# United States v. Cassidy

> District Court, N.D. California · April 2, 1895 · 67 F. 698

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8852482

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES v. CASSIDY
- **Court:** District Court, N.D. California
- **Decided:** April 2, 1895
- **Citations:** 67 F. 698
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Morrow
- **Judges:** Morrow
- **Cited by:** 31 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8852482

## Opinion text

MORROW, District Judge
(charging jury). Gentlemen of the Jury: I congratulate you on the approaching termination of this case. For five months you have been required to give your constant, and, I might say, exclusive, attention to the daily proceedings in this court. The trial of the case has been protracted, but I am not prepared to say that any greater time has been occupied than was necessary, under the circumstances, to secure the testimony of the 216 witnesses who have appeared before you upon the stand. The nature of the charges against the defendants now on trial, covering, as they do, the whole field of the railroad strike of last summer in this district, necessarily involves the closest scrutiny into every feature of that affair. In this examination you have displayed a patient interest of such a commendable character as to call for the special acknowledgment of the court. You are, indeed, entitled to the gratitude of every good citizen of the community for the sacrifices you are making, and for the service you are rendering in the faithful performance of a public duty.
In submitting the case to your consideration, it becomes my duty to call your attention to the character of the charges against the defendants, and the provisions of law under which the prosecution is being conducted. It is the duty of the court to declare the law; it is your exclusive province and responsibility to apply the law so declared to the facts as you, upon your conscience, believe them to be established.
*702 The indictment contains two counts, which, in general terms, charge that the defendants conspired, combined, and agreed together, and with divers other persons, to obstruct and retard the passage of the United States mails, and the carrier carrying the same, and also that they engaged in a combination and conspiracy in restraint of trade and commerce among the several states of the United States, and with foreign countries. The crime of conspiracy is based upon section 5440 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, which provides as follows:
“If two or more persons conspire eitlier to commit any offense against the United States or to defraud the United States in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such parties do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy all the parties to such conspiracy shall be liable to a penalty of not more than ten thousand dollars, or to imprisonment for not more than two years or to both fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court”
To make this statute as clear to you as possible, I will call your attention to its three essential provisions. The first element is the act of two or more persons conspiring together; the second is to commit any offense against the United States; and the third is what is termed the “overt act,” or the element of one or more of such parties doing any act to effect the object of the conspiracy. With respect to the first element, we find that a conspiracy has been described as a combination of two or more persons, by concerted action, to accomplish a criminal or unlawful purpose, or some purpose not in itself unlawful or criminal, by criminal or unlawful means. Pettibone v. U. S., 148 U. S. 203 , 13 Sup. Ct. 542. The common design is the essence of' the charge, and while it is necessary, in order to establish a conspiracy, to prove a combination of two or more persons, by concerted action, to accomplish the criminal or unlawful purpose, it is not necessary to constitute a conspiracy that two or more persons should meet together, and enter into an explicit or formal agreement for an unlawful scheme, or that they should directly, by words or in writing, state what the unlawful scheme was to be, and the details of the plan or means by which the unlawful combination was to be made effective. It is sufficient if two j or more persons, in any manner, or through any contrivance, posii tively or tacitly come to a mutual understanding to accomplish a j common and unlawful design. In other words, where an unlawful lend is sought to be effected, and two or more persons, actuated by 'the common purpose of accomplishing that end, work together, in i; any way, in furtherance of the unlawful scheme, every one of said !' jjersons becomes a member of the conspiracy, although the part he was to take therein was a subordinate one, or was to be executed at a remote distance from the other conspirators. A combination formed by two or more persons, to effect an unlawful end, is a conspiracy, said persons acting under a common purpose to accomplish the end designed. Any one who, after a conspiracy is formed, and who knows of its existence, joins therein, becomes as much a party thereto, from that time, as if he had originally conspired. U. S. v. Babcock, 3 Dill. 586 , Fed. Cas. No. 14,487. Furthermore, where several persons are proved to have combined together for the same *703 illegal purpose, any act done by one of the parties in pursuance of ihe original concerted plan, and with reference to the common object, is, in the contemplation of the law, the act of the whole party, and therefore the proof of such act will be evidence against any of the others who were engaged in the same conspiracy. It is also rue that any declaration made by one of the parties during the pendency of the illegal enterprise is not only evidence against himself, but is evidence against tbe other parties, who, when the combination is proved, are as much responsible for such declarations and the acts to which they relate as if made and committed by themselves. This rule, you will understand, applies to the declaration of a co-conspirator, although he may not be under prosecution, Ms declaration being equally admissible with those of one under indictment and prosecution.
The confederacy to commit an offense is the gist of the criminality under the law. The law regards the act of unlawful combination and confederacy as dangerous to the peace of society, and declares that such combination and confederacy of two or more persons, to commit crime, requires an additional restraint io those provided for the commission of the crime, and makes criminal the conspiracy, with penalties and punishments distinctive from those prescribed for the crime which may be the object of the conspiracy. You will readily understand why this is true. A conspiracy becomes powerful and effective in the accomplishment of its illegal purpose in proportion to the numbers, power, and strength of the combination to <-fieri it. It is also true that, as it involves a number in a lawless enterprise, it is proportionately demoralizing to the well-being and character of the men engaged in it, and, as a consequence, to the safety of the community to which they belong.
The second essential element in the offense described by the statute is the purpose of the conspirators to commit an offense against íl¡e United States. The indictment charges that the defendants conspired with others to commit two offenses against the United States,-—one to obstruct and retard the passage of the United States mail and the carrier carrying the same; and the other, that they engaged in a combination and conspiracy in restraint of trade and commerce among the several states of the United States and with foreign countries. The first charge is based upon tbe provisions of section 3995 of the Revised Statutes, which provides as follows:
“Any person who shall knowingly and willfully obstruct and retard the passage of the mail, or any carriage, horse, driver, or carrier carrying the same, shall, for every such offense, be punishable by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars.”
This section of the Revised Statutes was originally section 9 of the act of March 3, 1825 (4 Stab 104). and, having been passed prior to the introduction into the United States of the method of transporting mail by railroads, the phraseology of the law conformed to the conditions prevailing at that time, but it is equally applicable to the modern system of conveyance, and protects alike the transportation of the mail by the “limited express,” as it does the carriage by the old-fasbioned stagecoach. There are, however, certain *704 provisions of law directed specifically to the transportation of the mail by railroad trains, to which I desire to call your attention.
Section 3964 of the Revised Statutes provides as follows:
“The following are established post-roads: * * * All railroads or parts of railroads which are now or hereafter may be in operation.”
Section 3, Act March 3, 1879 ( 20 Stat. 358 ), provides “that the postmaster general shall, in all cases, decide upon what trains and in what manner the mails shall be conveyed.” Section 4000 of the Revised Statutes provides that:
“Every railway company carrying the mail shall carry on any train which may run over its road, and without extra charge therefor, all mailable matter directed to be carried thereon, with the person in charge of the same.”
There is still another provision of law applicable to the transportation of mails on the Pacific railroads, which is as follows:
“That the grants aforesaid are made upon the condition that said company shall * * * transport mails * * * upon said railroad for the government, whenever required to do so by any department thereof, and that the government shall at all times have the preference in the use of the same for all the purposes aforesaid (at fair and reasonable rates of compensation, not to exceed the amounts paid by private parties for the same kind of service), and all compensation for services rendered to the government shall be applied to the payment of said bonds and interest until the whole amount is fully paid.” Act July 1, 1862, to aid in construction of a railroad and telegraph line from the Missouri river to the Pacific Ocean, § 6 ( 12 Stat. 493 ).
Recurring, now, to section 3995 of the Revised Statutes, making it an offense to obstruct and retard the passage of the mails, and you will observe that the statute applies to those persons who “knowingly and willfully” obstruct and retard the passage of the mails, or the carrier carrying the same; that is to say, to those who know that the acts performed, however innocent they may otherwise be, will have the effect of obstructing and retarding the passage of the mail, and they perform the acts with the intention that such shall be their operation. U. S. v. Kirby, 7 Wall. 485 . “It would be no defense finder this statute,” said an eminent judge in a recent case, “that the obstruction was effected by merely quitting employment, where the motive of quitting was to retard the mails, and had nothing to do with the terms of employment.” Thomas v. Railway Co., 62 Fed. 822 .
The statute also applies to those persons who, having in view the accomplishment of other purposes, perform unlawful acts, which have the effect of obstructing and retarding the passage of the mails. In such case, the intention to obstruct and retard the passage of the mails will be imputed to the authors of the unlawful act, although the attainment of other ends may have been their primary object. U. S. v. Kirby, supra.
The second offense, which, it is charged in the indictment, was the object of the conspiracy, was to restrain trade and commerce among the several states and with foreign nations. This offense is described in an act of congress entitled “An act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies,” approved July 2,1890 ( 26 Stat. 209 ), which provides as follows:
*705 “Section 1. Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several states, or with foreign nations, is hereby declared to be illegal. Every person who shall inalce .any such contract or engage in any such combination or conspiracy, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, or by - imprisonment not exceeding one year, or by both said, punishments, in the discretion of the court”
“Trade” has been defined as “the exchange of commodities for other commodities or for money; the business of buying and selling; dealing by way of sale or exchange.” The word “commerce,” as used in the statute and under the terms of the constitution, has, however, a bioader meaning than the word “trade.” Commerce among the states consists of intercourse and traffic between their citizens, and includes the transportation of persons and property, and the navigation of public waters for that purpose, as well as the purchase, sale, and exchange of commodities. County of Mobile v. Kimball, 102 U. S. 702 ; Gloucester Ferry Co. v. Pennsylvania, 114 U. S. 203 , 5 Sup. Ct. 826. Pullman cars in use upon the roads are instrumentalities of commerce. U. S. v. Debs, 64 Fed. 763 . The primary object of the statute was, undoubtedly, to prevent the destruction of legitimate and healthy competition in interstate commerce by individuals, corporations, and trusts, grasping, engrossing, and monopolizing the markets for commodities. U. S. v. Patterson, 55 Fed. 605 . But its provisions are broad enough to reach a combination or conspiracy that would interrupt the transportation of such commodities and persons from one state to another. U. O. v. -Workingmen’s Amalgamated Council, 54 Fed. 995 , 1000.
We conte, now, to consider the third element involved in the crime of conspiracy, as it is declared in the statute under consideration; that is to say, the overt act, or the element: of one or more of the parties to .the conspiracy doing any act to effect its object. At common law, it was neither necessary to aver nor to prove an overt act in furtherance of a conspiracy. Bannon v. U. S., 15 Sup. Ct. 467. The offense was complete when the unlawful concert and agreement was entered into and concluded, although nothing was done in pursuance thereto, or to carry it into effect. It was one of the few cases in which the law undertook to punish criminally an unexecuted intent or purpose to commit a crime. U. S. v. Walsh, 5 Dill. 58 , Fed. Cas. No. 16,636. But, under the statute of the United States now under consideration, the doing of some act in pursuance of a conspiracy is an ingredient of the crime, and must be established as a necessary element of the offense, although the act need not be in itself criminal or amount to a crime. U. S. v. Thompson, 12 Sawy. 155 , 31 Fed. 331 .
With this general statement and explanation of the statute involved in this case, 1 will proceed to consider the allegations in the indictment, which, as I said before, contains two counts.
The first count charges that the defendants conspired both to obstruct and retard the passage of United States mails, and to unlawfully engage in a combination and conspiracy in restraint of trade and commerce, while the second count charges a conspiracy in re *706 straint of trade and commerce alone. Otherwise, both counts are, in substance and form, identical. In general terms, the two counts charge: (1) Formation of the conspiracy; (2) legal corporate existence of the Southern Pacific Company, and its means, manner, and methods of transporting the mails and interstate commerce; (3) means conspired to be used in effecting the object of the conspiracy; (4) overt act charged; (5) concluding with an allegation of unlawful intent.
Bearing these general features of the indictment in mind, you will now be able to understand the meaning of the various allegations of the indictment, as I proceed to refer to them somewhat more in detail.
