Report of the Committee Appointed to Investigate the Railroad Riots in July, 1877: Read in the Senate and House of Representatives May 23, 1878Pennsylvania. General Assembly. Committee Appointed to Investigate the Railroad Riots in July, 1877
History
Report of the Committee Appointed to Investigate the Railroad Riots in July, 1877: Read in the Senate and House of Representatives May 23, 1878
Pennsylvania. General Assembly. Committee Appointed to Investigate the Railroad Riots in July, 1877
Q. Did you have any further connection with the movements of the
police?
A. Not in the capacity of commander or leader.
Q. Were you present at any of the disturbances after that?
A. I went through it all, backward and forward, around the city, in the
capacity of an officer.
Q. Were the police, to your knowledge, reinforced in the morning of the
20th--Friday morning.
A. No, sir; the police force was not reinforced until Tuesday
morning--the following Tuesday--that is, were not organized. Then the
regular force was filled up and organized by the committee of safety.
But a number of the men who were called on on Monday and Sunday
responded. But the regular organization did not take place until
Tuesday.
Q. They responded whenever the calls were made?
A. A number of them responded on Sunday, after the fire was going on.
Q. Was there any difficulty, so far as you know, in reinforcing the
police force?
A. I know, from my own experience, that there was considerable
difficulty in bringing the men dropped from the rolls when there was no
trouble,--in bringing them to the front after the trouble commenced. A
great many of them objected to going on duty.
Q. Why?
A. I suppose they looked on it in this way. I inferred this from the
tone of their conversation--that they were discharged--that the
councils had thought proper to dispense with their services when there
was no trouble, and that, when they were in trouble they did not
propose to put their heads into the halter. I know one of them left my
squad--or two of them. One of them did not reflect that he might be
taken to where he would get hurt or get hit with a stone. He left and
the other left.
Q. What reason did he give?
A. He simply left.
By Senator Reyburn:
Q. These men were not organized at all?
A. They had been dropped from the rolls the week previous. They were
not bound in any way to the city.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Did not a demand have to be made on them?
A. No, sir; I simply told them. Those that wanted to go, fell into
line, and marched out as volunteers.
By Mr. Means:
Q. They could leave as soon as they wanted?
A. Yes; the same as any other citizens. They were not under pay--not
under pay at all.
By Senator Yutzy:
Q. Did you not have the right from the mayor to demand them to go with
you?
A. I did not know I had a right any more than I could command you to
assist me.
By Mr. Lindsey:
Q. Did you get such instructions from the mayor?
A. At the time we went out we did not expect any such trouble.
Q. But did the mayor give you instructions to demand them to go with
you?
A. He did not think of it, and I did not either. I thought that the
presence, as Mr. Watt told me--that the presence of five or six men
would have the desired effect.
Q. Did you make any report to the mayor, during the afternoon?
A. I reported to the chief of police.
Q. That is the only report you made?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who was he?
A. Philip Demmel.
By Senator Yutzy:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account