolution you claim to be in effect and force? — A. Evolution, ' c^rtainlfy ; we 
 must conceive that from the conclusions of science. 
 
 Q. When do you say that modern socialism had its rise? — A. Aljout the middle 
 of last century, that is, in contradistinction from Utopian socialism, which occupied 
 the mind of the public in the previous century. 
 
 Q. Emanating from what particular source did modern socialism arise ? — A. 
 Speaking nationally, largely from a German source. Marx Engels and La Salle are re- 
 garded as classic authors of modem socialism. Marx is regarded as the founder, above 
 all other men, of socialism. 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact all his data refers mostly to British industry? — A. Yes, he 
 took his inspiration from the fact that England was more capitalistically advanced. It 
 furnished the best data for forming his conclusions. 
 
 Q. Taking socialism as contradistinguished from capitalism, is there any line of 
 int/erest or is there a necessary conflict between these two? — -A. It is very apparent, 
 both from study and experience, that there is an antagonism that can never be over- 
 come or included in a united interest, that is between capitalists and workers. So- 
 cialism divides society into two classes. 
 
 Q. You say there is no unity between these two ? — A. Only a partial unity, an ex- 
 ceptional one maybe but not a necessary one 
 
 Q. So far as a capitalist or employer of labour is concerned his interests are op- 
 posed to labour ? — A. Necessarily an underhanging antagonizing influence. 
 
 Q. As far as labour is concerned it is dealt with merely as a commodity by capi- 
 talists ? — A. Yes, labour has been reduced absolutely to a commodity, as can be easily 
 proved. 
 
 Q. Is labour the creator of all wealth? — A. That is our stand, and I believe the 
 only one, unless someone can suggest some other source of wealth. 
 
 Q. Then apparently the creations of labour have become more powerful than the 
 labour ? — A. Yes, the tools of production in the hands of capitalists control the labour, 
 as was not the case unden the handicraft system. 
 
 Q. There was a time before the introduction of steam and electricity when, men 
 controlled their own implements of manufacture ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And what would you say as to the tendency of modern trusts and combines? 
 
 A. To more completely enslave labour by absorbing the greater amount of the products 
 cf labour. 
 
 GEORGE DALES— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
ON I^)r>VStBtAL DISPlfTES TN SUiriSB COLUMBIA 64? 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a '■ 
 
 ' Q.' 'Wliat^'iS'th^ ^'ositidti'WM rektion^totapital'a&dlabbut toJaayt'-^A The pbsi- 
 iioh tbfday/as'weliave'abtiiidant'evIdeTice, is ant'agonfefcie. W6 have ftttiKe^'practieal^' 
 ly e^rj^wheM'' •■■"■'•-''• ' ;^-- ;: - \".'. ■.■■•,■ ■, , -.■,'..■■ ' -• ';.- 
 
 Q. Jp. what relation does the trade union stand between labour and capital ?-^A. ' 
 As a Hnd of bluffer, gro'wing less effeetuM." • " -■ ; 
 
 Q. Are you a'trades iiriionistl-^A. No, I never' worked at a trade' that woiild' " 
 entitled me to be a member of a trade union. 
 
 Q. Tou are not a member of the Typographical Union?— A. No, I am not. 
 
 Q. What are the main principles of trade uhions?— A. Well, the first, of course, 
 is the principle of association. Men 6n 'th6 inti-oductiori of 'machinery and the con- 
 sequent division of ^labour^of course we miist date all eiiploitation f^ora' the intro- 
 duction of machinery and the consequent division Of labour^exploitation was hardly 
 possible under the old handicraft system. A man controlled his own tools and conse- 
 quently controlled to a certain extent the result. Under the old guild system there was 
 undoubtedly a nnity of interests between the master and the workmen. In most cases 
 the master took but little toll from the production of his journeymen. But on the 
 introduction of machinery and industry on a large scale the field for exploitation 
 naturally opened out, and the workers began to feel the necessity for combination. The 
 present form of trade union, while it is in history connected with the guilds, really oc- 
 curred with the history of capitalism. Of course it was very naturally passed by a 
 clause in the legislature in the early part of the last century. It was hardly settled 
 until about the third decade of the last century. 
 
 Q. According to your statement trade unionism officiates in an intermediate 
 capacity between the capitalist system and some system towards which you are looking ? 
 — A. Operating entirely in the realm of industry, it becomes less and less effectual as 
 capitalism gets an increasing control over political and other institutions. 
 
 Q. Take for instance our own province, what do you say about political conditions 
 in this province ? — A. I am a comparatively new citizen of this province, and I think 
 I have had some opportunity for observation, and conditions here are a little more 
 advanced, inasmuch as capitalism is further advanced and somewhat different from 
 central Canada. I find here what I would expect to find, greater antagonism between 
 capital and labour. 
 
 Q. And you mean because capital is further developed ? — A. Yes, I mean that 
 the staple industries of this province such as mining, lumbering and fishing, are almost 
 exclusively controlled by the capitalist class. There is nothing in any middle class 
 such as we have in central Canada, little farmers and so on. 
 
 Q. And that is why you account for the condition of labour in British Columbia ? 
 — A. That is how I account for it according to the theory of socialism. There is ne- 
 cessarily some of that owing to the form of industry. 
 
 Q, Do you think that trade unionism offers any substantial remedy for the pres- 
 ent condition of affairs ? — A. I think its possibilities are practically limited, inasmuch 
 as trade unions think that social justice can be established witliin the limits of the 
 wage system, an idea that is exploded altogether by advanced sociologists seeing that 
 capital absorbs the ever-increasing production of the products of labour. 
 
 Q. What is your contention as to the products of labour — that these products 
 are not properly distributed to-day ? — A. Certainly not. According to one of our 
 doctrines, we believe that the product belongs to the producer, and that the capitalist 
 is becoming more and more detached from the operation of industry, and is now be- 
 coming' absolutely unnecessary. What I mean is that rent, interest and profit, which is 
 the tripod on which our economic system rests, are not necessary to production. All that 
 is" intrinsically necessary is labour and natural production, and it follows that the 
 product belongs to the producers. The capitalist class are distinctly privileged by 
 every law which they themselves have made. It is the result of the domination of the ' 
 middle class. They are naturally different from the lijae of any class that had domin- .. 
 
 GEORGE DALES— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
648 MINUTES OF EVIDEyCE OE. ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 ,^3-4 EDWARD Vl!.^. A. 1904 
 
 ation in Europe. There was between them and, the classes, connected, with, theia a 
 feeling of responsibility. There is nothing but a money connection between the capi- 
 talist class, who control, and the producirig class — ^what we call a cash-nexug. ; . 
 
 Q. You .say the present system, has established an aristocracy of paoney ?— 7A. I 
 don't think any one can dispute that. . . _ 
 
 Q. It is, practically in the United States?— A. Having control, of practically 
 every industry. An aristocracy more odius than ever existed before in human society, 
 to my mind. , _ 
 
 Q. Is there any tendency among imions to advance in the direction of political 
 action i — A. Yes, it is indicated on every side, both in America and Europe, particu- 
 larly in the case of the Western Federation of Minevs and the American tabour 
 Union. They have avowed themselves in favour of strenuous political action. 
 
 Q. They have adopted as a political platform what particular political party ? — 
 A. The socialist party, necessarily, as a working class party. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to the Democratic party in the United States ? — ^A. It is 
 simply another section of the capitalist party, with no essential principle dividing 
 them. 
 
 Q. From the Republican party ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You say as far as it is concerned, it is for what ? — A. For plunder. They 
 correspond exactly with our Conservative and Liberal party. 
 
 Q. You think the claim of the Liberal party to be a labour party in Canada is 
 not well founded ? — A. I think no reasonable person could ever claim that, looking 
 on their actions, and even their professions. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. There is no party that has the interests of the labour people at heart except 
 the Socialists ? — A. Necessarily, inasmuch as there is no party that professes to under- 
 Btai^d their position or aspirations. • 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. The Liberal party of the Dominion claim they have passed more legislation 
 in the interest of labour than any political party has attempted before ? — A. Yes, 
 but what are the results ? Do we find industrial conditions any bettesr for it ? Do 
 we find wages raised, except to a limited extent, except to those things directly under 
 the government's control ? In the public works, for instance, thete has been some 
 little modification of the trouble in that respect. 
 
 Q. How does the cost of living compare with the rate of wages paid in regard to the 
 public works? — A. The government only contend for the current rate of wages ob- 
 taining in the district in which the work is being carried out— for the union local 
 rate. 
 
 Q. Where do you find the most advanced type of unionism ; I am just asking you 
 the general question ? — A. The most advanced and intelligent kind of unionism would 
 be found in Germany and France, especially in Germany, where the labour movement 
 has, from the beginning been associated with the political movement. The rise of 
 socialism and unionism — ^that is as to industrial production, are contemporaneous in 
 Germany. 
 
 Q. Heretofore in Great Britain, Canada and the United States has nniohisnl been 
 usually associated with political action ?— A. Not directly. Of Course it is beginning 
 to move now. In the preamble of the constitution many of the unions are enjoined to 
 study politics. ' ■ ■ .. : ,v ., 1 
 
 Qi As a matter of fafct it has been an established fact that' there "Should be no 
 politics in the unions ? — A. That means of more active politics — not to exclude abstract 
 economic and social questions. 
 
 Q. Has it not been established as a principle hy thp Dominion Trades iflongress or 
 ether recognized bodies of labojir men that labpur leaders appearing on a public plat- 
 GEQROB DALES— Vancouyer* June 10. 
 
ON inbt'STEIAL DfSPVrSS IN'BiUTISH COLVMJiJA 649 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ' form in support of eithei' of the capitalist parties as you call them is looked upon -H^ith 
 ' some degree of doubt ? — A. I think so. 
 
 Q. What would you say was the fundamental principle underlying that ?— A. 
 Their distrust of the capitalist parties from their previous experience and observation. 
 
 Q. The Alien Labour Law — is that a fair sample of capitalist legislation in favour 
 of the labouring classes ?— A. Yes, both of legislative and administrative. 
 
 Q. Can you give us a general estimate of that Act as entertained by the labour 
 up-ions ? — A. I believe the bulk of them regard it with indifference, and a good many 
 with contempt. It has been practically inoperative since it was passed. I have heard 
 it from the lips of men who have been entrusted with its administration wlio have told 
 me they have been tied by departmental instructions which prevented them doing any- 
 thing. ' 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say the operation of the laws thwarted by the action of gov- 
 ernment officials ? — A. No, not by government officials, but I believe they are so tram- 
 melled by instructions that it is impossible to malte it effective. 
 
 Q. But the law can be set in motion by 'any man affected by it ? — A. It is not easy 
 for the labour men to do. If there had been any real desire to help the men the depart- 
 ment itself would have enforced it. 
 
 . Q. It is an Act for the benefit of trade unions — surely they should take the trouble 
 of seeing it enforced ? — A. If it is passed for the benefit of trade unions its adminis- 
 tration should be administrated by the department. 
 
 Q. If you get attacked on the street there is no government official bound to take 
 up your case. You go to a police magistrate and lay information. Why should you 
 not lay information when there is a violation of the Alien Labour Law ? — A. I am 
 not well acquainted with the rules that govern that particular law, but I understand 
 from persons who have known something of it that it is very ineffective. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I desire to file some correspondence between Charles Wilson, K. C, 
 written for the TJ.B.R.E., to Sir Charles Tupper in an attempt to get the Alien Labour 
 Act enforced; The effect of tne correspondence is that Mr. Wilson advised the U. B. 
 E.E. that fhe whole Act is practically a dead letter and advising them to give up any 
 attempt, that there are not in a position, financially or otherwise, to enforce the Act. 
 
 (Letter, Chas. Wilson, K.C., to F. J. Halton, and Sir Charles Tupper to Chas. 
 Wilson, put in as Exhibits numbered 60 and 61 respectively.) 
 
 His Lordship. — Are you sure that Sir Charles Tupper saw the Minister of Labour? 
 
 Mr. BnU). — ^I have only the correspondence. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^I cannot see how that can be admissable. If you could show us 
 some correspondence between Mr. Wilson and the Minister of Labour it would be dif- 
 ferent, but not as to correspondence between two unofficial persons without showing 
 that there has 'been some correspondence between official persons. Why not show us 
 that Sir Charles Tupper has interviewed the Minister or some member of the gov- 
 vernment. Perhaps Mr. King can teU us ? 
 
 Mr. King. — I know as a matter of fact that the Department of Labour has never 
 been appealed to. If an appeal had been made the department would have replied 
 that an action could be taken by the parties themselves., The law was amended 
 in that form in order, to that action from Ottawa would be unnecessary, and it is so. I 
 know, as a matter of fact, that no communication has come in regard to the Alien 
 Labour Law in conectipu wjth tljis , naatter. The correspondence, I think, does not 
 mention th^ ^Minister of Labour, but the Solicitpr-Qeneral, if am rightly informed. 
 
 By Mr. Bird .; _ 
 
 Q. Whafeffeot would the affiliation between the TJ.B.E.E. and the American 
 Labour Tjnion have upbii the former organization ? — A. The effect upon the U.B.R:E. ? 
 
 'GEOUGE dales— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
650 MlNOTESi OF EY I DENGS QFROTAI GpMMJ8SI<Mf .,t> 
 
 3-i. §DWAR0 .yJU fif^ , 119.04 ., 
 
 Well^ iaithe fii^st place it;. woul4 flaturally.^jcr^pgtii^ thejj^ ,^y bein^ ,a,ffi.U^1;ed \Rit^„a.,. 
 large and progressive body of workers— strengthen them financially and benefit them 
 fcU round. , ' ..,,-. 
 
 Q. Would the members of one; organization, necessarily, by affiliating be pledge^ , 
 to one -another % — A. Tou mean by having in tie preamble, the, socialist policy ? 
 
 Q- Yes ? — A. No, I don't, think that would, necessarily embfaqe it. Being. in the 
 preamble the principles are not emphasized . necessarily upon every trade, any more 
 than our British Columbia legislature is a Christian institution. . It is opened, by 
 prayers, but it doesn't deal with every principle. There is ni? doubt that the fact .of 
 being . associated with the American. Labour Ilnipn haying a a?cialistic . programme 
 in its preamble would suggest the . idea that every man was copimitted to hard and 
 fast socialism. I don't think that view is fair at all. There is no doubt that a num- 
 ber of the members of the A. L. U. are socialists, but it is one of the general prin- 
 ciples, although they do their best to urge their memftjers to look to the final remedy, 
 to exercise their own citizenship politically. ' '' ' ' 
 
 Q. I understand it is in contemplation of the socialists to substitute instead of the 
 present wage system some other system whereby the labourers, the producers' may be 
 remunerated. Will you kindly briefly emphasize what you desire to emphasize in re- 
 spect of these conditions ?^A. Well, the alternative principle to individualism and 
 capitalism is co-operation—common enjoyment of common property. Wealth is now 
 socially produced ; it is impossible for one man to say what he does produce. It is 
 impossible to equitably value a man's own production. No other alternative with the 
 elements of justice in it is possible. 
 
 Q. Tou talk about production. Has production, as contradistinguished from 
 distribution, proceeded further than any distribution of wealth ? — A. Well, in produc- 
 tion industry has proceeded to an almost incalculable extent through socialist indus- 
 try, but the appropriation of profits remains as individualistic as it was a century and 
 a half ago except in exceptional cases. 
 
 Q. The tendency in modem production in the United States is to gather into 
 gigantic trusts and corporations all similar capitalistic concerns ? — A. Undoubtedly. 
 
 Q. The tendency of socialism would be in the same direction. Tou recognize that 
 the tendency of production in the United States by these trusts is in the direction of 
 socialism ? — A. Tes, in this form. 
 
 Q. Socialism fully realized would be carrying into effect in one gigantic organiza- 
 tion control of the entire production system of the country ? — A. It would undoubted- 
 ly facilitate the transition. 
 
 Q. When that state is reached, the production would be centralized to the extent 
 that the socialist party desires ? — A. Not necessarily. Centralization and absorption 
 goes on now with no regard to anything but making a profit. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. If you have obtained a complete centralization of all production, under what 
 systern of distribution is it suggested ?— A. Well, a man would be reward^, I presume. 
 That is no essential part of socialism how the wealth will be exactly distributed. It 
 will be upon the plan found most advantageous to the whole community, but as to the 
 exact form a man would be very cautious before he committed himself to a-ny exact 
 method. 
 
 Q. Is that an insupportable objection to the idealistic system which you are look- 
 ing for ? — A.. I don't see that. If it does not accomplish more equitably than the num- ' 
 erous disparities which exist between wealth now, it would not have much to recom- 
 mend it. ,., . 
 
 Q. Take the management of the C.P.E. We will assume my facts are correct: 
 They have a superintendent of employees all along the line. They pay them money— 
 an arbitrary rate of wages governed by local conditions.' There would be, under co- 
 
 OfiORGE DALES— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
ON yj^D't/SI'Mii m&MTM TJf ^liiffSEl tOLtlMBlA- 651 
 
 SESSVONAt P'A'|ieFt'lM'6'.-36si ■ '• 
 
 opCTSti-v^'e comnloW&lili/'similaif distribution of labour. There would be ' superiii- 
 tendetits' of the' s^etal cMfeSes of labour "?--^A; -Yes. ' - • ; ;•:- ■ ■■ 
 
 Q. It is coiitemi)lated that they should receive equal remuneration ? — A. I don't 
 see why thfeiy- should riot as Idng^ as there i^ abundance for everybody. The' different 
 wage with professions to-day result from the eommodlty production.' So loivg as that 
 commodity production lasts we shall have a different wage, which is part of the satae 
 system. We have made merchandise of everything— men, women and children. — and we . 
 have becottie so brutalized thdt we cannot conceive of any other satisfaction than that ' 
 of money. 
 
 Q. TJrider the conditions such as you dream of, there would be remuneration ? — 
 A. Undoubtedly, and ainple remuneration for everybody. 
 
 By His Lordship : .; . , 
 
 Q. What kind of remuneration ? — ^A. Material returns for services rendered. 
 
 By Mr. Bird ; 
 
 Q. We are assuming that all would be provided with at least the necessities of 
 life ; over and above that wonld there be remuneration ? — A. I thiflk a man who 
 would desire more than necessary than to give him. a relatively better position in 
 society than another — that is a wish not deserving of respect. 
 
 Q. It is claimed against socialism that the ordinary incitement to effort would 
 be gone, that man must have a continual bribe in order to make him at his best ? — :A. 
 It arises from the cause, I think, that we have come to think of no remuneration ex- 
 cept that of money, that labour can only be rewarded in money. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. In your opinion, do men in important branches of work receive equal remun- 
 eration ?— A. I believe iJot. 
 
 Q. What departments of important work receive small remuneration in the mat- 
 ter of education ? — ^A. Particularly in the remuneration of art, science and litera- 
 ture. I think they are the three worst rewarded classes, relatively, in society. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. There are a number of inventors who are millionaires ? — A. There are a great 
 many more who have been made millionaires out of the inventors. 
 
 Q. Take the man who invented the telephone — ^he is a millionaire 1 — ^A. Bell ? 
 
 Mr. Eowe. — I understand he is in poverty. 
 
 His Lordship. — That might be through over-speculation. 
 
 Witness. — Edison is an inventor who is not regarded as wealthy. 
 
 His Lordship. — He is wealthier than you and I. 
 
 Mr. KoWE. — That might not imply much. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Do you think such a state of society would be any solution of, say, the liquor 
 prqblem, which is very materially affecting the labouring class ? — A. Undoubtedly it 
 wo.uld deal with; the liquor problem. It is only a secondary matter, of course. It 
 would not undertake to make every drunkard sober. But it would arrange the thing 
 so. that the best interests of all would be conserved. 
 
 Q. \yould the elimination of profit be a good tbing ? — A. There is no more moral 
 necessity for profit tban there is for arson or small-pox. It is not necessary for pro- 
 duction. 
 
 GEORGE DAI^S— Vancouver, June 10,; 
 
652 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE^ OF ROYAL COMMISSION' 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. iS04 
 
 By Mr. Rome : ■ ; > . , 
 
 Q. Do you think one nation could adopt socialism and continue to do business 
 with others 1 — ^A. No, it is tiecessarily a national conception. It would not neces- 
 sarily obliterate the national line. Ultimately, possibly it might. , 
 
 Bi/ Mr. Bird : ■ , , 
 
 Q. What do you say as to the charge against socialism that it intends doing away 
 with the military system — is that a just one ? — A. I hardly understand you. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Is socialism incompatible with patriotism ? — A. If by that is meant racial 
 patriotism that is pumped into boys. and girls, it would necessarily. It does not imply 
 necessarily the sweeping away of racial or political lines. But it would establish a 
 co-operation and fraternalism in the course of time. 
 
 Q. It has the disarmament of the world as one of its methods ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. And carry into effect the dream of the former C?ar of Kussia — ^that might be 
 obtained ? — A. Yes, but these things are not necessarily a part of the teachings of 
 socialism, but it is correct to suppose that it looks to the dissolution of war and the 
 establishment of peace. 
 
 By Mr. Howe : 
 
 Q. Don't you think if men were so that such a condition of society could exist 
 that necessarily war would cease ?— A. Undoubtedly, if men were so. 
 
 Q. That is to say, if socialism were possible, then war would be impossible ? — ^A. 
 No, they could not co-exist together. One implies a negation of the other. 
 
 Q. Then you would not hope for socialism until there was a condition of mind 
 that made war impossible ? — A. Until there was a common conception on the part of 
 all mankind of their social relation with. each other. 
 
 Q. Which would be largely a process of temperament and could not be brought 
 by legislation ? — A. Temperament and legislation combined in unity. Socialism 
 would support any legislation that was in the right direction. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. What is the position of socialists in regard to natural resources such as coal 
 mines, and then as regards developed industry such as great national highways ? — A. 
 Naturally those, whilst the most prominent, are included with the means of production 
 generally. Having been created by social labour, they should be a social possession. 
 
 Q. That would apply to the wealth from any mine, and so on. Socialists claim, 
 I suppose, that this is an inheritance to the people and should not belong to any indi- 
 vidual ? — A. Certainly not. 
 
 Q. Should be retained entirely to be worked by the people for the people ? — A. Tes. 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. As far as the natural resources are concerned, the socialists claim that for the 
 whole people ? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. Would you say it would be possible for a country to advance under a^ system 
 of that kind, that capitalists would be required to go into the country for producing 
 that wealth ?^A. It certainly could not be under a capitalistic system. We are in 
 that position now. We may have the greatest abundaijce of. labour and could not do 
 anything without money. We have come to regard capital as intrinsically necessary 
 for production, and it is not. The two factors are labour and natural opportunity. 
 
 Q. Is money as a circulating medium a necessity under the socialist conditiofj ?— 
 A. Certainly not. A medium of exchange is, of course. 
 
 Q. How are the labourers to be sustained until this wealtlb is made available ? 
 Take the opening of a coal mine, for instance. The capitalist may not be'necessaryj 
 but the capital is surely ? — A. '^,e does it by virtue of greed. 
 GEORGE DALES— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
0^ INDUSTHIAL DISPUTES IN BJUTISB COLUMBIA 653 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. What I mean is that the government assume to do this, could advance money 
 for the development of mines and enjoy the profits of the operation ?— A. Oh, un- 
 doubtedly, but all the government itself now has been under the capitalist form. 
 
 Q. Yes, but the resuh; is the same to the people ; they enjoy the production ?— A. 
 Practically. The only advantage of state ownership is that it gives the public mind 
 the idea of no political defects. We have an instance in the I. C. E. The conditions 
 of employment, and the rates obtained there are pretty much the same as on the C.P.E. 
 or any other system. WTiilst there might be some advantages, political or otberwise, 
 it is no substantial benefit to the community. 
 
 By His Lordship : \ 
 
 Q. How would that be improved by socialism ? — A. It would be expropriated by 
 the people. 
 
 Q. Yes, but it is owned by the people ? — A. Yes, but interest is payable on the 
 cost of it. 
 
 Q. Would you repudiate th^ interest ? — A. I suppose they would be appropriating 
 the industry. 
 
 Q. And one of the doctrines of socialism is confiscation, is it ? — A. Eestitution. 
 Confiscation has been proceeding very rapidly now for centuries. 
 
 Q. Eestitution to whom ? — A. To the people whom the country and all its works 
 belongs, to the class who produce. 
 
 Q. It seems to me it is a restitution to the people who have not produced. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. You say all wealth is produced by labour; how do you define labour ? — A. I 
 take rather a wide view; I would say every useful human activity; everything thjat 
 conduces to the welfare of the community. 
 
 Q. What are the two classes ?— A. The owning or presiding class and the useful 
 class. 
 
 Q. Take, in the case of corporations like the C.P.E., what would be the members 
 of the one class and one of the other in that connection say ? — A. We should discri- 
 minate distinctly between the stockholders and those who were administering the rail- 
 way. 
 
 Q. The capitalist class in that case would be the stockholders ?^— A. The logical 
 conclusion, apart from those who operate and those who use the railway. / 
 
 Q. The class of labour would extend from the highest to the lowest position in the 
 company ? — A. It would mean the services of every man necessary to maintain the 
 industry— they would all be workers. 
 
 Q. You spoke of the middle class. How would you describe the middle class to- 
 day ? — A. That has reference more to European communities. The middle class, as 
 spoken of historically and socially is the class between the workers and the aristo- 
 cratic class, but the governing class in this country corresponds to the middle class 
 in Europe, I would think. 
 
 Q. What would you do, first speaking as a socialist, supposing you say they should 
 take' political action. How would socialists proceed if the power was in their hands ? 
 —A. That is a speculation I would not like to indulge in. I have no doubt it would 
 depend on the condition of things for the time being. 
 
 ' Q. I don't ask in a contentious spirit at all. What are the intermediate steps^ — 
 legislative steps ? — A. Well, the first thing a socialist would be pledged to in the legis- 
 lature would be to 3o all he could to benefit labour by advancement of wages, shortening 
 of hours &c. Dealing with improved conditions and greater leisure would result in 
 men coming to a mote rational' conclusion. At the same time, collective owiiership 
 of the means of ptoduetibii. 
 
 'GEORGE DALES— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
654 MI'NWrES OF EVIomCS OF ROYAL COifMimiQN- > •: 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vth,-A.i.l9P+ 
 ' '■' By ili^ Coriship' : ■< ■ ■■ ■. , ■ ,'.• ... . . !,:,,..., 
 
 Q. The amelioration of existitig^'eonaitdbns tas'been brought about by men: rwho' 
 were not socialists ? — A. Undoubtedly under pressure from the working classed. My 
 observation in England was that it was under extreme pr^fesure from the working 
 men, never voluntary. ' ■ 
 
 By Mr. Bowe :■ •-■ 
 
 Q. Would you say that of the factory Acts ?— A. Probably with the exception of 
 Lord Shaftsbiiry. There is a similar factor at; work in all classes of society. ■■ 
 
 Q. Then the socialist' believes in progressive legislation ? — A. He is in favour of 
 progressive legislation so long as/it leads directly to his goal ■■'•■■.■■:'■ 
 
 By His Lordship : . _ . . , . , 
 
 Q. What is the actual goal to be obtained ?^A. The collective ownership of all 
 the means of production following necessarily from the socialist condition of industry. 
 
 Q. Does that involve equitable distribution ? — ^A. It would involve equitable dis- 
 tribution, and probably equal. . 
 
 Q. Who is to decide on these matters, as to how they should be divided ? — A. I 
 suppose the people would find their methods in some legislative body. There is no 
 doubt that government could consist far more of administration than legislation, 
 
 Q. One of the difficulties I imagine that is in the way of socialists is that the 
 majority of the people do not understand the objects to be attained, or that socialists 
 cannot point out any distinct object that can be obtained ? — A. It seems to me that 
 the object is clear enough — that what is socially produced should be socially enjoyed. 
 
 Q. It is all right to indulge in these cloud-raising phrases, but what we would like 
 is something that could be seen. What we want to know is the exact mode that will 
 bring about this ? — A. That is asking what might occur in twenty years time. I 
 think no one could say what will happen twenty years since. We are satisfied for the 
 rime being with promulgating our principles, trusting to the future to work out the 
 details. 
 
 Q. The object is to secure equitable distribution ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Does that mean equal distribution V — A. An equitable distribution would in- 
 \olve probably equal distribution, but I would not commit myself to that. Seeing that 
 a man's needs are practically equal whether the man works on a contract or presides 
 over the contracts, he wants about the same needs. He wants a bed just the same and 
 three meals a day. There would not seem to me to be anything very extreme about an 
 absolute equality. 
 
 Q. I suppose the socialist does not want to commit himself to any condition in the 
 hope that there may be a better condition that he could adopt ? — A. That is one reason. 
 
 Q. You would not suggest that all men should have the same kind of shack, live 
 in the same bed, and have the same tooth brush? — A. Certainly not. 
 
 Q. It seems to me if that is the golden effect of socialism the world would be one 
 vast lunatic asylum ? 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Do you think that men are generally in the best positions they are fitted for in 
 society ? — A. No, a man is forced by economic circumstances to take whatever he can 
 get. 
 
 Q. Do you think a man will have better opportunities for being in a position that , 
 he is better fitted for ? — A. I do. . ; 
 
 Q. Does the plan of socialism involve the destruction of the present system of 
 society, such as the home ? — A. Not by any means, rather tends to preserve the home, i 
 Conditions now are decidedly against the institution of home. 
 
 Q. Is marriage compatible with socialism ? — A. Undoubtedly. 
 
 GEORGE DALB^— Vancouver, Juie 10. ' __ 
 
ON T^iitjBtkrAL nt^PmtES^ /^ BkinsH oodumbia 655 
 
 SESSIONAL' PAPEH :No. aSa i 
 
 Q. Is it regarded as a permanent institution by socialists generally j^ A. Men 
 differ- -mucli a^ to that. It is a subjiect largely discussed. It is evidently' the best form 
 of domestic life at the present time. ' 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. In this Utopian scheme, because that is what it seems to me to be, would it be 
 permissible for one man to live in a $50,000 house and another in a ,$500 one ?— A, 
 Some men's aspirations run to houses, some .to other things. 
 
 Q. I want to get an idea from you as a represeijtative socialist, just what your, idea 
 is. Oouldsbme mehliv6 in a fine house and others not ?^-A,. Certainly, if they- chose 
 to spend their means that W^ay. ;;-■.!..■_ : . , , 
 
 Q. Then you admit it would be possible under the socialist system for some to 
 accumulate more than others ? — A. Some men would spend and others accumulate, but 
 there would be no possibility of oiie man exploiting anything or making a profit put of 
 one man's work. , . 
 
 Q. I suppose it naturally remains that some would be idlers ? — A. Yes. 
 Q. What would you with them ? — A. Pretty much as now. 
 
 Q. You would have jails ? — A. No. Some of them, the idlers, are pretty well cared 
 for. We should not look upon poverty as a crime. 
 
 Q. I am talking of men who won't work ?^A. He would be regarded as insane, I 
 believe. I don't think that class is as bad as some people think. It is not work that 
 men shirk. 
 
 Q. What would be the inducement under your system for a man to work ?: — A. In, 
 order to live. 
 
 Q. What would be the inducement for him to spend his full energy ? — A. The idea 
 that he would benefit society. 
 
 Q. Do you think that would be strong enough to keep him ? — A. I think it has 
 actuated all the best men who have .ever lived. 
 
 Q. Do you think that all workmen should be in a separate political organization ? 
 — A. I think it is high time that organized labour should recognize its opportunities 
 and decide for intelligent political action. 
 
 Q. What do you think is most productive of the spread of socialism among union 
 men — successful or unsuccessful unionism ? — A. No doubt as they come to see its 
 limits and ineffectiveness beyond a certain point, it might be said, its ineffectiveness. 
 
 Q. Do you think recognition of unions by employers is calculated to produce 
 socialism, or the opposite ? — A. Well, for the time being, no doubt the disappointed 
 man would more easily turn socialist. The man who was granted recognition on reason- 
 able terms might for a time be contented. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it injurious for men to adopt a political creed through a spirit 
 of resentment and disappointment ? Would it not be better to have them urge it by 
 intelligent progress rather than driven to it under compulsion ? — A. I think necessity 
 has always been the advancement and improvement. They will simply adapt them- 
 selves to any line according to necessity. 
 
 Q. Having regard to the general necessity, would it not be better for socialists 
 to proceed from the intelligence of men rather than by exciting their animosity ?~ 
 A. Undoubtedly, and I think that is the usual way. 
 
 Q. Do you think it contributes to the benefit of society generally, or must he use 
 what I was going to call strong language, having reference to the other classes of 
 society ?— A. Extreme cases ; sometimes call for strong language, but so long as it 
 is logical and truthful it should be tolerated. 
 
 Q. Eeferring again to this doctrine of confiscation, supposing the socialists were 
 in a position to acquire the C P. E., I mean by virtue of political power, would it be 
 right to take that railway over without paying the stockholders who are in Europe ? 
 — ^A. Inasmuch as it has been created out of the natural wealth of Canada, and by the 
 
 CEOBQE DALES— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
656 MI^^VTES OP miDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 '3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904' 
 
 labour in Canada, and u&ed by tbe people in Canada, I tbink, it would be perfectly just 
 to expropriate it. ' 
 
 Q. You understand tbat tbere are people of moderate means in Holland having 
 money invested in connection with the building of the railway ? — A. I don't thinj: any 
 injustice would be done. I speak more particularly of the men who have tnade their 
 money without production. 
 
 Q. Would it be right to expropriate the money of the common people of Holland, 
 which has been put in on the honesty of the company ?^A. I think it would be right. 
 
 Q. Then, I gather that the matter of contract is a very small matter with socialists, 
 that when a socialist considers a contract is unfair he is quite ready to repudiate it ? 
 A. It is always, to my mind, safe to repudiate wrong. 
 
 Q. There is not much faith to be put on the contract of socialists ? — A. That is 
 a matter of opinion. 
 
 Q. Well, I gather that from what you say. And it is soinewhat remarkable, Mr. 
 Dales, in the case of contracts that have been entered into with unions that are socia- 
 listic in their position, that it seems to be a matter of some difficulty to get these bodies 
 to stand by their contracts. I simply want to get the idea of a representative socia- 
 list like yourself ? — A. I don't claim to be that. If you wish to impute that a socialist 
 repudiates any agreement that he has conscientiously and intelligently subscribed to, 
 I wish to repudiate any such suggestion. My own experience amongst socialists and 
 others is that the word of a socialist is as good at any rate as that of other men. They 
 don't claim any moral superiority, but the obligation to their principles would involve 
 things that a capitalist would look on as a breach of contract undoubtedly. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. You say a capitalist would look on it as a breach of contract, why not a 
 Bocialist ? Give us an instance. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. There is a large sum of money taken out of a foreign country, loaned on the 
 faith of the people that they would return it, and yet you as a socialist on acquire- 
 ment of that railway would repudiate that debt ? — A. To come to an intelligent and 
 equitable adjustment of that, we would have to inquire how the money was made. 
 
 Q. What difference would it make to you how it was made, provided it was bor- 
 rowed from these people in Holland ? — A. The people in Holland would not be in a 
 different position from any one here. 
 
 Q. You think it would be right to take the money from the people in Holland and^ 
 repudiate that debt ? — A. The interests of the few and a section of the community 
 are always subservient to the welfare of the whole. If a contract to which the people 
 of Canada have not acceded has been made as against their interests, they would be. 
 justified in repudiating it. 
 
 Q. And upon the same principle, a contract , entered into with a union, if it has 
 been entered into inadvisedly by the officers of the union, would, on the same prin- 
 ciple, be repudiated without any moral wrong ? — A. Not necessarily. There is a very 
 essential difference between the two cases. 
 
 Q. I fail to see it ? — A. One is a contract to which, the men are intelligently and 
 understandingly entering into themselves and are morally bound to respect. 
 
 Q. They may have entered into it under pressure and necessity ? — A. I wOuld not 
 try to defend any union breaking its contract. ; , 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : . , ^J . 
 
 Q. I suppose you distinguish between a contract that binds the people arid one 
 that binds the people to make it on posterity ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 His Lordship.— You would have great difficulty in determipiing the time at which 
 posterity began. . 
 
 GEORGE DALES— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH GOLVMBIA v 657 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ' Bp Mr. Bird : ^ 
 
 ,Q. Is the doctrine of confiscation, as set forth by you, generally obtaining among 
 socialists ? — ;A. I think so, although there are various suggestions made for trans- 
 ferring capitalist wealth to the working classes or to the useful class. For instance, 
 Robert Blatchford, a very representative man, suggests that ownership terminate by 
 death, and there lare various forms of increasing taxation and extending succession 
 duties. 
 
 Q. Would you assume that the succession duties and certain systems of taxes are 
 systems of confiscation ? — A. There is direct confiscation in compelling succession 
 duties. 
 
 Bu Mr. Davis : , 
 
 Q. On the whole, Mti Dales, ' your explanation of socialism is what is usually 
 understood by socialism in the usual acceptance of the term ? — ^A. Of course, I am 
 speaking for myself, but I think it represents a very large section of the socialist party. 
 
 XJ. You say that socialism does not necessarily exclude violence. "What is your 
 attitude with reference to the question of violence ?— A. In stating that, I had no 
 suggestion that any violence was contemplated or formed any part of the socialist plan. 
 
 Q. What is your attitude with reference to violence ? — A. I am entirely opposed 
 to it. 
 
 ,Q. That is, if you got your desire as you outlined your theory, if that could not 
 be obtained except by violence, you would let it go ? — A. I was speaking from an his- 
 torical standpoint. No revolution has ever been completed without more or less vio- 
 lence. The object of the socialist party will be to complete a peaceful transfer. 
 
 Q. I am not speaking about historical revolution. We know about that in his- 
 tory. I mean what would your doctrine and that of the socialist party you represent 
 be towards the question of violence ? — A. I say I am opposed to it; I am in favour of a 
 constitutional method. 
 
 Q. And if you cannot obtain your goal without violence, you will give it up ? — 
 A. That is something that does not present itself. 
 
 Q. If you cannot get your goal without violence, will you u^e violence ? — A. If 
 force were necessary to institute justice it would and has been inseparable from move- 
 ments 
 
 Q. If force is necessary to obtain justice you will use force ? — A. Justice is based 
 
 on force. 
 
 Q. If it is necessary to use force would you, to obtain what you consider justice, 
 use force ? — A. Certainly, as soon as there was an opportunity for a successful issue, 
 it is impossible to do otherwise. . _ 
 
 Q. If you cannot obtain your goal without force, you will use force ? — A. I sup- 
 pose so. 
 
 Q. And as a matter of fact, froni the doctrines that you promulgate, it is almost 
 imposible to hope for this attainment without force ? — ^A. On the contrary, the pro- 
 babilities are strongly in the reverse direction. _ .' 
 
 ' Q. As I understand your theory for obtaining possession of these trusts, W6 wjll 
 call them — ^what I ineaii is, large institutions such as raiMaysr coal lands; smelting . 
 works, &c., which you think shoulil be operated by the government, is what -you call 
 confiscation without appropriation, is that not so ?— A. Sd^^ far as it is for the benefit 
 of the *holfe community. ' . ' ' ' ' '; ; ', ■-, 
 
 ' Q. Sd far as it is necessary to obtam them at all ?— A.' Oaeinlplies the other tieces- 
 
 s&ril'V« 
 
 Q. Your theory of socialism i^ that all these 'sfeottldbe own^d by the state ?— A. ', 
 
 No, by the community in common. , ^ ; . " .. , 
 
 J Q. You say the ' cpmn;iunity ' j I mean the same thing when I usp the word state' ? 
 
 — a! iiie're is quite a difference; ' ' ' ,'• 
 
 GEORG-E DALES— Vancouver, JiiW 10.> 
 
eSi MINUTES oy ETIDMCE 6f royal COilMlSSION • 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. It is your theory that the community should own all these eonlmodities ?■— A. 
 Certainly, yes. 
 
 By His Lordship: . ■' , .' 
 
 Q. What do you mean by community; ithe whole country, or a section (>f it ? — A.- 
 The whole people — a common ownership. ■. ■ 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. What is the difference between that and state ? — ^A. The state ia cnly the func- 
 tionary head of the community. The common: property would be' vested in thd pisbple 
 rather than the government. 
 
 Q. That is the theory of -all governments, only in the English goVammeht it is 
 called 'Majesty,^ in the States 'The People,' just in these words exactly. There is 
 no use in our differing about terms,: . ■, : , : • ; 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Tpu mean public ownership ? — A. Common ownership. on behalf of the people. 
 Mr. Davis. — Government ownership would be ownership of the people. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. The essentials of your theory would have to be different ? — ^A, I imagine it 
 would work a great revolution in the form of government; It would become more 
 administrative than legislative; 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. What is your idea of the change of government which you would bring about? 
 — A. Do you mean in the form ? 
 
 Q. Tou say there ought to be a change of government ? — ^A. It would be more 
 administrative and less leg^islative. 
 
 Q. Will you please put that into some specific language. I don"t know exactly 
 what that means myself ? — ^A. To-day we are regulated by a multiplicity of laws that 
 could not be except for antagonisms in society. These, to my mind, arise from the 
 lack of a proper appreciation of right relationship between men. The socialists anti- 
 cipate in the future, when matters are adjusted in relationship to each other, there will 
 le less government according to statute law; that general principles wiU take the t>la<je,' 
 to a large extent, of statute law. 
 
 Q. All you mean by change of government is change of statute law ? — A. Not 
 necessarily. - 
 
 Q. What more than that ? What other change do you expect ? — A. I believe it 
 would be very largely decentralized. 
 
 Q. In what respect do you wish to decentralize it ?--A. I mean that a greater 
 autonomy would be granted to municipalities and localities. , . 
 
 Q. In what respects ? What do you complain about in the province ? What lack 
 of power in the municipalities ? What greater power would you give ? — A. I would 
 give them pOwer to own the city. 
 
 Q. Is your theory as to the form of government of the ownership of property that 
 each municipality should ovsm all the territory within its limits ? — A. Perhaps own' 
 would hardly be the correct word. They would have the right to administer it. 
 
 Q. Who would own it accordijig to your theory ? — A. The whole community. 
 
 Q. Who would represent the community ? — A. Representatives, I presume. ' 
 
 Q. That would be the government, would it ?^A. Tes. 
 
 Q. Do you propose to do away with government ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. What is your objection to the word government ? — A. I have no particular 
 objection to the word government. ' ' 
 
 OEORGE DALES— Vancouver, Jun* 10. , 
 
ON mOUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 659 
 
 SESSIONAL, PAPER No. 36a 
 
 , Q. iJ'he property woitild ,bQ o,wnBd by- tlve: gpweTOHiQat, acQorciing to your, theory ? — 
 A. That would represent the people. 
 
 Q. That would be ihe government ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. If you mean something by that, Mr. Dales, let us hear it. Would you change 
 the form of government ?— tA. In many respects^ no doubt. 
 
 Q. What ? — A. By making the election lawsimo-re easily applied. 
 
 Q. That is not a change in the form of government; you will change the legisla- 
 tion. I understand you would rectify a great many things that are wrotig. They are 
 no doubt Utopian ?^-A. I object to the word Utopianj' 
 
 Q. Do you: advocate a change -in the form of: government? — A. Not necessarily. 
 We advocate a change in the spirit and aim and purpose of the government. 
 
 Q.-Wiat the. spirit of government is is alittlehardto find- out; ^ We have been 
 trying to find that out for a long time. But the form you would not change ? — A. It 
 would be the right form of government undoubtedly. 
 
 Q. Do you advocate a change of the present form of government ? — A. Do you 
 mean the executive ? 
 
 Q. You are a newspaper man — don't you understand what is meant by form of 
 government ? — A. Yes, I do. 
 
 Q. Did you advocate a change in the form of government ? — A. Our quarrel is 
 very little with the form of government. 
 
 Q. Then, I "understand you to say that practically you don't advocate any change 
 in the form of government ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Would you have a king ?— A. I don't regard him as necessary. 
 Q, Do you advocate his abolition ? — A. Not necessarily. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. You have no quarrel with the government as it exists to-day. The form of 
 government is perfectly consistent with socialistic theory ?-— A. I hardly tmnk it is. 
 
 Q. Then the socialists' theory of government is not consistent with the idea of a 
 monarchy ? — A. No, I should not think it is, although we have no quarrel as to govern- 
 ment at the. time being. 
 
 Q. So if your theory were being applied to our country at the present time it would 
 necessitate , the doing away with the monarchical form of government ? — A. Just as 
 you say. 
 
 Q. Is it so ? — A. I believe it would be so eventually. 
 
 Q. There is no other change in the form of government which you advocate ? 
 Is that right ? Except what you were speaking of— that you would have it more de- 
 centralized ? — A. No particular change in the form of government. 
 . Q. You say the only change you have suggested as yet is that you would have the 
 various municipalities own the property. You intend property to be owned by the 
 government ?— A^ It is quite likely that municipalities and all local bodies would have 
 a greater degree of autonomy in the administration. 
 
 Q. What I am asking is what you advocate, and when I say you I mean the socialist 
 party ?-^A,. You are asking for details of events that will probably happen in the 
 future. 
 
 ^. If you say the socialists have no ideas on the subject, I won't go further ?r— 
 A. It seems, Mr. Davis, that you are trying to draw me out on some details that seem 
 problenaatical. ■ . ■■.,..■ 
 
 Q. The question I started with was whether the socialists advocated any change 
 in government. We found put that they dp advocate the, dojng away with the mon- 
 archical, form of government. Next we find out that they want more extensive powers 
 to be given to municipalities. Now, I ask you what nidre extensive powers ?^A. I 
 say the power to adminster the industries within the limits of their boundaries. 
 
 36a— 42i GEORCtE DAifcg-^Vancouver, Juneift.' 
 
660 MINUTES OF ETIDEyCE Of EOYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. That is the general idea, the main idea of socialism, that the governmetit shall 
 be the owners of all industries ? — A. On hehalf of the people. Not necessarily all in- 
 dustries. All that are socially carried out. • ■ 
 
 Q. What are these that the socialists say are necessary to be owned by the state ? 
 . — A. All wealth socially produced. 
 
 Q. Tell me the industries that need not be owned by the state under your theory ? 
 — A. It is well known that practically all wealth is socially produced. 
 
 Q. I understand that the socialist idea is that all industries should be owned by 
 the state. If there aie any exceptions as you now admitj will you please tell me what 
 they are ? — A. I might mention the lawyers. 
 
 Q. I don't regard them as an industry. They are not industries ?^— A.. It does 
 not follow that individual initiative would be utterly excluded. 
 
 Q. Are there industries which, according to the socialists' doctrine ought to be 
 excluded by the state ?-^A. No. 
 
 Q. Now, the central theory of socialists is that all industries should be owned by 
 the state, and your idea is that the municipality should administer these industries ? 
 — A. Yes, in the interests of the entire community. 
 
 Q. The central government would not administer these at all, but they would be 
 administered throughout the different municipalities 2 — A, According to general prin- 
 ciples. 
 
 Q. But by the municipalities ? — A. I believe that administration would be 
 localized generally. 
 
 Q. They would not be administered by the govempient. For instance, all shingle 
 factories administered by government under commission or something, but all the 
 shingle factories here would be administered by this municipality, and so on ? — A. 
 Probably something like that, and not by individual owners, 
 
 Q. Not an administration by government, but by different municipalities ? — A. 
 Yes, by local bodies. 
 
 Q. Haye you any theory as to changing municipalities ? — ^A. Oh, no. 
 
 Q. (Now, your idea being that all property is to be owned by the state, your second 
 idea being that that property is to be acquired by the state without compensation — 
 that is correct, is it not ? — A. To be acquired by the state on behalf of the whole peo- 
 ple. : ^ 
 
 Q. Don't you think it would be very difficult to carry out these theories without 
 violence? — ^A. No, I don't. 
 
 Q. You think that the owners of property would tamely submit to their property 
 being taken away ? — ^A. Not perhaps very tamely submit. There would be resistance, 
 no doubt, but I believe it would take, to a large extent^ a peaceable formv 
 
 Q. Don't you think it would be a form of revolution — ^I mean a violent revolution? 
 — A. No< I don't think so. 
 
 Q. You remember the American revolution arose out of a little- tax ^ on -tea ?^-A. 
 Yes.-- ' -^ -■'■- ■ - - ■'■:,;-,■> ,-> 
 
 Q. And you don't think that the taking away of all property of perhaps 50 per 
 cent in the country would cause a revolution ?--^A. Do you think it reaches 50 per 
 cent ? ,.-.-,.--,..; ■\ . _ 
 
 Q. Well, taking away property from the owners of that property, wotild. not pre- 
 cipitate a revolution ?-t.-A. I don't think so, not necessarily a violent one. 
 
 Q. -But if it did precipitate that revolution, you would be prepared to. abide by 
 this result ? — 'A. Wemust be, we have no choice. - 
 
 Q. "You would carry it through in spite of' the revolution ? — ^A. I don't" say that. 
 I say I am in favour and believe that the revolutionary method wiJl prevail,' - 
 
 Q. Then your idea of what is right is, as you said a little while ago,- the interests 
 of the W&jority ?--^A, The interests of the working and useful classes. -■ I believe that 
 when the legitimate claims of labont as the useful dass are satisfied, there isiid'. fur- 
 "tJier legitimate isteresf; in.^opjety to consider. 
 GBOR&E DAliBS— Vancoiiver, June 10. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL' DISPUTUS IN JJKITISB COLUMBIA 661 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. And that must mean what the industrial and useful class, as yon put it, con- 
 sider to be their interests, must it not ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. They will be the sole judges of what are their interests ?— A. By the rule that 
 society of all kinds rests upon. 
 
 Q. They will be the sole judges of what are their own interests? — A. We know of 
 no law above majority rule. 
 
 Q. Are they to be the sole judges ? If not, who is to be the judge ? — A, The peo- 
 ple themselves will judge. 
 
 :lQ. So that no matter what they decide is to be carried out ?— A. Exactly as they 
 do to-day. 
 
 Q. In taking away this property from people without compensation ? — A. If an in- 
 dividual did that it would be stealing or highway robbery. It would.be stealingi in 
 the broad sense ? — A. You are speaking of things as they are to-day. 
 
 Q. If an individual did it it would be to-day ?^A. That is the logical interpreta- 
 tion of it. 
 
 - Q. But if the industrial and useful classes considered it to be in their interests to 
 take this property away, then it would be justifiable ? — A. That is exactly how gov- 
 ernment operates to-day. 
 
 Q. That is, if the steal were wholesale it would be justifiable, but not if retail ?— 
 A. Certainly, if the interests of the community demanded. 
 
 Q. Then, the doctrine of socialism, if that is so, recognizes nothing above the laws 
 passed by themselves ? — A. By the majority. 
 
 Q. They cannot recognize any law of God as to right or wrong ? — A. You are 
 introducing a subject here which has no reference whatever to it. 
 
 Q. What is the attitude of socialism in that respect ? Do they recognize any 
 laws above or outside of the law of majority?— A. The attitude of the socialist is this- 
 with regard to property. I don't know, you might as well ask me what it has to do 
 with astrology. 
 
 Q. Do the socialists, or do they not, recognize any other law whatever than the law 
 of the majority ? — A. They are just like the rest of the community. There are all 
 kinds of creeds held by socialists. 
 
 Q. Then, I understand that the socialists don't know whether they recognize any 
 law of the majority or not ? — A. Just as much as the rest of the community. You 
 might just as well ask me the colour of the hair of every socialist. 
 
 Q. That is getting a long way off. If you tell me you don't know, and you can't 
 answer the question — A. I can answer the question with all the knowledge I have, and 
 tell you there are men of all Creeds. It is no necessary part of socialism. > 
 
 Q. I asked you a simple question : Do the socialists in their theories, as you under- 
 stand them, recognize any, and if so, what laws above or outside of the law of the 
 majority, or are they the sole guardians of right and wrong ? — A. You mean the socia- 
 ■ lists themselves, certainly. ■ ' j 
 
 Q. What does certainly mean, they do, or they do not ? — A. They recognize no 
 laws in respect of material things above natural laws. ; ; •, ■ ,. 
 
 Q. I am hot limiting it. I want to know whether they recognize any' other law ? 
 — A. They are like the rest of the community. ; 
 
 . ' Q.. So that as socialists themselves they have no view on the .subject t — A-' No. 
 
 Q. Then they would not know what to do if the law of majority as they undeifstood 
 contravened the divine law ? — A. I can hardly understand how such a thing 
 
 Q. I can give you an idea. Supposing the majority came lb the conclusion that 
 
 murder should be legal-^eonsider executiws to be imperfect oif, any other way you 
 
 may take it. Would you justify sucfa-a liw aS' that,?-^A. You are suggesting , an ex- 
 
 :-treme case..'-V' ■ ' '' -'.■•;■ ^ •- . ;■-'■■ -i: ^_^ ,;■•, ,, j , i ,;,,' ■, , .■ ^ „; ■ _^_; 
 
 ,.•: Q..1 am trying to find out -^yhftther the socialists'r,ecogfliz6'any law above .jthe law 
 
 :'of,majorityi?— -A- .They are upholders olthe moral law. ; : , . ; . , i • . ! . 
 
 ■"'"■'''"'''"'" ■■' '■'i(}E6TtGfe D'XLteS^Vail'ciJuV^'*'! H^i 10. 
 
662 MINUTJfS OF EVIDENCE OF ttOtKL OOUMlMtOV 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A; 1904 
 
 Q. They don't recognize a law above thfe law of the majority 1 — A. Certainly not 
 in practical affairs. You are confusing theory with practice. 
 
 Q. Would you consider laws that are passed practical affairs ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Now, you have just been advocating the passing of a law which would amoiuit, 
 to ordinary men, as nothing more than stealing^ Supposing a law were passed making 
 murder legal because it was passed by the majority ? — A. Certainly not. 
 
 Q. Why do you draw a distincti6n between legalizing ; thieving and- legalizing 
 murder ? — A. I would not regard it as thieving. ' . 
 
 Q. The majority are to bejthe judges of rights and wrong ?■ — A; Yes.i • ' 
 
 Q. Then therecan be no law ?■ — A. Society rests upon the consent of its membe:!f3. 
 
 Q. Your theory is, as I understand it, a good' dfeal the same as that set out in 
 Edward Bellamy's 'Looking Backward '1^ A. No. - 
 
 Q. The first thing. is that all industries dre to be owned by the state for the 
 people — that is correct ?'— A. They are to be owned by the. peopje^ collectively "and ad- 
 ministered by their representatives. > 
 
 Q. Ovsmed by the people and administered by- the repnesentatives of- the people. 
 Any profit arising from the administration of these industries will be equally divided 
 among all the people ? — A. I cannot tell you. 
 
 Q. What is the theory ? — A. That the collective product will be used for the com- 
 mon benefit of the whole community. ^ ," 
 
 Q. Cannot you give any closer view in theory, as to how it should be divided ? — ^A. 
 I say for the benefit of the whole community, according to the common expression of 
 opinion when such time arrives. 
 
 Q. The division of that money will be left in the hands of the representatives 
 of the people ? — A. Yea. : . . . 
 
 Q. You don't contemplate doing away with the legislature ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. That the distribution of these profits is to be left in the hands of the legis- 
 lature ? — A. Not necessarily. 
 
 Q. Because if it did, I think the legislative assembly would get most of it ?— A. 
 Judging by what occurs in Victoria. 
 
 Q. How is it to be divided ? — A. You might as well ask me about the weather. 
 It will be divided according to the highest sense of justice . prevailing in the com- 
 munity. 
 
 Q. Does the socialist doctrine vary like the weather ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Have the socialists any doctrine as to the disposal of these profits ? — A. Not 
 more than what I have said. 
 
 Q. Your highest sense of justice ? — A. That of the reflected will of the people. 
 
 Q. That sounds awfully nice, but will you tell me how it is to be expressed ? — A. 
 Through their representatives. 
 
 , Q. Then the distribution of this wealth is to be in the hands of the legislative 
 assembly? — A. No. 
 
 Q. In whose hands ?^A. Except as executive of the people. 
 
 Q. It is to left, as it were to the Lieutenant-Govemor-in-Oouncil ?— A. No. . 
 
 Q. What 'do you mean by executive ? — A. I say the representatives of the people, 
 
 Q. Then in the hands of the legislative assembly to distribute ? — A. Grant it so. 
 
 Q. They are to decide how these profits are to be divided up ?— A. You are just 
 speaking, Mr. Davis, as though the question would be reconsidered from time to time. 
 
 Q. I can easily understand that. Fresh assemblies would reconsider it ? — ^A. Not 
 unless the people voted. 
 
 Q. However, that is your idea,' that these profits should be divided up in accord- 
 ance with the wishes of the legislature , ' ,' 
 
 His Lordship. — They would be more liable to stay with the assembly than go to the. 
 people. 
 
 OEOR/GS DALES— y^iiicouver,, Jiia^ 10. , . ■ , ' j 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BUITISH COLUMUIA 66$ 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ,.;Q.\Do you think that, would be any improvement on the present system of distri- 
 lution of profits ?— A. I think it would be. . • ; 
 
 Q._ If you were existing at that time you would want to be in the assembly ?— A. 
 There is nothing to tempt me to, that as, far as I can see. 
 
 Q. Another fundamental principle I understand is that all men are equal. That 
 is really the basis of the thing ?— A. Wbsrt do you Inean by that, physically ? 
 
 . ; Q. Is that in accordance with your theory ?— A. I believe all men should be soci- 
 ally classed as equal, but they are not physically,, no doubt. • ' 
 
 Q. In fact the statement that all men are equal is not true in any sense except as 
 before the law.. Are. they in, any otherr^rgy ?=— A. Yes, they are practically equal in 
 regard to their natural needs and desires; 
 
 Q. Are they equal in that respect ?— A. I say they are practically equal. 
 
 Q. Bid you ever meet any two people exactly the same ? — A; No. f , 
 
 Q. Why do you say they are equal ? — A. They are practically equal. The govern- 
 ment could probably strike a balance that would satisfy them all — a balance for their 
 physical needs, which are practically the same; 
 
 Q. Is that your idea of the division of things; that they shall strike one balance 
 and all be treated the same ? — A. Nothing of the kind. Too much prevails that way 
 now. 
 
 Q. What other changes do the socialists recommend in society, beyond the confis- 
 cation by the state of the industries and the administration of these industries by the 
 state or municipalities. What abouj the rest of the community. Will the grocery 
 business be run by the state ? — A. That will be decided by the people when industry is 
 socialized. 
 
 Q. Is it a part of your theory that business such as the grocery business should be 
 run by the state ? I want to find out their theory. Is the grocery business to be run by 
 the government ? — A. The wealth socially produced shall be socially distributed. 
 
 Q. Under your theory is the grocery business to be run by the state ? — A. Cer- 
 tainly, if it is decided on. 
 
 Q. What is the theory of socialists ? — A. That wealth will be equally distributed; 
 that the grocery business will be socialized. 
 
 Q. You mean by that to be owned and run by the government ? — A. By the peo- 
 ple's representatives. 
 
 Q. And the same way with painting and paper-hanging ? — A. With every indus- 
 try. 
 
 Q. Of every sort ? — A. Yes, not doctors, probably. 
 
 Q. What about doctors ? — A. I mean doctors would be public servants and have an 
 interest in maintaining the health of the community, rather than an interest in epi- 
 demics. 
 
 Q. At the present time your idea is that medical men are interested in the spread 
 of epidemics ? — A. No, I don't know in the present form that they necessarily have 
 an interest- I have a better opinion of the medical profession than that. 
 
 Q. You think they have an interest at the present time in the spread of epidetnics ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 , By, His Lordship : 
 
 ,Q. I suppose it is natural for a doctor to feel bad in dull times ? — ^A. No doubt. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 Q. The undertaking business would be run by the government, of course ? — A. 
 People, I think, would die under socialism. 
 
 Q. How about painting ? Is there to be an equal wage given to each man on this 
 work ?-^A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. What is the theory of socialists ? — A. That all useful labour that contributes i 
 to the common welfare is uniformly honourable and valuable. 
 
 GKOROE DALES— Vancouver, June 10. ' 
 
€64 MINVTEli OF ETIDENCE (JF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. I want to get down to particulars.: There is no use of their putting forth a 
 theory that has nothing practical about it. You could not get followers if you cannot 
 answer questions like these ? — A. W© arq. pretty successful in getting followers.' 
 
 Q. I want to know what you are going to do. According to your theory the paint- 
 ing industry is to be run by the government who will distribute the profits in accord- 
 ance with the legislative assembly. Are the men who do the work to be paid v?ages i— 
 A. They will share in the common production. , .' 
 
 Q. The legislative assembly might say that the men should not get any of it ?— A. 
 That is impossible. - ■ , 
 
 Q. yout idea is, then, that the pain ters^ should not get anything until the legis- 
 lative assembly distributed the profits ? — A. I say they will share equally with others. 
 
 Q. Are they to wait for anything for their work until the legislative assembly 
 vote it for them ? — A. It would not be in the power of the. assembly to vote ai man out 
 of his labour. 
 
 Q. How are they to get the reward of. their labours ? — A. I presume it would be 
 administered by persons appointed for the purpose. 
 
 Q. Then they would be paid wages ? — A. Not wages as we understand it now. 
 
 Q. They would be paid sums of money per day or per week or per month ? — A. 
 They would be remunerated undoubtedly. 
 
 Q. And any balance of profit there was over would be divided by the legislative 
 assembly ? — A. I said nothing about profit. The socialist system eliminates profit. 
 There is an essential difference between profit and a system without profit.. . 
 
 Q. Now coming back to these sums of money which I call wages. These wages 
 that are paid to the painters for their work — ^how are they to be regulated ?— A. By 
 the degree of productivity of their labour. 
 
 Q. How are you going to regulate them according to the degree of the' producti- 
 vity of the labour ? How are you going to get at the wages to be given these painters ? 
 — A, It might be there would be a uniform wage. 
 
 Q. What is the theory of socialists on the point ? — A. That they will divide the 
 whole production equitably. 
 
 Q. You admit there are to be certain sums of money paid these men at certain 
 -specified times ? — A. They will be paid, , 
 
 Q. They don't have to wait until we see whether the government makes a profit or 
 loss on the painting industry. Supposing there is no surplus. Suppose there is a 
 loss. Would they get paid for their labour ? — A. How could that be ? It would not 
 be possible, running things as we would. 
 
 Q, How are you going to arrange the amount of money to be paid these men ? — 
 A. I say the gross production will be distributed to those who contribute services in 
 creating it. - 
 
 Q. The gross production would not probably be known to a man for a year after 
 'he had done his work ?^— A. Th& gross wealth as the business progresses. 
 
 • Q. How would they know how much to give these men ? — A; They would . know 
 that frbtn the gross income and the production of labour, generally.. 
 
 (J. At the end of each year they would figure out how much had been got: in a 
 preceding year and divide it up among the people in the state ? — A. Something dike 
 that. ■ ■ ; ■ . ..,: : ;;' 
 
 Q. How would they get at the proportion to give each man ?— A. I suppose the 
 l^w* of , arithmetic would not, fail. 
 
 Q. Would they divide thp amount of mpney hy the number of people ?— A. 1 don't 
 vknow... ,, , , - , , , -,,, '■■,...-. " ' ' ' ''■'■'■ 
 
 Q. I want your theory ? — A. I thought you wanted facts. 
 
 Q. You have no facts to give ?— A. It is quite likely" the results of labour' would 
 be summed up certainly according to their needs. . ►; 
 
 ■>.:-.■. Q..Do you say it would be divi4«J.a{i_C9rdiijg,tQ.tbe.,peeds,,or.the »upil)er-of;people 
 or equally ? — A. Probably it would be equally divided. ' " 
 
 '©BORGHri>A£,Efi!^Vaiab6utiBr;''Jml«;"19. ' '"'' 
 
OV INDUSTRIAL DIJiPVTES m BRITISH VOLUMlilA 665 
 
 SfeSSlONAIi PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. That is your idea of how it should be done, divided equally ?— A. Equally as 
 far as possible. 
 
 Q. Well; it would be quite possible to divide it exactly, is - that your theory ? — A. 
 There is a good deal of difference. Personally, I am in favour of economic equality. 
 
 Q. You believe in dividing it equally ?— A. I would not impose that on the socia- 
 lists as a whole. 
 
 Q. It is your idea of having it dividtid equally ?^ A. I am personally in favour 
 of it. - 
 
 Q. Dividing the money up equally among all the people ? — A.- Yes. ; 
 
 Q. Every man gets the same ahiount — ^that is your, theory ? That pre-supposes or 
 Bhould pre-suppose the equality of all pfople in every respect, should it not ?— A. Not 
 necfessarily. i ■ • ^ ; r .,.,..,.< , • . 
 
 Q. You are going to force everybody, to live alike ? — A. I would base that on the 
 conception that all human needs — material needs — are practically equal. 
 
 Q. You think the material needs of all people are the same ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And your idea is that all people should receive the same amount of money and 
 live in the same way ?— A. Nothing of the kind. 
 
 Q. Don't you think there are some people who like living in an inexpensive way 
 rather than in an expensive way ? — A. Undoubtedly. 
 
 Q. And others who would like to live in an expensive way rather than in an in- 
 expensive way ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And yet you want them to get the same money ? — A. I would have them get 
 what is due to them. I mean the return for their labour. It would be set out by the 
 consensus of opinion. - 
 
 Q. Has your experience with the socialists been that there is such a thing as con- 
 sensus of opinion among them ?— A. Yes., 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Where do you draw the line between capital and wages ? — A. The labourer 
 is remunerated by wages and not by the profits of any man's labour. 
 
 Q. Would you say a man like the president of the C. P. E. is a capitalist ? — A. 
 In so far as he represents stock he is a capitalist, but as to his work he is a labourer. 
 
 Q. Would you say a man like that should get the same reward as a switchman or 
 baggageman ? — A. I don't think that an equal reward would compensate for both, 
 especially looking to the increase of productivity of labour under the socialist admin- 
 istration. The wastefulness now is something that is pretty hard to understand. 
 
 Q. A man would be ahead if he occupied the position of baggageman, if he got the 
 same wages. He would not have the same responsibility ?^A. Depends on' the tem- 
 perament, btfaers are happy in a simple and humble position. 
 
 . By Mr. Bowe : . ' 
 
 Q. I suppose a large share of the duties of the manager would, be remove^, he 
 would not have any competition, no bargains to make, simply^ to organize and super- 
 vise ? — A. I imagine a large portion of President Shaughnessey's work is, in connectipn 
 ' with the. ownership of the directors. All that would be done away with. Witl) com- 
 •petitioil limited 'and the sources going on it is calculated by copiparative, statis.tics 
 that labour could be increased 1,000 to 1,200 per cent. ^ .' 
 
 ' By His Lordship r ' . . .,■,,.,■ 
 
 Q. Would you have to determine on that positioii by ballot ? — A. Tliat i& a (Ques- 
 tion in tne community, whenever necessity existed iii Selectiihgtherilost' useful man. 
 
 Q. How would that selection be arrived at I — A. I imagine by the selection of 
 ,the most competent and useful* man. ■ - ' ' " ' ': ' '- ' - .-* 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : - . - ' ■ 'v ■ : i i, .; ,i 
 
 ■Q. There^otfld be' no Itftber akJUt- subsidies or knd-granrts ?— A. I don't think 
 
 BO, -' ■' ■' .—■•>■ ■-'■ ■' •■-- V '- ■. 'i ' -a.'. ,. . '.1 
 
 6EOBGE- DALESr-VaDcouvpr^ J»rha;.;3,0. 
 
gjje MINVTE8 OF EVlDmOE OP ROYAL COMUISSWN . 
 
 3-4 EDWARO V|l., A. 1904 
 
 ' By His Lordship-: > ■ '{■ 
 
 Q. Would you say that the post office System as run tinder th6 GJaiiflidiati'-'gdveJ'n- 
 ment is a fair example of an industry beiilg conducted without pWfit 1 — ^A. 'Yfe,' as- 
 far as it goes. It is by no means an ideal institution, but it serves for an illustration. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : ■ ' i ■' t^-; ■ ■■; :< -, . • ■ -. ::-■■' . •.; 
 
 Q. You think the difierenee iii rates, say. "for cattying a letter fi-oili here to Hong 
 Kbng and that the transfer of a parcel by Express to Hong Kong would Show a dif' 
 fe'reiice under the liublic b*iie'rship and under the profit' system ?— A. I dou't qiiite 
 comprehend. /■■■ii.-v '■■■■:- -.■• ; 
 
 Q. I am jiist going to illustrate. 'It takes two" cents' to send a letter to 'Hong 
 Kbiig aad probably $1.25 to S'end a parcel by express. 'Would- yoti' say under collective 
 Ownership fhat'the parcel might 'properly "be sent at approximately a cost of two cents ? 
 — A. It is quite possible! " ' 
 
 Q. So you say the balance would represent waste ? — A. YeS, waste in profits. 
 
 Q. Mf leariied friend referred to ' confiscation of property. In. time of war — we 
 recognize the fact that it is a recognized policy that confiscation is properly the order 
 6f the day at time of war 1 — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Would you say that that was ah example where the law of Ood'was overridden 
 by the law of nations ? — A. Undoubtedly it -would be one of many. 
 
 Q. You don't think it is any more exaggerated example of disturbing the com- 
 mands of the higher powers than what has been suggested by confiscation ?^A. Cer- 
 tainly not ; it is equally stealing. , There are some clearer examples of that. For 
 instance, whole blocks of the country are" transferred to corporations without the 
 slightest sense of justice. 
 
 Q. Now, if the majority decide in the legislature under the system you have in- 
 dicated, if the majority decide in favour of socialism and the capitalists were to take 
 up arms in favour of their rights, do you think the constituted authorities would be 
 just and have the right on their side to resort to arms to maintain the position they 
 had taken ? — A. They would have no other alternative. 
 
 Q. So that in that way force might be compelled at the instance of the minority ? 
 —A. Yes. " 
 
 Q. And if force is ultimately resorted to in connection with your ideal system it 
 will probably be by some such system ? — A. Every working change has been made with 
 more or less force. 
 
 Q. How does the useful class as you term it compare numerically with the class 
 6f those not useful to society ? — A. There are various estimates with regard to that 
 I imagine that the wage-earning class amount to something like seven- tenths of the 
 f.ntire community. 
 
 Q. So that they considerably outnumber the parasite class ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 Q. Which class do the judiciary fall into ? — A. Not necessarily into the -parasite 
 class and not necessarily the lawyers, though, I find that elections for the most part 
 are conducted by lawyers; the laws made by the lawyers, and one cannot avoid the in- 
 ference that it has been largely in the interests of lawyers. That must occur to every- 
 body. Four-fifths of the American Senate consists of corporation lawyers. - 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. You said something about a class holding morals as deduced from natural laws. 
 .Can you explain that?— A, I .hold it to be a man's highest wisdom, from a study of 
 iiati^ral laws, to govern ourselves as individuals and in association and aiming to trust 
 ourselves to moral strength to conform to them.. 
 
 Q. What is the standard ?— A. Qf morality ? ' 
 
 GEORGE PALES— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
ow'tndu^trIjll bi^PutMs' ■iisf yitlTIS'S COWMBIA 667 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Yes. — A. We believe that the standard has changed from age to age and is 
 veiy largely, a. reflex ;of;ecQnopiic cgnijitiojis. It u^§4 to be hejd that honesty was the 
 hpst policy, To'day it seems to be that policy is the best honesty. 
 
 By His Lordship . ■ 
 
 Q. What is the view of the socialists' body towards the militia ? I? it a proper 
 thii:^ for a socialist to be a piember of the militia ? — A. Seeing that the militia is 
 used so largely to r^ress riots .and to put down ,all eijideaxours on the part of the 
 working classes, the militia has gained nq,;favour with worknaen. generally, and especial- 
 ly on the side of the socialists. 
 
 Q. Then you think that riots, should not be put down \—A. No, .but I think, they 
 are deliberately put in effect sometimes to, further the influence of the capitalist clas^. 
 
 Q. When they do: occur it, is necessary that they should be put down, shouldn't 
 they ? — A. The manner of putting them down is provocative of greater trouble, if 
 the police were used more effectually, 
 
 Q. What do you mean by that ? — A. I think that the militia have been called 
 out prematurely,! , ■ 
 
 Q. Militia are necessary to the preservation of order ? — A. Yes, under the present 
 condition of society, but, I think, that is a great reproach to us to think that the 
 militia are really necessary in an intelligent community. 
 
 Q. The militia would have no place in a socialistic state ? — A. I don't think it 
 would be policy at the beginning. We don't propose to institute a new order of things 
 altogether. No doubt the change in our social institutions will be gradual and more 
 or less by degrees to a higher; and more creditable form. . 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I desire to put in two letters, I will read them : 
 
 (Exhibit 60.) 
 
 ' Vancouver, B.C., April 14, 1903. 
 ' F. J. Halton. Esq., 
 
 ' Secy. U. B. E. E., City. 
 
 ' Dear Sir, — We were instructed some few weeks ago with respect to a 
 clear case of importation of alien labour. As you know, proceedings cannot 
 be taken under the Alien Labour Act without the consent of the Dominion 
 Attorney General. In order to ascertain the procedure necessary under 
 these circumstances, we wrote to Sir Charles Hibbert Tapper for information 
 on the subject, and ascertain what was to be done. We inclose yoii a copy 
 of his letter, which explains itself. In other words, the Act is really a dead 
 letter by reason of the means adopted for its enforcement. 
 'Ypurs faithfully, 
 
 (Sgd.) 'Wilson, Sekkler & Bloomfield, 
 'V^r O.W.' 
 (Exhibit 61.) 
 
 ' House of Commons, 
 
 ' Ottawa, April 3, 1903. 
 
 'Mr Dear Wilson, — Immediately on receipt of yours of the 24th March, 
 I saw the Minister of Justice, and his attitude confimis the general disaffec- 
 tion in regard to the Alien Labour Act. What he practically says is that 
 these proceedings are under the administration of the Depalirtment of Labour, 
 and applications to have proceedings taken must be considered there in the 
 first instance. This means, of course, a forinal presentation of your casfe to 
 that detrai^ment. Then, he says, if it be thought desirably f Or the Attornejjr 
 Genera] to intervene in any caSe, I'epresentsitlon/^dt'thjit purpose should 
 emanate from the Department of Labour; 
 
 GfeORGB rkAlJES— X^aiiBbilVer; jurie'lO:' 
 
668 MINUTES OF ETIDE'sCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDVVARb VII., A. 1904 
 
 'I will see you shortly, as I leave to-morroW for the coast, stopping 
 a day at Winnipeg en route. 
 
 'Yours sincerely, 
 
 (Sgd.) 'Charles HibBert Tupper. ' 
 ' Charles Wilson, Esq., K.C.,. 
 ' Vancouver, B.C.' 
 
 His LoRDSHn-.— Mr. King, you might go into the box and explain these letters. 
 
 W. L. Mackenzie King, sworn. 
 
 Witness.— I notice the first letter which Mr. Bird read from Wilson, Senlder 
 & Blooinfield to Mr. Halton states as follows: 'We were instructed some weeks ago 
 with respect to a clear case of importation of alien labour. As you know, proceedings 
 cannot he taken under the Alien Labour Act without the consent of the Dominion 
 Attorney General.' 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. What is the date of that letter ?— A. 14th of April, 1903. I, may say that that 
 contains a misstatement of the situation. Mr. Wilson says. — 'proceedings canJtiot he 
 taken without the consent of the Dominion Attorney General.' The law as it was 
 passed originally in 1897 contained a provision under section No. 8, 60-61 Vic, cap. 11^ — 
 ' No proceedings under this Act, or prosecutions for violation thereof, shall be in- 
 stituted without the consent of the Attorney General or some person duly authorized 
 by him.' Mr. Wilson evidently had that section in his mind when he wrote the letter. 
 In 1901, that section was repealed, expressly for the reason that it was regarded as 
 an extreme method of enforcing the Act. The old Act required that any proceedings 
 ghould first of all have the consent of the Attorney General of Canada. The Act 
 assented to on the 23rd May, 1901, expressly repeals that section — section 8 of the 
 Act— and a new section was substituted, which would put the law in such a position 
 that any person could have it enforced without appealing to Ottawa, and without 
 going through any difficult procedure, and that is the first section of the amended i Act 
 passed in 1901. Section 1 reads: - 
 
 ' Section 3 of chapter II of the statutes of 1897 is repealed and the fol- 
 lowing is substituted therefor : — 
 
 ' 3. For every violation of an^ of the provisions of section 1 of this Act 
 
 the person, partnership, company or corporation , yiplating it by knowingly 
 
 "assisting, encouraging or soliciting the immigration or importation of any 
 
 alien or foreigner into Canada to perform labour or service of ajiy kind under 
 
 tiontract or- agreement, express or implied, parole or special, with such alien 
 
 ' or fdj-eigner; previous to his becoming a resident in or a citizen of Canada, 
 
 flhall fol-feit and pay a sum not exceeding- one thousand dollars^ npr,less than 
 
 fifty' dollars.' ■ •'. ',. ' , ' 
 
 Here is the method in -which the law may be carried out : : ; ■ 
 
 '2. The sum so forfeited inay,' with the written consent of any judge 
 
 of the court in which the action is intended to be' brought,' be sued for and 
 
 recovered as a debt by any person who first brings his action therefoi; in any 
 
 court of competent, jurisdiction in which debts ©f like amonnt are now re- 
 
 ., . covered.' ' ' - . -. ; , 
 
 ,,j. , In qther words, all the procedure necessary is for' the person wishing to en- 
 
 ,y;for£^,the Act, nota jtradeunion or corporation, but any individual, isimplyvto get in 
 
 ^j.lhe,%Sit,inst^nce..thewitten consent o^^ the ju^ge in this^ court inwhich he'intends- to 
 
ON INDBSmiAL .DISrVTMS IN BRlfim QOLVVBIA 669 
 
 SESSIQNAU PAPER No.. 36a 
 
 bring the action and bring the action as for a debt. There is another clause by which 
 
 persons are given another opportunity : 
 
 ' Such sum may also, with the written consent, to be obtained ex parte, 
 of the Attorney General of the province in which the prosecution is had, or 
 of a judge of a superior or county court, be recovered upon summary convic- 
 tion before any judge of a county court (being a justice of the peace), or any 
 judge of the sessions of the peace, recorder, police magistrate, or stipendiary 
 magistrate, or any f uctionary, .tribunal or persons invested by the proper legis- 
 .lative authority with power to do alone such acts as are usually required to 
 be done by two or more justices of the peace, and acting within the local 
 limits of his or its jurisdiction.' 
 
 The reason there are so many parties named there was largely, I think, to meet 
 conditions in ^British Columbia. It was pointed out that under the law as it was before 
 the parties would first have to write to Ottawa and get the consent of the Attorney 
 General to take proceedings. It was thought that instead of , that the consent simply 
 of some judge or some magistrate in the' province interested, or in the locality itself, 
 would cause the machinery not to be so cumbersome, and any individual would have it 
 in his power to take action at once. It is clear that the section requiring the con- 
 sent of the Attorney General was repealed altogether and this other put in its place. 
 It is for this reason that I say Itfr. Wilson could not have seen the amendment passed 
 in 1901, or would hardly have advised that proceedings could not be taken under the 
 Act without the consent of the Attorney General. 
 
 His Ioedship. — One of the cases where the lawyers don't know the law ! ' 
 
 Witness, — The communication goes on to state — ' We wrote to Sir Charles Hibhert 
 Tupper for information on the subject and ascertain what was to be done. We incl<3se 
 - you a copy of his letter, which explains itself. In other words, the Act is really a dead 
 letter by reason of the means adopted for its enforcement.' Mr. Wilson says that the 
 means are the consent of the Attorney General. Representation was made to the 
 Dominion Government, that in view of that the Act was a dead letter, and it was in 
 view of this that the amendment was put in, so that it would not be a dead letter. ■ 
 
 , Sir Charles Hibbert Tupper's letter to Mr. Wilson states — ' I saw the Minister 
 of Justice, and his attitude confirms the general disaffection to the Alien Labour, 
 Act. What he practically says is that these proceedings are under the ad- 
 ministration of the Department of Labour, and applications to have proceedings 
 taken must be considered there in the first instance.' Up to that point, I think Sir 
 Hibbert is correct enough. It is provided that in case the conviction is obtained half 
 of the penalty can be given tothe party who lays the information. In case the party 
 wishes to recover that amount he has to make application for it. Th?it. is turned over 
 to the Department of Labour. We have the administration of that part of the law. 
 "iVhen that ajpplication Comes in the department advises the., Receiver Ge^neral what 
 shoiild be done. I might mention a case in point. At Rossland , t?vo actions were 
 brought under this Act as amended, against a party named^ Geiser; in one case the 
 conviction was $500 and in another case $50. That amount was , paid; in to the Re- 
 ceiver General. Mr. McDonald, the man who brought the action, sent in an.^pplica- 
 -tion asking for that money, and the recommendation was to have that money' turned 
 over. One of the Jast letters I wrote under the instructions of the Minister was that 
 ' as much as possible of those fines should go to. Mr. McDonald. That is a' case which 
 the department had the administration of. , , / " 
 
 Sir Hibbert's letter says further : ' This means, of course, a fonnaT presentation 
 Gi yourcase'to that: department.' Sir Hibbert. draws that conclusion himself, It is 
 not stated hg the. Minister of Ji^stice that ^ fprmal presentation inust be iriade to the 
 department.,; * T.lien, he sayg, if it.bf<, thopgbt desirable for the.Attoriieir Genferai' to 
 intervene in any case, representation for that purpose should emanate from the DeiJktt- 
 
 W. t. MACKENZIE KII«Jr-yati!C(»ur^, .,^iHve 1^. 
 
670 MINUTES OF EVIDEWCE OF ROTAL COMMISSIOIf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 ment of Labour.' That is not a deduction drawn from what the Act sayb, hut evi- 
 dently from a conversation which he had had. ,. 
 
 I may say, if a representation had been made to the Department of Labour, what, 
 the department would have done would have been to send to the parties a oopy of the 
 Act, and also a copy of the amendments, pointing out that the. section which originally 
 required the consent of the Attorney General had been repealed, and that, the machinery 
 for enforcing the Act was set out in this new part. Their attention would have been 
 called to the law and fully explained in that way^ That step was taken. Tl;ere was 
 simply a reply that the law was a dead letter. , In .this case, which, as far, as I know, 
 has been the only one, the penalties- were awarded arid half the penalty given.' to the 
 parties who laid the information. ., 
 
 By Mr. Foley: 
 
 Q. You speak of the alternative made in this law, and that is ofPe;red as an excuse 
 for not enforcing it ? — ^A. It is not offered as an exciiSe for riot enforcing it,, . It is 
 impossible for the government to initiate actions until the law is amended; The law 
 was so put, I think, very largely at your' suggestion'. •'■•■,' . : .■, 
 
 Q. Why was not the old law enforced? — A. The old law as it originally stood 
 was, to my knowledge, very much enforced. As a matter of fact through the Depart- 
 ment of LaFour some YO odd persons were returned from this country to thfe United 
 States, who were shown to have been brouglit over here in violation of the Act. ' 
 
 Q. I know we asked for a good deal more in Kossland and it waS riot complied 
 with. I suppose you are aware of about 800 men being imported into the Slocan ? — 
 A. No, I am not aware of any such thirig. 
 
 His Lordship.— If the labour law was broken to that extent, why didn't somebody' 
 lay an information ? 
 
 Mr. Foley. — That was in the hands of the government at that time. 
 
 His Lokdship. — I understand the consent of the Attorney General had to be 
 obtained. 
 
