Homestead

The general relief committee perfected its organization by electing Burgess Hollingshead president, William Gaches, treasurer, and George Hadfield, secretary. Mr. Hollingshead was authorized to receive money contributions and turn them over to the treasurer, and to Mr. Hadfield was assigned the duty of receiving donations of food, fuel and clothing.

One of the first subscriptions received was the sum of $25 from the employees of Kaufman Brothers of Philadelphia, transmitted by the city editor of the Philadelphia Record. Others poured in rapidly, the business people of Pittsburgh being especially liberal in their response to the demands upon them. The Building Trades council appointed a committee to take charge of the Pittsburgh donations, with Vice President Michael Sharran at the head. Mr. Sharran, assisted by Mr. D. S. Mitchell, labored with untiring activity and these two men were instrumental in securing thousands of dollars worth of supplies.

Among the most liberal contributors was Mrs. J. M. Gusky, head of the great clothing firm of J. M. Gusky & Company, a lady noted for her charities and always foremost to respond in emergencies such as that occurring at Homestead.

Kaufmann Brothers and Eisner & Philipps gave an immense quantity of clothing. W. M. Laird contributed a sufficient quantity of shoes for all claimants, and the large grocery and commission firms forwarded provisions of all kinds.

The Pittsburgh Press raised a fund of $2,500 in addition to supplies of clothing and other necessaries, and the Dispatch collected over $700, to which was added $300 from the charitable people of Washington, D. C.

As Christmas drew near, public sympathy was more and more keenly aroused in behalf of the Homestead sufferers. A few days before that holiday of holidays, the children in the Homestead public schools were instructed to write letters to Santa Claus, asking for whatever they most desired. Nearly all the letters contained requests for shoes and other necessaries. Many of them were published in the newspapers and spoke volumes for the unhappy condition of the poorer class of strikers and their families.

Santa Claus was not missing, however, when the eventful morning came, nor were the other essentials of a merry Christmas conspicuous by their absence. One thousand turkeys came from the kind hearted workingmen of McKeesport and 300 from Mrs. Gusky, and the heart of every child was gladdened by the gift of a picture book and a box of candy from Kaufmann Bros. of Pittsburgh.

The Homestead relief committee kept up its good work until the end of March, by which time the necessities of the people ceased to be pressing. A report was then published showing receipts amounting to $5,587.28, of which $4,926.79 had been expended in relieving distressed families. A committee of three was appointed to use the unexpended balance in relief work, and the general committee then dissolved, having excellently discharged its mission.

Reference has already been made to the appointment of a committee of United States senators to investigate the Homestead affair and the postponement of action by Senator Gallinger, the Republican chairman of that committee, until after the presidential election. Within two weeks after election day, Senators Gallinger and Pfeffer began the inquiry at Chicago, where a hearing was given to Pinkerton agents and authorities on police methods, the latter submitting opinions on the best means of coping with labor disturbances. Chief of Police McClaughrey advocated the removal of the police force in great cities from the field of politics and placing municipal departments under a civil service system, and Marshal Hitchcock suggested the enactment of a law providing a severe penalty for refusing to serve on a posse comitatus. On November 23, Messrs. Gallinger and Pfeffer arrived in Pittsburgh. The other members of the committee, Messrs. Hansbrough, of North Dakota; Felton, of California; Sanders, of Montana; White, of Louisiana, and Hill, of New York, did not find it convenient to attend. The testimony taken was mainly a repetition of that given before the House Committee. Captain Rodgers repeated his tale of the adventures of the Little Bill; Superintendent Potter told of the innocence of the purpose entertained in the bringing in of the Pinkertonian Three Hundred; William Weihe explained how easily the trouble could have been adjusted if the Carnegie firm had desired an amicable settlement and condemned the facilities afforded for the importation of cheap labor in violation of the contract labor law; David Lynch and William G. Roberts testified to the peaceable disposition of the Homestead men prior to the Pinkerton invasion and their respect for the property rights of their employers; A. C. Robertson, a politician who had formerly been a glass blower, condemned arbitration, whether voluntary or compulsory, as a failure, and ex-Judge Thomas Mellon declared the employment of armed guards during strikes to be necessary because there is "too much politics" to permit of the proper enforcement of the law.

