Q. The question is a straight one?
A. I will give it to you straight. We proposed to treat the commanding
officer with all the respect in the world due to his position. We were
perfectly well aware that the chief executive of the State was out of
the State, and we did not think that he could depute his powers to any
one in the State. So we would want to know where he got his orders
from, and if he got them from a railroad magnate, we did not propose to
pay any attention to him.
Q. But you said if the soldiers fiddled, you proposed to dance?
A. Yes.
Q. Then if they proposed to maintain order, you proposed to resist
them--answer yes or no?
A. I refuse to answer the question in that way.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. If the soldiers undertook to disperse the crowd assembled there, did
the strikers intend to resist?
A. I did for one, undoubtedly. I would rather have died right there,
before I would have budged an inch.
Q. Was it talked of--was it understood that you, as a body, would
resist?
A. I don't think there was a man there but what would have gone to just
what I led him to.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. What do you mean by saying if the commanding officer had his orders
from a railroad magnate, you intended to do thus and so?
A. What do you mean?
Q. To resist, I understood you to say?
A. No; we proposed if General Huidekoper came to Allegheny, to go and
interview him and explain the situation. We were going to ask him the
question as citizens of the Commonwealth, for we looked upon it we had
that right; if he had his orders from the chief executive or from
Governor Hartranft; if he had, we would recognize him, if he had not,
we did not propose to recognize him any more than anybody else. We
proposed to treat him as a rioter, for we did not count ourselves as
rioters, for if the mob had come we would have given the mob the best
we had.
Q. Then you would have resisted in that case?
A. If he did not have authority, undoubtedly.
Q. But suppose he had authority?
A. Then we would have recognized it.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Do I understand you to say that you would have resisted if the
soldiers had undertaken to disperse you?
A. We looked at it this way: the Governor was out of the State, and we
had our reasons for thinking he had not got his orders from the
Governor, so we proposed to see who he got his orders from.
Q. If he had his orders from the Governor or the commander-in-chief,
then you would have obeyed his orders and dispersed?
A. Yes, if he had his orders from the Governor. That was the only
authority we recognized, and we knew he was out of the State.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Did you take advantage of his absence in this strike?
A. No, we did not.
Q. But you were well aware he was out of the State?
A. Yes.
Q. Was it your impression that no other man in the State of
Pennsylvania could order out the military?
A. That was our impression of it, yes.
Q. It certainly would be a bad fix if there was nobody else that could
order out the military?
A. All right; we knew the Lieutenant Governor was here.
Q. You did not take advantage of the Governor's absence, then?
A. No; we thought we had some rights that the railroad men were bound
to respect, but they did not seem to respect them. They treated us like
mad dogs.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. When was the Trainmen's Union organized?
A. On Saturday evening, June 2, 1877.
Q. Were you a member of the body?
A. I was the first man that ever took an oath in it.
Q. What was the purpose--what were the objects of that Union?
A. The purpose and object of the Trainmen's Union was to get the
trainmen--composing engineers, conductors, brakemen, and firemen, on
the three grand trunk lines of the country--into one solid body. We
knew that a reduction over the three grand trunk lines was going to
take place, and we thought if we could combine into one body all the
men, at a certain hour on a certain day, if the railroad magnates did
not accede to our demands we would strike, and leave the trains
standing just where they were, and go home. That was the object of the
Trainmen's Union.
Q. Do you know how far and wide it extended?
A. Yes.
Q. Please state?
A. It extended over the Baltimore and Ohio, the road from Pittsburg to
Baltimore, the Fort Wayne road from Pittsburg to Chicago, and I think
the last division was organized at Valparaiso, or Fort Wayne. It was on
the Northern Central and its leased lines, and all the leased lines of
the Pennsylvania company were in it.
Q. Did it extend on the Erie road, and to the Atlantic and Great
Western?
A. Yes.
Q. Over the whole length of the road?
A. I do not know.
Q. Where did it originate?
A. In Allegheny City.
Q. What arrangements, if any, were made by your organization for a
strike?
A. When we thought we were strong enough so we could control at least
three-fourths of the men of those roads, then we thought we could bring
matters to a point--we could all quit. We knew they could not find
enough green men to run the roads, and we thought that the citizens
would look at it in the same light as we did--that the citizens would
not care to trust their lives to green men--that the people traveling
on the roads would not trust their lives to green men; and we thought
by all going off and stopping the traffic on the roads that they would
give us back our ten per cent.
Q. It was not organized until after the ten per cent. reduction was
made on the 1st of June?
A. No; but it was talked about before that.
Q. How long before that was it talked about?
A. I believe the notice was stuck up by the Pennsylvania Company about
the 26th or 27th day of May--somewhere in that neighborhood--and from
that time on it was talked about.
Q. What led the men to talk about it at that time?
A. The notice was stuck up, that there would be a reduction.
Q. That was the first that called the attention of the men to it?
A. Yes.
Q. Was there any day set for the strike by the Trainmen's Union?
A. The 27th day of June, at twelve o'clock.
Q. State the extent of this strike as it was expected to take place on
the 27th of June? How many men had you, who had agreed to strike? How
wide was it to extend over the country?
A. I have just mentioned over the different lines.
Q. Had they all agreed to strike on that day?
A. Yes. Three or four days before the 27th of June--the 27th day of
June was a Wednesday--the Sunday night before, that is, the 24th, forty
men were sent out from Pittsburgh, so if they shut off the wires from
us, we could notify the different divisions if we could not get
telegrams to them in time, that if anything turned up, that it was
ordered, and that that was the day set.
Q. At what hour?
A. At twelve o'clock, noon, June the 27th.
Q. To what points were those men sent?
A. All over the different trunk lines.
Q. To notify all the different lodges or divisions?
A. Yes.
Q. Did they so notify them?
A. They did, I believe, so far as they could get. But a hitch occurred
before the 27th.
Q. What was it?
A. That was a Sunday night. On Monday night, the Pan-Handle division
had a meeting, and most of the members from the other divisions were
there, and it was decided on Monday night, when delegates from all the
divisions around were there, that the strike should take place on the
27th, and on Tuesday night, all the members of the divisions around
there were to come to Allegheny, to the usual place of meeting, and
have another talk with the boys there. They met there, when three or
four of them kicked up a rumpus, and it came near ending in a row. Some
of the men who were the first to go into the thing--who were the first
to propose doing anything, were the very men to kick, and two of them
that night, went out on No. 11, west, and took the news out west, that
there would be no strike the next day. We were all ready on the 27th,
at twelve o'clock, noon, to go out on a strike, but we got telegrams
from everywhere, asking if we were going on a strike, or whether we
were not going on a strike. So the thing got mixed up, and they stopped
the telegraph wires, and we couldn't get a word over. We had some
trains stopped at Pittsburgh, but I had them all moved out on the track
again, as I thought we had better let the thing go, than make a failure
of it, and wait for some better time--a better organization, or some
time when we could get things into better shape.
Q. What became of those men, sent out to notify the various divisions?
A. They beat their way back again, I guess, from all over the country
to Pittsburgh.
Q. Did the Trainmen's Union break up at that time, or did they continue
their organization?
A. They never had a meeting after the 27th, that I know of, in
Pittsburgh.
Q. Did they at any other point?
A. Yes; the Trainmen's Union is still in existence.
Q. Was there any time arranged afterwards for a strike?
A. No; no time was agreed upon, but all labored under the impression
that the bubble had grown so large, that it would have to burst sooner
or later.
Q. Was there any pre-arranged plan, by which any strike was to take
place on the 19th of July?
A. No, there was not. There was some little talk about it, if the
railroad company would do so and so, that they would kick.
Q. Do what?
A. Put on double-headers.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. What do you mean by kick?
A. Not stand it.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Strike, do you mean?
A. Yes.
Q. Then there was no pre-arranged plan for that strike on the 19th?
A. There was no pre-arranged plan.
Q. Was it talked over?
A. Not on that day; but just as soon as they put on double-headers they
didn't propose to submit to it, as they thought seventeen cars were
enough for the men to take care of.
Q. These double-headers were only confined to the Pennsylvania Central?
A. Yes.
Q. They didn't extend over any other roads leading into Pittsburgh?
A. No.
Q. Was it known to the men on any other roads that the men on the
Pennsylvania Central were going to strike?
A. I suppose they knew that they had their sympathy.
Q. I understood you to say that you left Pittsburgh the day before the
strike?
A. No; I left it about the 16th.
Q. Did you know any thing about it then, or understand that there would
be a strike then?
A. Yes; I remarked after the 27th day of June that I was positive there
would be a strike, sooner or later--that the thing would have to come
to a head itself.
Q. Did they say to you, or did you understand from any employés on the
Pennsylvania Central road, that there would be a strike on the 19th?
A. No one knew that they were going to strike on that day.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Then no time was set?
A. No.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Was it understood that when the order was given to run the
double-headers that they would strike?
A. It was understood that just as soon as they put on double-headers
they wouldn't run them. The men couldn't stand it.
Q. Did you know any thing about the strike at Martinsburg?
A. Yes; I heard of it.
Q. Before it took place?
A. No; not before it took place. I knew of it as soon as it did take
place.
Q. Was there any general understanding that a strike would take place
at the time the strike broke out at Martinsburg?
