The weekly intelligencer. [volume] (Lexington, Mo.) 1891-1901, 1893-04-15
. SWEEPING DECISION.
Judge speers' Interpretation of the Law
Concerning Labor and capital.

'uuRe speors' interpretation OF the Law
Concerning Labor and Capital.
MACON, Ga, April 11.-Judge Speers
Of the United States district court an
nounGed Saturday that the receiver of
the Georgia Central railroad would be
instructed 20 enter into a new contract
with the Brotherhood of Locomotive
Engineers as was recently petitio ned
for.
In making this nnouncement the
Judge, after paying high tribute to
tho falthfulncSs to duty of engineers,
and declaring that the brotherhood
ordinarily Is undoubtedly a benefit to
the men and the public, declares that
The law makes it perfectly competent
for n court, where il railroad is in the
hands of a receiver, to adjust differ
enceS between the receiver and his
employees. He then continues:
The most important difference bet ween the
parties Is as to the effect upon the duty OF the
court and property of the rule of the brother
as follows: "TwelfthlTEai hereafter when
an issue has been sustained by the grand chief
ana carried into effect by the brotherhood OF
niZed as "a violation of the obligation if a
member of the Brotherhood of L~ocOmotiye
Eisineers, who may be employed on Il railroad
run IN connection with or adjacent to, said
road, to continue 10 handle the property be.
longing TO said railroad, or system. in any wuy
mat may benefit said company with which the
brotherhood OF Locomotive Engineers are Mt
Issue until the grievances or issues or differ
ehce OF any nature or kind may have been
amicably settled
This rule is understood to have been adopted
by the brotherhood In Denver three wears
ago. In his testimony, Mr.. A.. Is Younsson,
re asslstagt ehier engineer, frankly, admitted
that the e1ect of this rule, as applied to the
properties in the hands of the receiver and
the engineers in his employ, would be as fol-
common carrier, with which the receiver IL
charged, 1t should become necessary
TO- convey over the lines of the
O railroad company on which there was u strike
of the ensineers, IL would be the duty Of the
brotherhood men In the employ of the re-
ce1ver TO refuse to handle the train containing
such car, and If the officers Of the road insisted
That the car should proceed, loyalty 10
should at once resign his station and abandon
his duty. He might, he stated, If he thought
proper, carry the train to the terminal point.
Now, there cannot be a doubt thai this rule
of the brotherhood is In direct and positive
violation of the laws of the land and no court,
state or federal, could hesitate for a moment
80 to declare. II is plainly u rule, or an agree
fnent in restraint of trade of commerce., as de
Scrfbed In section | OF the act of July =, 1850,
known as the Sherman antitrust law. A com
olnatlon or persons, without regard TO their
occupation, which would have the effect to de-
feat the provisions of the interstate COM
merce law. inhibiting discrimination in
hlN
passengers, would he liable TO the severe
penalties Of the statutes. Now il is true that
In any conceivable strike upon the transporta-
ton lines OF this country, whether main line
or branch roads. there would be interference
with interstate or foreign m 1t will
be practically impossible hereafter for q body
OF men to combine to hinder and delay the
work OF the transportation company without
becoming obnoxious TO the provisions of these
laws, and a combination, or agreement of rail
road officials or representatives OF capital.
with the same effect, will be equally under the
ban Of the penal statutes.
Organized labor, when injustice has been
done, or Threatened to its membership, Will
find its useful and valuable mission in present
ing to the courts OF the country a strong and
~resolute protest, and a petition for redress
against unlawful trusts and other combinations
which would do unlawful wrong to 1t. It's mem
bership need not doubt that It's counsel will
DO heard, nor that speedy or exact justice will
be administered whenever the courts have
jurisdiction. 1t will follow, therefore. that In
all such controversies 1t will be competent, as
we have done in this case for the courts TO re-
verse the present rights of the operatives to
spare them hardships, and ut the same time to
spare the public the unmerited hardship
which 1t has suffered from such conflicts in the
past.