The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-04-10
portation of the country, in whIoh the pub
lie In so vitality concerned. it 10

the experimenting power OF court OF
equity, il is competent for the court 10 al.
just difficulties between the receiver ana
his employees which. in the absence OF such
adjustment would tend to injure the prop
erty and to defeat the purpose OF the re-
ceivership. Indeed the power OF the court
to direct contract between It's onSers
does not appear to be questioned. 1he
most important difference between the
parties is as to the effect uDon the duty TO
the court and prOpriety of the rule OF the
brotherhood. which 10 understood by the
court to be as follows:
THAT hereafter when issue has been sus-
tanned by the grand chief and carried into enect
by the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers IL
shall be recognized as a violation or the opHSa-
tion II a member OF the brotherhood OF LOCO
motive Engiueers, who may be employed on
railroad run in connection with or adjacent 10
said road. continue TO handle the property be-
longing to said railroad or system in any way
that may benefit said company with whicn the
Brotherhood OF Locomotive Engineers are at Is.
sue until the grievance or issues OF dnerence OF
any nature or kind have been amicably settled
This rule Is understood to have been
adopted by the brotherhood In Denver
three years ago. In his testimony, Mr. A.
Il. Youngson, the assistant engineer,
frankly admitted that the effect OF this
rule. AS applied to the properties IN the
hands of the receiver and the engineers in
has employ would be as follows:
THE BOYCOTT DEFINED.
IF, in the pursuance of the business Of o
common carrier with which the receiver is
charged 1t should become necessary to
convey over the lines of the Central rail-
road q car belonging to q railroad company
on which there was O strike of the en-
gineers. 1t would be the duty of the bother
hood men in the employ of the receiver TO
refuse to haul the train containing such
car; and. if tho officers of the road In
sisted that the cars should pro.
ceed loyalty to the brotherhood
required that the engineer shoud
at once resign his station and abandon ms
duty. He might, he stated, II he thought
proper, carry the train TO the terminal
point. Now. there cannot be doubt. that
the rule of the brotherhood is IN direct and
positive violation Of the laws of the land
and no court, State OF federal. COULD hesi-
tate for moment 80 TO declare. Its plain
ly q rule or an agreement in restraint of
trade or commerce. as described In Section
Of the act of July 2. 1850. known as the
Sherm an ANTITRUST law. A com biuation of
persons, without regard to their Occupa-
tIon. which would have the effect to defeat
the provisions of the interstate commerce
law. lnhibiting Determinations In the
transportation of freight and passengers
would be liable to the severe penalties OF
the statutes.
''Now. it is true that in any conceivable
strike on the transportation lines of this
country, whether main lines or branch
interstate or foreign commerce. 1t will be
practically impossible hereafter for body
of men to com bine to hinder end delay the
work Of the transportation company with
out becoming obnoxious ito the provisions
of these laws; and . combination OF agree-
ment OF railroad officials or other repre-.
sentativeS of capital. with the same effect.
will be equally under tho ban OF these
injustice has been done or threat
ened to It's membership. will find its
useful and valuable mission In presen ting
to the court of the country strong and
resolute protest, and q petition for redress
against unlawful trusts and other combi-
nations which would do unlawful wrong
to it. Its membership need not doubt that
their counsel will be heard, nor that speedy
or exact justice will be administered
wherever the courts have Jurisdiction. 1t
will follow, therefore. that in oil such con-
trOversies 1t will be competent as we have
done in this case. for the courts TO reserve
the present rights OF theOperative to spare
them hardship and at the same time to
spare tho public the unmerited hardskips
which 1t has suffered from such conflicts
in the past"
BOTH SIDES MUST GIVE IN.
1T is In evidence and is generally
known, that almost the entire business of
transportation of freight Is carried in cars
which. without breaking the bulk of their
freight, are forwarded from one railroad to
another. This Is an absolute necessity.
The interests of the public and the
economies of cheap and rapid transit de.
mand it. There are between one and two
hundred thousand cars u pom the railroads of
the United states. There are los 402 miles of
railroad or more than seven cars per mile.
The Central railroad. according to the re-
cent report of the superintendent. has less
than two cars per mile. 1t therefore. In
n t.I Ia <h.& he, "a
other lines, but If 1t were otherwise. it
would be impossible, under the present
system, to deny the cars and freight of
other lines transit over the lines of
the Central without violation of the
law. The receiver cannot violate the
law, and the engineers cannot compel him
to do so without themselves becoming OBJ
nOxious to the criminal statutes. and the
court does not doubt from their bearing
and testimony in this case that they only
need To be advised of these facts, when
they will Immediately recede from the un-
lawful and most dangerous attitude in
which this rule has placed them IL is in.
deed q rule which, more than all others.
has gwen strength and comfort to tho
enemies of organized labor. 1t is true,
however. that the learned counsel for the
petitioners when his attention had been
called by the court TO the lnsuperable diff
ticulty in the way of q mutually beneficial
contract presented by this rule. while In
sistlng that 1t ought not to stand in the
way of q contract hastened to afford ad
ditional evidence of the good faith of his
client by stating. reservedly. on this as Oh
all subjects, that they were willing and
anxious to take the direction of the court.
This declaration is authoritative and
the court will act upon it. 1t Is binding
upon the engineers of the brotherhood who
are officers of the receiver. and who were
represented by the committee and their as
sistant chief engineer, Mr.. Y0ungson both
of whom were in the presence of the court
when 1t was made. 1t Is accepted as made
in good faith and condition OF the con.
tract which the court will direct the re-
ceiver to make. While, therefore. any
engineer may at any time exercise
his right as an individual to leave the serv-
Ice of the receiver. he may not do SO In
such manner as to iDjure the property or
impede It's proper management by the re-
ceiver. In case of any Issue with the man.
agement in which the brotherhood or its
members are concerned, and the members
in the employ OF the receiver shall desire
to leave his service in q body or other wise,
In such manner as may In any way impede
the operations OF the road, they will be re-
quired to DO so on such terms and conditions
as the court may think proper for the pro-
lection of the property and the nlslntenance
of justice and fair play To all concerned.
In the meantime. the old contract Will re-
main in force, always under the general
operation of this decision. With reference
to Rule II. of the brotherhood. until the
terms of the new contract are definitely
settled by the court. il will be specially
directed that no engineer or other person
be discharged. or in any way injured on
account of this proceeding. or OF any step
taken in its inception or advocacy"