The herald., 1894-11-09
BROTHERHOOD TRA|NMEN
Their Controversy With the
Reading Road.
The Receivers Attempt to Gust
AAANANe
~-7--r
Attorney General Olney Takes Up
the Cudgel.
An Elaborate Opinion on the Rights OF
Organized Labor-Ths Reading s.-
Recsivsrs' Action Il ,,.>~-r&s
Criticised. :
By the Associated Press.


versy between the receivers of the Read.
ing Railroad company and such en-.
ployees as are members of the Brother
hood of Railway Trainmen, has
prompted an expression of opinion from
Attorney. General Olney. in the form OF
letter to Judge Dallas. of the United
States circuit court. before whom the
case is pending. The difficulty between
the two organizations reached crisis
on August 18th, last, when General
Superintendent Swigard summoned be-
fore him II employees and notified
them they should abandon the brother
hood as condition of retaining theiI
places with the company. Vigorous
protests were made against this alter
native, and the brotherhood urged the
receivers to withdraw it, but in answer,
the receivers ON September 18th wrote:
Tine policy of the company is we'll
known to be that it will not consent
that persons in its service shall owe
allegiance to other organizations which
may make claims upon them which are
incompatible with their duties to their
employers. This position was taken
advisedly, and we have no intention of
departing from it,"
Attorney. General Olney's letter is an
exhaustive discussion OF the question
presented, and he reviews the various
problems and the consistent solutions to
be applied in every aspect. In sub
stance he holds that labor unorganized
is practically powerless; that in COM
bination, such as this, lies the only
safeguard of the workingmen in his
dealings with organized capital, and
/ that his right to belong to euch !. union
beneficial in intent and purps els
legal right which he cannot be deprived
of. The letter is as follows:
Suggestions respecting the questions
raised by the petition of Hymas,
| Ryley and other members of the
Brotherhood of Railway Trainmen.
The tendency of this petition having
been incidentally brought to my atten-
ton, the issues involved impressed me
as of great gravity and Importance, not
only as between the parties Immediately
! concerned, but as regards the country
at large. In that view-in which [
could not doubt the court would share
it seemed to me that the court would
not object to brief discussion OF the
case from public point of view merely.
and uninfuenced by the wishes and in
terests OF the particular litigsnts before
it. Upon this suggestion being made to
the court, it was at once cordially as
sented to. The considerations follow
ing. therefore. are submitted by me as
amioua curia merely, and by express
leave of the court.
First-The material facts may be
briefly stated: The petitioners are
mem bers of the Brotherhood of Rrail-
Of hrx
been members for seven or eight years;
assessments, which now amount to con-
siderable sums of money. and by con-
tinuing their membership, will in case
| of death or permanent disability,
become entitled, by themselves or rep
resentatives, to large pecuniary pay
ments from the funds of the brother.
hood. On the other hand, by ceasing to
be memb bers, they lose all benefit from
the assessments and dues already paid
and forfeit all claims upon the brother
hood treasury. The constitution and
rules of the brotherhood aud of the sub.
ordinate lodges are before the court az
part OF the petition. No controversy OF
antagonism has ever arisen or existed
between the Reading railroad and any
members as such members.
AS it is claimed the Reading railroad
has for some years adopted the rule that
it would not have in its service any
member OF a labor organization. it Is o
rule which has not been uniformly or
invariably acted upon, since there has
been Philadelphia lodge OF the brother.
hood on the Reading line for nearly
eight years, and its existence cannot
have been unknown to the Reading
| oHs hat hos ban
what has led to the present petition is
this: The Reading officials have noti-
fed the members of the brotherhood on
it's line that unless they cease to be such
mem bers they will be discharged from
their present employment on or before
October 9th. The receivers make no
complaint OF the manner in which tho
broth er hood employees discharge their
respective duties. The notice has been
given simply because of such employees
membership of the brotherhood. as is
conclusively shown by the following
telegram received by Grand Mastar
Wilkinson in reply to his remonstrancs
against the course proposed to bs taken
The policy of this company is well
known to be that it will not consent
that persons in it's service shall own
allegiance to other organizations which
| may make claims upon them which are
incompatible with their duties to their
employers. This position was taken
advisedly, and we have no intention Of
departing from it,
[Signedi JOSEPH H. HARRIS,
President and Receiver.
Thus if the receivers are right and
their rule is to prevail, membership OF
the Brotherhood by and OF itself inca
paci:ates for service on the road. it ID
respectfully submitted that the receiv-
ers are wrong and that the action pro-
posed by them ought not to be sanc.
toned by the court.
Seconds will make plain the prs.
else question before the court, to note
the opening words OF the telegram lusk
CONTINUED on Third page.l