THE COMMISSION.
The commission appointed by President Cleveland to investigate the
strike began its work Aug. 15, at 10 o'clock in Judge Grosscup's court
room. Most of those present were members of the American Railway Union.
Prof. Bemis, of the Chicago University, was in attendance. Neither the
Pullman Company or the railroad companies were represented. The
witnesses examined were Geo. W. Howard, vice-president of the American
Railway Union, and James R. Sovereign, grand master workman of the
Knights of Labor. Acting with the commission were B. J. Hastings, of
Utica, N. Y., and Deputy United States Marshall Bartlett. Chairman
Wright announced that they were in session pursuant to the President's
call which the clerk read. This document directed an inquiry into the
causes and the conditions of the controversy between the Illinois
Central and the Rock Island roads and their employes. After the reading
chairman Wright made the following statement: "By the act recited in
the commission of the President that has just been read, this commission
is directed to examine into the causes, controversies and difficulties
existing between the roads named and their employes at the time the
commission of the President was issued. The board is constituted as a
temporary body for this purpose and not for the purpose of arbitrating
the difficulties that existed. It is practically a court of inquiry and
its proceedings will be in accordance with the usages of such courts. It
will proceed first to hear all witnesses in behalf of the employes and
then those of the corporations named. All such witnesses are requested
to hand their names to the clerk. Under the law parties may be
represented by counsel or appear in person as they see fit, and examine
and cross-examine the witnesses. After all the witnesses have given
their testimony the commission will then consider arguments or
suggestions to be made upon the questions before it. All suggestions and
arguments presented in writing will be filed and considered by the
commission, but the question as to how far the commission will listen to
parties who desire to be heard orally will depend upon the time left to
the disposal of the commission and will be determined after the
testimony is concluded. By the act creating it this commission possesses
all the power and authority of the United States Commissioners appointed
by the Circuit Courts of the United States. The hours of sitting will be
from 10:00 A. M. to 4:00 P. M. Parties and their counsel and witnesses
attending will find seats within the rail."
Vice President Howard was the first witness sworn. In answer to
questions as to his age, residence and occupation, Mr. Howard replied
that he was 46 years old, resided in Chicago, and was vice president of
the American Railway Union. For nearly 30 years he had been identified
with the railroad service filling positions from trackman to general
superintendent. He had been a member of the Yard Masters' Association,
the B. of L. E. and O. R. C. By request of Mr. Wright he gave the
following connection of the American Railway Union with the strike.
"We began organizing the Pullman employes in March of this year. Early
in May they struck. The strike was voted by themselves not by the
American Railway Union, indeed we advised against the strike.
"Immediately after the strike was called I accompanied a committee of
forty-three representing every branch of the Pullman service to a
conference with Mr. Wickes at Pullman. Mr. Pullman refused to arbitrate
but promised to give their grievances immediate attention if they would
return to work. I inquired of Mr. Wickes if there would be any prejudice
against the members of the committee and was assured by him that there
would not be. After receiving this assurance from Mr. Wickes, I advised
the men to go back to their work, which they did. Next day three of the
committee were discharged, not on order or with the knowledge of Mr.
Wickes or Mr. Pullman, but by some under boss in the shops. This so
incensed the rest of the employes who considered it a breach of promise
that they unanimously struck again.
"June 12, the convention of the American Railway Union met in Chicago.
The Pullman strikers were represented by seven or eight delegates. The
situation at Pullman received consideration. A joint committee
representing the convention and the Pullman strikers was appointed to
wait on the Pullman company. The committee was informed that the Pullman
company would confer with only its employes, consequently this body was
discharged and a committee consisting of Pullman employes appointed. The
action of the Pullman company was reported to the American Railway Union
convention whereupon each delegate wired his local union for
instructions. The result of this was that the members of the American
Railway Union all over the country voted to discontinue handling Pullman
cars if at the end of five days from that date the Pullman company
refused to arbitrate with its employes.
"In this connection I wish to say that Mr. Pullman stated to the
committee of forty-three, in my hearing, that his employes at that time
owed him $70,000 for rent and that he had not pushed them for payment
which fact clearly shows that his men were not making enough to pay
rent."
Mr. Wright: "That was the boycott order, was it?"
Mr. Howard: "I do not use the word boycott. The action taken was simply
that members of the American Railway Union would not handle Pullman
cars.
"Two days before the limit of five days--the dates I do not now
recall--but I will furnish them--the General Managers' Association took
action declaring that they would share the expense of whipping the
American Railway Union.
"Pullman would not arbitrate and first the men on one road then on
another refused to handle Pullman cars. They did not decline to handle
other cars, but switchmen, you understand, would not attach Pullmans to
trains. Engineers, conductors, firemen and trainmen would not take out
trains which Pullman cars were attached to. There was no attempt to
interfere with the mails but on the contrary every effort in our power
was made to help the roads carry them. The companies held the mails in
their determination to attach Pullman cars to trains.
"Of my personal knowledge I know of a road that abandoned a mail train
to take out an excursion train, not having crews to take out both. In
another instance I know of a mail train going out on the order of the
railway officials after the Pullmans had been cut off by the employes.
Things went on in this way for several days. No violence was committed
by the employes and the police were in full control of the situation to
prevent violence from outsiders.
"The first pistol was drawn by one Miller, an employe of the Tribune at
Blue Island, wholly without cause, and after the troops were on the
ground. The violence that was afterward committed was not as was
believed by members of the American Railway Union but by outsiders--some
acting in passion, because they saw in the presence of the soldiers an
instrument of tyranny. Others in a spirit of mischief and love of
destruction and others still--hired by the General Managers in order to
create public sentiment against us. Yesterday I gave the mayor of
Chicago the name of a man who claimed, while under the influence of
liquor to have received $400 for burning cars. The Committee of safety,
at Springfield, sent us the names of three men who quarreled about the
division of $500 received for burning cars. $200 of which was paid in
advance by John M. Eagan, of the General Managers' Association."
Regarding the motives actuating the organization of the American Railway
Union Mr. Howard denied that it was to destroy the old organizations but
because they no longer fulfilled the necessities of the situation. If
the old brotherhoods could get together amicably there would be no need
of the American Railway Union, but they never can. There are two many
causes for jealousy, for instance: There are 10,000 locomotive engineers
who are not in the B. of L. E. but are members of the B. of L. F. In
case of a grievance the engineers are divided and are represented by two
organizations. The Brotherhood of Trainmen contains men who have been
promoted to conductors causing a friction between these two orders.