A. No; the understanding we had of this thing--our object in organizing
the Trainmen's Union was, that the Pennsylvania Company would make a
reduction on the first of June of ten per cent., and that, if their
employés submitted to it, that the New York Central would follow about
the 1st of July, and if their employés submitted to it--they had two
roads, and had pooled their earnings--they would make a reduction on
the 15th of July on the Baltimore and Ohio. They thought if they didn't
get a strike before the 15th day of July, then the Pennsylvania road
and these other roads would get so used to it, or that they would get
us so frightened that we would have the idea knocked out of us, if they
could run their traffic over those roads. They were not going to make a
reduction over two trunk lines at one time.
Q. Did all that happen?
A. No; there was a reduction on the Pennsylvania on the 1st of June,
and on Vanderbilt's road on the 1st of July, and on the Baltimore and
Ohio on the 15th or 16th, and on the 15th was the strike.
Q. Did you have any communication with the men at Martinsburg before
they struck?
A. I had some friends down there, and I used to hear from them once in
a while.
Q. About the strike--this particular strike that took place at
Martinsburg--did your union communicate with them? Was it understood or
arranged between you for that strike on the 16th?
A. No; although they said that just as soon as they got the reduction
they were going to strike.
Q. I understand you to say it was the double-headers, or the order to
run them, that caused the strike on the 16th, at Pittsburgh?
A. Yes; because it was the wrong time to put on the double-headers,
just following the strike at Martinsburg. That just started the whole
thing.
Q. This Trainmen's Union was organized, you say, for the purpose of
protecting yourself?
A. For protecting our own interests.
Q. What had you to complain of at the time of organizing the union?
A. The ten per cent. reduction. We thought we were getting little
enough money.
Q. Had you anything else to complain of?
A. Yes; we had something a little worse than the reduction. That was
all right. If they saw fit to reduce, and could get men to work at
their rate, all right. The officials of the road, and Mr. Scott, all
treated us all right. It was only the little under-officials who
treated us like dogs. I was told that if I voted for a certain man I
would get discharged off the road. I wanted to vote for a neighbor of
mine.
Q. By whom were you told that?
A. By a petty under-official, the assistant day dispatcher.
Q. Had you anything to complain of, except this ten per cent.
reduction?
A. Not on our road--not on the Fort Wayne road.
Q. Had they on the Pennsylvania Central, before the order was issued to
run the double-headers?
A. No; I don't believe they had.
Q. That was the only thing you had to complain of?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you have any negotiations with the magnates of the road in
regard to that?
A. Yes; we appointed a committee to wait on them, and talk with them,
and try to get the thing settled up; but we couldn't reach them with a
forty-foot pole. We tried everything with reference to avoiding a
strike.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. How long were you on the road?
A. About eleven months, I guess.
Q. Had there been any talk of striking before--during those eleven
months?
A. No.
Q. Were any committees appointed to wait on the officials?
A. That was when we heard of the ten per cent. reduction.
Q. Had you any grievances before?
A. No.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. It was arranged then by your union that you would strike in case of
a reduction?
A. That was what we organized for.
Q. Do you claim the right at all times to strike as a body? Do you
claim that it is one of the rights that you have?
A. I claim that every free born American citizen, if necessary,
has the right to quit work if he wants to. That is what I call
striking--quitting work.
Q. Doing anything more?
A. We have no right to destroy property.
Q. Do you claim it as a right to interfere with those who want to work?
A. It is a right to use mere suasion. If I were to see you rushing on
headlong on the breakers, and I can stop you, I would do so.
Q. Do you claim that you have a right to assemble in crowds or groups
upon the property of the railroad company?
A. If that is where we are employed; yes.
Q. But when you strike, you are no longer in the employ of the railroad
company?
A. No; not when we have once struck.
Q. Then after you have struck you don't claim that you have the right
to assemble there?
A. Until we are ordered off?
Q. But when ordered off, have you the right to refuse to go?
A. It depends greatly upon who orders you off.
Q. When ordered off by an official of the railroad company?
A. If I am there for any unlawful purpose, I ought to go, but if I am
not there for any unlawful purpose, and if I run against a man who
wants to show fight or ride a big horse, I don't think I have any
business to go, if I want to stay.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. But do you say that you have the right to go on another man's
property and stay there if he wants you to go away?
A. I don't recognize any one like a day dispatcher. It is not his
business.
Q. But it is his business to keep the track clear?
A. No; it is not.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. You did assemble at yard of the Fort Wayne and Chicago road, one
hundred and fifty or two hundred of you?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you ordered off--ordered to leave or disperse?
A. No; directly we were not.
Q. By any one belonging to the road?
A. The dispatcher told the chief of police to disperse this mob, that
they were not employés of the Fort Wayne road, but rioters and loafers
from Pittsburgh, and wouldn't allow their men to work.
Q. You resisted this? You refused to go?
A. I don't like a man to call me a liar.
Q. Did you refuse to go?
A. No one told me to go off the property.
Q. Didn't the policemen tell you to go?
A. No.
Q. Didn't they undertake to disperse you?
A. They got in amongst us, but they didn't push or tell us to go off.
Q. But you refused to go?
A. We didn't understand it that way.
Q. Was it not your duty to disperse when the policemen requested you,
having been instructed so to do by the officials of the railroad
company?
A. The police didn't tell us to disperse.
Q. You knew what they came among you for, and what commands had been
given to them by the officers of the railroad company?
A. I heard the dispatcher say, disperse this lot of loafers and rioters
from Pittsburgh. I don't know that he spoke to me.
Q. Did he refer to the crowd?
A. I don't know of any loafers or bummers in that crowd.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Were you ordered to disperse by anybody?
A. No; the dispatcher didn't speak to us, but to the chief of police,
that these men are a lot of rioters from Pittsburgh, and he wanted them
off the property.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Did you consider you had the right to take that property and pack it
away on the side tracks?
A. I thought I did perfectly right.
Q. If it was in danger of being destroyed?
A. Everybody appeared to be excited, and they had lost their heads, so
that you couldn't get them to do anything. There were some passenger
and freight cars, and a lot of cars loaded with live stock standing on
one track, and nobody appeared to know what to do with them. People
came to me and asked what to do, from even the dispatcher himself--he
looked to me.
Q. But after you had refused to work, had you any right to interfere
with that property?
A. We didn't interfere with the property.
Q. Had you any right to do anything with it?
A. If we were asked to do it we had.
Q. Had you any right to interfere with that property in any way?
A. Yes.
Q. You understand what I mean by my question? Do you not think it was
your duty, after having refused to work, to leave the premises entirely
and go away?
A. That depends on circumstances.
Q. But if you were working for a man and stopped work, or he turned you
off, have you any right to remain around?
A. That depends a great deal on whether he wants me around or not.
Q. But have you any right to interfere with his property in any way,
under any circumstances?
A. I would think I was a very foolish man. If my property was in danger
I would like him to come and lend a hand.
Q. I didn't ask any question about the property being in danger?
A. We didn't interfere with the property in any way or manner.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Had the commander of the military refused an interview with you, or
the party you represent, what would have been the consequences--what
was your determination?
A. I don't know as we figured that far ahead.
Q. But you must have had some plan, sir?
A. I didn't happen to meet him, therefore, I cannot tell you.
Q. I want to know what was your determination?
A. That is something nobody knows.
Q. I insist upon an answer?
A. It is a question I cannot answer.
Q. This is the question. Had the commander of the military refused to
have an interview with you or the party you represent, what was your
determination--what did you intend to do?
A. That would have depended greatly on circumstances. I don't know what
we would have done.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Did you intend to resist the militia?
A. If you or any other man or the militia had raised a gun to shoot me,
I undoubtedly would have resisted.
Q. But answer yes or no, then explain after answering the question?
A. What is the question?
Q. Did you intend to resist the militia had they attempted to disperse
the crowd?
A. I will have to answer the question yes and no. If they had come with
the requisite authority from the Governor of the State and ordered us
to disperse, undoubtedly we would have obeyed them. If they had
authority from the Governor of the State, I, for one, would have walked
away.
Q. But suppose they had authority from General Latta?
A. I didn't recognize him.
Q. You didn't recognize him?
A. I didn't at that time.
Q. Certainly you couldn't have been a law-abiding citizen if you
didn't?
A. I didn't at that time.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Then you intended to use your own judgment as to whether the militia
were there lawfully or unlawfully?
A. I look upon General Huidekoper as a gentleman, and don't think he
would lie.
Q. Suppose he had said he was there on authority from the Governor?
A. I told you I would have gone off the premises and walked away. If he
had told me it was none of my business, I would have told him I would
make it my business. If he had told me he was there by authority of
some railroad official, I would have told him that the best thing he
could do for his own and for our sake, would be to take the back track,
and go away.
Q. Did you see the daily papers of that week?
A. No; I don't believe I did.
Q. Did you see a published proclamation of the Governor's?
A. I don't believe I did.
Q. Did you know a proclamation had been issued?
A. I had heard of it.
Q. Commanding all citizens to disperse?
A. I had heard of it, but I didn't read it.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Then you and your party were to be the judges, whether or not
General Latta had authority or not?
A. We were open to conviction. We thought we were endowed with a little
common sense.
Q. I don't doubt it for a moment--not at all. But you were to be the
judges whether General Latta had authority or not?
A. The way I came to get under that impression--an attorney, the first
day of the strike, who was around there when this question came up
about the Governor being out of the State, said that the troops or
military could not be ordered out, because the Governor was not here.
