In an editorial on the trial, headed: The Press against Justice, the Chicago Times had this to say: "When it became evident that the rights and actions of E. V. Debs and his associates in the American Railway Union strike were to be reviewed in court this paper said editorially: "The Times appeals to its contemporaries and to the people to join with it in avoiding all clamor which may in the least degree influence the findings of the court or bring its proceedings into contempt." It appears that the appeal fell upon deaf ears.
"Such papers as the Tribune and the Evening Journal seized upon the very first utterance of Mr. Debs' counsel as an opportunity for insidious effort to prejudice the court and the people against the cause of the labor leaders.
"Two of the editorials and two of what itcalls editorialettes were necessary to the Tribune yesterday in order to give its advice to the prosecuting lawyers and the court proper expression. The other organs of plutocracy though less lavish of editorial space, employed their news columns to the same end. The first strike of the allied newspapers is to pronounce the opening plea of the counsel for the defense, Mr. Erwin, in effect an assertion of the gospel of anarchy.
"Overworked as it is by the bigoted press the word anarchy still serves as a more or less effective bogyman to frighten timid and ill-informed people, but no one who will read the reports of Mr. Erwin's address will find any anarchistic doctrines lurking therein.
"He charged that Pullman and the railroad managers had conspired together against the interest of workingmen, that the manner of the conspiracy made resort to the law hopeless, that lawmakers could not or would not act, and under these conditions the men were justified in combining, resisting and refusing to work longer for Mr. Pullman or the roads allied with him.
"The Times is unable to discern the savour of anarchy in that. It is in effect only a declaration that when employes combine to resist them,neither by direct statement or by innuendoes did the attorney suggest or excuse violence or the destruction of property. He erred, the Times thinks, in describing Pullman's course of procedure as illegal, for unhappily, law as it stands, protects Pullman in his most despotic and oppressive acts. If Pullman's course had been illegal, action at law instead of a strike and boycott would have been the remedy for it, but with the exception of this over-statement which may have been due to inadvertence, Mr. Erwin said nothing that men of fair and judicial minds can denounce as false, and nothing at all incendiary. The clamor of the conspiracy is raised to defeat justice."
After the release of the officers a meeting was called at the Revere House, of the directors of the American Railway Union. They concluded to call a convention of the delegates from the different local unions, to meet in Chicago, August 2d, and take some action on the strike. Each local union was notified of this action and instructed to send a delegate with full power to act.
After this meeting of the officers, they at once repaired to Ulrich Hall, where an enormous crowd greeted Mr. Debs with the greatest enthusiasm.
Mr. Debs,—after being introduced by the chairman of the meeting, Mr. Adams,—was given three cheers with such a vim that the building fairly shook. He then advanced to the platform and said: "I see you have changed your quarters since I saw you before, and I am glad to say we have changed ours also.
"When Judge Wood delivered his ruling yesterday he declared it to be illegal for men to combine and strike.
"If that is the law, labor organizations had better disband at once. If we have no right to strike, no right to combine, no right to exercise the functions which are delegated to us, then we might as well give up and acknowledge that we are slaves.
"If that is the law we have no right to resist or defend ourselves against the injustice of employers.
"No matter how much has been said about the stars and stripes and the freedom of the workingman, if that is the final tribunal, corporate capital has the right to suck the life blood from the toiler who must make no sign. But I am not prepared to believe that this is in harmony with the constitution. If this is the constitution, thenour liberty is gone. Mr. Erwin sounded the slogan yesterday when he declared that there is a higher power than the courts, a power greater than the aggregated combinations of capital and railroads. That is the inherent rights of workingmen to strike at the polls.
"What we want then is to rid ourselves of the old party shackles.
"We want to change the constitution so that even federal judges will be elected by the people. Then no judge will render a decision defying all law and justice. It is wonderful how sensitive the machinery of justice is to any complaint directed against the workingman.
"But how is it when corporations combine? Is it of record that any officials of any one of them has ever been in prison for violating the law?
"It is a notorious fact that the Santa Fe has robbed the people of $7,000,000 in the face of the interstate commerce law. Why not bring these colossal scoundrels to justice too? They say we must obey the law. I say we are law-abiding, and I defy any man to show a single instance where the heads of the labor organization have advocated violence. If the authorities want thelaw respected let them enforce it against the rich and poor alike.
"In July, 1892, when the switchmen struck, the soldiers were called out to suppress them. Deputy marshalls set fire to a lot of box cars in Buffalo, N. Y., and this furnished the railroads an excuse to call on the government for soldiers. The railroads are still violating the eight hour law for which the men struck. They arrested the switchmen while the corporations are still allowed to trample the law under foot.
"Is not that enough to bring disrespect of the law? As it is now, the whole thing is a roaring farce. Has anybody ever heard of soldiers being called out to guard the rights of workingmen? Whatever else I have suffered myself, I have not lost the right of free speech. If Judge Wood expounds the law I would rather rot in jail than be an alleged freeman. There is no man in the country who can directly charge me with violating the law of this country. Did any one of you ever hear me advocate violence? (A mighty no went up in response.) On the other hand did anyone here ever hear me counsel the men to be frank and straight forward, and honest and law-abiding in all they did?"
The audience shouted yes to this and President Debs continued:
"Before we get through with this trial it will be shown that the real conspirators are the railroad managers. Then if I go to the penitentiary Mr. Egan will have the distinction of accompanying me. We will produce the proof that the real purpose of the General Managers Association was to reduce wages, and that until we stopped them on the Great Northern, they were going around the circle with that end in view.
"When it comes to striking at the polls we know the people will be with us, it will be a contest against the money power by which this country has been absolutely ruled for so many years. Havemeyer goes into the United States Senate and dictates what the duty on sugar shall be, and all the people combined can't stop him. Let a poor man go to Washington to protest and he is arrested for treading on the grass.
"I am a populist and favor wiping out both old parties, so they will never come into power again. I have been a democrat all my life and I am ashamed to admit it. I want every one of you to go to the polls and vote the peoples' ticket."
