The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1893-04-04
CASE OF THE ENGINEERS.
THE HEARING BEFORE JUDGE
SPEER UNDER WAY.

Court-The Organization of the Er-
E.neers Defended on the Ground of
Necessity for Selfprotection.
MACON, ,.GA., April 3.-The case Of the
brotherhood of engineers against Receiver
Conner Of the Central railroad. in which,
for the first time In the history of that
organization, the brotherhood has appealed
20 the courts for relief, was called before
Judge Speer in the United States court this
morning.
a. B. Youngson, assistant chief of the
brotherhood, and many Central engineers
were present. r. W. Patterson appeared
for the engineers, and Mr., Cunningham of
Savannah for the road.
When the case was called both sides an
nounced ready. Nr. Cunningham was pre-
pared to file his answer when Mr.. Patterson
stated that he had matter which no thought
proper the court should pass upon at the
threshold Of the case. Mr. Conner, as
receiver he said, had acted in direct viola
tion of the order OF the court directing him
to enforce the old contract until the case
could be adjudicated in the courts. One
thing to which he wished to call attention
J
engineer on the Nancy Hanks when under
the contract the place should have been
filled by some agent Of tho company,
whereas a Mr.. Parks was substituted.
Then again the engineers were TO hevo
changed forces at Wadley, instead OF which
orders were issued compelling them TO run
| a through train, entailing five or seven
hours additional labor upon the men each
day. bAaa
sPEER CONFIRMS IT.
"It is unuuestionably true.' said Judge
Speer, "thpt it was the understanding that
the contract IN effect previous 10 March
was still in force and governed the rotations
of the engineers and the receiver. l met
MIR. Conner on tho way 60 Washington after
having seen a committee OF engineers and
had a conference with him in which stated
this. However, we are here to consider the
proprety Of forming new contract. The
two do not intermjugie. This case should
proceed independent. 1t 10 utterly illegal 90
continue with both together. One Is
criminal and the other a civil proceeding"
Mr. Comer's ans er was then filed. IL IS
| not very lengthy making about column.
| ID asserts that many rules governing the
| brotherhood are secret aud that such secret
regulations have n direct besriug upon any
contract signed by members OF the order.
| Such conditions put party entering into u
| contract with the brotherhood ht a dised-
| vantage and renders uncertain the position
| the members of the order may take under
| certain circumstances that might arise.
| z. That number OF engineers are en~
| ployed on the Central who are not members
| of the brotherhood, and consequently it is
| not proper to single out one class with which
| to make q contract.
5. Catering into such contract would
| prevent officers from exercising the freedom
necessary for the best management OF the
! property.
/. That the receiver under the law is
| bound as "a common carrier, and that by
| making contract with engineers bound by
! secret laws to withdraw from the service at
certain tunes It might become impossible at
auy time for him to obey tho law regard
! ing common carriers.
| s. That the officers Of the company should
be left free to use their discretion in select
ing the best men for managing the roads
! business without being subjected to the dis
cretion OF the brotherhood.
! g. Should the contract sought be ordered
| by the court it would be holding out premi-
um for non-brotherhood men Ia the employ
! Of the company TO become members OF the
! brotherhood. Making such contracts has u
! tendency to force men into labor orggniza-
tions. which often provo burden 10 thom
| and detrimental 90 corporations.
T. The question OF contract has arisen be-
! tween the company and Order Of Railway
| Conductors and the brotherhood OF Loco
| motive Eiremeu, but none were made, yet
| the service has beoa Of such a character as
| to show that this course il bost for the em-
| ploYes and the company.
! 6. That entering into such contract has
| a tendency to take the responsibility from
| of the officers OF the company fer efficient
and proper management and running Of
trains.
| 10. The respondent denies that 1t is usuEl
| and Customary for the railway companies
of the United States to make such contracts
with the Brotherhood Of Locomotive En-
| gineers.
| Assistant Chief YounRson was placed on
| the stand in behalf OF the engineers. He
! testified as to the means OF testing the abil-
| ity of engineers under the seniority clause,
! which makes it obligatory on roads to pro-
mote engineers according to length OF
service. ability being equal. committee
| Of engineers and master mechanics passed
upon these qualifications.
There are certain secret rules OF your
| order" said Mr.. Cunningham, (Which gov
ern the making Of contracts. l suppose
you are bound not to tell Of these"
There Is not q single rule" retorted the
witness, ''in our organization, secret or
otherwise chat | would not be willing for
! every man, woman GDd child In this
| country 20 know except our secret signs and
! pass words. Under our secret rules" con-
| tinued tho witness In reply to further ques-
| lions, "our committee are not allowed to
| make any contracts not containing tho
! seniority clause, rs we understand that on
| that point rests tho welfare Of our orgGniza-
| ton"
lis there not a secret rule Of the brother
| hood prohibiting members Of the brother
| hood from hauling cara Of a road on which
! there is strike, disregardiug the fact
whether they have auy grievance with the
com pany with which they are employedG'
| asked Nc. Cunningham.
"Yes; there is"
''Under this rule what would be the re-
suit OF an order made upon an engineer to
| haul cars for u road on which strike was
in progressl"
THE engineer il loyal to the brother
| hood, would resign chen and there u
Tho court asked: "Suppose tho engineers
were working under a contract silent on
this subject, what would the brotherhood
engineers do under such cLrcumstaDcesP
They would resign"
Would they do that II they had no
grievance against the road for which they
were workingF
"Our laws 30 require. You soc your
honor, - continued the witness. "we think
we have been compelled to combine for
mutual protection tecause the railways
have combined against us. This VAS
demons.rated in the . strike when other