After a visit to the Homestead mill, the committee proceeded directly to New York where the testimony of Robert A. Pinkerton and Captain Heinde was heard. The Pinkerton chief described the men sent to Homestead as model citizens. It had been agreed, he said, that the guards should be sworn in as deputy sheriffs. There had been no firing from the barges until after the captain was shot, and then only in sheer self-defense. Witness claimed that his agency had lost $15,000 by the Homestead affair, owing to the seizure of 225 rifles and other property, and the cost of caring for men hurt in the battle. He thought it doubtful that Mr. Carnegie would reimburse the agency. Being asked if he thought that the violence committed at Homestead was due to the strikers or to the rabble attracted there, he said: "I think it was committed by the strikers, their leaders and the advisory committee itself." Captain Heinde's evidence was merely a recital of the events of July 6. With his examination the investigation was concluded.

The report of the committee, presented to the senate on February 11, 1893, denounced the employment of Pinkertons as "an utterly vicious system, responsible for much of the ill-feeling and bad blood displayed by the working classes," and suggested that if Mr. Frick had carried out the humane policy enunciated by Mr. Carnegie in his famous article in the Forum, the Homestead strike might have been avoided. At the same time, it declared that there was "no excuse for the scenes of disorder and terrorism for which the strikers were themselves responsible," and that "laboring men should learn the lesson that they cannot better their condition by violating the law or resisting lawful authority." The committee doubted the power of Congress to mend matters by legislation, and advised arbitration as the only middle ground on which employer and employe could meet without depreciating the rights of either.

About this time the House committee on investigation of the Homestead strike awoke from its lethargy and Messrs. Ray and Broderick, the Republican members, handed in a minority report, condemning the employment of armed guards, but advising that legislation on this question be left to the several states. In the judgment of the minority of the committee the "present system of federal taxation" had nothing to do with the Homestead strike, which was in reality a struggle for supremacy between organized capital and organized labor.

The majority report was presented shortly afterwards. It held that Mr. Frick should have united with the sheriff of Allegheny county, without regard to the inefficiency of that officer, in an appeal to the governor, instead of undertaking to crush the strikers on his own account; criticized the Amalgamated Association as a body the members of which were encouraged to become intemperate zealots, denied the right of the Homestead men to oppose the landing of the Pinkertons, and ended by suggesting that it be left to the several states to enact laws regulating Pinkertonism.

Individual minority reports were presented as follows:

By Mr. Broderick, advocating the passage of a compulsory arbitration law by the states.

By Mr. Buchanan, of New Jersey, declaring the investigation to have acted as a boomerang against the Democrats in that it showed a high protective tariff to be productive of high wages.

By Mr. Boatner, claiming that, under the clause of the constitution which authorizes the inter-state commerce law, inter-state carriers can be prevented from hiring Pinkertons.

By Mr. Stockdale, of Mississippi, claiming that the Pinkertons were trespassers; and

By Messrs. Bynum and Layton confessing their inability to find a remedy for conflicts between capital and labor.

All the reports cited having been duly read and filed away by the two branches of Congress, the Homestead question was thereupon dropped by general consent and, its political utility having vanished, was heard of no more in the national legislature.

The Pennsylvania legislature, which assembled in January, 1893, was obliged to meet the Pinkerton question squarely. All the members of the lower branch of that body – the House of Representatives – and one-half of the members of the senate came fresh from the people, having been chosen in the November elections, and a large proportion of them stood pledged to their constituents to aid in the passage of an anti-Pinkerton bill. Many measures of this character were introduced, but that upon which support was centered, by common consent, was a bill introduced by Representative John Kearns, of Pittsburgh, a gentleman in close touch with organized labor. The Kearns bill was entitled "An Act relative to the appointing of special deputies, marshals, detectives or policemen by sheriffs, mayors or other persons authorized by law to make such appointments, and by individuals, associations or corporations incorporated under the laws of this State or any other State of the United States, and making it a misdemeanor for persons to exercise the functions of an officer without authority."

The bill underwent some vicissitudes, which delayed its passage until May, although introduced early in January and advanced on the House calendar through Mr. Kearns' energetic efforts. At one stage in its progress, a proviso was added requiring that any person appointed or deputized to perform the duties of special deputy, marshal, policeman or detective should be "of known good moral character and temperate habits" and should give bond in a considerable sum for the faithful performance of his duties. This provision was attacked because of its being presumably aimed at the low class of detectives employed by the Law and Order society of Pittsburgh, which was just then making war on Sunday newspapers and lobbying against a bill for the protection of journals publishing Sunday editions, and for this reason it was eliminated. The word "detectives" was stricken out of the title and, as it was feared that the bill might interfere with the appointment of regular policemen in municipalities, a special proviso to prevent such a result was added in the senate:

As finally enacted into a law, signed by the governor, and placed upon the statute books, the measure reads as follows:

Section 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in General Assembly met, and it is hereby enacted by the authority of the same, That no sheriff of a county, mayor of a city, or other person authorized by law to appoint special deputies, marshals or policemen in this Commonwealth to preserve the public peace and prevent or quell public disturbances, and no individuals, association, company or corporation incorporated under the laws of this State or of any other State of the United States and doing business in this State, shall hereafter appoint or employ as such special deputy, marshal or policeman any person who shall not be a citizen of this Commonwealth.

Section 2. That any person who shall in this Commonwealth without due authority pretend or hold himself out to any one as a deputy sheriff, marshal, policeman, constable or peace officer, shall be deemed guilty of misdemeanor.

Section 3. Any person or persons, company or association, or any person in the employ of such company or association violating any of the provisions of this act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be sentenced to pay a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars, or undergo an imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both or either at the discretion of the court.

Provided, That if any company or association be convicted under this act it shall be sentenced to pay a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars.

Provided further, That the provisions of this act shall not be construed as applying to policemen, constables or specials appointed by municipalities for municipal purposes.

As long as the Kearns act stands – and it is safe to say that it is not likely ever to be repealed – the Pinkerton Detective Agency is effectually barred out of Pennsylvania.

CHAPTER XVIII.

The First Trial

Sylvester Critchlow Arraigned – Pinkertons on the Stand – The Prosecution Makes a Strong Showing – A Suspicious Carnegie Banquet – Attorneys Erwin and Argo to the Rescue – An Alibi for the Defense – John S. Robb Attacks Mr. Erwin – The "Northwestern Whirlwind's" Magnificent Oration – He Captures the Court and Confounds the Prosecution – "Not Guilty" – The Backbone of the Murder Charges Broken

SYLVESTER Critchlow was the first of the Homestead men to be placed on trial in the Allegheny County Criminal Court, the charge against him being the murder of T. J. Connors.

On the morning of November 18, 1892, Critchlow was arraigned before Judges Kennedy and McClung. A great crowd assembled in the court room, curious to observe the opening scenes in the memorable legal battle which was to ensue, but to the great disappointment of the throng, the judges ordered the room to be cleared of all except members of the bar, witnesses, jurors and reporters.

The prisoner was perfectly cool and self possessed. His wife and mother sat near him, watching with womanly solicitude every step in the proceedings, the issue of which meant so much to both.

The array of legal talent on both sides was formidable. The prosecution was in the hands of District Attorney Burleigh, assisted by Messrs. D. F. Patterson, John S. Robb, E. Y. Breck, P. C. Knox and Assistant District Attorney Harry Goehring. Counsel for the defense were: Messrs. W. W. Erwin and G. W. Argo, of St. Paul, Minn.; E. A. Montooth, Thomas M. Marshall, William J. Brennen and William Reardon, of Pittsburgh, and John F. Cox, of Homestead.

Immediately upon the opening of court, Critchlow was ordered to stand up, and having heard the charge read, pleaded not guilty in a clear, firm tone of voice. Attorney Brennen asked to have the indictment quashed on the ground of an irregularity in the drawing of the grand jury panel. The motion was overruled, and the selection of jurors began, this process being conducted by Mr. Burleigh for the prosecution and Mr. Marshall for the defense. Within a few hours, the following "good men and true" were selected: Peter Roth, John Herron, James Marshall, Amos Mashey, Chris Wiggand, C. S. Eaton, Chris A. Sende, James M. Wright, D. J. Herlehy, W. A. Freyvogel, Burns Wadsworth and Louis Jackman.