At the conclusion of his address, Mr. Debsannounced his intention of going to his home for a few days.
On hearing this, the members of the American Railway Union determined to escort him to the depot, and, although they had but two hours to make arrangements, a procession a couple of miles in length was formed.
On arrival at his home in Terre Haute, President Debs was tendered a great reception. Thousands of his fellow citizens in all stations of life welcomed him with outstretched arms. Early in the evening the Naylor Opera House was packed to completion, and hundreds of people were denied admission owing to the dense throng of people who wished to do honor to this great leader. When President Debs appeared upon the stage he was greeted by a roar of applause that shook the building to its very foundation. His eloquent address on the strike situation and the causes that led up to it was received with thunders of applause.
This was the man whom the corporate courts had indicted for criminal conspiracy.
Through the machination of the general managers, the courts and the press and the Benedict Arnolds of labor, the cause of the railroad corporations was beginning to triumph. Discouraged and disheartened by the treachery in their own ranks, a great many strikers had lost confidence in the success of their undertaking and were now silently awaiting the result of the convention called at Chicago. This was made known on the return of the delegates.
The action taken was to decide by a majority vote of each system whether the strike would continue in force or be declared off.
After thoroughly discussing the matter, it was decided to call off the strike owing to the fact that they were forced to fight against overwhelming odds and rank treachery, and the men were instructed to make application for their positions at once, in view of getting as many as possible re-instated.
This action was taken on all roads with the exception of the Chicago and Eastern Illinois, the Santa Fe and the Northern Pacific.
Very few of the men were successful in securing positions, for instance at Minnesota Transfer the switchmen waited on the superintendent in a body (all who were still in the city) and made applications to be reinstated.
Mr. Dudgeon the superintendent, who, by the way, was appointed during the strike to fill the vacancy made by the resignation of Mr. Sullivan, informed the men that he had more applications already than would fill all vacancies for the next two years. He said: "I will not mislead you boys for one minute, not one of you will be taken back."
I was not present at this interview, but being informed that Mr. Hastings, president of the company, had signified his willingness to hear us, we consulted together and decided to call on him at his office.
John F. Keenan and myself were appointed as a committee to confer with him, and, after introducing ourselves, stated our mission.
He received us in a gentlemanly manner, said that he was always ready to listen to the switchmen,as he had been a switchmen himself at one time, and while he assured us that he knew we had not interfered with the company property during the strike and conducted ourselves in a creditable manner, he could do nothing for us. He also said that he had more respect for us than he had for those who were hanging on the fence, but he had nothing to do with the employes of the Minnesota Transfer, as he had left that matter entirely in the hands of the superintendent. We told him that we were informed that Mr. Dudgeon would take some of the men back if the president of the company was satisfied.
"Whatever arrangements you boys make with Mr. Dudgeon will be satisfactory to me," answered Mr. Hastings.
He then referred us to Mr. Dudgeon who was present and who then said that he had already given us our answer which was final. He said that he had promised steady work to the men he had already employed if they proved themselves competent, and as they were doing the work satisfactorily, he would not consider any more applications.
This statement regarding the work we knew to be a bluff, as it would take an old switchman, ifunacquainted with this yard, at least three months under the most favorable circumstances to learn, if unaided, enough to enable him to give efficient service, as the yard is very complicated. And again in contradiction of this statement it is known that freight was refused from different roads for four days at a time to enable them to get the yard in shape, and after the freight of twenty-four hours was received, the same operation would be necessary, although they had the services of competent switchmen from the Omaha and other railroads.
So speaking for the Minnesota Transfer the general managers were winners so to speak, in the game of freeze out waged against the switchmen. The men in all other departments were taken back with but few exceptions, but it was now a settled fact that the switchmen must look elsewhere for employment. The officials were credited with saying that they would permanently close the transfer, rather than reinstate a single switchman.
It would be nothing more than justice at this time to say that the former superintendent, Mr. D. M. Sullivan, had resigned his position during the strike for the reason that the management would not allow him to take back the old men.Mr. Sullivan contended that it would be impossible to operate the yard without the assistance of a goodly portion of the old employes.
In a newspaper article he denied that his resignation was handed in on that account, but it is nevertheless credited by those who know him well, and by the employes themselves.
We then applied at all the yards in the Twin Cities but with like result, and although not told in so many words, we were given to understand that we were blacklisted, and this was the case not only with us, but with men all over the country.
The Soo Line had now put in force an ironclad agreement that all employes were obliged to sign if they wished to remain in the service of the company. This debarred the men from belonging to any labor organization for five years. Another rule put in force at this time was that engineers would hire their own firemen. This would appear to be a blow at the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen.
The railroad corporations exulting in their victory, determined to boycott every striker and sympathizer throughout the country, as far as it was in their power.
The weapon, that it was made a criminal offense for a striker to use, and for which the officers of the American Railway Union were sent to jail, was now in the hands of the railroad corporations to use at will.
What was decided by the courts unlawful in the hands of the American Railway Union was legal in the hands of the General Managers Association. This the federal judges made no effort to investigate. Judge Wood said regarding the charge of a combination on the part of the railroads, that while it was irrelevant he would hear it as a matter of curiosity.
Expressions like this emanating from a judge of the United States court, immediately following his ruling against the strikers, are too plain to be misunderstood. While he might condescend to hear the charges against the general managers, it is very evident that a motion to quash any proceeding against the corporation would be granted.
The greatest pressure of evidence brought to bear by the American Railway Union against this illegal combination would have no weight with the judge, therefore it could not be wondered that when the General Managers Associationstarted a systematic course of boycotting the American Railway Union by blacklisting its members, there was no action taken to prosecute them.
The Union Pacific, now in the hands of the government, not only discharged every striker and sympathizer but blacklisted them also.
This is a sample of justice. Some of the men had worked for the company for twenty years, and the only charge against them was that of being members of the American Railway Union and struck in sympathy with the starving Pullman employes.
Their system of blacklisting is so perfect that every avenue of escape is closed against an employe.