 Mr. Foley. — This is a protective law. When we desire to have our tariff laws en- 
 forced is it necessary that some individual shall lay a complaint or prosecute the 
 parties, or are there officials to look into it ? 
 
 His Lordship. — That is a question of policy. 
 
 Witness. — I would say that the only effort made by the workmen in Rossland to 
 bring the machinery to bear on the situation was in the case I have riientioned. You 
 are speaking of the importation 
 
 Mr. Foley. — "No, previous to that, under the old law. 
 
 His Lordship. — That is a matter of political arrangement. There is no use go- 
 ing into what took place under the late law. : .i 
 
 Mr. Foley. — The witness has stated that at the request of the labour men an' 
 alternative has been made. It was made because under the old system the law was 
 being violated and the government was not attempting to enforce it. Then we desired 
 to have it raade enforceable. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is quite clear under the new law that any one can lay an in- 
 forination with the consent of the magistrate. 
 
 Mr. Foley. — Who bears the expense? 
 
 His ESrdship. — I understand any man who wants to take the action. 
 
 Mr. Foley. — I understand this is a criminal complaint. We secured a conviction 
 at-Bossknd and sustained it. The .man affected was over the line Eef ore the decisiori 
 of ti^e judge was returned, and it was absolutely impossible to collect the fine. 
 - ^Witness. — ^That is not so, the money was paid. , . . 
 
 W. li. MACKENZIE KIN<K-Vaiic»UTer, Juae XO. . 
 
ON INDVSTRTAl DISPVTE& IN SRITISH GOLUMBIAy 671 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a - 
 
 By Mr. Foley: , ,- 
 
 Q. Who paid the money in ? — A. Und&ubtedly 4he person whom the conviction 
 was'obtainedagalnst. 
 
 ' Q. The man I know went over the line. Have you any information as to the 
 present violation of this law by the C.P.E.?— A. Has any information been laid be- 
 fore the department? Not that I know of. 
 
 Q; Did you have any inforUaatioii aa to the law being violated in the trackmen's 
 strike ?^-A. Yes," and if I remember rightly the parties were informed how they should 
 procefed in ' connection with th^ alleged violation. ' 
 
 ' Q. Why didn't the peirti^s take action? — A. It was in their hands. They evi- 
 dently did not appear to take it. The law has been ametided to; do' aWay with any 
 poor working of it. It had been stated it was an extreme method to have to go to 
 Ottawa whenever it had to be enforced, and the law was changed to bring it to every 
 man's door if he wanted to put it into execution. 
 
 Q. Take the case of Epssland. Many of these men came from Missouri and 
 Michigan. In order that you shall discover the exact facts of the case it is necessary 
 that a man should be sent down to find out where these men come from. Why was not 
 some arrangement made by jthe government to appoint some official? — A. Mr. Foley, 
 I have not the making of the laws. 
 
 Q. Can you tell me why I was told by the Minister of Justice and Mr. Sifton that 
 a man would go down to Missouri ? — A. That is beyond my province. 
 
 Q. Is there no law either in the Dominion or provincial governments that forces 
 an official to, enforce .this law? Was there any understanding arrived at between the 
 Dominion and provincial government as to how this law should be enforced by 
 officials? — A. Absolutely none that I know of. The law was simply passed by the 
 Dominion government and certain machinery provided. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it was necessary, under these circumstances, that there should 
 be some provisions made by which the Chief Justice should be compelled to take up 
 this law ? Mr. Eberts said the law was not worth the paper it was written on. — -A. 
 The law was so framed that in the event of your failing to win or not getting satis- 
 faction there were other parties who could be appealed to. The Attorney General is 
 only one party named for getting permission to enforce the provisions of the law. 
 That very possibility was provided against in expressed terms. I don't know whether 
 it was feared by the government that possibly in applying to one particular judge 
 there might he some difficulty in " getting consent, but at any rate the provision 
 
 was altered enough to get over it 
 
 ' Such sum may also, with the written consent, to be obtained ex parte 
 of the Attorney General of the province in which the prosecution is had, or 
 of a judge of a superior or county court.' 
 
 If the Attorney General did not care to give his consent there was opportunity of 
 
 appeal to a judge of a superior or county court. In the preceding section 
 
 'The sum so forfeited may, with the written consent. of any judge of the 
 court in which the action is intended to be brought, be sued for and recovered 
 as a debt by anj person who first brings his action therefor in any court of 
 competent jurisdiction in which debts of like amount are now recovered.' 
 
 There is no need of going to the Attorney General of the province at all. As a matter . 
 of fact I think that representation was made to the government, that parties desiring 
 to enforce this Jaw might find it difficult in going before the Attorney General and 
 getting consentT and these provisions were provided for the very purpose of that con- 
 
 Q. I may say that the union at Eossland appealed to the Attorney General and he ■ 
 refused to take the matter up. They took the matter up and secured a conviction, and 
 before the conviction was returned the gentleman was on the other side. He came 
 
 W. Ij. iMAjCKENZIH king— Vailicouver, Juil« 10. i 
 
672 MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll., A. 1904 
 
 in under a contract to operate the company for the LeEoi. Don't you think it would 
 have been advisable under these circumstances for the government tp go in and find 
 out what connection Bernard McDonald had with it, instead of prosecuting others? 
 I know that is our experience, that Mr. Eberts said it was not worth the paper it was 
 written on. — A. The case you have cited shows the law was worth all it was intended 
 to be worth. 
 
 Q. Suppose a miner's union had attempted to prosecute that nian and had not 
 secured a conviction and had gone to an expense of $1,000, who was going to re- 
 munerate the miners' union for their, loss ?^A. There would be time to consider that 
 when such a case would arise. 
 
 Q. Tou can see how it would arise? — A. No, I could not. Every case has come 
 out precisely in the opposite way. It seems to me that it was very unfair that a letter 
 written saying the law was a dead letter and that no proceedings could be taken .with- 
 out the consent of the Attorney , General, should, be set before the Commission as a 
 ground for. believing that it was a dead letter- , 
 
 His Lordship. — That letter was written in' complete ignorance of the existing 
 state of the law.' 
 
 Mr. Foley. — And you tell me that this money has been paid into the hands of 
 the government and Had been paid over. As a matter of fact the money has not been 
 paid, and it was the impression that" the" money would never be paid over. 
 
 . His Lordship. — That is a matter for the electors. The government can only move 
 within the limits of the law. If you want the union to be notified, why should the 
 government be blamed for that? That question should be raised at the hustings and 
 not here. 
 
 Witness. — ^I said that one of the last acts I performed was to write to the Minister 
 of Justice stating that it was the desire of the Department of Labour that the amount 
 should be paid. Whether the amount has been paid or not I am not sure of. But the 
 letter was sent in view of the fact that the money was paid over by the justice of 
 the peace by whom the conviction was given, and had been sent to Ottawa, and an ap- 
 plication was made for half of that money, and I believe that it is the intention of 
 the government in every case, that the party who lays the information shall get all 
 that the law wiU entitle him to have of the penalty, which is 50 per cent. 
 
 Christopher Foley^ sworn. ' 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 ^. You are a trades imionist, Mr. Foley. — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. At that point, are you also a socialist? — ^A. Not in the general acceptance of 
 the term. As some one said here the other day, I want to know what you raean.^ 
 Q. You don't belong to the socialist party? — ^A. I don't. 
 . Q. But you are a trades unionist?^ — A. Yes. . , 
 
 Q. You belong to what organization ? — A. I belong to the Labourers',. Union, 
 Q. Are you a member ©f ■ Hm Westejji Federation, of Miners,?rTrA. No, I aip not. 
 I have really never withdrawn, but I have not paid dues for about a year, and dop,'t 
 think of goiog back to the, mines, ^nd hence feel that I have drawn out of it. ■ ' {, ' 
 
 By Mr. Bird: ■ > ' 
 
 Q. You have had considerable experience in labour matters, in British' Columbia ? 
 
 —A, Ye^.. -.. - ■;:.-.,.•; :-.^..M,;. '"' " "'"'' '' " '' "' '"'' ' '' 
 
 OHRISTOPHER PO LET— Vancouver, June 11. -:• - 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN EUTISM COLVMJilA 673 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Do you feel that labour organizations are here to stay, or is trade unionism 
 developing into political action? — A. Yes, so far as I am able to gain information the 
 idea of going into politics is rapidly becoming universal among trade unions. 
 
 Q. Have you noticed a spirit developing in labour circles in Vancouver? — A. I 
 have. 
 
 Q. What is your idea of the necessity, or is there any necessity for labour men, 
 in your opinion, to get into politics? — A. I certainly believe there is. 
 
 Q. Are they suffering under any grievances, or are their conditions such that 
 they need protection or anything of that kind — legislative action? — A. I feel that 
 there are such. 
 
 Q. You might explain yourself? — A. As one reason for looking at it from this 
 standpoint, the labouring man is held equally responsible for the existence of the 
 government. He is held equally responsible for the maintenance of this government 
 with the manufacturer or employer. The manufacturer is protected in everything he 
 produces in this country, while the labourer is really receiving no protection. That 
 is oils of the chief reasons I look at the matter from that standpoint. 
 
 Q. You referred to the Alien Labour Act as a measure of protection. Now, after 
 Mr. King's explanation, you will admit that there is a measure of protection by the 
 Alieil Labour Act? — A. So far as I have discovered it is so small as not to be worth 
 muchj 
 
 Q. The machinery of the law is applied, and it is enforced. What is your objec- 
 tion? — A. Well, I would saddle that upon either the provincial or Dominion govern- 
 ments. When a crime has been committed there is an officer appointed for the special 
 purpose of enforcing the law, and I cannot understand why crime committed against 
 the interests of labour should not be brought to justice by the same process as men 
 who violate and contravene laws against the interests of the employers. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. As a private prosecutor you would be entitled to put the criminal law into 
 motion. For instance, if a man is guilty in respect of criminal liability you don't 
 tell your trouble to a policeman. You set the law in motion yourself? — A. Yes. But 
 I don't have to pay the expenses of the prosecution, as I understand we have been 
 doing it here. Of course, Mr. King's statement puts the thing in a new light, if the 
 money has been paid over 
 
 Q. Would that make any difference? — A. I don't know that it would. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. Do you think that labouring men should be afforded some extra measure of 
 protection? — A, I do, by all means. 
 
 Q. In other words, you say that the machinery of the law if put in force at the 
 expense of the Crown, would be workable ? If an organization of reasonable men were 
 enabled to make a requisition on the provincial authorities that the law should be en- 
 forced, you think that would assist matters? — A. I certainly think they should be re- 
 moved from the expense of prosecuting the case, and I don't understand why they have 
 not the right to lodge complaints. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. You mean without the consent of some officer? — A. Well, of course. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 Q. If it were lodged by an individual it might be a ground of abuse to the in- 
 dividual prosecutor ? — A. Certainly it might, and that is one reason why I looked upon 
 it that there should be some law to protect the men lodging the complaint. The labour- 
 ing man working for a corporation, such as the C.P.E., for instance, will very often 
 hesitate about making a complaint because it may mean the chopping ofi of his own 
 head. 
 
 OQ^ ^3 CHRISTOPHER FOLEY— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
674 MINUTES OF EVIDmCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Then you think it should not be left to an individual to take the action? — A. 
 No more than lodging the complaint. I think there should be some plan by which he 
 can be sheltered. How, I cannot say. That should be left to men who know more 
 about it. 
 
 Q. If the provincial authorities were bound to take up the prosecution at the 
 instance of properly constituted labour men, you would think that would be sufficient 
 to afford a measure of protection for labour? — A. That is probably as far as I can see. 
 
 Q. Is there any other protection of labour that you could suggest that would be 
 an alleviation of present conditions? — A. Yes, there are very many of them to my 
 mind. For instance, our manufacturers at present in the elast have a lobby 
 in Ottawa trying to force on the government the necessity of increasing the tariff 
 laws. And this same lobby, as I understand it, have got a proposition before the gov- 
 ernment by which we shall have absolute free trade. I don't know what the result of 
 that will be, but surely there will certainly be a strong opposition. But there should 
 be some relief granted and I think the thing is manifestly unfair. I cannot under- 
 stand why if a manufacturer is to be protected, labour should not be. They tell me 
 when you protect the manufacturer you are protecting labour. I don't see it. When 
 a manufacturer is protected he is intended to increase the price of the commodity, 
 thus increasing the price of it to labour, while at the same time he is permitted to 
 introduce the cheapest kind of labour to make this commodity, and the result is that 
 only the manufacturer is benefited by protection. And I feel that whenever the 
 manufacturing industry raise the price of a commodity there should be a proportion- 
 ate increase in the wages of that particular industry. 
 
 Q. Now in regard to something that bears on the U.B.R.E. What is your idea 
 of international organization? — A. I believe in the present system. They are ab- 
 solutely necessary. So long as we have corporations with international affiliations the 
 labour men should have them also. At the time of our trouble in Rossland, I may say 
 — ^I may say I detest strikes on all occasions, because I believe if you win you are 
 losing in the end. I would state that during our troubles in the Slocan, agents were 
 sent to Michigan and there secured a number of men, the lowest class of labour to be 
 found, many of whom could speak no English at aU. These men were accustomed to 
 the lowest form of living. They were brought in in contravention of the Alien Labour 
 Law, the old law. During that time the Western Federation had agents in Michigan, 
 but in spite of that fact I forget how many of them were brought in and placed on 
 the Great Northern Railway. They came to the Canadian line and were transferred 
 to the Canadian authorities, and a new crew put on board of each car. They were 
 then taken on steamboats up the Kootenays, on boats chartered by the company, and 
 sent from there to Kaslo. They were put in what we called the bull-pen until what 
 we called scab-day, Sunday; the wires were not working that day and we were pre- 
 vented from getting at the fact that they were brought in violation of the law and for 
 the purpose of destroying Canadian unionism. 
 
 Q. You think your connection with the Western Federation of Miners helped 
 you in this instance? — A. Yes, and there was another instance in Rossland a little 
 while ago. It is not a matter of whether the men were right or wrong, but the rule 
 seems to apply in that case. I think in the neighbourhood of 900 men were brought 
 in in that case, and during the time that its agents were down working the business 
 up on the other side of the line, the Western Federation had Y or 8 men employed 
 trying to counteract this movement and give information to these men. We boarded 
 trains at Spokane and found that they were being brought in violation of the laws of 
 the country and for the purpose of crushing Canadian unionism. 
 
 Q. You think the C.P.R. is strong enough to fight any organization? — A. I con- 
 sider there is no labour organization on earth to-day, and it is not my opinion alone, 
 that there is not a labour union that cannot be crushed if capital feels like expending 
 sufficif^nt money to do it. 
 
 CHRISTOPHER FOLEY— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 675 
 
 SESStONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say you think it is necessary that men on the C.P.R. should 
 be entitled to join unions for the purpose of self -protection ? — ^A. I certainly think it 
 is in their interests to do so, and certainly so long as the government refuses to pre- 
 vent employers from using the alien club to whip them into subjection, they should 
 certainly be permitted to affiliate with those controlling that club on the other side of 
 the line to protect themselves. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. Then do you mean to say that a proper alien law would remove the necessity 
 for international affiliation? — A. To a large extent it would, but we are living close 
 to the boundary line, and in going down from here to Seattle you have got to join a 
 new organization there. Men coming from the other side of the line are handicapped 
 in the same way. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Tou are aware that the miners at Fernie and adjoining places have surrendered 
 the Western Federation charter? — A. I am. The reason, in my opinion, is that there 
 are several of the most prominent leaders socialists, revolutionary socialists of the 
 most dangerous order. What I mean by that is not what is called British Columbia 
 socialists. I mean the socialist labour party. While there is a good many men among 
 them who are not, I feel that there are a good many men who are a danger to the com- 
 munity. I consider there were a good many men who were dissatisfied with the set- 
 tlement there, and because the Western Federation virtually refused to support them. 
 After the evidence began they succeeded in pulling their members out of the union. 
 While there is a considerable element of conservative men among them, over one-half 
 of the men are Slavs and Dagoes brought in for the purpose of cutting American 
 wages down. This class composes a very large portion of that organization and they 
 are. generally more aggressive and are better talkers and wield a powerful influence. 
 At the time we effected that settlement there we were blackened men, particularly for 
 the part we had taken in it, and I felt what occurred there demonstrates the necessity 
 of compulsory investigation. We had worked there for nearly three weeks without 
 effecting anything and finally decided to throw the matter up, but before doing so it 
 was decided to take testimony under oath, and we got more than 33 different wit- 
 nesses to give testimony. Previous to this we had been with Mr. Tonkin. I claim 
 he was to blame for the strike, because of the bitter attitude he took toward the strike. 
 He will not live up to his agreements unless he is compelled to. It was owing to the 
 fact largely that he had persecuted these men that they became so radical. At any rate 
 we managed to effect a settlement, and Mr. Tonkin conceded nearly everything the 
 men asked for, with the exception of the wages. Then we went into an investigation 
 of the wages and succeeded in demonstrating that the average wage was $3.69 a day. 
 Having conceded everything else — and nearly everything he conceded was fair and 
 just — we felt that with such a wage as that prevailing there that they would not be 
 justified in striking. Mr. Doherty. who was elected president of the district union here, 
 discovered that the wages were fully on an average with those prevailing on the Island 
 and elsewhere and says, ' gentlemen, the Western Federation will not sustain you in a 
 strike under these circumstances. The wages being $3.69, which is considerably over 
 the average wage of the country, the Western Federation will not sustain you in a 
 strike under these circumstances," and it was largely owing to the stand taken by Mr. 
 Doherty that these men have pulled out. Previous to this time the Western Federation 
 had not only put up some $1,000 to the strike, and further than that, the Western 
 Federation are not a mine, they have not got the money to fight these things that many 
 people give them credit for. Their money is mostly raised by levying assessments on 
 their members. 
 
 CHRISTOPHER FOLEY— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
 36a— 43J 
 
676 MINUTES OF ETIDEUCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 Bi/ Mr. Rowe: 
 
 Q. Is not the United Mine Workers a more conservative organization tban the 
 Western Federation of Miners? — A. I am not as familiar with them as I am with the 
 Western Federation. I should judge they are more so, but I wish to call your atten- 
 tion to this fact, to show you that the Western Federation are not as black as they are 
 represented to be. To show you the conception the Western Federation takes of these 
 things : Although we have had trouble at the Cosur d'Alenes in which they are not in 
 an enviable position. At the time we had trouble owing to what is known as the con- 
 tract system, some three or four years ago I was a member of the executive board and 
 was on that board for some two or three years. We succeeded in effecting a settle- 
 ment under the contract system, and I would say one of the chief reasons why the 
 labouring man is opposed to a contract system is because of the fact that each man is 
 pitted against the other in the mine, and finally a point is reached where a man is 
 doing everything possible to do. He has made a standard, and any man who cannot 
 live up to that standard cannot hold his job. Men are marked at $5 a day who could 
 tell you they are doing fully two days' average work to accomplish it. The men in- 
 strumental in introducing that, who were more or less the men at the head of this 
 trouble, were imported from the other side of the line. Some of them we believe were 
 imported because of tiieir reputation as fighters in the past. At any rate we saw 
 plainly that if we adopted — that is if we rejected the contract system coming before 
 the committee, that such a rejection, unless the system was rejected by other mining 
 caiQps in the country, would place us in a position where we would not get public 
 sympathy. • That is one of the reasons why myself and a few others accepted the offer 
 of the management. I generally got the credit of settling this. No sooner was the 
 matter settled than some five or six men — good Canadians, some Nova Scotia, others 
 English, and two or three Irishmen — they were not Americans — than they commenced 
 pulling wires at Denver, and began branding me as a traitor; I had sold out to the 
 company, and all that sort of thing; some of them paid a visit to Denver, and when 
 the next convention came on letters were heaped on me for the purpose of doing ;n6 
 up, as they put it. When this became known to the convention and they were elect- 
 ing members to the convention, I desired to pull out, because I knew I had had trouble 
 enough, but they would not permit anything of the kind. A motion was made when 
 they were electing members of the executive, again placing me on the board, and I 
 declined the nomination, and they insisted that I should run. That motion was 
 seconded and carried almost by a unanimous vote. The mover and seconder were 
 'Americans. And it was stated that these men had tried to get their auger into Mr. 
 Foley, and we want to show how we think of Mr. Foley. That is the position they 
 took. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. That is to say, they sustained you in preventing a strike? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you got any opinion as to the recent change in the constitution at the 
 recent convention ? — ^A. No, I have not, but the second last convention, the one before 
 this, I believe, they endorsed the socialist platform; but in advising that platform, I 
 don't consider they are altogether endorsing socialism. The principles of the social- 
 ist platform I am ready to endorse myself to a large extent, but the methods which 
 the socialists have of advocating their case I -entirely disapprove of. I believe in 
 evolutionary methods of bringing these things about. My interest is with co-opera- 
 tion and that socially one shall be the equal of all, as a Christian holds to the universal 
 brotherhood of man. 
 
 Q. Do you think one is possible without the other? — A. I don't. I believe that 
 the two are interdependent upon each other, and I believe one of the reasons why the 
 church has n6t succeeded in establishing the golden rule to a large extent is because 
 they have neglected the economic aspect of these things too much. My idea of moving 
 in that direction would be by the government expropriating, not confiscating, the 
 
 CHRISTOPHER FOLEY— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 677 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 railways, the coal mines, telegraphs, street railways, waterworks — all these things 
 should become the property of the public. Then, I believe in the application of the 
 single tax to the land, in order to compel the land-grabber to let go. I believe in 
 establishing a condition under which the interest of each would be the interest of all. 
 I. think that is all we could expect to accomplish in this century, and by that time 
 they will be able to take another step. That is my idea. 
 
 Q. In asking you about the constitution, I had reference to a passage printed in 
 yesterday's paper in reference to a change in the constitution. Are you in a position 
 to say anything about that? — A. I may have seen it, but I don't remember exactly 
 what it was, now. 
 
 Q. You don't believe in strikes or sympathetic strikes? — A. Under certain con- 
 ditions, but they have to be extreme conditions. I would not approve of a sympathetic 
 strike only as a last extreme. Suppose it were demonstrated to me that a union were 
 struggling for existence, as in the case of the U.B.R.E. here, say. If these men are 
 demanding nothing but the right to exist as an organization, and if the C.P.R. are 
 determined to crush them, I believe that is a matter that all labour unions should 
 take up, and if they don't go on strike, it would be a matter of policy rather than of 
 wrong. 
 
 Q. Is it not hard on the other, too ? — A. Yes, but as General Sherman said, ' War 
 is cruel at its best, and you cannot refine it.' The result of the strike is the lowering 
 of the money power of the labourer. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Do you think, where an employer has got a contract with a body of men, • 
 should this contract be broken by reason of a strike elsewhere? — A. No, I cannot say 
 that I approve of that. I cannot say that I have seen a case yet that I would 
 approve of. 
 
 Q. It seems to me that it would be a parody on all things, if we cannot get a 
 position where a contract is absolutely safe, except in the case of war? — A. Yes, but 
 if the existence of an organization is threatened by a corporation, and if the govern- 
 ment refuses to protect them — either recognized by the government as being a legal 
 Ijody — then it raises the question, to my mind, whether serious and harsh measures 
 should be resorted to. 
 
 Q. This is not harshness; it is a lack of faith? — A. We have international laws 
 that are often broken also. I don't think our government has always lived up to their 
 agreement. I cannot recall anything just now, but I know there are several in my 
 mind, and if such method as that is to be by opinion they are setting a bad example. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. What agreement are you referring to as having been broken ? — A. I said I 
 could not recall a single instance, but I have not got them in my mind. 
 
 Q. I don't think you can produce one where the English government has broken 
 an agreement ? — A. I guess you will admit that the English government has not 
 lived up to the Christian teachings. I was going to call your attention to the war of 
 1844 with China over the opium business. 
 
 Q. We were taUiing about contracts, and I challenge you to mention a contract 
 broken by the British government ?— A. I cannot recall one, but I am satisfied I can 
 produce them. They may not have been broken in their entirety but certainly par- 
 tially so. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Then I understand there are circumstances under which a union's regard for 
 
 another union will be paramount to its own contract with its employers ?— A. When a 
 
 man's interests are at stake and a man has a knife to his throat he does not stop to 
 
 think when he strikes back; he considers what the effect will be on his own brother- 
 
 CHRISTOPHER FOLEY— Vancouver, June 10. 
 
678 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION ' 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 hood, and that is the case of the U.B.RE. as I understand it. If these men demand 
 anything further than recognition, and even if they ask for wages they have asked for 
 nothing but the right to exist, I feel that the government is guilty of treason to that 
 organization and the workmen to refuse protection to them in that position. 
 
 Q. What is your opinion as to incorporation of unions ? — A. I believe they should 
 be, but not until we have a compulsory arbitration law. I am a believer also in that. 
 
 Q. Then you think the government should not be compelled to take any interest 
 in a body that has no legal interests ? — A. I have not taken that into consideration. 
 The government certainly recognizes the men's right to become an organization, and 
 if a company as powerful as the O.P.E. attempts to deprive them of that right it seems 
 to me it is the duty of the government to protect them in that position. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That is up to the law-making body; the government has nothing to do with 
 that ? — A. I am not familiar with that. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — If the TJ.B.E.E. does not exist, the C.P.R. should have no objection to 
 letting them exist. Why should they take into consideration the fact that these men 
 claim they exist. 
 
 Mr. EoWE. — ^I guess the C.P.E. claim they do. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Do you believe with the last witness that society is divided into the toilers 
 and the spoilers? — A. No, there are a good many things that I don't endorse. I can- 
 not say that I agree with this idea that all profit shall cease to exist until we have 
 'changed the whole system. I feel that a piece ^ of machinery or anything else 
 a man possesses, if honestly acquired rightly, belongs to him, and if that piece of 
 machinery is engaged in co-operative production that man is entitled to the profit, I 
 think the man with a machine is entitled to part of it, but it is the proportion of the 
 division that I object to. 
 
 Vancouver, June 11, 1903. 
 
 His Lordship. — Owing to the fact that negotiations for settlement have not yet 
 been finally reached, the Commission has thought it well not to enter into any con- 
 tentious evidence. The evidence we would like to hear now would be evidence gen- 
 erally on the subject of conditions of unions or on the subject of compulsory arbitra- 
 tion. By the way, Mr. Quigley is here with some more telegrams, I understand. 
 
 M. T. Quigley, recalled: 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. Have you any more telegrams? — A. Yes, I have 135. I have not had anl 
 opportunity of making a list of these telegrams. I would like to get a list and receipt. 
 jThere were 17 on Friday and 135 to-day. I would like to ask if we will get the tele- 
 grams back sometime or other? 
 
 His Lordship. — I think so, after the Commission is through. 
 
 (Telegram put in as Exhibit 62.) 
 M. T. QUIGLEY— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
02V INDUSTRIAL DI8PVTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 679 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Christopher Foley, recalled. 
 
 Witness. — I would just like to read a letter that I received last evening from a 
 man I mentioned here yesterday, who was instrumental, in my opinion, more than 
 any other individual in the settlement of that strike at Fernie, and who is an Ameri- 
 can, or was at the time of the district union of the Western Federation of Miners iu 
 this province. I will just read some extracts from the letter to show the kind of men 
 we have to deal with : — 
 
 ' I might add that since my return from Fernie I have heen accused of 
 everything but murder, and possibly that if the truth were known ; they are 
 at present writing to all parts of the country, trying to find out where I 
 scabbed and betrayed labour, and the only thing that makes me hang on is 
 the fact that if I were to resign now they would say that I was afraid to have 
 my record inquired into, but just as soon as they succeed in satisfying them- 
 selves that I am not what they have accused me of, I will resign, and then I 
 will consider myself a free man, and will be in a position to give vent to my 
 feelings, which I will do in no gentle manner. I have been referred to as 
 Chris. Foley and Ealph Smith, and all the other labour leaders who are out 
 for the pap. 
 
 ' To give you an idea of the class of men that I have to fight in this 
 
 locality, I need only refer to your esteemed and worthy friend, Mr. Fred 
 
 Hazelwood, Mr. Mike McAndrew, a crazy butcher, and an insane telegraph 
 
 operator.' 
 
 Now there is a class of men, and they are not Americans, but Canadians, Englishmen, 
 
 Irishmen and Scotchmen. I am not using this to cast any reflection on any of these, 
 
 _})ut to show you that the assertion made here that all this trouble is the result of the 
 
 position taken by American labour agitators is a mistake. 
 
 I desire to reply to a question asked me by my learned friend. He wanted me to 
 point out a single instance where our government violated an agreement. I would 
 recall the gentleman's memory to the case of the Alabama, a Confederate vessel built 
 in English waters, and permitted to escape from those waters and prey upon American 
 commerce for several years, destroying millions of dollars worth of property. After 
 the war was over the Americana brought a claim, against the British government for 
 damages, and the arbitration awarded them some fifteen millions as near as I can re- 
 member, virtually admitting that they had violated their agreement with the American 
 government. There is one. I will quote two more. During the wars of Napoleon at 
 one time it was thought by the British government that Napoleon was about to take 
 possession of the Danish fleet, and immediately the British government fleet was sent 
 • over to Denmark, taking the fleet by absolute force. Next we come to Cuba some few 
 years ago. Some twenty-five Americans were under arrest and were to be shot. A 
 British man-of-war laid out in the harbour, and she immediately trained her guns on 
 Havana and told them that if these men were killed she would blow the city out of 
 existence. I heartily endorse that stand taken by the captain, but we violated our 
 agreement with the Spanish government just the same. I think that is a sufficient 
 
 Teply to that. 
 
 I may state, while speaking of this violation of agreements, at the time we settled 
 our difficulties over the 'contract system in Eossland some few years ago, Mr. Kirby 
 gave US his assurance, as did all the other managers, that they would not discriminate 
 ai^ainst any of their workmen, and yet I am positively certain he did so. He continued 
 to gradually discharge one man after the other, while giving no particular reason for 
 it and finally he succeeded in replacing nearly every mucker in the mine with a Dago, 
 and wherever practical every miner, generally with men who could scarcely spealc the 
 English tongue. Then again I would stat« that during that trouble in connection with 
 alien importation, special police to the number of some 15 or 20 were brought in from 
 the other side of the line, connected with the Pinkertons ; not belonging to that force 
 
 CHRISTOPHER FOLEY— Vancouver, June 11; 
 
680 MITTDTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISBIOy 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 but connected with it. These men were brought iu and placed on the hill to intimidate 
 Canadian citizens. These were foreigners. If a mining company is permitted to im- 
 port a foreigner to intimidate Canadian labour, I want to know why we are not to be 
 permitted to affiliate with organizations on the other side to protest against such things. 
 
 The next thing that occurs to me is this : It is said that to violate a contract is 
 a great crime. It is true, and I am not here to defend the violation of contracts. I 
 never violated a contract in my life that I remember of, because in doing so you are 
 ■violating the golden rule, but there is a law higher even than the golden rule, and that 
 law is the right to exist. The golden rule is absolutely useless if you have no right 
 to exist. The foremost law of all is that a man shall have the right to exist, and in 
 defence of that right I feel you have the right to appeal to almost every means to do so. 
 That is why I justify labour organizations when their existence is threatened with even 
 breaking a contract to maintain their existence. 
 
 Here is another matter bearing on this : the Australian strike. I will 
 show you the position held in these matters. The government owns the 
 lailways in Australia. They have paid their men there a higher wage rate than 
 ■what prevails in other countries and they give them better conditions, but in Australia 
 Ihey had a drought for several years, and things have been in a deplorable condition, 
 everyone out of employment and no money to be had under any condition. It was 
 deemed advisable to reduce the wages of the employees on the railway. The employees, 
 having a monopoly of that business refused and went on strike, with the result that 
 Ihey tied up all the industries in the country. This necessitated very drastic measures 
 and they introduced a law something to this effect : making it a criminal offence for 
 more than six men to assemble and discuss the question of going on strike. Had I been 
 a member of the legislature of Australia they would certainly have received my sup- 
 port. But I would apply it the same way : when a man like Mr. Dunsmuir tries to tie 
 this company iip by refusing to recognize a union I would take that gentleman by the 
 ■throat also. 
 
 Now our banks have got the rule, and it is practically in force, prohibiting the 
 marriage of those men working for them until their salary reaches a certain point. 
 This seeems an interference to me with individual liberty. And yet if these men 
 organized for the purpose of bettering their condition, of enabling themselves to 
 marry, the Bank of Montreal would immediately discharge every one of them, and 
 they would be called agitators for so doing. I would not work for any corporation 
 that would deny me the right to marry, and I submit that a government that permits 
 such a thing as this is not fulfilling its duties to its citizens. 
 
 Now I would like to call your attention to another thing. During our troubles 
 in the Slocan the mine o^wners employed foreign newspaper men, among others Mr. 
 O'Farrell from Montana, for the purpose of blackening the character of the labour' 
 leaders there. We were all represented as blacklegs and aliens and outcasts from the 
 Coeur d'Alenes, and the English language was exhausted for something that would 
 express the contempt they believed we should be held in. The statements were not 
 true. There was not a single man in that move who were Americans. They were 
 mostly all Canadians, and yet our Miners' Association went over to the other side 
 of the line and hired aliens to blacken our character. Are we justified in affiliating 
 with Americans on the other side in order to prevent this ? 
 
 We are accused, again, of permitting violence. While we are unable to bring 
 it directly home I feel there has been a little violence in this city, pointing in a 
 certain direction, probably, not endorsed by them, but they were instrumental in 
 bringing it about and labour unions have never done similarly. They do not endorse 
 these things, but violence has occurred rather outside of their administration because 
 they have never endorsed such conduct. 
 
 We are told that union men should not be permitted to interfere with employers' 
 business. I hold to that, and I hold also that the employer shall not interfere with 
 
 ■ CHRISTOPHER FOLEY— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 681 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 the union men's businesss. This thing works both ways. T cannot understafid why 
 if Mr. Marpole wishes to interfere with this business of the U.B.R.E. they have not 
 a right to interfere with his business. It seems to me the thing should work both 
 ways. From what I can learn Mr. Marpole had spotters in the union. I don't knOw 
 whether these gentlemen were spotted or not, our experience has been that these kind 
 of men came from the other side. I don't litiow whether Canadians would do these 
 things or not. 
 
 I am opposed, absolutely opposed to labour organizations in the abstract, and 
 insist upon their existence only because it is absolutely necessary that they shall 
 protect themselves-. The principle is wrong, it is a monopoly, it protects the strong as 
 against the weak. The same argument applies to secret societies as far as I am aware. 
 If you join a secret organization the first thing you are asked to do is to have an 
 examination by the best physician that can be got. If he decides that you are all 
 right you are received with open arms, but you are rejected if weak. These organiza- 
 tions pose as Christian organizations. I don't believe it. Labour organizations pro- 
 tect the strong as against the weak, and that is one reason why I believe we should 
 have a compulsory arbitration law in this country. Labour organizations as they are 
 working to-day will very soon have brought about conditions by which only the 
 strongest men can possibly obtain employment. This is certainly naturally wrong 
 and it is time the government of this country adopted some method by which pro- 
 vision might be made for the weak and old. I to-day have arrived at an age where 
 I cAnnot obtain employment, and I think I have a right to live for a few years yet 
 in this world. But it is necessary that men should organize in or'der to protect them- 
 selves and prevent these conditions from getting worse. 
 
 Now we are told by anti-compulsory arbitrationists that it interferes with indi- 
 vidual labour. There is not a law on our books which does not interfere more or 
 less with individual labour. Next we are told it is not workable, yet we learn it is 
 working in New Zealand and in Australia. It has not had time there to show what 
 it can do. We hear very little, in the reports from i^ew Zealand of the unsatisv- 
 factory condition of affairs, but we don't hear of the repeal of the law which shows 
 it is giving some degree of satisfaction. With the compulsory arbitration law under 
 the present conditions, I fear that the arbitration board might be trying to have 
 labour get the worst of it. In a deal of this kind it will pay labour to get into politics 
 and see that judges are appointed who will do justice. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Do I understand, Mr. Foley, that you mean to imply that with the gentlemen 
 we have on the bench now that it would be impossible to get a fair tribunal ? — A. Not 
 exactly that, but I would say this : That the power that wealth has got to create to- 
 day, there is identically the same power to create judges to-day that there will be to 
 create an arbitration board. That is no excuse for our repealing the laws. 
 
 Q. Were you ever impressed in any particular case that this power was used ? — 
 A. I do not know that I can mention a case just at present, but I certainly believe that 
 the education of the judge and his surroundings has been such that he did not thor- 
 oughly appreciate the other side of the question. Having lived among a certain quality 
 of the community, and our judges are as a rule largely the sons of men well-off — they 
 belong largely to the upper class of society, and such men as that their natural sympa- 
 thies would hardly be with the labouring men, as a rule, although there are exceptions. 
 
 Q. I don't know, but letting my mind run over the bench in several of the prov- 
 inces, I think there are a few who have had that characteristic, but fellows of that class 
 don't work hard enough to get to the bench ? — A. They may not have a great number 
 of men belonging to the middle class of society; a great many men have sprung from 
 the lower classes of society. Ton take the workingman's son and place him in school. 
 He is now in touch with lie labour men. He goes from school to college and when he 
 
 CHRISTOPHBR FOLEY— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
682 MINOTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 is gradtiated his natural tendency will be to associate with the more educated class, 
 and his sympathy will naturally be with them instead of the lower classes. 
 
 Q. How are you going to remedy it ? — A. We will just have to make a. selection. 
 I did not say they were all bad by any means, but we have to be in a position that if 
 we have any positive or really good evidence to believe that a man has not dealt fairly 
 with us we will be in a position to use our information, and have that gentleman re- 
 moved and replaced by a man whom we would believe would be fair to us. 
 
 Q. Was there ever a judgment given in which you thought the issue was unfairly 
 decided because the judge was influenced by the social condition of one of the claim- 
 ants ? — A. Yes, in Eossland. I cannot recall his name now. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 Q. What court ? — A. The police court. 
 
 Q. We are not talking of police court magistrates ? — ^A. I did not understand but 
 that this applied to all judges. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. I was s-peaking of judges, and what I wanted to find out was whether you as a 
 representative labour man held that position ? — A. Judge Boultbee was the man I 
 referred to, and the case was in connection with the Beamish case up there, where a 
 man was arrested for violating certain laws. Ketuming to your question, I cannot 
 recall of a single instance, although I am under the impression there are two or three 
 in which I have a very strong suspicion that they were controlled by class prejudice 
 or perhaps by a money consideration." I cannot recall them now. They are very few 
 I will admit. 
 
 Q. You are a man who is a close observer, have a good memory and able to form 
 an intelligent impression. From the fact that you cannot state a case, possibly there is 
 not much ground for that impression ? — A. I will call your attention to one instance 
 in Eossland and you can judge for yourself. The judge is dead now, and probably it 
 is wrong to mention his name, but at any rate we had an explosion up there in the Le 
 Koi mine. An engineer who was not onto his business ran the cage too high and broke 
 the gate. The day before this explosion happened one of the guide rails had been taken 
 out in order to repair the cage and the guide rail was not replaced. The result was the 
 cage a few days later was run into the shaft and the clutches having nothing to 
 clutch, the timber being removed, the cage went down. There were four men working 
 in the bottom of the shaft. The bulkhead was immediately broken, according to the 
 testimony of miners I know. The cage weighed about four tons and went down and 
 iLuocked out a couple of carloads of timber. All this was piled on top of these men. 
 None of them were killed, but several were crippled for life. The judge rendered a 
 decision that according to the laws of British Columbia the company could not be held 
 responsible for the mistake made by its engineer. In the next place he held that in the 
 sense in which he read the law — and the law read that all reasonable provisions shall 
 be made to safeguard the life and limb of the men in the shaft — he said that by no 
 manner of means can you place the construction upon the reading of the law that the 
 cage was falling material. It is possible under some circumstances it might not be 
 falling material, but certainly when it broke loose it was falling material, and if that 
 was not falling material, then the bulkhead, consisting of about half a carload of 
 timber would certainly be falling material, and in addition to that there were tons of 
 rock falling on the men. The case was thrown out of court, but on appeal was taken 
 to the Supreme Court. In any case a decision was given for the complainant. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 Q. Surely you don't suggest that the judge who tried that case was receiving any- 
 thing ? — A. I don't pretend to say that he was paid, but I say these judges were not in 
 a position to understand that popition. 
 OHKISTOPHER FOL/EY— Vancouver, Jua& 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISFUTH8 IN BlllTISR COLUMBIA 683 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You are setting up your knowledge of the law. It was a question of a point 
 of law and nothing else, and because you think that he was wrong in his law, you think 
 there is something behind it ?— A. Why was the judgment reversed ? 
 
 Q. They are reversed every day, but nobody suggests that there has been any bad 
 motives on the part of the judges ? — A. I am giving you my reasons for my suspicion. 
 Can I help having suspicions. I understand that position better than the judges do. 
 I do not quite understand the law but I understand the position, and I think I am 
 better capable of judging whether that was falling material than they were. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Supposing your suspicions were justified, there are very few cases out of the 
 total number of cases, but I wanted to get at your view. The difficulty in the men or 
 in a court of arbitration is not as great as they think 1 — A. In my mind, I don't think 
 it is. I have a better opinion of the judges in this country than probably a good many 
 have. Probably there may be cases where they err, at the same time I believe they 
 are very rare, if we are to retain our present laws on our statute books and have our 
 judges act on them there is no reason why we cannot employ another statute and 
 have other judges appointed. 
 
 Q. Do you believe in compulsory arbitration ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. I understand you would have a representative of each party and the third 
 arbitrator a judge ? — A. I consider a case of that kind cannot be tried in any other 
 way. 
 
 Q. Would the parties to the complaint take the initiative or should the govern- 
 ment ? — ^A. I think the two parties. 
 
 Q. What about the state ? Could the state intervene without invitation ? — A. As 
 I understand the New Zealand system the state does not intervene unless called upon 
 to do so. 
 
 Q. You would have such a law involve the registration of unions? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Would you have this preceded by attempted conciliation ? — A. I would. 
 
 Q. At what point would arbitration be brought in ? — A. When conciliation failed. 
 
 Q. Would you make the law necessary to have notice given so that cases should be 
 taken up before the strike really became acute ? — A. I would. I wish to call your 
 attention to one thing in connection with compulsory arbitration. I have always 
 favoured it. When we had this experience in Fernie a short time ago we tried to deal 
 with difficulty and failed until we took evidence under oath. Then the matter appeared 
 in a different light and both parties became more amenable to reason. After we had 
 very nearly effected a settlement, there were two men who both had previously been 
 engaged doing dirty work for Mr. Tonkin, and bringing in men from the other side of 
 the line. The union did not know these men were engaged in this business, and while 
 looking over the papers we discovered this man's name and commenced inquiry about 
 it, and Mr. Tonkin said, that fellow — he called him by a little different name — has 
 been in my employ some time, and he imported or at least shipped in here some 25 or 
 30 men sometime ago. He gave us a very bad reputation to the men. This matter 
 was brought up by the executive a little later on. Here was this man a member of 
 the executive board, and yet he had been playing into the company's hands. My im- 
 pression w£(fe that there had been some dispute with Mr. Tonkin over money matters, 
 and he thought he would get even on Mr. Tonkin by advocating a strike, and having 
 a tremendous influence over the Slavs there he was in a position, between him and the 
 other fellow, to tie that country up. He was in a position to have done this, and that 
 is what convinces me that compulsory arbitration is absolutely necessary. 
 
 Q. Compulsory investigation — ^power to investigate troubles ? — A. Yes. 
 
 CHHISTOPHBR FOLJETr— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
684 MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMUISmON 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VI 1., A, 1904 
 
 E. MaepolEj sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. What office do you told in the C.P.E.? — A. General superintendent of the 
 Pacific division. 
 
 Q. Would you say succinctly the position of the railway company towards the 
 question of forming unions on its road? — A. The matter of unionism with us is 
 simply a matter pertaining to the men themselves. As I publicly declared, we are not 
 antagonistic to unions. That would be evidenced by the fact that we have no less than 
 8 or 10 agreements at the present time with our men. We malce contracts with men 
 who are members of a union by means of a committee. 
 
 Q. Why with committees, rather than with the unions ? — A. For the simple reason 
 that a committee might be formed of non-union as well as union. We ask no ques- 
 tions of a committee of employees who come before us where all the members of that 
 committee are members of a union, but we do recognize the right of a union to pre- 
 sent grievances to us through the head of their order, and that any matter of investiga- 
 tion in the case of grievances shall be conducted with another member of the union 
 present. As I said before, we have no contracts with any union. 
 
 Q. What difficulty do you feel in relation to the U.B.R.E. union? — A. For the 
 good reason that it was unwieldy and something we had never seen before conducted. 
 That is an attempt to form an order and take in every man on a railway as an order 
 itself. We find that the difficulty would be that the majority of the men in the other 
 tmions — nearly all the unions would object to any such arrangement between us and 
 them. 
 
 Q. The existing unions? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Then your position is that you don't object to unions? — A. Not unions — not 
 among men of their own class. 
 
 Q. What you call class unions? — A. Yes, class unions. 
 
 Q. And by class unions you mean bodies of men who are governed by some one 
 official of the road? — A. Bodies of men engaged in one class of work. 
 
 Q. The idea being, I suppose, that these men in their various unions would have 
 their grievances settled by the official of the department overlooking that class of 
 work? — A. Exactly. 
 
 Q. And you find that that kind of union does not interfere with the management ? 
 — A. As far as I have experienced on this division. 
 
 Q. And the objection to a union like the U.B.E.E. is that the men unite indis- 
 criminately? — A. It would be a union covering all class of employees, and necessarily, 
 in my opinion, would be most unhealthy. It would also have the inherent difficulty 
 of being controlled by a union on the other side of the line. 
 
 Q. Do you mean by unhealthy that it would be difficult for the officials of the 
 departments to deal with? — A. No, I think it would be more difficult with the men in 
 arriving at settlements of difficulties. In case of an engineman having a grievance: 
 If we were bound to take a committee from the U.B.E.E. it might have for a leader a 
 labourer in the shop, or a car-wiper might appear on the committee and know little 
 about the matter, and who was subordinate to the men directly affected, as is the case 
 now. • 
 
 Q. And you think a committee of enginemen or firemen would be better able to 
 deal with the matter, at all events from their point of view ? — A. From mine too. 
 
 Q. I gather from what you say that the present unions objected to being en- 
 gulfed by the TT.B.E.E. ? — A. They objected to an amalgamation. 
 Q. They prefer a class union? — A. As it is at present, yes. 
 
 Q. You have had considerable experience with strikes, I suppose? — A. Yes in 
 the last 6 or 8 years. 
 
 Q. Have you considered the question of how they can be best prevented? A. 
 
 Yes, I have thought seriously over it, and I have formed the opinion that they sliould 
 H. MAiRPOLiB,— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTHS IN BRITISH COLVUBIA ^5 
 
 SESSIONAL J'APER No. 36a 
 
 differentiate between what I call public service corporations and ordinary industries. 
 In the case of public service corporations, I think compulsory arbitration should be 
 insisted on. I would call the railways, street railways, telephone and shipping, public 
 service corporations. 
 
 Q. And you think compulsory arbitration is the proper method of settling strikes? 
 — A. On public service corporations. 
 
 Q. How would you constitute the board? — A. I would constitute the board as I 
 understand it is done in New South Wales, by the appointment of a Supreme Court 
 judge. As I understand the law there, Chief Justice McMahon is chairman of the 
 board, and my idea is that the same should be done in this country, if this is prac- 
 ticable to the other arbitrators appointed by each side to the dispute. 
 
 Q. And that the judge be chairman ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Would you have compulsory arbitration available at the instance of either 
 party ? — A. Yes, and to anticipate the trouble instead of waiting until it ensues — 
 the strike, for instance. Unfortunately the public suffer while the two parties stand 
 and look at each other. I saw an article by Mr. Charles Francis Adams which was 
 clever, upon this subject, but it did not provide for anticipating trouble — — 
 
 Q. You think some machinery should be provided when trouble is threatened ? — 
 A. That is my idea. I don't think conciliation boards would do, particularly when 
 each side knows they could have arbitration and settle it. It seems to me to be 
 futile to attempt conciliation, particularly where large bodies are concerned, because 
 the parties who think they are right would do nothing with the conciliation board. 
 
 Q. Would you say when three or four men demanded a raise in wages that the 
 machinery of the state should be called in ? — A. No, I am talking about incorporated 
 unions. 
 
 Q. You think compulsory arbitration has this tendency — the incorporation of 
 unions ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. Suppose you have ten men asking for a raise of wages ? — A. You could not 
 have a union of ten men. Individual troubles of that kind would rectify themselves. 
 But I am speaking of any union incorporated, and representing a majority of the 
 employees. 
 
 Q. In your opinion compulsory arbitration would be valuable only as against in- 
 corporated unions ? — A. So far as I can see now. I cannot see where the responsi- 
 bility would be on the order composed of only a f.ew men. 
 
 Q. Would you have a special judge appointed as chairman of these bodies ? — A. 
 I would have one of the Supreme Court judges selected. 
 
 Q. Would you have the same man or a different man ? — A. I would have the 
 same judge. Because he would become identified and thoroughly understand labour 
 or industrial troubles. * 
 
 Q. From remarks dropped by the previous witness the fact seeemed to be that 
 the judge cannot appreciate the situation in this country? — ^A. That is ia peculiar 
 idea that some people have of the judiciary of this or any other country. I am glad 
 to say it is not my experience personally. 
 
 Q. I am afraid that law would not meet with the approval of the labour people ? 
 
 A. That is unfortunate certainly. It is certainly a fact that government will have 
 
 to devise some law, because I take the ground that the president of the railway or 
 the organization has no right to stop the public service. I have seen it done on very 
 slight provocation. It has no right to let the third party suffer. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to compulsory investigation of disputes ? — A. I have seen 
 'the suggestion made in the United States on some of these lines that rather attracted 
 me. It would be for the purpose of giving the public a clear idea of the controversy, 
 as I understand it. For instance, it has been suggested by Mr. Eamsay of the Wa- 
 bash, that a law should be passed that no man engaged on the railways should throw 
 up his job within thirty days, to allow of a public investigation. His decision in 
 that came from the fact that an. injunction was granted by the court to restrain men 
 
 R. MAEPOL/E — Van-cauv^r, Jane 11. 
 
686 SlNUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 from striking, and the result was that the men came together, a statement was given 
 and everything patched up. It came from their being prevented from striking. 
 
 Q. Have you ever considered how the award is to be enforced ? — A. If they are 
 incorporated ? 
 
 Q. What is to prevent the men from soldiering, suppose they don't consider the 
 award just ? How can any court reach that ? — A. They could do that in any case, 
 if men as a body choose to do that, but I am pleased to say that we have had no man 
 who has attempted to do that. 
 
 Q. Suppose the railway considered the award unjust ?— A. They should be pun- 
 ished, of course. Under New Zealand conciliation, I understand there are penalties 
 applied to either the men or the corporation. The framing of such a law would be 
 something we should take from the experience of other countries, but the fact remains 
 immistakably that some such law is necessary, whether as a court to investigate for 
 ithe r p.tirpose of showing which party is in the wrong, or else compulsory to settle 
 disputes. I have not the slightest doubt but that an early investigation properly 
 conducted, Compulsory investigation, if you choose to put it that way, would have a 
 beneficial effect on both sides, and certainly the side that is in the wrong. 
 
 Q. What would you say to compelling both parties to the controversy to file a state- 
 ment of their grievances in some public office ? — A. That would be a good thing to do. If 
 compulsory arbitration cannot be had, if there is a law compelling them to publish their 
 case that would be beneficial, and I believe would stop a lot of the troubles now ex- 
 isting. 
 
 Q. Suppose the men should give a certain number of days' notice before they should 
 be allowed to go out on strike; that they should file a statement of their grievances in 
 the office, say of the Supreme Court where everybody could see it, and a certain time 
 afterwards the company be compelled to answer that statement, would that not be a 
 good plan ? — A. Tes, it would be. 
 
 Q. Then the attention of the public would at once be dravm to the controversy, 
 and would soon begin to form an opinion about it ? — A. Tes, and public opinion would 
 have a great deal to do with determining the action of the corporation or the men. 
 
 Q. And faiUng a settlement you could have either compulsory investigation or 
 compulsory arbitration? — A. Tes. 
 
 Q. To what class of undertakings would you apply this compulsory arbitration ? 
 — A. I believe, to public service corporations. I would take telephones — anything to 
 which a franchise is given, or in which the public are directly interested. We have had 
 experience in this city where the public suffered from these troubles. And the same 
 with waterworks, and the same with the street railways. 
 
 Q. With the number of strikes occurring recently it would take a judge his whole 
 time looking after them ? — A. No, I disagree with you, my Lord. They would probably 
 get together and avoid so many strikes. They would be afraid of the courts, at all 
 events. I know it would be the last thing I would like to do, to appear before a court 
 of arbitration with my case, unless I knew it was absolutely right. I would try to com- 
 promise before that. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to the fear of the union that they would be harassed with 
 legislation ? — A. The court would protect that. The law would be settled by arbitration 
 the same as it is with disputes between myself and other men. Tou make a judicial 
 investigation — there is no getting away from that. If no union or corporation is 
 afraid of the law there is no use talking about any from of judicial investigation or ar- 
 bitration. 
 
 Q. I think Mr. Eussell's point was that there seemed to be a fear on the part 
 of incorporated unions that they would be a target for instant litigation. They 
 would be the weaker party and a corporation like the O.P.E. would keep them in hot 
 water? — A. Tes, but the law is inaugurated in the Dominion or Federal House and 
 surely the members of the cabinet are not going to permit that to occur. If such a 
 
 B. MARPOIiB, — Vancouver, Juue 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 687 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 thing would be done once or twice I fancy that law would be repealed or else cor- 
 rected in such a way to make it difficult for the corporation to pursue such a policy. 
 
 By Mf. Bow0 : 
 
 Q. I suppose you would include coal mines ? — A. Yes, I would for the reason that 
 that subject would include public carriers. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Would you make it possible for the state to initiate proceedings if necessary ? 
 — A. At a certain stage, I should think so. If it became apparent that the public 
 were to be inconvenienced. That would be the time. As I mentioned a moment ago, 
 it does not seem an honourable thing that an individual in charge of them or any 
 individual should stop industry to the detriment of the third party who I say does 
 suffer. 
 
 Q. I think there was a time here last summer when transportation was crowded, 
 mines closed up, and fishing stopped? — A. Yes, in which the province suffered finan- 
 cially and by reputation. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. You think the state should step in and say, you have to operate these industries 
 or give them to somebody who can ? — A. That is my view. 
 
 Q. What effect do you think unionism has upon men ? — A. The older they get 
 the more conservative they are. 
 
 Q. How does it effect them as employees in relation to the company? — A. I don't 
 notice any difference of that kind. I have noticed in some cases it has been an im- 
 provement in their habits. I know of several cases of men who have been poor work- 
 men or disgracing themselves have been disciplined by their orders. Lots of the labour 
 unions are very strict on that. They will not have in their union men of intoxicating 
 habits to excess. I think if they are properly constituted and controlled they are of 
 interest to the company. As I said the younger unions are inclined to be indiscreet 
 with their powers. But in the older unions men become more conservative. That is 
 my experience for twenty years. 
 
 Q. When you spoke about foreign control, does that not apply to the older unions ? 
 A. No, I don't know of any union extending from one end to the other in the s^ame way 
 as the TJ. B. E. E. You take the Western Federation of Miners, and take the American 
 Labour Union, they are all affiliated with TJ. B. K. E., or at least the TJ. B. E. E. is 
 affiliated with them, controlled in a measure, but I know of no other union controlled 
 that way. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. The engineers belong to an international union ? — A. Yes, but they are not 
 affiliated with any other. 
 
 Q. Their headquarters are in the United States? — A. Oh, yes, their headquarters 
 are there, but Estes is the first international leader I have seen. They don't interfere. 
 They settle the matter by their own local union. They refer to the international as 
 a last resort. In the event of strike being threatened, they often call in their presi- 
 dent or someone in authority. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. It is likely you would have seen the international leader if you had had a 
 strike ? — A. Well, we had strikes, but I never saw one. As I repeated to you, I never 
 saw one interfere before. 
 
 Q. They seem to have autonomy ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 R. MARiPOLE— Vanjcouver, Jun« 11. 
 
6^ MINUTSS OF ETIDESCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. The engineers could settle their dispute with you if they went on strike without 
 leferring the matter to headquarters ? — A. Yes. You mean the engineers of this divi- 
 sion could settle with me ? 
 
 ,Q. Yes ? — ^A. They could only come out with me on the question of rat§s, and with- 
 out reference to anybody else. If it was a general strike over the system I don't know 
 what the rules are. 
 
 Q. The men here don't have to get the approval of somebody outside to settle ? — A. 
 Not as far as I know. 
 
 His Lordship. — If there is anything more that Mr. MarpQle would like to state 
 we would be glad to hear it. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Speaking of that thirty days' notice, here is an article in the ' Kailway 
 Age' which seems to deal with that very point. (Handed in.) 
 
 J. H. Watson^ sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. What is your occupation ? — A. I am a custom-house officer at the present time. 
 Mjy trade is boiler-making. 
 
 Q. Are you a member of any union? — ^Yes, I am secretary of the Boilermakers' 
 Union here. 
 
 Q. Have you any other position? — A. Organizer of the American Federation of 
 Labour, and was organizer of the Dominion Trades Congress. 
 
 Q. How many unions have you organized ? — A. About 36 or 37, 1 am not sure. 
 
 Q. Different trades or occupations? — A. All different. 
 
 Q. All under a common system ? — A. I mean to say, the charters about alike ? — A. 
 Some are under the jurisdiction of the international union, some under the American 
 Federation of Labour, some under what they call the National Union, and some imder 
 the Dominion Trades Congress, a purely Canadian organization. 
 
 Q. What are the advantages of these international unions? — ^A. Well, there are 
 a good many advantages in the international unions — that is, the true international 
 ■anion. The first is that if they get out of work here they can go to the other side and 
 jget work in any shop in America. 
 
 Q. Could not that be done by affiliation? — A. It is doubtful whether they would 
 flo it. You cannot get work at the shops there unless you have your working card 
 ifrom the international union. Neither could you here if they carry out their affilia- 
 tion strictly. 
 
 Q. In the case of the boilermakers — I suppose they are pretty well unionized ? — ^A. 
 Yes. 
 
 Q. I mean all over America. How many would there be? — A. About 30,000, all 
 one union called the International Boilermakers and Iron Shipbuilders of America. 
 
 Q. I suppose they have a benefit fund? — A. No benefit, only a strike fund. 
 
 Q. Who determines the strike question? — A. The local union itself. The men 
 can go on strike without consulting the international head at all, but they won't get 
 any strike pay. They won't recognize a strike unless they get permission. 
 
 Q. When it comes to a settlement? — A. They can make their own settlement with- 
 out interference from outside at all. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. What is that?— A. They make their own settlement without outside inter- 
 ference at all. 
 J. H. WATSON— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
ON INDVSTlilAL DISPVi'ES IN BiarwB COLUMBIA 689 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. W^U, we had a case in reference to the-matter of the Garonne in Victoria. 
 A iiuinber of the Boilermakers' Union said they wished to'niake an arrangement, but 
 the headquarters at Kansas City would not permit them to do so?— A. I should not 
 believe that without I saw the authority for it. 
 
 Q. Is Kansas City the headquarters? — :A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. It has been given in a large body of evidence brought before this Commission 
 with a view of suggesting that unions are not any too reliable in keeping faith with 
 contracts with their employers? — A. They are not, I have to ndmit it. They don't 
 think — that's the trouble; don't give themselves time to think. 
 
 Q. In some cases they are very prone to throw over a contract? — A. Yes, a good 
 many. 
 
 Q. It occurs to me that if unions want to get the public on their side, the best 
 thing is to show the public that they appreciate a contract? — A. Yes, there is only 
 one way to do that. 
 
 Q. How? — A. I would make them incorporate and make them responsible for 
 their actions. 
 
 Q. Then it is alleged by those who oppose incorporation that the benefit funds 
 might be mfl.de a target. There is no real difficulty abovit that, is there ?^ A. There are 
 very few of them that have benefit funds. 
 
 Q. The law at any rate could provide that these benefits should be exempt ? — A, 
 I don't see any difficulty in it at all. 
 
 Q. Have you under notice a case of unions breaking a contract with its em- 
 ployers? — A. Its own agreements? No, I don't know that I have. 
 
 Q. Have you any case in mind of a union threatening to do it and being prevented 
 by any officers of the order ? — A. Well, I have known of officers of the order going and 
 compelling them to live up to their agreement. In the case of the U.B.E.E. strike in 
 Revelstoke some of the machinists there that belonged to the International Machinists' 
 Union, but who went out on strike and had already joined the U.B.E.E. They had 
 made an agreement with the O.P.R. and these men had to give so long a notice. These 
 men quit when the U.B.II.E. went out, quit work in spite of the contract. 
 
 Q. How long were they out ? — A. Perhaps a fortnight. Then it was brought to 
 the notice of Mr. O'Connell, the vice-president, and he ordered them back to work. 
 After the vice-president inquired into it he ordered them back to work or else give 
 up their card in the union. 
 
 Q. On the ground of breach of faith with their employers ? — A. Certainly, it 
 could not have been anything else. 
 
 Q. Did they go back ? — A. Some did, and some quit rather than go back. Some 
 left the town. 
 
 Q. What proportion of them went back ? — A. I don't know. There are machin- 
 ists in the shop can give that information better than I can. The blacksmiths were 
 the same way in Eevelstoke. They did not quit work, but would not work with help- 
 ers who were out on strike. They would not work with the helpers. 
 
 Q. Were the helpers breaking a contract too ? — A. As far as I know they were 
 under the same agreement as what they are in Vancouver, as far as I know. 
 
 Q. Were they ordered back to work ?-^— A. There was no one to order them back. 
 That is the trouble with the Dominion Trades Congress. There is nothing at the 
 back of the Congress to compel that. That is were the international has the ad- 
 vantage. 
 
 Q. That if the international is headed by responsible men, that is the chief 
 cause the local union are not allowed to break contracts ? — A. Unions belonging to 
 the international are hot allowed to break contracts. 
 
 J. H. WATSON— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
 360—44 
 
690 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. If they were left to themselves there might be some danger ? — A. In the case of 
 our union, if it breaks its contract and goes out in sympathy they would withdraw 
 thn charter of the union. 
 
 Q. They don't approve of sympathetic' striltes ? — A. No. I have a copy of the 
 international president's letter over this strike here, because our men at one time — 
 there was such a state of excitement over the U.B.R.E. they were liable to come out 
 i;t any moment. But we wanted to know just what powers we had from our head 
 office. I had a letter from our international union to show. This is a copy of the 
 letter that I got from our grand president in answer to a communication, so you 
 will see how they stand in the matter. . 
 
 (Copy of letter put in as Exhibit 63.) 
 
 Q. You might read that, Mr. Watson.-^A. This is a copy : 
 
 'Now, in regard to the boilermakers working on the C.P.E., will say, that 
 under no consideration will we allow any of our members to violate a con- 
 tract, and if any of the men attach themselves to any dual organization, or 
 go out in sympathy with any other organization and violate their contract, 
 they will immediately annul their card and a lodge that will encourage them 
 to do so, we will call in their charter. We appreciate the sanctity of a con- 
 tract, and if we do not live up to contracts, in a very short time the employers 
 wiU refuse to make any with us. I hope you will so notify those members, 
 as you can rest assured that we will do just as stated in this letter. 
 
 Fraternally yours, 
 
 John McNeil, 
 
 G.P.O: 
 
 Q. No doubt, Mr. Wilson, if all union men acted in the spirit of that letter there 
 would never have been any antagonism to unions ? — A. There are a number doing 
 the right thing, but there are a number, I am sorry to say, who don't do the right 
 thing. There is an element getting into them that is killing them off altogether. 
 
 Q. Will you just state what that is that is causing the trouble ? — A. I think the 
 socialist element in the union is causing the trouble. 
 
 Q. In what way ? — A. They preach the doctrine of discontent. That is what 
 they are able to preach, and that is what they preach in the union and out of the 
 union. 
 
 Q. Their central doctrine is that there is an irreconcilable hostility between em- 
 ployers and the workmen ? — A. They keep up that doctrine, that there is an antagon- 
 ism between capital and labour. 
 
 Q. And that belief is not shared by trade union men ? — A. Not by quite a large 
 number, no. 
 
 Q. That is to say their belief is that there is a necessary antagonism ?-^A. They 
 believe so, but that is not my belief. 
 
 Q. Have you any suggestion to make as to how that could be remedied ? — A. They 
 know my stand. I have told them lots of times. I would throw him out of the union. 
 If I knew a man was a socialist I would not allow the man into the union. If they 
 do they are only taking a viper into themselves, that is all. 
 
 Q. As a rule the socialists are opposed to the incorporation of unions ? A. I 
 
 don't know. I never had much talk with them. They are sure to be opposed to it. 
 If they are going to make them responsible fdr their actions they are going to be 
 opposed to it. 
 
 Q. It seems reasonable that where there is power there should be responsibility ? 
 — A. Certainly, undoubtedly. 
 
 Q. I suppose the Canadian population is not large enough to have national 
 unions. They would not be sufficiently strong ?— A. They might be a good deal 
 stronger than they are if these socialists were not trying to drag everything into these 
 J. H. WATSON— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 691 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 railway unions. Every union that had not an international head, I put into the 
 Dominion Trades Congress, and now they want to put it into the American Labour 
 Union. It has been my aim to strengthen it, and that cannot be done by working 
 theifl. out of it. 
 
 ^Q. "Would you favour national unions ? — A. Yes, I am in favour of all unions 
 that can be taken into the Dominion Trades Congress to go there, that is those that 
 have no international head. 
 
 By Mr. B,owe : 
 
 Q. Why does the Trades Congress require this ? — A. It is a matter of courtesy, 
 I take it. For instance, I was not aware when I organized the laundry workers hjre 
 that there was an international union for them, hut when I sent ther money to Mr. 
 Draper for their charter, he sent the money back and told me to ^pply to the secretary 
 of the International Laundry Workers' Union. It is a matter of honour between the 
 two. They won't interfere with each other's jurisdiction. 
 
 Q. The Dominion Trades Congress does not, hold absolute jurisdiction over the 
 country, but only over such orders as have not international afiBliation ? — A. They 
 have to do the best they can for the worker, and they know an international union 
 i3 the best thing a. worker can get into — that is a bona fide international. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Then when a particular trade does get an international they withdraw from 
 the Dominion Trades Congress and go into the international ? — A. Suppose they 
 organize here and take a charter, then suppose they grow strong enough to form an 
 international union over there, then the Dominion Trades Congress would hand 
 them over to the international union. 
 
 Q. Then the Trades Congress is a sort of parliament of unions where they dis- 
 cuss legislation ? — A. Purely a legislative body. 
 
 Q. And where they discuss matters that should be dealt with in the legislature ?-- 
 A. Tes. 
 
 Q. And that, of course, could be better done by them than international unions I — 
 — A. Certainly. You see the delegates that go to that congress are delegates from 
 international unions. 
 
 Q. Are there any delegates' from the other side ? — A. One fraternal delegate 
 from the American Federation of Labour, but the delegates who comprise the Trades 
 Congress are made up of members of international unions. 
 Q. But they are all men working in Canada ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What is your view of the sympathetic strike ? Is it ever advisable ? — A. No, 
 I don't think so, not under any condition. 
 
 Q. How would you advocate the settlement of labour disputes ? — A. Compulsory 
 arbitration is the only thing I see, aji^- make unions incorporate. Make them respon-. 
 sible for their actions, that is the only thing. 
 
 Q. I suppose the boycott ought not to be employed ? — A. Well, I don't know ; 
 it is employed. I am not in favour of it, but I know it is employed. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to the blacklist ? — A. I don't know anything about it ; 
 I have heard about them in the press. I don't know anything from experience, but 
 I believe a good many men have suffered from them in the States. Men have told 
 me they have walked from street to street in the United States, walked from one 
 store to another, from one town to another, and could not get emplojrment. 
 
 Q. You mean by the union ? — A. No, by employers. On account of taking part 
 in some strike or something of that sort. 
 
 Q. Don't you think both the union and employer should be prohibited from black- 
 listing ?^A. How do unions blacklist ? • 
 
 Q. By posting a list of unfair people I — ^A. Yes, I never looked at it in that 
 way before. I suppose it is. 
 
 2Qa — 44i J- H. WATSON— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
692 MINUTES OF EYIDENCE Of ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII.; A. 1904 
 
 Q. Well, it might post a list of those who were fair, not post a blacklist-? — A. 
 iThey should only do to others what they want others to do to them ; that is a sure 
 thing. 
 
 Q. Eor instance, in a paper which is known hy the name of the ' Western Clapon,' 
 1 think, published in Vancouver, we find a paragraph of this kind: 'The Betraying 
 Hand and Blood Money. The following men have returned tq work and are scabbing : 
 E, V. Dangerfield> baggageman. John Ward, clerk- — — ' and so on. That is not an 
 honourable thing to do, is it ?— A. Better look where it comes from. 
 
 Q. That sort of practice should be condemned on the parf of both employers and 
 miions ? — ^A. I think so. If it is wrong in one case it is wrong in another. There is 
 ancJther thing in this paper. There were three men here boycotted or something of 
 ihat kind through the contractor here, Mr. Cook, completing his contract with them. 
 The very men that are condemning that very building or that contract are the 
 very men that are encouraging this American Labour Union that was organized ex- 
 pressly to do an injury to the American Federation of Labour. They never lose an 
 opportunity of doing it. I think if one is good the other is. 
 
 Q. Do the U. B. E. E. consider the engineers and firemen scabs because they did 
 not come out ? — A. They look on me as a scab too because I encouraged other men to 
 keep in. I don't suppose any other man in this town had more abuse simply because 
 I wanted the men to act the man and live up to their agreement. I am one of those 
 fellows that believes if a man makes an agreement with an employer he has a right 
 to live up to the letter of that agreement, and has a right to expect the employer to do 
 the same. If he cannot live up to it, he cannot expect the employer to do it. If I 
 was an employer and had a body of men working for me, and they ever broke their 
 agreement, I would take fine care not to make another one. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. A member of your union who said that a contract could not stand against the 
 interest of the union and authority of the headquarters is not saying what is your 
 conception of that position ? — A. No. If it was left to headquarters it is not true, 
 because that letter proves it. There is a letter from the grand president of the same 
 union. 
 
 Q. We had a case, nevertheless, where a body of men belonging to your order 
 undertook to do certain work and at the command of Kansas City, through the in- 
 vitation of an American lodge they ordered the men but and broke their agreement, 
 and they did ? — A. I don't think they went on strike. They had undertaken not 
 to touch the work. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What I have about that is : ' We asked Kansas City what we should do. We 
 explained the facts, that we were willing to go to work ; that the Seattle men thought 
 it would help them if we did not go to work, ' and also that we had promised to go to 
 work. The reply was we were to work in conjunction with Seattle, so long as Seattle 
 regarded it as unfair we could not go to work. We had to consult both Seattle and 
 Kansas City. If we disobeyed the Kansas City people our charter would have been 
 lost, and we would have been called scabs and could not have got a job anywhere, only 
 in a non-union shop.' Then he says : ' I think a Canadian organization would be 
 strong enough provided we had a good alien law.' ? — A. I don't think it. There are 
 only five lodges in Canada. 
 
 Q. That was a very extraordinary case because it seemed to go to prove this: 
 that a number of Canadian workmen on a ship in Victoria were actually called out 
 because of the action of some of people in Seattle, to which they were not in the 
 slightest degree a party. That is a case which should not be allowed to continue ?^A. I 
 think they only refused to do the work. ' I don't know the circumstances of th^ case. 
 
 His Lordship. — But if these men could not touch that work it could not be done ? 
 J. H. WATSON— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
ON INDVSTJtlAl DISPUTES IN BRITISU OOLVl^BI^. 693 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mr. Bird. — 'Was that not a case where the work was sent from Seattle to be done 
 in Victoria ? 
 
 His Lordship. — ^Yes. 
 
 Mr; KoWe. — The machinists were having trouble with Morau Brothers in Seattle, 
 and the owner wanted to get the boiler work done. Morans had entered into a con- 
 tract and he came to the Albion Iron "Works, asking them to take the contract. The 
 manager went into the matter with the men. They agreed to take the work. He 
 went over and they still agreed to do it. Then the ship came over, and with it a com- 
 mittee from Seattle, who instructed these men not to do the work. ' Thie firm had taken 
 the job on the faith of this promise made by the boilermakers. Kansas City and Seattle 
 told these men in' Victoria they were not to do it, and they did not. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You see it is getting .to be a grave question, Mr. Watson, as to how far a 
 Canadian organization should be interfered with from the other side ?^A. It is no 
 good saying they were interfered with. Two or three men came over from Seattle, and 
 if the lodge were not willing they need not do it. 
 
 Q. But the lodge at Victoria had received a reply from Kansas City that they were 
 not to proceed under fear of losing their charter. If that sort of thing goes on the 
 Canadian workman is a mere machine in the hands of somebody on the other side ? — 
 A. My experience has been, if men who take the offices in these different unions state 
 the case fairly to the executive head of the union, there would not be so much trouble 
 to come to the right decision, but the trouble is in referring these things to head- 
 quarters they have difficulty in getting at the right and the wrong and often jump at 
 conclusions. At the same time, our international officers here and in every city should 
 be very careful how they communicate things to the head office. There were two 
 strikes here two years running in succession on the C. P. E. with the machinists. Our 
 men came out on strike in sympathy with the machinists, and we had a telegram from 
 the head office refusing that these men should come out on strike in sympathy. 
 
 Q. Was that obeyed ? — A. No, the men took the bit in their teeth and went out. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Do you take an oath in your order on joining ? — A. Yes, there is an obligation, 
 an oath and obligation. The whole of them, as far as I have seen. I don't think the 
 oath is in any way detrimental. I have never come across one that was detrimental. 
 Only an oath that they would be true to one another. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Do you believe in politics in unions ? — ^A. Not in unions, no. 
 
 Q. You say that should not be introduced as part of discussion or part of any 
 policy ? — ^A. It should not be brought into the union. 
 
 Q. When did you come .to that conclusion ?— A. That has been my conclusion 
 from experience gained within these last two years. 
 
 Q. Then before that you were of the opinion that politics were a proper thing in 
 the union ? — A. Not in the union. 
 
 Q. Do you remember writing a letter to the ' Boilermakers' Journal ' in June last ? 
 — ^A. I would like to see it. 
 
 Q. You did not state that ' the sooner that labour gets into politics and gets in 
 quickly to end the present economic system by declaring with a common voice for 
 social democracy, the better ' ? — A. Noi I don't know that I held such opinions as all 
 
 that. 
 
 Q. You didn't write this : 'The old chestnut of no politics in the union is all 
 humbtig — ^let us shout it everywhere. The workers must enter politics or die. Let us 
 go to the polls, as on Labour Day we parade to show our strength, so on election day 
 
 J. H. WATSON— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
691 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF R07AL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 let us marcli to tlie polls and record our aolid vote as one man for one of our choice 
 from our own ranks, who are workers like ourselves, and instead of showing the world 
 our strength, let it be felt with a mighty blow that shall forever put an end to the 
 present economic system and party government, which is giving away our inheritance 
 and making slaves of all ' ? — A. That is not my language. 
 
 Q. Will you swear that you did not write that ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you ever see an article in the ' Journal of the Boilermakers' Union ' of 
 June last appearing over your name ? — ^A. I will swear that I did not write it. 
 
 Q. That you did not dictate it or send it ? — ^A. I swear it never appeared in the 
 ' Boilermakers' Journal ' in the exact words you are reading. 
 
 Q. I hold in my hands what purports to be a quotation from the letter, signesd by 
 you ? — A. I have read it. The whole thing is a tissue of lies. 
 
 Q. Tou say the quotation is false ?— A. I want to tell you this : that my whole 
 action in this city contradicts it. 
 
 Q. Do you say this quotation is false ? — A. Yes, that is false. 
 
 Q. You say that with full knowledge of having read it ? — A. Yes, I have read it 
 — the whole thing. 
 
 Q. You stated the fact that ugly names bad been called you by reason of your 
 recent position in connection with labour matters ? — A. I never said scab, but know 
 how I am looked on. 
 
 Q. You are looked upon as having sold out to a certain political party ? — A. I 
 don't know. 
 
 Q. You hold a position in the post office ? — A. No, I don't. 
 
 Q. In the customs ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you have recently been dismissed from the Trades and Labour Council ? — 
 A. No. 
 
 Q. You are still a member of the Trades and Labour Council ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You have been until recently ? — A. TJntil about four months. 
 
 Q. You were politely told you were not required ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Was there any pressure brought to bear upon you to leave ? — A. No pressure 
 whatever. I left of my own free will. 
 
 Q. Don't you know that the Dominion Trades Congress passed a resolution stating 
 that any man appearing on a public platform in support of either the Conservative 
 or Liberal party was to be looked on with disc^dit ? — A. Yes, that was ^ socialist 
 move, done at the last minute. 
 
 Q. Apparently it has got in advance of your sentiments which have apparently 
 changed as to socialists ? — A. That would be an advance of mine. It is a long way 
 from being socialist yet. 
 
 Q. At the same time by reason of all this you were a discredited member of the 
 local organization, the Trades and Labour Council ? — A. Well, I don't know. 
 
 Q. Were you not a delegate from the Boilermakers' TTnion ? — A. Yes, and my 
 union withdrew its delegates,. There was no question about being turned out. My 
 union withdrew its delegates. I don't want you to make insinuations against me, be- 
 cause you will get them back. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. There is one telegram here (indicating) you might tell us about ? — A. That is 
 right. One of our union was fined $25 for quitting his work and breaking his agree- 
 ment in Eevelstoke. That was done by the local union here. 
 
 Q. Was this man a member of the local union here ? — A. Our jurisdiction extends 
 to Nelson, because there are not enough to form a separate union. The union fined 
 him $25 and they afterwards took it off, because they found he was only out from the 
 old country and he was new to the business. He withdrew from the organization 
 and that settled it. 
 J. H. WATSON — ^Vancouver, June 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 696 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. There is a telegram here from Kansas City apparently to you : 'Avoid sympa- 
 thetic strike.' This order prohibits ?— A. That was in answer to a resolution, or not a 
 resolution, but an order made by my union at a special meeting called to discuss the 
 II.B.E.E. affair. They arranged there the question that I was to ask the headquarters, 
 and that was the answer, to avoid a sympathetic strike. 
 
 Q. "What followed the word ' unless.' The words are blotted out ? — A. I don't 
 know. I took the telegram down to the men at the shops, and I have not seen it since. 
 There was no sympathetic strike. Our men kept at work. 
 
 Q. Who is Mr. Garnhalti ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I understand he was the former agent of the U.B.R.E. before Mr. 
 Halton — the acting agent. 
 
 Bp Mr. Foley : 
 
 Q. You said under no condition would you approve of the violation of a contract ? 
 —A. No. 
 
 Q. Suppose that an employer violated his contract, would you consider the con- 
 tract broken ? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. Then if by any means he violated his agreement would you feel justified in vio- 
 lating yours ? — A. Certainly, 
 
 Q. In your self-defence ? — A. Certainly. I should not think the agreement was in 
 existence if he violated it. 
 
 Sarah McDonald^ sworn. 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Tou are the proprietor of a boarding house, I think ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You understand you are not here voluntarily: — that you have been compelled 
 to come here ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How long have xpu been proprietor of this house ? — A. Eight years in August, 
 but I have been always keeping boarders since the fire here. 
 
 Q. What class of boarders ? — A. Clerks and ordinary men working in foundries 
 and places like that. 
 
 Q. Mechanics and clerks ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Some few days ago you were waited on by some men, were you not, regarding 
 your keeping certain boarders ? — A. Yes. It was the moulders that Were boarding 
 with me, that belonged to the union, the moulders' union. There were three of them. 
 
 Q. They came to you and said what ? — A. They didn't want me to keep these men 
 who came from the C.P.E. 
 
 Q. What men ? — A. The men that were working for the C.P.R., that were working 
 in the place of the strikers. 
 
 Q. How many of such men were there ? — A. After they broke up the boarding 
 house — the C. P. E. was boarding them there— about eight or ten. I had one for eight 
 years and they wanted me to let him go. 
 
 Q. How many men ? — A. Eight or ten. 
 
 Q. Including one man who had been with you for nearly eight years ? — ^A, Yes, 
 that was seven years last Christmas. 
 
 Q. It was on the ground that these men were scabs ? — A. Yes. I told them I 
 could not possibly do it. They were paying their way and were respectable men in the 
 house, and for the men they wanted to go I told them that was impossible, I had no 
 reason whatever. I told them if any of them had done anything dissatisfying to their 
 union I could not do anything to have them go. 
 
 SABAH McDONALD-^Vancouver, Jun« 11. 
 
696 MINUTES OF EVIDEKCE OF WYAL COMMISSION ~ 
 
 Z-A EDWARD, Yllv, A. 1904 , 
 
 Q. Wiat happened then ? — A. They left me. There were fiye left • altogether. 
 
 Q. Did they tell you if you didn't send away these men they would go ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Anything else ? — A. No. They didn't say they would post me as unfair. I 
 told them I had legal advice, and if they put my name up in lodge or union hill that ' 
 I would have them prosecuted, which is what I was prepared to do. , ' 
 
 Q. What did they say to that ?— A. They didn't say anything ; they said they Were 
 going and they went. 
 
 Q. They didn't say they would post you up ? — A. No, they didn't. Not that I 
 ever heard. 
 
 Q. Was there any dispute between these men in your house ? — A. No, they never 
 said a word to the men, to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. What time was this ? How long ago ? — A. This was some time perhaps the 
 last of April, I think, when this happened. 
 
 Q. About the time of the outbreak of the strike ? — A. No, that was after the strike. 
 
 Q. The C.P.E. boarded the men — the scabs, as we call them ? — A. Yes, until about 
 that time. 
 
 Q. Is your boarding house near the O.P.R. ? — A. No, my boarding house is on 
 Eichards street. 
 
 Q. Have any union men come to board with you ? — ^A. No, I have union men with 
 me who would not go. 
 
 Q. Did these union men who stayed with you say anything to the nien who went 
 out ? — A. One of them said he thought they were a little hasty in doing what they did. 
 
 Q. You heard that ? — A. No, one of them told me he said that. 
 
 Q. Have you felt any particular effect on your business ? — ^A. No, I have always 
 had my place full. 
 
 Q. So it has not affected you ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did any of these men say they would not eat at the same table with these peo- 
 ple ? — A. No, I never heard anything of that kind said. 
 
 Q. They simply said they could not stay there ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That unless you turned them out they would go ? — A. Yes, they said they 
 could not stay. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether you have been posted up or not? — A. No, I don't, because 
 if it is up it is not interfering with my business. I was going to give it up altogether 
 sooner than be beaten. I didn't know what they might do. 
 
 Q. You were going to give up the boarding house ?^A. Yes, sooner than I would 
 be beaten. I don't know whether they could do anything to hurt my business, and I 
 didn't like to have to give up. 
 
 Q. Are you dependent on the boarding house for a living ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Are you a married worman ? — A. I am a widow since 1891. 
 
 Q. And you have n6 other way of making a living ? — A. No other way. 
 
 Q. All I would say to you is that these three men are not fit to be in any decent 
 boarding house. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. These were not U.B.E.E. men ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. It was just an individual instance of unionism carried to extremity ? — A. Yes, 
 the TJ.B.E.E. never said one word to me. 
 
