order of 150,000 men composing the American Railway Union, the members
refused to handle Pullman cars. It has been claimed that the president
of the union was a self appointed leader who had ordered the strike,
etc. In this connection I wish to say that while such is not the case,
when the report came in I gave it my approval as president. I do not
wish to avoid any of the responsibility. If I had had the authority I
would have ordered it under the same circumstances. June 26, the men
began to refuse to haul Pullman cars. They had been advised not to
handle the cars on any system where they could not get the sanction of a
sufficient number of men to make such a refusal effective. The officers
of the union opened headquarters at Uhlics Hall and as committees came
in from various roads and made their reports they were advised how to
act, and above all else to avoid trouble and violence and to maintain
order. We advised them of their right to quit in a body and told them
their rights ended there, and that the railroad companies had a right to
hire new men and their right began there."
Commissioner Kernan: "What steps if any did you take to prevent
violence?"
Mr. Debs: "When we saw there was to be trouble we issued an appeal to
the men not to commit any acts of violence. Fourteen years of experience
taught me that violence was the worst thing that could happen for any
strike."
Commissioner Kernan: "How about the telegrams sent by you?"
Mr. Debs: "None of them were inflammatory."
Commissioner Kernan: "How about that 'save your money and buy a gun'
telegram?"
Mr. Debs: "I can explain that telegram very easily. Among those who were
employed at headquarters to take charge of our correspondence and
telegraphing was a young man named Benedict. He had authority to sign my
name to telegrams in answer to questions, etc. The telegram was sent to
a man whom Mr. Benedict had worked under as a telegraph operator in
Montana. The allusion to the gun was a playful expression which they had
been accustomed to use in joking each other, and was understood in that
way by the man who received the telegram. I have his letter in
explanation of the matter which I will be glad to turn over to the
commissioners. I never saw many of the telegrams sent out and did not
see the one you refer to. The employes, obedient to the order of the
convention, began as I have said, to refuse to handle cars. The refusal
usually came from the switchmen who refused to make up trains with the
Pullman equipment. As they refused they were discharged--when the others
would quit.
"July 1st. After five days of strike the general managers were
completely defeated and their immediate resources exhausted. Up to that
time there had been no signs of violence anywhere. Our men were intact
and confident. Then the intervention of the courts was called into play.
"July 2d. I was served with a sweeping injunction restraining me from
sending out telegrams or issuing orders having the effect of persuading
the men to quit work. This injunction was issued wherever the trouble
existed. The result was to reduce our influence to nothing. This was the
point from which the strike was conducted by telegrams and otherwise.
Then a special grand jury was called to inquire into my conduct with the
result that I was indicted with other officials of the union and
warrants issued for our arrest. We were held under a joint bond of
$10,000. Then followed an attachment issued for contempt of the
injunction of July 2d, and our incarceration in the county jail. As
soon as our men found we were under arrest they quit. The U. S. courts
ended the strike, not the soldiers." Mr. Debs told of the seizure of his
mail and personal effects. He said he merely cited the fact to show to
what extent the U. S. authorities were willing to go to defeat the
strikers. He also commented on Gen. Miles who was reported to have gone
directly to the General Managers headquarters on his arrival with the U.
S. troops. He said Gen. Miles was quoted next day as having said he had
broken the back bone of the strike. Mr. Debs thought Gen. Miles had
mistaken his mission which was to preserve order and not to help the
railroads run their trains. He said:
"I think Gen. Miles was vulgarly out of place, both when he went to the
General Managers and when he made the remark credited to him." He said
he thought if the General Managers were compelled to bring into court
copies of their telegrams sent to the attorney general as the American
Railway Union had done he could substantiate the charge that it was the
object to annihilate the American Railway Union.
Mr. Worthington: "Did I understand you this morning to charge the
General Managers Association with the responsibility of the strike?"
Mr. Debs: "Not in that broad and general way. The American Railway Union
ordered the strike and is responsible for it, but there were aggravating
circumstances which ought to go in mitigation under any view of the
situation. But the attitude taken by the General Managers' Association,
their expressed determination to crush the American Railway Union, in
that respect and in refusing to arbitrate they were responsible. We felt
if they could combine we could and each was culpable."
Mr. Worthington: "You believe in enforcing the law, do you not, and in
the proper authorities using sufficient force to do it, do you not?"
Mr. Debs: "Most certainly I do."
Mr. Worthington: "You have doubtless given considerable thought to the
matter. How do you think strikes can be avoided?"
Mr. Debs: "There are two ways. First. By submitting to reduction in
wages and other grievances as the old organizations have done for years.
When the general manager determines to reduce wages he proposes a cut of
20 per cent when he only intends to make a 10 per cent reduction. Then
there is a conference when they finally agree on 10 per cent. This
avoids strikes but it reduces wages. The second way is a unification of
all, or practically all the railroad men of the country in a prudently
managed organization. That would prevent strikes on railroads, for even
if the railroads could unite to beat such an organization, it would be
expensive."
Mr. Worthington: "Do you believe that such an organization would be so
strong as to compel the adoption of all reasonable demands?"
Mr. Debs: "We did believe it, or the American Railway Union would never
have been organized. We see now that it cannot because all the organized
forces of society and of the government are arrayed against it. When a
strike inconveniences no one, no one is particularly interested in it
and it gradually dwindles down to the little end of nothing. But when a
strike does inconvenience the public, as railroad strikes must of
necessity do, the organized forces of society and the government, a
practically impregnable force, and properly so, is arrayed against it.
Take, for instance, the Ann Arbor strike. It inconvenienced the public
and immediately the roads applied to the courts, and Judge Taft issued
an injunction against the men. The first of the injunctions that have
been so much questioned both by lawyers and laborers."
Mr. Worthington: "Is it justifiable to incommode the public as such
strikes do?"
Mr. Debs: "It depends on circumstances. I believe with Admiral Porter,
that a pin is worth fighting for if a principle is involved. To resist
degradation is justifiable no matter what the result. If there were no
resistance, things would be, if possible, worse than they are and
without resistance degradation is inevitable. If the railroads treated
their men fairly there would be no labor organizations. Every
organization of railroad men is traceable to oppression. The Brotherhood
of Locomotive Engineers was born of the tyranny of the Michigan Central
road. I have that from the lips of Mr. Robinson, the founder of that
organization. The first meetings were held in secret because the men
would have been discharged if the management knew they were organizing.
