A. No, sir; none whatever.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Was there any effort made by the strikers, or the railroad employés, to compromise the differences between the railroad company and themselves?
A. We heard nothing from them at all up to the time of the strike. On Friday afternoon, a committee, representing the strikers, consisting, I think, of engineers and firemen and brakemen, two or three of them, called on Mr. Pitcairn in person, and presented a written demand, stating that unless these demands are complied with, that they would not run their trains. This committee met Mr. Pitcairn on the platform, and I went out there to hear what they had to say. He handed me this paper, and I read it, and handed it back, and told him to have no further talk with them; that they had demanded such things that we couldn't grant them at all, and it wasn't worth while to discuss the matter. They demanded that their wages should be raised, and that double-headers should not be run; that no more than seventeen cars should be run to a train; that each engineer should have the privilege of selecting his own fireman, and that that the firemen should not be changed without his consent, and a number of other things of the same kind.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. They also had up the classification?
A. Yes; the classification of engineers was to be abolished, and no man engaged in the strike was to be discharged. In other words, they proposed taking the road out of our hands.
Q. What was the classification of engineers?
A. It was introduced on our road, on the lines west of Pittsburgh, in 1871 or 1872, I think. The engineers asked for an advance of wages at that time, claiming that they were not being paid as much as other lines were paying—other lines that competed with us. A committee, representing each division of the road, called upon Mr. Scott at that time and asked for an advance, which resulted in the meeting being adjourned to Pittsburgh, where I met them. Mr. Layng and I presented this plan, stating that we were willing to advance the older men, but we couldn't advance the younger men in the service. I think it advanced all men who had been in the service over ten years ten per cent., and made no advance for the others. The understanding was that there should be four classes of men. In the first class, those who had served three years; that they should be in the second class two years; and be in the third class one year; and a man who was promoted from a fireman, should be in the fourth class. We made an advance of ten per cent. in the one class, and the second was ten per cent. below the first, and the third was ten per cent. below the second.
By Senator Yutzy: