 |
Victor
|
The
Cripple Creek
Strike:
a History of
Industrial Wars
in Colorado,
1903-4-5
By Emma Florence Langdon
pages 527 to 542
HAYWOOD HOME AGAIN.
Sunday, August 4, William D. Haywood and party reached Denver just before midnight. Notwithstanding the lateness of the hour it was estimated 10,000 people had assembled and anxiously awaited his arrival to tender a welcome of cheers to the man who had spent nearly eighteen months in an Idaho jail.
It was a day long to be remembered in Denver! As the train steamed into the Union depot the thousands in waiting gave vent to their pent up enthusiasm. Carriages were in waiting and the party were escorted to the Albany hotel where a suite of rooms had been engaged for the family. When the party reached the hotel—cheer after cheer rent the air and cries for a speech followed in rapid succession. The vast assembly simply went wild over the man McParland had said "would never leave Idaho alive." Haywood, after a brief address that was drowned in the shouts of enthusiasm, mingled with the crowd and upon several occasions was lifted off his feet by the frantic crowd that yearned to grasp him by the hand and congratulate him.
No man in history was ever given a more hearty welcome than William D. Haywood upon his return home to the "Queen City of the Plains."
PRESIDENT MOYER RELEASED ON BOND.
After a delay of thirty-six hours after the verdict of the jury in the Haywood case, Charles H. Moyer was released from Ada County jail on a bond of $25,000.
President Moyer did not return with the Haywood party. An editorial in the Miner's Magazine, August 8, explained thoroughly President Mioyer's attitude better than the writer would be able to do. The Editorial follows:
"Charles H. Moyer and wife did not reach Denver with the Haywood party. The president of the Western Federation of Miners did not feel that the time had come for him to receive the congratulations of his friends. He is yet facing that charge that was made by a combination that feels no scruple in putting a noose around the neck of the man who does battle for the interests of the laboring people. President Moyer has been permitted to enjoy temporary freedom under a bond of $25,000. When he has conquered his enemies and when the doors of an Idaho jail have opened to give liberty to his loyal and staunch friend, George Pettibone, Moyer will then feel that the victory is complete and will enjoy the downfall of the conspiring fiends who attempted to perpetrate the crime of judicial murder."
"The health of President Moyer and wife is not of the best, and it is probable that he will rest for several days before he takes up the active work of the presidency."
Long live the President of the Western Federation of Miners Charles H. Moyer!
PETTIBONE REFUSED BAIL
Formal application was made July 30, before Judge Wood to have Pettibone admitted to bail. The motion was submitted without argument and promptly denied. So George A. Pettibone still remained a prisoner in the state of Idaho. No generosity could be felt by the prosecution for the philosophical man who had borne with patience and a cheerful spirit eighteen months imprisonment. But while he was left alone in his prison cell the hearts of all organized labor was with him and pledged their "fortune and their all" in his behalf.
Steve Adams was still held to appease the wrath of corporate despotism but the Federation pledged itself to exhaust every dollar in the treasury, if necessary, in protecting his honor with the others.
The Pettibone Trial
"O, such a day,
So fought, so followed, and so fairly won,
Came not, till now, to dignify the times,
Since Caesar's fortunes."
—Shakespeare.
AFTEE the satisfactory termination of the Haywood trial, the workers throughout the country seemed to fall into a lethargy of indifference, which had the effect of giving hope to the conspirators. Any one who understood the case in all its details realized it was as important to completely vindicate Moyer, Pettibone and Adams as Haywood—this was not a battle for individuals, one any more than another, but justice for all.
It was the consensus of opinion all over the land that the acquittal of Haywood was the vindication of the others and that the cases would be dismissed against Moyer and Pettibone.
George A. Pettibone suffered the pangs of imprisonment for a period of nearly two years. Notwithstanding his health was shattered, the conspirators, in cold-blooded brutality demanded that he be refused bail. So when the day dawned that had been set for the trial, he had been confined so long behind the walls of a jail that he was but a physical wreck of the philosophical Pettibone when he enjoyed good health.