They have what is known as the blacklist book. The names of the strikers are entered in the book of which a copy is held by all railroads. When a man makes application his name is taken and the book is then consulted. If his name is registered he is told that no more men are wanted, if not, he is told to call the next day, by which time, if he is a striker, it is known, and he will have to travel.
An assumed name will do no good, as he willbe asked to give reference signed by his last employer, so you will see very plainly that the strikers lot is not a bed of roses.
President Debs has been accused of being responsible for this condition of affairs. There is absolutely no truth in that accusation, as in the first place it was directly against his wishes and advice that the Pullman employes struck, and only after a personal investigation of the case—and realizing that the causes which led to it would admit of no denial that the men were justified in their action—did he approve of it.
The boycott that followed the Pullman strike, as has been previously stated, was not ordered by Mr. Debs. He did not have the power to order it, therefore he could not be held responsible for the result.
The men who were the victims of this unfortunate boycott, were themselves responsible for its beginning, as by an almost unanimous vote they ordered it. Perhaps they may have acted hastily, it has been stated many times that this was the case, but when the brutal inhuman treatment of the Pullman employes came to light through the investigation of the delegates to the convention, they would be less than human if theyhad refused to come to the assistance of these men who were being ground down by a merciless corporation.
After reading the facts brought to light by the witnesses before the strike commission appointed by President Cleveland, and also Gov. Altgeld's personal investigation I do not believe that any one with a spark of humanity in his heart will condemn them for their actions.
The commission appointed by President Cleveland to investigate the strike began its work Aug. 15, at 10 o'clock in Judge Grosscup's court room. Most of those present were members of the American Railway Union. Prof. Bemis, of the Chicago University, was in attendance. Neither the Pullman Company or the railroad companies were represented. The witnesses examined were Geo. W. Howard, vice-president of the American Railway Union, and James R. Sovereign, grand master workman of the Knights of Labor. Acting with the commission were B. J. Hastings, of Utica, N. Y., and Deputy United States Marshall Bartlett. Chairman Wright announced that they were in session pursuant to the President's call which the clerk read. This document directed an inquiry into the causes and the conditions of the controversy between the Illinois Central and the Rock Island roads and their employes. After the reading chairman Wright made the following statement:"By the act recited in the commission of the President that has just been read, this commission is directed to examine into the causes, controversies and difficulties existing between the roads named and their employes at the time the commission of the President was issued. The board is constituted as a temporary body for this purpose and not for the purpose of arbitrating the difficulties that existed. It is practically a court of inquiry and its proceedings will be in accordance with the usages of such courts. It will proceed first to hear all witnesses in behalf of the employes and then those of the corporations named. All such witnesses are requested to hand their names to the clerk. Under the law parties may be represented by counsel or appear in person as they see fit, and examine and cross-examine the witnesses. After all the witnesses have given their testimony the commission will then consider arguments or suggestions to be made upon the questions before it. All suggestions and arguments presented in writing will be filed and considered by the commission, but the question as to how far the commission will listen to parties who desire to be heard orally will depend upon the time left to the disposal of the commission andwill be determined after the testimony is concluded. By the act creating it this commission possesses all the power and authority of the United States Commissioners appointed by the Circuit Courts of the United States. The hours of sitting will be from 10:00A. M.to 4:00P. M.Parties and their counsel and witnesses attending will find seats within the rail."
Vice President Howard was the first witness sworn. In answer to questions as to his age, residence and occupation, Mr. Howard replied that he was 46 years old, resided in Chicago, and was vice president of the American Railway Union. For nearly 30 years he had been identified with the railroad service filling positions from trackman to general superintendent. He had been a member of the Yard Masters' Association, the B. of L. E. and O. R. C. By request of Mr. Wright he gave the following connection of the American Railway Union with the strike.
"We began organizing the Pullman employes in March of this year. Early in May they struck. The strike was voted by themselves not by the American Railway Union, indeed we advised against the strike.
"Immediately after the strike was called Iaccompanied a committee of forty-three representing every branch of the Pullman service to a conference with Mr. Wickes at Pullman. Mr. Pullman refused to arbitrate but promised to give their grievances immediate attention if they would return to work. I inquired of Mr. Wickes if there would be any prejudice against the members of the committee and was assured by him that there would not be. After receiving this assurance from Mr. Wickes, I advised the men to go back to their work, which they did. Next day three of the committee were discharged, not on order or with the knowledge of Mr. Wickes or Mr. Pullman, but by some under boss in the shops. This so incensed the rest of the employes who considered it a breach of promise that they unanimously struck again.
"June 12, the convention of the American Railway Union met in Chicago. The Pullman strikers were represented by seven or eight delegates. The situation at Pullman received consideration. A joint committee representing the convention and the Pullman strikers was appointed to wait on the Pullman company. The committee was informed that the Pullman company would confer with only its employes,consequently this body was discharged and a committee consisting of Pullman employes appointed. The action of the Pullman company was reported to the American Railway Union convention whereupon each delegate wired his local union for instructions. The result of this was that the members of the American Railway Union all over the country voted to discontinue handling Pullman cars if at the end of five days from that date the Pullman company refused to arbitrate with its employes.
"In this connection I wish to say that Mr. Pullman stated to the committee of forty-three, in my hearing, that his employes at that time owed him $70,000 for rent and that he had not pushed them for payment which fact clearly shows that his men were not making enough to pay rent."
Mr. Wright: "That was the boycott order, was it?"
Mr. Howard: "I do not use the word boycott. The action taken was simply that members of the American Railway Union would not handle Pullman cars.
"Two days before the limit of five days—the dates I do not now recall—but I will furnishthem—the General Managers' Association took action declaring that they would share the expense of whipping the American Railway Union.
"Pullman would not arbitrate and first the men on one road then on another refused to handle Pullman cars. They did not decline to handle other cars, but switchmen, you understand, would not attach Pullmans to trains. Engineers, conductors, firemen and trainmen would not take out trains which Pullman cars were attached to. There was no attempt to interfere with the mails but on the contrary every effort in our power was made to help the roads carry them. The companies held the mails in their determination to attach Pullman cars to trains.
