The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1905-11-04

hers. have sought to annoy, interfere
with, hound, cntice away. purchase
bribc, or by any, unlawful means drive
from the employment Of said complain
ants. or any OF them, the present ems
ployes engaged by thcm. or any OF them
The Wilde Allegation.
Paragraphs $, 8. 10 and u arc simply
declared untrue but when IL Is reached
lnc printers are emphatic. and they give
me Following as their version of the
| Wyldc affair: %
y Is denied that William Wylde was
, ,nr.a, abused lofo insulted, ms set
i iorth In said paragraph, or said bill, bu,
the facts were thcse THAT the said
William Wy)dc was met BY j. o. stew
hrt, member OF said union, for the pur-
! pose OF nscertalnng whether he was
member OF any union, and also for the
| purpose OF persuadng him to become
meinner OF ms union: that In this con-
4 rei~ntioh with said Stewart the said
4 William Wyldc asserted that he desired
to return TO his home in England, and
that THIS was his sole purpose in coming
mere 10 work, so {nsLAo earn sufficient
i money to get back home, nd he proposed
4 TO go home. at once itfrIthis union would
let MIN have sufficient money, and when
nskcd BY Mr.. stewart how much he
wanted. he finally said he re-
CURED $40, and thcrcupon Mr. Stewart
4 informcdsilim that he had no authority TO
4 accept such proposition. but that he
would Introduce the said William wylde
/ to the committee representing said union.
7 known as the i1ight.Hour Committee
which was done; that, subsequently, said
4 William Wylde went 10 Murphys Hotel
i to see the committee In reference to this
proposition Of his. but said committee
4 were very loath to accept his proposition.
I and tried to persuade the said Wylde 10
alter his proposition and Join the r. Il. u,
I No. 30
/ Said Wyldc, however. insisted that his
i original proposition should be carried
out. that 1t was necessary for him to
&. have abou: 70 pounds when he arrived
IN England 10 pay some debts, and.
therefore. he could not go homo with
less than his original proposition, which
the committee then accepted and paid
him the money demanded By him, AMI
thereupon the said Wyde pretended thar
he was going back to England and IN
! fnrtherance Of this fnlse preterce and
10 give credence TO same. he purchased
ticket to New York and had his bag
gage sent 10, the depot with n FUN knowi-
edge that this whole matter was q CON
sptracyg ccncocted between him and Ger
tain members representing tho complain
ants. who We're then armed with a. capias
|
resting him and apparently stopping
him from carrying out his pretended
i trip to England: thereupon he WAS taken
in charge under said capias by the shcr-
III and was bailcd, with ono OF his COM
pIainant. AZ his surety and he was taken
to the home OF one OF thescomplhinants,
Rufus Williams. where he slept. The
next night one OF these respondents. E,
w. Blakey, who had paid the $40 to said
Wyida, called at the boarding house or
the said Wylde for the sole purpose or
finding out from him whether or not h.
was honest In his transaction, or had
deliberately deceived him. MT. Blakey
said to Wylde that he had given the $40
under. promise, and wanted to know
whether Wylde intended 10 carry OH,
i his promise. NVylde replied that Ills
wages had been increased and that he
1 (Blaloey) would have to give him $50
more sif he wanted him 10 carry out his
promise
Dir. Blakcy then fully realized that the
said Wylde had gotten this money UNI
/ der false pretencr and demanded the
return Of the $780, .Jhich Wylde declined
to do. Mr.. Blakey stated to Wylde that
he intended to prosecute him for making
money under false pretences, which
| would have been done, but the said
Wylde, conscious Of his guilt, has les
the State Of Virginia. as these respon-
dents are informed. and his whereabouts
s | unknown to them.
! These respondents admit that II was
very natural that Mr.. Bakey should
have gotten angry under the clrcum-
stances. realizing, as he did. that he had
been defraudcd out OF $40 under false
! rretence. and that In addition thereto.
| the said Wylde attempted to get $50
! more under a similar circumstance
| These OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES that Mr.. Ba"
4 key did not get angry with Mr.. Wxlde
because he was working for one of the
| ccmplnlnants, but because Of his me-
farious conduct In defrauding him out
OF $40, as above set forth.
/ These respondents allege that this was
q result of conspiracy on the part Of
the said Wylde and certain OF the COM
/ nlainants as the representatives Of the
Richmond Typothetac and these re-
spondents especially call the courts at
| tcntion 10 the fact i that the only over
/ ture made by theno1tO the said Wylde
was 10 become member OF their union.
Wills, MI propositions that the said
/ wide should pay money came from
! him (Wylde), as willlmore fully appear
by a sworn certificate signed by the
said Wylde and filed with tho affidavit
OF IT, w. Blakey
Other Paragraphs.
Paragraph 13 Is simply denied, and
the others are answered as follows:
"a In answer to the allegation OF para
,ronh II OF said bill. these respondents
soy they admit that by argument and
ners,aslon only they~5haHe attempted to
! YET certaln employees aof-the compainants
e Shecome members OF their union. hut
n,ost emphatically deny that they have
,eed any Illegal or unlawful methods.
is. These respondents deny the allesa-
tions SGT forth IN paragraph IL OF said
! bill. and say the same are untrue
10. Omitted from the 6ll.)
III These respondents deny the alcga-
l lions set forth In paragraph II of said
bill and say the same nre not true.
These respondents further answer 10
said bill, but the answer while perth
nent, is not important
These respondents deny that a COM