Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1886-04-25
From the Trish World,
TO THE PUBLIC.

In view of the fact that the assertion is
made dag after day by railroad officials
and their apologists and defenders that
the employees of the Missouri Pacific rail-
road nad no cause for striking, no grieY-
ances against the company whatever,
that they struck to PUNISH the Texas and
Pacific railroad. it is necessary that the
particulars be laid before the world IN
order TO set at rest once and forever the
silly charges which ignorance or malice
now publicly and repeatedly proclaim.
Gov Martin, OF Kansas, and Gov. Mar.
maduke, of Missouri, in a letter to Mr..
HOXie, of recent date, says: after
careful investigation we are unable to
lind wherein the Missouri Pacific Rail-
road Company has violated the terms and
conditions of the agreement made March
10, 1885, touching its employees in our re-
spectiVe States" Where have these
Governors found the evidence upon which
they base their emphatic statement?
From whom did they receive it? 1t
certainly must nave been from
the railway officials. Then from
this one-sided testimony they make
a public declaration that
latter careful investigation" they
cannot find wherein the railroad company
has violated that contract. WHAT was the
contract OF March, 1885? Its chief pro-
visions were, first, that the wages of sep
TENDER, 1884, were to be the basis, with
/ = time tor sundays; and overtime over
10 hours; second. no mans wages were
to be reduced without 80 DAYS notice
That contract was t. be Ob'ervcd on all
the roads under the Missouri Pacific man.
agement. but leaving the Texas and Pa
cidc railway entirely out OF the present
consideration, that contract has been bro
ken, violated, and ignored time after time,
tO-wt:
First. In many cases the Septem her
wages never were restored, as the agree
ment provided.
Second. Section foremen were reduced
S. per month without any notice.
Third. BOilermakers were sent out on
the road from DenisOn and allowed only
one-half time while travelling.
Fourth. Engine wipers in fOundhouses
w re reduced from.$1 % 20 81 10 per day.
Fifth. the car tor, man at Fort Worth
was reduced $40 per month, and then had
to do the work of two men, for which the
company mad previously paid double the
money they paid him.
Sixth. The foreman in the mill at De
Soto, Mo-, was reduced $40 per month
with VI notice.
seventh. Carmen. at Parsons, reduced
about $40 per month, and no notice given.
Eighth. Many men worked over the en-
tire system / and II hours per day for
81 - without anything for overtime. and
on Sunday the same long hours for the
same sum. 81 10, without overtime.
Ninth. Check clerks in freight houses
reduced 50 per month without notice.
Tenth. rhe men were q scharged on no
other grounds than because they had
taken part in the strike OF 1885, and new
men were employed, at less wages. to
take their places. A systematic method
OF discharglng in detail and replacing
with cheaper men was being carried out,
which, II allowed to 10 on, would have
resulted IN bringing the men back to the
reduction basis against which they struck
IN 1885.
Were these no violations Of contract?
II not, In the name Of heaven what did
toe contract meaui Other forms and
other instances OF its violations might be
cited, but IT would be useless.