She stated that the Pullman employes were indebted to Mr. Pullman
$70,000 for rent at the time of the strike; that their wages had been
insufficient to enable them to live and pay their living expenses. Mr.
Debs was re-called and asked if he sent out an official order June 28,
and he said he did; that the official order was given to the city
newspapers and the Associated Press over his own signature. Mr. Debs
read the manifesto, which had been referred to, and after counseling
peaceful methods in all cases and a strict compliance with the laws, the
manifesto concluded with these words:
“A man who will violate law is against the interests of labor.”
More than 150 telegrams were read to the jury, signed by Mr. Debs,
counseling peaceful methods and standing together if they wished to win.
The government attorneys did all they could to prevent such evidence
being introduced. The government attorneys asked Mr. Debs what wages he
was getting as a fireman in 1875. He said, “I began at $1 a night.” He
said, “I was afterwards paid by the mile.”
[Illustration:
DEBS’ PRESENT HOME IN TERRE HAUTE
]
Attorney Walker for the prosecution then asked Mr. Debs the following
questions:
“Q. Your salary as president of the American Railway Union of $3,000
still continues, does it not?
“A. No, sir; I cut it off myself last September.
“Q. The purpose of your Union was to get the control of all the railroad
employes in the hands of the American Railway Union, was it not?
“A. Yes, sir, under the limitations of the Constitution and By-Laws.”
Mr. Debs was then asked if the Great Northern strike was a peaceful
strike. He replied it was,—that no intimidation was used; that the
company made no attempt to bring in new men; that there were no troops
called out. The government attorney then asked:
“Q. You simply took possession of the road and held it?
“A. No, sir; we simply went home and stayed there.
“Q. There was no excitement?
“A. None whatever.”
Mr. Debs was then asked the meaning of the word “strike.” He replied as
follows: “A strike is a stoppage of work at a given time by men acting
in concert in order to redress some real or imaginary grievance.”
The government attorney then said: “Mr. Debs, will you define the
meaning of the word ‘scab?’” He replied as follows: “A scab in labor
unions means the same as a traitor to his country. It means a man who
betrays his fellowmen by taking their places when they go on a strike
for principle. It does not apply to non-union men who refuse to quit
work.”
February 8 it was again reported to the court that Mr. Pullman could not
be found. Each day there was reported an additional disappearance of
employes of the Pullman Company; first, Mr. Pullman was reported gone,
then his private secretary disappears, and the court issues subpœnas
against the great man’s stenographers, whose services are so valuable
that they are generally in attendance upon the head of the company
throughout the entire year, but no sooner are the subpœnas issued and
the officials are sent to serve them than the individual for whom they
are intended are not to be found. The judge looked very grave and when
he heard the news of these disappearances of witnesses that the
defendants were trying to bring into court and the attorneys for the
defense failing to get these employes, issued subpoenas for others
around the Pullman buildings.
On convening court Judge Grosscup announced that “owing to the sickness
of a juror and the certificate of his physician he will not be able to
get out for two or three days. I think it will be necessary to adjourn
the further taking of testimony in this case.” General Black, for the
prosecution, said he thought it would be possible to arrange that the
proceedings be continued with eleven jurors. Judge Grosscup thought such
proceedings would not be valid. Mr. Darrow, for the defense, proposed
that the place of the sick juror should be filled and the case proceed
after the evidence had been read over to the new juror. Long argument
was then held and on Tuesday morning, the 12th of February, 1895, Judge
Grosscup discharged the jury, and continued the Debs case to the first
Monday in May. This was done over the objection of the defendants. They
were confident of an acquittal at the hands of the jury and their
confidence was justified by both words and actions of the jurors after
they were discharged. As soon as court adjourned they shook hands with
Judge Grosscup and then made a break for the defendant and their
attorneys. For half an hour they held a regular levee, shaking hands and
chatting most cordially with Mr. Debs and the other defendants. Counsel
for the government were rather left to pose as wall-flowers. Mr. Debs
was told by more than one juror that on the notions he held when he went
into the jury box, five years in the penitentiary might not have been
unexpected, but that since hearing the testimony, his notions were very
different. Mr. Walker, attorney for the government, who was nearest the
jury, remarked to one of them that now he was free to do so, by reason
of their being discharged, he would like to shake hands with them. “We
want to shake hands with the judge first,” was the reply he got. Most of
the jurors shook hands with the judge, then hastened to find Mr. Debs,
the defendants, and their attorneys. One or two jurors shook hands with
the prosecution attorneys, but there was a decided heartiness in the
demeanor of the jurors toward the defense. Mr. Debs and all of the
defendants have ever since believed that the jurors were fair, candid
and able and they did everything possible to have the case brought to a
conclusion by the jury which had been selected and accepted.
