Q. As prisoners?
A. Prisoners, and the object of my being sent for was to see what to do with them. On Sunday I went out there, and was met by Daniel J. Worrall and the chief of police of Johnstown. He was brought along to see whether he could identify any of the dangerous or turbulent class of people of Johnstown, and I went into examination—all I could do was with the aid of eight of these policemen and Mr. Worrall, and I examined each one on oath—sixty of them, at least. The other fifteen of them were retained, because they were a little more suspicious characters, and it turned out, according to any kind of evidence that we could get—and I guess it was the fact—that they had been idlers that heard of this train being wrecked. Some of them were very innocent people, who had come there to see if they could render assistance. Some had come as idle spectators, and there was not the slightest evidence from any source that any of them had been guilty of having turned the switch, or were participants in the stoning of the train. The train had been stoned just before they got there, but none of those people were arrested until some little time afterwards, and as I concluded from the evidence I heard there, it seems most probable that the operators of the act wouldn't hardly be about looking on, just after a thing of that kind occurred, and they got out of the way. And these people, while they might have sympathized, there was nothing at all to show that they had any guilty connection with the turning of the switch. On Monday, I waited again to see about some others—we had got reports from Johnstown, saying that they were satisfied—parties who told to me that they were satisfied they were not concerned in it. Finally, from time to time they were all released, having no evidence against them whatever, and that was the principal part of my business there. It kept me there several days—maybe a week—on the train. That is all I know about that. Then there was a difficulty occurred at Scranton and I went up there, and the Governor telegraphed to me while I was there, and I went to see about what to do with some—there was an alderman up there had issued a warrant, in pursuance of the report of the coroner's inquest, I think, upon the bodies of some men who had been shot in the riot, and they had pronounced all the military, I believe, participants in what they called a murder, and I started in obedience to the dispatch the same day. I arrived there, but they had done just what I was going to recommend; they had delivered themselves up to the proper authorities, habeas corpus had been issued, and the judges of the court—I think Judge Harding had them to apply. It turned out that they were either indicted, or no bills found true against them, or something of that kind. There was other difficulties of that kind occurred while we were up there, and occasionally these same police alderman—Mahon, I think his name was, in the Sixth ward of Scranton—would issue out a warrant once in awhile against certain of the military, and they would simply go and give bail, and that was the end of it. That was all the connection I had with the riots—the actual knowledge I have about it. Something about these prisoners. We found some little difficulty in keeping them up there from getting into the hands—it was evident, as the people of Scranton said, that if the warrants of this alderman were executed, and the soldiers were taken over into that Sixth ward, that is made up—if any of you know the situation of Scranton, there is a ward that is made up of miner's houses across the stream—the Lackawanna, I think likely—and they threatened if any soldier was taken over there before this alderman he would never get back alive, and they were devising ways and means to prevent any difficulty of that kind. I remained there a few days, and came back to Philadelphia, and at St. George's hotel I got an honorable discharge from military service. That is all the duties I had, except attachments, &c., which were not connected with the riot.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. I wish to ask you a question: You were consulted by Governor before he left the State, as regards his absence for any length of time, whether it was policy for him to be absent and the policy pursued in his absence?
A. He spoke to me about it. There seemed to be, as I said to him, and as appeared to him, as good a prospect of peace in this State as ever there was, and he asked me what I thought about the propriety of his leaving upon a trip of that kind, and I told him I could not see any difficulty about it. That no doubt the State would go on harmoniously and all right, that it would not be a vacating of the office of the Governor. He didn't tell me anything about that I give more attention than I otherwise would during his absence, rendering any aid I could to the other authorities, to see to things. General Latta telegraphed to me that morning I speak of, the 20th, that he had a general authority to act in the Governor's absence, when the military were required, and simply telegraphed that there was trouble on the Pennsylvania railroad. He had acted, however, before that, because he had called out the troops. I recollect pretty nearly the second dispatch sent to me to Harrisburg. They were both sent within half an hour of each other. That if the civil authorities were insufficient to suppress disturbance, to maintain the peace and call out the troops, and to communicate to the Governor if he could, and if not, to suppress the riot promptly, and we would look for the authority afterwards. That is about what he had told him, and he acted upon the general authorities which the Governor had given him.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. In your conversation with the Governor, was there anything about the probability of a strike on the Pennsylvania railroad?
A. No, sir; there was no apprehension of anything of that kind at the time at all, although it seemed to come pretty suddenly after that. There was nothing at all to indicate it—the Governor said nothing at all about that—he simply talked to me about his going out of the State to remain a length of time he would be gone. I forget now what it was, whether it would give any authority to have his office considered vacant or any ability or disability to act. I told him I thought not, that for the purpose of managing the State government, I thought it would be perfectly proper for him to go, that he was entitled to have that sort of recreation. Of course, none of us apprehended anything, except what might arise at any time, and he had taken the precaution, it seems, although I do not know that, to say to General Latta, that he should act for the purpose of sustaining the civil authority as they had done heretofore, or something of that kind, as I learned afterwards, but the Governor did not tell me that, so far as I remember now. I believe that was what the Governor did say.
Sheriff Jennings, recalled: