Illinois vs. August Spies et al. trial transcript no. 1 Direct and re-direct examination by Mr. Foster. Cross-examination by Mr. Ingham. Testified on behalf of the Defense, Spies, August et al. Testified on various topics (page numbers provide a partial guide): socialists and/or socialism (vol.M 335), anarchists and/or anarchism (vol.M 336), advocating revolution (vol.M 336), the Alarm (vol.M 340), the Arbeiter-Zeitung (vol.M 355), McCormick Reaper Works strike, meeting or riot (vol.M 349), Greif's Hall (vol.M 340), eight-hour movement (vol.M 360), 1886 May 4 meeting of the American Group at the Arbeiter-Zeitung office (vol.M 344), International Workingmen's Association (vol.M 336), the American Group (vol.M 337), Central Labor Union (vol.M 346), Parsons, Albert (vol.M 344), Parsons, Lucy (vol.M 344), Schwab, Michael (vol.M 345), Fielden's speech at Haymarket (vol.M 346), Fielden's version of the Haymarket events (vol.M 334), attendance of women and children at labor meetings and rallies (vol.M 337).
Testimony of Samuel Fielden (first appearance resumed), 1886 Aug. 7.
Volume M, 334-365, 32 p.
Fielden, Samuel, b. 1847, defendant.
Teamster; English immigrant.
Go to Next Witness | Return to Previous Witness | Return to Trial TOC | Return to the HADC Table of Contents
[Image, Volume M, Page 334]
Illinois vs. August Spies et al. trial transcript no. 1
Direct and re-direct examination by Mr. Foster. Cross-examination by Mr. Ingham. Testified on behalf of the Defense, Spies, August et al.
Testified on various topics (page numbers provide a partial guide): socialists and/or socialism (vol.M 335), anarchists and/or anarchism (vol.M 336), advocating revolution (vol.M 336), the Alarm (vol.M 340), the Arbeiter-Zeitung (vol.M 355), McCormick Reaper Works strike, meeting or riot (vol.M 349), Greif's Hall (vol.M 340), eight-hour movement (vol.M 360), 1886 May 4 meeting of the American Group at the Arbeiter-Zeitung office (vol.M 344), International Workingmen's Association (vol.M 336), the American Group (vol.M 337), Central Labor Union (vol.M 346), Parsons, Albert (vol.M 344), Parsons, Lucy (vol.M 344), Schwab, Michael (vol.M 345), Fielden's speech at Haymarket (vol.M 346), Fielden's version of the Haymarket events (vol.M 334), attendance of women and children at labor meetings and rallies (vol.M 337).
August 7th, 10 o'clock A. M.
Court met pursuant to adjournment.
Direct Examination resumed by
Q Do you know Mr. James Bonfield, the detective?
A Yes sir.
Q Did you hear his testimony in this case?
A Yes sir.
Q I will ask you if you related to Mr. Bonfield the direction or course that you went after getting off the wagon that night?
A I did not. I never spoke to him. I didn't know him as James Bonfield at all until after I had been in court some weeks.
Q I will ask you if you stated to Mr. Bonfield or anybody else immediately after your arrest at the station or at any other time or any other place that you escaped through Crane's alley that night?
A I did not.
Q In the conversation with the reporter, with Knox, or any of these parties, was there a statement of that character made on the night of May 5th, or at any other time, or at any place whatever, that you went through Crane's alley that night?
A After the corner's inquest there was some three or four reporters came down there and they asked me to give a short account of myself and of the occurrence. I did so, and I told them that I went around the corner.
Whether I stated to them that I went around on the corner of Randolph s reet I don't know, but I never said to anyone that I went through the alley---because I never did.
CROSS EXAMINATION BY
Q You say you were born in England?
A Yes sir.
Q How old were you when you came to America?
A I was 21
Q Did you have any business while you were in England?
A I went to work in a cotton mill at eight years of age. I worked in the same mill until I left that mill and come to the United States.
Q Did you have any profession, any calling while you were in England?
A Going in as a boy, I worked all the way up until I became a weaver, was a weaver before I left the mill, and when I left it I was what is called a binder, that is winding the warps on the beams.
Q You came to this country at 21?
A 21, yes sir.
Q How long have you lived in Chicago?
A Well, I come to Chicago, in 1869, and it has been my principal home since.
Q You say you have been here how long?
A I came here in 1869 in August, and it has been my principal place of residence since.
Q How long have you been a socialist?
A I joined the socialistic organization in July 1884.
Q What organization was that?
A The International Working
Q What department of it, or branch of it?
A The American Group.
Q How long have you been a anarchist?
A Well, I suppose I was an Anarchist soon after I joined that, as soon as I began to study it.
Q You passed from socialism into Anarchism?
A Yes sir.
Q How long have you been a resolutionist?
A Well, in the sense of evolutionary revolution. I have been that I suppose some years----I can't tell exactly how many.
Q How long have you been of the belief that the existing order of things should be overthrown by force?
A I don't know that I have ever been positively on the belief or am yet. I have always been of the belief and am yet that the existing order of things will have to be overthrown either by one method or the other.
Q Either peaceably or by force?
Q If it cannot be accomplished by the ballot then it must be done by force?
A It is the necessary order of things that is my opinion.
Q If you cannot convert the majority of the people of this country to your belief, then the minority must overturn the majority by force.
THE COURT: The examination must be confined to what is said and done. What he has said and done is the legitimate subject.
MR. INGHAM: How long have you preached anarchy?
Mr. Foster. That assumes he has preached anarchy. It is immaterial and not proper cross examination.
MR. INGHAM: Q How long were you a member of the American Group.
A Before my arrest I was a member about a year and ten months.
Q Who were membersof that Group while you were a member so far as you can recollect?
A When I had the books as the financial secretary there was some thing like 175 members that was a year----no, that was last November when I became the treasurer and financial secretary----since that time I don't know how many members have been added to the list.
Q The Group was composed of both men and women?
A. Men & women, yes sir..
Q. What proportion were men, & what proportion, women?
A Well, I don't know how many/. The largest number was men, was probably some fifteen or twenty ladies belonged to it.
Q You called it the American Group because it was the Group in which the English language was used, did you not?
Q It was not confined to persons who were born in America?
A No sir.
Q But open to any one who spoke the English language?
A Yes sir.
Q Was there any other English speaking group in this City
that you know of.
Objected to as immaterial and not proper cross examination.
THE COURT: I think this particular question is not specific anough. It is simply as to his knowledge of any other English speaking group. Whether he himself had any connection or association with such group or not, whether there was any other English speaking group which he had ever met with, or any of the members with which he had any association, would be a different question.
MR. INGHAM: Did you ever meet with any other English speaking group in this city or county.?
MR. BLACK: We object to all testimony which does not come within the rule of cross examination, that is to say which does not relate to the examination, does not relate to the subject matter of the direct examination.
THE COURT: The only difference is in the application of the rule. I think that rule does allow a complete examination as to his own conduct.
MR. BLACK: We except to the ruling of the court.
MR. INGHAM: Q Did you ever attend any meeting of any English speaking group other then the American Group in this
city or county.
Objected to for reasons already stated. Objection overruled to which ruling of the court defendants' counsel then and there excepted.
A Well, we have tried to found English speaking groups. We tried to found one a year ago last winter on West Indiana street. I think we only held two meetings, and then we abandoned it.
Q Any other more than that that you ever attended?
A I don't remember any now.
Q You for the last two or three years have been making speeches have you not, socialistic and anarchistic speeches?
A Well, I have been making labor speeches. They were not always socialistic and not always anarchistic.
Q But you have made socialistic and anarchistic speeches during the last two or three years?
A Well, that I understand to be---sometimes I have touched upon socialism and anarchy, and sometimes my speeches might have been delivered from an ordinary trade union stand point--whether any socialism or anarchism was in them.
Q Where did you make these speeches?
A I have made speeches on the lake front, most of my speeches I think. No, not most of them, I have made a great many on the lake front some on the market square, some at 54 West Randolph, and some
at West 12th street Turner Hall.
Q 54 West Randolph?
A West Lake.
A Greiff's, and some at 106 East Randolph
Q What days of the week did you speak on the Lake front?
Q Sunday afternoon?
A Sunday afternoon.
Q How many times have you spoken on the Lake front on Sunday afternoons.?