 •Mr. Bird. — I might say, Mr. Commissioners, that a better sentiment prevailed 
 and that there has been no instance of fighting women by these unfair tactics. 
 
 His Lordship. — I think these three men are a disgrace to unionism and are not 
 fit to be in any decent boarding house. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — There are lots of men claiming to be Christians. These are individuals 
 examples. 
 SARAjH iMcDONAIiD— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BHITISB COLUMBIA 697 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Botve : , i 
 
 Q. How many union men are there in your house ? — A. I could not say ; I 
 never bothered so long as they w^re respectable and minded their own business.' 
 
 Q. There were some union men remained when the others left ? — A. Yes, I could 
 not say how many. 
 
 William D. Mum, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are a baker ? — A. Yes; I run a hake-shop at Mount Pleasant. 
 
 Q. That is a suburb of Vancouver ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How long have you been in business ? — A. I have been baking about eight 
 years. 
 
 Q. Have you had any contracts baking bread for the C. P. E. ? — A. Not the 
 C. P. E., the C. P. N. I have been furnishing them bread for about two years, up to 
 the present time. I am. supplying them to-day. 
 
 Q. Have you had any difficulty, arising out of the fact of your having a contract, 
 with any union ? — A. Yes, there was some trouble with the C P. E. and their men 
 at the time of the U. B. E. E. strike, and I was supplying the Princess May with 
 bread. I was advised by the union not to supply that ship any longer. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. What union ? — A. The Bakers' Union — the journeymen. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. To refrain from supplying bread to the Princess May ? — A. Yes, I had a letter 
 from the union, advising me that this boat was unfair. 
 
 Q. Have you got that letter ? — A. I have not got it with me ; I can tell you what 
 is in it. It wanted to know about my contract, and if I knew they were on the un- 
 fair list. It was from the Journeymen Bakers' Union. 
 
 Q. That is different from the Masters' Union ? — A. Yes. We have no Masters' 
 Union here. It was from the secretary, Mr. McLean. 
 
 Q. And that letter stated the Princess May was on the unfair list, and requested 
 you to stop supplying bread ? — A. Yes. He wanted to know if I was aware that these 
 boats were on the unfair list, especially the Princess May. I am supplying a lot of 
 the boats, but it was this oae particularly. They wanted to know about the nature 
 of my contract with the company. I replied that I kept no record or unfair list, 
 except men who did not pay. About my contract, it was my business, and nobody 
 else's, and that I should keep on supplying them, which I have done and am yet. 
 
 Q. Any reply to that ?— A. A few days after that the men were advised to boy- 
 cott my shop. , 
 
 Q. How do you know ? — A. I had a second letter. 
 
 Q. What language did that letter use ? Have you got that letter ? — A. I have 
 not got it with me ; I think I have that one. Just about what was in it was tha't 
 after Monday morning, if I continued supplying these boats, that my shop would be 
 on the unfair list. Monday would be the 6th April — Ii believe that is the correct 
 
 date. 
 
 Q. Were the men called out ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. By whom ?^A. By this union. A meeting was called and they were advised 
 to quit. There were eight or nine in the shop. We employ nine now. 
 
 ;WIL<LIAM D. MUIR— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
6^ MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL' COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Did you have any talk with the men before they went out ? — A. Yes, I advised 
 them what was coming. I showed them my letters, and the men agreed to stay with 
 me — all but two. 
 
 Q. These two men went out^-what did they say as to their reason for going out ? 
 — A. Because I was supplying these boats that vpere unfair. 
 
 Q. In the interests of the union or that they were compelled ? — A. I believe it was. 
 
 Q. Was it because they had to obey the union, or because they thought the action 
 of the union was proper ? — A. I would suppose both, but I hav« nothing to show that. 
 
 Q. Was there anything passed in the conversation with you that would give some 
 light on that ? — A. I have not much to show. Of course, anything that was unfair 
 we would not be supposed to supply it: For instance, I had a car of flour consigned 
 to me, and as the teamsters were on strike I could not get it delivered. Consequently, 
 I had to use a wholesale wajrehouse — have the flour put in there , and get it delivered 
 through that. I am showing this to show that I was not supposed to have anything 
 to do with these boats because they were unfair. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe ; 
 
 Q, Had you other boats besides the Princess May ?-^A. Quite a lot of the C.P.N, 
 boats, Any that asked for it, got it. 
 
 Q. Do your contracts with the C.P.N. represent a large portion of your business ? 
 — ^A. Ko, I think a small part. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did you have a written contract with the C.P.N. ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Any written contract with your men ? — A. Yes, they signed a contract with 
 me last year. It runs from, the 1st of July — to work with me for a certain time at 
 certain wages. 
 
 Q. Anything about notice to quit ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Where is that contract ? — A. I have it down at my office. 
 
 Q. We would like to have all these papers — will you look for them ? — A. Well, I 
 think I may not be able to find them. 
 
 Q. Have these men come back since ? — A. No, they have been working for other 
 people and walking around part of the time. 
 
 Q. Did you put men in their places ? — A. Yes, I had no difficulty in getting men. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Were they union men ? — A. No, non-union men. 
 
 By His, Lordship : 
 Q. You have union men ? — A. No, not now. All are non-union since that 
 trouble. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Are these men who remained with you not union men ? — A. They were, but 
 they were discharged from the union because they remained in my shop. I believe 
 there are six. One of the men who will follow me has got a paper to show the names. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Was your contract in regard to supplying the Princess May in existence prior 
 to the strike ? — A. Yes, I have been supplying these boats since I have been in Van- 
 couver. 
 
 Q. Was not the chief difficulty in regard to this union that you were supplying 
 the Tosemite and the Bithet, on which the scabs were being boarded? — A. I waa 
 supplying them too. 
 
 WILLIAM D. MUIR— Vancouver, Jane 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN DRITISa COLUMBIA 699 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You got the contract subsequent to the strike ? — A. No. I have been supply- 
 ing the Princess May and several of the others for the last two years — for the summer 
 before this. 
 
 Q. Were the Yosemite and the Bithet not mentioned? — A. No mention of any 
 boats at all; I simply went to the purchasing agent and asked him for this business. 
 
 , By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. This letter you got from the union was in regard to the Princess May ? — A. 
 Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. You can produce this contract with the O.P.N. ? — A. I have no vsritten con- 
 tract with them. 
 
 Q. Your contract is nothing moj"e than your ordiiiaTy contract with people who 
 ■buy bread tickets ?-^A. With anybody, yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. In the letter you got from the union there was no reference to the Rithefi— 
 A. No, I don't 'think these boats were used as boarding houses then; I believe they 
 were boarding in cars, but I would not be sure, and that shortly after this the boats 
 were put here. I know about the Yosemite and Rithet afterwards, I think. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Did the action of the union in placing you on the unfair list affect your busi- 
 ness ? — ^A. A little. Some of the union men have quit buying bread. I probably lost 
 forty or fifty private houses. 
 
 Q. Were you posted as unfair ? — A. I have not been to their labour hall. There 
 has been nothing in the newspapers. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Who is the man in charge of the union ?— A. I could not say. 
 
 His Lordship. — I suppose Mr. Eussell can tell us about this unfair list ? 
 
 Mr. Eussell. — Mr. Muir, I believe, is posted by the Bakers' Union because he in- 
 sisted on supplying bread to the scabs. The notice is there, on the blackboard, signed 
 by the secretary of the Bakers' Union. 
 
 His Lordship. — We will get a full account of that practice later. 
 
 Witness. — I might also say that at the time these men were taken out of my shop, 
 several of the men belonging to the Bakers' Union went to a lot of places in the city — 
 grocery stores — and went to the hotels, restaurants and other places, and solicited them 
 to quit buying bread from me. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What was your total income before this" per month ? — A. I could only give you 
 the number of loaves. We were turning out before the strike about 20,000. 
 
 Q. And by reason of these forty or fifty families leaving you ? — A. We are still 
 turning out about 20,000; We have picked up all we have lost. We did not lose many 
 stores. We lost three or four stores. 
 
 Q. Did they tell you so ? — A. They told the drivers. Some restaurants quit us. 
 No hotels quit us to my knowledge. 
 
 Q. Can you give us the name of one of these grocery stores ? — A. Well, I could 
 not at the moment. If I come back after dinner I could. 
 
 Qi Can you give us the names of any people who quit doing business with you ?— 
 
 A. I could bring a list, but I have not it with me. I believe I advised my bookkeeper 
 
 to keep a record, so that we would know just what that list was. That was done purely 
 
 for curiosity. 
 
 IWILLIAM D. MUIR— Vancouver, Jiuno 11. 
 
700 MINUTES OF ETIDEXCM OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 '- 3-4 EDWARD V»f.,'Ai 1904 
 By Mr. Eowe : :^ 
 
 Q. Did any ojf the customers say they stopped on account of this actioii ?t— A. Yes, 
 there were either sons or fathers, or somehody in the house belonging to the,U3-IJ-E., 
 consequently they could not buy bread of us. ' 
 
 Q. How many cases of that ? — A. I could not say how many. I can get a list 
 made out and give it to you pretty closely.. 
 
 Q. What was your supply per month to the steamboats ?— A. In winter tiine it 
 cmounted to very little. Previous to this these boats were not running north. We 
 have a standing order for about 300 loaves every time she sails. They take abou-t 
 that. Fo» the last two months I would say about 900 to 1,200 each month, say 1,000 to 
 1,200 loaves, a month. That has been for the months of April and May, and June will 
 be about the same. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Tou had better bring these papers after lunch ? — A, You want to know the 
 names of the people who quit us ? 
 
 Q. We want the names, we want the two letters, and we would like to look at that 
 agreement ? — A. I don't know about the letters, but I am satisfied I have, the agree- 
 ment. 
 
 Charles A. Wilband, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are a journeyman baker ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you are in the employ of the last witness, Mr. Muir ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. How long ? — A. For about two years. 
 
 Q. Are you now an employee ? — ^A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. You have heard what the last witness said about the trouble he had ? — A. Yes, 
 I heard what he said all right. 
 
 Q. What have you to say about the action of the union ? — A. Well, the union 
 wrote to him and told him he was not to supply that boat Or else they would call the 
 men out. I was a member of the union. 
 
 Q. Are you now ? — ^A. No, for I considered they were not doing what was right 
 by the man, so I withdrew from the union and stayed with the shop. 
 
 Q. Were you told by the secretary of the union that you had to come out ? — A. 
 Well, he gave us verbal notice, but the rule is he should write us by written notice to 
 attend a special meeting, and it was only just a verbal notice and we didn't go. 
 
 Q. You didn't go to the meeting ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. How many journeymen bakers are there in tovm ? — A. At that time there were 
 22 members in the union. I have been a member of the union for three years. The 
 fact is I was a chartered member. I worked in the city previous to the time that there 
 was a union. 
 
 Q. You didn't go to the meeting. Were you ordered out by the secret.ary or the 
 union ? — A. We got notice that we were to be called out, a verbal notica 
 
 Q. Who gave it to you ? — ^A. It was the secretary. 
 
 Q. Who is the secretary ? — A. His name is McLean. 
 
 Q. Where did he give it to you — A. At the shop. He said if we kept on working 
 at that ^hop which supplied the company's men they would enforce a fine on us of $25 
 for each week we worked. 
 
 CHARLES A. WIL.BAND — Vancouver, June 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPVTB8 IN BRITI8R COLUMMIJ- VOl 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. What did you say ? — A. We told him we would stay with the shop and did not 
 intend to go out. We told him the reason we did not intend to go out was that we 
 didn't think they were running the union by union principles. 
 
 Q. And you think it is not good unionism to call you out on strike because your 
 employer was supplying the Princess May ? — A. No, for the simple reason that if he 
 was supplying the boat it would not make any difference to us who he supplied the 
 bread to, as long as we got our hours and our wages. 
 
 Q. How many men disobeyed this summons tO come out ? — A. Five men. 
 
 Q. Five stayed with the shop and two with the union ? — A. There was one man 
 working a day or two, and the other man, named Evans, he was the only man who 
 went out. 
 
 Q. What has become of the union since ? — A. I don't know for sure whether it is 
 existing or not, but I heard it was running. 
 
 Q. This union is a branch of the International Bakers' Union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did none of you men complain to headquarters about the action of this union ? 
 A. Yes, as a body we wrote to headquarters for a decision. 
 
 Q. Have you got an answer ? — A. We got an answer, and they turned us down, 
 supporting the local union in their action. 
 
 Q. Have you the letter ? — A. No, but that was the effect of it. The letter stated 
 that the local union here had done right and that we had to go back, and all the fines 
 would be clear if we went back in the union. 
 
 Q. Have you the letter ? — A. No. There are some of them have it. 
 
 Q. I mean the letter you got from headquarters as well as the one you sent ? — A. 
 I have not the letter, but I guess some of the men have. 
 
 Q. It is important to know exactly what was done. You say you can get a copy 
 cf the letter sent ? — A. Yes, and I am pretty sure I can get the reply. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. Do you know a baker named Joseph Davidson has been on the unfair list ? — 
 A. Yes, ever since the union started. 
 
 By Eis Lordship : 
 
 Q. What was the ground for that ? — A. The ground was that the men wanted to 
 see him concerning an agreement in dispute, and he would not have anything to do 
 with the union. 
 
 Q. He was a sensible man not to have anything to do with this kind of union. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Were you one of the parties voting to put Joseph Davidson on the unfair list ? 
 A. No. I never voted to put him on the unfair list. 
 
 Q. Did you oppose it in any uiiion meeting? Did you consider it a proper thing 
 to do ? — ^A. I didn't consider it a proper thing. I did not vote either way. I was 
 only one of the members. 
 
 Q. You did not thinlc it necessary to stand up for any man's privileges ? — A. No, 
 I didn't vote either way. 
 
 Q. If you had happened to be in any other shop and not in your shop you would 
 have voted for posting Muir on the same list ? — A. No, when I was working in another 
 shop I voted to get Muir on the fair list. There had been previous attempts made of 
 that sort. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. On what grounds ? — ^A, On the ground of supplying this boat. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. How could that be ? Were you working in another shop during the strike ? — 
 A. Not exactly during the strike, but some time before this. 
 
 CHARDES A. WILjBAND— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
702 MINUTES OP ETIDEXOE GF ItOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. It was during some other strike ? — A. Ooncerning other troubles. 
 
 Q. And Mr. Muir had been supplying scabs on other occasions ? — A. I don't know 
 if or sure; as far as the JournejTnen Bakers' Union is concerned it did ifot matter who 
 the boss supplies. As long as you get the hours you ask for and the wages, it don't 
 make any difference to you who he supplies his stuff to. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Then your union in putting anyone on the unfair list went beyond its con- 
 stitution and beyond its rights ? — A. Tes. , 
 
 Q. Tour union is only authorized to object to the question of wages' and hours ? 
 — A. Tes, that is all. Of course, as far as finanees- are concerned they help other 
 unions as well. 
 
 Q. Have they any benevolent purposes ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. They merely contribute to the support of the Trade's and Labour Council in 
 Vancouver ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Mr. EowE. — ^It would be wise to know to what length this union would go in the 
 ease of bread. It seems to me there are some other people than scabs who would look 
 like murderers who would refuse to supply bread. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — You shall not live by bread alone,, it is said ! 
 
 Mr. EowE. — Has anyone got a copy of the constitution of that Bakers' Union ? 
 
 Witness. — ^Yes, I have a copy at home, I will bring it. 
 
 George Nelson, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are a journeyman baker ? — A. Yea. 
 
 Q. You have been in the employ of Mr. Muir ?^— A. Yes, for two years. 
 
 Q. Were you a member of this Bakers' Union ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Were you called out at the time were were speaking of ?— A. No, sir, I was ex- 
 pelled from the union two days before the shop was ordered out on strike because I 
 wrote a letter to the headquarters to ask information. 
 
 Q. What reason was there for expelling you for that ? — A. I wrote to head- 
 quarters to ask whether they could order me out on strike when my employer was 
 acting up to agreement as to wages and hours. 
 
 Q. Did you have a written agreement with Muir ? — A. So far as wages and hours 
 are concerned. 
 
 Q. And you considered hy going out you were breaking a contract ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And for that reason you wrote the headquarters to find out ? Have you a 
 copy of that letter ? — A. No, but I have a copy of the letter that I got from head- 
 quarters. I simply wrote that I was a member of local union 46, and I asked in the 
 letter if local 46 could order our shop out in sympathetic strike when my employer 
 was acting up to our agreement and contract. That was all I wrote. 
 
 Q. You got a letter from headquarters ? — A. Yes, I was expelled the same night 
 I showed the letter to the imion. A fine was put on me of $25. I would not pay it 
 and I was expelled. That was four days after. The first meeting I brought up a copy 
 of the letter I had written. When that was read, I was expelled. The expulsion was 
 p'assed by unanimous vote. I was fined and would not pay, and then I was expelled. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Did everyone vote in favour of the expulsion ? — A. Yes, except one man from 
 our shop — ^he did not vote at all. None of the rest of the shop were there. 
 
 GEORGE NEJLSON— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRIT I SB COLUMBIA 703 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Is he one of the men who have since gone out ? — A. No, he is in the shop 
 still. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Ton say you have not kept a copy of the letter you sent ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Is it against the rules to write a letter of that sort ? — A. No, we have the right 
 to do that. I was also an officer in the union ; I was the statistician. 
 His, Lordship. — You can read this letter: 
 
 (Witiiess reads copy of letter received by. him from headquarters of union — 
 Exhibit 64.) 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. They evidently upheld the action of the union ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Is that union affiliated with the American Labour Union ? — A. No, sir. Their 
 headquarters are in Cleveland. 
 
 Q. Then evidently you were to abide by the action of the union in one case and 
 not in the other ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : ■ 
 
 Q. What they said was that you should obey the orders of the union, but you 
 had the right to ask information ? — A. When they fined me they said I had no right. 
 The secretary said he was the man, and if I wanted any information I had to ask 
 the union. I studied the constitution book. This -is not the only union I have joined. 
 The constitution allows you to communicate with the headquarters any time you wish, 
 and therefore I did it. 
 
 Q. Is this union still existing ? — A. It is still going--two or three, men in work 
 in the union. Of course the New Westminster bake-shops are the same union — the 
 two cities. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. The meaning of that is that you must break a contract if you make one, if 
 the union orders it ? — A. A contract on either side. No alterations to be made on 
 either side under thirty days' notice. 
 
 Q. I mean the law of your union is that you jnust break a contract if the union 
 orders it ? — A. In the constitution it says : If any dispute occurs between master 
 and servant, they must try and settle it as peaceably as they can. A strike is the last 
 thing that must come on the board. By the way, they ordered us out on strike. You 
 have to have two-thirds of a vote, and there was no two-thirds vote at the meeting 
 that night. 
 
 Q. Who was the cause of your being ordered out ? — A. The cause was because 
 my employer was serving the Princess May. 
 
 Q. But did the secretary of the Bakers' Union have any communication with any 
 other union ? — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. Why should they take up this matter without anybody asking it ? — A. (None.) 
 
 Mr. BiRD.T— Mr. Eussell will probably be here this afternoon, I suppose. 
 
 His Lordship. — We would like to find out about this blacklist. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^He told me he was going to see some of the members of the Bakers' 
 Union and the Trades and Labour Council. 
 
 Hi,s Lordship. — We would like to have this unfair list fully explained. 
 
 Q. Does the constitution require a two-thirds vote before the men can be called 
 out ?— A. Yes. 
 
 GEORGE NELSON— Van* ouver, June 11. 
 
704 MINVTeS OF ETIDEHCB, OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD :VI|.,, A- 1iSp4, 
 
 Q. Did they have a two-thirds vote ? — A. I was not there, but. all the members 
 have got to be at the meeting when the strike is called, and all members were, not 
 there. All members have got to be notified in written order, which was no^done. No 
 one in our shop got a written notice. I was expelled on Thursday afternoon, and this 
 happened on a Saturday. ^ 
 
 Q. Tou say there was no written notice for a two-thirds vote ? — A. All the mem- 
 bers were not at the meeting, and a written notice was not given at all. 
 
 Chaelks a. Wilband, recalled. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You say you did not get written notice of this meeting ? — ^A; No. 
 
 Q. Do you know by what majority the resolution was passed which called you out ? 
 — ^A. It was not a two-thirds majority. 
 
 Q. Were you there ? — A. No, I was not there that night. The five who stayed out 
 were not there at all. 
 
 Q. How do you know there was not two-thirds ? — A. We were supposed to be 
 notified in writing and we were not. We had meetings about every night of the week, 
 and we thought we would not go unless we had a written notice. 
 
 Q. Did you object to the meeting considering the matter on the ground that you 
 had no written notice ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you send written notice to the effect that you objected ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You did not go to any meeting ? — ^A. No, we did not go to any meeting. 
 
 Vancouvek, June 12, 1903. 
 Mr. Davis. — ^If the Commission will call Mr. Marpole for a moment 
 
 His Lordship. — In view of the fact that I understand a settlement is practically 
 assured 
 
 Mr. Davis. — I understand that, owing to the good offices of the Oormnission in 
 that regard, a settlement is practically assured. 
 
 His Lordship.- — ^I would say that the time taken by the Commissioners would be 
 very materially lessened if the same admission were made as in the Supreme Court, 
 that is, that originals are originals and copies copies, and that the Commission can 
 draw their own conclusion. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I have also, on behalf of the U. B. E. E., to thank the Commission for 
 their intervention. I feel that had it not been for them matters would not have been 
 in so satisfactory a position to-day. I sincerely hope that the negotiations that have 
 been going on may result in the announcement of a satisfactory settlement on behalf 
 of the U. B. E. E. 
 
 Mr. Davis. — Of course, it must be remembered that the strike is settled between 
 the -C. P. E. and the striking men. 
 
 His Lordship. — I am very glad that the Commission has been of assistance in 
 bringing about a happier relation between the men and the company. I hope our 
 efforts will have something to do in bringing this about, and ^ith troubles ip the 
 future. 
 
 CHARIjBS a. WIUBAND— Vancouver, June 11. 
 
ON. INBV8TBIAL DlSPUrEJ^ ^m BRITISH COLUMBIA 705 
 
 SESSIONAL; iPAR^R .No. 3^^ 
 
 !.f; R. Marpole, reealWri «,•,;.;• ., 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. Will you please say what were the reasons for certain meji being, sent east in 
 February, first Wilson and Dick, second Halton, and third Foulds ? — A. In the case 
 df' Wilson; as in the case of liick; by the desire" 6f certain officers of this cotapanjj who 
 wished to do a good turn to bbthtoeii, absolutely without the iiitentioii of hurtirig 
 either of them. That I know for a positive fact. In the case of Messrs, Foulds and 
 Halton, it was done from Mr. Ogden, without reference to me whatever. I simply 
 reeeivM a telegram from Ogden-to^send these two men. The explanation of what it 
 vtas for, and the matter was discussed months before, was that the accountant's branch 
 would be sepeirate'from my office. That is the reason they went east. ' 
 
 Q. Were other men in corresponding divisions called to Montreal at the same time?: 
 — A. I understiand so. Fi'om Winnipeg and somewhere' else. 
 
 Q. There was an impression prevalent amoiig some of the employees at one 
 time that Mr..Purvi8 was sent south- by you with aview of getting information ia con*- 
 nection with the U. B. E. E. Why was Mr.'Pur¥i& sent south ? — -A.: He was. sent south 
 for the betterment of the men's position .here. ■ 1 1 was asked . to try and. find iaut the 
 rates of pay on. o-ther roads southi and Mr.' Purvis, my chief clerk; was selected fox that 
 purpose and made reports. ; lam glad.you asked me thequestidn,. -because I explained 
 it fully to the committeej as 1 wanted to .explain to the striking employees, that it was 
 for the one special object t)f> improving their condition, and the result was they got 
 increases on- the 1st of Febjuary. .i . '.'. ■• ■ . , .; , , , , _ 
 
 Q. There has been some talk about blacklisting. Will you explain to the Commis- 
 sioners whether there is any blacklist on the C.P.E.., or what there is which might be 
 considered as a systeni of blacklist ? — A. The system on the road is that when a man is 
 dismissed or suspended, I should say that a list is made up at the end of the month of 
 all cases of discipline of that kind, and sent to each general superintendent on the 
 system. That is all that is done, but the impression I gathered from the evidence here, 
 and expressions I heard before, that this company sends a blacklist to :every Amercan 
 road, is absolutely false. 
 
 Q. There seems to be an impression that there was an agreement between the 
 G.P.E. and other roads with reference to something of that sort ? — ^A. I never heard of 
 it, and I never had any correspondence with American roads as to that. I simply 
 answered questions as to cause of dismissal, that is all. 
 
 Q. As a result of Mr. Purvis' visit south, do you know how the rates paid on the 
 Pacific division to clerks, &c., compare with rates in Sea:ttle, or south ? — A. I attempted 
 to estimate them as far as I could without knowing the specific duties of each man, and 
 if there is any error in the figures it is mine. I went through what my chief clerk 
 told me, and tiie evidence he produced, always having in mind what I considered wag 
 the extent of their work done here in comparison with theirs. 
 
 By Mr. Bird ; 
 
 Q. Is not this information of the general superintendent collected in the head office 
 cf the company at Montreal ?— A. No, by me here, and I may say, Mr; Bird, that I 
 never did any -since the Strike began. 
 
 Q. Is there not a book kept in the head office at "Montreal called a stafi record book ? 
 -^A. There may be, but I don't know it officially. : Possibly, I should judge there 
 would be. ', r 
 
 Q. Is it not the custom of t^e company to keep complete records, of a man's career, 
 which would include inquiry into his record for some years prior to his employment by 
 the company ? — A. Tes, we do that ourselves here. 
 
 Q. And for thesake of reference I should say these documents are filed in sched- 
 ules similar to the system used by mercantile establishments ? — A. Well, I know noth- 
 
 no AK R. MARPOLE— Vancouver, June 12. 
 
70S Mmm'm ■'Of Mvmawo'e OF^ so^al .coismiissim nv. 
 
 ing about the. systeip regarding the^staff book. ',1 aimply-5ent infopnatijOp^ tfaeire, fiiid 
 that is all I know. 
 
 Q. Supposing you want to get a man's record who Jjas previovisly,W9rked on apy 
 division of the r^lway ?^Ai Pn thi§ division ? ' • ,, 
 
 Q, . Supposing a ntan lias/'^pi'-lted, say on jthe Atla'ni;ic,dayisio,n, and he 13 out here ' 
 and applies for emploj^ment, what.'is the" course yon adopt i—Ji. He.gliould pr^iduce a 
 certificate of service when he applies. 
 
 :Q. Then in regard to, the clpa^ance ?— A, If ,we get a. clearance we, wrUerto the 
 superintendent, and ask for.hisrepprd there. .'W^e sire guided Ky.tliat. \V'e'iaTe:seen so 
 many spurious forgeries that is one reason wJiy we do that., .. ' ....:.., i. 
 
 Q. Do you writ© to the l^ontreal oifiee ?— A,, ^o^ !,X have ngver coniinunica,ted ' 
 with Montreal about men. ., , 
 
 By His Lordship : ' '' - ■ - 
 
 Q. You say you have ;had f^^ged ctearanees ?— A. I h^ye had "then; . herel- One 
 from Kansas City— the. late^ilr. Deschenes' '.signature. They put in a dead'maii's 
 signature.. .. .. ,.,-, ,,. ,. 0, ; ., ',.■'.. . > ■ '■'" " 
 
 .,' By Mp.^ird;: ;"-:\:'''''..,r''''"':^''i' _'',]''''' ■-■ "•■'•;^ -■■-■' - ••■'■■ ."■ '--■■ 
 
 . Qi Now,- 1' am infprnied ,.that youjr clearance papers do not: always carry tc? the 
 casual reader th^irtrue significance... That cl^esranee papers are given, 'left of his own 
 accord.' < Dpes l^at me^n exactly -what it purpprts to me^n ?— A. So. far as I am con- 
 cerned it Would. .' • : , . 
 
 Q. I am informed that there is a file stating that a document bearing that means 
 ' Employ him-pn Ho aqcount-' ?-^A. Never heard of su.ch a.thing in.wy life. 
 
 Q. Where one of the$e clearances hearsi on the face of it, ' Left,pf his own accord,' 
 in regard to any employee, it really means, ' Don't employ him on any account,' When 
 I said your views^ Imean Mr. Beasley ? — A. I -tell you if Mr. Beasley did that he 
 v.ould never work for me. , . - , 
 
 Q. YPu say that is not the case ? — A. I aay so distinctly. 
 
 Q. They say — I have heard from a gentleman who should be an authority in 
 regard to superintendents that a water line with the crane's head struck off, appearing 
 on the paper of the clearance means, ' Don't employ him on any account,' and although 
 the testimonial is all right on the face of it, it is different when held Up to the light. ? — 
 A. That is a new phase of railway life for me. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. They will teach you bad practices if they keep on ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Apparently this document which was put in evidence some days ago from the 
 Great Northern, so far as their practice is concerned, fhey don't pretend but what they 
 give clearances on the face of them ? — A. I saw that certificate, but as I said the man 
 i? employed, I have never seen the clearance. The question with me is how you got 
 that document. 
 
 Q. Might not the fact of it getting into the waste-paper basket be tlie reason ho 
 IS employed ? — A. No, documents of that sort do not get into the waste-paper basket. 
 
 Q. Is it your practice to put the actual facts on the face~of clearances ? — A. No. 
 except dismissed for cavise. We are bound to say that. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 Q. You don't mean that you put anything that is not an actual fact ? — A. Oh, 
 no. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I really think, Mr. Commissioners, that it would be unwise to proceed 
 with a direct cross-examination seeing that friendly relations are about to be assured. 
 R. MARPOLE— Vancouver, June 12. 
 
OiV iWu^f^iAi DisPtyTE^ /^r Mt'riSB COLVMBTA 707 
 
 SESStb^AL pAPER N6. 36a' " 
 
 ' 'His''LtiiiDkktf;^l4l«h'i''SieeV^tt\3h LbjecJi; iti {t 'Th^fe' ai'fc some itatis-tifc* I W6uld- ' 
 like to get. v.-i , .' : '■• ;,, .., 
 
 ^ '4 t WouM iile 'toimw-^kai'WiMieFWeW'out;^^^ ^^Tie, ib&d'?— A-.'I'shq'uld kay 
 about seventy per cent, but \yill give you the "ifeiires.' I' \^ill give'tHenl''t6'-Mr; King. 
 
 Q. 1 under'sttod some men weilt'out at Nelson', Eevelstoke/Wihnipeg.and otKer 
 places. We would' like to get the ^tatifetics' ?^— A. I" Can give yoSi theiii lat each p6int — 
 a statement. -j i ; ^ i . 
 
 Q. Were iherp sinymeri Went ibui'atHhese points besides membfeft of tHs' U.iB.K.E. 
 organizeition' ? — A. I netef inquired a& to whkt they 'really 'were. "I hever Sisked the ' 
 question. Some might have gone' out in sympathy. ' ' ' • " : 
 
 QV There were soriie blacksmiths wfent oiitat ReVelstoke ?— A. The machiniflts and 
 fitters went out, as Mr_Watson said yesterday. I fancy about 48; or 60. 
 
 Q. They went out in sympathy with the IT. B. R. E. ? — A. So I understand. They 
 had contracts with us at all eyents. 
 
 . Q. Tell us shortly what occurred about ' that ?^A. These "inilchiriistS arid 'fitters 
 went out in syinpathy, ' as I understand ' it, "w'ith the UiB.E.E. strikers, and we the6 
 had to call in the aid of the Canadian head of that order to assist us in proving to 
 these men that they were breaking their agreement. That was done, (in the .case of 
 the machinists and fitters, I think, by Mr. Holmes. This was reportect to us by our 
 ofiicials. The blacksmiths did not come ou;t,'b'nt they refilsed to wdrk with the helpers 
 we sent there, consequently, they were idle for d feW weeks Withoift pay. We were 
 determined to live up to our agreement and' we would rt'ot dismiss them. We had to call 
 on the Canadian agent, Mr. Marshall, I think, of Winnipeg, and he came' there and' 
 settled the thatter. ' ' ' '- - ■ ■ ■ : ■ , ', • , .: ■ ' -i , 
 
 Q. Tou say these blacksmiths and machinists would not help ?-^A. The ma- 
 chinists and fitters went out, but the blacksmiths did not. They stayed there and 
 refused to work ■with imported labour. 
 
 Q. You don't mean labour imported from the other side ? — A. Oh, no; labour 
 brought from Montreal and Winnipeg. 
 
 Q. Will you give. us some idea of what delay has been caused by the strike with 
 reference to freight ? — A. I would say there was very little. I could not claim, for 
 instance, that a strike of a few men in Vancouver is going to delay things between 
 here and Winnipeg. I should judge there Would not be one per cent of the delay 
 between here and Winnipeg. 
 
 Q. How much business has been delayed in the city by the non-delivery of 
 freight ? — A. I am not quite certain as to that. 
 
 Q. I have heard on the street, Mr. Marpole, that the projected additions in rela- 
 tion to the rebuilding of this hotel in the city has been retarded. CouM you tell us 
 anything about that ? — A. Well, it was fully the intention of the company to proceed 
 with those additions, and owing to the fact that the responsible contractors whom I 
 approached would not undertake the work without a strike clause, and knowing labour 
 disputes here I could not take the responsibility of advising the mailageiflent to go 
 on with it. Under orders from the management we decided to wait arid see develop- 
 ments, and see whether we could get some responsible contractors to undertake it with 
 a good bond, and we abandoned it for that reason. 
 
 Q. How long do you expect that state of afiairs will exist ? — A. Until some gov- 
 ernment action; I am not going to take the responsibility. It is too serious for me to 
 answer. 
 
 Q. During the strike here was there any picketing ? — A. Yes, probably I could show 
 you some photos if you would like to put those in. They won't recognize. the indivi- 
 duals, but will sho-w :hpw men were congregated on Cordova street and down by my 
 own house, and particularly opposite the station. 
 
 Q. Was that practised during the wtole strike ?-^A. Until they ^ot tired, yes. 
 
 R MARPOLE— Vancouver, June 12. 
 
 36a^-45J 
 
708 MINUTES OF EVIDM^CB OF ROYAL COMMISSION < 
 
 3J4. EDWARD ■ Vl 1., A. i 1904 
 
 Q. Could' you give us the number ?— A. 'i icanadt' say how many w^reactual 
 pickets. The photographs show from 30 to 40- men. I might say tliat no .meii ever 
 accosted me, and I have nothing to say as to what they did. ' . ,. . 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say your house was watched ?.-t7A. No>I think they were 
 searching the wharf or thei platform next to my gardeni;: I -am aware that my house 
 has been pidieted twoor thre times during: the trouble, I don't know what for. Maybe 
 to see whether the U. B. R. E. came 'to see me. , : 
 
 Q. I understand' the C P. E. has brought coal over from Japan ? — A; We are 
 bringing over 10,000 tons. The first cargo is'invthe harbour now. Thi^; was, in, con- 
 sequence of the trouble on the Island. ' Our souTce of supply was practically cut off 
 by reason of the strikes there. , , ,, ^ .: .i ,..i. 
 
 Q. How much coal have you brought fromthere ?^— A. Tiiere will b,^ 10,000 tons 
 by this time, one ship in the harbOuTi one, due on M^mday, p,nd two others follofwing. 
 
 Q. What do you estimate you paid for that coal ?-^A.,How much n;ioney is goipg 
 out to the colliery for that ?— A. About ;$65,000, ., , . 
 
 Q; It would have been earned in British Columbia ?— A^ No, I should judge about 
 $8T,000 less. That is what weiwould have paid for this 10,000 tons of coal delivered 
 here,:about$8f^00. ; :,•: .. . - ' ,,. ,; ,. .. , :, • - ,, 
 
 Q. I suppose if it came to pass that these strikes were lasting an indefinite time, 
 you would ultimately get coal much cheaper from Japan l — A. Certainly, my Lord. 
 We had to get what we did in a hurry, a;id I suppose we could make contracts to get 
 it; here by some Japa,nese mines. I might add that ^e coHild get cttal ftom Puget 
 Sound, but it was of inferior quality, but we could liot get a guarantee that' ttat would 
 be delivered to us. 
 
 J. McCreery, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Davis : 
 
 Q. What is your position ? — A. I am local freight agent. 
 
 Q. You have been freight agent for about a year ? — A. Since June, 1902. 
 
 Q. There was something said the other day with reference to working overtime. 
 The chief biller in your office is called the chief billing clerk ?^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What are the regular hours of your staff ? Are the chief billing clerk's hours 
 
 regulal houifs-^the same ? — A. The same hours, only we have to make it a rule that 
 
 the chief billing clerk, on the arrival of steamers from the Orient, that he must be on 
 hand to do any billing after six o'clock. Eegular hours are 8.30 to 6. 
 
 Q. And when the Oriental steamers are in the rule is what ? — ^A. That he must be 
 down there in order to bill freight from the Orient to the east. 
 
 Q. About how often does that happen ? — A. On an average about twice a month. 
 That is, the arrival of the steamers. 
 
 Q. There are only five steamers, the three Empresses, the Tartar and tli(< 
 'Athenceum ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the Tartar and the AtJienoeunti come about every ten weeks ?-^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. ISfow, on account of the necessity of thei hile being put in conneetioii with tlie 
 chief billing clerk, is any allowance made to even that up ?-^A. Well, while the. chief 
 billing clerk is expected to be on duty every night on which this cargo is going east, 
 he is not expected to be on duty a^ain next morning. Soiiietimes, for instance, it will 
 take him from one o'clock to six in the morning to get through with his work, on the 
 arrival of the steamer. He goes home at six o'clock and does not come on duty again 
 until probably six or seven o'clock, and then works again. until one or six o'clock in 
 the morning, probably until he gets through. 
 J. McCREERT— Vancouver, June 12. 
 
02V IND-VSTBIAL DISFVTTllS. IN. BMITISE COLUMBIA 709 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Withreference toolerk&T^-cleulis are not paid o\fertime, I, believe ? — A. IJo. 
 ■ Q. As far as your experienca lias gone,, have you ever knotvn clerks in that position 
 to be paid overtime ? — A. No. \ 
 
 Q. Do clerks get ^ny holidays to even up, this overtime ?v— A. In June, 1902, this 
 question of overtime oame up, anddt was agreed that all clerks, one year in the service 
 should have two weeks'' holidays withoutdeduofeion* ofipay to inake up for overtime. We 
 also allowed Saturday afternoon holidays^. all except two.. ■■ :, '.'.,: .:■ j; • ■ . 
 
 Q. lii reference to this overtime, was any increase, in paymade.to the«hief biHiiig 
 clerk in June, '02 ?— ^A. In July, '02, there was a- confetence. between the . superinten- 
 dent and the clerks at which Mr. Peters and I were present. The subject of overtime 
 was brought up and it was considered that the increase in pay granted was supposed to 
 thoroughly ttiafce up' for any overtiriie the clerks bad to work. ~ 
 
 Q. Was the arrangement- arrived at apparently satisfactory to Mr. Dennison ? — 
 A. Apparently it was. We heard no complaint from' him-. 
 
 Q. You are in the same office as Mt. Dennisoii ? — A. Yes. • 1 , . 
 
 Q. About what wa's the average' of his overtime per week, to the best of your know- 
 ledge, during the year he was tlierfe.' What Would be the average- for the year perweek 
 of overtime ? — A. I don't think it would be more than six or eight hours per W€iek over- 
 time. ■ ' ,■' ' ' ' '■ "' ' " "'' '■ ' ■ '■ '■ -'--■■ ' ■■•• ■■ " ■ :■ ■ 
 
 By His Lordship' ; '''[' 
 
 Q. Do you pay, clerks for overtime ?: — A; No. 
 
 Q. Why shouldn't you ? — A. I , don't believe personally myself in clerks working 
 overtime, except it cannot be avoided. , 
 
 Q. Why should they work overtime unless they are paid for it ? — A; Of course the 
 question of overtime came up last July, and it was considered that any little overtime 
 ihe clerks had to work this increase in salary was to make up for it. 
 
 Q. Then you say they were virtually paid for overtime ? — A. Yes, virtually. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. What was the amount of the increase ? — A. I think it averaged all round about 
 13 or 14 per cent. 
 
 £y His Lordship .; 
 
 Q. And the increase was about six hours per week ?— A. I say the overtime of the 
 chief biller was, I believe, from six to eight hours per week. 
 
 Q. What are the regular hours ? — A. From 8.30 to 6. 
 
 Q. How many hours is that ?^A. Eight and a half hours, I thinlf, and of course 
 be had Saturday afternoons half -holiday. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. What about Sunday ? — A. He had to come back every fourth Sunday and work 
 tibout two hours in order to get out his time freight. , 
 
 Q. Is it not possible to have matters so arranged so as not to have clerks work over- 
 time l. — A. I don't think it could be arranged in a freight office, on account of the work 
 in progress. Not so long as all other work is done on a railway. Of course, if you stop 
 freight work on Sunday you have to stop all work in connection with freight. 
 
 Q. Don't you think they shojuld be given ai;i allowance ?— A. The clerks under- 
 s1 and this when they ar^ engaged to work,, , They accept the work under these condi- 
 tions." ■■-,.,, i, ■,',.' ■ 
 
 Q. It, is these difficulties about hours that lead men to form unions ? — A. They 
 understand these conditions thoroughly, everyone of them. 
 
 Mr. BiRi>.-^I feel it is almost impossible to allow this witness to go without chal- 
 lenge, because the statements made by Mr. Dennison and this witness are so widely 
 different. 
 
 J. McCREBR'y— Vancouver, June 12. 
 
710 MINUl'-E^OFEVlDEACBOFSOTALiCOMMmsmW Wm 
 
 3-*:®)WARiEBVm/ A. t904 J 
 
 His Tx)Ri)-SHip.^Ia.Mr.,]>ennisofttJie,<Mef'Ml^r,^rr, *^ -..ov ■,u;v,»s^*iwa 'n/ ' 
 
 Q. I uii^eKtand.ypiti, ar^ neyei; on 4uty, at .night. ?— iA.,.,1 am sometiraes, , 
 
 Q. Do youT sometimes .njean once a jnonth,.or^onp9,.3, ye^ j.t*-^. I^KO.ljabty .-tWQ or. 
 three timps, a month., .y, .-..r,,^.,-,,,. ,,, .,.^^,;,! v ;i -in :■ ic:., .:<>:nr.^': .■■'■■■.' . '; " 
 
 Q. So that as far as Mr. Denni^qu'a .claiiji ;f or, .oveijtjnae, yqiji know only qnc? or 
 twi^ie a mon^li, ?<— A.I Jino,v whenjgo jcjliQivn jn^th^^^aytifflije j1i{j?it.,hjq,is npt-^at hia deek 
 in t]^ daytima. - .: ,-- .--i.v f3f,f:. >,.-;,.,. ,-,ffli,,f -wSt ?>-•,'?/ tsd''' .,''-'..■. r..-.- >'i •■ ff 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say if he staysj qyie^jlis^urs-.-.osHf^iPiB^t.ii.e 4i^,..sure to.be late.; 
 the next morning. ?t-A. -Xes^.,M-alwa^s_-is,, u,;. ;:;-m .„[,t j!,; ,••..;: . . '■ar,: ■ .-■. ■' 
 
 Q. So that he necessarilyf.<;Q'mpens'fltes ,l!umself.ijii.Jii^fc.^ay,,?r7Tr4s- iYe§.i. ,,•,,- 
 ..Q.;^o,,tiliat from the ^aej o-f having a tremenidousf ;am;^i®t. of ■?fQrl^.t(> dp he would 
 surely take off the next morning ■?— A. Yes,. and- iie;;jiaos,t alw/ays djLd. ■ ..•■ ,: >,. 
 
 Q. Does tLOt your €,onrse Qf *.efi*P*i?3g «h())lv,,.thftt hi§.;3taying.,0^C!r: hotirs is entirely 
 unnecessary ?^ A. No, the^re.qsqn.jia |he,,Y?C¥ck,xj^in,q<i he.don?. io the, (Jay time. The 
 menjoad up the;freig^tHin,-,tiij^ d3y:.*ime,;and4ti^nfl,Qt,V«e dpw^ > ..' .:: _.■.'.■• : - , 
 
 ::Q,/H(jw Ipng have yon heeni,'^6r%?^A, Ahont a year. This Ijaat time about. ton . 
 or jt^lye years.. '; :,j.- r.?,* ,:{ -iV.T,' , ,1^.. , ;,,:,• ,,-:;^' 
 
 Q.Mr. Dennison said he was always making complaints ? — A., He h?e not,, made 
 
 complaints to me. ;; v,it!.: :..■-:, 5; iy.j-,, ~r ■--.mi.-,-- ^■■ib -vu -.:-'-:V>-J;i\ i; >... :■•■.'} i;' C 
 
 Q. He states he w«nt to Mr, ,Beasl,ey;at one; time, , and he ■wtaa told that sucii< over^, 
 tame necessarily went with that <lesk ? — :A. Tliere is some overtime to be .worked. I 
 think about eight hours might cover it, as far as I know*. .; 
 
 Q. You judge so far as the once or: twice a*mctnth that you might see him work- 
 ing overtime ? — A. No, I am there every day, and while he, works at night I can tell 
 whether he is at his desk in the morning or Jiot. , ,, _ • . j. - .; , 
 
 Q. If he is at his desk in the morning have you any notice that he is working 
 overtime ? — A. I know by the work being done. But he compensates himself by not 
 appearing on duty next morning. He stays away until six or seven o'clock the next 
 night. 
 
 Q. That is when he worked that day and night ? That is when he worked for 
 thirty hours at a stretch ? — A. I never knew of any. He has worked a day and a night, 
 that is to say 8.30 and worked all day and at night from one to six in the morning , 
 very often. . ■ 
 
 Q. And he states further that he has gone on duty at 8.30 in the morning and 
 worked until 8 at night ? — A. I never knew him to do it. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. I understand you to say that he has worked the eight and a half hours regular 
 work, and then on to one or six ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. So that he would be practically working 24 hours ? — A. Well, yes. 
 
 Q. Do you think a, man should be asked to work for a stretch of time like that ? 
 — A. Of course that would be rare. , He would often get through at one or three 
 o'clock. 
 
 Q. Do you think he should be fined when he makes a mistake under such hours ? 
 — A. Yes, I think so, to maintain the office. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact, when a man worliS in Vancouver he gets double pay for 
 overtime ? — A. Only in manual labour. •. . , . 
 
 Q. Because clerical labour has been so discredited they have not been able to get 
 overtime ? — A. I don't know as to that, but in any other oflSce Where clerical work 
 is done you wUl find it the same way. .1 ha.ve never heard of it- 
 
 J. McCREBRT— ya,npouver, .June 12. 
 
ON mnrrsTRM^ DispuTun in rritisb- tjoEtrHBtA - 711 ^ 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. :36a C 
 
 Q. And consequently you don?t khoiv that tfeerfr is clerk's iinfon in 'Vancouver, 
 so far as the clerks are concerned ? — A. They are a different class altogether, they ;are 
 not office men. 
 
 Q. You. don't thiilX it'ib right' that' -overtime is Worth tlvice wh^t it i& ordinarily ? 
 — A. It' is air ri^t so far as laboxifSi's 'arfe '(Jbricerned, ydu have to have' it. 
 
 Q. You say Mr. Dennison got a raise of salary to compensate hirn for bvertime ? 
 — A. That was partly the reason that'lh^St \Vaff given. ' '' "^ ' • ' '' -' "^ 
 
 Q. So far as" yOul* mind was c'dneernSd. ' But lio 'st&teftieht of that kind was ever 
 made to Mr. Dennison ? — A. That was the statement made between Mr. Be'asley and 
 Mr. Peters'; that was what I \indeTsfo6d' it t« he. ' ' ' 
 
 Q. As a matter of fact, all the men got ataiSfe of salary ? — A. Yea. 
 
 Q. And Mr. toeiinism canie^iii-fof 'his share ?--A. Yes. ■■ ' ■'■"-' •"' ' 
 
 Q. And it was hot as eWef -biller that he came in for his raise ?-— A. Some of the 
 men have just as much Teasbn to ask for 'overtime as the billerS. ' ' 
 
 Q. This- really applies to others as weE? — A. Probably five or six of them.- 
 " Q. Do you mean to say that Mr; Denriis6n-^he has sworn' poaitively before the 
 Commission that he has hatdly known \Vhat it iS to have! more thaii one or two Sun- 
 days in a year to himself ?— A. In -the event-of' the 'Tarter atid y4i'ten.(5Btt»j.''arkviifg. 
 They generally arrive on Saturday night or Friday. In that case he woUM 'h&Vb to 
 work^il'Sariy^StihEay.- " ' ':';:-ic('i.(c t^jn^iw^! ;;••,,:.■ ^.iw ^n i .:;8 L.-iuu-.-M -ill.' 
 
 Q. Mr. Dennison assures me they came in about three times a m6nl;h-? — ^A. I' 
 think about twice a month. I think 'we have about 2S shijjs a' y^ar: • • ■^ 
 
 - Q. I suppose there "are* tramp steamers in connection with these ? — A. No, we 
 have no tramp steamers — regular steamersi- ■'-" • " • • .■ ^ •■ - r 
 
 Q. In the twenty-five steamers you don't include the Australian boats at all ? — A. 
 No, there is very little eastern cargo. 
 
 Q. If Mr. Dennison had gone and made a kick about this overtime the probability ■ 
 is he would be dismissed ? — A. Business is spasmodic, and this sort of thing cannot 
 be avoided, but he is allowed to stay over the next day', and if worii becomes slack he 
 would get a couple of days off to make Up for it, and very often got it, no doubt. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. This stuff that is necessary to be handled — these cargoes — does that occur seve- 
 ral times during the rdonth ? — ^A. Yes, and when these big steamers come in there is 
 
 extra help and assistance given to the billing desk. 
 
 "1 
 
 By His Lordship : , ;; 
 
 Q. Would it be right for the country to inaugurate a law that these men should 
 be required to work so much time and be paid for overtime ? — A. I doii't think it 
 would be workable in an office, because the company, as a rule, try to avoid all the 
 overtime as far as the clerks are concerned. I myself do not ask the men to work 
 overtime except it cannot be avoided. 
 
 Q. What I want to get at is this : It seems to me that the men should not be in 
 a position where they are forced to work overtime on pain of dismissal, that is, for 
 such long periods, of time as 24 hours. That is, no doubt, what would happen. You 
 would tell these men, if you don't like it you can go, and I will get somebody else ? — 
 A. I am afraid some people overlook the fact that they are allowed time off nearly 
 enough to make up for it. 
 
 Q. Yes, but you say they are kept busy most of the time ? — A. In the daytime. 
 
 Q. You would -not want- them to work both day and night ? — ^A. Well> in the in- 
 ptance of the chief biller, he would have the next day off. 
 
 By Mr, Bowe : 
 
 Q. Would he have to work th© following night ? — A. Yes, to get Out the freight 
 
 tliat was loaded that day. 
 
 J. McCREERY— Vancouver, June 12 
 
712 MINUTED Ot; EYWEKGE^ -OPRmAh COMMISSION 
 
 .,3-4,EOWARP. Vll.t;A. 1904 
 
 Q. When it came to the final night would he have that off ?— A. That is how I 
 figure that the chief biller ' did nxJtVotk" t)v6r six or eight hoiits ovcrtiths. I think 
 eight hours would certainly be the butside, and he'gets Saturday aftern6oa "holidays. 
 
 Q. What are the cpportunities of promoticmi i^or' the chief -bi'Iler ? — A. He is en- 
 titled to be made chief cashier; -'chief aecouiitant or 6hi&f' clerk: = ' ' '■ 
 
 Q. He is next in order ?-^A. Yes, the accountant and chi^f cashier; and chief clerk 
 ;.aresufP06ed to be superior tp ±be chief feiHer^ aiid, h? ,ip. supposed to b§,^Ugib|e for these 
 as they become vacant. 
 
 Q.. There are-larger salaries attached to these ppsitions ? — A. Yes, sir, larger than 
 the chief biller. 
 
 G. B. Gbier, sworn. :, . ,;, , ; . , 
 
 By Mr. t>avis : ' "' 
 
 Q. What is your position in the Canadian Pacific ?— ^A. General freight agent. 
 
 ,Q. About how many years' experience have you had in railway .freight work ? — 
 A. -Nineteen." . ■'<.-■_•' • ■-<■. .'■■■••■; ■ ■.,> ..,-,,-^„r .;., ,,,,,,; , .,, ,-,, ; 
 
 Q. Have you worked on other roads than the C. P. R. ? — A. I have. 
 ■ " , Q. Has it bfeen a practice on anyr road that you have worked on, to pay overtime 
 to freight clerks or station agents, or men in , corresponding positions ?-^A. Ho, sir ; 
 I never heard of it, that is in, the ofilce staff, no railway I hfive ever worked for. 
 
 Q. Do they at the present time, for instance, pay overtinie to clerks in the oflSces 
 of railways on the Sound ? — ^A. No, sir. J 
 
 Q. Just explain, Mr. Grier, why this is? — A. Well, for one reason, that the poor 
 man would have just' as much consideration as the good man. One roan can do twice 
 as much work in the same time as another man, and it would not be fair to give any 
 man who shirked his work during the day overtime, because he had to go back at night. 
 A good deal of the overtime is voluntary. I have done a good deal of it myself. 
 We would consider, I can do this particular work better at night because I am not 
 bothered, and I will leave that vmtil to-night and go back and do it. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You would go off then for part of the day ? — A. No, but that particular work 
 
 — ^they would do something else, but they could have done this, just as well during the 
 
 day if they had seen fit to take hold of it. Some question corning up which you feel 
 
 you can give better consideration to if you have got a moment at night to fight it out. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Tor instance, vfhen a cargo is being hustled away ? — A. No, that is not the 
 ease when a cargo is being hustled away, but then if you pay one man working on this 
 cargo, if you pay him overtime there will be others, and if you adopt a system of over- 
 time you must make it general. You could not make it in any special ease. 
 
 Q. Are the wages of the clerks arranged with a view to no pay being paid for 
 overtime ? — A. We have never considered the question of overtime at all. 
 
 Q. How do the wages paid in the freight ofSces here, to chief billing, clerk and so 
 on, compare with the south of here in similar positions ? — A. Practic£illy the same to 
 my understanding. 
 
 Q. How do the hours of work compare in Vancouver with, the regular hours in 
 Seattle and Sound cities ?— A. In Seattle they go to work fully one hour earlier than 
 (■n this side. 
 
 Q. So that the hours are shorter with the same pay here ?— A. Yes. 
 G. B. GRIBR— Vancouver, June 12. 
 
ON mrtrnTRiAL nmrvTM m'^BniTisu Columbia 713 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPtR No.-36a 
 
 ,. , Q. A}i(l:they work pv^ptime ? — k. X neyer.tnew a rail-^ay office in wtich tliere waa 
 Eot some overtime tp b^ done., A.traiii,may,b£( delayed^ |aijdtlu:ee days freigli^ in 
 
 at one time. Huring tjiat tbree, days' d€\lay there is .pi^aciiqaiiy nothing, being done in 
 the office, and after it arrives you haye l^o. put in,,9vertin;e.' . . , 
 
 Bjj Mr. Bird ; - ■ ' . . 
 
 Q. The' rates of pay ill Variconver have been raised siri'ce thg Strike ? — A.. Not that 
 I know of. > ; 
 
 Q. No 'general liaise since the stHke ? — A. Nbt t"ha;t I kiiow of. Certainly not in 
 my office. ,' 
 
 Mr. Makpole. — It was on the first of February that the wages were raised. 
 By Mis Lordship : 
 
 Q. Can you give us any idea as to what extent the delivery of freight has been 
 delayed during the striive 'i — A. When the strike was declared we were about two days 
 perhaps that we were unable to make satisfactory freight arrangements.' ' 
 
 Q. You mean in unloading freight off the cars ? — A. Yes, and delivering to the 
 consignees, taking the frpight to the teams. 
 
 '■ By Mr. Bird : ■ '-■':' -■ ■ -; ..- ; ■ ,-< ',,,;.; ,;,; ^-..,',;.. ;, '.' 
 
 Q. Do you consider that operators and agents are properly classed among the 
 clerical staff ?-^— A. I^o, sir. ' 
 
 Q. They receive time and a half for Overtime, do thfey not ?^-A; I am not posted 
 on that. That is out of my department. 
 
 Mr. Marpole. — Operators are paid for special calls for telegraph work. No agents 
 are paid for overtime. A telegrapher is when he is called for telegraph duties only. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. How do you speak with authority on the rates in Seattle ? — A. I have worked 
 on Puget Sound. 
 
 Q. And you have worked here for ten years ? — A. No, I have been in British 
 Columbia for five years. 
 
 Q. So your knowledge of Puget Sound dates back how far ? — A. Five years. 
 
 Q. You don't know whether the same conditions prevail there now as during your 
 time ? — A. No. 
 
 By His Lordship : ■ 
 
 Q. Have you: had many complaints from merchants about inability to get their 
 freight ? — A. We have had a few, your Honour. 
 
 Q. How many ?— A. I could not count them. Just practically — we had the same 
 complaints right along in the regular course of business. Some freight might go 
 astray. 
 
 Q. These complaints became much more numerous when the strike was declared, 
 did they not ?— A. Yes, I think they did. 
 
 Q. I might mention that several merchants in Victoria said they could not get 
 freight ? — A. Well, that is incorrect. We never had any trouble about Victoria freight. 
 It was only in making local deliveries, and what caused tliat waa. probably the fact that 
 the teamsters Went out in sympathy with the f reight-handlers , and freight clerks,. but 
 our deliveries have been prompt with very few exceptions. I could name maybe a 
 dozen cases where freight has gone astray owing to billing being lost or destroyed, or 
 something of that sort. 
 
 Q. Considerable delay was caused by the teamsters going on strike 2 — A. Yes, at 
 the time they first went out on strike. 
 
 Q. How long did the delay last ? — A. I suppose it took them a week to get other 
 teamsters and start the business moving to any extent. 
 
 -G. B. GRIER— Vanco^ve^, June-12. 
 
714 UlifUTES OF EYIDEifGE OF UOTAL <;OMMISSIOJT - < 
 
 3-4 -EDWARD VII., A. 1:904 
 
 Q. It wAs stated Eere by a baker this momiii^ that. h6 had ..to get his, flotir, worked 
 into a'warehtraSe anditaken 'irdmii!herb;to his.sltop i?:MA.^ I ibhink that) wouM. be; correct, 
 I have heard of cases where a car has been switched down to a point in the yard -where 
 the'teamstersVould not have ktt&T*n'1iAtiiit''liaabfen'ta3lned:away;>V! ■-lo-v ,*■',: -v .',} 
 " Q. The rion-iinion teamster^'? — A. Yesy or the union: teamsters. - - '; 
 
 Q.' It wovtld'be'doil^ on the sly ?— A. 'Yes;-:^ ; : .. ;• ■ =. ; -. 
 
 ''Q.'Wer6'the*e many caSeS'?-MA. Yes, iqurte'-<a few. 'wi' ;;'*'•■•' ..n'i -.>.;i>-!-'vyi> .?..-. 
 Q. That would be a case *tvhere -the T'eamster' Union was on' Strike -and liie fn.en.. 
 working ? — A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : . , . . 
 
 ,Q. Any ease of demurrage on car lots ,? — A. Yes, a great, deal. " ' 
 Q. That is, they could not unload the cars in time to avert it; ? — A, "^ell, we 
 never .assessed it. If, ttijough: this .strike; they were unable , to, .take delivery by reasion 
 of the teamsters, or temporary difficulty in procuring men, we did uot, assess the 
 demurrage. Of course there is a great deal of demurrage all the time, but in these 
 cases it would -be given consideration. v:. ; , \' , 
 
 WiLLUM b.MuiR, recalled." " ■ ' ■■,:•!.-:■.■.■.! .,■.-/■:.--: 
 
 By His Lordship^ : . :;. 
 
 Q. You have been sworn, Mr. Muir — have you got those papers ? — A. Yes, sir. • 
 
 (Papers produced and put in as Exhibits 65. and, 66. Exhibit 65— list of firms. 
 Exhibit 66 — agreement.) 
 
 Q: Forty-three people in all ceased doing business with you ?-t-tA. Yes. 
 
 Q. On the ground that- you were icnown as what is called unfair ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Do you know whether or not your name was posted in the Trades and Labour 
 Hall ? — A. I don't know myself. Some gentlemen said this morning that it wp.s. 
 
 Q. Well, I can tell you that it is, for I saw it there myself ! We are now certain 
 of it. Is there anything more you wish to say ? — A. Yes, the ease of the flour, why 
 I had to take the flour through the wholesale house was because my union men would 
 not take it if it was hauled by non-union teamsters. I had to do this way to get the 
 union to handle it. They would take it from the sidewalk, but not from the track. 
 I sent one of my men up and we brought it through this wholesale grocery. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe: 
 Q. That disinfected it ? — A. Yes, that is the idea. 
 
 By Sis Lordship : 
 
 Q. One of your men took it out of the car, and then the union men took hold 
 of it. Your man was doing the scab act ? — A. I guess it was. 
 
 WiTNKSS. — In the month of January, here before this trouble came up, I was 
 notified one Saturday night about 11 cfclock. I was notified that no work would be 
 done in the shop unless some action was taken. That was in the forepart of- January. 
 Some little difficulty among the men was the cause of that trouble, about pay or some- 
 thing. I gave in to that. On Monday morning, after I had lost about sixty dollars' 
 worth of bread that was spoiled through want of notice of the trouble- : 
 
 By His Lordship- ; ^ . 
 
 Q. Does the agreement call for notice ? — A. Well, I am not just .sure whether it 
 does or not. It was for twelve months, and I never expected anything like that would 
 happen. 
 WILLIAM D. MUIR— Vancouver, Juiie'12. 
 
ON ii^Dm^arAij' vispm'jisjN British volum-bia- ■■: "^l^ . 
 
 ■^■'As'fhifiEtSiliefc.^i^iAiaJife^fa^itoH'clad^ foS-^a full year-?-r-Ai Yes, 
 
 and I lived tip to that id tlie^l&ttbr M thaAam.. I understood that no party qouldj change 
 it. That% why I entered uL -;,' .;-- ;.■..: .;^ ;. , .. , [,:__.■ 
 
 Q. What were the, circnmatances ?— A. The Jirsti trouble capi,e , up, I, thinly, there 
 is a part in that thatisaysisoimanyi, hours, per- Week. (Shis pflrtici,bl,aT.,w9elt. tbeifB was 
 a holiday, and in that particular week they Vworked ?iboul.;fi.Ye 4s?*Wra,:pipfp, ^nd they 
 claimed overtime. This week they ihad ;woriied sortie 48 'hauis apd idemap^ed pay for 
 three-hours 0"Ver'-thei45.o Tbe agreetiient; -waSf .for ,54 hoilrs. ,> - f - <■ '-..U ., ;. 4'! 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. They thought forty-five was the maximum because of the holidajr ?^A. Yes, 
 but it did,JiJot,go„ove]' the fifty^four. '■ It" would be six hours less than the other w6ek. 
 
 Q. I suppose they clainied that I3ir6^' hours of their holiday was- taken off ?— A. 
 They claimed everything oter 45 was eiititled to tirrte aiid a half. I claimed that it 
 should be over 54. ■ ' ; * .;;• - 
 
 By His Lordship : :. .: ■ v • . , i . . , , 
 
 Q. Apparently their view was that you broke the agreement by asking them to 
 work on the holiday ? — A. They didn't work on the holiday. They worked more than 
 45 on the other days. For instance, on Monday they worked eleven hours. They had 
 been receiving payment from me. I explained that unless, they went oyer 54 hours, no 
 overtime would be demanded. 
 
 Q. There is no provision in this agreement by which they should giye you any 
 notice if you broke it ?-i-A, No. ., , . ;,:■ .,,■ - 
 
 Q. Their contention, you see, was that you had not lived up to the agreement. 
 The agreement makes no provision for giving notice in that event, so they were hot 
 called on to give you any notice if you were breaking the agreement ? — A. There was ' 
 no evidence that I had broken it. The second trouble calne up over my -discharging a 
 man. I had about $40 worth of bread spoiled over that. When the third time came 
 I made up my mind I would not give. in. , , 
 
 Q. What did you do ? — A. I kept on supplying- the bread. I did not discharge 
 any men. Six out of the eight stayed with me; the others left. 
 
 Charles A. Wilband, recalled. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Have you got the papers asked for ? — A. Yes. This is the ' Bakers' and Con- 
 fectioners' Journal.' 
 
 (Put in as Exhibit 67.) 
 
 Q. There is an article in this paper — this is the ofiB.cial organ of the International 
 Bakers' Association ?— A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Thfere is aii article in it : 'Notice, the following men (giving the names) are 
 expelled by orderiof the union.' 
 
 Q. What is the object of a publication of that kind ? — A. Providing, you see, that 
 we would go to other places in the States to seek employment, and in going to make 
 application into any union they would have that paper, and we would have to go in 
 under a big fine. That goes to every union man wherever there is a union; each indi- 
 vidual man gets; the paper: 
 
 Q. Then, this paper circulates' gratis among the members ?-^A. Yes, that is for 
 members only. 
 
 CHARXiES; ;A. WIDBA-ND— Vancouver, J'une 12. 
 
716 Mll^VTES Of E7IDENC3 OF KOtAL OOMUlSStOTf- ' 
 
 S4 EOWAflb VllvA. 1904 
 
 Q. And every'bakers' uniorij I suppose, in the States would have a copy of this list? 
 —A. Yes. " '■''■'-^- 
 
 Q- Aiid the; e£feOt of that is ybu could nbt apply for reinstatement ? — ^A. With- 
 out paying a fine; ■*= ■'' -' ' ■" ■ ■ ' ■'■ -' "- ■■' ' '■ 
 
 Q. ' That -would -be the effek if you didn't want ti> join the union id tie States. 
 Could you gfet'^ork ?^A. Well, the efteof' would be, if all the shops Were union shops 
 you, coilld not get a job. ■ ' ■■ •= ■■ ■ , , ,, 
 
 Q. You would have to go to a non-tmion'shop ! — ^A. Yes, or else pay a fine. 
 
 Q. How inafiy' -people are there in the Bakfers' Union ? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. Do they form a niajotity of the bakers ?— A. "They foTm a* big niajority, but I 
 could not "say how many there is of ' them. ■ i. 
 
 Q. You might identify this' dodtiment ?— ^A. That iS' the constitution of the Jour- 
 neymen Bakers and Confectioners' Association. (Exhibit 68.) ' ■ ■ ■ • 
 
 Charles "Woodwarp,, ^woin., , , . . ^ . . , . t 
 
 By Sis Lordship : 
 
 Q. What is your occupation ? — A. I am in business^ 'a igenferal liierchant. 
 
 Q. You got into trouble with the union here recentlS^ ?— ^A.' Yesj they put us on 
 the blacklist. , . , 
 
 Q. What do you mean by blacklist i — A. It is being: unfair to union labour and 
 to unions. ■ 
 
 Q. Why Was that ? — A. I don't know any particular reason^ other than that Mr. 
 Hilton — We were putting' up a building heren — ■ ■ i . • 
 
 Bi/ Mr. Bows : 
 Have you got a copy of the poster blacklisting you ! — ^A. Yes. (Put in. Exhibit 
 09.) ! 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. This was posted where ? — A. On a telephone pole at Keefe Street and West- 
 minster Avenue. , 
 
 Q. Have you seen any other posters 2 — ^A. Yes, I saw one that iMr. Hyman got off 
 another pole in another part of the city. 
 
 Q. Is it put up in the union hall ? — A. I don't know. 
 
 Q. Well, let me tell you that it is. I saw it myself. Tell us how this came about ? 
 — A. When we decided to build, Mr. Hilton, I think it is, the Trades and Labour 
 delegate, or at least looks after the imfair people and sees that men are union men, 
 and looks after union interests in general, he waited on me a couple of times and 
 wanted to know if we would not have certain conditions incorporatfed with' whoever 
 took the contract of the building. We had not entered into a contract at this time, 
 but had advertised for tenders. We agreed to that, provided it did not cost any inoife 
 money. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : . ' - , 
 
 Q. What were the conditions ? — A. I have my own letter and Wr. Hilton's letter 
 , in answer to it. " - . , i 
 
 By His Lordship : ■ . , 
 
 Q. Yo,u4iad better read these two letters 2 — ^A. The Jettter, from niyself to Mr. 
 m+nn TO na fnllnwR CExhibit 703 : — 
 
 Hilton is as follows (Exhibit 7(3^ 
 CHARLES WOODWARD— Vaneouven June 12. 
 
ON INDDSTRIAIi VlSfuT-E^ IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 717 
 
 SeSSlOMAL PAFSER .No, SSa 
 
 . , • < r March 6, 1903. 
 
 To Mr. Hilton : . 
 
 Dear Sir, — Since talking witji you in. reference, to our building and the 
 best way of protecting union labour, our company has decided to go into this, 
 ' -alid if ipossiUe try and ;cawy oitit iydui; vie^s, believi^ig las we do that the best 
 interest; of our cityiWicyuldb© Served, as well as tlje country a,t large. 
 
 Now, wiU you kindly give me in writing the different clauseg you think 
 ..desirable ior the iprotection of .union labour,: and we will endeavour to have 
 ..them incorporated iin (Jurfbnjldipg agreement with Mr, Cook, who has been 
 awarded the contract Cf. building; our ,stoi'9. ; We, hppe. to be able , to fetch 
 around a more friendly and better state of; affairs .between. Mr. Cook and your 
 .respective unions, believing, thereby to help advance the prosperity of our city. 
 Kindly let m.e have these sugigestions of yours on or before Monday fore- 
 noon, say 10 o'clock. If it is not convenient for you to deliver them to me I 
 will send for them, if you will let me know by 'phone. 
 
 I am, respectfully, 
 
 (Sgd.) Charles Woodward, 
 
 President. 
 The answer I got to that was on Monday from Mr. Hilton: ^ i 
 
 Vanoodver, March 9, 1903. 
 Chas. Woodward, Esq., ^ - > 
 
 I)epa,rtm^nt Store, , . ^ 
 
 Westminster Avenue : , 
 
 Dear Sir, — -I am in receipt of yours of. the Yth inst., and note with plea- 
 sure the desire expressed by you on behalf of your company to bring about 
 art understanding between Mr. JV. Cook and this council, and would state that 
 there is no contractor in the city of Vancouver that this council would wish 
 to be on friendly terms with more than with the same Mr. Cook, who has 
 proved to be a stout opponent, and would therefore make a strong ally. 
 
 The points that I would suggest for the protection of union labour in the 
 building trade, are as follows : — 
 
 Recognition of the Vancouver Building Trades Council and its card 
 system, as now in force and effect, which of course carries along with it the 
 rates of wages established in the various trades, or about to be established on 
 the 1st of April; hours of work and overtime. All these minor points, how- 
 ever, ai-e embodied in the point, viz., recognitioii of the council' and running 
 the job under the card system. ; 
 
 I am, dear sir, yours obediently, 
 
 : (Sgd.) C. I. Hilton, ' 
 
 , Business Agent. 
 Q. What pffiqe does he hold ?— A. Business agent. 
 Q. Of what ?■— A. T'he Trades and Labour Council. 
 
 Mr. BiED.^As a matter of fact, he is the delegate of the Building Trades Council, 
 business agent of that council. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. What became of this ? — A. After I awarded the contract to Mr.^ Cook, at the 
 same time we arranged with him to see if it were not possible to make some arrange- 
 ment with the Trades and Labour Congress in reference to this card system and also 
 about paying wages. Of course, he satisfied us that he was paying union wages, and 
 more in some cases. 
 
 Q. What is meant by the card system ? — A. If Mr. Cook had any men working 
 for him they would have to have cards, and they could not have cards unless they Ije- 
 
 CHARLES WOODWARD— Vancouver, June 12. 
 
718 ■ ' MlilVrES OF EVIDENCE OP iiOTAI^ COMMTSmON - ' 
 
 3-4 EDWARD- Vfl., A. 1904: .i? 
 
 longied' to the international' uaion, and of course' Mr. Cook's irieii bdonged tothB locAl 
 
 union, and could not have cards. * . <i" ■ -^ ,-■,;*■ ■ ;^, ■■: ■■■-_ ..i •: . iv 
 
 Q. Wliat kind o^ wnipn- ?-^A.-.IJ i§ a-. Oafla^iap; ii^l^tjajti^ft;4ljfly, ha v^^ti, charter; ;! 
 
 belifftev. ■ f. ■ '<:> -.■ -nc^.^i ( .-rin ■■:■; ■.- •, u- J;! ,;■-,;, -..ici r,^ )■::■! V •^■■■'. 1 -i-' ■■'^j. ■:■;;:) . 
 
 Q' '^Jiat is the name of it ,? — A.iJ could nottell xou.tie .n^meof it. •; ., ,j :; 
 Q. So Co^k was employing .pniop. jiieif..?— A. Yes.,, _ .- j ' 
 Q. But not men^beloiiging to the anternational ? — A. No^ After discussing tho 
 matter with Mr. Cook, we said ^e wanted to have this ' thiiig ' sff'i'iriged'' It was in- 
 jurious to our business, and we had a good many friends among theiinep. He, agreed 
 to ]?;ie,et ^..conipiiJffte.fEom th^ International Unioij, anjl we acq,uainted Mr. Hilton 
 I don't know what the result of that irieeting was, oiiiy what I gained from Mr. Cobk, 
 I asked him if ever that ipeeting topk place, and he .said no. " "' 
 
 " By Mr. Rom': ' ■'"■ '- ■ ' ''^'''■'' ■ ''~ ^ 'v'":^ ^"M"' •;■•••'■■ 
 
 Q.. And the iiext you, h^ard of it was this ? — A, YeS; . ' , , ' 
 
 ' By His Xoi'dship .' " - ' ' 
 
 Q, Is Cook going on with the job,? — A. Yes. '" '' ' , -' 
 
 0- Has there been any interference ?^ — A. Not that I am aware of. Thefe liavo 
 
 bceu.no delays. ... . 
 
 By Mr: E&we : ' ■■ - ' ■ ■ ' ■',,'■' r. , 
 
 Q. Did'you know he was hostile to the union, or that the union were out with ' 
 
 him when you gave the contract ? — A, Yes, and for that reason we i'eluctantly gave 
 
 Mr. Cbok the contract ' . 
 
 Q. What was the inducement, ? — A. There was considerable difference in, the 
 
 contract price. . , 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That is all you have- had to do with it, tliat is the only reason why you are 
 posted up as unfair ? — A. So far as I know. I don't know of anything else. 
 
 Q. Have you found your business has suffered anything from being posted up ? 
 — A. No, I think it has increased. 
 
 Q. Been a sort of advertisement ? — A. I don't think it has done any harm. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe ; , 
 Q. It w«s not a deep-laid scheme of yours to get the advertisejnent ?^^A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Bird ; 
 
 Q. I appear for the Building Trades Council. You say you knew Mr. Cook was 
 hostile to the unions ? — A. No, I did not say hostile, but they were -opposed to Mr. 
 Cook. 
 
 Q. Did you not know that Mr. Cook was a very active opponent of union labour 
 in Vancouver 1 — A. No. 
 
 Q. That between Mr. Cook and the Building Trades Council there was a long- 
 standing hostility 
 
 His Lordship. — Why should that keep off Cook from securing work from Wood- 
 ward. Do you mean to say the union men of this city are going .to dictate to Mr. 
 Woodward who he can and cannot employ 3 Is that what the country is coming to ? 
 The sooner we find it out the better. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — If your Lordship will permit me I will follow up a. certain train of 
 inquiry. It is alleged that this is a blacklist. We contend th^t- it is nothing of the 
 kind. '-■,-..-(:; ;.,,. ,,\' ,. ,. 
 
 His Lordship. — What do you call it ? 
 
 CHARLES WOODWAHP— Vancouver, June ,12. 
 
oy mmrsi'mM, ommrea nr britisb colttubia ■, 719 ^ 
 
 SESSIONAL -PAP-ER No: 36a " .. 
 
 iMrJ BittDi-^A.^mePeistetenafiat.'to.EWery^umoh iian .tbat.Mr^i Woodward .and th<e- ,, 
 other gentlemen there are not dealing with union labour.,; : -^ . , ■, , ,,,i., .• 
 
 His EdSDSHtl>.— AlWw me tii'kay-, Mr. Bird,' that I cohsidet- it a gross piece Hi im- 
 pudence for a body of men to take such a liberty with any man's name on the street. 
 It may be all right in iheir Own hall, biit to publish It on the s-treet is very different. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I know, your Lordship has very strong views ori the Subject. ^ ^ 
 
 His Xordship. — i'e^, . I, hayel ^ It it', a ipiQ.ce of outrageous tyranny.' ,. , , , , 
 
 ' ■ By Mr.'Bird:" ■ ' '•■v.-^v ■..,,. ■-;■;• —,''-. 
 
 .Q. ITour businegs, Mr. Woodward, is situafisd on Wppdward Avenue, -and you deal 
 largely' with labour meii ? — A. 'Pes,. \ / -'■-■. 
 
 Q. And most of them union lahour men ? — A. As far as I know, yes. 
 
 Q. The labour men might reasonably have thought, as they were almost entirely 
 your customers, that you would support thepf in return. That would not be an un- 
 reasonable assumption ? — A. I don't know. A great many of these men individually, 
 they did not think I was justified in taking any other course i-when, , !t explaiiied the 
 circumstances to them. -.-■/■ ■ , ;, . ■ ' .\ 
 
 ; Q.,Sa,faT' as you, J^ave.cpme ^cros^ tjieua you,,lJ4Ye;fp^u>d, unioji'^meri reasohablfi ? 
 — A. 'i'es. ....... ... ■ • - ■ 
 
 Q. And this may have arisen from a misunderstanding ? — A. Well no, tney could 
 easily have found out the facts. I have been twelve years in the ci ty,; and ey embody 
 knows, the stand I have taken.., My ^yniisathy, has. al:?7ays_b.een with the unioji and 
 labour. I have always fought for, them. <.,,,, ,, \/ ,, .. . , . , , 
 
 Q. Your letter premises that position ?— A. Yes, I believe in good wages being. , 
 prdd. : . , .,.,,,.. , ; " 
 
 Q. The only difference, so far as you are concerned, is you have assumed in support- 
 ing Mr. Cook you were supporting union labour ? — A. I assumed this : This is the age 
 of competition. I am not a socialist. I have to compete with other men. Our com- 
 pany would necessarily have to. award that contract, all things being equal, to the men 
 i^ho would do that building at the lowest price, and we acted on that assumption. That 
 is the reason the contract went to Mr. Cook, not that we had any friendly feelings p,ar- 
 ticularly with Mr. Cook than others; in fact, we had not as much. 
 
 Q. You tried to get those contractors representing union labour ? — ^A. As a matter 
 of fact, I made an appointment with the man who had the tender in next to Mr. Cook. 
 
 Q. What was his name ? — A. Shindler. He is a man who is on the fair list and 
 considered fair to union labour. In discussing this thing I said, supposing anything 
 should occur that we could not give this to Mr. Cook, are you prepared to carry it on. 
 Jn fact, he did not seem anxious about it, and in the next interview said he did not 
 want it, or words to that effect. His contract, as far as my recollection goes — ^it would 
 make a difference of between $1,300 and $1,500 between the two prices. 
 
 Q. This is an incorporated company you now represent ? — A. Yes, I am the man- 
 ager. 
 
 Q. And the three men mentioned in that list are incorporated -A. We were the 
 
 promoters of the company. 
 
 Q. Did you not feel that it would be in the best interests of your company and the 
 fchareholders of the company to give this to union labour which largely sitpports you ? 
 
 A. Yes", we did. We thought they were thelargest body and as a question of business 
 
 it would be in tl»3 best interests of the company to make a sacrifice, and We were pre- 
 pared to make a sacrifice. While this conversation was taking place witli Shindler we 
 had not closed the thing with Mr. Cook. 
 
 Q. And you were prepared to do something in the interests of union labour in Van- 
 couver ? — A. We were prepared to make a sacrifice. I won't say in the interests of -'■■ 
 the union. We don't get all our business from the union, but it was in the general 
 Interest. 
 
 CHARLES WOODTVARD^VancoKVcr, Juiie 12. ' 
 
720 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROrALGOMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARt) Vll.y A. 1^04 
 
 Q. This is a pretty big contract of yours ; $1,300 would not amount to mucli ! — A. 
 Yes, but the other man would not take it. If we had agreed to give it to him- lie would 
 not have taken it. ,,,,.; 
 
 By Mr. Rowe • - ■• -' ■ - ^ ■■'..■,i .-^r ■ ; ■' '...■-. ,.,,.- . ,-•,.; i •.. '.' ' ' 
 
 Q. 1 suppose the iinibii. men !,4i,d not sa;^ they paid. Ijifr.^Wood ward any" more tlian 
 they did anyone. else ?T— A. 'jfp, we were selling to, .all ,^like^^ ,;V ' / ,,■ , • 
 
 ByMr/Bird: ' ' ' "' " ;= ^ ' ^ '^ ■' ' '■ " ;■ 
 
 Q. Now, as a, piatter of pplicy, if a.certajin .class of, citizens in this city showed 
 themselves unfriendly, and .woujd not desire, to., de^l.ajt your store, you would not, as a 
 natural consequence desire.to .deal with tjieiu J'^A. I find it is n,atnral .that we desire 
 to stay with our friends as, much as we. can. , : . , , , 
 
 Q. Is it not natural, upder these .pircumstance^, that the Building Trades Council 
 ehould not desire to — —A. How xould. tjiey expect us,, how could any man expect us to 
 makes a di^.er^ice^of .^oma thousands of dollars in a -contract, just because he was. a 
 fiiend of theirs. ,: Jt, is not; commpn sens^,' it is not reason. ■ 
 
 Q. In lipnestiy .t<> your stopkholders and to, yourself, you could not doit J^— A; No. 
 ,, Q. Ypu spoke of inteFnatippal.ijnionS' llsiifehis an ; American union, ;this.,iBiiilding 
 Trades Coujicil ? — :A. A? fa.:ras,.I know, ,it has its headquarters in the United ^States. 
 
 Q. Now, would you, be surprised to know that, the headquarters of the Building 
 Trades Council- is 4a Manchester, I mean theiAmalganiated Society of Carpenters. • You 
 would be surprised to know that the Building Trades Council is a purely -local institu- 
 tion. I believe that that is the caseJ^A.. How do you reconcile them being affiliated 
 with the others who are international ? , . ■ ' ,'■ 
 
 Q. Do you know as a matter of. fact thatthat is the ease ? — A. No, I don't. 
 
 Q. The Amalgam,a;ted Society of Carpenters and Joiners, one of the principal 
 signers of that, I understand, is an old country organization, and one of the strongest 
 ill the world, some 75,000 members ?^A. Some of those unions that are listed there as 
 endorsing this thing never came up before them at all. 
 
 Q. Do you know that as a matter of fact? — A. I know it from some of the mem- 
 bers. I know also from a man, a member of the Trades and Labour Council,' told me 
 that, that thing never came up before the Trades and Labour Council. I don't know 
 whether that is a fact,, but I can get the man to prove that. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — It may be necessary to challenge that. 
 
 Mr.. .IlowE.^ — It occurs to me that the constitution of the Amalgamated Society of 
 Carpenters .would not permit them to do that. 
 