"Of my personal knowledge I know of a road that abandoned a mail train to take out an excursion train, not having crews to take out both. In another instance I know of a mail train going out on the order of the railway officials after the Pullmans had been cut off by the employes. Things went on in this way for several days. No violence was committed by the employes and the police were in full control of the situation to prevent violence from outsiders.
"The first pistol was drawn by one Miller, an employe of the Tribune at Blue Island, wholly without cause, and after the troops were on the ground. The violence that was afterward committed was not as was believed by members of the American Railway Union but by outsiders—some acting in passion, because they saw in the presence of the soldiers an instrument of tyranny. Others in a spirit of mischief and love of destruction and others still—hired by the General Managers in order to create public sentiment against us. Yesterday I gave the mayor of Chicago the name of a man who claimed, while under the influence of liquor to have received $400 for burning cars. The Committee of safety, at Springfield, sent us the names of three men who quarreled about the division of $500 received for burning cars. $200 of which was paid in advance by John M. Eagan, of the General Managers' Association."
Regarding the motives actuating the organization of the American Railway Union Mr. Howard denied that it was to destroy the old organizations but because they no longer fulfilled the necessities of the situation. If the old brotherhoods could get together amicably there would beno need of the American Railway Union, but they never can. There are two many causes for jealousy, for instance: There are 10,000 locomotive engineers who are not in the B. of L. E. but are members of the B. of L. F. In case of a grievance the engineers are divided and are represented by two organizations. The Brotherhood of Trainmen contains men who have been promoted to conductors causing a friction between these two orders.
Mr. Wright: "Then the sole purpose of the American Railway Union in taking the action it did was to oppose the Pullman company and it was not actuated by any desire to injure the other railway organizations?"
Mr. Howard: "That is it exactly. After the action taken by the General Managers' Association we had to act as we did or lie down."
Mr. Wright: "Did the officers of the American Railway Union advise the men on roads other than those using Pullmans to go on strike?"
Mr. Howard: "The men on all roads represented by the General Managers' Association were advised to go out on strike."
Mr. Kernan: "Was this order extended toroads not using Pullman cars or which were not represented in the General Managers' Association?"
Mr. Howard: "No, sir."
Mr. Kernan: "Were there any such road?"
Mr. Howard: "Yes. General Manager Clark, of the Mobile & Ohio, sent us word that his road would drop the Pullman service if the men would continue at work. We advised the men to return to work under those conditions, but the men at St. Louis argued that such action would weaken their cause and refused to take our advice in the matter."
Mr. Worthingford: "How did you advise all other organizations to go on a sympathetic strike?"
Mr. Howard: "We did not advise nor even request other organizations to declare a strike. We invited the heads of all labor organizations to come here and aid us by their advice or in any way they saw fit to help us. I think Mr. Debs sent the invitation. When the representatives of the other labor organizations met here, we went before the body and explained the entire situation. They asked Mr. Debs what he wished them to do. He replied that he did not askanything of them but left it to their best judgment and conscience to take such measures as would help bring the trouble to an end. Mr. Debs read a communication which he had prepared to present to the general managers, and asked the representatives at the conference if they would act as a board of arbitration or assume the role of peace-makers. President Gompers of the American Federation of Labor, seemed afraid that such action would involve the other organizations in some way and hesitated to accept our request to take the communication to the general managers. We then concluded to ask Mayor Hopkins to present our communication. The mayor willingly granted our request."
Mr. Kernan: "Was any written record kept of that conference of the heads of the labor organizations which was held at the Briggs House?"
Mr. Howard: "I do not know."
Commissioner Kernan: "What records have you of the proceedings of your convention as to who invited the heads of other labor organizations to meet here in conference, and what they were expected to do?"
Mr. Howard: "I think it was decided at the convention of the American Railway Union, whichmet here June 12, to extend such an invitation. I know it was talked over then."
Commissioner Wright: "Then the American Railway Union did not advise a sympathetic strike of all organizations."
Mr. Howard: "No, sir. Mr. Debs left that question to the judgment and conscience of the men themselves."
Commissioner Wright: "Was the action of the convention of June 12 a strike?"
Mr. Howard: "Well, it was called a strike."
Commissioner Worthington: "Was the communication you referred to presented to the general managers?"
Mr. Howard: "Yes, sir, and returned without an answer further than a statement that the General Managers' Association had no business to transact with the American Railway Union or its representatives."
Mr. Kernan: "It is charged that your organization, like others, encouraged its members to persistently interfere with and prevent unorganized labor from taking positions given up by their striking members. Is that charge true?"
Mr. Howard: "It cannot be shown in one instance that anything of the kind has been done."
Commissioner Kernan: "You won't go so far as to say that no interference of the sort alluded to has ever been engaged in?"
Mr. Howard: "Certainly not. I mean that such interference was not authorized or countenanced by the union."
Commissioner Kernan: "Did you take any steps to prevent such interference?"
Mr. Howard: "We have taken the ground that when we go out on strike not to interfere with any of the new men the companies may employ."
Commissioner Kernan: "You do countenance advice to such men not to take the places of strikers?"
Mr. Howard: "Oh, yes. We claim the right to ask new men not to take our places."
Mr. Kernan: "Is it not a fact that such interviews usually result in violence?"
Mr. Howard: "No. I think the rule is to the contrary. We go no further than to request the men to quit work and to commit no violence."
Commissioner Kernan: "Is there any punishment for violation of that rule?"
Mr. Howard: "No. No organization hasany power to punish a member for violation of such rule except by expulsion. We leave the punishment of such cases to the civil authorities."
Commissioner Kernan: "Don't you think some steps should be taken by labor unions to punish their members who violate the rules in that respect?"
Mr. Howard: "Yes, sir, I do, and we started out to do so here during the strike but the trouble assumed such vast proportions that it was impossible to do anything in that direction. In the case of the Great Northern strike we appointed committees to guard the company's property, and the men were instructed to shoot anyone found in the act of destroying same."
Commissioner Kernan: "What, as a rule has been your experience in strikes where violence was restored to?"
