A Documentary History of
American Industrial
Society
Volume IV
Supplement
A Documentary History of
American Industrial
Society
Edited by John R. Commons
Ulrich B. Phillips, Eugene A. Gilmore
Helen L. Sumner, and John B. Andrews
Prepared under the auspices of the American Bureau of
Industrial Research, with the co-operation of the
Carnegie Institution of Washington
With preface by Richard T. Ely
and introduction by John B. Clark
Volume IV Supplement
Labor Conspiracy Cases
Cleveland, Ohio
The Arthur H. Clark Company
1910
COPYRIGHT, 1910, BY
THE ARTHUR H, CLARK CO.
AH rights reserved
-
f Pi
,
4
*
AMERICAN BUREAU OF INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH
DIRECTORS AND EDITORS
RICHARD T. ELY, PH.D., LL.D., Professor of Political Economy,
University of Wisconsin
JOHN R. COMMONS, A.M., Professor of Political Economy,
University of Wisconsin
JOHN B. CLARK, PH.D., LL.D., Professor of Political Economy,
Columbia University
V. EVERIT MACY, Chairman, New York City
ALBERT SHAW, PH.D., LL.D., Editor, American Review
of Reviews
ULRICH B. PHILLIPS, PH.D., Professor of History and Political
Science, Tulanc University
EUGENE A. GILMORE, LL.B., Professor of Law,
University of Wisconsin
HELEN L. SUMNER, PH.D., United States Bureau of Labor
JOHN B. ANDREWS, PH.D., Secretary,
American Association for Labor Legislation
THE DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF AMERICAN
INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY COMPRISES-
VOL. I Plantation and Frontier, Volume 1,
by Ulrich B. Phillips
VOL. II Plantation and Frontier, Volume 2,
by Ulrich B. Phillips
VOL. Ill Labor Conspiracy Cases, 1806-1842, Volume 1,
by John R. Commons and Eugene A. Gilmore
VOL. IV Labor Conspiracy Cases, 1806-1842, Volume 2,
by John R. Commons and Eugene A. Gilmore
VOL. V Labor Movement, 1820-1840, Volume 1,
by John R. Commons and Helen L. Sumner
VOL. VI Labor Movement, 1820-1840, Volume 2,
by John R. Commons and Helen L. Sumner
VOL. VII Labor Movement, 1840-1860, Volume 1,
by John R. Commons
VOL. VIII Labor Movement, 1840-1860, Volume 2,
by John R. Commons
VOL. IX Labor Movement, 1860-1880, Volume 1,
by John R, Commons and John B. Andrews
VOL. X Labor Movement, 1860-1880, Volume 2,
by John R. Commons and John B. Andrews
LABOR CONSPIRACY CASES
1806-1842
Selected, Collated, and Edited by
JOHN R. COMMONS, A.M.
Professor of Political Economy,
University of Wisconsin
and
EUGENE A. GILMORE, LL.B.
Professor of Law,
University of Wisconsin
Volume II Supplement
CONTENTS OF VOLUME TV-Supplement
PREFACE 13
XI* THOMPSONVILLE CARPET WEAVERS, 1834-1836 . 15
1. Thompsonville Carpet Manufacturing Company vs.
Wm, Taylor, Edward Gorman and Thomas Norton.
2. Wm. Taylor vs. the Thompsonville Manufacturing
Company.
* Sec volume iv, page 313.
PREFACE
On account of limits of space the two cases herewith
published were omitted from volume iv of the series.
They are .accordingly printed in this supplementary
volume and furnished to those who have subscribed to
the series, in conformity to our promise that the Docu-
mentary History of American Industrial Society should
include all of the extant Labor Conspiracy Cases not
otherwise available in public or college libraries.
JOHN R. COMMONS -EUGENE A. GILMORE.
January, 1910.
XL THOMPSONVILLE CARPET WEAVERS,
1834-1836
i. THOMPSONVILLE CARPET MANUFACTURING
COMPANY, w, WILLIAM TAYLOR, EDWARD
GORMAN, AND THOMAS NORTON
2, WM. TAYLOR v. THE THOMPSONVILLE MANU-
FACTURING COMPANY
These cases grew out of the same labor dispute. This action was begun
July 31, 1834. The first trial, which occurred in August, 1834, resulted in a
verdict for defendants. Plaintiff appealed to the Superior Court where a
second trial, held in September, 1834, resulted in a disagreement of the jury.
The case was continued until January, 1836, when the trial reported here was
had, resulting in a verdict for the defendants.
The case of Taylor v. Thompsonville Carpet Mfg. Co. grew out of
Thompaonville Carpet Mfg. Co. v. Taylor, it al., and was brought in Oc-
tober, 1834. The plaintiff alleges that the action by the Thompsonville
Carpet Manufacturing Company against him and others was groundless and
was brought to secure the arrest and imprisonment of the plaintiff, thereby
intimidating him and compelling him to continue to work, for the Company.
The plaintiff states that on account of the unjust and excessive damages
claimed in that action he was unable to procure bail and ww imprisoned
for twenty days. At the rime of this case a defendant in a civil action
who possessed no property subject to attachment could be arrested on thr
original writ. The Thompsonville Company demurred to the plaintiff's writ
and declaration. The demurrer was overruled, after argument, at the
November term, 1834. Defendant appealed to the Superior Court. The caw
waa continued from time to time until February n, 1837 when it was,
others like it against the same company, withdrawn.
1 6 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
[Title page] REPORT of the case of the THOMPSON-
VILLE CARPET MANUFACTURING COMPANY versus
WILLIAM TAYLOR, EDWARD GORMAN, & THOMAS NOR-
TON, Charged with a Conspiracy for being Concerned
in a Strike for Higher Wages. Tried before the Hon.
Superior Court for Hartford County, Ct. (Chief
Justice Williams presiding,) at the January Term,
A.D. 1836. In which the Jury returned a Verdict of
not Guilty. This case occupied the court a whole
week, upwards of seventy witnesses were examined,
&c. Hartford: Printed by John B. Eldredge. 1836.
REPORT, &c.
Thompsonville Carpet Manufacturing Company vs.
William Taylor, Edward Gorman and Thomas Norton.
This was an action on the case brought by this Com-
pany against the defendants for an alleged conspiracy
to stop the Plaintiffs' works, by combining with about
sixty other Ingrain Carpet Weavers in the employment
of the plaintiffs to raise their wages. The case excited
much interest and came on for trial before the Hon.
Superior Court for Hartford County, (Chief Justice
Williams presiding) at the January Term, A.D. 1836.
The Jury empannelled consisted of the following
gentlemen, viz:- William Alford, of Windsor; Henry
Halsey, of Windsor; William Boardman, of Weathers-
field; Wyllys Bradley, of Southington; Cornelius B.
Andrews, of Southington; Samuel Norris, of Suffield;
Roland Taylor, of Suffield; Daniel Easton, of East
Hartford; Samuel Arnold, of East Hartford; Samuel
Kennedy, of East Hartford; Abijah Flagg of Berlin;
George Francis, of Berlin.
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVTLLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 17
To the SHERIFF OF HARTFORD COUNTY, his Deputy, or
any Constable of the Town of Simsbury within
said County, Greeting.
By authority of the State of Connecticut you are
commanded to summon William Taylor, Edward
Gorman, Wallace Baylie, and Thomas Norton of
Simsbury in said County, to appear before the County
Court to be holden at Hartford, within and for Hart-
ford County, on the 2d Tuesday of August, A.D. 1834,
then and there to answer unto the Thompsonville
Carpet Manufacturing Co. an incorporated Company
having its Manufacturing establishment and office of
business at Enfield, in said County, in a plea of the
case, whereupon the Plaintiffs declare and say, that
they are an incorporated Company, incorporated by the
name aforesaid by the laws of this State, with power
to sue and be sued, to hold the real and personal estate,
hereinafter mentioned, and to carry on the business of
manufacturing Carpets as hereinafter mentioned, and
with the usual powers of corporation created for manu-
facturing purposes; that on the 24th day of July 1833,
at said Enfield the Plaintiffs owned and possessed at a
place called Thompsonville in said Enfield, land [4]
and buildings, and privileges of water of great value,
to wit, seventy-five thousand dollars, which the plain-
tiffs used and occupied for the purpose of manufactur-
ing Carpets, and also a great amount of machinery,
implements of various kinds, and other personal estate
of great value, to wit, forty thousand dollars, used by
the Plaintiffs for the same purpose, and had there and
elsewhere a great amount of wool, yarn, and other
stock of great value, to wit, of the value of one hun-
dred thousand dollars, which they had for the sole
and only purpose of manufacturing the same into
!8 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
Carpets, and had then in their employ a great number,
to wit, one hundred persons, employed in the various
processes ,of their said business of manufacturing Car-
pets, and among others sixty Ingrain Carpet Weavers
and more, and had then many contracts of great value
before that time entered into by them for the delivery
of Carpets then soon to be performed, and were prose-
cuting their said business successfully and profitably
to the amount of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars
per annum, all which was then and there well known
to the Defendants. And the Defendants well knowing
the premises, and intending, and contriving to injure
the Plaintiffs, then and there unlawfully, wantonly,
wickedly, and maliciously, did conspire, combine, con-
federate, and agree together to hinder, interrupt, and
stop the Plaintiffs' said business, and deprive the Plain-
tiffs of the profits thereof, and subject them to the in-
convenience, embarrassments and losses occasioned by
its interruption, and then and there in pursuance of
said unlawful, wicked, and malicious conspiracy, com-
bination, confederacy, and agreement between them
the Defendants as aforesaid had, did at said Enfield
on said 24th day of July 1833, being themselves weavers
in the Plaintiffs' employ, unlawfully abandon the
Plaintiffs' employ, and falsely and deceitfully persuade
and induce all the said Ingrain Carpet Weavers in the
Plaintiffs' employ, to abandon and quit the Plaintiffs'
employ and to refuse to work, and wrongfully and in-
juriously by threats and falsehood induce a great num-
ber of Ingrain Carpet Weavers, to wit, seventy, em-
ployed by the Plaintiffs in their said business to
abandon the same, and did wilfully, maliciously^ and
injuriously intimidate, dissuade, hinder, and prevent
other Carpet Weavers from engaging in the Plaintiffs'
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 19
said business, although then and there ready and will-
ing so to do; by reason of which unlawful, wicked,
and malicious conspiracy, combination, confederacy
and agreement between the Defendants aforesaid, and
their said unlawful, injurious, wilful and malicious acts
and doings aforesaid in pursuance thereof, the Plaintiffs'
said business has been hindered, obstructed, and entirely
stopped, and they the Plaintiffs entirely deprived of
all the profit and advantage thereof, and all use of
their said real and personal estate employed therein,
and of the labor and services of their said workmen,
and their arrangements broken up for a long time, to
wit, from said 24th day of July 1833, to the 27th day
of August 1833, and they have been subjected to great
loss and damage.
Also for that the Plaintiffs on the 24th day of July
A.D. 1833, at said Enfield were an incorporated Com-
pany as aforesaid, with the [5] powers aforesaid, and
had other personal and real estate at Thompsonville
in said Enfield of great value, to wit, two hundred and
fifty thousand dollars, and had a great number, to wit,
ico persons in their employment, which said estate
last aforesaid was used, and said workmen employed
exclusively in the manufacturing of Carpets, and the
Plaintiffs were carrying on their said business of manu-
facturing Carpets successfully and profitably to a
great amount annually, to wit, one hundred and fifty
thousand dollars, and were acquiring great gain
thereby, all which was then and there well known
to the Defendants; but the Defendants well knowing
the same, and wrongfully contriving to injure the
Plaintiffa in their said business, then and there at an-
other and different time, unlawfully, wickedly, and
maliciously did conspire, combine, confederate and
20 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
agree together to induce a great number of the Plain-
tiffs' workmen last aforesaid, to wit, sixty-three Ingrain
Carpet Weavers to quit the Plaintiffs' employment,
and thereby hinder and interrupt the Plaintiffs' said
business; and then and there in pursuance of said
conspiracy, combination, confederacy, and agreement
between the Defendants as last aforesaid, did, at
said Enfield on the 24th day of July 1833, being
themselves Ingrain Carpet Weavers in the Plaintiffs'
employment, cause and procure the said workmen of
the Plaintiffs, to wit, the sixty-three Ingrain Carpet
Weavers, unlawfully to assemble and meet together,
and being so assembled and met together, unjustly and
corruptly to agree, and pledge themselves to each other,
and did induce the Plaintiffs' workmen last aforesaid
to abandon and quit the Plaintiffs' employment, and to
refuse to return to their work in the Plaintiffs' said
business, and by threats and falsehood did hinder and
prevent other workmen from entering into the Plain-
tiffs' service in the Plaintiffs' said business; by reason
of which said conspiracy, confederacy, combination
and agreement between the Defendants as last afore-
said in pursuance and execution thereof, the Plaintiffs
have lost the services of their said workmen last afore-
said, their said business has been wholly interrupted,
and they have lost all profit and advantage thereof, and
of their estate real and personal last aforesaid employed
therein for a long time, to wit, from the 24th day of
July 1833, to the zyth of August 1833, and have been
subjected to great losses and damage.
Also for that afterwards, to wit, on the 24th day of
July 1833, at said Enfield, the Plaintiffs being an in-
corporated Company with the powers aforesaid, es-
tablished at said Enfield as aforesaid, had other real
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 21
and personal estate at said Thompsonville of great
value, to wit, of the value of 215,000 dollars, used by
the Plaintiffs for the manufacturing of Carpets, and
had a great number of persons, to wit, 100 persons
employed by the Plaintiffs in said business, and were
then and there prosecuting said business extensively
and profitably to a great amount and value, to wit,
150,000 dollars annually, and acquiring great gains
thereby, all of which was then and there well known
to the Defendants, and the Defendants well knowing
the same and wrongfully contriving and devising to
injure the Plaintiffs [6] in their said business, and un-
justly to extort from the Plaintiffs great sums of money
for their, the Defendants' labor and hire in their, the
Defendants' art, mystery, and manual occupation of
weavers, did at another and different time, to wit, at said
Enfield on the 24th day of July 1833, together with a
great number of other weavers in the Plaintiffs' employ,
to wit, sixty and more unlawfully assemble and meet
together, and being so met did then and there corruptly
and unjustly conspire, confederate, and agree among
themselves, that none of them would work thereafter
at the usual and accustomed rates and prices, at which
they and others had been wont and accustomed to work,
and to exact and demand from the Plaintiffs the follow-
ing prices, to wit, for plain grounds 15 cents per yard,
for fines 1 1 cents per yard, for stripes above two shuttles
and double whites 155^ cents per yard, for double
shot abouts i6j4 cents per yard, and for the three plies
30 cents per yard, and did then and there conspire,
confederate, and agree that none of them would return
to the Plaintiffs' employ unless the Plaintiffs would
agree to pay the prices aforesaid, being more than the
usual and accustomed prices, and did wrongfully and
22 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
unlawfully conspire, confederate and agree together
to hinder and prevent all others from entering or con-
tinuing in the Plaintiffs' employment in said business,
and entirely to hinder and stop the Plaintiffs' said busi-
ness ; and in pursuance of said conspiracy, confederacy,
and agreement last aforesaid, the Defendants at said
Enfield on said 24th day of July 1833, an( * thence un-
til the 27th day of August 1833, together with their
said other confederates, did remain and continue at
said Enfield united and combined in their said con-
spiracy, did refuse to return to their said work for the
Plaintiffs, did hinder and prevent all other workmen
from entering into the Plaintiffs' employ in said busi-
ness, did by threats and intimidation, by persuasion
and falsehood hinder and prevent from returning to
their said work all of the Plaintiffs' said workmen, who
were willing and desirous to do so, and did wantonly,
injuriously and unlawfully hinder, obstruct, and in-
terrupt the Plaintiffs' said business for a long time, to
wit, from the 24th day of July 1833, to the ayth day of
August 1833, by reason of which unlawful, wicked,
and malicious conspiracy, confederacy, and agreement
of the Defendants last aforesaid, and the wrongful and
injurious acts and doings of the Defendants in pursu-
ance thereof, the Plaintiffs lost all benefit of their said
real and personal estate last aforesaid, and of the labor
of said workmen,' and lost the profits of their said
business, from the 24th day of July 1833 for a long
time, to wit, five weeks, and were subjected to great
losses.
All which is to the damage of the Plaintiffs fifteen
thousand dollars, which to recover with first costs this
suit is brought. Hereof fail not to make due service
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 23
and return. Dated at Suffield this 3ist day of July
A.D. 1834. WILLIAM GAY, Justice of the Peace.
Defendants pleaded not guilty.
[7] After the respective claims of the contending
parties were stated by their Counsel, the Plaintiffs
proceeded to introduce their testimony. The first
witness examined was the Agent of the Company, who
testified in substance as follows.
HENRY THOMPSON. In the month of July 1833, a
committee waited upon me and informed me that the
weavers had held a meeting relative to the complaints
of one of their number by the name of Keys. The
cause of complaint was my refusal to pay Keys when
requested. I attended the meeting by request of the
committee, and assigned the reason for the refusal,
which was that Keys had not given the usual notice
of his intention to leave the Plaintiffs' employment.
Some of the weavers present claimed that I had before
given permission to any one to leave when they chose,
to which I replied that I remembered no such thing.
I then offered to pay Keys, remarking that any one who
should choose to leave afterwards would be required
to give notice. I told them the company would soon
meet and rules would be made and put up in the shops.
A part of the men only understood that they might
leave without notice. I turned to leave the meeting,
when William Taylor remarked that perhaps the men
would not suffer the rules to be put up. Some of the
weavers then said that the company had introduced
some new fancy fabrics which were more difficult to
weave, among which was that called the Double Shot
abouts, and that the price on those fabrics ought to be
raised. I replied that the company would meet on
24 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
the 23d of July, and they must address a petition to
them, as I had no power to raise the prices. On the
day when the company met the weavers presented their
petition. (This petition was here read and a copy may
be found in a note marked A.) They were told they
should receive an answer on the next day. The answer
was accordingly furnished. (The answer was here read
and may be found in the note marked B.) In about
an hour after the answer was forwarded to the weavers,
which I believe was on Thursday the 24th of July, the
company received some resolutions which the weavers
had adopted and forwarded to the company. (The
resolutions were here read and will be found appended
marked C.) The committee who brought the resolu-
tions inquired what the company had to say to the
resolutions, and were informed they had nothing to
say. It was then thought best to shut up the shops.
The weavers were then all in one shop and the other
five were empty. I met Mr. Reynolds, the Foreman,
and directed him to see all the shops shut. He in-
formed them of the directions given, and they left the
shop where they were assembled and held a meeting
in Mrs. Metcalfs lot. Another committee came in
about an hour or two, and requested their pay for what
they had worked. The company refused to pay any
one unless he would weave out his piece. Nothing
more was done that day. On the next day, at the
request of the company, I called the men together and
read some rules which were proposed by the company.
(The rules were here read and [8] are published in the
note marked D.) The weavers assembled as requested,
and after hearing the rules read, repaired to the field
where they had held a former meeting. Next day the
company handed me another paper to be read to them.
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 25
I delivered it to John Adams and George Black , whom
the weavers had appointed their President and Secre-
tary. (The paper which proposed an equalization of
prices was read and is attached and marked E.) Adams
thought that with a slight alteration it might do. On
the next day Adams handed back the paper to me, and
said the men would not agree to the proposition. I
told Adams and Black they had better go into the
shops, and if they did not we should fill up the shops
with other men. Adams said he was severely repri-
manded by the men for saying what he did to me, and
that they told him he had no business to make any
offer without their direction. On Saturday following
Alonzo Terry, one of the weavers, told me they had
written to all the Factories in the United States to
prevent weavers coming to Thompsonville. The
weavers continued at Thompsonville, but I had little
conversation with them. Toward the last of the next
week I saw John Reynolds and Thomas Little - asked
them to go back to work but they refused. I did in-
duce one Wilbraham to go back on one day, but he
left the shop the next. Another man by the name of
More was brought there from Hartford about a fort-
night after the strike, as it is called, who said he would
go into the shop, but did not. I tried to induce the
weavers to leave the place which they refused to do,
but can name no one. I had a conversation with one
Green, a weaver. He said they had broke Factories
in the old country and could break this. I went to
Hartford to consult counsel, and by their advice three
of the weavers were arrested and taken to prison.
When they went off there was considerable cheering
and huzzaing among the men. A second suit was
brought, upon which John Adams was arrested. He
26 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
was taken a few miles toward the prison and then
agreed to return to work if he could be discharged from
arrest, and he was therefore discharged. Adams re-
turned to work and Little also. The old weavers con-
tinued about the village, and such new weavers as were
procured were disheartened by the treatment which
they received from them. They were frequently
taunted and called Skunks.
On Sunday afternoon about the 27th of August,
eleven men came from New York and stopped by
direction, about a mile and a half below the village
at Smith's tavern. They had been employed by the
company to come to Thompsonville, and enter into
the employment of the company as weavers. I went
down to see them on that evening. On my return to
the village I met a number of old weavers going in the
direction of Smith's. I returned to Smith's and saw
a number of them there. I warned them to a meeting
at the office on the next morning. Next day I brought
the eleven new weavers from Smith's to the village,
and drove up to Scrimgeour's tavern. They went in
and were immediately followed by the old weavers, so
that the room was full. The old weavers asked the
[9] new ones if they had come to take the bread out
of their children's mouths. There was considerable
conversation between the old weavers ,and myself on
this occasion, and some harsh language. Conversed
with McDowell and two or three old weavers in all
at this time. About 9 o'clock in the morning, the
eleven new weavers went into the shops. At about 1 1
a.m. diree of the old weavers called upon me to know
if I would receive a committee, to which I consented.
Alexander and McGill came as a committee, and in-
quired if we would pay them now the same prices
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 27
which we paid when they struck for higher wages.