Everywhere organization originated from similar causes. No legislation
can reconcile railroad employers and employes while human nature is in
it. Confidence has been destroyed. The men have been so treated that
they have grown suspicious, and when general managers, who are
themselves employes, order a reduction of wages on instructions from
those above them, that it is necessary because of hard times or slack
business, the men are not at all assured that such are the reasons. They
may accept the reduction, but they are not satisfied. In many instances
the general managers obey orders to reduce wages with regret for they
are humane men, many of them. Soon after the Great Northern strike, the
president of a railroad told me that I now had the opportunity to make
myself a most enviable reputation, both among railroad employers and
employes by advising the men themselves to propose a reduction of say 10
per cent in their wages during these dull times, thus putting the road
under obligation to increase wages when business improved. I said to
him, only a few months ago your road was doing a phenomenally heavy
business. Did you propose an increase of even 5 per cent in your
employes wages because you were making money? Every time a decrease in
wages has been prevented or an increase secured, it has been the result
of weeks of labor and pleading and the expenditures of thousands of
dollars by the men. Every schedule ever adopted is evidence of that.
Now that the strike is practically over the usual persecutions will be
indulged in against those who took part in it. Some people are
felicitating themselves that the strike has been suppressed, but the
safety valve has been screwed down, that's all. The men are no more
satisfied than they were. Some of them will get back their old
positions; others will get work on other roads; still others will find
work elsewhere, while some will be forced to remain idle for a long
time. None of them are satisfied with the conditions and sooner or later
strikes will break out again, I fear. You might as well try to stop
Niagara with a feather as crush the spirit of organization."
Commissioner Kernan: "If it should be shown that government ownership of
railroads resulted in poorer service and more expensive management, do
you think it would be a good thing?"
Mr. Debs: "Government ownership of railroads is decidedly better than
railroad ownership of government. The time is coming when there must be
government ownership of railroads. Strikes cannot be averted
otherwise."
Commissioner Worthington: "Will government supervision answer the
purpose?"
Mr. Debs: "I don't think so."
Mr. Worthington: "Will arbitration answer?"
Mr. Debs: "I fear not. No good can come from compulsory arbitration,
that is a contradiction of terms, even if some means of enforcing the
decree could be devised. Those against whom the decree was rendered
would not be satisfied. The basis must be friendship and confidence."
Commissioner Worthington: "Admitting that there is some contradiction in
the term compulsory arbitration, it expresses what we mean though
compulsory attempts at conciliation would express it better. Would it be
of no avail in any case?"
Mr. Debs: "It would undoubtedly in many cases where trouble is local and
the conditions homogeneous, so that all of them could be considered as
for instance in the Pullman troubles. It could be put in force if there
was a trial by jury or something of that sort, as other courts are
constituted, but in interstate matters on railroads extending over
thousands of miles where conditions vary, no decree could be made to
fit the case. It is easy to compass local matters but not widespread
matters because the conditions are not homogeneous. It would be
impossible to force the decree."
"MR. DEBS' TESTIMONY."
An extract from the Chicago Times.
"People who read an Editorial from the Chicago Times of Eugene V. Debs
before the strike commission, as printed in the Times yesterday, cannot,
if they be fair-minded, fail to be convinced of the justice of the cause
in which he is working and of the sincerity and ability of the man
himself.
"In a struggle for the rights of humanity individuals are nothing. He
will be but a poor champion of the cause of the people who will pause to
eulogize certain champions when he should be fighting for principles.
But when a leader like Debs is attacked, as he has been attacked, and
all the agencies and all the influence of capitalism are set in motion
to 'make an example of him'--i. e., to so persecute him that no other
man will be willing to encounter like danger in the wageworkers'
cause--then must every spokesman of the working classes speak out in
defense of the leader so attacked.
"The slanders that have been directed against Debs during this struggle
simply baffled recountal because of their number. He has been called
crazy, drunken, revolutionary, criminal, incompetent. Newspapers have at
once declared his conduct of the strike impotent and denounced him for
having made it so effective. Labor has been entreated to throw him over
as a puerile leader and capital has been warned that he is a dangerous
man because of his surpassing ability. 'Anything to beat Debs' has been
the one policy which has animated the organs of capital for the last
four months.
"Well, Debs is beaten--in a certain sense. His effort in behalf of the
Pullman strikers has failed and the very journals which most strenuously
opposed his work are now printing the story of the dreadful destitution
bred of the Pullman despotism which Debs did his best to break down.
"It is too late now to fight over again the issues of the American
Railway Union strike and boycott. Debs and his associates now stand in
the shadow of the penitentiary for trying to avert by entirely proper
and lawful means the conditions which now engage the attention of the
governor of the state, and which must awaken the sympathy of all humane
people. The privileged corporations flocked to the aid of the Pullman
concern--no one conversant with the facts in the case can gainsay that.
The railroads stood by Pullman; every morning newspaper in Chicago
except the Times stood by the railroads; the government joined in with
the combination. Mr. Debs' testimony is to the effect that governmental
action, by hastily issued injunctions, killed the strike--a statement
which everybody cognizant of the course of that movement will indorse.
"There has been much evidence adduced before the investigation
commission, but none so exact or none more clear than that of Mr. Debs.
His explanation of the causes of the strike and boycott is perspicuous
and logical, his outline of the causes of its failure coherent and
convincing, his suggestion of means for avoiding its recurrence
absolutely right. He sees, as all clear-sighted and fair-minded men must
see, that under the private ownership of railroads there is no
possibility of justice for railroad employes. The public interest in the
smooth and uninterrupted course of traffic over the roads enables the
managers to call upon public opinion and even upon state forces to aid
them against the employes in any serious controversy. The government
ownership of railroads is indeed, as Mr. Debs has said, the one
effective remedy for strikes among railroad hands. Asked for a solution
of the general railroad problem, he suggested the co-operative
commonwealth--a solution, doubtless, but one so difficult of
accomplishment as to seem almost, if not quite, Utopian. Mr. Debs might
have proceeded logically from his declaration for government ownership
of railroads to government ownership and management of all other
industries which tend naturally and inevitably to become monopolies.
