The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1890-11-27

empiGyes Was read and accepted ~ a
mestlng Of the Democrats in Tie Y M' ",
q. room last evening. The report signed
as IA M. by five OF Maaalllon'h most pror'l'
nent and highly respected elu4thh, can
leave no doubt In the mind ot anyone
thai Russell 4 Co, we're guilty OF dlhehhrR'
inc men, for the sole reason lhhllheS WeIv
Democrats. The action Of the meeting W
condemning the boycott IL 70 pc eo'h'
mended. The report ID given ~ lull'
TIM OoMSurTEE's REroRf'
MAasILLoN, o., Nov, 20, 1870,
Mn, PRESIDENT, AND CiTiHthh our
committee appointed about Two weeks
ago, 10 Inquire into the causes OF tue Hia'
charge OF d number OF workmen hi lhe
ahopa OF Russell 4 Coz on NE ALLEGED
ground Of their having voted ihe perlo,
cratic ticket, hubmlt the following Itpor,
The committee met hnn vG'i vlvGe'eu ~, ~,
HoWells chairman, aud X, w, heChuHhty
secretary. We then requested the men 20
diseharped 10 meet the committee, anu
make tielr atatemonta aa 20 tho reasons
| III their discharge. We also called upon
Russell 4 Co, and had "A conference WIN
| the presldent, Secretary and Tfehhurer'
| Seyenteen OF the discharged men appear
| ed b, fore tho committee, ana thelr hlhlo'
menta were taken down verbatim, anu
are attached 10 this report, No yorbaVn
report of the conference with ltuhaell ~
| %, was made, but the report OF ahiu CON
ference publlshed Ia the Daily lndepend'
ent of Nov. II, 1880, ID aubhhnvhlly cor
rect, and N here attached Az llhis confer,
| onoe Proaidont MoLymonds denied 'ha'
the discharges
WE'RE ron POLITICAL REAsoNh'
and refused TO reinalate the discharged
men. but agreed 20 take up each indiNidu'
All cnse, and II the facts Justified, 70 rem
gtate them and report the results OF hll
| Investigation on Monday NOV, ~ lovy
| This report IN also hereto attached, ~
will be plainly seen that there . wlue
| difference In the statement OF we chuaot
| Of discharge ~ given by inc COMPANY
and the discharged mon upon we uo'or'
| mlnatiOn OF whieh the uuNoH VI '"'p YUM
mlttoe depend usc. L. n,.,
tic discharges were made because
ruE MEN DISCHARGED WE'RE oFrfHsiyi
TO them and were interfering with tht
discipline Of the shop, and hence we SUP
stance OF their last answer NJ, th9t w,
| whole matter IN none OF our buniucss
| ifthis N true that these discharges hat
no political significance then we rendil,
| eoncodc that the whole matter " ono be-
Longing 10 the firm, and In which We ~
| citigons have no right 10 mcddlci but " OF
| tho other hand, and any or oil OF thea'
mon were discharged for political reatoni
| tbon L becomes the business OF every ciu
zen, for II h
AN ATTACK uroN THE FREEpoM,
tho liberty and tho manhood Of eycry
member Of the community, Having thui
ma we hope, clearly established the onll
| bneig upon which the committee assumed
ia act. wo proceed TO the discussion OF the
solo question, as we look at II, that 10 N
laane' via, Were the discharges made FOL
| politicnl renaonsY In the discussion o
this question We deem tho following fact
First~That prior to tho election OF Nov
the ith, 1890, Russell * Co., employed DO
tween six aud seven hundred mon'
Sccond-presldcn MoClymonds IN hii
report Of Nov. 18th, states that OF u os'
employed since the discharge, two hun
drod are Democrats, we cohsluor tnia q
low estimate and therefore say that before
said election, two hundred anu ility wer'
Democrats. and the balance Republicans
| Third-Up 20 the dth day OF Now, The
dny of the election, no complaint wai
made or fault found with the work OF ans
of said workingmen, nor were they or any
| of them charged nt any time with inter
ferlnu with the discipline OF tho shop.
Bourth-On tho day or two following the
election a number OF tho employees OF
said Russell a CO., were
NOTIFIED OF A REDUCTION
OF 83N per cent In their wageA, and In onC
case 30 per cent
FIfthIThe exact number OF reductions
| Ia not possible for the committee to state
Mr.. McClymonds, In answer TO n question
| Of one OF the committee placed the mum
her nt twenty three. The committee have
| The names OF twenty.four, who actually
uuit work, 10 that we place the number
after taking into consideration seven NOR
who accented the reduction and remained
al work, affected by the order at between
thirty and forty.
Slxth-Whilo the order was upon Ia
face reduction Of wages, II is admitted
by the Company that II was
INTENDED As A REQUEST 10 QUIT.
Seyonth-Of the men affected by thii
order, all arc Democrats. No Republi
cans were discharged.
Elphth-Since the meeting OF your com
mltteo with President McCymonds, he re-
ports the reinstatement OF about one-hali
OF tho discharged men, The exact mum
ber we have no means OF knowing Mat
ters In dispute are discussed as occasion
brings them up. Applying the undisputet
facts and carefully weighing tho disputed
ones, we reach the following conclusions
The claim OF tho Company is: First
"That the claim that these men were dis
charged for political reasons, is unfound
ed.n
Second-"ThatR Russell q Co. have never
directly or otherwise, attempted 10 intlm
| idato their men I'm the use OF the fran
chise. We propose that our men shal
have the same right we demand our
Belves.n
Third--"That the men were offered re
duced wages, not because they voted fo
Mr.. Warwick at oil, but simply and solel!
because they permitted their feelings Il
get the better OF their discretion, becom
ing 30 offensive in manner as to be ser
iously detrimental to the shop discipline.
The first statement OF Russell d Co. is
that tbe claim that these men were dis
charged for political reasons In untound
ed, This statement coming from on'
holding the position In this community
occupIed by the president Of the Compan.
would ordinarily go unchnllenged, but Tn
statement, that My statement as TO TN
cause OF this action
is THE ONE YOU MUST TAKE"
is proposition so preposterous that VI
can never concede II for moment. Their
is no man IN America so exalted that hi
statements may not he called In question
by the humblest citizen, or bis actions ol
questions affecting the public, be tried q
the bar OF public opinion. And. we nov
assert that this claim, that the claim tina
the Companys action was not political !
unsupported by, and is is direct conflc
with every other fact ana circumstance
in the proof OF tho assertion, we invit
your careful consideration.
First. II Ia admitted that out OF betweel
ak and seven hundred employed we nd
init the number twenty-three as stated b
Mr.. McClymonds, or between thirty o
forty as found by this committee 70 be th
correct number, every man discharges