I replied we would pay them the same we paid the
new weavers. They went away and held a meeting,
then returned and asked if those in jail might return
upon the same terms, and no examples be made of any,
to which I consented. It was understood that those in
prison might return to work on these terms, or remain
there and try their case. In the evening Simpson,
(one of the old weavers) came to see me, and I wrote
to Mr. Toucey one of our counsel, that if the men in
prison wished it he might liberate them, which he
accordingly did.
On the day after Adams returned to work, we in-
duced Crawford to go in also. He and Little were
both ill treated and insulted by the old weavers, and
both soon went away. On the afternoon of the ayth
of August, and after some had agreed to go back, I
was informed that there was a disturbance in one of
the shops. I went there and found three men about
Crawford's loom. They said nothing after I went in,
and I commanded them to leave the shop, informing
them I had agreed no man should be insulted. It was
a common thing for the old weavers to call the new
ones Skunks, and I have heard them call Adams so.
During the strike I believe I employed some of the
old weavers to labor for me in the field.
Cross Examined. The committee inquired of me if
I would pay up to the reed, or for the labor which
had been performed, and I refused to do it. The usual
method adopted is this -the workman presents his
piece when finished, to the Foreman for examination,
if it is passed he gives a ticket which is presented to
the Secretary, and he gives a check upon me for the
money. Do not remember that any one whose piece
28 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
was out, called upon me for payment. Believe I did
say to some one that he might sue for his pay. Those
who had pieces out, had also unfinished pieces in the
loom, and if abandoned and finished by another, the
damage might be greater than the debt. Do not remem-
ber that the company formally voted not to pay, but it
was generally understood that no payment was to be
made. I do not recollect that any one called with a
check and was refused, nor do I remember that any
one offered to go away if I would pay him. It was
never the practice to pay until the piece was finished.
George Simpson had a piece in the loom when he
called for his pay. If any man left a piece before it
was finished he procured a satisfactory guaranty that
the piece should be well finished before we paid him.
A man by the name of McMoore came to the village
and agreed to take a loom on the following day. Saw
him [ro] with the old weavers, he got intoxicated and
went away without commencing work at all.
Mr. Gorman, one of the defendants, worked for the
company after he was discharged from prison, I think
in sorting wool, and Mr. Norton I believe also spoke
of taking a loom. The men with whom I conversed
at Scrimgeour's when the new weavers came, were
McDowell and Elder. The conversation lasted about
fifteen minutes. They said it was deceiving the men
who had just come, and McDowell claimed the right
to talk with and undeceive them. There were several
present, but I cannot recollect any other names, and
do not know but they boarded there. The average
length of pieces was ninety yards, and the pay day was
on Saturday, once in two weeks. The shops of the com-
pany are within thirty or forty rods of Connecticut
River, and several of the weavers who had families
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 29
lived near the river. I do not know that the defendants
did any thing. Did not see them do any thing amiss.
The defendants were carried to jail on the loth of
August. (The witness is here shown a paper dated
November 24th 1829, containing a list of prices which
he identifies -A copy is subjoined marked F.) All
but the Venetian weavers stopped work. All branches
of the Ingrain business was stopped. Warpers, wind-
ers, among whom were about fifteen girls were all out
of employment, and the Foreman of the Factory. The
number of Ingrain looms which were stopped was
about sixty. There was no variation of prices from
January 1830, to July 1833. When the Thompson-
ville company first commenced operations, they con-
tracted with a number of men in Scotland to come to
this country as weavers, five or six only of whom were
at work at the Factory at the time of the turn-out.
They were to be paid at the usual prices paid in this
country. At first those prices were not known to the
company, and they were paid more than the usual prices
on some fabrics, and less on others; but in 1830 the
prices were equalized. Double Whites and Half dou-
bles were introduced in 1830. We paid premiums if a
piece was finished in a given time, and inflicted fines
if the work was not finished by a certain period.
Witness says he has not been active in the preparation
of this suit.
JOHN ADAMS. Upon the 6th of July 1833, I was
requested to call the shop together of which I was
President. Mr. Taylor thought the opinion of the
shop ought to be taken in relation to a grievance of
which one of the workmen complained. One Boyle
had complained that he had finished his piece within
the time and could get no premium. William Keys
30 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
also complained to me on the same day that he could
not get a ticket, and that he had been much hindered
in his work by poor filling. I called a meeting at 4
o'clock on Saturday and sent to Mr. Thompson. The
reason of the refusal to pay Keys was that he had not
complied with the rule requiring a webb's notice of
his intention to leave the employment of the company.
It was always understood at Thompsonville, and all
other [n] Factories, that a webb's notice was to be
given by the employer or employed, if the one intended
to discharge a workman, or he intended to leave. There
is a great danger that if two workmen, even good work-
men, are employed upon the same piece, that the figure
will not match, and that the piece will be thus de-
stroyed. At the meeting on Saturday before mentioned
Mr. Henry Thompson attended and consented to pay
Keys, and that he might go away, but said he wished
it distinctly understood that a webb's notice would be
required thereafter. Mr. Boyle's complaint about not
receiving the premium was also considered at this
meeting, and Mr. Thompson said the premiums should
be given up, and upon being inquired of if fines were
to be given up also, he answered yes. Before the agent
Mr. T. left the meeting, he was requested to raise the
prices upon some difficult fabrics, to which he replied
that he would refer them to the company who would
soon meet. A committee of six were appointed to
draw a petition, which was presented to the company
at their next meeting. An answer was returned by the
company on the following day. A meeting was then
called in the High Shop and the answer was read and
was unsatisfactory. And the question was then put,
"shall we make a stand or not?" It was determined
to ask for an increase of wages on all kinds of fabrics,
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 31
and the terms were agreed upon. The three ply
weavers had never before made any complaint. We
concluded to ascertain the views of those present by a
personal vote, and each individual was asked "stand
or not." Seventy said "stand," and but one made any
objection, and he a slight one. Resolutions were then
adopted and a committee of which John Elder was one,
was appointed to present them to the company. The
meeting remained organized until the committee re-
turned with a report that the company were not pre-
pared to make any other alterations. Toward evening
the Foreman (Mr. Ronald) came to the shop where
we had assembled, and told us he was directed by Mr.
Thompson to require us to leave the shop. I requested
that we might be permitted to remain thirty minutes
to finish our business, but he refused, saying he was
ordered to shut the shops. We left the shop and went
into Mrs. Metcalf s lot, where I was chosen President,
and George Black Secretary. A committee of man-
agement consisting of nine was also appointed. The
committee was composed of the President and Secre-
tary, with William Liddle, James Alexander, William
Taylor, John Connor, John Flood, Samuel Sturgeon
and Henry White. A tax of six cents was laid to pay
postages. We were then instructed to repair to some
convenient place, and not to separate until we had
written to all the principal Carpet Manufactories in
the United States. We did so, and a letter was written
which was approved. It was then determined that
each of the committee should make a copy & address
it to some individual in some other Factory with whom
he was acquainted. One read from the letter first
written and the committee wrote. I wrote to James
Wells, West Farms, N.Y., George Black wrote to
32 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
Alexander Winkle, at New Haven, James Alexander
to [12] Hugh Torrence, Baltimore, William Taylor to
Robert Young, Lowell, Mass. John Conner to William
Gibbs, Tariffville, Samuel Sturgeon to Robert Wilson,
New Jersey, Henry White to John Park, Rochester,
N.Y., John Flood to his brother, at Saxonville, Mass.
There were eleven letters in all written. Liddle did not
write but read the first letter while others wrote. Two
were written on the following day. It was thought
advisable to write to Mr. Miller of New York, who
keeps the Blue Bonnet Tavern, and request him to give
information to Charles Cunningham of the Rob Roy
House in that city, that they might give notice to
weavers of the strike. The letter to Miller differed
from the rest in the request that he would give infor-
mation to Cunningham. It was proposed that the let-
ters written should be lodged in the Post Office at
Suffield, and I delivered them to Samuel Sturgeon for
that purpose, and gave him the money to pay the
postage. Nothing more was done that evening.
On the next day Mr. Thompson requested me to
call the men together in the yard at 2 o'clock p.m.
which I did. They assembled and Mr. Thompson
read a paper. (It will be found in note marked D.)
We went into the field and upon consultation refused
to accede. On the morning following which was
Saturday, at about 6 o'clock, Mr. T. handed me an-
other paper, to which we were required to agree by
Monday or to go in afterwards, if at all, at reduced
prices. It was determined to call a meeting that fore-
noon. I saw Thompson before the meeting and sug-
gested some alterations, which I informed him I be-
lieved would render the proposition acceptable. Mr.
Thompson would not agree to any alterations. A meet-
four, Supp.] TIIQMFSONVILLE WEAVERS. 1834-1836 33
ing was held on that day in the field. The resolutions
were again publicly read, and I explained what I had
said to Mr. Thompson. Several present, among whom
was Richard McDowell and James Taylor, repri-
manded me severely, and said among other things that
I was their servant and not their director. The ques-
tion was then taken shall we accept the offer or
stand permanently. The question was taken by per-
sonal vote, each being asked individually, and they
unanimously said stand. I was then requested to
invite those who belonged to the support society
to remain after the meeting was dissolved. The
meeting was then dismissed. In the Society's meet-
ing it was proposed to dissolve that Society which
had been in existence for several years, and draw
the money from the Saving's Bank and divide it
amongst the members. The proposition was agreed
to. George Simpson and William Taylor were in
favor of this measure. On Thursday following, one
week from the day of the strike, a meeting was holdcn
on the River bank, and the money divided & two letters
read from Tariffville, approving of our conduct. Early
next week a committee meeting was held at William
Taylor's room, at which about six of the committee
were present. The object was, to provide funds for the
support of those who had families and others in need.
William Liddle, William Taylor and Henry White
offered to furnish $5 each, and Black offered to lend
$5 more, if needed, and act as Treasurer. The money
waa to be loaned and [13] returned afterwards if the
person borrowing had ability, and was to be appor-
tioned among the needy as follows. To a family of
more than two children $3.00 -of two children $2.50-
and single persons $2.00 per week. On the roth day of
34 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
the strike there was a meeting held in Smith's lot. The
committee reported their views to the meeting, which
were approved. The committee were then authorized
to contract for $60 in any manner for the support of
the indigent At this meeting James Taylor, Thomas
Green and James Law were added to the committee.
On my way home from the meeting, I met James
Borland who handed me a letter from Tariffville
which contained $54.00. The letter was addressed to
me. Mr. Law soon came down and I delivered the
money to him, and informed him he had been elected
Treasurer, and that the money must not be paid out
without my order.
On Monday after the strike the committee met and
prepared an article for the Old Countryman, a
paper published in New York. We soon began to
receive letters of approval and promises of money to
aid us. The first letters which we received did not
contain money. We wrote them a second time in-
forming them that we were still standing out, and
intimating that we might have need of aid. About
two hundred dollars were received during the first
three weeks. During the third week Mr. Thompson
asked us what we intended to do, whether we should go
back and work or remain as we were. I told him our
wages had been reduced & we wanted them increased.
He said we should be ruined if we persisted. He then
requested me to call six of the men to the office whom
he named, and they came. Charles McGill, one of the
six, told him he might make him work in the shop
with those who worked at an under price, but he could
not make him associate with them. Wm. Dixon, Esq.
was present at this meeting and proposed to meet six
of the men at the office in the afternoon, and read them
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 35
the laws of the country about turn-outs. It was with
difficulty that I could procure six to attend, and they
were young men. Mr. Dixon read the law about turn-
outs, but the men went away as much dissatisfied as
ever. Mr. Thompson told us they should bring men
from New York and fill the looms if we did not go
back. George Simpson said they might put hell on
the looms if they wished, they had ruined other Fac-
tories, and could ruin them, and send their Factory
down the river.
At a general meeting on Saturday a resolution was
passed, or an agreement made that each one should be
as active as possible in preventing weavers from coming
there, and if any did come to notify them of the strike
before Mr. Thompson knew it. One James Latty came
there from Scotland. I asked him if he had any knowl-
edge of the turn-out. He said after he had been re-
quested to come, he had been informed of it at the Blue
Bonnet tavern in New York. We informed him of the
facts, and he said he would do us no harm - offered
to furnish him money if he needed it. Charles Stewart,
William Taylor and David Gibson were present at
the conversation. [14] Latty went that evening by our
advice to David Gibson's and I did not see him again.
Latty came up in the Boat, and some few always at-
tended upon the Boat on its arrival.
A weaver by the name of Clayton came there also,
and William Taylor told me he gave him a dollar, and
sent him to the Shakers to seek for work. Taylor said
he (Clayton) was out of money, and he gave him the
dollar to bear expenses. He wished the money re-
funded. Law, Sturgeon, and Liddle were present.
On Saturday the ijjth of August, the defendants were
arrested on the first suit It was agreed among the
36 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
weavers that one or two should go and see them each
day, to see that they were supplied with every thing
necessary, to consult with counsel and if possible to
procure bail. Mr. Martin the Clerk told me that the
company were determined to fill up the works, and
that I had better go in. The company threatened to
arrest me and did so, and on my way to prison I gave
up and consented if I could be discharged and pro-
tected, to return to work. I signed a paper and was
discharged accordingly and again went to my loom.
Some young men had already gone in when I returned,
which was on Monday the igth of August. From the
time I went in, the old weavers hissed and spit at me
and shouted at me as I passed and called me skunk.
John Hanson spit at me from the Tavern window.
They would stand about in clusters and insult me
daily -called me a traitor and a Monteith. Some one
in a house said it would be well to throw a pail of
water on me, but I can't say whether it was a man or a
woman. On Saturday of that week the Foreman of
the Norwich Factory came there, and I took a letter
from him. On Monday following several came to the
loom where I worked, three or four at a time. James
Buckridge, one of the weavers engaged in the strike
said, "can this be the same John Adams that wrought
here ,a few months ago?" John Lamont said, look at
him again and you will find that it is the same man.
They called me a traitor, &c. One said to Thomas
Little, I thought you knew better about strikes, & had
been in the Aberdeen strike. Others shouted and
hissed at me that afternoon. I went to Mr. Thompson's
office but did not find him, and the men came again and
insulted me. Next morning I went into the shop but
went away that day- went by the way of New Haven.
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 37
At one of the meetings spoken of, I think it was said, if
any one went back he would be put on the black cata-
logue. The defendants were all present at the first
meeting, but do not know that they were at every
other. No new fabrics were introduced before the
strike - no fabric is new which does not require an al-
teration of the reed. In the resolutions adopted at the
strike, we claimed J^ a cent more on the whole per
yard than we claimed in our petition. The object of
the three ply weavers in joining us was to help us as
I supposed, as they had not complained. Don't know
diat double shot abouts had been woven in this coun-
try until introduced at Thompsonville.
Cross Examined. We sent a deputation to Mr.
Thompson from [15] the field to inform him if he
would pay us up we would go away. There was no
vote of the meeting instructing the committee what to
write. It was left to the discretion of the committee,
what the letter should be -each letter was signed by
the President and Secretary. The first meeting ad-
journed at half past 6 o'clock, and did not come to-
gether again that evening. At a meeting held on the
third day, it was proposed to station men at Warehouse
Point, to inform any weavers who were coming that
way of our difficulties, but the proposition was voted
down. It was voted however to attend upon the Boat
on its arrival at Thompsonville, and to be generally
vigilant. During the strike I worked with three or
four more for Mr. Thompson in the field. James
Anderson made patterns during the strike - Callaghan
might also have been employed but I cannot say posi-
tively.
At the different general meetings, the committee re-
ported what had been done, and the meetings ap-
38 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
proved. On Saturday after the proposition was made
by the company it was said in the meeting if any man
wished to accept he could do so then, and they all
voted not to accept but to stand. I have had no agency
in the preparation of this case. I wrote to Robert
Wilson in New Jersey, on my own account, and also
to John Miller in New York, after a former trial of
this case, enquiring relative to the contents of the cir-
cular letter which they received. In my letter to Wil-
son I did not state what the contents of the circular
were. Did ask Wilson, in my letter to him, if the cir-
cular requested that men should be kept from coming
to Thompsonville. I had been contradicted in my tes-
timony at the former trials by some of the men, and
I wrote to Wilson to ascertain if I was right or not, as
one of the circulars was addressed to him. (The wit-
ness was then shown a letter addressed to George
Flood, Saxonville, which he says is not one of the cir-
culars.) You have shown me that letter twice before,
which I denied and deny it again. All the circulars
contained a request to prevent men from coming to
Thompsonville - were signed with my own hand, and
were all sent to Suffield Post Office. Have never re-
ceived any answer from Wilson to my letter.
John H. Miller of the City of New York, of the age
of thirty eight years, being duly sworn deposes and
says, that he is the keeper of the Blue Bonnet Tavern,
No. 10 Frankfort Stree't, in said City, which he has
kept for the last five years - that he is a Scotsman by
birth, and was formerly a Carpet weaver in this coun-
try with John [16] and Nicholas Haight-that the
house of deponent is more frequented by Carpet weav-
ers than any other public house in this city as he
thinks -that orders are frequently left with the de-
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 39
ponent to send Carpet weavers to different Manufac-
tories in different parts of the country, which deponent
has frequently done, when he has had an opportunity -
that at the commencement of the strike of the Carpet
weavers at the Thompsonville Carpet Manufactory in
July 1833 the deponent received a letter from John
Adams, President of the Association of the weavers
at Thompsonville, and that to the best of deponent's
recollection it was also signed by George Black as Sec-
retary. Deponent has made dilligent search several
times for the said letter but has been unable to find it,
and he believes it is lost or destroyed - the substance of
the contents of the letter was that the deponent was to
use his influence to prevent any Carpet weavers that he
might know or meet with from going to Thompson-
ville, to ask, or seek for employment, in that Manufac-
tory - that to the best of his recollection he also thinks
fae was requested in the letter to call at the Rob Roy
House kept by Mr. Cunningham, at Greenwich vil-
lage & other places for the same purpose- and further
he saith not.
James Crawford, a witness produced by the plaintiffs
in the above suit, being sworn doth depose and say,
that he is about twenty-six years of age, and that he
resides in the city of Philadelphia, that he is a Carpet
weaver, that he was in the employment of the plaintiffs
in the above suit during a portion of the Summer of
1833 in Thompsonville, Connecticut, that while he was
there the Ingrain Carpet weavers struck for more
wages, that the company requested the deponent about
three or four weeks after the strike "to commence
Ingrain Carpet weaving," that he had been before
that time a Venetian Carpet weaver that he did com-
mence Ingrain Carpet weaving, that he went into
40 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
the Ingrain Carpet weaving under the expectation and
promise of the company that he should be protected
from any injury from the "hands," weavers, who had
struck, that nearly from the time he went into the
Ingrain Carpet weaving until he left Thompsonville
he received abuse and insults and threats from the
workmen who had struck for higher wages, that it was
entirely on that account that he left Thompsonville at
that time, that he would have left it before, on account
of the insults he received, had it not been for the
solicitation of the company, that while he was at his
loom the Ingrain Carpet weavers came to him and
threatened him, and told him that he should never
weave there with any peace, and they threatened to lay
hands on him violently, that he received insults from
them as well while he was at his loom as when he
was absent from it, that no person could stand the in-
sults he received from the men without quitting, diat
the names of the men from whom he particularly re-
ceived the insults and threats are Charles Stewart, one
Sims, one Buckridge, one Borland and James Boyle,
that they use towards him all kinds of opprobrious
epithets, that [17] he frequently called at the com-
pany's office and stated to their Agent and Secretary
that he must quit the company's work, but they per-
suaded him to stay by telling him that he would protect
him, and that the weavers would cease giving their
insults, that these declarations caused him to stay as
long as he did stay -he further says that he knows
of no inducement that would persuade him again to
go through the same scene.
Lorin F. Avery of Springfield, in the County of
Hampden and State of Massachusetts, of lawful age
being duly cautioned, examined and sworn accordingly
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 41
to law do testify and say, that in July 1833 I resided
at Thompsonville in Enfield, Connecticut, that I know
that the weavers in the employment of the Thompson-
ville Carpet Manufacturing Company about that time
struck for higher wages, that I often heard them talk
on the subject, I heard them say that they had the staff
in their own hands and would use it, that they had
written to all the Carpet Factories in the country to
prevent weavers coming to Thompsonville, that they
would make the company suffer unless they would give
them their prices, and that they received money from
other Factories to support them in their turn-out for
wages. Arthur Dick, John Hanson, James Sims and
William Taylor were among those who talked as above
stated. These observations took place at the house of
E. J. Scrimgeour where I lived at the time. I was
bar-keeper for Scrimgeour at the time. William
Taylor boarded with Scrimgeour, and the weavers
held frequent meetings at his room.
Question by Henry Thompson Agent for the Plain-
tiffs - Did you at that time frequently see a large num-
ber of the weavers walking about the streets and lots
and engaged in conversation together? Answer. Yes.
Question by Edward Gorman, one of the Defend-
ants - Can you remember any words used by Taylor
himself? Answer. No.
Question zd by Defendants - Was or was not the
Factory locked at the time, or about the time you saw
the weavers walking about the streets and lots? I
cannot say that it was at the precise time I saw them
walking the streets and lots; but it was generally
locked.
Question by Defendants - Do you know of any at-
tempts made to frighten the watch about this time?
4 2 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [VoL
Answer - There was an attempt to frighten Olmsted,
one of the watch.
Question by Defendants - By whom was this attempt
made; was it made by any of the weavers? Answer -
I should think it was not made by any of the weavers -
I know of none engaged in it.
EwiNG MCCRISTIE. I was at Patterson when the
strike took place at Thompsonvillc. I received a
letter from there stating the cause of the strike, &c.
It was signed by John Adams President, and George
Black Secretary. The letter has been lost or destroyed,
and I am unable to state its contents particularly -
believe the [18] letter requested advice, and that none
of the weavers should come that way. I afterwards
received two other letters - cannot state their contents,
but think they contained information as to how they
were getting along. I called my shop together, and
the men directed me to write to Thompsonville saying
that we approved of the conduct of the men. After
the second or third letters was received I sent them
$10. Mr. Hanson who was engaged in the strike came
from Thompsonville to Patterson and said he had no
doubt if they stood out they would gain their point,
and that he believed they could break the company -
that heavier ones had been broken in the old country.
Hanson came to Patterson in the early part of August
and at about middle of the strike - he remained there
only one night. The first letter which I received I think
I noticed was post marked at Suffield, because I did
not know why I should receive a letter from there.
Witness has lived in Thompsonville in the employment
of the company for about a year and a half past.
JAMES HUNTER. I am one of the eleven who came
from New York during the strike. We stopped at
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 43
Smith's in Enfield on Sunday night. Arthur Dick
and a man by the name of Flood came there in the
evening, and asked me if any men had come there
from New York as weavers. I told him I believed
there had. They asked me if we had heard there was
a strike there. I told him we had, and had heard some
had gone back. They said only two or three had proved
faithless. They asked me if they could see the men -
I told them I thought not as they had gone to bed.
They then asked permission of Smith to go into their
chambers but he refused. They wished me to inform
those who had gone to bed that the weavers would
have a meeting next morning and request them to at-
tend, and they would then be informed of their turn-
out and their grievances. The proposed meeting was
postponed until afternoon in consequence of a meeting
having been warned on that morning by Mr. Thomp-
son. Arthur Dick came from the same town in Scotland
with myself. Several old weavers came there that
night and fifteen or twenty were there next morning
between 6 and 7 o'clock. Did not have much conver-
sation with them in the morning -I walked to the
village with Richard Currie, and Mr. Martin carried
the other new weavers in a waggon. Currie, who was
one of the old weavers, requested me to go to the
meeting which was to be held in the afternoon. He
said he was sorry we had come there at that time.
Arthur Dick said he would call for me after dinner,
and he did. I went to the meeting, which was held
in the field. I walked by the side of Dick -Simpson,
Cadys and Waterson were in company with us. He
spoke about the men in jail and said he wished I could
see them, told what brave and true men they were. I
found sixty or seventy assembled in the field. George
44 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
Simpson I believe was chosen President. The Presi-
dent stated the grievances of the men who had turned
out, and said the company would promise fair but
would not perform. After he got through with us
they told us we [19] might go as they had some private
business to transact. A Mr. Torrey said they were as
able to stand as ever. At Scrimgeours when we first
came up McDowell and Dick talked a great deal to
us, but at the meeting no one addressed us but Simpson
the President, and his address occupied from half an
hour to three quarters. Other weavers who came with
me went in to work on Monday following, the old
weavers on the next day, and I went in the day after.
Do not remember that any of the old weavers recom-
mended me to go away. I cannot say that I was told
by any one that the prices had not been reduced.
HUGH STEELE. I was one of the eleven new weavers
who came from New York -saw five or six of the
old weavers at Smith's tavern - heard no conversation
on Sunday evening on their part. Mr. Thompson
carried us on Monday morning to Scrimgeour's tavern
in the village. A number of the old weavers came
there, and one asked us what we came there for. We
told them we had come there to weave. McDowell
said we had no business to take the bread out of their
mouths. Mr. Henry Thompson talked with him but
cannot say what he said - he went with some of us to
the shops and shewed us the looms. On Monday we
commenced work. On that day the old weavers came
in and George Black said (speaking of me) pull him
off the loom, the scoundrel. Arthur Dick came to
my loom and said he should weave out his piece.
Thomas Bradbury who was learning me, told Black
that he had no business to use such language there, to
four, Supp.] THOMFSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 45
which Black replied that if he said any thing he would
throw him out of the window.
ROBERT CADYS. I was another of the eleven new
weavers - stopped at Smith's on Sunday night - I was
acquainted with Currie and Conner in the old country -
saw them there that evening but nothing was said,
except inquiries were made and answers given about
other matters. Thompson and Martin came to Smith's
on that evening. Next morning a number of old
weavers came down before Thompson. We were then
carried to the village. There were several old weavers
who immediately came into the tavern where we were.
They began to tell us their grievances, and the reduc-
tion of prices. Mr. Thompson interfered and told
them they had no business with the men, that we were
strangers. McDowell said he would say what he
pleased. He said Thompson had got some damn'd
nice weavers now - that would make pretty work. He
said something about taking bread out of their mouths
and used bad language. We went down with Mr.
Thompson to look at the looms. Four of us did not
go to work at first. Arthur Dick asked us to go to
the meeting to hear their grievances - four of us went.
Dick said he hoped we would have no hard feelings
at what had been said. At the meeting George
Simpson said if we had staid back we could have come
in and been sociable with the rest, and if we had not
come they should have got their minds accomplished.
Some one said if we would stay back they would use
us decently, and said as much as to say they would
assist us if we had need. Next day [20] Dick came
into the tavern and threatened to whip me, and two
of the old weavers pulled him out of the house. One
of the old weavers went in the same day I did, and
46 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
said he would make sure of his loom. He commenced
work next day.
JAMES SIMPSON. I came to Smith's on Sunday
evening with the other new weavers from New York -
do not remember any thing that took place at Smith's.
The old weavers invited us to attend their meeting and
we attended. Simpson was President and addressed
the meeting and recited their grievances. I cannot
relate what was said in particular- I remarked it was
hard after being ofiered work and coming from New
York to refuse it, and Mr. Flood replied that if we
choose to go back, they had money enough and would
assist us to return.
JOHN MORE. I was one of the eleven new weavers
spoken of -heard no conversation on Sunday evening
at Smith's. On Monday morning four weavers came
down of whom John Conner was one. He had a con-
versation with us in which he remarked that it was a
pity that we had happened to come at this time, that
if they had got us into the shop, they would make us
work at under prices, and would promise fair but
never perform. Mr. Martin said it was false and that
whatever the old weavers had we should get for the
same labor. Heard the conversation at Scrimgeours
and considerable scolding, but do not remember much
that was said. On Monday I commenced work in the
same shop in which John Adams wrought. On that
day Charles Stewart went up to Adams' loom and
called him Monteith and a traitor, and called Little also
the same names. Two or three other men were with
Stewart. I was standing at the head of the stairs, and
two men who were standing at the window asked me
what I was going to do, and if I had stopped weaving.
I answered diat I had rather return to New York than
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS. 1834-1836 47
to take another man's loom which he wanted. They
said if I would take no loom they would furnish me
sufficient money to return. Those making this offer
were old weavers but I cannot say whom.
JOB. B.ALLEN. On Monday the ayth of August 1833,
I went on to a loom at Thompsonville to learn to weave.
Mr. Thompson directed Mr. Ronald to teach me.
Three or four old weavers came up. John Smith who
had a piece in the loom asked me what business I had
there, and said he would pull me off. Andrew Black
said if it was his loom he would snake me off. I in-
formed Mr. Martin, but returned to the loom and
continue there yet. On one occasion three old weavers
went to Crawford's loom and insulted him, but could
not understand what was said. He got off the loom,
Symmes kicked at or toward him for an insult The
old weavers called the new ones skunks, and Charles
Stewart called me so. He said to the old weavers as I
was going into the shop, stand back and give the
skunk room.
PETER REYNOLDS. The old weavers were at my
store almost daily. [21] I asked them the reason why
they did not go to work -they said they should not
until the company came to their terms. They said
they had written to the different Factories in the United
States and the old country. I tried to prevail on them
to return to work. I got Mr. Thompson's Liberty to
give those who owed me, the price they asked to work
out their pieces but they refused. I asked them if they
intended to break the company, and they said such
things had been done in the old country. During the
time of the strike I was standing at the door of my
store, when John Ronald went past with a man who
had a bundle. When he returned I asked him who it
48 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
was he passed by with. He said it was a weaver whom
he had been putting on the way to Norwich. The
old weavers made frequent calculations upon the loss
which the company were suffering daily and said it
was large. David Gibson, John Smith and John
Ronald were among the number to whom I made the
offer to pay them the prices required to weave out their
pieces. This was before the new weavers came can-
not give the names of those who made estimates of the
daily loss to the company, or of those who spoke of
companies being ruined in the old country by strikes -
but a good many said so.
WILLIAM L. HILLS. I was to work for the company
as a carpenter at the time of the strike heard the
weavers frequently speak of the turn-out. I heard
William Hamilton, George Simpson, Thomas Calkins,
Green and Kelly speak more frequently than others.
They said they had written to all the Factories in the
United States, and that the company must come to their
terms. That they had known companies fail in the
old country in consequence of a strike.
JAMES REED. I was engaged generally to do any
kind of work and was employed in learning the men
who came from New York. I went into the shop on
Monday forenoon. The old hands came into the shop
and insulted the new ones and others employed there.
One asked the others if they did not feel a smell, and
said I smell a skunk. I complained to Mr. Martin,
and he ordered the men away. On Tuesday the old
weavers came in and used the same language. The
fabrics called fancy fabrics are not new here, and I
never heard any complaint about Double Shot abouts,
until the time of the strike. The uniform practice is
to give a webb or piece's notice by the employers and
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 49
employed, and such was the agreement between Robert
Thompson and the men when he was Agent some years
ago. If a weaver leaves a piece unfinished there is
danger that another weaver, though a good workman,
cannot finish it so that the figure will match. Witness
is one of the weavers that came out from Scotland on
an agreement in 1829, and has been in the employment
of the company ever since with the exception of about
two weeks, when he had an altercation with Mr.
Thompson and went away with Mr. T's consent.
[22] JOHN RONALD. Was there at the time of the
strike - do not recollect the particulars about Double
Shot abouts. We sent resolutions to the company and
a deputation. The deputation returned and said we
should have an answer in a few moments. Foreman
soon came and said the company would not comply
and had ordered him to close the shops. We went into a
lot, resolved to stand, and appointed a committee of
management. That committee by advice of general
meeting were to write letters to all the Factories and in-
form weavers what had been done. Next day Mr.
Thompson called a meeting of the weavers in the yard,
and then read a paper proposing to us if we would re-
turn to work by the next Monday we might return at
the old prices, and if we did not commence work until
afterwards the prices would be reduced. Mr. Thomp-
son advised us to return to work. On Friday afternoon
again held a meeting in Mrs. Metcalf's lot, again voted
to stand. At this meeting John Adams said, any one
can return now if he wishes, but let every man con-
sider his vote well, for if he says stand, and afterwards
goes in to work he shall be considered a traitor. Mr.
Law rebuked Adams for this remark, and said such
language ought not to be used. At this last meeting
5 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
it was resolved to hold no more general meetings for
some time unless called by the committee. Recollect
nothing further until Adams returned to work which
was on Monday, and the next day I went to Patterson
I know of no general meetings afterward. The three
ply weavers were at die meeting in the High Shop
with the rest. A vote was taken on all the resolutions
in the shop before we went into the lot. No vote was
taken in the shop after the resolutions were passed.
There was a desultory conversation in general meeting,
and then a vote was passed to write to all the Factories
in the Union, to let them know what we had done,
and how we stood. The committee were entrusted
with full powers to communicate with other Factories.
The first proposition which I heard was that the com-
pany would probably advertise for men, and it was
proper we should inform the men in other Factories
of our situation and intentions so that they might not
come, and it was also proper we should remain at
Thompsonville and not take other people's looms to
drive them there. It was also said that too many
meetings was a bad job and had a tendency to destroy
the union. At this meeting John Adams said "remem-
ber the bundle of rods in the fable, if we stick together
we shall succeed." I was supported from the common
fund and received $2 from Black, $3 from Liddle, and
$3 from Adams. After I went to Patterson I saw a
man there who commenced talking with me about
going to Thompsonville in search of work. I told
him the circumstances of the Factory, that I had left,
but that they were building a new Factory and if he
would wait a little T had no doubt he could get work.
But he said to me he knew too well about strikes to
go there. I saw the letter which was written from
four, Supp.] THOMFSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 5 1
Thompsonville to Patterson. It was signed John
Adams and George Black. It commenced telling the
circumstances of the case, prices, &c. and inquired if
their conduct was approved [23] of, and if so requested
none would come that way until the difficulties were
settled.
The practice of the trade is to give a webb's notice
before leaving the employment of the establishment,
and by a webb is understood a piece - and if part of
the piece is woven notice should be given to the end
of the next piece. I worked at Thompsonville from
1831 to the time of the strike. If they left in good
fellowship a webb's notice was given. Have known
Mr. Thompson give such notice and have known him
discharge men without any notice. I did not see the
letters at Thompsonville which were written by the
committee, but did see a letter in the hands of Ewing
McChristie at Patterson. I believe it was one of the
letters written on the 2401 of July and signed John
Adams and George Black. I have never said that Mr.
Thompson told me after the trial of this case in the
County Court that he had no more work for me, but
did say he told me that I did not tell what I knew.
At the last general meeting on Friday it was said if
any man wished to go back then he might, and there
would be no hard thoughts. If either the employer
or employed do not act up to the rule of the trade
regarding a webb's notice it is not honorable. Andrew
McKnight was discharged without notice, as it was
said for damaging his piece by putting oil upon it.
There had been a support Society established at
Thompsonville before I went there for the relief of the
sick and indigent. The funds of this Society were
divided during the strike and I received my share. I
52 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
did pass Mr. Reynolds store as he has stated. The man
who was with me with a bundle was my nephew. He
had been working at Tariffville and his name was
Lockhead. He staid at my house one night and the
next day I put him on the road to Norwich. He had
previously worked at Thompsonville, and on account
of some difficulty as I understood was discharged.
GEORGE W. MARTIN. The Thompsonville company
commenced weaving in June 1829. At that time they
had from eight to ten looms in operation. I am Clerk
of the establishment. There was some debate about
the price of weaving. At first the company paid 16
cents per yard and then i^/t cts. until the average
price in the country could be ascertained. This was
ascertained in September and it was agreed that 14^
cts. should be afterwards paid, beginning with the ist
of January 1830. The contract fixing the prices was
dated the 24th of November 1829, and from that time
to the time of the strike no alteration was made on
fines or super fines. In 1830 commenced manufactur-
ing Double Supers and during the year made 37 pieces.
For these we paid 16 cts. per yard. From the ist of
January 1831 to the Autumn of 1832 we manufactured
one hundred and ninety-four pieces, and paid 15 cts.
per yard. From that time to the time of the strike
manufactured no double whites or double supers which
are the same thing to any amount. At the same time
we made half doubles, fifteen or twenty pieces in all,
for which we paid i^J4 cts. 16 cents being the price
for double supers. When double supers were reduced
to 15 cts. half doubles were paid at 14^ cts. In the
fall of 1830 fines and premiums were introduced [24]
and were continued until the month of June before
the strike, & it was then agreed upon by both parties
four. Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 53
that they should be given up. At the time of the strike
very few of the double whites were going, and only
thirteen pieces had been manufactured in several
months. The fancy fabrics or double shot abouts were
introduced about three months before the strike and
three pieces only had been woven.
I went to Smith's tavern to see the new weavers on
the Sunday night spoken of by other witnesses - met
several of the old weavers on my return going in that
direction. I went down the next morning early, and
two old weavers John Conner and James Buckridge
were there. They were talking with the men who had
come from New York - they said the company would
make fair promises but would not perform. Buckridge
said the men who had come had been told a pack
of lies and he wanted to tell it as it was. Mr.
Thompson carried the men to the village. The old
weavers came into Scrimgeour's tavern and Richard
McDowell conversed with the new men.
It is the practice in a great many instances to give a
webb's notice but have known men to go away without
giving notice and discharged without notice. Do not
know as any have been dismissed without notice except
for improper conduct. We received information about
sun-down of the arrival of the new weavers at Smith's -
we arrived there, a distance of two miles from the
village about dark. We remained there about fifteen
minutes and had proceeded about three quarters of a
mile on our way home when we met from four to six
old weavers and soon eight or ten more. We then
turned about and returned to Smith's.
All but six or eight of those engaged in the strike
afterwards returned to work, and most of them went
into the shops on the a8th of August 1833 afl d at re-
54 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
duced prices from those which they had before re-
ceived. At the time of the strike the amount of stock
on hand was estimated at about $100,000. During the
strike nothing was done. Fifteen girls with the warpers
and foremen were thrown out of employment. On the
2jd of August I came to Hartford to see Boyle. He
at first agreed to go up to work but afterwards refused.
At this time John Adams had gone in. On the next
day I met a man by the name of McMoran. He
promised to go up, and did go, but got intoxicated and
did not go to work. On the ajjth of August which was
Friday, I met George Simpson and two or three others
at the Steam Boat wharf. They abused me and said I
had brought that poor man McMoran there, but did
not get him to work and added we were too many
for you.
I presume we have taken back men who have left
us without notice. Some who have left us without
notice have been paid up to the reed. James Crosby
was thus paid and so was Thomas Norton - the latter
one left because he complained of bad yarn. At one
time there were written rules in the shops relative to
notice, but they have not been there for a year or more.
Notice was generally given [25] when men conducted
well. One or two have gone away without notice and
without calling for their pay. I never knew one call
for his pay who did not receive it. John Lockhead
and William Walker were discharged on account of
their bad habits, and John Gait because he did not do
work enough. Cannot remember now any instance in
which the rule about notice was complied with. Do
not positively know whether Samuel Clayton and his
father were dismissed for not boarding at a place
which Thompson designated, but believe that was the
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 55
fact. They could get board cheaper -the price was
somewhat reduced and they returned. John Walker
was discharged without notice and paid to the reed.
Others were also discharged without notice. Do not
recollect any instance in which a man has been dis-
charged upon a webb's notice. A webb's notice is a
notice given when a man commences his piece that he
shall leave when it is finished. The weaver puts the
yarn upon the beam and after it is finished the Foreman
examines it and gives a certificate regarding the quality
of the work. The defendants were arrested on the loth
of August, and were in prison until the 29th. The num-
ber of men employed in the establishment is about one
hundred and twenty.
JAMES RONALD. Am Foreman - on Thursday after-
noon Mr. Thompson said the men had sent up reso-
lutions concerning more wages and the company would
not give them, and directed me to go and close the
shops. I communicated my directions to them who
were assembled in the shop. They immediately went
away and I locked the shops. I believe it is always the
practice of the trade to give a webb's notice -know of
no difference in this particular between the Thompson-
ville Factory and others. It is my business to examine
the pieces after they are completed and to give a ticket
stating what are the deficiencies if any. After certifi-
cate is given and there is no defect the weaver is
entitled to his pay. The certificate is handed to the
Clerk and he gives a check upon the Treasurer. I
came to Thompsonville in 1829. I do not recollect
whether rules had been set up there or not, and know
of no agreement about notice. Some have been dis-
missed and paid up to the reed. Among those were
Norton who left on account of bad yarn, Black who had
56 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
a controversy with the Agent about breaking a yarn
pole & James Crosby. I measured their pieces. Rules
now are posted up which require fourteen days notice
from the men, but none from the company.
JOEL W. SMITH. Kept tavern where the eleven new
weavers stopped. They got there about four o'clock
p.m. Some of the old weavers came to see them on
the night of their arrival. Most of the new weavers
had gone to bed and I told the old weavers they could
not see them. Early next morning a number of the old
weavers came down. I sent to Mr. Thompson on Sun-
day evening and informed him of the arrival of the
men. The old weavers talked [26] with two or three
of the new weavers who had not gone to bed on Sunday
evening.
LATHROP OLMSTED. I commenced weaving at the
same time with Job Allen. Several of the old weavers
came to Allen's loom, and John Smith said it was his,
and he would pull him off and throw him down stairs.
Andrew Black and other old weavers were with Smith.
In the afternoon they went to Crawford's loom and
Symmes inquired of him if he could weave pantaloons,
said he wanted a pair woven and stood so near he
could not conveniently throw the shuttle - called him
a skunk, &c.
HENRY THOMPSON (recalled). Lockhead who has
been spoken of as discharged was intemperate, and I
gave him frequent notice if he did not reform I should
discharge him. William Walker also discharged.
Henry White was discharged because waste was found
under his loom, but was subsequently retained upon
explanation. Do not remember that I discharged
Welles. Winkie was discharged while Robert Thomp-
four. Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS. 1834-1836 57
son was Agent. McKnight was discharged for putting
oil on his piece but was discharged after his piece was
out Andrew Black was discharged for taking away
two yarn poles without liberty which were broken,
I charged him fifty cents for them. He would not pay
it and I discharged him. Clayton turned out about
board and went away of his own accord. Two of the
weavers refused to board in a house belonging to the
company and I discharged them. Have uniformly
given some notice before discharging a man. We never
made any particular bargain about notice. (The wit-
ness is here shown two certificates which he acknowl-
edges he gave to Gorman & Norton after being re-
leased from Prison -they were here read and are as
follows :
The Bearer, Mr. Edward Gorman, has been in the
employment of the Thompsonville Company between
three and four years as a Carpet Weaver, and I think
him an honest, sober and industrious man.
Sept 7th, 1833. HENRY THOMPSON.
The Bearer, Mr. Thomas Norton, has been employed
by the Thompsonville Company for the last two years,
and I consider him an honest, sober and industrious
man. HENRY THOMPSON.
Sept. 4th, 1833.
I did tell Dow and Mickle that unless they boarded
at company's house I had no more work for them, but
did not tell any one I had no work for him if he would
not board at Martins. Never discharged a man upon
a webb's notice who conducted well. The mode of giv-
ing notice was to tell a man if he could not do better
he must go. At any time afterwards I told him to quit.
Samuel Chaffee of the town of Enfield, in the County
58 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [VoL
of Hartford, [27] in the State of Connecticut, of law-
ful age, being duly cautioned, examined and sworn
according to law, do testify and say, that in the Summer
of 1833, and during the time of the turn-out of the
weavers of the Thompsonville Factory, I was at work
building additions to several of the houses in the village
of Thompsonville, I heard much conversation among
the weavers who had turned out, and sometimes con-
versed with them on the subject of the strike. I can now
recollect but little part of it, but I well recollect that
George Simpson after returning from one of the meet-
ings said they could stand out as long as the company,
that if the company did not yield he would never throw
a shuttle, that they had written to all of the Factories
and to Scotland to prevent weavers from coming to
take their places, that the weavers at Tariffville had
agreed to pay a certain proportion of their wages to
help them, and that they had received about one hun-
dred dollars. I also heard John Calkins say that he
would not throw a shuttle until the company had come
to their terms. I heard one of the weavers say, I think
it was George Simpson but cannot be certain, that if
the company did not yield they would break them, that
other companies had been broken in that manner, and
further the deponent saith not.
