By Senator Yutzy:
Q. How did he show the white feather?
A. He was a man who didn't live up to what he said he would do.
Q. In what respect?
A. He didn't live up to what he said he would do at the meeting.
Q. What did he agree to do in the first place?
A. He agreed to stand by the boys.
Q. What were the boys to do?
A. If the boys went out on a strike, Muckle was to stand by them.
Q. And prevent the running of trains?
A. The understanding was that every man was to quit work and go away, but not to prevent the running of trains. Muckle was discharged, and he tried to get a job in the employ of the road. His object in getting the men to strike was to get them out and then come in and scab it.
Q. That is, come in and offer his services to the railroad?
A. Yes.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. But were communications going on between you and the leaders of the Pennsylvania road—the leaders of the strike? Was there any concerted movement or action between you?
A. No, sir.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Give us a definition of your idea of a strike. What is generally understood by railroad men, or what did the Trainmen's Union understand by a strike?
A. So far as the Trainmen's Union was concerned, we considered by a strike that every man on the three grand trunk lines should go home when the hour came—just leave his train standing there.
Q. You mean refuse to work?
A. Yes.
Q. Nothing more?
A. That was our understanding.
Q. But you were not to prevent other men from working?
A. We had an understanding if a man was not a union man to coax him off if we could.
Q. But if he would not be coaxed?
A. Then to leave him stay. We considered that his own conscience would be enough for him.
Q. But you were not to try to drive him off?
A. No; a man who is a scab has a hard enough time of it. He has a hard time enough of it to make his life unbearable to him.
Q. Was any violence used that you know of to prevent trains from running on the Fort Wayne and Chicago railroad?
A. No, sir; none was used. I would not have allowed, so far as I was concerned.
Q. By what authority did you assume charge of the Fort Wayne and Chicago railroad?
A. I think I assumed authority of the Fort Wayne from telegrams I received from Mr. Layng, who is the general manager from Pittsburgh to Chicago.
Q. What were those telegrams?
A. I was asked to take charge of the trains and engines, and to move them to places of safety.
Q. Have you those dispatches?
A. I have.
Q. Have you them here?
A. No.
Q. Can you produce them?
A. I can, sir.
Q. Will you produce them?
A. Not in this city.
Q. Where will you produce them?
A. I will produce them anywhere where I can get them. I asked to have them sent here, but could not get them.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. Would this strike on the Fort Wayne and Chicago road have occurred if the strike on the Pennsylvania road had not occurred at that time?
A. That is a pretty hard question to answer.
Q. From your information—from what you know of the circumstances and the men engaged in it?
A. I have not thought over that, and really I cannot give an answer.
Q. Do you know whether the men on the Fort Wayne and Chicago road were making any preparations for a strike distinct from any strike upon the Pennsylvania railroad?
A. Some of them were and some of them were not.
Q. At this particular time that the strike occurred?
A. Really, I have never thought the matter over, and I cannot answer that question, because I have not thought it over in that light at all. They may have and they may not.
Q. You say that the main cause of the strike on the Pennsylvania road was the running of double-headers?
A. That is my impression.
Q. The cause of the strike upon the Fort Wayne road at that time was what?
A. Several things combined. I think it was the abuse of power by the under officials more than anything else.
Q. That and the ten per cent.?
A. Yes; that was pretty hard to swallow.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. I understood you to say in talking to some citizens you had given some figures as to the wages that could be earned after the ten per cent. reduction. Can you give those figures to the committee now?
A. I didn't state the amount that could be earned, but the amount they were paying—brakeman, $1 45.
Q. Per day?
A. Per trip, that is called a day.
By Mr. Englebert:
Q. How many hours?
A. The shortest run on the road was seven hours and twenty-five minutes. The longest run was eight hours and thirty-five minutes. Firemen the same as brakemen. Conductors, first class, $2 12; second class, $1 89 or $1 91, I forget which. Engineers—I don't remember the classified pay—first class, three dollars and eleven or twelve cents. That had a great deal to do with the strike—the classification—so far as the engineers were concerned.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. How many days could you average per week?
A. The year around, or at that time?
Q. At that time?
A. I think the month that I was discharged I drew twenty-nine dollars and some cents—I don't know what.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. As brakeman?
A. Yes. I had an income of forty dollars a month besides that, and it was the only way I could live.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Did you make all the time?
A. I believe I did. I believe I lost only one trip. My impression is I did lose one trip.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Was not the amount you could earn governed by the amount of business doing by the road at that time—if the freight shipments were large you all got work?
A. We all had work any how. We all came in our turn.
Q. But the amount of money you made depended on the amount of the business of the road?
A. Yes.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. You put in your six days a week—work a week at $1 40?
A. I undoubtedly worked six days.
Q. Every week?
A. Not at that time. We were not averaging six days' work at that time.
Q. Were you prior to that time?
A. Really I have forgot; but the pay was running very poor. I think the business was good in January and February, March and April, but I think after that time it was very slack.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. How many days did you make in any one month?
A. In the month of January I made forty-four days.
Q. By over work?
A. Yes.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Did not the officials, when you sent your committee to them, didn't they talk over this matter with you?
A. Before the strike?
Q. Yes.
A. No, sir.
Q. Didn't you send a committee down to Philadelphia to see Mr. Scott?
A. Of engineers, I believe. We heard what the engineers were doing, and got enough of the engineers. They generally patched things up for themselves. They didn't look after anything else. It was about the time of taking the ten per cent. off.