The District Attorney, in his opening speech, after having given the conventional explanation as to degrees of murder, asked the jury to avoid the impression that the case on trial was one of treason or was to be considered in connection with Homestead. "We are," he said, "simply trying Sylvester Critchlow for the murder of T. J. Connors, who was killed in the barges at Homestead on July 6. The barges were there lawfully and for a peaceable purpose… We will show that Sylvester Critchlow was behind the barricade with a rifle, shooting down to the barges within easy range of Connors, and firing in a direction in which he would likely hit Connors."

"You must also remember, gentlemen, that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is the prosecutor and Sylvester Critchlow is the defendant. There is no private prosecutor here. The case will be prosecuted by public officials and no one else will be allowed to interfere. Other counsel may appear in the case, but they will be in subordination to the district attorney."

Dr. McKennan, Superintendent W. A. Cowan, of the West Penn hospital and Rev. Father Leonard Lynch were the first witnesses examined. They testified to the death of Connors and the nature of his wound.

Captain John W. Cooper, of the Pinkerton agency, followed with the familiar story of the river expedition and the battle at the landing. He also swore positively to the position of Connors at the time when he was shot and the hour at which he fell.

Captain Cooper was subjected to a searching cross-examination by Mr. Brennen, but went through the ordeal without permitting himself to become confused. Mr. Brennen sought to show (1) that the witness was not of good moral character and (2) that Connors was accidentally shot by one of his own comrades.

At one point the cross-examination ran as follows:

Mr. Brennen. – Were you not a "Hey Rube" for a circus for nine years?

Mr. Burleigh. – What in the name of common sense is a "Hey Rube?"

Judge Kennedy. – Yes, Mr. Brennen, we would like to know what you mean by a "Hey Rube."

Mr. Brennen. – I mean a circus fighter. The witness knows what I mean.

Witness. – I was detailed by the Pinkerton agency to accompany the Barnum circus in the capacity of a detective. I was with the circus for nine years.

W. H. Burt, also a Pinkerton detective, recounted the incidents of the fight at the landing and described the shooting of Connors as follows: "I knew T. J. Connors. He was on the boat. I saw him between 11 and 12 o'clock that day. That was before he was shot. He was near the bow of the boat. Three or four minutes later I saw two men picking him up. He had fallen about twenty-five feet from the bow of the boat. He was placed on a table and a medical student from Chicago, who had hired as a guard, bandaged the wound on Connors' arm."

Detectives P. J. Connors and Joseph Malley gave evidence of similar tenor to that of the two preceding witnesses, and Captain Rodgers and Deputy Sheriff Gray repeated their well-worn story of the Little Bill.

This stage of the proceedings was reached on the afternoon of Saturday, November 19, at the customary hour of adjournment. The court decided to hold a night session, and accordingly at 7 P. M. the examination of witnesses was resumed.

J. M. Dickson, H. H. Hervey and J. H. Slocum, clerks in the employ of the Carnegie firm, swore that on the morning of July 6 they saw Critchlow with a gun in his hand going towards the mill gate. Each of them positively identified the prisoner.

Charles Reese, a newspaper artist, being sworn, said that he saw Critchlow, with a gun in his hands, occupying an exposed position in the mill yard, near the pump house. Somebody had said to witness, "There is Critchlow. He is a regular dare devil." Mr. Brennen elicited from the witness the fact that he had attended a gathering of newspaper reporters called together by Capt. E. Y. Breck, attorney for the Carnegie firm, at the time when the Critchlow case was before the grand jury. This affair had created no little scandal when it occurred, some of the newspapers openly stating that Captain Breck had invited those whom he intended to use as witnesses to a banquet for the purpose of "coaching" them. Mr. Reese, however, denied that there had been a banquet or, that he had received any formal invitation from Captain Breck. Nevertheless, the evidence was regarded as establishing a reasonable presumption of the use of unfair methods by the prosecution.