Taking up the first count: The formation of the conspiracy is alleged, and it is charged that John Cassidy, John Mayne, Fred Clarke, and James Rice, with divers others, names unknown, did conspire to obstruct and retard the passage of the mails of the United States, and to restrain trade and commerce among the several states and with foreign nations. (2) The legal corporate existence of the Southern Pacific Company, and its means, manner, and method of carrying the mails and interstate commerce, are set out. It is averred that the Southern Pacific Company was a railroad corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws of the state of Kentucky, engaged in the business of a common carrier of the mails of the United States, and of passengers, freight, express matter, and other commodities, comprising and constituting trade and commerce, within the meaning of the act entitled “An act to protect trade and commerce against unlawful restraints and monopolies, approved July 2, 1896.” The lines of railroad over which it carried on its mail and interstate commerce; the manner and means employed and necessary to its doing so, viz. yards, depots, tracks, trains of cars, and other equipment suitable for the transportation of the United States mails, passengers, freight, and express matter, and other commodities,—are also set out. (3) Then follow the means conspired to be used in effecting the object of the conspiracy. These are, briefly: First.. By forcibly taking and keeping possession and control of all yards, depots, tracks, and trains of cars upon said lines of railway, and by forcibly holding and detaining the same. Second. By causing to be assembled, and assembling with, large crowds of persons in said depots and yards of said Southern Pacific Company, at various points and places upon said lines of railway, in said state and Northern district of California, to wit: 1. At the city and county of San Francisco. 2. City of Sacramento. 3. City of Oakland. 4. City of San José. 5. City of Stockton. 6. Town of Red Bluff. 7. Town of Dunsmuir, county of Siskiyou. 8. City of Vallejo, county of Solano. 9. Town of Lathrop, county of San Joaquin. 10. Town of Palo Alto, county of Santa Clara. By gathering in great numbers in said yards and depots, and other places, around, in, and upon the trains, cars, and engines of the said Southern Pacific Company, and upon the tracks of the railways, preventing the movement and passage of said engines, cars, and trains. Third. By threats, intimidation, personal assaults, and other force and violence, to prevent the engineers, firemen, conduct *707 ors, brakemen, switchmen, and other employés of said Southern Pacific Company from discharging their duties, and from moving and operating said engines, trains, and railways. Fourth. By forcibly disconnecting air brakes upon such trains,—mail, passenger, and freight. Fifth. By putting out the fires in the engines drawing the same. Sixth. By throwing switches, in order to prevent the passage of such trains through depots and .stations. Seventh. By opening drawbridges over navigable and other streams, upon which drawbridges the tracks of said railway cars were situated. Eighth. By burning and destroying bridges, trestles, and culverts, over which such trains necessarily and usually would pass. Ninth. By loosening, removing, and displacing the rails of the tracks of said railroads. Tenth. By greasing the rails of the said tracks. Eleventh. By stopping trains upon railway crossings and upon switches, and by forcibly refusing to allow such trains to be hauled from such crossings and switches. Twelfth. By compelling the employés of said rail-road company to leave their trains, shops, and the work of said company, while in the performance of their duty. Thirteenth. By using all such other forcible means as to them should seem expedient to prevent, for an indefinite period, the use-of the said railways for the transportation of the mails of the United States and interstate commerce.
It will be well to observe, at this point, that the indictment does not charge that the defendants did, in fact, use or put in operation the means herein, set out, in effecting the object of the conspiracy; the charge is that such were the means conspired to be used for that purpose. Now, when you come to consider the testimony, you will probably find that some of it tends to show that certain persons did, in fact, use such means to prevent the movement of railway trains. This testimony was admitted, not to prove that such acts had been committed, but because of the relevancy of such testimony to the charge in the indictment,—that such means were to be used in effecting the object of the conspiracy. In other words, it tends to show that a conspiracy was formed to obstruct and retard the passage of the United States mails, and to restrain trade and commerce among the several states and with foreign nations, and that such means were to be used to carry the conspiracy into effect.
This brings us to a feature of this charge of consxfiraey which you will bear in mind.' It is not incumbent upon the prosecution to prove that all of the means set out in the indictment were, in fact, agreed upon to carry out the conspiracy, or that any of them were actually used or put into operation. Tt will be sufficient if it be established to your satisfaction, and beyond a reasonable doubt, that one or more of the means described in the indictment were to be used to execute that purpose.
After stating the means by which the conspiracy was to be effected, the indictment then sets out the overt acts; that is to say, it charges the doing of certain acts to effect the object of the conspiracy. They are as follows: That on the 6th day of July, 1894, the defendants, at Palo Alto, (1) forcibly took possession and control of the yards, depots, buildings, tracks, engines, and cars, and other appliances and *708 property, of the Southern Pacific Company: 1. By causing to be assembled, and assembling with, a large crowd of persons in said depots, buildings, and yards of the Southern Pacific Company; and by gathering with said crowds of persons in said depots, buildings, and yards, around, in, and upon the aforesaid trains, cars, and engines, and upon the tracks of the railways. 2. By threats, intimidations, personal assaults, or other acts of force and violence, in, upon, and towards the engineers, firemen, conductors, brakemen, switch-men,- agents, and other employés of said company having charge of said depot, buildings, and other property, etc. It is further charged (2) that, on the 6th day of July, 1894, said defendants, at Palo Alto, forcibly and violently prevented the movement of all trains of the Southern Pacific Company to, from, or through the town of Palo Alto: 1. By gathering in crowds, etc. 2. By placing physical obstructions upon said track. 3. By displacing the switches. 4. By forcibly and violently assaulting, threatening, and intimidating said engineers, firemen, conductors, brakemen, switchmen, agents, and other employés, while engaged as aforesaid. 5. By uncoupling the cars of said trains and disconnecting the same. 6. By removing said cars from said tracks. 7. By withdrawing the water from the boilers and tanks of said engines, and putting out and removing the fires therein. 8. By displacing and removing valves, pins, bolts, plates, and other appliances and portions of the machinery of said engines and cars, and of the rails of said railways, thereby loosening said rails. 9. By other violent, forcible, and unlawful acts and means to the grand jurors unknown. It is further charged (3) that said defendants, at the time and place above indicated, unlawfully, forcibly, and violently occupied and held possession and control of said yards, depots, tracks, engines, trains of cars, and other appliances and property of the Southern Pacific Company, by the means aforesaid, and by said means excluded the Southern Pacific Company and its employés from the possession, use, and control thereof, and by said means prevented the movement of said trains from and including July 6 to and including July 10, 1894.
■ The same observation, which I have just made to you with respect to the establishing of one or more of the means alleged to have been concocted and "conspired to be used, is applicable to the overt acts charged. It is not necessary to a verdict of guilty that you should find that each and every one of the overt acts charged have, in fact, been committed. If you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that one or more of these overt acts have been committed, and that they were done in furtherance of the conspiracy alleged to have been entered into by and between these defendants, and to carry out or effectuate in some way the object of the conspiracy, that is all that the law requires. The indictment concludes with allegations of intent, viz.: That the defendants, by the acts and means aforesaid, knowingly and willfully obstructed and retarded the passage of the mails and the carrier carrying the same, and restrained interstate commerce from the 6th of July to and including the 10th day of July, 1894, at Palo Alto. The second count, as stated above, is confined to charging a conspiracy to restrain trade and commerce *709 .alone; otherwise it is identical in form and substance with the count just elaborated upon.
Having directed your attention to the different provisions of law involved in the charges against these defendants, and having also stated to yon, in brief terms, the several allegations of the indictment, you are now prepared to consider the testimony in the case in its proper light, for the purpose of determining the guilt or innocence of the defendants; but in referring to the testimony you will distinctly understand that you are the exclusive judges of the facts, and that it is not my province or purpose to intrude upon your jurisdiction in any particular or to any degree. If, in any of my rulings during the progress of 'this trial, I have appeared to indicate that any controverted fact has been established, or if I now assume or appear to consider or treat any fact as proved, unless it may be an admitted fact, you will disregard such assumption, and act entirely upon your own judgment and conscience in determining- the facts of the case.
From what has been stated, it will appear to you that you are brought to the consideration of three questions which may be properly suggested to you as a guide for your deliberation: (1) Has the government proved the existence of a conspiracy alleged in the indictment? (2) If it did exist, were any of the alleged acts performed by one or more of the parties to the conspiracy? (3) If such a conspiracy existed, were the defendants parties to it?
Taking these questions in their order, you will first consider whether the conspiracy charged in the indictment has been established.
General Conspiracy.
This is the important question in this case, and is a question of fact for,you to determine, subject to such rules of law as the court will give you to assist yon in arriving at a correct conclusion. The evidence on this point is largely circumstantial, and involves a consideration of the acts of members of the American Railway Union; the course and methods of the association in boycotting the Pullman cars, and subsequently declaring a strike against the Southern Pacific Company; and, generally, the attitude and conduct of the strikers and those acting with them during the time the strike was in operation.
American Railway Union.
The evidence tends to show that the American Railway Union is a fraternal organization, composed of railroad employes below a certain grade. The headquarters of the association are located at Chicago, 111. In June and July last Eugene Y. Debs was its president; Geo. W. Howard, vice president; and Sylvester Keliher, secretary. The union is divided up into local unions. In the constitution of the order, introduced in evidence, the principles and purposes, so far as they are pertinent to this feature of the case, are stated as follows:
“It is a self-evident truth that ‘in union there is strength,’ and, conversely, without union weakness prevails; therefore the central benefit to be derived from organization is strength,—power to accomplish that which defies indi *710 vidual effort. The American- Railway Union includes all railway employes, born of white parents, organized within one great brotherhood. There is one supreme law for the order, one roof to shelter all, and all united when unity of action is required. The reforms sought to be inaugurated and the benefits to be derived therefrom, briefly stated, are as follows:
“First. The protection of members in all matters relating to wages and their rights as employés is the principal purpose of the organization. Railway. employés are entitled to a voice in fixing wages and in determining conditions of employment. Fair wages and proper treatment must be the return for efficient service, faithfully performed. Such a policy insures harmonious relations and satisfactory results. The order, while pledged to conservative methods, will protect the humblest of its members in every right he can justly claim; but, while the rights of members will be sacredly guarded, no intemperate demand or unreasonable propositions will be entertained. Corporations will not be permitted to treat the organization better than the organization will treat them. A high sense of honor must be the animating spirit, and even-handed justice the end sought to be attained. Thoroughly organized in every department, with a due regard for the right wherever found, it is confidently believed that all differences may be satisfactorily adjusted; that harmonious relations may be established and maintained; that the service may be incalculably improved; and that the necessity for strike and lockout, boycott and black-list, alike disastrous to employer and employé, and a perpetual menace to the welfare of the public, will forever disappear.
“Second. In every department of labor, the question of economy is forced to the front by the logic of necessity. The importance of organization is conceded, but, if it costs more than a workingman is able to pay, the benefits to accrue, however great, are barred. Therefore, to bring the expenses of the organization within the reach of all is the one thing required,—-a primary question which must be settled before those who stand most in need can participate in the benefits to be derived; hence to reduce the cost to the lowest practical point is a demand strictly in accord with the fundamental principles of economy, and any movement which makes it possible for all to participate in the benefit ought to meet with popular favor.
Third! The organization will have a number of departments, each of which will be designed to promote the welfare of the membership in a practical way and by practical methods. The best thought of workingmen has long 'sought to solve a problem of making labor organizations protective, not only against sickness, disability, and death, but against the ills consequent upon idleness and those that follow in its train. Hence there will be established an employment department, in which it is proposed to register the name of every member out of employment. The department will also be fully informed where work may be obtained. It is doubtful if a more important feature could be suggested. It evidences fraternal regard without a fee, benevolence without alloy.”
Section 54 of the constitution of the American Railway Union (entitled “Laws of Protection”) provides for what is called a “board of mediation,” and defines its powers. It is as follows:
“The board of mediation of each local union shall elect a chairman. The chairman of the local board of mediation shall be a member of the general board of mediation of the system or line on which they are employed. The general board of mediation shall elect a chairman and secretary. The general board of mediation shall meet on the second Tuesday of September of each year at the headquarters of the road on which they are employed, for the transaction of such business that may emanate from the local board of mediation. All complaints and adjustments of a general character shall be handled by the general board of mediation. All complaints and adjustments must be taken up first by the local union; if accepted by a majority, vote, it shall be referred to the local board of mediation for adjustment; and, if failing, the case shall be submitted to the chairman of the general board of mediation; failing in which, they shall notify the president of the general union, who shall authorize the most available member of the board *711 of directors to visit and meet with the general chairman of the hoard of mediation, and issue such instructions as will be promulgated by the directors.”
