The Milan exchange. (Milan, Gibson County, Tenn.) 1874-1978, 1886-05-01

lucu, Sulu NIL OuhlNui.Nt -
didn't intend to settle any differences be-
tween the Knights of Labor who were
out of your employ"
eyes" SAID Mr.. Gould, fthat was the
understanding"
Mr.. Burnes then Intercepted Mr.
Gould about his connection with the Mis-
souri, Pacific, the extent Of It's lines and
the history of its construction, but he
knew nothing about the history OF its
construction, not having any interest In
it until 1879
Mr.. Burnes then asked witness about
the effect Of pooling on the public inter-
est.
Mr.. Gould thought it beneficial to the
railroads aud to the people who lived
along the lines of the road.
"Then, in theory" said Mr.. Burnes,
competition between two competing
roads, say the Fort Wayne and Lake Shore
roads to Chicago, is not beneficial"
To this Mr.. Gould replied:
81 am not running those roads; better
ask those familiar with them"
Mr.. Burnes continued his inquiries
about local and through competition, and
charges for long and short hauls, but Mr..
Gould did not volunteer his views on
these questions, saying they did not come
within his province, and that he did not
know much about such details.
Mr.. Burnes considered this question
involving general principles of the rail-
road problem, and ceased questioning the
witness further about it.
Chairman Curtin said he regretted that
the resolutions under which the commit
N,.a ,I~t, IL In
quirY into railroad building and watering
of stock generally, but intimated that the
committee would get to the bottom of the
railroad problem.
Mr.. Gould said then perhaps he would
wait until the committee made its formal
report before making any more invest
ments.
Mr.. Martin remarked; "0h, [ guess
not; you may take little shy at Wall
street."
This brought out laugh all around,
and it became uproarious when the Gov.
ernor added: "And if you do, Mr.. Gould,
l would like to be your partner"
In reply to question, Mr.. Gould
stated that at no time during his confer
ences with Messrs. Powderly and Nc
Dowell did he think of taking the matter
of arbitration out of the hands of Mr..
Hoxie.
Mr.. A. L. Hopkins, of New York, sec
ond vice-president of the Missouri
Pacific, next testified. He stated
at the outset that he knew very
little about the strike which Mr.. Gould
had not stated, as his sources of in
formation were the same as those of Mr..
Gould. He believed that the strike
would have been avoided il Mr.. Powderly
had called the attention of Messrs. Gould
and HOxie to the differences before the
strike begun.
Referring to the arbitration bill before
Congress, Mr.. Hopkins said it would be
of no effect if it did not prohibit
strikes. He thought strike that in
terfered with men who wanted to work
should be made criminal OffenSei that
a case where Il man quit work and an
other was not allowed to take his place
should be made a crime. The plan of ar
bitration should be fixed by law and en-
ployes should be compelled to submit to
it or remain peaceful if unsatisfactory.
Mr.. Hopkins knew of many instances
where labor organizations were for the
good of all concerned. Mr.. Hopkins did
not think Mr.. Powdcrly was responsible
for the strike; he was too sensible a
man.
To question by Mr.. Cultivate, Mr..
Hopkins said that he was approached by
man in Wall street and informed that
the strike was enacted by bears on the
stock market. That the spectators who
were short on railroads had got the men
in the Southwest to keep up the strike.
This was short time after the strike be.
gan.
Mr.. Hopkins was present at the con-
ference between Mcssrs. Gould, Powder
" and Mcdowell. He did not under.
stand that Mr.. Gould'S consent to arbi.
trate was a decision Independent of Mr..
, HoXie. The arbitration, if it took place,
was not to be between the company and
the Knights of Labor, but between the
company and the men employed in
| dividually.
2 "Right there" said he, ''is where the
. trouble came in. We refused to recog
, nize the knights of Labor as an organiza
S ton. The strike had been going on three
l.. weeks. 1t was much like catching a mar
? who had robbed your house and prOpos
t ing to arbitrate as to who should have
Il | VIC SOOuos 1uCoC llltu lldOl Dttll DuIulllS
S our cars, blockading traffic and destroy
C ing our property"
Mr.. Hopkins would not say, however
i that the damage done to property wa
r done by Knights of Labor He describe,
: the inconvenience the people we're sub
s iected to by the strike, showing tina
n many workmen in all kinds of bushes
n were thrown out. Mr.. Hopkins state,
y that he had heard that certain gentlemen
Y prominently connected with the Knight
1t of Labor were about the brokers offices Il
J. New York, and they were on the short sid
o of the stock. Being pressed for the name
r of men, Mr.. Hopkins refused to Civ
ID them, but said he would communicat
le the name of his informant to the commits
lie son. 81 think, however," said he, "tha
i before you get through with this invest
ID CATION you will get plenty of evidence o
or tits point"
D. Adjourned until eleven O'Clock to-moi
row.
e. Costly Blaze.