By Mr. Engelbert:
Q. What position did you hold in Trainmen's Union?
A. I don't know that I held any position. I was appointed to organize the unions, and had unlimited powers.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. By whom?
A. By what we called—there were members appointed from each division, and they constituted a sort of grand lodge. The division I belonged to was first organized. That is where I got my power from. They sent me right out. It was a Saturday night, and I left Pittsburgh the following Monday, June 4.
Q. Who organized the first lodge?
A. I was the first man to take an oath. I guess all took a hand in it.
Q. Were you president of that lodge?
A. There was no president of that lodge at that time.
Q. Were you chief of that lodge?
A. I suppose I was that night.
Q. What did they call the chief of that lodge—what name?
A. The grand organizer.
Q. Then by delegations from other lodges, you were appointed to organize lodges throughout the country?
A. Our lodge gave me authority, and as we formed lodges, they sent in delegations to form a grand lodge, and they confirmed the action of our lodge.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. Who paid your expenses going around?
A. The boys.
Q. As a union or a society, or did the boys contribute what they saw fit?
A. All the money I ever got, I got from the union at that time.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. From the lodge?
A. Yes; from the treasurer of the lodge.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Was it an oath-bound association?
A. Yes.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Did you go to Martinsburg, Virginia?
A. I was in that neighborhood.
Q. Were you at Martinsburg, Virginia?
A. I was very near to it.
Q. That is not an answer to my question.
A. At what time?
Q. To organize a lodge there before the strike?
A. I did initiate men into the organization called the Trainmen's Union, at Martinsburg.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Did you organize lodges over the Baltimore and Ohio road?
A. Yes.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Was it understood by your lodges that this strike was to commence at Martinsburg?
A. No, sir.
Q. Did you know, before the strike commenced at Martinsburg, Virginia, that it was going to take place?
A. No; of course I heard all that talk. They talked most loud at Martinsburg, but I thought it was all wind. I didn't think they would strike at all.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. When you were telegraphed at Oil City, were you there for the purpose of organizing lodges?
A. It was Parker City.
Q. Were you there for the purpose of organizing lodges?
A. At that time?
Q. Yes?
A. I went up there to get work.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. How long had you been railroading?
A. About eleven months altogether.
Q. What had been your business before that?
A. I was in the hotel business.
Q. Where?
A. At Collinwood, eight miles from Cleveland.
Q. Were you proprietor of the hotel?
A. Yes.
Q. For how long?
A. One year and nine months.
Q. What was your business before that?
A. I was in the insurance business.
Q. Where?
A. At Pittsburgh.
Q. Is that your home?
A. Yes; it is my native place.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Were you working for your father or for yourself in the insurance business?
A. I represented four Chicago companies for myself.
Q. When you returned from the oil country, you say you met some railroad men who belonged to the Baltimore and Ohio railroad?
A. Of the Connellsville division.
Q. Where did you meet them?
A. Around the Union depot.
Q. How many of them did you meet there?
A. I remember three engineers who were there.
Q. Any other trainmen?
A. O, yes.
Q. Of the Baltimore and Ohio road?
A. These three engineers are all I can remember.
Q. Were they the ones who telegraphed to you to come to Pittsburgh?
A. No.
Q. Where did those men belong to—the Baltimore and Ohio or the Pennsylvania Central? Who telegraphed you?
A. To neither road.
Q. Of what road were they employés?
A. Of the Fort Wayne road.
By Mr. Dewees:
Q. How many miles of railroad had this trouble?
A. I never figured it up. A good many miles.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. You had a signal to stop trains?
A. You can stop any train if you have the signal.
Q. But did not your organization have a particular signal by which you could stop the trains?
A. The Trainmen's Union?
Q. Yes?
A. Before the strike?
Q. Yes?
A. No, sir.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Different from the ordinary signal?
A. I don't comprehend the question exactly.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Was not there an understood signal among the trainmen by which, if an engineer of a train undertook to run it, they would throw him this signal, and he would stop the train and get off?
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Some peculiar signal?
A. No; I saw lots of engineers that wanted the boys to do that.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. You say then that there was no signal?
A. No.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. What was this signal that was used on the Pennsylvania railroad to stop trains? Was it any peculiar signal among the strikers different from other signals?
A. I have heard of it, but I can't speak from my own knowledge.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. What did you hear?
A. While in jail, McAllister told me that an engineer came to him and said, "McAllister, when we come to pull out from the round-house, you just jump up on the engine and say there is some danger—you put up your hand." McAllister is an innocent sort of a fellow, and he did just as the engineer told him, and he was convicted and sentenced to six months in the work-house.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Did the engineer get off when McAllister told him he couldn't go down to Twenty-eighth street?