 His LoKDSHip.-^How did the name of that society get there ? Judging by the 
 representatives in Victoria, they would not support such an action as that.' , ' ; 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I am reading from the constitution of that very society : 
 
 ' The Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners offers a- bond of 
 uuion to the trade in various parts of the world. Although ocean? may sepa- 
 rate us from each other, our interests are- identical ; andif, we become united 
 under one constitution, governed by one code of rules, having one common 
 fund available wherever it may be required, we acquire a power vrjiich, if 
 judiciously exercised, will protect, our interests more effectually and ^ill con- 
 fer greater advantages than can possibly be derived from any partial union,' 
 
 Now, I understand that they feel here, in oonneetidh with this, that it is necessary 
 to take some such measure to protect human interestfe. ' 
 
 Mr. EowE. — I know that they have to give three months' notice before they can 
 go on strike. 
 CHARLES WOODWARD— Vancouver, June 12. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPVTm IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 721 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a / 
 
 His Lordship. — ^Do you find anything in that constitution that warrants any pla- 
 carding a man up from pillar to post all over the city ? Let us see the clause that 
 warrants that. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — As to that, I may say that I am not entirely going by the constitution. 
 I expected rather to show that case against the union might be defended • 
 
 His Lordship. — It would take a good deal of ingenuity on your part to defend such 
 an action as that. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — That may be so. I had not gone into the matter as fully as I would 
 have liked. There is a meeting to-night, and I will try and get information and pre- 
 sent it to-morrow. 
 
 His Lordship. — That is a matter that ought to be threshed out. The power that 
 will give a union power to do a thing of that kind on the public street ought to be 
 pretty well defined. 
 
 Mr. Bird.— There may be circumstances 
 
 His Lordship. — There is nothing so apt to provoke a breach of the peace as that 
 sort of thing, a man being held up to public ridicule and insult. 
 
 Mr. EoWE. — ^I think that the true character of these things has not been realized 
 I think they have been reached by easy stages. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I agree with you, Mr. Commissioners. I think they don't realize the ' 
 position; often when men are hot-headed and have been turned down and investiga- 
 tions of this kind, I think, are productive of good, in opening the eyes of men to the 
 real facts. 
 
 Mr. EoWE. — I would be very much surprised, if the Amalgamated Society of Car- 
 penters would not express condemnation of that action, unless it was taken with more 
 deliberation than appears from Mr. Woodward's evidence. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I think the. matter should be gone into. I suppose Mr. Woodward had 
 better attend in the morning. 
 
 George Baetlet^ sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are editor of a paper published in Vancouver ? — A. Yes, sir, the 
 ' Independent.' 
 
 Q. You are a socialist ?— A. What is a socialist ? 
 
 Q. Do you entertain the same view as Mr. Dales ? — A. No, sir, I don't. 
 
 Q. He is the editor of the other paper, the ' Western Clarion ' ? — A. Yes, sir. - 
 
 Q. Are you an advocate of trades unions ? — A. Yes sir. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to the incorporation of trades unions ? Would it be a good 
 thing ? — A. That depends. In some instances it would be proper, and in some in- 
 stances, I consider, it would be detrimental to the union. For instance, a union thati 
 is a stable institution, that is fixed and has property, they certainly should be incor- 
 porated, but a union that will spring into existence for perhaps three or six months, 
 and the class of workmen engaged in this particular trade, will be hawked around from 
 one part of the country to the other, I don't think incorporation would be a good 
 thing simply because the same parties who predominated in the union would not have 
 an op'portuniiy at all times to have a say in the business of the union; 
 
 Q. Have you had any experience with strikes ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to the best method of settling them ? — A. Arbitration. 
 
 CEORGB BARTIjEY— Vancouveri June 12. 
 
 360—46 
 
722 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMlSSIffN 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VH., A. 1904 
 
 Q. By that do you mean compulsory arbitration? — A. Well, I believe that com- 
 pulsory arbitration is all right, provided conditions are equal, in this regard : if thero 
 were a compulsory arbitration Act in force in the province in the present time, the 
 great preponderance of union men would not have confidence in its administration, 
 because the legislature is made up of a majority of men who are not in sympathy 
 with their interests because their business prevents them throwing a certain amount 
 of sentiment into conducting a board of arbitration. If there was a secretary equally 
 advisable to the legislatures that make the law, who could see that the carrying out of 
 it would be profitably done, I believe compulsory arbitration would be a good thing ; 
 but at the present time, I certainly would be opposed to compulsory arbitration. 
 
 Q. The advisability of compulsory arbitration would depend on the arbitrators, 
 not the legislation ? — A. You don't have the drawing up of the act, and the appoint- 
 ing of the real arbitrator, the chairman of the 'board of arbitration. 
 
 Q. Who would you suggest he should be ? — A. It is impossible for me to make 
 a suggestion. These things would have to be worked out. 
 
 Q. Should he be a judge, or some other person than a judge ? — A. That would 
 depend a good deal on the case. I believe, if it was a case brought before a board of 
 arbitration of' purely technicalities, that is, discussions confined entirely to technicali- 
 ties of the trade, I don't think that a court judge would hardly be fitted for a position 
 of that kind. When I say that I don't think that the judges would be biased at all, 
 but I don't think their training would fit them to be proper persons to sit on a board 
 of arbitration. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe .• ' 
 
 Q. Well, in the practice before the courts they have a good deal of technical 
 laatters before them, such as medical matters. I should think they would be able to 
 grasp the points of technicalities. It must be somebody who is trained to weigh evi- 
 dence and grasp the facts ?— A. That is a question which is agitating the greatest 
 minds we have in the labour movement to-day. 
 
 Q. The fact that everybody seems to want to avoid strikes would seem to indicate 
 that every help would be given to a court of arbitration and that the ambition of the 
 arbitrators would be to reach a settlement agreeable to parties to disputes, they might 
 soon lose their influence and be driven out of their position if they showed any bias? 
 - — A. I personally would be in favour of having an experiment in the matter. 
 
 Q. What do you say as to sympathetic strikes ? — A. That would be entirely de- 
 pending on the circumstances. The organization to which I belong are opposed to 
 s-ympathetic strikes — the Typographical Union — because if we adopt the principle of 
 going out in sympathetic strikes with trades with which we might possibly be allied, 
 with any trades and labour council or central unions we would be in strikes all 
 the time because the business in which the Typographical Society is involved is al- 
 ways mixed up with both sides to the controversy in the way of newspapers. 
 
 Q. In fact they could not carry on a strike if the printers quit work ? — A. I 
 presume they realize that. I might add too that we have got what we call the Printing 
 Allied Council. That body is a purely local affair in each instance. It is composed 
 of representatives of one or perhaps three from each body connected with the printing 
 business, such as bookbinders, pressmen,' stereotypers and typograph men. If there 
 was a strike brought oh Jhey would come out in sympathy with each other, because 
 their occupation id practically one but under different departments, but say in the 
 case of a strike between a railway, the printers would not be in a position to go out 
 on strike with them. We have a schedule of wages wherever there is a typographical 
 union, and that is lived up to very rigidly. 
 
 Q. Do you know any reason why tbere should be more labour troubles in British 
 Columbia than other parts ? — A. I could not say. 
 
 Q. How do you thinli the conditions here are as compared with other provinces ?— 
 A. I think, regardless of all troubles, that conditions here are the best on the contin- 
 GKORGB BAR'PL.BY— VaMOUver, June 12. 
 
ON mOUSSTmih disputes in BBITISE COLUMBIA 723 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 cnt of America. Another thing I have noticed is, there is a sort of line of demarcation 
 between the east and the west, and we might say that line follows pretty well the 
 Mississippi and the Great Lakes. It seems when matters pass that particular line they 
 become better. I think you will notice the difference in the labour movement as com- 
 pared with that in the east. As near as I can make out by reading, the American. Fed- 
 eration of Labour represent something like 2,000,000 workmen. West of the Missis- 
 sippi I don't believe there would be much over a quarter of a million of organized worlc- 
 men. You can see the difference in the organization. There is a spirit of political 
 advocation among the western classes of men which is almost obscured in the east, 
 although they pretend to have their candidates, but the returns in the elections show 
 that the sympathies of the people in the east are not with the political movement. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 Q. Have you formed any theory as to this recent epidemic of strikes in the mines 
 and railways ? — A. I could not say as to that. I would say a good deal of inexperience 
 is one thing. This is a new country, and there are hundreds of men in unions who 
 have never been in a union. You take a number of unions, they have to get burned 
 once or twice before tbey get sensible. Older organizations don't do that so much. 
 
 By His Lordship -: 
 
 Q. When you give a boy a tin sword he is bound to try and do some mischief with 
 it ? — A. I look on trades unions as purely a business proposition, not one of senti- 
 ment. 
 
 Q. You think a strike is a thing to be avoided ? — A. I certainly do. 
 
 By Ml*, Rowe : 
 
 Q. Do yoja think there is any connection between the unstable political conditions 
 and labour conditions ? — A. I think to a certain extent, but not as much as one would 
 suppose from the news we hear. 
 
 Q. I mean the actual political condition, and politically in British Columbia we 
 l.ave not had a stable form of government, as you know ? — A. Yes. 
 
 -Q. I was wondering whether you thought industry and trade were in any way 
 aggravated by these conditions ? — A. Well, we have to deduct out ideas from certain 
 quarters. I believe that to a certain extent that the unstable condition of government 
 ]s the cause of certain amount of discussion on these questions, politics that otherwise 
 would not be brought up, and when they thrust politics upon the minds of the people, 
 the niass of the people are not really fitted to reason while these things are on. But 
 still we find troubles in the older countries also. At the present time there is no occu- 
 try that I know where the working class could control things like they could in British 
 Columbia, if they could agree among themselves. 
 
 F. J. Russell, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You hold some office in the Trades and Labour Council ? — A. Secretary. 
 
 Q. You are one of the members of what is called the headquarters committee of 
 this strike ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Who are the other members ? — ^A. There are so many. Mr. Garnham, Mr. 
 Turnbull, Mr. Eobinson, Mr. Brooke, Mr. Halton, Mr. Capstick, Mr. Walker, Mr. Kerr, 
 Mr. Soper, Mr. Johnston, Mr. Thompson 
 
 Q, Is.thatG.,,H. Thompson ?—:A,, Yes, sir. I think that is about all. 
 
 36a — 46J F. J. RUSSELL,— Vancouver, June 12, 
 
724 MINUTES Oh' EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. Is Mr. Bulley a member 2 — A. No, he belongs to Victoria. 
 
 Q. What was the exact nature of this committee ? Was it a joint committee of 
 the different organizations ? — A. That committee was appointed, as near as I can re- 
 member, about ten days after the strike came on. When the other unions came out 
 we added on one or two, so that the others would know what was going on. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. The nucleus was the U. B. E. E. ?— A. Yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Who are the U. B. E. E. men ? — A. All I named down to Mr. Wallcer, I think. 
 That was the executive. 
 
 Q. What office did Garnham hold ? — A. At the time we went on strike, Mr. Halton 
 was east at Montreal and Garnham was appointed acting agent. 
 
 Q. He would be the chairman of the committee ? — A. No, Mr. Brooke was chair- 
 man. 
 
 Q. This committee was in constant communication with Mr. Estes ? — ^A. More or 
 less, yes. 
 
 Q. And I believe met frequently with Mr. Estes ?— A. Yes, when he was here. 
 
 Q. How many organizations besides the U. B. E. E. went out on strike ? — A. 
 Three, the teamsters, longshoremen and B. 0. steamshipmen, and there were fifteen 
 men belonging to the carmen came out about a month afterwards. 
 
 Q. Can you . tell us how many were in the teamsters' union ? — A. About 190, I 
 think, as near as I can remember. 
 
 Q. They all went out ? — A. About 80, I think. The rest were working at work 
 where they were not mixed up with freight from the C. P. E. 
 
 Q. These 80 went out because they could not handle freight ? — ^A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. And the longshoremen, how many were they ? — A. About 135. 
 
 Q. Did they all come out ? — A. So far as I know, yes. 
 
 Q. Why did they come out ? — A. I could not tell you except for the same reason, 
 except that they objected to working in conjunction with scabs handling scab freight. 
 
 Q. Neither the teamsters or the longshoremen had any difficulty with their em- 
 ployers ? It was on account of scab freight ? — A. As far as I know, 
 
 Q. Now, about the steamshipmen ?— A. I cannot tell you as to that. Some 50 
 or 60, I believe, joined after the strike was on. ,, _ 
 
 Q. Did they all go out ? — ^A. I think so. I think it was 60 went out in the first 
 place, and then there were a great many joined afterwards. I am not positive, how- 
 ever. 
 
 Q. These three organizations, the teamsters, the longshoremen and the B. C. steam- 
 shipmen went out in sympathy with the TJ.B.E.E. ?— A. Well, I don't know as to that. 
 
 Q. That is what y^u would call a sympathetic strike ?— A. I don't know. That 
 
 is not my idea of it exactly. . , . , , , o 
 
 Q. That appears to have been Mr. Estes' idea, judging from the correspondence ? 
 —A. I understand that in the case oi the teamsters and longshoremen that their sur- 
 roundings were made so that they could not stay in and be good union men. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. What about the others, the steamshipmen ?— A. The same, I suppose. But I 
 believe the real breaking off of negotiations between the 0. P. N. and the steamship- 
 men was they claimed Captain Troupe had broken an agreement. 
 
 Q. Do you believe in sympathetic strikes ?— A. If the work is all practically under 
 cne head I do. If the work is divided I don't. That is, I don't believe in men getting 
 themselves misled if they cannot do any good. 
 
 O Now it seems to be a practice m the Irades and i-iabour Council to.^post up 
 people as unfair in their hall ?— A. There is very few thkt we fost up there. - 
 p. J. EUSSBLlf— Vancouver, June 12. 
 
ON INDDSTRIIL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 725 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. How long has that practice been prevailing there ? — A. There have only been 
 one or two instances with the Trades and Labour Council. That is left to the unions 
 who are involved. 
 
 Q. I see you have room on two big blackboards ? — A. Yes, there is room for lots 
 of names. Those were left us by the Methodist Church. 
 
 Q. Are those official blacklists ? — A. I don't know anything about those. Those 
 are the Building Trades Council, that is a distinct council altogether. 
 
 Q. Those are on your bulletin board ? — A. Yes, any union has the use of the 
 boards. 
 
 Q. Any union can put up a blacklist of its own ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Yes, but tliis was endorsed by the Trades and Labour Society ? — A. Yes, I 
 was present at that meeting. 
 
 Q. How did the name of the carpenters get in there ? — A. I don't know anything 
 about that. I was not present at their meeting, so I could not tell what was done. 
 
 Q. This headquarters committee — what were the officers, chairman, secretary and 
 treasurer ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. "Were they all U.B.R.E. men ?— A. That is the TJ.B.R.E.— of course, all moneys 
 that came in came from that source, but in paying out money for relief it was through 
 the treasurer appointed by the whole committee. Mr. Mclver, of the teamsters, waS the 
 iirst one. His name should have gone down on that executive. He was treasurer until 
 he got a job and then, I think, Mr. Thompson took it. 
 
 Q. What was he, a steamship man ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you giva help to the Teamster Union and the Longshoremen's Union I 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You gave financial assistance to them ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That is, the money came first to them as U. B. R. E. money ? — A. It was 
 both TJ. B. R. E. money and money put in by different unions. 
 
 Q. The bulk of it was U. B. R. E. money ? — A. Yes, and nearly all the money 
 that came into the Trades and Labour Council came from the States. The United 
 Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners was one of the biggest contributors to the 
 U. B. E. E. 
 
 Q. Caii you estimate how much money has been lost by the strikers by reason of 
 the strike ? — A. No, I never figured it up. 
 
 Q. Can you give us a rough idea of how much has come in the way of aid ? — 
 A. I should say, probably, somewhere about $8,000 or $10,000. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. Did the U.B.R.E. ask these other -unions to come out? — A. No, sir, not that 
 I am aware of. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Would it surprise you to hear that Mr. Estes had made arrangements with 
 some of these other organizations to come out ? — A. If he did, I don't know anything 
 about it. In fact, the day before the teamsters went out I was talking to the presi- 
 dent, and I said, I don't think it would do any particular good, but the next morning 
 they were out. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. When- did you first hear of the steamshipmen's strike ?^A. The first I knew 
 about it was the notice sent us from Victoria. 
 
 Q. From whom ? — A. I don't' remember whether it was from Mr. Bulley or not. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q, Bulley waff the secretary of that body, was he not ? — A. I think Jie was the 
 nreeident of the Victoria body,, or vice-president. 
 
 P. J. RUSSELL— Vancouver, June 12. 
 
726 MINUTES Of EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904, 
 
 Q. Any moneys that tha TJ. B. R E. sent to that association would be sent to 
 kim, would they not ?— A. I don't know whether he was acting as treasurer or not 
 I was acting as secretary for the Trades Council advisory board. So many things 
 turned up, it la pretty hard to remember just what did occur. 
 
 T /-, ,, Vancouver, June 13, 1903. 
 
 J. C. Meiss, sworn. 
 
 Mr. BuiD.— I may state that I call this witness at his own request, as he is anxious 
 to lea.ve. My idea is to show there are combinations of capital as well as labour that 
 do things that_ probably would not meet the view of the Commission as right. 
 
 Q. What is your occupation ? — A. Cigarmaker. 
 
 Q. About the first of April were you in need of lumber ?— A.. Yes, for fixing 
 up a cigar factory. 
 
 -^,r^^ ^' w*^ ^°^ proceed about procuring it ?— A. Yes, sir, we went to the Eoyal City 
 Mills. We were told if we wanted any lumber we had to have it O.K'd by the British 
 Columbia Milling Company. I think that is the name. 
 
 Q. Don't you mean the B. C. Manufacturing Association ?— A. Yes, sir. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. You had to have their O.K. ?— A. Yes, sir. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. For the reason when we went down to get the lumber if we had a 
 union carpenter working on the job, they would not allow us the lumber. There was 
 trouble between the carpenters and employing contractors. 
 
 Q. A strike for better hours and better pay ? — A. I think so, whatever it was. 
 
 By Mr. Bird: 
 
 Q. Did you go to the B. C. Association ? — A. I did. 
 
 Q. Have the Builders' Exchange quarters there ? — A. I believe so. They asked 
 who was going to do the work and I told them, knowing that I was telling a* falsehood, 
 but knowing I had to do that to get the lumber. It seemed here that we should have 
 to wait for weeks. They would O.K. it, provided we did the work personally. 
 
 Q. Did you know whether there was an arrangement made by the B.C. Builders' 
 Exchange that nobody should get lumber at all who was employing union labour ? — 
 A» I believed that was so. 
 
 Q. Who did you go and see ? — A. I could not say just now the names of the men 
 who O.K.'d it, but the first one of the Eoyal Mills, and I was told by the clerk in the 
 charge of the mill that I could not get any lumber unless it was O.K.'d by the B. 0. 
 Association. He told me they could not sell any lumber unless it was O.K'd. by the 
 MilUing Association. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. Because for the simple reason that if we put any union labour on. 
 The clerk didn't say that, but at the B. C. Association they asked me that. 
 
 Q. Who did you see there ? — A. There was two of them. One of them was a young 
 man about 22, or a little older. I stated our case, and he called someone else from 
 the other room, I presume it was the manager. He put me some questions asking 
 what we wanted the lumber for, and who we wanted to perform the labour on it. I told 
 him we were going to perform the labour ourselves, and the next day after it arrived 
 we employed a union to do it. \7i1en we had the lumber we thought we could do with 
 it as we saw fit. 
 J. C. MEISS— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
ON mDUSTRlAL DI^POTBS IN BUITISH COLUMBIA 727 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Did the Milling Association give any reason why it had to be O.K.'d ? — ^A. I 
 was told at the mill. 
 
 Q. Did either of the men you saw say there was any arrangement of that sort? — 
 A. "No, they did not. I presume there was something between them because they would 
 not give me any lumber at the mill until it was O.K'd. 
 
 Q. Did you offer to pay for it ? — A. Certainly, cash. Offered to pay for it at the 
 mill. The lumber amounted to $14.40 and I gave him a $20 bill. I was told before I 
 went down that if I said union men were going to do the work that I could not get the 
 lumber. When I went to the man at the mill he went to work and figured out about 
 what it would amount to. He asked me what we were going to do with it and I told 
 him. He said, before you get the lumber you will have to go to the B.C. Association 
 and have it O.K.'d. 
 
 Q. The cash question did not come up between you and the milling people? — A. 
 No. 
 
 Q. What I want to get at is : Was there anything said, either by the Koyal Mills 
 l^eople or the Milling Association people, to give any foundation to the fact that they 
 would not supply any lumber to union men? — A. Yes, I was prompted before I went 
 there to tell them I was going to supply the labour. 
 
 Q. If either of these people had told you it might have had some consequencel — 
 A. Didn't he ask me in the B.C. Association who was going to do the work ? I told him 
 I was. I know if I had stated union men I would not have got it. Union men had 
 gone down to get lumber and they Xvould not supply them with it. 
 
 r. Johnston^ sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are president of the Longshoremen's Union here ? — A. Yes, my Lord. 
 
 Q. How long has that been in existence ? — A. Since November lY, 1888. 
 
 Q. The longshoremen have been out on strike ? — A. No, my Lord. 
 
 Q. They have not been working lately ? — A. No, but we have not been on strike. 
 We ceased work on principle because we could not handle scab material. 
 
 Q. When did you cease work ? — A. On March 4, 1903. 
 
 Q. And how many of you ceased work ? — A. 140 men. 
 
 Q. All the members of the union ? — A. All the members of the union. 
 
 -Q. How did you know that scab material was being handled ? — A. Well, the day 
 prior to us ceasing work the freight-handlers had ceased to work, and they were all 
 union men, and any one taking their places was scabs. 
 
 Q. How did you know the freight-handlers had ceased work — who told you ? — A. 
 I saw it in the paper. 
 
 Q. Do you take for gospel everything you see in the paper ? — ^A. Not if it is the 
 C. P. E. organ, I don't. 
 
 Q. That is the only way you know that the freight-handlers came out, because you 
 saw it in the paper ? — A. Some of the members told me they were out. 
 
 Q. Who told you ? — A. I cannot recollect the members' names particularly. I 
 am not very good at remembering things, especially names. I don't take anything in 
 my head more than I can help. 
 
 Q. Did you, or the secretary of your union get any notice from the freight-handlers 
 or any other organization that they had gone out ? — A. I don't recall that. 
 
 Q. A matter of small conseqiience, I suppose ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What is your idea of a sympathetic strike ? — A. I don't know anything about 
 sympathetic strikes. 
 
 P. JOHNSTON— Vancouver, June 13. ; 
 
728 iJlNVTE)^ Of EVIDMA'CE OF ROYAL COMilLSSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Q. You don't know anything about sympathetic strikes, never heard of one before; 
 would not know a sympathetic strike if you ran up against it ? — A. No, I would not. 
 
 Q. You do know about striking against scabs and scab freight ?— A. That is not 
 striking, my Lord, that is principle. 
 
 Q. Did you have any communication with Estes about this trouble ?— A. No com- 
 munication with Estes concerning 
 
 Q. Did you have any interviews with him ?— A. As a personal friend, of course, I 
 came in contact with Mr. Estes, but all conversations between Mr. Estes and myself 
 were private, nothing concerning the strike at all. 
 
 Q. Have long had you known Mr. Estes before he came to Vancouver ? — A. I 
 did not know him until he came to Vancouver. 
 
 Q. He was a great friend of yours, was he ?— A. Not a great friend, didn't say so. 
 
 Q. And you had a lot of private conversations ?— A. Not a lot. I may have met 
 him ten or twelve times. 
 
 Q. And the subject-matter of the strike never came up ? — A. Not in my presence. 
 
 Q. Never talked about strikes at all ?— A. No, strikes did not interest me. 
 
 Q. Never talked about ceasing work, he did not discuss the question of your coming 
 out? — A. Decidedly not, it had nothing to do with him that I know of. 
 
 Q. Did you get any financial help from Mr. Estes? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Erom the U.B.R.E. ?— A. Not from them as a body. 
 
 Q. From whom? — A. From whatever financial aid has come in. It has not come 
 from headquarters, it has come by subscriptions from different union men, not only 
 from the U.B.E.E. but other unions who felt it their duty to assist one another as 
 unions. It is not the sympathetic part of it, it is the principle. 
 
 Q. Who did you get the financial aid from? — A. I have no record of the different 
 unions who subscribed. 
 
 Q. The U.B.R.E. gave you some as well as the others ? — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. The executive committee did ?— A. From the executive, certainly. 
 
 Q. Were you on the executive? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you have consultations jvith the other members of the executive as to the 
 strikes? — A. Very little, because I had too much to do looking after my own body. 
 
 Q. You mean the men who went out?^-A. The men who went out, tKe longshore- 
 men. 
 
 Q. Did you have any understanding with Mr. Estes how long the men were to re- 
 main out ?— A. I told you, my Lord, at the first, that I had no conversation with Mr. 
 Estes about the- strike or the men. 
 
 Q. No conversation with any other members of the headquarters committee about 
 that ?^A. No, my Lord. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 Q. Did your union have a meeting before theyqUit work? — A; Well, we must 
 have a meeting to declare the thing unfair. It was our ordinary meeting. It hap- 
 I)ened it was our ordinary meeting the night before we ceased work, so we called no 
 special meeting for that at all. It came in the ordinary routine of business. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 
 Q. And at that meeting a resolution was adopted to the effect that the C.P.R. 
 was unfair? — A. No, but that the freight we should handle would be unfair, being 
 handled as it was the day before we declared to come out, by unfair or scab men, men 
 who take the union men's places. 
 
 Q. Have you gone back to work ? — A. Yes, we resumed work yesterday. 
 
 Q. There are some of these scabs still handling this freight? — A. For the time 
 being. 
 
 Q. You can stand the scab freight for a few days ? — A. Well, my Lord, you know 
 the agreement is not signed between the C.P.E. and the employees yet. We have gone 
 P. JOHNSTON— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
ON INDVSTSIAL DWPtPrES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 729 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 back to work pending the decision which we know will be accepted anyhow. I take 
 it of course that the freight handlers will resume work about the 22nd of this month. 
 
 Q. All I desire to know is whether you can handle scab freight for a few days, be- 
 cause if you can, it seems to me you can stand it for a few months ? — A. If you force 
 it along that line 
 
 Q. What I don't understand is, you cease work ou principle, and it appears to me 
 you are prepared to surrender your principle for a few days? — A. Certainly. 
 
 Q. If for a few days, why not for a good long time? — A. One is a commencement 
 of the trouble, and now, as I take it, this is a cessation of hostilities. 
 
 Q. You say you went out on principle to prevent handling scab freight? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And you are handling it to-day? — A. Yes, but don't j'ou know at the time of 
 strike there is a chance to give the company time to get rid of their substitutes and to 
 give the union a chance to get men to take their places. If that thing had been called 
 ofi yesterday with everyone concerned, things v/ould be in a pretty mess. 
 
 Q. I guess it is not your fault, Mr. Johnston, that it is not in a bigger mess than 
 it was?— A. What I mean is there would not have been any men here to perform the 
 work. The substitutes would have walked off the docks, and there would have been 
 no men here to replace them. ^ 
 
 By Mr. Bowe: 
 
 Q. At the meeting at which you decided the freight was unfair, was any member 
 of the U.B.E.E. present?— A. No. 
 
 Q. No address made on the subject by anybody other than members of the union? 
 — A. No, we transacted all our own business. 
 
 Q. Did the resolution require the meeting to quit work next day? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Is your union affiliated with International Longshoremen's Union? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of the constitution ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was your union asked to appoint a member of the headquarters compiittee? 
 — ^A. The headquarters of our international? 
 
 Q. No, the committee here of the strike? — A. It was the executive committee. 
 
 Q. And it was an enlarged executive of the U.B.E.E. Was your union asked to 
 join that committee? — A. We were not asked to appoint one, but of course naturally 
 the unions that came out, the B.C.S.S., the longshoremen, and teamsters naturally 
 had members sitting on that committee. 
 
 Q. Were they there by the appointment of their respective lodges? — A. Well, 
 certainly. 
 
 Q. Had your union any schedule with the men you worked for, any contract ?^A. 
 No, we have no particular schedule with any particular employer, because a good deal 
 of ours is casual labour, but we have what is called a port wage, and all employers 
 know that port wage. 
 
 Q. You have no contract as to the number of men you will furnish the contractor? 
 — A. That all depends. If we have the men we supply them. It is not under a con- 
 tract, it is an understanding. 
 
 Q. Any understanding as to notice to these men if you purpose not working? — ^A. 
 No, if a man does not suit him an employer has the right to discharge that man at a 
 minute's notice, giving a reason, of course. Of course the men also have the same 
 option. The same sword cuts both ways. 
 
 By His Lordship: 
 Q. Do you know anything about picketing ? — A. The only thing I ever knew about 
 picketing is out on the prairie. If you have no stable for your horse, you drive a 
 
 stick ' . , , 
 
 Q. It seems to me, Mr. Johnston, you are pretty green for the president of ,^ long- 
 shoreman's union ?^A. I may be a little green, but I'm not cabbage-looking anyhow. 
 
 F. JOHNSTON— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
730 mNUTES Off EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSIOJf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 4904 
 
 George Noonan, sworn. > i 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are secretary of this longshoreman's union ? — A. Tes> my Lord. 
 
 Q. You, with 140 members of the union, quit work on March 4 last ? — A- Yes. 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. On principle. 
 
 Q. What is your principle ? — A. The principle is that I could not as a union man 
 handle freight if the freight-handlers had gone out on strike. 
 
 Q. Could not handle scab freight ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did you notify the company that you were going out ? — A. No, my Lord. 
 
 Q. Went out without giving any notice. How was this question of coming oiit 
 decided by the union ? — A. On principle. 
 
 Q. Yes, but you had a general meeting ? — ^A. At our ordinary regular meeting. 
 
 Q. You mean the meeting of the executive or the meeting of the whole ? — A. Of 
 our union. 
 
 Q. How was that meeting called ?— A. It was our regular meeting night. It 
 came up in the ordinary course of business. 
 
 Q. How often do you meet ? — ^A. Efery other Tuesday. 
 
 Q. And this matter came up at a regular Tuesday meeting ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The Tuesday before you went out ? — A. Yes, my Lord. 
 
 Q. Does not the constitution provide for a special meeting to be called for the 
 purpose of considering a strike ?— A. This is not a strike. 
 
 Q. What do you call this ? — A. We just ceased work on principle. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. I suppose a strike is not on principle, then ? — A. I don't consider this a strike. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Would you give us your idqa of what a strike is ? — A. I presume if we made 
 an advance to the company for an increase in wages or if we laboured under any par- 
 ticular grievance connected with our own organization, which would not be rectified, 
 it would be brought before a special meeting, and if the grievance could not be adjusted 
 we would strike. 
 
 Q. And you call this, what ? — A. Ceasing work on principle. 
 
 Q. That is something different from a strike. How many of the men of the union 
 decided to cease work on principle ? — A. It was unanimous. 
 
 Q. By ballot ?— A. Open vote. 
 
 Q. Don't you think a grave question of this kind should be by ballot ? — A. It is 
 not what I think, it is what the majority of the organization think. 
 
 Q. What do you think ? — A. No, I don't thinlt it odd. 
 
 Q. Was it unanimous ? — A. Yes, my Lord. 
 
 Q. How many were there of the whole 140 ? — ^A. I don't recall, I cannot give an 
 answer. 
 
 Q. Were there 20 ?— A. Oh, yes. 
 
 Q. Were there 40 ? — A. I should say over 40. 
 
 Q. Were there 50 ?— A. Well, going into, figures 
 
 Q. You cannot work it up higher than 50 ? — A. I could not say, my Lord. 
 
 Q. I will put down 50 ? — A. I don't say there were 50 or not, or over. 
 
 Q. Well, you cannot say that there were over 50 ? — (No answer.) 
 
 Q. Now, you were the man who got the men on the Empress to come out, were 
 you not ? — A. No, my Lord. 
 
 Q. Did you have any negotiation with any Empress seamen ? — A. No, my Lord.. 
 
 Q. None whatever ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. Are you sure about that ? — A. Quite sure. It was a question that did not- 
 concern the longshoremen's union whatever. , 
 
 GEORGE NOONAN— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DtSPVTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 731 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Did you have any communication with Bulley, of the Steamshipmen'a Asso- 
 ciation, about the strike ? — A. Not as a member of the Longshoremen's Union, my 
 Lord. 
 
 Q. In your private capacity ? — ^A. No. 
 
 Q. In what capacity, then ?— A. Well, I might say as a member of the B.C.S.S 
 
 Q. You were a member of this headquarters committee, were you ? The joint 
 board of these unions that quit work, we won't say struck ? — A. Yes, my Lord. 
 
 Q. Had you any negotiations with Estes about quitting work ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. None whatever, no interview or conversation with him ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did you ever have any correspondence with Estes ?— A. No, I never wrote a line 
 to Mr. Estes in my life. 
 
 Q. Ever receive any letters from Mr. Estes ? — A. No, my Lord. 
 
 Q. Would you be surprised to hear there are some letters in our possession ? — A. 
 Written by me to Mr. Estes ? 
 
 Q. By Mr. Estes to you ? — A. It would, my Lord, if there was a letter written by 
 Mr. Estes to me. 
 
 Q. Did you have any conversation with any man coming out from the east to go 
 on the Empress ? — A. No, my Lord. 
 
 Q. On the C.P.R. train or elsewhere ?^-A. No, never had any conversation with 
 any of the seamen coming out from the C.P.R. Never was on the company's property 
 after the men came out. 
 
 Q. You had no conversation on the train with any men who were coming out to 
 take the places of seamen who were leaving the Empress ?— A. No, my Lord. 
 
 Q. Did the B.C. Steamshipmen's Association receive any money from the execu- 
 tive ? — A. "I cannot say as to that, my Lord, I am not in a position to say. 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about that ? — A. No. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. I see a reference to an officer called a delegate, what does that mean ? — A. Mr. 
 liowe, our delegate is our foreman. For instance, when a boat comes in our delegate 
 interviews the chief officer. The chief officer tells the men how many he wants and 
 where to place them. The delegate calls off the men and directs the placing of them. 
 
 Q. And I see that a union man cannot take a job on the ship except at the instruc- 
 tions of the delegate ? — A. Our contention is that it is to prevent unnecessary trouble. 
 The chief officer tells the delegate how many men he wants. On most boats the dele- 
 gate stays there and superintends the men, and assists the chief officer in placing the 
 cargo. The delegate — ^where he doesn't do that, where the matter is left entirely in the 
 chief officer's hands, he generally appoints a member of the union to act, and if the 
 chief officer wants any more men he generally tells this member. That is done to pre- 
 vent unnecessary confusion by men coming to work out of turn. We have a list. It 
 begins with No. 1. If the ship wants twenty men the delegate calls down to twenty, 
 and the rest of the men are told to go home. Then when that boat is finished and the 
 next boat comes in, the delegate starts where he left off and so on down the list. 
 
 Q. And you would impose a fine on any man who proceeded differently to get 
 work ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. 'No member shall take upon himseK to commence work without permission 
 cf the delegate,' and so on ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Under what article of your constitution did you take action at that meeting in 
 which you decided not to work any more ? — A. There was no article of the constitution 
 brought into effect. It was solely on union principles. 
 
 Q. Would a member of the Longshoremen's Union who worked after that meeting 
 be subject to discipline ? — A. He most assuredly would. 
 
 Q. What would his relation to the lodge be ? — A. He had disobeyed an order of 
 the union. He would, in my opinion, Mr. Eowe, be subject to discipline for the simple 
 reason that he had gone against the wishes 6i the majority. 
 
 GEORGE NOONANi Vancouver, June. 13. 
 
732 MlliVTES OF ETIDEiiCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That is a question outside of the constitution, according to you. This is not 
 a strike ? — A. It was a rule of the union that the union cease work, and in the second 
 or third article of our constitution, section 3, it says members shall obey all orders from 
 time to time 
 
 Q. There is nothing in the constitution about ceasing work ? — ^A. If we were to 
 print every detail in the constitution, like a copy of the law, it would be a big volume. 
 
 Q. That is an important matter — that all the men came out. That is not a mere 
 detail. That appears to me to he about as important a matter as could be considered. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. When you say the rules of the union, what do you refer to, by-laws ? — A. No, 
 lules or motions, or any decision arrived at by the union. 
 
 Q. It says here that no part of the by-laws shall be amended except by notice of 
 motion, such motion to lay on the table for a month. So if it became a principle for 
 the men not to work there would have to be a month's notice before it could be had. 
 The reason I ask this question is that if we find that unions don't live up to their con- 
 stitutions it has the effect of creating a feeling of insecurity on the part of those who are 
 dependent upon the proper observance of these rules. I see here the constitution says, 
 ' No strike or boycott shall be encouraged.' What do you understand by boycott ? — A. 
 I don't know, Mr. Kowe, it is a thing I have never gone into. I have nothing to do 
 with the adoption of the constitution. I presume that constitution was gotten up by 
 a committee of the members. Personally, the word ' boycott ' or anything of that kind 
 is a thing I have never gone into. 
 V Q. So you don't know what that means when it is here in the constitution ? — A. 
 
 No, I cannot say that I do. 
 
 By His Lordship _: 
 
 Q. You see, ITr. Noonan, you have undertaken to tell us about a union principle. 
 
 Surely if you understand all that, you understand what is meant by boycott. You 
 
 say you are dealing with a question of union principle. Now, boycotting has been 
 
 • very frequently discussed in unions ? — A. I have no knowledge in the organization 
 
 that I belong to, that the word boycott was ever used. 
 
 By Mr. Boive : 
 
 Q. Why did your union think it wrong to handle this freight ?— A. They con- 
 sidered because the C. P. K men had gone on strike, or had been forced out, that it 
 would be wrong for us to go down there and handle that freight which had been 
 handled by men they thought unfair. - . r, tt t. t. i? ) a 
 
 Q. What effect would your action have upon the fortunes of the U. B. K. h. i—A. 
 I don't know as we discussed that matter at all. We simply ceased work. 
 
 Q. Your ceasing work was not for the purpose of helping any union m this 
 struggle ? A. Well, if you have a mind to take it that way, yes. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q Did you have any coromunication with Thompson of the B. C. Association 
 about the Empress ?— A. About the Empress, no. I want it understood that any com- 
 munication I had with the B. C. S.S. related to their business. The busmess was 
 never discussed by the longshoremen in any shape or form. 
 
 Q What is your office in the B. C. Steamshipmen ?— A. I am the secretary of the 
 Vancouver division. I understood that I was subpoenaed here as the secretary of the 
 JLongshoremen's Union. .,, „ . ^ ., ^i. ^ - 
 
 Q. You have not done anything in connection with this strike that you are 
 
 ashamed of ?— A. No, my Lord. , .^ ^ ^ .^ ., , 
 
 Q. Well, I don't see why you hesitate to tell us all you know, 
 - <;E0RGE NOONAN— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 733 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 J. C. Keer, sworn. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are president of tlie Teamsters' Union here ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. That union quit work on the 4th of March ? — A. On the 12th March. 
 
 Q. How did they come to the conclusion to do that, how was it decided to quit 
 work, and why ? — A. Because it came in contact with scab freight and baggage on 
 the wharfs. , 
 
 Q. Have you got a copy of your constitution here ? — A. No, sir. 
 
 Q. Can you get one ? — A. Yes, sir. 
 
 (Copy of constitution put in — Exhibit 73.) 
 
 Q. Was this matter decided at, a general or special meeting ? — A. General meet- 
 ing. 
 
 Q. One of the ordinary meetings ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. No.special notice given to consider this question ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. How many men are in the union — the Teamsters' Union ? — A. I think over 
 one hundred. 
 
 Q. How many men were at the meeting ? — A. I think they were nearly all there. 
 
 Q. Nearly 100 ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Was the question decided by ballot ? — A. No, by open vote. 
 
 Q. Were there any dissenting ? — A. Just two. 
 
 Q. You went out on the 12th ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Why did you go out ? — A. We were forced but by our employers. 
 
 Q. Have you got a copy of the resolution which permitted you to go out or the 
 resolution transcribed in the minute book ? Do you keep minute books ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of the resolution ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you remember how it reads ? — A. No, my Lord, I don't. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. What did it require of the members ? — A. A two-thirds vote. 
 
 Q. In general terms, what did it state, what men were to stop work ?— A. All that 
 came in contact with scab freight and baggage on the C. P. R. service. 
 
 Q. Is there anything about scab freight in this constitution ? — A. I don't think so. 
 
 Q. So all the freight and baggage which came over the C. P. E. wharf was unfair ? 
 —A. Yes. 
 
 Q. There could not be any fair freight on that wharf ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Would that apply to freight sheds, too ?— A. The local freight sheds, yes. 
 
 Q. How many men were affected by this order of the union ? — A. I could not siay 
 exactly how many, I think about one-half of our union. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Did you have any agreement with the C. P. R. about your wages, any written 
 agreement ? — A. We have nothing to do with the C.P.R. 
 
 Q. How did you know this was scab freight you were being called on to take ?^ 
 A. Well, we saw by the papers and by the members of the other unions on the wharf 
 iiat they were out. , 
 
 Q. Members of the freight-handlers told you they were out ? — A. Freight-handlers, 
 yes. _ -'-,., 
 
 Q. Were you on this executive committee ?^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Did you get any money from the U. B. R. E. to help you ? — ^A. No. , 
 
 Q. Whom did you get money from ? — A. From the executive. 
 
 Q. Where did they get it from ? — A. From different unions. 
 
 Q. Some from the IJ.B.R.E. ?— A. I don't think so. 
 
 Q. Nothing \diatever from the U.B.R.E. ? — A. I could not say. 
 
 J. C. KERR— -Vancouver, June ,13. 
 
734 MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROTAt COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vtl., A. 1904 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. Wlio collected the money ? — A. No person collected it. 
 
 Q. To whom was it sent from the various unions ? — A. To the executive, I expect 
 Q. Who decided the amount that was to be given to the various unions ? — A. I 
 could not say. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You were a member of the executive ?— A. Yes. 
 
 Q. The matter never came up ?— A. To go to the different unions ? No, there 
 was not any amount specified. 
 
 ^ Q. It was never decided at the executive meeting as to whether the Teamsters' 
 Union should get a certain amount or the longshoremen ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. On what basis was the money distributed ?— A. Well, a person that was really 
 needy and could not find work and asked for assistance, why they would get assistance. 
 
 Q. The individuals would make application ? — ^A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What do you understand by sympathetic strike ? Can you give us any 
 light on that subject ? — A. No, not very much. , 
 
 Q. You would not call this a synipathetio strike ?— A. No, I don't think I would 
 call it a sympathetic strike. 
 
 Q. If you would not call this a sympathetic strike, tell us what you understand by 
 a sympathetic strike ? — A. I suppose you might call it a sympathetic strike. Some 
 would and some would not. 
 
 Q. There is not much doubt about it, is there? You had no grievance with your 
 employer ? — ^A. No. We had a verbal agreement with our employer that we were to 
 handle no freight or material — no scab material. 
 
 Q. When was this ? — A. In case there was a strike on they were not to ask us 
 
 Q. With whom was this arrangement come to ? — A. With our employers. 
 
 Q. -Who were your employers ? — A. The master draymen of the city. 
 
 By Mr. Eowe : 
 Q. They have an association ? — ^A. They had. 
 
 By His Lordship. : 
 
 Q. When was this agreement entered into ? — A. I really don't know; to save 
 trouble, I suppose. 
 
 Q. When did you arrive at this arrangement ? — A. When we were recognized 
 as a union. 
 
 Q. How long before you went out ? — A. It was quite a long time before we went 
 out. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Before the U.B.E.E. strike ?— A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q. Did your international union or general executive approve of the union's 
 action ?— A. We went out on our own stand. 
 
 Q. Didn't ask for approval of the general executive ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Did you get any assistance from the general executive ? — A. Yes, sir. From the 
 headquarters you mean ? 
 
 Qi-Yes. You got money from the defence fund, it is called that in the constitu- 
 tion. 'Money from the defence fund shall be drawn on only for the following pur- 
 poses: for the purpose of strikes, for the purpose of defending the principles of 
 unionism, &c, &c.' Is that the fund from what you draw assistance ? — A. I expect so. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. Did you have any communication with Estes about this organizatioti ? — ^A. 
 None whatever. 
 J. C. KERR— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
ON muVSTUTAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 735 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. Or any interview with him ? — A. No, 
 
 Q. Did you have any discussions with any U.B.E.E. officers? — A. I don't recol- 
 lect as I did, that is, the officers. 
 
 Q. Who did you discuss the matter with ? — A. Not with any of them particularly, 
 no more than members talking of the situation in general. 
 
 Q. I suppose the object of the teamsters was to help the TJ.B.E.E.? — A. No, not 
 altogether. 
 
 Q. Was that one object? — A. I don't know as they figured it was going to help 
 the TJ.B.E.E. any more than they refused simply to handle the freight. They con- 
 sidered it scab freight. 
 
 Charles Woodward^ recalled. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Is this an article authorized by you: 'Protest of C. W. Woodward & Co. 
 against Trades Council Manifesto.' (Quoting from Vancouver ' Daily World,' May 
 29, 1903) ? — A. It must have been, so far as I know. (Article put in as Exhibit Y4.) 
 
 Q. It appears in the ' World ' of the 29th of May ? — A. It is an interview. 
 
 Q. Now, I bring this to your attention because there is a statement here : ' What 
 the action really means is that the company, to please the unions, should throw away 
 from $5,000 to $6,000 on the price of their building. In this age of competition such 
 a course would be suicidal and union men who hold hundreds of dollars worth of the 
 slock of the company would be among the first to condemn the management for 
 
 waste ' I understood yesterday the only difference between them was $1,200 or 
 
 $1,500 ? — A. What I said was the tender — Mr. Cook's was the lowest tender, and the 
 next highest was from $1,300 to $1,500. The next one then was very much higher. 
 It would run from $4,000 to $5,000 and then run from $4,000 to $11,000. 
 
 Q. Tour explanation of that statement is that the man next higher than Mr. 
 Cook did not want the contract ? — A. I arranged an interview but he came to the 
 conclusion in discussing the thing that he did not want it, and in fact he said words 
 to that effect. He gave us to understand that he did not want it, even had we been 
 disposed to give it to him, but still if we had sooner the figure of Mr. Cook possibly 
 some arrangement might have been made. I 'will state that the company were pre- 
 pared to pay some sooner than have any trouble, but there was one thing with Mr. 
 Shindler which he did state and which we could not entertain, that he would not bind 
 himself to complete it in a particular time. He would not bind himself in any way to 
 build them in time through the labour trouble. 
 
 Q. Does that mean that Mr. Shindler insisted on a strike clause being inserted ? 
 — A. Oh, yes, he decided on that. 
 
 Q. You wanted a time limit with your contract ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you found that it is absolutely necessary to have strike clauses in con- 
 tracts in British Columbia ? — A. With Mr. Cook there is an agreement with a strike 
 clause. 
 
 Q. That is deferring the ultimate completion in the case of strike ? — A. Not with 
 ]iis own men, but in connection with something outside of his own union. I would like 
 to make a statement here, misrepresented in the ' Advertiser,' that I said that Cook's 
 men were non-union; they are union. 
 
 Q. As a matter of hearsay, you know nothing about this matter of union or non- 
 union ? — A. Only by what I hear. 
 
 By His Lordship : * 
 
 Q. I see you say something in your article here about having trouble with the 
 'union over bread. What was that trouble about ? — A. We were getting our bread in 
 
 CHARLES WOODWARD— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
736 MIXUTES OF ETIDEXCE OF ROYAL C0MMIS8I0V 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 the store from Mr. Murray, and he was declared unfair by the unions. The unions 
 v/aited on Mr. Wallace, who looks after the grocery part of my place about it. I did 
 not know about this until they came to me. They came to me on Sat\u"day night and 
 made the same complaint, and gave me until Monday to decide what we^ere going to do. 
 If we still continued to take Mr. Murray's bread, they would declare us unfair and boy- 
 cott us. I had an interview with Wallace and I told him. I said, for the sake of hav- 
 ing no trouble, you had beter change your baker'. I said, you had better change your 
 baker! and even after that we were put on the unfair list. 
 
 Q. Even though you changed your baker you were put on the unfair list ?— A. 
 Yes, and it was up a week. 
 
 Q. How do you account for that ? — A. I don't know, that occasion was previous 
 to this here, but we tried to have no trouble. 
 
 Q. What union posted you that time ? — A. The Trades and Labour Council, the 
 same as this— they have the running of advertisements now in the papers, one in the 
 ' Clarion ' and one in the ' Independent.' There is a running ad. in the ' Clarion.' It 
 Las been going for same weeks. They have one inj,he 'Independent,' I think, with 
 Mr. Cook's name coupled with it. I have not got that one. I could not find it this 
 morning. 
 
 Copy of ' Clarion ' containing advertisement put in as Exhibit 75.) 
 
 Q. Have you ever had any union men come to you and tell you he could not do 
 business with you on account of being on the unfair list? — A. Not to me. One of my 
 men told me he had an order of $10 and that he would have to go by my store. 
 
 Q. Is that employee of yours here ? — A. He is in the city, in the store. 
 
 Q. You don't think it makes much difference to your business being on the unfair 
 list ? — A. No, I think possibly we are making a special effort, the same as other mer- 
 chants are, cleaning up between fall and spring goods, but we have a better business 
 now than we have ever had in our history. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. This practice of placing on the unfair list is not unknown to you. Did you 
 ever see a calendar like that ? — A. No. 
 
 (Copy of 'Unfair' Calendar, Gumey Foundry Company, Toronto, put in as 
 Exhibit 76.) 
 
 Q. Did you ever see anything like that (exhibiting), ' Kefuse to buy Oxford stoves 
 and ranges; on the unfair list throughout the Dominion ?'— A. No. 
 
 (Copy of circular ' Eefuse to buy Oxford stoves and ranges put in as Exhibit 77.) 
 
 Q. This sort of practice has been to your knowledge in vogue throughout the 
 United States and Canada for some years ?— A. Yes, I have heard of such things. 
 
 Q. So when you came up against it yourself you recognized it was not a very seri- 
 fus condition. This document that was circulated as against your stores was addressed 
 to union men of the city of Vancouver and nobody else— the document you complam 
 of? — A. I don't know, let me see it. 
 
 Q. It was not for general circulation, it was for private circulation among the 
 men ? — A. Yes. 
 
 His Lordship.— Yes, but they stuck it up on telephone poles. 
 
 Mr. BiHD. — The unions are not responsible for that. 
 
 His LoKDSHip.^Whd is ? 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I suppose somebody would have a spite against Mr. Woodward. 
 
 His Lordship. — It is satisfactory to know that you disown the placing of it on the 
 
 poles. ^ ' 
 
 Mr. Bird. As I see it, it was for circulatioa among labouring men only ,and 
 
 intended to be brought to their attention only. 
 CHARLES WOODWARD— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
ON INDUSTmjIL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLVUBIA 737 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Edward Cook, sworn. 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. You are the contractor that built Mr. Woodward's building ? — A. Yes, my Lord. 
 
 Q. Tell us about your version of this trouble ? — A. Well, for some time back, some 
 years I may say, we have had more or less friction with union labour here in the build- 
 ing trades. 
 
 Q. You are a builder ? — A. Yes, and general contractor. At times matters were 
 running very smoothly ; we have had things fixed up at their dictation, and wp would 
 run along very smoothly for sometimes a week or so, sometimes longer, aiid the dicta- 
 tion would become so severe that it would become impossible to carry on operations 
 
 Q. What trades do you refer to ? — A. Well, all the trades in connection with build- 
 ing, especially bricklayers and stonemasons, carpenters, stonecutters. The result of 
 that was that the men complained, a large number of the men who were fair-minded, 
 reasonable men, they complained so bitterly of the treatment they were receiving that 
 they would have to withdraw from the union in the Labour Council in Vancouver and 
 organize a separate organization, that is, a Canadian organization. At certain times, 
 a number of workmen would arrive from the other side of the line, south of the line, 
 and finally the local men here had their meetings and decided on some radical change 
 which would seriously aflfect the interests of the men residing here. They were decided 
 on that, but at the same time a strike would be called or they would be called off the 
 work, and were called off my work a number of times. Hence the agitation about a 
 new organization, and I spoke of a national union. 
 
 Q. When was that formed-? — A. I believe perhaps two years ago. 
 
 Q. Was that a union of allied trades ? — A. All the trades that I spoke of are work- 
 ing under that organization now. 
 
 Q. What is the name of it ? — A. They call it the National Union of Canada. 
 
 Q. National Union of what ? — A. The National Union of Bricklayers, Mas_pns 
 and Carpenters. 
 
 Q. Separate unions of their own ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. How did you get into trouble with the Trades and Labour Council ? — A. They, 
 of course, consider that every one else is wrong unless they follow their dictation. 
 The man who doesn't follow it is considered to be a very poor tj^pe of man. They 
 called the men off the work at every oppo«rtunity, and interfered with them as much as 
 they could. Quite a large number of the men I spoke to in this organization refused 
 to be governed by them and are working for me. 
 
 Q. How did they come to claim you were unfair ? — ^A. Employing these local men. 
 
 Q. Were you notified by any of these bodies that you would be placed on the unfair 
 list if you did that ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you got that notice with you ? — A. I only have my name on the unfair 
 list they sent me. 
 
 Q. You were notified by the Trades and Labour Council ? — A. By their delegated 
 authority. I think I have it in writing, but I am not positive. 
 
 , Q. If you have it in writing you had better hand it in to the secretary ? — A. I am 
 certain about verbal notice. 
 
 Q. When was that given ? — A. At different times. 
 
 Q. You have experienced the unfair list several times ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. What wages do you pay these people ? — A. The current rate of wages. 
 
 Q. Have you any difiiculties with the men now in your employ ? — A. None what- 
 ever. If I had, not at any time that the men were left to themselves. 
 
 Q. Who has been interfering with them ? — A. The agitator or walking delegate 
 goes around and gives them notice that they should not work for me. 
 
 Q. Who is the walking delegate ? — A. Mr. Hilton is one of them. I think that is 
 his name. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — He is in the room. 
 
 ggjj ^ij EDWARD COOK— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
738 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. And he goes around stirring up trouble among the men? — A.- He goes around 
 and calls the men aside, probably that may be working, and says, don't you know you 
 are working for so-and-so, and in the conversation tells them they should withdraw 
 from the building and they might go away and not work any more. 
 
 Q. How many times does that occur ? — A. A large number of times. About a 
 dozen times in two years, within a couple of years. 
 
 Q. The same walking delegate ? — A. The same, yes. 
 
 Q. As many as two dozen times in a few years ? — A. He don't come much when 
 I am there. He would see the men at other times. 
 
 Q. On the work or away from the work ? — A. Away from the work, I think. 
 If I am on the works, I don't permit anything of that kind. 
 
 Q. Have you had men quit work on you ? — A. Tes, 1 have had men called off for 
 no reason. 
 
 Q. How many ?— A. About 20 or 25. 
 
 Q. All at once ? — A. Sometimes, and sometimes singly. 
 
 Q. What explanation was given why they quit work ? — A. They were told that 
 they were working on building that was considered unfair, and for a contractor who 
 was considered unfair by them. 
 
 Q. That is the excuse they would give you when they quit work ? — A. Yes. In 
 very many cases they came back and worked in a day or two, or a week, when they 
 found that they had been misled. 
 
 Q. Do you find any trouble in getting men to work for you ? — A. Not those under 
 the national union. I have no trouble whatever. They are pleased to work and very 
 much satisfied with the arrangements. 
 
 Q. Has the national union a charter ? — A. From the Trades and Labour Council 
 of Eastern Canada. 
 
 Q. The Dominion Trades Congress ? — A. Yes, the Dominion Trades Congress. 
 
 Q. How many men do you employ as a rule ? — A. Just now we have abOut 30 men 
 on the pay-roll. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Were they out in the recent strike here ?-::;A. No, my men were not out. 
 
 Q. Did they get the wages agreed on as a settlement of that strike ?— A. They 
 were not demanding additional wages. They had received shorter hours sometime 
 before, I think about the first of March, and they were not asking any demands of me. 
 
 Q. Are their terms and wages the same as other unions ? — ^A. Their hours are the 
 same, and their wages are the same so far as I know. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Could you give us a schedule of the rates of pay that obtains with your work, 
 Mr. Cook ? — A. Yes, I can give it. 
 
 Q. Give us the rate per hour of carpenters. How much do yoii pay the carpen- 
 ters? — A. Carpenters get 40 cents. 
 
 Q. And bricklayers ? — A. Bricklayers are 50 cents. 
 
 Q. Labourers ?— A. Labourers vary from 25 to 35, I suppose. ' 
 
 Q. I understand your men work 9 hours per day, Mr. Cook, is that right ?— A. 
 They are paid by the hour. 
 
 Q. They work 9 hours a day —A. Not all of them. 
 
 Q. Do they have Saturday afternoon off. When they work more than 8 hours a 
 day are they paid for overtime ? — A. They are paid extra. 
 
 Q. But not at the excess rate for overtime charged by other men. They get the 
 same 40 cents per hour ?— A. Yes, they are paid for all the time they work. 
 
 Q. But not as overtime. Thr^y don't get holidays on Saturday afternoons if they 
 work overtime ? — A. That is ojitional with them. 
 EDWARD COOK— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 739 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. They can work or not, but they are not entitled to time for overtime hours ? — 
 A. That is arranged between the men and myself. 
 
 Q. They just get their ordinary rate of pay ? — A. Not always, sometimes they are 
 paid extra. 
 
 Q. Por instance, Saturday afternoons ; I understand your men always work Satur- 
 day afternoons ? — A. No, the carpenters and bricklayers don't. 
 
 Q. They have been working on the afternoons since you started the Woodward 
 department store ? — A. Some days, when there was broken time. 
 
 Q. Now, you have been an opponent of unions for over two years ? — A. Not as an 
 opponent of unions 
 
 Q. You have been on the unfair list for about that length of time ? — ^A. No, I 
 was not on the unfair list until about a year and a half ago. 
 
 Q. You are a union man yourself, are you not ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Do you belong to this union with your employees ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You believe in strikes, don't you, to enforce what you believe to be correct 
 demands ? — A. No, I think they are very injurious. 
 
 Q. Never engaged in a strike as a union man yourself ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Ever remember being engaged in a strike in Winnipeg ? — A. No, I don't. 
 
 Q. It is reported you struck three times in one day on a certain job, Mr. Cook ? — 
 A. It must have been some other person of the same name. 
 
 Q. Do you know any Mr. Sault, in Vancouver ? — A. Yes, I worked for him in 
 Winnipeg. 
 
 Q. And did you ever, when you were working for him and had him in a tight place^ 
 make » demand and succeed in getting better terms? — A. I never had any trouble. 
 
 Q. Was there one day that you and another workman held out and got three sepa- 
 rate conditions during one day ? 
 
 His Lordship. — Three times ! We all strike for grub three times a day. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. You say that is not correct that you never went on strike at any time ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. Do you know anything about this national union ? I am informed that your 
 statement is not correct that these men have a charter from the Dominion Congress, 
 that they were turned out and refused a charter. 
 
 His LoRDSHip..'-That is, for a technical reason. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^For the reason that where there is an intern«tional union they could 
 not join. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^Yes, but it appears that these people were not satisfied with the 
 union. That does not make them any the less non-union men. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Would you correct your statement that they did not get a charter from the 
 ■frades Congress ? — A. I would not do that. 
 
 Q. Was it not the National Trades Congress ? — A. Well, it may be. I am in- 
 jformed that they have a charter from a Trades Congress in eastern Canada. There may 
 be more than one. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 I Q. There is a National Trades Congress in Canada ?— A. Yes. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q. Now attempts were made by Mr. Hilton and other members of the union to 
 meet you and endeavour to discuss grievances, and for the purpose of having your men 
 placed as proper union men, as understood by the Trades and Labour Council in Van- 
 couver. Meetings were arranged with you ?— A. Yes, Mr. Hilton met nic at different 
 
 times. EDWARD COOK— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
 36a — 47i 
 
740 iimVTES OP ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1S04 
 
 Q. And endeavoured to show the situation from his point of view ? — A. He stated 
 their terms. 
 
 Q. He wanted you to adopt on ybur building the card system, as approved by the 
 Building Trades Council of Vancouver ? — A. Those were impossible terms. 
 
 Q. In what sense, and where did injustice lie in respect of this request ? — A. One 
 condition is that you must employ the men they supply to you. 
 
 Q. You make that as a statement of fact ?— A. I have found it to be so. 
 
 Q. You have no choice in regard to your own men on any job. ? — A. No, we have 
 no choice. 
 
 Q'. Do you mean to say the ordinary procedure would be you would send up to 
 the labour hall for any number of men, bricklayers or carpenters, and you would have 
 to take the men assigned to you ? — A. You would have to take the number assigned to 
 you because the number would be so limited. 
 
 Q. I understand, according to your statement, that the union men were walking 
 around town. You don't mean that the union men are idle and that your men are 
 •A'orking ? — A. During the carpenters' strike, do you mean ? 
 
 Q. Generally ? — A. My men have been at work during the strike. 
 
 Q. Have you continuous employment for your men ? — A. Generally speaking, I 
 have. 
 
 Q. You have fostered this union in order to have a certain number of men whom 
 you could employ on your own terms ? — A. They asked me if I would give them em- 
 jiloyment. I said certainly, if they would not create disturbances and be satisfied with 
 fair hours and wages which would not be broken. 
 
 Q. Have you an arrangement in writing with your men ? — A. No, I have not. 
 
 Q. No arrangement with the men collectively as a union as to rate of pay or 
 hours ? — A. No, they govern that themselves. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say you accept the dictation of that national union in regard to 
 wages and hours ? They pay what they think is fair, or what you think yourself is 
 fair ? — A. They discuss the matter with their employers. 
 
 Q. Have you had any discussion with your men with regard to rates of pay, or are 
 you an autocrat altogether and say I will pay you so much and you can work or not as 
 you please ? — A. There is no disturbance about wages or hours. 
 
 Q. Have you any terms with your men that they cannot go on strike ? — A. They 
 have a rule in their constitution or by-laws that they will submit everything to arbi- 
 tration. • 
 
 Q. Have you ever had any arbitration over any points of difference between you ? 
 — A. No, it has not been necessary. Nothing has arisen. 
 
 Q. In case they demand a privilege, has the matter ever been submitted to arbitra- 
 1ion ? — A. There has not been any dispute, but if there were it would be submitted to 
 arbitration. 
 
 Q. Do you mean to say that Mr. Hilton, in your experience, is an agitator ? — A. 
 He is employed for that purpose. 
 
 Q. Is he not employed rather in a pacific capacity, in order that there would, be no 
 trouble ? That is his contention and the contention of the union ? — A. I have no 
 quarrel with the union. 
 
 Q. And I understand in this present instance you don't object to this unfair 
 list ? — A. Well, I have no way of preventing it, unless the Commissioners have. 
 
 Q. You mean to say it is a grievance you feel keenly, but have to submit to ?— A. 
 I don't know that I can do anything more. I have been going a straight course from 
 my point of view, and a large number of men are satisfied with the arrangement. 
 
 Q. You are a member of the Builders' Exchange ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Is it true, the circulated report, that the Builders' Exchange brought pressure 
 to bear upon the lumber manufacturers of Vancouver, that they should refuse the lum- 
 ber to union labour ? — A. I was not on that committee. 
 
 EDWARD COOK — ^Vancouver, June 13. 
 
ON lyDIISl'RIAL DISPUTES IN BUITISH COLUUBJA 741 
 
 SjESSIONAU PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ;, ,■ Q. Do you know that as a matter of fact as a member of tjie Builders' Exchange ? 
 A. I know there were certain arrangements carried out between the Builders' Ex- 
 change and the Lumber Association at that time. 
 
 Q. And that this arrangement amounted to a boycott of union labour i, — A. I 
 know there was an arrangement, but I don't know what it was. 
 
 Q. You know by reason of certain arrangements no union man or anyone employ- 
 ing union labour could, get one board from any of the mills in Vancouver ? — A. I 
 don't know that to be the case, but I know that some of the executive were dealing with 
 the matters in dispute at that time. 
 
 Q. Now a certain gentleman swore that he had applied for $14 worth of lumber, 
 and be had to apply to the Builders' Association for a permit ? — A. I know there was 
 an arrangement by which all orders for lumber were placed through the Builders' Ex- 
 change. » 
 
 Q. What was the object of that ? — A. That is a point I am not clear about. 
 
 Q. Have you no absolute certain knowledge ? Was not the object of that permit 
 retaliation against labour for its position ? — A. Not as I understand it. 
 
 Q. Was it not to bring the union men to the terms of the contractors ? — A. If I 
 had been present at the meeting I could give a clear answer, but I was not present. 
 
 Q. There was a large representative meeting of the Builders' Exchange and the 
 Manufacturers' Association that the men's terms should be acceded to prior to the 
 strike ? — A. I think I personally advocate that there should be a settlement made. 
 
 Q. That the terms asked for by the union should be acceded to ? They were ask- 
 ing both larger pay and shorter hours ? — A. I think I was one who advised that a set- 
 tlement should be made on some reasonable line. 
 
 Q. The matter was referred to arbitration ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. And the men succeeded in getting their demands ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. You don't know, after reference to arbitration, while the unions were at war 
 with their employers, that these measures were adopted by the Builders' Exchange as 
 a coercive system ? — A. Possibly; the executive were dealing with it, and you can get 
 this evidence from some of them. I was not on the executive board. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I have subpoenaed one of the executive for the purpose. 
 
 James A. Fullerton, sworn. 
 
 By nis Lordship: 
 
 Q. What office do you hold ? — A. Ship's husband of the C. P. Steamship Com- 
 pany. 
 
 Q. Has the company had any difficulty about men quitting work on the 
 Empresses ? — A. We have had in the past in connection with sailors on the ship. Of 
 course, the longshoremen have been at loggerheads. In connection with that we en- 
 gaged quite a number of men in St. John, in the east, and also from New York, but 
 these men in transit were apparently tampered with, as some of the men told me, after 
 leaving New York, that they were approached along the line in regard to the strike 
 being on and requested not to join. 
 
 ' Q. Who was doing the tampering ? — A. I don't know who the boys were, but I 
 personally do know that a man of Vancouver, who I think belonged to the IT. B. E. E., 
 tampered with our sailors, men that I went out to meet. It resulted, I think, that four 
 of them who had joined the Empress of India and signed articles, disappeared that 
 night and left their clothes behind. 
 
 Q. When was that ? — A. That was the night they arrived on the train; I could 
 not give the date exactly, probably three months ago. The India was the first ship that 
 
 JAMES A. FULLERTON— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
742 MlHi UTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 arrived during the strike. Owing to the difficulty we had to take Chinese to make up 
 the complement. 
 
 Q. How many men had left the Empress ?— A. Probably about 20, I should say, 
 on her returning here. 
 
 Q. Had their articles expired ?— A. Yes, the most of them, I think. 
 
 Q. Had they signed articles for another trip ?— A. No, for six montlis. 
 
 Q. Did they make any complaint a'bout wages ? — A. Not at all. 
 
 Q. No ground given for leaving ? — A. I can only say I think it was sympathy 
 with the trouble ; that is to the best of my knowledge. 
 
 Q. Have any of them gone back ? — A. Quite a few. 
 
 Q. How long ago ? — A. Some time after the strike, quite a few offered their ser- 
 vices. 
 
 Q. Were any taken back ? — A. Some men of good character. * 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 Q. I suppose there are quite a number leaving at every trip ? — A. Yes, it varies 
 from 6 to 10/ sometimes less. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. How many men had quit you this time ? — A. I should say about 20. There 
 were about 25 of the European crew and about 5 remained on the ship. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Did any of these men leave on the ground that they had been employed with- 
 out it being stated to them that they were asked to take strikers' places ? — A. Not to 
 my knowledge. 
 
 Q. You mean that excuse was given by nobody ?^A. I didn't hear it. : 
 
 Q. Don't you know that that was really the excuse ? — A. I don't. 
 
 Q. Were these men never informed, as far as you were acqiiainted with the fact, 
 that they were going to take strikers' places ? — A. Not that I know of. 
 
 Q. Do you think it would be fair to inform them of this ? — A. Personally, I think 
 the strike was known from one end of the road to the other, and that any man engaged 
 to join wcfuld know. 
 
 Q. Was there not a strike on the ships ? — A. Yes, there was a strike, I believe, 
 against the C.P.R. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it was the company's duty to tell these men that there was a 
 strike on here ?^A. That would depend on the party engaging them. 
 
 Q. Don't you think it would be a fair policy to pursue ? — A. Yes, I think it would 
 be, and if so, to say between man and man, you are going to take the places of striking 
 seamen, although I would not consider it necessary. 
 
 Q. Don't you think the same principle as between man and man should- apply as 
 between company and man ? — A. Yes, I think it is the only way to get along amioably, 
 but I would not consider it was necessary to tell these men, mind you. 
 
 Walter Hepburn, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. I understand you are the secretary of the Builders' Exchange ?— A. No, not 
 secretary. 
 
 Q. What is your official position ? — A. President. 
 
 Q. You are an employing contractor in Vancouver ? — A. Yea. 
 WALTER HEPBURN— Vancouver, June U, 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DIS^PVTHS IN BKITISa COLUMBIA 743 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Q. You had a good deal to do with engineering the contractors' side of the old dis- 
 pute with the carpenters ? — A. Something, yes. 
 
 Q. Now, I am informed that you found, among other measures that it was neces- 
 sary to take for your protection, that there was a combination between the Builders' 
 Exchange and the Manufacturers' Association and the mill owners of Vancouver in 
 regard to not supplying lumber to union men ? — A. Well, it was riot exactly in that 
 way. Of course, when the strike occurred we organized the Lumbermen's Association 
 to protect us in that way, and of cour: e we did" not wish to have any of the strikers em- 
 ployed, because we considered offers we had made were fair, therefore we did not want 
 to see them employed. Of course, that was our object, to have the strike over, and 
 therefore, we asked the Lumbermen's Association, of course, not to supply the lumber 
 and they agreed to do so. 
 
 Q. But not to supply any one with lumber — was that not qualified with who was 
 going to employ union labour ? — A. Any one on strike . 
 
 Q. Supposing I wanted to buy lumber, what course would I have to adopt ? — A. 
 We did not hamper any one any more than we possibly could. 
 
 Q. A certain gentleman said he went down to the mills and was referred to the 
 Builders' Exchange for a permit ?— A. Tes, we would grant it to anyone who was not 
 employing a striker. 
 
 Q. In other words, to enable me to get the material, I would have to make a state- 
 ment that I was not going to employ union labour ?— A. Tes, that is, on strike; not 
 necessarily a union, any men who were on strike. They were union men, certainly. 
 
 By His Lordship : . 
 
 Q. Was a list of these strikers filed with the association ? — A. No, we had no. list. 
 Q. How could you tell ? — A. We simply asked. Those who applied for lumber 
 simply had to say they were not employing any man on strike. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. Do you think that was a just measure to take ? — A. Yes, I think it was. 
 
 His Lordship. — Why should the union men complain. This is just a taste of their 
 owii medicine. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^Individuals under the present system are ground down by their em- 
 ployers until they are forced into taking these tactics. 
 
 His Lordship. — ^But there is tyranny on both sides. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — The tyranny starts with the employers. They are on the upper mill- 
 stone and the men on the nether. 
 
 His LoRDSHiP.^And the public in between. The public have been drawn between 
 the millstones as it were. 
 
 Witness. I don't think the contractors have been on top. The board of arbitra- 
 tion decided everything as to wages. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 Q And the wages asked were given on the basis that the increased cost of living 
 rendered the former rate an unfair rate of wages ?— A. I don't think that is the basis 
 
 on which they decided at all. -, „ . ^ t j -wi,- i -^ .i. * 
 
 Q. Have you a copy of the award ?— A. Yes, I don't think it supposes that. 
 q' Was that not the whole contention before the arbitrators, that the cost of living 
 having been gradually augmented during the last few years the present wage was not 
 adequate 2— A. I don't think that was proved before the tribunal at all. 
 
 Q Was it not attempted to be proved ?— A. Yes, but I don't think it was proved. 
 It was left with the third man. I think he concluded that the wages were not likely 
 to continue long. I certainly think that the case for the cost of living fell through. 
 The evidence of their own witnesses went to prove that. 
 
 WALTER HEPBURN — Vancouver, June 13. 
 
744 umVTES OF EVIDEVCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vll.,, A. 1904, 
 
 Q. You have been an employer of union labour for a great many years ? — A. Some- 
 times, yes. 
 
 Q. Does the union compel you to keep any man who 4oes not suit you ? — A. Not 
 at all. • 
 
 Q. If you want men you send up to the union hall and they send down men ? — A. 
 I think, with the exception of one time, I never sent to union hall. Each man has his 
 method of getting men. 
 
 Q. Mr. Cook alleged that he was practically compelled by union principles to take 
 what labour that was offered to him. Have you found that to be your experience ? — 
 A. It all depends on the supply of labour. This spring it has been a very difficult 
 matter. We have been compelled to pay 40 cents an hour to men who were not worth 
 20. 
 
 Q. That might be owing to the congested labour market at any time, but a union 
 principle, you are not bound to keep any man the union supplies you ? — A. No. 
 
 Q. You have your right of choice the same as any other occupation ? — A. Cer- 
 tainly. ^ 
 
 Charles Thomas Hilton, sworn. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. You have heard all Mr. Cook said. Is it your practice and the recognized 
 practice of the unions for you to call men oil that are working for men who are deemed 
 unfair ? — A. When they are working for men who are deemed unfair it is, that is, if 
 they are imion men under my jurisdiction. 
 
 Q. You are a paid employee of the Building Trades Council ?— A. Yes, sir. 
 
 Q.^ You are a carpenter by trade ?— A. Yes, and I work for the Building Trades 
 Council. 
 
 Q. What is the composition of such Council ? — A. It is a delegate body, composed 
 of delegates of ten different unions. 
 
 Q. This is your constitution ? — A. Yes. 
 
 (Constitution put in. — Exhibit 78.) 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. What is the name of your office ?— A. Business agent of the Building Trades 
 Council. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. That is what is called walking delegate ? — A. Yes, sometimes. 
 
 Q. It is stated by Mr. Woodward that this is a document purporting to be a cir- 
 cular of the labour men in Vancouver, was not authorized by the union men whose 
 names are subscribed ?— A. I think that is incorrect, Mr. Bird. 
 
 Q. You have personal knowledge of the fact ?— A. The matter was referred to the 
 different unions, and their delegates all voted in favour of this particular action. 
 
 Q. That is intended for circulation among labour men only ? — A. Yes, simply for 
 circulation at the different meetings. 
 
 Q. Was there any authority to post it up on telegraph poles or anything of that 
 kind ?— A. No. I must say whoever did that had little more shame than common 
 sense. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. How many copies had you printed ?— A. I think about 1,500 were printed. 
 
 CHAKLES T. HILTON— Vancouver, June IS. 
 
ON INDUSrHlAL DtSPlTES IN BRItlSU COLUMBIA 74& 
 
 SESSIONAU PAPER No. 36a 
 
 By Mr. Bird : ' 
 
 .Q. How many labour union men are in Vancouver ? — A. Between 3,000 and 4,000. 
 Q. So that there would not be enough to go round with them ? — A. No, of course 
 there could be a sufficient supply obtained. 
 
 Q. Don't all unions visit labour hall ? — A. Not all. It woiild not reach all unions 
 by circulation in union hall. I would like to state that Mr. Cook said on the stand 
 that I had visited men on his jobs and called men ofp. I would like to state that we 
 have never had any men under the jurisdiction of the Building Trades Council em- 
 ployed by Mr. Cook. The job we .considered unfair, and outside of our jurisdiction; 
 we did not interfere with it. 
 
 By Mr. Rowe : 
 
 Q. Do you consider it an unfair job by these men working under the National 
 Union ?— A. We do. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 
 Q. Why ? — A. During the strike of the bricklayers about thre« years ago, which 
 was ordered by a two-thirds vote of the union, certain leading men of that union 
 seemed, some of them officers of the union, after the strike had been in progress for 
 a few days; they went to certain strikers and made terms for these, and went back to 
 work without submitting the propositions to the men on strike. These men have con- 
 tinued in what is known as the local union until some time last winter, when, hearing 
 of the National Trades Congress they applied to that body for a charter, which I 
 believe they have obtained, and of course since they have been in possession of that 
 charter they have been advocating their demands to wipe out the records of the past 
 and to get a good standing as good union men again. 
 
 By Mr. Bowe : 
 
 Q. Are not two orders of carpenters represented in your union ? — A. The United 
 Carpenters and Joiners had its headquarters in Philadelphia formerly and now in 
 Indianapolis, and the Amalgamated Society, which has its headquarters in London, 
 has branches aU over the world. 
 
 Q. Why is there not room for a third ? — A. I might answer that question by ask^ 
 ing another. Why is there not room for legal or medical associations ? 
 
 Q. Because they are legally constituted bodies, and it is supposed to be in the 
 public interest that they should have such powers as they possess. 
 
 By His Lordship : 
 Q. As a matter of fact there are different legal and medical societies in the city ? 
 — A. Falling under one set. There are the boards of trade, for instance. 
 
 By Mr. Bird : 
 
 Q. They are all attempts to control an industry ? — A. Yes. 
 
 Q. Have you any examination by which men seeking to become members of your 
 union shall be subject to ? — A. A stranger coming in has a certain length of time to 
 work and he has to be vouched for by two members in good standing before he can 
 obtain admission. Both the Amalgamated and the other. 
 
 Q. Does the Trades and Labour Council enforce any conditions of that kind ? — 
 A. Oh no. It is simply a delegate body. 
 
 Q. Are you referring to the Building Trades Council and Trades and Labour 
 Council ? — ^A. Whatever body is concerned under the circumstances. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — ^I would like to have gone into and explained the position of the Trades 
 rnd Labour Council with respect to this unfair list. 
 
 His Lordship. — What it sennas to me, Mr. Bird, is that it is a weapon of warfare, 
 which the union men cannot object to having on the other side. What is sauce for the 
 
 CHARLES T. HILTON— Vancouver, June 13. 
 
746 Ml^VTES OF EVIDENCE OP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 goose is sauce for the gander, and this idea about the British Columbia Milling Asso- 
 ciation coming to an understanding that strikers could not be employed, that is exactly 
 the converse of the strikers who want to boycott the employers. If one method is 
 illegal, then the other ought to be. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I wanted to show that the same methods were adopted by 
 
 His Lordship. — Both sides to the struggle. In fact it is a necessary thing arising 
 cut of the situation. It is war. The sword is a two-edged one.- 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I have some copies of documents which have been handed to me to bring 
 before the Commissioners in connection with the strike of factory employees :here. 
 They have been employed ten hours and are asking for nine hours, and I have been 
 asked to put these before you. There is a notice here to employees stating that all em- 
 jloyees who decide not to continue work after the 1st June, for 10 hours per day, are 
 requested to remove their tools on Saturday and apply for their time. The demand for 
 , nine hours is a reasonable demand ; it has been recognized in every 'trade, and this is 
 the only case in which they stand out. The employers have considerable unskilled labour 
 and Japanese, and feel that they are strong by reason to stand out against organized 
 labour for what they consider their rights, and by reason of a demand which is unrea- 
 sonable on the face of it. . And they have received that notice, if they don't like it they 
 can take their tools and go. 
 
 His Lordship. — If it is represented to the Commission that there is any further 
 evidence of a nature that really ought to be brought before the Commission we will 
 hold another sitting here. 
 
 Mr. Bird. — I have been asked to bring this matter before the Commissioners, and 
 it is with a view to that that I have presented this. I think if this were ventilated it 
 might result in a recognition of conditions that might probably be remedied. 
 
 His Lordship. — I think the Commissioners are satisfied that the great body of pub- 
 lic opinion is with the right of men to combine. The only question is as to the limita- 
 tions of that right, and how far the methods of warfare are admissible. Our cardinal 
 duty in connection with this Conimission was simply to inquire into these strikes 
 and report to the government, and not to go into other troubles. We could, perhaps, 
 sit for a longer period and probably not unprofitably, but we have been requested by 
 the government to report by the end of June. It would be impossible for us to say 
 definitely whether they would extend the time, and there are now several hundreds of 
 pages of evidence to be transcribed. There will be notice given if we do not sit. 
 
ON INDV^TBIAL DI8PJJTKS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 747 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a .. ,- - -* 
 
 EXHIBIT 1. 
 
 Statement of the Wellington Colliery Company, Limited. 
 
 As a preliminary statement, and reserving to themselves the right to amend or 
 add to it from time to time, the company desire to lay the following matters before 
 the Corhmissioners : — 
 
 1. The present difficnlty has not arisen from a dispute between the company and 
 its employees respecting the amount of wages paid to, or the quantity Or kind of work 
 required from, its employees. All questions of that nature have heretofore been ami- 
 cab'fy adjusted between the company and its employees without the intervention of 
 any outside authority. 
 
 The employees are now insisting on their right to affiliate with a foreign union, 
 commonly known as the Western Federation. They have also demanded that the 
 company should recognize and treat from time to time with the said union. 
 
 The company, without pronouncing any opinion on the right of the men to asso- 
 ciate themselves with the Western Federation, have declined to recognize that body in 
 ihe management of the company's property here. 
 
 The reasons which have induced the company to take this stand are, among 
 others, the following: — 
 
 OL.) The society is a foreigrn association. Its headquarters are situate, and its 
 executive meet in places outside the territorial limits of Canada, 
 
 (2.) The business of the Federation is so conducted that the men who come under 
 its control may therefore be ordered on strike, although no grievance arises in the 
 course of their own employment. They may be willing to work, yet they can be com- 
 pelled to leave their employment in order to further the interests of the organization 
 in some particular matter which is being agitated in a foreign country, and with 
 which the owners of mines in Canada have no control whatever. 
 
 (3.) If the companay recognize the Federation, they cannot consistently object 
 if a strike is ordered according to the constitution, yet, for the reasons above stated, 
 the company wpuld, in such a case, place its undert^jking in Jeopardy in respect of 
 matters with which it has no concern, and over which it can exercise no control. 
 
 (4.) An organization such as the Western Federation, if recognized here, ma^ be 
 used to close the mines in this country, not for the benefit of the men employed, but 
 in order to increase the business or raise the price of coal produced by operators in the 
 United States. 
 
 (5.) It is difficult to avoid differences leading to strikes in any trade or under- 
 taking. It is admitted that strikes are disastrous from a commercial point of view, 
 and therefore, on the broad ground of the general welfare and prosperity of the coun- 
 try, the company consider it rmpatriotic to accentuate the evil caused by labour dis- 
 putes by recognizing the right of a foreign authority to assume the position of a dic- 
 tator in the industrial affairs^of British Columbia. 
 
 Dated at Ladysmith, the 6th day of May, A.D. 1903. 
 
 (Sgd.) E. V. BODWELL, 
 (Sgd.) A. F. LUXTON, 
 Counsel for ihe Wellington Colliery Company, Limited. 
 
^48 MJtiVTFlS OF EVIDENCE OF ROT AL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 EXHIBIT 2. 
 
 (Copy.) . X, r ^ . 
 
 Memorandum of grounds primarily responsible for the present trouble at Ladysmtfh. 
 
 Ladysmith, B.C., May 6, 1903. 
 