Q. Give us his name?
A. I cannot give it.
Q. I insist upon it?
A. I refuse to answer the question.
Q. If the committee insists upon an answer you certainly will have to
answer, because you have sworn to tell the truth?
A. Well, I well give the committee the names of any of these parties in
confidence, but I don't care about telling their names to the world. I
am perfectly willing to give them to the committee in confidence. I
don't want to keep anything back, but I don't want to tell tales on
anybody else.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Did your association have an attorney employed--the Trainmen's
Union?
A. Two or three were around there, sort of acting as though they were
employed, but we never knew who employed them.
Q. Did you consult with them?
A. No; they came there and gave us advice.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Gratuitously?
A. That is about it.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Were they ever paid any fees?
A. Not that I know of.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Were they practicing attorneys at the bar?
A. Yes.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. You continued to keep up the strike there, and hold possession of
the railroad property, until the arrival of the Governor of the State,
did you not?
A. I believe we were on the premises when the Governor arrived.
Q. And had possession of the property of the railroad?
A. I don't know. The property was all lying there. No one was holding
it?
Q. But didn't you guard it. Didn't you exercise care of it, and didn't
you afterwards deliver it over to the railroad officials?
A. Yes; we told them that we wouldn't have anything more to do with it,
that they must get somebody else to watch it.
Q. Who did you deliver it to?
A. A man I did not recognize came down and took possession for Mayor
Phillips or his police.
Q. You surrendered the property to him?
A. No, sir; I did not, but to the officers of the road.
Q. What day was that?
A. That was the evening the Governor came in.
Q. The evening the Governor arrived?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you have any interview with the Governor on his arrival?
A. Yes.
Q. Tell us what that was?
A. I had a little talk with him and passed the compliments of the day,
and asked him to come out and say a few words to the boys, and he came
out on the back platform and said something to them. We then passed on
to the round-house, where there was a crowd of some five or six
hundred, and he spoke a few words to them, and then went on to the city
of Allegheny, where the citizens met him with a carriage and took him
to Pittsburgh, by the suspension bridge.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Did you telegraph to him?
A. I did.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. What was the nature of those telegrams?
A. Some of them are part of history. I telegraphed along the line not
to interfere with the train he was on, so as not to get him angry with
us, and I telegraphed him guaranteeing him a safe passage to Allegheny
city.
Q. You had the power to give him a safe passage through?
A. My name was good enough at that time.
Q. Over the length of the Fort Wayne and Chicago road?
A. Yes.
Q. You controlled the road at that time?
A. It appeared that they were not going to recognize any man's orders
but mine.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. But they got obstreperous at last on your hands?
A. Towards the last.
Q. Didn't you go to a meeting with some citizens to a hall?
A. Yes.
Q. And there they thought you were taking too much authority on you?
A. They thought I was going back on them. At least a scab did. He
supposed I was misrepresenting things at that time. At least I think so
now. They were starving, and wanted coal, and I ordered a provision
train and a coal train out, and one fellow wanted to kill me right off.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. So they struck on you?
A. Yes; this was the following Thursday. I had not been down from the
Tuesday night when the Governor arrived until this afternoon of
Thursday.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. What means did you take to enforce your orders after they struck on
you?
A. They did not strike on me.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Didn't they refuse to obey your orders?
A. I had ceased to exist at that time. That was on the Tuesday night,
and this meeting was on Thursday afternoon. Because I would not come
up, I suppose they felt sick and sore, and thought I was trying to sell
them out.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Those citizens you talked about who offered you arms, were not those
men the ones who went with you to the meeting?
A. Neither one of them was there.
Q. Didn't they ask you to protect this property, and after a
conversation with you, didn't you agree to go with them to this meeting
and talk to the rioters?
A. There were no rioters on the Fort Wayne road.
Q. Or the strikers?
A. Yes.
Q. Didn't you promise them to keep order, and in consideration of that
didn't they agree to give you the arms to keep off the mob in case any
party came to burn the town?
A. No, sir; this was on the Thursday after the fire. I was at no
meeting from the 27th day of June until this Thursday.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. Was there no understanding between you and the strikers on the
Pennsylvania road during this time, after you got back to Allegheny
City and took charge of things--were you acting in concert in
preventing trains from going out?
A. I don't know that anything particular of that kind was agreed upon.
Of course we talked over things of that kind.
Q. But you had communications with the parties who were striking on the
Pennsylvania road?
A. Yes; men were going back and forth all the time.
Q. Was there anybody over there that had control of the strike there or
who was looked up to as a leader or recognized as such?
A. There were some three or four of them. The man supposed to be the
leader showed the white feather.
Q. Who was that?
A. Samuel Muckle, the president of the Pan Handle division.
Q. He was supposed to be the leader in the start?
A. Yes.
Q. Who was their leader after he showed the white feather?
A. I don't know, but I think Hice. He was at Torrens station.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. How did he show the white feather?
A. He was a man who didn't live up to what he said he would do.
Q. In what respect?
A. He didn't live up to what he said he would do at the meeting.
Q. What did he agree to do in the first place?
A. He agreed to stand by the boys.
Q. What were the boys to do?
A. If the boys went out on a strike, Muckle was to stand by them.
Q. And prevent the running of trains?
A. The understanding was that every man was to quit work and go away,
but not to prevent the running of trains. Muckle was discharged, and he
tried to get a job in the employ of the road. His object in getting the
men to strike was to get them out and then come in and scab it.
Q. That is, come in and offer his services to the railroad?
A. Yes.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. But were communications going on between you and the leaders of the
Pennsylvania road--the leaders of the strike? Was there any concerted
movement or action between you?
A. No, sir.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Give us a definition of your idea of a strike. What is generally
understood by railroad men, or what did the Trainmen's Union understand
by a strike?
A. So far as the Trainmen's Union was concerned, we considered by a
strike that every man on the three grand trunk lines should go home
when the hour came--just leave his train standing there.
Q. You mean refuse to work?
A. Yes.
Q. Nothing more?
A. That was our understanding.
Q. But you were not to prevent other men from working?
A. We had an understanding if a man was not a union man to coax him off
if we could.
Q. But if he would not be coaxed?
A. Then to leave him stay. We considered that his own conscience would
be enough for him.
Q. But you were not to try to drive him off?
A. No; a man who is a scab has a hard enough time of it. He has a hard
time enough of it to make his life unbearable to him.
Q. Was any violence used that you know of to prevent trains from
running on the Fort Wayne and Chicago railroad?
A. No, sir; none was used. I would not have allowed, so far as I was
concerned.
Q. By what authority did you assume charge of the Fort Wayne and
Chicago railroad?
A. I think I assumed authority of the Fort Wayne from telegrams I
received from Mr. Layng, who is the general manager from Pittsburgh to
Chicago.
Q. What were those telegrams?
A. I was asked to take charge of the trains and engines, and to move
them to places of safety.
Q. Have you those dispatches?
A. I have.
Q. Have you them here?
A. No.
Q. Can you produce them?
A. I can, sir.
Q. Will you produce them?
A. Not in this city.
Q. Where will you produce them?
A. I will produce them anywhere where I can get them. I asked to have
them sent here, but could not get them.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. Would this strike on the Fort Wayne and Chicago road have occurred
if the strike on the Pennsylvania road had not occurred at that time?
A. That is a pretty hard question to answer.
Q. From your information--from what you know of the circumstances and
the men engaged in it?
A. I have not thought over that, and really I cannot give an answer.
Q. Do you know whether the men on the Fort Wayne and Chicago road were
making any preparations for a strike distinct from any strike upon the
Pennsylvania railroad?
A. Some of them were and some of them were not.
Q. At this particular time that the strike occurred?
A. Really, I have never thought the matter over, and I cannot answer
that question, because I have not thought it over in that light at all.
They may have and they may not.
Q. You say that the main cause of the strike on the Pennsylvania road
was the running of double-headers?
A. That is my impression.
Q. The cause of the strike upon the Fort Wayne road at that time was
what?
A. Several things combined. I think it was the abuse of power by the
under officials more than anything else.
Q. That and the ten per cent.?
A. Yes; that was pretty hard to swallow.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. I understood you to say in talking to some citizens you had given
some figures as to the wages that could be earned after the ten per
cent. reduction. Can you give those figures to the committee now?
A. I didn't state the amount that could be earned, but the amount they
were paying--brakeman, $1 45.
Q. Per day?
A. Per trip, that is called a day.
By Mr. Englebert:
Q. How many hours?
A. The shortest run on the road was seven hours and twenty-five
minutes. The longest run was eight hours and thirty-five minutes.
Firemen the same as brakemen. Conductors, first class, $2 12; second
class, $1 89 or $1 91, I forget which. Engineers--I don't remember the
classified pay--first class, three dollars and eleven or twelve cents.
That had a great deal to do with the strike--the classification--so far
as the engineers were concerned.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. How many days could you average per week?
A. The year around, or at that time?
Q. At that time?
A. I think the month that I was discharged I drew twenty-nine dollars
and some cents--I don't know what.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. As brakeman?
A. Yes. I had an income of forty dollars a month besides that, and it
was the only way I could live.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Did you make all the time?
A. I believe I did. I believe I lost only one trip. My impression is I
did lose one trip.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Was not the amount you could earn governed by the amount of business
doing by the road at that time--if the freight shipments were large you
all got work?
A. We all had work any how. We all came in our turn.
Q. But the amount of money you made depended on the amount of the
business of the road?