NATHANIEL B. Bom Am Book Keeper for Thomp-
son & Co. in New York. In the month of July 1833, an d
at the time of the strike we had orders unexecuted for
530 or 40 pieces. Pieces average about 90 yards. The
orders are generally received by Thompson & Co. in
New York, entered in a book, and forwarded to
Thompsonville. If the figures of pieces are mis-
matched they are not worth half price. Our orders
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 59
were from Baltimore, Philadelphia, Albany and New
York. We keep patterns and merchants come to the
office, and select.
JOHN ADAMS (recalled). I was President of the
shop in which I wrought, and had been for two years -
most of the shops had a President. Business was ordi-
narily done with the president if of general interest.
A mere private affair between the company and weavers
the President and men had nothing to do with.
The testimony for the Plaintiffs was here closed, and
the Defendants introduced the following witnesses.
JAMES ANDERSON. Was not engaged in the strike.
I was one of the number with whom the company
contracted to come out from Scotland in 1829. We
were to receive the same prices as those which were
generally paid in the United States.* After we came
no one appeared to know what the prices were. For
a few pieces (supers) we received 16 cents per yard,
and afterwards 14 cents was agreed upon as the price
until the general price could be ascertained. [28] For
the purpose of ascertaining the average price it was
agreed that each parry should write to other Factories,
procure their prices, and strike the average. When the
answers to our letters returned from the Factories the
average was found to be 155^ cents for supers and n
cents for fines. These prices were continued for a few
months and then Mr. Andrews and Mr. Thompson said
they could not pay so much, but were willing to pay
14^ cents for suppers for two years, and io l /z cents for
fines. These prices were generally agreed upon for
one year. Double Whites were introduced in Feb-
*The witness was shown a paper which he says ia a copy of die agreement
which he and others entered into in Scotland. It will be found in the note
marked O.
60 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
ruary 1830. For these we got one and a half cent more
and y$ of a cent was added to Half doubles making
them 15^. A short time afterwards Mr. Thompson
proposed establishing premiums and fines which was
agreed to. The premium, if a piece of super was
finished in 12 days, was 50 cents -for fines the same
sum if finished in 10 days. Fines were 17 cents per day
for supers after 15 days, and the same for fines after
12 days. Some time in 1831 or beginning of 1832
Double Whites were reduced to 15 cents, and half
Doubles to 1^/2 cents per yard, and no notice given
to the weavers previous to their doing so. Some time
afterwards another reduction took place on Double
Whites which made them the same as others, viz.
14^ cents.
The next difficulty was in relation to premiums. This
happened two or three weeks before the strike, when
the company determined to pay premiums no longer -
believe the weavers were not consulted. The im-
mediate occasion of this determination was a complaint
made by James Boyle on account of the refusal of the
Agent to pay him a premium to which he thought he
was entitled. There was a meeting called to consider
Boyle's grievance and also the complaint of Keys.
Mr. H. Thompson was sent for - he said he would pay
Keys, but he would have articles or rules made out
and put up, and William Taylor said the men would
like to see them first. As Mr. Thompson started to go
away it was said by some of the men that there were
other grievances. Mr. Thompson asked what they
were, to which the reply was made that a new and more
difficult fabric called Double Shot abouts had been
introduced, and that there had been a reduction on
Double Whites. Mr. Thompson said he had no power
four, Supp.] THQMFSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 6:
to act -that the company would soon meet and the
men must make application to them for redress of their
grievances. I was one that was appointed to draw up
the petition which was sent to the company. I was
also requested to assist in drawing up a communication
for the Old Countryman, a paper published in New
York, which I agreed to do though not concerned in
the strike. This was on Friday after the turn-out.
I attended a meeting when the equalization paper was
read. Two or three were in favor of accepting the
offer of the company, and it was said if any wished
to go in to work at those prices they could do so then,
and there would be no hard thoughts. This was pub-
licly said and assented to. It was further said that if
they continued to stand and went back afterwards it
would be otherwise. They first voted unanimously
that [29] any one might go back if he chose. They
then voted unanimously to stand. I have never heard
of their trying to do any thing except refusing to work.
I wrote to some of the Factories by request of com-
mittee-wrote one to New Haven and signed it with
my own name in behalf of the committee. Letters
were frequently written giving a history of the progress
of the matter. The history given so far as I know
was strictly true, and there was nothing else in the
letters to my knowledge. I never heard any proposition
before the defendants were arrested to do any thing
more than refuse to work until the prices asked were
paid.
At a meeting in the lot upon the same day after the
defendants went to jail, it was agreed the defendants
should be visited and kept in company who were in
prison, and to use every exertion to procure them bail,
but nothing was done to prejudice the company. At
62 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
that meeting the men appeared to be alarmed at what
had taken place. It was also reported that others were
threatened to be sent to the same place. Shortly after
this I was appointed to go to New York to consult
counsel relative to the men in jail, and after I returned
Mr. Thompson in a conversation with me, contended
that the men had broken the law, which proposition
I denied. On one occasion he said we were dissatisfied
with every thing, and said he had no work for me ex-
cept to finish what I had on hand -when that was
done the difficulties were settled and I remained.
About ten months previous to the strike Mr. Thomp-
son said he found so much difficulty about giving
notice that he should discharge the men when he saw
fit. At the meeting called on account of Boyle and
Keys he said he had no recollection of ever having
said so. Have seen pieces left unfinished in the looms
after the men who commenced them had gone.
Cross Examined. I always thought a webb's notice
ought to be given, and should have given it myself.
Keys claimed that he had given notice, and that inde-
pendent of that, he was entitled to his pay. I was in
the course of the proceedings added to the committee
of management. I wrote to the weavers at New
Haven, furnishing them with a history of the progress
of the strike, but never requested others to stay away,
nor have I ever known the committee to do so. Never
heard of any thing else being written.
JOHN FLOOD. I came to Thompsonville in August
1831 and commenced on a piece partly finished, and
before I had completed it, was obliged to leave on
account of ill health. Afterwards went back and
commenced work on another loom, a part of the webb
had been wove by another person when I went to it.
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 63
Boarded at company's tavern. After a little time the
Keeper said he should raise the price of our board.
We told him we could get boarded cheaper at other
places. We were about to leave and Mr. Thompson
came and said he did not think it right for us to go,
and that if we did not board at Patterson's, Martin's
or Mrs. King's he had no more work for us. On Sun-
day night I went to another tavern to [30] board and
went to work as usual on Monday morning. When I
was at work Mr. Thompson sent for us to come to the
office, said if we would not go back he had no more
work for us. We requested him to measure our pieces
and pay us that we might go away. Mr Thompson
refused to do so. Finally a compromise was made as
to the price of board, and the price was agreed upon
at eleven shillings, which was sixpence advance from
the old price, and we continued at the Factory. In
this strike as Mr. Thompson calls it about board, there
were seventeen men in all concerned, and all returned to
work but two. The two were Edwards and John Park.
They went to Tariffville and got work there. No men
left work till Mr. Thompson told us he had no more
work for us. Whether they were paid or not I do not
know. In 1832 there was some notice put up in the
shops about fines and premiums. The fines or for-
feitures was to be doubled every day after the webb
had been in the loom fifteen days. The men quit work
and called upon Mr. Thompson the Agent -he said
they were rather worse than he thought, but he would
take them away altogether. It was agreed to and the
men returned to work.
In the fall of 1832 half a cent was taken off Double
Whites, reducing the price to 14^ cents. There were
no other alterations, except premiums were taken off
64 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
about two months before the strike. Keys complained -
the men were called together and Mr. Thompson was
sent for and was asked if he would act up to his con-
tract made about ten months before, that he would
discharge men without notice and they might go with-
out. He said he did not remember the agreement but
would pay Keys, and added that when the company
met rules would be adopted and put up in the shops,
so that there would be no misunderstanding afterwards.
Wm. Taylor replied he hoped the men might sec them
first As Mr. T. turned to go away the men said
there were other grievances, which were stated. Mr.
Thompson said the company would meet soon and
they must petition to them. The petition was drawn
and presented when the company met. The answer
to our petition was received from the company, and
the men were called together to hear it read. The
answer was not satisfactory. The resolutions which
have been read were drawn out and a committee ap-
pointed to take them to the company. The committee
returned to the meeting and stated that we would get
their answer in a few minutes. In the course of half
an hour James Ronald came and said he had got orders
to lock up the shops. We left the shop and went into
Mrs. Metcalfs lot. A committee was then appointed
to write to other Factories and inform them what had
been done, stating the prices we had received and what
we required, enquiring also what prices they received,
and their opinion of our conduct. It was also voted
that any man might then go back who wished, and
there would be no hard thoughts. This meeting was
on Wednesday, and I was present from the commence-
ment to the conclusion.
There was no proposition made to write to others
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 65
to prevent [31] their coming to work for the company,
or to write soliciting money. The committee consisted
of eight and no more, viz. Liddle, Conner, White,
Taylor, Alexander, Sturgeon, Adams, and Black. The
meeting held on Thursday was called by Mr. Thomp-
son. Mr. T. read a paper containing offers, &c. and
gave notice to those who occupied houses belonging
to the company to quit the possession. The men then
met in a lot and there voted that any might go back
to work who chose. A vote was then taken to stand,
and a deputation sent to Mr. Thompson to inform him
of the determination of the men, and request him to pay
them their wages. The deputation, which consisted
of James Boyle and John Elder, returned and reported
that the company refused. The second proposition
made by Mr. Thompson concerning prices was dated
July 25th 1833. I think it was shown to us on Satur-
day. It was read I believe by John Adams. It was
then proposed that any of the men who wished to accept
of the prices mentioned might do so, and there should
be no hard thoughts. They then unanimously voted
to stand. I never heard any proposition to station men
at Warehouse Point, to keep men away or to do any-
thing but inform others of the state of things, and not
to return to work until the prices demanded were
agreed to. I do not remember that there was any other
meeting until the defendants were sent to jail. I was
not present when the letters which have been mentioned
were written. George Black handed me eight letters
and I put them into the Enfield Post Office, on
Wednesday night the 24th July.
These letters were directed to Lowell, Saxonville,
Rochester, Tariffville, New Haven, West Farms, New
Jersey and Baltimore. The letters were deposited in
66 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
the Enfield Post Office that evening. There was
among them one directed to my Brother George Flood,
but none directed to John Miller. I wrote no letter to
my brother George Flood on that night and was not
one of the committee. On the same day the Defend-
ants were arrested and put in jail. I met Mr. Thomp-
son who said he was sorry things had come to this.
I was at Smith's tavern on Sunday night when the
new weavers came there. I said nothing to them but
Elder did. Heard nothing said to dissuade them from
entering into the Plaintiffs' employment. I was at
Scrimgeour's when new weavers came there. There
was no rush of the old weavers into the house. James
Simpson, one of the new weavers, asked me out of the
bar room - at first I did not know him. He said he
had come from New York but would not have come
if he had known how things were situated and would
return if he had money. I had known him in New
York and offered to lend him the necessary money to
return. I do not recollect having had any other con-
versation with Simpson. I was standing at the door
of Scrimgeour's tavern with Elder and McDowell,
when the new weavers came up. (A letter was here
shown to the witness which was addressed to George
Flood at Saxonville.) He says he believes it is one of
the circulars which he deposited in the Post Office on
Wednesday night. (The letter was here read and is
[32] the one shown to John Adams and is published
in note marked H.) I paid the postage on all the
letters and the Post Master marked them paid, in my
presence. I cannot recollect what Simpson said in his
address in the lot. After the Defendants were sent to
Jail I was put on the Committee. I was not in the
Room with the Committee the first night when the cir-
four, Supp.] THOMFSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 67
culars were writing, I received the letters from George
Black about 8 o'clock on Wednesday night. I have
known men leave the Factory when their piece was
unfinished and get payment for the work they had
done. Thomas Norton when he went to Rochester had
his cloth taken off the beam and measured, received
his pay and left
GEORGE BLACK. The letter shown to the last witness
is one of the circulars written by the Committee, and
is superscribed by myself. (Another letter is here
shown to the witness addressed to James Wells,
West Farms.) That is the letter which John Adams
wrote that night. Another letter is here shown to the
witness addressed to Alexander Winkie, New Haven.
That is the letter which I wrote myself the first night.
(Other two letters were shown to the witness one
addressed to John Park, Rochester, the other to
Hugh Torance, Baltimore, which he says were all
wrote the first night. They are all Post marked
Enfield, July 25, 1833, Postage paid. They are all a
copy of each other with this addition to the one ad-
dressed to James Wells.
"I hope you will give this your most earnest atten-
tion, with the approbation of your fellow workmen,
while I remain your friend. JOHN ADAMS, President.
GEORGE BLACK, Secretary.
JAMES LAW. I was engaged in Scotland to come to
this country in 1830. The prices paid at the Factory
have been correctly stated by Anderson and Flood.
The first meeting was called by Mr. Keys because as
he said Mr. Thompson refused to pay him for work
which he had finished. A Committee was appointed
at that meeting to wait upon Mr. Thompson to know the
reason why he would not pay Mr. Keys, and allow him
68 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
to go away. Mr. Thompson attended the meeting and
said that Keys had not given the requisite notice. Mr.
Thompson was then informed that he had agreed on
a former occasion that he would discharge any man
without notice when he saw fit, and the men would
have the same privilege to go when they thought
proper. Mr. Thompson said he had no recollection of
having said so, but as they understood him so, he would
pay Mr. Keys, and when the Company met he would
have rules drawn out and hung up in the Factory, that
there may be no mistake afterwards. William Taylor
said the men would like to sec them before you put
them up. As Mr. T. was about leaving the meeting,
some of the men said they had other grievances to lay
before you. There is the new fabric called double
shot abouts, the double whites and the striped grounds
ought to have some advance. Mr. Thompson said he
had no power to give any advance, but that they might
[33] draw out a statement of their grievances in writ-
ing and he would lay it before the Company which
was to meet in a few days. When the Company met,
the petition which has been read, was sent to the Com-
pany. (It will be found in note marked A.) The
weavers were called together to hear the answer from
the Company to our petition. (It will be found in note
marked B.) The three ply weavers among the rest
The answer was read to us in the High Shop and was
not satisfactory. The resolutions were then drawn out
by George Black and read to the meeting. (They will
be found in note marked C.) I did not approve of
the manner in which they were worded. I stated my
objections to the meeting, notwithstanding William
Liddle & John Anderson were appointed to carry
them up to the Office and lay them before the Com-
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 69
pany. Liddlc and Anderson returned and stated to
the meeting that we would get answer soon. We were
all waiting for their answer, when we saw Mr. Thomp-
son coming down and the men then come into the
shop. James Ronald came in and said that he had got
orders from Mr. Thompson to turn us out and lock
the doors. We went from the High Shop into Mrs.
Metcalf's lot. It was then thought proper to appoint
a Committee consisting of a President and Secretary,
and one man from each shop making eight in all.
The three ply Shop appointed James Alexander
The back Shop appointed Samuel Sturgeon
The first high Shop appointed William Taylor
The second high Shop appointed Henry White
The first low Shop appointed William Liddle
The second low Shop appointed John Conner
George Black was appointed Secretary, and John
Adams President. At that meeting a motion was made
and unanimously agreed to that any one who had a
desire to go back to work for the Company to say so,
and no one would be dissatisfied. John Adams said
those who did not go back now, but went back after-
wards would be considered Traitors. I publicly re-
proved him for the remark, and told him it was not
the language to be used by any of us. Adams remark
was not sanctioned by any of the men. Next day
(Thursday,) Mr. Thompson called us together and
read to us the Rules and Regulations of the Company,
the same which have been read in Court. (They will
be found in note marked D.) At the meeting on that
day, we appointed a Committee to request the Com-
pany to pay us our wages. The Committee reported
that the Company would pay no man. Next day
(Friday) the Committee met in my house, and wrote
70 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
a communication to the Editors of the Old Countryman
in New York, requesting them to publish the same.
On the next day (Saturday) another meeting was called
by request of Mr. Thompson, and John Adams read
to us a paper which is called the equalization prices.
(It has been read and will be found in note marked E.)
Some mentioned that, with a little alteration we might
agree to it. A motion was then made and agreed to,
that if any one [34] wished to go back to work for
the Company, that they might go and there would be
no hard feelings towards them. The meeting then
voted unanimously that they would not return to work
for the Thompsonville Company, until they agreed to
pay the price which we had fixed upon our labour.
Afterwards James Alexander and myself went to the
Office to get pay for the tickets which we had. Mr.
Martin said he had orders to pay no one, who was not
at his work. I left Thompsonville a few days, and on
my return Adams informed me that I had been ap-
pointed Treasurer, and delivered me some money. I
was one of the six men that Orrin Thompson sent for
to the Company's Office, and after some conversation
Mr. T. said he wished us to leave the place, as he could
not get men to come to the village as long as we were
in it. We all said pay us the money which is due and
we will go. Mr. Thompson said go and finish your
pieces and then we will pay you. We asked him at
what price- he (Mr. T.) said at reduced prices, we
told him that we would not work for 12}^ cents per
yard. Mr. Thompson turned to James Alexander and
said, "Will you not go away?" Alexander replied that
he knew of no cause why he should leave the village
at his request, as he was neither in their employ nor
occupying any of their Houses. However the Com-
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 71
pany owes me $40, and I have a ticket for $27, and
if you will pay me the $27, I will leave this place on
Monday and take my chance of getting the other $13.
Mr. T. said he would pay money to no man. This
conversation was on Saturday. At a meeting of the
Committee in my house, John Elder mentioned that
William Taylor had lent Cleeton a dollar & he
thought it but right that Taylor should get it from
the money in hand. Taylor also said he had lent
Cleeton the dollar and it was paid to him. Sometime
afterwards Taylor returned it to me.
A man by the name of Armstrong came to my house
one night when the Committee were met - Armstrong
wanted their advise as Mr. Thompson wanted to hire
him as a Boss Spinner - the Committee refused to inter-
fere in any way -they said they had no advise to give
him - he had a right to do as he pleased. A few days
afterwards Armstrong went to the Factory, and was
engaged learning the new hands how to weave. After
the Defendants were sent to Prison, others were put
upon the Committee. I never heard it stated at any
meeting that vigilance was to be used or that any thing
was to be done to the prejudice of the Company but
to refuse to work.
Money to the amount of $200, was put into my hands
to be paid out to the old weavers that were in poor
circumstances, and when they received it they gave
their note payable when they were in circumstances to
do so. The old weavers returned to work on Monday
in the afternoon. I was one appointed to make arrange-
ments for putting out our pieces in order that we
might get our wages and leave the place. We first
tried to get the old prices for weaving out the pieces
which were in the loom, but Mr. Thompson would
72 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
not agree to that -he said they might all go to work
at the new prices, [35] and the men in Jail could re-
turn upon the same terms if they wished, and if they
did not they might stay in Jail and try their case. Next
day Mr. Thompson settled with some of the old weav-
ers and they left. John Adams, Little, Armstrong, &c.
had gone in to work about eight days before the settle-
ment. I went to work in the Factory on Tuesday. At
the meeting which the new weavers attended, a history
was given of the strike and nothing was stated but
what was true. James Anderson was requested to
write to the Old Countryman. Mr. Thompson took
off the premiums and a deputation was sent to have
the fines taken off also. Tickets were usually paid on
Saturday, once in two weeks. Never heard of any of
the old weavers going into the Factory till after the
agreement was made with Mr. Thompson for us to
finish our pieces. The agreement was concluded about
four o'clock on Monday afternoon. In the forenoon
of that day James Alexander and myself asked per-
mission of Mr. Thompson to go in and look at the
rules. Mr. T. granted us liberty to read them. Those
whom I saw have tickets and could not get pay, were
James Alexander, John Ronald, Richard Alexander,
and myself. George Simpson I saw have two tickets.
JOHN CONNER. On the 24th July weavers were
called together to hear the answer to their petition. A
committee of management was appointed who were
instructed to write to other Factories, informing them
what we had done. The committee then went to Mr.
King's and wrote eight letters. One letter was written
first, and William Liddle read from that while the
others wrote. I wrote to Tariff ville that night. The
letters were directed to the places mentioned by Flood.
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 73
There was no letter written that evening to Miller.
The only instructions given by the meeting to the com-
mittee was to write to the different Factories stating the
facts. Heard nothing said about stationing men at Ware
House Point, and no proposition to do anything to the
injury of the company. Never heard any intimation
against keeping a record of our proceedings. Green,
one of the weavers, said .at one of the meetings as
the difficulties had assumed a formidable aspect, any
one whose circumstances would not admit of his being
off from work might return when he pleased, and
Adams immediately remarked that any one who chose,
could go in then, but if he went in afterward he would
be considered a traitor. He was reproved for this
remark by James Law. There was no proposition at
any general meeting to be vigilant to my knowledge.
I was not at the meeting in Smith's lot. I was at work
in Longmeadow at that time. I did not suppose I was
bound to give a webb's notice, or was entitled to such
a notice from the company. At the time that Mr.
Thompson put up the progressive fines the men held a
meeting and objected to them. Mr. Thompson stated
at that meeting that he would discharge any man when
he pleased, and that the men might go when they
pleased. At the meeting called by request of Keys,
Mr. Thompson said he would [36] have rules adopted
and put up when the company met. There is nothing
in Laws testimony in which I do not fully concur so
far as I heard. I heard that the new weavers have
come up from Greenwich Village. I thought of going
there. On Monday morning after they came to Smith's,
I went down to see them. Conversed with some if not
all of them. Mr. Martin came in and said to Buck-
ridge don't be telling lies to these men. He replied,
74 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
Mr. Martin am I telling lies? Are not the prices
reduced? Martin said no. I then said I considered my
wages reduced by taking off the premium. Buckridge
was led into conversation by Watterson one of the new
weavers, who was acquainted with Buckridge's brother.
Never heard of any agreement to keep away any per-
son. Was one of the committee. Never heard any
such conversation as that spoken of by John Ronald.
Made no agreement with Mr. Thompson about notice
and had no knowledge of any general rule upon that
subject except the one acted upon. I drew up one of
the copies of the circular and put in a clause about
employers advertising. Cannot say how much money
was received from the Factories, received none myself.
There was no authority given to any one to my knowl-
edge to write for the purpose of preventing weavers
coming to Thompsonville. Know of no letter written
by James Anderson but the one written for the Old
Countryman.
WILLIAM LEDDLE. Was one of the committee - was
at meeting called by request of Keys and agree fully
with Law in his statement. The origin of the dif-
ficulty was the new fabrics. The first meeting was
called by John Adams. I understood Keys had given
what he considered a warning. Mr. Thompson was
sent for to this meeting and was present, and said he
did not remember saying that he should discharge a
man when he pleased, and that one might go when he
pleased. Other grievances were spoken of as men-
tioned by other witnesses, and Mr. Thompson referred
the complainants to the meeting of the company, which
he said would be shortly holden. I was present when
the resolutions were drawn up and was one of the
committee to take them to the company. Alexander,
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 75
Taylor, and another were with me. We delivered the
resolutions to Mr. Orrin Thompson, and he said he
would let us know when the answer was ready. Noth-
ing was done till an answer came back. Ronald, the
Foreman, came soon and said he had orders to lock
up the shops. We left the shop where we had assem-
bled and went into the field. Nothing was there said
or done about keeping men away from the Factory. We
did not suppose the company would act so precipi-
tately and without discussion with us. A committee
of management was appointed at the first meeting in
the field. John Adams said at the meeting that things
had assumed a formidable aspect, and proposed that
letters should be written to other Factories to procure
information. We had a general knowledge of prices
in other Factories, but in case of further negotiation
with the company we should need more accurate in-
formation, and documents from other [37] Factories -
at several meetings it was proposed that any one might
go back to work who chose to do so, and there would
be no hard thoughts. There was no proposition at
any public meeting to take measures to deter men from
coming to the Factory, and nothing said about vigilance
or stationing men at Ware House Point. At a meeting
of the committee at James Law's, John Adams pro-
posed to station men at Ware House Point, and placing
men at the landing at Thompsonville, to watch the
Boat, but every other individual present disapproved
of the measures proposed, and nothing more was after-
ward said upon the subject in public or private. There
was no proposition in Smith's lot to raise sixty dollars,
and never heard at any time of such a proposition.
Some of the individuals present suggested that some
of the weavers who had families were unable to meet
7 6 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
their expenses, and that something should be done to
make them more easy in their pecuniary circumstances.
James Alexander, Samuel Sturgeon, and George
Black proposed to loan the sum of $5 each. The whole
sum raised was about $15, or $20, which was considered
to be set apart for the benefit of families. I know of
no other money raised but this, except the small sum
for postage. At a meeting about the middle of the
week after the strike, some notes were taken which
were signed by different individuals who had need of
it, and others signed with them. Taylor advanced
some and I some. When the money was paid to those
who were in distress, it was understood a note should
be taken to be paid when the person borrowing should
be able. There was never any proposition to write to
prevent men coming to Thompsonville, either in gen-
eral meeting or in any of the meetings of the committee.
I never gave John Ronald $3, or any other sum during
the strike. At the time John Adams was arrested, he
seemed much perplexed. I went over to his house to
sympathise with him. He took me into another room
and told me he had a letter with a few dollars in it,
and told me a part of it was for John Ronald. Letters
passed between the committee and other Factories
during the strike. It is quite the practice of the trade
to keep up a friendly correspondence, and especially
when they feel themselves injured. No directions
were given to write for money. John Adams wrote a
letter which he called a broad hint, but none others
of the kind were written to my knowledge. Cannot
recollect to whom Adams's letter was addressed. It
was quite foreign to the views of the committee to write
for money. We received money from Tariffville about
the end of the second week of the strike. Never heard
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 77
any thing said about writing to Miller of the Blue
Bonnet, or to the Rob Roy House. The first I ever
heard of any letter to Miller was in Court. I am now
engaged in the Factory at Thompsonville.
SAMUEL STURGEON. I was appointed one of the com-
mittee and wrote one of the circulars. One of the
objects of the committee in writing the circular, was
to let the weavers in other Factories know what we had
turned out for. I wrote to Robert Wilson. Never
[38] heard of a letter written to Miller until after the
first Court. I believe the letter which has been read
was written by the committee that night. The letters
written on the first night were delivered to John Flood.
The letters were delivered in my presence to Flood by
George Black, and not to me. I received no letters to
take to Suffield Post Office. Two letters were to be
written on the next morning, and were to be of the
same character as those written on the previous evening.
I have never heard any proposition to raise $60. I
returned to work on Tuesday -was at Smith's when
the new weavers were there, but had no conversation
with them. Heard the new weavers called skunks after
I went in, and Arthur Dick I believe told Hugh Steele
to come off his loom. I do not recollect to whom the
letters to be written in the morning were to be ad-
dressed. Another of the objects of the committee in
writing, was to know if their conduct was approved.
JOHN SMITH. Went in to work on Tuesday fore-
noon, the day after the settlement. I met Mr. Thomp-
son and Mr. Martin on the stairs - one of them asked
me to go upon another man's loom, I said I would not,
I wanted my own. Mr. Thompson said I might take
my own. I found Job B. Allen working on it, requested
him to come off - he made no reply to me but remained
78 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
on the loom- told him that as Mr. Thompson had said
I was to get my own loom, if he did not come off
immediately I would pull him off went and informed
Mr. Thompson that Allen refused to leave the loom.
A little after I went into the shop and found the loom
empty, got the carpenter to make some alterations, put
a mark in the piece where I began, and worked about
half a yard. Whilst I was gone to dinner Allen went
and began weaving on the loom, I ordered him off,
and he came off. Had not been at the loom till Mr.
Thompson told me I might have it -am a minor, my
father has charge of me.
THOMAS SMITH. I was one of the number engaged
by the company to come out from Scotland in 1829.
Was not employed as a weaver at the time of the strike -
was a Venetian Warper. My son was a carpet weaver,
he was about 16 years of age, he acted under my in-
struction. I told him not to go to work during the
strike, but otherwise not to take no part in it. The morn-
ing after the old hands had agreed to return to work,
I met Mr. Martin and asked him if my son should
have his own loom, he replied yes, certainly. I told my
son he might go to work in the forenoon. At dinner time
saw a mark which my son said he had put in when he be-
gan to weave, he had wove about half a yard- he told me
he had got some repairs put upon the loom. After
dinner I learned that Job B. Allen had taken possession
of the loom. I went up to Allen and told him if he
had been put there by the Agent to say so and he should
have no trouble from me, but if he had gone on without
such authority to come off immediately, or I would
take him off. I heard the testimony of James Anderson
with regard to the prices [39] of weaving in 1829 -
consider it substantially correct. We had a subscrip-
four. Supp.] THOMPSON VI LLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 79
tion society, the object of which was to support mem-
bers in time of sickness. One of the regulations of
this society was, that any member leaving the village
was entitled to draw his proportion of the funds. As
the majority of the members seemed to think of leav-
ing, we concluded that it would be necessary to break
up the society. We did so, and divided the funds.
Each member received about three dollars.
RICHARD CURRIE. Never knew of any rule requir-
ing a webb's notice in my acquaintance with the Trade.
In the beginning of 1832, I boarded at Mrs. King's
& understood the price of our board was to be raised.
I packed up my things on Saturday night paid Mrs.
King and left, others did the same. On Monday
morning I went to my work in the Factory as usual.
Mr. Thompson sent a line down to the Factory re-
questing eight of us to come to the Office. He asked
us why we left our Boarding place, we answered be-
cause we could get board cheaper elsewhere. Mr.
Thompson said if we would not return to Mrs. King's
and board there he had no more work for us. We
left the Office under the impression we were discharged
from work. We offered to go to work if he would
allow us to board where we pleased. I went to Tariff-
ville and got the offer of work there, and when I re-
turned to Thompsonville an arrangement was finally
made about the price of board and I returned to Mrs.
Kings and re-commenced work in the Factory. On
the Sunday night that the new weavers came to Enfield,
Arthur Dick told me that James Hunter was at Smith's
Tavern and wanted to see me next morning. On
Monday morning I went to Smith's Tavern and saw
Mr. Hunter, I was acquainted with him in Scotland
and also in New York. Mr. Hunter asked me and
80 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
some of the new weavers to walk out with him. They
asked me several questions about the Strike. I told
them nothing but what was truth. I said nothing to
injure the Company nor to deter the men from enter-
ing into their employment. I was at the meeting on
the first day of the strike. There was no instructions
to do anything to the injury of the Company. The
men would have protected the Company's property if
it had been in danger. I was at the meeting on Mon-
day when George Simpson was President and made
some remarks. At that meeting. I proposed that we
go in and finish our pieces and get our pay, most of
us thought of going off, when our pieces were out.
The Company owed me about $23. I had a ticket for
$13, which the Company would not pay. At the time
we petitioned, I complained of no grievance which
affected me at that moment. I put my name to the
petition because I did not know but I might get a fancy
fabrick the next piece. At the time the resolutions
were agreed to, I did not understand we were to leave
the work. I had a piece in the loom at the time.
JOHN PARK. I boarded with Currie and agree fully
with him [40] about the board. Considered myself dis-
charged on refusing to board at Mrs. King's at an
advanced price. Did not quit work until Mr. Thomp-
son told us he had no more work for us. I was not
present at the strike in 1833, was then at Rochester
when I received one of the circular letters which were
written. Received other letters while there. Norton
had been at Rochester and might have known we were
weaving for 143^ cents for supers and ioj^ cents for
Fines. Double shot abouts were not woven there.
They are more difficult than supers or Fines. No
letter was received at Rochester to my knowledge to
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 8 1
prevent men from going to Thompsonville. We sent
$12 to Thompsonville, but received no intimations
that they needed funds. It is usual in case of a strike
to send money to sustain the needy. Know of no rule
regarding notice in this country. At Tariffville, when
I wrought there, men were dismissed in any state of
their webb.
JAMES HOTSON. I was employed at New Haven in
the summer of 1833. The first intimations we had of
the strike at Thompsonville was by a letter addressed
to Alexander Winkie, without any signature. We ap-
pointed a man to write to Thompsonville to inquire
if the information contained in the letter was correct.
I cannot identify the letter we first received, but I
distinctly recollect the substance of it was similar to
the one read in Court. We sent money to Thompson-
ville to assist those of the weavers whose circumstances
might require it. The sending money was altogether
a voluntary act on our part, there was no request made
for any in the letters we received, nor the slightest
insinuation that they wished us to deter men from
coming to Thompsonville. I have worked in four
Factories, and know of no custom of the trade which
requires men to give a webb's notice before they leave.
I have known men discharged without previous notice.
Employers have a right so to discharge them. I con-
sider a man has a right to leave at any time. If a man
has made arrangements to leave, he will as a matter
of courtesy give notice of his intention. It is customary
for a man to finish his piece before leaving, but I do
not consider he is obliged to do so.
JAMES PYPER. Was at Tariffville when the circular
letter was received there. It was the same in substance,
as the one read before the Court. Never saw or heard
8 2 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [V [.
of any communication from the Thompsonville weav-
ers, requesting us to send them money, or to prevent
hands from going there.
Cross Examined. We sent them money,- our only
motive for sending them money, was to enable the
poor of our fellow tradesmen to procure bread for
their families, until such time as they and their em-
ployers, should come to an agreement We wished
them to stand out, thought they had as good a right
to stand as the Thompsonville Company had.
JAMES LATTIE. I arrived in New York from Scot-
land on the 29* [41] of July 1833. Next day the
owner of the ship I arrived in, asked me if I was a
Carpet Weaver. I told him I was - he also asked me
where I was going. I said to Thompsonville, he said
there was plenty of work to be got there. I was in-
formed at Mr. Ingrams in Gold Street, N.Y. that there
was a turn out in Thompsonville, however, I intended
to go there as I had a number of acquaintances in that
place. I landed in Thompsonville in company with
David Gibson's sister-in-law, who left Scotland with
me at the same time. A number of my friends were
at the wharf when I arrived. Among which was John
McGill, John Lamont, Wm. Hamilton and David
Gibson. Do not remember seeing John Adams.
Shortly after, I came on shore, John Bain said I had
come in a good time, I would get plenty of looms, I
said I did not want any of their looms. I made en-
quiries where I would get Brussels Carpets to weave.
That was the branch of business I had been accustomed
to. I was not an Ingrain Carpet Weaver. Never said
what John Adams has testified to. I was not in the
Blue Bonnet Tavern in New York. I never heard of
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 83
John Miller or the Blue Bonnet Tavern till after I
had been some time in Thompsonville.
DAVID GIBSON. Sometime during the strike I re-
ceived a letter from John Allen in New York, stating
that my sister-in-law had arrived from Scotland and
was on her way to Thompsonville and that she intended
to take the Steam Boat for that place. I told a number
of my friends among whom was John Lament, Wm.
Hamilton, Charles Stewart and John Bain. We all
went down to see the Boat arrive as it was expected
my sister-in-law might have letters or parcels for some
of us. Before the Boat landed her passengers I saw
James Lattie on board in company with my sister-in-
law. A few minutes after they came on shore, John
Bain said Lattie you have come in a good time, you will
get plenty of looms. This remark made considerable
laughing. Lattie said he did not want any of their
looms. I did not see John Adams there. I heard
nothing said about giving Lattie money. I knew he
had money of his own. I heard no one advise him to
go away. When James Ronald ordered us out of the
Factory, I considered myself discharged from the
Thompsonville Company's employ.
JOHN LAMONT. When the Boat arrived I saw
James Lattie, knew him in the old country- enquired
about relatives -no money was offered to Lattie and
no wish expressed that he would keep out of the way.
Lattie inquired about Brussel's Carpeting and I told
him I knew of none manufactured in this country but
at Lowell. Nothing was said about standing out ex-
cept that it was for an increase of wages. At two or
three of the meetings held by the men it was said if
any wished to return to work they might, and there
84 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
would be no hard feelings. Do not recollect that
Adams was at the Boat when Lattie arrived, and did
not notice any conversation between him and Lattie.
[42] CHARLES STEWART. Was at the Boat when
Lattie arrived, enquired of him after my relation in
Scotland. David Gibson's sister-in-law was expected
with parcels. I was at different Meetings but never
knew of any agreement or understanding to do any
thing to the prejudice of the Company, except not to
work without an increase of wages. Went in to work
on Tuesday, the day after the agreement to go back.
Worked in the room with Crawford, passing his loom
one day, did ask him if he was a Tailor. If I could
have got pay for my ticket during the time we were
out I would have left. Every thing was considered
an insult with the new weavers, if you laughed or did
not, looked or did not, spoke or did not.
JAMES SYMMES. On the day after we agreed to
go in, I asked Crawford if he was a tailor and told
him if he was, I wanted him to make me a pair of
small clothes. Never heard of any arrangement being
made to injure the company or to keep people away
from the Factory. I never said as Avery has asserted
in his deposition, that we would break the company.
Have heard a webb's notice talked of but never knew
of any such general practice, usage, or rule. Have
never applied by letter or otherwise for work in other
Factories. I went to work on Tuesday at reduced
prices.
JOHN HANSON. Do not remember hearing Adams
say any thing. Was not in the village after he went
back. Had no knowledge of any conspiracy, and
heard nothing proposed to injure the company. Had
a ticket for about $15 but the Agent refused to pay.
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 85
I went to New Jersey, and should have gone sooner
if I could have got my pay. Saw Ewing McChristie
at Patterson, but did not tell him I had broken com-
panies before, for I was never before engaged in a
strike. I was paid to the reed and I believe I procured
a man to be surety for me that the piece should be
well finished. I was absent about nine days, and did
not return until after the men went in. Attended some
of the first meetings. Mr. Thompson told us if we
would go in by Monday, we could go in at the old
prices, and after that if we did not accept the offer the
prices would be reduced.
WILLIAM HAMILTON. I was at the Boat when Lattie
came. Knew him in Scotland as a Brussell's weaver.
Bain remarked that lie had come in good time and
could get plenty of looms. I talked with him about
the old country, but nothing was said about his not
seeing Mr. Thompson, or about giving him money.
Heard of no arrangement to injure the company. It
is a matter of courtesy to give a webb's notice, but
there is no rule requiring it to my knowledge. I have
never held any such conversation with William Hills
as he has testified to. Never said I had ruined Fac-
tories and could ruin this. Was concerned in but one
strike before and that was settled. It was in Scotland.
GEORGE CALLAQHAN. I was at the meetings in the
shop and in the [4.3] field, & I concur in the statements
given by Law & Flood. Know of no combination to
injure the company but to stop work until prices were
increased. I was employed by Thompson and Martin
during the strike. I had a ticket which they refused
to pay, but paid me for patterns. I was discharged
on four hours notice, and when my webb was finished
within about four yards. There was no agreement en-
86 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
tered into for a strike until the resolutions were not
answered. The men were taken unawares when they
were turned out of the shop.
ROBERT GLENN. I was present at the meeting in
Mrs. Metcalf's lot, and agree with the Mr. Law in
his testimony relative to that meeting. I left Thomp-
sonville about a year and a half after the strike. I
was discharged, wove out my piece and left. I know
of no obligation to give notice either side. I have
had some agency in the preparation of this case.
JOHN McGlLL. I was at the Boat when Lattie came
but did not see John Adams there. John Bain spoke
to him (Lattie) as soon as he landed, and said there
were plenty of looms. I never knew of any combina-
tion to injure the company except in refusing to work.
I remained at Thompsonville after the strike and con-
tinue there still, and have never made application for
employment elsewhere.
DAVID COLMAN. Was in Patterson when Ewing
McChristie received the circular letter from Thomp-
sonville. He called the shop together and it was read.
It was of the same kind as the one read in Court last
evening. Nothing said in it about sending money. Soon
after the meeting sent them $10 or $12. McChristie
was appointed to write. Robert Thompson agreed to
send them some money. We sent them money because
they sent us some when we were burned out.
JOHN CROSLEY. I went to work on a loom at
Thompsonville on Saturday the last day in 1831. I
know of no rule relative to notice in that Factory. I
left them without notice, and have been discharged
without notice. They did not claim of me that I was
bound to give notice. I once commenced weaving a
four, Supp.] THOMFSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 87
piece which had been about half finished by another
person.
DEPOSITIONS
We, John Thompson, James Welles, and Alexander
Winkie, of the Village of West Farms, in the Town-
ship and County of West Chester, in the State of New
York, of lawful age, being cautioned examined and
sworn according to law, do testify and say, That in
July 1833, having understood that the carpet weavers
at Thompsonville were out of employ, we remitted
them money voluntarily, without request, thinking
their families would stand in need of assistance. [44]
That the aforesaid Alexander Winkie deposes that he
wrought as a carpet weaver in Thompsonville for some
months in the year 1830, and was discharged without
previous notice, and that in the middle of a webb, and
while he was there he never heard of any rule, either
written or understood whereby notice was to be given,
either by the men or the company when they wished to
make a change. That the aforesaid John Thompson
do further testify that he wove carpets for the Thomp-
sonville company in the years 1829 and 1830, and that
prior to his leaving their employment he gave them
no notice, to which no objections were made - he never
heard of any rule or regulation as regards a weaver
quitting their work without giving intimation before-
hand, and the aforesaid James Welles do further depose
that he went to Thompsonville in the year 1830, and that
he began to work on a webb part of which had been
wrought by a person who had been discharged without
previous notice, that he wrought there till Nov. 1831,
at which time he left the Factory without giving the
company any previous notice. That when he went to
88 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
the Factory, he understood that the company did dis-
charge their workmen when they thought proper, and
that a man could exercise the same privilege when he
thought fit. When I told the Agent I was going to
West Farms he replied a man had a right to do the best
for himself.
I, Robert Thompson, of the Township of Saddle
River, in the County of Bergen and State of New
Jersey ... do testify and say, that from the first
day of August, A.D. 1829, until the first day of August
A.D. 1831, I was sole manager and one of the Partners
of the Thompsonville carpet manufacturing company,
located at the Township of Enfield, County of Hart-
ford, and State of Connecticut, during which time I
employed and discharged such hands as I thought
proper. In the employing of said hands I know of no
agreement or stipulation to give any notice to the hands
of my intention to discharge them, neither was it made
incumbent on the part of those in my employ to give
any notice before quitting our employ -but on the con-
trary I always discharged such as I thought proper
without notice, and those that saw fit left our employ
without previous notice. The following persons are
some of those which I discharged without notice, to
wit: John Bain, Alexander Winkie, and one by the
name of Walker, given name not recollected, but more
generally known as the Baker.
I do further recollect that during the months of July
or August 1833, one Ewing McChristie was in my em-
ploy at the carpet weaving, when he presented to, and
read a letter to me as coming from the hands employed
at the Thompsonville carpet manufacturing company,
in which letter I am satisfied nothing therein contained
went in any way to persuade or deter persons from com-
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 89
ing to said works for employment, nor was there any
thing expressed therein requesting aid from abroad.
[45] Hugh Brown, of New Haven, in the State
of Connecticut . . . says, That we, the carpet
weavers of New Haven, in the Summer of 1833, re-
ceived a letter from the carpet weavers of Thompson-
ville, informing us of their turn-out for an advance of
wages, in consequence of fancy fabrics being introduced
into their work without any remuneration for extra
labor -and a meeting was immediately called of the
carpet weavers of this place, and it was unanimously
agreed, to send assistance to those families who were in
need of relief, as it is the custom of workmen in Fac-
tories in this country, to assist one-another in distress.
