Mr. Pullman: "I did express unwillingness and refer you to my published statements. I was aware of the losses of the company in paying the wages it did when contract prices were so low, and I knew it was impossible for the company to pay a higher scale. It was a question whether the shops should be closed, or secure work at a low figure. It was the principle involved in letting a third party determine how the company should transact its business."
Mr. Worthington: "But you paid the usual dividend of eight per cent last year?"
Mr. Pullman: "Yes. But the profit during the World's Fair helped out the amount."
Mr. Worthington: "Now don't you think that the Pullman corporation which paid a dividend of $2,800,000 for the year just ended should have borne with the employes and shared its profits to some extent?"
Mr. Pullman: "I don't see why we should take the money from the stockholders to pay a set of men higher wages because the manufacturing business paid well, to pay this money to men working at Pullman when the employes at Ludlow, Wilmington and St. Louis had no complaint to make. The efforts of the American Railway Union to call a strike there was a failure."
Mr. Worthington: "Has the Pullman Company ever voluntarily raised wages?"
Mr. Pullman: "No; but it always has paid fair wages."
Mr. Worthington: "Now, Mr. Pullman, when you see the present unrest of labor, and the possible consequences, what objection had you to distributing a portion of the profits or increasing wages a little?"
Mr. Pullman: "The reason is embodied in my statement, it is a matter of opinion, and then there is the principle involved. It is impossible under the circumstances."
Mr. Worthington: "Impossible, what is impossible? Could not arbitration determine the principle involved?"