The right of employés of railway companies to organize in this way for their own benefit and protection is not questioned They are entitled to the highest wages and the best conditions they can command, and they may organize an association or union for that purpose. There is no controversy on this point. It is a benefit to them, and it is not prejudicial to the interests of the public, that they should unite in their common interests and combine for such lawful purposes. In Thomas v. Railway Co., 62 Fed. 817 , Judge Taft, in the circuit court of the United States for the Southern district of Ohio, speaking of the relation of railway employés to the American Railway Union, says:
“If they (the employés) stand together, they are often able, all of them, tO command better prices for tbeir labor than when dealing singly with rich employers, because the necessities of the single employe may compel him to accept any terms offered him. The accumulation of a fund for the support of those who feel that the wages offered are below market prices is one of the legitimate objects of such an organiza,lion. They have the right to appoint officers who shall advise them as to the course to be taken by them In their relations with their employer. They may unite with other unions. The officers they appoint, or any other person to whom they choose to listen,, may advise them as to the proper course to be taken by them in regard to their employment, or, if they choose to repose such authority in any one, they may order them, upon pain of expulsion from their union, peaceably to leave the employ of their employer, because any of the terms of their employment are, unsatisfactory.”
This is clearly the law; but there is a just and reasonable limitation to the power and privilege of railway employés, even under the protection of such an organization. They are not entitled to interfere, with the rights and property of others, and by force and intimidation compel a carrier of United States mails or of interstate commerce to suspend the operations of sue!) necessary and lawful business; or, to state the proposition a little more exactly, they have no privilege or right to violate a law of the United States.
Now, with respect to the general charge of conspiracy contained in this indictment, I will direct your attention to some of the testimony which the government claims tends to establish that element of the case.
Time When the Boycott Took Effect.
It is admitted that in the latter part of June, 1894, a convention of the American Railway Union, assembled at Chicago, resolved to boycott the Pullman Company; this boycott to take effect in five days, should the difficulties existing between that company and its employés not be settled at the expiration of that period. On June 26, 1894, the president of the general union sent the following telegram, which was received by the American Union Lodge, known as “Local Union No. 310,” having its headquarters in Oakland: “Pullman boycott in effect to-day noon, by order of convention.” The telegram was signed by E. V. Debs, the president of the union. G. I). .Bishop, secretary of local union No. 310, at Oakland, identifies *712 this telegram. The boycott was therefore declared at noon of June 26, 1894, which fell on a Tuesday.
Mr. Knox, who was an employé of the Southern Pacific Company at Sacramento, and a member of the American Kailway Union at that place, being called as a witness for the defense, testified that he was chairman of the mediation committee; that the duties of the committee were to settle the differences between the employés and the corporation. He relates the circumstances connected with the commencement of the boycott, as follows:
“On the 26th of June we were asked to boycott the Pullman cars, and the union took action on it, and the mediation committee were ordered to call at Mr. Wright’s office,—this was about 11:20 at night,—and notify him of the action of the union. Mr. Knox, Mr. Compton, and Mr. Mullen composed the mediation committee. We went down, and saw Mr. Wright, and told him what action the union had taken, and went back and reported again to the union. We were authorized then to lay off from our work, and to attend to this boycott; to notify the members, and the like. I went down and asked Mr. Halloran for leave of absence until the trouble was over with, and it was granted me. I was laying off at the time of the strike. Obtained leave of absence about two o’clock or 2:30 in the morning of the 27th of June. The object of the boycott was this: That the American Railway Union had a big lodge at Pullman, Illinois. The Pullman Company had reduced the wages of their employes so that they could hardly live. * * * Received a message from President Debs, asking us to boycott the Pullman cars, and the mediation committee went down to the depot after the .meeting. We ordered the boycott We decided to boycott Pullman cars. We were notified to go down and tell Mr. Wright of the action of the union, which we did. Then we reported back to the union again, and told them what Mr. Wright said, and, after that, the meeting was adjourned, and we went from there to the depot to cany out our instructions. We were given full power to act In the matter. When we got to the depot, or shortly after we arrived there, Mr. Halloran, the yardmaster, and Mr. Small, and several of the officials, showed up around there, and wanted to know what the trouble was. Mr. ■ Halloran called me off to one side, and asked me, as a favor, not to ask the men to boycott the Pullmans on 2, 4, and 16. He said that if we did» not wish to handle the Pullman cars, if we would agree not to call him a scab, he would switch the cars. After consulting with the balance of the mediation committee, it was decided to let the Pullman cars on 2, 4, and 16 go through' to their destinations without boycotting them. We told him we would switch the cars instead of him. We did not ask him to do any work. On the morning of the 27th, about 8:30, I went through the shops,—there were a great many shopmen belonging to our union,—to see what action they had taken in reference to working on Pullman cars. I found a great many of the men idle. They were not working on the Pullman cars. We told them to go and complete their work; to never mind boycotting the work; to keep on with it. * * * After going through the shops, and notifying the men to keep on with their Pullman work, we then went back, to the depot. There was a train due to leave there at 10:25 in the morning, known as ‘No. 84.’ She has a Pullman car off of No. 2, that comes from Chicago, and another one to put on there at Sacramento. There is a first-class car put on at Sacramento. The other is a tourist car. The one that came through from Sacramento was loaded and the other one was empty. We asked the switchmen not to handle the Pullman car, because it was empty, and it was not necessary for it to go. We thought it was proper to boycott the empty Pullmans. They refused to put Pullman cars on. Mr. Halloran then came to us, and said he would take the engine and go to couple on, and we should come up and ask him not to couple on, and tell him we did not want him to scab on us, and he would not couple on. With that understanding he took the engine, and went around on the track where the Pullman ear was, and started to couple on. We went over, and told him we did not like to have the yardmaster *713 scabbing on ns; it did not look well. lie said, ‘Of course, I will have to yield;’ and he went up to the office, and asked us if we would go with him. We went with him. Mr. Jones asked him if he could not get some one else to put on the Pullman cars. He said, ‘No;, they are all A. It. U. men.’ Mr. Jones said, ‘Cannot you hire some one else? He said, ‘No; they are all A. R. U. men.’ That train stood there until leaving timo. Then it started to pull out, and perhaps pulled four or five car lengths out, and some one ran clown out of The office, and turned the plug on the hind end of the air hose, and stopped the train. She was backed up to the depot, and stood there for a couple of weeks. They refused to allow the engine to go without the Pullman car on. We tried to induce Mr. Wright to lot her go, beca we it was a mail train, a,nd we did not want to be no parties to' holding- Aie mail. He refused. We went to him, and asked him if he would not let this other Pullman car go on 104, because the passengers were very anxious to get through. He said they would, and they switched the loaded tourist car off of 84, and put it on 10-1. That is about all that happened on the 27th. * * * That train was made up at Sacramento. It runs between Sacramento and Oakland, by Tracy, and around that way. The Pullman cars go to Los Angeles. They carry the Pullmans down to Lathrop, and then they go to Los Angeles. The balance of the train comes into Oakland. It starts from Sacramento. The Pullman car, though, that goes through, that comes from Chicago,—that loaded one,—the tourist car. They sent it out on another train at night, 5:30. ‘JQ4’ it is called. Sent it out in the evening,—on the same day. There was nothing left of that train, then, except the mail, baggage, express, and passenger cars. There was no one in the passenger cars. They went off on the next train,—the passengers; the through passengers from Chicago that went on the next train. There were a good many of the local that went on the next train, too. That only runs to Tracy. It docs not come clear around to San Francisco, but stops there. Know C. A. Newton. I had a conversation with him on tile night of the 26th, and I might have had on the 28th. I would not say for certain. Had a conversation with him on the night of the 26th, at which I showed him a telegram. The telegram read: ‘Boycott declared on Pullman cars. E. V. Debs.’ ”
C. A. Newton, called for the United States, night yardmaster at Sacramento, for the Southern Pacific Company, contradicts Mr. Knox on this point, and says that Mr. Knox handed him a telegram, which he read. That the telegram read: “II. A. Knox, Sacramento. Boycott declared against Pullman. Hold all Pullmans. E. V. Debs.” That he handed the telegram bade to Knox, who left the room where they had met, with the exclamation, “That is hell.” The witness Knox further states:
“About 12:30, I think it was, on the morning of the 28th, I received a message from Los Angeles, saying that some men were discharged for refusing to handle Pullman cars, and saying that the Los Angeles Union had decided to strike for the reinstatement of those men, and asked us to participate in the strike. The committee having full power to act, we considered the matter, and came to the conclusion it was a just fight, and we would take It up and help them out. In that message from Los Angeles they asked us If we would notify all concerned, which we did. I went down to the depot, and that special that Mr. Newton was testifying about—the officers’ special—was just pulling out of the depot. I had had a. conversation with the engineer and the fireman before that, and they' told me if there was any strike they wanted a finger in the pie, so I ran Tip and got on the engine, and told the engineer and fireman about what had occurred. They said, ‘Well.’ Some one stopped them; I don’t know1 who. They were stopped from the hind end of the train, and they said, ‘Out us off, and we will go to the house,’ so somebody cut the engine off. I don’t know who it was. No one was with me on the cab of the engine,—only the engineer and fireman. Did not offer any threats or intimidation or violence. * * * The *714 engine was cut off, and the engineer was taking it around to the roundhouse. I was in the depot by that time. Mr. Wright wanted to know what was the matter with the special. I told him, as near as I could find out, the engineer was going to strike with us. He had Mr. Newton stop him there in front of the depot, and he had a conversation with the engineer, and they finally agreed to go on with the special, and asked us if we would couple on. We told him, ‘Yes; if, they wanted to go.’ I told Mr. Wright I thought it was foolish for them to go. They would go just as far as Rocklin, and that wits no place to stay. There were no accommodations there at all. He said, ‘For God’s sake, let them go out of Sacramento, if they don’t get over the American river bridge.’ I thought to accommodate him. We would not ask the conductor and brakeman to boycott the officers’ special. We would let them go as far as Rocklin. I knew they would not get any further than that, because the men had already quit up there. I got on the engine, and rode up through Sixth street yard with them, to see that the switches were all set, and everything ready to go. I rode with the engineer on the engine. After I got back from Sixth street the committee then went up to the Western Union & Postal Telegraph Company, and we sent a good many dispatches notifying them that we had struck.”
(These telegrams will appear further on.)
Newton testified as follows with relation to the special car,—or officers’ special, as it was called,—and with reference to the statements made by Knox at the time;
“I know Mr. Knox personally. He used to work for me. Mr. Mullen, I knew him personally, too. Mr. Compton I did not know until after the strike. I saw Mr. Knox about the 2Gth of June. * * * The first train that came into the yard after that conversation I had with Mr. Knox (referring to above) was a special that came from Oakland. It got in about 12:25 on the morning of the 29th. It was a special passenger train, that ran out of its ordinary time. It was composed of two officers’ ears and the engine. * * * Saw Mr. Knox on the arrival of the officers’ train, a little while after it got in, when it got ready to leave. Knox came running through the depot, and hollered out: ‘Stop that train! Stop that train! Not a son of a bitch of a wheel will turn on the system.’ This was on the morning of the 29th, about 12:25.”
This, it will be observed, flatly contradicts Knox as to what occurred at that time.
The witness Newton testifies further as to Knox’s attitude, as follows:
“Did not have any direct conversation with Knox. When No. 3 came in, going east, there was quite a number of shopmen around there, standing in groups, I guess to the extent of forty or fifty. They came in charge of United States Marshal Long. This was along in the morning, about daylight, probably four o’clock, on the 29th. That was a mail train,—the regular Eastern overland,—the Atlantic express; the ‘fast mail,’ they call it. After No. 3 pulled out, the groups got moving towards the depot—after she pulled out,—and some one in the groups made the remark to Mr. Knox why he did not hold the train,—what he let her go out for. He said he did not have force enough to hold her, but when seven o’clock came he would call out the shop men, and he would have force enough to hold anything that came along.”
Knox testifies that:
“The strike was formdlly declared about 12:30 or 1 o’clock on the morning of the 29th of June by the Los Angeles. Union. In Sacramento it was left in the hands of the committee. The committee had full power to act. The committee decided to strike to have those men in Los Angeles reinstated. As soon as they got the message they consulted probably for 25 or 30 minutes, and went on and did as requested by the message, to.notify all those concerned. That was about 12:30 or 1 o’clock on the morning of June 29th. Had not at that time received any notification from Oakland. Did not act *715 on anything but the notification from Los Angeles. The members that were out on the road,—we notified all the unions along, Truckee, and Rocklin, and Dunsmuir, and all over the system,—we notified them that we had struck; that we had ordered a general strike in Sacramento, and those in Sacramento —the shop men—were all notified the next morning after they wont to work, perhaps 8 o’clock or 8:30.”
