The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-12-17

Where did you get your information?,'
Kelly said, II get it from the one we all
get it FROM
Ketchams testimony as to these inter-
views was corroborated by one of the con-
ductors who was with him, and denied for
the most part by the railroad officials.
Michael Driscoll, railroad man of TWEEN
ty-seven years experience, testified that
when he went out with the strikers ne was
working for the Pittsburg q Fort Wayne
Railroad. After the strike he obtained work
under Superintendent Warner, of the chi
cago & Western Indiana Railroad. rev
weeks later he was discharged and ne Went
to Mr.. Warner and asked him,
How is it that you have al
lowed to work until | have AZ re as,d-
lar job and then discharged me-? Warner
replied that it was not he who was keeping
Driscon out of job that hat the Fort W oaIsre
yourself win the Fort Wayne" he said
''itwin be all right When Driscoll went
to his friend 1eltz, of the Fort Wayne road
Beltz said: Mike, if l should give you a
letter it would be the price of my own
head. / cannot do 1t" -
There was much other evidence of similar
import, showing a thorough understanding
among the railroads that man could not
get employment with railroad company
unless he brought the hecessary fiearanee
Attorney Strong also introduced as evil
dence blacklist of 524 names, issued by
the Illinois Central Railroad Company. II
bore the following heading:
illinois Central Railroad Company.
Chicago Terminals Division, Chicago
Aug. %. 1884.
Form 1894
department have been discharged or nave
left the services under circumstances rem
dering it undesirable to be employed by this
company, and should they apply to you, you
sholl refuse them employment without hrst
conforming to Article CSC"
Article 636 saws that men discharged shall
not be employed without first having the
consent of the head of the department I'M
der which they were last employed,
Norman Ford, clerk in the Illinois Cen
trail office. testified to having made nifty
copies of this list on the mlmeogrdph, and
that he mailed copies to every railroad hav-
ing offices in Chicago
The railroad officials, with one exception,
denied any knowledge of the list Superin-
tendent Atwater, of the Grand Trunk Rail
road testified that he never had seen the
list until this morning, when | saw it IN
your office referring to the office OF Mr..
Harahan, of the Illinois Central Railroad.
One of the clearest pieces OF evidence IN
the trial was that of Andrew Staeder. lie
testified that he had n leave of absence
when the strike broke out, and that he was
working for the Northwestern Railroad lie
was not a member of the American Railway
Union nor of any other organization. He
went back to work On July TO- during the
strike ana was ataeTwdrds "a arg i1s
for clearance. Mr.. Heath gave him TINS
letter: 90 ,oo-
ITO Whom 1t May Concern
This is to certify that the bearer An
drew Staeder. has worked for the Chicago
July 1890, as a locomotive fireman. Mr..
Staeder had been laid off on account of de-
preston in busine IS, causing reduction In
force. He has permission to work else
where. providing that he can obtain a po-
sition that is satisfactory to himself, but
in the event of his not getting work else
where he can return to us for service when
we have work for him.
ANY favors shown Mr.. Staeder will be
appreciated. Yours truly.
JOHN HEATH.
Master Mechanic
1t was proved on the stand that when the
Northwestern Railroad became aware that
Staeder was to testify it endeavored to get
him out of the way by Offering him a pass
and thirty days leave Of absence with full
pay Later he was discharged outright by
the company.
The defense put on eighty-seven witnesses
to prove that there was no such thing as q
blacklist. Thirty-one of these had secured
their positions since the beginning of hetch-
ans suit.
The position of the railroad officials who
testified in the was that of general
denial or cf profesHed Ignorance as to the
meaning of the documents submitted