This accomplished, the repeal of all laws giving private persons the
benefit of artificial law-created monopolies would follow. Then the
abolition of all taxes upon industry. Finally, the throwing open to all
men on equal conditions of all natural opportunities so that every man
starting in life should have, so far as human power could accomplish it,
an equal chance with every other man. Under such an organization and
with such laws the co-operative commonwealth which Mr. Debs suggests
would probably prove unnecessary. Competition, which is essential to the
progress of civilization, would still continue, but it would be free
competition, not the calm triumph of man plus monopoly over the man
without it."
Following President Debs' testimony the matter of rioting was taken up
by the commissioners. Chief Deputy U. S. Marshall John C. Donnelly,
testified that there were between 1,400 and 1,500 deputies sworn in,
armed and paid by the government, concerning whose character and fitness
practically no inquiries were made, and that there were between 3,000
and 4,000 men sworn in as deputies at the request of the railroads,
armed and paid by them, and that no inquiries concerning their
characters were made at all. That this army of 3,000 or 4,000 armed men
clothed with the authority of the United States was not at all under the
control of the U. S. marshall and was not responsible and reported to no
one unless to the chiefs of detectives of the several roads. Most of the
reports of drunkenness and violence of deputies were from among those
hired by the railroads.
Malcolm McDonald, a reporter for the Record, was next to testify. In
answer to questions by the commissioners he said, he thought as a rule
the turbulent element was not composed of railroad men. He spoke to some
of the American Railway Union men about upsetting cars and they denied
having had any hand in it. He also said that the conduct of the U. S.
marshalls had not been such as to prevent trouble and they seemed to be
hunting opportunities to get into conflict with the men.
M. L. Wickman, pastor of the Swedish Methodist Church, testified that
many members of his church who worked for the Pullman Company, had to be
taken care of during the fall and winter of 1893 and 1894. He told of
one man who had his hand injured by a piece of flying steel. After a
great deal of expense at the hospital he finally recovered the partial
use of his hand and was taken back to work at reduced pay. Mr. Wickman
took the case before Manager Brown, and that officer confronted him with
a written statement by the injured man to the effect that the accident
was one for which the company was in no way responsible. It was
subsequently proved that the man's signature to the paper was forged.
Ray Baker, a reporter for the Record, said he was at Hammond during the
rioting there and thought the rioters were not railroad men.
H. J. Cleveland, a reporter for the Herald, testified that he was to
work along the Rock Island and Lake Shore tracks where considerable
rioting occurred between July 4 and 15. From an extensive acquaintance
among railroad men, he felt sure that there were few, if any railroad
men among the rioters. Criticising the deputy marshals, Mr. Cleveland
said that he saw many acts on their part which were calculated to cause
trouble unnecessary, and thought, as a rule, they were men not fit to be
in authority. He characterized the whole lot as a contemptible set of
men. The men who were doing the rioting, had the appearance of those who
had never done an honest day's work in their lives.
N. D. Hutton, reporter for the Tribune, was the next witness called. He
said that he was at Blue Island and about the stock yards district.
Thought some of the rioting was done by railroad men, but could not say
so from personal knowledge of the fact.
Mr. Miller, a reporter for the Tribune was next examined. He testified
that he was sworn in as a deputy marshall and detailed to go to Blue
Island. After relating his experience as to rioting, Commissioner Kernan
asked him if he had an extensive acquaintance among railroad men.
Mr. Miller: "In the course of my work I have learned to know a great
many of them by sight at least."
Commissioner Kernan: "Did you see anyone whom you know to be a railroad
man engaged in violence or encouraging others who were so engaged?"
Mr. Miller: "Never, except once. That was when a meat train had been cut
in two and switches were being turned. He was not doing any of it but
the general tenor of his talk was in the nature of advice to what was
being done. Most of the trouble was caused by hoodlums and toughs. In my
reports I characterized them as hoodlums. Many were boys."
Commissioner Kernan: "What was your observation as to the sobriety or
otherwise of the strikers at the meetings?"
Mr. Miller: "I scarcely remember of seeing one under the influence of
liquor. Sobriety was the rule and drunkenness the exception."
Commissioner Kernan: "Did the speakers at the meetings advice against
violence or did they encourage it?"
Mr. Miller: "They advised against it."
Commissioner Kernan: "Did you think them sincere in this advice or was
it simply a cloak?" Mr. Miller: "I believed them sincere particularly
the brainier men."
Victor M. Harding, a reporter for the Times, was the next witness, he
testified to being present during the rioting on the Rock Island road,
and saw boys throwing burning waste into cars within a hundred yards of
a cavalry camp."
Commissioner Kernan: "Did you ever see anyone you knew to be a railroad
man engaged in any violence?"
Mr. Harding: "I never did. The stock yards furnish the most glaring
examples of the false and exaggerated reports of riot and disorder made
by the newspapers. This district has been for years made to bear the
burden of the crimes committed in this part of the city. There was
comparatively little disorder at the stock yards during the strike, but
the newspaper reports contained accounts of fights, shooting affrays and
riots almost every night. Capt. O'Neil, of the stock yards police told
me that the reporters and the militia were both responsible for this.
Volleys of shot fired by the soldiers or militia were to be heard every
day and night, which on investigation proved to have no cause other than
a desire to create excitement. The militia men, he said, were in the
habit of firing merely for the sake of making a sensation. A crowd would
naturally gather, reporters would flock around and then there would be
something to tell and brag about. I know this is so from talk with the
men themselves. They intimated that they were getting tired of doing
nothing and were desirous of creating some excitement. One night Capt.
O'Neil said he heard a volley of shots, went to the spot and found that
the shooting had been done by a lot of sentries. They said they had
fired at a Polak--the common name for a Pole--who was seen crawling
under a car. The soldiers claimed it was dark, the man was at a distance
and was not hit. Yet they knew he was a Polak. Equally absurd stories in
explanation of shooting were given the police captain on other
occasions."
Assistant Fire Marshall John Fitzgerald testified that he had been on
duty at all fires of any importance and had witnessed many acts of
incendiarism. In all instances he stated that these acts had been
committed by boys or youths belonging to the hoodlum element. He said
the eldest could not have been over nineteen years old. The fire
department had never been obstructed in any way in reaching fires. On
one occasion railroad men, whom he knew to be strikers, aided in placing
an engine in position, though he had never solicited aid of any kind
during the period when the fires were most numerous.
The Pullman side was now taken up by the commissioners.
