The morning call., 1894-11-09
jects of the brotherhood are stated in the

ests socially ana intellectually, TO protect their
| families by the exercise OF systematic benev-
| oence. needful in calling so hazardous
| as ours. this fraternity has been organized.
| Persuaded that il is for the interests both of
| cur members and their employers that good
understanding should at all times exist be-
tween the two, IL Will be the constant endeavor
of this order TO establish mutual confidence and
maintain harmonious relations.
Such are the aims and purposes Of the Broth
erhood OF Railway Trainmen.
Certainly these objects must be regarded as
laudabe in the highest degree and as deserving
the appreciation and support OF every good
citizen. These are indeed practically the same
as those for which the working people are eX-
pressly authorZ d 10 incorporate themselves
by act of COngress-ihe statutory description Of
such objects being for the purpose of aiding
its members 10 become more Skllful and eff.
fcient workers, the promotion of their general
intelligence, the elevation OF their character.
the regulation Of their wages and their hours
ana condition OF labor. the protection OF their
individual rights in the prosecution OF their
trade or trades, the raising of FUNDS for the
benefit of death. disabled or unemployed MEM
oers. or the families Of deceased members, or
for such other object or objects for which work.
ing people may lawfully combine. having In
view their mutual protection or benefit.
Second-If the means to these pTaisewOrthy
ends be now examined there is nothing in
them 10 which the most captOus critic can
object except the provisions made for strikes.
Ii Is well 10 note that even these provisions are
Of an emInently conservative chaTacter-that
great care Is taken 10 guard against the abuse
OF weapon which is twoedged sword and
generally proves as damaging TO those who use
it as 10 those against whom II is used. Thus
by the brotherhood constitution and rules a
strike does not take effect until approved, first
by local grievance committee. second by the
general grievance committee, third by a
board OF adjustment, and fourth by the grand
master with the consent OF two-thIrds OF the
members involved, while striking or melting TO
strike, except in accordance with The above
rules. is punished by expulsion from the
brotherhood.
Third-Nevertheles among the means OF ac-
complshing The ends OF the brol herhood is the
bringing about OF a strike. AS what strike"
Is, is not defined by the brotherhood constitu-
ton ana rules, its precise nature must be de-
termned by the court. And as the brotherhood
is entitled 10 the ordinary presumption Of law
fuiness for its methods as well as its objects
until the contrary is shown, the court will hold
the thing termed strike" in the bro herhood
constitution and rules to be something lawful.
unless there cannot be such thing as lawful
"strike"
Four ih-But whatever may the customary or
probable incidents Of accomplishments of a
strike, II cannot be ruled that there is no such
thing as legal strike, that every strike must
be unlawful.
The necessary elements of a strike are only
three: o., the quitting OF work; (2), by con-
cert between two or more; ~, simultaneously,
and of themselves involve no faint of Illegal
lily.
A strike becomes Illegal when TO these neces
sary features are added others, such as ma
lcious intent followed by a cruel injury in
timida ing violence the creation Of public
nuisance, or a breach of the peace of any sort.
Fifth-But 1t is unnecessary To elaborate the
proposition that strike is not necessarily un-
lawful, since it is emphatically sustained by
the recent decision of the Circuit Court of 4 D.
peals in the Farmers Loan and Trust Com
pany VS.. the Northern Pacific Railway Com
pany, just decided in Chicago, and 1t is hardly
necessary 10 point out that the attending cir
cumstances which often make strikes unlawful
are none OF them provided for by the brother
hood constitution and rules, aud cannot, there
fore, be assumed to be necessary incidents OF
any strike occurring pursuant TO them.
FOurtn-If the rule that a member OF the
Brotherhood of Railway Trainmen shall not
Work on The Reading Railroad cannot be justi-
fed because of anything inherently unlawful in
the constitution and rules of the brotherhood,
the only remaining ground on which IL can be
defended is that of business expediency. 1t is
conceivable, though the spectacle would be a
curious one, that court of the United States
may, on business grounds, refuse employment
to persons for no other reason than their mem.
bership OF an association whose purposes the
laws OF The United STATES expressly sanction
But il is safe to say the consideration OF bust.
ness policy impelllng the court 10 the course
suggested should be OF the clearest and most
cogent character and that The question pre-
sented IS one which the court will recognize as
of the greatest interest and importance.
In considering the question OF the business
expedlency of the employment of brotherhood
men such objection as there is TO It must arise
from the fact that under its constitution ana
rules the employees may engage in a strike with
all he natural and possible incidents and con-
sequences. Ii can hardly be denied that other
wise the brotherhood organization is not only
unobiectionable but is salutary in its operation,
both as regards the employees and employers.
1t should be remembered, in the first place.
the risks of a strike are not obvlated by excud-
ing The members Of the brotherhood from the
receivers service. Men, deeming themselves
aggrieved and seeking relief or redress, though
not associated In any formal way or for any
general purposes, may easily unite for the sin
gle purpose OF strike. In that view the
brotherhood constitu ION and rules may well be
regarded as operating in restraint of strikes.
By compelling the question of strike or no
strike to be acted upon affirmatively by four or
five different and independent tribunals they
certainly tend 10 prohibit strike that is rash
or reckless or for other than weighty causes
While. therefore, under the circumstances OF
the present case. the possible evidence of a
strike would seem to be mnimiZed, 1t should
not be forgotten IN the second place that the
receivers proposed remedy, TO wit: a rule ex-
Guiding or discharging from service any and all
members of the brotherhood, Itself open 10
serious objections and disadvantages.
When treatment so apparently unfair and
discriminating iss administered through the
fundamentally OF a court the resulting discon-
! tent and resentment Of employees are inevitably
intensified, because the law itself seems to
! have got wrong aud in some manner 10 have
| taken sides against them.
Thus the mischiefs apprehended from me en-
bership of the brotherhood by the receivers
employees lie wholly IN the future and are as
/ small as Is possible in the nature OF things.
! while the mischefs 20 rise from enforcing the
receivers proposed rule are real and imme-
diate. Whether and how far this may be re-
! garded as offsettng one another need not be
discussed. Tie rejection OF the proposed rule
with suck substantial advantages that the
/ court can hardly hesitate as 10 the course
| which sound business policy dictates.
! Not the least of such advantages Is the avoid
ance OF the necessary righteousness OF the ille-
! gal position that man shall go without work
| unless he will give up legal rgbt-a right he
may properly deem essential TO his safety and
welfare.