A. Yes.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. You put in your six days a week--work a week at $1 40?
A. I undoubtedly worked six days.
Q. Every week?
A. Not at that time. We were not averaging six days' work at that time.
Q. Were you prior to that time?
A. Really I have forgot; but the pay was running very poor. I think the
business was good in January and February, March and April, but I think
after that time it was very slack.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. How many days did you make in any one month?
A. In the month of January I made forty-four days.
Q. By over work?
A. Yes.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Did not the officials, when you sent your committee to them, didn't
they talk over this matter with you?
A. Before the strike?
Q. Yes.
A. No, sir.
Q. Didn't you send a committee down to Philadelphia to see Mr. Scott?
A. Of engineers, I believe. We heard what the engineers were doing, and
got enough of the engineers. They generally patched things up for
themselves. They didn't look after anything else. It was about the time
of taking the ten per cent. off.
By Mr. Engelbert:
Q. What position did you hold in Trainmen's Union?
A. I don't know that I held any position. I was appointed to organize
the unions, and had unlimited powers.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. By whom?
A. By what we called--there were members appointed from each division,
and they constituted a sort of grand lodge. The division I belonged to
was first organized. That is where I got my power from. They sent me
right out. It was a Saturday night, and I left Pittsburgh the following
Monday, June 4.
Q. Who organized the first lodge?
A. I was the first man to take an oath. I guess all took a hand in it.
Q. Were you president of that lodge?
A. There was no president of that lodge at that time.
Q. Were you chief of that lodge?
A. I suppose I was that night.
Q. What did they call the chief of that lodge--what name?
A. The grand organizer.
Q. Then by delegations from other lodges, you were appointed to
organize lodges throughout the country?
A. Our lodge gave me authority, and as we formed lodges, they sent in
delegations to form a grand lodge, and they confirmed the action of our
lodge.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. Who paid your expenses going around?
A. The boys.
Q. As a union or a society, or did the boys contribute what they saw
fit?
A. All the money I ever got, I got from the union at that time.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. From the lodge?
A. Yes; from the treasurer of the lodge.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Was it an oath-bound association?
A. Yes.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Did you go to Martinsburg, Virginia?
A. I was in that neighborhood.
Q. Were you at Martinsburg, Virginia?
A. I was very near to it.
Q. That is not an answer to my question.
A. At what time?
Q. To organize a lodge there before the strike?
A. I did initiate men into the organization called the Trainmen's
Union, at Martinsburg.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Did you organize lodges over the Baltimore and Ohio road?
A. Yes.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Was it understood by your lodges that this strike was to commence at
Martinsburg?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you know, before the strike commenced at Martinsburg, Virginia,
that it was going to take place?
A. No; of course I heard all that talk. They talked most loud at
Martinsburg, but I thought it was all wind. I didn't think they would
strike at all.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. When you were telegraphed at Oil City, were you there for the
purpose of organizing lodges?
A. It was Parker City.
Q. Were you there for the purpose of organizing lodges?
A. At that time?
Q. Yes?
A. I went up there to get work.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. How long had you been railroading?
A. About eleven months altogether.
Q. What had been your business before that?
A. I was in the hotel business.
Q. Where?
A. At Collinwood, eight miles from Cleveland.
Q. Were you proprietor of the hotel?
A. Yes.
Q. For how long?
A. One year and nine months.
Q. What was your business before that?
A. I was in the insurance business.
Q. Where?
A. At Pittsburgh.
Q. Is that your home?
A. Yes; it is my native place.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Were you working for your father or for yourself in the insurance
business?
A. I represented four Chicago companies for myself.
Q. When you returned from the oil country, you say you met some
railroad men who belonged to the Baltimore and Ohio railroad?
A. Of the Connellsville division.
Q. Where did you meet them?
A. Around the Union depot.
Q. How many of them did you meet there?
A. I remember three engineers who were there.
Q. Any other trainmen?
A. O, yes.
Q. Of the Baltimore and Ohio road?
A. These three engineers are all I can remember.
Q. Were they the ones who telegraphed to you to come to Pittsburgh?
A. No.
Q. Where did those men belong to--the Baltimore and Ohio or the
Pennsylvania Central? Who telegraphed you?
A. To neither road.
Q. Of what road were they employés?
A. Of the Fort Wayne road.
By Mr. Dewees:
Q. How many miles of railroad had this trouble?
A. I never figured it up. A good many miles.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. You had a signal to stop trains?
A. You can stop any train if you have the signal.
Q. But did not your organization have a particular signal by which you
could stop the trains?
A. The Trainmen's Union?
Q. Yes?
A. Before the strike?
Q. Yes?
A. No, sir.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Different from the ordinary signal?
A. I don't comprehend the question exactly.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Was not there an understood signal among the trainmen by which, if
an engineer of a train undertook to run it, they would throw him this
signal, and he would stop the train and get off?
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Some peculiar signal?
A. No; I saw lots of engineers that wanted the boys to do that.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. You say then that there was no signal?
A. No.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. What was this signal that was used on the Pennsylvania railroad to
stop trains? Was it any peculiar signal among the strikers different
from other signals?
A. I have heard of it, but I can't speak from my own knowledge.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. What did you hear?
A. While in jail, McAllister told me that an engineer came to him and
said, "McAllister, when we come to pull out from the round-house, you
just jump up on the engine and say there is some danger--you put up
your hand." McAllister is an innocent sort of a fellow, and he did just
as the engineer told him, and he was convicted and sentenced to six
months in the work-house.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Did the engineer get off when McAllister told him he couldn't go
down to Twenty-eighth street?
A. He run the engine back into the house.
Q. Who was the engineer?
A. I don't remember his name.
Q. Did you ever hear that a signal was agreed upon?
A. I have heard so many stories about that, I did not pay any attention
to them.
Q. Was there any class of men coöperating with your party, beside your
party?
A. The mill men and the glass-house men.
Q. They all seemed to be in sympathy with the strikers?
A. Yes; they came across to the boys.
Q. They came voluntarily, did they?
A. Yes.
Q. And entered into the strike like the railroad men?
A. Yes.
Q. And took hold and assisted you?
A. Yes.
Q. Was there another class of men--tramps or strangers--who came there
from a distance?
A. They crowded into Allegheny City, but we used to railroad them out
of the town.
Q. You did not care to have the assistance of that class of men?
A. No.
Q. Were there any men who came from other roads and assisted you there?
A. Yes; we had men from other roads--the Baltimore and Ohio, the Lake
Shore and Michigan Southern.
Q. How many men came from the Lake Shore and Michigan Southern?
A. Oh, two or three men.
Q. What did they say their business was?
A. That they came from such and such a road, and had a strike, and just
come to see how we fellows were doing it.
Q. What business did they have to travel up to Allegheny City?
A. It was not very far.
Q. Was there any agreement or understanding between you strikers and
the men who came from distant places, that they should concentrate at
Allegheny City or at Pittsburgh?
A. There was some talk about that.
Q. Why did they want to come to that place?
A. Oh, not to Pittsburgh, just exactly.
Q. But that was considered to be the head-quarters of the strike?
A. Yes.
Q. And the principal strike or trouble would be there?
A. That is about what they thought. It was talked over in the
Trainmen's Union.
Q. If the understanding among the strikers was that they were merely to
leave their work and go home--to leave their trains--why was there an
understanding to congregate at Pittsburgh?
A. I didn't say that. It was one of the things that was talked over,
but nothing was decided on definitely. If we had struck on the 27th of
June, there never would have been any trouble at all.
Q. Would the men have come from the Lake Shore and Michigan Southern to
Pittsburgh, if a strike had taken place on the 27th of June? Was there
any understanding, that if a strike took place then, that men from
different points would collect at some one point?
A. There was some talk about it, but nothing of the kind was decided on
definitely. It was all talked over.
Q. Then the men that came without any understanding?
A. They just wanted to see how things were going.
Q. Were they discharged men, principally, that came from the other
roads?
A. No.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Do you know anything about that boat load of men that came down the
Monongahela river?
A. No.
Q. Was there any understanding that that boat load should come?
A. Not that I know of.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Did any other citizens, except the two men you have
mentioned--citizens of Pittsburgh or Allegheny City--talk with you or
offer to aid you in any way?
A. Lots of the citizens were around there in the crowd, and they gave
arms to the boys, and encouragement. For instance, one man would have
his shot gun, and he brought it, and one man had a rifle, and he
brought it out and gave it to the boys, and some had revolvers, and
they brought them out.
Q. And arms were given to the strikers in that way, by the citizens?
A. Yes.
Q. Was ammunition given to you in the same way?
A. Yes.
Q. What class of citizens were they who gave the arms and the
ammunition?
A. They looked as respectable as Mr. Lindsey.
Q. Were they laboring men, or were they professional men?
A. They looked like professional men.
Q. Were any business men among them?
A. Yes.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. When was this?
A. On Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.
Q. Did they furnish arms and ammunition on Sunday?
A. Yes.
Q. Was there any other encouragement given to the strikers by the
citizens, except what you have mentioned--the giving of the arms?
A. They furnished us food.
Q. Was this food given to you because you were protecting the property,
or was it given to you because you were strikers?
A. Well, we were strikers.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Were arms furnished you for the purpose of resisting the
authorities, either the civil or the military, or for the purpose of
protecting the railroad property and other property?
A. We were not resisting any authorities at all. We had the arms to
keep off the mob. We did not take the arms to fight anybody that had
authority over us.