Objected to as immaterial, overruled, and exception.
A I think twenty times.
Q How many times have you spoken at Geiff's Hall?
A Well, I think I have taken part in discussions there---I don't consider that so much as a speech as taking part in discussion, if you call those speeches, I may have spoken there thirty times.
Q How many times on the marketsquare?
A On the east side or south side, I have spoken, I think I have spoken there some four or five times.
Q Did you make a speech there on the night of the opening of the Board of Trade?
Objected to; Objection overruled. Exception by defendants.
Q You were a stockholder in the Alarm?
A I have two dollars worth of stock in it I believe.
Q You were as much a stockholder as any one else, were you not.
Q But you did have two dollars worth of stock in it? (No Response.)
Q Did you have anything to do with the management of the Alarm?
THE COURT: That is admissible.
Defendants then and there excepted to the ruling of the court.
THE WITNESS: Well, I was part of the committee that met to see what we should do about it when it began to get in deep water and some one proposed that my name should be put on the paper as being the recipient of communications as to the management of it. I never received any complaints as to the management of it at all. Sometimes I would receive fifty cents, sometimes a dollar from people who contributed through me or subscribed through me---in that way, and complaints as to not receiving the paper--that is all I had to do with managing the paper.
Q How long were you connected with it in that way?
A My name was on there up to the time of its suspension.
Q For how long?
A I think it was a little less than a year.
Q Did you read the Alarm?
Objected to by defendants' counsel as immaterial The court overruled the objection to which ruling of the court defendants' counsel then and there excepted.
A I read it sometimes, and sometimes I didn't.
Q About how often did you read it?
Objected to by defendants' counsel as immaterial. The court overruled the objection, to which ruling of the court counsel for defendants then and there excepted.
A I can't tell you, because in fact I had not as much time to read anything as I would like to have had---my time being taken up so much with my work, having to rise early in the morning and consequently to go to bed at night at a reasonable time, and sometimes taking up so much of my time at speaking and when I had a night to myself of course I went to bed in rather early season.
Q Didn't you read this paper to keep track of the socialistic history as it was being made?
Objected to his motive. Objection overruled. Exception by defendants.
A I think if you look over the Alarm, you will see that a person could hardly keep track of the socialistic movement by the Alarm itself, to read it for that purpose would not be
hardly good judgment.
Q Have you read the Alarm enough to know that?
A What I have read in it---I have not read every issue. I have read portions. I think possibly there are some issues I have not read at all. There are others that I have read portions of, but not all of them.
Q Did you ever read any portions of the alarm containing the translations from the Freuheit?
A I think I read one issue. I don't know whether I read it through or not. and a portion of another, but I didn't read those articles., continuously, and I don't believe I read two of those articles from the Freiheit.
Q Did you see other articles from the Freiheit in the Alarm?
A I may have done so I can't tell now.
Q Do you remember when that was?
A I don't know. I can approximate it. I think it was about a year ago if I am not mistaken.
Q Do you remember to have read any articles signed Lizius?
A I think I have.
Q About how long ago was that if you remember?
A I can't tell---perhaps it is a year ago.
MR. BLACK: I move that the last question and answer be stricken out. The state has introduced one article from the Alarm signed Lixius, I believe one, possible two.
MR. INGHAM: Strike it out.
Q What time did you get to the Arbeiter Zeitung office on the night of the 4th of May?
A I think I got there about ten minutes to eight.
Q Why did you go there?
A I went there because of the advertisement I saw in the Daily News.
Q When did you see that advertisement?
A I think it was about half past six.
Q You got there about eight you say?
A A little before eight.
Q How many were at that meeting?
A I should think there was about a dozen there when I got in.
Q How many members of the American group did you know at that meeting that might?
A I think during the night there was possibly twelve or fifteen of the American group.
Q Can you name them? name those who were present?
A Well, there was Mr. & Mrs. Parsons. There was Mr. and Mrs. Timmons. There was I think Joh Walters and I think there was Brown and Snyder.
Q Who is John Walters?
A He is a member of the American Group.
Q Did you say Walters or Waldo?
A I think his name is Walters. I think he was there--I am not certain about him being there, but my impression is he was there., but I am not sure about it, I would not swear that he was. and there was Mrs. Holmes and Snyder and Brown--I mentioned them before I believe. I can't remember all of them now.
Q Was Mr. Ducy there?
A Well, that I cannot be positive about.
Q You staid there how long?
A I think we staid there until nearly nine o'clock. Perhaps ten minutes before nine.
Q Then where did you go?
A Then we went to the Haymarket
Q How did you come to go to the Haymarket?
A Mr. Rau came over from the Haymarket and said Spies was there, and no one else to speak, and there was a large meeting there.
Q Mr. Rau you mean?
A Yes, Mr. Rau.
Q Balthazar Rau?
A Balthazar Rau, yes.
Q Then you went?
A Then I went.
Q Who went with you?
A Well, I think there was some four or five of us went together---I don't know whether Brown went with us or went before us, but I know that Rau and Mr. Parsons, myself and Snyder went about together--it might be two groups of them one party walking ahead of the other.
Q Do you remember whether Schwab was at the Zeitung office that night?
A Yes, I do.
Q Did he leave the meeting before you, or at the same time with you?
A He left the meeting before us.
Q Did Parsons leave at the same time or before?
A Well, Parsons walked up Washington street with me from the corner.
Q Did you have an appointment to speak at any place that evening?
A I had promised on Saturday night at Greiffs hall a man who had been to my house before and asked me to
speak at a meeting for the Central Labor Union. I promised him to speak at either 368 or 378 West 12th street that night.
Q What sort of meeting was it to be as you understood it?
A I didn't ask him.
Q A labor meeting?
A Yes, I understood it because he was engaged in labor work.
Q After you got to the Haymarket and on the Wagon who were present on the wagon with you?
A I only remember Mr. Parsons, Mr. Spies and Mr. Snyder---I don't remember any one else. I know that there were some people who were strangers to me. There was a boy about 16 years of age came upon the wagon, and he rather crowded me to one side, and I told him he might as well stand down, that he could hear as well down below. There were some strangers on there I think but those are the only ones I can remember.
Q Those are the only ones you can remember?
Q How long did you speak?
A I spoke about twenty minutes.
Q You said you were not anxious to speak?
A I was not.
Q You spoke because Mr. Spies requested you to?
Q And not from any desire of your own?
A No Mr. Parsons spoke longer than I thought he would, and at that time I thought it was late enough to close anyway, but Spies said I might make a short speech.
Q Did you use this language inn your speech "There are premon,itions of danger. All know it. The press say the anarchists will sneak away. We are not going to."
A I don't
know whether I did or not. I don't know whether---I have no desire to deny that I did use that language, but here of course I think I ought to be allowed in justice to myself to make an explanation of what I meant if I used it.
Q That is the very reason I asked it so you could make an explanation of what you meant.
MR. BLACK: If he used it.
THE WITNESS: If I used it and I don't know whether I did or not.
MR. FOSTER: Go on with your explanation.
MR. INGHAM: Q If you don't know whether you used it or not how can you tell what you meant by it?
A Because if I had had an idea in my mind at any time which would be expressed in that language, I know for what reason I would have that idea, what reasons would give me that idea, and I think that I must have expressed there if I used that language.
Q Now, I read "If we continue to be robbed it will not be long before we will be murdered. There is no security for the working classes under the present social system. A few individuals control the means of living and hold the working man in a vice. Everybody doesn't know that. Those who know it are tired of it, and soon the others will get tired of it too. They are determined to end it and will end it, and there is no power in the land that can prevent them. Congressman Foran said the laborer could get nothing
from legislation. He also said that the laborers could get some relief from their present condition when the rich man there are dissatisfied workingmen---that that would solve the labor trouble. Do you remember whether you used that language or not?
A I think substantially I used that language as you have read it last.
Q Do you remember whether you used the whole of the language I read to you or not?
A I cannot tell exactly every word after being locked up for three months to come here ans ask me if I said every word just in the connection and in that place---I can't remember it.
Q I don't know whether you are democrats or republicans, but whichever you are, you worship at the shrine of rebellion. John Brown, Jefferson, Washington, Patrick Henry and Hopkins said to the people "The law is your enemy" Did you use that language?
A I did not say that they said "the law is your enemy."
Q You did not,?
A No sir.