The money sent to Thompsonville, was sent volun-
tarily, without any request on their part. I re-
member no letter from Thompsonville requesting us
to prevent weavers from going there to work, nor did
I know of any one being prevented from going there
to work during the strike. I heard all the letters read
that come from Thompsonville.
John Gait, of New Haven, in New Haven County,
. . . says, That I went to work in Thompsonville
Carpet Factory in Connecticut, in 1829. I did not know
( of any rule or regulation in said Factory whereby the
workmen on their part, or the company on theirs, were
obliged to give fourteen days previous notice before
quitting or dismissing. In the year 1831, I was dis-
charged by Mr. H. Thompson without giving me any
previous notice when I was to quit the Factory. I
asked Mr. H. Thompson why he discharged me so
abruptly, and he gave me no answer. When I was
about leaving Thompsonville, Mr. Martin handed a
recommendation to me signed by Mr. H. Thompson,
9 o AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [VoL
the substance of which was the following : that I had
been in the employ of the Thompsonville Carpet
Manufacturing Company for the space of two years and
a half, and that I had conducted myself with propriety,
and was now discharged.
Henry White, of New Haven, in the State of Con-
necticut . . . says: I was one of the commit-
tee appointed by the Thompsonville Carpet weavers
in the Summer of 1833. The said committee consist-
ing of John Adams, President, George Black, Secre-
tary, John Conner, .Samuel Sturgeon, Henry White,
William Taylor, James Alexander, and William
Liddle, went to Jabez King's tavern, where John
Adams drew out the first letter to our satisfaction.
William Liddle read it, and each one of the commit-
tee wrote a copy of what he read to us - they were all
alike, but were not all signed by the President and Sec-
retary. We wrote eight letters that night, viz: one
to James Welles, West Farms, Robert Young, Lowell,
William Gibbs, Tariffville, Alexander Winkie, New
Haven, Robert Wilson, Harsimus, John Park, Roches-
ter, George Flood, Saxonville, Hugh Torrance, Bal-
timore; and John Adams and George Black, were ap-
pointed to write two of the same kind next day, one to
Patterson and the other [46] to Norwich, but neither
of them were authorized to write to Mr. John H. Miller
of New York. The eight letters were handed to John
Flood that evening, to take to the Post Office, but he
was not in the committee, neither did he (John Flood)
write any of said letters. In a day or two after this,
Mr. H. Thompson the Agent called us together and
read some regulations from the company, the purport
of which were, if we did not go to work on or before
the following Monday, our prices would be reduced.
four, Supp.] THOMFSONVILLE WEAVERS. 1834-1836 91
The company was then requested to pay us for the
work we had done, but they refused to do so. On Fri-
day the 26th of July 1833, we sent an account of the
turn-out, accompanied with the new rules and regula-
tions, (which Mr. H. Thompson had handed to us)
to the Editors of the Old Countryman for insertion in
their paper, but they refused to publish them, when we
wrote another one to the Editors of the Working Man's
Advocate, which they inserted. On Saturday 27th,
there was a meeting held in Mrs. Metcalf's Orchard,
when there was a paper sent to us from the company
pretending to be an equalization of prices, but what
we considered to be a reduction from our former
prices. George Hewit proposed some alterations,
which if the company would agree to, he thought
might be acceptable to us. It was then unanimously
agreed, that if any man had a desire to go to work, he
might do so and there would be no hard thoughts
towards him - and the same was done at two or three
different meetings. On the morning of the same day
that the old weavers agreed to go back to work, I
attended a meeting called by Mr. H. Thompson at
the company's office, when he (Mr. H. Thompson)
requested that we should leave the place, and we told
him that we would, provided he would pay us what
money was due to us, which he refused to do, saying that
the company would keep it to pay damages with. I
heard Mr. H. Thompson tell the new weavers, that
the prices were not reduced.
I, Andrew Black, of Norwich, in the County of New
London, of lawful age, depose and say, that I was dis-
charged from the Thompsonville manufacturing com-
pany's employ in the latter end of September 1832,
without any notice previously given. The reason that
92 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
I was discharged, was that I refused to pay a sum of
money that was exacted of me by the Agent of said
company because I considered it unjust, which sum
of money was exacted of me for happening to break
a yarn pole. The Agent asked me if I was willing to
pay the value of it, I told him yes, I would pay the
value, which I considered to be two cents -he said
it was fifty cents. He gave me the money that was
due to me on the next pay day except the fifty cents. I
asked him to give me the whole, but he said he would
keep the fifty cents for the yarn pole, as he had the
money in his own hands. I then told him he would
be none the better of it. Better or not you will go from
my employment, and I went to the shop where the loom
was that I was weaving on, and he came down to see
if I had gone to work so as to stop me if I had.
Michael Kennedy [47] stepped forward to mediate
between him and me - but he replied it was of no use,
as he would not have me work any more. Then I
wished him to measure my cloth that was in the loom
which was I think about forty yards, and he agreed to it,
and when the Overseer came he told him not to meas-
ure it until Monday. This was on Saturday, and on
Monday the Overseer measured it. I then received
my ticket correct, and went to the Agent and received
my money, except the aforesaid fifty cents which was
and still is unpaid. . .
I, David Gait, Jr., of Norwich, in the County of
New London . . . say, That I worked for the Thomp-
sonville manufacturing company in the years 1830, 1831,
1832, and was discharged from their service in January
1833 without any notice. The reason alleged for dis-
charging me was that I went out one evening about
fifteen minutes to one Harris Meacham's tavern-
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 93
when I came back the Agent stood in the door of the
Factory and damned me for going out, and would
hardly let me go up stairs to get my coat - and said
"by God I will soon have you out of this place." And
he (the Agent) did not allow me to work any more.
George Simpson, of New Haven ... I com-
menced work at Thompsonville in the fall of 1830.
Shortly after there were some articles put up on the
shop door, which stated among other things that no
man would be allowed to absent himself fifteen min-
utes unless he would give notice at the office. The
men quit their looms until the articles were taken
down which was on the same day. The double whites
were reduced shortly after without any previous notice.
William Walker, James Crosley, and John Lochead,
were discharged without any previous notice nearly
at the same time. Some time in 1832 there were reg-
ulations put on the shop doors which imposed a new
order of fines, the weavers were unwilling to comply
with them because they advanced in a double ratio
after the i6th day. If the webb should remain in the
loom over 15 days the fine would be one shilling for the
1 6th, two shillings for the I7th, four shillings for the
i8th, 8 shillings for the i9th, 16 shillings for the aoth,
32 for the aist, and so on without end. The
weavers met and sent for Henry Thompson, Agent -
when he met them they (the weavers) told him it was
unreasonable to think any man could be asked to work
under such regulations. He said they were a great deal
worse than he thought they were, and he would have
them taken down and altered, but he wanted more work
done, and he wished to know what means he could
take to accomplish it. He was answered by the weavers
that when a man did not suit him he had always dis-
94 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
charged him, and it was the only proper remedy.
Walker and Crosley were then spoken of by the weav-
ers, as men who had always done a reasonable quantity
of work [48] and he discharged them. He said he
wanted their looms for the York Boys, for the company
had agreed to learn them the trade, else he would not
have discharged them at that time. Charles McGill
and Robert Alexander have both said often in my hear-
ing, that they were fined for having their webbs too long
in the looms, when they were detained from their work
on account of sickness in their families, (Robert
Alexander had a child die) and when they gave these
as reasons at the office, they were rejected. On the last
Saturday in June 1833, James Boyle came from the
office to the shop and told us that the company had
refused to pay him the premium, and he refused to
sign the Book- he requested a meeting of the weavers
to be called -the weavers met & Boyle stated to the
meeting that he had been detained for filling, and they
would not deduct the time nor pay him the premium.
The meeting appointed men to accompany James Boyle
to the office, (I was one of the number) when we went
there and talked with Mr. Martin about it, he said he
would pay Boyle but it would be the last premium
that he would pay, for he had more trouble with
premiums than all the rest of his other business.
A short time after this, a meeting was called by
Mr. Keys -he stated to the meeting that Mr. Thompr
son would not pay him because he was going away. Mr.
Thompson was sent for, when he came he said the
reason why he did not pay Mr. Keys was he had not
given legal notice. Mr. Keys along with the rest of
the weavers insisted that there was no specified notice
required by weavers nor employers -it had been the
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 95
practice of the company to discharge men at any time
they saw fit. Mr. Thompson gave in, paid Keys and
he left the place soon after. Mr. Thompson said at a
former meeting he would discharge a man when he
saw fit, and on being asked if a man would have the
same privilege he answered, certainly. As Mr.
Thompson was leaving the room the men said they had
some grievances to state to him -these new fabrics
which were lately introduced being more difficult to
work, ought to be better paid; the double whites which
had been reduced, we wanted restored to their former
prices, and stripes with above two shuttles on the
ground to the same as double whites, and double shot
abouts 16^2 cents per yard. Mr. Thompson said he
had no power to advance any thing on the prices, but
if we would draw out a statement he would present
it to the company when they met A list of their
grievances was drawn out and was presented, to which
the company returned an answer. A meeting was called
to hear it read, in the answer the company said they
would pay no more for weaving than they had paid.
The weavers being satisfied that the prices were lower
than in some other Factories, concluded upon asking
one half cent advance on the whole and quit work
until it would be obtained. This half cent was a
fraction of the premium paid to them who put their
pieces out in twelve days, which was taken away but a
few weeks before this time. George Black drew out
some resolutions which were read to the meeting, and
a vote taken whether they were [49] agreeable - they
were nearly unanimously agreed to & their approval
signified by passing from one part of the shop to the
other. There were four men appointed to deliver
the resolutions, to the company -when they returned
9 6 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
they informed the meeting who were waiting for the
answer, that Mr. Orrin Thompson said to them they
would send an answer soon. In a short time James
Ronald came and said he had orders from Mr. Thomp-
son to turn us out and lock the doors we all walked
quietly out and met in Mrs. Metcalf's lot. We then
appointed John Adams President, George Black Secre-
tary, and one from each shop to form a committee.
It was agreed at this meeting that letters should be
written to all the different Factories, letting them know
what had caused us to turn out and also to inquire
what prices they were receiving at their Factories. It
was also at this meeting that the men were requested
to conduct themselves with propriety, not to frequent
taverns and grog stores, nor give offence to any one,
and to keep away from rum barrels. When we were
about leaving the place John Adams mentioned the
bundle of sticks - the next meeting was Thursday the
25th, when Mr. Thompson read the regulations of the
company, which stated if we did not return to our
looms on or before Monday, the prices would be re-
duced, and those occupying the company's houses
would be allowed to stay no longer than Monday in
them. We then requested pay for the work we had
done, but it was refused. John Adams called a meet-
ing on Saturday the 27th -it was held in Mrs. Metcalf's
orchard -a paper was read from the company pre-
tending to be an equalization of prices, but in our
opinion a reduction of our former prices. George
Hewet proposed some alterations which if the company
would agree to, he thought we would be satisfied with.
It was then unanimously agreed to, if any man had a
desire to return to work for the company to do so,
and there would be no hard feelings toward him-
fovir, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 97
this was mentioned at two meetings besides. Mr.
Henry Thompson was several times called on for pay,
and particularly for cash for the tickets which we held
from James Ronald for webbs finished and passed by
him. I had two and no cloth in the loom, my loom
being in the same state that Andrew McKnights was
in when he was discharged. But Mr. Thompson said
he would pay no money to any man - on being asked
why, he said the company would keep it to pay dam-
ages, and he likewise said we might sue for it, the
law was open. In the time we were out, I mean we who
were out of the shops and out of jail, for there were
four in jail and Mr. Thompson was daily threatening
to put more of us in, I was frequently at work in the
fields, but I expected when I came home at night
that I should be one added to the number of those
confined. Mr. Chaffy was at this time building an
addition to the house in which I then lived, and when
I was at home he was very free in talking about the
turn-out and about the Thompsons -he said he knew
them all and was well acqainted with Orrin - he said
",he would send to Britain for weavers. I replied that
he might, his character was well known in Kilmar-
nock-he had a partner there -we [50] were hearing
almost every day that the company intended to starve
us into submission. I remarked to Chaffy that I had
lived before I ever saw Thompsonville, and I thought
I could live if I were out of it, and I thought all the
Thompsons put together could not starve me, & give
me fair play. I said I could stay out until the Factory
would rot. I likewise said that all the transactions
would be pretty generally known among the Carpet
Weavers and Thompson was acting against his own
interest, and if the company were not very rich they
98 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
would ruin themselves by their conduct. At any rate
they would hurt the men for they had injured us all
very much already. I said I considered the charge
which the company preferred against the weavers who
were in jail was malicious and aggravating to work-
men, because the profits arising from their labor &
their skill were enabling Thompson to prosecute them
for daring to stand up for their rights. I said I thought
no laboring man would dare to prosecute a rich man,
or a rich company on such grounds as the company
confined these men, and daily threatened the rest with
like treatment. About the last of August it was re-
ported that some men had arrived at Smith's tavern
in Enfield from New York, on their way to Thomp-
sonville, and having heard that some persons had been
made to believe that the weavers had turned in at re-
duced prices, I along with Mr. Buckridge and some
others went down to see them, for although a few of
the old hands had gone in at the company's prices,
the greatest number were still out. I thought I was
justifiable in making known to them the truth, that they
might not be deceived. When I went into the bar
room at Smith's I saw a few. I had some conversation
with two of them, they said they had learned from
the company that the weavers had gone in, and there
were a few looms left, on account of Mr. Thompson,
not going to employ some of the men who were turned
out -they were then told that there were only a few
in, and we should have a meeting on Monday, if they
pleased to attend they would see who were out. They
were then told that there were four men in jail for
conspiracy, combination, intimidation, &c. but there
never was any attempt made to intimidate any one,
nor would we try to intimidate nor deceive them-
four. Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 99
we had told them the truth, we neither would dissuade
from, nor persuade them to any thing.
Mr. Henry Thompson was at Smith's tavern on the
same evening, and requested a meeting at the office
at six o'clock on Monday morning. When we met
with him at the office, he said we had been interfering
with the company's business, and if we would continue
to do so he had it in his power to confine us, and he
certainly would do it -he requested us to leave the
place. We told him if he would pay us what he owed
us, we would leave it as soon as possible. He
said he would pay no money, that the company would
keep that for damages. The company at this time
owed me about 26 dollars, and I understood that the
whole number of weavers had a claim upon the
company for about 1500 dollars.
[51] James Craig, of New Haven . . . says, That
a letter was received from the carpet weavers of
Thompsonville in the Summer of 1833 addressed to
the carpet weavers of New Haven, informing us of
their turn-out for an advance of wages in consequence
of fancy fabrics being introduced into their work with-
out any remuneration for extra labor, and a meeting
was immediately called of the carpet weavers of this
place, and it was unanimously agreed to send assistance
to those families who were in need of relief, as it is
the custom of workmen in Factories in this country to
assist one-another in distress. The money sent to
Thompsonville was sent voluntarily without any re-
quest on their part. I read all the letters that were
sent addressed to the carpet weavers of New Haven.
I remember no letter from Thompsonville requesting
us to prevent weavers from going there to work, nor
did I know of any one being prevented from going
IPO AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
to Thompsonville to work. I am a carpet weaver, and
have lived with, and worked for Mr. P. S. Galpin in
New Haven for more than four years last past, and
further the deponent saith not.
Samuel Cleeton, now of New Haven . . . doth
on oath testify and say, that in the year of 1831, I went to
work in the Thompsonville Carpet Factory, and con-
tinued there for about 12 months, when I left that
place and went to Philadelphia. In the summer of
1833, I was in Thompsonville while the weavers were
out of employment, and was in company with William
Taylor, John Hanson and others. Wm. Taylor made
particular inquiries of me about my father -in the
course of conversation I mentioned my pecuniary cir-
cumstances which were very low. Wm. Taylor said
he would lend me a dollar, and did so, in presence of
J. Hanson, John Elder, & David Gibson -about two
months afterwards I paid him the dollar. There was
none in Thompsonville that tried to prevent me from
going to work, nor did any of the weavers advise me
to go away from Thompsonville, but some of them told
me to go to work if I chose. I was discharged at the
same time with John Park, Richard Currie, John
Flood, Richard McDowal and some others, because
we refused to board where Mr. H. Thompson
wished us. . .
Peter Arbuckle, of New Haven . . . says, That a
letter was received from Thompsonville in the summer
of 1833, addressed to the carpet weavers of New
Haven, informing them of their turn-out for an ad-
vance of wages, in consequence of fancy fabrics being
introduced into their work without any remuneration
for extra labor, and a meeting was immediately called
of the carpet weavers of this place, and it was unani-
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 101
mously agreed to send assistance to those families who
were in need of relief, as it is the custom [52] of work-
men in Factories in this country to assist one-another
in distress.
The money sent to Thompsonville was sent volun-
tarily, without any request on their part, I remember
of no letter being sent from Thompsonville requesting
us to prevent weavers from going there to work, nor
did I know of any being prevented from going.
I, Arthur Dick, of Norwich . . . depose and say,
that in the fall of 1833, there was a turn-out for wages
at the Thompsonville manufacturing company. I had
been there some years before this turn-out. It lasted
four or five weeks, when Mr. Thompson sent fourteen
or fifteen men from New York to Thompsonville Fac-
tory. These men stopped about a mile out of town,
or from the Factory, and staid at Mr. Smith's tavern.
We heard that these men had come to Smith's tavern,
and we went down to see them. There were six or
seven of us going down to see the men, and we met
Mr. Thompson and Mr. Martin, and when they saw
us going, they turned their horse and waggon about and
drove back to the tavern and got there before us. Mr.
Thompson and Mr. Martin said there would be a
meeting in the office the next morning, and they wished
us all to attend. After this they went home directly,
and there were two men standing there, one of them
named James Hunter, and one by the name of Simpson.
I knew James Hunter in the old country. I had not
seen him for ten years before that time. I asked how
he was, and how long he had been in this country,
and if his parents had come to this country, he said
they had. I asked him if he was come to Thompson-
ville to live, he said he was come to live there. I asked
102 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
him what he was going to do, he said he was not going
to weave. I told him they had a great demand for
weavers, but they had got bosses a plenty. I told him
there had been a strike there for some time, and that,
there had been four men put in jail because they would
not work for what the Agent had a mind to give them.
I told these men that they had better not mind any
thing that we said to them, but as there was to be a
meeting of the men and Agent at the office the next
morning, they could there see and hear and judge for
themselves.
Before I went home that night I asked Mr. Hunter
and Mr. Simpson to take something to drink. I told
Mr. Hunter there were two or three men from Ayr
at work in the Factory -he said perhaps he would
know them. He asked me their names. I told him
there was one Richard Currie, he said he knew him-
he told me that he wished to see that man. I told him
that I would send him down in the morning, and in
the morning he went down.
There were two double teams brought them into
town and landed them at Scrimgeour's tavern. There
were six or seven of the old hands standing near the said
tavern, and we went in soon after them into the tavern.
Shortly after we went in I saw Mr. Thompson there
in the tavern. One of the old hands by the name of
John Elder was talking to these new hands from New
York. Mr. Thompson [53] told him that he had no
right to speak to the men at all -he had no right
there. John Elder told Mr. Thompson that he would
speak to whom he pleased in a public tavern, and that
he had nothing to do with it.
I was boarding at Mr. Martin's and he told us that
he could not board us below two dollars per week.
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 103
We told him that we would leave him -he said he
would board us no less, and Richard McDowell,
John Hanson, James Sims, myself and two or three
others left him and found a new place to board. This
was on Saturday night that we went to our new board-
ing house, and on Monday morning there were a list
of names sent to us to come to the office; they were
the names of some of those who had changed the
boarding house. We went up to the office and Mr.
Thompson told us that if we would not go back to our
old boarding house and pay two dollars per week he
had no more work for us. We wished him to measure
our cloth and we would go. He said he would not.
We asked him to pay for the work we had finished -
he did not do it but went away.
Question by the defendants. Did you or did you
not when at Smith's tavern use any influence with the
men from New York, to persuade them not to go to
Thompsonville to work in the factory? Answer. I
did not.
Question by do. Did you or did you not consider
yourself discharged when you was turned out of the
Factory on the 24* of July 1833, by James Ronald?
Answer. I did. I went and took all that belonged to
me out of the Factory.
Question by do. When you went into Mr. Scrim-
geour's tavern, was there or was there not any rush,
or did you walk in quietly? Answer. There was no
rushing in, but all walked in in as quiet a manner as
any six or seven men would walk into any tavern.
I, Richard McDowal of Simsbury, Hartford
County, of lawful age, depose and say that on or about
the ist of July 1833, Mr. Henry Thompson was
called on by Mr. Keys to come to the shop to consult
I0 4 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
with the weavers concerning his not paying Mr. Keys.
James Anderson asked Mr. Thompson the reason of
his not paying Mr. Keys for weaving. Mr. Thompson
said that he had not formerly paid the men when they
left without notice. But Mr. Thompson paid Mr.
Keys -after that Mr. Thompson said that he would
have regulations drawn up so that every man should
see them and then there would be no misunderstanding.
Mr. Wm. Taylor said to Mr. Thompson before you
put them up you will show them to us, so that we can
see whether we shall be satisfied with them or not. Mr.
Thompson said he would some of the weavers said
to Mr. Thompson we have some grievances to lay be-
fore you - there is some new Fancy Fabricks, Double
Whites and stripes, which had more work on them
than what they had been doing. Mr. Thompson said
that was nothing to him - but the company was again
to meet soon and the best way [54] was to draw up a
petition and lay it before the board for more wages
on the Fancy Fabricks, Double Whites and stripes -
the petition was drawn and sent to the company on the
24th of July 1833 with a request to have an advance
on those pieces above mentioned, the company an-
swered and said they should give no more - then there
was a meeting of the weavers called and the company's
answer was read to them saying that they should not
give any more, the weavers then passed Resolves and
sent them to the company, saying that if they would
not pay them an advance they would not work, and we
were waiting for the company's answer, when Mr.