 1. The mine owner's refusal to employ men affiliated with the Western Federa- 
 tion of Miners. 
 
 2. The mine owner's refusal to employ men connected with any union. 
 
 3. General hostility to any form of lahour organization. 
 
 4. The mine owner insisting upon all his workmen residing at Ladysmith as a 
 condition of employment. 
 
 (Sgd.) CHAKLES WILSON, 
 
 Counsel for Local Union No. 181, affiliated with the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 EXHIBIT 3. 
 
 Statement iy Ladysmitli Miners re Slrilce. 
 
 Whereas the Chief Justice and Members of the Commission to investigate the 
 cause of the labour troubles in British Columbia, have suggested that pending the 
 inquiry report by the Commission, the mines should be reopened and the men return 
 to work. 
 
 And whereas this local union has taken that matter into its consideration and 
 has arrived at the following conclusions : — 
 
 That past experience has taught us beyond the shadow of a doubt, that if we at 
 this time comply with the suggestions of his Lordship and the Commission we feel we 
 would be at the mercy of our employer and that to now abandon our affiliation with 
 the Western Federation of Miners, would be to lose its sympathy and active support 
 and thereby destroy all unity among the workers. That, without the support of an 
 union or organization there in sympathy with it, the men would now, as in the past, 
 be discharged or in some manner forced to quit work. That no men would dare to 
 move in the direction of organization for fear of discharge. Therefore, this union 
 respectfully declines to abandon its affiliation with the W. F. M. 
 
 EXHIBIT 4. 
 
 Copy of Minutes of Ladysmith miners meeting, 
 
 Ladysmith, B.C., March 8, 1903. 
 
 Mass meeting of the miners of Extension mines called to order. Mr. James Prit- 
 chard was voted chairman of the meeting. After numerous nominations for the 
 secretary, Mr. S. Mottishaw, sr., accepted the position. The Chairman then explained 
 the business of the meeting was, as far as he knew, to ask for an advance of 15 per cent, 
 which was left for the meeting to decide on motion. However, it was decided to 
 waive the demand of 15 per cent and to organize in the Western Federation of Miners. 
 An amendment was made that a secret ballot be taken, which was seconded and was 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL Dlfil'VTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 743 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 carried; finally the amendment was included in the motion. After much discussion 
 it was decided to withdraw the motion and declare by a show of hands, which was 
 done. The vote being unanimous, a motion was then made and carried that the secre- 
 tary notify Mr. Baker, the organizer of the Western Federation of Miners, as quickly 
 as possible, to establish a branch of that organization at Ladysmith. A motion was 
 passed that we stand by any miner that may be discharged through taking steps to 
 join the Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 It was then deemed advisable to take up a collection to defray the cost of rent of 
 the Finn hall, which was done; the receipts therefrom being $11.85. 
 
 Rent of hall $3 00 
 
 Telegram i60 
 
 Nanaimo return fare 75 
 
 Stamps and stationery. 25 
 
 Total expenses $4 60 
 
 Balance $7 25 
 
 A resolution was passed that the names be taken of those wishing to join the 
 W.F.M., which was done with a satisfactory result. 
 
 SAMUEL MOTTISHAW, 
 
 Secretary pro tern. 
 
 Ladysmith, B.C., March 12, 1903. 
 
 A mass meeting of Extension miners and mine labourers was held in the Pavilion, 
 at 10 a.m. 
 
 Mr. James Pritchard voted to the Chair. 
 
 Meeting called to order, minutes of previous meeting read and adopted as read, the 
 Chairman then asked if any one had any statement to make. A question was then 
 asked if any men had been discharged owing to having taken part in Sunday's meet- 
 ing (March 8). On it becoming known to the meeting that Jas. Pritchard, S. Motti- 
 shaw, sr., S. K. Mottishaw, jr., and Eobert Bell had been discharged, it was moved and 
 seconded that we reafSrm our allegiance to motion passed on March 8 (i.e.) to stand by 
 any man who may be discharged owing to having taken part in that meeting. — ■ 
 
 Carried. 
 
 Moved and seconded that the secretary be instructed to write Mr. Dunsmuir with 
 regard to reinstating men discharged. 
 
 Amendment. That a committee be appointed to interview Mr. Dunsmuir in 
 regard to reinstating men discharged. 
 
 Amendment to the amendment. Moved and seconded, that we stay as we arc 
 until Mr. Baker arrives and organizes us as a branch of the Western Federation of 
 Miners before we approach the company with regards to reinstating men that were dis- 
 charged. — Carried. 
 
 The meeting then adjourned until the arrival of Mr. Baker, organizer of the 
 
 W.F.M. 
 
 Ladysmith, B.C., March 14, 1903. 
 
 Mass meeting of the miners and mine labourers of Extension mines. Meeting 
 
 called to order by the Chairman. Minutes of previous meeting read and adopted. 
 
 Moved and seconded that the communication from Mr. Baker be received and filed.— 
 
 Carried. Moved and seconded tliat this meeting adjourn until the arrival of Mr. Baker, 
 
 the oreanizer of the W.F. of Miners.— Carried. 
 
 tne organizei u ^^ MOTTISHAW. 
 
 Secretary. 
 
^gQ j^iaUTES OF EVIDENCE OF R07AL C0MMI8SI0V 
 
 3-A EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 EXHIBIT 5. 
 
 Copy of agreement between Canadian Pacific Navigation Company and B. 0. 
 
 Steamshipmen's Society. 
 B.C. Steamshipmen's Society, 
 Tederal Uniox No. G, Trades axd Labour Congress, 
 
 Vancouver, B.C., March, 14, 1903. 
 
 (For Publication.) 
 An agreement tas been made between Captain Troup of the Canadian Pacific 
 Navio-ation Co. and the B.C. Steamshipmen's Society as follows:- It is agreed that 
 the C.P.N. Co. are not to carry any scab freight or baggage on any boats m the fleet ot 
 the aforesaid company, or to carry coal for use on the Empress line of steamers, 
 1-nown as the C.P.Ry. E.M. Steamships at Vancouver.' Should . the company desire 
 to break this agreement, 12 hours notice to the men is to be given by the company, 
 and during which time no scab freight or baggage will be handled. This is to be in 
 force during the continuance of the strike. 
 
 Chairman Victoria Division, B.C. 8.S. 
 
 EXHIBIT 6. 
 
 Typewritten copy of simplified initiation ritual of British Columbia Steamship- 
 inen's Society, of Vancouver and Victoria, B.C. ■ ' ■ ' 
 
 EXHIBIT 7. 
 
 Copies of telegrams (7 in number) sent or received by the Western Union 
 Telegraph Company at Victoria, during March, 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT 8. 
 
 Copy of Circular issued by President Estes, of U.B.B.E. 
 
 Notice ! To all Union Men. The United Brotherhood of Railways Employees, 
 International Longshoremen's Union No. 211, British Columbia Steamship Society 
 and Teamsters' Union, of Vancouver, B.C., are involved in a strike with the .0. P. 
 Ry. Co. The United Brotherhood has ordered out the members of that organization 
 at Vancouver, Revelstoke, Calgary, Kootenay, Rossland, Winnipeg and Fort William, 
 
 This strike was due to the C. P. Ry. Co. trying to destroy unionism on its lines. 
 
 The three above named organizations have struck in order to assist the Uiiited 
 Brotherhood. 
 
 The Western Federation of Miners will be asked to stop the mining of coal on 
 Vancouver Island, in order to deprive the C.P.R. of fuel, and they will strike within 
 the next few days. 
 
 If you are a Union Man, or if you are friendly to unionism, stay away from 
 British Columbia, and ask your friends to do likewise, as this is a fight to a finish, and 
 the C. P. Ry. must give in or the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees with 
 Ihe assistance of the other organizations will carry on the battle indefinitely. 
 
 We ask the aid and co-operation of all unions in helping us to make this struggle 
 a success, and in the end the victory must be ours. 
 
 GEORGE ESTES, 
 
 President, U.B.R.E. 
 
 Denny-Coryell Co., (Allied Printing Trades Council Union Label, Seattle, Wash.) 
 
 Printers, Seattle. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DI8PXJTES IN BRITISB COLUMBIA 751 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 EXHIBIT 8a. 
 
 Letters re Steamshipmen's Strilce. 
 P.O. Drawer 675. 
 
 Canadian Pacific Navigation Company, Limited, 
 
 Victoria, February 3rd, 1903. 
 Captain Troup, 
 
 Manager C. P. N. Co. 
 
 Deab Sir, — This morning at a J 'before 2, the delegate ofthe Firemen's Union came 
 on board and called for me, and he told me that their was a man on board, that owed 
 $5.50 ito the union, and he would not pay it, and that he would have to go ashore, as 
 tlie rest of the men would not go out with him. I sent for the engineer and I asked 
 the delegate to give us 24 hours notice, he said it was against the rules of the union. 
 I then sent the mate down to see what the deck hands were going to do in the matter. 
 He came back and told me they would all leave if that man was not discharged. I 
 told the engineer that he must let him go which he did and the delegate had a fireman 
 ready to put in his place, and we got away at 2.15, and arrived at Vancouver at 8 
 o'clock.- The train was on time to-day. 
 
 From your obedient servant, 
 
 GEORGE EUDLIN, A.8. 
 
 P.O. Drawer 675. 
 
 Canadian Pacific Navigation Company, Limited, 
 
 Victoria, B.C., February 5, 1903. 
 Captain Troup, 
 
 Manager C. P. N. Co. 
 
 Deab Sir, — Tour favour of the 4th at hand &nd I send you Mr. Shaw's report 
 regarding to the firemans trouble and it looks to me a shame that the company should 
 suffer -on account of these unions, if we have a good man, and he does not belong to 
 the union, it looks as if we would not be able to keep him. One of my paint scrubbers 
 who is a good man, told me he would have to join the union against his wish, if not 
 te would not be able to sail with the union men. 
 
 I remain your obedient servant, 
 
 GEORGE RUDLIN, A.S. 
 
 P.O. Drawer 675. 
 
 Canadian Pacific Navigation Company, Limited, 
 
 Victoria, B.C., February 5, 1903. 
 
 Capt. RuDLiN. 
 
 Dear Sir,— In reference to the trouble with the Seamen's Union I beg to state 
 
 that the fireman discharged on demand of the union had always given satisfaction 
 
 here and that the man sent on board here by the union to take his place did not give 
 
 satisfaction and was discharged next day— another union man taking his place. This 
 
 latter was unable to keep steam up and another change will have to be made. I can 
 
 apparently only take men belonging to the Union and if they are able to do their 
 
 work properly, good and well, but if we cannot get good men in the union it will be 
 
 necessary to take outsiders. , ,. ^ 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 JOHN SHAW. 
 
„52 umVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSIOy 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII,, A. 1904 
 EXHIBIT 9. 
 
 Memorandum re opening of mines at Extension, 
 
 Started to work No. 1 slope, November, 1895. 
 
 Started to work No. 2 slope, January, 1896. 
 
 Started to work at Main tunnel, January, 1898. 
 
 Started to build wharfs at Ladysmitb, September, 1898. 
 
 Purchased land for townsite at Ladysmith, April, 1896. 
 
 Cost of $6,340. 
 
 Started to ship coal from Extension, September, 1890, about 200 men working. ' 
 
 EXHIBIT 9a. 
 
 Wage statement, Wellington mine. — Total of pay sheets. 
 
 1902. 
 
 April $73,549 85 
 
 May 76,710 44 
 
 June 65,116 52 
 
 July 65,440 24 
 
 August 71,723 21 
 
 September 64,172 50 
 
 October , 69,695 45 
 
 November 68,287 /8 
 
 December , 65,622 48 
 
 1903. 
 
 January. . .. , 71,527 32 
 
 February 65,000 63 
 
 EXHIBIT 9b. 
 
 'Agreement of Vancouver Coal Company with employees. 
 
 Memorandum of agreement entered into between the New Vancouver Coal Min- 
 ing and Land Company, Limited, and the Miners and Mine Labourers' Protective 
 Association of Vancouver Island, this 24th day of July, 1891. 
 
 1st. The company agrees to employ miners and mine labourers only who are 
 already members of the Miners and Mine Labourers' Protective Association, or who, 
 within a reasonable period after employment, become members of the association. 
 
 2nd. The company agrees to dismiss no employee who is a member of the associa- 
 tion without reasonable cause. 
 
 3rd. The association agree that under no consideration will they stop work by 
 strike without exhausting all other means of conciliation available. 
 
 4th. The association agree that they will not interfere with the company in em- 
 ploying or discharging employees. 
 
 5th. The association shall comprise all men employed underground, excepting 
 officials and engine drivers, and above ground all day labourers, not officials, engine 
 drivers or mechanics. 
 
 6th. This agreement can be terminated by 30 days' notice on either side. 
 
ON INDVSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 753 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 For the New Vancouver Coal Mining and Land Company, Limited, 
 
 (Signed) SAMUEL M. EOBINS, 
 
 Superintendent. 
 
 For tlie Miners and Mine Labourers' Protective Association of Vancouver Island, 
 
 TULLY BOYCE. ] 
 
 JOHN HUMPHEIES, I 
 (Signed) EOBEET B. LAMB, \ Committee. 
 
 JNO. HOREOBIN, 
 PETEE BAINES. 
 
 J 
 
 EXHIBIT 10. 
 
 Proposed Agreement entered into between the Western Fuel Company and Nanaimo 
 Miners' Union No. 177, Western Federation of Miners. 
 
 1. The company agree to employ miners and mine labourers only who are al- 
 ready members of the Miners' Union No. 177, W.F.M., or who within a reasonable 
 period become members of the same. 
 
 2. The company agree to dismiss no employee who is a member of the union 
 without a reasonable cause. 
 
 3. The union agree that under no consideration will they stop work by strike 
 without exhausting all other means of conciliation available. Neither to demand an 
 advance of prices, or change of other recognized conditions, by striking, without first 
 giving a notice of thirty days to the company. 
 
 And the company agree to give thirty days' notice before demanding a reduction 
 of prices, or change of other recognized existing conditions. 
 
 4. The union agree that they will not interfere with the company in employing 
 or discharging men without some reasonable cause. 
 
 5. The union shall comprise all men employed in and around the mines except- 
 ing officials only. 
 
 6. The company agree that in all deficient work, made deficient by following 
 causes, low coal, bodies of rock, or dirt, whether measurable or not, cr for any other 
 such cause, to pay not less than three dollars per day per man, so long as such defi- 
 ciency exists. 
 
 7. The company agree to pay for stringers in the pillar and solid work alike. 
 
 8. The company agree to allow pay for the removal of timbers, placing of tim- 
 bers, or removal of rock in the breaking away of new places. Such pay to be agreed 
 upon by the pit boss and the men affected, and if unable to agree, then the manage- 
 ment and the executive committee of the union. 
 
 9. The company agree to allow some consideration of pay for dirt in contract 
 places, and where the digger is by such cause hindered making what he otherwise 
 could make, or an average wage under average conditions. 
 
 Handed to Mr. Eussell 'by the committee at meeting, Friday, 27th February, 
 1903. 
 
 360—48 
 
754 U1NUTE8 OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 EXHIBIT 11. 
 
 Pj-oposition from Mr. Dunsmuir to Miners re Settlement. 
 
 It is hereby mutually agreed by and between the ' Wellington Colliery Company, 
 Limited,' (hereinafter referred to as the ' Company,' and 
 
 (hereinafter referred to as the ' Miner ') in coflsideration of the 
 promise and agreement by the other of them herein containd, as follows : — 
 
 1. The miner agrees to work continuously and exclusively for the company as a 
 coal miner in their coal mines at or near Extension, British Columbia, for the period 
 of years from the day of the date hereof in a workmanlike 
 and proper manner for the remuneration and upon the terms of this agreement. 
 (Provided that the company shall not be bound to find work for the said miner in 
 case of fire, explosion or trouble in the said mine, or lack of market.) 
 
 2. The wages or remuneration to be paid by the company to the miner for the 
 said work shall be three dollars per day for eight hours working day, to be paid weekly. 
 
 3. The company shall supply the miner with a helper, and with all things neces- 
 sary for his working, except miners' machines. 
 
 EXHIBIT 11 A. 
 
 It is hereby mutually agreed by and between the ' Wellington Colliery Company, 
 Limited,' (hereinafter referred to as the 'Company'), and 
 
 (hereinafter referred to as the 'miner'), in considera- 
 tion of the promise and agreement by the other of them herein contained, as follows : — 
 
 1. The miner agrees to work continuously and exclusively for the company as a 
 coal miner in their coal mines at or near Extension, for the period of 
 
 years from the day of the date hereof, in a workmanlike and proper manner and in 
 accordance with the usual practice in the niine, for the remuneration and upon the 
 terms of this agreement. (Provided that the company shall not be bound to find work 
 for the said miner in case of fire, explosion or trouble in the said mine, or lack of 
 market.) 
 
 2. The wages or remuneration to be paid by the rompany to the miner for said 
 work shall be seventy-five cents for each and twenty-five hundredweight of coal mined 
 and loaded in miners' boxes by the miner in the said mines. Provided that in all 
 deficient places the price to be paid by the company to the miner for yardage shall 
 be such as shall be agreed upon by the company's manager, the overman, and the 
 miner, and provided also that the price to be paid by the company to the miner for 
 narrow work, and for taking out pillar coal shall be such as shall be agreed upon 
 between the said manager, overman and miner. 
 
 The said wages or remuneration to be paid monthly. 
 
 3. The miner shall employ in his said work at least one helper, and in case 
 of taking out pillar coal, such further number of helpers as will enable him to take 
 the same out as speedily as possible. 
 
 The company shall supply to the miner if and for so long as he performs the 
 agreement on his part herein contained, one ton of coal per month for his own domes- 
 tic consumption at the price of two dollars per ton at the bunker. 
 
02V mOUSTBlAL DISPUTHS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 755 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 EXHIBIT 12. 
 
 Statement of vote on affiliation with W.F.M. 
 
 Ballot taken in Union Hall or ' Free Press ' Hall, November 1, 1902. 
 
 For affiliation 128 
 
 Against . . 59 
 
 Total votes cast 187 
 
 T. J. SHENTON, Secretary, 
 WILLIAM NEAVE. 
 
 Notice was given of two weeks duration. Said notice was posted at mine head. 
 
 EXHIBIT 13. 
 
 Statement of Cumherland Miners re Cause of Strike. 
 
 Cumberland, B.C., March 27, 1903. 
 Secretary of the Eoyal Commission. 
 
 Dear Sir,— I beg to submit the following reasons why we went out on strike. I 
 now send you a copy of the resolution passed by a mass-meeting held on May 2. 
 
 Resolution. — ^Whereas we formed a branch of the W. F. of Miners on Sunday 
 April 5, 1903, named the Cumberland Miners' Uuion, No 156 of the W. F. of Miners, 
 find whereas since organizing some of our officers and most active members have one 
 after another been denied the privilege to work in the mines of the Wellington C. Co., 
 Cumberland. Therefore be it resolved that we the officers and members of the CM. 
 "Union No. 156 of the W.F. of Miners in mass-meeting assembled do declare to proceed 
 at once to take a ballot on whether or not we stop work until such times as the officials 
 and members who have been discriminated against by the Wellington C. Co., are re- 
 instated in their proper order with full recognition of the W.F. of Miners. 
 
 I may say, as you are probably aware, that the result of the ballot was almost 
 unanimous, there only being 12 dissentient votes. 
 
 I have the honour to be. 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 GEORGE M. EICHAEDS, 
 
 Secy. CM. Union. 
 
 EXHIBIT 14. 
 
 Copy of telegram from President of Western Federation of Miners to J. J. Baker. 
 Check 28 Denver, Colo., April 22, 1903. 
 
 To J. J. Baker, 
 
 Nanaimo. 
 We approve of calling out any or all men necessary to win at Ladysmith. Organ- 
 ize Japanese and Chinamen, if possible. 
 
 CHAS. MOYEE, 
 
 President, W.F.M. 
 
 iWM. D. HAYWOOD, 
 3ga 18} Secretary Treas. 
 
753 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 EXHIBIT 15. 
 
 Western Federation of Mines. 
 Letters to Cumberland Union from various parties. 
 
 Nanaimo, B. C, May 11, 1903. 
 
 To the Executive Boards of the Miners' Unions 
 at Ladysmith, Nanaimo and Cumberland. 
 
 Dear Sirs and Brothers, — Owing to the fact that the vast amount of business I 
 have in hand at the present time, in connection with our organization makes it neces- 
 sary for me to absent myself from this locality for the present, it is with feelings of 
 regret that I find this step necessary, but in doing so I feel that you will understand 
 that you will not be deserted or neglected by our organization, and that either I or some 
 one representing the organization will be with you in the near future. While regret to 
 absent myself from here in the present emergency, yet I feel that our case is in good 
 hands here, as I have the utmost confidence in the integrity, honesty of pui'pose, and 
 ability to cope with the present difficulties, of our members on Vancouver Island, and 
 in leaving you at this time I beg to oflfer the following counsel : — 
 
 I recommend that the Executive boards of the three unions as speedily as possible, 
 form a co-operative arrangement so that you may be as closely in touch with each other 
 as possible, and you will then at all times be in a better position to cope with the diffi- 
 culties that confront us here, arrange some system that will enable you to speedily 
 communicate with each other at all times, this, to my mind, is very necessary as we 
 cannot afiord to throw away any chance that will have a tendency to assist us in this 
 struggle. This is a common cause amongst us and let us each say to himself this fight 
 is mine and I am going to do all in my power to win it. The above recommendation 
 is, in my opinion, the proper step at this time as it will enable us to better get the true 
 benefits of our unity and co-operation. Above all things avoid jealousy and everything 
 that savours of internal discord. 
 
 I am sending this letter to each of the three unions above mentioned and trust 
 the same will meet with your approval. 
 
 Until you hear from me again, any communication will reach me at 625 Mining 
 Exchange Building, Denver, Colorado. 
 
 Yours fraternally, 
 
 J. A. BAKER, 
 
 Memler Executive Board. W.F.M. 
 
 EXHIBIT 15b. 
 
 On Board Steamer, May 12, 1903. 
 Mr. George M. Richards, 
 
 Secretary, Miners' Union, 
 Cumberland, B.C. 
 
 Dear Sir and Brother,— It was fully my intention to again visit Cumberland 
 before going east, but owing to the fact of that Royal Commission sitting at Lady- 
 smith, I felt tbat I did not dare neglect that, for the following reasons : While I 
 have not the slightest hope that they will do us any good, and from what I could see 
 of them I am of the opinion that such was not their intention from the beginning. 
 But there is one point they are after 'public opinion,' and they are going to adver- 
 tise the situation to the public, and for that reason I felt it to be my duty to see that 
 we were not placed in a false light I found the conditions to be this, that instead of 
 this being a thorough and complete investigation into difficulties (past and present). 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 757 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 that the fact was, the Western Federation was on trial for their right to exist. They 
 had me on the stand six and a half hours altogether, and I don't think they scored 
 a point ; and one result of their work has been to unite the men of Ladysmith more 
 firmly together than ever, for the reason that the true position we are in and how we 
 are regarded by the powers that be was disclosed to them more plainly than they had 
 ever seen it before. They informed me it was their intention to visit Cumberland ; 
 so, in my opinion, you had best be prepared to meet the issue, as they have power to 
 summon witnesses and force testimony the same as any court. 
 
 I would have went up there after I got through if I had any time at my disposal 
 at all, but I am expected to be in Denver on the 18th to meet with the Ex. Board, and 
 I have to go home to get some statistics for my report, then I have to go to Fernie 
 and investigate their late adjustment, and then go to Frank and see how those people 
 are situated after that disaster and what may be necessary for us to do for them ; 
 so you can see how I am situated, and I have more important work to bring before 
 the board and the convention I think than any other member of the board. It was 
 owing to the circumstances above mentioned that I did not go to Cumberland as I 
 wired you I would do, but got Bro. Shenton to go instead. I considered this neces- 
 sary, for the reason that all those men were too new in the organization to be well 
 enough posted to defend it against the bombardment they were preparing for us. I 
 trust your union will appreciate the circumstances under which I was placed, and 
 I'caHze that there was no desire on my part to neglect you, and as soon as it is pos- 
 sible to get back from this work either I or some representative of the organization 
 will be with you. In the meantime do not, if possible to prevent it, allow anything 
 to bring discord into your ranks. The cases of necessity will have to be attended to. 
 In order to do this, I request that without delay you elect or appoint a relief com- 
 mittee to look into the condition and necessities of our members with the view of 
 relieving their necessities, and at the same time protect the organization from any 
 imposition. Another necessary provision will be for your treasurer (or if not con- 
 venient for him, then some person to act as treasurer in this present emergency) to 
 file a proper bond with the Ex. Board of the W.F.M., in compliance with sec. 1, art. 
 1, of the by-laws. Your executive can attend to getting this bond arranged, and I 
 think it will be satisfactory to us. 
 
 Also write the Sec'y of the W.E.M. at Denver and give him full and complete 
 details of your situation, when you need assistance, and your estimated am( unts, &c. 
 Don't neglect any of those details and thereby endanger the situation by allowing 
 your members to acquire the fear that they are not going to get all the necessary sup- 
 port that the organization can extend to them, and thereby cause a division in the 
 ranks. In my opinion, we have simply got to win this fight, and I don't want to see 
 any stone left unturned to accomplish that end. I have recommended a unity of 
 action between the three unions on the Island, and feel sure this step is advisable, 
 yet I don't want to take the position of a dictator, but feel convinced you will agree 
 with me in this matter. 
 
 With best wishes to yourself and the members of your Union, 
 
 I remain, yours fraternally, 
 
 J. A. BAKEE. 
 Address me at 625 Mining Exchange Building, Denver, Coloiado. 
 
758 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 EXHIBIT 15c. 
 
 Western Federation op Miners. 
 
 Denver, Colorado, May 13, 1903. 
 Mr. George M. Eichards, 
 
 Secretary Miners' Union No. 15C, W.F.M., 
 Cumberland, B.C., 
 
 DaAjj Sir and Brother, — ^Tour letter of May 7, with money orders for $180 in 
 payment of per capita stamps is received. Enclosed, please find receipt. I am sending 
 the stamps to you by registered mail to-day. 
 
 I have been advised by executive board member Baker that the members of Cum- 
 berland No. 156 were on strike. I am satisfied that you will have almost insurmount- 
 able obstacles to confront, but the right of men to organize for mutual interest and^ 
 protection cannot be denied. I am glad to learn that you intend to protect yourselves 
 where capitalistic tyranny prevails in that locality. 
 
 The action that you have taken in reference to engineers and mechanics is good, 
 and the best that you could do under the circumstances, but in our opinion every 
 pressure should be brought to bear to bring into the miners' union every man who is 
 employed in and around the mine in whatever capacity. This is as provided for in 
 section 1, article 1, of our constitution, and we find it is decidedly better to have all 
 men in the organization than to be called upon to lay matters before them in some 
 other union. 
 
 I note that you state there are some needy ones that will require assistance soon, 
 and in reply to this, will say, that I telegraphed to brother Baker requesting him to 
 reply to me what funds would be required at Ladysmith and Cumberland. I have 
 just received a lengthy communication from brother Baker, a partial report of the 
 Royal Commission. It seems that the Western Federation of Miners is on trial in 
 Canada, but we have no fear of the results, as our loyal members will keep the banner 
 of their unions flying wherever they have been established. 
 
 I would ask that you keep us acquainted with the situation and advise us of any 
 new developments. Say to your members, one and all, they have the earnest and 
 hearty support of the executive ofiicers of the Western Federation of Miners, and we 
 will aid you in every way possible to bring the controversy on the Island to a speedy 
 and successfiil termination. With best wishes to you all, I remain. 
 
 Yours fraternally, 
 
 WM. D. HAYWOOD, 
 
 Secretary-Treasurer. 
 
 EXHIBIT 15d. 
 
 Western Federation op Miners, 
 
 Denver, Colorado, April 14, 1903. 
 Mr. George W. Eichards, 
 
 Secretary Miners' Union No. 150, W.F.M., 
 Cumberland, B. C. 
 
 Dear Sir and Brother, — I am just in receipt of a letter from brother J. A. Baker, 
 with money order for $42.50 and application for charter for Cumberland Miners' 
 Union. Enclosed, please find receipt for the amount. I am sending you 100 appli- 
 cation blanks, 100 withdrawal cards, and one warrant book, by mail to-day, the other 
 supplies having been given you by brother Baker, with the exception of stamps. 
 These are the same as the payment of per capita tax and are at the same rate. 
 
OS INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 759 
 
 SISSION'AL PAPER No. 36^ 
 
 c-ix for $1, remittance to accompany order. It is well in buying stamps to pur- 
 chase a sufficient amount to supply your members for one quarter, also any new ones 
 coming in. If you run short, however, they can be purchased at any time. I will 
 S3nd your charter as soon as I can have it engrossed and am ordering the seal 
 made this afternoon. I am also sending a few samples of the Miner's Magazine, 
 the official organ of the Western Federation of Miners, which contains the directory 
 of all local unions affiliated with us. 
 
 Do not be backward about writing me for any supplies or information that we 
 can furnish, as your letters wiU always be, answered promptly, and with pleasure. 
 
 Wishing you the best of success, I remain. 
 
 Yours fraternally, 
 
 WM. D. HAYWOOOD, 
 
 Secretary-Treasurer. 
 
 EXHIBIT ISe. 
 
 Enterprise Miners' Union, No. 181, W.F.M., 
 
 Ladysmitii, April 13, 1903. 
 George M. Eichards^ 
 
 Secretary Cumberland Union. 
 
 Dear Sir and Brother, — I am instructed by the members of Enterprise Miners' 
 Union to convey to you and your union our hearty congratulations on your entry into 
 the W. F. M. as an organized body of men. We feel you have strengthened our hands 
 considerable by your doing so. I am sending you a copy of the ' Miners' Magazine,' at 
 the request of Mr. Baker. Wishing you and your union the g^reatest success and pros- 
 perity, 
 
 I remain, yours fraternally, 
 
 SAMUEL K. MOTTISHAW, 
 Secretary Enterprise Miners' Union, 181. 
 P. O. Box 295. 
 
 EXHIBIT 15f. 
 
 Texada Miners' Union, No. 113, W.F.M., 
 
 Van Anda, B.C., April 15, 1903. 
 Mr. Geo. M. Eichards, 
 
 Secretary, Miners' Union, 
 Cumberland. 
 
 Dear Sir and Brother, — On behalf of the Texada Miners' Union, No. 113, I take 
 pleasure in forwarding congratulations. It takes courage to organize in face of such 
 stern opposition as you have to deal with. May your union prosper and may we all, 
 working together, bring about conditions soon that will overthrow the power of capi- 
 talistic anarchists of the Baer, McNeill and Dunsmuir typo. 
 
 Bro. J. A. Baker has asked me to send a copy of our local constitution and by-laws, 
 which I send with this mail. 
 
 With best wishes, 
 
 I am, your fraternally, 
 
 JOHN P. LAWSON, 
 
 Secretary Texada Union. 
 
760 MI2iVTE8 OP EVIDENCE OF EOYAL COMjVlSSfOy 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 EXHIBIT 15g. 
 
 Nanaimo Miners' Union, No. 177, W.F.M. 
 Eecording Secretary, Nanaimo, B.C., April 20, 1903. 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Union, W.F.M. 
 
 Dear Sir, — A committee from Ladysmith Union attended our meeting of the 
 18th inst. From the statement of affairs detailed by the committee as existing in 
 Ladysmith, it is evident that some method will have to be adopted to relieve any cases 
 of pressing want. This, we might assume, is the function of the executive board of 
 Western Federation. Owing to the fact that full board will have to meet in Denver 
 one month from now, the Federation is seeking to avoid the expense of calling execu- 
 tive board together before that date. The Federation can only order levy after autho- 
 rity has been received from the executive board. If we could assume responsibility 
 of the situation until that time, any levy ordered for some trouble later will not apply 
 to us. 
 
 We are calling a meeting for next Saturday afternoon to go into the whole matter, 
 and it was the opinion of the meeting that we endeavour to get one or more represen- 
 tatives of your union to attend, so that united action could be taken by Nanaimo and 
 Cumberland. If you find it at all possible, please send some one or more down. 
 
 I am, pours fraternally, 
 
 PAEKER WILLIAMS, 
 Recording Secretary, Nanaimo Miners' Union, 177, W.F.M. 
 
 EXHIBIT 15h. 
 
 Nanaimo Miners' Union, No. 177, W.F.M., 
 Geo. M. Eichards, Nanaimo, B.C., May 16, 1903. 
 
 Secretary, Cumberland Miners' Union, 
 
 Dear Sir and Brother, — Your letter and remitted postal order of the 12th inst. 
 to hand, and in reply I desire to say that I am pleased to realize that the brethren at 
 Cumberland are making so valiant a stand. As to ourselves at Nanaimo, well things 
 are in fairly good shape, except the serious accident of a brother killed by the explo- 
 sion of some dynamite and the burning of three others. Ladysmith brethren are all 
 right as far as I know, and intend to see the fight through to a finish if the necessary 
 support is given by the Federation. The Ladysmith brethren are doing all in their 
 power to give the most effective evidence to the Commissioners, and, as stated by myself 
 when at Cumberland, the fight before that Commission is waged in an attempt by Mr. 
 Bodwell to bring into disrepute the W. F. M. I gave a full and encouraging report of 
 matters with you and he was very pleased, and to me he stated that he was more than 
 pleased that he had decided to attend that Commission, for the fight, as stated, was the 
 W.F.M. versus the employers. He also stated that if proper recommendation was 
 made by the unions here to the executive of the W.F.M. for assistance in the charges 
 of employing counsel, that they would help. Our delegate was instructed to bring 
 this matter to the attention of the executive at Denver and ask for aid. I am inclosing 
 a copy of Act re Chinese and referring to our co-operation as executives, the thought is a 
 good one. I take it to mean that in all matters relating to the general good of all three 
 locals, we must keep each other posted and that whenever necessary for the three boards 
 to deal with any matter conjointly that we should arrange a time and meet to deal with 
 any such matter, and I can assure you that so far as Nanaimo is concerned, this will 
 be strictly followed. If you are sending a delegate to the convention, please ask him to 
 aid the delegate of Ladysmith and Nanaimo to make the petition effective for getting 
 assistance for counsel on Commission. Tours truly, 
 
 T. J. SHENTON, 
 
 Secretary. 
 
ON INDV8TB1AL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 761 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 EXHIBIT 16. 
 
 File of telegrams, thirteen in number, having reference to strike, sent by officers 
 of Cumberland Union from or received at Cumberland telegraph office during the 
 months of April and May, 1903, 
 
 EXHIBIT 17. 
 
 Abstract of Wages paid at Cumberland. 
 
 EXHIBIT 17a. 
 
 Wages — No. 4 Slope, March, 1903. 
 
 1. Kh'kwood & Crozette 
 
 2. Harvirood & Ripley 
 
 3. Horbury & Sou 
 
 4. Johnsou & Vass 
 
 5. Tobacco BVos 
 
 6. Potter & Francolln 
 
 7. Bardisona Bros 
 
 8. Reese & Stevens 
 
 9. Gibson Bros 
 
 10. Roy & Harbury 
 
 11. Tobacco & Tauz 
 
 12. Hennessey & Edmondson . . . . 
 
 13. Anderson & Walker 
 
 14. Bennie & Son 
 
 15. Harwood & Nicholson 
 
 16. White & Gray 
 
 17. Robertson & Whyte 
 
 18. Pearse & Collishaw 
 
 19. Falrbow & Whitefield 
 
 20. Coe & Son 
 
 21. Pollock & McNeil (19-year boy). 
 
 22. Gillis & McNiven 
 
 23. Bona & Bertholdl 
 
 24. Ducca & Perroni 
 
 25. Farmer & Son 
 
 26. McStephen & Co 
 
 27. Balagono & Lippiatt 
 
 28. Stant & Son 
 
 29. Bauer & Mackle 
 
 $ 3 55 30. Holden & Swanson $ 3 
 
 3 72 31. Hutton & Coe 3 
 
 4 05 32. Hey wood & Guthrie 3 
 
 3 24 33. Halliday & Williamson 3 
 
 3 45 35. Ead & Vass 3 
 
 3 20 3G. Watson Bros 3 
 
 4 42 38. Cook & Horbury 3 
 
 6 70 39. Ashman & AVilson 4 
 
 4 10 40. Mclntyre & Parks 3 
 
 4 80 41. Wain & Hunden 4 
 
 3 25 42. Haddow & Keenau 4 
 
 4 55 43. Stewart & McAllister 5 
 
 5 72 44. Richards & Thomson 3 
 
 4 40 45. Potter Bros ' 5 
 
 3 70 4G. Michele & Thomson 3 
 
 4 40 47. Maxwell & Somerville 5 
 
 4 05 48. McLellan & Stewart G 
 
 4 97 49. Hutchinson Bros 3 
 
 3 57 50. Richards & McNeil 4 
 
 5 00 51. Jaynes & Anthony 4 
 
 2 GO 52. Lcfley & Gray 4 
 
 3 95 .53. McGregor & Crossan 3 
 
 3 28 54. Balayno & Allarl 3 
 
 2 65 55. Ross & Dodds 
 
 3 70 56. Ruava & Corra 
 
 3 35 57. McKenzie & Bickle 
 
 3 78 58. Caraboose & Francolia. . . . 
 
 3 78 59. Barber & Stauss 
 
 4 34 00. Read & Stevenson 
 
 85 
 
 83 
 
 GO 
 
 90 
 
 85 
 
 80 
 
 70 
 
 10 
 
 85 
 
 55 
 
 70 
 
 95 
 
 G5 
 
 35 
 
 80 
 
 10 
 
 10 
 
 90 
 
 20 
 
 05 
 
 10 
 
 G5 
 
 45 
 
 20 
 
 70 
 
 GO 
 
 05 
 
 85 
 
 30 
 
 Average wages per man each day for about 7i hours'" work, $4.13. 
 No. 4 Slope, April, 1903. 
 
 1. Klrkwood & Crozette $ 3 05 15. 
 
 2. Harwood & Ripley 2 97 IG. 
 
 3. Horbury & Son.. 4 02 17. 
 
 4. Johnson & Vass 3 07 18. 
 
 5. Tobacco & Bro 2 92 19. 
 
 6. Potter & Francolia 3 10 20. 
 
 7. Bardisona & Bro 4 30 21. 
 
 8. Reese & Stevens 4 65 23. 
 
 9. Monnaco & Gibson _ 24. 
 
 10. Godfrey & Edwards 3 35 25. 
 
 11. Tobacco & Tauz 3 92 2G. 
 
 12. Hennessey & Edmondson .... 3 18 27. 
 
 13. Anderson & Walker. 4 12 28. 
 
 14. Bonnie & Son 3 95 29. 
 
 Harwood & Nicholson 
 
 White & Gray 
 
 Robertson & Bickle 
 
 Pearse & Baird (Baird only). 
 
 Fairbow & Lawrence 
 
 Coe & Son 
 
 Pollock & McNeil 
 
 Bona & Bertholdi 
 
 Ducca & Perroni 
 
 Farmer & Son 
 
 McStepheil & McNamara . . . 
 
 Delzano & Lippiatt 
 
 Stant & Son 
 
 Bauer & Mackie 
 
 5 13 
 4 05 
 
 3 G5 
 58 
 
762 
 
 MINUTE 8 OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 No. .4 Slope, April, 1903 — Concluded. 
 
 30. Holdon and Swanson . . . : . .$ 3 05 
 
 31. Hutton & Coe 
 
 32. Heywood & Guthrie 
 
 33. Halliday & Williamson 3 10 
 
 34. Williamson & RIcNiven. . .... 4 55 
 
 35. Ead & Gillis 3 73 
 
 36. Watson Bros. 
 38. Cook & Horbury. 
 
 00 
 
 39. Ashman & Wilson 3 50 
 
 40. Mclntyre & Parks 5 00 
 
 41. Wain & Hunden 3 08 
 
 42. Haddow & Keenan 3 80 
 
 43. Stewart & McAllister 
 
 44. Richardson & Thomson 4 75 
 
 45. Potter Bros 
 
 4 13 
 3 30 
 
 46. Michele &- Thomson 
 
 47. Maxwell & Somerville ? 
 
 48. McLellan & Stewart 
 
 49. Hutchinson Bros 
 
 50. Richards & McNeil 
 
 51. Jaynes & Anthony. ,. 4 05 
 
 52. Lefly & Gray. . . . 
 
 53. McGregor & Crossan 
 
 54. Benino & AUari .. . 
 
 55. Ross & Dodds ., 
 
 56. Ruava & Corra 
 
 57. Not working 
 
 58. Caraboose & Francolia 
 
 59. Barber & Stauss.. ' 4 22 
 
 60. Read & Stevenson 
 
 EXHIBIT 17b. 
 
 Summary op Wages. 
 
 Pire bosses, $3.25 per day, 8 hours shift. 
 Shot lighters, $3.25 per day, 8 hours shift. 
 Timbering, $3 per day, 8 hours shift. 
 Engine drivers, $3.20 per day, 9 hours shift. 
 Hoisting engineers, $4 per day, 12 hours shift 
 Drivers, $2.50 per day, 8 hours shift. 
 Machinists, $3.50 to $3 per day, 9 hours shift. 
 Carpenters, $3.50 to $3 per day, 9 hours shift. 
 Blacksmiths, $3 per day, 9 hours shift. 
 
 All white men are paid from $2.50 to $4 per day for labour from 8 to 12 hours. 
 Chinese and Japanese receive for work of 8 hours from $1.25 to $1.50 per day. 
 Chinese and Japanese miners receive same price per ton as white miners, viz., 75e., 
 and no discrimination is made. 
 
 April, 1903. 
 
 X Strang & Co $ 3 20 28 
 
 2. Columbo & Co 2 41 30. 
 
 3. Gen-a & Co 3 30 31. 
 
 4. Webber & Co 4 05 37. 
 
 8. Stewart & Co 4 10 38. 
 
 12. Berglund & Co 3 70 40. 
 
 13. Henderson & Co '..... 3 30 41. 
 
 15. Hanna & Co 3 80 42. 
 
 18. Marinaia & Co 3 30 45. 
 
 23. Renaldi & Co 3 00 47. 
 
 24. Anderson & Co 3 10 53. 
 
 27. Manlcor & Co 3 08 54. 
 
 Average wages for No. 5 shaft, $3.45. 
 
 Howell & Co $ 4 
 
 Morris & Co , 3 
 
 Stahge & Co 2 
 
 Berglund & Co 3 
 
 Delaney & Co 2 
 
 Freeburn & Co 2 
 
 Morris & Co 3 
 
 Nord & Co 3 
 
 Nelson & Co 4 
 
 Kubryhet & Co 2 
 
 Brown & Co 6 
 
 Pluto & Co 3 
 
 03 
 
 80 
 72 
 40 
 60 
 95 
 30 
 00 
 40 
 40 
 20 
 62 
 
 No. 6 Shaft, April, 1903. 
 
 Per Day. 
 
 12. Dirkes & Co $ 4 03 
 
 14. Farinonl & Co 3 27 
 
 23. Casella & Co 4 20 
 
 25 Bumaby & Co 3 20 
 
 Average, $3.76 per day. 
 
 Per Day. 
 
 20 Maxwell & Co $ 4 15 
 
 27. Webster & Co 4 50 
 
 30. Picetto & Oo 3 55 
 
 32 McLean & Co 3 15 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 763 
 
 
 
 EXHIBIT 17c. 
 
 
 
 
 
 No. 4 Slopk, February, 1903. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Per Day. 
 
 
 
 
 Per Day 
 
 1. Kirkwood & Co. . . 
 
 . . .about 
 
 ..$ 3 75 
 
 33. Robertson & Co. 
 
 
 about . 
 
 .$ 4 30 
 
 2. Harwood & Co.. . 
 
 (( 
 
 . 4 00 
 
 34. McNevin & Co. 
 
 
 n 
 
 . 4 40 
 
 3. Horbury & Co. . . 
 
 li 
 
 . 4 20 
 
 35. Ead & Co.. .. 
 
 
 tt 
 
 . 4 75 
 
 4. Johnson & Co 
 
 (1 
 
 . 3 35 
 . 3 80 
 . 3 55 
 
 3G. Watson Bros. . 
 
 
 
 3 45 
 
 5. Tobacco & Co. . .. . 
 
 37. Horbui-y & Co.. 
 
 
 . 3 85 
 
 G. Potter & Co 
 
 38. Cook & Co. . 
 
 
 (( 
 
 . 3 10 
 
 7. Bardisona & Co. . . 
 
 
 . 4 00 
 4 20 
 
 39. Ashman ife Co. . 
 
 
 tt 
 
 3 55 
 
 8. Reese & Co 
 
 40. Mclntyre & Co. 
 
 41. Wain & Co. . . 
 
 
 I< 
 
 3 30 
 
 9. Gibson Bros 
 
 n 
 
 . 3 GO 
 
 
 •> 
 
 . 4 90 
 
 10. Collishaw & Co. . . 
 
 . • . . • ■ 
 
 . 4 70 
 
 42. Haddow & Co. 
 
 
 tt 
 
 . 3 20 
 
 11. Tobacco & Co 
 
 . . . about. 
 
 .. 3 85 
 . 3 75 
 
 43. Stewart & Co. . 
 
 
 tt 
 
 ". 5 30 
 
 12. Hennessey & Co. . . 
 
 (10 tons 
 
 per shift.) 
 
 
 13. Anderson & Co. . . 
 
 . . . " . 
 
 . 4 35 
 
 44. Richards & Co. . 
 
 
 (( 
 
 . 3 10 
 
 14. Bennie & Son .. . 
 
 « 
 
 . 5 15 
 
 45. Potter Bros. . . 
 
 
 tt 
 
 . 3 00 
 
 15. Harwood & Co. . . 
 
 «( 
 
 . 3 55 
 
 (Yai 
 
 dage.) 
 
 
 
 16. Gray & Co 
 
 it 
 
 . 5 20 
 . 5 85 
 . 5 25 
 
 4G. Michelle ■& Co. . 
 
 
 tt 
 
 . 3 20 
 
 17. Robertson & Co . . . 
 
 47. Ma.xwell & Co. . 
 
 
 . 5 15 
 
 18. Hodson & Co.. . 
 
 48. McLellan & Co. 
 
 
 . 5 35 
 
 19. Fairbow & Co.. .. 
 
 It 
 
 . 3 90 
 
 49. Hutchison Bros. 
 
 
 tt 
 
 . 4 30 
 
 20. Coe & Son 
 
 tt 
 
 . 4 15 
 
 50. Richardson & Co.. . 
 
 tt 
 
 . 3 60 
 
 21. Pollock & Co 
 
 ti 
 
 . 3 30 
 
 51. Janes & Co. .. 
 
 
 tt 
 
 . 4 25 
 
 22. Gillis & Co 
 
 It 
 
 . 4 15 
 
 (Yardage.) 
 
 
 
 23. Bona & Co 
 
 n 
 
 . 3 00 
 
 52. Lefley & Co. . . 
 
 
 tt 
 
 . 4 55 
 
 24. Ducca & Co 
 
 tt 
 
 . 3 10 
 
 53. McGregor & Co. 
 
 
 " . 
 
 . 4 05 
 
 25. Farmer & Son . . . 
 
 ft 
 
 . 4 20 
 .'. 3 90 
 
 54. Balagno 
 
 
 
 . 4 10 
 
 26. Idle 
 
 55. Ross & Co . . . . 
 
 
 2 95 
 
 27. Balzano & Co 
 
 . . .about. 
 
 5G. Ruava & Co.. 
 
 
 . 3 10 
 
 28. Stant & Son 
 
 . . . *' . 
 
 . 4 25 
 
 57. McICenzie & Co. 
 
 (Couldn't make 
 
 29. Bauer & Co 
 
 it 
 
 . 4 10 
 
 up) 
 
 
 
 , , 
 
 30. Smith & Co 
 
 . . . " . 
 
 . 4 G5 
 
 58. Caraboose & Co. 
 
 .... 
 
 .about. 
 
 . 3 40 
 
 31. Hutton & Co .. . 
 
 <( 
 
 . 4 10 
 
 59. Barber & Co. . . 
 
 .... 
 
 tt 
 
 . 4 05 
 
 32. Hey wood & Co. . . 
 
 • • • • 
 
 . 3 73 
 
 60. Read & Co. . .. 
 
 . • . 
 
 tt 
 
 . 4 05 
 
 
 
 EXHIBIT 18. 
 
 
 
 
 Telegrams sent to and by Wellington Colliery Company at Cumberland during 
 April and May, 1903, (46 in number), mostly in cipher. (Produced on examination 
 of John Matthews, manager of company at Cumberland.) 
 
 EXHIBIT 19. 
 
 Telegrams (15 in number) sent or received by telegraph operators at Ladysmith, 
 B. C, during the months of April and May, 1903, having any reference to strike. 
 
 EXHIBIT 20. 
 
 Copies of telegrama (29 in number), produced by telegraph operator at Nanaimo. 
 
 EXHIBIT 21a. 
 Statement of case of TJ. B. E. E. re strike. 
 
764 MFNUTES OP EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 EXHIBIT 21. 
 
 In tlie matter of the Royal Commission to inquire into Labour Disputes in British 
 Columbia. 
 
 STATEMENT OF CASE OF UNITED BROTHEEHOOD OF RAILWAY 
 
 EMPLOYEES. 
 
 1. The United Brotherhood of Railway Employees is a fraternal as well as an 
 industrial union, and has the following for its objects : — 
 
 (a.) To bring all classes of actual railway employees in closer contact with each 
 other, for their mutual benefit and improvement, and to establish among them 
 a fraternal society of the rail, binding all together for the purposes of friend- 
 ship and mutual advancement, and to create among them more tolerance of 
 the opinions, rights, duties, privileges and importance of each other in the 
 world's transportation system, the accomplishment of which cannot fail to 
 result in generally improved conditions for every railway employee. 
 
 (h.) To encourage its membership, by every legitimate means, to attain a higher 
 standard of morality, especially as regards gambling, the use of intoxicating 
 beverag'es of every character and all vicious habits. 
 
 (c.) To urge its members to greater efforts in better fitting themselves for th* 
 situations they occupy in their several departments of railway labour, and in 
 preparing themselves for advancement to higher and more responsible posi- 
 tions,' that they may reach the highest planes possible in their special lines of 
 endeavour. 
 
 (d.) To assist its membership in sickness or distress, and to aid and comfort the 
 families of members removed by death. 
 
 (e.) To prepare and publish a weekly journal for the full discussion of all techni- 
 cal and other questions pertaining to railway labour in its several branches, 
 as an educational medium through which the membership may absorb special 
 and general knowledge of railway matters, and of questions pertaining to the 
 operations of this Brotherhood. 
 
 (f.) To provide a perfect and systematic insurance department, open to all railway 
 employees, who are members of this Brotherhood, and who pass the physical 
 examination prescribed by the Brotherhood, and their insurance against acci- 
 dents and death, and to administer the same economically, expeditiously, and 
 in accordance with the majority participating therein. 
 
 (g.) To promote, by every legitimate means in its power, favourable municipal, 
 state and national legislation to railway employees, and while not opposing 
 wholesome regulations of railways by law, to resist unjust, antirailway legis- 
 lation tending to cripple the transportation systems served by its membership, 
 which may be retailed injuriously to railway employees. 
 
 (h.) To limit, in a reasonable and conservative manner, by precept, practice, organ- 
 ization mandates, municipal, state and national regulations, the supply of 
 skilled railway operatives, in every branch of the service, for the purpose of 
 alleviating the privations and sufferings which bear heavily on unemployed 
 railway wage-earners, the dependent members of their families and indirectly 
 upon all engaged in transportation service, through the unnecessary overpro- 
 duction of railway employees. 
 
 (L) To protect, by every legitimate means at its demand, the interests of its mem- 
 bers, under all conditions that may arise coming within the province of this 
 Brotherhood. 
 
 2. The said Brotherhood is international in its organization. 
 
ON INDUm'RIA.L DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 765 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a ' 
 
 3. At the time of the organization of the local division of the said Brotherhood 
 in Vancouver on the 24th of June, 1902, the Brotherhood comprised a total member- 
 ship of 25,000, of which there were approximately 300 in Winnipeg, Manitoba. 
 
 4. The organization is planned after the scheme of the following industrial unions : 
 the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, having a membership of about 100,000, the 
 Amalgamated Society of Eailway Servants of England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales, 
 having about 65,000 members, and the United Mine Workers of the Eastern States, 
 comprising about 147,000 men. 
 
 5. The local organization is composed exclusively of employees of the Canadian 
 Pacific Eailway and the membership in Vancouver totals about 213. 
 
 6. On or about July 1, 1902, the local freight office employees, about 25 in num- 
 ber, all members of the said Brotherhood, requested improvements in their conditions 
 of employment and increases in the rates of their remuneration. The initial demand 
 was for an advanace of 20 per cent. Committees waited on Mr. E. Marpole, general 
 superintendent, and ultimately succeeded in obtaining an approximate increase of 13 
 per cent, although not evenly distributed. The wages, therefore, received by these 
 freight ofiice employees had for a minimum, thirty-five dollars per month, for men's 
 wages. The increase of 13 per cent was accepted on the assurance of Mr. E. Marpole 
 that the arrangement was agreeable to him. 
 
 7. The local organization thereafter employed one of their number, Mr. H. V. 
 Poore, as organizer for British Columbia, and membership for the local organization 
 was secured along the line of the Canadian Pacific Eailway in British Colmnbia. 
 
 8. In January, 1903, Mr. Marpole, general superintendent at Vancouver, sug- 
 gested and advised that the United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees should organize 
 and present a wage schedule to the Canadian Pacific Eailway, as other organizations 
 had done, and immediately thereon, Mr. H. V. Poore was appointed general organizer 
 for Canada and left for Vancouver, proceeding to Eevelstoke, Nelson, and via Crow's 
 Nest Pass line to Calgary and Winnipeg. 
 
 9. Contrary to expectations induced by this request of Mr. Marpole, Mr. Poore 
 found that his progress from place to place was embarrassed by the presence of special 
 detectives, who harassed his movements and by coercion, threats and gromises at- 
 tempted to prevent his obtaining members for the order. 
 
 10. About this date, Mr. Fred J. Halton, chief clerk in the accountant's ofiice of 
 the Canadian Pacific Eailway at Vancouver, was discharged for alleged breach of 
 discipline. The United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees unanimously resolved to 
 wait upon the general superintendent in regard to the dismissal of Mr. Halton and 
 with the assistance and co-operation of the president of the organization, re-instate- 
 ment was secured for Mr, Halton. 
 
 11. The Canadian Pacific Eailway, therefore, on several occasions, discriminated 
 against the members of the United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees and particu- 
 larly against the committee and ofiicers of the Brotherhood, and, employees who were 
 members of the said Brotherhood were frequently subjected to rigid examinations 
 accompanied with threats and intimidatory suggestions. 
 
 12. A statement was made by the divisional superintendent, Mr. H. E. Beaslay, 
 to a member of the United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees, that one million dollars 
 would be spent by the Canadian Pacific Eailway to kill the organization. 
 
 13. The Canadian Pacific Eailway, on or about the 26th day of February, in- 
 definitely suspended by Mr. H. P. Forrest, the past manager of the Brotherhood, on a 
 charge of conspiring to defraud the company. The alleged misdemeanour consisted 
 of the commission of an act of courtesy to one George Hamilton, such as is customary 
 from railway employees, and similar acts have been recognized by general freight 
 agents repeatedly. The act itself never having been considered a grovind for dismissal 
 or discipline. 
 
766 MtNTjTES OF EVIDENCE OP ROYAL C0MMI88I0V 
 
 Z-A EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 14. The members of the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees thereafter 
 held a meeting on account of the continued discrimination against their members and 
 the dismissal of Mr. Forrest, and appointed a committee to call upon the general super- 
 intendent. This committee requested that the hostile policy that the company were 
 pursuing should be discontinued, and in conjunction therewith that Mr. Forrest be 
 reinstated. 
 
 15. The committee, acting for the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees, in 
 this instance informed the general superintendent that they did not desire the rein- 
 statement of Mr. Forrest if any breach of the rules and common usage of the com- 
 pany had been committed by him. 
 
 16. Matters having been gone into exhaustively by the committee and the general 
 superintendent, the former were dismissed and positively told that the Canadian Pacific 
 Railway would not listen to any request made by their organization. 
 
 17. The members of the said Brotherhood thereupon ceased to work for the Cana- 
 dian Pacific Railway Company. 
 
 18. The members of the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees made no 
 demand upon the Canadian Pacific Railway other than the right to belong to the 
 organization of their choice without interference. 
 
 Delivered, pursuant to the order of the Commissioners, this second day of June, 
 nineteen hundred and three, by 
 
 J. EDWARD BIRD, 
 Acting as Solicitor for the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees. 
 
 5a. On and prior to the 1st of June, 1903, and subsequent thereto, the conditions 
 of employment with the C. P. R., particularly with relation to the clerks and clerical 
 staff, were such as forced the said employees, and particularly the clerks and clerical 
 staff, into the formation of a union for the purpose of securing protection, and for the 
 purpose of relieving the abuses practised upon them by the Canadian Pacific Railway 
 and the officers thereof, such as requiring them to work overtime without extra pay 
 and requiring them to work as it was from 8.30 in the morning to 6 in the evening 
 (without counting the overtime), at a rate of wage lower than that paid on any rail- 
 way on the Pacific coast handling the same competitive busines, and by the improper 
 imposition of fines. 
 
 EXHIBIT 21b. 
 
 In the matter of Royal Commission to hear and investigate labour disputes in British 
 Columbia. 
 
 Particulars of Paragraph 5a, United Brotherhood of Railway Employees' case: 
 
 1. Robert Chance— Clerk, C.P.R. Telegraph office. At the end of every month and 
 on the 1st and 2nd days of each month has worked until midnight and 1.30 a.m. on 
 monthly balances, and always every fifth Sunday. Has not been paid for overtime; 
 married man with family and salary $40 per month. 
 
 2. James Dick — Chief clerk, claims department, C.P.R. From August, 1896, to 
 February, 1903, worked several hours overtime during nine months in each year. 
 
 3. Reginald V. Farker— Clerk, local freight office, C.P.R., Vancouver. From 
 January 1st, 1900, to July 1st, 1902, worked until 10 and 12 p.m. almost every night. 
 From July 1st to February, 1903, worked four and fi-we hours overtime about three 
 nights per week. 
 
 4. Harry Wilson— From December, 1901, worked several hours per week overtime 
 without extra pay. 
 
ON IN DV ST RIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 767 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 5. J. E. Baker, Clerk, local freight office. From September, 1901, to February, 
 1903, worked almost every night, with the exception of Sunday night, until 10 or 11 
 p.m. Sometimes until 2 a.m., and almost every Sunday morning during that time. 
 
 6. Walter J. Thicke — Clerk, general freight office, C.P.E., Vancouver, commenced 
 work for O.P.E. June, 1898, averaged about 2 hours per night. During 1903 to Febru- 
 ary 27th, worked on an average two nights per week from 8 p.m. until 10 or 11 p.m. 
 
 7. S. S. Hewitt — Clerk, superintendent's office, started to work December, 1902, 
 worked two hours every Sunday morning until February 27th. 
 
 8. "William E. Foulds— Commenced woik for the C.P.E. December, 1892; about 
 nine years of this time worked in the accounting department at Winnipeg and Van- 
 couver, worked overtime in every month. The most overtime put in during 1902. 
 Several months in 1902 worked every night from two to five hours overtime. Worked 
 ten nights overtime during each month, also worked Sundays and public holidays. 
 Have never received pay for overtime worked. 
 
 9. J. N. Kendall— Clerk, local freight office, C.P.E. Started work October, 1900; 
 while acting as assistant day biller worked two to four nights overtime on the arrival 
 of each steamer from the Orient, and also every fourth Sunday. 
 
 10. E. H. Fowler — Started to work monthly salary September 1st, 1898; worked 
 10 hours every Sunday night until time of discharge, also worked nights of holidays. 
 Never received any remuneration for overtime worked. 
 
 11. Walter H. Browne — Entered service of company January 9th, 1889; worked 
 overtime in all positions filled particularly when ' Transfer ' clerk. Agent at that time 
 informed Mr. Beasley, superintendent, that I was overworked ; also worked overtime as 
 assistant on billing desk. 
 
 12. W. J. Marshall — clerk, local freight office. Started work for company May, 
 1902. Worked overtime whilst billing and on customs desk almost every night from 
 October, 1902, to February, 1903, several hours. Also worked Sundays when boats were 
 in on that day. Kever received extra pay for overtime worked. . 
 
 13. James G. Eobertson — Commenced to work for company September, 1900, gen- 
 eral superintendant's office. Worked almost every Sunday. Transferred to account- 
 ant's office; worked much overtime while there. Transferred to paymaster's office and 
 worked from 10 to 14 nights in every month from 7 to 12 p.m. Never received pay 
 for overtime worked. 
 
 Xi. James A. Wood — Timekeeper, Eevelstoke Stores, C.P.E. and mechanical de- 
 partment from December 26th to March 3rd. On December 31st, 1902, worked until 
 12 p.m., January 1st (New Year's Day) worked all day from 7 a.m. to 12 midnight, 
 January 2nd, 3rd and 4th worked two hours' overtime each day. Worked every Sunday 
 en an average about three hours. January 31st, 1903, worked until midnight. Febru- 
 ary 1st (Sunday) worked from 7 a.m. iintil 11 p.m. From Februaiy 2nd to February 
 27th worked on an average of from two to three hours' overtime. Never received any 
 extra pay for overtime. 
 
 15. Percy G. Denison — Chief biller, local freight office, Vancouver. Commenced 
 to work August, 1901, averaged about thirty hours per week overtime. This overtime 
 was due to China and Australia boats. Never received extra pay for overtime. Have 
 frequently worked twenty-eight hours without rest. 
 
 16. Fred. J. Winlow — Clerk, local freight office. Commenced working for com- 
 pany June 1, 1902. Worked some nights all night. Was never paid extra for over- 
 time. 
 
 17. Stephen Gamham — Station baggageman, Vancouver. Commenced work May, 
 1902. Worked on many occasions until midnight. On nights of departure of boats 
 to Skagway, worked until 11 p.m. Have also worked every Sunday and holiday dur- 
 ing my service and have never received extra pay for same. 
 
768 illKVTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMLSSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARO VII., A. 1904 
 
 18. T. C. Holt — Clerk, local freight office. After commencing to manifest Skag- 
 way boats, worked from 14 to 18 hours per day. After steamers commenced to run on 
 winter schedule worked some days twenty-two hours without receiving extra pay. 
 
 19. Harry Gage — From 1882 to 1900 worked 12 hours out of 24, and was required 
 to be ready for duty at any time. Have been on duty sixty hours at one time. 
 
 20. Tred. J. Halton — :Commenced working in accounting office, Winnipeg, as train- 
 men's timekeeper, July, 1899 ; worked from three to nine hours' overtime every night. 
 from the 1st of the month to the 25th. During October, 1899, worked from 9 a.m. on 
 the 17th to 10 a.m. on the 19th — 49 hours, with intervals for meals, some of which 
 were taken in office. Received $35 per month and had charge of all trainmen's rolls 
 between Port Arthur and the Pacific coast, including branch lines. Worked all night 
 on many occasions. Worked four or five hours every night in Vancouver from the 8th 
 to the 25th of the month, and always on Sundays and holidays. Never received any 
 extra pay for overtime. 
 
 The U.B.R.E. claim the right to furnish further particulars as the facts come t« 
 their knowledge. 
 
 Dated at Vancouver this sixth day of June, 1903. 
 
 J. EDWARD BIED, 
 
 Solicitor for U.B.B.E. 
 
 EXHIBIT 22. 
 
 In the matter of a Royal Commission issued to the Hon. Gordon Hunter, Rev. E. S. 
 Rowe and W. L. Mackenzie King, to inquire into mining and transportation 
 difficulties in British Columbia. 
 
 STATEMENT OF CASE FOE THE CANADIAN PAOIFIC RAILWAY 
 
 COMPANY. 
 
 1. At the time of the making of the request referred to in paragraph 6 of the 
 statement of case of the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees, none of the offi- 
 cials of the company in Vancouver were aware of the existence of such a body as the 
 United Brotherhood of Railway Employees, and met the parties who made that request 
 simply as a committee of the company's employees. The request for increased rates 
 of wages was referred, by agreement between Mr. Marpole and the committee, to the 
 consideration of Mr. Beasley, the company's superintendent at Vancouver, and Mr. 
 F. W. Peters, the general freight agent at Vancouver, and the settlement mentioned 
 was arrived at by them. 
 
 2. Mr. Marpole did not either suggest or advise in any way, shape or manner 
 whatsoever that the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees should organize or 
 present a wage schedule to the Canadian Pacific Railway Company, as set out in para- 
 graph 8 of the said statement of case. 
 
 3. As to paragraph 9 of the said statement of case the company admit that they 
 exercised a certain surveillance over the movements of Mr. Poore, as they were entitled 
 to do, but they deny all the allegations of harassing the said Poore by coercion, threats 
 or promises. The company requires particulars of the various acts of harassing, coer- 
 cion, threats and promises referred to in said paragraph. 
 
 4. As to paragraph 10 of the said statement, the company say that the services of 
 Mr. Halton were properly dispensed with by the company on account of a serious 
 breach of discipline on his part, but the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees 
 threatened an immediate strike without notice, and at a time when a strike would be 
 fatal to the interests of the company and the public at large, with the result that Mr. 
 Marpole was forced against his will to reinstate Mr. Halton in spite of his breach of 
 discipline. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 769 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 5. The company deny the allegations set out in paragraph 11 of the said statement, 
 and ask for particulars of the same. 
 
 6. It is absolutely incorrect that Mr. Beasley made any such statement to any one 
 as that set out in paragraph 12 of the said statement. 
 
 7. With reference to paragraphs 13, 14 and 15 of the said statement, the facts are 
 that Mr. H. P. Forrest was charged with defrauding the company by means of the 
 position which he occupied with the company, a charge which the company then be- 
 lieved and still believes to be well founded. Thereupon, in accordance with the well- 
 recognized rules of the company, Mr. Forrest was suspended pending an investigation, 
 at the end of which, if found blameless, he would in the ordinary course be reinstated 
 and paid for all loss of time. Before, however, such investigation could take place, 
 the committee acting for the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees insisted upon 
 an immediate reinstatement of Mr. Forrest irrespective of any investigation. At the 
 time in question Mr. Marpole promised the committee that an investigation would be 
 held and the usual practice of the company complied with. The committee left Mr. 
 Marpole's office with the understanding that they were to return in the afternoon for 
 further discussion, but instead of returning, within twenty minutes after leaving the 
 Brotherhood inaugurated the strike in question. 
 
 8. As to paragraph 18 of said statement, the company say that at the time of the 
 strike and for long subsequent thereto the one principal demand made by the United 
 Brotherhood of Railway Employees, and the one which they stated was vital to them 
 and for which they would fight to the last, was recognition of their union by the com- 
 nany, and it is only within a very recent time that the said Brotherhood have reduced 
 their demand to that set out in said paragraph 18. 
 
 9. At the time the strike was inaugurated, Mr. Marpole could not recognize the 
 union for the following reasons : — 
 
 (o.) That as a local manager he could not deal with a union extending over the 
 whole line which had not received recognition at Montreal ; 
 
 (6.) That no union in any event was entitled to recognition by the company until 
 it could satisfy the company that it controlled two-thirds, or at any rate a majority, 
 of the employees who were entitled to become members of such union, as otherwise 
 the recognition of such a union would lead to interminable conflicts with other unions 
 which were already established and recognized, and with which the company had con- 
 tracts. 
 
 10. Since that time and during the progress of the strike facts have come to the 
 knowledge of the company which justify the company in refusing not only to recognize 
 the union, but also to allow any of its employees to belong to such union. The follow- 
 ing are some of the reasons : — 
 
 (a.) The United Brotherhood of Railway Employees is an organization whose 
 headquarters are situated in the United States, its executive officers are residents of 
 a foreign country, and the organization is of such a character that it could be used \y 
 transportation companies of the United States as a means of hampering the trade of 
 Canada and injuring, if not altogether destroying, the usefulness of the Canadian 
 Pacific Railway Company as a public institution ; 
 
 (b.) It has recognized as a part of its policy the principles of revolutionary 
 socialism ; 
 
 ~(c.) While the company favours the organization of unions among different 
 classes of its employees, it objects to the organization of one union which will com- 
 prise all the diff^ent classes of employees who are entitled to become members of this 
 union on the ground that it is impossible to deal with them in a business-like way, 
 and that such an association is impracticable and would lead to endless dissension 
 among the employees themselves. 
 
 36a— 49 
 
770 MINVTkS OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 S-A EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 11. The company's objections to this organization are good, as shown by the fact 
 that it has never been able to obtain recognition in any other part of the world, not 
 even in the TJnited States itself. 
 
 12. The constitution of the United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees shows that 
 it intends to carry its objects into effect by means of sympathetic strikes, and that the 
 circumstances in connection with this strike show that it intends to use as a weapon, 
 in case of trouble with employees, boycott and intimidation. 
 
 The company submit the above as a preliminary statement, and reserves to itself 
 the right to amend or add to this statement from time to time as the investigation 
 proceeds. 
 
 Delivered at Vancouver this 3rd day of June, A.D., 1903. 
 
 DAVIS, MAESHALL & MACNEILL, 
 Solicitors for the Canadian Pacific Railway Company. 
 
 EXHIBIT 23. 
 AFFIDAVIT OF DOCUMENTS BY C.P.E. BE U.B.E.E. 
 
 Dominion of Canada. 
 Province of British Columbia, 
 C'ounty of Vancouver, To Wit 
 
 In the matter of a Eoyal Commission issued to the Hon. Gordon Hunter, Eev. E. S. 
 Eowe and W. L. Mackenzie King to inquire into mining and transportation 
 difficulties in British Columbia. 
 
 I, Eichard Marpole, of the city of Vancouver, in the province of British Colum- 
 bia, general superintendent of the Pacific Division of the Canadian Pacific Eailway 
 Company, do solemnly declare that: — 
 
 1. The Canadian Pacific Eailway Company have in their possession or power the 
 documents relating to the matters in question in this commission set forth in the first 
 and second parts of the first schedule hereto. 
 
 2. The said Canadian Pacific Eailway Company object to produce the said docu- 
 ments set forth in the second part of the said first schedule hereto. 
 
 3. According to the best of my knowledge, information and belief the Canadian 
 Pacific Eailway Company have not now and never had in their possession, custody or 
 power, or in the possession, .custody or power of their solicitors or agents, solicitor or 
 agent, or in the possession, custody or power of any other person or persons on their 
 behalf, any letter, memorandum, paper or writing, or any copy of or extracts from any 
 such document or any other document whatsoever affecting the questions, the subject- 
 matter of this Commission, or any of them, or wherein any entry has been made rela- 
 tive to such matters, or any of them other than and except tba documents set forth in 
 the said first and second parts of the said schedule hereto. 
 
 And I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing it to be true, and 
 knowing that it is of the same force and effect as if made under oath and by virtue of 
 the ' Canada Evidence Act, 1893.' 
 
 E. MAEPOLE. 
 
 Declared before me at the city of Vancouver, in the province of British Columbia, 
 this 3rd day of June, A.D. 1903. 
 
 E. V. BODWELL, 
 
 A Commissioner for taking affidavits within British Columbia. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 771 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 SCHEDULE EEFEEEED TO IN THE WITHIN DECLARATION. 
 
 First Part. — 
 
 1. Letter, H. E. Beasley to J. McCreery, June 23, 1902. 2. Letter, 3". McCreery to 
 W. Brett, June 23, 1902. 3. Freight Handlers' Schedule, Vancouver, May 31, 1902. 
 4. Letter, E. Marpole to W. E. Baker, Dec. 16, 1902. 5. Letter, Thos. Tait to E. Mar- 
 pole, Dec. 15, 1902. 6. Memo, for E. Marpole, with loose sheets of ' Trade Eegister ' 
 re foodstufis, Jan. 8, 1903. 7. Telegram, E. Marpole to D. McNicoll, March lY, 1903. 
 8. Telegram, D. McNicoU to E. Marpole, March 17, 1903. 9. Letter, J. W. Troup to 
 
 E. Marpole, March 4, 1903. 10. Telegram, E. Marpole to D. McNicoll, March 16, 
 1903. 11. Letter, E. Marpole to D. McNicoll, Feby. 5, 1903. 12. Letter, E. Marpole 
 to W. E. Foulds, Jany. 6, 1903. 13-14. Memo, of interview re strike, undated. 15. Copy 
 letter secretary Board of Trade to S. Garnham, March 4, 1903. 16. Letter E. Bow- 
 man to E. Marpole, May 16, 1903. 17. Copy of above letter. 18. Letter, E. A. Haggen 
 to E. Marpole, March 30, 1903. 19. Memorandum for Mr. Marpole, unsigned, May 11, 
 1903. 20. Extract from ' Eailway Age,' April 17, 1903. 21. Extract from Kamloops 
 ' Standard,' April 23, 1903. 22. Extract from Nanaimo ' Herald,' Dec. 6, 1902. 23. 
 Newspaper extract re Amalgamated Society of Eailway Servants. 24. Eeport No. 9, 
 April 17, 1903. 25. Extract from Nelson 'Daily News,' April 5, 1903. 26. Copy 
 ' Eailway Employees Journal,' March 26, 1903. 27. Telegram, D. Eobinson and Wm. 
 Marshall to Jas. Outhett, April 11, 1903. 28. John McNeil to J H.. Watson, April 
 11, 1903. 29. Letter, Executive Committee of strikers to E. Marpole, April 9, 1903. 
 30. Letter, E. A. Haggen to E. Marpole, April 7, 1903. 31. Letter, Executive Com- 
 mittee of strikers to E. Marpole, April 9, 1903. 32. Copy letter in reply, April 10, 
 1903. 32. Copy letter striking Unipns to E. A. Haggen, April 3, 1903. 33. Extract 
 from Montreal 'Gazette,' April 6, 1903. 34. Letter ' T.H.M.' to Editor 'World,' April 
 3, 1903. 35. Memo, for General Supt., April 15, 1903. 36. Letter, E. Marpole to T. 
 Kilpatrick, April 15, 1903. 37. Extract from ' Advance Advocate.' 38. Extract from 
 Nelson ' Daily News,' April 4, 1903. 39. Letter, T. Kilpatrick to E. Marpole, April 
 7, 1903. 40. Eesolution of Eevelstoke Board of Trade, April 7, 1903. 41. Eeport of 
 ' No. 17,' April 1, 1903. 42. Letter, C. H. Temple to E. Marpole, April 6, 1903. 43. 
 Letter, D. G; Hobbs to C. H. Temple, April 3, 1903. 44. Extract from Victoria ' Col- 
 onist,' April 8, 1903. 45. Newspaer clipping, undated. 46. Extract ' News- Adver- 
 tiser,' April 8, 1903. 47. Extract, Victoria ' Times,' April 6, 1903. 48. Newspaper 
 cutting containing platform of Socialistic Party of B. C. 49. Correspondence from 
 ' News- Advertiser,' April 8, 1903. 50. Extract from Victoria ' Times,' April 4, 1903. 
 51. Extract from 'Advertiser, April 8, 1903. 52. Extract from ' News- Advertiser,' 
 April p, 1903. 53. Extract from Winnipeg ' Tribune,' March 25, 1903. 54. Telegram, 
 
 F. E. Johnson to B. W. Greer, April 5, 1903. 55. Copy letter, M. M. Stern to E. Mar- 
 pole, March 19, 1903. 56. Newspaper clipping re TafE Vale case. 57. Copy letter com- 
 mittee of employees to E. Marpole, Feby. 26, 1903. 58. Extract fro ' Daily Colonist,' 
 April 5, 1903. 59. Copy letter to Hon. Col. Prior from E. Marpole, March 16, 1903. 60. 
 Letter, Hon. E. G. Prior to E. Marpole, March 16, 1903. 61. Memorandum of C. P. E. 
 published in press. 62. Memorandum of newspaper interview with J. H. Watson. 63. 
 Letter, E. Marpole to T. Kilpatrick, Feby. 27, 1903. 64. Memo. ,T. Kilpatrick to E. 
 Marpole, Feby. 24, 1903. 65. Letter, T. Kilpatrick to E. Marpole, Feby. 25, 1903. 66. 
 Leter, T. Kilpatrick to T. W. Bradshaw, Feby. 24, 1903. 67. Letter, T. Kilpatrick to 
 agent, Eevelstoke, Feby. 23, 1903. 68. Extract from letter of Estes, Dec. 18, 1903. 
 69. Letter, D. McNicoll to E. Marpole, March 13, 1903. 70. Telegram, D. McNicoll 
 to E. Marpole, March 10, 1903. 71. Telegram, I. G. Ogden to E. Marpole, Feby. 23, 
 1903. 72. Telegram, E. Marpole to D. McNicoll, March 17, 1903. 73. Memo, of Mr. 
 Marpole re strike. 74. Letter, C. H. Temple to E. Marpole, March 3, 1903. 75. Declara- 
 tion of A. Purvis, March 4, 1903. 70. Draft of agreement for settlement, March 5, 
 1903. 77. Conditions of settlement signed by Strikers' Committee, March 7, 1903. 
 78. Newspaper clipping re Estes. 79. Clipping from ' Western Socialist,' Jany. 17, 
 
 36a— 49i 
 
772 MINUTES OP EVIDEXCE GF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 1903. 80. Extract from Vancouver ' Province,' Peby. 9, 1903. 81. Extract from Van- 
 couver ' World,' Feby. 4, 1903. 82. Extract from Vancouver ' Ledger,' Peby. 
 4, 1903. 83. Extract from Winnipeg ' Voice,' Peby. 13, 1903. 84. Letter, M. M. Stem 
 to R. Marpole, Jany. 2, 1903. 85. Copy letter, E. Marpole to D. McNicoll, Jany. 26, 
 1903. 86. Letter, Employees of Stores Department to E. Bovcman, Jany. 5, 1903. 87. 
 Letter, Jas. Jones to E. Marpole, Jany. 31, 1903. 88. Shipping bill to Geo. Hamilton, 
 Jany. 19, 1903. 89. Shipping Bill to Geo. Hamilton ,Jany. 20, 1903. 90. Way bill, 
 Jany. 15, 1903. 91. Way bill, Jany. 9, 1903. 92. Shipping bill, Jany. 14, 1903. 93. 
 Letter, G. Hamilton to agent Asheroft, Jany. 7, 1903. 94. Shipping bill, Jany. 2, 1903. 
 95. Way bill, Jany. 9, 1903. 96. Letter, Jos. Guertin to E. Marpole, Jany. 24, 1903. 
 97. Freight way bill, Jany. 2, 1903. 98. Telegram, Ellesley to D'Arcy, Jany. 15, 1903. 
 99. Telegram, D'Arcy to Leslie, Jany. 15, 1903. 100. Telegram, Leslie to D'Arcy, Jany. 
 15, 1903. 101. Telegram, D'Arcy to agent Asheroft, Jany. 14, 1903. 102. Shipping 
 bill, Geo. Hamilton, Jany. 2, 1903. 103. List of ranking officers in lodge. 104. Letter, 
 committee of employees to E. Marpole, Feby. 26, 1903. 105. Letter, committee to E. 
 Marpole, Jany. 5, 1903. 106. Copy letter, E. Marpole to W. E. Foulda, Jany. 6, 1903. 
 107. Telegram to W. McLeod, signed 'B,' June 2, 1903. 108. List Showing number 
 of employees on strike. 109. List of employees, with table of salaries. 110. Letter, 
 B. C. Steamshipmen's Society to J. W. Troup, March 4, 1903. 111. Telegram, Estes to 
 E. B. Smith, March 16, 1903. 112. Circular signed by Geo. Estes, March 27, 1903. 
 113. Memo., E. Marpole to J. W. Troup, March 20, 1903. 114. Letter, Geo. Estes to 
 E. Marpole, March 5, 1903. 115. Circular issued by U.B.E.E. at Nelson. 116. Cir- 
 cular issued by H.B.E.E. at Calgary. 117. Copy, ' Eailway Employees Journal,' March 
 12, 1903. 118. Circulars containing extracts from 'Eailroad Telegrapher,' January, 
 1903. 119. Copy 'Western Clarion,' May 28, 1903. 120. Copy 'Eailway Employees 
 Journal,' May, 21, 1903. 121. Copy ' Eailway Empfoyees Journal,' March 19, 1903. 122. 
 Book containing newspaper extracts marked ' re strike.' 123. Book containing news- 
 paper extracts marked ' Estes.' 124. Constitution and by-laws of U.B.E.E. 
 
 Paet Secokd. — 
 
 1. Bundle of correspondence, telegrams, memoranda, &c., marked ' A.' 
 This is the schedule referred to in the declaration of Eichard Marpole, declared 
 before me this 3rd day of June, A.D., 1903. 
 
 E. V. BODWELL, 
 
 A Commissioner, &c. 
 
 EXHIBIT 24. 
 
 Correspondence produced by T. J. Shenton, being copies of certain letters received 
 by him as secretary of the Miner's Union at Nanaimo, referring in no way to existing 
 dispute. 
 
 EXHIBIT 25. 
 
 Affidavit of documents of U. B. E. E. 
 
 EXHIBIT 26. 
 
 In the matter of the Eoyal Commission to inquire into labour matters in British 
 Columbia. 
 
 Affidavit as to documents : — 
 
 I, Eobert Brooke, recently chief clerk in the Canadian Pacific Eailway Telegraph 
 office of the city of Vancouver, B. C, make oath and say : 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 773 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ^ 1. That I am the manager ef the local division of the United Brotherhood of 
 Railway Employees at Vancouver, B.C. 
 
 2. That I have in my possession or povcer the documents relating to the matters in 
 question upon the inquiry into the causes of the railway strike at Vancouver set forth 
 in the first and second parts of the first schedule hereto. 
 
 3. That I object to produce the said documents set forth in the second part of the 
 first schedule hereto. 
 
 4. That my grounds of objection are set forth accurately and correctly in the said 
 second part of said schedule. 
 
 5. That I have had, but have not now in my possession or power the documents 
 relating to the matters in question in this suit set forth in the second schedule hereto. 
 
 6. The last mentioned documents were last in my poseession or power on or about 
 the dates mentioned in the said second schedule. 
 
 1. That the said documents referred to in the second schedule were last heard of by 
 me, or last in my possession on or about the time mentioned in the second schedule. 
 
 8. That according to the best of my knowledge, information and belief, I have not 
 now and never had in my possession, custody or power or in the possession, custody or 
 power of the secretary of the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees', or of the 
 solicitor or solicitors for the said organization, or in the possession of any agent of 
 the same, or in the possession, custody or power of any other person or persons on my 
 behalf, or on behalf of the said union, any deed, account, book of account, voucher, 
 receipt, letter, memorandum, paper or writing, or any copy of or extract from any such 
 documents, or any other document whatsoever relating to the matters in question upon 
 this inquiry or any of them, or wherein any entry has been made relative to such mat- 
 ters or any of them other than and except the documents set forth in the said first and 
 second schedules hereto. 
 
 Sworn before me at Vancouver, B.C.,] ROBERT BROOKE 
 
 this 4th day of June, 1903. ) 
 
 Thomas Mathews, 
 
 Notary PuUic, B.C. 
 