The sudden termination of the Debs case left the question of whether Mr.
Pullman was in contempt or not in the shape of unfinished business. Mr.
Pullman afterwards said that he had had the grip, had aches in all parts
of his body; his nerves were shattered and his heart affected, he had a
bad taste in his mouth and felt a disinclination to engage in any
physical exertion; made up his mind to go East; thought the trip would
do him good; had his private car arranged, attached it to a train which
was to leave February 5. He admitted that he was in the Pullman offices,
as stated before.
Mr. Pullman has never been able, nor will he ever be able to make any
other explanation of his evasion of the law and his failure to do
justice to himself and the accused in this historic case.
It is now known that the General Managers’ Association, disguised in the
United States lion’s skin, was the prosecution and that it had but one
purpose and that was to break up and annihilate the American Railway
Union, by sending the leaders to the penitentiary, not only to get them
out of the way, but to warn other agitators not to interfere with the
General Managers’ Association’s right to do what they pleased with the
wages and hours of their employes and with the rates and charges for
transporting the products of the field, the mine, the farm and the
factory, or the persons of the people as they pleased. If Debs had fled
on the day of the trial, as Mr. Pullman did, we would not yet have heard
the last of such cowardly conduct.
The case was not called up in May, nor has it ever been called up, nor
have the indictments ever been withdrawn. The Railway Managers knew whom
they could call upon to enable them to carry out their purposes and they
called upon the late Grover Cleveland and in violation of every
principle of state sovereignty, he sent the U. S. troops into Chicago to
do ordinary police duty and crush out the right of the oppressed workers
to peacefully obtain a redress of wrongs. The principal actors in this
human drama have changed positions and roles. The accused are remembered
and idealized by the people and their accusers are as though they never
had been, except for the paltry parts they played.
It was almost impossible for the American people to learn about the
truth in this great case, because the railroads controlled then, as they
do now, the press. Bribery, falsehood, untruthful news items were spread
all over the country and many good people still believe that Debs was
the monster of wrong-doing and that Pullman was a magnate whose rights
as an employer had been unlawfully invaded.
SOME EDITORIALS IN CHICAGO PAPERS APPEARING DURING THE TRIAL FOR
CONSPIRACY.
Editorial in the _Evening Press_, November 23, 1895, entitled: “The
Liberation of Debs”:
“In the face of facts developed yesterday, it is idle to say that Eugene
V. Debs has lost the esteem of the masses. No such demonstration as was
made in his honor yesterday and last night has been seen in this city in
many years, if at all. Had he been the victorious soldier returned fresh
from conquests instead of a convict liberated from prison, his welcome
could not have been more spontaneous, enthusiastic, sympathetic. Whether
Eugene V. Debs merited imprisonment in the Woodstock jail; whether Judge
Woods in adjudging him in contempt of court did or did not debauch the
constitution, are questions now under consideration. Rightfully or
wrongfully, legally or illegally, Debs was sent to prison and after
serving his sentence to the last hour, was discharged yesterday.
“Do all men who transgress the law go to prison? Is the judicial and
military machinery of the United States set in motion every time a law
is violated? Is the interference with interstate communication a greater
crime than open, flagrant, overriding of the will of the people in
statute expressed by wealthy individuals and corporations? These
questions may be discussed and should be discussed by every man and
woman and child who hold law and justice in esteem.
“Not many months ago members of the cabinet, senators and congressmen
conspired with representatives of the Sugar Trust to rob the people of
millions of dollars. A secretary admitted before a congressional
investigation committee that he introduced a representative of this
gigantic sugar monopoly to law makers who would aid his cause. A senator
confessed to having made money by dealing in sugar stocks when the sugar
schedule was under consideration in the senate. The President of the
Sugar Trust boldly declared his concern made a practice of giving
hundreds of thousands of dollars to political parties to insure
favorable legislation. In each instance law was transgressed, yet not a
federal soldier was ordered out and not a man went to prison.
“The influence of the Standard Oil Company on courts and legislatures
and congress is notorious. Judges have been corrupted and law makers
bought by the mighty concern and not a soldier was ordered to arms or
another prison cell occupied. Steam and street railway companies have
bribed assemblies and councils and stolen public highways and lake
fronts and the soldier boys slept on in their fortresses and the prison
tailor had no calls for striped suits.
“The day must never come when there is no law. But it must come when
Justice will rip the bandage from her eyes and see and call for the
Havemeyers and the Standard Oil magnates and other transgressors of law,
as well as for the Debses.”