Q. What did you take the arms for?
A. To keep off the mob, or the tramps, or anybody else that wanted to
interfere with us.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Was that what the citizens gave you the arms for?
A. I didn't ask them what they gave us the arms for.
Q. What did they say they gave you the arms for?
A. Some of them said this, and some of them said the other thing.
Q. State what any one citizen said on the one side, and then on the
other?
A. Some of them said, "Shoot the damned soldiers when they come," and
some of them said, "If anybody interferes with you, or tries to wrong
you, kill them right here"--talk of that kind. "You are out on a strike
now, and have got the railroad company where you want it, and you are
damned fools if you don't keep them there."
Q. Were similar remarks to those made by any of the persons who
furnished you arms and ammunition?
A. I cannot say that, because I would only hear some of them talk as I
mingled with the crowd. I would turn around and look at them, and then
pass on. Of course, everybody was excited--everybody had lost their
brains--everybody was wild, and people did not know what they were
doing.
Q. Was anything said, prior to this strike, by the citizens about
furnishing you arms?
A. No; I didn't hear anything of the kind prior to the strike.
Q. Did anybody offer to furnish you flour or articles to live on during
the strike?
A. Yes.
Q. To what extent?
A. Enough to keep us until the strike was over.
Q. Were there any business men who offered to do that?
A. They were all business men.
Q. Flour dealers?
A. Yes; and grocery men.
Q. Wholesale dealers?
A. Men we were dealing with on the road offered to keep us all the time
we were on the strike.
Q. Offered to keep you all the time you were out on the strike?
A. Yes.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Did Mr. Jenkins offer to furnish flour to the strikers?
A. I have heard it so stated, but I cannot say so from my own
knowledge. I don't believe he did. I don't believe he is that kind of a
man.
Q. Did any other offer to furnish any?
A. No one except our grocery men--the men we were dealing with--they
encouraged us. They knew their money depended on us.
Q. From your intercourse with the citizens, was it your understanding
that you, as strikers, had the sympathy of the community?
A. Undoubtedly we did, sir.
Q. What led you to understand that you had their sympathy?
A. By their actions.
Q. But what else?
A. The way we would hear them talk in their daily conversation; but I
think if the strikers had turned in when the mob commenced burning the
property, and if the citizens had just turned in with them--and I know
if I had been in Pittsburgh, I would have died or I would have stopped
that mob--at any rate, I would have attempted it, and I think I would
have had enough citizens to help me.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. You mean help you to prevent the destruction of the property?
A. Yes.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. The sympathy you spoke of--was it general?
A. We appeared to have the sympathy of the whole community.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Did you have the sympathy of the citizens while destroying the
property of the railroad, or while burning it?
A. I think if we didn't have it, I think that they, the citizens, must
have acted very funny. I didn't stop to ask them.
Q. Did you have the sympathy of the citizens in the destruction of the
railroad property?
A. I don't think that they cared very much for the Pennsylvania
Railroad Company, even if it was burned up. They just stood around, and
said it was none of their business.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Were you over at the fire during Sunday?
A. No, sir; I kept decently away.
Q. Then how do you know that they stood around there?
A. I lived in a high house, and I noticed lots of people up on the
hill. I had a spy-glass.
Q. You say that you, as strikers, had the sympathy of the citizens. Was
there any antipathy on the part of the citizens against the railroad
company?
A. So far as I was able to judge, I don't think the citizens of
Pittsburgh ever had any high opinion of the Pennsylvania Company.
Q. Why?
A. On account of the freight discriminations, &c. I have heard business
men say repeatedly that their business had gone away from them--that
the Pennsylvania Railroad Company drove that away from them, and the
newspapers have been crying the Pennsylvania Company down for years.
Q. Was that what encouraged the railroad employés to strike?
A. No. We thought that our cause was a just one, and that any one with
any sense would be in sympathy with us.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. Were there any citizens who condemned the strikers--any of them who
ever said a word in rebuke of the strikers at any time?
A. After the fire; yes.
Q. But prior to the fire?
A. No. I never heard any one say anything of the kind before.
Q. But none of the officials of Allegheny condemned the action of the
strikers?
A. At what time?
Q. At any time prior to that Sunday?
A. I never saw any of the officials, except Mayor Phillips one time
when I spoke to him. He said if we wanted to strike we had a perfect
right to strike.
Q. But he made a speech?
A. Yes.
Q. Didn't he tell the crowd to disperse and let the railroad property
alone?
A. Not that I remember.
Q. What was the tenor of his speech?
A. My recollection of it is, he said if the men were determined to
strike, all right, that they had a perfect right; but as chief
magistrate of the city he would ask them not to interfere with any one
that wanted to work.
Q. Didn't he also say that you must not interfere with the railroad
property?
A. That is my recollection of it--that we must not interfere with
anybody that wanted to work.
Q. Don't you remember that he said anything about the railroad
property?
A. I have no recollection about his using the word property.
Q. Did he tell them that they must keep the peace?
A. Oh, yes.
Q. That he was there for the purpose of seeing that the peace was kept?
A. Yes.
Q. And you told him that you would keep the peace?
A. Yes; and he must have had some respect for our words, because he
withdrew his police.
Q. You had no trouble during the whole disturbance?
A. No, sir.
Q. There was no interfering with the men that wanted to work?
A. No; I said distinctly that--in the presence of the mayor--that if
they had scabs enough to work the trains they could do it.
Q. Do you know of any railroad men at the time of the disturbance, who
were ready to go out on the trains?
A. I didn't see a man. Every man I saw said he would not work.
* * * * *
A. J. Cassatt, _sworn_:
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. State your residence, and official connection with the Pennsylvania
Railroad Company.
A. I reside in Philadelphia, and am the third vice president.
Q. Just give us a statement, as to where you were when the first
disturbance occurred at Pittsburgh, on the Pennsylvania Central
railroad, and what came under your observation thereafter.
A. I was in the office on Thursday--in the office of the company--about
two o'clock, when I got a dispatch from Mr. Gardner, at Altoona,
addressed to Mr. Frank Thompson, at Philadelphia, which was brought
into me, on account of Mr. Thompson's absence in New York, stating that
a strike had taken place that morning at Pittsburgh, among the firemen
and brakemen, and that no trains had gone out that morning. I
telegraphed to Pittsburgh, to get extra conductors and engineers, to
take the place of those who had gone out, and I thought it would be
over very soon. I went up to the country where I lived, and I didn't
hear anything further until evening. On coming to the West Philadelphia
office, I then heard that no trains had moved up to that time, and I
thought that my duty ought to be there, and I got on a train and went
to Pittsburgh.
Q. What time did you arrive there?
A. On Friday morning. When I got to Pittsburgh, I found that Sheriff
Fife had called upon the State authorities, and that three regiments
were getting under arms then.
Q. State now, what the civil authorities were doing at that time, and
whether you had any interview with the mayor of the city, and if so,
what the end of it was, or whether you tried to have an interview?
A. I was told when I got there, that Sheriff Fife had gone out to the
mob, and had undertaken to disperse them with some deputy sheriffs who
were sworn in, but that they hooted at him, and it had no effect at
all. I was told that the city had no police force on in the day time,
or only a few men. I saw Mr. Stewart, who was formerly connected with
the company, and asked him to go and see Mayor McCarthy, and ask him to
put on some of the discharged men, and gather a posse, and send them
down to disperse the crowd, and get back the property. But Mr. Stewart
came back in a short time, and said that the mayor would not listen to
it. So I gave up the attempt to have a further communication with the
mayor, and wait for the State to take its course.
Q. Who is Mr. Stewart?
A. He was formerly our freight agent at Pittsburgh, and he is very well
known there.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. What is his first name?
A. David Stewart. What passed between the mayor and Stewart I heard
from Mr. Stewart himself.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Did you request the mayor to come to the Union depot, or request an
interview with him?
A. No; Mr. Stewart was simply to ask him to swear those people in; and
upon the mayor's refusing to do so, he came back and reported to me,
and told me at the same time that McCarthy, the mayor, had declined.
Q. What time did Mr. Stewart return to you?
A. About noon, on Friday.
Q. Did you meet Sheriff Fife on your arrival there?
A. I saw Sheriff Fife and exchanged a few words with him, because I
learned from Mr. Pitcairn and Mr. Watt what powers he had assumed.
Q. Did you see General Brinton during the day on Friday?
A. He came on Saturday.
Q. I mean General Pearson.
A. I did.
Q. And learned what steps had been taken by the State officials?
A. He told me what he had done. He sent Colonel Guthrie's
regiment--and, indeed, I saw them when they were out--to East Liberty,
and expected to go down with two other regiments and open the road.
That attempt afterwards was abandoned, because they thought the force
was not sufficient to disperse the crowd who were assembled there. They
thought it best to wait until they could get a larger force, when they
thought they could overawe the crowd, without coming to actual
hostilities.
Q. Was any attempt made to move any trains from that time up to four
o'clock Saturday afternoon?
A. No, sir; no freight trains. Our men declined to go out. The
engineers and conductors said they were afraid that the road was
blocked with the crowd.
Q. And until the arrival of General Brinton, with his force, no attempt
was made?
A. No; in fact, no attempt was made then.
Q. Had you no communication with the citizens of Pittsburgh after your
arrival?
A. Not as a body. I saw a number of the citizens. I think Mr. Park and
Mr. Thaw, and Mr. James Park, junior. I think I saw him on that day,
but I don't remember the citizens--quite a number.
