The Pullman Boycott Part 15

Mr. Heathcoat: "The freight car builders suffered more than others, but the commission can find out best by having some one from each department come before it."

Commissioner Kernan: "Don't the people of Pullman know that we want to hear from every one that can throw any light on this subject?"

Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. They understand it but there are lots of them who have not money to get down here."

Mr. Wright: "Tell us if you can what was the average pay of the employes, say in April last?"

Mr. Heathcoat: "On a lot of elevated cars on which I worked I made 16 cents per hour, on one car and 15 cents per hour on another, but there were men working alongside of me who made only four and five cents per hour. I would say that in January, February and March the mechanic's pay averaged $1.50 and the laborers' pay $1.30 per day. Some times the laborers' checks were bigger than the mechanics'."

Commissioner Wright: "Have you any suggestion of a remedy for labor troubles?"

Mr. Heathcoat: "Yes, sir. The ownership of railroads and banks by the government would do it. I never heard of a strike in the post-office department or the navy yard."

Miss Curtis next took the stand. She was an employe of Pullman and president of the Girls Union of the American Railway Union at Pullman.

Beginning her testimony she said: "In June, 1893, the wages in my department were 22-1/2 cents per hour, $2.25 a day. In April, 1894, they were 70 to 80 cents a day. There were two cuts in one week in November and another in January. In April the best wages any of us could make was eighty cents a day, while some could not make more than from 40 to 50 cents a day. Last June they could make at least $1.50 per day."

Commissioner Wright: "Do you pay rent?"

Miss Curtis: "Not now. My father worked for the Pullman company thirteen years, during which time he paid rent. He died last September and as there was some expense connected with his sickness he owed $60 back rent. Then I went to work in the repair shop and boarded out. The company made me pay $3 per week on account of the back rent. I still owed $15 on the day of the strike and owe it yet. Some weeks I did not earn enough to pay my board and rent too and then I paid only part of the $3."

Commissioner Wright: "Were you on any of the committees that waited on Mr. Pullman and Mr. Wickes?"

Miss Curtis: "Yes, sir. I represented the girls on that committee. We wanted our wages raised as the men did theirs. Mr. Wickes said it was impossible to raise wages as they were losing money on their contracts and it was utterly impossible to reduce rents. An appointment was made to meet Mr. Pullman on another day. When we saw him he said the same that Mr. Wickes told us."

Commissioner Kernan: "What work was done in your department?"

Miss Curtis: "We made the silk, satin and velvet drapings; the carpets, tapestries and mattresses for the sleeping coaches, the linen for the dining cars, sewed the fringe on cushions and all that sort of thing."

Theodore Rhode was the next to testify. He said: "Four years ago I had a good job. Then they wanted me to do a kind of work that no one else could make a living at. Four or five of us were to work together. I was to have charge of the work and we were to divide whatever we made. I said I would try it, but if I didn't like it wanted my old job back.

This was agreed to. When I became satisfied that I could make nothing at the new work I asked for my old place, but they would not give it to me and told me that if I didn't like what I was doing I could quit working for the company. After a while we got so we could make from $2.60 to $2.85 for 10-3/4 hours work. Then the cuts came, and work for which we had received $9.00 paid only $4.25. It was impossible to make $1.25 per day, and we were told by the foreman to quit if not satisfied. I paid $15.00 a month for rent and 71 cents for water. I could rent as good a house in Kensington or Roseland for $7.00 a month. On the day of the strike I owed $2.50 for rent. Have not paid it since, although the collector has been around two or three times lately. Low wages and high rents are not all the trouble. It is the abuse. They talk to men as they would to dogs. They are constantly experimenting with new materials. If it don't prove satisfactory we get no pay for our work. Take English varnish, for instance. The atmosphere must be just right or it won't work. Oftentimes, owing to a dampness in the air, we were obliged to do our work over two or three times for which we get no extra pay. In April my wages every two weeks were from $12.00 to $15.00. I understand they pay the men who took our places from $2.50 to $3.00 and $3.00 to $5.00 per day. I have not applied for work again."

R. W. Combes. For 30 years a car carpenter and for 10 years employed at Pullman, was next called before the commission.

"A year ago," he said, "wages in his department was $2.25 at piece work, and 17-1/2 cents per hour. In March, piece work was cut so that they could not make more than 68 cents a day."

Commissioner Kernan: "How much would you have gotten at the rate of wages in force in March or April?" Mr. Combes: "We did not built the same kind of cars in 1894, but had we, we would not have received anything for them. In February I had $3.50 to support my wife and two children after paying rent. Had the men received fair treatment there would have been no strike. John Pearson, superintendent of the freight car department, is the whole cause of the strike. He is abusive and tyrannical. I was inspector in April and Pearson told me if the men did not do what I told them to take a club and knock their d.a.m.ned heads off.

That's the kind of a man he is. I have not applied for work. Middleton told me I never could work there again."

H. F. Griswold, a switchman, testified that he had last been employed by the C. M. & St. P. Ry.--that he lost his position through the strike--had tried to get work within the last few weeks on the Penn. R.

R., at Pittsburg, Altona and Columbus and at each of these places had been shown a blacklist with his name on it as a member of the American Railway Union.

Several other witnesses testified as to being blacklisted on account of being in the strike.

Charles Naylor, a fireman on the Ft. Wayne road up to the time of the strike, was next examined. In answer to questions as to what he thought of arbitration he said: "From my knowledge of railroad men I do not believe they would have much confidence in arbitrators elected in the same way public officials are. My idea is that they should be appointed when their services are required and a new set of arbitrators selected for each case. The board should be composed of one man selected by the employes, one by the roads, and a third by these two."

Commissioner Wright: "That is the law now."

Mr. Naylor: "Yes, but it is not enforced. It seems to me that if Mr.

Cleveland had followed in the line of action pursued by Mr. Gladstone, during the coal miners' strike in England, there would have been no trouble here. If he had told the railroads when they called on him for troops that they must submit to arbitration or they would get no support from the government, the men would have thought a good deal more of his honesty and fairness, but when they see the whole power of the government thrown on the side of the railroads they lose confidence in the justice of the government."

Commissioner Wright: "There was no law under which the president could have told the roads to arbitrate the trouble with their men."

Mr. Naylor: "From all that I can learn there was as much law for him to do so as for him to send troops here without the request of the governor of the state."

Mr. Worthington: "In your suggestion of a board of arbitrators there would be but one of them unprejudiced?"

Mr. Naylor: "I think such a board would always be able to effect a compromise between the parties. I have acted in the capacity of arbitrator between the company and the men in adjusting grievances and have always found that a spirit of compromise was met in a like spirit and that is the principle, after all, upon which such questions must be settled."

Vice President Howard of the American Railway Union, was recalled to make an explanation regarding some testimony which Mr. Heathcoat had given the day before. He said: "Mr. Heathcoat told you that Mr. Pullman had promised to allow a committee to examine his books, to prove the correctness of his statements to the effect that his company was losing money on its contracts. The next day, Wallace Rice, a reporter on the Herald, called on Mr. Pullman and asked him if he would allow an expert to examine his books on behalf of the union. Mr. Pullman replied that what he meant by allowing an examination of his books was that he would have his own book-keeper prepare a statement to be submitted to the committee. He said he never had any idea of allowing the committee to actually examine his books. Mr. Howard then asked if he might make a statement of a couple of matters of importance to the employes. The commissioners looked doubtful about this, but finally Mr. Wright said he might go ahead if the matter had anything to do with the subject under consideration.

Mr. Howard then said: "The United States government is blacklisting 3,000 employes of the Union Pacific Railroad now."

Mr. Wright: "We have no authority to go into that question."

Mr. Howard: "And the other matter is that all the other roads are making a threat against the M. K. & T. to boycott its business if the road persists in making a certain rate to Washington."

Mr. Wright: "Has that anything to do with the American Railway Union?"

Mr. Howard: "Yes, sir. If the government allows the railroads to violate the laws it ought to keep hands off in disputes between the roads and the men."

Rev. Mr. Cawardine was called and related what he knew about the matter.

Mr. Cawardine is pastor of the M. E. church in Pullman. His testimony was directed chiefly to the exorbitant rents. In answer to Mr. Wright, saying that he had been charged with being an anarchist, and a socialist, Mr. Cawardine said: "I have considered the charge so contemptible in the bitterness and prejudice of its origin as to be beneath answer. That I, an American born citizen and the son of a soldier who died for his country, should be charged with being anarchist, seems to me incomprehensible. It is simply an evidence of what has been made very apparent that a good many people are violently prejudiced against working men and will not listen to what may be said on their side or read what may be written. I find this feeling even among many of my brethren in the ministry. I regret it too, because the labor problem can only be solved by a consideration of it from all sides."

Andrew W. Pearson, a real estate agent who formerly worked in Pullman, was called on the stand and in answer to a question put by Mr. Wright, said:

"Houses which rent for $17.00 in Pullman can be rented in Kensington and Roseland for $10.00. Pullman houses which rent for $25.00 can be rented elsewhere for $15.00, and $10.00 Pullman houses for $5.00. In Grand Crossing, a manufacturing town, $8.00 a month will rent a five-room brick cottage. The rents I am giving now are the present rents. There has been a decline since two years ago everywhere but in Pullman."