A. He run the engine back into the house.
Q. Who was the engineer?
A. I don't remember his name.
Q. Did you ever hear that a signal was agreed upon?
A. I have heard so many stories about that, I did not pay any attention to them.
Q. Was there any class of men coöperating with your party, beside your party?
A. The mill men and the glass-house men.
Q. They all seemed to be in sympathy with the strikers?
A. Yes; they came across to the boys.
Q. They came voluntarily, did they?
A. Yes.
Q. And entered into the strike like the railroad men?
A. Yes.
Q. And took hold and assisted you?
A. Yes.
Q. Was there another class of men—tramps or strangers—who came there from a distance?
A. They crowded into Allegheny City, but we used to railroad them out of the town.
Q. You did not care to have the assistance of that class of men?
A. No.
Q. Were there any men who came from other roads and assisted you there?
A. Yes; we had men from other roads—the Baltimore and Ohio, the Lake Shore and Michigan Southern.
Q. How many men came from the Lake Shore and Michigan Southern?
A. Oh, two or three men.
Q. What did they say their business was?
A. That they came from such and such a road, and had a strike, and just come to see how we fellows were doing it.
Q. What business did they have to travel up to Allegheny City?
A. It was not very far.
Q. Was there any agreement or understanding between you strikers and the men who came from distant places, that they should concentrate at Allegheny City or at Pittsburgh?
A. There was some talk about that.
Q. Why did they want to come to that place?
A. Oh, not to Pittsburgh, just exactly.
Q. But that was considered to be the head-quarters of the strike?
A. Yes.
Q. And the principal strike or trouble would be there?
A. That is about what they thought. It was talked over in the Trainmen's Union.
Q. If the understanding among the strikers was that they were merely to leave their work and go home—to leave their trains—why was there an understanding to congregate at Pittsburgh?
A. I didn't say that. It was one of the things that was talked over, but nothing was decided on definitely. If we had struck on the 27th of June, there never would have been any trouble at all.
Q. Would the men have come from the Lake Shore and Michigan Southern to Pittsburgh, if a strike had taken place on the 27th of June? Was there any understanding, that if a strike took place then, that men from different points would collect at some one point?
A. There was some talk about it, but nothing of the kind was decided on definitely. It was all talked over.
Q. Then the men that came without any understanding?
A. They just wanted to see how things were going.
Q. Were they discharged men, principally, that came from the other roads?
A. No.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Do you know anything about that boat load of men that came down the Monongahela river?
A. No.
Q. Was there any understanding that that boat load should come?
A. Not that I know of.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Did any other citizens, except the two men you have mentioned—citizens of Pittsburgh or Allegheny City—talk with you or offer to aid you in any way?
A. Lots of the citizens were around there in the crowd, and they gave arms to the boys, and encouragement. For instance, one man would have his shot gun, and he brought it, and one man had a rifle, and he brought it out and gave it to the boys, and some had revolvers, and they brought them out.
Q. And arms were given to the strikers in that way, by the citizens?
A. Yes.
Q. Was ammunition given to you in the same way?
A. Yes.
Q. What class of citizens were they who gave the arms and the ammunition?
A. They looked as respectable as Mr. Lindsey.
Q. Were they laboring men, or were they professional men?
A. They looked like professional men.
Q. Were any business men among them?
A. Yes.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. When was this?
A. On Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.
Q. Did they furnish arms and ammunition on Sunday?
A. Yes.
Q. Was there any other encouragement given to the strikers by the citizens, except what you have mentioned—the giving of the arms?
A. They furnished us food.
Q. Was this food given to you because you were protecting the property, or was it given to you because you were strikers?
A. Well, we were strikers.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Were arms furnished you for the purpose of resisting the authorities, either the civil or the military, or for the purpose of protecting the railroad property and other property?
A. We were not resisting any authorities at all. We had the arms to keep off the mob. We did not take the arms to fight anybody that had authority over us.
Q. What did you take the arms for?
A. To keep off the mob, or the tramps, or anybody else that wanted to interfere with us.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Was that what the citizens gave you the arms for?
A. I didn't ask them what they gave us the arms for.
Q. What did they say they gave you the arms for?
A. Some of them said this, and some of them said the other thing.
Q. State what any one citizen said on the one side, and then on the other?
A. Some of them said, "Shoot the damned soldiers when they come," and some of them said, "If anybody interferes with you, or tries to wrong you, kill them right here"—talk of that kind. "You are out on a strike now, and have got the railroad company where you want it, and you are damned fools if you don't keep them there."
Q. Were similar remarks to those made by any of the persons who furnished you arms and ammunition?
A. I cannot say that, because I would only hear some of them talk as I mingled with the crowd. I would turn around and look at them, and then pass on. Of course, everybody was excited—everybody had lost their brains—everybody was wild, and people did not know what they were doing.
Q. Was anything said, prior to this strike, by the citizens about furnishing you arms?
A. No; I didn't hear anything of the kind prior to the strike.
Q. Did anybody offer to furnish you flour or articles to live on during the strike?
A. Yes.
Q. To what extent?
A. Enough to keep us until the strike was over.
Q. Were there any business men who offered to do that?
A. They were all business men.
Q. Flour dealers?
A. Yes; and grocery men.
Q. Wholesale dealers?
A. Men we were dealing with on the road offered to keep us all the time we were on the strike.
Q. Offered to keep you all the time you were out on the strike?
A. Yes.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Did Mr. Jenkins offer to furnish flour to the strikers?
A. I have heard it so stated, but I cannot say so from my own knowledge. I don't believe he did. I don't believe he is that kind of a man.
Q. Did any other offer to furnish any?
A. No one except our grocery men—the men we were dealing with—they encouraged us. They knew their money depended on us.
Q. From your intercourse with the citizens, was it your understanding that you, as strikers, had the sympathy of the community?