Q. During the day Friday and Saturday, state whether the police
officers made any attempt to disperse the crowd that were assembled
about the railroad?
A. Not to my knowledge?
Q. Had you crews that were willing to go out in case they could get out
without any disturbance?
A. We had a number of crews to go out after the road was opened.
Q. On Saturday had you the crews?
A. Yes. On Saturday 1 walked down with the troops as far as the
round-house and went into the round-house myself, and saw a number of
engineers that said they would take their trains out as soon as the
road was open. We might have got up about a half dozen crews if the
road was opened, and if they could go in safety. We had the engines all
fired up and backed out, and ready to start at fifteen minutes' notice.
Q. Were the engineers and the firemen at their posts at the time the
troops arrived?
A. We had men at the round-house--engineers and firemen and conductors
and brakemen, ready to take the trains out, and we were going to send
out double-headers, too.
Q. How many crews had you ready then?
A. They reported twelve or fourteen crews--enough to take out that many
trains. I saw a number of men in the round-house, and talked to them,
and they said they would go if they had protection.
Q. Were you at Twenty-eighth street when the collision occurred with
the troops?
A. No, sir. I went down with the troops as far as the western
round-house, and went in there with the plan of starting the trains at
once, as soon as the tracks were cleared. I went into the round-house
and made arrangements to start, when the foreman of the machine shop
came to me, and said a riot was going on outside, and I got on the roof
and witnessed the collision between the troops and the people. A great
number of stones were thrown and shots were fired by the crowd, and
then I saw the troops fire in return.
Q. After the troops fired on the crowd, the crowd ran, and the tracks
were cleared for a time?
A. Yes.
Q. At that time were your crews ready to go out, during the time the
tracks were cleared?
A. They were. I can state that the only part of the track that was
clear was on Twenty-eighth street. The crowd lined the road above
Twenty-eighth street, and there was a crowd at East Liberty.
Q. Was that the reason why the trains did not start?
A. Yes; the men did not think it would be safe to go. The crowd
dispersed, and while I was on the roof I got a message from General
Pearson--for he was in Mr. Pitcairn's office, three or four hundred
feet from where I was--and that he wanted to see me, and I went there,
and General Brinton came in at the same time, and I was present when
the discussion took place between the two gentlemen as to the proper
course to pursue.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. After the firing?
A. Yes; General Brinton said that he was not satisfied with the orders
he had; that his orders were to go down and take possession of the
property, but that none had been received about firing on the mob, and
that he could not order his men to do it, and he wanted orders to
disperse the mob, as it was re-assembling, and drive it away and make
an end of it; or he wanted orders to get his command into a different
position; that they were hemmed in between the shops and the hill, and
were very much exposed to a fire of stones and a fire from the mob, and
he did not think the place tenable, unless he got orders to attack and
drive away the mob. General Pearson hesitated quite a while, and
finally, after five minutes' discussion, or more, he said he did not
think it his duty to attack the mob with that small force. He had no
doubt that General Brinton could drive off and disperse the crowd, but
there would be a great loss of life, and he thought the best thing was
to retire the troops and wait for reinforcements, and then overawe the
crowd and prevent bloodshed. I did not take any part in the discussion.
I think that General Pearson asked me one or two questions, and I said
that I was not a military man; that all I wanted was to get possession
of the property again. I went afterwards to the Union depot.
Q. And did you remain at the Union depot all night?
A. To one o'clock, and then went to the Monongahela House.
Q. Were you there when General Pearson came in from the round-house?
A. I was.
Q. Did you hear what was said by General Pearson to General Latta?
A. No; I came into General Latta's room about seven o'clock that
evening. My room was on the same floor. I saw General Pearson sitting
down there, and he said he had come down to communicate with General
Latta. I made some remark about his getting there--how he got there,
and he said he had come along the tracks and among the cars, and was
not recognized. I went away, and when I came in afterwards he had gone.
I was not a witness of anything that passed between the two gentlemen.
Q. Do you know where General Pearson was during the firing between the
troops and the people?
A. I believe he was in Mr. Pitcairn's office. I was so told that he was
in the office at the time--by the clerks.
Q. Do you remember how General Pearson was dressed when the troops went
out to Twenty-eighth street?
A. He was in a sort of undress uniform--light pantaloons and ordinary
fatigue coat--a military coat. He was not in full uniform.
Q. In fatigue uniform?
A. Yes; a blue military sack coat, and, I think, light or white
pantaloons.
Q. Did he have his sword?
A. No; I think he had a little cane in his hand.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. When he went out?
A. When he went down with the troops.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. How was he when he returned?
A. In the same way, except that he had his coat on his arms. He was in
his shirt sleeves. It was a very hot evening--a close evening.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Did he wear his belt?
A. I think not; but I am not positive about that.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Did you observe a belt he had on--a very fine belt?
A. No: he may have had it on, but I don't recollect it.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. In the conversation that you had with James Park, junior, do you
remember which day it was--whether it was Friday or Saturday?
A. I think it must have been on Saturday--I think it was.
Q. Can you state the nature of the conversation?
A. Mr. Park, I think, was arguing against the propriety of sending the
troops down, and said that the mob was a very violent one, and there
were very large numbers of them, and that we ought to have eight or ten
thousand troops to disperse them, and he thought that the troops ought
not to go down. I replied in substance that was not my business. That I
was to open the roads as soon as the tracks were cleared, and I
supposed that General Brinton had his orders, and would obey them.
Q. Did he suggest that it was a bad time to undertake to open the road
that afternoon?
A. I think he did, but I gave him to understand clearly that I had no
control over the matter; that I was only anxious to get the road open.
He wanted me to suggest to the State authorities, or to ask them not to
go down with the troops that day, or until we got reinforcements, and
other suggestions were made by some other gentlemen--by Mr. Thaw--but I
declined to have anything to do with them. In fact, Mr. Thaw had
written out a note urging that the troops should not be taken down. I
said I didn't think it was our business; that we were in the hands of
the State, and that they ought to decide. Mr. John Scott, the solicitor
of the Pennsylvania Company, came into the office while the discussion
was going on, and said I was right, and Mr. Thaw then tore up the note;
but he then made a strong appeal to me, personally, not to have the
troops sent down; but I had made up my mind not to interfere in any way
with the State officials, and I did not. I took the position that we
were in their hands, and it was their problem to work out.
Q. Did General Pearson talk to you about the propriety of undertaking
to open the road Saturday afternoon?
A. There was no discussion about it. It was taken as a matter of course
that the troops would be down there. On Friday it was talked about, but
on Saturday, when the Philadelphia troops arrived, there was no
discussion about it. It was understood that they were to move down
there at once.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. At the time of this conversation between General Brinton and General
Pearson in the office, did you hear General Brinton ask for permission
to attack the mob?
A. I don't know whether it was put in that form, but he said he had
force enough to disperse the mob and to keep them away, and wanted
positive orders to attack them. My recollection is, he objected to the
form of the orders he had--it throwed the responsibility. He said I
have got force enough, and my men are ready to obey orders. I have got
force enough to disperse the mob if I have orders to do so. He stated
to General Pearson, when he came in, that he had not given the orders
to fire, nor had any of his officers, but that the troops had fired in
self defense, which I think I can justify myself, as I saw the stones
and the pistol shots fired at them before they turned and fired; and,
indeed, the way in which the fire was returned led me to believe that
it was not upon an order. It was scattering at first, but then became
general.
Q. At the distance you were off, what led you to believe that no order
was given to fire?
A. I was about one hundred and fifty yards, or perhaps a little less
than that away, and I don't suppose the troops could have heard a
command, if given, as there was such a shouting and yelling. The crowd
was very large, and they all seemed to be shouting and hallooing. There
was quite a shower of stones before the firing commenced, and when it
did commence it was scattering, but then became quite general. It
lasted a minute or two minutes, and I could see the officers trying to
stop the firing, after it commenced.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. You remained at the Union depot until one o'clock?
A. Until one o'clock, Sunday morning.
Q. Did you learn that the mob had commenced firing at that time?
A. Yes; we saw the fire at that time. I left the depot in the first
place pretty thoroughly worn out, and then it was urged that there was
an ill feeling against Mr. Pitcairn, and General Pearson, and myself,
and they thought it might endanger the building if I remained there, so
I went up to the Monongahela house, and spent the night there.
Q. Did you have an interview with either General Latta or General
Pearson, in regard to preventing the mob from firing the property?
A. General Pearson had left at that time, and General Latta had no
force at all. There was a mile of space between the depot and the
round-house, where the troops were, and there was a crowd of people all
along that distance.
Q. Had General Pearson his coat off when he came in?
A. Yes; it was a surprise to me that General Pearson could get out at
the time he did. He must have been disguised. He had his coat on his
arm. He must have got in among the cars.
Q. Were you on the ground, anywhere in the vicinity, on Sunday?
A. I was at the Monongahela house until eleven or twelve o'clock on
Sunday. I then went over the Point bridge, and took that road because
there was no crowd there, in company with Mr. Bennett, who drove me
over. We went to Mr. Layng's office, and afterwards came back to the
Monongahela house, and stayed there until two or three o'clock, and I
then went to Allegheny City, and stayed there until eight o'clock,
trying to get provisions to General Brinton. I succeeded in getting two
wagon loads off, about eight o'clock in the evening.
Q. Had you or any of the officials of the road been able to ascertain
whether there was any arrangement for a strike of the employés of the
road?