Q "We are rebels against it" Did you use that language?
A Rebels against what?
Q "We are rebels against it"?
A If I used that language, and I possibly did, I referred to the present social system.
Q "The law is only framed for those who are your enslavers, (A voice: That is true.) Men in their blind rage attacked
McCormick's factories and were shot down in cold blood by the law of the City of Chicago in the protection of property. Those men were going to do some damage to a certain person's interest who was a large property owner and therefore the law came to his defense, and when McCarmick undertook to do some injury to the interests of those who had no property, the law also came to his defense, but not to the workingman's defense, when he, McCormick, attacked him and his living. There is the difference." Did you use that language?
A Substantially I think.
Q "The law makes no distinctions. A million men own all the property of this country. The law is of no use to the other fifty four million. You have nothing more to do with the law except to lay hands on it and throttle it until it makes its last kick." Did you use that language?
A I think so.
Q "It has turned your brethern out on the wayside and degraded them until they have lost the last vestige of humanity, and become mere things and animals. Keep your eye upon it, throttle it, kill it, stab it." Did you use that language?
A I think so.
Q "Do everything you can to wound it and impede its progress. If you do not, it is a life and death struggle between you and it and it will kill you." Did you use that language?
A Well, with a little explanation I think I did.
Q Is the explanation as to what the language means or as to your recollection of having said it?
A The explanation as to what the language means, and possible I may have said it.
Q "Remember if you ever do anything for yourselves, prepare to do it for yourselves. Don't turn over your business to anybody else." Did you make use of that language?
A I think I did.
Q "No man deserves anything unless he is man enough to make an effort to lift himself from oppression."
Q Then the storm came and interruption. Then you said "you know the people were very tired and you would not talk very long; you said that?
A Yes. I don't know whether I said I was tired or not. I think what I said about not talking very long was in response to a proposition to adjourn to Zepf's hall.
Q Did you then say the socialists are not going to declare war, but I tell you war has been declared on us, and I ask you to get hold of anything that will help to resist the onslaught of the enemy and the usurper?
A I don't remember saying that.
Q "The skirmish lines have met. People have been shot. Men women and children have not been spared by the ruthless milions of private capital," Do you remember that?
A I think so.
Q "It has no mercy". Do you remember that?
A I think so.
Q "So ought you"---do you remember that?
A Now, I don't know whether I rmember "It had no mercy, so ought you". There is not much sense in it. I don't think I should use it in that way.
Q Will you swear you did not?
A "It had no mercy---so ought you" I can't remember it, and I will not father it.
Q "You are called upon to defend yourselves, your lives your future. What matters it whether you kill yourselves with work to get a little relief or die on the battle-field resisting the enemy." Did you make use of that langusge?
A At that time I was speaking of the--that is a report which has been garbled. There are some expressions.
Q We might rise to a question of veracity.
A That is a report which has been garbled and it has not given the connections; and I can make a very inflammatory speech out of a lawyer's speech before any judge by garbling his speech, and taking a word here and there.
Q I am reading it to you exactly as it was testified to in court by the reporter?
A He testified also that he only gave the inflammatory words.
MR. INGHAM: The jury heard what he said.
MR. BLACK: He didn't pretend he got the whole of it.
Mr. English distinctly stated he didn't get the whole of it.
MR. INGHAM: We will see what Mr. English said.
Q Do you remember whether you used that language or not: "What matter it whether you kill yourselves with work to get a relief or die on the battle field resisting the enemy".
A I don't think I used it in that way.
Q "What is the difference. Any animal however loathsome will resist when stepped upon. Are men less than snails and worms. I have some resistance in me, I know that you have. You have been robbed. And you will be starved into a worse condition." Did you use that language?
A I think I used that language, but you haven't got the sense of it at all in quoting it in that way, and I don't accept that as my speech at all.
Q In what connection did you use this language: "The socialists are not going to declare war, but I tell you war has been declared on us and I ask you to get hold of anything that will help resist the onslaugh of the enemy and the usurpe The skirmish lines have met. People have been shot, men women and children have not been spared by the ruthless minions of private capital. It had no mercy so ought you. You are called upon to defend yourselves, your lives, your future. What matters it whether you kill yourselves with work to get a little relief or die on the battlefield resisting the enemy?
