The herald., 1894-11-28
BROTHERHOOD TRA|NMEN
They Get Knocked outin the
Courts.
Judge Dallas Delivers an
Opinion.
Reading Receivers May Discharge
Union Men.
The Petition of Union Traiumsu Denied.
4 Hard Blow for Organized
Labor Attorney General
Oluey 6nubbsd.
By the Associated Press.

flied an opinion In the United States
circuit court today, diemissing the petit.
tion Of Levi Hicks and other members
Of the Brotherhood of Railway T.ain-
men, who desired to compel the receiv-
ers OF the Philadelphia and Reading
company to retain them in the roads
employ, and at tho same time allow
them to remain members of the organi-
cation. In his opinion, Judge Dallas
makes no reference whatever to Attor-
ney. General Olney's recent letter on the
subject. In which the latter took the
ground that the receivers were mani.
festly wrong in interfering with the en-
of Railway Trainmen, and in which the
attorney general gave his opinion that
the men had . perfect right to organize.
Judge Dallas. in his opinion, which is
quite lengthy. among other things,
says:
The subject matter Of this litigation
was first brought to the attention of the
court by the joint petition filed October
18, 1894, of Stephen E. Wilkinson,
Thomas McDermott and George H.
Ripple, acting for themselves and all
employees of the Philadelphia and
Reading Railroad company, who are
embers of an unincorporated associa.
ton called the Brotherhood of Railway
Trainmen. The object OF the proceed
ing was to obtain an order restraining
the receivers from acting in pursuance
OF a notice. ss follows:
"'On or about the 18th day OF August
last, your petitioners were notified that
all members of the said association
must dissolve their connection with the
same on or before October 18th, or fails
ing to do go, wonld be discharged from
the aervice Of the receivers
Il thought, a. l still think. that
neither the association nor its chief
officer had any legal standing to be
heard in complaint of any aetien taken
or proposed by the receivers, or to In
woke or advise disallowance after any
measure adopted or contemplated by
them. They have made no contract
with or through this association. and
none had been made by the company"
The original petition having been
disposed OF, Judge Dallas next takes up
the petitions OF Levi Hicks and George
S. Riley and disposes OF them as fol-
lows:
both Of these persons are in the
service of the receivers and both are
members Of the unincorporated associ-
alton known 40 the Brotherhood of
Railway Trainmsn. A rule was adopted
by the railway company in the year
1887 and has since been maintained by
it and by the receivers to the effect that
no one would be employed in its service
who was q member Of such an associa-
tion unless be would agree to withdraw
therefrom.
Levi Hicks was employed az brake
man on October Goth, 1898. The estab.
lished form of application, representing
that the applicant was not member of
any labor organization or that il such q
member he would withdraw thereirom,
was presented to him for signature, but
he then declined to state whether or not
he was q member of such organization,
and he was thereupon employed by q
subordinate agent of the receiv-
ers and without their knowledge
or that Of the general superintendent.
On or before August l. 1894, he was no.
titled that unless he gave up his mem.
bership in the brotherhood he would be
discharged. He still retained both his
membership and his employment and
ON October Sth. the day on which its
orisinal petition was filed, and after it
had been preaented, the general super
intendent had an interview with others
OF the employees, at which no threats
were made OF discharge, but reference
was made to the agreements under
which the men had entered the service
OF the company, and to the rules Of the
company, and they did agree to with
ho -g
George E. 8. Riley has no connection
hood of Railway Trainmen, but ia caused
solely ~ his failure to satisfactorily per.
form his duties.
1.-THE circumstances disclosed in the
case OF Levi Hicks do not entitle him to
the Interpolation OF court OF equity on
his behalf. The purpose to discharge
Mr.. Hicks, unless he would resign from
the association, was communicated to
him about two months prior to October
9Th. and his promise of that day was
given simply in the exercise OF his right
of selection between the alternatives
which had been previously presented to
his choice. The fact is that he did agree
to sever his connection with the brother.
hood, but he WAC not subjected to legal
compulsion. 1t is not necessary that l
should, and l do not rest my Judgment
on this empty agreement.
1T is at least certain that by making
it, Mr.. Hicks acquired no better posi-
ton than he obtained before and with.
out 1t. am of the opinion that the
receivers wo1ld have been justified in
diminishing him upon grounds peculiar
to him and wholly irrespective OF the
broad question which he haa attem pied
to obtrude into this case. 1t results
that in the petition Hicks has not made
out a case emitting him to the relief
which he seeks and il il even more
manifest that the,case of George Z. S.
Riley ia entirely devoid OF equity"
Judge Dallas then takes up the
brotherhood of Railway Trainmen and
says:
'"rhe real question, however, is not
- n