A. We had heard that the men had organized the Trainmen's Union, as
they call it, and that a strike was threatened; but on looking at the
thing as carefully as we could, we came to the opinion, or we did not
believe, that any strike would take place, and we were rather surprised
when the strike did take place. We never had any delegations from the
men or any committees come to see us.
Q. Were there any complaints from the men after the issuing of the
order reducing the wages ten per cent.?
A. There was no formal complaints. A committee of engineers came to see
Mr. Scott, and after the interview with him, they asked him to put his
statement in writing--what he said to them--the necessity for the
reduction and the disposition of the company to restore the wages when
the business of the company revived; which he did. In reply, they wrote
a letter acquiescing in the reduction, because the company believed it
was a necessity, and that they would accept it as cheerfully as they
could.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. What time was that?
A. Shortly after the reduction took effect or after it was announced--a
couple of weeks before the strike. We never had any communication from
any brakemen or firemen or any one respecting that. This running of
double-headers, to which they objected, had been practiced on the
Pittsburgh division for a number of years, but not to the same extent.
Many of the coal trains were running with two engines, and, as a matter
of economy, it was decided to run all through trains with two engines.
On other portions of the road, we ran fifty or sixty cars to a train,
but at that end, we only ran seventeen cars with one engine, and in
increasing the numbers of cars, we reduced the number of train hands,
and saved expenses; and in order to do this, we decided double-headers.
Some of the men objected to that. That may have been a pretext for the
strike, but the men were not working any more hours.
Q. Did the issuing of the order running double-headers necessarily
discharge any men?
A. It reduced the force of brakeman.
Q. And of engineers?
A. Not of engineers or firemen.
Q. Conductors?
A. Conductors also.
Q. And brakemen?
A. Yes; the men at that time were making short time, because business
was slack. They were not making more than three, four, or five days a
week--five trips, and the monthly wages were small. We had discharged a
good many men--twenty-five or thirty per cent. of the men, but the
remainder, of course, would have made better wages, and we paid by the
trip only.
Q. How did the business of your company compare with the business done
by the company for the three months preceding that time?
A. It was much lighter. The business fluctuated a good deal. There is
sometimes a market for grain, in Europe for instance, when the
shipments are large, and then again the shipments slack off. That very
day I got a message from Mr. McCullough, the vice president of the
western lines, stating that there was a brisk demand for cars, and
asking me to send cars. If they had only waited a couple of weeks, they
could all have had enough to do.
Q. How did the business compare with the amount of business done at the
same time in the previous year?
A. We very often have periods of light business, quite as light as
that--very often--that last a few weeks or a month or two.
Q. Was that what induced the company to reduce the wages--the falling
off of business?
A. No; because we did not anticipate that falling off of business. In
fact, the tonnage that year showed an increase, but on account of the
low prices at which the business had to be hauled, we are forced to cut
down expenses or else break.
Q. Freights were lower than they had been?
A. Yes; they had been decreasing for a number of years. We had to do
the work cheaper.
Q. Was that in relation to through and local freights, both?
A. Yes; everything. Our local business was formerly the much larger
portion of our trade, and the rates at which they were done were lower
than they had been.
Q. Did that ten per cent. reduction apply to all the officers and
employés of the road?
A. Yes; to all the officers and employés of the road, from the
president down.
Q. Did it apply to the Pennsylvania Central Railroad and all its
branches?
A. Yes; the order was given simultaneously to reduce on all the lines
east and west of Pittsburgh. It was the second reduction made since the
panic of 1873. Our board thought that the shrinkage or rather the
reduction in the wages of that class of labor had been much greater
than nineteen per cent., and that our men ought to be able to stand
that.
Q. When was the first reduction made?
A. In the fall of 1873.
Q. What was the amount of that?
A. Ten per cent.; and then this reduction of ten per cent. made an
aggregate reduction of nineteen per cent. on the original pay of 1873.
Nearly every other class of labor had come down more than that.
Q. It was the only reduction made since 1873?
A. Yes.
Q. Were any of the employés of the road getting less than a dollar a
day?
A. None of the train men were. I think that some of the apprentices in
the shops were--the boys--and my impression is that they and the
laboring men on the track were getting ten cents an hour, or a dollar a
day. When the last reduction was made it didn't apply to the men
getting a dollar a day.
Q. A dollar a day, or less?
A. Yes.
Q. Did these men who were working at a dollar a day have an opportunity
to put in full time?
A. They worked by the day--full time--and the only thing that caused
them to lose any time was bad weather, when they could not work.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. You mean the laboring men?
A. Yes; laborers about the shops--unskilled labor--on the track.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Do you know anything about citizens going to Mayor McCarthy and
asking him to swear in police officers to maintain peace in the city of
Pittsburgh?
A. I don't know. All I know is what Mr. Stewart told me--about the
mayor's reply to him when he took a message to him, that he would not
swear in the policemen who were discharged--we offering to pay the
wages.
Q. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company offering to pay the wages?
A. Yes; I was told he had discharged about a hundred men, and we
thought that the hundred men who had been on the force--accustomed to
the people--could be better handled. We made the offer to pay them.
Q. Did you ever have any strike before?
A. I don't remember any strike in the last seventeen or eighteen years
on the Pennsylvania road.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Had any differences arisen between the employés and the company at
any time?
A. Oh, yes; differences have arisen, but none that were not adjusted by
compromise.
Q. Was there any difference existing between the company and the
employés about the time of the strike on the Reading railroad--you
remember there was a strike a few months before on the Reading
railroad--principally the engineers?
A. There was no difference, at that time, that I know of.
Q. What is the general policy of your company in such cases--cases of
disagreement or dissatisfaction between you and the men?
A. We hear the statement of the men, and if we think they have any just
ground for complaint, we endeavor to remedy them, and after we have
said so and so, we stand by our position. We looked upon this objection
of the men to the running of double-headers as an interference with our
own business. We thought that if we would let them say how many engines
or cars should go to a train, we might as well give up the management
into their hands, so we did not have any discussion about it. But we
had no formal complaint. No committee waited on us in regard to that.
We simply knew that some of the men objected, but from no person had we
any complaint in a formal way. We did not think it a thing that
affected the men, personally, but thought it simply a question of
management.
Q. Always, when any difficulty had arisen or any complaint had been
made, you had come to an amicable solution?
A. It had been the result before. I don't think that any strike on the
road has taken place--certainly not since 1860, probably not for two or
three years before that. There was a strike of engineers before that
which was adjusted by conference.
Q. You knew nothing of the action of the sheriff at Pittsburgh, or the
proclamation of the Governor, until you arrived at Pittsburgh?
A. Nothing.
Q. Then you had nothing to do with the proclamation?
A. Nothing whatever. I never saw it until it was printed in the papers.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. To whom did you first make application for protection to your
property?
A. I stopped at Greensburg, on my way out, and saw the Lieutenant
Governor, supposing that, in the absence of the Governor, he was the
proper one to take action, and having been advised, on my way out, that
Sheriff Fife had telegraphed him for assistance. I stopped over one
train, the trains being run close together, to ascertain what action he
was going to take, and I came on the next train to Pittsburgh.
Q. Did you ever make any application to the mayor of Pittsburgh or of
Allegheny for protection?
A. I did not make any personally, but it was done by the officers
before I got there.
Q. Did you make any direct application to the State authorities for
protection?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know who made the application to the State for protection?
A. I was informed that Sheriff Fife did. I was informed by telegraph,
on the way, on Friday night--early on Friday morning, I think, at
Cresson, that Sheriff Fife had called upon the Lieutenant Governor for
assistance; that he had not force enough to disperse----
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. You were informed by your solicitor, Mr. Scott, what had been done
in the way of calling for help on your arrival?
A. Yes; I was informed that he had first called upon the sheriff, and
that the sheriff had made an attempt to recover possession of the
property, and failed, and that the sheriff had made a formal call on
the State officials.
Q. Did Mr. Scott state that they had called on the mayor before calling
on the sheriff?
A. I don't recollect that. I don't know. When I got there, on Friday
morning, the Governor's proclamation had been issued, and the troops
were called out, and the matter was then in the hands of the State.
Q. Was any call made by you, or by any other officer of the
Pennsylvania railroad, to your knowledge, upon the Governor directly?
A. No, sir; none whatever.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Was there any effort made by the strikers, or the railroad employés,
to compromise the differences between the railroad company and
themselves?
A. We heard nothing from them at all up to the time of the strike. On
Friday afternoon, a committee, representing the strikers, consisting, I
think, of engineers and firemen and brakemen, two or three of them,
called on Mr. Pitcairn in person, and presented a written demand,
stating that unless these demands are complied with, that they would
not run their trains. This committee met Mr. Pitcairn on the platform,
and I went out there to hear what they had to say. He handed me this
paper, and I read it, and handed it back, and told him to have no
further talk with them; that they had demanded such things that we
couldn't grant them at all, and it wasn't worth while to discuss the
matter. They demanded that their wages should be raised, and that
double-headers should not be run; that no more than seventeen cars
should be run to a train; that each engineer should have the privilege
of selecting his own fireman, and that that the firemen should not be
changed without his consent, and a number of other things of the same
kind.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. They also had up the classification?
A. Yes; the classification of engineers was to be abolished, and no man
engaged in the strike was to be discharged. In other words, they
proposed taking the road out of our hands.