The attitude ot the mediation committee, as representatives of the American Railway Union, is stated by Knox as follows:
“Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Knight wanted to know our position that we had taken in the matter, and between us wo explained it. as thoroughly as possible to them, and told them that, in the first place, wo had boycotted the Pullman cars on legal advice; and, if I am not mistaken, I fold them who our advice was from,—Mr. Ingersoll; and Mr. Knight said that a Pullman car, as long as it was attached to a mail car regularly made up, was part of a mail car. Of course we had an opinion from a very eminent lawyer and attorney, and we thought he knew as much about it as Mr. Knight did. Consequently we told him we would not handle any trains with Pullman cars attached during the boycott, and, now that the strike had been ¡ordered, we would not handle any trains at all, except mail trains, until those men that had been discharged had been reinstated. That was about the gist of our conversation all the way through. It was repeated several times.”
Again he says:
“I told Mr. Baldwin our men would Dot work on Pullman cars. That is all I told him. * ® * We were doing nothing with reference to preventing the movement of trains; only quit work, that is all. ,s * * Wo wore trying to induce the men that showed up to strike with us. That was the understanding between Mr. Wright and myself. * * * I told Mr. Baldwin that our men would not work on Pullman cars. Did not make the statement tlia t we would not allow Pullman cars to move.”
As to the power possessed by the mediation committee, Knox says:
“The committee had full power to act. The union had given them full power to act.”
On cross-examination Knox testifies as follows:
“We discriminated between Pullmans that were full of passengers and Pullmans that were empty, on the 27th and 28th of .Tune. After the strike was ordered, we did not. All Pullmans were treated alike, and everything else, except mail. It grew from the Pullman ears to every other form of cars except the mail "ars. After those men were discharged it did; did not matter what the destination of the cars was. We thought that we could control the A. R. U. organization, and we did. Anything that we knew anything about we controlled their action, through the strike. Anything that was done by any of the officers of the A. R. Ü. organization during the strike was done with the full consent, and was under the policy of our organization, as far as Sacramento was concerned. We were given full power to act. That power has never been taken away from us yet. Had control on the 3d of July, but do not know whether there was an A. R. TL man who moved the Pullman cars on that day or not. Could not swear to it. I do not think there were very many of them.”
It appears that on July 5th, and during the strike, Knox, Compton, and Mullen, of the mediation committee, appeared before the Citizens’ Protective Association of Sacramento, and made a statement concerning the attitude of the American Railway Union. Cornelius C. Howell, w'ho was present at,the meeting, testifies as follows:
“Was in Sacramento the latter part of June and the early part of July last. I was employed by the Industrial Improvement & Manufacturers’ As *716 sociation of Sacramento. I was looking up manufacturer’s' Industries to locate at Sacramento for that company or association. Became a member of the Citizens’ Protective Association, I believe, on the 3d of July. That association formed for to.get together and see if they could not do something to open up the commerce connected with the city, t and suph other business as might be necessary, owing to the condition that things were in at that time from the cause of the strike that had been ordered on the 29th of June, or the strike that occurred on the 29th of June. I was secretary of the organization from the day that we organized, up until, I think, the 15th or 20th’of July; somewhere along there. Performed the duties of secretary at meetings. Recollect a meeting held on or about the 5th day of July last. It was called by the association to see if they could not do something in order to open up the commerce. Members of the mediation committee of the A. R. U. were present at that meeting. They were Mr. Knox, Mr. Compton, and Mr. Mullen. After discussing the ways and means to adjust matters, it was decided that it would be better to bring these people before the association, this mediation committee, and find out the condition of affairs,—what the causes were of all the trouble,—and see if we could not do something to adjust matters; and in-that connection it was agreed that we would admit them, and see what they had to say; they having, I believe, made a proposition to some member of the association that they would like to come before the association, as the mediation committee of the American Railway Union. They came before the meeting and made a statement. Parts of their statement were reduced to writing. This is a part of the record of the meeting of the Citizens’ Protective Association held on the 5th of July. Not the entire statements, but I took down part of what they said, and then we dictated it out, and took the minutes to Mr. Knox in his room. Mr. Compton was present when I went there with the minutes. , I asked them to read them over, and see if they were correct; that I did not wish to have them quoted as saying something before -the association that they did not say, and, before they would become a part of the record, I wanted them to see if thef were right. I read the minutes to them. These two were present at the time. They looked them all over; and wherever they wanted any changes made I run the pencil through them, as it appears here, and when they got through—-they looked it all over and' read it—I wrote this certificate attached, and Mr. Knox signed it, and Mr. Compton signed it, In my presence,—both of them ’ in my presence. I left the paper with them so that they might show it to Mr. Mullen, another member of the committee. He returned, as I understand, after I left, signed the paper, and they sent it down to my office. We had offices in the -same building. The interlineations or erasures were made just before that was signed, while Mr. Compton and Mr. Knox were standing at my side. I think they were made—in fact, I know—at the request of Mr. Knox. He did the talking.”
This document reads as follows:
“Sacramento, July 7th, 1894.
“When the committee returned and had introduced the mediation committee from the A. R. U. to the chairman, Mr. Katzenstein, he in turn introduced Mr. Knox, Mr. Mullen, and Mr. Compton to the association, and invited Mr. Knox to address the association, which he had come to meet. Mr. Knox, among other things, after thanking the association for allowing him to be heard, stated among the grievances that the original cause for this strike was on behalf of the wage-earners at Pullman, Illinois. Mr. Geo. Pullman had been grinding down his men with such small wages that it was impossible for them to get along. Mr. Knox went Into detail as to treatment of the employes received at the hands of the Pullman Car Co., at Pullman, Ill. That through the president of the A. R. U. order he had declared a boycott against the Pullman cars, and to effectually accomplish the object he had ordered the striké, and it had now resolved itself to this: That the A. R. U. order, which he represented, demanded that Pullman restore his meh in Chicago to their old places, with the same scale of wages paid to them in 1893; or that the S. P. R. R. Co. purchase the one-quarter ownership of the Pullman Co., paint out the Pullman name from the cars, and restore all the men on the railroad and In all shops to their old position and wages. Senator Cox inquired of Mr. *717 Knox il he did not think this committee of citizens could be interested to an extent that something might be done to adjust matters beween thein and the railroad. Mr. Knox said it liad gone so far that nothing could be done until the whole question was settled, and that he had given his ultimatum. Mr. McClatchy asked Mr. Knox what condition affairs were in at this time or what the situation was. Mr. Knox then stated that he would allow the mail and express to be moved, but that no passenger cars or freight cars of any kind or description would he consent to have moved until such time as the demand lie made had been complied with. Mr. Mullen said, in part, •after Mr. Knox had taken his seat, that this was a fight between capital and labor, and tliat from the chief justice of the United States down through all the brandies—judicial and legislative departments—of the government, they were corrupt,, and that labor could not get its jifst dues, and that his association had taken this way of forcing justice to assist their fellow men in obtaining for honest, labor a proper compensation. Mr. Cox then asked what he could suggest. To this Mr. Knox replied that they might intercede with the government, and see if they could not move the mails-, and express to accommodate tlie business of the country. He said that that would help us out. We are ii> this light to win. but we are as anxious to have it settled as you are, and we want to go to work, but will not until this question is settled as I have outlined. There is a revolution going on in this country. To-day it is a principle that we are con lending for. Should we give up, they would make us crawl on our bellies after them.’ Mr. Compton stated, among other things, that the A. R. U. organization would not resort to any desperate means, so long as the Railroad Co. would deal with them without using armed force. That their organization was composed of law-abiding citizens, and would not commit any overt acts. At this point Mr. Ray tried to have his resolution read, but was declared out of order, and the resolution remained on the table. Several attempts wore made by others, but without effect; whereupon Mr. Avery moved that a vote of thanks be tendered this committee for having made thin association of Inirinesn men so frank and fair a statement in relation to their position with the railroad company and. this general boycott. The motion being seconded, it was unanimously carried, after which the committee retired. ,
“Ve have read the foregoing statement of the records kept by Mr. Howell of our statements, and certify to their correctness.
“Committee: H. A. Knox, Chairman,
“Thos. Compton.
“Jas. Mullen.”
Mr. Knox was asked if lie signed the statement produced by Howell. He said lie did; that there were some alterations, but they were not material
Continuing, Howell further stated:
“Saw Knox after the 7th. I had no conversation with him, although I saw him a number of times, after the time I went to his room and he signed that paper, until the 9th of July. I saw him then before the executive committee of (he Citizens’ Protective Association, at tlie Orangevale office in Sacramento. George XI. Katzenstein, Mr. Van Vorliees, Gen. Dlewellen Tozier, Mr. Frank Miller, Mr. J. V. McClatchy, of the Sacramento Bee; and I am not suro but I think Senator Cox was present at tliat meeting. The executive committee was composed of nine members, but they were not always there. Mr. Knox was there. I was there. I think Mr. James Mott was there. He is the manager of the Crocker Company up there. During the time of this strike we were in the habit of meeting every day, sometimes twice a day, and we had received information from some source that the government was going to take charge of affairs, and wo had heard a good many rumors. We sent for Knox. We brought him there to see what position ho was going to take in view of the fact that the troops were to be expected there. This was the 9th of July. These gentlemen met Mr. Knox in the capacity of the executive board of the Citizens’ Protective Association. Mr. Katzenstein, the chairman of the executive committee, asked Mr. Knox some'5 questions in relation to the position that Iiis *718 association expected to take or that he expected to take after the troops-got there. My recollection is that Mr. Katzenstein in one of the quesi ions said that it was reported, and so published, that Mr. Debs, of Chicago, had issued a proclamation advising all men to keep away from these public places, from collecting at the depots, and so forth, and he asked him why that rule could not.be enforced by the A.R.U.here. Mr. Knox handed Mr. Katzenstein a telegram. The telegram, as near as I can remember,—the substance of the telegram,—was about this: To pay no attention to newspaper rumors; that they were sure to win; that everything was progressing all right in their interests, or words to that effect. Mr. Katzenstein asked him this further question: That in view of the fact that the troops were ordered there, and would probably be there the next day, or the morning after, and as the matter was passing out from the civil authorities to the military, and in view of the fact that he was a citizen, the same as the balance of the people he had come there to meet, what position he would take; to which he said, as near as I recollect, that, so far as he was concerned himself, he could not do anything, for thére were two or three injunctions against him. But, so far as his men were concerned, which was over 2,000, he had no control of them, and he did not believe they would allow any train to go out of the depot with Pullman cars attached. Then Mr. Katzenstein further asked him, as near as I can recollect, * * * that in view of the fact of the military coming there, and if it would be a question between the principles of his order and the protection of the citizens and his family and so forth, which course he would pursue. He said that the principles of the order of the A. R. U. stood first with him in relation to this business, or in relation to this strike. Mr. Katzenstein, as near as I can remember, called his (Knox’s) attention to the proclamation, as it was published in the paper. I don’t remember Mr. Knox saying anything in relation to the cause of the proclamation. He produced that telegram. It was read. He handed it out, and talked in about the same strain that was expressed in the language of the telegram. I would not undertake to repeat what he said. I remember distinctly he stated you could not depend on the proclamation. He did not believe there was any truth in it, and used this telegram as evidence to corroborate his statement.”
Y. S. McClatchy, called on behalf of the 'United States, testified:
“I am one of the proprietors and business manager of the Evening Bee, Sacramento.”
A paper being shown the witness, he said:
“That paper is a statement made by the secretary of the Citizens’ Protective Association, under instructions from its executive committee. * * * The paper was drawn up by Mr. Howell, secretary of the Citizens’ Protective Association, under instructions of its executive committee, and purported to embody the statements made by the mediation committee of the American Railway Union before the Citizens’ Protective Association at its meeting, I think, of July 5th. Mr. Howell was instructed to draw this paper up and present it to the mediation committee for their approval and signature. * * * I saw it signed by two gentlemen. I did not see the third member of the committee sign it. * * * Mr. Knox, who was chairman of the committee, signed it, and, as certain as I can be at this time, the second one was Mr. Compton. The third member, who I think was Mr. Mullen, was not present * * * At this time I saw those two names signed Mr. Howell was present. He then left it with Mr. Knox, who was to obtain the signature of the third gentleman. * * » I have in my possession another statement signed by Knox, relative to the strike. * * * Mr. Knox made certain ' statements before the executive committee of the Citizens’ Protective Association, I think about July 9th—I do not want to be certain of the date,—and under instructions I prepared a report of Mr. Knox’s remarks before the committee, or some of them, and submitted it to him for approval prior its being published in the newspaper. Mr. Knox approved it, after minor amendments, and it was published. * * * Mr. Knox signed it in my presence. * * * Mr. Knox’s signature was obtained in the afternoon, shortly before the Bee would go to press. In'order to insure its publication. *719 that day, it had to be cut up in what printers „call ‘short takes.’ * * * It was signed before being cut up. It can be readily pasted together.”