Frank W. Glover was the first witness. He described himself as a real
estate dealer who owned a sub-division in Kensington, besides acre
property there, owned and sold houses and lots, and had tenants. In
reply to Commissioner Worthington as to what he knew of the rents in
Pullman, Kensington, Roseland and other similar suburbs, how they would
compare, Mr. Glover said: "I should say a six-room house in Pullman for
$17.00 is better than one of my six-room houses in Kensington which
rents for $10.00 to $12.00. The Pullman houses are connected with
sewers. The land on which they stand is better drained and from what I
should judge from outside appearances they have more of what are called
modern conveniences. My houses have no sewer connections, the land is
low, and in spring and fall is liable to have water on it; besides I
understand the Pullman Company keeps their houses in repair, while I do
not."
Paul E. Hearns, stationer and newsdealer at Pullman, was the next
witness. In his opinion there would have been less suffering if some of
the men had let beer and whiskey alone.
L. H. Johnson, a hardware and furniture dealer, testified next. He
expressed the belief that the Pullman employes were as thrifty,
economical and temperate a class of people as others of a similar class.
Wm. R. McKay, a reporter for the Mail, was next heard. He said that he
had been detailed to look after the American Railway Union headquarters
and the meetings at Uhlics Hall. The speeches at all these meetings were
against violence and in favor of observing the law as the only means of
winning the strike.
B. H. Atwell, a reporter for the Daily News, was the next witness. He
testified that he was at Blue Island during the trouble. He said the
deputy marshalls had drawn revolvers without any reason. Most of the men
who made trouble there were not railroad men. Railroad officials had
said to him that the strikers were not making the trouble. At the stock
yards also, such violence as was done was not by railroad strikers but
by toughs.
The next witness called was Alex Lungren, a wood-carver. In answer to
Commissioner Kernan's question if foremen had absolute power over the
men in their departments, Mr. Lungren replied that he did not know.
Commissioner Kernan: "Are the workingmen compelled to obey the orders
given by the foremen?"
Mr. Lungren: "Yes. They must obey orders."
Commissioner Kernan: "Is there any appeal from these orders?"
Mr. Lungren: "No."
Commissioner Kernan: "Then there is no way of getting the matter to the
officials or superintendent?"
Mr. Lungren: "No."
Commissioner Kernan: "Then there is no system of obtaining a hearing
from the officials concerning any grievance?"
Mr. Lungren: "No there is no system and it is very difficult to see any
of the officials to obtain redress."
Commissioner Kernan: "What were the conditions of your re-employment
with the company?"
Mr. Lungren: "I had to leave the American Railway Union."
Commissioner Kernan: "Were you obliged to sign any contract relating to
your membership in any labor organization?"
Mr. Lungren: "Yes. There was a written contract which I signed. It
stated that I would have nothing to do with the American Railway Union."
Mr. Lungren also testified that he did not vote to strike. He did not
attend the meetings; said he quit work in accordance with the notice
posted by the company that the works would be closed down.
Dr. John W. McLean was the next witness. He said he had been a
practicing physician since 1863, and had been in the employ of the
Pullman company since 1894. He thought the strike had been brought about
by the general depression in business throughout the country. Did not
think the rents exorbitant in Pullman. Said he attended the Pullman
employes who were injured, free of charge. When asked by Commissioner
Kernan if he thought intemperance one cause of the Pullman strike, he
said:
"Yes, I think all labor troubles are directly due to this cause."
General Manager E. St. John of the Rock Island road was the next witness
examined. His testimony, which would fill several pages, was in brief a
general contradiction of all evidence offered by the reporters, and
American Railway Union witnesses. He charged the rioting to the
strikers. He was opposed to the government ownership of railroads and
also thought arbitration impracticable. He admitted that a greater
reduction of wages was liable to follow unless the present depressed
condition of business was soon remedied. Regarding the losses incurred
by his road on account of the strike he said it was his impression that
they would be somewhere between $800,000 and $1,000,000. When the
question of communications from the officers of the American Railway
Union came up Commissioner Kernan asked why the General Managers
Association declined to receive it.
Mr. St. John: "Because we considered such an organization unworthy of
consideration."
Commissioner Kernan: "Were you determined not to recognize any union?"
Mr. St. John: "Not exactly, but the American Railway Union least of
all."
Commissioner Kernan: "Were not the roads united sympathetically? Now
what had the Lake Shore road to do with the Rock Island road?"
Mr. St. John: "What had the Rock Island to do with the Lake Shore?"
Commissioner Kernan: "Is it not true that the roads were united
sympathetically?"
Mr. St. John: "Let me ask you a question."
Commissioner Kernan: "No, I am not on the stand. I may be some day and
then you can question me."
Mr. St. John: "When a neighbor's house burns we all unite to fight the
blaze. When an assault is made on all the roads, they unite to resist
it."
When General Manager St. John resumed the witness stand, he had with him
one of the twenty-six sets of books mentioned by Mr. Howard, containing
the scale of wages and rules of employment of all classes of railway
employes on the roads represented in the General Managers' Association.
When questioned by Commissioner Kernan he admitted that a committee had
been appointed to formulate from these a schedule of what was a fair
rate of wages for all classes of employes and uniform rules of
employment. That committee reported, but the report was never acted on.
This committee was appointed under a resolution passed February 15,
1894. Its report was made in March, and if adopted would have affected
125,000 men at least. One or two roads, he admitted, might have reduced
wages about this time, but there was no agreement with the other roads
concerning it. It became known that Mr. Wright, chairman of the
commission, had an annual Pullman pass. He said concerning it that he
and Mr. Pullman had been personal friends for several years, and it was
to him as a personal friend that the pass was given several years ago
and had been renewed annually since. He deemed that it was for the
glowing reports of Pullman, made by Mr. Wright and others in 1884, for
he did not know Mr. Pullman then. He said that he had not used it since
the appointment of the commission.
Following Mr. St. John, John M. Eagan took the stand.
Mr. Eagan admitted that as the manager of the General Managers'
Association he was authorized to incur any expense to secure force to
crush the strike, but was not authorized to do anything to settle it
peaceably. Of his connection with the General Managers' Association he
said that he was requested to take charge of the association during the
strike.
Commissioner Worthington: "Did you have anything done in relation to the
appointment of deputy marshals?"
Mr. Eagan: "Each road appointed an official to select the men they
wanted to act as deputy marshalls and turned 'em over to me. I sent them
to Arnold to be sworn."
