The News Herald

ARBITRATION HEARING
Testimony Before the Board on the
Erie Railway Trouble.
The Board Can Give an Opinion or a Decision
Only When Both Parties
Consent to Arbitration.

The State Board of Arbitration met at
Albany, N. Y., Friday morning. Mr.
Powderly did not arrive, and Messrs.
Wright and Roger A. Pryor appeared for
the Knights of Labor, and Hamilton
Harrison for the road. Division Superintendent
Bissell, of Albany, took the
stand, and said that all dismissals on
the New York Central were at the order
of the third vice president, and he understood
that Mr. Le Fevre was suspended
for lack of attention to duty.

He did not know that any one was
dismissed because he was a Knight of
Labor. Mr. Pryor asked for details as
to Le Fevre's neglect of duty, and witness
said that he (Le Fevre) often was
seen neglecting his legitimate duty.
Witness knew that the discharged man
was a Knight of Labor, but did not pay
attention to his standing. He admitted
that he thought Mr. Le Fevre was active
in the Knights. Mr. Le Fevre, the
discharged employee, testified that he
had been in the employ of the company
for eighteen years. Mr. Bissell discharged
him, but gave no reason, telling him
he knew what for. He supposed that it
was because he was a Knight. He had
never been reprimanded, suspended, accused
of drunkenness or incapacity. The
testimony of other discharged employees,
of the general tenor, was also taken.
The
object
of
the
witnesses
was
to
show
that they
were
discharged
on account of their connection
with the Knights of Labor. Officials
of the road testified to the discharge
of the men for cause, in one instance
the cause assigned for the discharge
of three men being that they were
bothering with committees when they
should have been at work. Commissioner
Purcell asked for the production
of the agreement between the road and
the men, as heretofore published, and it
was put in evidence. Both sides declared
themselves through, and the
hearing was declared closed. Mr. Purcell,
in closing, said that the public, he
thought, and the newspapers were under
the impression that the Board could
give a decision in favor of one side
or the other. That impression was
false. He wished it understood that
the law allowed the Board to give an
opinion or a decision only when both
parties consented to arbitrate. In this
case the Board would consider the testimony
and would make certain recommendations
for the amicable settlement of
the difficulty. The Board can not make
this
announcement.
however.
but
through the Legislature, and so January
will probably be the date when their
views will become public. The only advantage
thus far gained is in the bringing
of the case in its true light before
the public.