The Atlanta constitution. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1885-19??, 1888-03-20
Argument of the Burlington Railroad i'm tho
Court at Chicago.

CHICAGO March 12.-Judge Gresham g
court room and the diacent halls were packed
to suffocaton this afternoon when the applica-
ton of tho Chicago Burlington and Quincy
railroad for an order on the receiver of the
Wabash railway to compel him to receive and
handle their freight. Came up for q hearing.
The bar, railroads, and general public were
represented, and all paid the closest attention
to the proceedings.
When the case was called Attorney Henry
Crawford, on behalf of tho Wabash railway,
said that before the other side opened their
case, there was an affidavitfed by them which
had not been read, and which his side OF the
case desired to use. lie then read the affidavit
of General Manager Stone, OF the Burlington
road, in which was set at length copies of a
telegram alleged to have been sent by Chief
Engineer Arthur, from Chicago, March 9th,
to M. w. Vernon, at Omaha, Neb., of tho
grievance committee OF the brotherhood, and
reading as follows:
DO not haul any Chicago, Burlington and Quincy
cars, or AID them in any way. r. NJ ARTHUR.
The affidavit alleged that similar dispatches
had been sent out by Mr.. Arthur in all drec-
tions to members Of the brotherhood, and
among others to engineers in the employ OF
tho receiver, and that il would be abundantly
established that the said Arthur was tho main
executive officer Of tho brotherhood, and as
such had interfered with the property In the
custody Of the court, and the engineers in the
employ of the court had obeyed his order
against the laws Of the state, and the laws of
the United States, and the order OF the conrt.
Attorney Dexter then opened the case for
the Burlington company by reading the petit
ton and atfldavits Of tho companants as filed
by them on Friday He was followed by Rob
ert T. Lincoln with the answer OF Receiver
McNulta, OF the Wabash.
Respondent, in conclusion, says that no be-
lieyes that the petition, at the time when fled
by the petitioner, originated not so much in
the desire OF the petitioners to procure o re-
sumption Of insignificant and unimportant traf-
iic, which it had given the respondent before
the petitioner had been disabled from transact
ing any business whatever by the refusal of the
employees to continue in the service, as afore-
said, as in the hope that there would result
from the filing Of the petition. The situation
affairs in which the respondent might be
rendered practically incapable Of transacting
any Of the business Of the Wabash whatever,
SO that, temporarihlly Mt least, a large amount
of such business now done by the respondent
would be carried by the petitioner, and 1t re-
ceiYed the profits thereof In part compensation
for the losses sustained by 1t during
the time in which it was not able TO transact
its own business, and now having fully an
swered said petition, the respondents pray that
the same may be dismissed at petitioners cost.
After the Wabash answer had been Nread,
showing that Receiver McNulta had on Satur-
day, the 10th, revoked all previous instruc-
tons and ordered former business relations
with tho 90" road resumed, Judge Gresham
asked the representatives Of the "Q'' what
position that left them in tho suit and Mr.
Dexter replied that the 20" still desired the
order from the court which was originally
asked for. They desired this, that they might
feel assured the Wabash would not again re-
fuse to accept the freight, as they bad already
done. They still asked further that the court
issue direct order restraining Chief Arthur
and the brotherhood from ordering or causing
a strike on the Wabash or any other road in
consequence Of the action Of these roads in
hauling 90" freight.
Arguments were made nj length in support
Of the 20. W position, and were answered at
equal length by the attorneys for the Wabash
At tho close Ofthe arguments Judge Gresham
practically gave his decision when he said lie
did not think the 90" had any case in court
1.-THE Wabash has granted you all you ask, /"
said Judge Gresham. at has promised 70 re-
ceiye your freight, and now you ask the court
10 issue an order punishing the Btfbefhood Of
Loco1iotive Engineers for an alleged crime
which they deny, and against the Wishes Of the
general manager Of the road, who IS an officer
Of this court,"
The prevailing opinion in the courtroom OF
the decision was that the Judge would refuse
TO Issue sny order touching the action Of Chief
Arthur or the brotherhood % the gfound that
it u beyond bis Jurisdiction Rhd properly regu-
atcd By stkte laRB