Commissioner Kernan: "How much higher are rents in Pullman than elsewhere?"

Mr. Pearson: "I should say fully one-third."

Frank P. McDonald, a locomotive engineer and author of the Great scab route circular, testified that he was a member of the American Railway Union and a delegate to their convention. He said he was opposed to the strike, but voted for it as it was the unanimous sentiment of his local union. His reason for opposing it was because he did not think the union was strong enough to win.

President Debs, of the American Railway Union, was the next important witness to testify. Mr. Debs outlined the trouble from its inception down to the special convention in Chicago on Aug. 2. In answer to questions by Commissioner Wright, Mr. Debs said he was 38 years old, a resident of Terre Haute, Ind., and had been president of the American Railway Union since June 20, 1893. He was a practical railroad man, had been employed four and a half years in the capacity of locomotive fireman and was at present editor of the Fireman's Magazine. Mr. Wright told him to go ahead and give a history of the late strike so far as he knew from his own experience.

Mr. Debs said: "In the early part of May, while at home in Indiana, I received a telegram from Mr. Howard notifying me of the probability of a strike at the Pullman shops, the employes of which were members of our union. I authorized Mr. Howard to take full charge of the matter, but to do all in his power to prevent a strike. My reason for this was that the American Railway Union had just been involved in a strike on the Great Northern railway. At a meeting of the general officers of the union we had discussed the possibility of other strikes arising on account of the victory the union had won on the Great Northern railway, and we decided that it would be good policy to be very cautious in encouraging the men to go into strikes whenever there was a possibility of avoiding them.

May 11th, I heard that the Pullman employes had struck. A few days after, I came here and made a personal investigation of the trouble.

After a trip to St. Paul I again went down there and the result of my investigation was that the conditions at Pullman justified the men in the course they had taken. I found that wages and expenses were so adjusted that every dollar the men made found its way back to Pullman coffers. The men were not only not getting enough wages to live on but were getting deeper and deeper in debt every day. They had not money enough as a rule to get away. There seemed to be no escape for them.

Wages had been reduced, but expenses remained the same. After I had satisfied myself of the truth of the men's statements regarding their conditions, I made up my mind to do everything possible in law and justice to right the wrongs of our members who had gone out on strike.

We first tried to get the company to arbitrate. We were confident that any fair and impartial board would decide in favor of the employes. The company, however, refused every proposition of that sort saying that it had nothing to arbitrate. I then suggested that the Pullman company select two men to act with two judges of the circuit court and a fifth person whom they should select to act as a board to investigate the question whether there was anything to arbitrate. This proposition was refused.

"June 12, delegates representing 425 local unions of the American Railway Union met here in the first quadrennial convention of the organization. The Pullman question came up for consideration before the convention sitting as a committee of the whole to hear reports etc. I wish to say in this connection that all of our deliberations were held with open doors, except one executive session at which the question of finances was considered, in which we felt the general public had no interest, but at all the other meetings the entire press of the city was represented. I mention this in refutation of the statements which have been made as to the American Railway Union forming a conspiracy against the railroads and committing offenses against the United States. If a conspiracy were intended it seems improbable that we should have sat with open doors. The first steps taken toward securing a settlement of the trouble, was the appointment of a committee composed partly of Pullman employes and in part of other delegates present, with authority to call on Mr. Wickes to find out if anything could be done toward effecting a settlement of the strike."

Here Mr. Debs related how Mr. Wickes refused to confer with a committee composed of any but his former employes, and finally refused to confer with them, stating that he had nothing to arbitrate.

He then continued: "The matter was then referred to a special committee with authority to act in the matter. This committee reported that if the Pullman Company refused to concede anything after five days time to consider the question, it was the sense of the convention that the members of the union would refuse to handle Pullman cars. Under the const.i.tution of the American Railway Union the majority rules in all questions under consideration. No strike can be declared except by a majority of the men involved. In order to conform to this rule, the delegates were instructed to communicate by wire with their respective unions to ascertain the sentiment of the members on the question before the convention. After reports had been received from all the local unions, the convention by a unanimous vote decided to adopt the report of the special committee.

"Since the railroad employes have been criticised for engaging in a sympathetic strike, I wish to make some statement regarding the general situation. In many instances they had local grievances themselves, and besides, there was this general condition which aggravated the whole situation.