Mr. Wright: "Then the sole purpose of the American Railway Union in
taking the action it did was to oppose the Pullman company and it was
not actuated by any desire to injure the other railway organizations?"
Mr. Howard: "That is it exactly. After the action taken by the General
Managers' Association we had to act as we did or lie down."
Mr. Wright: "Did the officers of the American Railway Union advise the
men on roads other than those using Pullmans to go on strike?"
Mr. Howard: "The men on all roads represented by the General Managers'
Association were advised to go out on strike."
Mr. Kernan: "Was this order extended to roads not using Pullman cars or
which were not represented in the General Managers' Association?"
Mr. Howard: "No, sir."
Mr. Kernan: "Were there any such road?"
Mr. Howard: "Yes. General Manager Clark, of the Mobile & Ohio, sent us
word that his road would drop the Pullman service if the men would
continue at work. We advised the men to return to work under those
conditions, but the men at St. Louis argued that such action would
weaken their cause and refused to take our advice in the matter."
Mr. Worthingford: "How did you advise all other organizations to go on a
sympathetic strike?"
Mr. Howard: "We did not advise nor even request other organizations to
declare a strike. We invited the heads of all labor organizations to
come here and aid us by their advice or in any way they saw fit to help
us. I think Mr. Debs sent the invitation. When the representatives of
the other labor organizations met here, we went before the body and
explained the entire situation. They asked Mr. Debs what he wished them
to do. He replied that he did not ask anything of them but left it to
their best judgment and conscience to take such measures as would help
bring the trouble to an end. Mr. Debs read a communication which he had
prepared to present to the general managers, and asked the
representatives at the conference if they would act as a board of
arbitration or assume the role of peace-makers. President Gompers of the
American Federation of Labor, seemed afraid that such action would
involve the other organizations in some way and hesitated to accept our
request to take the communication to the general managers. We then
concluded to ask Mayor Hopkins to present our communication. The mayor
willingly granted our request."
Mr. Kernan: "Was any written record kept of that conference of the heads
of the labor organizations which was held at the Briggs House?"
Mr. Howard: "I do not know."
Commissioner Kernan: "What records have you of the proceedings of your
convention as to who invited the heads of other labor organizations to
meet here in conference, and what they were expected to do?"
Mr. Howard: "I think it was decided at the convention of the American
Railway Union, which met here June 12, to extend such an invitation. I
know it was talked over then."
Commissioner Wright: "Then the American Railway Union did not advise a
sympathetic strike of all organizations."
Mr. Howard: "No, sir. Mr. Debs left that question to the judgment and
conscience of the men themselves."
Commissioner Wright: "Was the action of the convention of June 12 a
strike?"
Mr. Howard: "Well, it was called a strike."
Commissioner Worthington: "Was the communication you referred to
presented to the general managers?"
Mr. Howard: "Yes, sir, and returned without an answer further than a
statement that the General Managers' Association had no business to
transact with the American Railway Union or its representatives."
Mr. Kernan: "It is charged that your organization, like others,
encouraged its members to persistently interfere with and prevent
unorganized labor from taking positions given up by their striking
members. Is that charge true?"
Mr. Howard: "It cannot be shown in one instance that anything of the
kind has been done."
Commissioner Kernan: "You won't go so far as to say that no interference
of the sort alluded to has ever been engaged in?"
Mr. Howard: "Certainly not. I mean that such interference was not
authorized or countenanced by the union."
Commissioner Kernan: "Did you take any steps to prevent such
interference?"
Mr. Howard: "We have taken the ground that when we go out on strike not
to interfere with any of the new men the companies may employ."
Commissioner Kernan: "You do countenance advice to such men not to take
the places of strikers?"
Mr. Howard: "Oh, yes. We claim the right to ask new men not to take our
places."
Mr. Kernan: "Is it not a fact that such interviews usually result in
violence?"
Mr. Howard: "No. I think the rule is to the contrary. We go no further
than to request the men to quit work and to commit no violence."
Commissioner Kernan: "Is there any punishment for violation of that
rule?"
Mr. Howard: "No. No organization has any power to punish a member for
violation of such rule except by expulsion. We leave the punishment of
such cases to the civil authorities."
Commissioner Kernan: "Don't you think some steps should be taken by
labor unions to punish their members who violate the rules in that
respect?"
Mr. Howard: "Yes, sir, I do, and we started out to do so here during the
strike but the trouble assumed such vast proportions that it was
impossible to do anything in that direction. In the case of the Great
Northern strike we appointed committees to guard the company's property,
and the men were instructed to shoot anyone found in the act of
destroying same."
Commissioner Kernan: "What, as a rule has been your experience in
strikes where violence was restored to?"
Mr. Howard: "The men have always been defeated."
Commissioner Kernan: "Then a resort to violence is rather detrimental to
the cause of the strikers?"
Mr. Howard: "Decidedly so. We want public opinion with us in a strike."
Commissioner Kernan: "Do you know of any organization that disciplines
its members for resorting to violence?"
Mr. Howard: "None, excepting the American Railway Union. Our argument is
that the only weapons labor has to fight its battles with are the strike
and the boycott. There is some talk about the ballot but some questions
cannot be settled by the ballot. Only the array of labor in one solid
phalanx will give it the power that will make strikes unnecessary."
Commissioner Kernan: "Does not history show that on account of
jealousies in your own ranks a complete organization of labor cannot be
effected?"
Mr. Howard: "Yes. That is history up to the present, but the workingman
is doing more thinking to-day than ever before."
Commissioner Kernan: "You regard such a strike as would be possible
under the conditions you outline as a desirable thing for organized
labor?"
Mr. Howard: "No, sir. If employers would be a little more considerate of
their men there would soon be no labor organizations in existence."
Commissioner Kernan: "You do not say that all grievances are just, do
you?"
Mr. Howard: "No. Many of them are frivolous."
Commissioner Kernan: "It is charged that there is a minority in all
labor organizations who are practically enslaved by the will of the
majority and that a man for that reason loses his independence when he
joins a union?"
Mr. Howard: "Well, I think the reverse is the rule. The hot heads and
agitators in the labor movement are in the minority; the quiet, thinking
men are always in the majority. It often happens that the man who is
really most anxious to strike assumes an air of indifference or positive
objection to such a move. He is merely waiting for a good excuse to stop
and let the blame lie with some one else. He wants some one to order him
to quit work so he can say to the superintendent that he is afraid to
remain at work for fear of personal violence."
Commissioner Kernan: "Was any other motive behind the strike other than
to force a settlement with Mr. Pullman?"
Mr. Howard: "No."
Commissioner Kernan; "Was there any object in breaking the older unions
so that the American Railway Union might profit thereby?"
Mr. Howard: "While the increase in membership in the American Railway
Union meant a decrease in the strength of the older organizations it was
not the object of the strike to break down the older unions."
In answer to a question by Commissioner Kernan as to what he would
suggest to prevent railroad strikes in the future, Mr. Howard replied
that the government ownership and control of railroads was the only
practical solution of the question. He argued that about one third of
the railroads of the country are practically under control of the
government, and thought the balance could easily be taken. He claimed
the Santa Fe was from two to four months behind in payment of wages;
that it would seem only fair that the government should see that the men
were paid. The government had gone to the extent of forcing the employes
of that and other roads to work whether they wished to or not and he
thought the other step might as well be taken at once.
Mr. Sovereign, grand master workman of the Knights of Labor, was the
next witness. He testified that he was a member of the American Railway
Union. Said the only official connection the Knights of Labor had with
the strike was the adoption of a resolution that they would not ride in
Pullman cars. He also stated that a general tie-up of all the industries
in the country to force public sentiment on Pullman and bring to bear on
the Pullman company the greatest possible pressure was contemplated, but
it was found the tie-up could not be made sufficiently general to bring
about the desired results, so it was not attempted.
Commissioner Kernan: "Then you do not consider the American Railway
Union responsible for the rioting that occurred?"
Mr. Sovereign: "No, sir. In fact I do not think there was any rioting."
Commissioner Kernan: "Do you consider burning cars a species of
rioting?"
Mr. Sovereign: "Not when it was done by U. S. marshalls."
Commissioner Kernan: "Was it so done?"
Mr. Sovereign: "I read reports in Mayor Hopkins' office to-day to that
effect--reports that seem conclusive on that point. Moreover I don't
think there was as much rioting as is generally believed. I came from
Des Moines on what was supposed to be the last train to Chicago. We
arrived without incident at Blue Island on July 6. There the train was
side tracked and we were told by the officials that it could go no
further because of the mobs between there and the city. I saw a west
bound mail train on another track and was told it had been there for
twenty-six hours and could not proceed on account of the mob and
violence beyond, though it would go on the very same track on which we
had just arrived. I bought a ticket from Blue Island to Chicago on the
Wisconsin Central. After coming a short distance the train stopped and
the conductor told us we could go no further on account of mobs ahead of
us. I picked up my grip with the intention of walking to the city, but
the conductor cautioned me against risking my life. However I walked in,
was not molested, saw no disorder and did not see more then ten men at
any one place."
Mr. Kernan inquired what views the Knights of Labor held about letting
non-union men take the places of strikers.
Mr. Sovereign: "That depends on circumstances. In the case of mine
owners, for instance, who have sold houses to their employes who have
partly paid for same, the unjust discharge of these men means a
forfeiture to the mine owners of all money paid on the property. We hold
that we must by all honorable means prevent others from taking their
places."
Commissioner Kernan: "But suppose honorable means are not effective?"
Mr. Sovereign: "Well, if it's necessary to prevent them from passing a
given line we clasp hands and keep them out."
Commissioner Kernan: "You do not assault them?"
Mr. Sovereign: "No. If they break through they assault us."
Mr. Sovereign did not think that strikes or compulsory arbitration was
the remedy for labor troubles. He believed that the government ownership
of railroads would settle the trouble for employes. He also believed the
employes of corporations had an equity in their positions and for unjust
discharge should have a remedy in a court of equity.
Mr. Kernan: "Why cannot the contract between employer and employe
provide for all you want the law to cover?"
Mr. Sovereign: "Because labor is always dependent, always has been at
least and is forced by the duress of circumstances to accept employment
without insisting on protecting conditions."
George W. Lovejoy was the next witness to take the stand. In answer to a
question by Commissioner Wright, he said: "I am familiar with the
history of the strike on the Rock Island road. Beside the order passed
by the convention to refuse to handle Pullman cars, the men at La Salle
had a special grievance that consisted of unjust treatment of the
members of the American Railway Union which had a local lodge at that
point. I for one was dismissed without any cause being assigned.
Complaint was made to Supt. Dunlap and an explanation asked as to why
the men were discharged. He refused to consider the grievance submitted
to him so the men concluded to strike."
Commissioner Wright: "Was the grievance submitted in writing?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "It was. I have not a copy, but think I can get one from
the local union."
Commissioner Wright: "What part did your local union take in the Pullman
strike?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "It decided to sustain it."
Mr. Worthington: "Was there any violence at La Salle?" Mr. Lovejoy:
"No, sir. None whatever."
Commissioner Kernan: "Have any of the old men been taken back?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "No, sir. And never will."
Mr. Worthington: "Is it on account of the strike that they cannot get
back?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "I suppose it is."
Commissioner Kernan: "How general was the strike at La Salle?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "It extended to every branch of the service. Switchmen,
firemen, engineers, conductors, brakemen, telegraph operators, clerks,
round-housemen and trackmen."
Commissioner Kernan: "Now tell us about the cause that led to your
discharge as you understand it?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "Six months previous to the convention of the American
Railway Union which met in Chicago, June 12, I had an understanding with
the superintendent that I would get a leave of absence and was to put a
man in my place while absent. When I got ready to come to Chicago, I
sent a note asking for such leave of absence and transportation. The
transportation was sent me, but no answer to my note was given. When I
came to Chicago I called at the office of the superintendent to have an
understanding about my leave and he told me that a written notice was
not necessary. Whenever I wanted to go anywhere all I had to do was to
put a good man in my place and go. The Tuesday following the opening of
the convention the assistant superintendent went to La Salle and put
another man in my place permanently. No reason has ever been given me
why such action was taken."
Commissioner Wright: "Mr. Lovejoy, I suppose you have given the subjects
of labor troubles and strikes some study. I wish to ask if you can
suggest any solution of these troubles."
Mr. Lovejoy: "Yes, sir, I have and I consider the only way to solve the
question is for the government to own the railroads."
Commissioner Kernan: "What is your reason?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "I think the employes would receive better treatment and be
better satisfied. I think they would get the same kind of treatment as
the postal employes and there would be no strikes under these
conditions."
Commissioner Kernan: "What do you think of arbitration as a remedy?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "I have never seen arbitration tried to any great extent
and while I believe in the principle I am not prepared to say that I am
in favor of compulsory arbitration."
Commissioner Wright: "If the government owned the railroads how would
you avoid the changes incident to a change in administration?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "I consider that railroad employes would be in practically
the same position as postal clerks. They would be under civil service
rules to the extent of being pensioned after a term of years of faithful
service."
Commissioner Kernan: "Would it not cause jealousy among other branches
of workingmen if such a system should be adopted toward railroad men?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "I do not think so. I am not jealous of postal clerks."
Commissioner Wright: "What would you suggest as the next best thing if
government ownership proved impracticable?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "That the government keep hands off altogether; let the
roads and their men fight out their troubles free from outside
interference. It is the knowledge that the government can be called to
their aid that makes many of the railroad officials so arbitrary with
their men."
Commissioner Kernan: "Don't you think that disputes ought to be settled
by some other method than open warfare?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "There would be none if the authorities would keep away.
The employes would settle their grievances by arbitration."
Mr. Worthington: "What would you think of a law providing that upon
application of a certain number of employes the railroads should be
compelled to come before a board of arbitration and make answer to the
grievances of the men or vice versa before a strike could be declared? I
mean by that a law which would compel a hearing of disputes by a
constituted tribunal even though that tribunal had not the power to
force a decision in the matter?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "I would be in favor of such a court and believe that the
railroad men would abide by its decision voluntarily if they had some
choice in the selection of the arbitrators."
Commissioner Kernan: "Is it not one of the greatest troubles the
railroad men have to contend with that they cannot get a hearing of
their grievances?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "Yes, sir. It is. And if the men could always be sure of
getting a fair and impartial hearing I do not believe there would be any
strikes. As a rule the men are opposed to strikes and resort to them
only when every means of settling grievances has failed."
Commissioner Kernan: "Is it not true that strikes usually end
disastrously to the men?"
Mr. Lovejoy: "Strikes often fail to accomplish the particular end in
view, but I believe on the whole their tendency is toward a betterment
of the conditions of the men. The strike we have just passed through has
demonstrated to the working people of this country that they must get
together as one solid body before they can win. They have found out that
when they undertake to assert their rights they have no friends but
themselves. The press, the judiciary, the ministers and office holders
are all against them."
Secretary Kelliher of the American Railway Union was next to testify. He
promised to furnish the commissioners with certified copies of any of
the proceedings of the convention, and the correspondence which occurred
during the strike. In answer to questions by the commissioners he
considered government ownership of railways the only solution to
strikes. While he favored arbitration, he did not think compulsory
arbitration would be satisfactory to the men.
Thomas J. Heathcoat, a resident of Pullman, and one of the strikers, was
the next witness examined. He testified to the condition of Pullman
prior to and at the time of the strike and gave a full account of the
strike and the causes that brought it about. He gave in detail the scale
of wages paid prior to June, '93, and the constant reductions since.
Mr. Heathcoat, in answer to Commissioner Kernan asking him to explain
the mode adopted by the Pullman Company in cutting wages for piece work,
said:
"Take, for instance, that desk behind which you sit. Suppose it were
given to me to make. I figured that I could do the work for $20.00, and
took it at that price. As a good mechanic I could make $4.00 per day at
it. For the next one the foreman would allow me $18.00. Being anxious to
make good wages, and being a good mechanic, I would use extra effort and
still make $4.00 per day. The next one the foreman would allow me only
$16.00 for. Yet, by extraordinary effort I could still make $4.00 daily.
The next one the foreman would allow me $12.00 for, and with my utmost
endeavors I could make only $3.00 per day. As a good mechanic I would
refuse to take any more at that price and the work would be given to an
inferior workman who could make only $1.25 per day. This is the way the
Pullman Company has worked its piece work system."
Commissioner Wright: "Did the cuts in other departments average as much
as in yours?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "They averaged the same though they were not alike. The
new men in the freight car department suffered more than we did and
there were others in some of the departments that were making pretty
good wages at the time of the strike."
Commissioner Wright: "You have spoken of asking the company for a
reduction in rent. What rent do you pay, and what did you get for it?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Up to the beginning of the strike I paid $17 a month
rent and 71 cents per month for water. Gas I did not use. Could not
afford it. The company charged $2.25 per 1,000 feet. My house had five
rooms, cellar and back yard." Commissioner Wright: "What would similar
houses rent for elsewhere?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "I know of eight and nine room cottages with front and
back yards, in every way more desirable than the house I live in, that
can be rented for $8.00 and $9.00 per month."
Commissioner Worthington: "What, in your opinion, would it cost to build
houses such as you live in?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "I should like to take the contract for building them at
$600 apiece."
Commissioner Kernan: "What other accommodations do you get for the rent
you pay, say in the way of paved streets?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "There are cheap wooden sidewalks in front of the house
and the company keeps a force of men on the street picking up paper and
hauling away garbage. That's all I know."
Commissioner Wright: "Have you applied to the Pullman company for work
since the strike?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "No, sir. I understand that I am blacklisted. They have a
blacklist, you know. I have one in my pocket now."
Commissioner Wright: "Will you let me see it?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. Here it is."
Commissioner Wright: "Have you any objection to telling us where you got
this?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. I got it from a friend of one of the clerks in
the Pullman office and I would not like to tell the name of either, as
it would cost the clerk his position."
Commissioner Wright: "Have you any other evidence of the existence of a
blacklist?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. One of the men who applied to Mr. Childs at
the Rock Island shops for work. He was asked his name and the same being
found on one of their lists he was told that he was a Pullman striker,
consequently could not get work. I understand the Pullman company's
blacklist was sent to all the railroads so that others besides myself
can never get work in the railroad shop again."
