The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-02-16
And Tells Mr.. Thurston TO Give the Mel
Sixty Days Notice Before Reduc-
ing Their Salaries.
JUDGE DUNDY SURPRISED
He Says His Order Holds Good
Until Reversed i'm Court.
Caldwelrs Alleged Instructions of No
Legal Effect-Appeal of Employees
of the Northern Pacific.

ST. LOUIS, Feb. 15.-Attorneys ThursteS
and Corwin, who came here to endsAses 49,
secure an order harmonzing the contradIc-
tory opinions Of Judge Bundy, of Omaha,
and Judge Hallett, of Denver, have met
with a surprise at the hands OF Circuit
Judge Caldwell. In an informal talk with
Judge Caldwell to secure date for hear
ing Mr.. Thurston gave a resume of the
existing state of affairs reciting what the
courts, as well as the receivers, had done,
devoting himself more especially TO the an
nulling by the receivers of the wage sched-
ule and their order placing a new and re-
duced one in effect in March, together with
the order of Judge Dundy recognizing the
propriety of such action and the action by
Judge Hallett, in effect, contrary TO that
order. Mr.. Thurston said that the failure
of Judge Hallet to make any order on the
subject was held as a refusal TO indorse
the idea that the receivers have the power
to adopt new schedules. and it this APP
parent clash of judicial opinion that was
creating discomfort along the line and max
ing the situation almost threatening.
After some desultory talk Judge Caldwell
said to Mr.. Thurston that the receivers had
taken advantage of the men behind their
backs. go back to Omaha and revoke that
order" the Judge said. Then / will take
your case Prepare and advertise your
schedule and give the men notice, and
think that sixty days might not be unrea-
sonable / Will come to Omaha and hold a
conference with your receivers and the rep
resentatives OF the labor societies. and we
will see If we cannot agree on schedule
that will be just to the employees and will
be such as the receivers can afford TO pay"
Mr.. Thurston called the attention OF
Judge Caldwell to the contradictory orders
issued by Judges Dundy and Hallet as to
the traffic contract between the Union Pa
cific and the Gulf branch of that system.
Judge Dundy had directed the receivers 10
disregard that contract and Judge Hallet
said that II must be respected: This con-
tract obligated the Union Pacific TO put
up for the bonded Indebtedness of the
Gulf branch nearly a million a year, and
the receivers thought prudent business man
agement required that they be relieved Of
that drain. AS matters now were the re-
ceivers stood a certainty of being in con-
tempt In one jurisdiction or the other.
Judge Caldwell said that he would consult 1!
with Judge Sanborn as TO whether they
had jurisdiction, and reply later.
A dispatch from Omaha says; The em-
ployes OF the Union Pacific are jubilant over
what they term the victory gained in St
Louis by Judge Caldwell ordering Mr..
Thurston to revoke the new wage schedule
order. They have been confident all along
that Judge Caldwell would not sustain the
order of Judge Dundy. The Caldwell order
is declared to be the greatest victory In re-
cent years for organized labor, and has
demonstrated that a legal department will
be a necessary adjunct TO all labor organi-
cations in the future.
A dispatch from Denver says: J. y. Cor
/ bin secretary of the Union Pacific En-
ployes' Association and editor of the Em-
ployes' Magazine, says the action of Judgs
Caldwell is surprise, as the Judge has
expressed himself in this line before Mr..
Corbin says: 1.-The action of the Union Pa
cific employees relating TO going into court
is the opening for the proper settlement of
difficulties between corporations engaged In
interstate commerce and their employees. II
employees can be brought into court as or
ganiZsd bodies they can come in plaint-
ifs. The corporations, in their efforts TO
crush organizations of employees, have es-
tablished the precedent, and 1t is one that
works both ways"