Omaha daily bee., 1903-01-27
SIGN CUT THROAT LEASES
Msrkle's Miners Hold Houses at Option Of
0omranJ'S Managers
ALL CONFESS JUDGMENT FOR EVICTION
Documents Contain CIause Providing
for Ejcctment NJ the VIII Of
the owner of the
Property.

pied today by a circular presented by c. B.
Markell & Co. Ten witnesses were exam
lned, the more important being Sidney
Williams, general superintendent OF the
firm; Gertrude Martin, a professional nurse
in the employ Of the company, and Frank
Walk, general storekeeper at Jeddo.
Mr.. Williams testimony was based on
the company's answer to the miners de-
mands. He was subjected to a rigid cross
examination by Mr.. barrow. and was COM
PEELED to admit that. although thirteen men
were refused unemployment by the COM
pany for alleged criminsl acts during the
recent strike he had no knowledge that
anyone Of them had ever been guilty Of a
criminal action.
Miss Martin was a good witness for the
company. She told OF efforts by MIR. and
Mrs. Markle to properly care for sick en-
ployes, and stated that where cases Of ne
cesslty we're discovered. patients were fur
nished with medicines and nourishing food,
free of charge.
Frank Walk described the operations Of
the credit" or company store. The prices
Of articles, he said, were about the same as
those charged by other dealers. but he ad-
mitted that none other than employees Of
the company we're given credit, and after
the company store system was abolished
NV ut ItSOiltu 10 tue CdSn OASIS, ne lOSt
two-thirds OF his custom.
Call Miners Lawyer.
Counsel for the company caused some
surprise by requesting the commission to
summon as q witness D.. j. Mccarthy Of
Hazleton, one of the attorneys for the mine
workers. Mr.. Mccarthy objected on the
ground that he could not be expected to
testify to facts he had learned as counsel,
but, as counsel for the company said he
would not ask such questions, the lawyer
waived objection and took the stand.
he was asked when he had first heard
of the eviction notices served by the
Markle company on twelve tenants, to
which he replied that all his Information
In this connection was derived as attorney
for the evicted men.
In answer to further questions witness
said he knew the leases signed by the men
confessed judgment in election. The
evicted men told him they had never will
ingly signed such a lease and had never
given authority to any person to confess
Judgment in ejectment.
Il believed continued the witness, 1.-The
man had a good defense, so I saw the sher-
III and asked him to notify me a day or
two before he served the notice, so that I
could prepare the defense,
Notices Served at D~aybrenk.
HE promised to do 30, but failed, anr
when l upbraided him he said the writs
had been prepared at midnight and brought
to him at 8 o'clock in the morning, with
instructions to serve them Immediately"
Counsel for the company asked II he was
not aware that Judgment could not be con-
fessed unless an agreement had been
signed.
Il have heard OF forged papers," replied
Mr.. Mccarthy.
d you mean to say that these leases
were forgeries?"
II mean to say l think the men were
grossly deceived"
Counsel read from the photographer
notes a statement made by Mccarthy be-
fore the commission at Scranton to the ef-
feet that the resident physicians employed
by the company received a salary from the
company in addition to the fees charged
the miners, and asked II he knew
1t to be so. Mr.. Mccarthy re.
piled that he had no positive knowledge on
the subject. 1t was a rumor, he said, and
he had so stated when he previously men.
toned 1t.
On cross-examination witness sail The
evicted men had been elected without
notice.
Judge Gray asked II the men hat
received copies Of the leases from III.
company, and the witness answered in the
negative.
These leases are commonly known a;
'cut-throat agreements are they not?'
interjected Attorney Brumm.
Yes"
Tells of E~victIOns.
Sidney Williams said he had been ldenti.
fed with the coal business about sever
years, but had held his present position
only a few months.
On October 22, at his direction, notices
were posted asking the striking employee:
TO appear at the ONCE. bringing their brass
checks, and apply for work. Probably ii
men responded, but pickets had been sta
toned along the roads leading 20 tho oaic,
to prevent others from doing likewise.
On October 23 a committee Of miner,
waited on Mr.. Markle and said Inc msn de
sired to return In a body, as they mad left
They were told that there were severa
cases Mr.. Markle wished 10 take under ad
visement and on the following day the com
mittee was informed that several Ilel
would not be re-employed. The men pro
tested that the decision of the Wilkesbarr
convention should be sufficient agreenen
, and expressed their surprise at being com
4 PEELED to apply for work as individuals.
The miners failed to accept the overture
. Of the company and on October q twelv
e notices OF eviction were issued. On No
= vember 6 the evictions took place.
Cross-examined. Mr.. Williams said II
. was present at all evictions. None of tn
g tenants, he said, had paid any rent durin
e the strike.
t He was asked II he had observed an
e cases OF illness among the families VII
we're compelled to leave their homes. an
replied in the negative.
) In one or two cases, witness continued
the sheriff had asked an extension Of
few hours TO permit the families to scare
for another dwelling. Counsel for tn
company had advised against this course
as he believed It to be a ruse TO obstruC
The legal process.
a WAS any man refused reinstatement be
cause Re was an officer or member Of tn
d union? asked counsel, and witness re
piled in the negative.
70 Knew None as Criminals.
9 Mr.. Dsrrow read a letter written by MI
Markle, saying it was the intention I