The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1900-05-10
MASS MEETING OF STRIKERS.
Some Demands Of the Men TX
p!alnrd by Speakers.

i 'it~S me ling WAS h,.ri - ;h- W..t
: r-nI coliseum lasj night in order that the
! members of the union could present their
cas-" 10 fhc pJllir and exu!ain clauses ~
N" proposed agreement which. they state
have h.iu r9I-r. Hstrir.ti
About ''N" people Were iI.s.u; whom Ito
! i"e"jlHG VAS called to order ny Dave Krey-
hHg. Ir,Si-'Et Df tho central Trades and
i-hhoE ni"r. who acted a chairman TIE
crowd probably would have been larger If
N" H""rN"eI'" "a'i not turned many away
!'Fc'sus" h" Thought that the meeting WAS
intended f"r ~tr.o; railway men only.
H"f'r" Introducing ". q. Nahon. pre.i-
Hrht oi the AlnalSanat"d Association %
Sti"et Railway Employees of America NJ
( kfeyiiES said That Il number Of Other spc,k-
frS had been expected. hut haI not Ir-
rived.
MT. MIh"n said that President Edwards
W N.Ita.i"r 4 Til" transit company must have.
misunderstood the demands OF the uni H. or
that he had drawn on his iInaginatinn H.,
tAcH went ON 10 explain what the demands
al ;he union We're. Before inIng - he read
parts Of Mr.. Whitaker's recommendation
TO the Board Il Directors of IN. ST Louis
Transit Company
The union does not want TO dict..t. to the
company or say whom thcy shall or shall
not employ The company may hir. any
one that suits them. All the union demands
Is that these men become members nf the
union They max" his demand as q pratec-
tion t" themselves"
After explaining a few more minor
clauses of the pr posed agreement Nj Ma
h"n said that the company had not lived
up TO its agreement of March 10
At that time" said lie. they agreed to
pay IN" 'nsn on waiting orders half pay
Tor the time they remained at the Sheds
nut up to the time Of he strike non. Of
thes" men had received cent fur that
time, tn" company also agreed t. refrain
from making a hight on the union m.n
Union men have been discharged for
trumped-up charges. which were proven
false when investigated. When appealed 70
the company said that it was running its
business ami would discharge any man
they pleased. This was not according 20
their agreement" He then cited several In
stances to show that SOM. f the men had
ben discharged for no apparent infrartion
"f IN" rules OF the comnany. one of them
was about the InotCrman who stopped his
car nj Naudevcrtrr and Finney avenue To
punish q negro for abusing n little girl. \
passenger " no witnessed the incident wrote
To Mr.. Raumh"ff. praIsIng the motorman
for his action. and his letter was read lt
tine meeting. Mr.. MahOn cited other cases
to show he said. that the union men on
the system were being Disseminated
against.
When Mr.. Mahon finished his speech VI
u i-rtiN presented a RESOLUTION 10 Mack
Aissik secretary cf the Transit COMPANY
Employees Union. The resolution was read
and unanimously adopted by the assembly
II is as follows:
Whereas. The st Louis Transit Com
rary has falsely stated the differences
which exist hctween it and its emnloyes
and has shown by its actions in refusing
to arbitrate these differences thl; j. is
opposed to Justice ard fairness. and.
Whereas. II is seeking - conceal the
zeal question 1T issue w. the life "- death
~ tn" union. and "udeavnring ir suhstiiTt"
counterfeit; Jud foreign matters. therefore,
l-r Il
Resolved. hy Tho peace-lnving and Law
aiicinc citiz"Is "f ST Louis. in mass meet
ing assembled. Thai condemn the g.;
Louis Transit Company as being unworthy
"f cur moral and financial support and that
v" manifest our disapproval of its action IN
the present serious strike by extending 10
its employees our sympathy and aid and
encourage IN. N TO insist on faying Justice
rendered them by tho transit company"