Immediately after the disagreement of the jury in the Adams case in November, the Pettibone case was called and the long, tedious task of selecting a jury begun on November 27. Judge Wood announced that he would not allow the latitude of challenges that he had permitted in the Haywood trial. He also stated long sessions would be held each day in order to conclude the trial as quickly as possible.
The Pettibone trial was practically a repetition of the Haywood trial. Judge Fremont Wood presided; James B. Hawley representing the prosecution and Clarence Darrow chief counsel for the defense.
Here I wish to mention that the prosecution during the examination of talesmen had the unexcelled audacity to ask each juror that took his seat in the box if he would convict Pettibone on the same evidence that was produced at the Haywood trial. If the juror gave a negative reply, the prosecution challenged the eligibility of the man to sit as juror.
JURY COMPLETED.
December 6, 1907, the jury to try Pettibone was completed and sworn in and were as follows:
J. H. Frazier, 25 years old, student; E. L. Evans, age 38, farmer; A. A. Tillotson, age 29, merchant; W. A. Palmer, age 40, liveryman; Wm. Stahl, age 48, placer miner; A. C. Boot, age 52, printer; Charles Wilmot, age 45, farmer; Arthur Estes, age 38, farmer; C. R. Smead, age 29, liveryman; J. H. Garrecht, age 40, butcher.
Both Clarence Darrow for the defense and James R. Hawley for the prosecution expressed satisfaction with the jury selected. The defense used but seven peremptory challenges and the state nine, each side being allowed by law ten challenges. Practically one week of actual work was consumed in empaneling the jury, and eighty talesmen were examined. In the Haywood trial it required more than ihree weeks to obtain a jury, three hundred and twenty men having been called. Court adjourned until Monday, December 9.
December 9, after a long conference between attorneys for the state and defense, a stipulation was signed, providing that all testimony introduced in the Haywood trial on the Bradley explosion at San Francisco, be read to the jury from the court records and that no witnesses on that feature of the case testify in the trial.
No agreement could be reached regarding the testimony on the crimes which Orchard claimed he committed in Colorado.
Judge Wood announced no testimony would be admitted concerning the deportation of miners, but practically all of those who testified in the Haywood trial both for and against the state were summoned as witnesses.
Judge Goddard of the Supreme Court of Colorado, again went to Boise, Idaho, to Bolster up the confession that was framed up for Orchard by the Pinkerton agency.
When a judge on the supreme bench of a state is called on to make creditable the monstrous story of a confessed degenerate, it is needless to say that the judiciary is in need of disinfectants.
Here may be mentioned that the prosecution had a great deal to say about L. J. Simpkins, member of the Western Federation Executive board, not going forward and surrendering to the state. McParland had included Simpkins in the list of the "inner circle" that he had absolute "evidence" against. The opponents of the Federation claimed Simpkins keeping secret his whereabouts was evidence of his guilt.
Simpkins not testifying or surrendering to McParland was not evidence against him when even his former experience in the strike of '99 is known. People are not always guilty because they do not fall into the arms of their persecutors and become martyrs.
Simpkins had suffered nine months in the military stockade of the Coeur d'Alenes in '99 and to this day carries a scar on his breast from the thrust of a bayonet in the hands of one of Uncle Sam's "peace preservers." Notwithstanding his imprisonment of nine months he never had a trial. Is it any wonder Simpkins didn't seek any more of Idaho's interpretation of Justice? Does the English language contain another word that has had to bear the burden of so many crimes committed in her name as the word "Justice?"
"Justice, while she winks at crimes,
Stumbles on innocence sometimes."—Butler.
About December 10, Senator Borah returned from Washington and took his place with counsel for the state. Hawley stated the case against Pettibone in substance about as follows:
"Pettibone has been the paymaster into whose hands was passed the money given to the actual murderers by officers of the Western Federation. He was an actual participator in some of the crimes, and was the constant counsel, with others, engaged in the conspiracy. He operated a store in Denver, near Federation headquarters, and that store was the arsenal and the scene of the hatching of many a murderous plot. Pettibone was the most important factor in the conspiracy. He was mediator between the Federation leaders and the desperate men who made murder a trade and assassination a means of livelihood. It was Pettibone who manufactured a peculiar kind of explosive known as 'Pettibone dope' which, when thrown upon anything, causes fire which cannot be put out; it was he who sawed off the shotguns which became common weapons for the use of the assassin; he helped to make the bombs which caused a score of deaths."