MR. INGHAM: I will not insist on it if it is objected to.
MR. FOSTER: If you say that you are ashamed of it, let it appear in the record.
MR. INGHAM: I am not ashamed of it. I offer to give this man an opportunity to explain before the jury his language. You object to it. I am not ashamed of the offer to give this man that opportunity.
MR. FOSTER: You know that your offer is not fair. You know that it is not right. You know that it is not admissible.
MR. INGHAM: We will leave it to the jury if it is fair or not.
MR. FOSTER: You know you have incorporated in the question things which this witness says he didn't say.
MR. INGHAM: There is not a word incorporated in the question which was not testified to by Mr. English.
MR. FOSTER: I am not speaking about Mr. English.
THE COURT: There was something said a few moments ago about explanations which I understood both sides were proposing to have him make.
MR. FOSTER: But incorporated in this question is the remark that Mr. Fielden said he didn't make because there is no sense in it--he couldn't have made such a remark as that.
THE COURT: The three words, "so ought you" he thinks don't come in and make connection. If they were used at all it is an eliptical phrase.
MR. INGHAM: Q Look at the article in the February 21st number of the Alarm headed "Dynamite" signed T. Lizius. Did you ever see that article, Feb. 21st, 1885?
A 1885 I don't remember ever having seen it.
Q Where were you standing when you were shot or where were you?
A I was not standing.
Q I changed the question.
A I was either running or beginning to walk, and I think it was just before I came to those boxes which have been testified to.
Q Look at the article which I now show you, in the issue of June 27th, 1885, the Alarm, headed "Dynamite"? Instructions regarding its use and operations." Address A. S. S. Alarm 5th Ave. Chicago." Did you ever see that article.?
MR. SALOMON: I presume our general objection applied to this
THE WITNESS: I don't remember now that I have.
THE COURT: I don't know how that will be. If you wish to have a special exception, I suppose the record ought to contain it now.
MR. FOSTER: Are we to object to every question asked? We objected to the articles in regard to the articles in the Alarm and the court admits them. Does the court require us to stand up here and make continual objections?
THE COURT: I suppose there is no reason why if you agree to it there cannot be inserted in the record an exception to each question, but unless it is by agreement upon
both sides it cannot be done.
MR. FOSTER: That has been the understanding all through this trial that when we object to the general line of testimony, that that general objection extends to it all.
MR. GRINNELL: We won't have any trouble about it.
MR. FOSTER: I will ask you whether or not that is the understanding in this case.
MR. INGHAM: About every question that has been asked has been objected to.
MR. BLACK: Not all of it.
THE COURT: A general exception as to all cross examination of this witness except as to the specific things he was asked about in chief would cover it.
MR. BLACK: That has been made, overruled and excepted to.
MR. SALOMON: Our objection applied to such matters as have not been inquired into on direct examination.
MR. INGHAM: The minute you raise that question in the first instance it covers everything on that line. If you object to any question in regard to the Alarm, of course every question comes under that objection.
Q After you were shot, where did you go?
A I went down Randolph street, went south to Randolph and DesPlaines, down Randolph to Clinton. I walked south on Clinton I think until I changed my mind about going home then, and thought I would go down past the Arbeiter Zeitung office on a car;
and then I think I turned over on Jackson street to Canal, and I am positive, very distinct of catching a car just as it was making a very rapid race up the grade over the viaduct, and as I jumped on the driver was somewhat angry at my jumping on the forward platform there as it was going so fast.
Q Why did you change your mind about going home?
A Well, the mind of man is susceptible to incidents over which he hasn't altogether any control.
Q I asked you why you changed your mind?
A I can't tell you why. Impressions sometimes come on a person's mind which he cannot explain why they come there.
Q You started with the intention of going home?
A I think when I turned the corner, turning south, that I had that impression in my mind as well as I can remember now.
Q Did you start with the intention of going home?
A I think I thought at one time that I would go home.
Q Where did you live at that time?
A Where I live now.
Q Where is that?
A Clinton and Polk.
Q Instead of going home however you went down town?
A Yes sir.
Q Did you go to the Zeitung office?
A I rode past there on a car.
Q Did you walk past there?
A No sir.