Commissioner Worthington: "Did those men serve as employes of the road
while acting as marshals?"
Mr. Eagan: "My judgment is that they were to take care of the interests
of the roads."
Commissioner Worthington: "Did they act in the double capacity as
marshals and as railroad employes? That is, would an engineer, for
instance, while wearing a star showing his authority, run an engine for
the road?"
Mr. Eagan: "I believe they did that. They were sworn in as deputy
marshals to give them a chance to protect themselves."
Commissioner Worthington: "By whom were the deputy marshals to be paid
or by whom will they be paid?"
Mr. Eagan: "Each road is supposed to pay its own men."
Commissioner Worthington: "What do you know of any efforts made by the
officers of the American Railway Union or the city officials to settle
the strike amicably?"
Mr. Egan: "A party named McGillen, Alderman McGillen, I think, told me
that Howard and Debs wanted a conference with me about settling the
strike. I told him I had no authority to confer with them."
Commissioner Worthington: "Did you not have authority to talk with them
and find out what they wanted or could do, without making any agreement
with them?"
Mr. Eagan: "Not with those parties--I did not think I had. A few days
later I found the mayor and Mr. McGillen in the office of the General
Managers' Association. They said they had come with a letter from Debs,
Howard and Kelliher. I told the mayor he ought not to make a messenger
boy of himself for these parties of the American Railway Union. Later I
was given the document to give to the mayor. He was at Kensington, so I
left it with the chief of police, and wrote a letter telling him I
could not receive the letter he had brought."
Commissioner Worthington: "Were any other overtures of settlement made
to you?"
Mr. Eagan: "That's all I know of any overtures."
Commissioner Worthington: "Was there anything insulting or offensive in
the language of the letter the mayor brought you that made you refuse to
receive it?"
Mr. Eagan: "The letter was published that evening and next morning and
speaks for itself."
Commissioner Worthington: "I am asking you how you regarded it. Did you
consider that there was anything insulting or offensive in the letter?"
Mr. Eagan: "I considered that any parties that had fought railroads as
they had and been beaten as I believe they have been had lots of cheek
to dictate the terms of their surrender."
Commissioner Worthington: "You do not answer my question. Were there not
soldiers, U. S. marshals, deputy sheriffs and policemen engaged in
guarding the railroads, and were you not hindered in the operation of
the roads?"
Mr. Eagan: "Yes."
Commissioner Worthington: "Now was not the letter courteously composed
and looking to a settlement of the difficulty?"
Mr. Eagan: "We didn't need a settlement--we had 'em already."
Commissioner Worthington: "The soldiers, marshals, sheriffs and police
remained on duty sometime after that--didn't they?"
Mr. Eagan: "Yes, we needed the soldiers to protect our property."
Commissioner Worthington: "If a settlement could have been reached at
that time between the railroads and the strikers, couldn't the soldiers
and marshals have been dismissed. They wouldn't have been needed after
an amicable settlement had been reached, would they?"
Mr. Eagan: "It was their intention not to recognize the American Railway
Union."
Commissioner Worthington: "Then it is true is it that the reason this
communication was not received was not because it was not courteously
worded or because it was discourteous or insulting but because the
General Managers would not recognize the American Railway Union?"
Mr. Eagan: "Well, that's as I understood it." Commissioner Worthington:
"What would have been out of the way in your talking with Debs and
Howard when they asked a conference with you?"
Mr. Eagan: "I didn't have any authority to talk to them."
Commissioner Worthington: "Then your authority extended to this. You had
authority to contract at the expense of the railroad for all the force
necessary to crush the strike but had no authority to settle it by
peaceful means?"
Mr. Eagan, "Well, yes. I suppose so."
Commissioner Worthington: "When you rebuked the mayor did you think it
derogatory to bear a respectful message looking to a peaceful settlement
of the difficulty?"
Mr. Eagan: "I believed the American Railway Union was whipped at that
time."
Commissioner Worthington: "It was then the condition and not the
character of the men that signed the document that made you refuse to
receive it?"
Mr. Eagan: "We believed we had the strike won."
Commissioner Worthington: "Did you ever try to use anything but force
to settle the difficulty?"
Mr. Eagan: "None, except to the different parties that came to see me,
men that I knew personally had quit work. I told them to go back to
work." In regard to violence Mr. Eagan knew nothing about it personally,
but assumed that the strikers did it.
Superintendent Dunlap, of the Rock Island, was asked if he recognized
any of the ex-employes among the rioters, and said that he did not know
many of the men but was sure that they were present. He was also asked
by Mr. Wright if he knew one John T. Norton to which he answered no.
Superintendent of Police, Michael Brennan, was next examined. He
testified that but a small per cent of the rioting was done by strikers.
John T. Norton, a locomotive engineer, was next called to the stand and
testified that he was employed on the Illinois Central road prior to the
strike, and had since obtained a position on the Calumet & Blue Island.
This line uses the Rock Island track to Joliet. He said that he passed
an examination on the C. & B. I. and also on the Rock Island. He had
made one trip when informed that the Rock Island road had barred him and
would not allow him to run over any part of their line. He consulted a
lawyer and was told to see Superintendent Dunlap. He called on him in
company with a friend named Fraser. He asked Mr. Dunlap if he was barred
off the Rock Island, who said yes, and he then saw that he was
blacklisted.
Mr. Kernan: "Do you call that evidence of a blacklist?"
Mr. Norton: "I do. After getting a letter from Superintendent Conlin I
was barred out by Superintendent Dunlap who has just sworn he did not
know me."
Mr. Kernan: "Can you produce Mr. Fraser. We would like to hear his
testimony?"
Mr. Norton: "I will."
Mr. Kernan: "Were you concerned in any violence during the strike?"
Mr. Norton: "No."
Mr. Kernan: "Are you an officer of the American Railway Union?"
Mr. Norton: "Yes. I am president of local union No. 193."
Mr. Gompers of the American Federation of Labor was next examined but
refused to be sworn. Mr. Gompers went into the labor question in a
general way. In reference to strikes, he said that so long as the
present industrial and commercial systems last, so long will strikes
continue.
George M. Pullman, president of the Pullman company, was now before the
commissioners. He submitted a lengthy statement in relation to the town
of Pullman, and under examination he told of the increase of the Palace
Car company from $1,000,000 to $36,000,000 and the accumulation of a
cash surplus of $25,000,000. When questioned concerning the grievance of
the employes, he was not so well posted. When asked by Mr. Wright if it
was the practice of the company to reduce wages from time to time, he
said:
"I am not familiar with the details of the manufacturing department and
must refer you to the second vice-president."
