People's Pilot, Volume 4, Number 11, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 31 August 1894 — THE LATE STRIKE. [ARTICLE]

THE LATE STRIKE.

Representatives of Labor and Capital Tell Their Stories. Employers Are Heard—General Manager St- John Takes the Stand—Egan and His Views—President Gompers on Strikes in General.' CAPITAL HAS Fig SAY. Chicago. Aug 25.—0 n Thursday General Manager John A St. John, of the Rock Island railroad company, added his testimony. He presented, a detailed statement of the history of the trouble on his road, and denied the existence of a blacklist so far as that road is concerned. Mr. St. John refused to allow the commission to publicly examine or make part of its records the contract between the Rock Island and Pullman companies: he answered, however, all questions put concerning the contract. Witness said the company was obliged to use the Pullman cars. He said 522 employes ■were engaged in the strike, the others going out through intimidation: seventy-four had been reinstated: all had been taken back except those against whom there were charges. He said the exact cost of the strike had not yet been ascertained, but thought it would reach 88'J0 000 or e 1.000.000. He said that the purpose to put into effect schedules of wages was one of the most remote objects of the association. In answer to a question as to its idea concerning the remedy for strikes, he said that it seemed to him that the government control of railroads involved possibilities that might prove dangerous to the government itself. Arbitration, it seemed to him. could not prove effective in all cases, for. if applied to wages, it would naturally be found • very difficult to enforce its decisions: nor could it hardly prove effective if it was objectionable’to the employe. To many minds, he said, the law of supply and demand must still govern. Being asked why an association such as ths one he represented should refuse to treat with cne of employes such as the American Railway <OOIOO, he said the union did not represent as it claimed the employes of the roads. Another reason might be that the association did not think there was room for such an organisation. “We never question," he concluded, ■“a man as to whether he belongs to any union cr not so long as he is competent." Manager Egan Heard.

Chicago, Aug. 27.—The General Managers association, represented by General Manager John M. Egan, submitted its views of the strike to the labor commission at Friday’s cession. The itness told the story of the prop sed conference to be held by the mayor, representatives of the American Railway union and of the managers’ association. He said ho had no authority to take part in such a conference. He had returned the document left at his office by the mayor because the managers’ association had directed him to return it. He ■would not state whether the document in question was offensive and Insulting to the association. Witness said that at that time the strike had not been settled so far as the American Railway union ■was concerned. It was “settled” on the part ■of the railroads because they had employed other men in place of those who went out The <leneral Managers’ association had refused to recognize the American Railway union. When the mayor presented the document signed by Messrs. Debs. Howard and Keliher Mr. Egan said to him that he “thought the mayor should not act as a messenger boy for such parties." He (Egan) had advised all individual strikers coming to him to go back to •work. He had had no negotiations with the strike leaders. He had authority to make all arrangements to fight the strike, but did not consider he had any authority to confer with the mayor or others regarding an amicable .settlement, therefore be declined to do so. In answer to questions Manager Egan stated lie had made no effort to effect an amicable aettlemcnt of the strike: that it was the policy •of the railroads to crush the strike: that he had refused to %eat with the Americ .n Railway union in any way, but that he did not know that it was the policy of the companies to -crush the American Railway union, though he admit te S that the companies would have nothing to do with American Railway union people. Being confronted with tae charge made that he had furnished money to be paid to men for overturning and burning cars, and for doing overt acts, in order that prejudice against the strikers might be created. Mr. Egan replied: “My attention was first attracted to statements by what I read in the newspapers. Considering the source from which it came I think ail I need say is that it is the veriest rot. It is on a parity with numerous other statements of Debs. Howard and other leaders of the American Railway union to influence the men they had duped.” The mayor, he said, directed him to discharge immediately any policeman who was found lukewarm or inefficient. Several officers were suspended on complaints, but when he ■came to investigate he could And no responsible author.

“So tar as I have been able to learn, the railroad men had very little to do with the disturbances and destruction of property. The rioters were hoodlums, mixed in with crowds of women and children It was the opportunity of the tough' element, and they took advantage o< it. Ido not think the average daily arrests during the strike was any larger than the regular average. The police were massed along tracks or held in reserve at stations, and bo did not pay as much attention to the criminal classes of the city as usual." 'the chief said many of the complaints made against the police were made by deputy marBhals, who were more in the way than of service. To show the character as some of these men the chief offered to introduce the records ■of three deputy marshals who had been arrested for highway robbery. T) e commission excluded the records as irrelevant. John T. Norton, a locomotive engineer residing in South Chicago and formerly employed by the Illinois Central railroad, gave ills experience with the "blacklist." After the strike he secured a position with the Calumet & Blue Island road, which was to run over the Rock Island tracks part of the way to get out of South Chicago. He made one trip and on his return was informed that the Rock Island officials had barred him from their tracks, and he was therefore discharged. He. with a witness, called on Superintendent Dun- , lap, of the Rock Island system, and was told that he could not run on their tracks because he belonged to the A. R. U.. and for no other reason. Says Strikes Do Good. Chicago, Aug. 28.—President Samuel A. Gdmpers, of the American Federation of Labor. being called to testify, told the commission about the Briggs house conference of July 12, at which there were present representatives •of all the prominent national labor organizations. This conference was called upon by a -committee from several Chicago unions asking that a general strike be ordered as suggested. The request was considered carefully, and the conference of the American Federation of Labor came to the conclusion that the president of the United States should be called upon to do whatever there was in his power to bring the great labor trouble to an amicable settlement. To that end a telegram was sent to the president asking that he either come to Chicago or send some one to act for him in a conference with the executive council of the America” Federation of Labor. The president did not reply to the telegram. The council decided that it would be detrimental to the cause to indorse a general strike, as the American federation had no such authority, even were its members so disposed. Mr. Gompers said he had no scheme for the abolition of strikes, boycotts and industrial disturbances. He said that he did not join in the denunciation of strikes. So long *s the present system of labor and trade exists there would be strikes. The •M-rike shows that the workingman has Jest yet some honor, manhood and courage. Striata have forced the employing classes and the test of the world to pay some attention to the labor question. Strikes were not the failures they aere usually written down to be. Mttrv than two-tbirds of the strikes were Victoria. to»:be li borers involved. Mr. Gompers said li. tr - the people when they tailed. Employee