Mr. Howard: "The men have always been defeated."
Commissioner Kernan: "Then a resort to violence is rather detrimental to the cause of the strikers?"
Mr. Howard: "Decidedly so. We want public opinion with us in a strike."
Commissioner Kernan: "Do you know ofany organization that disciplines its members for resorting to violence?"
Mr. Howard: "None, excepting the American Railway Union. Our argument is that the only weapons labor has to fight its battles with are the strike and the boycott. There is some talk about the ballot but some questions cannot be settled by the ballot. Only the array of labor in one solid phalanx will give it the power that will make strikes unnecessary."
Commissioner Kernan: "Does not history show that on account of jealousies in your own ranks a complete organization of labor cannot be effected?"
Mr. Howard: "Yes. That is history up to the present, but the workingman is doing more thinking to-day than ever before."
Commissioner Kernan: "You regard such a strike as would be possible under the conditions you outline as a desirable thing for organized labor?"
Mr. Howard: "No, sir. If employers would be a little more considerate of their men there would soon be no labor organizations in existence."
Commissioner Kernan: "You do not say that all grievances are just, do you?"
Mr. Howard: "No. Many of them are frivolous."
Commissioner Kernan: "It is charged that there is a minority in all labor organizations who are practically enslaved by the will of the majority and that a man for that reason loses his independence when he joins a union?"
Mr. Howard: "Well, I think the reverse is the rule. The hot heads and agitators in the labor movement are in the minority; the quiet, thinking men are always in the majority. It often happens that the man who is really most anxious to strike assumes an air of indifference or positive objection to such a move. He is merely waiting for a good excuse to stop and let the blame lie with some one else. He wants some one to order him to quit work so he can say to the superintendent that he is afraid to remain at work for fear of personal violence."
Commissioner Kernan: "Was any other motive behind the strike other than to force a settlement with Mr. Pullman?"
Mr. Howard: "No."
Commissioner Kernan; "Was there anyobject in breaking the older unions so that the American Railway Union might profit thereby?"
Mr. Howard: "While the increase in membership in the American Railway Union meant a decrease in the strength of the older organizations it was not the object of the strike to break down the older unions."
In answer to a question by Commissioner Kernan as to what he would suggest to prevent railroad strikes in the future, Mr. Howard replied that the government ownership and control of railroads was the only practical solution of the question. He argued that about one third of the railroads of the country are practically under control of the government, and thought the balance could easily be taken. He claimed the Santa Fe was from two to four months behind in payment of wages; that it would seem only fair that the government should see that the men were paid. The government had gone to the extent of forcing the employes of that and other roads to work whether they wished to or not and he thought the other step might as well be taken at once.
Mr. Sovereign, grand master workman of the Knights of Labor, was the next witness. He testified that he was a member of the American RailwayUnion. Said the only official connection the Knights of Labor had with the strike was the adoption of a resolution that they would not ride in Pullman cars. He also stated that a general tie-up of all the industries in the country to force public sentiment on Pullman and bring to bear on the Pullman company the greatest possible pressure was contemplated, but it was found the tie-up could not be made sufficiently general to bring about the desired results, so it was not attempted.
Commissioner Kernan: "Then you do not consider the American Railway Union responsible for the rioting that occurred?"
Mr. Sovereign: "No, sir. In fact I do not think there was any rioting."
Commissioner Kernan: "Do you consider burning cars a species of rioting?"
Mr. Sovereign: "Not when it was done by U. S. marshalls."
Commissioner Kernan: "Was it so done?"
Mr. Sovereign: "I read reports in Mayor Hopkins' office to-day to that effect—reports that seem conclusive on that point. Moreover I don't think there was as much rioting as is generally believed. I came from Des Moines on what wassupposed to be the last train to Chicago. We arrived without incident at Blue Island on July 6. There the train was side tracked and we were told by the officials that it could go no further because of the mobs between there and the city. I saw a west bound mail train on another track and was told it had been there for twenty-six hours and could not proceed on account of the mob and violence beyond, though it would go on the very same track on which we had just arrived. I bought a ticket from Blue Island to Chicago on the Wisconsin Central. After coming a short distance the train stopped and the conductor told us we could go no further on account of mobs ahead of us. I picked up my grip with the intention of walking to the city, but the conductor cautioned me against risking my life. However I walked in, was not molested, saw no disorder and did not see more then ten men at any one place."
Mr. Kernan inquired what views the Knights of Labor held about letting non-union men take the places of strikers.
Mr. Sovereign: "That depends on circumstances. In the case of mine owners, for instance, who have sold houses to their employes who have partly paid for same, the unjust discharge of thesemen means a forfeiture to the mine owners of all money paid on the property. We hold that we must by all honorable means prevent others from taking their places."
Commissioner Kernan: "But suppose honorable means are not effective?"
Mr. Sovereign: "Well, if it's necessary to prevent them from passing a given line we clasp hands and keep them out."
Commissioner Kernan: "You do not assault them?"
Mr. Sovereign: "No. If they break through they assault us."
Mr. Sovereign did not think that strikes or compulsory arbitration was the remedy for labor troubles. He believed that the government ownership of railroads would settle the trouble for employes. He also believed the employes of corporations had an equity in their positions and for unjust discharge should have a remedy in a court of equity.
Mr. Kernan: "Why cannot the contract between employer and employe provide for all you want the law to cover?"
Mr. Sovereign: "Because labor is always dependent, always has been at least and is forced bythe duress of circumstances to accept employment without insisting on protecting conditions."
George W. Lovejoy was the next witness to take the stand. In answer to a question by Commissioner Wright, he said: "I am familiar with the history of the strike on the Rock Island road. Beside the order passed by the convention to refuse to handle Pullman cars, the men at La Salle had a special grievance that consisted of unjust treatment of the members of the American Railway Union which had a local lodge at that point. I for one was dismissed without any cause being assigned. Complaint was made to Supt. Dunlap and an explanation asked as to why the men were discharged. He refused to consider the grievance submitted to him so the men concluded to strike."
