The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1894-11-09
oLNEY ON oRIANIzED LABOR.
Employees Mar JoIa unIons and not JsOp.
aFdiEs 1hslr Positions

HNf"" @'"f' ~@fhsF'~s
Philadelphia. Nov. S.-Tho contro-
versy between the receivers OF tho
Reading Railroad company and such
employees aB are members Of the Broth
erhood OF Railroad Trainmen, has
prompted an expression OF opinion from
Attorney General Olney In the form OF
a letter 10 Judge Dallas, OF the United
states circuit court, before whom the
case Ii pending. The dlfiiculty between
the two organizations reached a crisis
ON Aug II last. when General Superin-
tendent Sweigard summoned before
him all employees, and notified them
they should abandon the brotherhood
as a condition OF retaining their places
with the railroad company Vigorous
protests were made against this nj
Tentative. and the brotherhood urged
the receivers 10 withdraw II, but IN an-
swer, the receivers, on Sept. H. wrote;
''The policy OF this company In we'll
known TO be that IL will not consent
that persons In its service shall owe
allegiance 10 other organizations which
may make claims upon them which are
Incompatible with their duties 10 their
employers. This position WAS taken
adVisedly and we have no Intention of
departing from It,"
Attorney General Olneys letter is an
exhaustive discussion OF the questions
presented, and he reviews the various
problems and the consistent solutions
to be applied, In every respect. In sub
stance he holds that labor unorgnnlzed
is practically powerless. that In com
bination. such as this. lies the only safe
guard of the worklngmen In their deal
ings with organized capital. and that
his right 10 belong To such union
beneficial In intent and purpose-is n
legal right which he cannot be deprived
Of The receivers make no complaint
OF the manner In which brotherhood
employees discharge their respective
duties. III the receivers are right, and
their rule is to prevail, membership In
the brotherhood by and OF itself inca
pacitates for services on the road. IL
is respectfully submitted that the re-
ceivers are wrong. and the action pro-
poaed by them ought not TO be sane
toned by the courts. The Reading rail-
road now being In the hands of the re-
lceivers, the receivers and the employees
OF the company are officers OF the court.
The court, therefore, and not the COM
pany, is now the employer OF all per-
sons engaged in the operation OF the
road. The present policy OF the court,
and not the past policy of the company
is the material thing to be considered,
and hence, the precise question Is, viii
the court now lay down a rule that
members OF the Brotherhood OF Train
men shall, because they are such MEM
bers, be discharged from service OF the
road? The court, IL is admitted, ought
not and cannot lay down any such rule
to that ground. until either the pur-
poses and objects OF the brotherhood,
or the means by which they are to be
attained, are shown TO be illegal.
Certainly" continues the decision,
"the objects of the brotherhood must
be regarded as laudable in the highest
degree. and as deserving the approba-
tion and support Of every good citizen.
These are, indeed. practically the same
as those for which working people are
expressly authorized 10 incorporate
themselves by act of congress, the
statutory description of such 9bject Is
being. For the purpose of aiding its
members to become more sklllful and
efficient workers; for the promotion of
their general intelligence: the elevation
of their character; the regulation OF
their wages and their hours and con-
,Aiitions of gabor; for the protection
of their individual rights in the prose-
cution of their trade or trades; the
raising of funds for the benefit OF dis
abled or unemployed members or fam
lilies OF deceased members, or for such
other object or objects for which work
ing people may lawfully combine, hav-
ing I'm view their mutual protection or
benefit