Western Kansas world. [volume] (WaKeeney, Kan.) 1885-current, 1888-03-17


Judge 0resham's court q this Afternoon
ana Med an answer to the petition Of The
Chicago. Burlington q Quincy railway re-
quest,ng the court to compel its receiver to
comply with thereQulati.ns of the inter-sfafe
commerce Law, etc. In the answer the 70
spondent admits that he, in his official capici-
~, u subject to the orders of the court, and
noios h1mseH out to the public az a common
carrier OF persons and property, and subject
70 all the obligations, duties and Limitations
imposed upon such carriers engaged in state
ana interstate traffic, either by common
law or statutes of Illinois or act OF conoreaa
thereto pertaining" and further admits the
truth of the allegations of the petition re-
spectlng the usages and practice of inter-
changing loaded cars between petitioner and
this respondent in his Official capacity az
receiver, but denies that such interchange of
loaded cars have been large at the city of
Cmcago or elsewhere, as stated in this peti-
uon. On the contrary, the respondent says
that, IN fact, such interchange with the petit
uoner nave been very small and unimp0f-
tant part of the business of respondent, such
business having amounted in the month of
January, being the last month for which
complete returns have been compiled, to a
value not exceeding $500. being less than
onc.sixteenth Of per cent of the railway
business under the management of respond
emit for that month. This respondent, further
answering, says that the Chicago, Burlington
& Quincy Railroad company is not engaged
in the operating of railroads which forms,
with that operated by your respondent, con-
tlnuous or trunk line or lines leading from
one or more sections of country to others;
but. on the contrary, is operating q system
which enters and occupies much of the ter
rltory tributary to the railroads operated by
respondent and its associated lines, and
WI ia to- ~
and is directly competitive at many points.
The answer admits that their agent de-
clined to haul Burlington freight cars ten
dered them on March 6, but denies that
such refusal was as alleged in the Burling-
TONS petition made under specific instruc-
tions, originating with the Wabash,
whereby. that company had directed
that their agents and employees should
absolutely and Internationally refuse to
receive any loaded cars from, or deliver any
loaded cars to petitioner, or disregard it's
obligations as connecting carrier. The
Wabash issued no instructions concerning
the handling of Burlington freight until
March 7, when they issued the following:
"We cannot haul Chicago, Burlington q
Quincy cars over this road at present. We
must decline to receive them. Transfer all
freight from their cars to Wabash cars"
Their reason for this order was. according
to the answer, that the Burlington. since its
engineers and firemen struck, had succeed.
ed in filling their places in very considerable
numbers. That road has gradually but
slowly come in to renewed partial opera
tions. That in so doing, said petitioner has
absorbed and taken into its employment
substantially all the competent unemployed
locomotive engineers in the United States.
except those who by association and COM
munity of feeling, are in sympathy with
the locomotive engine men who SO left the
employ of said petitioner.
The answer then goes on to state that the
relations betweenithe Wabash and their engi-
neers and fremen were harmonious, and
that they, being solicitous that their traffic
should not be interrupted "by reason of any
complication growing out of utilization and
friendly feeling of the engine men in their
employ toward the engine men who had left
the employ of the petitioner, and for that
reason the orders were issued for a tempo
rary measure" The answer then says that
the orders not to handle 20" freight were
on Saturday last, and the fol-
lowing orders issued: Gall orders and d.
rections heretofore given by me or by any
officers or agent of this road which have
been understood as limiting the interchange
of cars or traffic with the Chicago, Bur-
lington & Quincy railroad, or any roads
in that system are hereby rescinded."
Business of receiving and iuterchanging
cars and traffic by this road with the Chi
cago, Burlington IL Quincy. and all the
roads of that system will go on upon the
same basis and the same conditions as those
upon which similar business is done by this
road with other connecting railroads. The
above order, the answer says, has been in
full force since its issuance, and will be con-
tinued and executed. In conclusion, the
Wabash denies having had any business
or communications with P. M.
Arthur, or any one representing him, and
prays:that the'petition bed is missed at thepe-
titioner's cost.
After the WabashJ answer had been re-
ceived showing that the receiver had. on
the 10th inst, revoked his previous
and ordered former business
relations with the 20" road resumed, Judge
Gresham asked the representative of the
20" what position that left them in in the
suit, and they replied that they still desired
The order from the court which was original
y asked for. They desired this that they
might feel assured that the Wabash would
not again refuse to receive their freight, as
hey had already done. They still asked, fur
her, that the court issue the desired order re-
,training Chief Arthur and the brotherhood
from ordering or causing q strike on the
The action of these roads in hauling 20"
freight. Arguments were made at length in
support of the so" position, and
we're answered at equal length by the attor-
1eys for the Wabash.
At the close of the arguments Judge
Gresham practically gave his decision when
he said that he did not think the "Q'' had
my case in court. 'The Wabash has granted
'ou all you ask" said the Judge. 'Tt has
to receive your freight, and now
'ou ask the court to issue an order Furnishing
he Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers
or an alleged crime which they deny and
gainst' wishes of the general manager of:the
Dad, who is an officer of this court" While
he Judge thus indicated what his decision
1ould probably be, he announced that he
7ould take the matter under advisement.
he prevailing opinion in the court room
fter the decision, was that the Judge would
efuse to issue any order touching the action
# Chief Arthur or the brotherhood on the
round that it is beyond his jurisdiction and
properly regulated by the state laws.
Good Resolve
LONDON, March 12.-During breakfast at
,reil yesterday it is reported that Sullivan