Mr. Worthington: "Did you ever express any unwillingness to arbitrate?"
Mr. Pullman: "I did express unwillingness and refer you to my published
statements. I was aware of the losses of the company in paying the
wages it did when contract prices were so low, and I knew it was
impossible for the company to pay a higher scale. It was a question
whether the shops should be closed, or secure work at a low figure. It
was the principle involved in letting a third party determine how the
company should transact its business."
Mr. Worthington: "But you paid the usual dividend of eight per cent last
year?"
Mr. Pullman: "Yes. But the profit during the World's Fair helped out the
amount."
Mr. Worthington: "Now don't you think that the Pullman corporation which
paid a dividend of $2,800,000 for the year just ended should have borne
with the employes and shared its profits to some extent?"
Mr. Pullman: "I don't see why we should take the money from the
stockholders to pay a set of men higher wages because the manufacturing
business paid well, to pay this money to men working at Pullman when the
employes at Ludlow, Wilmington and St. Louis had no complaint to make.
The efforts of the American Railway Union to call a strike there was a
failure."
Mr. Worthington: "Has the Pullman Company ever voluntarily raised
wages?"
Mr. Pullman: "No; but it always has paid fair wages."
Mr. Worthington: "Now, Mr. Pullman, when you see the present unrest of
labor, and the possible consequences, what objection had you to
distributing a portion of the profits or increasing wages a little?"
Mr. Pullman: "The reason is embodied in my statement, it is a matter of
opinion, and then there is the principle involved. It is impossible
under the circumstances."
Mr. Worthington: "Impossible, what is impossible? Could not arbitration
determine the principle involved?"
Mr. Pullman: "As president of the company I do not care to give any
other."
Mr. Worthington then introduced a lease used between the company and its
tenants. This provided that the tenants should make all repairs to
plumbing, water pipes, gas, etc., and to surrender premises in good
repair. When such repairs were made by the company, the amount was
deducted from their salaries.
Mr. Worthington: "Now, the company does not make any repairs, does it?"
Mr. Pullman: "The company repairs the roofs or outside of the houses, I
am not familiar with the details."
Mr. Worthington: "But by the lease the tenants are bound to make all the
repairs, it is stipulated that the tenant shall repay the company for
all repairs made."
Mr. Pullman: "I will have to refer you to some official of the company."
(Laughter.)
Mr. Worthington: "The rent is deducted monthly, is it not?"
Mr. Pullman: "I am unable myself to identify that lease you handed me."
Mr. Pullman concluded with the statement that the company declined to
employ any member of the American Railway Union.
Mr. Worthington again asked if the company could not afford to pay an
increased scale of wages and this Mr. Pullman refused.
Mr. Kernan: "When the general cut in salaries was made, was your salary
reduced?"
Mr. Pullman: "No." (Laughter.)
Mr. Kernan: "That of officials, superintendents or foremen?"
Mr. Pullman: "No."
Mr. Wickes then took the stand. His evidence--which in main was
documentary--embraced every detail of the strike. He admitted having
promised members of the grievance committee that they would not be
discharged, and said the agreement had not been broken by him. From
statistics presented by Mr. Wickes, he claimed that the average rate of
wages paid for the year ending in April, 1893, was $2.63 per day and for
the same succeeding period $2.03, which fact, he said, disproved of
statements made by strikers.
In the case of Miss Jennie Curtis the books showed that her father had
owed but $17.00 at the time of his death, which sum had never been
repaid the company.
Blacklisting, he said, had never been practiced by the Pullman Company,
although the foreman kept a list of discharged men. He also said that
the company had been losing $500 per month by furnishing water. He said
that the men were advised by Mr. Howard not to strike.
Referring to rent and wages, he did not consider that there was any
connection between them. He said: "We paid the market price for labor
and we asked the market price for houses." He contended that wages were
regulated by the law of supply and demand. We go into the market to buy
labor, as we go into the market to buy other things. If a manufacturer
by reason of improved machinery, of special facilities, or greater
ability in securing supplies or disposing of products, or by more
effective handling of men, should be making larger profits than his
competitors and should increase wages, he would deprive himself of all
the benefits of these advantages which are his and to which his employes
do not contribute, and would make no more than the manufacturer who
conducted his business in a shiftless manner or without ability, energy
or enterprise.
Mr. Wickes concluded his testimony, and Inspector Nicholas Hunt was
called.
He testified that from June 27th, or the time his force was first called
to protect railroad property at various points, up to July 3d, there had
been no serious difficulty. When asked by Mr. Worthington if he had seen
railroad men take part in the destruction of property. He replied:
"I have not seen one railroad man interfere in any way."
A. J. Sullivan, general manager of the Illinois Central, was next to
testify.
He went into details concerning the trouble on his road. He was certain
that the acts of violence were committed by the strikers although he did
not witness it personally.
H. R. Saunders, general yardmaster for the Rock Island, testified for
the company in relation to the way the strike was ordered on the Rock
Island. He charged that Mr. Howard, vice-president of the American
Railway Union, with using abusive and violent language. Epithets applied
to Pullman and the expression, "if scabs take your places kill them with
a coupling pin," was declared to have been used.
W. D. Fuller, agent for the Rock Island road at Blue Island, testified
that he was present, and thought Mr. Howard's speech was very violent,
he applied epithets to Pullman, thought he ought to be hanged, and that
he (Howard) would like to head a crowd to do it.
L. A. Camp, a yardmaster for the Rock Island, was also at the meeting
and heard no violent language used.
G. D. Cruelly also a yardmaster for the same road, thought the strike at
Blue Island was due to Mr. Howard and Mr. Debs. Mr. Howard in particular
and Mr. Debs incidentally. Mr. Howard was violent and abusive in his
language. The witness is a member of the Order of Railway conductors but
not of the American Railway Union.
Fred Baumbach testified to hearing both Debs and Howard speak, but did
not remember of hearing either one of them using violent language.
Otto Moriling, a tailor, testified to being present. He did not hear any
violent language used except that Mr. Howard applied an epithet to
Pullman.
James Simmons also heard Howard speak, but did not hear him counsel
violence.