Q Was there any reason for staying on the car, not walking?
A No, I didn't wish to be arrested that night.
Q You said something in your direct examination about being known by reporters?
A I am known by a great deal of them.
Q For that reason you did not walk near the Arbeiter Zeitung office but rode on the car?
A I rode on the car.
Q You stated something about detectives after you got back on the west side?
A I saw a crowd near Zepf's Hall around that corner, and I thought possibly there would be lots of detectives there, and I certainly didn't wish to be arrested that night.
Q You thought you would be arrested?
A Of course after the trouble I did. It was only natural to suppose I would.
Q You were speaking after the police came up?
A Yes sir.
Q You considered there was nothing inflammatory in your speech, nothing incendiary?
A No, I didn't think there was.
Q Just an ordinary speech according to your impression?
A Of course different persons have different ways of looking at a speech. Some persons would call one speech inflammatory which another would consider very mild.
Q At any rate you didn't consider it inflammatory or indendiary?
A I didn't incite anybody to do anything If I had been allowed an explanation I would have shown you I did not incite anybody to do any overt act to anybody or anything. I spoke generally, from a general stand point.
Q That is a sort of general principle speech, and when you said they should resist you meant generally the people should resist?
A I meant resist the present social system which degraded them and turned them out of employment, and gave them no opportunity to get a living.
Q In your opinion you hadn't made an incendiary speech at that time?
A No sir.
Q Somebody threw a bomb and you didn't know who it was nor anything about it?
A I did not know, I don't know now.
Q You didn't at that time?
A I did not.
Q And yet you were afraid you would be arrested?
A Well, I have read some reports of criminal proceedings and I know that they arrest everybody in order to find out who is responsible. I knew that at that time. I thought that I, being one of the participants in the meeting that I should at least be arrested for some time at least; that when I spoke, when I testified before the corner's jury I had a different opinion of the police from what I have now. Knowing my innocence, I made that statement, and I thought that when they had examined into the truth of that statement that I should be released but I found out my mistake.
Q The police didn't indict you, did they?
A I don't know who indicted me.
Q Don't you know that the police had no power to discharge you after you were bound over bybthe corner's inquest?
MR. INGHAM: That is all.
Re-Direct Examination by
Q I will ask you whether the meeting that you were asked to speak at on the night of the 4th of May and which you say on Sunday you had promised to speak at, was a meeting of the sugar refiners?
A I have often been to meetings, and when I get into the hall, I would ask them right there, where I had been invited to go, and they would tell me what they meeting was for, I would make a general labor speech, showing the general condition of labor--would be right in the hall. I have been on the platform of meetings and not known what the organization was for that met there, and at that time I didn't ask the ma what it was, but I think I have learned since, that it was.
Q Sugar refiners' meeting?
A Yes, I think that it is.
Q You were going to make some explanation in regard to the words which the reporter has testified to you made use of at the Haymarket with regard to the premonitions of danger. You stated that if you were permitted to make an explanation, that you would tell just the idea conveyed, or if the words were used, the idea that prompted them. Now, you make any explanation which youndesire to?
A I meant at that time when I made that remark, if I did make it, that there was so many
men striking, and from my knowledge of other strikes where trouble had occurred, that there was a possible outlook that some trouble would originate between the strikers any their employers, and that perhaps the authorities in endeavoring to preserve the peace, before this trouble was ended, as there was such a number striking for to eight hour movement, and knowing that men, all men are not very cool and some men become aggravated, their condition may have a good deal to do with it, and they perform acts sometimes which the officers of the law in their capacity as officers officers of the law are compelled to interfere with. That is the general idea that I had.
Q That is what you hadbreference to by premonitions of denger?
A Yes sir.
Q You had no reference to the presence of dynamite at that meeting?
A No, I was speaking of the general labor question and the issue that was up for settlement during the eight hour movement.
Q Then passed to that portion of the report which has been read to you by Mr. Ingham in which you were asked as to what you said about Hopkins, Jefferson and Washington and other public persons stating that the law is your enemy. you said you didn't use those words but you could explain what you said on that subject. Will you now explain?
A I didn't say that they said "The law was their enemy".