And now, July 22, 1908, as I write, the famous decision imposing a fine
of $29,240,000 on the Standard Oil Company for violation of the laws of
the United States is reversed by the same Judge Grosscup who handed the
lemons to the striking workers and their leaders in 1894. Do you see?
“COULD NOT SERVE GEORGE M. PULLMAN.”
“At the beginning of the afternoon session the attention of the court
was called to the difficulty experienced in securing the attendance of
George M. Pullman as a witness. Deputy Marshal Jones told the court he
had not been able to get personal service on Mr. Pullman, though he was
satisfied he was in the city. He had been to Mr. Pullman’s office and
the elevator boy had told him that Mr. Pullman was in his private room,
but when he announced his business to Mr. Pullman’s private secretary,
the latter went to the sanctum of the sleeping car magnate and returned
with the information that Mr. Pullman was not in, but was wintering in
Saint Augustine, Fla.
“The Court looked very grave when this announcement was made and
remarked that he would see the attorney for the defense in his chambers
after court adjourned.”—_Chicago Times_, Feb. 7, 1895.
* * * * *
“ROOM FOR THE MAGNATE.”
“The Court then adjourned on account of the absence of George M.
Pullman, for whom a subpœna had been issued.
“Of course, adjourn a court to suit the convenience of George M.
Pullman, who has grown decidedly since last July. He is now a magnate of
the first class in the Republican party, and the Court in having
presumed to subpœna him at all ought to have accompanied the service of
the process with ample apologies for venturing, even in the name of the
United States, to trespass upon the valuable time of a gentleman
distinguished not only in his own, his native land, but also throughout
civilization as the proprietor of perambulating lodging houses and
stand-up whisky bars.
“Of course, a court ought to adjourn in order to consult the convenience
of Mr. Pullman. Mr. Pullman himself had regard for his own convenience
when, during all the trouble of last July, he remained in the East,
while the militia and the constabulary force of Cook County guarded his
property so effectively that not even a blade of grass was trampled
down, not even a window was broken in all the establishments of the town
that bears his name.
“He rose superior to the dictates of common humanity last July, and why
should the dictate of a court affect him in February?
“It is absolutely essential that Mr. Pullman should be heard; why should
not his Honor adjourn his court and bring its officers and the jury and
the whole entourage to Mr. Pullman’s palatial residence and let him have
his say while he sips his chocolate?
“Is it not a fault of the republic that the masses do not sufficiently
consider the dignity of the magnates? They are superior beings. Ordinary
processes of law are made for ordinary individuals. Magnate Pullman has
all the dignity of a Chinese mandarin, and he ought not to be approached
save with the obsequiousness of a subject of the Celestial Empire
prostrating himself at the foot-stool of Chinese majesty.”—Editorial,
_Chicago Times_, February 7, 1895.
“THE MAGNATE.”
“Magnate Pullman is still missing. His whereabouts seem to give no
concern to his immediate attendants, but Judge Grosscup of the United
States Court is showing some anxiety to learn where he is and why it is
that he has not been served with a process calling him into court. An
examination of Magnate Pullman’s colored doorkeeper made by the Judge
personally disclosed that he saw the magnate enter his office Monday at
10:30 o’clock, an hour after a deputy marshal called, but he has since
mysteriously disappeared, and the marshal has been unable to locate him.
“Why this assumption of right to inquire into the personal movements of
so great a man as Mr. Pullman? Ought we not, rather, anxiously unite in
efforts to ascertain whether he is entirely safe, for if Magnate Pullman
were to disappear into thin air, it is doubtful if the world would
continue to revolve upon its axis and make its usual diurnal revolution.
Human laws are made for the mass of mankind. Why should Magnate Pullman,
who does not belong to the mass, but is a being apart, constructed of
superior clay, be subjected to any such belittling regulation? Magnate
Pullman keeps more bar-rooms in more states in the Union than any grog
shop seller and employs more male chamber-maids than any other magnate
in the bed-house business.
“The _Tribune_ finds excuses for the magnate. It says: ‘It is not
strange that he should be unwilling to go on the stand and be questioned
by Mr. Darrow, Mr. Geeting and the other lawyers for the defense. It is
not pleasant for a person who is at the head of a great corporation, who
has many subordinates and no superiors, and who is in the habit of
giving orders instead of answering questions, to be interrogated by
persons who are unfriendly to him, and who may put disagreeable
inquiries which he has to reply to civilly.’
