The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1902-07-08

Wen Dy the employees ms any other ROAD
ton employees as he had agreed To do nv
lnose at AlRiers. The committee went
to Algiers and obtained from those
employees a copy Of Mr.. Ryan's agreement
IN which he gave all employees receiving
$3.50 per day and less 10 per cent raise
IN pay and nlne-hour day when. in the
opinion of the company. IL was admissible
om the committees return they again
chlled on Mr.. Ryan and discussed the petit
ton, at which meeting the committee sub
siltuted 10 per cent increase In lieu
OF the nine,hour proposition, which was
fetelred to the management, and the coun-
yer proposal of l cent an hour Increase to
an employees receiving 500 and less per
Jay, ana those receiving 1928 were to re
celve y cent more per hour. raising them
TO $3.50 per day.
A similar petition having been presented
by the coach, cal painters, car repairing
ana inspecting departments and having re.
celNed a like proposal Of l cent raise
the matter reached n common state OF ar.
1aifs. A mass melting was called of all
employees affected by said petition, NJ
which meeting the offer of the 1 cent raise
by the company was declined and the com.
mttee instructed TO demand the 10 per
cent crease. A consultation was held
with Mr. Ryan at which he said he could
not oner any more, whereupon the commit
tee asked for a conference with Mr.. W G.
Van Week, manager. and after very
pleasant conference we were again toid
that the l cent proposition was all that
the company felt called upon to offer, as,
In Its Judgment. that increase would put
II on parity with other roads in the
State and in some instances slightly ahead
OF them. The committee then asked Mr..
Van Week 20 arrange for meeting Win
Mr.. kruttschnitt, assistant to the presl-
dent, for the committee. Replying he sug-
gestcd thar Mr., Kruttschnitt might desire
to delegate authority to someone In llous-
ten and intimated that Vice President
Markham would in all probability be the
proper party which was agreed 10. The
committee retired and waited a very
reasonable time for an answer and n mem
her was delegated to call upon Mr. Ma~i
ham to ascertain If there was any news
from MIR. kruttschnitt and he 1.-THE com
mittCcman) was asked to call tho next
morning nt 10 o'clock. at which time he
was advised that Mr. kruttSchnitt had
hosen Mr.. Markham in his stead to meet
the committee but Markham stated that
II would not be convenient for him to
meet the committee for two or three weeks
on account of an inspection tour of the
road by the officials, which they claimed
was at that time several weeks delayed.
/, The committee accepted the situation, hut
IT was quite unsatisfactory to the employees
and which made II quite disagreeabe for
the members of the committee. Two
weeks elapsed and the daily papers an
nounced the return of Mi Markham and
party on Saturday night On Monday
delegate waited on Mr. Markham and was
! told by his chief clerk that he was slightly
| indisposed hut thought he would he MP 10
his office the next morning aud that nc
would deliver to Mr.. Markham or re-
quest for him TO arrange as early a anect-
ing as possible for tho committee and he
promised he would notify the committee
delegates the next day, which hr neglected
TO do. and the following day, Wednesday
evening. the office was communicated with
/ ny phone and the committee was Informed
that Mr.. Markham was not nj his otnce
| hut was confident that he would he on
hand the next morning. The delegate
cHilcd next NOR Thursday and was
again told that Mr.. Markham was Al home
sick. 50 the delegate inquired Of the clerk
who Mir, Markham'S physician was anu II
was then learned that Mr.. Markham was
suffering from an attack of typhomnlnrial
fever.
Mr.. Van Week was then seen Mt noon
and was asked to wire Mr.. kruttschnltt
to appoint someone else in Mr. Markham
place. MS he would likely be III for three
or four weeks and such would not meet
tho approval of the committee. The delc
cate was promised that the matter woud
receive attention that CIhursday) evening
and on Saturday evening the delegate
called at 80 or o'clock ana was III
formed that an answer had been receiver
hut to Mr. Van Week 1t was not satls
factory and another message had been sen;
to which no answer had arrived hut IL
ing Monday the delegate called at the OF
nee and the chief clerk stnted mat MI.
Van Week was out Of the city ara woulu
likely be gone till the following Ncdhes
day and hhd iei' hol"uS i'i 80"
The matter was laid before the commit
foe and the committee Issued the following
ultimatdm. which was delivered lnesuhE'
! July !, 10o2. ~ - 49,
| To the Management OF the IeNaS ana Ne"
Orleans Railroad. c.,.o,,
Houston, Texas, July l;--GentlemSsn;
This is 10 give YOU notice that after que
Characterization of matters existing today he,
tween the employees and said lcXas anu
New Orleans Railroad company that We
6nd as we believe. unnecessary delay ne
ing introduced into the proper proceenlhGs
of negotiations and that on the part OF
the company and charGahlc entirety 10
them and as the employees have SHOWN up
| f. this time utmost confidence in the
claims and promises Of the management
| l. e.: THAT they were willing at all times
! 10 do as well and even better by thelr
employees than other roads similarly stu,
atcd were doing" and after canvass OF
! competing roads in the state OF IeAos We
find a greater difference In the amount
| asked for hy the employees OF said Texas
! and New Orleans Railroad COMPANY TAX,
! ing into consideration these things anu
/ tho further fact Of patience which mas
/ hccn shown on tho part Of tho empioSes
| and the seeming Indifference and dlSinter-
/ cst OIL the part of the company u becomes
our bounden duty as men Of honor ana
| integrity to issue this. our ultimatnn, to-
wit: that IL the request made Of 10 per
cent increase in wages age Is not granted ao ny
| NC will take the same a refusal on the
! part Of the company to treat fairly with
! the employees and the matter VIII ne re-
| ferred to the employees for settlement
Very respectfully submitted by the com
W. r Morrison, Chairman.
! j. w Arlington
C. Il. Bcrcav,
f. f Burke,
Fred Dettman
J. w. GALLON,
George +. Taylor,
| r. NJ Stahl.
In answer to which the company made
! TO committee for their consideration the
| following proposition:
| can employees who are now receiving
| 50 and 32I5 cents per hour. shall receive 80
cents per hour, and those receiving less
| than 90 cents per hour shall receive an
! Increase Of six (t) per cent, provided that
/ the maximum rate allowed In any depart.
! mcnt shall not exceed 80 cents per nour."
This was referred to the employees for
their acceptance or rejection and at
mass meeting nj p m. Saturday July .,
| 1902 the meeting, which was a large one,
rejected the proposition Of the company
/ considering Il only repetition NJ the re-
/ hon m