A. Undoubtedly we did, sir.
Q. What led you to understand that you had their sympathy?
A. By their actions.
Q. But what else?
A. The way we would hear them talk in their daily conversation; but I think if the strikers had turned in when the mob commenced burning the property, and if the citizens had just turned in with them—and I know if I had been in Pittsburgh, I would have died or I would have stopped that mob—at any rate, I would have attempted it, and I think I would have had enough citizens to help me.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. You mean help you to prevent the destruction of the property?
A. Yes.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. The sympathy you spoke of—was it general?
A. We appeared to have the sympathy of the whole community.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Did you have the sympathy of the citizens while destroying the property of the railroad, or while burning it?
A. I think if we didn't have it, I think that they, the citizens, must have acted very funny. I didn't stop to ask them.
Q. Did you have the sympathy of the citizens in the destruction of the railroad property?
A. I don't think that they cared very much for the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, even if it was burned up. They just stood around, and said it was none of their business.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Were you over at the fire during Sunday?
A. No, sir; I kept decently away.
Q. Then how do you know that they stood around there?
A. I lived in a high house, and I noticed lots of people up on the hill. I had a spy-glass.
Q. You say that you, as strikers, had the sympathy of the citizens. Was there any antipathy on the part of the citizens against the railroad company?
A. So far as I was able to judge, I don't think the citizens of Pittsburgh ever had any high opinion of the Pennsylvania Company.
Q. Why?
A. On account of the freight discriminations, &c. I have heard business men say repeatedly that their business had gone away from them—that the Pennsylvania Railroad Company drove that away from them, and the newspapers have been crying the Pennsylvania Company down for years.
Q. Was that what encouraged the railroad employés to strike?
A. No. We thought that our cause was a just one, and that any one with any sense would be in sympathy with us.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. Were there any citizens who condemned the strikers—any of them who ever said a word in rebuke of the strikers at any time?
A. After the fire; yes.
Q. But prior to the fire?
A. No. I never heard any one say anything of the kind before.
Q. But none of the officials of Allegheny condemned the action of the strikers?
A. At what time?
Q. At any time prior to that Sunday?
A. I never saw any of the officials, except Mayor Phillips one time when I spoke to him. He said if we wanted to strike we had a perfect right to strike.
Q. But he made a speech?
A. Yes.
Q. Didn't he tell the crowd to disperse and let the railroad property alone?
A. Not that I remember.
Q. What was the tenor of his speech?
A. My recollection of it is, he said if the men were determined to strike, all right, that they had a perfect right; but as chief magistrate of the city he would ask them not to interfere with any one that wanted to work.
Q. Didn't he also say that you must not interfere with the railroad property?
A. That is my recollection of it—that we must not interfere with anybody that wanted to work.
Q. Don't you remember that he said anything about the railroad property?
A. I have no recollection about his using the word property.
Q. Did he tell them that they must keep the peace?
A. Oh, yes.
Q. That he was there for the purpose of seeing that the peace was kept?
A. Yes.
Q. And you told him that you would keep the peace?
A. Yes; and he must have had some respect for our words, because he withdrew his police.
Q. You had no trouble during the whole disturbance?
A. No, sir.
Q. There was no interfering with the men that wanted to work?
A. No; I said distinctly that—in the presence of the mayor—that if they had scabs enough to work the trains they could do it.
Q. Do you know of any railroad men at the time of the disturbance, who were ready to go out on the trains?
A. I didn't see a man. Every man I saw said he would not work.
A. J. Cassatt, sworn:
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. State your residence, and official connection with the Pennsylvania Railroad Company.
A. I reside in Philadelphia, and am the third vice president.
Q. Just give us a statement, as to where you were when the first disturbance occurred at Pittsburgh, on the Pennsylvania Central railroad, and what came under your observation thereafter.
A. I was in the office on Thursday—in the office of the company—about two o'clock, when I got a dispatch from Mr. Gardner, at Altoona, addressed to Mr. Frank Thompson, at Philadelphia, which was brought into me, on account of Mr. Thompson's absence in New York, stating that a strike had taken place that morning at Pittsburgh, among the firemen and brakemen, and that no trains had gone out that morning. I telegraphed to Pittsburgh, to get extra conductors and engineers, to take the place of those who had gone out, and I thought it would be over very soon. I went up to the country where I lived, and I didn't hear anything further until evening. On coming to the West Philadelphia office, I then heard that no trains had moved up to that time, and I thought that my duty ought to be there, and I got on a train and went to Pittsburgh.
Q. What time did you arrive there?
A. On Friday morning. When I got to Pittsburgh, I found that Sheriff Fife had called upon the State authorities, and that three regiments were getting under arms then.
Q. State now, what the civil authorities were doing at that time, and whether you had any interview with the mayor of the city, and if so, what the end of it was, or whether you tried to have an interview?
A. I was told when I got there, that Sheriff Fife had gone out to the mob, and had undertaken to disperse them with some deputy sheriffs who were sworn in, but that they hooted at him, and it had no effect at all. I was told that the city had no police force on in the day time, or only a few men. I saw Mr. Stewart, who was formerly connected with the company, and asked him to go and see Mayor McCarthy, and ask him to put on some of the discharged men, and gather a posse, and send them down to disperse the crowd, and get back the property. But Mr. Stewart came back in a short time, and said that the mayor would not listen to it. So I gave up the attempt to have a further communication with the mayor, and wait for the State to take its course.
Q. Who is Mr. Stewart?
A. He was formerly our freight agent at Pittsburgh, and he is very well known there.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. What is his first name?