Commissioner Wright: "Do labor unions ever blacklist non-union men?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "The American Railway Union does not. That is the only
labor union I ever belonged to."
Commissioner Wright: "What was the feeling of the employes toward Mr.
Pullman previous to the strike?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "As a rule I think the employes had a high regard for Mr.
Pullman until Harry Middleton took charge two and a half years ago. He
is not a practical car builder. He wastes material for which we are
charged. He displaces men who have earned their positions by good work
and promotes his favorites. He makes arbitrary and tyrannical shop rules
which deprive us of part of our pay. For instance, suppose a car
carpenter be given a lot of cars, the work to be finished in a certain
time. Within a day of the time limit it is seen that there is still six
days work for one man. He will put on five extra men, regardless whether
that many can work to advantage, and pay them by the hour charging the
same to the man who took the job as piece work."
Commissioner Kernan: "Is not time enough allowed to finish the work so
that such instances would be due to the neglect of the man who took the
job?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "No, sir. It is not, except in rare cases. It is
misjudgment on the part of the manager, Mr. Middleton, as I said before,
who is not a practical car builder. As an instance of a waste of
material--There was a set of car sashes, made of mahogany. Care was not
taken to see that the mahogany picked out was all of the same color.
Instead of picking out those of the set that were alike in color and
completing the set with new ones and using the off color ones in another
set with wood picked out to match, Middleton had the whole set smashed
and charged the men with the cost of the material and refused to pay
them for their time when it was not their fault at all."
Mr. Wright: "Referring now to the committee appointed to wait on Mr.
Pullman--tell us what you said and what was said to you."
Mr. Heathcoat: "We asked Mr. Wickes and Mr. Pullman to adjust our wages
so that we could support our families. We wanted either the wages of
June, 1893, or a reduction in rent and some increase in wages. Mr.
Pullman said he could not reduce rents as he was making only 3-1/2 or
2-1/2 per cent., I don't know which now, on his investment. He said he
could not increase wages because he was losing money on his contract
work. But he did not say what was a fact that nine tenths of the work
that had been done since the cut began was Pullman and not contract
work."
Commissioner Kernan: "What do you mean by Pullman work?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Work on cars owned and operated by the Pullman Company
and not work on cars sold to railroads. One result of this was that the
company was getting work from us for $1.90 for which it paid the
railroads when they did this work $2.50 and $2.70. Two days after he
told us the company was losing money on its contract work, a quarterly
dividend of 2 per cent. was declared."
Commissioner Kernan: "That might have been paid from accumulations and
not from earnings."
Mr. Heathcoat: "Mr. Pullman did not make any such explanation to us when
we spoke to him afterward. If he had, perhaps we would not have felt so
badly about it. But it did seem hard that when men were working and not
getting enough from the company to buy enough to eat that it should pay
out $600,000.00 in dividends."
Commissioner Wright: "Were there those not getting enough to eat?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "I have seen men faint by the side of cars on which they
were working because they had not had enough to eat. After the cuts,
while working as hard as I could to earn enough to support my family, I
have been obliged to sit down in the middle of the forenoon to rest
because I had not had enough food to enable me to do such hard work and
there were hundreds worse off than I. If rents had been reduced I
believe there would have been no strike. We wanted to submit the
question of rent and wages to a board of arbitration, we to choose one,
the Pullman company one, and the two a third. We would have abided by
any decision the arbitrators made."
Commissioner Wright: "Did not Mr. Pullman offer to let you look over the
company's books to convince you that what he said was true?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes. But what would we know about them? Besides, we did
not believe that the books would show the real facts. I have been told
that there is only one accountant in the city who understands the
company's books and we did not have money enough to buy bread let alone
to hire an accountant. I have seen men crying at the paymaster's window
when their pay checks for two weeks would be eight cents or 35 cents,
or one dollar or two dollars over their rent and the company expected
them to support their families on that 'till next pay day. You see the
men got two pay checks, one for just the amount of rent owed and the
other for the balance of their two weeks pay. The rent checks they are
expected to indorse and turn over at once to the town agent in payment
of rent. The law will not allow the company to deduct the rent from the
pay and retain it, but the check must be turned over just the same for
you cannot cash it unless you can persuade the agent that you cannot
possibly live unless you are allowed to retain it. Then perhaps you will
be allowed to retain a part or all of it. I have been insulted by the
clerks in the agent's office because I told them I could not get along
without the money for my rent check. Yet such was the case for there was
one time when my pay after the rent was deducted left only eight cents a
day for each member of my family to live on until the next pay day."
Mr. Worthington: "Are the Pullman employes required to live in Pullman?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. As long as there are any houses in Pullman
vacant the men must live there, unless they own houses somewhere else or
are favorites of the shop bosses. In fact during last winter I knew of
people who owned houses in Roseland leaving them unrented and moving to
Pullman so they could get work. When you apply for work you are required
to make application if you are a man of family."
Mr. Worthington: "Are there any lots in Pullman bought and sold so that
you could form an idea of the value, for instance, of the lot on which
the house you live in stands?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "No, sir. No lots are sold but I know of a house and lot
over in Roseland on the boulevard near One hundred and eleventh street
which were bought two years ago for $2,500 and can be rented for $12 a
month. The house is better than the one I live in, is bigger and in a
good location while mine is on a back street and I would not pay more
than $1,000 for the house and lot."
Mr. Worthington: "If your house could be built for $600 and only yields
3-1/2 per cent the lot must be worth more than $5,000. Is it?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "No, sir. It is not, but there are some frame houses in
Pullman which the company charges eight dollars a month for that could
be built for $100."
Mr. Wright: "It was said at the beginning of this strike that the
Pullman people owed $70,000 for rent. How far back did that accumulation
begin?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "I should say about Nov. 1, 1893."
Mr. Wright: "Tell us if you know what the cuts in wages were in
departments other than your own."
Mr. Heathcoat: "The freight car builders suffered more than others, but
the commission can find out best by having some one from each department
come before it."
Commissioner Kernan: "Don't the people of Pullman know that we want to
hear from every one that can throw any light on this subject?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. They understand it but there are lots of them
who have not money to get down here."