Alexander Quasso said he was present when Howard spoke but heard no
violence counseled except some reference by Mr. Howard to the justice of
hanging Pullman.
Vice President Howard now took the stand and testified regarding his
speech at Blue Island. He said:
"I want to begin by saying that among railroad men particularly
trainmen, it has been a constant habit and practice and has been for
years, to use a certain class of expressions which literally are very
offensive in the lightest and most ordinary way, and without meaning
anything in particular about them. Every old railroad man can bear me
out in this. A railroad man will address his best friend with a most
offensive epithet uttered in a most cordial way and intended to express
cordiality, so that the term I applied to Pullman, has among railroad
men a technical meaning, very broad it is true and expressing according
to the circumstances very different sentiments. But its use is so common
and I may say usual, that it has altogether lost the meaning it has,
among others than railroad men.
"I was telling them the condition of things at Pullman. I told them of
incidents that have been testified to before this commission. I was
trying to array them against Pullman. I used the language of railroad
men and I applied to Mr. Pullman the epithet I am charged with using.
But I used it in the railroad sense. I said he ought to be hung, that is
another railroad expression.
"I did not say that I would like to take part in the hanging or lead a
party to hang him. As to the coupling pin expression, what I said at
Blue Island, I have said at hundreds of other places, it was this I told
them, it was often said that capital would always defeat labor. I denied
this. I said that capital could only whip labor when it could divide it,
and make labor defeat itself. That in the last few years a wave of
religious intolerance had swept over this country, and the
representatives of the railroads had taken advantage of it as a means of
dividing labor. I gave instances where some emissary of the railroads
would come in, and going to the protestant members, instill distrust in
their minds of the Roman Catholic members, and then going to the Roman
Catholics and creating distrust of the Protestants. I urged them not to
allow themselves to be divided in the labor movement by questions of
religious differences, and I said that if any of those sleuths, and I
may have said sleuths of hell, come into this movement to array you
against each other in a question of religion, I hope some one will have
the nerve to hit him on the head with a round end coupling pin and send
him to his last long sleep.
"I said nothing about injuring men who came to take their places. I told
them if they struck, to put on their good clothes and keep away from the
railroad property. If the railroads could get men to run their roads,
let them, but if the men stood together, were united, the roads couldn't
get men and would have to yield.
"Far from advising violence, I have always advised against it. I have
some questions I would like the commission to put to the general
managers, either here, or in Washington. They are these:
"1st. Were not the general managers whipped on July 5, before there had
been any violence to array public opinion against the strikers, and
before the troops were here and by their presence provoked violence?
"2d. Did your company have a contract with the government to carry the
mails?
"3d. Was the contract dependent upon your ability to carry Pullmans?
"4th. Did your contract with the Pullman Company require you to refuse
to transport mail if you left the Pullmans off?
"5th. Did the strikers interfere to prevent carrying of the mails if you
left the Pullmans off?
"6th. Could you not have carried mails, if you did not insist in hauling
Pullmans?
"7th. Was your contract with the government less binding on you than
your contract with the Pullman Company, or was either dependent on the
other?"
Mr. Kernan had no objection to the questions being put to the general
managers, but did not think, under the circumstances, the commission
could prolong its sitting in order to ask them.
Mayor John P. Hopkins was then called and cordially shook hands with the
commissioners before taking the witness chair. His examination was
conducted by Judge Worthington as follows:
Mr. Worthington: "As mayor of the city and the actual head of the police
department, please state the general conduct of the police force during
the strike and the conditions attending the strike."
Mr. Hopkins: "The evening of June 25, Mr. Ellsworth, who claimed to
represent the different railroads, called on me and said he understood a
boycott was to be enforced on all roads hauling Pullman cars. He said he
understood I was going to Springfield that night and wished me to give
instructions to the chief of police and arrange for the protection of
the roads. So far as I know, the police did all the work required of
them, and I have ample assurance of that fact from railway officials.
"This condition existed until July 5. That morning Mr. Wright of the
Rock Island called at my office and claimed that riotous mobs were
interfering with the operation of trains, overturning cars, etc. I went
with him to the office of Mr. Cable of the Rock Island road, where we
discussed the matter. Mr. Cable said he thought the police were not
doing their duty, but from the information I had received, I was
confident that such was not the case. I then suggested that Mr. Cable go
with me to the scene of the alleged trouble, but he said that he did not
think it safe to do so. I proposed the same plan to Mr. Wright, but he
made the same objection. I then saw the corporation counsel and
suggested the same plan, which he accepted. A switch engine was secured
and we went. A crowd of probably 3,000 or 3,500 persons, mostly women
and children, had assembled at that point. On the tracks at
Thirty-seventh street four trains were standing, and just north of them
an empty freight car was lying across the tracks. Half an hour after we
arrived, a wrecking crew, accompanied by young Newell, Attorney Wright,
and other officials came up, and they started to take the car off the
track. On going down we had found the tracks entirely unobstructed, but
on going back found ten or fifteen overturned cars. I thought the police
did all they could to prevent such an occurrence. I stayed about two
hours, when I came back and issued the proclamation to the people which
was published. I also instructed the chief of police to suspend all
officers who had been stationed at the crossings where the cars were
overturned.
"That night I wired the governor at Springfield, that the militia, which
had been preparing to go into camp there, had better be retained in the
city, as it might be advisable to call out the troops within twenty-four
hours. The same night about 10:30, I was at the Hyde Park police
station when I heard that the "Diamond Special" had been stopped at
Kensington and that large crowds had congregated there. Inspector Hunt
sent re-inforcements to that point, and when I retired everything seemed
quiet. Friday morning, July 6, which was the first time the railroads
had intimated that the protection afforded them was inadequate, I heard
from Kensington that there was trouble in the Rock Island and Chicago &
Eastern Illinois roads. I then called on the governor for five regiments
of the state militia. Saturday, at 3:30 P. M., some trouble
occurred at Forty-seventh and Loomis streets, where a mob had collected.
The state troops fired and killed one man, two others dying afterward.
There was no trouble after that, so far as I know."