Q. What was the classification of engineers?
A. It was introduced on our road, on the lines west of Pittsburgh, in
1871 or 1872, I think. The engineers asked for an advance of wages at
that time, claiming that they were not being paid as much as other
lines were paying--other lines that competed with us. A committee,
representing each division of the road, called upon Mr. Scott at that
time and asked for an advance, which resulted in the meeting being
adjourned to Pittsburgh, where I met them. Mr. Layng and I presented
this plan, stating that we were willing to advance the older men, but
we couldn't advance the younger men in the service. I think it advanced
all men who had been in the service over ten years ten per cent., and
made no advance for the others. The understanding was that there should
be four classes of men. In the first class, those who had served three
years; that they should be in the second class two years; and be in the
third class one year; and a man who was promoted from a fireman, should
be in the fourth class. We made an advance of ten per cent. in the one
class, and the second was ten per cent. below the first, and the third
was ten per cent. below the second.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. You graded the men according to their time of service and
efficiency?
A. According to their value to the company.
Q. Was that one of the things complained of by the men?
A. I didn't know that there was any complaint about that until this
committee came on Friday afternoon, and that was one of the things they
wanted to abolish--the classification.
Q. So that they should be all alike?
A. All alike. I doubt very much to-day whether it is the sentiment of
the road at all. I don't think that fair and sensible. It is the proper
thing to do, but I don't think, however, that had anything to do with
the strike, but they thought while they were asking for so many things,
they might as well ask for that, too.
SCRANTON, _March 29, 1878_.
The committee met at the Wyoming house, at six o'clock, P.M. Mr.
Lindsey in the chair.
All members present except Mr. Dewees.
* * * * *
R. H. McKune:
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. State where your residence is?
A. City of Scranton.
Q. Were you mayor of the city in July last.
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long had you been mayor previous to that time?
A. I took the office of mayor in 1875--20th March.
Q. When did your term expire?
A. It will expire next Monday, sir.
Q. I wish you would just go on Mr. McKune, in your own way, and make a
statement of the disturbance that occurred in your city here in July
last, giving the date when it commenced?
A. Will I commence with it at the commencement of the suspension?
Q. I think you had better give us a summary of it right along?
A. On Sunday evening, July 22, I think, I received notice, or received
information, in regard to the riot at Pittsburg. I at that time was at
Ocean Grove. I immediately started for home, taking the train next
morning, and reached home Monday evening. I found the citizens here
very much excited over a rumor of a strike that was to occur.
Q. What day was that?
A. On Tuesday. I attempted to get my council together, but found that
they were opposed to taking any action for protection in any way, and
gave it up. The strike was fixed to occur the next day. On Wednesday, I
went to the depot, and was in the office of the superintendent, when a
gentleman connected with the strike came in and stated to Mr.
Halsted----
Q. The superintendent of what road?
A. Delaware, Lackawanna and Western--that the trains could go no
further. The superintendent asked me for protection for the train.
Q. On the 25th?
A. On the 25th; yes, sir.
Q. What time of day?
A. This was at nine-fifty, sir. It was on the 25th, and this young man
said that they would permit the engine and mail car to go through, but
none--all the other cars to go, or the coaches--none of the coaches to
go.
Q. Do you know who that gentleman was?
A. Mr. William F. Halsted, the superintendent of the road, will know. I
think we will have him.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Do you know yourself?
A. No, sir; I do not. He was one of the employés of the road. He was
one of the members of the executive committee--one of the executive
committee of strikers. Mr. Halsted asked me if we could give him any
protection to get the train through. The crowd was dense. I told him
no. That my advice was that the engine be taken and run into the yard.
I might say right here, in coming through New York, I had had an
interview with Moses Taylor and other parties connected with the road,
and I gave them to understand that I had no force here of any moment,
and, from what I knew, that the Governor was out of the State; that I,
probably, could not have any to assist them in getting a train through,
and that the best way was not to attempt to push a train through until
we could get sufficient force to do so. That was why I advised Mr.
Halsted so to do. Mr. Halsted gave orders to have the engine taken and
placed in the yard--not in the round-house, but in the yard--refused to
permit it to go without it went with the train. Previous to that, I
telegraphed in respect to the difficulty to Governor Hartranft, and
received this telegram: "The Governor will be here at one o'clock. Let
things remain in _statu quo_, and do not precipitate a collision.
Signed by C. N. Farr."
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Where is it dated?
A. Dated Harrisburg. Immediately upon the cars being--upon the engine
being taken off--I telegraphed to the Governor stating the fact that
the strikers had taken the coaches off. That is, on the 24th
instant--the 25th, we have got the dates wrong there--no, the dates
must be right, this must be wrong, July 24. I telegraphed to the
Governor like this, "The coaches have been taken off the mail train."
During the afternoon the Governor's dispatch, after arriving, advising
Mr. Halsted to let the mail car go through, which dispatch was sent not
only to Mr. Halsted, but to the strikers. Their meeting was in the
office immediately opposite to mine, and we then consulted in the
evening or immediately, and from what I could gather as to the wishes
of the parties--the board of directors concluded not to put the train
through. On July 26, everything during the day was quiet. I would say
on the 26th, the miners came out--the employés of the Delaware,
Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company, with also the mining
company--they came out from their works to hold a meeting at the Round
woods--a meeting probably of six or eight thousand.
Q. Where are the Round woods?
A. The Round woods lie in the Fifth ward--just on the borders of the
Fifth ward, and the adjoining township. At this meeting a committee was
appointed for the purpose of conferring with Mr. Storrs, asking for an
advance of wages, and so on.
Q. Who was Mr. Storrs?
A. He is general manager of the coal department of the Delaware,
Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company. This is Thursday. The streets
began to be filled at that time with strange faces, faces of which my
officers, nor none of the old citizens, nor the foreman of any of the
companies could identify as citizens of our city. As I said before, I
had asked a member of council, and tried to get my council called
together to see what they would do to assist me in regard to the
matter, and there was nothing done, and I then called together an
advisory committee, consisting of seven of our leading men of the city.
I selected gentlemen who were not connected in any way, who were all
property holders, and not connected in any way with any of the
corporations. That advisory committee met in the morning, at nine
o'clock, and at three o'clock in the afternoon.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. On Thursday?
A. Yes, sir; and the whole time during the strike. On Thursday the
pumps in the mines were vacated--ceased to work--and on the 27th of the
month I received a notification from the Delaware, Lackawanna and
Western Railroad Company, through their president, Sam Sloan, like
this:
ROBERT H. MCKUNE, _Mayor of the City of Scranton_:
You are hereby notified that by reason of strikes and threats and
unlawful conduct of disorderly and evil disposed persons, the
Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company apprehend that
their property, situated within our city, is in danger of damage
and destruction, and that the said company is unable to protect its
rights and property, and look to you to use such lawful measures as
will prevent its destruction and assure its safety.
DELAWARE LACKAWANNA AND WESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY,
Per SAM SLOAN,
_President_.
The same day I also received a notification from Mr. W. W. ----.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Who was it signed by?
A. The railroad company, per "Sam Sloan, president"--not "Samuel," you
will notice it is "Sam Sloan." I also received from W. W. Scranton,
superintendent, on the same day--W. W. Scranton, general superintendent
of the Lackawanna Iron and Coal Company--a like notification. I should
state that on the 26th I had received from Mr. Lathrop, the receiver of
the Central Railroad Company of New Jersey, a like notice. On receiving
this notice I immediately placed a few special policemen out, and in
consulting with my advisory committee, it was thought best to swear in
a number of special policemen from among our citizens, who would be
willing to act in case of emergency or outbreak, or the like of that
without compensation.
Q. Will you tell how many policemen you had in the city at that time?
A. I had in the city, at that time, nine--ten regular police for day
and night service, and put on eight specials. I had eighteen policemen
in a city of thirty-five thousand inhabitants. I run the city now with
eleven policemen.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Will you please state just here, if you had any difficulty in
getting men to serve as police officers, that were citizens of this
city?
A. Yes, sir.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Let him get through with the history.
A. In the mean time, I had continued my--I may say that on the 25th, a
committee from the railroad employés, a committee from several of the
organizations of strikers, waited upon me to ask me to issue a
proclamation prohibiting the sale of liquor. I issued the following:
MAYOR'S OFFICE, SCRANTON, PENNSYLVANIA, _July 25,1877_.
The general public opinion, as expressed to me, seems not to
apprehend any violence or danger, unless a too free use of liquor
shall be indulged in; and, at the request of committees from the
workingmen's organizations and others, who have called upon me this
morning, requesting me to close all places where liquor is sold, I,
therefore, in compliance with said request, ask of you to close
your bars, and to strictly abstain from the selling of all kinds of
liquor for the present.
R. H. MCKUNE,
_Mayor_.
I will state that, as a general thing, that request was complied with
up to the 27th or 28th; in fact, all of our eating-houses sold no
liquor during the whole time of the strike. Immediately upon my
advisory committee coinciding with me in regard to my special
police--they were afterwards known as vigilants--I placed the matter in
the hands of Colonel Hitchcock for organization, and Captain Ripple and
Captain Merryman. They immediately commenced their organization of
enrollment, and during Thursday, I think, some thirty enrolled
themselves. In the meantime, on the 27th, I had from Carney's, near
Harrisburg--there seems to be two dates here, one of 27th and the other
28th--the following telegram:
ROBERT H. MCKUNE, _Mayor_:
Can do nothing for you at this moment. If you have patience for a
few days, I hope to be able to relieve you.