A. David Stewart. What passed between the mayor and Stewart I heard from Mr. Stewart himself.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Did you request the mayor to come to the Union depot, or request an interview with him?
A. No; Mr. Stewart was simply to ask him to swear those people in; and upon the mayor's refusing to do so, he came back and reported to me, and told me at the same time that McCarthy, the mayor, had declined.
Q. What time did Mr. Stewart return to you?
A. About noon, on Friday.
Q. Did you meet Sheriff Fife on your arrival there?
A. I saw Sheriff Fife and exchanged a few words with him, because I learned from Mr. Pitcairn and Mr. Watt what powers he had assumed.
Q. Did you see General Brinton during the day on Friday?
A. He came on Saturday.
Q. I mean General Pearson.
A. I did.
Q. And learned what steps had been taken by the State officials?
A. He told me what he had done. He sent Colonel Guthrie's regiment—and, indeed, I saw them when they were out—to East Liberty, and expected to go down with two other regiments and open the road. That attempt afterwards was abandoned, because they thought the force was not sufficient to disperse the crowd who were assembled there. They thought it best to wait until they could get a larger force, when they thought they could overawe the crowd, without coming to actual hostilities.
Q. Was any attempt made to move any trains from that time up to four o'clock Saturday afternoon?
A. No, sir; no freight trains. Our men declined to go out. The engineers and conductors said they were afraid that the road was blocked with the crowd.
Q. And until the arrival of General Brinton, with his force, no attempt was made?
A. No; in fact, no attempt was made then.
Q. Had you no communication with the citizens of Pittsburgh after your arrival?
A. Not as a body. I saw a number of the citizens. I think Mr. Park and Mr. Thaw, and Mr. James Park, junior. I think I saw him on that day, but I don't remember the citizens—quite a number.
Q. During the day Friday and Saturday, state whether the police officers made any attempt to disperse the crowd that were assembled about the railroad?
A. Not to my knowledge?
Q. Had you crews that were willing to go out in case they could get out without any disturbance?
A. We had a number of crews to go out after the road was opened.
Q. On Saturday had you the crews?
A. Yes. On Saturday 1 walked down with the troops as far as the round-house and went into the round-house myself, and saw a number of engineers that said they would take their trains out as soon as the road was open. We might have got up about a half dozen crews if the road was opened, and if they could go in safety. We had the engines all fired up and backed out, and ready to start at fifteen minutes' notice.
Q. Were the engineers and the firemen at their posts at the time the troops arrived?
A. We had men at the round-house—engineers and firemen and conductors and brakemen, ready to take the trains out, and we were going to send out double-headers, too.
Q. How many crews had you ready then?
A. They reported twelve or fourteen crews—enough to take out that many trains. I saw a number of men in the round-house, and talked to them, and they said they would go if they had protection.
Q. Were you at Twenty-eighth street when the collision occurred with the troops?
A. No, sir. I went down with the troops as far as the western round-house, and went in there with the plan of starting the trains at once, as soon as the tracks were cleared. I went into the round-house and made arrangements to start, when the foreman of the machine shop came to me, and said a riot was going on outside, and I got on the roof and witnessed the collision between the troops and the people. A great number of stones were thrown and shots were fired by the crowd, and then I saw the troops fire in return.
Q. After the troops fired on the crowd, the crowd ran, and the tracks were cleared for a time?
A. Yes.
Q. At that time were your crews ready to go out, during the time the tracks were cleared?
A. They were. I can state that the only part of the track that was clear was on Twenty-eighth street. The crowd lined the road above Twenty-eighth street, and there was a crowd at East Liberty.
Q. Was that the reason why the trains did not start?
A. Yes; the men did not think it would be safe to go. The crowd dispersed, and while I was on the roof I got a message from General Pearson—for he was in Mr. Pitcairn's office, three or four hundred feet from where I was—and that he wanted to see me, and I went there, and General Brinton came in at the same time, and I was present when the discussion took place between the two gentlemen as to the proper course to pursue.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. After the firing?
A. Yes; General Brinton said that he was not satisfied with the orders he had; that his orders were to go down and take possession of the property, but that none had been received about firing on the mob, and that he could not order his men to do it, and he wanted orders to disperse the mob, as it was re-assembling, and drive it away and make an end of it; or he wanted orders to get his command into a different position; that they were hemmed in between the shops and the hill, and were very much exposed to a fire of stones and a fire from the mob, and he did not think the place tenable, unless he got orders to attack and drive away the mob. General Pearson hesitated quite a while, and finally, after five minutes' discussion, or more, he said he did not think it his duty to attack the mob with that small force. He had no doubt that General Brinton could drive off and disperse the crowd, but there would be a great loss of life, and he thought the best thing was to retire the troops and wait for reinforcements, and then overawe the crowd and prevent bloodshed. I did not take any part in the discussion. I think that General Pearson asked me one or two questions, and I said that I was not a military man; that all I wanted was to get possession of the property again. I went afterwards to the Union depot.
Q. And did you remain at the Union depot all night?
A. To one o'clock, and then went to the Monongahela House.
Q. Were you there when General Pearson came in from the round-house?
A. I was.
Q. Did you hear what was said by General Pearson to General Latta?
A. No; I came into General Latta's room about seven o'clock that evening. My room was on the same floor. I saw General Pearson sitting down there, and he said he had come down to communicate with General Latta. I made some remark about his getting there—how he got there, and he said he had come along the tracks and among the cars, and was not recognized. I went away, and when I came in afterwards he had gone. I was not a witness of anything that passed between the two gentlemen.