of a railroad strike. The corporation hires other men. These new men certainly elevate their economic condition, else they wouldn’t make the change. Mr. Gompers said his observations had led him to believe that the men who strike are not lowered: do not take relative positions with the other men. So that even failing strikes benefit the community. He did not advocate strikes where it was possible to do without them. He believed in voluntary arbitration. He was not prepared to say that tate socialism would be the remedy; he did believe in the government ownership of railways and all means of transportation and communication. He said:

•■The government already operates a great number of railroads. If it can operate a bankrupt road 1 do not see why it could not operate ; it before it becomes bankrupt. Mr. Gompers thought the beneficial outcome of the recent strike was the appointment of the commission before which he was testifying. only it would have been better if the com mission had been sent to Chicago earlier—fluting the strike. He thought that it would have been able to bring the General Managers’ association and the leaders of the labor organizations together. The witness had some things he wanted to ' say about the injunctions issued by court. He held that these injunctions were not rightly based on the inter state commerce lawj that that law was not intended to apply to labor organizations. He said the Injunctions were based on court-made law, upon decisions given in the absence of law. He held further that “old musty laws" tnade a hundred years ago. before the application of steam and electricity to industry had ever been dreamed of, were not pliable enough, elastic enough to deal with the problems of to-day. Conditions had changed so that the laws should be changed. A humane and beneficial law. when passed, was not infrequently pronounced unconstitutional. George M. Pullman Appears. Chicago. Aug. 29.—George M. Pullman appeared before the national labor commission Monday as a voluntary witness. As president of the Pullman company he told about the organization of the corporation, its financial standing, and answered questions regarding the manner in which its affairs are conducted. The object in establishing the town of Pullman, he said, was that convenient homes might be provided for the workmen and that they might enjoy better accommodations than were obtained elsewhere for the same outlay on their part. The advantages gained by residence in the model town were set forth at length by the capitalist. Asked about the rent paid by tenants. Mr. Cullman said it was just 6 per cent, on the inAtafment.

The capital of the Pullman company, he stated, is $36,000,000 Being asked about the report that the company had a surplus of $16,000,000, he said that it was more than that. The dividends are based upon the capital of $36,000,000, and are 2 per cent, quarterly. He was then asked about the reductions of employes’ wages. He replied: “I am not familiar with the daily workings of the town of Pullman. I will have to refer the commission to the second vice president for these details. I will say, however, that for entire months we did not have an order for a car. 1 realized that unless something was done there would be suffering at Pullman, and after a consultation with Vice President Wickes I determined to make bids under the actual cost of construction. We did this, and .1 remember the first order was for fifty-live cars. I put in a bid for these cars at from S3OO to S4OO below the cost a ear. making up my mind to make this contribution rather than see my men idle. I believe many other car builders in the country felt the same way. As evidence of this the next lowest bid to mine was only $24 higher than mine. On another occasion I bid for a lot of 250,cars at a loss of sls on each car, preferring undo this rather than see the freight shops closed. I underbid the next competitor only $1 a car. It cost us about $50,000 to keep the men in work as long as I did. I explained all this to Mr. He;.thcote. the leader of the strikers. whosuid to me: ‘We want the wages of ’93’ I informed him that was impossible: I told him it would be a most unfortunate thing if the wages of 93 were restored; that there was only six or eight weeks’ work here as it was. and there was none in sight at the rate on which the wages of ’93 were based.” He admitted that the company taking the whole year through had made money, and paid its regular dividends, which amounted to about 82.50 u (JOO. In explaining why the company chose to reduce wages while paying large dividends Mr. Pullman said:

••The manufacturing business is separate from the business of the sleeping car company. I see no reason why I should take the profits of the 4,200 stockholders in the Pullman SleepingCar company and pay men a higher rate of wages than was paid in other parts of the country for the same work, or than was paid by other companies for the same work. Because we have been careful and accumulated a surplus I do not see that it is a reason we should take the surplus now and pay it out for exceptionally high wages." Concerning arbitration he said: "There are some matters that are proper subjects for arbitration. such as a disputed title. Hut there are others that are impossible of arbitration. I cannot arbitrate on a question where I know the facts to be thus and to. The question a* to whether our shops should continue to run at a loss is a thing that could not be arbitrated.” Q. "Why was it impossible:" A. “Because it violates the principle that a man has a right to manage his own business.” “We make it a condition of return to work that the member of the American Railway union shall surrender his card. That is the only union we have ever discriminated against, although I believe our men have belonged to other organizations. It is the fixed policy of the Pullman company to retain no one connected in any way with the American Railway union." “Were rents reduced when wages went down?” asked Judge Worthington. “They were not. So little Income was coming from rents that we could not afford to re- [ duce them further." “Were your wages and those of the other officers of the company reduced?” “They were not.” “Why was this not done?" When Mr. Pullman fully recovered from the effect of the audacity of the questions he said it was not good policy to reduce the salaries of high officials, because men of their caliber were not easily replaced and would not stand a reduction of any considerable amount.