For two hours Hawley spoke of what he termed the most gigantic conspiracy in the annals of crime, always keeping in the foreground the part which he alleged Pettibone took in it.
At the conclusion of the statement by Hawley for the state, Darrow calmly announced that the defense would reserve its statement until the conclusion of the state's case.
The taking of testimony was begun at the afternoon session, December 10. Two or more witnesses were heard and then Harry Orchard was put on the stand and under the guidance of Hawley retold the story of his crimes. It was the same story with but few omissions and one special addition. He went more into detail as to the manufacture of what he termed "Pettibone dope.'' Otherwise, the time of the court was consumed by hours in listening to the recital of Orchard's story of crime in detail. From the days of high-grading to the murder of Steunenberg. In the cross-examination by Darrow, it was brought out very clearly that Orchard had been a deep-dyed criminal, possessed of many aliases before he met either Moyer, Haywood or Pettibone, according to his testimony.
From the latter part of November to December 24, the case continued, long sessions being held. It would be impossible to go into the all the details of the testimony, the charge, the proof offered and the ultimate outcome is all the writer has made an effort to record.
The defense had filed a motion for an instructed verdict of acquittal. December 24, at the morning session, Judge Wood announced his conclusion on the question of corroborative evidence, and stated that there had not been sufficient corroboration of Orchard's testimony on the killing of Governor Steunenberg alone to warrant a conviction. He said that corroboration was necessary to establish a conviction. He also said that corroboration was necessary to establish a conspiracy and invited argument as to whether or not such corroboration had been given by the state and whether or not the defendant had been connected with that conspiracy.
This announcement created a great deal of excitement and some curiosity as to what his ruling on the motion would be.
In the Haywood trial Judge Wood held that it was necessary for the state to produce evidence tending to connect the defendant with the specific crime charged, independent of the testimony of Orchard. He stated he would rule on the motion Thursday, December 26, and directed the defense to be ready to proceed with its case at that time in the event the motion was not sustained. Attorneys for the defense offered arguments in support of the motion to instruct jury to acquit, going at length into all the technicalities of the law in the case. Senator Borah spoke for the prosecution.
December 26, Attorney Darrow, chief counsel for the defense, was too ill to rise from his chair and spoke with difficulty. By permission of the court he remained seated as he outlined his case to the jury.
On the 26th Judge Wood said he did not have his ruling ready and would be prepared by the following day, 27th. He, later, denied the motions filed by the defense that a verdict of acquittal be advised by the court. In considering the motion he reviewed the independent testimony on each side of the crimes confessed by Orchard and stated that in his opinion there was sufficient corroboration of each of them to require the submission thereof to the jury. Concluding, Judge Wood said:
"I think the facts already in evidence tend to show a conspiracy as contended by the prosecution and I think that the independent testimony sufficiently tends to connect the defendant Pettibone therewith to require the submission thereof to the jury."
On the convening of court in the afternoon of December 26, Darrow again asked permission to remain seated as he addressed the jury. This was granted. He reviewed briefly the early life of Pettibone in Pennsylvania and of his coming West and engaging in mining in the Coeur d'Alenes, where he became president of the Gem union. In 1892, Darrow said, the defendant left the Coeur d'Alenes and never engaged in mining again. "It was a number of years after he went to Denver that Pettibone heard of the Western Federation of Miners. But one day he learned of a convention that was to be held and he attended it, becoming acquainted with the officers and leading members. He was later made an honorary member of the organization. He never attended a meeting of a local union in his life, never paid any dues and never had anything to do with forming policies of the organization."
Darrow called attention to the alleged indignities to Simpkins in the Coeur d'Alenes bull pen, and of the bitterness that he had always retained. He said that Haywood lived in Idaho at the time and had considerable feeling over it, but Pettibone and Moyer had nothing to do with the troubles of 1899 and had no feeling in the matter. He told of the passing of the eight-hour law in Colorado, of the Supreme Court declaring it unconstitutional, of the adoption of a constitutional amendment, of the failure of the Legislature to act, and of the smeltermen's strike at Colorado City, Colo., and the resulting strike at Cripple Creek, which he characterized as the greatest labor war in the history of the country and the most disastrous to organized labor.
Harry Orchard was referred to by Darrow as a man always looking for easy money, who never stuck to anything except gambling. He told of Orchard's transferring his interest in the Hercules to Gardner, from whom he always had hopes of getting his claim back, and said the defense would show that he tried to sell this interest a year after he had disposed of it to Gardner. Darrow said the defense would prove by fifteen or twenty witnesses that Orchard swore vengeance on Steunenberg for the loss of his rich Hercules interests. Darrow declared that while Orchard was drawing benefits from the Miner's Union he was being paid as a detective for the other side and that he had claimed credit for a good many crimes with which he had nothing to do.
Darrow said that the defense would show that the Vindicator explosion was a pure accident and that Orchard went out and hunted up all the crimes he could and claimed them as his own, boasting frequently of crimes as his own which were not his.
Taking up the Independence depot explosion, Darrow said he did not wish to charge the mine owners with intentionally killing anyone —but that this explosion occurred while Orchard was working for Scott and Sterling. "Something had to be done to bring the troops back!" he said, "but they made a mistake of a few seconds and got a lot of men they never intended to."
December 27, Clarence Darrow was forced on account of ill health to retire from the Pettibone case for the time being and left for Los Angeles, California, where he had an operation performed to remove an abscess in the ear. The physicians told him after he made the opening address to the jury, that if he did not submit to the operation at once his life would be endangered.
This left Attorneys Wilson and Nugent in charge of the defense. The remainder of December 27 and 28 was consumed in reading depositions of San Francisco witnesses on the explosion in the Bradley home.
December 30, George A. Pettibone was seriously ill and court was adjourned on his account. He had been a very sick man all through the trial and had frequently been taken to the hospital at night because of his suffering but urged constantly that the trial be continued. At times his illness seemed very critical and doubts were expressed as to his being able to last through the long dreary trial.
On one occasion, while he was confined in a hospital, before his trial commenced, he left the hospital and wandered back to the jail and asked to be locked up. At this time the prosecution claimed Pettibone was not able to stand trial. So Pettibone made his escape from the hospital and returned to jail hoping to prove his health would permit the hearing of his case, thus thwarting the flimsy excuse of the prosecution.
Judge O. N. Hilton, of Denver, was entered December 30, as an attorney for the Western Federation of Miners.
December 31, when court convened Pettibone was in his place looking paler than usual from his severe attack.
After the formalities of opening court had been concluded, Judge Hilton, for the defense, announced that the defense would rest its case and offer to submit the case to the jury without argument. This announcement came as a complete surprise to the state. Judge Hilton said that he had gone over all the testimony and as the state had failed to connect the defendant with the crime charged in the indictment, it had been decided to offer no further testimony.
Senator Borah asked for a recess in order that the proposition of the defense might be considered, and Judge Wood granted the request. After a brief conference of the state's attorneys, Senator Borah stated that the question of dispensing with the arguments could not be settled until the instructions of the court had been examined. Judge Wood announced that he would have his instructions ready by January 3, 1908, and after he had instructed the attorneys to submit their suggestions an adjournment was taken.
There was nothing of special interest between December 31 and January 3. Only brief sessions being held. Judge Wood announced night sessions would be held in order to complete the case during the week.
January 3, the jury in the case of George A. Pettibone began its deliberations at 8:50 p. m. The last day of the trial was begun by James Hawley for the prosecution, and the instructions of the court. The defense carried out its announced intention not to argue the case, thus preventing Senator Borah from addressing the jury. Hawley fairly dared the attorneys for Pettibone to speak in his behalf, but they sat dumb when he concluded, and when asked by Judge Wood if any argument would be presented by the defense, Judge Hilton answered:
"Certainly not."
The courtroom was cleared before the jury retired, but the attorneys, defendant and a few of his friends waited for a time in the hope of hearing the verdict at once. No session of court was held in the afternoon on account of the illness of Juror Stahl, but he recovered sufficiently for the trial to proceed in the evening. Pettibone was very sick during the day, but insisted on the trial being concluded. It was necessary to carry him to the courtroom after supper on account of him being too ill to walk.
In closing Hawley argued that every circumstance in the evidence pointed to the guilt of Pettibone. Recalling the list of the score of men killed by Orchard, the prosecutor said that every one was an enemy of the Western Federation of Miners, and said that during that time no friend of the Federation met his death through violence; he said that while Orchard was, he conceded, one of the worst criminals of the century, he regarded those who hired him and directed him as vastly worse than he. Hawley concluded at 8:10 o'clock and Judge Wood asked Juror Stahl, who had been ill, if he felt able to proceed that night.
"Yes," answered Stahl, "I would like to hear from the other side."
This significant remark was passed and Judge Wood proceeded with the reading of his instructions.
The instructions differed to some extent from those given in the Haywood trial. Judge Wood held that on proof of the existence of a conspiracy to kill enemies of the Federation; that the defendant was a member of such conspiracy; that Steunenberg was regarded as an enemy of the Federation and that his murder was a result of the conspiracy, the defendant should be found guilty.
The jury was instructed that if these facts were proven it was not necessary to show that the defendant was cognizant of the crime charged in the indictment at the time it was committed. The jury was instructed that the accomplice must be corroborated by independent testimony tending to connect the defendant with the crime charged.
Saturday, 11:00 a. m. January 4, 1908, the jury in the case of George A. Pettibone rendered a verdict of "Not Guilty."
MOYER CASE DISMISSED.
The case of Charles H. Meyer was called by Judge Wood in the afternoon. James H. Hawley, representing Prosecuting Attorney Van Duyn, signified the desire of the state to have an order of dismissal entered. So the formal dismissal of Charles H. Moyer, President of the Western Federation of Miners occurred at 4:00 o'clock p. m. January 4, 1908.
"I am satisfied," said Judge Wood, "that the course taken by the district attorney and decided upon by attorneys for the slate is the proper one to be taken. I have watched the evidence carefully, so far as the connecting and corroborating evidence under the statute was concerned in its application to this defendant, and certainly nothing has been developed in the two cases that would justify the court in submitting the case against him to a jury, unless there was considerable additional connecting testimony, and for that reason the case will be dismissed and an order entered exonerating the bail of the defendant."
At the request of the state the case against Dr. Magee and C. W. Aller, charged with perjury by reason of testimony given by them in the Haywood case, were also dismissed.
At the conclusion of the Pettibone case the Western Federation of Miners had expended a total sum of over $300,000, in the defense of those persecuted in connection with the conspiracy.
This ended the farce of the conspirators to murder judicially, the three men kidnapped from Colorado, February 17, 1906. The Federation after all the slander came forth from the battle grander and stronger to continue the great struggle for Industrial Liberty.
Adams is the only victim left to be vindicated. He stood trial twice in Idaho and in each case the jury failed to agree but in both instances the majority stood for acquittal. The enemies of the Federation finally came to the conclusion they could not convict Adams on the charge of being implicated in any of the Idaho cases, transferred him to Telluride, Colorado, on the charge of murdering Arthur Collins years ago. Court will convene in that district in May, 1908. A change of venue in the case of Adams will be asked. In case this is granted, his case will go over to the fall term of court. In the meantime, Steve Adams occupies a prison cell.
As this work goes to press, April, 1908, Charles H. Moyer, President of the Western Federation of Miners, is again at the helm—having assumed his duties as president immediately upon the acquittal of his friend George A. Pettibone. After the acquittal of Haywood and the release of President Moyer upon bond, the latter devoted his energies almost entirely to the Pettibone case—was untiring in his determination not to desist until the prison doors were thrown open and Pettibone walked forth a free man.
HAYWOOD ON LECTURE TOUR.
In January Mr. William D. Haywood started on an extended lecture tour through the Eastern states. Mr. Kirwan resigned as acting secretary-treasurer and Mr. Earnest Mills, executive board member of Greenwood, B. C., was appointed by the executive board to fill the position of secretary-treasurer. Mr. Mills has been closely connected with the movement for years and is recognized as a man of executive genius and ability.
Mr. Haywood was greeted in all the large cities by audiences that packed every meeting place. His Boston meeting probably ranks among the most notable of his extended tour on account of the history that has been made in the hall where the workers gathered to listen to him.
Faneuil hall, the cradle of liberty, was the scene of a historic gathering Monday night, February 17. It was the most impressive, enthusiastic and inspiring meeting ever held there. Patrick Henry, with words of fire, demanded constitutional rights. Wendell Phillips asked for the freedom of the negro. Haywood, in a speech logical, eloquent and so heartfelt that many wept, demanded the freedom of the wage slave.
Patrick Mahoney, of Cigarmakers No. 97, acted as chairman. As first speaker he introduced Joseph Spero, who did so much for the great Boston demonstration held on the Common May 5, 1907, where one hundred thousand people gathered to protest against the hanging of Moyer, Haywood and Pettibone.
Mr. Mahoney introduced Miss Luella Twining as the little woman who had come from the West and done more for the liberation of Moyer, Haywood and Pettibone than any other person. She made an appeal for Steve Adams and the miners in Goldfield. The collection was $150.
In introducing Haywood Chairman Mahoney said: ''On this platform have stood many renowned men and women. Here our forefathers came to protest against the oppression of King George. They made the rafters of this hall ring for over a century. Never has so important a meeting been held here, never has so great a man stood on this platform as William D. Haywood.'' When Mr. Haywood stepped forward he was given an ovation. The people of Boston had been waiting to see and hear him in Faneuil hall and they expressed their pent-up feeling in the reception they gave him.
His address was brilliant; many said the best they had ever heard in that hall. The Social Revolution is already producing its orators. He was interrupted by great applause. He made his points well and brought them out with telling effect.
A meeting had been arranged and widely advertised, permit granted and an audience of 3,000 congregated to hear Haywood speak February 5. Delegations from all over New England gathered and when the doors of Faneuil hall were thrown open at 7 o'clock they poured in. Ten minutes before the hour set for opening, a messenger arrived with a notice to the committee on arrangements canceling the permit for the meeting. The crowd, when this was explained, refused to go, and the janitor sent in a call for the police. For a time it looked like serious trouble, but the police reserves were called and the crowd was literally forced out of the hall and the doors locked.
Just then Haywood arrived and started to address the people from the street corner. The police threatened to arrest him, so he advised the people to go home. The city authorities explained their conduct by stating they had had considerable trouble with the unemployed and were afraid Haywood's speech would incite them to riot.
Mr. Haywood also addressed the convention of the United Mine Workers of America who were assembled in annual convention at Indianapolis. This visit of Mr. Haywood's brought the organization of the U. M. W. of A. and the Federation in closer sympathy than ever before. A step was taken, by the appointment of a committee from the coal miners to visit the coming Western Federation of Miners convention to see if a joint understanding could be reached that would result in the amalgamation of the two miners' organizations.
All organized labor would be pleased to see the two great miner's organizations united into one body—many times in the past they have differed to a great extent as to tactics—notwithstanding this, when either were in trouble, differences of opinion were forgotten and they were united when either was being oppressed by their common foe.
The United Mine Workers contributed liberally to the defense fund—more than one donation of $5,000 being sent immediately following the kidnapping besides the amount donated by local unions of the organization. It was very fitting that Haywood should address the great convention at Indianapolis for the coal miners protested vigorously against the treatment accorded Moyer, Haywood and Pettibone and substantially backed their moral support with the necessary prerequisite—cash.
While Moyer, Haywood and Pettibone have been vindicated—tyrany still lives and Labor has yet to fight the battle for the Industrial emancipation of the toilers in the ranks and the complete overthrow of corporate tyranny—"Why don't they vote as they march on Labor Day?"