Mayor Hopkins then read a number of communications from railway
officials expressing satisfaction in regard to the perfect protection
afforded by the police during the strike. Among these were letters from
President Marvin Hughitt of the Northwestern, General Superintendent
Sullivan of the Illinois Central, President Thomas of the Chicago &
Western Indiana, and others. Several officers who were deemed worthy of
promotion for their good services at critical times were mentioned in a
letter from a Santa Fe official. The mayor then continued his testimony
as follows:
"So far as the management of the police was concerned I think it was
excellent. I wish to state that the Blue Island police are governed by
the officials of that town. The word police has been referred to
indiscriminately in the testimony, leaving the impression that Blue
Island was under the jurisdiction of the city.
"There was very little resistance to the police. The strikers treated me
all right, and the crowds seemed good-natured. There was some resistance
to the police, I believe, on the night of July 7, at Ashland avenue and
the Northwestern tracks. The police fired and killed a woman on the roof
of a house in the neighborhood."
Mr. Worthington: "How many were killed in all or who have since died in
consequence of injuries received?"
Mr. Hopkins: "About seven, I think in Chicago. Three at Forty-seventh
and Loomis streets, one at Kensington, the woman just mentioned, and I
think two others."
Mr. Worthington: "Please state about the militia engaged during the
strike."
Mr. Hopkins: "I will read my copy of the telegram to the governor to
which I referred. The next day I again telegraphed the governor
suggesting that five regiments be placed at the disposal of the city. In
one half hour I received an answer stating that the militia had been
ordered to report. There was virtually the entire militia of the state
in service, probably 2,000 men. The last detachment went home August 6."
Mr. Worthington: "You have stated that you gave orders to suspend
officers at certain crossings. Why was that?"
Mr. Hopkins: "The officers complained that people jumped over the fences
and that they could not prevent them. The Rock Island road is protected
on each side of the right-of-way by low fences, and empty freight cars
were standing for many blocks on the side track next the fence. The
people who lived near the tracks could easily jump the fence unseen and
tip the cars over. I ordered the men suspended for the general effect it
would have on the force."
Mr. Worthington: "I would like to ask a general question. As mayor of
the city, do you think the police, or a portion of them, either directly
or indirectly, took a part in promoting the strike in any way?"
Mr. Hopkins: "I would not deny that some of the men had sympathy with
the strikers. I am in sympathy myself with the Pullman strikers."
Mr. Worthington: "But do you think the police did their duty?"
Mr. Hopkins: "Yes, sir. Several times Mr. Eagan telephoned that trouble
was occurring at some point. When officers would investigate they would
find no trouble at all. There are 2,100 miles of railway in the city
limits; there are 1,360 trains daily, 160 railroad crossings, and 3,000
surface railroad crossings. The police force for this year is scheduled
at 1,928 patrolmen. There are 186 square miles of territory in the city
and you can readily see that every point could not be covered at once.
The amount of violence was not very great. In Pullman not one pane of
glass was broken in the three months of the strike. I live in Pullman
myself."
Mr. Worthington: "You may state whether at any time you advised the
American Railway Union or its members to strike?"
Mr. Hopkins: "No, sir."
Mr. Worthington: "Did the General Manager's Association either during or
since the strike request the city to arrest any individual strikers or
suggest such arrest?"
Mr. Hopkins: "No, sir; I think that President Newell swore out a warrant
for a man named Hall, but the information was furnished by the city."
Mr. Worthington: "Has the American Railway Union brought in any
information of this character?"
Mr. Hopkins: "Yes, sir; in the case of Hall, who was charged with
turning over cars; also in other cases, which upon investigation we
concluded not to take up."
Mr. Worthington: "Then the disposition of the American Railway Union
appears to have been to assist the city?"
Mr. Hopkins: "Yes, sir."
Mr. Worthington: "During or before the strike were there any overtures
made in regard to arbitration?"
Mr. Hopkins: "I met Mr. Pullman at lunch in the Chicago club one day
and he told me of a meeting his employes had held. Then July 3, there
was a further talk about protecting the works on the following day when
trouble might be expected. There was some talk about a settlement, but
the company seemed to regard the strikers as law breakers. Then a
committee of the council was appointed, and word sent to Mr. Eagan, but
he said he couldn't come. Then the committee called at Mr. Pullman's
office to discuss the question of arbitration--or if there was anything
to arbitrate. The answer received there was that the company refused to
arbitrate. July 11, I received a telegram from Mayor Pingree of Detroit,
asking if I would act with him in endeavoring to settle the strike. He
had communications from fifty other mayors giving their views on the
question. We saw Mr. Wickes, Mr. Runnels and Mr. Brown, and had a long
interview. Mayor Pingree took the point that arbitration should be
tested, and made a strong argument. He is a member of a shoe
manufacturing firm and related his own experience in a strike of nine
months' duration. Mr. Wickes, Mr. Runnels and Mr. Brown withdrew and
prepared a statement giving the position of the company and declining
the proposition. On July 13, Mr. Debs, Mr. Howard, and Mr. Kelliher
prepared a communication to the railway managers offering to settle the
strike if the railroads would re-instate the men as individuals or such
men as had committed no overt acts. With Mr. McGillen I went over with
the document to Mr. St. John. What occurred there has been published.
Now, while I think of it, I want to say that the statement published in
some papers that Mr. St. John told me I should not act as a messenger
boy for the American Railway Union is false. I deny most emphatically
that Mr. St. John used those words. I should not have allowed it. This
was the last action on my part to bring about a settlement.
"It has been said that I protested against the presence of the federal
troops in the city. I do say that the railways had never complained that
the civil authorities were unable to protect the roads. I have never
protested against the federal troops and think they did some good."
Mr. Worthington: "It has been stated in the press that you applied to
Mr. Debs to move trains."
Mr. Hopkins: "That is not true. A man named Brenock has a contract with
the city to remove dead animals, the place where they are rendered
being over the Indiana state line. He called upon me and said that there
was a train load of dead animals at the stock yards which could not be
pulled out; the men had quit work. I said I thought a volunteer crew of
trainmen could be procured which would do the work. I sent my secretary
to the American Railway Union with that request. A crew went down to the
yards and manned the train. When it proceeded some distance it was
discovered that a train load of dressed beef had been substituted and
the train crew abandoned the cars. The dead animals then remained where
they were for several days."
Mr. Kernan: "Then this action was simply a plan to guard the public
health?"
Mr. Hopkins: "Yes, sir; simply to remove the dead animals from the city
limits."
At the conclusion of Mayor Hopkins' testimony, President Carroll D.
Wright arose and declared the commission formally adjourned until
Wednesday, Sept. 26, at Washington, D. C.