[NOTE. The newspaper cutting was here offered in evidence by the chairman. It is as follows:]

There will probably be a good deal of “bulldozing" done in Massachusetts this year of a civilized type. The laborers employed by General Butler in his various enterprises-mills, quarries, &c.-will be expected to vote for him or give up their situations. The same rule will hold good on the other side. There will be no shot-guns or threats. Everything will be managed with decorum, adorned by noble sentiments. But the men who oppose Butler employ three-fourths, if not seven-eighths, of the labor of the State. They honestly believe that Butler's election would injure their property. They know that idle hands are waiting to do their work. It is not to be expected that they will look on indifferently and see their employés vote for a destructive like Butler. Human nature is much the same in Massachusetts and Mississippi. Only methods are different. Brains, capital, and enterprise will tell in any community. It is very improper, of course, to intimidate voters, but there is a way of giving advice that is quite convincing.

Q. Are many of the operatives in the mills in Worcester Democrats?A. Very many; I should say a majority.

By Mr. PLATT:

Q. What is the name of this corporation that owned the hall?—A. The Manchaug Manufacturing Company, I think, is the name.

Q. Do you know the manager of that company?-A. I am not personally acquainted with him, but have heard that his name was either Chase or McArthur; that is, one of these was the name of the superintendent and the other that of the manager, as I am told. I was told that one or both of them were present at my meeting in the barn.

Q. Is the hall in that village immediately connected with their manu. facturing establishment or situated at some distance from it ?—A. I am unable to say, for I never saw the hall. This meeting was assembled upon the outskirts of the village and happened to be upon the very road by which I approached the village, so that I never saw the hall, and I doubt whether I saw the factory.

Q. The point of the inquiry was whether the ball was a part of their manufacturing establishment or was a separate building which they owned in the village?-A. I do not know as to that, but there are gentlemen present from Sutton who know all about it.

Q. At what hour was your meeting held ?-A. Late in the afternoon, after the ringing out from the mill, but early enough to enable me to fill another appointment at Whitinsville, some distance from this. I know that it was quite dark when we got through our meeting in the barn, so dark that we had lanterns.

Q. Was the hour of the meeting selected with special reference to catching the operatives as they came from their work so that you might address them?-A. I suppose it was selected with special reference to enabling the operatives to attend and hear, otherwise there could have been no meeting in Manchaug, as there are only operatives there.

Q. Did they work in the evenings?-A. I do not think that they did. Q. If the meeting had been held in the evening, all classes of citizens could have attended it ?—A. Yes; but my other appointment interfered with my being there in the evening. I had to speak two or three times a day pretty much all the time.

Q. At what point, with reference to its proximity to the works of the corporation, did you commence your open-air speech?-A. I did not commence it.

Q. You were to speak in the open air?-A. It was so arranged, and the audience began to assemble in the street, when I proposed that we should go across the street. I did not see the corporation's works that day. Our approach to the village was by the very road on which this

meeting had assembled, and I think the house was the very first one on the road leading to the village. I did not go further than that on the road. I could not tell whether the place of the meeting was a quarter or a half a mile from the company's works, but it was in the vicinity on the outskirts of the village, not far from them.

Q. Have you known of the Boston Herald for many years?—A. I have known of it; have frequently read it; but have not been a regular subscriber to it.

Q. What do you understand its politics to be?-A. I think it is very difficult for anybody to understand what its politics are.

Q. Is it classed as an independent paper?-A. It was sometimes called such, but it was the most partisan of all papers last year, so far as I know.

Q. That was in the Butler campaign?—A. Yes; it was last year, so far as I have knowledge, the most intensely Republican of all the papers in Massachusetts.

Q. On that particular issue, Butlerism, aside from Butler's running for governor, has it ever been classed as Republican ?-A. On the main issue, who shall issue the currency of the country, it has been more intensely Republican than any other paper.

Q. An intensely hard-money paper?-A. A "gold" paper.

Q. You get the point of my inquiry?-A. Yes; but it calls itself independent.

Q. And would not claim to be an organ of the Republican party?— A. Except upon occasion.

Q. And then it is rather its own organ than anything else?-A. It is its own organ.

Q. Rather than a party organ?—A. I think so as a rule.

By Mr. BLAIR:

Q. Which are the Republican papers of the city of Boston?-A. The Journal and the Advertiser are, I think, prominent as such; as also, I believe, the Transcript, though I seldom ever see it.

Q. And the Traveller?-A. The Traveller also; I usually read the New York papers instead of the Boston papers.

By Mr. PLATT:

Q. What took place between the agent of the corporation and any other person with regard to the refusal of the use of the hall, you know of only from hearsay?-A. Yes, sir; I saw no man with reference to the hall; I was not introduced to the superintendent or the manager, and all that I know about the hall being refused is merely from what my friends told me there; I know nothing of the circumstances only from what I heard, which was that they would not let the hall to Democrats.

By Mr. McDONALD:

Q. But you know this, that you did not get to speak in the hall, and had to speak at some other place?-A. I know that I spoke in a barn and did not speak in the hall, and I suppose that it was for the reason that was given me.

Q. For the same reason that Jack didn't eat his supper?-A. Yes; I feared that our people might feel humiliated somewhat, and I expressed myself upon that point; however, this is no place for me to repeat any part of a stump speech.

Q. We have had several?-A. Yes; I heard some this forenoon; what I said was that I hoped none of my friends would feel humiliated in being obliged to attend a public meeting in a barn, for, above all

cathedrals and temples, I held the barn in reverence as having been the birthplace of the Saviour of mankind, and I was glad to see my audience lighted up by it.

Q. But you did not go to the barn that day from any preference for the place?—A. No; still I cared very little where I spoke, so I did not have the wind in my face.

MR. PLATT. A great deal of the early New England preaching was in barns, was it not?

The WITNESS. Yes, sir.

JAMES H. MELLEN, sworn and examined.

By THE CHAIRMAN:

Question. Where do you live?-Answer. In Worcester.

Q. What position do you now hold in the State?-A. None whatever. I was a member of the legislature for three years, from the city of Worcester, and chairman of the labor committee of the house of representatives.

Q. Were you present on the occasion of which the preceding witness (Mr. Thayer) has spoken?-A. I was at Manchaug Village with Mr. Thayer during the last campaign.

Q. Where did you speak?—A. We spoke in a barn.

Q. Do you know who owns the hall there?—A. I learned that it was owned by the Manchaug Manufacturing Company. Of that company Mr. McArthur is the agent and superintendent.

Q. What was the character of that hall; was it a public hall?—A. The hall is owned by the company, as I learned that day. It is over and in the same building with the post-office, and was used as a public hall. I was told that minstrel troupes performed there, that various kinds of meetings had been held there, that they had no objection to the operatives holding meetings there if for political purposes; or, for that matter, if they were for Republican political purposes.

Q. Was any effort made to get the hall for you on that occasion ?— A. We were so informed; for that matter we tried to get it. The day was a raw, blustery one, and we found that the only place where we could speak was out of doors in the draught.

Q. Did you speak with Mr. Thayer that day?—A. I did; I think I followed him.

Q. What do you know about the control of employés by employers in the county of Worcester ?-A. Personally, I have but little knowledge, my information being mainly from hearsay. Having been connected with the labor committee in the legislature, I have heard many complaints from workmen in different parts of the county and in different parts of the State. I know that there are more complaints coming from a village like Manchaug, where a single individual is almost an autocrat, than from the city of Worcester; for instance, in a city like Worcester, manufacturers are more in dread of public opinion, although there were the last time some complaints from the cities.

Q. What is the number of Democratic voters in the city of Worcester?-A. There were last fall for governor nearly forty-two hundred votes cast for Butler and nearly forty-seven hundred for Talbot. I believe that some two hundred votes were cast for Judge Abbott.

Q. What proportion of the operatives in the mills are Democrats?—

A. The industries are varied; I do not know that I could tell the proportion of voters among the operatives. I say this much, that the great mass of Democratic voters are operatives.

Q. What is the fact as to the great mass of the employers ?-A. They are Republicans and Abbott men.

Q. What are the superintendents and agents of the corporations generally?—A. They usually agree with their chiefs, "the captains of industry," as they call them-their employers.

Q. Were there more complaints last fall on this subject of the control of employés by employers than usual?-A. Yes; many more. The campaign was more heated than any other in my time, at least; and, as the committee can judge from the testimony of the chairman of the Republican State central committee, who was here to day, from the harsh names he applied to those who did not agree with him and the suggestions he made to those who were called together by him, who were employers, it is to be presumed that means were brought to bear upon those who were in the mills more generally than they had been at preeding elections.

Q. What was the result at the election, so far as you know?—A. In the city, I do not know that there were so many intimidated, because I think they are less subject to the control of employers. I have heard of some instances, but could not particularize. If I had known last winter that it would have been possible to get an investigating committee to come to Massachusetts to inquire into the subject of the intimidation of the operatives or the men who vote with the Democratic party, I think I could have submitted many facts. If I had been notified of it only two weeks ago, I might have been able to submit many facts; but I was too busy yesterday when subpoenaed even to collect my thoughts as to what facts I did know. I know of one case in point in which I was concerned which will illustrate the manner of intimidation. It occurred in a shop that I worked in two or three years ago.

Mr. Platt reminded the witness that the inquiry was confined to the Presidential election of 1876 and subsequent State or general elections. The WITNESS. I guess this was at a municipal election. The CHAIRMAN. Then do not mention it.

By Mr. McDONALD:

Q. What is your occupation?—A. I am working on a newspaper now. Q. As compositor or publisher?-A. As publisher.

Q. What paper are you publishing ?-A. The Worcester Daily Evening Star, recently started.

Q. In what were you engaged last year?-A. I was speaking.

Q. Were you engaged in any business except that of the canvass?— A. As a founderyman, employed in a foundery.

Q. You knew that Mr. Thayer, the chairman of the State central committee, was the chairman of the central committee, did you not ?—A. Yes, sir.

Q. You knew him personally?-A. I knew of him for years. He is a Worcester man, was born and brought up in Worcester.

Q. Did you know anything about the meeting that was held at the office of Mr. Washburne in Worcester at which Mr. Thayer met those other gentlemen?-A. Not personally, only from hearsay.

Q. You knew of it at the time?-A. I heard of it shortly afterwards. Q. The fact that such a meeting as that was held was known in Worcester, was it?-A. It was.

Q. Was its character understood?-A. It was understood that it was

a meeting of employers for the purpose of agreeing upon a plan of working upon their employés.

Q. A meeting called there for the purpose of conferring with the representatives of the Republican organization of the State upon that question?-A. Well, no, sir. The prevalent opinion was that it was a meeting of employers to agree upon some plan of working their help, of prevailing upon them to vote as they voted.

Q. Of agreeing upon some plan for help to their ticket and to devise the best means in which it could be applied?-A. Yes, sir; as I believe, of forcing their help, through dread of non-employment, to vote contrary to their wishes and according to the wishes of the employers.

Q. That impression went out in regard to the character of the meeting, did it ?-A. Yes, sir; that was the prevalent opinion.

Q. To administer something like convincing advice to their employés ? -A. Exactly; a sort of civilized bulldozing.

Q. How long before the election was it, do you understand, that that meeting occurred?-A. I presume a couple of weeks. I could not say definitely.

Q. You were a candidate for the legislature at that time?-A. Yes, sir; that is, I could not say that, as our caucuses when they made the nominations were later.

Q. You were a candidate for the nomination?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you were made a candidate for representative and were elected at that election ?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. You were then actively concerned in the canvass from that time in October up until the election in November. Did you know of any sensibly manifest effect growing out of that meeting? Did you notice any strong political current setting in from that time as against the current of sentiment which before that had been running in the county? -A. I could not tell what was its effect in the county; and in the cities, as I remarked, I do not think it had any very great effect. I think it had some.

Q. It had some ?-A. I think it had. An employer calling his men together and telling them, "I would like you to vote so and so,” was like a creditor who would call his debtors together and say, "I would like you to do so and so."

Q. They have a very persuasive way of settling that question ?-A. Yes, sir.

By Mr. PLATT:

Q. What are your politics?—A. I am somewhat independent. I have voted the Democratic ticket. If a Democrat who was not what I thought he ought to be was up, I would not support him; if he had done an act that I thought he ought not to have done, I would not support him, as I have not in the legislature supported some Democrats.

Q. You were running on the regular Democratic ticket in 1878 ?—A. Yes; in a largely Democratic ward, the largest of its kind in the city. Q. You had been elected previously?-A. I was elected two years, in 1877 and 1878.

Q. In what establishment were you employed in the fall of 1878 ?—A. I was not employed last fall at any establishment. I am a moulder by trade, but was out of a job.

Q. Previous to that, how long had you been employed in a foundery ?— A. It might have been a couple of years. When I got through with the legislature, I found it difficult to get a job; my business is poor also.

Q. So that you have no knowledge, in respect to any establishmen