 This is the first schedule referred to in the affidavit of documents of Robert Brooke, 
 manager of the United Brotherhood of Railway Iknployees, hereunto annexed and 
 sworn before me to-day : — 
 
 1. Charter of Division No. 81 of the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees, 
 dated June 24, 1902. 
 
 2. Constitution and by-laws of the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees. 
 
 3. Ritual of the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees. 
 
 4. Souvenir History, published by Division No. 81, United Brotherhood of Rail- 
 way Employees. 
 
 5. Pension scheme of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company and circular signed 
 by president, dated December, 1902. 
 
 6. Copy of contract, or wage schedule, between the freight-handlers and the Cana- 
 dian Pacific Railway Company, dated May 31, 1902. 
 
 7. Notice re strikers, dated February 26, 1903. 
 
 8. Letter from President Estes to all divisions, dated March 1, 1903. 
 
 9. Letter from J. R. Lawson to P. G. Denison, dated February 27, 1903. 
 
 10. Letter from the International Brotherhood of Blacksmiths Union, No. 151, 
 dated March 2, 1903. 
 
 ! 11. Letter from the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees, No. 167, 
 dated March 2. 
 
774 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 12. Letter dated March 8, from the Shingle Weavers' Union, No. 8390, 
 
 13. Letter dated March 4, from the Cigarmakers' Union, No. 357. 
 
 14. Letter dated March 4, from the Building Trades Council. 
 
 15. Letter, undated, from the Bakers' Union. 
 
 16. Letter from the Team Drivers' International Union, dated March 4. 
 
 17. Letter from the International Brotherhood of Bookbinders, Local Union No. 
 105, dated March 4. 
 
 18. Letter dated March 9, from the executive of the United Brotherhood of Kail- 
 way Employees, addressed to the people of British Columbia. 
 
 19. Memo, dated March 10, giving statement of causes leading to strike. 
 
 20. Letter dated March 21, to the Eev. G. A. Wilson, secretary of the Ministerial 
 Association, Vancouver. 
 
 21. Memo, dated March 25, giving strikers' explanation. 
 
 22. Letter dated March 25, from the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, No. 581. 
 
 23. Letter dated March 26, to the Rev. G. A. Wilson, secretary of the Ministerial 
 Association. 
 
 24. Letter dated March 22, from the Victoria Trades and Labour Council. 
 
 25. Letter dated March 31, to P. M. Draper, secretary-treasurer Trades and Labour 
 Congress, Ottawa. 
 
 26. Letter dated April 2, from G. B. Clark. 
 
 27. Letter dated April 3, from Chas. H. Tupper to Chas. Wilson, K.C. 
 
 28. Letter dated April 3, from the four allied unions to E. A. Haggen. 
 
 29. Batch of correspondence dated April 10, regarding Mr. Haggen's endeavour 
 to bring about a settlement. 
 
 30. Letter dated April 11, to E. A. Haggen. 
 
 31. Letter dated April 14, from Wilson, Senkler & Bloomfield. 
 
 32. Letter dated May 11, from Charles Clarke, Eevelstoke. 
 
 33. Letter from City Clerk, Vancouver. 
 
 34. Copy of letter from agent Division. 81, Brotherhood of Railway Employees, to 
 Sam. Smith, Sydney, Australia, dated March 6. 
 
 35. Bundle of newspaper clippings from various newspapers, fastened together and 
 marked letter ' Z.' 
 
 36. Copy of correspondence between R. Marpole and Colonel Prior, dated March 
 16, and copy of interview with Mr. Marpole attached thereto. 
 
 37. Letter dated March 10 from E. G. Prior. 
 
 38. Letter from E. B. Smith, dated May 1, 1903. 
 
 39. Copy letter to superintendent at Revelstoke, signed by the executive committee, 
 dated March 2, 1903. 
 
 40. Copy letter from agent Division No. 81, United Brotherhood of Railway Em- 
 ployees, to E. G. Prior, dated March 12, 1903. 
 
 41. Copy of letter from the President of the United Brotherhood of Railway 
 Employees to R. Marpole, dated March 5, 1903. 
 
 42. Letter from the agent of the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees to 
 W. J. Lamerack, dated March 7. 
 
 43. Copy of letter to W. Gault, dated March 4. 
 
 44. Copies of letters from agent Division No. 81, United Brotherhood of Railway 
 Employees, to the Wholesale Grocers, dated March 2, 1903. 
 
 45. Telegram from George Estes to agent Division 81, United Brotherhood of 
 Railway Employees, dated February 25. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 775 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 46. Memo, of terms and conditions utider which strikers will return to work, dated 
 March 6, 1903. 
 
 47. Comparative estimate of rates of wages paid, Vancouver and Portland. 
 
 48. Letter from H. V. Poore to Eobert Brooke, dated January 19, 1903. 
 
 THOMAS MATHEWS, 
 
 Notary Public, B.C. 
 
 This is the second part of th^ first schedule to the affidavit of Eobert Brooke, man- 
 ager of the United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees referred to in the affidavit, here- 
 unto annexed, and sworn before me to-day. 
 
 1. Bundles of correspondence marked ' A,' ' B,' ' C,' ' D,' ' E,' and ' F,' comprising 
 in all about 2,000 letters bearing upon the question at issue, most of which are confiden- 
 tial between various members of order, communicated in confidence and under the sanc- 
 tion of the oath of organization. ' 
 
 Most of these communications are in regard to the collecting of funds for the 
 Brotherhood and discussions and reports of progress of the strike, for all of which 
 privilege is claimed. 
 
 THOMAS MATTHEWS, 
 
 Notary Public, B.C. 
 
 This is the second schedule referred to in the affidavit of documents of Eobert 
 Brooke, manager of the United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees, hereunto annexed 
 and sworn beforg me to-day. 
 
 1. The several letters referred to in the first part of the first schedule hereto, of 
 which only copies are now in my possession, these letters were parted with and posted 
 on or about the dates mentioned in the said first part of the said schedule. 
 
 2. The number of communications to various newspapers, of which clippings are 
 row in my possession. These clippings bear the signature of an ofiicer or responsible 
 member of the union, and which clippings are referred to in the first part of the firs^t 
 schedule. 
 
 THOMAS MATHEWS, 
 
 - Notary Public. 
 
 EXHIBIT 26. 
 
 In the matter of a Eoyal Commission to inquire into the labour disputes of British 
 Columbia. 
 
 Affidavit of documents of U. B. E. E. : — 
 
 I, Frederick Joseph Halton, of the city of Vancouver, in the province of British 
 Columbia, ex-employee of the Canadian Pacific Eailway, do solemnly declare : — 
 
 1. That I am secretary of the local division number eighty-one (81) of the United 
 Brotherhood of Eailway Employees. 
 
 2. That I have an intimate knowledge of all matters pertaining to the United 
 Brotherhood of Eailway Employees' strike. 
 
 3. That I have read the declaration of E. Marpole disclosing certain documents. 
 
 4 That the docunients consisting of bundle of correspondence, telegram, memoran- 
 dum etc., marked 'A' I believe to contain a number of special service reports which 
 I am informed and verily believe are liable to production. 
 
 5 That the said special service reports are not made as I know for the information 
 cf solicitors or for the purpose of taking advice thereupon. 
 
776 M1XVTE8 OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL- COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 6. That hereunto annexed, marked as exhibit ' A,' is the heading of a special ser- 
 vice report which came into my hands sometime ago. 
 
 7. That I believe a complete disclosure of these special service reports will show 
 that the Canadian Pacific Railway have been influenced by lying reports, many of 
 which are manufactured and which have constantly inflamed the minds of the officers of 
 the said company against the organization of the United Brotherhood of Railway 
 Employees, and that a disclosure of the same will enable our organization to put our- 
 selves straight on many of these matters. 
 
 Declared before me at the city of Vancouver,") 
 
 in the province of British Columbia, this)- FRED. J. HALTON. 
 
 3rd day of June, 1903. J 
 
 THOMAS MATHEWS, 
 
 Notary Public, B.O. 
 
 This is the exhibit A referred to in the affidavit of F. J. Halton, sworn before me 
 at the city of Vancouver, B.C., this 4th day of June, 1903. 
 
 THOMAS MATHEWS, 
 
 Notary Public. 
 
 CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY. 
 
 special service department. 
 
 Daily Reports of Constables and Watchmen. 
 
 The following is my report for day, the 
 
 day of 190 
 
 EXHIBIT 27. 
 
 LETTERS AND WAGE SCHEDULE OF FREIGHT-HANDLERS, VAN- 
 COUVER. 
 
 Canadian Pacific Railway Company, 
 
 Office of the Superintendent, 
 
 Vancouver, B.C., June 23, 1902. 
 • Mr. J. McCreery, 
 
 Agent, Vancouver, 
 
 Dear Sir, — This to confirm my verbal understanding with yourself and committee 
 of freight-handlers yesterday that we will grant the rates referred to in their letter 
 of May 31, 1902, such rates to be applied in accordance with the conditions set forth 
 in their schedule, with the exception of overtime for meal hoiirs, which is not allowed. 
 
 You may, therefore, confirm this arrangement in writing to the committee. 
 Please see that this is done promptly, as I promised the committee the increases should 
 be covered by an official letter this morning. 
 
 Approved, Yours truly, 
 
 R MARPOLE, H. E. BEASLEY, 
 
 General Superintendent. Superintendent. 
 
ON mOVSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 777 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Canadian Pacific Eailway Company^ 
 
 Office op Local Freight Agent, 
 
 Vancouver, B.C., June 23, 1903. 
 W. Brett, Esq., Timekeeper, City. 
 
 Dear Sir, — Under the new schedule for freight-handlers and checkers, the follow- 
 ing changes will be made in the pay-roll for men working on monthly wages : — 
 
 Name. 
 
 Occupation . 
 
 Old Rate. 
 
 New Rate. 
 
 W. B. Moffatt 
 
 Foreman 
 
 $ cts. 
 
 CO 00 
 CO 00 
 50 00 
 50 00 
 
 So 00 
 
 45 00 
 45 00 
 50 00 
 45 00 
 50 00 
 
 S ets. 
 C6 00 
 
 P. Harris 
 
 C. H. Silcox 
 
 BC 00 
 55 00 
 
 
 
 55 00 
 
 
 11 
 
 11 . . . . L 
 
 55 00 
 
 John M^cDonald . 
 
 49 50 
 
 E. H. Fowler '. 
 
 49 50 
 
 F. G. Forrest 
 
 
 55 00 
 
 W. J Beddin? 
 
 Car sealer 7 
 
 49 50 
 
 W. S. Dick 
 
 Day car checker 
 
 55 00 
 
 
 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 J. McCEEERY, 
 
 Local Freight Agent, 
 
 United Brotherhood of Eailway Freight-handlers, 
 
 Federal Union No. 4, Vancouver, B.C. 
 
 Freight-handlers Schedule. Canadian Pacific Eailway, Vancouver. 
 
 Article 1. 
 
 Section 1. — That the rate of pay for freight-handlers shall be 22 cents per hour 
 day work, and time and one half for overtime. 
 
 Section 2. — That rate of pay for checking shall be 27 cents per hour day work and 
 33 cents per hour overtime. 
 
 Section 3. — That the rate of pay for wharfingers and all monthly men shall be in- 
 creased 10 per cent. 
 
 Article 2. 
 
 Section 1. — That 10 h<)urs shall constitute a day's work for freight-handlers and 
 pang checkers, namely from Y k, to 12 k, and 13 k, to 18 k. 
 
 Section 2. — That overtime shall constitute all Sundays, nights. New Year's Day, 
 Good Friday, 24th May, Christmas Day, and any other day proclaimed by tho Gover- 
 nor-General in Council. 
 
 Article 3. 
 
 Section 1. — That union men be given the preference. 
 
 Section 2. That any one representing the union in any official capacity, shall not 
 
 be discriminated against by the company. 
 
778 MINUTES OF EVIDMCE OF ROYAL COMMISSWIf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Article 4. 
 
 Promotions shall be governed by seniority of service and ability to perform the 
 ciuties required. 
 
 Articlk 5. 
 
 If any member of the union considers himself unjustly dealt with, the agent of 
 the union shall be allowed to take the matter up with the foreman and superintendent. 
 
 Article 6. 
 
 That men wanted on the dock at any time shall be called. 
 
 Article 7. 
 
 This schedule shall be signed by both parties for twelve months, and if any change 
 be required, thirty days' notice shall be given on either side at the end of twelve months 
 from date of signature, to all of which we agree. 
 
 Article 8. 
 
 This schedule shall come into force three weeks from date. 
 Dated this 31st day of May, 1902. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the union. 
 
 President, Secretary. 
 
 EXHIBIT 28. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees. The 
 Star Press, 429 Montgomery St., San Francisco. 113 pages. 
 
 EXHIBIT 29. 
 
 Eitual of the United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees. San Francisco, 1902. 
 45 pages. 
 
 EXHIBIT 30. 
 
 Copy of letter to General Superintendent of C.P.B. at Vancouver, hy Committee of 
 employees ; — 
 
 Vancouver, February 26, 1903. 
 E. Marpole, Esq., . 
 
 General Superintendent, 
 
 Canadian Pacific Eailway, 
 Vancouver. 
 
 Dear Sir, — We, the undersigned committee of employees, have been instructed to 
 write you requesting the immediate withdrawal of the suspension of H. P. Forrest of 
 the local freight staff, issued subsequent to your cancellation of his suspension by 
 Mr. Beasley. 
 
 We further request a cessation of the policy of intimidation lately pursued against 
 the employees of various departments by your various oificials because of their mem- 
 bership in the United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees. 
 
oy mnusTRiAL disputes in British Columbia 779 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 A satisfactory written reply hereto is requested by 11.30 o'clock a.m.j to-morrow, 
 27th instant, otherwise the employees represented by this committee will cease work 
 at 12 o'clock noon. 
 
 Tours truly. 
 
 (Sgd.) 
 (Sgd.) 
 (Sgd.) 
 (Sgd.) 
 (Sgd) 
 
 EOBT. BROOKE, 
 F. J. WALKER, 
 DAVID LAVEROCK, 
 P. G. DENISON, 
 S. GARNHAM, 
 
 Acting Agent. 
 
 EXHIBIT 31. 
 
 
 Extract from letter of Pres. of V.B.E.E., dated Dec. IS, 1902. 
 
 ' In all your writings carefully word your articles so as to develop a public senti- 
 ment for the U.B.R.E. — the Industrial Union Plan-^the A.L.U. and against the 
 reactionary and capitalistic party now temporarily in control of the A.E. of L. but not 
 f>gainst the masses of members comprising the A.F. of L. Continually separate the 
 administration of the A.F. of L. from the A.F. of L. itself and give all possible praise 
 to the masses of the A.F. of L. but without being personal or vindictive ; condemn the 
 temporary capitalistic administration of the A.F. of L. in the shortest terms you can 
 possibly employ. 
 
 ' In this way you will constantly stimulate and augment a great public sentiment 
 for the U.B.R.E., for the Industrial Union, for the A.L.U. and for socialism (but don't 
 use the word) and against the capitalism and the Gompers faction which is working 
 in harmony with Marcus Hanna and the infamous Civic Federation to keep down the 
 masses of the people.' 
 
 EXHIBIT 32. 
 
 Copy of ' Railway Employees' Journal,' dated at San Francisco, Cal., May 28, 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT 33. 
 
 Copy of ' Railway Employees' Journal,' dated at San Francisco, Cal., May 21, 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT 34. 
 
 Copy of Railway Employees' Journal, dated at San Francisco, Col., March 19, 
 
 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT 35. 
 
 Copy of 'Railway Employees' Journal,' dated at San Francisco, Cal., March 12, 
 
 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT 36. 
 
 Copy of ' Railway Employees' Journal, dated at San Francisco, Cal., April 23, 1903. 
 
780 MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 EXHIBIT 37. 
 
 Copy of circular addressed hy President of U.B.B.E. to all unions affiliated with the 
 American Lahour Unions : — 
 
 United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees, 
 
 General Offices, 210, 211, 573, 574 Parrot Buildino, 
 San Francisco, Cal. 
 
 Executive Office, 
 
 President's Headquarters in the Field. 
 
 Vancouver, B.C., March 27, 1903. 
 To all Unions 
 
 Affiliated with the American Labour Union. 
 
 Brothers, — The United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees is now passing 
 through the fifth week of a tremendous conflict on the Canadian Pacific Eailway. 
 
 The U.B.E.E. was attacked by the C.P.E. during February last for the purpose of 
 destroying it. Members were intimidated, transferred, reprimanded, suspended and 
 discharged, and every possible effort made to disrupt the Brotherhood. 
 
 It was learned that men were being hired in large numbers in Montreal, Winnipeg, 
 Seattle and other points to come to British Columbia under contract for the purpose 
 of brushing away the last vestige of the Brotherhood. 
 
 The Division at Vancouver (No. 81) endeavoured to stay the destruction by send- 
 ing a committee before General Superintendent MSrpole, of the Canadian Pacific 
 Eiailway, but to no purpose, and at noon, Friday, February 27, 1903, acting on its own 
 motion as an emergency measure, the Division struck to save its own life and was 
 quickly followed by the divisions at Eevelstoke, Nelson, Calgary and Winnipeg. 
 
 The Longshoremen's Union at Vancouver, by reason of its working on the wharfs, 
 where the C.P.E. freight-handlers were out, found itself immediately involved in the 
 strike, and the British Columbia Steamshipmen's Society, also the Teamsters' Union 
 of Vancouver, were at once drawn into the controversy by reason of their close connec- 
 tion with the work performed by the longshoremen and railway employees. 
 
 The freight business of the C.P.E. from Winnipeg to Vancouver, 1,500 miles, is 
 more or less demoralized and at Vancouver is practically destroyed for the time being. 
 The Trades and Labour Councils at Vancouver, Winnipeg, Nelson, Calgary, Eevel- 
 stoke and Victoria have endorsed the strike and are doing all in their power to help 
 the movement, morally and fijiancially. 
 
 There are now one thousand men out and the expenses of conducting the tre- 
 mendous controversy are enormous. 
 
 The strike is only to preserve the union principle and nothing else. The members 
 of the U.B.E.E. who are not out on strike are not asking for more pay or shorter 
 hours of service, but are protesting against the destruction of their union. 
 
 The C.P.E. is having men arrested and is resorting to every possible form of petty 
 tyranny to destroy the strike. It is prosecuting the President of the U.ll^E.E. and 
 endeavouring to send him to the provincial prison on a charge of inciting men to 
 stvike and delaying the mails. 
 
 Superintendent H. E. Beasley, of the C.P.E. stated four days before the strike 
 began that the Canadian Pacific Eailway would spend a million dollars to kill the 
 U.B.E.E. and the railway is now losing enormous sums daily in its endeavour to crush 
 the Brotherhood. 
 
 To win this fight we must have all the financial help possible and as quickly as pos- 
 sible, and we urgently appeal to all unions affiliated with the A.L.U., whose principles 
 we believe in and uphold, to send us financial aid in as large amounts as possible, and 
 to continue aiding us until the fight is won. 
 
ON IXDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISE COLUMBIA 781 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Malie all remittances to Fred. J. Halton, Agent Division No. 81, U.B.E.E., box 
 G35, Vancouver, B.C., and they will be acknowledged by him and distributed to all the 
 points affected, which includes Victoria, Eevelstoke, Nelson, Calgary and Winnipeg. 
 
 Yours for Industrial Unionism, 
 
 Headquarters American Labor Union, 
 
 Butte, Montana, March 31, 1903. 
 
 We approve and endorse the above appeaL 
 
 GEO. ESTES, 
 
 President, TJ.B.R.E. 
 
 CLARENCE SMITH, DANIEL McDONALD, 
 
 Secretary, A.L.TJi. President, A.L.U. 
 
 EXHIBIT 38. 
 
 Copy of letter to General Superintendent of G.P.R., hy committee of employees. 
 
 Vancouver Division No. 81, 
 
 Vancouver, B.C., lO.k, January 5, 1903. 
 E. Marpole, Esq., 
 
 General Superintendent, 
 
 C.P.E., Vancouver, B.C. 
 
 Deab Sir, — As you are probably aware, some six months ago, the United Brother- 
 hood of Eailway Employees came to take up its permanent residence in Vancouver, 
 since which time the membersip has grown to such an extent that it now numbers in 
 Vancouver and immediate vicinity, several hundreds, embracing nearly every branch 
 of the service. 
 
 You are also~aware that J. W. Allan, of Nelson, was discharged from the service 
 because of his membership in this union. At that time we refrained from taking up 
 his case at his own request. Within the last few days the action taken by the com- 
 pany with reference to Miss Code and Mr. Halton, has been of such a nature as to 
 lead us to suppose that it is the intention of the company to force matters to an issue. 
 The reasons given in the cases of Miss Code and Mr. Halton were not adequate. It 
 is the firm belief of our membership at large that the company's action in the cases 
 quoted are really because the parties mentioned are members of the United Brotherhood 
 of Eailway Employees, and to prevent any further trouble in the matter we beg to 
 request that Mr. Halton be reinstated and that Miss Code be also reinstated or be 
 given a position with the Canadian Pacific Eailway Company at Vancouver equal 
 in all respects to the position from which she was removed. 
 
 We further request that the company use no discrimination against any employee 
 on account of his or her connection with the United Brotherhood of Eailway Em- 
 ployee?. 
 
 We, the undersigned, being bona fide employees of the Canadian Pacific Eailway 
 Company (duly elected a committee of the United Brotherhood of Eailway Em- 
 
782 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF BOTAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 ployees), will wait on you at 14.15 (fourteen-fifteen) o'clock to-day to receive your 
 written agreement to these requests. 
 
 Tours truly, 
 
 H. P. FOEREST, Local Freight Office. 
 
 EOBT. BROOKE, Telegraph Department. 
 
 JAMES DICK, Claims Department. 
 
 J. D. TURNBULL, Freight Foreman. 
 
 H. WILSON, Car Service Department. 
 
 P. G. DENISON, Local Freight Department. 
 
 JlSrO. ARMSTRONG, General Freight Department. 
 
 H. J. FERRIS, Purchasing Department. 
 
 W. R. FOULDS, Accounting Department. 
 
 E. ROBINSON, Baggage Master. 
 
 JOHN WALMSLEY, Local Freight Shed. ' 
 
 WILLIAM E. MOORE, Mechanical Department. 
 
 THOMAS PENNEY, Local Freight Department. 
 
 WILLIAM M. BEARN, Locomotive Department. 
 
 CLAIR MALCOLM, Stores Department. . 
 
 Canadian Pacific Railway Company, 
 
 Office of the General Superintendent, 
 
 Vancouver, B.C., January 6, 1903. 
 Mr. W. E. FouLDS, 
 
 For tlie Committee of Employees. 
 
 Dear Sir, — Regarding the interview between a committee of employees and my- 
 self this afternoon : 
 
 My understanding is that Clerk Halton is to be suspended one week for absent- 
 ing himself without leave and deceiving you as to the reason for his absence on 
 Wednesday last; this decision being arrived at after the explanation given by Mr. 
 Halton and yourself as to the reason of his absence, which should have been forth- 
 coming before; and that any similar breach of discipline will mean immediate dis- 
 missal. 
 
 As to Miss Code : There appears to be a misapprehension in her case, as she 
 is still employed, and no intimation was given her that her services were not required. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 General Superintendent, 
 
 EXHIBIT 39. 
 
 Extract from 'Daily Star,' Montreal, re U.B.B.E. strike. 
 C.P.R. STRII^EES RETURNING TO WORK. 
 
 The strike on the Canadian Pacific steamer Charmer, plying between Vancouver 
 and Victoria, is not considered serious by the officials here. It seems that sorrie firemen 
 and deckhands, five or six, left the ship at Vancouver with a view of preventing her 
 Bailing. 
 
 ' These men,' says an official, ' have no grievance whatever against the company, 
 and simply refused to work, to show their sympathy with the clerks whom the company 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BK1TI8E COLUMBIA 783 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 lefuse to reinstate. However, their desire did not succeed, as the Charmer not'only left 
 Vancouver on time, but also reached Victoria on time. These men made no demand for 
 any increase of their wages ; they are now earning $60 a month and the cost of board, 
 and are simply acting in this manner to endeavour to compel the company to recognize 
 the union. Mr. Estes, president of the new organization known as the United Brother- 
 hood of Railway Employees, is back of the whole thing, but will not succeed any better 
 iu the future than he has in the past. The service has not been greatly affected so far. 
 Many of the strikers are returning to work, and many who wish to return are being 
 refused re-employment.' 
 
 CLEEKS DISMISSED BY CANADIAN PACIFIC. 
 
 A sensation was caused on Monday by the dismissal of eight clerks in the depart- 
 ment of the auditor of statistics of the Canadian Pacific Railway at Windsor Street 
 station, and two in the office of the .superintendent of car service. These gentlemen 
 say that the reason the company gave for discharging them was that the staff had to be 
 reduced, hut they claim that the real reason is because they had become members of a 
 union of railroad employees. 
 
 Mr. A. A. Goodchild, auditor of statistics, said to-day : ' There is no foundation 
 for the statement that these men were discharged because they belonged to the union. 
 I was instructed to reduce my staff and did it in the best interests of the company. 
 There is no rule forbidding a clerk belonging to the union. 
 
 EXHIBIT 40. 
 
 Extract from Montreal ' Yfiiness ' re U.B.B.E. strike. 
 THE VANCOUVER STRIKE. 
 
 The following letter explains itself: 
 
 To the Editor of the ' Witness.' 
 
 Sib, — In the issue of the daily ' Star ' on Wednesday, March 18, some prominence 
 was given to a report purporting to come from Vancouver, stating that a number of 
 the striking members of the United Brotherhood of Railway Employees were returning 
 to work at that place, also that a number of others desirous of doing so, could not, 
 from the fact that the railway company refused them re-employment. 
 
 We are glad to be able to state that there is no truth whatever in the report quoted, 
 and that not a single item enumerated has any foundation in fact. Emphatic denial 
 has been received from the executive committee of the Brotherhood in Vancouver, iind 
 it is entirely with a view of removing any false impression created by this report, at 
 the present status of the strike, that we desire you to give publicity to this denial. 
 
 Trusting that you will find space for this, and thanking you in anticipation, we 
 
 are, sir, yours, &c., 
 
 ' ' ' ' ' H. WILS®N, 
 
 Cert. 87, Vancouver Division, No. 81, U.B.R.E. 
 
 JAMES DICK, 
 Cert. 22, Vancouver Division, No. 81, U.B.R.E. 
 
784 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 EXHIBIT 41. 
 
 Clearance given to H. Wilson hy C.P.R. 
 
 MoNTKEAL, March 25, 1903. 
 Name, Harold Wilson. 
 Age on entering service, 19 years. 
 
 Total length of service, from September 1, 1899, to March 23, 1903. 
 Employed as clerk at Winnipeg, from September 1, 1899, to December 13, 1899. 
 Employed as chief clerk at Vancouver, from December 13, 1899, to Feb. 24, 1903. 
 Employed as clerk at Montreal, from February 24, 1903, to March 23, 1903. 
 Dismissed, for publishing without the authority of the company incorrect state- 
 ments damaging to their interest. 
 
 (Sgd.) F. A. GASCOIGNE, 
 
 Car Accountant. 
 
 GEO. S. CANTLIE, 
 
 Supt. Car Service. 
 
 EXHIBIT 42. 
 
 Report of Executive Committee, Nanaimo Union, dated September SO, 1902. 
 
 Executive committee meeting held September 30, 1902, to consider the con- 
 stitution of the different American labour unions. 
 
 Members present: President, Mr. W. Neave, E. Blakely, S. Woodcock, M. 
 Churchill, J. Oliver, J. McCouts, T. Booker, T. Johnston and J. Muir. 
 
 (1) Moved and seconded, that the executive board meeting favours our afiBliation 
 with the Western Federation of Miners, and we thus recommend such affiliation. — 
 Can led unanimously. 
 
 The reason your executive recommends affiliation with this body in preference to 
 other bodies is, first, because this Federation is a body of metal and coal miners only, 
 and secondly, because this body at present is not responsible for supporting of the 
 great strike raging in the Pennsylvania district of United States, incurring upon its 
 members a levy equally in the case of the United Mine Workers of ten per cent of the 
 gross earnings of its members. Also, because this body is represented in our province, 
 and is therefore the securest and most convenient body to join. 
 
 Moved and seconded, that the treasurer be placed under three hundred dollars 
 bonds, and that the union pay the expenses of providing such bonds. — Carried. 
 
 EXHIBIT 43. 
 
 Minutes of joint hoard meeting of Miners' Unions at Nanaimo, April 26, 1903. 
 
 No. 177, W.F.M. 
 
 Nanaimo, B.C., April 26, 1903. 
 Conjoint daiegate board meeting, held April 26. 
 
 Members present: Bro. Jefferies, Bro. Barber, J. Hutchison, D. Haliday, W. 
 Neave, W. Holt, J. Pritchard, J. Carrol. 
 
 Moved and seconded, that we send three delegates from this conjoint delegate 
 board to wait upon Mr. Mclnnis and to approach the government and lay before them 
 
ON moUSTBIAL DlSimTMS IN BlilTISH COLUMBIA 785 
 
 SESSION AU PAPER- -No. 36a 
 
 the situation at Lady smith, and to ask tjiem to use their powers with Mr. Dunsmuir 
 to arrange a settlement at Ladysmith that will be in harmony with the rfsoognitiop, of 
 the union and the reinstatement of nien discharged, also reinstatement of any men 
 who taay have been discha'rged at Curaberland. Carried. 
 
 Delegates sent were J; Hutchison, T. J. Shenton and J. Pritehard. 
 
 No. X77, W.F.M., 
 
 Nanaimo, B.C., April 18, 1903. 
 
 That this board recommend to the regular meeting that we tender assistance to 
 Ladysmitli by • levying ourselves. Also that we seek to arrange a meeting of the 
 Cumberland and.Ladysmith unions executives.— rCarried. 
 
 EXHIBIT 44. 
 
 ' Report of committee appointed hy joint hoard, April 20, 1903. 
 
 Nanaimo Miners' Union, No. 177, W.F.M. 
 
 N.VNAIM0, B.C., April 29, 1903. 
 
 REPORT OF DELEGATION FROM CONJOINT DELEGATE BOARD. 
 
 In accordance with the resolution passed by the conjoint delegate meeting held 
 April the 26th inst., which authorized the appointment of three delegates to go to 
 Victoria to interview Mr. Mclnnis, also to approach the members of th? House,. and 
 to ask them to use their power to arrange a settlement of the trouble at Ladysmith. 
 We, the undersigned delegates, so appointed, desire to submit the following report : 
 We went to Victoria by train, April 27th ultimo, and after our arrival we , pro- 
 ceeded early to the legislative hall, and there interviewed Mr. Mcln^iis. We set before 
 him the reason of our going dbwii, and discussed with him matters relating to the 
 trouble at Ladysmith. He asked us if' we coiild ineet him the following Tuesday morn- 
 ing and give him a copy of the resolution passed by the meeting sending us down' 
 We thus arranged to meet him again, as stated, and in consequence we again met him 
 for the second time on Tuesday morning, the 28th inst., and gave to hint a copy of 
 resolution spoken of. At this interview we discussed for some tirrie the question of 
 what could be done by him and the House, in arranging an amicable settlement at 
 Ladysmith that would be. in harmony with the recognition of the union, the rein- 
 statement of the men discharged, also the reinstatement of the men who may have 
 been discharged at Cumberland. He replied by outlining the method he intended oper- 
 ating to bring about a settlement of matters. He said that Mr. Dunsmuir was sorely 
 afraid of the powerful institution of the W.F.M. and that if he consented to recogni- 
 tion thereof it would mean the destruction of his industry, and in order he said to 
 remove this fear fromr his mind it was necessary to arrange some kind of agreement 
 between the men and Dunsmuir, aiid that if this could be accomplished, which he had 
 no doubt that it could, then a settlement could be got. If the men were willing to 
 submit to such an arrangement, covering a period of a year or two then he felt sure 
 the matter could be ad.iusted. Further, he stated that a caucus meating was at tliis 
 time going on among the cabinet, and that he would introduce the matter immediately 
 before this meeting and that if we would see him later on then he would, he, able to. 
 tell us just what was done. Your committee then, retired and again, later on in the 
 afternoon of Tuesday, we held another interview with Mr. Mclnnis, when he stated 
 that he had brought the matter before the cabinet and they had decided writing Mr. 
 Dunsmuir asking him to «llow the appointment of a mediator looking to the settle- 
 ment of the trouble at Ladysmith, and that if this be accepted theri the case would be 
 
 36a— 50 
 
736 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROTAL COMMISSION 
 
 34 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Open for settlement. Our arrangement witE Mr. Mclnnis on leaving, and after this 
 last interview was that so soon as he got a reply from Mr; Dunsmuir he would then 
 write us as early as possible. We waited upon the different members of both sides of 
 the House and acquainted them of our mission, and asked them to do all they could 
 in support of the scheme in arranging a settlement at- Ladysmith, and they assured us 
 that they would only be too pleased to do all they could in such a matter. 
 
 Each member seemed anxious to help us, and we were informed by them that if 
 anything could be done by any one in the House with Mr. Dunsmuir that Mr. Mclnnis 
 was the most likely man to do iti We are the conjoint committije. - ■ 
 
 JOHN HUTCHINSON, 
 JAMES PEITCHAED, 
 T. J. SHENTON. 
 
 EXHIBIT 45. 
 
 Circular letter, Pres. U.B.R.E. to W.F.M., March 1, 1903. 
 
 United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees, 
 
 Vancouver Division, No. 81. 
 
 Vancouver, March 1, 1903. 
 To the Western Federation of Miners, 
 
 United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees. 
 
 Gentlemen and Brothers, — , 
 
 Vancouver Division of the U.B.E.E. went on strike at noon February 27, 1903. 
 
 The causes which led up to the strike are disclosed in the clipping from the ' World,' 
 11 daily newspaper pubUshed in Vancouver and a copy of the clipping being attached. 
 
 I arrived here six hours after the strike was on. 
 
 The situation is very peculiar and was brought about by the determined efforts of 
 the O.P.E. to destroy the U.B.E.E. in British Columbia before it should become power- 
 ful enough to secure for its members fust consideration from that great railway cor- 
 poration which pays the poorest salaries of &ny trunk line in Nprth America. 
 
 The strike was called suddenly and quickly as an emergency measure to prevetit 
 the destruction of the Brotherliood in this section. 
 
 I believe that the division exercised its best judgment in taking the action it did 
 pending my arrival. 
 
 The full particulars had been written, and wired me and I left Portland for this 
 place at the earliest possible moment in order that I might be here to assist in this 
 fight for existence in the province of British Columbia. 
 
 I will do my utmost to keep all divisions advised of the progress of the strike, 
 -which will likely last for some time and will be contested determinedly to the end. 
 
 The other unions in Vancouver are quite in sympathy with the movement and are 
 affording us all the help in their power. The situation is improving from our point 
 of view ; we are getting all of our plans and methods thoroughly systematized, so that 
 we may be able to handle the strike successfully. 
 
 The C.P.E. has imported twenty-five scabs from Seattle but our members at that 
 point advised us of this movement before the scabs left that place, and most of them 
 came out as soon as they arrived here and learned the true situation. 
 
 Superintendent H. E. Beasley, of the Canadian Pacific Eailway, stated to our 
 members that the C.P.E. would spend one million to kill the U.B.E.E., because its 
 plan of organization would be too powerful for them to control it, as they are able to 
 do with class orders on railways. 
 
 It is necessary, therefore, in order to preserve the life 'of the U.B.E.E. in Vancou- 
 ver and British Columbia that we have help and have it as quickly as possible from 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES W BRITISH COLUMBIA 787 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 every division of our Brotherhood, in order to make this great fight, which is the fight 
 of all members of the U.B.K.E. wherever they may be found. 
 
 I earnestly appeal to every member of the Brotherhood to contribute as liberally 
 as possible to this cause and not only that but such divisions as can do So, should raise 
 additional money by any means at their command from among their members and in 
 any way available; and forward same to S. Garhham, Cashier, Vancouver Division 
 No, 81, Vancouver, B.O. • . , 
 
 • All ranittances will he acknowledged and a fuU accounting will be rendered of 
 the division during this controversy. 
 
 Fraternally, 
 
 GEO. ESTES, 
 ■ ■ ■ President. 
 
 Box 635, Vancouver, B.C. 
 
 'DAILY WOELD,' 
 
 Vancouver, B.C., Saturday, February 28, 1903. 
 
 Estes is in the city regarding the strike of the C.P.E. clerks. Gives out a statement. 
 The railway company declines to recognize the Brotherhood and says it cannot 
 tolerate the interference of that body. 
 
 President Estes is here regarding the strike of the members of the clerical forces 
 of the C.P.E., who are connected with the United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees. 
 The statement of General Superintendent Marpole was given in Friday's paper. Mr. 
 Marpole says that he has nothing to add thereto. The U.B.E.E., he says, is not 
 recognized by the headquarters of the company, and its interference with matters 
 sSecting the discipline of the office cannot te tolerated. The C.P.E. says that no 
 trouble has so far been experienced in running any of the offices. 
 
 President Estes, of the U.B.E.E., arrived in the city on Friday evening, and all 
 day he has been in consultation with the local executive. 
 
 The members of the executive committee to-day gave out the following statement : 
 
 ' The strike which has occurred in the membership of the TJ.B.E.E. in the city of 
 Vancouver was forced on the organization against its will by the C.P.E. in the hope 
 of destroying it, to prevent its becoming stronger. No requests or demands for in- 
 creased pay, shorter hours of service or conditions differing from those hitherto in. 
 force were made by the Brotherhood or by the division in Vancouver. 
 
 ' Officers of the C.P.E. have been calling members of the Brotherhood into their 
 offices and warning them against continuing as members thereof. They have been 
 advised that further promotions would be denied them, and that if they considered 
 their own welfare they should leave the TJ.B.E.E. immediately. 
 
 ' In the case of the freight handlers, some 60 or 70 men, their committee was ad- 
 vised that the entire body must leave the TJ.B.E.E. immediately if they expected to 
 have the present schedule of rates of pay continued for another year. 
 
 ' C.P.E, detectives, including one McDonald, were placed on the track of Harold 
 V. Poore, the general organizer of the TJ.B.E.E., who left Vancouver on January 1, 
 imder instructions from the Brotherhood to work through to the Atlantic coast. These 
 detectives shadowed and followed his every movement, and did all in their power to 
 dishearten him and cause him to turn back. 
 
 ' They at first offered him, on behalf of the C.P.E., preferment and all kinds of 
 concessions, provided he would abandon the work of organizing for the TJ.B.E.E., and 
 at the same time advised him that his work would be made as difficult as possible, and 
 every hindrance thrown in his way, if he continued. 
 
 ' Statements, seemingly inspired by the C.P.E., were forwarded from Montreal, 
 purporting to have been telegraphed from Winnipeg, to the effect that the great seven 
 
 36a— 50i 
 
788 .MISOTJ^S OP EXlBEilCB VP ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 a-4 EDWARD VI k, A. 1904 
 
 months' strike which the U.B.E.E. .;has been ebgaged in on the Canadian Northern 
 lailway, was settled on the understanding that employees of the C.N.R. were to with- 
 draw from the U.B.E.E^, when the' opposite of this *as the truth, and the O.N.E. 
 employees are now very rapidly joining the 'TJ.B.R.E. at that point. • 
 
 ' The local trouble, which had already become acute, culminated on the 26th inst. 
 by the discharge of H. P. Forrest, outstanding clerk in the local freight office, and a 
 very old and worthy railway employee, and one who is entirely competent in every way, 
 and is so admitted by all who work vwtlj; him.: He was advised that his discharge was 
 for the following reason : George C. Hamilton, also a member of the U.B.E.E., and a 
 resident of Winnipeg forwarded a shipment of hoiisehold g<)ods, sometimes designated 
 as settlers' effects, from Winnipeg to Ashcroft, and then came on here, and, deciding 
 to have the shipment forwarded here, naturally called at the local freight office of the 
 C.P.E., and presented the prepaid shipping receipt, which was issued to him by the 
 C.P.E. at Winnipeg, and requested that the shipment be ordered to Vancouver. Mr. 
 ±'orrest, who happened at the tnoment to-be serving at the'counter, CoOiplied with 
 Mr. Hamilton's request by writing- a -letter in Mr. Hamilton's name to the agent at 
 Ashcroft, requesting that the shipment be forwarded to Vancouver. The request was 
 complied with by the Ashcroft agent, and for this Mr. Forrest has been discharged, 
 and the allegation made to him by the <3.P.R. officers that he had defrauded the com- 
 pany by this action, owing to the fact that the local rates on settlers' effects from 
 Winnipeg to Ashcroft, plus the locBil rate thence to Vancouver, is cheaper than the 
 through rate from Winnipeg to Vancouver. 
 
 'Of this, however, Mr. Forrest had no knowledge, not being either a biller or re- 
 viser, and had he begn in possession of that knowledge, his action was still proper and 
 in accordance with established methods and practices on all railways in North America. 
 That is to say, when patrons desire shipments forwarded, the local freight staff in- 
 variably complies with such request. The fact that the sum of the tWo local rates 
 happened to be less than the^ through rate covering both local hauls cannot prevent a 
 shipper from forwarding goods from Winnipeg to Ashcroft, and then re-shipping to 
 Vancouver whenever he desires to do so, and moreover the through rate is not in 
 fxeess of the combined locals, because of the fact that the general freight department 
 of the C.P.E. has issued instructions to use for the through rate the combination of 
 the locals, if such combination would make' a; lower rate. Therefore from every pos- 
 sible point of view the action of Mr. Forrest was eminently right and proper. 
 
 ' However, he was discharged and the charge of fraud hurled at him, but the real 
 "cause was to precipitate trouble with the U.B.E.E. and crush the organization if 
 possible. 
 
 ' Following this, David Inches, jr., business agent for Division No. 97, TJ.B.E.E., 
 at Eevelstoke, was discharged without sufficient cause, and not only has abundant 
 evidence thus been furnished of the intention of the C.P.E. to destroy this Brother- 
 hood, but the officers of the C.P.E. have stated plainly that they will spend a million 
 dollars to destroy the U.B.E.E., because the plan of organization is laid on a founda- 
 tion so broad and deep that they are unwilling that it shall gain a footing in Canada. 
 
 ' There being no possible hope of an amicable settlement with a management whose 
 open and avowed policy is the destruction of this organisation; it has pursued the only 
 course open to it, that is to say, after 48 hours' notice, the members of the clerical 
 department of the C.P.E., connected with the TJ.B.E.E. have ceased serving that com- 
 pany, and earnestly appeal to all union men in Vancouver, and British Oolumbifl to 
 support their just cause, which is merely to preserve the union principle, or the right 
 of these men to become and remain meiri^ "rs of the organization which they have 
 Belected.' 
 
 A meeting of the general body of the TJ.B.E.E. is being held this afternoon. 
 
OJf lyovSTRIAL DmPVTEB IN BBITJBH COLUMBIA 789 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No, 36a 
 
 EXHIBIT 46. 
 
 ; , Additional bi^ndle of papers put; in Ijy T. J, Shenton relating to affairs of the 
 Nanaimo Union, &c, correspondency re legislation, &c. : 
 
 EXHIBIT 47. 
 
 ■Copy telegram .(?. B. Scantlie to W- 0, Miller. 
 
 Montreal, Feb. 24, 1903. 
 W. O. Miller, , : . 
 
 Vancouver, B.C. 
 
 , ' Owing to change in staff I have position here for Wilson. Would like you to 
 send him east at once. Will send good man Thursday to replace. Answer^ 
 
 G. K. SCANTME. 
 
 EXHIBIT 48. 
 
 Copy telegram, 8. Garnham to H. Wilsori. 
 
 Yancouver, B.C., Mar. 18, 1903. 
 II. Wilson, 
 
 76 Maekay St. , 
 
 Deny report emphatically ; all firm, and fight going on in out favour. 
 
 S. GARNHAM. 
 
 EXHIBIT 49. 
 
 Copy of Pension Scheme of Canadian Pacific Railway. 
 
 Canadian Pacific Eailway, 
 
 Office of the President, 
 
 Montreal, December 8, 1902. 
 
 The company feels that a time has arrived when some provision should, be made 
 for officers and permanent employees who, after long years of faithful service, have 
 reached an age when they are unequal to the further performance of their duties. 
 With this object in view, the directors, with the approval of the shareholders, have, 
 fcfter a careful study of the question, determined upon a plan of superannuation, the 
 particulars of which are set out in the accompanying rules and regulations. 
 
 The system adopted calls for no contributions from the employees themselves. 
 
 The company hopes, by thus voluntarily establishing a system under which a 
 continued income will be assured to those who after years of continuous service are 
 by age or infirmity no longer fitted to perform their duties, and without which they 
 might be left entirely without means of support, to build up amongst them a feeling 
 of support, to build up amongst them a feeling of permanency in their mployment, 
 an enlarged interest in the company's welfare, and a desire to remain in and to devote 
 their best efforts and attention to the company's service. 
 
 T. G. SHAUGHNESSY, 
 
 President. 
 
790 MINVTE^ OF EVlomCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VIU, A. 1904 
 CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY. 
 
 Pension Department. 
 Bides and Regulaiions. 
 
 1. The adminstration of the Pension Department shall be under the direction of 
 a committee to be composed of the following officers of the company :— The president, 
 the vice-presidents, the chief solicitor. 
 
 A secretary shall be appointed who shall have charge of the records of the depart- 
 ment. 
 
 The president of the company shall be ex officio chairman of the committee. 
 
 2. The office of the Pension Department shall be at Montreal. 
 
 3. All communications shall be addressed to the Pension Department. 
 
 4. Meetings of the committee shall be held at 10 o'clock in the morning of the 
 first Monday in each month. Other meetings may be held if necessary at the call 
 of the secretary. 
 
 5. The committee shall have power : 
 
 To make and enforce rules and regulations for the efficient operation of the 
 
 pension department ; 
 To d-etermine the eligibility of employees to receive allowances. 
 To fix the amount of such allowances; and 
 
 To prescribe the conditions under which such allowances may inure. 
 They shall make rules for their own government not inconsistent with these 
 
 regulations, and from time to time, as required, make reports of their 
 
 action to the board of directors of the company. 
 
 The proceedings of the committee shall be subject to the approval of the board, 
 
 6. The benefits of this pension system shall apply oiily to those persons who have 
 been required to give their entire time to the company, or to the company and some 
 other railway company or railway companies jointly. In cases of joint employment, 
 and when the whole salary is not paid by this company, the pension to be paid l)y this 
 company shall be estimated upon the proportion of salary or wages received ffdm this 
 company. 
 
 All officers and employees who have attained the age of sixty-five years shall be 
 retired, and such of said officers and employees who have been ten years or longer in 
 the company's service shall be pensioned. 
 
 The committee, however, shall have power to vary the foregoing rule and retain 
 in the service any employee who has reached the age of sixty-five years if in their 
 opinion it is in the interest of the company to do so ; provided, however, that no employee 
 who has reached the age of sixty-five years without having served ten years contin- 
 uously in the company's service, and who shall be retained in the service after he at- 
 tains the age of sixty-five years, shall be eligible for pension allowance. 
 
 8. Officers and employees betw.een the age of sixty and sixty-five, may at the dis- 
 cretion of the committee, be retired with a ijension either upon the application of such 
 employee or upon the recommendation of the head of the department. 
 
 Under special circumstances the committee shall have the power to retire with 
 a pension employees who have not reached the age of sixty years, and the committee 
 shall also have the power in special cases to add additional years to the actual teym 
 of service, provided that in each case the approval of Hie board shall have been first ob- 
 tained. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 791 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Physical examination sliall fee made of employees recommended for retirement who 
 are under sixty-five years of age, and a report with the recommendation of the com- 
 pany's surgeon shall be transmitted to the committee for consideration in dealing with 
 tuch cases. 
 
 Six months' previous notice shall be gi veil to employees who are to be compul- 
 sorily retired. 
 
 9. Retirement shall be made effective from the first days of January or July in 
 each year. 
 
 10. The terms ' service ' or ' in the service ' shall refer to employment upon or in 
 connection with any other railways operated by the company, and the service of any 
 employee shall be considered as continuous from the date since which lie has been 
 continually employed' Upon such railways, whether -prior or subsequent to their control 
 or acquisition by %h& Canadian pacific Kwlway; provided, however, that in no case 
 shall such service be counted for any period prior to the incorporation of the Canadian 
 Pacific Railway Company. 
 
 11. In computing service it shall be reckoned from the day since which the per- 
 son has been in the service to the date when retired. 
 
 12. Leave of absence, suspension, dismissal, followed by reinstatement within one 
 year, or a tfemporary lay-off on account of reduction of forces, need not necessarily 
 be treated by the committee as constituting a breach in the continuity of the service, 
 end the time when so laid off or absent, unless the employee has during such absence 
 entered other employment, may be allowed by the committee to count as part of such 
 sirvice. 
 
 Persons voluntarily leaving the employment of the company when their services 
 are required thereby become ineligible for pension allowance. 
 
 13. The pension allowance authorized shall be granted upon the following basis : 
 For each year of service an allowance of one per cent of the average monthly pay 
 
 received for the ten years preceding 'retirement. For instance, an employee has been 
 in the service for forty years and received on an average for the last ten years fifty 
 dollai^s per month, the pension allowance would be forty per, cent of fifty dollars, or 
 twenty dollars per month. 
 
 In calculating the period of service upon which the pension allowance is based, 
 the broken period following the completion of a year, when it is less than six months, 
 shall not be counted, when it exceeds six months it shall count as an additional year. 
 
 14. When pension allowances are authorized, pursuant to these regulations, tVey 
 shall be paid monthly during the life of the beneficiary; provided, liowever, that the 
 company may cancel any pension in case of gross misconduct on the part of the pen- 
 sioner. 
 
 15. Pay-rolls covering all pension allowances, showing the names of those to 
 whom- such allowances have been made and the amount of such allowances, shall be 
 prepared at the close of each month by the secretary of the department ; shall be 
 certified by him ; shall be countersigned by at least one member of the committee ; 
 and shall be forwarded to the accounting department for registration and payment. 
 
 16. The ofiicer in charge of the staff records of the company shall report to the 
 pension department on the first days of January and July in each year, the names, 
 with the particulars of service, of all employees who will attain, during the ensuing 
 six months, the requisite age for consideration for a pension allowance. 
 
 17. The secretary of the pension department shall keep himself informed of the 
 whereabouts of all employees who have been retired from the service, and shall require 
 satisfactory evidence from each of such employees, at least once a year, that he still 
 comes within the rules of the pension department. 
 
792 MINUTES OP EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION ; 
 
 3^4 EDWARD VII., Ai 1904 
 
 18. In order that the direct personal relatib&srbfetween the company and its retired 
 employees may be preserved and that they may continue^ to enjoy the benefit of the 
 pension system, no assignment of pensions will be permitted or recognized. 
 
 19. The acceptance of a pensjon allowance docs not debar a retired employee from 
 engaging in other business, tut such retired employee cannot so engage in other business 
 nor re-enter the service of the company, except with the consent of the committee, 
 without forfeiting his pension allowance. ' ■ • 
 
 20. The establishment and continuance of this system of pensions is entirely a 
 voluntary act on the part of the company, and as the employees do not in any way 
 contribute towards it, neither the action of the board of directors in establishing such 
 a system, nor any other acticn now or hereafter taken ty them or by the committee in 
 the inauguration or operation of the pension department, shall be construed as giving 
 to any officer or employee of the company a legal right to be retained in its service, 
 or any legal right or claim to pension . allowaiica While it is the policy of the com- 
 pany to encourage its employees to remain witli it, and by faithful service to earn a 
 pension,- the company expressly reserves its right and privilege to discharge at any 
 time any officer, agent or employee, when the interest of the, company, in its judgment, 
 may so require, without liability for any claim for pension or other -allowance than 
 the salary or wages due and unpaid. 
 
 21. These rules and regulations ^shall take effect on January 1, 1903, and may 
 be altered or repealed from time to JJme. as the committee, subject to the approval 
 of the board, may hereafter determine. 
 
 Montreal, November 10, 1902. 
 
 EXHIBIT 50., 
 
 Copy of alleged hlachlist of C. P. B. . ., ■ . .; 
 
 Canadian Pacific Eailway Compakt, ' 
 
 ■ Office of Supekintendent, 
 
 Nelson, February 9, 1903. 
 Chas. Russell, Esq., 
 
 Supt. N. P. Eailwa 
 
 Missoula, Mont. 
 
 Dear Sir, — ^Benjamin Franklin Wood is an applicant for employment in the 
 operating department of this _ company. He states he was employed by operating de- 
 partment as switchman, at iJIissoula, from July to December, 1902. 
 
 Will you kindly favour us with information regarding his record ? Your reply 
 will be treated confidentially. 
 
 Tours truly, 
 
 WM. DOWNIE, 
 
 Superintendent. 
 
 PLEASE REPLY HEREON. 
 
 The person above named was employed by C. Eussell, superintendent, as switch- 
 man at Missoula, from January 28, 1902, to February 9, 1902, with the. following 
 record: Struck during day switchman strike; agitator; took prominent part in strike. 
 Clearance reads 'dismissed account reduction of force.' 
 
 a RUSSELL, 
 Date February 12, 1903. 
 
O^r .1NDVSTRIA.L mSFVTMS IN.BRI.TISB CGLUMBIA 7S3 
 
 r 
 SESSIONAL PAPEjR, No. 36a 
 
 EXHIBIt 51. 
 
 Copy of redommendation given 'by C.P.B, to W. B. Broivne. 
 
 Canadian Pacific Railway Company, 
 
 Vancouver STA'iIO^^ January 10, 1903. 
 To whom it may coilcern. 
 
 This is to certify that the bearer, W. H. B.rowne has worked in the freight office 
 of the C.P.R. for the last twelve years and is a competent clerk and is steady and 
 reliable. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 (Sgd.) J. M. McCEEERY, 
 
 Agent. 
 
 EXHIiBIT 52. 
 
 Telegrams put in by agent of G.N.W. Telegraph Company at Vancouver, B.C;,. 
 being copies of all telegrams sent or received by that office during March, April or 
 May, 1901, referriiig in any way to the strike. 
 
 EXHIBIT 53. 
 
 Telegrams put in by agent of C.P.R. Telegraph Company at Vancouver, B.C., 
 being copies of all telegrams sent or received by that office during March, April or 
 May, 1901, referring in any way to the strike. 
 
 EXHIBIT 54. 
 
 Victoria, B. C, June 8, 1903. 
 E. P. Davis, K.O., 
 
 Vancouver, B.C. 
 Dunsmuir -authorizes me say that no prosecution will be undertaken against 
 iistes by E. & N. if he returns give evidence before Royal Commission. 
 
 E. V. BODWELL. 
 
 EXHIBIT 55. 
 
 Statement of time of certain C.P.B. employ&es. 
 
 J. E. Baker, November 24, 8 a.m. to 2 a.m.; on time following day. 
 
 P. G. Denison, December 10, 8.05 to 8k, December 11, out for breakfast., 
 
 J. N. Kendall, 8.30 to 8k, December 11. 
 
 P. G. Denison, 3 p.m., December 13, to 4 a.m., December 14. 
 
 Kendall, 3 p.m., December 13, to 4 a.m., December 14. 
 
 P. G. Denison, 13.30, December 14, to 21.30, Sunday. 
 
 J. N. Kendall, 13.30, December 14, to 21.30, Sunday. 
 
 P; G. Denison. 10k, December 2Y, to 21.15. 
 
 W. J. Marshall, 10k, December 27, to 22.30. 
 
 P. G. Deni.'on, 8.30, December 30, to 2.30, December 31. 
 
 J. N. Kendall, 8.30, December 30, to 2.30, December 31. 
 
 P. G. Denison, 13k, December 31, to 5 a.m., January 1, 1903. 
 
 J. N. Kendall, 13k, December 31, to 5 a.m., January 1, 1903. 
 
794 MINUTES OFISVIDWCE OF ROTAl, COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vir., A. 1904 
 
 P. G. Denison, 8 a.m., January 2, to 18k, January 2. 
 P. G. Deniscm, 8.30, January 8, to 5 a.m., January ,9, 1903. 
 P. G. Denison, 8 a.m., January 27, to 3k, January 28, 1903.'' • 
 J. N. Kendall, 8 a.m., January ,27, to 3k, January 28, 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT 56. 
 
 Comparison of Vancouver and Portland rales of wages. 
 
 Occupation. 
 
 Stationmen— 
 Baggagemaster . 
 Depotmaster . ; . . 
 Baggageman . . . 
 
 Local Freight Office^ 
 
 Customs clerk. 
 
 Stenographer. 
 
 Abstract clerk. . .... . 
 
 Timekeeper 
 
 Statistical clerk 
 
 Accountant 
 
 Asst. accountant. . . 
 '■• Expenses clerk 
 
 Clerk . 
 
 The baggage foi: all railways entering ^ 
 Portland is handled by the Terminal [ 
 Company. Th9 chief baggagemaster 
 gets about $126 per month and check- 
 men about $60 
 
 Coastwise S, S. clerk . 
 
 Abstract clerk 
 
 O. S. and D. clerk. .. . 
 
 Claims clerk 
 
 A»st, O. S. clerk 
 
 Outstanding clerk. . . 
 Night biller 
 
 S. S. clerk , 
 
 Asst. cashier 
 
 Cashier .... 
 
 L. F. agent 
 
 Chief biller. 
 
 Chief clerk 
 
 Collector 
 
 Warehouse clerk 
 
 Revising clerk 
 
 Asst. claims agent . ... 
 Freight Sheds — 
 
 General foreman 
 
 Asst. 
 
 Car checkers 
 
 Checkers 
 
 Cashier '. . 
 
 Audit office^ 
 
 Accountant 
 
 Chief clerk.. 
 
 St.itistical clerk 
 
 Pay roll clerk 
 
 Appropriation clerk. ... 
 
 Voucher clerk 
 
 General — 
 
 Trainmen's timekeeper. 
 
 Engineer's h 
 
 Staff record clerk , 
 
 Roadmaster's clerk 
 
 Vancouver 
 Bates. 
 
 Pacific div. 936 miles . 
 
 Pacific division 936 miles . 
 
 Chief clerk in div. supt's. office .... 
 
 ti master mechanic's office 
 
 Roadmasters are not allowed clerks on 
 the S. P. system although they fre 
 quently put on clerks and report them 
 as labourers to head office at $1.75 
 per day 
 
 cts. 
 
 75 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 55 00 
 
 55 00 
 
 35 00 
 
 55 00 
 
 50 00 
 
 55 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 50 00, 
 
 50,00 
 
 4£ 00 
 
 50 00 
 
 55 00 
 
 55 00 
 
 65 00 
 
 50 00 
 
 65,00 
 
 55 00 
 
 50 00 
 
 75 00 
 
 65 00 
 
 75 00 
 
 140 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 SO 00 
 
 45 00 
 
 50 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 80 00 
 
 66 00 
 
 55 00 
 
 33 00 
 
 R5 00 
 
 85 00 f 
 
 70 00 
 
 55 00 
 
 45 00 .{ 
 35 00 
 35 00 
 
 I 
 
 60 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 40 00 
 
 Portland, Oregon, 
 Kates. 
 
 45 00 
 
 * cts. 
 
 None. 
 
 65 00 
 
 70 00 
 Agt.' keeps time. 
 
 70 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 65 00 J 
 
 65 00 
 
 65 00 ' 
 None . 
 
 70 00 
 
 70 OO 
 
 70 00 
 None. 
 None. 
 
 70 00 
 
 70 00 
 None. 
 
 70 00 
 100-00 
 180 00 
 
 80 00 
 110 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 75 00 
 Not in S. P. system. 
 
 05 00 
 70 00 
 65 00 
 GO 00 
 70 00 
 
 This system is not iised 
 on the S. P. There is 
 only one auditing office 
 and it is at San Fran- 
 cisco and audits the 
 accounts of 8,100 miles 
 of railway. 
 
 125 00 
 125 00 
 None such. 
 
 None. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ,, EXHIBIT 57. -. 
 
 0. P. B. comparison of T.ancouver and Portland rates of wages. 
 "Vancouver wharf and local freight shed. 
 
 795 
 
 Present. 
 
 Pro.-, 
 posed. 
 
 -'Nop. Pao. Ry. 
 
 Seattle. 
 
 Tacoma 
 
 Great Northern Ry. 
 
 O.R.&N.S.Pac. 
 
 Port- 
 land. 
 
 Seattle. 
 
 Spolcane 
 
 Port- 
 land. 
 
 Port- 
 land. 
 
 Agent 
 
 Chief cleijk . 
 
 Cashier . 
 
 Asst. cashier 
 
 S. S. clerk 
 
 Chief biUer 
 
 Asst. II 
 
 Night 1 
 
 Accountant 
 
 Asst. accountant.. 
 
 0. S. clerk 
 
 Clerk 
 
 Claims clerk 
 
 O. S. &D 
 
 Asst. O. S. & D . 
 Transfer , 
 
 Revising. 
 
 Abstract, 
 
 Statistical 
 
 Timekeeper or warehouse 
 
 clerk 
 
 Foreman's clenk 
 
 Customs 
 
 P.N.S S 
 
 Warehouse local 
 
 Abstract" 
 
 Clerk. 
 
 Stenographer. . 
 Expense, local . . 
 
 Cashier, local . . 
 
 Wharf foreman. 
 
 Asst. II 
 Foreman 
 
 Checkers ' . . 
 
 Truckers , 
 
 Labourers 
 
 II overtime, , 
 
 $ Cts. 
 
 125.Q0 
 
 SO 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 70 00 
 70 00 
 45 00 
 50 00 
 05 00 
 45 00 
 
 65 00 
 
 45 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 50 00 
 40 00 
 60 00 
 
 CO 00 
 
 50 00 
 50 00 
 
 45 00 
 50 00 
 50 00 
 45 00 
 50 00 
 50 00 
 45 00 
 40 00 
 30 00 
 45 00 
 
 65 00 
 
 85 00 
 
 70 00 
 60 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 $ cts. 
 
 14a oa 
 
 80 00 
 ; 75.00 
 
 65 00 
 
 75 00 
 70 00 
 50 00 
 55 00 
 65 00 
 50 00 
 
 65 00 
 
 45 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 GO 00 
 45 00 
 65 00 
 
 65 00 
 
 55 00 
 55 00 
 
 50 00 
 50 00 
 50 00 
 50 00 
 55 00 
 65 00 
 45 00 
 45 00 
 35 00 
 50 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 Asst. agt 
 
 $85or$90 
 
 70 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 $ cts. 
 
 160 00 
 ■ 85 00 
 . 100 00 
 
 110 00 
 
 75 00 
 65 00 
 
 (.75 
 \ 65 
 
 70 00 
 
 60 00 
 60 00 
 
 65 00 
 60 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 05 00 
 
 50 00 
 65 00 
 60 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 60 00 
 65 00 
 CO 00 
 
 45 00 
 
 50 00 
 
 55 00 
 
 80 00 
 
 22 
 33 
 
 22 
 33 
 
 $ cts. 
 
 Genl. 
 
 200 00 
 
 110 00 
 
 95 00 
 
 f 110 00 
 
 [ 95 00 
 
 [ 75 00 
 
 70 00 
 80 00 
 
 $ cts. 
 
 140 00 
 } 95 00 
 
 ]■ 95 00 
 
 65 00 
 
 $ cts. 
 
 150 po 
 90 00 
 
 100 00 
 
 75 00 
 
 $ cts. S cts. $ cts. 
 
 70 00 
 70 00 
 65 00 
 
 75 00 
 60 00 
 60 00 
 60 00 
 
 70 00 
 60 00 
 60 00 
 60 00 
 
 } 
 
 \ 71 
 
 65 00 
 00 
 
 65 00 
 ]• 65 00 
 
 -*80 00 
 
 y 70 00 
 60 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 65 00 
 50 00 
 70 00 
 
 65 00 
 50 00 
 60 00 
 
 80 00 
 
 60 00 
 60 00 
 
 50 00 
 50 00 
 60 00 
 
 60 00 
 70 00 
 60 00 
 
 CO 00 
 50 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 90 00 
 75 00 
 65 00 
 60 00 
 65 00 
 2 50 
 
 2 25 
 
 25 
 
 70 00 
 75 00 
 
 80 00 
 75 00 
 70 00 
 
 1 95 
 
 2 00 
 25 
 
 50 00 
 60 00 
 
 75 00 
 
 75 00 
 75 00 
 75 00 
 55 00 
 60 00 
 
 1 75 
 
 2 00 
 1 75 
 
 135 00 
 90 00 
 
 90 00 
 
 65 00 
 
 65 00 
 60 00 
 60 00 
 
 55 00 
 60 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 60 00 
 5Q 00 
 55 00 
 
 50 00 
 
 50 00 
 50 00 
 
 50 00 
 
 55 00 
 55 00 
 
 75 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 175 
 2 00 
 25 
 
 140 00 
 110 00 
 
 100 00 
 
 67 50 
 
 75 00 
 
 65 00 
 60 00 
 
 65 00 
 
 60 00 
 63 00 
 67 50 
 
 65 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 63 OO 
 
 90 00 
 
 75 00 
 
 70 00 
 63 00 
 
 90 00 
 
 _63 00 
 2 10 
 1 95 
 
 180 00 
 110 00 
 
 100 00 
 
 80 00 
 65' 00 
 70 00 
 70 00 
 00 00 
 
 65 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 50 00 
 70 00 
 50 00 
 
 75 00 
 
 55 00 
 60 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 60 00 
 
 70 00 
 
 per hr . 
 
 95 00 
 70 00 
 65 00 
 
 CO 00 
 
 2 25 
 
 * Chief auditor. 
 
'7^ MINUTES OF miDENCE OF kOTAL COi! MISSION ' 
 
 34 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 CANADIA'N PAClFiO RAILWAY. 
 
 pacific division., 
 
 Office of the General Superintendent, 
 
 Vancouver, B.C. 
 Nelson Freight Shed and Station Staff. 
 
 Propose to equalize the i-ates now paid for clericar help with what is paid south of 
 ITelson, to wit : at Spokahe ; but, of course, taking into consideration the class and 
 volume of work done, but the rates are not in any case to exceed those We propose to 
 'Piiy at Vancouver and Revelstoke. ' ' - 
 
 'Unfortunately, have not Nelson and Revelstoke pay-rolls by me at' the moment, 
 but will ask you to authorize an increase not to exceed $40 per month at both places 
 ($25 at Nelson and $15 at Revelstoke, distributed as I may determine). 
 
 EXHIBIT 58. 
 
 Letter-press copies of letters referred to in evidence of P. Dennison at Vancouver, 
 
 , June 8. 
 
 EXHIBIT 59. 
 
 Preamble and .Constitution of the American Labour Union, adopted at Salt Lake City, 
 
 May 10-16, 1898, 26 pages. 
 
 EXHIBIT 60. 
 
 Letter from, Wilson, Senkler & Bloomfield to F. J. Ealton, dated April H, 1908, re 
 
 Alien Labour Act, 
 
 Vancouver, April 14, 1903. 
 F. J. Halton, Esq., 
 
 Secretary U.B.R.E., 
 
 City. 
 
 Dear Sir, — We were instructed some few weeks ago with respect to a clear ca«e of 
 importation of alien labour. As you know, proceedings cannot be take^ under the 
 Alien Labour Act without the consent of the Dominion Attorney General.' In order 
 1,0 ascertain the procedure necessary under these circumstances, we wrote to Sir Chas. 
 llibbert Tupper for information on the subject, and asked him to inteirview the Min- 
 ister of Justice and ascertain what was to be done. We inclose you a copy of his 
 letter, which explains itself. In other words, the Act is really a^dead letter by reason 
 of the means adopted for its enforcement. 
 
 Yours faithfully, 
 ■ WILSON, SENKLER & BLOOMFIELD, 
 
ON, JNDU^TfilAL JXISPVTE^ IN BRfTISH CQLVMBJA W 
 
 Sf,S§lOf«4AL, PAPfpNo, 36a 
 
 EXHIBIT 61. 
 
 Letter Jrom Sir Charles Hihlert Tupper to Charles Wilson, dated April 3, 1903, re 
 
 Alien Labour Act. 
 
 House of Commons, 
 
 Ottawa, April 3, 1903. 
 My Dear Wilson, — ^Immediately on receipt of your letter of March 24, I saw the 
 Minister of Justice, and his attitude confirms the general disaffection in regard to 
 the Alien Labour Aqt. What he practically says is that these proceedings are under 
 the administration of the Department of Labour, and applications to have proceedings 
 taken must be considered there in the first instance. This means, of course, 
 a. formal presentation of your case to that, department Then, he says, if it be thought 
 desirable for the Attorney General to intervene in any case, representation for that 
 purpose should emanate from the Department of Labour 
 
 I will see you shortly as I leave to-morrow for the coast, stopping a day at Win- 
 nipeg en'route. 
 
 Your sincerely, 
 CHAKLES HIBBEET TUPPEK. 
 Charles Wilson, Esq., K. C, . - 
 
 Vancouver, B.C. 
 
 EXHIBIT 62. 
 
 Telegrams produced by agent of C.P.E. Telegraph Company at Vancouver, 
 affecting U.B.E.E. strike. 
 
 EXHIBIT ^62. 
 
 Additional telegrams produced by C.P.E. Telegraph Company, (ioncerning U.B. 
 
 R.E. strike. 
 
 EXHIBIT 63. 
 
 Letter from John McNeil to J. E. Watson. 
 
 Brotherhood of Boilerjtakers and Shipbuilders op America, 
 
 Kansas City, Kas., April 11, 1903. 
 J. H. Watson, Esq., ' 
 
 Cor. Sec. L. No. 194, 
 Vancouver, B.C. 
 » « * * * * * 
 
 Dear Sir and Brother, — Now, in regard to the boilermakers working on the 
 C.P.E. will say, that under no consideration will we allow any of our members to 
 violate a contract, ^nd if any of the men attach themselves to any dual organization, 
 or go out in sympathy with any other organization and violate their contract, they 
 
 • will immediately annul their cards, and a lodge that will encourage them to do so, we 
 will call in their charter. We appreciate the sanctity of a contract, and if we do not 
 
 -live up to contracts, in a very short time the employers will refuse to make any with us. 
 1 hope you will so notify those members, as you can rest assured that we will do just 
 
 as stated in this letter. , ; . 
 
 With best wishes and regards, I remain 
 
 Yours fraternally, 
 . , (Signed) JOHN McNEIL, 
 
 O.P.O. 
 
79? MINUTES OF ETiDETfCE OF ROYAL COMMISSIOJf 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 EXHIBIT 64. 
 
 Letter from headquarters of Bakers' Internatioridl Union to members of Bakers' 
 Union, Vancouver. 
 
 Bakers and Confectioners' International Union, 
 
 Cleveland, Ohio, May 17, 1903. 
 Matter of Local Union No. 46, vs. members W. A. Wood, S. E. Brov?n, John William, 
 F. W. Bartte, C. A. Welland and S. A. Nelson. 
 
 Brothers, — At the last session of the international executive hoard the matter in 
 which. Union 46, and above membevs-are, or have been invplved in for some time vras 
 taken up and carefully considered. 
 
 When any one Joins an orgaruza.tion, he pledges himself to abide by the decisions 
 of the union, of the majority, and the union .-} the other hand promises to protect its 
 members and give justice to every one affiliated... 
 
 In reading the letters from both sides the international executive board finds that 
 the members as named have not followed the instructions of their local uirion, and 
 therefore the action of the union was upheld in this case. 
 
 But in the fining of S. A. Nelson, the international executive board decided to 
 instruct Union No. 46, to annul that fine, because according to our constitution any 
 member has a right to communicate with the officers of the International Union and 
 seek iUformation. 
 
 Per order International Executive Board, 
 
 F. H. HAEZBEGKEK, 
 Int. Secretary J. B. & C. I. U. of America. 
 P.S. — Absence from headquarters delayed me sending you this letter. 
 
 EXHIBIT 65. 
 
 List of parties who quit huying tread at Muir's bakery, Vancouver, on account of 
 
 labour troubles. . 
 
 The following are the names of parties who quit buying bread at Muir's bakery on 
 account of union troubles ; — 
 
 &24 Church. 808 Gore Avenue. 
 
 New York Kitchen, Abbott St. Mrs. Young, 235 Barnard, 
 
 Carleton's Grocery, Dunsmuir and 1214 Princess St. 
 
 Hamilton. 1256 Princess St. 
 
 De Eosey, 528 Helmecken St. Victoria House. 
 
 Savard. Taggart's Grocery, Granville. 
 
 Ostrum, 1018 Bumaby. Mrs. Stevenson, Y Ave., Fairvlew. 
 
 Owens, 1214 Hornby. J. Courtney, 202 West Ave. 
 
 McQuillan, 431 Eooson. McCulloch Bros.' Grocery. 
 
 542 Homer. Mrs. Aldred's Grocery, West Ave. 
 
 Jefferson, 804 Homer. Aldred & Son, grocery. West Ave. 
 
 Sims, 1227 Eichard. Mrs. Greaves, 1133 Comox. 
 
 Davis, 712 Homer. Mrs. Chambeilane, 717 Burrard. 
 
 Yendall, Eichard St. Thomson, 552 Howe St. 
 
 1126 Pender. Mathews, 564 Howe St. 
 
 1135 Pender. The Norden Hotel, Cordova St 
 
 Babcock, Broughton and Pender Sts. S. Cocker, 539 Hamilton. 
 
 Hornby & Dunsmuir. 331 Eobson. 
 
 Heming, 1700 Blk. Georgia. 251 Georgia. 
 
 1156 Davie. 230 Georgia. 
 
 W. Anderson, 110 Dunlevy. 533 Homer. 
 
 830 Dunlevy. • (43 names in all.) 
 837 Gore Avenue.. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAIt DISPUTES IS' BRITISW COLUMBIA 79? 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 EXHIBIT 66. 
 
 Agreement between W. D. Mmr, Vancouver, and his Employees. 
 
 Agreement. 
 
 This agreeinent, macie and entered into this 28th day of June, A.D. 1902, by and 
 between W. D. Muir, Vancouver, party of the first part, and Bakers' and Confectioners' 
 International Union, No. 46, of the City of Vancouver, B.C., party of the second part ; 
 
 WitnesSeth, That said party of the first part hereby agrees that the following scale 
 of wages and shop rules shall govern the bakery operated by said party of the first part : 
 
 1. All men shall be furnished by Local Union No: 46, should said union be in a 
 position to furnish them; should, however, the master baker engage a baker from out- 
 tide of the organization, no objection will be made if such baker will join our union, 
 unless there are charges against him from some other union. 
 
 2. Nine hours shall constitute, a day's ; work, the aggregate hours not to exceed 
 fifty-four (54) hours per week of si;s (6) days. The hour of starting work shall not 
 be earlier than five (5) a.m., except, on JVEondays,. when it may be not earlier than three 
 (3) a.m. . 
 
 3. Nine hours shall constitute a night's work, the aggregate hours not to exceed 
 fifty-four (54) hours per week of six days, at the same rate of pay as day work,. but on 
 and after September 1, 1902,. the master baker hereby agrees to substitute day work. 
 
 4. Journeymen shall be paid a minimum wage of fourteen ($14) dollars per week; 
 foremen, a minimum wage of sixteen ($16) dollars per week; men working in single- 
 handed shops same rate as foremen; jobbers shall be paid a minimum wage of two 
 dollars and seventy-five cents ($2.Y5) per da;^. 
 
 5. Only in cases of necessity shall overtime be allowed and paid at the rate of time 
 and a half. 
 
 6. Time and a half shall be paid for work done on legal holidays. 
 
 Y. The union label shall be furnished the master baker on demand so long as the 
 firm upholds the agreement with the imi'on; but the union reserved the right to agitate 
 for the union label whether the master baker adopts the same or nofe' - -i 
 
 8. In case of any grievance' a committee of the union shall try to adjust the same 
 with the firm. , 
 
 9. One apprentice shall be allowed each shop. 
 
 10. No member of this union shall work with Oriental labour. 
 
 11. These regulations shall be in force till the first day of July next, 1903, and no 
 alteration shall be made at the end of that period without fifteen days' notice by the 
 party desiring to make the change. If no notice be given, then these regulations shall 
 continue for a period of twelve months, and so on from year to year. 
 
 12. A copy of this scale of wages and shop rules shall be posted in a conspicuous 
 place in each shop. 
 
 REGULATIONS FOR APPRENTICES. 
 
 Article I. 
 
 Sec. 1. An apprentice shall serve three years, not to be indentured. He shall serve 
 his whole time in the bakeshop. 
 
 Sec. 2. Nothing less than tweleve (12) months in one shop to Count part of the 
 three years; but if an employer should from any unforeseen cause be unable to fulfil 
 his obligation to an apprentice, it shall be lawful for such apprentice to complete his 
 term with another employer. 
 
 Sec. 3. In case of an apprentice wishing to leave a place and being able to show 
 JTiBtification for doing so, he shall come under Section 2, Article 1. 
 
80a MINUTES OF ETIDENCE OF ROYAJL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Article II. 
 
 The minimum rate of pay for apprentices shall be as f ollow§ : For the first year, 
 four ($4) dollars per week; second year, seven ($7) dollars per week; third year, ten 
 ($10) dollars per week, without board; overtimejer rate of wages; hours of work to be 
 t)je same as those of journeymen. 
 
 In witness whereof we have hereunto set our hands and seals this 28th day of 
 June, 1902. 
 
 W. D, MUIIt, . ., 
 Party of the. First ParU 
 
 Bakers' and Cokf^egtioners' Ikternational TJnion No. 46, 
 
 Party of the Second Part. 
 By WM. H. BAKNES, 
 S. H. WALKEE. 
 
 Notice. — All inquiries, complaints or other communications should be made in 
 writing and addressed to the secretary of the union or the president qonaulted. 
 
 Agreement between Master and Journeymen Bakers of VANceuvER, B.C. 
 
 (Endorsed hy the International Executive Board and the Trades and Labour Council 
 
 of Vancouver, B.C.) 
 
 This Memorandum of Agreement, made at Vancouver, B.C., on the 22nd day of 
 August, 1901, by W. D. Muir, at No. 2414 Westminster Avenue, Vancouver, B.C., party 
 rf the first part, with W. A. Woods, for Bakers' and Confectioners* TJnion No. 46, of 
 the City of Vancouver, party of the second part, . 
 
 Withesseth _: . , 
 
 ,1. AH men shall be furnished by Local Union No. 46, should said union be in a 
 position to furnish them ; should, however, the master baker engage a baker from out- 
 side of the organization to introduce a new kiud of bre^d, &c., no objection wiU be raade 
 if such baker is a union man or will join our union, unless there are charges, against 
 him from some other union. 
 
 2. (a.) Ten hours shall constitute a day's work, the aggregate hours not to exceed 
 sixty hours per week of six days. 
 
 (h.) Nine hours shall constitute a night^s work, the pay to be the same as for 
 ten hours day work and the aggregate hours not to exceed fifty-four hours per week of 
 six days. 
 
 (c.) Time of hours in each case shall be arranged to suit both parties. 
 3i Time and a half shall be paid for work done on all legal holidays. 
 
 4. Journeymen shall be paid a minimum wage of $14 per week; foremen, a mini- 
 mum wage of $16 per week ; jobbers, a minimum of $2.50 per day. Any workmen laid 
 off for any part of a week more than two days shall be paid jobber's wages. 
 
 5. Only in case of necessity shall overtime be allowed and paid for at the rate of 
 25 cents per hour. 
 
 6. The union label shall be furnished the master baker on demand so long as the 
 firm upholds the agreement with the union ; but the union reserves the right to agitate 
 for the union label whether the master baket adopts the same or not. 
 
 7. In case of any grievance, a committee of the union shall try to adjust the same 
 with the firm. 
 
 8. One apprentice shall be allowed to each shop. 
 
 9. No member of this union shall work with Oriental lubour. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL mSPOTBS IN BliiriSH COLUMBIA 801 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 10. These regulations shall be in force until 1st July next, 1902, and no alteration 
 l.e made at the end of that period without thirty days' notice by the party desiring to 
 make the change. 
 
 _ If no notice be given, then these regulations shall be kept in force for a further 
 period of twelve months, and so on from year to year. 
 
 "" Signed on behalf of Firm, 
 
 W. D. MUIR. 
 
 Signed on behalf of Union, 
 
 W. A. WOODS. 
 Mr. W. D. Muir expects a week's notice. 
 
 EXHIBIT 67. 
 
 Copy of ' The Bakers' Journal,' published at Cleveland, 0., dated May 23, 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT 68. 
 
 Constitution of the Journeymen Bakers' and Confectioners' International Union 
 of America. — United Printing Co., Cleveland, Ohio, 1901. 
 
 EXHIBIT 69. 
 
 Copy of circular placing certain persons in Vancouver on unfair list, 
 
 UNFAIE TO UNION LABOUR. 
 To Union Men of the City of Vancouver, Greeting : 
 
 Some time ago the Charles Woodward Company advertised for tenders for the 
 construction of their new departmental store building on the corner of Abbott and 
 Hastings streets. Special delegations and committees were sent by the Vancouver 
 Building Trades Council at different times to Mr. Woodward and others associated 
 with him, viz. : Messrs. Davidson Bros, and E. G. Buchanan & Co., and were always 
 met with the assurance that they did not propose to move their building out of the city 
 in order to do business, but they fully intended to work in harmony with the union 
 men of the city, with whom they fully expected to do the bulk of their trade. 
 
 Three times were tenders called for, the previous ones having been too much in 
 excess of the amount appropriated by the company at its formation for the construction 
 of the building. Finally, after considering the third set of tenders for some time the 
 contract awarded to E. Cook, a bitter opponent of organized labour, a man who has 
 persistently exploited little local unions in order to keep the workers fighting among 
 themselves, and to throw dust in their eyes to blind them to the main issues. In eonse- 
 fiuence of this, the Building Trades Council have placed these firms on the unfair list 
 and request all union men of the city of Vancouver not to patronize the Chas.' Wood- 
 ward Company, corner of Westminster avenue and Harris street, Davidson Brothers, 
 jewellers and silversmiths, Cordova street, R. G. Buchanan and Cpmpany, glass'ivarc 
 and crockery dealers, Hastings street. 
 36»— 61 
 
802 MIVUTB8 OF" EVIDENCE Of ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 This action on the part of the Building Trades Council- was endorsed by the Trades 
 and Labour Council on May 14, 1903, and by the following subordinate unions: — 
 
 The Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners — A purely national .organi- 
 zation, headquarters at Manchester, England, and branches all over the English- 
 speaking world. 
 
 The United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners International Union. 
 
 The Bricklayers and Masons' International Union. 
 
 The Journeymen Plumbers' International Union. 
 
 The Painters' and Decorators' International Union. 
 
 The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. 
 
 The Stonecutters' International Union. 
 
 The Building Labourers — A purely national union. 
 
 The Plasterers' International Union. 
 
 The Sheet Metal Workers' International Union. 
 
 The Lathers — Canadian National Union. 
 
 EXHIBIT 70. 
 
 Copy of letter, Chas. Woodward to 0. I. miton. 
 
 March 6, 3. 
 
 To Mr. Hilton, 
 
 Dkar Sir, — Since talking with you in reference to our building and the best way 
 cf protecting union labour, our company has decided to go into this if possible and try 
 to carry out your views. Believing as we do that the best interest of our city would be 
 served, as well as the city at large. 
 
 Now will you kindly give me in writing the dijBferent clauses you think desirable 
 for the protection of union labour, and we will endeavour to have them incorpr)rate(l 
 in our building agreement with Mr. Cook, who has been awarded the contract of build- 
 ing our store. 
 