Mr. Wright: "Tell us if you can what was the average pay of the
employes, say in April last?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "On a lot of elevated cars on which I worked I made 16
cents per hour, on one car and 15 cents per hour on another, but there
were men working alongside of me who made only four and five cents per
hour. I would say that in January, February and March the mechanic's pay
averaged $1.50 and the laborers' pay $1.30 per day. Some times the
laborers' checks were bigger than the mechanics'."
Commissioner Wright: "Have you any suggestion of a remedy for labor
troubles?"
Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. The ownership of railroads and banks by the
government would do it. I never heard of a strike in the post-office
department or the navy yard."
Miss Curtis next took the stand. She was an employe of Pullman and
president of the Girls Union of the American Railway Union at Pullman.
Beginning her testimony she said: "In June, 1893, the wages in my
department were 22-1/2 cents per hour, $2.25 a day. In April, 1894, they
were 70 to 80 cents a day. There were two cuts in one week in November
and another in January. In April the best wages any of us could make was
eighty cents a day, while some could not make more than from 40 to 50
cents a day. Last June they could make at least $1.50 per day."
Commissioner Wright: "Do you pay rent?"
Miss Curtis: "Not now. My father worked for the Pullman company thirteen
years, during which time he paid rent. He died last September and as
there was some expense connected with his sickness he owed $60 back
rent. Then I went to work in the repair shop and boarded out. The
company made me pay $3 per week on account of the back rent. I still
owed $15 on the day of the strike and owe it yet. Some weeks I did not
earn enough to pay my board and rent too and then I paid only part of
the $3."
Commissioner Wright: "Were you on any of the committees that waited on
Mr. Pullman and Mr. Wickes?"
Miss Curtis: "Yes, sir. I represented the girls on that committee. We
wanted our wages raised as the men did theirs. Mr. Wickes said it was
impossible to raise wages as they were losing money on their contracts
and it was utterly impossible to reduce rents. An appointment was made
to meet Mr. Pullman on another day. When we saw him he said the same
that Mr. Wickes told us."
Commissioner Kernan: "What work was done in your department?"
Miss Curtis: "We made the silk, satin and velvet drapings; the carpets,
tapestries and mattresses for the sleeping coaches, the linen for the
dining cars, sewed the fringe on cushions and all that sort of thing."
Theodore Rhode was the next to testify. He said: "Four years ago I had a
good job. Then they wanted me to do a kind of work that no one else
could make a living at. Four or five of us were to work together. I was
to have charge of the work and we were to divide whatever we made. I
said I would try it, but if I didn't like it wanted my old job back.
This was agreed to. When I became satisfied that I could make nothing at
the new work I asked for my old place, but they would not give it to me
and told me that if I didn't like what I was doing I could quit working
for the company. After a while we got so we could make from $2.60 to
$2.85 for 10-3/4 hours work. Then the cuts came, and work for which we
had received $9.00 paid only $4.25. It was impossible to make $1.25 per
day, and we were told by the foreman to quit if not satisfied. I paid
$15.00 a month for rent and 71 cents for water. I could rent as good a
house in Kensington or Roseland for $7.00 a month. On the day of the
strike I owed $2.50 for rent. Have not paid it since, although the
collector has been around two or three times lately. Low wages and high
rents are not all the trouble. It is the abuse. They talk to men as they
would to dogs. They are constantly experimenting with new materials. If
it don't prove satisfactory we get no pay for our work. Take English
varnish, for instance. The atmosphere must be just right or it won't
work. Oftentimes, owing to a dampness in the air, we were obliged to do
our work over two or three times for which we get no extra pay. In April
my wages every two weeks were from $12.00 to $15.00. I understand they
pay the men who took our places from $2.50 to $3.00 and $3.00 to $5.00
per day. I have not applied for work again."
R. W. Combes. For 30 years a car carpenter and for 10 years employed at
Pullman, was next called before the commission.
"A year ago," he said, "wages in his department was $2.25 at piece work,
and 17-1/2 cents per hour. In March, piece work was cut so that they
could not make more than 68 cents a day."
Commissioner Kernan: "How much would you have gotten at the rate of
wages in force in March or April?" Mr. Combes: "We did not built the
same kind of cars in 1894, but had we, we would not have received
anything for them. In February I had $3.50 to support my wife and two
children after paying rent. Had the men received fair treatment there
would have been no strike. John Pearson, superintendent of the freight
car department, is the whole cause of the strike. He is abusive and
tyrannical. I was inspector in April and Pearson told me if the men did
not do what I told them to take a club and knock their damned heads off.
That's the kind of a man he is. I have not applied for work. Middleton
told me I never could work there again."
H. F. Griswold, a switchman, testified that he had last been employed by
the C. M. & St. P. Ry.--that he lost his position through the
strike--had tried to get work within the last few weeks on the Penn. R.
R., at Pittsburg, Altona and Columbus and at each of these places had
been shown a blacklist with his name on it as a member of the American
Railway Union.
Several other witnesses testified as to being blacklisted on account of
being in the strike.
Charles Naylor, a fireman on the Ft. Wayne road up to the time of the
strike, was next examined. In answer to questions as to what he thought
of arbitration he said: "From my knowledge of railroad men I do not
believe they would have much confidence in arbitrators elected in the
same way public officials are. My idea is that they should be appointed
when their services are required and a new set of arbitrators selected
for each case. The board should be composed of one man selected by the
employes, one by the roads, and a third by these two."
Commissioner Wright: "That is the law now."
Mr. Naylor: "Yes, but it is not enforced. It seems to me that if Mr.
Cleveland had followed in the line of action pursued by Mr. Gladstone,
during the coal miners' strike in England, there would have been no
trouble here. If he had told the railroads when they called on him for
troops that they must submit to arbitration or they would get no support
from the government, the men would have thought a good deal more of his
honesty and fairness, but when they see the whole power of the
government thrown on the side of the railroads they lose confidence in
the justice of the government."
Commissioner Wright: "There was no law under which the president could
have told the roads to arbitrate the trouble with their men."
Mr. Naylor: "From all that I can learn there was as much law for him to
do so as for him to send troops here without the request of the governor
of the state."