Isaac J. Jury, a constable residing in Homestead, swore that he saw Critchlow in the mill yard and advised him to get out, but that his warning was not heeded.

The most damaging testimony of all was given by Samuel Stewart, a clerk, in the Homestead mill. He said:

"I know Sylvester Critchlow; saw him near the Company office between 8 and 9 o'clock on the morning of July 6; next saw him back of the barricades, near the pump house on the river bank; he was kneeling back of the barricade, a gun in his hands; the gun projected through the barricade between the second and third beams; the barricade was built of steel 'I' beams; his gun was pointed toward the barges; the bows of the barges were nearest to the barricades; you could see into the boats from where Critchlow was kneeling; the door of the outer barge was open; I saw Critchlow fire once in the direction of the barge; saw him aim carefully and pull the trigger; I remained there about 20 minutes; Critchlow was there when I arrived, and was still there when I left; I cannot tell the kind of gun Critchlow had, except that it was a single barrel."

On cross-examination witness stated that he also saw Anthony Flaherty, Joseph A. Hall and James Flannagan shoot from behind the barricade. He stuck firmly to his story in the face of Mr. Brennen's questioning. Stewart's examination ended the Saturday night session.

When the trial was resumed on Monday morning, Detective Malley was again placed on the stand and swore to having seen Critchlow on the river bank with a gun in his hands and to have heard him called by name. Photographs of the burning barges, the barricades and the mill yard, taken by order of the Carnegie Company on July 6, were put in evidence, and here the commonwealth rested.

Attorney George W. Argo made the opening speech for the defense. He explained that he and his colleague, Mr. Irwin, had been sent by the laboring element of the Northwest to assist in the defense of the Homestead men. "As far as I am concerned," he said, "I was not selected on account of any extraordinary ability, but because for years I have been in touch with labor. At one time I was a barge builder near this city. My parents resided in Washington County."

In setting forth the reasons for demanding an acquittal, Mr. Argo enlarged upon the enlistment of armed men to invade Homestead "within two days of the anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence" and, after describing the expedition of the Pinkertons went on to say:

"These men were not laboring men. It was an invasion of armed men employed by a man named Frick; it was an assault upon this grand old commonwealth; it was an assault upon the state in which the Declaration of Independence was signed; this armed body of men who invaded this state and trampled upon the soil made sacred by the feet of Washington; these men were not under the command of any regular officer of this county; they were men who could not be sworn in as deputies or special officers. Under the evidence in this case these men made an attack upon the people of Homestead; there is not any evidence that Frick owned one dollar's worth of property in Homestead. These men sneaked in on a dark, foggy night; they were met, not by strikers, for there is no evidence that there was a strike, but by the good people of the town, who, when the armed foe attempted to land told the latter not to come ashore; begged of them not to interfere with their rights, begged of them not to attempt to land. Not a particle of evidence has been given that these foreign emissaries had any right there. The men, the peaceable citizens, attempted to defend their rights. A young man named Foy went down to the gang-plank to plead with the men not to come ashore. He was met by a lot of armed men. Becoming alarmed he turned to go back, when he slipped and fell across the plank. As he fell he was shot in the back by some one on the barges. That was the beginning of the terrible battle. It will appear in evidence in this case that the first shots were fired from the barges and not by the people on shore. We will show you that preparations had been made for this trouble one month before it occurred. We will show that a stockade or high fence had been built around the works, a fence like that built in the west to repel Indian attacks. This fence was full of portholes, and resembled the outer wall of a fort. There is no evidence that the people who were on the banks on the morning of the invasion were strikers. They were peaceable citizens of Homestead. Every man in that crowd had a right to defend himself with arms; the law gives to every man the right to defend himself, to defend his family; to defend his neighbors and his friends; this right is given every man by a power higher than the law of man. The people were attacked by an armed foe and they had the right to use weapons in self-defense. The evidence shows that the men on the barges were in command of officers whose names are known, who have testified in this case, yet your honorable district attorney has made no effort to bring these men to justice. Thus he becomes a defender of these armed invaders of your county."