Ronald came to the shop and said that he had orders
from Mr. Thompson to order the men to quit the shop
and to lock the door, and we all quit the shop as was
ordered, and went into Mrs. Metcalf's lot near by-
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 105
there the question was put to each man, whether he
would go back to work or not. Every man said that
they would not unless we got the prices asked for. We
then appointed a committee to write to other Factories
to let them know that we had quit work, and the reason
of our quitting and to have them write to us what prices
they had. Some time afterward, we had another meet-
ing to receive propositions from the company. Mr.
Adams was present, and said that he had made proposi-
tions to the company, to have us go to work again.
James Taylor and myself, told him, that if he made
any, to make for himself, and not for us. At that meet-
ing, there was men appointed to see Mr. Thompson,
and request him to pay the men the money then due,
the answer came back, that he said he should not pay
any man, until they had finished their pieces in the
loom. About one week after we quit work I heard
George Simpson ask Mr. Thompson to pay him for
the pieces he had got out, and Mr. Thompson said no.
Question by the defendant. At the time we were or-
dered out of the shop by Mr. Ronald, whether you
did not consider yourself discharged from work.
Answer by the Deponent. I did.
Question by the Defendant. Were you at Smith's
tavern on Sunday evening when the new weavers came
from New York? Answer. I was.
How many of the old weavers were present? An-
swer. I should think about seven.
Did you have any conversation with the men from
New York? Answer. I did not, but saw Mr. Thomp-
son and he requested me and some others to call at his
office in the morning.
Question. Was you at Mr. Scrimgeour's tavern when
the new weavers came on? Answer. I was.
io6 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
Question. Was there any thing said to the new
weavers by the old weavers to discourage the new ones
from going to work? Answer. There was none in my
hearing.
Question. Was you present there until the new
weavers went to the shop? [55] Answer. I was.
Question by*the Defendant. When you went to work
for Mr. Thompson did you agree to give any notice
to him when you quit or was he to give you any?
Answer. No, I was at option to go when I pleased
or he to turn me away when he pleased, and he has
discharged me once previous to the 24th of July 1833,
without notice and would not pay me what was then
my due, and the reason of it was because I would not
board where he wanted and pay more price than what
I had been paying, but afterwards I made an agree-
ment with Mr. Thompson and went back to work again.
Question. Did you ever know of Mr. Thompson's
discharging any body before the pieces were out?
Answer. I did know him to discharge Thomas Brad-
bury and measured what was then done, and further
the deponent saith not.
I, John Lochead of the Town of Newtown, do tes-
tify and say that I went to work for the Thompsonville
Manufacturing company in A.D. 1830, and was dis-
charged in 1831 from said Factory, without any
previous notice having had my Cloth taken out of the
Loom and measured up to the reed, and received pay-
ment in full for the same, and furthermore, I testify
that in 1833 I was in Thompsonville at the time of
the dispute between the workmen and their employers
and visited my relations John Ronald and James
Taylor. I left there of my own desire and free will
without any one requesting me to do so no one trying
four, Supp.] THOMFSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 107
to prevent me from working in Thompsonville at that
time.
We, John Lynch, John Bailley, James King, Sam-
uel Lyle, Samuel Donough, William Brown, John
McKechnie & James McQueen, Carpet Weavers of
Baltimore, of lawful age, depose .and say, That neither
we nor any of the carpet weavers of Baltimore ever
heard, or had any knowledge of any difficulty existing
or likely to occur between the Thompsonville Manu-
facturing company and the weavers in their employ
previous to the receipt of a letter directed to Hugh
Torrance signed by John Adams, President, and George
Black, Secretary, dated we believe about the later end
of July 1833, which Hugh Torrance read to us and
others. From that letter we received the information
that the weavers in Thompsonville had stopped work
on account of certain grievances which the company
refused to redress and were then out of employment
and being led to believe that there were some of the
weavers weak or of low circumstances who, without
some pecuniary assistance must ultimately be obliged
to submit to what the weavers here had no doubt was
arbitrary and oppressive measures, that the Thompson-
ville company wished to impose upon them. This
consideration induced the carpet [56] weavers here in
Baltimore to enter into voluntary subscriptions for the
relief of whatever hands among the weavers at Thomp-
sonville were weak and needed it, and might be in
distress, not being in employment. The money being
thus raised was forwarded to the weavers in Thompson-
ville, and did not amount to more than $100, part of
which was sent back by them, having come to hand
either after they had or about the time they went to
work. There was no money ever solicited by letter or
1 08 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
message from us by the Thompsonville weavers or by
any others in their behalf, this money was not raised
and sent on in pursuance of any combination to injure
the Thompsonville company or prejudice their business
in any manner, no such combination existed here or
any where else as we know of. This money was raised
and transmitted to them on the same principle that is
usual for us to raise and transmit money in a variety
of other cases for the purpose of assisting individuals
who have been brought into distress, whether by want
of health or any other incidental circumstances, by fire
or otherwise, whereby they have been thrown out of
employment - their case being considered worthy and
needing help. We know of nothing that has been done
by the Weavers of Thompsonville, & are sure that
nothing has been done here, nor was any letter or
message received from them by us or others that we
know of to prevent hands from going on to work, in
the Thompsonville company's employ, nor do we know
of any one being prevented that would otherwise have
went. The letter that was read to us by Hugh Torrance
has been sent to William Taylor at Tariffville, and
further the deponents say not.
I, Robert B. Wilson, who being duly sworn, de-
poseth and saith, that some time in the summer of the
year 1833, ne tfl e deponent received a letter from a
person, or rather the persons of the names of John
Adams President, and George Black Secretary, which
letter is lost or mislaid or perhaps destroyed, this
deponent knoweth not which, nor has this deponent at
this time any distinct idea of the contents of said letter.
And furthermore this deponent testifieth that he re-
ceived one other letter, in November A.D. 1835, through
the hands of Orrin Thompson, which said letter was
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 109
signed John Adams dated November i6th 1835, and
which said letter this deponent put in the hands of
Robert Glenn - and further this deponent saith not.
Robert Glenn (Recalled and is shown a letter ad-
dressed to Robert Wilson). That is the letter I received
from the hands of Mr. Robert Wilson. [The letter
is here read and is as follows :]
Thompsonville, Nov. i6th, 1835.
MR. ROBERT WILSON.
Sir, having an understanding that you will be called
upon to give testimony as to the contents of the circular
letter sent to you from this Factory at the time of our
strike, I have thought proper to give [57] you a hint
of the particulars contained in it, as I am doubtful you
will not be able to produce the original.
It was dated July 25th, 1833, wrote by Samuel
Sturgeon, committee-man, and signed by me as Presi-
dent, and George Black as Secretary, and to give you
and your brother weavers information that we had
turned out for higher wages, which was yi cent on all
plain grounds, and a whole cent on stripes, and double
whites, and asking your approbation of our doings or
not, and ordering you to use all influence to keep all
people from coming here in search of employment,
until we would obtain our object, and likewise if you
approved of our conduct we would look to you for
support under our undertaking. This was I think
about the substance of the letter sent you under my
inspection at that time. The contents of this letter I
hope you will make known to none except Mr. Haight,
who I expect will be called upon for testimony on the
same purpose. Yours most Respectfully,
JOHN ADAMS.
no AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
MR. ROBERT WILSON, Hersymus Carpet Factory,
New Jersey -per favor of Mr. Thompson.
HENRY THOMPSON (recalled). Robert Thompson
had no power to discharge men. Winkle, Gait and
Lochead were discharged for intemperance. Robert
Thompson had a difficulty with the company & work-
men. Two men by the name of Crosby were discharged
for the same cause.
The testimony was here concluded upon both sides.
During the progress of the trial several questions were
raised, as to the admissibility of the testimony offered
under the Plaintiffs' declarationn, but it is not thought
necessary to insert them. The case was elaborately
argued by the counsel for the respective parties. It
was claimed by the counsel for the Plaintiffs that if a
man conspires for an end lawful, or unlawful, he con-
spires the means. That if a man conspires means, the
natural effect of which is to produce a certain result,
he conspires that result. That the Defendants did
conspire both the end and the means. The end was the
stoppage of the Plaintiffs' works. The means by which
this was to be effected was, ist, by [58] depriving the
Plaintiffs of the hands in their employment, and ad,
by throwing impediments in the way of their procur-
ing other hands. That in tracing out a conspiracy it
was necessary to look at all the circumstances of the
case. The relative situation of the parties at the origin
of their difficulties, and the manner in which each
conducted until the company resumed their operations.
The testimony was thus completed, by which it was
claimed that the various means set forth in the declara-
tion as having been adopted by the defendants to ac-
complish their object had been fully made out.
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 1 1 1
The Defendants' counsel claimed that the Plaintiffs
must prove ist, a combination ; zd, that the combination
was unlawful. That the intent of the combination was
effected. That to sustain a civil action, the intent must
be acted on, and the acts proved.
The Defendants then claimed, that a combination
among workmen not to work below certain prices, was
not an indictable offence under our law, and laid no
foundation for a civil action.
That this was the sole object of the Defendants, and
although a temporary suspension of the Plaintiffs' work
might result from the laborers leaving their employ-
ment, yet their object, and the means of obtaining it
were both lawful, and that no other means had by them
been resorted to, than the weapons of truth.
The counsel then examined the sources of evidence
by which the Plaintiffs attempted to prove their decla-
ration, ist, the parol, ad, the written evidence. As
to parol proof, it was said no evidence of any unlawful
acts going to establish a conspiracy was adduced except
from John Adams and John Ronald. That as to Adams,
all his testimony relative to the course taken in the pub-
lic meetings, the votes passed or acts done to interfere
in any way with the company, or to prevent other hands
from coming-in short, that all the principal facts
testified to by him, were sustained by no other solitary
witness on the part of the Plaintiffs, and were substan-
tially contradicted by every witness whose attention
was called to his evidence on the part of the Defend-
ants, and that as to Ronald who testified but to one or
two facts of any importance, he was sustained by Adams
only, and contradicted by the united voice of the rest.
In addition to which, that he had testified twice be-
fore, and did not allude to the facts which the Plaintiffs
H2 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
now attempted by his testimony to establish. They
further claimed that although their own most important
witnesses were now, and since the strike had continued
in [59] the Plaintiffs' employment, and liable at any
moment be discharged, that even by these witnesses,
they had conclusively shown that no object was ever
proposed, or attempted, but to obtain a reasonable
addition to their former wages.
That the written evidence consisted, ist, of the Peti-
tion: ad, the Resolutions: and 3d, the Circular Letter.
That the Petition was admitted to be respectful and
proper. That if laborers had a right to decline work-
ing except at specified prices, there was nothing in the
Resolves that were liable to objection. That as to the
Circular, it contained nothing but the truth, and that
the defendants had an unquestionable right to send
letters to other Factories, or to individuals, containing
the truth as to the differences that existed between them
and die Company.
The Defendants claimed that it was not contended
they had done any acts, except at the public meetings,
or by authority given them at the public meetings.
That all the proof to implicate them was the acts of
others.
They then contended that they could not be affected
by the acts of others, unless it was shewn that such acts
were done in pursuance of an agreement to which they
were parties. That the first meeting in the shop was
held with the knowledge and approbation of the com-
pany, and to receive from them an answer to their
petition. That no agreement was then entered into,
except what is contained in the Resolves sent to the
Company. That the shops by order of the Company
were immediately closed, and that all the combination
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 183^-1836 1 13
which was ever entered into when the Defendants were
present, or in which they had any agency, was not to
work, and to authorize the Committee to write to other
Factories to tell the truth, and that if the Jury found
these facts to be true, then all the subsequent acts or
declarations made or done by others, could not affect
the defendants. . .
[Here follows an examination and criticism of the
testimony of John Adams.]
[61] . . . The trial commenced on Monday,
and the argument was concluded on Friday evening,
when Chief Justice Williams proceeded to charge the
Jury in an able, lucid, and impartial manner. He ex-
plained to the Jury the nature of the action, commented
at large upon the testimony adduced by both parties,
and as to the principles involved in the case he in-
structed the Jury that the Plaintiffs must prove a com-
bination by the Defendants to do an unlawful act, or
to do a lawful act by unlawful means, to the injury
of the Plaintiffs.
The charge in the Plaintiffs' declaration, was a com-
bination to injure and destroy the Plaintiffs business,
and it is alledged to have been entered into on the 24*
day of July, 1833, and continued until the 27th of Au-
gust following. The Defendants claim that as the
Plaintiffs have given evidence tending to shew a con-
spiracy on the 24th of July, they cannot prove one upon
any other day. The law does not consider the day
material. The Plaintiffs are not confined to the day
stated in the declaration, nor to the fact that they have
attempted to prove the conspiracy upon that particular
day. If they have succeeded in proving the conspiracy
on any day between the 24th of July and the 27th of
August, it is sufficient.
H 4 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
The testimony relative to the meetings after the first
day, is also proper, as tending to shew a conspiracy
upon that day.
If a conspiracy is proved to have been entered into
by the Defendants and others, it has heretofore been
holden, that it was not material that the others were
not named in the declaration.
The act of conspiracy may be proved by direct evi-
dence, or by circumstantial, and when proved, the acts
or declarations of other persons who are not defendants,
in pursuance of such concert, or conspiracy, is evidence
against the defendants.
That such acts or declarations of others, are not to
be regarded as evidence of the combination or conspir-
acy itself, so as in that respect to affect the Defendants.
The act charged upon the Defendants in this case,
is a conspiracy to interrupt and destroy the Plaintiffs
business. The Defendants claim that there was no
agreement or concert on their part, except an agreement
not to labor below certain prices. If that was the real
nature of the agreement between the Defendants, or
the Defendants [62] and other workmen, it has been
determined in this Court that such agreement is not by
our law an indictable offence, nor the subject of a civil
action. But if the Defendants conspired to interrupt
and destroy the business of the Plaintiffs, and thus com-
pel them to pay the wages demanded, and have thus
interrupted or destroyed the Plaintiffs' business, and
the Plaintiffs have thus suffered damages, they arc
entitled to a verdict against the Defendants.
On Saturday morning the Jury returned a verdict
of not guilty in the following form :
"In this case the Jury find that the Defendants are
not guilty in manner and form, as the Plaintiffs in their
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 1 1 5
declaration have alledged, and therefore find for the
Defendants to recover their costs.
WILLIAM ALFORD, Foreman.
A true copy of verdict of Jury in said case.
PHILO A. GOODWIN, Clerk of Superior Court."
The sum demanded in the declaration was fifteen
thousand dollars. The Defendants were in prison for
a time upon the charge of conspiracy, at the suit of the
Plaintiffs. The Defendants obtained a verdict in their
favor in the County Court from which the Plaintiffs
appealed. Another trial was had in the Superior Court
in which there was no verdict, and the trial here re-
ported was the third which has been had in this case.
The nature of the charge, together with the attendant
circumstances, and the importance of the principles in-
volved, rendered this case one of unusual interest, and
the result it is believed has met with public appro-
bation.
Counsel for the Plaintiffs, Wm. Hungerford, and
Wm. W. Ellsworth, Esq 18 . For the Defendants, Calvin
Goddard, Samuel H, Huntington, and Francis Parsons,
Esq
As the Reporter has been unable to obtain from
either of the Counsel who argued the cause, even an
epitome of their arguments, and as he took no minutes
of them at the trial, he is unable to give any other than
a very brief outline of the positions taken by them for
their respective clients.
n6 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
[63] (Note A)
Thompsonville, July 23d, 1833.
To THE THOMPSONVILLE CARPET MANUFACTURING
COMPANY.
Gent. We the undersigned, weavers in your em-
ploy, having had an interview with your Agent respect-
ing some grievances which we complained of, we
requested him to redress them, but received for an
answer, that he had not any power in the matter, and
was advised by him to make out a statement of them
and present them before you at your meeting.
We therefore respectfully submit the following par-
ticulars for your consideration. The introduction of
new and fancy fabrics are alike beneficial to all the em-
ployed, as well as the employer. But when there is
additional labor, it is right the laborer should have
remuneration for his extra work. Therefore you know
for instance, that fabric lately introduced, called a
double shot about, is a great deal more difficult for the
weaver to get along with, and we think should be paid
at one shilling per yard. The double grounds also
should at least have one half cent additional as former-
ly, & the same for stripes with above two shuttles on
the ground. To the above grievances we solicit your
attention. Our requests are so moderate that we think
they only want to be represented to you, to have them
redressed.*
(Note B)
The Thompsonville Company have this day received
a petition from the weavers in their employ, soliciting
8 Seventy-one names were signed to this Petition.
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 117
an increase on the prices of weaving, and in answer, the
Company request their petitioners will seriously con-
sider the following facts.
The Thompsonville Company desire at all times to
be on the most friendly terms with all persons in their
employ. The Thompsonville Company, possessing a
full knowledge of the present situation of the Carpet
Manufacturers in the United States, are decidedly of
opinion that the profits on the business are not such
as to warrant any increase on the prices now paid for
weaving ; and the Company believe it will be most for
the permanent interest of the weavers in their employ,
to combine to work at present prices.
The Thompsonville Company believe their petition-
ers must be aware of the reduction which has already
taken place in the duties on Carpeting, and that it is
necessary for American Manufacturers [64] to be able
to meet Foreigners in the markets of this country. The
duty on Ingrain and Venetian Carpetings (formerly
stood at 40 cts. per square yard, and in March last was
reduced to 35 cts. per yard, and a further reduction
of 3 cts. per yard is to take place in January next, which
will then make the duties 32 cts. per square yard. ^ The
Thompsonville Company would inform their petition-
ers that the styles of goods on which they ask an ad-
vance, command no higher price than other descrip-
tions, and that the Company are obliged to make such
styles as their customers order. The Company presume
their petitioners must be satisfied that no favors have
been shown to particular persons, but all have been
placed on the same footing.
The Thompsonville Company believe that their
petitioners will best promote their own interests by
n8 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
continuing to work as heretofore. By order of the
President and Directora.-
GEORGE W. MARTIN, Secretary.
Thompsonville Company's Office, July 24, 1833.
(Note C)
Thompsonville, July 24th, 1833.
GENT. OF THE THOMPSONVILLE MANUFACTURING
COMPANY.
We the weavers in your employ, having received
your answer to our petition, when we immediately held
a meeting, and came immediately to the following
resolutions, viz :
ist. Resolved, That all plain grounds shall be paid
as follows, at the rate of 15 cents per yard, and fines
at 1 1 cents per yard.
2d. Resolved, That all stripes above two shuttles, and
double whites, shall be paid ijjj^ cents per yard.
3d. Resolved, That all Double shot abouts shall be
paid at the rate of 16^2 cents per yard.
4th. Resolved, That the three plies shall be paid at
the rate of 30 cents per yard.
5th. Resolved, That we shall not return to work
until the above grievances are redressed.
(Note D)
RULES AND REGULATIONS. All persons who enter
the employ of the Thompsonville Company, will be
considered as assenting to the following rules :
ist. Any weaver leaving the employ of the Thomp-
sonville Company shall give notice of the same before
commencing their last piece, the same notice shall be
given by the company to the weaver.
2d. All weavers keeping a piece of Fine Carpeting
four, Supp.] TH.OMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 119
over twelve days - a piece of Super fine over fifteen
days - a piece of three ply [65] over Twenty one days -
shall be liable to be discharged unless in case of sick-
ness or some reasonable cause and which will only be
allowed when duly reported at the Office.
3d. No reading of Newspapers or other publica-
tions will be allowed in any of the Weaving shops,
and any one found so doing, will be fined One Dollar
for the first offence and for the second discharged.
5th. No smoking shall be allowed in any building
belonging to the weaving department. Any man so
doing, will be fined Five Dollars and forthwith
discharged.
6th. Any weaver wishing to be absent more than one
day must give notice of the same at the Office.
Thompsonville Company's Office, July 25, 1833.
The Thompsonville Company inform the Weavers
who lately have left their employ, that unless they re-
turn to work by Monday morning next, they will not
after that day be allowed to enter the Company's em-
ploy on (the same terms as heretofore. And all those
who occupy Houses belonging to said Company are
hereby notified to quit the same on Monday next, unless
they return to work. By order of the President and
Directors. HENRY THOMPSON, Agent.
(Note E)
Prices which the Company offer to pay for weaving,
in lieu of former prices provided the weavers accept
the same on Monday, or they can have the former price
say- 14^ Cents per yard.
Plain ground and top or two Colored Supers . 13^2 Cents
shaded Supers. . . I4# "
Double " " " " Colored Supers .15 "
120 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
Striped grounds over 3 Shuttles Shaded . . 15 Cents
Shot about ground and top . . . . 15 "
Three ply and Fines to be paid as formerly.
Prices the Company will pay after Monday-
Plain ground and top or two Colored Supers . 12 Cents
Plain ground and top shaded . . . I2j "
Striped ground over z Shuttles . . . 13 "
Double Super ground and shaded top . .13 "
Three ply Supers . . . . . 27 "
FINES
Plain grounds and top .... gj Cents
Plain ground top shaded . . . .10"
Striped ground over 2 Shuttles . . .10"
Thursday, July 25, 1833.
[66] (Note F)
The Thompsonville Company and the weavers in
their employ, have this day agreed that the prices for
weaving after the ist day of January will be ioj4 Cents
for fine 22 pair, and 1454 Cents for Superfine 26 pair
in the Loom, and further that the above price shall
continue to be paid from the ist of January 1830 to
the ist January 1831 - and the present price now pay-
ing shall be continued and paid to all pieces brought
out of the Loom before the ist January 1830.
(Note G)
Article of agreement made and entered into by and
between A. B. of the town of Kilmarnock on the one
part and James E. Smith on behalf of the House
of Andrews, Thompson & Co., of the City of New
York, in the United States of North America on the
other part-
Witnesseth, That the said A. B. doth hereby cov-
enant and agree with the said J. E. S. for and in con-
121
four, Supp.] THQMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836
sideration of the sum of six pence sterling to me in
hand paid, to my full satisfaction, to engage with the
Thompsonville Carpet Manufacturing Company on
my arrival in America for the period of two years, for
the purpose of weaving Carpeting. The said Company
to pay me the same price they pay to other Weavers in
their employ, or the usual price paid in that country for
Weaving.