Mr. Worthington: "In your suggestion of a board of arbitrators there
would be but one of them unprejudiced?"
Mr. Naylor: "I think such a board would always be able to effect a
compromise between the parties. I have acted in the capacity of
arbitrator between the company and the men in adjusting grievances and
have always found that a spirit of compromise was met in a like spirit
and that is the principle, after all, upon which such questions must be
settled."
Vice President Howard of the American Railway Union, was recalled to
make an explanation regarding some testimony which Mr. Heathcoat had
given the day before. He said: "Mr. Heathcoat told you that Mr. Pullman
had promised to allow a committee to examine his books, to prove the
correctness of his statements to the effect that his company was losing
money on its contracts. The next day, Wallace Rice, a reporter on the
Herald, called on Mr. Pullman and asked him if he would allow an expert
to examine his books on behalf of the union. Mr. Pullman replied that
what he meant by allowing an examination of his books was that he would
have his own book-keeper prepare a statement to be submitted to the
committee. He said he never had any idea of allowing the committee to
actually examine his books. Mr. Howard then asked if he might make a
statement of a couple of matters of importance to the employes. The
commissioners looked doubtful about this, but finally Mr. Wright said he
might go ahead if the matter had anything to do with the subject under
consideration.
Mr. Howard then said: "The United States government is blacklisting
3,000 employes of the Union Pacific Railroad now."
Mr. Wright: "We have no authority to go into that question."
Mr. Howard: "And the other matter is that all the other roads are making
a threat against the M. K. & T. to boycott its business if the road
persists in making a certain rate to Washington."
Mr. Wright: "Has that anything to do with the American Railway Union?"
Mr. Howard: "Yes, sir. If the government allows the railroads to violate
the laws it ought to keep hands off in disputes between the roads and
the men."
Rev. Mr. Cawardine was called and related what he knew about the matter.
Mr. Cawardine is pastor of the M. E. church in Pullman. His testimony
was directed chiefly to the exorbitant rents. In answer to Mr. Wright,
saying that he had been charged with being an anarchist, and a
socialist, Mr. Cawardine said: "I have considered the charge so
contemptible in the bitterness and prejudice of its origin as to be
beneath answer. That I, an American born citizen and the son of a
soldier who died for his country, should be charged with being
anarchist, seems to me incomprehensible. It is simply an evidence of
what has been made very apparent that a good many people are violently
prejudiced against working men and will not listen to what may be said
on their side or read what may be written. I find this feeling even
among many of my brethren in the ministry. I regret it too, because the
labor problem can only be solved by a consideration of it from all
sides."
Andrew W. Pearson, a real estate agent who formerly worked in Pullman,
was called on the stand and in answer to a question put by Mr. Wright,
said:
"Houses which rent for $17.00 in Pullman can be rented in Kensington and
Roseland for $10.00. Pullman houses which rent for $25.00 can be rented
elsewhere for $15.00, and $10.00 Pullman houses for $5.00. In Grand
Crossing, a manufacturing town, $8.00 a month will rent a five-room
brick cottage. The rents I am giving now are the present rents. There
has been a decline since two years ago everywhere but in Pullman."
Commissioner Kernan: "How much higher are rents in Pullman than
elsewhere?"
Mr. Pearson: "I should say fully one-third."
Frank P. McDonald, a locomotive engineer and author of the Great scab
route circular, testified that he was a member of the American Railway
Union and a delegate to their convention. He said he was opposed to the
strike, but voted for it as it was the unanimous sentiment of his local
union. His reason for opposing it was because he did not think the union
was strong enough to win.
President Debs, of the American Railway Union, was the next important
witness to testify. Mr. Debs outlined the trouble from its inception
down to the special convention in Chicago on Aug. 2. In answer to
questions by Commissioner Wright, Mr. Debs said he was 38 years old, a
resident of Terre Haute, Ind., and had been president of the American
Railway Union since June 20, 1893. He was a practical railroad man, had
been employed four and a half years in the capacity of locomotive
fireman and was at present editor of the Fireman's Magazine. Mr. Wright
told him to go ahead and give a history of the late strike so far as he
knew from his own experience.
Mr. Debs said: "In the early part of May, while at home in Indiana, I
received a telegram from Mr. Howard notifying me of the probability of a
strike at the Pullman shops, the employes of which were members of our
union. I authorized Mr. Howard to take full charge of the matter, but to
do all in his power to prevent a strike. My reason for this was that the
American Railway Union had just been involved in a strike on the Great
Northern railway. At a meeting of the general officers of the union we
had discussed the possibility of other strikes arising on account of the
victory the union had won on the Great Northern railway, and we decided
that it would be good policy to be very cautious in encouraging the men
to go into strikes whenever there was a possibility of avoiding them.
May 11th, I heard that the Pullman employes had struck. A few days
after, I came here and made a personal investigation of the trouble.
After a trip to St. Paul I again went down there and the result of my
investigation was that the conditions at Pullman justified the men in
the course they had taken. I found that wages and expenses were so
adjusted that every dollar the men made found its way back to Pullman
coffers. The men were not only not getting enough wages to live on but
were getting deeper and deeper in debt every day. They had not money
enough as a rule to get away. There seemed to be no escape for them.
Wages had been reduced, but expenses remained the same. After I had
satisfied myself of the truth of the men's statements regarding their
conditions, I made up my mind to do everything possible in law and
justice to right the wrongs of our members who had gone out on strike.
We first tried to get the company to arbitrate. We were confident that
any fair and impartial board would decide in favor of the employes. The
company, however, refused every proposition of that sort saying that it
had nothing to arbitrate. I then suggested that the Pullman company
select two men to act with two judges of the circuit court and a fifth
person whom they should select to act as a board to investigate the
question whether there was anything to arbitrate. This proposition was
refused.
"June 12, delegates representing 425 local unions of the American
Railway Union met here in the first quadrennial convention of the
organization. The Pullman question came up for consideration before the
convention sitting as a committee of the whole to hear reports etc. I
wish to say in this connection that all of our deliberations were held
with open doors, except one executive session at which the question of
finances was considered, in which we felt the general public had no
interest, but at all the other meetings the entire press of the city was
represented. I mention this in refutation of the statements which have
been made as to the American Railway Union forming a conspiracy against
the railroads and committing offenses against the United States. If a
conspiracy were intended it seems improbable that we should have sat
with open doors. The first steps taken toward securing a settlement of
the trouble, was the appointment of a committee composed partly of
Pullman employes and in part of other delegates present, with authority
to call on Mr. Wickes to find out if anything could be done toward
effecting a settlement of the strike."
