Evening star., 1917-05-21


insist upon their demands for the
closed shop and recognition of the
union. providing other demands salts
factory to the men We're allowed.
Counsel also brought out that Mr.. VIII
burt had not availed himself of OPP
portunity for final conference with
President King of the railway com
pany, because that conference was to
have dealt only with the individual
contracts proposed by the company and
Wilburt did not think it would be
worth while to meet.
Hints Union Laws Violated.
Counsel of the company then sought
to show by questioning that the by
laws of the parent association were not
lived up to in the letter of the law in
the preliminaries to calling the strike.
internationally questioning the techni-
cal method of enforcing the strike.
1t was developed by the testimony
of Mr.. Wilburt, who had been a motor
man in the company's employ since
1908 and president of the local branch
of the amalgamated since its organiza-
tion in 1916. that the railway head
would not deal with any committee of
the amalgamated. but would treat only
with a committee of the men not rep
resenting that organization.
Questioning the witness as to the rea-
son for the accession to membership in
the union OF ZUS employees OIL the r
street repair shops February 81, 1917.
and why they were not admitted before,
the answer was ELECTED that if they
had Joined the union they would
promptly have been dismissed by the
company.
Then was not your reason for talk
ing them in that you were getting
ready for striker
No"
But their admission was followed by
r1 hn
yes"
Did you not about that time. say in
effect that you had the employees OF
the Potomac Electric Power Company
strike of railway employees you would
shut down the power house, put the
city of Washington in darkness and
stop every wheel turned by electric
power?"
'T have no recollection of any such
statement" replied the witness.
Sticks to Statement.
Counsel questioned the witness to
have been glad to receive the griev-
ance committee OF. the men 10 talk over
any and all grievances presented. but
the witness clung to the statement that
Mr. King only wanted to talk about
the 1n0lVlQudE contract. mat QOCu-
ment, in the opinion of the witness.
was of character which made dis
cussion of it useless, from the view
point of the union men.
The witness told of an interview with
President King at which the closed
shop paragraph of the mems demands
was under discussion. He said Mr..
King was indignant over this section,
declaring it to be "the most damnable
proposition ever conceived" and want
~ 1yro he atcrnt n
stuff" The witness had replied that it
was twentieth century thought" and
Mr.. King had retorted that then the
calendar had better be turned back"
Why They Didn't Go Back.
Coming back to the failure of the
witness to keep the final appointment
with Mr.. King, which the witness said
was only tentative appointment,
Counsel Hoover asked "Why didn't you
go back to see him?"
Because the grievance committee had
authority only to discuss questions IN
der the 1916 agreement, then drawing
to a close, while the issue of the mo-
ment was making a new contract" said
Mr.. Wilburt, who added that MIR. King
was apparently intent only upon induc-
ing the grievance committee to try to
persuade the men to accept the indi-
vidual contracts.
Didn't you. about this time, publicly
say that the conferences were over be-
cause Mr.. King refused to recognize
the union?" asked the counsel, to which
the witness answered in the affirmative.
He later went on to say that while the
men wanted their union recognized and
favored the closed shop. still they would
not cause a strike on refusal of those
demands alone. provided other conces-
sions were made. but that Mr. King
would not discuss these propositions
with the union.
Counsel for the company then sought
to bring out Mr.. Wilburts authority for