And in case I the said A. B. do not fulfill the above
specified agreement, I hereby agree to forfeit and pay
to the said A. T. & Co., the sum of Two Hundred Dol-
lars without offset or defalcation.
I the said A. B. do also agree that the sum advanced
for my passage to America (as stated in my promissory
note given to the said J. E. S.) shall be deducted from
my wages by weekly instalments as earned after sup-
porting myself.
In witness whereof, I hereunto set my hand and seal
this -day of March in the year of our Lord 1829.
(Note H)
Thompsonville, July 24, 1833.
MR. GEORGE FLOOD AND OTHERS -
We the undersigned in the name of the Thompson-
ville Carpet weavers take this early opportunity of in-
timating to you that we have this day struck work for
an advance of wages in consequence of Fancy Fabricks
being introduced into the work without any remunera-
tion for extra labor, such as shot about top and bottom
interspersed with shading, for which we ask 2 cents
more than is paid for solid grounds. The double
whites for which we received formerly 16 cents but
which they reduced repeatedly until they brought them
to the level of single grounds, namely i^y 3 cents - also
I22 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
we had a [67] premium of 50 cents if we finished them
in 12 days of which they have deprived us, and we look
upon this also as a reduction of wages. For double
whites, we ask i$y 2 cents - also for stripes we ask itf/z
cents with above 2 shuttles on the ground -for all
others we ask 15 cents per yard, which is only one half
cent on the yard exclusive of the premium - also we ask
1 1 cents for fine, which is no more than what is paid in
some other places. As we anticipate that our employ-
ers will advertise for hands, we deem it our duty to let
all men know on what grounds they are wanted here.
Will you please send us a statement of your prices, and
do not lose a post- also your opinion of our conduct,
which we hope will meet your approbation, along with
all others connected with the trade -by order of the
Committee. JOHN ADAMS, President.
GEORGE BLACK, Secretary.
The following is the letter alluded to by several of
the witnesses during the trial, which was published in
the N.Y. Working Man's Advocate of August 24th,
1833, and which was read in Court at a former trial
of this case. It was not read at the last trial on account
of its being mislaid.
To THE EDITOR of the Working Man's Advocate, New
York.
Sir. As you have professed yourself the Working
Man's advocate, and have repeatedly offered them the
use of your columns, particularly when any portion of
them are laboring under difficulties with their employ-
ers, we have been induced to address you on the present
occasion.
The press is the great palladium of liberty; and when
we find an individual connected with it possessing spirit
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 1 23
enough openly to espouse the Working Man's cause, it
is the duty as well as the interest of that class to sup-
port and encourage him, and to furnish him with in-
formation of the difficulties we often labor under, in
order that he may have the means of defending us and
of putting the whole laboring community on their
guard. Impressed with these views, Mr. Editor, and
actuated a little by self-interest, we have thought it
right to send you an account of some difficulties which
have occurred between the carpet weavers and their
employers in this town, that you may publish the same.
We may tell you, by the by, before proceeding farther,
that we sent a copy of our proceedings to the editors
of the Old Countryman for publication, that paper,
from the nature of its contents, being much read by
foreigners, of whom carpet weavers mostly consist Its
editors thought proper, however, notwithstanding our
offer of payment, to refuse our request, and give us
some paltry excuses not altogether free from unfair
influence.
To our statement then. Having had an interview
with the company's agent on the 24th of July, in order
to settle some dispute that [68] had arisen between one
of the weavers and him, and which concerned us all,
and that being amicably settled, we requested him to
allow us a small remuneration for fabrics, some of them
newly introduced, which required extra labor to get
along with. The advance was so trifling, and at the
same time so just, besides its being allowed in most other
Factories, that we thought it only wanted to be laid
before the Company to be granted. However, they
decided otherwise, and peremptorily refused to grant
our request; upon which, considering we were paid be-
low the average rates in other parts of the Union, we
124 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
took higher ground, and requested one half cent
advance on the yard on all kinds, and refused to work
for less. Upon this last proposition being presented to
them, they sent down their Foreman, with orders to
turn us out and lock the doors of the Factory. Next day,
we met, by appointment, the Agent, who read to us
the resolutions of the Company. They were to this
effect: that unless we went in on or before the zgth,
our wages (like those of the Armory people in Spring-
field) were to be reduced 17 per cent. Now, add three
per cent, the advance we ask, and it makes a difference,
as we now stand, of twenty per cent They added to
the resolutions a string of articles, a copy of which we
have sent you, which we, in particular, wish you to
publish ; and they notified the householders under them
to leave their houses immediately. Thus matters stood
till the tenth of August, when, to add lustre to the
beauties of the "American System," four of our hands
were Arrested, upon God knows what authority, and
Committed to Prison, upon a charge of maliciously
combining, conspiring, &c. &c.- the damages being
laid at fifteen thousand dollar?! 11
The above will afford you materials for comment.
A niche in your useful columns for these observations,
or as many of them as will leave our case fairly stated,
will confer a benefit on your friends here, and we hope
on the working men generally. There are upwards
of seventy weavers turned out, to which add winders
and others, and they will amount to about one hundred.
You will observe, too, that the men arrested are, ap-
parently, selected at random, and are guilty of no crime
except that of refusing to work for what the Company
is pleased to give.
We ought to have stated before, that the company
four, Supp.] THOMFSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 125
refused, from the first to pay us our wages -even that
part for which we have receipts from the Foreman.
They have from twelve to fourteen hundred dollars of
our money in their hands.
Enfield, Conn. August i2th, 1833.
126 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
2. WILLIAM TAYLOR v. THE THOMPSONVILLE
CARPET MANUFACTURING COMPANY
From the Record, Hartford County Court, November Term, 1834..
To THE SHERIFF OF HARTFORD COUNTY or his
Deputy or either constable of the town of Enfield in
said County Greeting.
By authority of the State of Connecticut you are
hereby commanded to attach to the value of six thou-
sand dollars the goods and estate of the Thompsonville
Carpet Manufacturing Company, an incorporated
company by the laws of this State, having its manu-
facturing establishment and office of business at said
Enfield in the county aforesaid; and also to summon
said company to appear before the County Court
within and for the County of Hartford, next to be
hoi den at Hartford in and for said County on the
second Tuesday of November A.D. 1 834 then and there
to answer unto William Taylor of Simsbury in said
County, plea of the case whereupon the Plaintiff de-
clares and says, that the Defendants are an incorporated
company incorporated by an act of the General Assem-
bly of this State passed at its session begun and held
at New Haven on the first Wednesday of May A.D.
1828 by the name of the Thompsonville Carpet Manu-
facturing Company, for the purpose of manufacturing
carpets, wool, cotton and other manufactures in the
most advantageous manner, and by that name were
authorized and empowered to purchase hold and con-
vey such real estate in the County of Hartford as shall
be necessary for the purposes of said corporation - also
to sue and be sued - plead and be impleaded - to answer
and be answered unto in any court of record, with a
capital of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars - and
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 127
with power to appoint a President Directors, and all
other necessary officers and agents to conduct the busi-
ness of said corporation ; and to have and use a common
seal and to alter the same at pleasure - and said com-
pany was duly organized and commenced the business
of manufacturing carpets at Enfield aforesaid accord-
ing to the provisions of their said act of incorporation -
and so continued organized and manufacturing carpets
and transacting their said business up to, on, and ever
since the gth day of August A.D. 1833 - and the plaintiff
says that the Defendants on said gth day of August A.D.
1833, not having any reasonable or probable cause of
action whatever against the plaintiff, but wrongfully
and unjustly contriving and intending to injure, oppress
and imprison the plaintiff, falsely and maliciously pro-
cured and obtained from Isaac Toucey Esq. Justice
of the Peace within and for the County of Hartford
a writ of attachment at the suit of the Defendants
against the Plaintiff and others viz. Edmond Gorman,
Thomas Norton and Wallace Bailey, directed to the
Sheriff of Hartford County his Deputy or any Con-
stable of the town of Enfield in said County com-
manding them to attach to the value of fifteen thousand
dollars the estate of the plaintiff and others mentioned
in said writ as aforesaid and for want thereof attach
his and their bodies and them have to appear before
the County Court to be holden at Hartford within
and for the County of Hartford on the second Tuesday
of November A.D. 1833 then and there to answer unto
the defendants in an action on the case in which the
defendants alledged and set forth that on the 24th day
of July 1833 at said Enfield they were the owners and
possessors of a place called Thompsonville in said
Enfield and land and buildings and privileges of water
128 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
of great value, to-wit, of seventy-five thousand dollars
which they used and occupied for the purpose of manu-
facturing carpets and also a great amount of machinery
implements of various kinds and other personal estate
of great value, to-wit of forty thousand dollars used
by them for the purpose of manufacturing carpets as
aforesaid and had there and elsewhere a great amount
of wool, yarn and other stock of great value to-wit of
the value of one hundred thousand dollars, which the
defendants had as they pretended in their said writ
for the sole and only purpose of manufacturing into
carpets -also that they then and there had in their
employ one hundred persons in their said business of
manufacturing carpets - and among others sixty in-
grain carpet weavers, and had there many contracts
at that time of great value entered into by them for the
delivery of carpets, then soon to be performed, and
were prosecuting their said business profitably to the
amount of one hundred and fifty thousand dollars per
annum all which the Defendants ia their said writ
claim was well known to the Plaintiff and others men-
tioned in the defendants' said writ- and that they well
knowing the same and intending and contriving to
injure the defendants, unlawfully, wantonly, wickedly
and maliciously did conspire, combine, and confederate
and agree together to hinder interrupt and stop the
defendants' said business and deprive them of the
profits thereof and subject them to the inconvenience
embarrassment and losses occasioned by its interruption
and then and there in persuance of said unlawful
wicked and malicious conspiracy, combination con-
federacy and agreement between the plaintiff and
others mentioned in the defendants' said writ, they did
at said Enfield on said 24th day of July A.D. 1833, being
four. Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 129
themselves weavers in the defendants' employ, unlaw-
fully abandon the defendants' employ, and falsely and
deceitfully persuade and induce all the said ingrain
carpet weavers in the defendants' employ to abandon
and quit said employment and to refuse to work, and
wrongfully and injuriously, by threats and falsehoods
induce a great number of ingrain carpet weavers, to-
wit seventy to abandon the defendants' said business,
and did unlawfully, maliciously and injuriously in-
timidate dissuade hinder and prevent other carpet
weavers from engaging in the defendants' business al-
though then and there ready and willing to do so-
by reason of which doings of the plaintiff, and others
mentioned in the defendants' said writ, the defendants
claimed that their said business was hindered inter-
rupted entirely stopped and they the defendants entirely
deprived of all the profits and advantages thereof and
of all use of their said real and personal estate and of
the labor and services of their said workmen, and were
subjected to great damage and loss demanding as
damages therefor the sum of fifteen thousand dollars -
and the defendants contriving and intending as afore-
said and without having any reasonable or probable
cause of action whatever against the plaintiff falsely
and maliciously caused the plaintiff to be arrested by
his body in virtue of said writ of attachment and to
be thereupon imprisoned and kept in prison a long
time to-wit for the space of twenty days then next fol-
lowing during which time the plaintiff was wholly
unable to procure bail for his appearance before said
Court to answer to the defendants according to the
exigency of their said writ; whereas in truth the de-
fendants at the time of praying out said writ and of
the said arrest and imprisonment had not any reason-
130 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
able or probable cause of action against the Plaintiff
for which by law he ought to have been arrested and
imprisoned as aforesaid - and the plaintiff says that
afterwards at the time of the session of said Court to
which said writ was made returnable the defendants
did not appear to pursue their said action, and although
said writ was duly returned to the Clerk of said Court,
by the officer serving the same, the defendants neg-
lecting to appear as aforesaid no other or further pro-
ceedings were had in said writ but the same was by
the defendants wholly abandoned and given up, and
thus was ended and determined in the plaintiffs favor.
By means of which said several premises, the Plaintiff
not only suffered great pain of mind and body during
said imprisonment, but was injured in his credit pre-
vented from transacting his necessary and lawful busi-
ness and compelled to expend large sums of money in
the employment and payment of counsel in said writ
and in endeavoring to procure bail and in obtaining
his release from said imprisonment to-wit five hun-
dred dollars.
And the Plaintiff further says that the defendants
are an incorporated company, incorporated by an act
of the General Assembly of this State, passed at the
session thereof begun and held as aforesaid, by the
name, with the powers and for the purposes aforesaid -
and said company was duly organized and commenced
the business of manufacturing carpets at said Enfield
according to the provisions of said act of incorporation,
and so continued organized and manufacturing carpets
and transacting their said business up to, on, and ever
since the 9*h day of August, A.D. 1833 ~ an< * the plain-
tiff says that the defendants on said 9th day of August
A.D. 1833 not having any reasonable or probable cause
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 131
of action whatever against the plaintiff, but wrongfully
and unjustly contriving and intending to injure op-
press and imprison the plaintiff, falsely and maliciously
procured and obtained from Isaac Toucey Esq. Justice
of the Peace within and for the County of Hartford,
a certain other writ of attachment at the suit of the de-
fendants against the Plaintiff and others to-wit Edmond
Gorman Wallace Bailey and Thomas Norton directed
to the Sheriff of Hartford County his Deputy or either
Constable of the town of Enfield in said county com-
manding them to attach the estate of the plaintiff and
others mentioned in said writ as aforesaid to the value
of fifteen thousand dollars and for want thereof to
attach his and their bodies and them have to appear
before the County Court to be holden at Hartford
within and for the County of Hartford on the second
Tuesday of November A.D. 1833, then and there to
answer unto the defendants in an action on the case in
which the defendants alledged and set forth among
other things, the several matters and claims as recited
in the first Count aforesaid, and demanded as damages
therefor the sum of fifteen thousand dollars, and the
Plaintiff says that said damages so demanded in the
defendants' said writ were unjust illegal and excessive -
and that the defendants unlawfully wantonly wickedly
and maliciously contriving and intending to injure op-
press and imprison him and without having any reason-
able or probable cause of action whatever against the
plaintiff, did falsely maliciously and unlawfully de-
mand in their said writ of attachment the said unjust
illegal and excessive damages, to-wit, the sum of fif-
teen thousand dollars with the wicked malicious and
sole intent of unlawfully and falsely imprisoning the
plaintiff and of preventing him the plaintiff from pro-
I 3 2 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
curing and of deterring anyone from becoming bail
for his the plaintiff's appearance before said court to
answer to the defendants as aforesaid -and the de-
fendants contriving and intending as aforesaid did
falsely maliciously and wickedly cause the plaintiff to
be arrested by his body in virtue of said writ of attach-
ment and to be thereupon imprisoned for a long time,
to-wit, for a space of twenty days during which time
the plaintiff by reason of said unjust, illegal and ex-
cessive damages to-wit the sum of fifteen thousand
dollars so as aforesaid falsely maliciously and unlaw-
fully demanded by the defendants in their said writ
of attachment, was wholly unable to procure bail, for
his appearance before said court to answer to the de-
fendants according to the exigency of their said writ,
but remained in imprisonment a long space of time
to-wit twenty days and until the defendants of their
own will discharged him therefrom - whereas in truth
the defendants at the time of praying out said writ
and of the said arrest and imprisonment had not any
reasonable or probable cause of action against the
plaintiff, for which by law he ought to have been ar-
rested and imprisoned as aforesaid - and the Plaintiff
says that afterwards at the time of the session of said
court to which said writ was made returnable, the
defendants did not appear to pursue their said action,
and although said writ was by the officer serving the
same duly returned to the Clerk of said Court, the
defendants neglecting to appear as aforesaid, no other
or further proceedings were had in said writ but the
same was by the defendants wholly abandoned and
given up and thus was ended and determined in the
Plaintiff's favour. By reason of which several prem-
ises the plaintiff not only suffered great pain of mind
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS. 1834-1836 133
and body during said arrest and imprisonment was
greatly injured in his credit prevented from transacting
his lawful business, and compelled to expend large
sums of money in obtaining his release from imprison-
ment, in endeavoring to procure bail and in the em-
ployment and payment of counsel to-wit five hundred
dollars -and the Plaintiff further declares and says that
the defendants are an incorporated company incorpo-
rated by the General Assembly of the State, at the time,
by the name, with the powers, and for the purposes
aforesaid - and said company was duly organized and
commenced the business of manufacturing carpets at
said Enfield according to the provisions of their said
act of incorporation - and so continued organized
and manufacturing carpets and transacting their said
business up to, on, and ever since the gth day of August
A.D. i833-and the Plaintiff says that he then was and for
a long time before had been well skilled in the art trade
and mystery of ingrain carpet weaving -and had be-
fore that time been employed by the defendants as an
ingrain carpet weaver in their said manufacturing
establishment at the usual and customary rates and
prices for weaving ingrain carpets to-wit, at the rate
of fifteen cents or more for weaving each yard -and
that the defendants on said 9th day of August A.D.
1833, not having any reasonable or probable cause of
action whatever against the Plaintiff, but wrongfully
and unjustly contriving and intending to injure oppress
and imprison the Plaintiff, thereby to intimidate and
to enforce him against his will and interest to engage
in the defendants' service as an ingrain carpet weaver
in their said carpet manufacturing establishment, for
wages lower than the usual and accustomed rates and
prices of weaving ingrain carpets, and at which he
I3 4 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY [Vol.
and others had been accustomed to work for the de-
fendants, to-wit, for twelve and a half cents for weav-
ing each yard of all kinds of ingrain carpets, they
the defendants did falsely and maliciously procure
from Isaac Toucey Esquire Justice of the Peace within
and for the County of Hartford a certain other writ
of attachment at the suit of the defendants against the
plaintiff and others to-wit Edmond Gorman Wallace
Bailey and Thomas Norton directed to the Sheriff of
Hartford County his Deputy or either constable of
the town of Enfield in said County commanding them
to attach the estate of the Plaintiff and others men-
tioned in said writ to the value of fifteen thousand
dollars and for want thereof to attach his and their
bodies and them have to appear before the County
Court to be holden at Hartford within and for the
County of Hartford on the second Tuesday of No-
vember A.D. 1833 then and there to answer unto the
Defendants in an action on the case in which the de-
fendants alledged and set forth among other things the
several matters and claims as herein before recited in
the first count of the Plaintiff's declaration and de-
manded as damages therefor the sum of fifteen thousand
dollars; and the plaintiff says that said damages so
demanded were unjust illegal and excessive, and that
the defendants, not having any reasonable or probable
cause of action whatever against the plaintiff but un-
lawfully wantonly wickedly and maliciously contriving
and intending to injure oppress and imprison the plain-
tiff, thereby to intimidate him and enforce him against
his will and interest to engage in the defendants' service
as an ingrain carpet weaver in their said carpet manu-
facturing establishment for wages lower than the usual
and accustomed rate and prices of weaving ingrain
carpets and at which the plaintiff and others had been
four, Supp.] THOMPSONVILLE WEAVERS, 1834-1836 135
wont and accustomed to work for the defendants, to-wit
at the rate of twelve and a half cents for weaving each
yard of ingrain carpeting, did falsely maliciously and
unlawfully demand in their said writ of attachment
the said unjust illegal and excessive damages, to-wit
the sum of fifteen thousand dollars with the sole wicked
and malicious intent of unlawfully and falsely im-
prisoning the plaintiff and of preventing him from
procuring and of deterring anyone from becoming bail
for his the plaintiff's appearance before said court,
thereby to intimidate him and to enforce him against
his will and interest to engage in the service of the
defendants as an ingrain carpet weaver in their said
carpet manufacturing establishment, for wages lower
than the usual and accustomed rate and prices of weav-
ing ingrain carpets and at which he and others had
been wont and accustomed to work for the defendants,
to-wit at the rate of twelve and a half cents for weaving
each yard of ingrain carpeting and the defendants
contriving and intending as aforesaid did falsely,
wickedly and maliciously cause the plaintiff to be ar-
rested by his body by virtue of said writ of attachment
and to be therefor imprisoned for a long time to-wit
for the space of twenty days during which time the
plaintiff by reason of said unjust illegal and excessive
damages, to-wit, the sum of fifteen thousand dollars
so as aforesaid falsely maliciously and unlawfully de-
manded by the defendants in their said writ of attach-
ment was wholly unable to procure bail for his appear-
ance before said Court to answer to the defendants
according to the exigency of their said writ but re-
mained in imprisonment a long space of time to-wit
twenty days - whereas in truth the defendants at the
time of praying out said writ and of the said arrest
and imprisonment had not any reasonable or probable
136 AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY
cause of action whatever against the plaintiff for which
by law he ought to have been arrested and imprisoned
as aforesaid - and. the plaintiff says that afterwards at
the time of the session of said court to which said writ
was made returnable the defendants did not appear
to pursue their said action and although said writ was
by the officer serving the same duly returned to the
Clerk of .said Court, the defendants neglecting to ap-
pear as aforesaid no other or further proceedings were
had in said suit, but the same was by the defendants
wholly, abandoned and given up and thus was ended
and determined in the plaintiffs favour - By reason
of which several premises, the plaintiff not only
suffered great pain of body and mind during said
arrest and imprisonment but was greatly injured in
his credit prevented from transacting his lawful busi-
ness and compelled to expend large sums of money in
obtaining his release from imprisonment in endeavor-
ing to procure bail and in the employment and pay-
ment of counsel to-wit the sum of five hundred dollars -
to the damage of the Plaintiff the sum of five thousand
dollars to recover which with just and legal costs this
writ is brought.
Hereof fail not but of this writ with your doings
thereon legal service and return make.
Dated at Hartford this aist day of October A.D. 1834.
Samuel H. Huntington recognized in the sum of
fifty dollars to prosecute this suit-
CHARLES SHEPARD, Justice of Peace.
CEDAR RAPID*
IOWA