Here Mr. Debs related how Mr. Wickes refused to confer with a committee
composed of any but his former employes, and finally refused to confer
with them, stating that he had nothing to arbitrate.
He then continued: "The matter was then referred to a special committee
with authority to act in the matter. This committee reported that if the
Pullman Company refused to concede anything after five days time to
consider the question, it was the sense of the convention that the
members of the union would refuse to handle Pullman cars. Under the
constitution of the American Railway Union the majority rules in all
questions under consideration. No strike can be declared except by a
majority of the men involved. In order to conform to this rule, the
delegates were instructed to communicate by wire with their respective
unions to ascertain the sentiment of the members on the question before
the convention. After reports had been received from all the local
unions, the convention by a unanimous vote decided to adopt the report
of the special committee.
"Since the railroad employes have been criticised for engaging in a
sympathetic strike, I wish to make some statement regarding the general
situation. In many instances they had local grievances themselves, and
besides, there was this general condition which aggravated the whole
situation.
"In the spring of 1893, just before the opening of the World's Fair, the
general managers of the various roads centering in Chicago, were very
apprehensive lest there should be a general strike among all classes of
railroad employes for an increase of wages. The officers of the
organizations appealed to the men not to strike, arguing that it was
their patriotic duty to bear with patience their grievances until the
fair was over. The result was there was no strike anywhere. The men all
worked in harmony throughout the country. Some of the managers promised,
by implication at least, that there would be an increase of wages to
reward the patriotic action of their men. Instead of doing as they
promised, the general managers during this time equipped their
organization to protect their mutual interests."
Mr. Debs then read an article from a Chicago paper which told how the
general managers had formed an air tight association which would be able
to deal with any strikes that might arise in the future, and suggested
that the association rather courted than feared trouble with employes of
the railroads.
Continuing, Mr. Debs said: "Shortly after the new association had
completed its organization it became apparent what course it intended to
pursue. About Sept. 1, the Louisville & Nashville road made a sweeping
reduction of 10 per cent in the pay of all its employes--the section men
getting 67-1/2 cents a day under this reduction. Then in succession
followed the East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia, the Richmond &
Danville, the Mobile & Ohio, Nashville & Chattanooga, Big Four, New York
& New England, New York, New Haven & Hartford, Wabash, Union Pacific,
Northern Pacific, Monon, Great Northern and the Great Western was just
on the point of declaring a reduction when the strike was declared. "It
was significant that no two roads declared a reduction at the same time,
and in most instances the reductions began with the unorganized and
poorest paid men in the service. The men viewed these reductions with
apprehension and unrest. This was particularly the case after Judge
Caldwell had declared upon investigation that the cut on the Union
Pacific was unwarrantable. In two cases the reductions annulled and the
original pay of the men restored. On the Union Pacific--on the order of
Judge Caldwell and on the Great Northern through the efforts of the
American Railway Union. In the later case the matter was decided by a
board of arbitration, composed of leading capitalists and business men
of St. Paul and Minneapolis.
"These conditions confronted the American Railway Union, when its
delegates met here in convention. The employes felt that other systems
in sound financial conditions had taken advantage of the unfortunate
condition of the country to reduce wages. The men had lost confidence in
their old unions which had failed utterly to protect them against these
reductions and they came in the hope that the American Railway Union
would take some steps to resist them and protect its members against
the rapacity of the railroad companies. This was the reason they were
ripe to take up the cause of the Pullman strikers. They were wrought up
to a point where they were willing to jeopardize their positions to
protect both themselves and the Pullman employes. The primary purpose
was to cut off Pullman's revenues by cutting off his cars and thereby
force him to a settlement."
Mr. Wright: "I understand you to say you advised against the Pullman
strike. Why did you do so?"
Mr. Debs: "We had just gone through a strike on the Great Northern and I
did not think it advisable to go into another at that time."
Mr. Wright: "What would have been the action of the convention if there
had been no strike at Pullman? Did not that strike force the issue?"
Mr. Debs: "There would have been no trouble with the railroads, I think,
but for the Pullman strike. That and the depressed condition of the
country aggravated the situation so as to bring about a general strike."
Mr. Wright: "Was the general strike precipitated by the Pullman
troubles?"
Mr. Debs: "Yes sir, it was."
Mr. Wright: "Was a notice of the action of the convention served on the
different companies?"
Mr. Debs: "Not by the convention. That matter was left to the men on the
various systems. From the action of the managers toward the American
Railway Union generally, the matter of serving a formal notice of our
action on them was not looked upon as necessary, as we were very sure it
would be ignored."
Mr. Wright: "Was notice served on the Illinois Central and Rock Island
roads?"
Mr. Debs: "I think so, but am not sure."
Mr. Worthington: "Did they have notice through the press?"
Mr. Debs: "Yes, sir."
Mr. Wright: "Do you know the date on which the general managers adopted
their resolution to resist the strike?"
Mr. Debs: "I think it was June 24, four days after our action. It was
currently reported at that time, though I have no written or other
evidence of the fact that the general managers resolved among themselves
to exterminate the union."
Mr. Wright: "If the American Railway Union had had its own way in
regard to its policy would a general strike have been postponed?"
Mr. Debs: "Yes, sir. The conditions were not altogether propitious and
we were fully aware of the fact."
Mr. Wright: "What was the number of your membership at that time?"
Mr. Debs: "About 150,000."
Mr. Wright: "Did you consider that strong enough for a general strike?"
Mr. Debs: "Yes, sir. But it was not a question of membership altogether.
There were other reasons." Mr. Debs said there was one other point to
which he wished to call the attention of the commission. One great
reason the men had in resisting a reduction of wages was the fact that
the companies never restored them voluntarily. The tendency had
therefore been for the employes to get closer together to resist the
combined efforts of the managers. That was the principle, he said, which
had inspired the idea of the American Railway Union. Then resuming the
history of the strike Mr. Debs said: