The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-03-15
And that the Employees of the Receiver Can
not Be Compelled to Remain in His Sery-
ice If They Wish to Leave Their Posts.
Another Petition of Wider Scope Pre-
sented for the Courts Consideration.
Brotherhood Men on the Western, Northwest.
ern and Southwestern Lines Decide to
Stand By Their Burlington Brethren.
a Practical Defeat for the Burlin gt0n-A Ca
of Wider Scope to- Re Prasanfnn

of Wider Scope to BE Presented
CHICAGO March 14.-After a formal state.
n1ent or the case. judge Gresham delivered the
following opinion in the Wabash case this morn.
ing:
although the property of the Wabash COM
pany is in the Gust ody of the court, 1t is oper-
ated by the receiver as common carrier. His
rights and duties are those OF He is
bound to afford TO all railway companies whose
hines connect with his, equal facilities for the
exchange of traffic. 1t is his duty to receive
and deliver to other connecting roads both
loaded and empty cars. lie cannot discriminate
against one road by maintaining a policy of nom
intercourse. More need not be said on this ques-
tion, as the receiver has ~isely rescinded his
instructions, which Disseminated against the
petitioner, and he has no purpose desire to
deny the petitioner any of its legal rights. Al
though the petitioner has accomplished its chief
purpose in invoking the aid of the
court. IL is urged by Its counsel
that persons belonging TO the Brotherhood or
Locomotive Engineers. and especially r. NJ. Ar
thur who 10 the chief officer OF tnat organiza-
tion, has interfered with the receiver and hia
subordinates in the management of the Wabash
property, and that they should be punished for
their illegal and contumacious conduct The
receiver and his counsel make such COM
plant. On the contrary, the receiver declares
that there has been interference with him.
While afidavts submitted in support of the DO
sltion show that Mr.. Arthur sent teegraphc
message TO the engineers of she Union Pacific
Railway Company, at Omaha, directing them TO
haul 10 cars Of the petitioner, it does not fairly
appear from the evidence that the engineers in
the service of the receiver received such
orders by telegraph or otherwise. For
the present it is sufficient to say that the court
will protect the property of the Wabash in its
custody. The employees of the receiver cannot
be obliged to remain in his service against their
wish. but neither they nor others will be permit
ted to interfere with or disturb the receiver
his subOrdinates in the possession and opera
ton of the property in his custody. Lawless
interference with the receiver and his employees
in the discharge of their duties will not be toler
ated. 1t Is proper to state, however, in Justice
TO the Wabash engineers, that they do not dc
sire TO maintain an attitude of defiance to the
law. and that they are now willing to aid the re-
ceiver in the lawful and successful admins
tration of his trust. The receivers answer
than direct that the petition remain on file for
future action should there be occasion for it."
That the Burlington company is not fully sat
is6ed with the decision made by Judge Gresham
was evidenced this evening by the filing of an-
other bill before him that will apparently in-
volve ruling of much wider scope. According
to the bill, Affirmative Injunction liz sought BY
the Burlington to compel the Belt Line Rail-
way Company, of Chicago TO handle the freight
OF the Burlington, and the Judge is also asked
to make order that will prevent the Belt
Line and its officers from refusing to handle
20" freight and especially to restrain it's en-
ployes from declining to do No action was
taken on the bill by Judge Gresham. 1t is to be
called up at P. NJ tomorrow, a motion for
the injunction prayed, but it is thought prob
able the Belt Line will then secure a contnu-
ance was done in the Wabash case. The
employees of the Belt Line are not mentioned by
name. but leave is prayed to make them defend
ants when their names shall be discovered. The
Belt Line is described in the bill a branch OF
the Chicago & Western Indiana, engaged in
transferring freight from lines coming
into Chicago from the East TO 1nez
leaving Chicago for the West The Belt
line carried the Burlington freight until Marcn
g. when its officers notified the 20" road that il
could not do SO any longer, because the engin.
eers refused to handle 1t. The engineers ara
brotherhood men, and they had notified the
Belt line of their intention Such reason ia
regarded to be no legal and valid excuse for the
refusal The engineers charged with hav-
ing usurped the practical management of the
Belt line. and. notwithstanding this the officials
of the latter continue to employ them. The
persons responsible for the delay TO Burlington
freight are claimed to be guilty of criminal
offense The bill states that it is filed under
the interstate commerce law, and to pre-
vent multiplicity of suits by consignees aud
of freight account of non delivery.
Loaded freight-cars to the number of $3.50, it is
stated in the bill, have been waiting in the Bur
liugton yards to be transferred to the Belt line,
and 200 are in possession of the Belt line await
ing transfer to the Burlington.