Martinsburg independent. [volume] (Martinsburg, W. Va.) 1875-1900, 1888-02-04

CHA4tMAN Lhh PioyeS VI Ills CoupaHy
at Port Richmond in charge of the switch
engines refused to transfer the elevator COM
pany's goods consigned to them, and for re-
fusing were discharged
s.Now, we ask Mr.. Corbin: Was he not
aware that the general superintendent, Mr..
Sweigard, had entered into an agreement
that none of the employees of the company
should be discharged without a fair and inn
partial hearingl 1 will refer Mr.. Corbin to
Article IL of the agreement signed by Mr..
Sweigard. When the committee waited upon
Mr.. Sweigard he refused to comply with the
articles Of agreement, and he further refused
TO hold any conference with the committee,
The police and Pinl1erton men were sent to
Port Richmond, and were ON the company's
property, intimidsting the employees, before
any strike had taken place. This fact alone,
Mr.. Corbin justihes the people in saying that
this strike was promeditated by the officials
of the Reading Railroad company. Bear in
mind, Mr.. Corbin, your subordinates dis
charged the men at Elizabethport without
acknowledging the agreement between the
company and its employees.
eve now would like to call the attention
of Mr.. Corbin to the fact that the company,
on its representative, Mr. Sweigard, has
made objections to labor organizations, and
stated that they would wipe out the Knights
of Labor Finally, on Saturday, the 4th
day of December, the general manager is
sued an order that the names of such en-
ployes as did not report for duty on the
morning of Tuesday, the 27th day of Decem-
ber would be stricken off the rolls, and their
places filed by new men. That was done
"Right here, Mr. Corbin, we place our
side of the case before the people, and say
that was not done. When our committee
visited Mr.. Sweigard on Monday, December
the Goth, the committee agreed with Mr..
Sweigard to make an unconditional sur
render to him for the discharge of the five
crews together with Bernard Sharkey and
Ambrose Hede, and then agreed to obey the
order issued by General Manager Mcleod,
that the men who did not report for duty
would be discharged.
snow right here, Mr.. Corbin, we would
like to ask you did the company carry out
the orders issued by the general manager
when the subordinates under the general
manager discharged all the prominent men
along the entire line of the road who COM
piled with order of Saturday, December "A,
and did go into effect Tuesday, December 81?
Who is at fault in this difficulty-the men
who obeyed the order of the general man
ager or the officials who disrespected Mr..
Mcleod and his order Of Saturday, Deem
Der 242
"Mr Corbin says: NO man shall be ostra-
cized on the road because he belongs to a
labor organization All that is expected
from our employees is to render faithful SER
vice and obey the management
eff Mr.. Corbin means what he says, and
viii act accordingly, there is no good reason
why he will not hear our side of the case,
and when he gets the mems side of this case,
he cannot say they refused to obey the order
of the general manager, and if his officers
have lost their heads and caused the strike,
why not shoulder the responsibility whore it
belongs, and start your mines and railroads,
and do not let the public suffer any loss and
inconvenience on account of the action of
few stubborn officials over whom you have
absolute control The trouble was caused by
them, and it is the opinion Of the general
public that it is your duty to end the
trouble. JOHN l.. LEE,
Of Exaoutiva ('op1rnittaa