I have recently read the history of the United States by George Bancroft, and I know that they were not in any sense the enemies of law, in the sense that anarchists are supposed to be. And I referred in speaking of John Brown, Jefferson, Hopkins, Patrick Henry, I referred that we occupied in relation to the present social system which had outlived its day, and no longer provided security for the masses; that we occupied just about the portion that three men occupied with the further government and dictation of Great Britain over the colonies; that they repeatedly appealed to Great Britain to settle the differences in regard to the port duties, and the stamp tax, and so on, and to settle it peaceably, but when it could not be settled peaceably they could not any longer, they could not submit to it, and they were compelled by necessity to resort to something else, and it was always the case that the element of tyarany was always the inciter of strife, and as it was in that case so it would be in this
Q And it was in that connection and in that idea that you made that expression?
A With that idea, and I have repeatedly in public meetings said that it was not a very cheerful outlook, that in my opinion there would strife result, was compelled to look at it in that way.
Q I am not asking you what you stated in other meetings.
A That was the substance of what I had repeated before many times.
MR. FOSTER: I ask that it be stricken out so much as has reference to either meeting then that of the 4th of May.
THE COURT: Well.
MR. FOSTER: You have been read what has been said upon throttling the law, killing it and stabbing it---these adjectives that are piled up here--state the explanation you said you desired to make in regard to that?
A Well, it was just the explanation that a republican orator might make when he was denouncing the democratic party, perhaps trying to get rid of the democratic party. He might say that he would kill the democratic party or "We will kill it", or "We will throttle it" or "Defeat it"---that is just about what it was. It was an adjective that any speaker in rushing along might throw in without think much of what the full import of thw word might be.
Q You also were read a portion of the reporter's notes with regard to snails and worms and said there was a want of connection there. What was your words in reference to the snails and worms or the idea as you now remember you wished to be conveyed?
A Well, The idea that I intended to convey at that time was that when they were thrown out of work through no fault of their own, and it being a fact that it had been proven and asserted on the floor of the House of Representatives that over a million of men are now out of employ men through no fault of their own; that these men
MR. FOSTER: I ask that it be stricken out so much as has reference to other meetings than that of the 4th. of May.
THE COURT: Well.
MR. FOSTER (Q) You have been read what has been said upon throttling the law, killing it and stabbing it--- these adjectives that are piled up here--- state the explanation you said you desired to make in regard to that?
A- Well, it was just the explanation a that a republican orator might make when he was denouncing the democratic party, perhaps trying to get rid of the democratic party He might say that he would kill the democratic party or "We will kill it", or "we will throttle it" or "Defeat it"-- that is just about what it was. It was an adjective that any speaker in rushing along might throw in without think much of what the full import of the word might be.
Q- You also were read a protion of the reporters notes with regard to snails and worms and said there was a want of connection there. What was your words in reference to the snails and worms or the idea as you now remember you wished to be conveyed?
A- Well, the idea that I intended to convey at that time was that when they were thrown out of work through no fault of their own, and it being a fact that it had been proven and asserted on the floor of the House of Represenratives that over a million of men are now out of employment through no fault of their own; that these men
being driven from post to pillar and become degraded and loath-some and people look upon them with contempt, and yet it is really no fault of their own, they had no hand or part in producing the condition of things which turned them out of employment, and leads up to their abject condition.
Q- You were asked with reference as to whether or not your language was incendiary and as to what you said or did with reference to inciting violence-- what have you to say in explanation if anything upon that branch of your examination?
A- My remarks that night were intended in my own mind on that night to call the peoples attention to resisting not by force-- I had'nt such an idea in my mind that night--- to resist the present social system so that they would be enabled to live, that by the introduction of labor saving machinery, and the subdivision of labor, less men were continually needed, and more productions were produced, and the over production did not give them a chance to work by these schemes of incre asing the rapidity of production, and that by their organizing together they might become partakers in the benefits of civilized production, and more advantageous production and quicker production.
Q- You had no idea of any immediate action or any immediate violence at that meeting?
A- I had not the slightest idea.
Q- No idea of the presence of any dynamite bombs or anything
of that kind?
A- No, and I did'nt know and no one conveyed any information to me as to there being a superior number of police at that station. I did'nt know anything of the kind until after the meeting that there had been that number there or a larger number than usual.