After further testimony tending to identify the document, it was introduced, and is as follows:
“Chairman H. A. Knox, of the Sacramento mediation committee of the .A. It. II., had a short conference this afternoon with the executive committee of the Citizens’ Protective Association, at the request of the latter. The work of the committee so far had been directed towards preventing a conflict at Sacramento that could only result in bloodshed, without settling the main issue, and to this end had brought influence to bear on both the Southern Pacific Company and its striking employes to prevent any aggressive measures on either side. The position of the United States government. however, in ordering the opening of the road and the use of federal troops for such purpose, has practically taken all discretion out of the hands of the railroad company and the United States marshal. Mr. Knox was asked, therefore, if the United States government insisted on taking charge at Sacramento and running trains, would the A. It. U. permit it to be done without obstacle, or would it oppose by force the government officials and troops? Mr. Knox stated that personally he would do all he could to prevent a conflict with the government, and, if it moved trains, would not oppose, whether with Pullmans attached or not, and would so advise his men. He said, however, that if the government insisted on moving Pullmans without a settlement of the main question, he could not control the men under him, as they had notified him—over 2,000 strong—that they would not obey orders in that event, and would engage the troops. He said the position of the A. R. II. was in no way changed. It would not permit the running of any trains unless the demands of the organization, as outlined at a former conference with the citizens’ committee, and published in the P.ee of Friday last, were complied with. His attention being called to the declaration of Eugene V. Debs, head of the A. R. U., calling on all members not to attempt interference with trains or railway property, Mr. Knox said that he had not received officially any such notice, and had been warned by Debs to pay no attention to newspaper reports, unless officially reported to him. He could not, therefore, take any notice of the proclamation referred to, and doubted its genuineness. [Signed! H. A. Knox.”
Sir. Knox denies having signed the statement produced by Mr. MeClntchy. In this regard he testifies as follows:
“i never signed that statement in. the world. That statement, or part of it, was when they called me before their committee in the afternoon, I think, of the 9th. It was simply said verbally, part of it, and part of it was not. I never signed the statement, and they have got more in there than I ever said. * * * The statement is about correct, until we get down to where it says: ‘He said, however, that if the government insisted on moving Pullmans without a settlement of the main question, he could not control the men under him, as they had notified him, over 2,000 strong, thai they would not obey orders in that event, and would engage the troops.’ I never made any such statement as that.”
Barry Baldwin, the United Slates marshal for the Northern district of California, was at Sacramento during the strike, and testifies as follows respecting statements made to him by members of the mediation committee and others, in relation to the attitude of the American Railway Union:
“I know Mr. Knox, Mr. Compton, and Mr. Mullen. Know Mr. Worden. I sa w them on the evening of the 1st of July at the depot, in a caboose, in the yard there, right at the depot, on the tracks. I was told that they wore a committee; that they wore the leaders of the committee of the strikers. Found Mr. Worden there at the time. * :: * I went there officially, in order to protect the mails,—to protect the trains carrying the mails; in *720 order to allow the railroad officials to run the trains carrying the mails. We heard that they were being prevented from doing so. This was Sunday evening, the 1st of July, about eight o’clock in the evening. * * * It was a caboose on the tracks adjacent to the depot building,—the yard at Sacramento; possibly a hundred yards from the river,—fifty to a hundred yards. The parties in the car went to find Mr. Knox. Mr. Knox was not in the car at the time. They found Mr. Knox, and Mr. Knox came in -presently, after a little; and they requested a- number of people there, who had no business with their committee, to withdraw. A number of people in there withdrew, leaving, I suppose, some six to ten inside the car. It was dark in the car. It was lighted afterwards, but poorly lighted. Mr. Knox was present, and also Mr. Worden, and I believe Mr. Compton, and Mr. Mullen, and several others whom I don’t know,—did not recognize at the time. * * * I stated to them the purpose for which I had come to Sacramento, and they asked me whether Pullman cars were to be moved with the train. Knox was the spokesman, and did most of the speaking. The others spoke a little, some of the others, and. especially Mr. Worden, who was continually talking and interrupting. I told them who I was, and my purpose in going to Sacramento. * * * My business there was to see them and talk to them, and see what the trouble was, and why these trains could not be moved, and why they were preventing them from being moved. They objected to Pullman cars being moved, claiming that they were willing that the trains should go with the mails and other passenger cars, but not .with Pullman cars. They sa»id they had advice that Pullmans were no part of a train,—no part of a mail train; and they gave me to understand that they would not be allowed to go,—to be moved. They said they had eminent legal advice. That they had paid |250 for the advice. They did not state who had advised them. * * * I told them that I should perform my duties, and see that the trains were moved. I told them that the trains should be moved as often as made up, with Pullman cars attached where it was customary to place them. I told them that I was certain they were not right in doing it,—in opposing the proper authorities and defying the law. They continued in the attitude that they could not allow Pullman cars to move. I told them my purpose in being there was to protect those mail trains, and trains carrying the mails,—United States mails. * * * Had conversation with Mr. Worden on my way up from the caboose out across the tracks. He asked if we knew who he was, and I then first learned his name. He said that bis name was Worden; that every one knew him there, and he was prominently connected with the movement. * * * It was the A. E. U. people that were organized there. They were the mediation committee of the A. E. U. -They were the committee. I treated them officially as leaders of the movement,—ostensible leaders of the movement.”
The same witness further testifies, as to the action and attitude of the mediation committee, substantially as follows:
“I saw the members of the mediation committee again (the second time) on the evening of' the 2d, at the Golden Eagle Hotel, at my room. Saw Knox, Mullen, and Compton. They came to see me as the mediation committee of the A. K. U. They came to see me as U. S. marshal. They came to see me at the room I occupied. I informed them that it was my intention to go down the next day, and clear the depot grounds of the crowds that were there, in order that the railroad company could move their trains, —the mail trains, or trains carrying the mails,—and that I hoped that the strikers would not offer any resistance; that I was there by lawful authority to do this; it was my duty to do it. Then we talked the matter over. They said that they had no wish to use any violence. They asked me to go down. They said they would do all they could to get the strikers to vacate the depot grounds. They asked me to go down myself, or with as few deputies as possible, for they thought there was less danger of a conflict if I did that; that I could get on better alone than to take down a number of deputies; that it might irritate the people, and we would not get on well. But they said they would assist me as much ,as they could in inducing the crowd to clear away from the depot, and allow the trains to be operated. *721 They Paid that if they did this they wanted me to allow them to send a committee of three to induce Uie engineers, or those that were to work the trains, in together, to persuade them not to go out with the Pullman ears; to go inside of the line I might form. I told them that. 1 did not know that 1 would object to their doing that, so long as they did not intimidate them,—so long as they were not too persistent, and would not continue- to talk to them too long, or in any other way threaten them, by numbers of talk; and also, if the people they were talking to did not wish to hear them, did not wish to listen to them, aud requested them to leave, why, they should leave. But I told them that I could not promise even that 1 would let them do that; that I could not say at that moment; that the'-v might be some objection arise at the timo on the part of the railroad company, and I might have to further consider the question as to their right to be present at the depot grounds, but at that time I did not see any objection to it, as long as they did it peaceably.”
Mr, Knox, in. his testimony, details this interview in the caboose as follows:
“Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Knight wanted to know our position that we had taken in the matter, and between us we explained it as thoroughly as possible to them, and told them, in the first place, we had boycotted the Pullman cars on legal advice; and, if 1 am not mistaken, X told them who our advice was from.—Mr. Ingersoll; and Mr. Knight said that a Pullman car, as long as it was attached to a mail car regularly made up, was part of a mail ear. Of course, we-had an opinion, from a very eminent lawyer and attorney, and we thought he knew as much about it as Mr. Knight did; consequently we told him we would not handle any trains with Pullman cars attached during the boycott, and, now that the strike had been ordered, wo would not handle any trains at all, except mall trains, until those men that had been discharged had been reinstated. That was about the gist of our conversation all the way through, it was repeated several times.”
T. W. Hfiini'zelinaii, master mechanic in the employ of the Southern Pacific Company at Sacramento, called for the United States, testified as follows:
“X know Knox and Compton. They were out on a strike. Before the strike, Knox was a switchman, and Compton was a machinist working in the shop. * * w x was present during a part of a, conversation between Knox and Mr. Small at the roundhouse on .Tune 80th. Mr. Small was the superintendent of motive power. ® * e Í heard Knox remark that they were in the strike to win, and they were going to win by any means.”
E. O. Jordan, locomotive engineer at Sacramento, called for the United States, testified to attending a meeting on June 29, 1894, at which Knox was present, as follows:
“In relation to a telegram he said he would get, it was asked him as to what his jurisdiction was in this matter; and he stated that, his jurisdiction extended from Sacramento to El Paso and to Portland and to Ogdon, out of Sacramento. * * There were three orders present,—Conductors, the Engineers, and Mr. Knox, of the A. R. U. * * * The meeting was held for the purpose, as I understood if, of taking some action to bring the strikers or the A. R. U. men and the company together, in order to devise some means by which the strike could be adjusted In some manner to start tlie road.”
The following telegrams, purporting to have been signed and sent by H. A. Knox to various unions within his jurisdiction, respecting the state of affairs at Sacramento, and transmitting advice to other I&cai unions with reference to the action they should take, were in *722 troduced by the prosecution for the purpose of showing the concert of purpose and action among the different branches of the American .Railway Union.
“June 27, 1894. To I. B. Hoffmire, Portland, Or.: Stop all Pullman sleepers. Answer. H. A. Knox.”
“June 27, 1894. To E. Y. Debs, Pre» A. R. U., Chicago: Will we stop loaded sleepers? Ans. H. A. Knox.”
“June 27, 1894. To W. H. Clune, Los Angeles: Stop all Pullman sleepers. Answer. H. A. Knox.” . '
“June 27, 1894. To J. M. Wagner, Ogden, Utah: Stop all Pullman sleepers. Answer. H. A. Knox.”
“June 28, 1894. To M. C. Roberts, Dunsmuir, Cal.: Be ready to go out at moment’s notice. H. A. Knox.”
“June 28, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Chicago, Ill.: The ORC and BRI are going to take train out to-night. We are going to stop everything. Answer. H. A. Knox.”
“June 28, 1894. To J. M. Wagner, Ogden, Utah: Be ready to go out at moment’s notice. H. A. Knox.”
“June 28, 1894. To M. C. Roberts, Dunsmuir: Don’t know, but if any, you hold. H. A. Knox.”
“June 29, 1894. To B. P. Condrey, Rocklin: Yes; stay in Rocklin. H. A. Knox.”
“June 29, 1894. To C. B. McClintock, Truckee, Cal.: Hold Nos. 4 & 2 sure. H. A. Knox.”
“June 29, 1894. To G. W. Lindsay, Wadsworth, Nev.: Hold No. 4 there sure. H. A. Knox.”
“June 29, 1894. To E. P. Condrey, Rocklin: General tie up ordered. Notify all concerned. Answer. H. A. Knox.”
“June 29, 1894. To McClintock, Truckee: General tie up ordered. Notify all concerned. H. A. Knox.”
“June 29, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Pres. A. R. U., Chicago: General tie up ordered on S. P. system. All out. H. A. Knox.”
“June 29, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Pres. A. R. U., Chicago, Ill.: Everything on system at standstill. Company makes their death struggle to-night. H. A. Knox.”
“June 30, 1894. To P. Almas, Summit, Cal.: No; stop at once. H. A. Knox.”
“June 30, 1S94. To J. C. Church, Carlin, Nev.: Ice until further orders. Everything stopped. H. A. Knox.”
“June 30, 1894. To J. T. Roberts, Oakland, Cal., A. R. U.: Have any troops left, and where are they going? H. A. Knox.”
“June 30, 1894. To J. T. Roberts, A. R. U., Oakland: Has train left with deputy marshals? Rumor here. H. A. Knox.”
