Those of the Homestead men charged with treason, who were not already held for murder, managed, for the most part, to find bail. Many continued in hiding. Burgess McLuckie, tired of running after bondsmen, had betaken himself to Youngstown, O., and, acting on the advice of Attorney W. T. Anderson, of that city, refused to return without a requisition. Honest John was lionized by the Youngstown people, delighted them with his speeches about high tariff and high fences and could have found a body guard any time to defy the Carnegie Company, the Supreme Court, the militia and all the other powers in Pennsylvania. On the morning of Monday, October 10, the grand jury of Allegheny County assembled in the criminal court room, which was thronged with attorneys curious to watch the development of Judge Paxson's program. At 9.30 A. M., the Chief Justice entered accompanied by Judges Stowe, Kennedy, McClung and Porter, of the county courts, all of whom took seats on the bench while Judge Slagle sat with District Attorney Burleigh behind the clerk's desk. The gravity of the occasion was felt by everyone and dead silence prevailed as Judge Kennedy opened the day's proceedings with a few words to the jurors stating that, in view of the unusual nature of the treason cases, Judge Paxson had "kindly consented" to instruct the jury. The Chief Justice began his charge by explaining that his intervention was due to the supreme importance of furnishing an authoritative interpretation of the law in the Homestead cases and that he acted at the invitation of the county judges. He then entered upon a review of the conditions and events at Homestead. "The relation of employer and employee," he said, "is one of contract merely. Neither party has a right to coerce the other into the making of a contract to which the mind does not assent. The employer cannot compel his employee to work a day longer than he sees fit nor his contract calls for, nor for a wage that is unsatisfactory to him. It follows that the employee cannot compel his employer to give him work or to enter into a contract of hire, much less can he dictate the terms of employment. When the negotiations between the parties came to an end, the contract relations between them ceased. The men had no further demand upon the company, and they had no more interest or claim upon its property than has a domestic servant upon the household goods of his employer when he is discharged by the latter or when he voluntarily leaves his service, nor does it make any difference that a large number were discharged at one time; their aggregate rights rise no higher than their rights as individuals. The mutual right of the parties to contracts in regard to wages, and the character of the employment, whether by the piece or day, whether for ten hours or less, is as fixed and clear as any other right which we enjoy under the constitution and laws of this state. It is a