 We hope to be able to fetch around a more friendly and better state of things be- 
 tween Mr. Cook and your respective unions ; believing thereby to help to advance the 
 prosperity of our city. 
 
 Kindly let me have these suggestions of yours on or before Monday forenoon, say 
 30 o'clock. If it is not convenient for you to deliver them to me, I will send for them 
 if you will let me know by phone. 
 
 I am, respectfully, 
 
 CHAKLES WOODWARD, 
 
 President. 
 
 EXHIBIT 71. 
 
 Copy of letter. Building Trades Council, Vancouver, to Chas. Woodward. 
 
 Building Trades Council, 
 
 Vancouver, B.C., March 9, 1903. 
 Chas. Woodward, Esq., 
 Department Store, 
 
 Westminster Avenue. 
 
 Dear Sir, — ^I am in receipt of yours of the Yth inst. and note with pleasure the 
 desire expressed by you on behalf of your company to bring about an understanding 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 803 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 between Mr. E. Cook and this council, and would state that there is no contractor in 
 the city of Vancouver that this council would wish to be on friendly terms with more 
 tlian with the same Mr. Cook, who has proved to be a stout opponent and would, there- 
 fore, make a strong ally. 
 
 The points that I would suggest for the protection of union labour in the build- 
 ing pra.de are as follows :— 
 
 Eecognitidn of the Vancouver Building Trades Council and its card system, as 
 now in force and effect, which of course carries along with it the rates of wages estab- 
 lished in the various trades, or a;bout to be established on the 1st of April; hours of 
 work and overtime. All these minor points, however, are embodied in the point, viz., 
 recognition of the council and running the job under the card system. 
 
 I am, dear Sir, 
 
 Yours obediently, 
 
 C. I. HILTON, 
 
 Business Agent. 
 
 EXHIBIT 72. 
 
 Copy of Circular signed hy Building Trades Council, dated February, 1903. 
 VANCOUVER BUILDING TRADES COUNCIL. 
 
 February, 1903. 
 
 The folowing firms in the building and kindred trades are declared to be unfair 
 to union labour. Union men will not work for them, nor on the same job with them. 
 Contractors who sublet work to any of them will also be considered unfair to union 
 labour and their names will be included in the next issue : — 
 
 Builders' Supply Men : E. Cook, Alexander street ; Columbia Clay Co., Anvil 
 Island. 
 
 Carpenter Contractors : Carter, Albert E., 1440 Barclay street ; McDonald, Dun- 
 can, Prior street; Copk, Edward, 105Y Nelson street; Findlay & Hardy, 1368 Hornby; 
 McLuckie, John, 75 Sixth avenue; Strain, Frank, 86Y Prior street; Williamson, 
 George, 6Y4 Seventh avenue, Fairview; Young, James, 1025 Comox street. 
 
 Bricklayer and Mason Contractors: Carter, A. E., 1440 Barclay street; Cook, 
 Edward, 1057 Nelson street; Creason, George, 548 Sixth avenue. 
 
 Master Electrical Workers: Bushong, Ivan, 555 Hornby street; Globe Electrical 
 Company (trades under two names), A. LePage, manager, 1025 Nelson street; LePage, 
 Alfred. 
 
 Master Painters and Decorators: Davis, Wm., 472 Eighth avenue; Gray, , 
 
 1303 Hornby street; McLeod, , city; Parkes, S., 1777 Seventh avenue, Fairview; 
 
 Tompkins, B. S., 229 Thirteenth avenue east; Tompkins, Charles, 146 Eleventli ave- 
 nue west. 
 
 Master Plasterers: Barrett, P. I., 501 Gore avenue ; Churchill, Joseph, city ; 
 Fleming, John, Cedar Cottage; Mittbn Bros., Harwood street; Waite, Wm., city. 
 
 Master Plumbers : Morrison Brothers, Mount Pleasant. 
 
 By order, 
 
 BUILDING TRADES COUNCIL. 
 
 EXHIBIT 73. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of Team Drivers' International Union of America. A. 
 W. Brookes, Detroit, Mich. 51 pages. 
 .36a— 51i 
 
804 MINUTES OF ^YIDENCjS OF ROTAL COMMISSW.f 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 EXHIBIT 74. 
 
 Copy of 'Daily World,' Vancouver, May 29, 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT 75. 
 
 Copy of the ' Western Clarion,' Vancouver, dated May 23, 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT 76. 
 
 Calendar for year 1903, with the words : ' The Gurney Foundry Co., of Toronto, 
 makers of Oxford stoves and ranges, are unfair to organized labour. This firm also 
 make gas stoves, radiators and furnaces. This fight has been endorsed by Toronto 
 District Labour Council, Federated Metal Trades of Toronto, Dominion Trades Con- 
 gress, American Federation of Labour, Iron Moulders' Int. Union, Metal Polishers' 
 Int. Union, Stove Mounters' Int. Union.' 
 
 EXHIBIT 77. 
 
 Copy of Circular — 'Refuse to iuy Oxford Stoves and Ranges.' 
 
 If it is fair for the workingmen and women of Canada to support and purchase 
 the goods of a fair manufacturer, why should we not condemn and refuse to purchase 
 the goods of the unfair manufacturer? We appeal to the workingmen and women of 
 Canada to help us in our fight against the Gurney Foundry Company, of Toronto. If 
 you intend to buy a stove or range, bear in mind that this firm has tried to crush our 
 organizations and is still fighting us; therefore be governed accordingly. All goods 
 made by this firm bear the name of Oxford. You! Brother toiler, as a consumer, are 
 the final arbitrator. You shall decide whether this firm shall have the right to crush 
 our organizations to the earth, whether it is tyranny and oppressions or our unions, 
 and their demands for justice, that shall triumph. Help us fo win by telling your 
 friends that Oxford stoves and ranges are on the ' unfair list ' of organized labour. 
 This fight will continue until it is won. 
 
 lEON MOULDERS' UNION, No. 28. 
 
 METAL POLISHEES' UNION, No. 21. 
 
 STOVE MOUNTERS' UNION, No. 14. 
 Pass to a friend. 
 
 EXHIBIT 78. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of Building Trades Council, Vancouver, B.C. 'Inde- 
 pendent' Print. 12 pages. 
 
 EXHIBIT 79. 
 
 Correspondence and Statement re factory Hands' Strike, Vancouver. 
 
 May 14. 
 We, the undersigned employees, do hereby request that on and after the first of 
 June the hours for labour be as follows — 9 hours per day for 5 days ; 5 hours on Satur- 
 days ; 60 hours to constitute a week's wark ; pay to remain same as for the present day 
 of 10 hours; all overtime to be paid at the rate of time and a half. ■ ^ 
 
 Signed by 
 
 ALL FACTORY EMPLOYEES. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL -.BISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA m 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 The British Columbia Lumbek and Shingle Manufacturers' Association. 
 
 Vancouver, B. C, May 19, 1903. 
 Messrs. Eoyal City Planing Mills, City. 
 
 Dear Sir, — I am instructed to forward you the following circular. 
 Whereas at a meeting of the B. C. Lumber and Shingle Manufacturers' Associa- 
 tion it was unanimously agreed that it would be impossible for members to successfully 
 operate their factory plants for but nine hours in competition with others which are 
 operated for ten hours. 
 
 It is hereby resolved unanimously ' that all factories, members of this association 
 shall be operated for ten hours per day.' 
 
 Tou are therefore, hereby notified of this resolution, and requested to post a copy 
 of this communication in your factory for the information of your employees. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 E. H. H. ALEXANDEK, 
 
 Secretary. 
 
 Vancouver, May 22, 1903. 
 The Secretary B. C. Lumber Association, 
 Vancouver. 
 
 Dear Sir, — Referring to the request made by us on the 14th instant to the various 
 factories, and to which you replied on the 19th instant, we have to inform you that at 
 a full meeting of tlie factory employees held on the 22nd instant, it was unanimously 
 resolved ' that we adhere to the resolution previously passed and forwarded to you.' 
 
 In the event of a strike being declared all present employees to be reinstated. 
 
 I am, dear sir, yours faithfully, 
 
 Secretary^ Royal City Mills Factory. 
 
 NOTICE. 
 
 May 28, 1903. 
 All employees who decide not to continue work after June 1, for ten hours per 
 day, are requested to remove their tools on Saturday and apply for their time. • 
 
 British Columbia Mills Timber and Trading Company 
 royal city planing mills branch 
 
 E. 0. MAHONY, 
 
 Local Manager. 
 
 Vancouver, May 29, 1903. 
 To 
 
 Gentlemen, — On the 22nd instant, as a result of a unanimous resolution passed 
 at a meeting of the Factory Employees of the various factories we forwarded a letter 
 to Mr. Alexander, the secretary of the British Columbia Lumber and Shingle Manu- 
 facturers' Association, conveying to you the terms upon which the employees would 
 work at the various mills, but, at the present time no reply has been received by our 
 committee. 
 
 The following notice has been posted up at the mills : — 
 
 Notice. — All employees who decide not to work ten hours per day after June 1, 
 will kindly remove their tools on Saturday and call at the office for their time. , 
 
 (Sgd). 
 
806 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Are we to understand by 'tliis notice that the resolution we forwarded to you in 
 good faith has been ignored by the factories ? At a meeting of the factory employees 
 held this evening it was unanimously agreed upon that we respectfully request an 
 answer to our former communication, and we regret to say that we cannot continue to 
 work for the factories under any other conditions than those laid down in our letter 
 of the 22nd instant. Be good enough to give us your decision by noon on the 30th 
 instant. 
 
 Signed on behalf of the factory employees. 
 
 Vancodver, B. C, May 30, 1903. 
 Messrs. Bowman & Dunn. 
 
 Dear Sirs^ — Replying to your communication just handed to us by your factory 
 foreman, Mr. Luke, re letter sent by you to Mr. Alexander, secretary of the British 
 Columbia Lumber and Shingle Manufacturers' Association, in conixection with your 
 request of a nine-hour day, and your suggestion that the employees have been ignored, 
 inasmuch as no reply had been received from that quarter, we beg to point out that 
 the communication from the secretary was not addressed to the employees, but, on the 
 contrary, was in the nature of instructions to each establishment affected. 
 
 Therefore we feel that the ignoring is entirely on your part in not forwarding your 
 communication direct to us. 
 
 Respecting the notice posted in our factory under date of 28th instant, we can 
 only say that our decision is final, and we regret that employees who have been with us 
 so long should see fit to sever their connections with our company. 
 
 Tours truly, 
 British Columbia Mills Timber and Trading Company 
 
 ROYAL city planing MILLS BRANCH 
 
 E. C. MAHONY, 
 Local Manager. 
 
 THE FACTORY WORKERS' STRIKE. 
 
 The factory workers of Vancouver and New Westminster, numbering about 90 
 in Vancouver and 37 white men and 20 Japanese and Chinese, in New Westminster, 
 are on strike, with a demand that they be conceded a nine^hour day at the same rate 
 of pay as at present. These men are at the present time paid at a minimum rate of 
 274 cents per hour for mechanics, with a maximum of 32i cents per hour to bench 
 hands. 
 
 The labour represented by these men is skilled, and represents machine workers 
 and bench hands. 
 
 Their demand is shortly, that they are able to turn out as good and as much work 
 in a nine hour day, and should not be asked to work longer. They ask the same rate 
 of pay as they are now earning in ten hours. They desire Saturday afternoons off, and 
 that fifty hours shall constitute a week's work. 
 
 This is not essentially a union strike, as all the factory workers now making 
 demands are not necessarily union men. The demand has been made by the individual 
 workmen upon their separate employers. The reply, however, has come to them from 
 the Lumbermen's Association, and their demands have been refused. Reasonable 
 notice was then given by the factory men that on the first of June, unless their de- 
 mand was acceded to; they would cease work. In reply they were each served with a 
 notice that those of them who did not desire to work the full ten hours under tho 
 arrangements as heretofore existing, would be expected on the first of June to remove 
 their tools and apply for their time. 
 
 Ay the factory hands in Vancouver and New Westminster, with the exception of 
 one sticker man and a boy, have ceased work. This applies to the Royal City Mills 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA 807 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Vancouver and New Westminster; to Heaps & Co.'s mill, Vancouver ; to the Vancouver 
 .Sash and Poor Factory, Vancouver; and to Eobertson and Hackett, Vancouver. 
 
 -The carpenters, bricklayers, plumbers, and painters of Vancouver have all been 
 accorded an eight hour day, their demands having so far as the carpenters been con- 
 ceded as the result of a strike for better conditions this spring. 
 
 The millmen vv:ill meet the strike either by shutting down, or by importing labour 
 from eastern Ontario, or from the United States. 
 
 The millmen have met the situation by a combination which has for its object the 
 boycotting of the striking factory hands. As an evidence of this, H. D. and J. H. Mc- 
 Gregor, two brothers, having applied to Stanley J. Stevens, foreman or partner with 
 Mr. Limpkie, who is engaged on the construction of the Fee building on Granville 
 Street, were turned off the said job after having sttvted to work on June 3rd, by Mr. 
 Limpkie. 
 
 i Mr. liimpkie is a member of the Builders' Exchange, an organization composed of 
 ODntractors. . ■ 
 
 ■ It will be remembered that evidence was adduced on Saturday last, June 13, 
 ■during the sitting of the Commission, to show that these contractors during their 
 strike with the carpenters, had called the millmen to their assistance and established 
 a boycott of union strikers by refusing to supply lumber or material of any kind to 
 any one who employed union labour. It now appears that the millmen have obtained 
 from the contractors assistance along the same lines, and the contractors are now, for 
 the purpose of assisting the millmen, refusing to employ striking factory hands. 
 
 Mr. Limpkie, when discharging the McGregor brothers, stated that the Builders' 
 Exchange, on the previous night, had passed a resolution to the effect that no striking 
 workers would be allowed to work on outside buildings. This statement was made in 
 the presence of E. H. Macey, who can corroborate the evidence of the McGregors. 
 
 It is understood that the resolution passed by the Builders' Exchange for the pur- 
 pose of helping the millmen, goes further, and states that none of the striking factory 
 hands will be allowed to work at any factory other than the one wliere they have 
 previously been employed. 
 
 It would appear that a combination of employers has been made for the purpose 
 of meeting and resisting every demand of labour, whether the demand be a reasonable 
 one or the reverse. It is difficult to foresee what the future will be if combinations of 
 employers are made for the purpose of coercing the employees irrespective of questions 
 of right or wrong. 
 
 The factory hands are willing to submit their position to the arbitration of a pro- 
 perly constituted board, and they urge the following considerations as reasons why 
 their demand should be acceded to : — 
 
 1. Ten hours, as in other trades and under like circumstances, are too long for 
 a day's work. 
 
 2. That a man can do as much in nine hours in most cases as in ten. 
 
 S. That the factory dust, especially where cedar is exclusively used, is injurious 
 to the health, the cedar dust containing much poisonous matter. 
 
 4. That if carpenters outside factories are worth 40 cents per hour, the factory 
 man should be worth 33J to 35 cents per hour. 
 
 5. That no other trade or industry is working more than nine hours, and in many 
 similar employments not more than eight hours. 
 
 6. Factory men, in addition to their long hours, suffer much inconvenience and 
 some loss in the withholding of their earnings in the following manner: — 
 
 The Vancouver Sash and Door Company pay semi-monthly, withholding two 
 weeks' back pay. The Eoyal City Planing Mills pay on the 24th of the month, hold- 
 ing back 24 days' pay. Eobertson and Hackett pay on the 20th of each month, hold- 
 ing back 20 days' pay. Heaps and Company pay on the 15th of each month, holding 
 back 15 days' pay. The interest and use of this money would be of much value t* the 
 workmen. As it is, in addition to the grievances under which the men suffer, from 
 $5,000 -.t© $10,000 of theiT wages properly earned, ar6 left in the hands of their em- 
 ployers for the benefit of their employers or their bankers. 
 
808 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE OF ROYAL COMMISSION 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 If blowers were kept generally in operation during working hours in all the mills, 
 the danger to employees from the dust would be much reduced. To keep these blowers 
 in operation, however, costs the employers something, and without proper enforcement 
 of sanitary conditions in factories the men will continue to be laid off from time to 
 time in ill-health on account of breathing the poisonous atmosphere. 
 
 8ome of the factories recognize this condition, and work blowers part of the time. 
 They should be worked continuously and generally. 
 
 To allow men a niue-hour day and a half day on Saturday would enable them to 
 bring greater energy and more heart to their employment. 
 
 Where the action of the workmen depends entirely upon machinery, it may be 
 conceded that more work can be got through in ten hours, than in nine, but during 
 the later hours of the day, or while a man is fatigued, much greater chance of accident 
 and casualty is run. 
 
 When one considers the profits that the millmen are making as compared with the 
 cost of production of the articles they have for sale, the demand of the factory work- 
 ers seems not only reasonable, but trivial. The cost of living is rapidly increasing. 
 The combinations of the trusts and of the employers have a tendency which has been 
 exhibited in every line to raise the cost to the consumer. To labour must be ascribed 
 the production of all commodities, and even a cursory examination will disclose the 
 fact that they receive a mere trifle of what they produce. 
 
 The demand of the striking carpenters this spring resulted in a recognition that 
 the wages did not keep pace with the increased cost of living. 
 
 A memorandum attached hereto gives a statement of the cost of production of 
 some of the commodities offered for sale by the millmen, the commodities being those 
 produced by the factory workers now on strike. These statements have been carefully 
 prepared and their accuracy vouched for by the undersigned. 
 
 Dated at Vancouver, this 15th day of June, 1903, and signed on behalf of the 
 factory workers by 
 
 J. EDWAED BIED, 
 On behalf of the factory workers on strike. 
 
 British Columbia to wit: 
 
 In the matter of the factory workers' strike and of their demands for a nine hour day 
 
 with half holiday on Saturday. 
 
 I, Major S. Williams, of the city of Vancouver, in the Province of British Co- 
 lumbia, glazier, having had twenty-three years' experience in sash and door work in 
 evei"y branch of that industry, and I, Alma Pengelly, of the same place, carpenter, 
 do solemnly declare that I have gone into the statement hereunto annexed marked 
 ' memorandum of cost of production of certain articles produced at the factories 
 mentioned in the annexed memorandum,' and I say that the estimate given in such 
 memorandum of the cost of production of the door and window and of the other things 
 mentioned therein, is a fair and reasonable estimate, allowing every doubt in favour 
 of the millmen. The figures therein set forth as an estimate of the cost of production 
 of the articles is, if anything, excessive, and I believe that the articles mentioned can 
 be produced at even a less cost, and I make this solemn declaration in conjunction with 
 the other party above mentioned conscientiously believing the same to be true, and that 
 this declaration has the same force and effect as if made under oath and by virtue of the 
 Act respecting ' Extra Judicial Oaths.' 
 
 Affirmed by Major S. Williams and Alma" 
 Pengelly, before me at the city of Vancouver, 
 in the province of British Columbia, this 
 22nd day of June, 1903. 
 
 J. EDWAED BIED, 
 
 A Notary Public in and for B.C. 
 
 MAJOE S. WILLIAMS, 
 r A. PENGELLY. 
 
0-V INDUSTRIAL'DISPUl'ES IN BRl'I'lHU COLUMBIA 809 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 MEMOEANDUM OF THE COST OF PRODUCTION OF CERTAIN ARTICLES 
 NOW PRODUCED AT THE FACTORIES MENTIONED IN THE AN- 
 NEXED MEMOEANDUM. 
 
 1. A door 2 ft. 8 in. X C ft. 8 in. x IJ in. can be produced at a cost of 71 cents. 
 This includes material estimated at $22 per thousand, the labour and a reasonable al- 
 lowance for the hire of machines. This door is sold at $2.75. 
 
 2. A window 24 x 30 x IJ in., with two lights, including glazing and all complete, 
 can be produced at $1.16 and retails at $2.75. 
 
 3. Two men working six hours and one man working ten hours will earn at a 
 mauling sticker a profit of $65 clear, reckoning material at $22 per thousand. Their 
 joint production sells for $100. The labour, material and hire of machines totals $35. 
 
 4. All other articles of commerce produced at the factories can be shown to bo 
 produced at about the same ratio of cost and profit. 
 
 EXHIBIT A. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of the Western Federation of Miners, headquarters at 
 Denver, Colorado. 
 
 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT B. 
 
 Copy of Miners' Magazine, ofiicial organ of the W.F.M., for the month of April, 
 
 EXHIBIT C. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of the Brotherhood of Boilermakers and Iron Ship- 
 builders of America. 
 
 EXHIBIT D. 
 
 By-laws of Boilermakers and Iron Shipbuilders, Victoria Lodge, No. 191. G.S.R. 
 Co. Print, Victoria, B.C., 4 pages. 
 
 EXHIBIT E. 
 
 Constitution and outline of the American- Federation of Labour, headquarters, 
 Washington, D.C. 
 
 EXHIBIT F. 
 
 List of organizations affiliafed with the American Federation of Labour, issued 
 by A.F. of M., at headquarters in Washington, D.C. 
 
 EXHIBIT G. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of the B.C. Steamsbipmen^ Society of Vancouver and 
 Victoria, B.C., 28 pages. 
 
810 MimjTES OF- EVIDENCE OF ROYAL OOMmSSION 
 
 ZA EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 EXHIBIT H. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of Shipcarpenters and Caulkers' Association of the 
 ports of Victoria and Esquimault, No. 29. "Victoria P. and P. Co. Print, 27 pages. 
 
 EXHIBIT I. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of the International Brotherhood of Blacksmiths, 
 Molme, 111., 1901, 47 pages. 
 
 EXHIBIT J. 
 
 Constitution, By-laws and Rules of Order of the Bricklayers' and Masons' Local 
 Union of Victoria, B.C. Victoria, Thos. E. Ciisack Co. Print, 1902. 
 
 EXHIBIT K. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of the Victoria Capital Division, No. 109 of the Amal- 
 gamated Assocition of Street Eailway Employees of America. Banfield & Jew«ll 
 Presses, Victoria, B.C., 1902. 
 
 EXHIBIT L. 
 
 Constitution of Amalgamated Association of Street Railway Employees of 
 America. 
 
 EXHIBIT M. 
 
 Constitution of International Typographical Union. International Typographical 
 Union, Nos. 7 to 12 DeSoto Building, Indianapolis, 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT N. 
 
 Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners' Monthly Report for January, 
 1903. Published at Manchester, Eng. 
 
 EXHIBIT 0. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of the Victoria Trades and Labour Council. ' Colonist 
 Press,' Victoria, 1900, 17 pages. 
 
 EXHIBIT P. 
 
 Rules of the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners (Canadian Edition) 
 Toronto. J. S. Williams, Typo., 73 Adelaide, 163 pages. 
 
ON INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES IN DIIITISU COLUMBIA 811 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 EXHIBIT a. 
 
 Monthly Report of Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners for the 
 American and Canadian District. Published at New York, April, 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT R. 
 
 Copy of 'Eailway Employees' Journal,' published at San Francisco, Cal., dated 
 April 9, 1903. 
 
 EXHIBIT S. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of the Journeymen Stonecutters' Association of North 
 America. 32 pages. 
 
 EXHIBIT T. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of the Victoria Branch of the Journeymen Stonecutters' 
 Association of North America. Victoria, Thos. Eoarke & Co., Printers, 28 Broad 
 Street, 22 pages. 
 
 EXHIBIT U. 
 
 The 'Miners' Magazine,' the Official Organ of the Western Federation of Miners 
 for January, 1903. Published at Denver, Col. 
 
 EXHIBIT V. 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of the Nanaimo Miners' Union, No. 177, W.F.M. 
 Nanaimo ' Free Press ' Print, 20 pages. 
 
3-4 EDWARD VII. SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a A. 1904 
 
 IN^DEX 
 
 Page. 
 
 Accident at Trent Eiver Bridge 502 
 
 Accidents, Mining, lack of proper precautions against — 
 
 (Evidence of Hall) 495, 49G 
 
 (Evidence of Matthews) 503 
 
 Agitators — 
 
 Denounced — (Evidence of Dunsmuir) 239 
 
 Objected to — (Evidence of Eobertson) 275 
 
 Objected to by Contractors — (Evidence of Cook) 738 
 
 Objected to by Eailways — (Evidence of Browne) 627 
 
 Often have good reason — (Evidence of Kelly) 152 
 
 Only disadvantage of Unions — Evidence of Seabrooke) 105 
 
 Should be Law against — (Evidence of Piper) 149 
 
 Suppression of, should be left to Unions — (Evidence of McNiven) 208 
 
 Unnecessary — (Evidence of Eussell) 190 
 
 Wrongly blamed — (Evidence of Foley) 079 
 
 Agreements as to Notice of Strikes — 
 
 (Evidence of BuUen) 126 
 
 (Evidence of McMven) 202 
 
 (Evidence of Neave) 306 
 
 (Evidence of Booth) 324, 325 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 329 
 
 Agreements as to Wages — (Evidence of Lauderbach) 285,287 
 
 Proposed with Nanaimo Miners— (Evidence of Eussell 344 
 
 Agreements, National, violations of — (Evidence of Foley) 679i 
 
 Albion Iron Works 101 
 
 Alexandria Miners' Union 41,238,366 
 
 Alien Labour — 
 
 Importation of — 
 
 (Evidence of Baker) 19, 74 
 
 (Evidence of Foley) 674, 675 
 
 International Unions a protection against — (Evidence of Mottishaw, sr... 60 
 
 Should be excluded— (Evidence of Kelly) 153 
 
 Alien Labour Act — 
 
 Advantage of, if effective — (Evidence of Baker) 72 
 
 Consent of Attorney General not necessary for proceeding under — (Evi- 
 dence of King) 668, 669 
 
 Convictions under— (Evidence of King) 669 
 
 Enforcement of by Department of Labour— (Evidence of King) 670 
 
 Improved Law necessary — Evidence of Piper) 149 
 
 Ineffective — 
 
 (Evidence of Dales) 649 
 
 (Evidence of Foley) 673 
 
 (Wilson, counsel) 4, 19 
 
 Judges, Powers of as regards enforcement— (Evidence of King) 671 
 
 Letter Wilson, Senkler & Bloomfield to F. J. Halton, stating law inopera- 
 tive 667, 796 
 
 Letter, Sir C. H. Tupper to C. Wilson, re enforcement of . . 667, 797 
 
 813 
 
814 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Pago. 
 
 Allans, Shipwrights at Victoria, Strike over employment of 122, 124' 
 
 Amalgamated Association of Street Railway Employees — 
 
 B. C. Street Railway Unions affiliated with. . 193 
 
 Constitution of .193, 810 
 
 Powers of as to Strike 193 
 
 Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners . .'. 214 
 
 Benefit System of 222 
 
 Constitution of .'222. 720 
 
 Membership of 215, 223 
 
 Powers of Executive as to Strikes .... . . . .215, 720 
 
 Reports of .310, 811 
 
 Representation in .. . .- . . . . '. ; .. 223 
 
 Rules of . . 810 
 
 American Academy of Political and Social Science — Eitract from Annals of. . 209 
 
 American Eederation of Carpenters and Joiners. . '.'V' 214 
 
 American Eederation of Labour — • 
 
 Administration of criticised ^.''562 
 
 Constitution of .129, 809 
 
 Difference between, and American Labour Union. ....... 94, 95 
 
 Membership of 94 
 
 Organizations affiliated with 809 
 
 Typographical Union affiliated with 94 
 
 Western Federation of Miners preferred to — (Evidence of Shenton) . . . . 328 
 
 'American Industries ' — Its Opinion of Trades Unions 27 
 
 American Labour Union 28 
 
 Affiliation of U. B. R. E. with— 
 
 (Evidence of Johnstone) 544 
 
 (Evidence of Dennison) 644 
 
 Circular by President Estes to Unions affiliated with 780 
 
 Constitution of 796 
 
 Co-operation of in U. B. R.E. Strike — (Evidence of Johnstone).. .. ... 544 
 
 Co-operation of Western Federation of Miners with — (Evidence of Baker) 33 
 
 Rival of American Federation of Labour — (Evidence of Twigg) 94 
 
 Socialism in — 
 
 (Evidence of Dales) 650 
 
 (Evidence of Dennison) ; 644 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) .... . .94, 133 
 
 ' Amphion ' Contract 105 
 
 Anarchy attributed to Trades Unionism 27 
 
 Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science — Extract from. . 209 
 
 Anthony, William. Evidence of 431, 436, 472 
 
 Blacklisting of Unionists 434 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration favoured 433 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Strike — 
 
 Ballot in favour of 433 
 
 Not sympathetic 474 
 
 Recognition of Union demanded 432 
 
 Wages of Miners 435 
 
 Arbitration — 
 
 Denounced by ' Miners' Magazine ' 252 
 
 Favoured — 
 
 (Evidence of Ncave) 312 
 
 (Evidence of Penkith) ng 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) , , 92 
 
INDEX 81& 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Page. 
 A];bitration — Con. 
 
 Eegarded as impracticable — rEvidence of Johnstone) ,. . . . 570 
 
 Satisfactory operation of — (Evidence of Kussell . . . , 189 
 
 Western Federation of Miners, position of respecting — (Evidence of Baker) 71 
 Arbitration, compulsory — 
 Approved — 
 
 (Evidence of Anthony) 433 
 
 (Evidence of Bolden) *. 218 
 
 (Evidence of Foley) G81, 683 
 
 (Evidence of 'liall) • 200 
 
 (Evidence of McNiven) 211 
 
 (Evidence of Marpole) 085, 680 
 
 (Evidence of Smith) 261 
 
 DifiScuIty of enforcing Awards — (Evidence of MciSi^cn) . 213 
 
 Objected to by Unions— (Evidence of Bolden) 218 
 
 Objections tc — (Evidence of Kobins) 302 
 
 Opposed — 
 
 (Evidence of Bartley) 722 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) 258 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 418 
 
 (Evidence of Hammond) , 233 
 
 (Evidence of Kelly) ., 151 
 
 (Evidence of McKay) .' 234 
 
 (Evidence of Robertson) 276 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 96 
 
 Hegarded as favourable to Employers — (Evidence of Barnes) 363 
 
 Eegarded as impractica^ole — 
 
 (Evidence of Bryden) 267, 268 
 
 (Evidence of Matthevps) 485 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 342 
 
 (Evidence of Woodburn) 271 
 
 Third Arbitrator — 
 
 Difficulty of agreeing on — (Evidence of Baker) 73 
 
 Should be appointed by Judge — 
 
 (Evidence of Penkith) 118 
 
 (Evidence of Seabrookc) 110 
 
 Should be Business Man — (Evidence of I.eiser) 128 
 
 Should be Government Appointment — (Evidence of McNiven) .... 211 
 
 Should be Judge— (Evidence of Marpole) 685 
 
 Should be Permanent Official— (Evidence of Bullen) 125 
 
 Archibald, W. F., Telegrams re production of Messages— (Evidence of King) . 475 
 
 Archibald, W. F., Evidence of, production of Telegrams re Strike 506, 507 
 
 Armstrong, John 205 
 
 Assaults on Non-unionists — 
 
 (Evidence of Bullen) 137, 138, 142 
 
 (Evidence of Troupe) 229 
 
 Astori, Louis, Evidence of; ordered to remove from Extension to Ladysmith. .85-87 
 
 Aihenwum, Steamer :■••;•••; ■^^'^'. '^^^ 
 
 Attorney General, consent of not necessary to Proceedings under Alien Lahour 
 
 , Act— (Evidence of King) ... • ■ ■ • ■ • -668, 669 
 
 Australian Strike. • • •■••■•••;••.••• ■■ ■ ' ^^'^ 
 
 Awards under Compulsory Arbitration, difficulty of enforcing— (Evidence of 
 
 : McNiven) • • • • ^13 
 
 Bailey, Mrs. J. W 67,245 
 
816 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Page. 
 Baker, James A. — 
 
 Correspondence of G. Richards with, re Ladysmith Strike — (Evidence of 
 
 Eichards) 434-440 
 
 Letters from to Cumberland Miners' Union 756, 757 
 
 Movements of — (Evidence of Shenton) 627, 529 
 
 Organized Ladysmith Miners' Union — 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) 248 
 
 (Evidence of Pritchard) 37 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 521 
 
 Organized Cumberland Miners' Union — 
 
 (Evidence of Barber) 383 
 
 (Evidence of Reed) 461, 462 
 
 Statements of — 
 
 (Evidence of Lauderbach) 285, 280 
 
 (Evidence of Mottishaw) 289 
 
 (Evidence of Robertson) 278, 279 
 
 Telegram from Moyer to, re Lady-smith Strike 755 
 
 (Evidence of Barber) 396, 474 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday 472 
 
 (Evidence of Hutchinson) 445-448 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 510, 686 
 
 Telegram to annoixicing Decision of Cumberland Miners' Union to Strike — 
 
 (Evidence of Richards) 470 
 
 Telegram to Moyer asking Consent to Cumberland Strike in sympathy with 
 
 Ladysmith— (Evidence of King) 475 
 
 Baker, James A., Evidence of 8-36, 67-74 
 
 Alien Labour Act, should be effective 72 
 
 Alien Labour, importation of 19, 74 
 
 Arbitration, compulsory in New Zealand 73 
 
 Boycotting 34 
 
 Governmeent interference in Strikes 73, 74 
 
 Incorporation of Trade Unions 30, 36 
 
 International Organization of Capital 74 
 
 ' Miners' Magazine ' 20, 21 
 
 Picketing 34 
 
 Polities in Trades Unions 34 
 
 Socialism Approved :..'.. 3,'! 
 
 Universal Organization as a Remedy 73 
 
 Western Federation of Miners — 
 
 Action of, in Ladysmith Strike 23-28 
 
 Affiliation with other Bodies 63 
 
 Membership and Finances of 28, 29, 31, 33, 62 
 
 Militia, Attitude regarding 29 
 
 Powers of, as to Sympathetic Strikes 22 
 
 Purposes and objects of . . . . 8-19 
 
 Socialism in 27, 29 
 
 Strikes, Attitude towards 71, 73 
 
 ' Bakers and Confectioners' Journal ' 801 
 
 Blacklist in Y15 
 
 Bakers' Strike, Vancouver, in sympathy with U.B.R.E.-^ 
 
 (Evidence of Muir) .697-700 
 
 (Evidence of Nelson) 703 704 
 
 (Evidence of Wilband) 700t702, 704 
 
 Bakers' Union. (See Journeymen Bakers' Union.) 
 
INDEX 817 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Bakery, Boycott of— *^^' 
 
 (Evidence of Muir) . . .. 697-700 
 
 (Evidence of Wilband) , . . . 700-702 
 
 (Evidence of Woodward) Y36 
 
 List of Persons who quit buying Bread at Muir's Bakery 798 
 
 Ballot, Strikes voted on by — 
 
 (Evidence of Penkith) ; . ng 
 
 (Evidence of Anthony) 433 
 
 Barber, O. W 413 
 
 Barber, O. W.— 
 
 Evidence of 383-410, 473, 474 
 
 Chinese and Japanese— Instructions of W. F. of M. to organize. 396-398, 406-409 
 Cumberland Miners' Union — 
 
 Financial Aid to Ladysmith Strikers voted by 393 
 
 Membership of 384,402 
 
 Organization of 383,399-402 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Strike 385 
 
 Approved by Executive W. F. of M 380 
 
 Cause of — Eefusal of Work to Unionists 387 
 
 Interview of Union Committee v,-i']; Mr;n-cer 388 
 
 Not a Sympathetic Strike 409, 410, 473 
 
 Eecognition of Union refused 389, 403 
 
 Wages, no Complaint as to 392 
 
 Telegrams, Moyer to Baker re Ladysmith Strike 474 
 
 Unions, advantages of 385 
 
 Barnes, Aaron 246 
 
 Barnes, Aaron, Evidence of 351-369 
 
 Cavil system of assigning work in mines 354 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration, in favour of Employers 368 
 
 Extension preferable to Ladysmith as Place nf Residence 356 
 
 Favouritism by Employers .'!53, 355, 363 
 
 Internationalism favoured 352, 368 
 
 Ladysmith Strike — 
 
 Propositions for settlement of 356, 361 
 
 Rejection of, by Miners 357 
 
 W. F. of M. men refuse to abandon ' 357, 359, 362 
 
 Narrow Work in Mines 363, 364 
 
 Taxation of Land Values favoured 362 
 
 Unions, advantages of 351 
 
 Union officers at Comox discharged 351, 362 
 
 W. F. of M. Contracts with Employers referred to 367 
 
 Bartley, George, Evidence of 721-723 
 
 Compulsory Arbitradon opposed 722 
 
 Incorporation of Unions , 721 
 
 Politics in Unions 723 
 
 Strikes due to inexperience . 723 
 
 Sympathetic Strikes opposed by Typographical Union '. . 722 
 
 Bate, Hugh 244 
 
 Beamish Case • • ■ ■ . • 682 
 
 Beasley, Mr., C.P.R 624,0.39 
 
 Benefits, fraternal 192, 214, 216 
 
 (Evidence of Hammond) 222 
 
 (Evidence of Johnstone) 543 
 
 Bertha, Steamer, Dispute over repairing 122, 123 
 
 SGor— 52 
 
818 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A.J904 
 
 Page. 
 
 Bickell, Thomas 400.413 
 
 Bird, J. E., Counsel for U.B.E.E 514 
 
 Blacklisting (See also ' Boycoting/ ' Unfair,' &c.) — 
 By Canadian Pacific Eailway — 
 
 Agreement with other Companies not to employ Men discharged for 
 cause — 
 
 (Evidence of Browne) 624-620 
 
 (Evidence of McMillan) 5Y4 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) , . . 590 
 
 Clearance stating Cause of Discharge — 
 
 (Evidence of Marpole) 706 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) 583 
 
 Copy of AUeged Blacklist . . 792 
 
 Existence of, denied — (Evidence of Marpole). . . 705 
 
 Striker refused Work at Seattle— (Evidence of Wilson) . . 591 
 
 Unionists — (Evidence of Browne) 630,631' 
 
 By Unionists — (Evidence of Browne) . . 630, 631 
 
 By Vancouver Trade & Labour Council 803 
 
 (Evidence of Kussell) 725 
 
 In Baker's Journal — (Evidence of Wilband) 715, 716 
 
 Of Contractor — (Evidence of Cook) 737 
 
 Of Grumey Stoves 804 
 
 (Evidence of Woodward) 736 
 
 Of Merchant, by Vancouver Building Trades Council — (Evidence of Wood- 
 ward) 716-721 
 
 Of Unfair Employers — 
 
 (Evidence of McMillan) 576 
 
 (Evidence of Muir) 699 
 
 (Evidence of Wilband) 701 
 
 Of Scabs— 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) 251 
 
 (Evidence of Mottishaw) 294 
 
 Disapproved — (Evidence of Watson) 692 
 
 Of Unionists — 
 
 (Evidence of Anthony) 434 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 98 
 
 Blacksmiths, International Brotherhood of I54 
 
 Constitution and By-laws of 810 
 
 Blacksmiths' Journal, urges Employers to Organize 156 
 
 Blacksmiths' Strike, Victoria — (Evidence of Ladingham) 154, 155 
 
 Cause of — ^Demand for increased Wage and shorter Hours 155 
 
 Strike successful I55 
 
 Blacksmiths— Wages of I55, 156 
 
 Hours of Labour of I55 
 
 Blind Kiver ; 381 
 
 Boarding-house, Boycott of, inU.B.E.E. Strike — (Evidence of McDonald) . .695-697 
 
 Bodwell, Mr., Counsel for Wellington Collieries Co 1 88 
 
 Boilermakers' and Iron Shipbuilders' Brotherhood of America — 
 
 Action of in Victoria Boilermakers' Strike II4. 
 
 Boilermakers' Union, Victoria, affiliated with ^^12 
 
 Constitution of 112,688,809 
 
 Membership of 1;^2 688 
 
 Opposed to Sympathetic Strikes qqq ggg 
 
mOBZ 819 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Boilermakers and Iron Shipbuilders, Victoria— ***^*' 
 
 By-lawa of g^g 
 
 Hours of Labour of -.qq 
 
 Wages of '.!...!'...!'.!*. .107, 109 156 
 
 Boilermakers' Journal— Letter to disavowed— (Evidence of Watson) '.'. ..'..' 693 
 Boilermakers' Strikes, Victoria — 
 
 Onjob of repairing Ship Topeka—ior 8 hours— Evidence of Seabrooke). . 107 
 Union men refuse work on Contract in sympathy with Seattle Strikers— 
 
 (Evidence of Penlt ith) 112-115 
 
 (Evidence of Seabrooke) ; ..101-105 
 
 (Evidence of Watson) . . , . . (392 693 
 
 Bolden, J. W., Evidence of 213-222 
 
 Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners .. 214 
 
 Membership of 215 
 
 Powers of Executive re Strikes , . 215 
 
 American Federation of Carpenters and Joiners . 214 
 
 Carpenters' Union 214 
 
 Benefits, fraternal ..214 216 
 
 Contractors, position of, in . . 216 
 
 Strike of 216 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration — ^Unions opposed to 218 
 
 Conciliation 219 
 
 Government interference sometimes beneficial. 219 
 
 Incorporation of Unions 217 
 
 Internationalism _ 219 
 
 Socialism among Unionists 221 
 
 Sympathetic Strikes, when justified 220 
 
 Technical Education 222 
 
 Trades and Labour Council, Victoria 219 
 
 Conditions of Membership 219 
 
 Policy as to Strikes 219 
 
 Booth, Eichard, Evidence of 317, 326 
 
 Agreements with Employers, how far binding.- 324, 325 
 
 Estes, George, power to order sympathetic Strike 323 
 
 Foreign interference, Objections to 322, 323 
 
 Sympathetic Strikes, limits of ..324,325 
 
 Western Federation of Miners — • 
 
 Ballot of Nanaimo Miners on Aifiliation with 317, 3I8 
 
 Socialism in 320 
 
 Eeasons for affiliation with 321 
 
 Boultbee, Judge 682 
 
 Bosworth, Mr., C.P.E 613 
 
 Bowes, Wallace, Evidence of. Telegrams produced by 505 
 
 Boyce, Edward 370, 376 
 
 Boyce, Tully 390, 403 
 
 Boycotting (See also ' Blacklisting,' ' Unfair,' &c.) — 
 
 Advertisements of in newspapers 736 
 
 Approved of — (Evidence of Johnstone) 567 
 
 By Lumber Dealers — 
 
 (Evidence of Cooke) 741 
 
 (Evidence of Hepburn) . .742-744 
 
 (Evidence of Meiss) 726 
 
 By Western Federation of Miners— (Evidence of Baker) 34, 35 
 
 Considered legitimate— (Evidence oJE Twigg) ^ .i 95 
 
 36a— 52J 
 
£20 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Page. 
 
 Boycotting — Con. 
 
 Disapproved of — (Evidence of Halliday) 415 
 
 Of Bakery, by Vancouved Unionists — (Evidence of Woodward) Y36 
 
 Of Bakery supplying 0. P. N. boats — .679-700 
 
 (Evidence of Muir) 6Y9-700 
 
 (Evidence of Wilband) 700 
 
 Of Boarding-house in U.B.R.E. Strike— (Evidence of McDonald).. ..695-697 
 
 Of Gurney Foundry Co 736 
 
 Shipwrights don't resort to — (Evidence of Piper) 147 
 
 Union Labor as Substitute for . . 207 
 
 Bramley, Jonathan 243 
 
 Bramley, Jonathan, Evidence of respecting sale of lots in Extension 75-78 
 
 Bricklayers' Union, Victoria — - 
 
 Arbitration suecesssfully adopted by 189 
 
 Constitution of 187, 810 
 
 Withdrawal of from International 188 
 
 Bricklayers, Victoria, Wages of 189 
 
 Hours of Labour of 191 
 
 Bricklayers, Vancouver, Strike of 745 
 
 Brickmaking, Chinese employed in — (Evidence of Russell) 190 
 
 Brick manufasturers, Victoria, Combine among — (Evidence of Russell) 191 
 
 British Columbia Electric Railway 192-195 
 
 British Columbia, Labour conditions of— (Evidence of Bulley) 169 
 
 British Columbia Manufacturing Association, Boycotting by — 
 
 (Evidence of Cook) 741 
 
 (Evidence of Hepburn) 742-744 
 
 (Evidence of Meiss) 726 
 
 British Columbia Marine Railway Co., Limited, Strike against .121-127 
 
 British Columbia Mining Association 252 
 
 British Columbia Steamshipmen's Society (See also ' Steamshipmen's Strike ') — 
 
 Agreement with Canarian Pacific Navigation Co _ 750 
 
 Constitution of .' 134, 177, 171 
 
 Discharge of Member from Employment for non-payment of Dues. . . .180-183 
 
 Expelled Members, treatment of 184 
 
 Incorporation of 180, 185 
 
 Initiation Ritual of . . 750 
 
 Membership of 185 
 
 Oath of 134 
 
 Strike of against C. P. Navigation Co., &e 134-143, 158-171 
 
 Brooke, Robert 559 
 
 Brooks, Thomas : 252 
 
 Browne, W. H., Evidence of 622-631 
 
 Agitators, Objected to by Railways 627 
 
 Canadian Pacific Railway,- Opposition of to Unions 629 
 
 Clearance System, Operation of .624-626 
 
 Picketing 627 
 
 Refused Employment by American Railroads on account of connection' with 
 
 Strike 622, 623 
 
 Unions approved of 630 
 
 Blacklisting by .630, 631 
 
 Bryden, Andrew ■. . .83, 237 
 
 Bryden, John, Evidence of 262-268 
 
 Coal Fields, Exhaustion of 263 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration impracticable ^^ 267 268 
 
INDEX 821 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No.. 36a 
 
 Page. 
 Bryden, John— Evidence oi—Oon. 
 
 Extension, disadvantages of as a Place of Eesidence 262, 263 
 
 Grievances, adjustment of 266 
 
 Knights of Labour, refused recognition 265 
 
 Pit Boss, authority of 265, 267 
 
 Eemoval of Miners from Extension 264, 265 
 
 Saloons supported by Workmen 268 
 
 Unions, considered useless 264, 268 
 
 Wages of Miners 265 
 
 Builders' Exchange, Vancouver 741, 742 
 
 Building Contract, objected to by Unions 719, 735 
 
 Building Trades Council, Vancouver — • 
 Blacklisting by — 
 
 (Evidence of Hilton) 744 
 
 (Evidence of Woodward) 716-721 
 
 Constitution of 744 
 
 Correspondence with Woodward re building contract 717 
 
 BuUen, Harry F., Evidence of 121-127 
 
 Arbitration, Appointment of third Arbitrator 125 
 
 Conciliation, by Victoria Trade and Labour Council 124 
 
 Internationalism, Objections to 127 
 
 Loss of work owing to industrial disputes 123 
 
 Strike of Shipwrights employed by B. C. Marine Railway Company. . . .122, 124 
 
 Strikes — agreement with unions re notice of 126 
 
 Trade unions — Advantage and disadvantages of 125 
 
 Bulley, Alfred H. — Demand of union for discharge of 180, 129 
 
 Bulky, Alfred H.— (Evidence of) 182, 185 
 
 Discharged for refusal to pay union dues 183 
 
 Steamshipmen's Strike — 
 
 Contributions in aid of 182 
 
 Danube Steamer — not tied up by • • 184 
 
 Steamshipmen's Union — 
 
 Expelled members, treatment of 184 
 
 Incorporation of 18^ 
 
 Membership 18'' 
 
 Bulley, Anthony B 226, 230, 231 
 
 Bulley, Anthony B.— (Evidence of) 134-143, 158-171 
 
 0. P. E. difficulty with U. B. E. E 167 
 
 Joan Steamer, unionists on, discharged 168 
 
 Labour conditions in B. C 169 
 
 Non-unionists, right to employ •_ 168 
 
 Steamshipmen's Society of British Columbia- 
 Constitution of 1'^ 
 
 Oath of •••••••••.•••: ••• ^^* 
 
 Steamshipmen's Strike at Victoria against C. P. Navigation Co.— 
 
 Assaults by union men • ■ • -IJ, 141. "2 
 
 Causes of ^^^' ^^^- ^^"' -^*'" 
 
 Estes George, Action of relating to 139, 164, 165, 166, 169 
 
 Picketting. ^^^' 1'^^' ^'^^ 
 
 Troupe, Capt., Agreement with not to handle unfair freight 135, 159, 161 
 
 U. B. E. E.— Connection with strike 163:167 
 
 Vancouver Trade and Labour Council- 
 Assistance to Strikers by • 1 '^ 
 
 Sympathetic Strikes, limits of ••••: 
 
822 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Page. 
 BuUey, Anthony B. — Evidence of — Con. 
 
 U. B. R. E.— Discrimination against by C. P. K 136, 139, 143 
 
 Unfair freight— objections by steamshipmen, &c., to handle, 135, 136, 140, 143, 167 
 
 Wages of Steamshipmen 169 
 
 Burdette, Samuel, Telegram to re Cumberland Strike 469 
 
 Business, Effect of Strikes on — (Evidence of Leiser) 127, 128 
 
 California Coal Market 199,201 
 
 Canadian Members of International Unions — 
 Disabilities of — 
 
 i(Evidence of Carroll) .... 254 
 
 (Evidence of Cook) 737 
 
 (Evidence of McNiven) .' 203 
 
 No prejudice against — (Evidence of Twigg) i . . 99 
 
 Representation adequate (Evidence of Boldeu) 219 
 
 Satisfied with position — (Evidence of Penkith)) 117 
 
 Canadian Pacific Navigation Company — Agreement of with B. C Steamship- 
 men's Society 750 
 
 Canadian Pacific Navigation Company — Strike against (See also ' Steamship- 
 men's Strike ') — 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 134-143 
 
 —(Evidence of Shenton) 524,525 
 
 Boycott of Baker supplying Bread to — 
 
 (Evidence of Muir) 697-700 
 
 (Evidence of Wilband) . 700-702 
 
 Strikers propose to tie up Steamers of ; . 175 
 
 Canadian Pacific Railway — (See also ' U. B. R. E. Strike,' &c. — 
 
 Action of Miners' Union Executive re supply of Coal to and from Nanaimo 
 
 —(Evidence of Shenton) 524, 525 
 
 Agreement with Freight Handlers' Union — (Evidence of Johnstone) . .539, 562 
 Agreement with other Companies not to employ men discharged for cause — 
 
 (Evidence of Browne) '. 622, 623 
 
 (Evidence of McMillan) 574 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) 590,591 
 
 Alleged Black List 792 
 
 Com^rison of Portland and Vancouver — Rates of Wages 794, 795 
 
 DifEerence of Opinion among Unionists regarding Strike — (Evidence of 
 
 Thompson) . . , 171 
 
 Discharge of Unionists by — 
 
 (Evidence of Dick) 614 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) 581-583, 592-595, 606 
 
 Discrimination against U.B.R.E. — 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 136,139,143 
 
 (Evidence of Dennison) 640 
 
 Documents produced by. Affidavits and Schedule of 770-772 
 
 Effects of Strike on Business — 
 
 (Evidence of McMillan) 5Y5 
 
 (Evidence of Marpole) , Y07 
 
 Existence of Blacklist denied — (Evidence of Marpole) Y05 
 
 Freight-handlers, Letters and Wage, Schedule of 776-778 
 
 Increase of Salary to Clerks — (Evidence of McCreery) 709, 711 
 
 Letter of Committee re Suspension of Forrest YYg 
 
 Nelson Freight Shed and Station Staff, Wages of 796 
 
 Opposition to Unions by — (Evidence of Browne). . . . ^ 629 
 
INDEX 823 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 ^ Page. 
 
 Canadian Pacific Kailway — Con. 
 
 Overtime Work of Clerks — 
 
 (Evidence of Dennison) 635-638, 641 
 
 (Evidence of Grier) Y12, 713 
 
 (Evidence of McCreery) 708-712 
 
 Pension Scheme of 789-792 
 
 Kecommendation, W. H. Browne 793 
 
 Statement of Case in U.B.K.E. Strike 517, 768-770 
 
 Statement of Time of Employees 793 
 
 Secret Service of. Affidavit of F. J. Halton 775 
 
 Wages paid by — 
 
 (Evidence of Grier) 713 
 
 (Evidence of Dennison) , 638 
 
 Canadian Pacific Railway Telegraph Co.— Telegrams re Strike produced by. .793, 797 
 Canadian Pacific Steamship Co. — Sailors of quit Work in sympathy with Strikers 
 
 -^-(Evidence of Fullerton) 741 
 
 Cantlie, Mr., C.P.R 580, .597 
 
 ' Capital,' by Karl Marx, largely read by Miners— (Evidence of Halliday) 415 
 
 Influence of — (Evidence of Dales) 640 
 
 Capital, Internationalism of — 
 
 (Evidence of Baker) 74 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 415 
 
 Capital, Obligations of, not recognized — (Evidence of Dunsmuir) 379 
 
 Capitalism, necessarily opposed to Labour — (Evidence of Dales) 646 
 
 Capitalists, Alleged promotion of Strikes by — (Evidence of Pritchard) 44 
 
 Privileged by law — (Evidence of Dales) 647 
 
 Card, Union 374 
 
 Objected to — (Evidence of Cook) 740 
 
 Carpenters' Strike, Victoria — (Evidence of Bolden) 216 
 
 Carpenters' Union, Victoria 214 
 
 Benefits, fraternal 214, 216 
 
 Contractors, position of, in . 216 
 
 Carroll, Henry .353, 364 
 
 Carroll, Henry, evidence of 248-258, 349 
 
 Blacklisting of Scabs 251 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration opposed 258 
 
 Conciliation favoured 258 
 
 Conversation of Woodburn and Shenton re Organizer's Cormnission 349 
 
 Incorporation of Unions favoured 256 
 
 Ladysmith Miners' Union, organization of 248, 249 
 
 Ladysmith, preferable to Extension as Place of Residence 255 
 
 'Miners' Magazine,' extracts from 251, 252 
 
 Pit Committee, duties of 257 
 
 Union Mines, sympathetic Strikes at 250 
 
 Unions approved of 256 
 
 Disadvantages of 256 
 
 Western Federation of Miners — 
 
 Controlled by Americans 255 
 
 Methods of 252 
 
 Not a Coal Miners' Union 263 
 
 Strikes promoted by 254, 255 
 
 Withdrawals from 255 
 
 Cavil System in Mines 354, 364 
 
 Charmer, Steamer 135, 140, 159, 172, 226, 581 
 
82i INDEX 
 
 3J* EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 Page. 
 
 Check Weigliman, none in Extension Mine 53, 60 
 
 Chinaman, fatal Accident to ■ -496, 512 
 
 Chinese — 
 
 Conversation of Shenton and Eev. L. W. Hall re organization of — 
 
 (Evidence of Hall) 452-460 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 508, 512, 513, 532-535, 585 
 
 Employed in Brickmaking — (Evidence of Russell) 190 
 
 Engaged in place of Cumberland Strikers — (Evidence of Matthews) 482 
 
 Hl-treatment of — (Evidence of Hall) 454 
 
 In coal mines — (Evidence of Robins) 298 
 
 Instructions of Western -Federation of Miners' Executive to organize — 
 
 (Evidence of Barber 6396-398, 406-409 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 426 
 
 Number of, employed in Cumberland Mines — (Evidence of Matthews). . . . 500 
 
 Wages of — (Evidence of Hall) 452 
 
 Cipher Messages re Ladysmith Strike 475, 505 
 
 Class-consciousness — (See also ' Socialism ') — 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) 253 
 
 (Evidence of Dales) 646 
 
 (Evidence of McNiven) 208-210 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 335 
 
 Clearance system on Railways — (See also 'Blacklisting.') — 
 
 (Evidence of Browne) 622, 626 
 
 (Evidence of Marpole) 706 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) 784 
 
 Clearance given to Wilson 590 
 
 Clergyman, Communications to not privileged 451 
 
 Clinton, Geo. W., Evidence of 501, 502 
 
 Intimidation of Voters denied 502 
 
 Resignation of manager, Thos. Russell, on account of politics 501 
 
 Coal business, as effected by Strikes — 
 
 (Evidence of Hall) 197,198 
 
 (Evidence of Kingham) 200, 201 
 
 California market for 199,201 
 
 Comox Coal 199 
 
 Japan, importations from 198, 708 
 
 Price increased 198, 201 
 
 Nanaimo output 200, 201 
 
 Seattle, importations from 198, 199 
 
 Coal fields— Exhaustion of 262, 304 
 
 Code, Miss — Committee of U.B.R.E. ask for re-instatement of 579, 601-605 
 
 Not suspended 732 
 
 Colbert, Mr., plumber 91, 185, 187 
 
 Collective Ownership (See also 'Socialism') advocated — 
 
 (Evidence of Dales) 652-655, 658 
 
 (Evidence of Foley) 677 
 
 Colonist, Victoria .185,187 
 
 Commission, powers of 450 
 
 Procedure of 514, 636-538 
 
 Scope of Inquiry 2, 87 
 
 Comox Mines • 127 
 
 Coal output of 199 
 
 Sympathetic Strike at 250 
 
 Union oificials discharged ,.. 352 
 
INDEX 825 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPEfl No. '363 
 
 Competition, shorter hours remedy for— (Evidence of Ladingham). 1^5^^' 
 
 Competitive system, waste of— (Evidence of Dales) C65 666 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration— (See ' Arbritration, compulsory.') 
 
 Compulsory investigation of Labour Disputes proposed— (Evidence of Marpole) 685 
 
 Conciliation — 
 
 Approved of — 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) 258 
 
 (Evidence of Hammond) 223 
 
 (Evidence of Neave) 312 
 
 (Evidence of Eobertson) 276 
 
 (Evidence of Smith) 26J 
 
 Effective in Victoria Shipwrights' Strik6^(Evidence of Bullen) 124 
 
 Fernie Strike settled by — (Evidence of Bolden) 219 
 
 Regarded as impossibles— (Evidence of iialliday) 418 
 
 Eemedy for Strikes — (Evidence of Twigg) 96 97 
 
 Should be tried before Arbitration — (Evidence of McNiven) 211 
 
 Stone-cutters' Strike settled by— (Evidence of McKay) 234 
 
 Conciliation Act, B.C 234 
 
 Conciliation Boards ; 271 
 
 Confidential Communications, objections to disclose, overruled 450, 451 
 
 Confiscation, Socialist view of — (Evidence of Dales) 653J 656 
 
 Contractor, position of in Carpenters' Union 216 
 
 Contracts — (See also 'Agreements.') 
 
 By Unions, considered binding — (Evidence of Dales 656 
 
 Enforced by Unions — (Evidence of Watson) 689 
 
 Opposed — (Evidence of Foley) 676 
 
 Violation of — (Evidence of Foley) 077,679,680 
 
 Individual — Proposed as settlement of Cumberland Strike — 
 
 (Evidence of Matthews) 485-487 
 
 (Evidence of Little) 487 
 
 Eefused by Miners 490-494 
 
 Cook, Edward — Contract with regarded as unfair — (Evidence of Woodward) . .716-721 
 
 Cook, Edward, Evidence of 737-741 
 
 Agitators foment trouble .738 
 
 Blacklisted by Vancouver Trade and Labour Council ■ 737 
 
 Boycott of Unionists by Lumber Dealers 741 
 
 Diificulties with International Unionists 737 
 
 National Union of Bricklayers, Masons and Carpenters organized 737 
 
 Union Card System objected to 740 
 
 Wages in Building Trades 738 
 
 Co-operation as Substitute for Wage System — 
 
 (Evidence of Dales) 650 
 
 (Evidence of I'oley) - • 676 
 
 Cost of living, Vancouver ■ . 169 
 
 Craig, F. B 511, 625 
 
 Cripples, treatment of, by Unions 146 
 
 Crow's Nest Pass Coal Co '?4 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Strike Yl, 286 
 
 Cause — discharge of Union Officials — 
 
 (Evidence of Baker) I'l 
 
 (Evidence of Barber) * • 387 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 420 
 
 (Evidence of Hutchinson) 443, 446 
 
 (Evidence of Eichards) .._.. • > 441 
 
826 INDEX 
 
 3^ EDWARD Vll, A. 1904 
 
 Page. 
 Cumberlanad Miners' Strike — Oon. 
 
 Considered sympathetic — (Evidence of Matthews) 481 
 
 Correspondence with Baker in reference to — (Evidence of Richards). . . .438-440 
 
 Documents re produced 584 
 
 Interview of Union Committee with Manager — 
 
 (Evidence of Barber) 388 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 420 
 
 (Evidence of Matthews) 481 
 
 Intimidation of Non-unionists — (Evidence of Reed). . . . . . .464, 468 
 
 'Negotiations for settlement of ; 490-4&4, 503, 504 
 
 Not a sympathetic Strike — 
 
 (Evidence of Anthony). 474 
 
 (Evidence of Barber) 409, 410, 473 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 472 
 
 (Evidence of Hutchinson) 471, 472. 
 
 (Evidence of Hunden) 476-478 
 
 (Evidence of Richards) 470 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 586, 587 
 
 Recognition of Union refused — 
 
 (Evidence of Barber) 389, 403 
 
 (Evidence of Little) 488 
 
 (Evidence of Matthews) 481 
 
 : Request for Strike by Ladysmith Miners — 
 
 (Evidence of Mottishaw, jr.) 289, 290 
 
 (Evidence of Robertson) 277, 279 
 
 Statement of Miners re causes 755 
 
 Settlement proposed by individual Contracts — 
 
 (Evidence of Little) 487 
 
 (Evidence of Matthews) 485-487 
 
 Telegram, Baker to Moyer asking Consent to Strike in sympathy with Lady- 
 smith — (Evidence of King) 475 
 
 Telegram to Baker, announcing Decision to Strike — (Evidence of Richards) 469 
 Telegram to Burdette, Employment Agent, that Strike on — (Evidence of 
 
 Richards) 470 
 
 Telegrams to and from Company re Strike 763 
 
 Wages, loss of (Evidence of Matthews) 500 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Union — 
 
 Aid to Ladysmith Strikers voted by — 
 
 (Evidence of Barber) 393 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 420 
 
 Letters to and from various Parties . .756-760 
 
 Membership of — (Evidence of Barber) 384^ 402 
 
 Organization of — 
 
 (Evidence of Barber) 383, 399-402 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 411-414, 422 
 
 (Evidence of Hutchinson) 443 443 
 
 (Evidence of Reed) 461^ 4g7 
 
 (Evidence of Richards) 436 
 
 Wages of 425, 761-763 
 
 Dales, George, Evidence of 645-667 
 
 Alien Labour Act, inoperative 649 
 
 Capitalist Class, privileged by Law 647 
 
 Contracts by Union, bindings 65g 
 
INDEX 827 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Page. 
 Dales, Greorge— Evidence oi—Con. 
 
 Inventors, poorly rewarded 651 
 
 Middle Class, absence of in B. C 64Y 
 
 Political Action by Workers advocated 648, 655 
 
 Socialism — 
 
 Class struggle 646 
 
 Collective Ownership of Means of Production 652-655 
 
 Competitive System, waste of. ... 665, 666 
 
 Co-operation, as Substitute for Wage System 650 
 
 ' Distribution of Products 654,664 
 
 Government changes in advocated 658, 659 
 
 Interest, repudiation of : .653, 656 
 
 Majority, rule of 661 
 
 Marx, Karl, influence of Writings of .646, 658, 659 
 
 Militia, not favoured : . . . . . 667 
 
 Post Office aa example of Collective Ownership 666 
 
 Eelationship to Morality 054, 661, 606 
 
 Eevolutionary 646 
 
 Else of 646 
 
 Violence opposed by 657 
 
 War opposed by 652 
 
 Trade Unions, losing efficiency . .... 647 
 
 In Germany and France 648 
 
 Danube, Steamer 160, 175, 176, 184, 288 
 
 Darcy, Mr., C.P.E 017 
 
 Davidson & Woodward, blacklisted 576 
 
 Davidson, Joseph, blacklisted. 
 
 Davis, E. P., Counsel for 0. P. E 514 
 
 Denison, A. G 559 
 
 Dennison, P. G., Statements of re Overtime contradicted— (Evidence of Mc- 
 
 Creery) 708-712 
 
 Letters referred to by 796 
 
 Dennison, P. G., Evidence of ....634-644 
 
 American Labour Union — 
 
 Affiliation with 644 
 
 Socialism in 644 
 
 Overtime Work on C.P.E 035-038,641 
 
 Promotion withheld owing to connection with Union 040 
 
 Eailway Clerks, local organization of 638 
 
 Demand for increased pay 639 
 
 Fines for mistakes of 641 
 
 Eecognition, gained by Strikes - 643 
 
 Eogers, Frank, Murder of 039,640 
 
 U.B.E.E. Strike Bulletin, publication of 644 
 
 Affiliation of Eailway Clerks with 638 
 
 Demand of for Halton's reinstatement 040, 642 
 
 Men engaged in anticipation of Strike of 642 
 
 Socialism in 643 
 
 Departure Bay 263,268 
 
 Designs and Trade Marks Act i^^ 
 
 Detectives ^^g 
 
 SS^to'; Letter 'to Montreal ' Witness '/.C.P.E Strike by'. '. ■.:.■.::■■..: '. 582 
 Transfer of, to Montreal— (Evidence of Marpole) 705 
 
S2i INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 Page. 
 
 Dick, James, Evidence of 612-C22 
 
 Discharged by C.P.E. without reason assigned 614 
 
 Letter in Montreal ' Witness ' re Strike, signed by G14 
 
 Interview with Marpole re reinstatement of Halton C13 
 
 Railway Clerks, pay of OIG, 621 
 
 Transferred from Vancouver to Montreal . . 613 
 
 U. B. R. E.— 
 
 Action in Halton Case 618, 619 
 
 Dbjects of 618 
 
 Railway Clerks join 617,620 
 
 Doherty, Thomas 240, 675 
 
 Doherty, Thomas, Evidence of — 
 
 Miners compelled to remove from Extension to Ladysmitli. 
 
 Dominion Trades and Labour Congress 94 
 
 American Federation of Labour similar to — (Evidence of Twigg) 97 
 
 Distrust of Politicians by — (Evidence of Dales) 049 
 
 Duties of — (Evidence of Mc^ay) 235 
 
 Locals chartered by must belong to International of their Trade — 
 
 (Evidence of Bolden -. 219 
 
 (Evidence of McNiven) 206 
 
 Relation of to International Organizations— (Evidence by Watson) 691 
 
 Victoria Boilermakers affiliated with ,. 121 
 
 Victoria Shipwrights affiliated with '..... 150 
 
 Withdrawal of Nanaimo Miners from — - 
 
 (Evidence of Booth) 325 
 
 (Evidence of Neave) 304 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 320 
 
 Dominion Trades Union Act .... 270 
 
 Downie, Mr., C.P.R 625,629 
 
 Drinking among Workmen 268 
 
 Drunkards, how regarded by Unions — 
 
 (Evidence of Marpole) 687 
 
 (Evidence of Piper) 145, 146 
 
 Diuismuir, James — 
 
 Alleged dismissal of Employees for opposing election of — 
 
 (Evidence of Clinton) 502 
 
 (Evidence of Hall) 498-500 
 
 Attitude of, re Labour Organizations — 
 
 (Evidence of Jeffries) 62, 63 
 
 (Evidence of Mottishaw, jr.) 64 
 
 Negotiation for purchase of Extension property— (Evidence of Bramky) 77 
 Orders Miners to remove from Extension to Ladysmith — (Evidence of John- 
 eon 49 
 
 Propositions by, for settlement of Ladysmith Strike 754 
 
 (Evidence of Barnes) 356-361 
 
 Refusal of Manager Russell to support — (Evidence of Clinton) 501 
 
 Undertaking by, not to prosecute Estes 634, 793 
 
 Dunsmuir, James, Evidence of 237-248, 378-382 
 
 Alexandra Miners' Union 238 
 
 Capital, Obligations of, not recognized 379 
 
 Extension Mines, development of 241, 242 
 
 Ladysmith, preferable as place of residence to Extension 243, 244 
 
 Ladysmith Strike — 
 
 Arrangement to meet Committee representing individual Miners. .245-248 
 
JWDMX 829 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Page. 
 Dunsmuir, James— Ladysmith Strike— Con. 
 
 Pit Committees, objections to 240 
 
 Proposition for settlement 382 
 
 Eef iisal to recognize Miners' Union 239 
 
 Eemoval of Miners from Extension to Ladysmith 241-244, 380, 381 
 
 Unions, objections to 378,379 
 
 Members of discharged 379 
 
 Wellington Mine, Pay-roll of , 242 
 
 Dunsmuir, Martin 353^ 364 479 
 
 E. & W. Co. — Strike against by Steamshipmen 134 
 
 Employers' Organizations " 156 
 
 Empress^ Steamer 637, 708, 741 
 
 Strikers propose to tie up 175 
 
 Engineers, marine, hold aloof from other Workingmen — (Evidence of Bulley) . . 137 
 
 English Trade Union — Shipwrights' Union, Victoria, modelled after 147 
 
 English Typographical Society . . 374 
 
 Estes, George — 
 
 Action of, in support of U.B.E.E. Strike — 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 139 
 
 (Evidence of Johnstone) 566 
 
 Action of, relating to Steamshipmen's Strike — 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 164-166, 169 
 
 (Evidence of Troupe) 230,232 
 
 Asks support of Steamshipmen's Union for U.B.E.E. — (Evidence of Thomp- 
 son) 173-175 
 
 Circulars issued by 341, 366, 760, 780, 786 
 
 Letter to H. Poore re Socialism and A.E. of L 561, 623, 779 
 
 Power of, to order sympathetic Strike by Western Federation of Miners — 
 
 (Evidence of Booth) 823 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 428, 429 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 330-334 
 
 Statement in Montreal ' Star ' as to connection with Strikes 581 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) 593 
 
 Statement of, in Vancouver ' World ' re Strikes 787 
 
 Undertaking by James Dunsmuir not to prosecute 793 
 
 Extension — 
 
 Disadvantages of, as place of residence — 
 
 (Evidence of Bryden) 262, 263 
 
 (Evidence of Lauderbach) 280 
 
 (Evidence of McMillan) 288 
 
 (Evidence of Woodburn) _ 269 
 
 Miners compelled to remove from, to Ladysmith — 
 
 (Evidence of Aston) 85-87 
 
 (Evidence of Bryden) .264,265 
 
 (Evidence of Dunsmuir) ^ 241-244, 380, 381 
 
 (Evidence of Fontana) 83-85 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 424,428 
 
 (Evidence of Sherwood) 78, 79 
 
 (Evidence of Johnson) .49-3^ 
 
 (Evidence of Joseph) .46-49 
 
 (Evidence of Lauderbach , ■ • 286 
 
 (Evidence of Mochar) •• •• • ..79-82 
 
 (Evidence of Myllymaki) 82 
 
830 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Page. 
 Extension — Miners compelled to remove from, to Ladysmith — Con. 
 
 (Evidence of Pritchard) 45 
 
 (Evidence of Eobertson) 278 
 
 (Evidence of Tassin) 65-67 
 
 Preferable to Ladysmith — (Evidence of Barnes) 356 
 
 Extension Miners' Strike — (See ' Ladysmith Miners' Strike.') v 
 
 Extension Miners' Union — 
 
 Members of discharged — (Evidence of Pritchard) 38 
 
 Organization of — (Evidence of Mottishaw, senr.). . . . 53, 56, 57 
 
 Extension Mines — 
 
 Development of ..241,242 
 
 Memorandum re Opening of 752 
 
 No check weighman in • 53, 60 
 
 Wages 54,57 
 
 Factory Workers' Strike, Vancouver, correspondence and statement respect- 
 ing 804-809 
 
 Favoritism, by employers — (Evidence of Barnes) 353, 355, 363 
 
 Federation, Western, of Miners (8ee 'Western Federation of Miners'). 
 
 Fernie Miners' Strike — 
 
 Effect of on Business — (Evidence of Leiser) 127, 128 
 
 Vote of Miners on — (Evidence of Baker) '. 19 
 
 Fernie Miners' Union 255 
 
 Withdrawal of from W. F. of M. — 
 
 (Evidence of Foley) 675 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 512 
 
 Foley, Christopher, representative of U. B. R. E 515 
 
 Foley, Christopher, Evidence of .672-683 
 
 Alien Labour, importation of 674 
 
 Alien Labour Law, ineffective 673 
 
 Australian Strike 680 
 
 Collective Ownership advocated 677 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration approved 681, 68-'' 
 
 Contracts, violation of G77 679 680 
 
 Contract System opposed 676 
 
 Foreigners employed to intimidate Unionists. 680 
 
 Incorporation of Unions favoured 678 
 
 Internationalism favoured 674 
 
 Judges influenced by Class prejudice ". 682 
 
 Political Action by Unions approved 673 
 
 Socialism opposed _ _ _ _ 675 
 
 Sympathetic Strikes sometimes justifiable 677 
 
 Violence, not approved by Unionists 680 
 
 Western Federation of Miners — position of re Fernie Strike 675 
 
 Fontana, Joseph, Evidence of. Ordered to remove from Extension to Lady- 
 smith. . . ._ 83-85 
 
 Forcimer, Benjamin, Evidence of. Conversation of Woodburn and Shelton re 
 
 Organizer's Commission g^g 
 
 Foreign Interference — 
 
 Against Unionists — (Evidence of Foley) 680 
 
 No Boundary recognized — (Evidence of Barnes) 367 
 
 Objected to by Employers — 
 
 (Evidence of Hutchinson) _ ^4^ 
 
 (Evidence of Matthews) 433 
 
 (Evidence of Seabrooke) jOB 
 
INDEX 831 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Page. 
 Foreign Interference — Oon. 
 Objected to by Unionists — 
 
 (Evidence of Booth) 322, 323 
 
 (Evidence of Cook) Y37 
 
 (Evidence of Piper) 149 
 
 (Evidence of Eussell). 190 
 
 Prevails chiefly in newer Unions — (Evidence of Marpole). 687 
 
 Strikes caused by — (Evidence of Seabrooke) . . 108,111 
 
 Forest, H. P., Suspension of 558, 559, 569 
 
 Letter of Committee respecting 779 
 
 Fowler, Edward, Discharge of 542, 564 
 
 Frank Miners' Union 22, 30 
 
 Free School Books advocated — (Evidence of Bolden) 221 
 
 Free Speech, right of interfered with — 
 
 (Evidence of Anthony) 431 
 
 (Evidence of Hall) 400, 461, 493 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 411, 412, 425 
 
 (Evidence of Eeed 467, 468 
 
 Freight-handlers, C.P.R. -Letters and Wage Schedule of 776-778 
 
 Freight-handlers' Union , . . 539 
 
 {See U.B.E.E.) 
 
 Agreement of, with C.P.E 539, 562 
 
 Eefusal to Work with Scabs — (Evidence of Johnstone) 540, 541, 564 
 
 Friendly Societies Act, Incorporation under •. 180 
 
 Fullerton, James A., Evidence of. Sailors quit Work in sympathy with U.B.E.E 
 
 Strike 741, 742 
 
 Garnham, S., Telegrams from re U.B.E.E. Strike 596, 789 
 
 (Evidence of Watsan) 695 
 
 Garonne, Ship. Strike over repairing lOi-105, 131, 689 
 
 Gascoygne, Mr., C.P.E .583, 611 
 
 Gladstone Miners' Union 22 
 
 Gompers, Samuel 562 
 
 Government, changes in advocated by Socialists — (Evidence of Dales).. ..658, 659 
 Government interference in Labour Disputes (See also ' Arbitration, Compul- 
 sory ')— (Evidence of Baker) 73, 74 
 
 Approved — 
 
 (Evidence of Anthony) 433 
 
 (Evidence of Leiser) 128 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 97 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) 90 
 
 Proved beneficial in Femie Strike — (Evidence of Bolden) 219 
 
 Goward, A. T., Evidence of 192-195 
 
 Amalgamated Association of Street Eailway Employees, Constitution of 193 
 
 Power of as to Strikes 193 
 
 British Columbia Electric Eailway Grievances, mode of adjusting 192 
 
 Profit-sharing arrangements with Employees 192 
 
 Strike, under former management 194 
 
 Union, recognition of 194,195 
 
 Wages of Employees 195 
 
 Seattle, Street Eailway strike in 193 
 
 Great Northern Eailroad 622 
 
 G N. W. Telegraph Co. — Telegrams re Strike produced by 793 
 
832 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 ■ 
 
 Page. 
 Gregg, Charles A. — Evidence of — 
 
 Correctness of reports, documents and statements by Rosslarid Miner re 
 
 Strike 115,116 
 
 Grier, G. B.— Evidence of 712-714 
 
 Overtime work on C.P.K 712,713 
 
 Teamsters' sympathetic Strike 713 
 
 tJ,B.R.E. Strike, effect on trade 713 
 
 Grievance Committee 192 
 
 Of C.P.E. employees 579,601-605,613 
 
 Grievances, adjustment of— 
 
 (Evidence of Boyden) 266 
 
 (Evidence of Johnstone) 548 
 
 (Evidence of Neave) 305 
 
 (Evidence of Robins) 295-297 
 
 Grieves, Fred 353,363 
 
 Gurney Foundry Company, blacklisted 736 
 
 Calendar, blacklisting 804 
 
 Haggerty, James '. 280 
 
 Hall, Kev., L. W., conversation with re organization of Chinese — (Evidence of 
 
 Shenton) 508, 51, 513 
 
 Hall, Eev. L. W., Evidence of 450-461, 495-500 
 
 Chinaman, accidental killing of 495-497 
 
 Chinese, conversation with Shenton re organizing 452-460 
 
 Ill-treatment of 454 
 
 Organization, object of 456-458 
 
 Wages of 452 
 
 Free Speech, interference with 497 
 
 Intimidation of coroner's jury 497 
 
 Intimidation of voters 460, 461, 498, 500 
 
 Objection to disclose confidential commimicp.tions overcome 450, 451 
 
 Unionism a poor expedient 453 
 
 Hall, Richard, Evidence of 197-200 
 
 Coal business — Effect of Ladysmith strike on 197, 198 
 
 California market 199 
 
 Comox, supply from 199 
 
 Japan, importation from 198 
 
 Seattle, importation from 198,199 
 
 Compulsory arbitration favoured 200 
 
 Halliday, David, Evidence of 410-430, 472 
 
 Boycott disapproved 415 
 
 Chinese and Japanese, organization of ' . . . 426 
 
 Compulsory arbitration opposed 418 
 
 Conciliation impossible 418 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Strike — 
 
 Discharge of Unionists 420 
 
 Interview with manager 420 
 
 Sympathetic Strike not discusssed 472 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Union — 
 
 Aid to Ladysmith strikers voted by 420 
 
 Organization of 411-414,422 
 
 Wages of 425 
 
 Internationalism favoured 414 
 
 Militia 417 
 
INDEX 833 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 rialliday, David— Evidence of— Core. ^°^' 
 
 Eecognition of Union— What implied by /417 
 
 Eemoval of miners from Extension to Ladysmith 424-428 
 
 Socialism favoured 414 4x5 
 
 Strikes disapproved 445 418 
 
 Telegram Moyer to Baker re Ladysmith Strike 472 
 
 Trade Unionism ineffective 418 
 
 U.B.RE., Strike of V .".' . '. '. .' '. .' '. .' '. .428-430 
 
 Western Federation of Miners — 
 
 Political policy of 4I4 
 
 -Provision that Executive must sanction Agreements vpith Employers 
 
 approved of 43I 
 
 Eelation of, with U.B.E.E 428-430 
 
 Socialist party of B.C. aided by 422 
 
 White, Wm., discharged for political opinions 411 
 
 Halton, F. IE— 
 
 Affidavit by, presented 536, 775 
 
 Committee U.B.E.E. ask for reinstatement of — 
 
 (Evidence of Dennison) 640, 642 
 
 (Evidence of Dick) ......_ 612, 618, 619 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) 597, 601-605 
 
 Letter from Committee asking reinstatement of 781 
 
 Letter to from Wilson, Senkler & Bloomfield, declaring Alien Labour Act 
 
 inoperative 667 
 
 Suspension of by C.P.E. — (Evidence of Johnstone) 560 
 
 Transfer of, from Vancouver — (Evidence of Marpole) 705 
 
 Hammond, John, Evidence of 222,223 
 
 Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners — 
 
 Constitution of 222 
 
 Benefit system of 222 
 
 Eepresentation in 223 
 
 Strikes — Power of Executive as to 223 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration opposed 223 
 
 Conciliation advocated 223 
 
 Hanna, Marcus A 562 
 
 Harriday, Striker refused work at Seattle 591 
 
 Haywood, W. D. — ^Letters to Cumberland Miners' Union 758, 759 
 
 Hazlewodd, F 679 
 
 Hepburn, Walter, Evidence of — 
 
 Lumber Manufacturers refuse to sell to those employing Strikers 742-744 
 
 Higney, James 411,412,422 
 
 Hilton, Charles T. — Correspondence of with Charles Woodward 802, 803 
 
 Building Trades Council, Vancouver- 
 Constitution of 744 
 
 Blacklisting by 744 
 
 National Unions considered unfair by ,. . . . 745 
 
 Horda, Ship— Albion Iron Works lose contract for repairing 108 
 
 Hough, John • 512 
 
 Hours of Labour — 
 
 More work done under Short Hour System — (Evidence of Eussell) 191 
 
 Shorter— Obtained by Bricklayers, Victoria 191 
 
 Strike of Blacksmiths, Victoria, for reduction of 154, 155 
 
 >Strike of Boilermakers, Victoria, for reduction of 107 
 
 Strike of Carpenters, Victoria, for Shorter 216 
 
 36a— 53 
 
834 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 Page. 
 
 Huglies, Harrry „ 363 
 
 Himden, David, Evidence of — 
 
 Cumberland Strike not Sympathetic 476-478 
 
 Hunter, Hon. G., Chief Justice 1 
 
 Hutchison, John, representative of Cumberland Miners 382 
 
 Hutchinson, John, Evidence of 442-450,471,472 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Strike not considered sympathetic 471, 472 
 
 Officials of discharged 443, 446 
 
 Organization of 442,443 
 
 Internationalism approved 444 
 
 Reference of agreements with Employers to W. E. of M. approved 444 
 
 Telegram, Moyer to Baker re Ladysmith Strike '. . . .445, 448 
 
 Socialist Party 448, 449 
 
 Imperial Government — Relations of Trades Unions with — (Evidence of Kelly) . . 154 
 Incorporation of Trades Unions — 
 
 Advocated — (Evidence of Marpole) 685 
 
 Effect of, under Taff Vale Decision — (Evidence of Thompson) _ 377 
 
 Employers favour — (Evidence of Bolden) 217 
 
 Favoured — 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) 256 
 
 (Evidence of Foley) 078 
 
 (Evidence of Matthews) ■ ' 484 
 
 (Evidence of Robins) 303 
 
 (Evidence of Russell) ; 346 
 
 (Evidence of Watson) 689 
 
 Opposed — (Evidence of Thompson) 376 
 
 Regarded as questionable — • 
 
 (Evidence of Baker) 30 
 
 (Evidence of Bartley) 721 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 98 
 
 Some B. C. Unions incorporated — (Evidence of Baker) 30 
 
 Would facilitate Contracts — (Evidence of Kelly) 150 
 
 Would prevent Boycotts — (Evidence of McNiven) 207 
 
 ' Independent,' Vancouver 152, 170, 721 
 
 Blacklist published in. ... . 736 
 
 Industrial Union plan 501 
 
 Internationalism — 
 
 Advantages of — (Evidence of Thompson) . 374 
 
 Approved — 
 
 (Evidence of Barnes) 352, 308 
 
 (Evidence of Foley) 674 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 414 
 
 (Evidence of Hutchison) 444 
 
 (Evidence of Ladingham) 15Y 
 
 (Evidence of McKay 235 
 
 (Evidence of Penkith) . 115 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 98 
 
 (Evidence of Watson) . . 688 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) 609 
 
 As opposed to local Unions — (Evidence of Woodward) 717, 718 
 
 Disadvantages of — (Evidence of Robertson) 276 
 
 Dominion Trades and Labour Congress — Attitude respecting — 
 
 (Evidence of Bolden) 219 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 130 
 
INDEX 835 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Luternationalism — Con. 
 