“That’s it. Mr. Pullman is superior to the law. Like the king, he can do
no wrong, and no processes can lie against him. The _Tribune_, however,
we are bound to say, weakens a little, for it adds: ‘Nevertheless, it is
the duty of all men to appear in court when they are wanted there. The
subpœna does not discriminate between persons. Furthermore, those who
need the defense of the law the most, should be the promptest and the
most willing to submit themselves to the occasional unpleasantness of
the law, and should try to show that they believe all men are equal
before the law.’
“How presumptuous to suggest such a thing to Magnate Pullman, who does
not believe that all men are equal before the law. The _Tribune_ further
ventures to say that Mr. Pullman ‘should have faced the music like a
man.’
“There was some music here last June and July. It was music that never
should have been played if Magnate Pullman had been like the ordinary
run of human beings, but, being altogether an extraordinary creature, he
waved his baton and the band began to play, but, far from facing the
music which he himself had set in motion, he retired with a lawyer
bodyguard to the East and viewed the concert from a distance of a
thousand miles. Really, he had nothing to fear, for, as it turned out,
not a single pane of glass in his marvelous town was broken by what he
regarded as a fearful mob.
“The outcome of the present matter will be, of course, a demonstration
that Magnate Pullman is a bigger man than the United States
Court.”—Editorial, _Chicago Times_, February 8, 1895.
“SHALL DEBS BE TRIED AGAIN?”
“Owing to the illness of one juror the conspiracy cases against Eugene
V. Debs and his associates of the American Railway Union have come to a
sudden stop. The propositions of the defense to continue the hearing of
the case with eleven jurors, or to swear in a twelfth juror and proceed
after the evidence already in had been read to him, were both opposed by
counsel for the government and the railroads. As the matter now stands,
a new jury will have to be impaneled and the whole thing gone over
again, unless the Government decides to abandon the prosecution.
“It is exceedingly unfortunate that the present trial should have been
interrupted in this unforeseen fashion. A judicial declaration upon the
issues involved would have been of very decided value to all classes of
society. As the evidence has been detailed day after day in the very
full reports in the columns of the _Times_, the people have been able to
gain a clearer and more exact idea of the incidents of the great strike
than was possible in the moments of heated controversy last summer. It
does not seem like over-statement to say that there was every indication
that the defense would be successful. The charge of conspiracy had not,
at the time of the abrupt termination of the case, been at all
forcefully substantiated. Interviews with the released jurors establish
the fact that they would have acquitted the defendants had the case been
carried to its regular conclusion. It is credibly asserted that the
prosecution has for some time apprehended such an outcome of the trial,
and it was probably for this reason that the attorneys for the
Government exercised their undoubted right to protest against continuing
with an incomplete jury.
“In this situation the question arises whether the Government shall
proceed further with this prosecution. Heavy expense is involved in it
and it will consume much of the time of a court already overcrowded with
business. It is just, too, to call attention to the fact that the
defendants are poor men. The expenses of the defense thus far have been
met by voluntary contributions from other poor men, who are in sympathy
with the men on trial. There is obvious injustice in enlarging this
financial burden by bringing these men again to trial.
“In the opinion of the _Times_ enough has been done to maintain the
dignity of the State in this matter. Further prosecution of Debs and his
associates would look like persecution. The Government would better
abandon the case forthwith.”—Editorial, _Chicago Times_, February 13,
1895.
“WANT A TWELFTH JUROR.”
“Then there was a consultation between Court and counsel as to what to
do. To discharge this jury and commence all over again would occasion a
waste of time and delay which neither Court nor counsel wanted to
permit, if there was any possible way of avoiding it. However, counsel
for the Government seemed more easily able to reconcile themselves to it
than anybody else. There was a very strong impression in the courtroom
that the Government counsel had conceived the opinion that the jury
would not convict, and were not altogether sorry something had arisen to
give them a chance for a new jury.
“General Black at first thought that they could proceed with a jury of
eleven, if the defendants would agree. The defendants were ready to
agree, but took the view, and Judge Grosscup shared it with them that
such a stipulation would be a fatal error. Finally, General Black came
to this conclusion himself. Then the defense made a proposition itself.
This was in effect that the present jury be discharged and a new one at
once impaneled, consisting of the eleven of the present jurors and a
twelfth man; that for the benefit of this twelfth man the evidence
already taken might be read over. In support of this proposition Mr.
Gregory read a lot of authorities, some of them interesting in
themselves, aside from any aid they might be in the present case.
“The proposition was talked about informally between the Court and
counsel, and the more they talked about it the more feasible it seemed.
But before it was finally decided on Judge Grosscup wanted to sleep over
it. So he adjourned court until 10 o’clock this morning.”