Commissioner Wright: "Was the grievance submitted in writing?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "It was. I have not a copy, but think I can get one from the local union."
Commissioner Wright: "What part did your local union take in the Pullman strike?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "It decided to sustain it."
Mr. Worthington: "Was there any violence at La Salle?"Mr. Lovejoy: "No, sir. None whatever."
Commissioner Kernan: "Have any of the old men been taken back?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "No, sir. And never will."
Mr. Worthington: "Is it on account of the strike that they cannot get back?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "I suppose it is."
Commissioner Kernan: "How general was the strike at La Salle?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "It extended to every branch of the service. Switchmen, firemen, engineers, conductors, brakemen, telegraph operators, clerks, round-housemen and trackmen."
Commissioner Kernan: "Now tell us about the cause that led to your discharge as you understand it?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "Six months previous to the convention of the American Railway Union which met in Chicago, June 12, I had an understanding with the superintendent that I would get a leave of absence and was to put a man in my place while absent. When I got ready to come to Chicago, I sent a note asking for such leave of absence and transportation. The transportation was sent me, but no answer to my note was given. When I came to Chicago I called atthe office of the superintendent to have an understanding about my leave and he told me that a written notice was not necessary. Whenever I wanted to go anywhere all I had to do was to put a good man in my place and go. The Tuesday following the opening of the convention the assistant superintendent went to La Salle and put another man in my place permanently. No reason has ever been given me why such action was taken."
Commissioner Wright: "Mr. Lovejoy, I suppose you have given the subjects of labor troubles and strikes some study. I wish to ask if you can suggest any solution of these troubles."
Mr. Lovejoy: "Yes, sir, I have and I consider the only way to solve the question is for the government to own the railroads."
Commissioner Kernan: "What is your reason?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "I think the employes would receive better treatment and be better satisfied. I think they would get the same kind of treatment as the postal employes and there would be no strikes under these conditions."
Commissioner Kernan: "What do you think of arbitration as a remedy?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "I have never seen arbitration tried to any great extent and while I believe in the principle I am not prepared to say that I am in favor of compulsory arbitration."
Commissioner Wright: "If the government owned the railroads how would you avoid the changes incident to a change in administration?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "I consider that railroad employes would be in practically the same position as postal clerks. They would be under civil service rules to the extent of being pensioned after a term of years of faithful service."
Commissioner Kernan: "Would it not cause jealousy among other branches of workingmen if such a system should be adopted toward railroad men?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "I do not think so. I am not jealous of postal clerks."
Commissioner Wright: "What would you suggest as the next best thing if government ownership proved impracticable?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "That the government keep hands off altogether; let the roads and their men fight out their troubles free from outside interference. It is the knowledge that the government can be called to their aid that makes manyof the railroad officials so arbitrary with their men."
Commissioner Kernan: "Don't you think that disputes ought to be settled by some other method than open warfare?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "There would be none if the authorities would keep away. The employes would settle their grievances by arbitration."
Mr. Worthington: "What would you think of a law providing that upon application of a certain number of employes the railroads should be compelled to come before a board of arbitration and make answer to the grievances of the men or vice versa before a strike could be declared? I mean by that a law which would compel a hearing of disputes by a constituted tribunal even though that tribunal had not the power to force a decision in the matter?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "I would be in favor of such a court and believe that the railroad men would abide by its decision voluntarily if they had some choice in the selection of the arbitrators."
Commissioner Kernan: "Is it not one of the greatest troubles the railroad men have to contend with that they cannot get a hearing of their grievances?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "Yes, sir. It is. And if the men could always be sure of getting a fair and impartial hearing I do not believe there would be any strikes. As a rule the men are opposed to strikes and resort to them only when every means of settling grievances has failed."
Commissioner Kernan: "Is it not true that strikes usually end disastrously to the men?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "Strikes often fail to accomplish the particular end in view, but I believe on the whole their tendency is toward a betterment of the conditions of the men. The strike we have just passed through has demonstrated to the working people of this country that they must get together as one solid body before they can win. They have found out that when they undertake to assert their rights they have no friends but themselves. The press, the judiciary, the ministers and office holders are all against them."
Secretary Kelliher of the American Railway Union was next to testify. He promised to furnish the commissioners with certified copies of any of the proceedings of the convention, and the correspondence which occurred during the strike. In answer to questions by the commissioners he considered government ownership of railwaysthe only solution to strikes. While he favored arbitration, he did not think compulsory arbitration would be satisfactory to the men.
Thomas J. Heathcoat, a resident of Pullman, and one of the strikers, was the next witness examined. He testified to the condition of Pullman prior to and at the time of the strike and gave a full account of the strike and the causes that brought it about. He gave in detail the scale of wages paid prior to June, '93, and the constant reductions since.
Mr. Heathcoat, in answer to Commissioner Kernan asking him to explain the mode adopted by the Pullman Company in cutting wages for piece work, said:
"Take, for instance, that desk behind which you sit. Suppose it were given to me to make. I figured that I could do the work for $20.00, and took it at that price. As a good mechanic I could make $4.00 per day at it. For the next one the foreman would allow me $18.00. Being anxious to make good wages, and being a good mechanic, I would use extra effort and still make $4.00 per day. The next one the foreman would allow me only $16.00 for. Yet, by extraordinary effort I could still make $4.00 daily. The next one theforeman would allow me $12.00 for, and with my utmost endeavors I could make only $3.00 per day. As a good mechanic I would refuse to take any more at that price and the work would be given to an inferior workman who could make only $1.25 per day. This is the way the Pullman Company has worked its piece work system."
Commissioner Wright: "Did the cuts in other departments average as much as in yours?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "They averaged the same though they were not alike. The new men in the freight car department suffered more than we did and there were others in some of the departments that were making pretty good wages at the time of the strike."
Commissioner Wright: "You have spoken of asking the company for a reduction in rent. What rent do you pay, and what did you get for it?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Up to the beginning of the strike I paid $17 a month rent and 71 cents per month for water. Gas I did not use. Could not afford it. The company charged $2.25 per 1,000 feet. My house had five rooms, cellar and back yard."Commissioner Wright: "What would similar houses rent for elsewhere?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "I know of eight and nine room cottages with front and back yards, in every way more desirable than the house I live in, that can be rented for $8.00 and $9.00 per month."