“June 30, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Pres. A. R. U., Chicago, 111.: This motion was adopted by B. of L. E. and O. R. C.: That the basis of the settlement be that all discharged men who have taken part in the Pullman boycott be reinstated, and guaranty given men won’t be discharged for same cause. Pullman boycott to remain in force, and strike declared off. This is the grandest victory ever won, and everybody is on our side. H. A. Knox.”
“July 1, 1894. To A. W. Wallace, Rocklin, Cal.: There was, but we stop at other points. Not wheel moving. H. A. Knox.”
“July 1, 1894. To J. T. Roberts, A. K. U., Oakland, CaL: Keep me posted on everything that leaves there. H. A. Knox.” ,
“July 1, 1894. To W. H. Clune, Sec., Los Angeles, Cal.: How are engineers and conductors standing with us down your way? H. A. Knox.” “July 2, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Pres. A. R. U., Chicago, 111.: Did you give permission to move Mrs. Stanford? H. A. Knox.”
“July 2, 1894. To H. L. AValthers, Dunsmuir, Cal.: She can go via Davis, not by Sacramento.
“July 2, 1894. To H. L. AValthers, Dunsmuir, Cal.: Troops coming here. Stand firm; we are. Ans. H. A. Knox.”
“July 3, 1S94. To E. E. Barton, Ogden, Utah: We understand Co. tried to brake block, but we fooled them. H. A. Knox.” .
*723 “July 3, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Pres. A. R. U., Chicago, Ill.: Hunt up the National Pres, of the Marine Engineers. Confer with him. Steamers are & terrible damage to us. H. A. Knox.”
“July 4, 1894. To HcClintock, Sec. A. Tt. U., Truckee, Cal.: Big army here. You come with all guns and volunteers. Come by train without orders at once. H. A. Knox.”
“July 4, 1894. To E. E. Barton, Ogden, Utah: Good. Same here. We have 4,000 beside the city. Stand firm. H. A. Knox.”
“July 4, 1894. To Arthur Wallace, Itocklin, Cal.: Soldiers on this end of American river. Don’t stop. Bridge O. K. H. A. Knox.”
“July 4, 1891. To Arthur Wallace, Rocklin, Cal.: Come. Bring all hands. Rush. H. A. Knox.”
“July 4, 1894. To H. L. Walthers, Dunsmnir, Cal.: One thousand cavalrymen and militiamen here. Come with whole outfit by train, without orders, at once. H. A. Knox.”
"July 4, 1894. To W. H. Walthers, Bunsmuir, Cal. Don’t close the Western Union office. That will hurt our cause. And take guard away from the Postal office. H. A. Knox.”
“July 4, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Pres. A. R. U., Chicago, Ill.: We have the troops on our side. They have refused to obey commands, and we are stayers from away back,—bound to succeed. H. A. Knox.”
“July 5, 1894. To C. B. McClintock, Truckee, Cal.: Please allow merchants to take perishable freight from cars, but agent must check it to them. H. A. Knox.”
“July 5, 1894. To Madden & Turner, Dunsmulr, Cal.: All quiet here. We are sure to win. H. A. Knox.”
“July 5, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Pres. A. R. U., Chicago, Ill.: It is reported ' the U. S. marshal and Gen. Dimond, of state troops, has turned our affair over to Washington. Have attorney there to work on it We have everything our own way, and have not broke the law, only by keeping about 5,000 men in sight. Please advise us what to do. Not a wheel moving. H. A. Knox.”
“July 6, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Pres. A. R. U., Chicago, Ill.: Any truth in report of strikers and soldiers having battle in Chicago? Please ans. We are as firm as rock. I-I. A. Knox.”
“7/7/189. To J. M. Wagner, Ogden, Utah: All quiet. Stand firm. H. A. Knox.”
“July 7, 1894. To Wm. O. Leary, Pres. Miners’ Union, Virginia City, Nev.: Resolutions received, and return thanks. We are bound to win. We are as solid as rock. H. A. Knox, Chairman.”
“July 8, 1894. To W. H. Chine, Los Angeles, Cal.: Force them to stop, or tell them when we settle, their firemen will run their engines. We done that, and yon bet It brought them to time. All quiet here. We are solid aa rock. H. A. Knox.”
“July 9, 3894. To W. H. Clune, Los Angeles, Cal.: Everything very quiet here. Nothing moving here. How is things there? Stand firm, and don’t let nothing go. H. A. Knox.”
“July 9, 1894. To Chas. Fink, Oakland, Cal.: We sent Geo. Hale to Vallejo, but if there at Oakland he is O. K. I-I. A. Knox.”
“July 11, 1894. To W. G. Boyce, Pres. Miners’ Union, Silver City, Nev.: Thanks for sympathy. We are under heavy expense. Financial aid would be gratefully received. H. A. Knox, Chairman.”
“July 11, 1894. To Chick Featherson, Summit, Cal.: I received orders from E. V. Debs to order strike on entire system. Hence my order. Sacto. is solid yet. H. A. Knox.”
“July 11, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Pres. A. R. U., Chicago, Ill.: Sorry yon are in jail, but be strong, and we will carry the strike on if they put all of you in jail. Lots of soldiers here, but everything quiet so far. Every man out here, but a few scab engineers. H. A. Knox.”
“July 11, 1894. To J. S. Walton, Oakland, Cal.: Adopt code. Lots of soldiers here, but everything quiet yet H. A. Knox.”
“July 12, 1894. To J. Balder, Truckee, Cal.: Train of soldiers getting ready to leave here for Truckee. Everything quiet. H. A. Knox.”
“July 12, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Pres. A. R. U., Chicago, Ill.: I will stand *724 ■by A. R. U. as long as life lasts. I refused to run for railroad commissioner, because I thought so much of the fight. We are doing nothing but what is proper. We are going to fight it out on this line. We have 1,800 soldiers here, but no trains out yet. H. A. Knox.”
“July 13, 1894. To Chairman A. R. U., Truckee, Cal.: Reports all fake. Stand pat. Freight left here, under protection of soldiers, for the East. H. A. Knox.”
“July 13, 1894. To Clune, Chairman A. R. U., Los Angeles, Cal.: Reports all fakes. Strike is on in full force. Stay with them to the last. All O. K. here. H. A. Knox.”
“July 13, 1894. To J. C. March, Carlin, Nev.: 1,800 soldiers here for two days, but have only got freight out east. Reports are all false. Stand pat. H. A. Knox.”
“July 13, 1894. To F. M. Gillett, San Luis Obispo, Cal.: Reports all false. Stand pat. 1,800 troops here, but got only one train out in two days. Sure to win. H. A. Knox.”
“July 13, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Pres. A. R. U., Chicago, 111.: United Press, dispatch says you have declared strike off. -I have sent messages all over denying it. Answer. H. A. Knox.”
Telegrams have been introduced purporting to have been signed by H. A. Knox, addressed to E. V. Debs, at Chicago, and to other persons, in relation to the strike, dated July 14th, and subsequent dates; but Knox testifies that he was arrested on July 14th, and was in jail for three weeks, and he denies specifically having signed the 11 telegratns dated July 22d, which bear his name. It is possible that some member of the mediation committee, or other officer of the American Railway Union at Sacramento, acting for the committee, may have signed these télegrams in the name of Mr. Knox; but as the testimony in the case, and particularly the telegrams sent out by T. H. Douglass, who appears to have been chairman of the mediation committee after July 14th, indicate that tie strike was declared off on July 21st, telegrams purporting to have been signed by Knox, and dated after July 14th, and particularly those dated July 22d, are certainly discredited, and I will not, therefore, refer to them further in this connection. In any view, they do not appear to be important
George Vice testified, on the part of the defense, that he had been a locomotive fireman for the Southern Pacific Company in June last; that he belonged to the American Rahway Union at Sacramento; was the vice president of it; thinks he was present the night that the telegram came from Chicago, announcing the fact that there was going to be a Pullman boycott. He admits signing the following telegram:
“Sacto., July 6, 1894. H. F. Michaels, Master Cactus Lodge, 94, Tucson, Ariz.: Firemen of following lodges out with A. R. U., to the man: 260, 143. 312, 91, 97, 19, 58, 98, 366, 193, and Roseburg. If you tie division up, will guaranty full protection of A. R. U. Not a wheel turned here for six days. Answer. Geo. Vice, Master 260.”
Also the following:
“Sacramento, Cal., July 16, 1894. J. Friant, Fresno, Cal.: Firemen here stand firm. Scabs scarce. We are winners. Geo. Vice.”
Also the following:
“Sacto., July 16, 1894. Geo. W. Lindsay, Wadsworth, Nev.: Firemen here all firm. Scabs scarce. We’re winners. You stand firm. Geo. Vice.”
*725 He also admits sending the following:
“Sacramento, Gal., July 17, 1894. It. JO. Nobel, Summit: Quit immediately, and tie up everything. Gome to Sacramento. We’re sure winners. Answer. Geo. Vice.”
The v/itness, being questioned about the wording of the telegram, testified further as follows:
“A Juror: Q. What did you mean by ‘tie up everything'? A. Leave their work. Q. You said, ‘Quit and tie up everything.’ What do you mean by ‘tie up everything’? A. Just to leave work. The Court: Q. You say, ‘Quit and tie up every tiring.’ ‘Quit’ seems to be your definition for ‘tie up.’ A. I meant the same thing by it. Q. ‘Quit’ and ‘tie up’ are the same thing? A. Yes, sir. Mr. Knight: Q. By ‘tie up everything,’ you mean leave work from everything? A. Leave the service. Q. From everything? A. Yes, sir. Q. What i«s the meaning of the word ‘everything-’? You said, ‘tie up everything.’ A. I suppose there is a whole lot of meaning to ‘everything.’ Q. What is your meaning in that connection? A. If a man is on a job, according to that,—if he is on an engine,—-he will leave his work.”
He also admits sending the following telegram:
“Sacramento. Cal., July 17, 1894. J. J. Brennan, Rocklin: Stand. Bo not allow anybody to report for work. Stronger here than over. We’re sure winners. Geo. Vice.”
The v/itness states:
“When this telegram was sent, it was only meant for the firemen. There were lots of firemen that did not belong to the A. R. U.”
Admits writing and sending this telegram:
“Sacramento, Cal., July 17, 1894. Geo. W. Lindsay, Wadsworth, Nev.: Still firm, and will stay to last Sure winners. Gaming recruits from scabs. Fillmore weakening. He interviews mediation board, and makes concessions. Geo. Vice.”
Also this one:
“Sacramento, Cal., July 18, 1894. II. F. Michaels, Tucson, Arte.: State situation. Tied up here tighter than ever. Use all means to do same there. We’re winners. Geo. Vice.”
Also this one:
“Sacramento, Cal., July 18, 1894. W. J. Featherson, Summit, Cal.: Quit immediately, and tie up everything. Gome to Sacramento. We’re sure winners. Answer. Geo. "Vice.”
Algo this one:
“Sacramento, Cal., July 21, 1894. F. P. Sargent, Terre Haute, Ind.: Eastern B. L. F. men taking our jobs. For God’s sake, save us. S. TP. will not re-employ us. Use all means to save us. Answer. Geo. Vice, Master 200.”
The witness states that he had no authority to send telegrams for the American • Railway Union; that he sent them by virtue of Ms being a master of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen. He admits, however, that he was also an officer of the American Kailway Onion, being its vice president.
H. B. Breckenfeld, called for the United States, testified that he was chief train dispatcher for the Sacramento Division of the Southern Pacific, at Sacramento; that he knew Terry Douglass; that he knew that Douglass was connected with the A. R U. during the recent strike, because Douglass appeared before Mr. Fillmore, or in his rooms, on one or two occasions, in connection with the strike; *726 that on one occasion Douglass came in an official capacity; that, when he did come in an official capacity, Douglass announced that they had decided to declare the strike off. This was in the latter part of July. Douglass’ position in the American Railway Union was a member of the mediation committee. Douglass was not. a member of the mediation committee right through the strike. The witness understood that they (Douglass and the two men who accompanied him on the occasion just referred to) took the place of the original mediation committee at Sacramento. On the occasion referred to they came into the rooms of Mr. Fillmore, and requested the stenographer who was present to prepare upon the typewriter a statement to that effect, which was read to them by the stenographer, and was signed by them. The witness was present when this was done. Witness knows the handwriting of Douglass. Identifies the signature of Douglass on the following telegrams:
“Sacto., July 14th, 1894. To F. P. Cox, Rocklin, Cal.: Men are determined. Situation good. T. H. Douglass.”