Q. Do you know where General Pearson was during the firing between the troops and the people?
A. I believe he was in Mr. Pitcairn's office. I was so told that he was in the office at the time—by the clerks.
Q. Do you remember how General Pearson was dressed when the troops went out to Twenty-eighth street?
A. He was in a sort of undress uniform—light pantaloons and ordinary fatigue coat—a military coat. He was not in full uniform.
Q. In fatigue uniform?
A. Yes; a blue military sack coat, and, I think, light or white pantaloons.
Q. Did he have his sword?
A. No; I think he had a little cane in his hand.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. When he went out?
A. When he went down with the troops.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. How was he when he returned?
A. In the same way, except that he had his coat on his arms. He was in his shirt sleeves. It was a very hot evening—a close evening.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Did he wear his belt?
A. I think not; but I am not positive about that.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Did you observe a belt he had on—a very fine belt?
A. No: he may have had it on, but I don't recollect it.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. In the conversation that you had with James Park, junior, do you remember which day it was—whether it was Friday or Saturday?
A. I think it must have been on Saturday—I think it was.
Q. Can you state the nature of the conversation?
A. Mr. Park, I think, was arguing against the propriety of sending the troops down, and said that the mob was a very violent one, and there were very large numbers of them, and that we ought to have eight or ten thousand troops to disperse them, and he thought that the troops ought not to go down. I replied in substance that was not my business. That I was to open the roads as soon as the tracks were cleared, and I supposed that General Brinton had his orders, and would obey them.
Q. Did he suggest that it was a bad time to undertake to open the road that afternoon?
A. I think he did, but I gave him to understand clearly that I had no control over the matter; that I was only anxious to get the road open. He wanted me to suggest to the State authorities, or to ask them not to go down with the troops that day, or until we got reinforcements, and other suggestions were made by some other gentlemen—by Mr. Thaw—but I declined to have anything to do with them. In fact, Mr. Thaw had written out a note urging that the troops should not be taken down. I said I didn't think it was our business; that we were in the hands of the State, and that they ought to decide. Mr. John Scott, the solicitor of the Pennsylvania Company, came into the office while the discussion was going on, and said I was right, and Mr. Thaw then tore up the note; but he then made a strong appeal to me, personally, not to have the troops sent down; but I had made up my mind not to interfere in any way with the State officials, and I did not. I took the position that we were in their hands, and it was their problem to work out.
Q. Did General Pearson talk to you about the propriety of undertaking to open the road Saturday afternoon?
A. There was no discussion about it. It was taken as a matter of course that the troops would be down there. On Friday it was talked about, but on Saturday, when the Philadelphia troops arrived, there was no discussion about it. It was understood that they were to move down there at once.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. At the time of this conversation between General Brinton and General Pearson in the office, did you hear General Brinton ask for permission to attack the mob?
A. I don't know whether it was put in that form, but he said he had force enough to disperse the mob and to keep them away, and wanted positive orders to attack them. My recollection is, he objected to the form of the orders he had—it throwed the responsibility. He said I have got force enough, and my men are ready to obey orders. I have got force enough to disperse the mob if I have orders to do so. He stated to General Pearson, when he came in, that he had not given the orders to fire, nor had any of his officers, but that the troops had fired in self defense, which I think I can justify myself, as I saw the stones and the pistol shots fired at them before they turned and fired; and, indeed, the way in which the fire was returned led me to believe that it was not upon an order. It was scattering at first, but then became general.
Q. At the distance you were off, what led you to believe that no order was given to fire?
A. I was about one hundred and fifty yards, or perhaps a little less than that away, and I don't suppose the troops could have heard a command, if given, as there was such a shouting and yelling. The crowd was very large, and they all seemed to be shouting and hallooing. There was quite a shower of stones before the firing commenced, and when it did commence it was scattering, but then became quite general. It lasted a minute or two minutes, and I could see the officers trying to stop the firing, after it commenced.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. You remained at the Union depot until one o'clock?
A. Until one o'clock, Sunday morning.
Q. Did you learn that the mob had commenced firing at that time?
A. Yes; we saw the fire at that time. I left the depot in the first place pretty thoroughly worn out, and then it was urged that there was an ill feeling against Mr. Pitcairn, and General Pearson, and myself, and they thought it might endanger the building if I remained there, so I went up to the Monongahela house, and spent the night there.
Q. Did you have an interview with either General Latta or General Pearson, in regard to preventing the mob from firing the property?
A. General Pearson had left at that time, and General Latta had no force at all. There was a mile of space between the depot and the round-house, where the troops were, and there was a crowd of people all along that distance.
Q. Had General Pearson his coat off when he came in?
A. Yes; it was a surprise to me that General Pearson could get out at the time he did. He must have been disguised. He had his coat on his arm. He must have got in among the cars.
Q. Were you on the ground, anywhere in the vicinity, on Sunday?
A. I was at the Monongahela house until eleven or twelve o'clock on Sunday. I then went over the Point bridge, and took that road because there was no crowd there, in company with Mr. Bennett, who drove me over. We went to Mr. Layng's office, and afterwards came back to the Monongahela house, and stayed there until two or three o'clock, and I then went to Allegheny City, and stayed there until eight o'clock, trying to get provisions to General Brinton. I succeeded in getting two wagon loads off, about eight o'clock in the evening.