Commissioner Worthington: "What, in your opinion, would it cost to build houses such as you live in?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "I should like to take the contract for building them at $600 apiece."
Commissioner Kernan: "What other accommodations do you get for the rent you pay, say in the way of paved streets?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "There are cheap wooden sidewalks in front of the house and the company keeps a force of men on the street picking up paper and hauling away garbage. That's all I know."
Commissioner Wright: "Have you applied to the Pullman company for work since the strike?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "No, sir. I understand that I am blacklisted. They have a blacklist, you know. I have one in my pocket now."
Commissioner Wright: "Will you let me see it?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. Here it is."
Commissioner Wright: "Have you any objection to telling us where you got this?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. I got it from a friend of one of the clerks in the Pullman office and I would not like to tell the name of either, as it would cost the clerk his position."
Commissioner Wright: "Have you any other evidence of the existence of a blacklist?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. One of the men who applied to Mr. Childs at the Rock Island shops for work. He was asked his name and the same being found on one of their lists he was told that he was a Pullman striker, consequently could not get work. I understand the Pullman company's blacklist was sent to all the railroads so that others besides myself can never get work in the railroad shop again."
Commissioner Wright: "Do labor unions ever blacklist non-union men?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "The American Railway Union does not. That is the only labor union I ever belonged to."
Commissioner Wright: "What was thefeeling of the employes toward Mr. Pullman previous to the strike?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "As a rule I think the employes had a high regard for Mr. Pullman until Harry Middleton took charge two and a half years ago. He is not a practical car builder. He wastes material for which we are charged. He displaces men who have earned their positions by good work and promotes his favorites. He makes arbitrary and tyrannical shop rules which deprive us of part of our pay. For instance, suppose a car carpenter be given a lot of cars, the work to be finished in a certain time. Within a day of the time limit it is seen that there is still six days work for one man. He will put on five extra men, regardless whether that many can work to advantage, and pay them by the hour charging the same to the man who took the job as piece work."
Commissioner Kernan: "Is not time enough allowed to finish the work so that such instances would be due to the neglect of the man who took the job?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "No, sir. It is not, except in rare cases. It is misjudgment on the part of the manager, Mr. Middleton, as I said before, whois not a practical car builder. As an instance of a waste of material—There was a set of car sashes, made of mahogany. Care was not taken to see that the mahogany picked out was all of the same color. Instead of picking out those of the set that were alike in color and completing the set with new ones and using the off color ones in another set with wood picked out to match, Middleton had the whole set smashed and charged the men with the cost of the material and refused to pay them for their time when it was not their fault at all."
Mr. Wright: "Referring now to the committee appointed to wait on Mr. Pullman—tell us what you said and what was said to you."
Mr. Heathcoat: "We asked Mr. Wickes and Mr. Pullman to adjust our wages so that we could support our families. We wanted either the wages of June, 1893, or a reduction in rent and some increase in wages. Mr. Pullman said he could not reduce rents as he was making only 3-1/2 or 2-1/2 per cent., I don't know which now, on his investment. He said he could not increase wages because he was losing money on his contract work. But he did not say what was a fact that ninetenths of the work that had been done since the cut began was Pullman and not contract work."
Commissioner Kernan: "What do you mean by Pullman work?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Work on cars owned and operated by the Pullman Company and not work on cars sold to railroads. One result of this was that the company was getting work from us for $1.90 for which it paid the railroads when they did this work $2.50 and $2.70. Two days after he told us the company was losing money on its contract work, a quarterly dividend of 2 per cent. was declared."
Commissioner Kernan: "That might have been paid from accumulations and not from earnings."
Mr. Heathcoat: "Mr. Pullman did not make any such explanation to us when we spoke to him afterward. If he had, perhaps we would not have felt so badly about it. But it did seem hard that when men were working and not getting enough from the company to buy enough to eat that it should pay out $600,000.00 in dividends."
Commissioner Wright: "Were there those not getting enough to eat?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "I have seen men faint bythe side of cars on which they were working because they had not had enough to eat. After the cuts, while working as hard as I could to earn enough to support my family, I have been obliged to sit down in the middle of the forenoon to rest because I had not had enough food to enable me to do such hard work and there were hundreds worse off than I. If rents had been reduced I believe there would have been no strike. We wanted to submit the question of rent and wages to a board of arbitration, we to choose one, the Pullman company one, and the two a third. We would have abided by any decision the arbitrators made."
Commissioner Wright: "Did not Mr. Pullman offer to let you look over the company's books to convince you that what he said was true?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes. But what would we know about them? Besides, we did not believe that the books would show the real facts. I have been told that there is only one accountant in the city who understands the company's books and we did not have money enough to buy bread let alone to hire an accountant. I have seen men crying at the paymaster's window when theirpay checks for two weeks would be eight cents or 35 cents, or one dollar or two dollars over their rent and the company expected them to support their families on that 'till next pay day. You see the men got two pay checks, one for just the amount of rent owed and the other for the balance of their two weeks pay. The rent checks they are expected to indorse and turn over at once to the town agent in payment of rent. The law will not allow the company to deduct the rent from the pay and retain it, but the check must be turned over just the same for you cannot cash it unless you can persuade the agent that you cannot possibly live unless you are allowed to retain it. Then perhaps you will be allowed to retain a part or all of it. I have been insulted by the clerks in the agent's office because I told them I could not get along without the money for my rent check. Yet such was the case for there was one time when my pay after the rent was deducted left only eight cents a day for each member of my family to live on until the next pay day."
Mr. Worthington: "Are the Pullman employes required to live in Pullman?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. As long as thereare any houses in Pullman vacant the men must live there, unless they own houses somewhere else or are favorites of the shop bosses. In fact during last winter I knew of people who owned houses in Roseland leaving them unrented and moving to Pullman so they could get work. When you apply for work you are required to make application if you are a man of family."