“Sacto., July 16, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Chicago, Ill.: A committee of fruit growers has waited on us. Are you any nearer a settlement? Ans. quick. T. H. Douglass.”
“Sacto., July 16, 1894. To S. Brennan, Rocklin, Cal.: Message from Debs. Situation everywhere good. Switchmen have all quit here. T. H. Douglass.” “Sacto., July 16, 1894. To R. A. Battenfield, Rocklin: Four trains tied up at Red Bluff. No crews to move. T. H. Douglass.”
“Sacto., July 16, 1894. To E. V. Debs, Chicago, Ill.: Scabs coming from East. With few exceptions, men solid here. T. H. Douglass.”
“Sacramento, C4.I., July 17, 1894. To R. A. Battenfield, Rocklin, Cal.: Situation better than yesterday. Prospects brighten every hour to A. R. U. T. H. Douglass.”
“Sacto., July 18th, 1894. To R. A. Battenfield, Rocklin: Did any train leave Rocklin this morning? T. H. Douglass.”
“Sacto., July 18th, 1894. To W. Balder, Truekee. Cal.: Received message from James Hogan. He states situation firm everywhere. T. H. Douglass.” “Sacto., July 18th, 1894. S. J. Brennan, Rocklin: Situation has not
changed. No work for shopmen. T. H. Douglass.”
“Sacto., July 18th, 1894. To E. E. Barton, Ogden, Utah: Committee waited on J. A. Fillmore. Nothing satisfactory. Men remain firm. T. H. Douglass.”
“Sacto., July 19, 1894.- To G. W. Dindsay, Wadsworth, Nev.: No change in situation here. Remain firm. T. H. Douglass.”
“Sacto., July 20, 1894. To James Hogan, Chicago, Ill.: True situation men wavering in many places. Give your views affairs. T. H. Douglass.” “Sacto., July 21st, 1894. To F. P. Cox, Rocklin, Cal.: Probably strike will be declared off at 2 p. m. T. H. Douglass.”
“Sacramento, Cal., July 21st, 1894. To W. Balder, Truekee, Cal.: Expect strike to be settled by 2 p. m. T. H. Douglass.”
“Sacramento, Cal., July 21st, 1894. To G. W. Lindsay, Wadsworth, Nev.: This lodge has declared strike off by unanimous vote. T. H. Douglass.” “Sacto., July 21, 1894. To S. J. Brennan, Rocklin, Cal.: This lodge has declared strike off. T. H. Douglass.”
“Sacramento, Cal., July 21, 1894. To W. Balder, Truekee, Cal.: Strike has been declared off Pacific, unconditional. T. H. Douglass.”
T. H. Douglass, called for the defendants, testified: That he was a brakeman last June and July, running between Sacramento and Truekee. That he belonged to the American Railway Union and Order of Railway Conductors. That he acted as chairman of the mediation committee, he thinks, from the 12th or 13th or 14th *727 of July. That the occasion of Ms so acting was because the original members on that committee were arrested. That John Hurley and (x. IT. Hale were on the committee with him. That he continued in that capacity until the strike was declared off. That lie does not remember tbe day when the strike was declared oil, but he thinks it was the 25tli day of July. He attended a meeting of the American Hallway Union on the 26th of June. There was a message read from, E. V. Dobs, declaring a boycott on Pullman cars. The union took action on the matter, and declared a boycott. Was in Truckee when the strike was ordered. First beard of it about 6:80 in the morning. “The train master asked the crew if they would go out on Ho. 20. They told Mm, ‘Yes.’ After he [the train master] left, seven or eight men came in, and told us there was a strike ordered, and we had not better go. Well, we did not go.” Douglass admits having received and sent a number of dispatches during the strike.
Beginning of the Strike at Oakland.
Thomas J. Boberts, a witness for tbe defendants, testified that he resided in West Oakland; that he had been employed for six years as a locomotive engineer for the Southern Pacific Company; that he was president of local union Ho. 310, of the American. Railway Union, which was organized in May, 1894; that the first he knew of any trouble was a communication he received from Mr. Worden, who was delegate to the convention in Chicago. He says:
“I received a letter from Mm stating that the Pullman boycott had been declared, to take effect in five days, unless the trouble between the Pullman Company and their employés was settled. On the same day a telegram was read in our meeting—that was Tuesday, .Tune 2Gth—from the president of our general union, saying, ‘Pullman boycott in effect to-clay noon, by order of convention.’ ”
He further says:
“It was the evening before we received the telegram, and, that being our regular meeting night, the secretary held the telegram until the meeting opened; and after the meeting had opened, and we got through with our preliminary work, the telegram was read, and the matter was discussed, and I think the telegram said the Pullman boycott was in effect that day at noon. Still we did not want to take any snap judgment on the company, and we decided not to put it into effect until 12 o’clock the following day, .Tune 27th. That would be Wednesday. A motion was put and carried to that effect, and our secretary was instructed to notify the Southern Pacific officials that after Wednesday, June 27th, at noon, we would not handle any Pullman cars, or do any Pullman work.”
Continuing, the witness testified:
“June 27th the boycott took effect, at noon. That afternoon we had some trouble in tbe passenger yard where I was employed. Some of the boys that were cleaning cars were instructed by some foreman that they were working under to clean some certain Pullman cars, and they refused to do so. They told him that they belonged to the American Railway Union, and that there was a boycott in effect, and that they could not clean the Pullman cars. He told them that if they did not want to do that there was nothing else for them to do, and that they could go home.”
The men were reinstated at bis request. They went on with their customary work. The strike was to take effect the morning of the 29th, at 12:30. It was for the reinstatement of the men who had *728 been discharged. By “strike,” he means that the men were all to withdraw from the service of the company, and refuse to work. In case the men were reinstated, they would be returned to work. By “the men,” he means the strikers. There was no resolution. That was the understanding,—his understanding. The secretary was instructed to notify all the uniqns on this system, or in this state; he is not sure which. All the action that was taken was that they advised the men to try and keep men from going to work and taking their places; to persuade those that were at work to quit. “Tie up” is a railroad phrase. It means to cease work. It is used by officials and train dispatchers. Perhaps a train at Port Costa may get orders, “Train No. 18 will tie up at Tracy.” That means that they will not go any further.
The witness was shown a number of telegrams, among others the following, which he admits having sent:
“West Oakland, Cala., June 28, 1894. To F. P. Sargent, Terre Haute: Firemen’s lodge kere indorsed Pullman boycott. Will not handle their cars. T. J. Roberts.”
“Oakland, Cal.,-June 30,1894. To W. H. Russell, Secretary B. R. T., Bakersfield, Cal.: What is situation? Define position of B. R. T. T. J. Roberts.”
“Oakland, Cal., June 30, 1894. To H. A. Knox, A. R. U., Sacramento, Cal.: No troops sent out from here. T. J. Roberts.”
“Oakland, Cal., June 29, 1894. To M. H. Reon, San José, Cal.: Firemen out here. Do not work. Come home. T. J. Roberts.”
“West Oakland, July 14, 1894. To F. P. Sargent, Terre Haute, Ind.: Authorized American Railway Union strike here. Shall B. L. F. men work during strike? T. J. Roberts.”
“Wesit Oakland, July 18, 1894. To F. B. Porter, Reno, Nev.: Solid here. Do not waver. Victory is ours. T. J. Roberts.”
He was in frequent correspondence with the officers of different lodges of the American Railway Union throughout the state, and in some instances with the American Railway Union headquarters at Chicago, during the strike. Does not know particularly that he sent them by virtue of his official position as president of the American Railway Union in Oakland. It was merely for information. The union sent a great many official notifications of the strike through- • out the state. He did not. The secretary sent them. The union ordered the secretary to notify the different local unions in the state of the strike here. They had no authority to send them in his name. They related to the strike. He got some messages from Knox, of Sacramento, and sent him some.
G-. D. Bishop, called for the defense, testifies that he was the secretary of the American Railway Union at Oakland. The secretary was instructed, the night of the boycott, to notify other unions in reference to the boycott.
Beginning of the Strike at Red Bluff, Truckee, and Dunsmuir.
John Kelly testified, as a witness on behalf of the government, that he went out on strike on June 28th or 29th; that he had been a fireman for the Southern Pacific Company; that he went out at Red Bluff; that he was a member of the American Railway Union; that that had to do with his going out on a strike.
J. P. Heaney, a witness called for the defendants, states that he *729 went to Red Bluff from Sacramento on June 23 th; that he lived at Sacramento, and belonged to the Sacramento lodge of the American Railway Union; that he had been braking for the Southern Pacific Company; that there was no American Railway Union organization at Red Bluff. He testifies as to being advised of the strike by a telegram from Mr. Knox; that he had asked Mr. Knox if there was a strike ordered, and the latter had replied, “Yes, there is a general strike ordered by Eugene Y. Beba.” The witness states that he was appointed chairman of a committee at Red Bluff. The committee were composed of railroad employes who had struck. Although the witness is very uncertain as to the purpose of the meetings, and the appointment of the committee of which he was chair man, he admits that at least one of its objects was in order that; there might be some authorized person to receive and send dispatches for the men out on strike at other points, and be a channel of communication between Mr. Knox and the men at Red Bluff. He. received quite a number of dispatches from Mr. Knox, and from other places. Although Heaney admits having received a great many telegrams, Ms recollection as to their contents is extremely vague. But one of these telegrams was introduced on the part of the prosecution. It is as follows: ,
“3:15 p. m., .Inly 3/94. Red Bluff, Cal. Received at Sacramento, Gal. .Tack Heaney: Trains swR-ched by official. Coaches detained by ttireo thousand people. H. A. Knox.”
One from Heaney reads as follows:
“Red Bluff. Gal., July 2, ’94. H. A. Knox, Sacramento, Gal.: Shall we let Adams, engineer that brought No. 15 in, go back with Mrs. Stanford’s special? He has no fireman. Heaney.”
The following is a telegram from Dunsmuir, purporting to be signed by M. O. Roberts:
“Dunsmuir, Gal., June 28th. 1894. H. A. Knox, S. P. Depot, Sacramento, Gal.: firs Portland boycotted Pullman? Answer. M. O. Roberts.”
Mr. Knox replied:
“Sacramento, Gal., .June 28, ’94. M. O. Roberts, Dunsmuir, Cal.; Don’t know. But if any, you hold. H. A. Knox.”
From Truekee comes the following' telegram:
“Truekee, Gal., July 4, 1894. H. A. Knox, Sac.: Do you. still want as? Train on mail line ready to go. O. B. McOlintoek.”
Mr. Knox replied:
"July 4; 1894. To O. B. McOlintoek, Truekee, Gal.: Gome without fail; coming from all points. H. A. Knox.”
The following telegram purports to have been sent by F. H. Aim us to Mr. Knox:
“Summit, Cal., June 30/4. Harry Knox, Chairman of A. R. IT. Committee. Sac.: Will I continue service on work train or not? Answer. F. H. Almus.”
Almus testified for the defendants, and stated that he was a member of the American Railway Union, Knox’s reply is as follows:
“.Tune 30, 1894. To F. Almus, Summit, Cal.: No. Stop at once. H. A. Knox.”
*730 The following telegrams are from Los Angeles, signed by W. H. GLune:
“Jane 27/4. Los Angeles, Cal. G. D. Bishop, Secretary A. R. TJ. 310, W. Oakland, Cala.: Stand firm. Will boycott at Los Angeles this p. m. W. H. Clune, Sect No. Eighty.”
“L. A. 7/2, 1894. To T. J. Roberts, Prest. A. R. U., Oakland, Cal.: Resolutions in press is fake. Out of one hundred engineers here, ninety-seven are with us till the end. Trainmen, firemen, carmen, shopmen, section and bridge men,—solid. W. H. Clune, Seety.”
Strike in San Francisco by A. R. U. Lodge 345.
It is admitted by the defense that the defendants John Mayne and John Cassidy were members of this lodge at the time of the strike. Rice and Clark, the two other defendants charged in the indictment, but who are not on trial, were also members of the same lodge. Charles Ault, called for the government, testified: That he was a member of the American Railway Union. That the number of his lodge was 345, San Francisco. It was the same lodge to which the defendants belonged. One Bradley was president, and another person, by the name of Elliott, was on the executive committee. This lodge went out on the strike, as a body, on June 29th,—the night of June 29th. It also appeared from the testimony of H. J. Bederman, a witness for defendants, that one J. E. Riordan was its secretary. McOlintock was also a member of this lodge. . The purpose which prompted the lodge to join the strike is stated by the testimony as follows: T. J. Roberts, president of the Oakland lodge, American Railway Union, testified that the union of which he was president authorized the secretary to send telegrams to different unions, as follows:
“American Railway Union tliree hundred ten declared strike. Takes effect twelve thirty a. m. to-day.”
