Evening star., 1917-05-13

L
man if he did not think that in justice
to the people of the District he should
have given the company this Information.
which might have averted the strike.
Given in Confidence.
Mr.. Newman replied that the infor-
nation was given the Commissioners
BY the men with the request that 1t be
not given to the company. He said the
Commissioners respected this request
You knew that strike was immi-
nent.'' said Mr.. Hoover. did you think
il right not to give this information to
the company? Why didn't you tell
Mr.. King?''
81 thought it right" retorted Mr..
Newman. with considerable heat. That
is my reason. You can ask me QueS-
tions from now until o'clock tomor-
row morning and 1 will give you no
different answer"
Mr. Newman added that the Commits
sioners, acting as mediators last year
between the street car men and the
companies, had not told the men or the
company what they learned from each
side, and that if they had done SO there
would have been no compromise at that
time.
your first duty" said Mr.. Hoover,
returning to the charge" was to avert
a strike in the interests of the Dis
trfct"
81 have answered that question" said
Mr.. Newman.
Pressed Point on Company.
Mr. Newman repeatedly said that the
Commissioners had impressed upon the
officials of the company that If they
would consent to mediation the men
could be brought to waive recognition
OF the union in the negotiations. Read
ing from the letter sent by the men to
the company suggesting plan of ar
bitration. Mr.. Newman pointed out that
they proposed that the old agreement
under which the men had been working
for the last year, be retained in effect
for thirty days, during which negotia-
tions could proceed for an adjustment.
IF the company had accepted that
suggestion" said Mr. Newman, there
would have been no strike.
Did you inform the company of the
fact that the men would waive recog-
milton of the union. and IL not why
not?' asked Mr.. Hoover.
Mr.. Newman apparently was thoroughly
incensed over the repetition of this ques-
ton
II decline to answer that question"
he shouted. IF 1 am in contempt of
this committee. l am sorry
The committee did not insist upon his
answering. and Mr.. Hoover did not
press the question.
Individual Contract.
Mr.. Hoover also questioned Mr.. New
man in regard to the Individual con-
tract offered the men by the company.
You criticised this contract to Mr..
King" said Mr.. Hoover, ''in your con-
ference with him March 10 because it
prevented the men from joining the
Amalgamated.''
Mr.. Newman said that was not the
point, that it prevented the men from
joining any organization, and he be-
lieved in the right of men to organize.
The Amalgamated. however, was the
only organization involved in this sit
uation," insisted Mr.. Hoover.
Mr.. Newman also criticised the indi-
vidual contract because it prevented
collective bargaining and because he
did not believe the men, signing as in
dividuals, would be strong enough to
urge their complaints against the COM
pany. He modified his statement made
earlier in the day, in which he had said
that a complaint under this contract
would never reach the public utilities
ator. He said he thought a complaint
was mot likely to reach the commits
sion
Senators Ask Questions.
Members of the committee took
hand in questioning both LIT. Newman
and Mr.. Hoover. Senator Pittman
brought out that the company had OBJ
jected to an agreement similar to that
of last year, on the ground that it was
not satisfactory and caused trouble.
Senator Johnson of California asked
Mr.. Hoover whether, if the company
had been told by Mr.. Newman that the
men would waive recognition of the
union, the company would have agreed
to mediation.
Mr.. Hoover said he was not empow-
cred to answer this question for the
company.
Before adjourning until tomorrow
morning at $3.50. the committee decided
W O1N q
by counsel for the strikers that the
company furnish them with facts con-
cerning the employment of men since
the strike, the wages paid them, the
revenues of the company since the
strike Mr.. Hoover said the company
would object TO giving some of this in
formation as irrelevant and beyond the
scope of the hearing.