Mr. Worthington: "Are there any lots in Pullman bought and sold so that you could form an idea of the value, for instance, of the lot on which the house you live in stands?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "No, sir. No lots are sold but I know of a house and lot over in Roseland on the boulevard near One hundred and eleventh street which were bought two years ago for $2,500 and can be rented for $12 a month. The house is better than the one I live in, is bigger and in a good location while mine is on a back street and I would not pay more than $1,000 for the house and lot."
Mr. Worthington: "If your house could be built for $600 and only yields 3-1/2 per cent the lot must be worth more than $5,000. Is it?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "No, sir. It is not, but there are some frame houses in Pullman which thecompany charges eight dollars a month for that could be built for $100."
Mr. Wright: "It was said at the beginning of this strike that the Pullman people owed $70,000 for rent. How far back did that accumulation begin?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "I should say about Nov. 1, 1893."
Mr. Wright: "Tell us if you know what the cuts in wages were in departments other than your own."
Mr. Heathcoat: "The freight car builders suffered more than others, but the commission can find out best by having some one from each department come before it."
Commissioner Kernan: "Don't the people of Pullman know that we want to hear from every one that can throw any light on this subject?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. They understand it but there are lots of them who have not money to get down here."
Mr. Wright: "Tell us if you can what was the average pay of the employes, say in April last?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "On a lot of elevated cars on which I worked I made 16 cents per hour, onone car and 15 cents per hour on another, but there were men working alongside of me who made only four and five cents per hour. I would say that in January, February and March the mechanic's pay averaged $1.50 and the laborers' pay $1.30 per day. Some times the laborers' checks were bigger than the mechanics'."
Commissioner Wright: "Have you any suggestion of a remedy for labor troubles?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. The ownership of railroads and banks by the government would do it. I never heard of a strike in the post-office department or the navy yard."
Miss Curtis next took the stand. She was an employe of Pullman and president of the Girls Union of the American Railway Union at Pullman. Beginning her testimony she said: "In June, 1893, the wages in my department were 22-1/2 cents per hour, $2.25 a day. In April, 1894, they were 70 to 80 cents a day. There were two cuts in one week in November and another in January. In April the best wages any of us could make was eighty cents a day, while some could not make more than from 40 to 50 cents a day. Last June they could make at least $1.50 per day."Commissioner Wright: "Do you pay rent?"
Miss Curtis: "Not now. My father worked for the Pullman company thirteen years, during which time he paid rent. He died last September and as there was some expense connected with his sickness he owed $60 back rent. Then I went to work in the repair shop and boarded out. The company made me pay $3 per week on account of the back rent. I still owed $15 on the day of the strike and owe it yet. Some weeks I did not earn enough to pay my board and rent too and then I paid only part of the $3."
Commissioner Wright: "Were you on any of the committees that waited on Mr. Pullman and Mr. Wickes?"
Miss Curtis: "Yes, sir. I represented the girls on that committee. We wanted our wages raised as the men did theirs. Mr. Wickes said it was impossible to raise wages as they were losing money on their contracts and it was utterly impossible to reduce rents. An appointment was made to meet Mr. Pullman on another day. When we saw him he said the same that Mr. Wickes told us."
Commissioner Kernan: "What work was done in your department?"
Miss Curtis: "We made the silk, satin andvelvet drapings; the carpets, tapestries and mattresses for the sleeping coaches, the linen for the dining cars, sewed the fringe on cushions and all that sort of thing."
Theodore Rhode was the next to testify. He said: "Four years ago I had a good job. Then they wanted me to do a kind of work that no one else could make a living at. Four or five of us were to work together. I was to have charge of the work and we were to divide whatever we made. I said I would try it, but if I didn't like it wanted my old job back. This was agreed to. When I became satisfied that I could make nothing at the new work I asked for my old place, but they would not give it to me and told me that if I didn't like what I was doing I could quit working for the company. After a while we got so we could make from $2.60 to $2.85 for 10-3/4 hours work. Then the cuts came, and work for which we had received $9.00 paid only $4.25. It was impossible to make $1.25 per day, and we were told by the foreman to quit if not satisfied. I paid $15.00 a month for rent and 71 cents for water. I could rent as good a house in Kensington or Roseland for $7.00 a month. On the day of the strike I owed $2.50 for rent. Have notpaid it since, although the collector has been around two or three times lately. Low wages and high rents are not all the trouble. It is the abuse. They talk to men as they would to dogs. They are constantly experimenting with new materials. If it don't prove satisfactory we get no pay for our work. Take English varnish, for instance. The atmosphere must be just right or it won't work. Oftentimes, owing to a dampness in the air, we were obliged to do our work over two or three times for which we get no extra pay. In April my wages every two weeks were from $12.00 to $15.00. I understand they pay the men who took our places from $2.50 to $3.00 and $3.00 to $5.00 per day. I have not applied for work again."
R. W. Combes. For 30 years a car carpenter and for 10 years employed at Pullman, was next called before the commission.
"A year ago," he said, "wages in his department was $2.25 at piece work, and 17-1/2 cents per hour. In March, piece work was cut so that they could not make more than 68 cents a day."
Commissioner Kernan: "How much would you have gotten at the rate of wages in force in March or April?"Mr. Combes: "We did not built the same kind of cars in 1894, but had we, we would not have received anything for them. In February I had $3.50 to support my wife and two children after paying rent. Had the men received fair treatment there would have been no strike. John Pearson, superintendent of the freight car department, is the whole cause of the strike. He is abusive and tyrannical. I was inspector in April and Pearson told me if the men did not do what I told them to take a club and knock their damned heads off. That's the kind of a man he is. I have not applied for work. Middleton told me I never could work there again."
H. F. Griswold, a switchman, testified that he had last been employed by the C. M. & St. P. Ry.—that he lost his position through the strike—had tried to get work within the last few weeks on the Penn. R. R., at Pittsburg, Altona and Columbus and at each of these places had been shown a blacklist with his name on it as a member of the American Railway Union.