 May be legitimate — (Evidence of Eobins) 300, 301 
 
 Objections to — 
 
 (Evidence of Bullen) 127 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) 255 
 
 Of capital — (Evidence of Baker 31^ Y4 
 
 Opposed — 
 
 (Evidence of Kelly) 152, 154 
 
 (Evidence of Eeed) 468 
 
 (Evidence of Russell) 188 
 
 (Evidence of Smith) 259 
 
 Principle of W. F. of M.— (Evidence of Baker) 13, 14, 25, 30 
 
 Intimidation — {8ee also ' Assaults, &c.') 
 
 Of coroner's jury — (Evidence of Hall) 49Y 
 
 Of non-unionists — (Evidence of Matthews) 480, 483 
 
 Of voters, &c. — 
 
 (Evidence of Hall) 460, 461, 498, 500 
 
 (Evidence of Clinton) 502 
 
 Inventors, poorly rewarded 651 
 
 Irvine, L., telegram from, to Samuel Burdette re Cumberland Strike 4G9 
 
 Isherwood, Thomas, Evidence of — 
 
 Ordered to remove from Extension to Ladysmith 78, Y9 
 
 Japan, Coal imported from 198, 708 
 
 Japanese — 
 
 Employed in place of Strikers — (Evidence of Matthews) 482 
 
 Number of, employed in Cumberland Mines — (Evidence of Matthews). .. . 500 
 W. F. of M. Executive sends instructions to organize — 
 
 (Evidence of Barber) 396-398 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 406-409 
 
 Jeffries, Joseph 239, 246, 448 
 
 Jeffries, Joseph, Evidence of — - 
 
 Refusal of Mr. Dunsmuir to recognize Trades Union 61, 63 
 
 Jenkins, Mr., Victoria 105 
 
 Joan, Steamer — Union men discharged from — 
 
 (Evidence of BuUey) 168 
 
 (Evidence of Thompson) , 172 
 
 Johns, John 38, 49, 64 
 
 Johnston, George 242 
 
 Johnston, George, Evidence of 49-52 
 
 Extension Miners assured that place of residence made no difference. ... 50 
 
 Ordered to remove to Ladysmith 49, 51 
 
 Johnston, F., Evidence of 727-729 
 
 Longshoremen's Strike — 
 
 Financial aid to Strikers 728 
 
 Refusal to handle unfair freight 727-729 
 
 Johnston, John 56 
 
 Johnstone, D. B., Evidence of 538-571 
 
 Arbitration impracticable 570 
 
 Boycott favoured S67 
 
 Treight handlers' Union 539 
 
 Incorporation of Unions opposed 569 
 
 Non-unionists, right to employ 568 
 
 ' Railway Employees' Journal '—Extracts from 565 
 
 36a— 53J 
 
836 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Page. 
 Joliiiitoue, D. B. — Evidence of — Con. 
 
 Sympathetic Strikes disapproved of 567, 568 
 
 United Brotlierliood of Eailway Employees — 
 
 American Labour Union, affiliation with 544 
 
 Constitution 543, 549 
 
 Divisions of 548 
 
 Fraternal benefits 543 
 
 Grievances, adjustment of 548 
 
 Membership of 544 
 
 Oath of 550 
 
 Socialism in 543, 561 
 
 U.B.E.E. Strike- 
 Agreement of freight-handlers with O.P.E 539» 562 
 
 American Labour Union, convention of 566 
 
 Assistance received from Brotherhood 546 
 
 Causes of 542 
 
 Constitutionality of 551, 552, 564 
 
 Discrimination against Members 556 
 
 Estes, George, action of 566 
 
 Circular issued by 566 
 
 Letter from, to H. Poore 561 
 
 Eorest, H. P., Suspension of 558, 559, 569 
 
 Halton, F. H., Suspension of 560 
 
 Loss in wages by 546 
 
 Notice of 559 
 
 Sanctioned by Executive .549, 553 
 
 Joseph, William — (Evidence of), Miners living at Extension compelled to remove 
 
 to Ladysmith 46, 49 
 
 Journeymen Bakers' Union, Vancouver, sympathetic Strike by — 
 
 (Evidence of Muir) 697-700 
 
 (Evidence of Nelson) 703, 704 
 
 (Evidence of Wilband) 700-702, 704 
 
 Expulsion from Union — (Evidence of Nelson) 702 
 
 Journeymen Bakers and Confectioners' International Union, Constitution of. . . 801 
 
 Journeymen Plumbers' Association, Victoria 91,185-187 
 
 Journejrmen Stonecutters' Association, N.A. — 
 
 Constitution of ". 233, 811 
 
 Powers of Executive re Strikes 233 
 
 Victoria Branch 236 
 
 Constitution of 811 
 
 Judges — 
 
 Influenced by Class Prejudices — (Evidence of Foley) 682 
 
 Powers of, under Alien Labour Act — (Evidence of King) 671 
 
 Kelly, David 122 
 
 Kelly, David, Evidence of ". 150-154 
 
 Agitators usully have good reason 152 
 
 Alien Labour should be excluded 153 
 
 Arbitration, appointment of Third Arbitrator 152 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration opposed 151 
 
 International Organiztions, disadvantageous 162, 154 
 
 Labour Literature 152 
 
 Navy, Unionists work with Carpenters of 154 
 
 Shipwrights' Union, Eule of as to preference of Local Men 151 
 
INDEX 837 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 T^ T ^ Page. 
 
 Is-err, J. C, Evidence of '733-735 
 
 Teamsters' Strike, Vancouver 733 
 
 Financial Aid to 733, 734 
 
 Eefusal to handle unfair Freight 733 
 
 Knights of Labour, Disbanded in Nanaimo 321 
 
 Eefused recognition 205 
 
 Kootenays, Business of, affected by Strikes 127 
 
 King, W. L., Mackenzie, Evidence of 474-476, 686-672 
 
 Alien Labour Act — 
 
 Consent of Attorney General not necessary for proceedings under. .668, 669 
 
 Convictions under 669 
 
 Enforcement of by Department of Labour 670 
 
 Judges, Powers of, regarding enforcement 671 
 
 Statements in letter of Wilson, Senkler & Bloomfield denied 668 
 
 Telegram, Baker to Moyer, re Ladysmith Strike produced 475 
 
 Telegram from, to C.P.R. Agent, Nanaimo, for Copy of Despatch, Baker to 
 
 Moyer 475 
 
 Kingham, Joshua, Evidence of 200-?f)l 
 
 Coal Business — 
 
 California Market 201 
 
 Effect of Ladysmith Strike on 200 
 
 Increase of price 200 
 
 Supply from Nanaimo 200, 201 
 
 Label, Union — (Evidence of McNiven) 207 
 
 Should be protected — (Evidence of Twigg) 133 
 
 Labour, competition of, Shorter Hours remedy for — (Evidence of Ladingham). . 157 
 
 Labour, Department of, re-enforcement of Alien Labour Act by — (Evidence of 
 
 King 670 
 
 Labour, interests of, opposed to Capitalism — (Evidenc of Dales) 646 
 
 Labour Legislation of Liberal Party 648 
 
 Labour Literature — 
 
 (Evidence of Kelly) 152 
 
 (Evidence of McNiven) ^ 210 
 
 ' Miners' Magazine ' 20, 21, 251, 252 
 
 Labour Saving Machinery — (See ' Machinery.') 
 
 Ladingham, Wm. J., Evidence of 154-158 
 
 Blacksmiths' Strike, Victoria 154, 155 
 
 Blacksmiths, Wages of 156, 156 
 
 Employers urged to organize by Unionists 156 
 
 Internationalism approved. IS**" 
 
 Labour-saving machinery 157 
 
 Shorter Hours as a means of absorbing surplus Labour 157 
 
 Unions, benefits of ^ • • • • ; • 156 
 
 Ladysmith, Miners compelled to remove from Extension to. (See 'Extension.') 
 
 Ladysmith Miners' Strike- 
 Alleged promotion of by Capitalists— (Evidence of Pritchard) 44 
 
 Arrangement for Committeee representing Individual Miners— (Evidence of 
 
 Dunsmuir) ; • • • • • • • • ■ ■•••.;• • ■ ^^^ 
 
 Causes of, discharge of Union Men and anticipation of Lockout — (Evidence 
 
 of Pritchard) 38, 43 
 
 Connection of, with U.B.E.E. Strike— (Evidence of Shenton). . ..... .529-531 
 
 Correspondence of Geo, Richards with Baker— (Evidence of Richards). .438-410 
 
833 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 Page. 
 Ladysmith Miners' Strike — Con, 
 
 Cumberland Miners asked to Strike in sympatty 'with' — 
 
 (Evidence of Mottishaw) 291-293 
 
 (Evidence of Robertson) 277-279 
 
 Documents produced. ... 584 
 
 Effect of, on Coal Business — 
 
 (Evidence of Hall) 197-200 
 
 (Evidence of Kingham) 200-201 
 
 Effect on General Business — (Evidence of Leiser) 127 
 
 Lockout, Notice of given Miners — (Evidence of Pritchard) 88 
 
 Loss in wages of — 
 
 (Evidence of McMillan) 288 
 
 (Evidence of Robertson) 277 
 
 Mem. of grounds for 748 
 
 Miners decline to vrork pending inquiry 7 
 
 (Evidence of Baker) 24 
 
 Miners' Executive, meeting in aid of — (Evidence of Shenton 519 
 
 Minutes' of Miners' meeeting 748, 749 
 
 Minutes of Joint Board meeting at Nanaimo, appointing delegates re 
 
 settlement 784 
 
 Proposition from employer re settlement 754 
 
 Proposition rejected by Miners — (Evidence of Barnes) 356, 361 
 
 Recognition of Union refused — 
 
 (Evidence of Jeffries) 62 
 
 Evidence of Dunsmuir) 239 
 
 Report of delegates as to settlement . . 785 
 
 Statement by Miners 748 
 
 Sympathetic Strike at Union Mines, Comox — (Evidence of Carroll) 250 
 
 Telegram, Baker to Moyer, asking consent to sympathetic strike by Cumber- 
 land Miners — (Evidence of King) .' 475 
 
 Telegram, Moyer to Baker 755 
 
 (Evidence of Hutchinson) 445-448 
 
 Telegrams produced by Ladysmith operators 763 
 
 Western Federation of Miners' support — 
 
 (Evidence of Baker) 23 _ 
 
 (Evidence of Mottishaw) 291-293 
 
 Ladysmith Miners' Union, organization of — 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 336, 337 
 
 (Evidence of Mottishaw, senr.) 53, 56 
 
 (Evidence of Lauderbach) 280 
 
 Ladysmith, preferable to Extension as place of residence — (Evidence of Carroll) 255 
 
 (Evidence of Dunsmuir) 243, 244, 380, 381 
 
 (Evidence of McMillan) 288 
 
 (Evidence of Smith) 259 
 
 Land values, taxation of, advocated — (Evidence of Barnes) 368 
 
 Larmour, Mr., C.P.R G17, 620 
 
 Lauderbach, Samuel 55 
 
 Lauderbach, Samuel, Evidence of 279-287 
 
 Agreements with employees 285, 287 
 
 Baker, J. A., Statements of 286, 286 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Strike 286 
 
 Extension not desirable place of residence 280 
 
 Removal of Miners from Extension to Ladysmith 285 
 
 Pit Committee 284 
 
INDEX 839 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Lauderbacli, Samuel— Evidence of— Con. 
 
 Ladysmith Miners Union, organization of 280 
 
 Unionism, advantages and disadvantages of 284 
 
 Western Federation of Miners, objections to. 283 
 
 Laverock, David 559 
 
 Laveroclv, David, Evidence of — 
 
 Causes of U.B.R.E. strike 517, 518 
 
 Lawson, J. P., letter to Cumberlanad Miners' Union 759 
 
 Leiser, Simeon — (Evidence of) 127-129 
 
 Arbitration, appointment of third arbitrator 128,129 
 
 Government interference in labour disputes approved 128 
 
 Strikes, effect of on business conditions 127, 128 
 
 Le Eoi Mine — 
 
 Action by victim of accident in 682 
 
 Strike at 273 
 
 Letter Carriers' Association 219 
 
 Little, Francis D . . .353, 434 
 
 Little, Francis D.— (Evidence of) 487-489 
 
 Contracts, individual, offered to Cumberland Miners 487 
 
 Recognition of Union refused 488 
 
 Lookouts — 
 
 At Ladysmith Mines anticipated by strike — (Evidence of Pritcbard) 38 
 
 Of Shipwrights, Victoria — (Evidence of BuUen) 124 
 
 Locomotive Engineers, Brotherhood of 545 
 
 Locomotive Firemen, Brotherhood of 545 
 
 Longshoremen's strike, Vancouver — 
 
 (Evidence of Johnston) 727 
 
 (Evidence of Noonan) 730-732 
 
 (Evidence of Russell) 724 
 
 Constitutionality of — (Evidence of Noonan) 731, 732 
 
 Financial aid to — 
 
 (Evidence of Johnston) 728 
 
 (Evidence of Russell) 725 
 
 Unfair freight, refusal to handle — 
 
 (Evidence of Johnston) 727-729 
 
 (Evidence of Noonan 730 
 
 Longshoremen's Union, Vancouver 163 
 
 Longshoremen, wages of 181 
 
 Los Angelos ' Times ' 100 
 
 - Lumber Dealers, Boycotting by T26, 741-744 
 
 Luxton, Mr., Counsel for Wellington Colleries Company 1 
 
 MoAndrew, M 679 
 
 McBride, striker, fined for assault 137, 138 
 
 McCloskey, Capt -227 
 
 McCloskey, W 47- 242 
 
 McCreery,J 630 ^gj 
 
 McCreery, J.— (Evidence of) ^aq '^1 1 
 
 Increases in pay, C.P.R 709,711 
 
 Overtime work by clerks '^08, 712 
 
 McDonald, Bernard ,•.••;•■■■,■■■■■;,■■■■■■■■■;■;■■ ^^^ 
 
 McDonald, Sarah— (Evidence of). Boarding house boycotted by unionists dur- 
 ing U.B.R.E. Strike v 695-697 
 
 Mclnnis, Mr., C.P.R ^13 
 
840 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 Page. 
 
 McKay, William— (Evidence of) 233-237 
 
 Arbitration, compulsory, disapproved 234 
 
 Conciliation Act, B.C 234 
 
 Dominion Trade and Labour Congress, duties of 235 
 
 Internationalism advocated 235 
 
 Stonecutters' Association of North America — 
 
 Constitution of ; 233 
 
 Powers of Executive re Strikes 233 
 
 Victoria branch of 23G 
 
 Stonecutters' Strike, Victoria 234 
 
 Caused by workman being required to pay for damage 234 
 
 Settled by conciliation 234 
 
 Trade and Labour Council, Victoria, settlement of disputes by 236 
 
 Trades TTnions, advantages of 237 
 
 Moral effect of, beneficial 237 
 
 McKinnon, Ales., charged with assault 138 
 
 McMicking, E. N., Evidence of. Strike of Telephone Employees in Victoria 
 
 in sympathy with Vancouver Strikers 195-197 
 
 McMillan, Thomas— (Evidence of) 287-289 
 
 Ladysmith preferable to Extension as place of residence 288 
 
 Ladysmith Strike, loss of wages by 288 
 
 Unions not necessary 288 
 
 McMillan, William, J.— (Evidence of) 574-579 
 
 Blacklist of C.P.R 574 
 
 Blasklisting by Unions 576 
 
 Teamsters' Strike, Vancouver 576-578 
 
 Agreement by Merchants to employ Non-unionists 576 
 
 Double rates charged by Non-unionist teamsters 578' 
 
 U.B.E.E. Strike, effect of, on business 575, 577 
 
 McMurtry, Joseph — (Evidence -of). Conversation between Woodbum and Shen- 
 
 ton re Organizer's Commission 350 
 
 McNeil, John 690, 797 
 
 McNiven, James D.— (Evidence of) 201-213 
 
 Agitators, should be suppressed by Unions 208 
 
 American Academy of Political and Social Science, views of, on Unionism 
 
 controverted 209 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration favoured 211 
 
 Conciliation 211 
 
 Dominion Trades and Labour Congress 206 
 
 Difficulty of enforcing awards 213 
 
 Incorporation of Unions would prevent boycotts 207 
 
 International, advantages of 204 
 
 Label, Union 207 
 
 Labour Literature 210 
 
 Politics in Union, advocated 208 
 
 Socialism, growth of, in Unions 210 
 
 Strikes, feeling against among unionists 211,212 
 
 Typographical Union — 
 
 Chapel, functions of 201 
 
 Grievances, how dealt with 202 
 
 International, constitution of 203 
 
 International, Powers of as to strikes .202-204 
 
 Eepresentation of local bodies ; , 205 
 
INDEX 841 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Page. 
 McNiven, James D.— Evidence of— Typographical Union— Con. 
 
 Strikes, notices of, required 202 
 
 Sympathetic strikes, powers of International Executive as to 204 
 
 Unions encourage sobriety and morals 209 
 
 Machinery, labour-saving 157 
 
 Machinists, International Order of 545 
 
 Action of, in U.B.K.E. Strike— 
 
 (Evidence of Watson) 689 
 
 (Evidence of Marpole) 707 
 
 Machinists' Strike, Seattle 103 
 
 Maintenance of way men, Union of 645 
 
 Maley, Mr 479 
 
 Manual training. Unions opposed to — (Evidence of Bolden) 222 
 
 Marion, Arthur — (Evidence of W. Wilson), employing plumber posted as un- 
 fair 185-187 
 
 Marpole, E. — 
 
 Agreement made by, with Strikers 163, 164 
 
 Employment of spotters by — (Evidence of Foley) 681 
 
 Interview of U.B.E.E. Committee with, asking for reinstatement of Hal- 
 ton — 
 
 (Evidence of Dennison) 640, 642 
 
 (Evidence of Dick) 613 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) .579, 601, 605 
 
 Notice of Strike to, by U.B.E.E 559 
 
 Marpole, K.— (Evidence of) 084-688,705-708 
 
 Blacklist, C.P.E., denied 705 
 
 Clearance system, operation of 706 
 
 Coal, importation of from Japan 708 
 
 Compulsory arbitration favoured 085, 686 
 
 Third arbitrator should be Judge 685 
 
 Compulsory investigation of labour disputes proposed 685 
 
 Trades Unions — 
 
 Approved 687 
 
 Attitude of C.P.E. towards 684 
 
 Incorporation of, advocated 685 
 
 Moral influence of 687 
 
 U.B.E.E., objections to 684 
 
 U.B.E.E. Strike- 
 Effects of, on traffic 707 
 
 Extent of "^07 
 
 Pieketting by Strikers 707 
 
 Marx, Karl, influence of works of 415, 646 
 
 Master Plumbers' Asociation, Victoria ■^■- •_• •■91 
 
 Matthews, John-(Evidenee of) 4,.s-4,s<, 500-504 
 
 Chinaman, accident to _ 502 
 
 Chinese, employed in place of Strikers 482 
 
 Number of, in mines •. 500 
 
 Compulsory arbitration, impracticable 485 
 
 Cumberland Strike, considered sympathetic 481 
 
 Employees, Cumberland Mines, number of 500 
 
 Foreign interference objected to 483 
 
 Incorporation of Unions, favoured. . .. • ■• ••484 
 
 Individual contracts, company prepared to accept ..485-487 
 
 Interview with Union Committee 481 
 
842 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Page. 
 Matthews, John — ^Evidence of — Oon. 
 
 Intimidation of Non-unionists 480, 483 
 
 Japanese, employed in place of Strikers 482 
 
 'Number of, in mines 500 
 
 Loss of wages by Strike 500 
 
 Eecognition of Union refused 481 
 
 Unionists discharged 479, 481 
 
 Voters, not intimidated . . " 479 
 
 Wages of miners 478 
 
 Warring, Arthur 479 
 
 White, Walter, discharge of 479 
 
 Meiss, J. C— (Evidence of) 726-727 
 
 Boycotting by capitalists 720 
 
 Liimber refused to employers of Union labour 727 
 
 Michel Miner's Union 22, 255 
 
 Sympathetic Strike by — (Evidence of Baker) 16 
 
 Middle class, absence of in B.0 647 
 
 Militia — 
 
 Attitude of W. F. of M. respecting — 
 
 (Evidence of Baker) 29 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 417 
 
 Not favoured by Socialists — (Evidence of Dales) 667 
 
 Objections of Unionists to — (Evidence of Twigg) 133 
 
 Mine Owners' Association — Evidence of Baker) •. . . 74 
 
 Discrimination against Unionists by — (Evidence of Thompson) 370, 371 
 
 Miners' and Mine Labourers' Protective Association, Nanaimo . .295, 352 
 
 Agreement of Vancouver Coal Company with 752 
 
 Miners' ' Magazine ' 809, 811 
 
 Extracts from 20, 21, 251, 252, 335 
 
 Socialism inculcated by 27, 252 
 
 Miners' Strike (general) in 1901 — (Evidence of Thompson) 372 
 
 Miners' Western Federation of. {See ' Western Federation of Miners.') 
 
 Mines, collective ownership of, favoured — (Evidence of Dales) 652-655 
 
 Mochar, John — (Evidence of)' compelled to remove from Extension to Lady- 
 smith 79,82 
 
 Molly Maguires 265 
 
 Montreal ' Star,' extracts from, re U.B.E.E. strike 581, 782 
 
 Montreal ' Witness,' Letter of C.P.E. employees to, re U.B.R.E. Strike . .582, 614, 783 
 
 Morality, Socialist attitude respecting — (Evidence of Dales) 654, 661, 666 
 
 Moran Bros., Seattle fOl 
 
 Morrisey Miners' Union 22, 255 
 
 Mottishaw, Samuel K., junr.— (Evidence of) 38, 40, 239, 337, 364 
 
 Authorized request to Baker to organize Union — (Evidence of Shenton) . . 522 
 
 Letter of, to Cumberland Miners' Union 589 
 
 Mottishaw, Samuel K., junr. . .' 38, 40, 239, 337, 364 
 
 Baker, J. A., statements of 289 
 
 Blacklisting 294 
 
 Eecognition of Union refused 64 65 
 
 Eesolution of Ladysmith Miners asking Cumberland Miners to strike. .289, 290 
 
 W. F. of M., financial aid from, to Ladysmith Strikers 291-293 
 
 Mottishaw, Samuel, senr 37, 40 
 
 Mottishaw, Samuel, senr. — (Evidence of) 52-61 
 
 Alien labour qq 
 
 Check weigh man, none in Extension Mine 53 qq 
 
INDEX 843 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Mottlshaw, Samuel, senr.— Evidence of— Con. ^^^^' 
 
 International organizations favoured 59 
 
 Ovganization of Union at Extension 53, 56, 57 
 
 Wages of Miners 54 57 53 
 
 Moyer, Charles, President, Western Federation of Miners- 
 Telegram from Baker to, asking consent to sympathetic strike at Cum- 
 berland — (Evidence of King) ' . . 475 
 
 Telegram from, to Baker, re Ladysmith Strike 445-448, 755 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) • 510, 586 
 
 Telegram from, to stop supply of Coal to C.P.R.— (Evidence of Shenton) 524', 589 
 
 Muir, William D.— 
 
 Agreement with Employees 799-801 
 
 List of parties who quit dealing at bakery of 798 
 
 Muir, Wililam D. — (Evidence of) — 
 
 Boycotted for supplying bread to C.P.N. Company boats 097-700 
 
 Murray, baker, boycotted 736 
 
 Myllimaki, Jacob — (Evidence of). Ordered to remove from Extension to Lady- 
 smith 82 
 
 Nanaimo — 
 
 Coal of 200, 201 
 
 Conditions of labour at — (Evidence of Pritchard) 45 
 
 Telegrams produced by operator at 763 
 
 Nanaimo Miners' Union 30, 240, 248, 295, 352 
 
 Affiliated with W.F. of M 307,316,318 
 
 Documents respecting, produced 584 
 
 Minutes of Joint Board Meeting 781 
 
 Papers produced by Shenton re affairs of 789 
 
 Preferred to International organization — (Evidence of Carroll) 258 
 
 Proposed Agreement of Western Euel Company, with 735 
 
 Report of Executive Committee 784 
 
 Strike of 303, 343 
 
 Statement of vote on affiliation with W.E. of M 755 
 
 Nanaimo River 381 
 
 Narrow work in mines 363, 364 
 
 National Trades Congress 124, 206, 739, 745 
 
 National Union of Bricklayers, Masons and Carpenters — 
 
 Considered unfair — (Evidence of Hilton) , 745 
 
 Organization of — (Evidence of Cook) 737 
 
 Navy, Unionists work with carpenters of — (Evidence of Kelly) 154 
 
 Neave, William — (Evidence of) 304-316 
 
 Agreements, as to notice of Strikes 306 
 
 Arbitration approved! • 312 
 
 Conciliation favoured 312 
 
 Grievances, method of adjustment of 305 
 
 Incorporation of Unions favoured 312 
 
 Socialism, extent of, in Nanaimo Unions 314, 318 
 
 Various kinds of 315 
 
 Strike, caused by dispute over payment for safety lamps 306 
 
 Unions, advantage of to Employers 305 
 
 Wages of Miners ■ 312 
 
 Western Federation of Miners — 
 
 Ballot of Nanaimo Miners on affiliation 307, 310 
 
 Contract with Employers referred to 308 
 
844 mnsx 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Page. 
 Neave, William — Evidence of — Western Federation of Miners — Con. 
 
 Power of Executive to order sympathetic Strikes 307 
 
 Qartz Miners, influence of, in 313 
 
 Socialism of 310 
 
 Nelson, George — (Evidence of) 702-704 
 
 Bakers' Union, Strike of 703, 704 
 
 Expelled from Bakers' Union for action in sympathetic Strike 703, 704 
 
 New Vancouver Company, collieries 240, 351 
 
 New Westminster Street Eailway Employees' Union 192 
 
 New Zealand, compulsory arbitration in — 
 
 Awards only favour men on rising market — (Evidence of Barnes) 3G8 
 
 Satisfactory operation of^(Evidence of Foley) 681 
 
 System not suited to Canada — ■ 
 
 (Evidence of Baker) 73 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 96 
 
 Non-unionists — (See also ' Trade Unions Strikes,' &c.) — 
 Assaults on — 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 137, 138, 142 
 
 (Evidence of Troupe) 229 
 
 Double rates charged by, during Strike — 
 
 (Evidence of, desired) 87 
 
 (Evidence of McMillan) 578 
 
 Intimidation of — (Evidence of Matthews) 480, 483 
 
 Printers, position of — (Evidence of Twigg) 100 
 
 Right of, to employment — (Evidence of Anthony) 432 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 168 
 
 (Evidence of Johnstone) 568 
 
 (Evidence of Eichards) 438 
 
 (Evidence of Thompson) 174 
 
 Union men refuse to work with — (Evidence of Bullen) 122 
 
 Noonan, George — (Evidence of) 730, 732 
 
 Longshoremen's Strike 730, 732 
 
 Constitutionality of 731, 732 
 
 Refusal of men to handle unfair freight 730 
 
 Northern Pacific Railroad 622,625 
 
 Northfield 303, 351 
 
 Northfield Coal Mine, closing of 296, 303 
 
 Northport Smelter, Strike at 373 
 
 Oath— 
 
 Of Steamshipmen's Society of B.0 134 
 
 Of U.B.R.E 550 
 
 OfW.F. ofM 30 
 
 O'Brien, Andrew 86 
 
 O'Farrell, journalist 680 
 
 Organization — (See also ' Trade Unions ') — 
 
 As solution to labour problem — (Evidence of Baker) 73 
 
 Of employers, favoured by trade unionists — (Evidence of Ladingham). .156, 157 
 
 Eight of 5, 6 
 
 Organizer — 
 
 Commission of — 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) 349 
 
 (Evidence of Forcimer) 349 
 
 (Evidence of McMurtry) , . . . ,., 350 
 
INDEX 845 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 r\ ■ r-, ■ Fuse. 
 
 Urgauizer — Commission of — Con. 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) '. , ..348-349 
 
 (Evidence of "Woodburu) 272 
 
 Executive of W.r. of il. act as— (Evidence of Eichards) 441 
 
 Salary of — (Evidence of Baker) 32 
 
 Otter, steamer 229 
 
 Overtime work on C.P.E.— (Evidence of Dennison) C35-638, 641 
 
 (Evidence of Grier) 712, T13 
 
 (Evidence of McCreery) 708-712 
 
 Oxford stoves and ranges, circular blacklisting 804 
 
 Oyster Bay 280, 282 
 
 Pacific Coast Company 623 
 
 Peacey, Albert H. — (Evidence of). Telegram relating to Strike, produced. .451, 487 
 
 Penkith, George— (Evidence of) 112-121 
 
 Arbitration, favoured 118 
 
 Ballot, Strikes voted on by 118 
 
 Boilermakers' and Iron Shipbuilders' Union of America, constitution and 
 
 membership of 112 
 
 Boilermakers' Strike, Victoria 113 
 
 Garonne contract regarded as unfair 113 
 
 Strike due to decision of Executive in Kansas 114 
 
 Boycotting 119 
 
 Dominion Trades Congress, affiliation with 121 
 
 Internationalism, advantages of 115 
 
 Recognition of Union 118 
 
 Shop Committee, duties of 119 
 
 Unfair Employers 119 
 
 Unionism, wages increased by 120 
 
 Pension scheme, C.P.R 789-792 
 
 Peters, Mr., C.P.E 639, 640 
 
 Statement of re blacklisting by railroads — (Evidence of McMillan) 574 
 
 Picketting — 
 
 (Evidence of Baker) 34, 35 
 
 (Evidence of Browne) 627 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 95 
 
 In Steamshipmen's Strike — 
 
 (Evidence of Bulky) 141, 142 
 
 (Evidence of Troupe) 228 
 
 In U.B.E.E. Strike— (Evidence of Marpole) 707 
 
 Pinkerton detectives 29 
 
 Piper, Thomas— (Evidence of) 144-150 
 
 Agreements with Employers 149, 150 
 
 Alien Labour Law needed 149 
 
 Boycotting 1^' 
 
 Cripples, treatment of by Unions _ 146 
 
 Dominion Trades and Labour Congress, affiliation of Shipwrights with 150 
 
 Drunkards, how regarded by Unions 145, 146 
 
 Foreign interference opposed 149 
 
 Incorporation of Unions 150 
 
 Eecognition of Union, what is meant by 147 
 
 Shipwrights' Union modelled after English Trade Union. 147 
 
 Shipwrights' strike, Victoria, caused by employment of non-residents. .144, 148 
 Socialism ^ l*^ 
 
84fi INDEX 
 
 6A EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Page. 
 
 Piper, Thomas — Evidence, of — Con. 
 
 Sympathetic strikes opposed as an American institution 149 
 
 Trade unionism, advantages of '• . • 148 
 
 W<7ges of shipwrights 147, 148 
 
 Pit hoss, authority of 265-267 
 
 Pit Committee, Miners' ; .240, 257, 275, 384, 344 
 
 Phimbers' Association, Journeymen, Victoria 91, 185-187 
 
 Plumbers' Association, Master, Victoria 91 
 
 Plumbers, Victoria, wages of 91, 186 
 
 Political and Social Science, Extract from Annals of Academy of 209 
 
 Political parties, Socialist view of — (Evidence of Ja.cs) 648 
 
 Politics in Trade Unions — 
 
 (Evidence of Baker) 34 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) 90 
 
 Advocated 
 
 (Evidence of Dales) 648, 655 
 
 (Evidence of Foley) 673 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 415 
 
 (Evidence of McNiven) 208 
 
 By ' Miners' Magazine ' 252 
 
 By ' Railway Employees' Journal ' 565 
 
 American Labour Union enegage in — (Evidence of Twigg) 94 
 
 Characteristic of the West — (Evidence of Bartley) 723 
 
 Disapproved — (Evidence of Watson) 693 
 
 Disorganizing influence of — (Evidence of Thompson). 370, 378 
 
 Should be excluded — 
 
 (Evidence of Booth) 319 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 335, 342 
 
 Poore, H., Letter of George Estes to, re Socialism and American Federation of , 
 
 Labour . .561, 023, 779 
 
 Porter, H. T., Evidence of. Cipher Telegrams re Ladysmith Strike 505, 500 
 
 Posting as Unfair. (See ' Blacklisting ' and ' Boycotting.') 
 
 Princess Louise, Steamer 135, 140 
 
 Princess May, Steamer 135, 159, 173-175, 224, 697 
 
 Pritchard, James 448 
 
 Pritchard, James, Evidence of 37-43 
 
 Discharge of Union Miners ^ . . . 38 
 
 Miners compelled to remove from Extension to Ladysmith 45 
 
 Organization of Miners' Union at Extension 87 
 
 Preference for International organization 41 
 
 Strike on account of discharge of Unionists and in anticipation of Lockout. . 43 
 
 Vancouver Coal Co. — Conditions of Labour 45 
 
 Profit-sharing — B. C. Electric Eailway adopt system of — (Evidence of Goward) . 192 
 
 Profit, unnecessary for Production — (Evidence of Dales) . 551 
 
 ' Province,' Daily, Vancouver . . Q12 
 
 Public Interests, how regarded by Strikers — (Evidence of Thompson) 181 
 
 Purvis, Mr., C.P.E 70g 
 
 Quartz Miners 22 
 
 Influence of in W. F. of M 313^ 3;1q 
 
 Queen City, Steamer I75 
 
 Quigley, M. T., Evidence of. Telegrams re U.B.E.E. Strike produced 632-634 
 
INDEX 847 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Page. 
 Eailway Clerks, C.P.E.— 
 
 Demand for increase of Pay — (Evidence o£ Dennison) 039 
 
 Fines for Mistakes of — (Evidence of Dennison) 641 
 
 Organized in connection with the U.B.E.E.^ 
 
 (Evidence of Dennison) 038 
 
 (Evidence of Dick) G17, 020 
 
 Overtime, work of — 
 
 (Evidence of Dennison) G35-038, 041 
 
 (Evidence of Grier) 712, 713 
 
 (Evidence of McCreery) 708-712 
 
 Pay of— (Evidence of Dick) CIC, 021 
 
 Strike of (U.B.R.E.) — (Evidence of Dennison) 042 
 
 Eailway Conductors, Order of 545 
 
 ' Eailway Employees Journal ' 779, 811 
 
 Extracts from 565 
 
 Eailway Telegraphers, Order of 545 
 
 Eailway Trainmen, Order of 545 
 
 Eamsay, Mr., Wabash Eailroad 685 
 
 Eecognition of Union — 
 
 By B.C. Electric Eailway — (Evidence of Goward) 192 
 
 Cumberland Strike a fight for 504 
 
 Only won by Strikes — (E\'idence of Dennison) 643 
 
 Wliat is implied by — ■ 
 
 (Evidence of Authony) 432 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 417 
 
 (Evidence of Thompson) #,. 174 
 
 Eeed, James— (Evidence of) 461-469 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Union — 
 
 Baker, J. A., Statements of 462 
 
 Opposition to. . ' 403, 466 
 
 Organization of 461,467 
 
 Free Speech 467, 468 
 
 Internationalism opposed 468 
 
 Intimidation of Non-unionists 404, 468 
 
 Unions approved 469 
 
 Eents in Vancouver 169 
 
 Eevolutionary Socialism, exposition of — (Evidence of Dales) 615-667 
 
 Eicharde, G. ~M.., representative of Cumberland Miners 382 
 
 Eichards! George, Evidence of 436-442, 469-471 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Strike — 
 
 Cause of ^41 
 
 Correspondence with J. A. Baker in reference to 438-440 
 
 Not a sympathetic Strike 470 
 
 Telegram from L. Irwin to S. Burdette 469 
 
 Telegram to Baker announcing decision to strike 470 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Union, organization of 436 
 
 Executive W. F. of M., duties of 441 
 
 Non-unionists, right to employ 438 
 
 Eiddell, Mr., C.P.E 613-615. 619 
 
 Bithet, Steamer 698, 099 
 
 Eobertson, Andrew o^o o^o 
 
 Eobertson, Andrew, Evidence of ilt 
 
 Agitators •■ ^H 
 
 Baker, James A., Statements of 278, 279 
 
848 IKDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1934 
 
 Page. 
 Eobertson, Andrew — Evidence of — Con. 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration opposed 276 
 
 Conciliation approved 276 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Strike — Eequest for by Ladysmitb Miners 277, 279 
 
 Internationalism disadvantageous 2r6 
 
 Ladysmitb Strike, loss in wage by 277 
 
 Pit Committee 275, 276 
 
 Eemoval of Miners from Extension to Ladysmitb 278 
 
 Union, advantages of 275 
 
 Eobins, S. M., Evidence of 294-304 
 
 Chinese labour 298 
 
 Coal Mines, exhaustion of 304 
 
 Compulsory arbitration, objections to 302 
 
 Incorporation of Unions favoured 303 
 
 Internationalism, may be legitimate 300, 301 
 
 Nanaimo Miners' Union 295 
 
 Vancouver Coal Co 294 
 
 Agreement to employ Union men only 295 
 
 Grievances, adjustment of 295, 297 
 
 Miners, nationality of 303,298 
 
 Pit Committee 297 
 
 Sales of lots by 298,303 
 
 Unions, advantages of 302 
 
 Unions, experience with 299 
 
 Wages paid 297 
 
 Wages, reduction of, accepted by Unions 296 
 
 Eoger, Frank, murder of 639 
 
 Eossland ' Evening World ' . . 116 
 
 Eosslanad ' Miner ' , 115 
 
 Eossland Miners' Strike — 
 
 Accuracy of Statements, reports, &e., respecting — (Evidence of Gregg). .115, 116 
 
 Effects of, on business — (Evidence of Leiser) 128 
 
 Eowe, Eev., Elliott S., Commissioner 1 
 
 Eoyal City Mills 726 
 
 Eussell, F. T., Evidence of 723-726 
 
 U.B.E.E. Strike- 
 Blacklisting, in aid of 725 
 
 Headquarters of Committee of • .. ..723-724 
 
 Sympathetic Strikes 724 
 
 Financial aid to 725 
 
 Eussell, John, Evidence of 187-191 
 
 Agitators regarded as unnecessary . 190 
 
 Bricklayers Union, Victoria 187 
 
 Arbitration, satisfactory working of 189 
 
 Constitution of , . . . 187 
 
 Hours of Labour, reduced 191 
 
 Wages of 189 
 
 Withdrawal from International Union 188 
 
 Brick Manufacturers, combination of 191 
 
 Chinese Labour ,. 190 
 
 Internationalism favoured by Victoria T. and L. Council ■ . , . . 188 
 
 Sympathetic Strikes . 190 
 
 Eussell, Thomas, Eesignation of as Manager for political reasons — 
 
 (Evidence of Clinton) 501 
 
 (Evidence of Hall) . . . . .^ ... 499 
 
INDEX 849 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No, 36a 
 
 Page. 
 
 Russell, Thomas, Evidence of 343-347 
 
 Agreement proposed with Miners 344 
 
 Incorporation of Unions favoured 364 
 
 Pit Committee 344 
 
 Strike of Nanaimo Coal Miners over allowance for safety lamps . . 343 
 
 Unions, advantages of to Meen 345 
 
 Disadvantages to Employers 34 
 
 Sailors on Mimpress of India quit work in sympathy with Strike — (Evidence of 
 
 Fullerton) 741-742 
 
 Saloon 268 
 
 Scabs— ((See also 'Unfair,' 'Blacklisting,' &c.)— 
 
 Posting of 251 
 
 Eefusal of Freight-handlers on C.P.E. to work with — (Evidence of John- 
 stone 540, 541, 564 
 
 Unionists refuse to board with — (Evidence of McDonald) 695-697 
 
 Seabrooke, Bagster R., Evidence of 101-112, 117 
 
 Arbitration — Third Arbitrator should be appointed by Judge 110 
 
 Boilermakers' Strikes, Victoria — 
 
 For shorter hours (over contract for repairing Ship Topeha 107 
 
 Sympathetic Strike over contract for repairing Ship Garonne. .101-105, 111 
 
 Wages, loss of by Strikes 112 
 
 Boilermakers, Wages and hours of 109 
 
 Contract to repair Garonne signed before Seattle Strike 117 
 
 Foreign influence a cause of Strikes 108, 111 
 
 Union Men preferred to Non-unionists 107 
 
 Seattle — 
 
 Coal imported from 198, 199 
 
 Machinists and Moulders' Strike at 102 
 
 Street Railway Strike at 193 
 
 Secret Service, C.P.R., Affidavit of F. J. Halton respecting 775 
 
 Sharp, Mine Manager 73, 83, 237 
 
 Shenton, Thomas J • 447, 448 
 
 Conversation with M. Woodburn re Commission as Organizer — 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) 34!) 
 
 (Evidence of Forcimer) 349 
 
 (Evidence of McMurtry) 350 
 
 (Evidence of Woodburn) 272 
 
 Conversation of, with Rev. L. W. Hall re organization of Chinese— (Evi- 
 dence of Hall) 452-460 
 
 Letter to Cumberland Miners' Union 760 
 
 Papers producpd hv, re Nanaimo Miners' Union 789 
 
 Shenton, Thomas J., Evidence of 326-343, 348, 349, 507-514, 519-536, 584-590 
 
 Action re Supply of Coal to C.P.E. from Nanaimo 524, 525, 588 
 
 Agreements with Employers as to Notice of Strike 329 
 
 Baker, J. A., Movements of 527, 529 
 
 Chinese, organization of— 
 
 Conversation with Rev. L. W. Hall regarding .^ns, 512, 513 
 
 No steps taken for 532-535 
 
 Not approved 508-510 
 
 Not authorized to organize 585 
 
 Not discussed by Miners' Executive at Nanaimo 520 
 
 Class consciousness 335 
 
 Compulsory arbitration impracticable 342 
 
 360-^54 
 
850 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Page. 
 Shenton, Thomas J. — ^Evidence of — Oon. 
 
 Dominion T. & L. Congress — Withdrawal of Nanaimo TJnion from 326 
 
 Document re Strikes produced 584 
 
 Estes, George — Circular signed by 341 
 
 Power to call out miners on sympathetic Strike 330-334 
 
 Ladysmith Miners' Strike — 
 
 Connection of, with U.B.K.E. strike 529-531, 587 
 
 Executive meeting in Nanaimo in aid of 519 
 
 Ladysmith Miners' Union — 
 
 Organization of 336, 337 
 
 Telegram to Baker respecting 521, 589 
 
 ' Miners' Magazine ' — Extracts from 335 
 
 Politics in Unions 335,342 
 
 Socialism among Unionists ■ 336, 587 
 
 Sympathetic Strikes 340 
 
 Unions, advantages of 326 
 
 U.B.E.E. strike, correspondence with Estes respecting 52G 
 
 Western Federation of Miners — 
 
 Fernie miners withdraw from 512 
 
 ISTanaimo Union affiliated with 326-328 
 
 Powers of— As to sympathetic Strikes 328 
 
 Preferred to American Federation of Labour 323 
 
 Socialism in 327 
 
 Woodburn's staTement re organizer's commission denied 348, 349 
 
 Ship Carpenters' and Caulkers' Association, Victoria and Esquimalt — Constitu- 
 tion of ■ 810 
 
 Shipping Act — Powers of employers under 178 
 
 Shipwrights' Strike, Victoria — Caused by employment of non-residents — 
 
 (Evidence of Bullen) 12-1 
 
 (Evidence ot Piper) 144, 148 
 
 Shipwrights' Union, Victoria — 
 
 Agreement of Employers with 12G 
 
 Constitution of. . ..... ^ 149 
 
 Eule that local men must have preference 131 
 
 Shop Committee, duties of 119 
 
 Sick Benefit Association, B.C. Street Railway employees 192 
 
 Slocan, importation of Aliens into 674 
 
 Smith, Ealph. M.P 318, 352. 679 
 
 Smith. Y\'imam 353,363 
 
 Smith, William, Evidence of 258-262 
 
 Compulsory Arbitration approved 261 
 
 Conciliation favoured 261 
 
 Internationalism opposed 259 
 
 Ladysmith preferable to Extension as place of residence 259 
 
 Unions, advantages of 260, 262 
 
 Sniders, Non-unionists, assault on 137, 138 
 
 Socialism — ■ 
 
 American Labour Union declare for — • 
 
 (Evidence of Dennison) 644 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 94,133 
 
 Class-conscious, advocated — 
 
 (Evidence of Ilalliday) 414, 415 
 
 Extent of, in Unions — 
 
 (Evidence of Bolden) 221 
 
INDEX 851 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Socialism — Extent of, in Unions — Con, 
 
 (Evidence of McNiven) 210 
 
 • (Evidence of Neave) 314 3ig 
 
 Miners' Magazine inculcates 27 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 336 587 
 
 Opposed — 
 
 (Evidence of Foley) 675 
 
 (Evidence of Watson) 690 
 
 Relationship of, to trades unionism — 
 
 (Evidence of Dales) 647 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 133 
 
 He volution ary, exposition of — 
 
 (Evidence of Dales) 645-667 
 
 United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees — Position of, towards — 
 
 (Evidence of Johnstone) „ 543, 561 
 
 Letter of President Geo. Estes respecting 779 
 
 Varieties of— (Evidence of Neave) 312 
 
 Western Federation of Miners — Vievrs as to — 
 
 (Evidence of Baker) 29, 33 
 
 (Evidence of Neave) 310 
 
 (Evidence of Spencer) 347 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 133 
 
 (Evidence of Woodhurn) 271 
 
 Socialist Party, B.C.— 
 Aided by W. F. of M— 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 422 
 
 (Evidence of Hutchison) 448, 499 
 
 Favoured — (Evidence of Dales) 648 
 
 Somona Vessel — ^DiiBculty of getting men to work on 123 
 
 Southfield 304 
 
 Spence, Wm ^ ' 
 
 Spencer, Arthur, Evidence of 347, 348 
 
 W. F. of M.— 
 
 Afiaiiation of Miners with 347 
 
 Socialist Platform not binding on Members 347 
 
 Spotters, employment of— (Evidence of Foley) 681 
 
 Spratt, Thomas 353, 363 
 
 ' Star,' Montreal, Statement in re C.P.R. Strike 581, 782 
 
 Steamshipmen's Strike, Vancouver and Victoria- 
 Agreement of Men to give 12 hours' notice of Strike — 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 159,161 
 
 (Evidence of Troupe) 227,230,231 
 
 Agreement with Capt. Troupe not to handle Unfair Freight— 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 135, 159-161 
 
 (Evidence of Thompson) 171, 1'2 
 
 (Evidence of Troupe) 224, 232 
 
 Approved by Vancouver Unions— (Evidence of Bulley) 170 
 
 Assaults by Union Men— io« -,.-, .,o 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 137, 141, 142 
 
 (Evidence of Troupe) 2^9 
 
 Bakers' Strike in sympathy with— 
 
 (Evidence of Muir) 697-700 
 
 (Evidence of Wilband) 700-702 
 
 36a— 54J 
 
852 iiiiikx 
 
 3-t EDWARD VII., A. 1S04 
 
 J?age. 
 
 Steamshipmen's Strike, Vancouver and Victoria — Con. 
 
 Causes of — Men in synipathy with TJ.B.E.E., Strike refused to handle unfair 
 freight — 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 135,136,140,143 
 
 (Evidence of Eussell) 724 
 
 (Evidence of Thompson) 171-173 
 
 (Evidence of Troupe) 224 
 
 Constitutionality of — (Evidence of Thompson) 178, 179 
 
 Contributions in Aid of — (Evidence of Thompson) 182 
 
 Effect of on Business — (Evidence of Leiser) 127 
 
 Forced by Minority — (Evidence of Troupe) 233 
 
 Letters respecting 751 
 
 Loss of Wages by— (Evidence of Thompson) 181 
 
 Picketting — 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 137, 141, 142 
 
 Evidence of Troupe 228 
 
 Statements re in Montreal Newspapers _.. 581, 582 
 
 Support of Steamshipmen's Union asked for TJ.B.II.E. — (Evidence of 
 
 Thompson) , . .173, 175 
 
 Union Men on C.P.N". Boats called out — 
 
 (Evidence of Thompson) .175, 176 
 
 (Evidence of Troupe) 226 
 
 Stonecutters' Association of N. A. — 
 
 Constitution of 233, 811 
 
 Powers of Executive as to Strikes 233 
 
 Stonecutters' Strike, Victoria, caused by requiring Workmen to pay for damage 
 
 —(Evidence of McKay) 234 
 
 Settled by conciliation . . 234 
 
 Stonecutters' Union, Victoria 236 
 
 Constitution of 811 
 
 Street Eailway Employeees' Union, B.C. — (Evidence of Goward) 192 
 
 Affiliation with Amalgamated Association of Street Railway Employees . . ._.. 193 
 
 Constitution of 810 
 
 Profit-sharing Arrangement with .... 192 
 
 Eecognition of Union 194 
 
 Sick Benefit Association 194 
 
 Strike of 194 
 
 Wages of 195 
 
 Strikes — 
 
 Agreements as to notice of — 
 
 (Evidence of Booth) 324, 325 
 
 (Evidence of Bullen) 126 
 
 (Evidence of McNiven) 202 
 
 (Evidence of Neave) 306 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 329 
 
 Alleged promotion of by Capitalists — (Evidence of Pritchard) 44 
 
 B allotting on — 
 
 (Evidence of Anthony) 433 
 
 (Evidence of Penkith) Ug 
 
 Causes of — 
 
 Bakers, Vancouver, sympathy with U.B.E.E. — 
 
 (Evidence of Muir) ^ _ ^ : 697-700 
 
 (Evidence of Nelson) ;_ _^q3 ijq^ 
 
 (Evidence of Wilband) 700-704 
 
INDEX 858 
 
 ; SESSIONAL PAPER No, 36a 
 
 'Strikes— Con. ^**®" 
 
 Blacksmiths, Victoria— Demand for increased Wages and shorter hours 
 
 — (Evidence of Ladingham) 154, 155 
 
 Boilermakers, Victoria, on Garonne contract— Sympathy with Strikers 
 at Seattle — 
 
 (Evidence of Penkith) 112-115 
 
 (Evidence of Seabrooke) 101 105 
 
 Boilermakers, Victoria on ship Topeka contract— Demand for shorter hours ' 
 
 — (Evidence of Seabrooke) 107 
 
 Carpenters, Victoria. Demand for increased Wages and Shorter Hours 
 
 — (Evidence of Boldeu) 216 
 
 Factory workers, Vancouver— Demand for 8-hour day 806 
 
 Longshoremen, Vancouver, refusal to handle unfair freight— 
 
 (Evidence of Johnston) 727-729 
 
 (Evidence of Noonan) 730 
 
 (Evidence of Eussell) 725 
 
 Miners, Comox, in — 
 
 Sympathy with Ladysmith Strikers — (Evidence of Carroll) 250 
 
 Miners, Cumberland — Discharge of Union officials — 
 
 (Evidence of Baker) 71 
 
 (Evidence of Barber) 387 
 
 (Statement) 765 
 
 Miners — in 1901 — Discharge of unionists — (Evidence of Thompson) . . 371 
 Miners, Ladysmith — (Extension mines) — 
 
 Discharge of Union men and anticipation of lockout — (Evidence 
 
 of Pritchard) 38, 43 
 
 Eecognition of Union refused — (Evidence of Dunsmuir) 239 
 
 Miners — Michel, sympathetic— (Evidence of Baker) 16 
 
 Miners, Nanaimo — Dispute over payment for safety lamps — 
 
 (Evidence of Neave) 306 
 
 (Evidence of Eussell) " 343 
 
 Shipwrights, Victoria — Employment of non-residents — 
 
 (Evidence of BuUen) 124 
 
 (Evidence of Piper) 144, 148 
 
 Steamshipmen, Vancouver and Victoria — 
 
 Eefusal to handle unfair freight in sympathy with U.B.E.E. — 
 
 (Evidence of Bulky) 135, 136, 140, 143 
 
 (Evidence of Eussell) 724 
 
 (Evidence of Thompson) 171-173 
 
 (Evidence of Troupe) 224-227 
 
 Stonecutters, Victoria — Workmen required to pay for damage — (Evi- 
 dence of McKay) 234 
 
 Teamsters, Vancouver — Eefusal to handle unfair freight in sympathy 
 with U.B.E.E. strike— 
 
 (Evidence of Grier) 713 
 
 (Evidence of Kerr) 733 
 
 (Evidence of Eussell)'. 724 
 
 Telephone linemen, Victoria — Sympathy with Vancouver Strikers- 
 
 (Evidence of McMicking) 196 
 
 United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees — Eefusal to work with 
 
 scabs, and discharge of Unionists — (Evidence of Johnstone) 540-542, 564 
 Conciliation as a means of settling— 
 
 (Evidence of Bolden) .. 219 
 
 (Evidence of Bullen) , 124 
 
854 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Page. 
 Strikes — Conciliation as a means of Settling — Con. 
 
 (Evidence of McKay) 234 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 96,97 
 
 Disappointed as ineffective — (Evidence of Halliday) 415,418 
 
 Effects of, on business — • 
 
 (Evidence of Grier) 713 
 
 (Evidence of Leiser) ; . . . .127, 128 
 
 (Evidence of McMillan) 574, 575, 577 
 
 (Evidence of Marpole) 707 
 
 Foreign interference as a cause of — 
 
 (Evidence of Seabrooke) 108, 111 
 
 Inexperience as a cause of — (Evidence of Bartley) 723 
 
 Loss of wages by — 
 
 Boilermakers, Victoria — (Evidence of Seabrooke) 112 
 
 Miners, Cumberland — (Evidence of Matthews) 500 
 
 Miners, Ladysmitb — 
 
 (Evidence of McMillan) 288 
 
 (Evidence of Eobertson) 277 
 
 Steamsbipmen — (Evidence of Thompson) 181 
 
 TJ.B.E.E.— (Evidence of Johnstone) 546 
 
 Machinists' International Union — Attitude of, respecting — 
 
 (Evidence of Marpole) 707 
 
 (Evidence of Watson) 689 
 
 Opposed — (Evidence of Anthony) 433 
 
 Powers of Trades Unions Executive respecting — 
 
 Carpenters' and Joiners' Amalgamated society — (Evidence of Bolden) 215 
 
 Stone Cutters' Association, N.A 233 
 
 Street Railway Employees' Amalgamated Association 193 
 
 Typographical Union 202,203 
 
 U. B. E. E 549 
 
 Western Federation of Miners 10, 73 
 
 Eecognition, only means to gain — (Evidence of Dennison) 643 
 
 Eossland Miners — Accuracy of reports, &c., regarding — (Evidence of 
 
 Gregg) 115 
 
 Sympathetic — 
 
 (Evidence of Eussell) 190 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 340 
 
 Boilermakers' International opposed to — (Evidence of Watson) 690, 695 
 
 Disapproved — 
 
 (Evidence of Johnstone) 567, 568 
 
 (Evidence of Piper) 149 
 
 (Evidence of Watson) 691 
 
 Limits of, how far allowable — 
 
 (Evidence of Bolden) 220 
 
 (Evidence of Booth) 324, 325 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 169 
 
 (Evidence of Foley) g7Y 
 
 Telegram from Moyer, President W. F. of M., consenting to, at Cum- 
 berland — (Evidence of King) 475 
 
 Typographical Union opposed to — (Evidence of Bartley) 722 
 
 Typographical Union— Power of Executive to order — 
 
 (Evidence of Mci^Tiven) 204 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 93 
 
 W. F. of M. — Powers of Executive to order — (Evidence of Baker) . .12, 16, 22 
 
INDEX 865 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Strikes — Con. 
 
 Trades and Labour Council, Victoria, Policy as to— (Evidence of Bolden) . . 219 
 
 Typographical Union oppose— (Evidence of McNiven) 211, 212 
 
 TJ. B. E. E. Constitution respecting 549 
 
 Universal, advocated by ' Miners' Magazine ' 252, 335 
 
 Western Federation of Miners, Attitude towards — 
 
 (Evidence of Baker 71, 73 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) * 254 
 
 Constitution respecting 10, 73 
 
 Succession Duties favoured — (Evidence of Dales) 657 
 
 Taff Vale Decision 377 
 
 Tartar, Steamer G37, 708 
 
 Tassin, Joseph, Evidence of. Miners forced to remove from Extension to Lady- 
 smith 65, 60 
 
 Taxation of Land Values advocated — (Evidence of Barnes) 368 
 
 Team Drivers' International Union, Constitution of 803 
 
 Teamsters' Strike, Vancouver — 
 
 Agreement of Merchants to suppart Masteers against Strikers — (Evidence 
 
 of McMillana) 575-578 
 
 Effect of, on business — (Evidence of Grier) 713 
 
 Financial Aaid to — (Evidence of Kerr) 733, 734 
 
 Refusal of Men to handle unfair freight — (Evidence of Kerr) 733 
 
 Supported by U.B.E.E.— (Evidence of Eussell) 725 
 
 Sympathetic Strike — 
 
 (Evidence of McMillan) 575 
 
 (Evidence of Grier) 713 
 
 Teamsters' Union, Vancouver 163 
 
 Technical Education favoured — (Evidence of Bolden) 222 
 
 Tees, Steamer 175, 229 
 
 Telephone linemen 195 
 
 Strike of, Vancouver — (Evidence of McMicking) 196 
 
 Sympathetic Strike, Victoria — (Evidence of McMicking) 196 
 
 Thompson, Alex. C, Evidence of 369-378 
 
 Incorporation of Unions opposed 376 
 
 Internationalism, advantages of 374 
 
 International Typographical Union — 
 
 Contracts with Employers enforced by 375, 376 
 
 Disapproval of Agreements by 373 
 
 Membership of 374 
 
 Power to order Sympathetic Strikes 375 
 
 Mine Ovmers' Association discriminate against Unionists 370, 371 
 
 Miners' Strike in 1901 372 
 
 Loss of Wages by 372 
 
 Politics in Unions 370, 378 
 
 Western Federation of Miners— 
 
 Boyce, Edward, President of ■ 370, 376 
 
 Executive refuse to sanction Strike for Recognition 370 
 
 Financial Aid to Strikers by 372 
 
 ^ -rj 175,176,231 
 
 Thompson, C H. 226, 220 
 
 Thompson, bhett • lYi mo 
 
 Thompson, Sheff, Evidence of . . • • • • ■•••;.• ,• •• - ^'^'^.'Z 
 
 Bulley Alfred H., demand of Union for discharge o± 180 
 
 Public' interests— How regarded by Strikers 181 
 
856 lNpf)X 
 
 8-4 EDWARD VU., A, 1904 
 
 Page. 
 
 Thompson, Sheff — Evidence of — Con, ■' ' 
 
 Steamshipmen's Strike — 
 
 Cause of ITli 172 
 
 Constitutionality of 178; 179 
 
 Estes, Geo., asks support of Union for U.B.K.E 173, 175 
 
 Loss of Wages by 181 
 
 Men on C. P. N. boats called out 175-177 
 
 Unfair freight objected to 172, 180 
 
 Steamshipmen's Union — 
 
 Constitution, provisions of re Strikes 177 
 
 Incorporation of ' 180 
 
 Oath of 171 
 
 Non-unionists, right to employ 174 
 
 Wages of Steamshipmen 181 
 
 Tinsmiths' Union, Victoria 187 
 
 Tonkin, Mr .675, 683 
 
 Topeka, Ship, strike of Boilermakers engaged on 107 
 
 Trades and Labour Council, Vancouver — 
 
 Assistance to Steamshipmen's strike by 170 
 
 Blacklisting by — 
 
 (Evidence of Cook) , 737 
 
 (Evidence of Russell) . . . . .~ 725 
 
 Endorse U.B.E.E. strike— (Evidence of Bulley) 136 
 
 Withdrawal of Boilermakers from 694 
 
 Trades and Lobour Council, Victoria 124 
 
 Conditions of membership 219 
 
 Constitution of ' 810 
 
 Policy of re Strikes ^219 
 
 Settlement of disputes by 236 
 
 Trades Unions- 
 Advantages of — 
 To employers — 
 
 (Evidence of Barnes) 351 
 
 (Evidence of BuUen) 125 
 
 (Evidence of Piper) 148 
 
 (Evidence of Neave) ' 305 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 326 
 
 (Evidence of Woodburn) 270 
 
 To •workers— 
 
 (Evidence of Barber) 385 
 
 (Evidence of Barnes) 351 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) 256 
 
 (Evidence of Ladingham) 150 
 
 (Evidence of Lauderbach) 237 
 
 (Evidence of McKay) 237 
 
 (Evidence of Piper) 148 
 
 (Evidence of Eobertson) 275 
 
 (Evidence of Kussell) 345 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) _ _ _ 326 
 
 (Evidence of Smith) 260 262 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) / ;^qj 
 
 Approved — 
 
 (Evidence of Brovpne) , q^q 
 
 (Evidence of Marpole) ,^ 687 
 
INDEl 857 
 
 £E£S:ONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Trades Unions — Approved — Con. 
 
 (Evidence of Eeed) 469 
 
 Considered ineffective— (Evidence of Halliday) 418 
 
 Considered useless — 
 
 (Evidence of Bryden) 2C4 
 
 (Evidence of McMillan) 268,288 
 
 Difficulties with — (Evidence of Cook) , . . 737 
 
 Disadvantages of — 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) 256 
 
 (Evidence of Lauderbach) . 284 
 
 Disadvantages to employer — 
 
 (Evidence of Bullen) 125 
 
 (Evidence of Kussell) 345 
 
 Experience with — (Evidence of Robins) 299 
 
 In Germany and France — (Evidence of Dales) 648 
 
 International, as opposed fo local — (Evidence of Woodward) 718 
 
 Objected to — (Evidence of Dunsmuir) 378, 379 
 
 Officials of, Comox, discharged 351, 352 
 
 Members of, discharged — 
 
 (Evidence of Matthews) 479,481 
 
 (Evidence of Dunsmuir) 379 
 
 - Members of, preferred to non-unionists — (^Evidence of Seabrooke) 107 
 
 Moral influence of — 
 
 (Evidence of McKay) 237 
 
 (Evidence of McNiven) 209 
 
 (Evidence of Marpole) 687 
 
 Position of C.P.E. respecting — (Evidence of Marpole) 684 
 
 Eecognition of— 
 
 Cumberland strike a fight for 504 
 
 Does not involve exclusion of Non-unionists — (Evidence of Goward). . 195 
 Involves exclusion of Non-unionists — 
 
 (Evidence of Bullen) 126 
 
 (Evidence of Piper) 147 
 
 Only gained by strikes — (Evidence of Dennison) 643 
 
 What is implied by — (Evidence of Penkith) 118 
 
 Eegarded as a poor expedient — (Evidence of Hall) 453 
 
 Socialist view of — (Evidence of Dales) 647 
 
 Weiges raised by — 
 
 (Evidence of Dick) 621 
 
 (Evidence of Ladingham) 156 
 
 (Evidence of Penkith) 120 
 
 Trent Eiver Bridge, accident at. . . . : ■ ■ . • 502 
 
 Troupe Capt. J. W., agreement of Steamshipmen's Union with, as to unfair 
 
 freight 135, 159-lGl, 171, ll72 
 
 Troupe, Capt. J. W.— (Evidence of) 224-233 
 
 Agreement of Steamshipmen to give 12 hours' notice of Strike. .227, 230, 231 
 
 Agre-ement with men not to handle unfair freight 227 
 
 Assaults by Unionists 229 
 
 Estes, George, influence cf in strike 230, 232 
 
 Men on C.P.N, boats ordered out 226 
 
 Never violated agreement with men 232 
 
 Picketting by Unionists _ 228 
 
 ^••- Eefusal of Steamshipmen to handle unfair freight 224 
 
 . Strike forced by minority 233 
 
858 mDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Fage< 
 Tupper, Sir Charles H., Letter of to Charles Wilson re Alien Labour Act. .667, 797 
 
 Twigg, Thomas H., conciliator in Victoria Shipwrights' Strike 124 
 
 Twigg, Thomas H.— (Evidence of) 92-101, 129-133 
 
 American Federation of Labour — 
 
 Constitution of 129 
 
 Difference between, and American Labour Union 94, 95 
 
 Typographical Union affiliated with 94 
 
 Arbitration 96 
 
 Blacklisting employees 98 
 
 Boycotting regarded as legitimate 95 
 
 Canadian members of International Unions, position of 99 
 
 Compulsory arbitration impracticable 96 
 
 Conciliation. 96, 97 
 
 Dominion Trades and Labour Congress will not charter local unless they 
 
 belong to International organization 130, 132 
 
 Government interference 97 
 
 Incorporation of Unions 98 
 
 Internationalism;, advantages of 98, 131, 132 
 
 Militia, objection of Unionists to 133 
 
 Non-union printers, position of 100 
 
 Organizer, duties of ■ 129 
 
 Picketting 95 
 
 Socialism, relation of to trades unionism 133 
 
 Strikes, remedies for 96 
 
 Typographical Union — 
 
 Constitution and membership of 92-94 
 
 Finances of 99, 130 
 
 Power of Executive re sympathetic strikes 93 
 
 Unfair, posting employers as 95 
 
 Union Label. ; 132 
 
 Chapel, functions of 201 
 
 Grievances, how dealt with 202 
 
 Internation al— 
 
 Advantages of 204 
 
 Agreements with employers 373 
 
 Constitution of '. . . .92, 93, 203, 810 
 
 Contracts enforced by 273 
 
 Membership of 92, 99, 374 
 
 Opposed to strikes Y22 
 
 Eelationship between locals of 132 
 
 Eepresentation in 205 
 
 Strikes, authority of as to , 202, 203 
 
 Sympathetic strikes, powers of Executive as to 93, 204, 375 
 
 Strikes, notices of required 202 
 
 Unfair (See also ' Scab,' ' Blacklisting,' &c.)— 
 
 Bakery listed as — (Evidence of Woodward) , 736 
 
 Circular placing persons in Vancouver on list 801 
 
 Gurney's stoves listed as. . . Y36 
 
 Posting merchant as — (Evidence of Woodward) 716-721 
 
 Posting employers as — 
 
 (Evidence of Browne) g3j 
 
 (Evidence of Penkith) jjg 
 
INDEX 859 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 35a 
 
 Unfair — Posting Employers as — Con. 
 
 (Evidence of Seabroolve) . . . 112 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 95 
 
 Considered legitimate — (Evidence of Marion) 185-187 
 
 Unfair freight — 
 
 Longshoremen refuse to handle — 
 
 (Evidence of Johnston) T2Y-Y29 
 
 (Evidence of Noonan) 730 
 
 On steamer Princess May — (Evidence of Muir) 697 
 
 Steamshipmen refuse to handle — 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 135, 136, 140, 143, 159-161 
 
 (Evidence of Thompson) 171,172 
 
 (Evidence of Troupe) ■ . . . 224 
 
 Teamsters refuse to handle — (Evidence of Kerr) 733 
 
 Union Mines, Comox, sympathetic strike at 250 
 
 United Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers 252 
 
 United Brotherhood of Railway Employees — 
 American Labour Union, affiliation with — 
 
 (Evidence of Dales) 650 
 
 (Evidence of Johnstone) 544 
 
 Constitution of 778 
 
 (Evidence of Johnstone) 343, 549 
 
 Fraternal benefits — (Evidence of Johnstone) 543 
 
 Grievances, adjustment of 548 
 
 Membership of 544 
 
 Oath of 550 
 
 Objections to — (Evidence of Marpole) 684 
 
 Eailway Clerks join — 
 
 (Evidence of Dennison) 638 
 
 (Evidence of Dick) 617, 620 
 
 'Railway Employees' Journal,' extracts from 565 
 
 Eitual '^'^8 
 
 Socialism in 543, 644 
 
 Extract from letter of President 561, 779 
 
 United Brotherhood of Eailway Employees, strike of— 
 
 Action of Miners' Executive re coal supply to C.P.E. from Nanaimo. .524, 525 
 Agreement of Freight Handlers with C.P.E.— (Evidence of Johnstone). .539, 562 • 
 
 American Labour Union, co-operation of— (Evidence of Johnstone) 566 
 
 Assistance received from Brotherhood— (Evidence of Johnstone) 546 
 
 Boilermakers' International Union opposed to 797 
 
 (Evidence of Watson) • ■ ''fJ^ 
 
 Boycott of boarding-house— (Evidence of McDonald) 695-697 
 
 Bulletin, publication of— (Evidence of Dennison) 644 
 
 Causes of, refusal of freight-handlers to work with scabs, demand on to with- 
 draw from Union, and discharge of Unionists— 
 
 (Evidence of Johnstone) 340, 542, 664 
 
 (Evidence of Laverock) 
 
 Connection of with other strikes— 
 
 Ladysmith Miners-(Evidence of Shenton) 529-531 
 
 Longshoremen— (Evidence of Eussell) '-* 
 
 Steamshipmen — -i-nr i±i -la" -irT 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) ^^^'^^^\ltlZ 
 
 (Evidence of Troupe) -^"' fj^ 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) . . . . ^^ °'''^ 
 
860 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A- 1904 
 
 Tfnited Brotherhood of Eailway Employees — Connectioii of, with other Strikes — Con. 
 Teamsters — Page. 
 
 (Evidence of Grier) '^13 
 
 (Evidence of EusseH) , . . . ■ 724 
 
 Constitutionality of — (Evidence of Johnstone) 551, 552, 564 
 
 Discrimination by C.P.E. against Unionists — 
 
 (Evidence of Bulley) 136, 139, 143 
 
 (Evidence of Johnstone) 556 
 
 Documents re produced by C.P.R Tld-ll'i 
 
 Produced by U.B.R.E 772-775 
 
 Effects of on traffic — 
 
 (Evidence of Grier) 713 
 
 (Evidence of Marpole) 707 
 
 Engagement of men in anticipation of — (Evidence of Dennison) 644 
 
 Estes, Geo., President — 
 
 Action of^(Evidence of Johnstone) 566 
 
 Circulars issued by .750, 780, 786 
 
 Correspondence with Shenton 526 
 
 Statement in Vancouver ' World' 787 
 
 Threat of, to call out Western Federation of Miners — 
 
 (Evidence of Booth) ; 323 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 428-430 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 330-334 
 
 Extent of — (Evidence of Marpole) 707 
 
 Forest, H. P., suspension of — (Evidence of Johnstone) 558, 559, 569 
 
 Letter by committee respecting . . 779 
 
 Halton, F. H., suspension of — (Evidence of Johnstone) . . 560 
 
 Headquarters of Strike Committee .723, 724 
 
 Intervention of Eoyal Commission for settlement of 704 
 
 Loss in wages by — (Evidence of Johnstone) 546 
 
 Machinists' Int. Union, action of — (Evidence of Watson) 689 
 
 Negotiations for settlement 645 
 
 Notice of — (Evidence of Johnstone) 559 
 
 Picketting — (Evidence of Marpole) 707 
 
 Sailors quit work in sympathy — (Evidence of FuUerton) 741, 742 
 
 Sanctioned by Executive — (Evidence of Johnstone) 549, 553 
 
 Secret service of C.P.E.— Affidavit of F. J. Halton 755 
 
 Statement of case by both parties. 517, 763-770 
 
 Strikers blacklisted — (Evidence of Browne) 662-626 
 
 Telegrams re strike produced 632-634 
 
 United Mine Workers 28, 512, 676 
 
 Co-operation of W.F. of M. with 63 
 
 Vancouver, business of, affected by strikes — (Evidence of Leiser) 127 
 
 Rents in 169 
 
 Strikes at. (See ' Strikes,' &c.) 
 
 Vancouver Board of Trade 136 
 
 Threat to by President Estes to call out Western Federation Miners on 
 sympathetic strike — 
 
 (Evidence of Booth) 323 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 330-334 
 
 Vancouver Building Trades Council- 
 Blacklisting circular signed by 803 
 
 Blacklisting of merchant by — (Evidence of Woodward).. 716-727 
 
INDEX 861 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Page. 
 
 Vancouver Building Trades Council — Con. 
 
 Constitution of 804 
 
 Correspondence with Woodward re tuilding contract , . . . .717, 802, 803 
 
 Yancouver Coal Company — 
 
 Agreement of, to employ only Union labour 752 
 
 (Evidence of Eobins) 295 
 
 Conditions of labour 45 
 
 Grievances, mode of adjusting — (Evidence of Eobins) 295, 397 
 
 Miners, nationality of 298, 303 
 
 Pit Committee 297 
 
 Reduction of Wages accepted by Union 296 
 
 Sale of lots to Miners by. . ' 298, 299 
 
 Unions, Experience with — (Evidence of Robins) , . 299 
 
 Wages paid by 59,297 
 
 Vancouver ' Independent ' 152, 170 
 
 Vancouver Trades and Labour Council — 
 
 Assistance to Steamshipmen's strike by . . . . 170 
 
 Blacklisting Fy — 
 
 (Evidence of Cook) 737 
 
 (Evidence of Russell) 725 
 
 U.B.R.E. Strike endorsed by— (Evidence of Bulley) 136 
 
 Withdrawal of Boilermakers from 694 
 
 Vancouver ' World ' 804 
 
 Interview of C. Woodward in 735 
 
 Venture, Ship 122 
 
 Victoria, Business of, affected by strikes — (Evidence of Leiser) 127, 128 
 
 'Colonist' 185,187 
 
 Strikes at— (/See ' Strikes,' &c.) 
 
 Victoria Trades and Labour Council 124 
 
 Conditions of membership 219 
 
 Constitution of 810 
 
 Policy of, as to strikes 219 
 
 Settlement of disputes by 236 
 
 Violence disapproved by Unionists— (Evidence of Eoley) 680 
 
 Disavowed by Socialists— (Evidence of Dales) 657 
 
 Voters, Intimidation of, by employers— (Evidence of Hsll) 460, 461 
 
 Intimidation denied— (Evidence of Matthews) 479 
 
 Wages — 
 
 Blacksmiths, Victoria— (Evidence of Ladmgham) 155,156 
 
 Boilermakers, Victoria — 
 
 (Evidence of Seabrooke) • 107, 109 
 
 (Evidence of Ladingham) 156 
 
 Bricklayers, Victoria— (Evidence of Russell) 189 
 
 Building trades, Vancouver— (Evidence of Cook) 738 
 
 Carpenters, Victoria— (Evidence of Bolden) 216 
 
 Chinamen— (Evidence of Hall) 452 
 
 Coal miners — 
 
 (Evidence of Boyden) • ^o5 
 
 (Evidence of Lauderbach) • ' 54, 57 
 
 (Evidence of Neave) 312 
 
 ( (Evidence of Robins) 297 
 
C62 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD VII., A. 1904 
 
 Paga. 
 
 Wages — Con. 
 
 Cumberland 761-763 
 
 (Evidence of Anthony) 435 
 
 (Evidence of Mattheves) 478 
 
 Plumbers, Victoria — 
 
 (Evidence of Wilson) 91 
 
 (Evidence of Marion) 188 
 
 Eailway Clerks — (Evidence of Dick) 616, 621 
 
 Eailway employees 777, 794, 795 
 
 Shipwrigtts, Victoria — (Evidence of Piper) 147, 148 
 
 Steamsbipmen, Vancouver and Victoria — 
 
 (Evidence of BuUey) 169 
 
 (Evidence of Thompson) . . . . 181 
 
 Street railway employees — (Evidence of Goward) 195 
 
 Walker, F. J 559 
 
 War, Attitude of Socialists regarding — (Evidence of Dales) . . . 652 
 
 Waring Arthur 479 
 
 Waterhouse, Erank 101 
 
 Watson, J. H.— (Evidence of) 688-695 
 
 Blacklisting disapproved 692 
 
 'Boilermakers' Journal,' Letter to, disavowed 693 
 
 Boilermakers' strike 692,693 
 
 Contracts with employers enforced by Unions 689 
 
 Dominion Trades Congress, relation of to International organizations. .. . 691 
 
 Incorporation of Unions favoured 689 
 
 Internationalism approved 688 
 
 Politics in Union, disapproved 693 
 
 Socialism disapproved 690 
 
 Sympathetic strikes opposed 691 
 
 Telegram prohibiting 695 
 
 Trades and Labour Council, Vancouver, withdrawal of Boilermakers from. 694 
 
 Wealth, obligations of, repudiated — (Evidence of Dunsmuir) 379 
 
 Wellington Collieries Company ; 1, 88 
 
 Coal of 199 
 
 Mines closed down 237, 263 
 
 Pay-roll, of 128, 242 
 
 Statement of 747 
 
 Wage, statement of 752 
 
 Telegrams to and by, at Cumberland 763 
 
 Western ' Clarion ' .612,643,804 
 
 Blacklist published in 692,736 
 
 Western Federation of Miners — 
 
 Affiliation of Ladysmith Miners' Union -with 37^ 53^ 59 
 
 Arbitration, attit,ude respecting Yl 
 
 Branches of, in British Columbia 22 
 
 Circular to by President Estes, of U.B.E.E Y86 
 
 Constitution of 8Q9 
 
 Contracts with employers referred to 367^ 444 
 
 (Evidence of Halliday) 43I 
 
 Cumberland Miners' Strike, approved by — (Evidence of Barber) 386 
 
 Detectives, attitude as to employment of 29 
 
 Fernie Miners withdraw from. . . .' 512, 675 
 
 Finances of 28-31, 63 
 
INDEX 863 
 
 SESSIONAL PAPER No. 36a 
 
 Western Federation of Miners— Con. ^^^^' 
 
 Financial aid to strikes — 
 
 (Evidence of Mottishaw) 291 293 
 
 (Evidence of Thompson) '_ .'.'.'.'.'... 372 
 
 Instructions of, to organize Chinese and Japanese — 
 
 (Evidence of Barber) 396-398, 406-409 
 
 Ladysmith Miners decline to withdraw from— (Evidence of Barnes 35Y, 359 
 
 Magazine published by 20, 21, 251, 252 
 
 Membership of 28 33 
 
 Methods of 252 
 
 Nanaimo Miners affiliate with 307, 316-318, 326-328, 347 
 
 Report Ex. Committee Nanaimo Union favouring 784 
 
 Statement of vote on affiliation 755 
 
 Oath of 30 
 
 Organizer, salary of 32 
 
 Political policy of— (Evidence of Halliday) 414 
 
 Powers of Executive re Strikes — (Evidence of Baker) 12, 22, 71 
 
 Preference of, to A. F. of L 328 
 
 Purposes and objects of — (Evidence of Baker) 8-19 
 
 Quartz miners, influence of 313 
 
 Recognition of refused 239, 490-494 
 
 Refusal to sanction strikes for recognition — (Evidence of Thompson) . . . . 370 
 Socialism, favoured by — 
 
 (Evidence of Neave) 310 
 
 (Evidence of Twigg) 133 
 
 Not binding on members — (Evidence of Spencer) 347 
 
 Objected to — 
 
 (Evidence of Lauderbach) 283 
 
 (Evidence of Woodburn) 271 
 
 Socialist party, B,C., aided by — (Evidence of Halliday 422 
 
 Strikes promoted by — (Evidence of Carroll) 254, 255 
 
 Sympathetic strikes. Power to order • . .307, 328 
 
 U.B.R.E., Relations with— (Evidence of Halliday) 428-430 
 
 Withdrawals from 255 
 
 Western Fuel Co. . . ., .200, 304, 343 
 
 Proposed agreement with Nanaimo Miners Union ., . . . . 753 
 
 Western ' Socialist ' 152 
 
 Western Union Telegraph Co., Telegrams received by 750 
 
 White, W. miner, Reasons for discharge of — 
 
 (Evidence of HoUiday) 411 
 
 (Evidence of Matthews) 479 
 
 Wilband, Charles A.— (Evidence of) 700-702, 704, 715, 716 
 
 Bakers' strike in sympathy with U.B.R.E 701, 704 
 
 Bakers' Union, International, action of '^01 
 
 ■ Blacklist in ' Bakers' Journal ' ^5, 716 
 
 Boycott of Muirs' bake-shop TOO 
 
 Unfair list, unconstitutional 702 
 
 Williams, Parker, Letter to Cumberland Miners' Union 760 
 
 Wilson, David ^\l^ 
 
 Wilson, Harry, Clearance giveen to ^54 
 
 Telegram re transfer of '89 
 
 Transfer of to Montreal— (Evidence of Margole) 705 
 
 Wilson, Harvy-(Evidence of) 579-584, 590-612 
 
864 INDEX 
 
 3-4 EDWARD Vli:, A. 1904 
 
 Page. 
 
 Wilson, Harry — ^Evidence of — Con. ! 
 
 C.P.E., Blacklist of 590 
 
 Arrangement with other railways not to employ men discharged for 
 
 cause 590 
 
 Harriday refused work at Seattle 591 
 
 Discharged for writing to the press re TJ.B.E.E. strike. 581-583, .592-595, 606, 611 
 
 Interview with Marpole asking reinstatement of Halton 579, 601-605 
 
 Internationalism favoured 609 
 
 Transferred from Vancouver to Montreal 580, 596 
 
 Urged to withdraw from Union 580, 597 
 
 Wilson, Chas., K.C., Counsel for Labour interests 1, 3 
 
 Letter to, from Sir 0. H. Tupper re Alien Labour Act 667 
 
 (Evidence of King) 669 
 
 Wilson, Senkler & Bloomfield, letter of , to E. J. Halton, declaring Alien 
 
 Labour Act inoperative 067, 796 
 
 Statement denied — (Evidence of King) . • 668 
 
 Wilson, William— (Evidence of) 89-92 
 
 Boycotting by Trades Unions 89 
 
 Government interference 90 
 
 Organization of Employing Plumbers 91 
 
 Union Men, objections to ,. 90 
 
 ' Witness,' Montreal, Letter to, by C.P.E. employees re Strike 582, 614, 783 
 
 'Woodburn, Moses, Conversation of, with T. J. Shenton re organizers'' commission — 
 
 (Evidence of Carroll) 349 
 
 (Evidence of Eorcimer) ' 349 
 
 (Evidence of McMurtry) 350 
 
 (Evidence of Shenton) 248,349 
 
 Woodburn, Moses — (Evidence of) 269-273 
 
 Compulsory arbitration impracticable 271 
 
 Conciliation boards 271 
 
 Extension not a desirable place of residence 269 
 
 Organizer, Commission of . 272 
 
 Unions, advantageous to employers 270 
 
 W.F. of M., Socialism in ^ 271 . 
 
 Woodward, Charles, Letter of, to C. I. Hilton .'' 802 
 
 Letter, C. I. Hilton to 803 
 
 Woodward, Charles— (Evidence of) . .TlG-721, 735, 736 
 
 Bakery backlisted as unfair 736 
 
 Building contract with Edward Cook, objected to by Unionists 719, 735 
 
 Correspondence with Vancouver Building Trades Council 717 
 
 International vs. Local Unions 718 
 
 Interview in Vancouver ' World ' 725 
 
 ' World,' Vancouver 804 
 
 Interview of C. Woodward re blacklisting in ' 735 
 
 Statement by George Estes re strike 787 
 
 Yosemite, Steamer ' C98,; 699 
 
3M924^78 655 960