Q. Had you or any of the officials of the road been able to ascertain whether there was any arrangement for a strike of the employés of the road?
A. We had heard that the men had organized the Trainmen's Union, as they call it, and that a strike was threatened; but on looking at the thing as carefully as we could, we came to the opinion, or we did not believe, that any strike would take place, and we were rather surprised when the strike did take place. We never had any delegations from the men or any committees come to see us.
Q. Were there any complaints from the men after the issuing of the order reducing the wages ten per cent.?
A. There was no formal complaints. A committee of engineers came to see Mr. Scott, and after the interview with him, they asked him to put his statement in writing—what he said to them—the necessity for the reduction and the disposition of the company to restore the wages when the business of the company revived; which he did. In reply, they wrote a letter acquiescing in the reduction, because the company believed it was a necessity, and that they would accept it as cheerfully as they could.
By Mr. Larrabee:
Q. What time was that?
A. Shortly after the reduction took effect or after it was announced—a couple of weeks before the strike. We never had any communication from any brakemen or firemen or any one respecting that. This running of double-headers, to which they objected, had been practiced on the Pittsburgh division for a number of years, but not to the same extent. Many of the coal trains were running with two engines, and, as a matter of economy, it was decided to run all through trains with two engines. On other portions of the road, we ran fifty or sixty cars to a train, but at that end, we only ran seventeen cars with one engine, and in increasing the numbers of cars, we reduced the number of train hands, and saved expenses; and in order to do this, we decided double-headers. Some of the men objected to that. That may have been a pretext for the strike, but the men were not working any more hours.
Q. Did the issuing of the order running double-headers necessarily discharge any men?
A. It reduced the force of brakeman.
Q. And of engineers?
A. Not of engineers or firemen.
Q. Conductors?
A. Conductors also.
Q. And brakemen?
A. Yes; the men at that time were making short time, because business was slack. They were not making more than three, four, or five days a week—five trips, and the monthly wages were small. We had discharged a good many men—twenty-five or thirty per cent. of the men, but the remainder, of course, would have made better wages, and we paid by the trip only.
Q. How did the business of your company compare with the business done by the company for the three months preceding that time?
A. It was much lighter. The business fluctuated a good deal. There is sometimes a market for grain, in Europe for instance, when the shipments are large, and then again the shipments slack off. That very day I got a message from Mr. McCullough, the vice president of the western lines, stating that there was a brisk demand for cars, and asking me to send cars. If they had only waited a couple of weeks, they could all have had enough to do.
Q. How did the business compare with the amount of business done at the same time in the previous year?
A. We very often have periods of light business, quite as light as that—very often—that last a few weeks or a month or two.
Q. Was that what induced the company to reduce the wages—the falling off of business?
A. No; because we did not anticipate that falling off of business. In fact, the tonnage that year showed an increase, but on account of the low prices at which the business had to be hauled, we are forced to cut down expenses or else break.
Q. Freights were lower than they had been?
A. Yes; they had been decreasing for a number of years. We had to do the work cheaper.
Q. Was that in relation to through and local freights, both?
A. Yes; everything. Our local business was formerly the much larger portion of our trade, and the rates at which they were done were lower than they had been.
Q. Did that ten per cent. reduction apply to all the officers and employés of the road?
A. Yes; to all the officers and employés of the road, from the president down.
Q. Did it apply to the Pennsylvania Central Railroad and all its branches?
A. Yes; the order was given simultaneously to reduce on all the lines east and west of Pittsburgh. It was the second reduction made since the panic of 1873. Our board thought that the shrinkage or rather the reduction in the wages of that class of labor had been much greater than nineteen per cent., and that our men ought to be able to stand that.
Q. When was the first reduction made?
A. In the fall of 1873.
Q. What was the amount of that?
A. Ten per cent.; and then this reduction of ten per cent. made an aggregate reduction of nineteen per cent. on the original pay of 1873. Nearly every other class of labor had come down more than that.
Q. It was the only reduction made since 1873?
A. Yes.
Q. Were any of the employés of the road getting less than a dollar a day?
A. None of the train men were. I think that some of the apprentices in the shops were—the boys—and my impression is that they and the laboring men on the track were getting ten cents an hour, or a dollar a day. When the last reduction was made it didn't apply to the men getting a dollar a day.
Q. A dollar a day, or less?
A. Yes.
Q. Did these men who were working at a dollar a day have an opportunity to put in full time?
A. They worked by the day—full time—and the only thing that caused them to lose any time was bad weather, when they could not work.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. You mean the laboring men?
A. Yes; laborers about the shops—unskilled labor—on the track.
By Mr. Means:
Q. Do you know anything about citizens going to Mayor McCarthy and asking him to swear in police officers to maintain peace in the city of Pittsburgh?
A. I don't know. All I know is what Mr. Stewart told me—about the mayor's reply to him when he took a message to him, that he would not swear in the policemen who were discharged—we offering to pay the wages.
Q. The Pennsylvania Railroad Company offering to pay the wages?
A. Yes; I was told he had discharged about a hundred men, and we thought that the hundred men who had been on the force—accustomed to the people—could be better handled. We made the offer to pay them.
Q. Did you ever have any strike before?
A. I don't remember any strike in the last seventeen or eighteen years on the Pennsylvania road.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. Had any differences arisen between the employés and the company at any time?
