Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1886-05-18

are only development In one d.. ection
| In your philosophy. They do not cover
ali OF your philosophy for tie benefit Of
the w0rldy A, Well, believe Ia the
organization that It's declaration Of prin-
ciples are founded on the. philosophy Of
elevatipg the human race.
q. You heard vie evidence here as 70
the running OF n train of the track and
killing an es,gineerS A. Yes, sir
q. DO you believe in proceedings
which lead 10 such results Ia order 70
elevate the rest Of the race? A. No, sir;
the Knights OF Labor do not indorse such
acts as that.
q. What would be your treatment OF
men like Vanderbilt and Jay Gould and
that class OF men7 A. AS individuals,
have nothing against those men.
Y. Yes, but you have scheme oil
philosophy that covers the worldY a.
Well, we might do this We might put
n graduated income tax on those large in
comes and prevent the great accumulation
OF fortunes, for / consider II 6 fact that
where q country makes millionaires 1t
also makes tramps.
q. You would not join in the cry to
kill, thenl A. No, sir; | would be the
last man to do that.
q. Then the killing OF the fireman and
engineer and the other persons that have
been mentioned you condemn a. con-
slider II Il henous crime.
q. Tell me how the farmers in this
vicinity were affected by the strike. A..
l do not know that the farmers were
affected by IL. | heard very little COM
plant. 1 was at several points during
the strike Galveston, Sherman, Sealy.
heard very little about It. They seemed
generally TO sympathize with the strikers.
| q. They were put TO considerable in
convenience A. Not much.
q Were the crops mainly In before
the strike began? A. No sir; not in
this part; they were in Southern Texas.
q. Were they not then troubled in
getting seed and other freights Of that
kind? A. do not know that | have
heard of q single instance.
z. DO you know OF any instance where
they were embarrassed in Shipping prop
erty away A. No, sir.
q. But the sympathy with the strikers
you speak of, that was largely sentiment
al, was III A. Yes sir; their sentiments
were with the strikers / do not mean
by the farmers; all men; simply as
general rule, from the persons heard
z Do you say you are opposed to all
strikesH A. NY remark was ! was OPP
posed to strikes on general principles;
that is, will say this. | believe that
strikes, so far as ultimate good is con-
cefned, are evils sometimes they are
NECESSARY believe the strike in 1885 |
was really necessary, but strikes, so far
as permanently bene1ting the working
men, believe they are failures, because |
they are almost sure to be fought over
again.
q. What is the benefit, II any, Of this
striker A. do not know of any benefit
that has ensued now.
q, You know, do you not, that the |
tradesmen, the dealers, the merchants, |
the freighters and the railroads have |
been largely injured by this strike? A. |
Yes sir, they have been injured to some
extent.
q. Now, do you not hold as d princi- |
pie, that the fund out OF which wages are
paid Is made up largely of the freight
money paid for the carrying? A. Yes, sir, |
| am satisfied OF that.
q. Now, will you tell me why a party
OF men employed by the railroad and
paid ont OF this wage fund made up by
the freighters should strike aud throw
the business OF all these people into con-
fusion without any notice to them or CON
sultatlon with them? A. Well, they take |
1t to be matter of last resort.
q. Wen, sir, ought there not to be a |
notice Of some period To all psi'ties before
a strike should be inauguratedt A. am
sure that would be better.
q. What are your ideas upon arbitra-
tionY a. Well, think that with corpora
lions In their present conditions 1t would
end in failure.
q. You think that as they are now adj
lusted to each other, the employees and
employers, that they are able to arbitrate?
A. Ihey can arbltrate and keep contracts
that have been founded in arbitration.
z Is there any method OF cancellation,
then, that would be effective? A, Not
under the existing institutions of the
country. ! believe not.
.. You have the general belief that all
these things are really out of Joint? A. /
might say to great extent, yes, sir.
z. And they might be better if proper-
ly managedy A. 1t seems, sir, the indus
trial system Of the country is wrong.
z. Hou too me you were a Knight of
Labor! A. Yes, sir.
q. What Is your official position? A
am master workman of District rs, state
of Texas.
Q, Who is your predecessor? A. E.
IL. Golden.
By Mr.. OuthWalte:
@. wish to ask you whether in your
opinion that whlch is termed the HAYES
agreement is dehuite and distinct enough
for there to be no question OF difference
between employers aud employees as To
It's meaningY In other WORDS, was that |
agreement so clear aud distinct that there
should be no trouble in constituting M
A, Well, sir, do not know about that.
don't know that have examined it. {
q. Is 1t not possible that there is room {
Tor the two opposite constructions which {
seem to have been given IL? A. You
mean the Hayes agreement In 1852 s
q. Yes sir. A? Yes sir, | have M '
dea but what both parties understood
nat agreement very well, as long as
Know what you speak Of. 5
e. DO you think that both understood
In the same way at the outset? A. c
TO not suppose there was much disagree. e
nent about 1t; in fact, nothing of that
haracter grew out of it, II ANYTHING o
rev out Of II of that character, / have q
10 knowledge of It. so far as NV under q
IN nd linz ~ . H..