A telegram to this effect was sent to the lodge in San Francisco:
“Oakland, Calif., June 29, 1894. J. E. Riordan, 118 Sixth St., Room 71, S. F.: American Railway Union, three hundred ten has declared strike. Takes effect twelve thirty a. m. to-day. T. J. Roberts, President”
Mr. Roberts, when examined, said that he had not personally authorized the sending of telegrams of such purport, and knew nothing about them. Some 21 others of a similar character were sent to different places.
Mr. Bishop, the secretary of the same organization, testified that these telegrams were sent out by direction of the union. They were authorized by the union. It will be noticed that the dispatch claimed by the government to have been sent to Riordan, of the San Francisco union, of which the defendants were members, is practically to the same effect. This witness acknowledged receiving the following telegram, purporting to come from J. E. Riordan:
“San Francisco, June 30, 1894. G. D. Bishop, Oakland: Committee out $n organization Narrow Gauge. Your assistance required. J. E. Riordan.”
He testified that he authorized the sending of the following telegram, to J. E. Riordan on June 30, 1894:
“Oakland, Cal., june SOtli, 1894. To J. E. Riordan, 118 6th St, S. F.: Will send men at once to confer with you. G. D. Bishop, Sec.”
*731 H. J. Bederman, a witness called for the defendants, and employed as a switchman by the Southern Pacific Company last spring, testifies, substantially, that he belonged to Lodge 345, Ban Francisco, of the American Railway Union; that the defendants belong to the same lodge; that the occasion of the strike by Ms union was on account of some of the members being discharged for not handling Pullman cars; that an executive and press committee was appointed; that the executive had charge of almost everything concerning the strike of the men; that most of the men belonging to Ms union worked on the Coast Division; that the committees were appointed on the evening of June 29th; that all the power regarding the strike was delegated to the executive committee, so that this committee had charge of the strike; did not seem inconsistent to Mm in striking on a division where there were no Pullman cars; not a question of sympathy; they were members of the union; they were supposed to do what was right by every member; if one was di-’oharged for a-cause he was not guilty of, they wquM try and protect him; the union protected them; Mr. Riordan was secretary of the union.
George Elliott testified, on being called as a witness for the defendants. that he was a foreman switchman in the passenger yards of the Bourhern Pacific Company, at I'ourth and Townsend streets; that he joined the American Railway Union (Lodge 345, San Francisco) on The night of the 29th of June, or the 30fh; that he became chairman of the executive committee; that this committee were to do everything that was to be done in connection with the strike; they had full power; the question of Pullman cars never, to Ms knowledge, came Tip; they struck for the reinstatement of employés that had been discharged. On cross-examination he states that he struck because of the discharged employes; he believes some were discharged in Los Angeles, and some in Sacramento; simpIj struck to see justice done. On redirect examination, he said that he first got some information about the strike from Mr. Bederman; that he believes that Bederman read a message to Mm; he doesn’t know whether it came from Oakland or Sacramento.
Edward F. Gerald, a witness called for the government, gave testimony tending to prove the handwriting of Mr. Riordan. He, states, respecting the following telegrams, that he “thinks they are all Mr. Riordan’s signatures”:
“San Francisco, 8/29, 3891. To Chas. IS. Bradley, Engineer S. P. Co., Pajaro: Strike ordered to-day noon. Lot trains come north. Notify San Joe<§ and along the line. J. E. Riordan.”
“Juno 29, 1894. F. Gillett, San Buis Obispo, S. P. Co. Caboose: Strike ordered immediately. Tie up everything. J. EL Riordan, Secretary A/315, A. IS. U.”
“.Tune 29, 1894. O. E. Bradley, Tres Pinos, S. P. Co.: Strike ordered immediately. Tie everything. J. K. Riordan, Secretary A. R. C.”
“June 29, 1894. A. E. Pratt, Pacific Grove, S. P. Co.: Strike ordered immediately. Tie up everything. J. 1-1 Riordan, Secretary 8 id, A. It. U.”
“.fane 29, 1894. E. B. Stanwood, Castroville Station, S. P. Co.: Strike ordered immediately. Tie up everything. J. 33. Riordan, Secretary :/£854, A, It. tí.”
“June 29, 1894. G. W. Gillett, Aptos, S. P. Co.: Strike ordered i3nmedi ately. Tie up everything. J. E. Riordan, Secretary ^¿348, A. R. IT.”
*732 “F. W. Clark, Pac. Grove: Greer O. K. - Keep • on good work. Tie up strong. J. E. Riordan.”
“San Francisco, 6-30, 1894. G. D. Bisfiop, Oakland Yard S. P. Co. Committee out on organizing Narrow Gauge. Your assistance required. J. E. Riordan.”
It is admitted on the part of the defendants that the following telegrams were signed by George Elliott, although, when the latter was cross-examined, he could not recollect as to whether he signed some of them, and denied that he signed others. The witness J. E. Dillon identified his handwriting.
“San Fran., 7/1, 1894. To R. Gillett, Aptos, Cal.: Not a wlieel turning between here and Chicago. It is our fight sure. Will keep you posted. George Elliott, Chairman.” ■
“7/2, 1894. To Ed Stanwood, Castroville Station: Everything is coming our way. Not a wheel moving between here and Chicago. Victory is certain. George Elliott, Chairman A. R. U.”
“7/2, 1894. To Ed Pratt, Pacific Grove: We are gaining strength rapidly. The fight is' ours. Everything is coming our way. George Elliott, Chairman A. R. U.”
“San Fran., 7/3, 1894. To R. W. Gillett, Aptos: No, sir. Allowing no trains to run we can help. Geo. Elliott, Chairman.”
“San Francisco, 7/3, 1894. To J. Morehead, Pacific Grove: No, sir. Out to win, and going to. Will advise when settled. George Elliott, Chairman.”
“7/3, 1894. To W. H. French, Aptos: You are all in to clear. Eugene V. Debs wires giving you full protection. Tie up everything at once. George Elliott, Chairman.”
“7/3, 1894. To J. M. Smith, Tres Pinos: Fight is ours, and win we must George Elliott, Chairman A. R. U.”
“7/3, 1894. To W. Johnson, San José, Care Eureka Hotel: Do not move. Committee will see you to-morrow morning. George Elliott.”
“7/3, 1894. To F. W. Gillett, San Luis Obispo: You are a brick. Debs wires that we will win. George Elliott”
I have now directed your attention to some of the testimony that tends to show the communications that passed between the various lodges of the American Railway Union and their members concerning the boycott and strike, and the concert of action that was had in pursuance of such communications. I have also called your attention to some of the statements of Knox and others as to the purpose of the boycott and strike, and the purpose they had in view in taking the action they did. To review all the testimony in the case bearing on this point would take too much time, and will not be necessary, in view of the argument of counsel for the defendants, who admits the concert of action claimed by the government, but denies that it involved a criminal purpose. With respect to these telegrams, and the testimony I have referred to in connection therewith, you will bear in mind that many'of them have been admitted in evidence with the consent of counsel for defendants ; the genuineness of others has been denied; and the testimony as to still others is, by reason of the contradictory nature of the testimony, involved in more or less uncertainty. As you are the sole judges of the credibility of the witnesses, and of all the evidence introduced in the case, whether it be oral or written or documentary, you will determine the genuineness of such of these telegrams as are in controversy, and this you will do from all the circumstances in the case. In passing upon the telegrams not admitted as genuine, you will be justified in resorting to all *733 those facts and circumstances in the case which will tend to establish their genuineness, or, on the other hand, serve to show their want of genuineness. For example, you may consider the occasions and occurrences to which the telegrams purport to relate; whether they would have been sent, but for such occurrences; the relation they bear to the events which you may deem the evidence establishes to your satisfaction, and beyond a reasonable doubt; their tenor and subject-matter; the fact that the sender or the recipient, as the case might he, was connected with the American Eailway Union. In fact, all those circumstances and incidents which may be rationally and naturally connected may be considered by you in passing upon their authenticity, and the probability of their having been sent and received by the parties whose names appear upon said messages. The importance and materiality of these telegrams as showing, or tending to show, that the conspiracy charged in the indictment did in fact exist, is for you to determine. There are two important facts, however, to which it is proper for the court to call vour attention, in vour consideration of this question, and these are that most, if not all, of these telegrams were sent, or purport to have been sent,—whether they were or not is, as I have stated, for you to determine,—by and to members of the American Eailway Union, and in the greater number of instances by those in authority in that organization, and who the testimony I have referred to, and other evidence adduced during the trial, tends to show were actively concerned in the strike, and took part in it with the avowed purpose of preventing the movement of all Pullman cars. Another significant circumstance, to which I call your attention, is that you are to consider whether these telegrams related to any of the facts charged in the indictment as constituting the conspiracy to commit the acts with which these defendants are accused, and whether they had any hearing or connection in any way with the acts charged in the indictment as means to effect the object of the conspiracy, and with reference to which—or some of which--acts the prosecution has introduced evidence showing, or tending to show, the conspiracy and overt acts, and the connection of these defendants with such conspiracy and acts. If you are satisfied from the evidence that these messages related to, formed a. part of, or had any bearing upon the object of the conspiracy, and the means to effectuate such object, charged in the indictment, and the overt acts alleged to have been committed in furtherance of such conspiracy, it is a circumstance which you may consider in determining the existence of such conspiracy. You will consider whether they establish, or tend to establish, the concert or purpose and action which constitute important elements in this case as to the existence of the conspiracy charged; particularly, where a number of telegrams of similar purport and tenor are sent to different places at or about the same time, and all proceeding, or purporting to proceed, from the same person or local lodge of the American Eailway Union. Thus, the telegrams sent by Knox, who, as testified to, was chairman of the mediation committee at Sacramento, *734 and whose jurisdiction as such extended over a good part of the Pacific coast,' or of Roberts, the president of the Oakland lodge or union, or of Bishop, its secretary, or of Douglass, Vice, Elliott, Riordan, and such others as the evidence ,shows, or tehds to show, sent telegrams of the same general character, these persons being officially connected with the American Railway Union,—whether these show, or tend to establish, a unity of design, a community of purpose, an express or tacit -understanding to do the acts charged in ¡the indictment.
It is claimed by the defendants that, while there may have been some concert of action on the part of the members of the American Railway Union with respect to the boycott and strike, the purpose of such concerted action was merely to advise members of that organization to quit work until the controversy between Pullman and his employés should be settled. As I have explained to you before, even this purpose would become a criminal conspiracy, if the concerted action were knowingly and willfully directed, by the parties to it, for the purpose of obstructing and retarding the passage of the mails of the United States, or in restraint of trade and commerce among the several states. The government claims, however, that the concerted action on the part of the American Railway Union had something more to it than merely advising its members to quit work. It is claimed that the language of the telegrams, to which reference has been made,' indicates that it was the purpose of the strikers to prevent the movement of railway trains belonging to the Southern Pacific Company, by actual and unlawful obstruction; and in this connection the question will arise in your minds, if these telegrams were intended merely to advise members of the American Railway Union to quit the service of the company, why did they not so state that purpose in plain language? It would have been an easy thing to have said, “We advise you to quit work.” Why, then, telegraph such instructions as these, —if these telegrams were sent: “Stop all Pullman sleepers.” “Tie up everything.” “Hold Hos. 4 and 2 sure.” “Tie up strong.” Eurthermore, if it were simply the purpose of the American Railway Union to advise its members to quit work, why did Mr. Knox use this language in his statement of the situation to the Citizens’ Protective Association of Sacramento on July 7th, last? “Mr. Knox then stated that he would allow the mail and express to be moved, but that no passenger or freight cars of any kind or description would he consent to have moved until such time as the demand he made had been complied with.” Why did Mr. Mullen, on the same occasion, say “that this was a fight between capital and labor, and that from the chief justice of the United States, down through all the branches—judicial and legislative departments—of the government, they were corrupt, and that labor could not get its just dues, and that his association had taken this way of forcing justice to assist their fellow men in obtaining for honest labor a proper compensation”? And why did Mr. Compton, at the same time, say “that the A. R. U. organization would not resort to any desperate means, so long as the railroad company would deal *735 with them without usi

[Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.]

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8852482. Public record. Not legal advice.