A. Oh, yes; differences have arisen, but none that were not adjusted by compromise.
Q. Was there any difference existing between the company and the employés about the time of the strike on the Reading railroad—you remember there was a strike a few months before on the Reading railroad—principally the engineers?
A. There was no difference, at that time, that I know of.
Q. What is the general policy of your company in such cases—cases of disagreement or dissatisfaction between you and the men?
A. We hear the statement of the men, and if we think they have any just ground for complaint, we endeavor to remedy them, and after we have said so and so, we stand by our position. We looked upon this objection of the men to the running of double-headers as an interference with our own business. We thought that if we would let them say how many engines or cars should go to a train, we might as well give up the management into their hands, so we did not have any discussion about it. But we had no formal complaint. No committee waited on us in regard to that. We simply knew that some of the men objected, but from no person had we any complaint in a formal way. We did not think it a thing that affected the men, personally, but thought it simply a question of management.
Q. Always, when any difficulty had arisen or any complaint had been made, you had come to an amicable solution?
A. It had been the result before. I don't think that any strike on the road has taken place—certainly not since 1860, probably not for two or three years before that. There was a strike of engineers before that which was adjusted by conference.
Q. You knew nothing of the action of the sheriff at Pittsburgh, or the proclamation of the Governor, until you arrived at Pittsburgh?
A. Nothing.
Q. Then you had nothing to do with the proclamation?
A. Nothing whatever. I never saw it until it was printed in the papers.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. To whom did you first make application for protection to your property?
A. I stopped at Greensburg, on my way out, and saw the Lieutenant Governor, supposing that, in the absence of the Governor, he was the proper one to take action, and having been advised, on my way out, that Sheriff Fife had telegraphed him for assistance. I stopped over one train, the trains being run close together, to ascertain what action he was going to take, and I came on the next train to Pittsburgh.
Q. Did you ever make any application to the mayor of Pittsburgh or of Allegheny for protection?
A. I did not make any personally, but it was done by the officers before I got there.
Q. Did you make any direct application to the State authorities for protection?
A. No, sir.
Q. Do you know who made the application to the State for protection?
A. I was informed that Sheriff Fife did. I was informed by telegraph, on the way, on Friday night—early on Friday morning, I think, at Cresson, that Sheriff Fife had called upon the Lieutenant Governor for assistance; that he had not force enough to disperse——
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. You were informed by your solicitor, Mr. Scott, what had been done in the way of calling for help on your arrival?
A. Yes; I was informed that he had first called upon the sheriff, and that the sheriff had made an attempt to recover possession of the property, and failed, and that the sheriff had made a formal call on the State officials.
Q. Did Mr. Scott state that they had called on the mayor before calling on the sheriff?
A. I don't recollect that. I don't know. When I got there, on Friday morning, the Governor's proclamation had been issued, and the troops were called out, and the matter was then in the hands of the State.
Q. Was any call made by you, or by any other officer of the Pennsylvania railroad, to your knowledge, upon the Governor directly?
A. No, sir; none whatever.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Was there any effort made by the strikers, or the railroad employés, to compromise the differences between the railroad company and themselves?
A. We heard nothing from them at all up to the time of the strike. On Friday afternoon, a committee, representing the strikers, consisting, I think, of engineers and firemen and brakemen, two or three of them, called on Mr. Pitcairn in person, and presented a written demand, stating that unless these demands are complied with, that they would not run their trains. This committee met Mr. Pitcairn on the platform, and I went out there to hear what they had to say. He handed me this paper, and I read it, and handed it back, and told him to have no further talk with them; that they had demanded such things that we couldn't grant them at all, and it wasn't worth while to discuss the matter. They demanded that their wages should be raised, and that double-headers should not be run; that no more than seventeen cars should be run to a train; that each engineer should have the privilege of selecting his own fireman, and that that the firemen should not be changed without his consent, and a number of other things of the same kind.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. They also had up the classification?
A. Yes; the classification of engineers was to be abolished, and no man engaged in the strike was to be discharged. In other words, they proposed taking the road out of our hands.
Q. What was the classification of engineers?
A. It was introduced on our road, on the lines west of Pittsburgh, in 1871 or 1872, I think. The engineers asked for an advance of wages at that time, claiming that they were not being paid as much as other lines were paying—other lines that competed with us. A committee, representing each division of the road, called upon Mr. Scott at that time and asked for an advance, which resulted in the meeting being adjourned to Pittsburgh, where I met them. Mr. Layng and I presented this plan, stating that we were willing to advance the older men, but we couldn't advance the younger men in the service. I think it advanced all men who had been in the service over ten years ten per cent., and made no advance for the others. The understanding was that there should be four classes of men. In the first class, those who had served three years; that they should be in the second class two years; and be in the third class one year; and a man who was promoted from a fireman, should be in the fourth class. We made an advance of ten per cent. in the one class, and the second was ten per cent. below the first, and the third was ten per cent. below the second.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. You graded the men according to their time of service and efficiency?
A. According to their value to the company.
Q. Was that one of the things complained of by the men?
A. I didn't know that there was any complaint about that until this committee came on Friday afternoon, and that was one of the things they wanted to abolish—the classification.
Q. So that they should be all alike?
A. All alike. I doubt very much to-day whether it is the sentiment of the road at all. I don't think that fair and sensible. It is the proper thing to do, but I don't think, however, that had anything to do with the strike, but they thought while they were asking for so many things, they might as well ask for that, too.