The mirror. (Stillwater, Minn.) 1894-1925, 1894-11-15
in answer, the receivers, on Sept. H.

IT,
wrote:
"The policy of this company is vel
known to be that it will not consent tina
persons in its service shall owe allegi
ance to other organizations which ma,
make claims upon them which are in
compatible with their duties to theil
employers. This position was take1
advisedly and we have no intention OF
departing from it."
Attorney General Olney's letter is ar
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 unOrganizeC
is practically powerless; that in comb
nations such as this lies the only safe
guard for the workingmen in his deal
ings with organized capital; and that
his right to belong to such union
beneficial in intent and purpose-is a
legal right which he cannot be deprived
of. The letter is as follows:
OLNEY's LETTER.
Suggestions respecting questions
raised by petition of Hymas, Riley and
other members of the Brotherhood OF
Hallway men, the tendency of this pc
tltlon having been incidentally brought
to my attention, the issues raised I'M
pressed 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 tit seemed to me
that the court would not object to a
brief discussion of the case from a
public point of view merely, and unin-
fluenced by the wishes and interests of
the particular litigants before it. Upon
this suggestion being made to the
court, it was at once cordially assented
to. The considerations following there
fore are submitted to me as Anxious
Curiae merely and by express leave of
the court.
"First-The material facts may be
briefly stated. The petitioners are
members of the Brotherhood of Rail
way Trainmen. Some of them have
been members for seven or eight years
have each year paid annual dues and
assessments which now amount to con-
siderable sums of mOney-and by con-
tlnuing, their membership, will, in case
OF death or permanent disability, be-
come entitled by themselves or their
representatives to large pecuniary pay
ments from the funds of the brother
hood. On the other hand, by ceasing
to be members they lose all benefit
from the assessments and dues already
paid and forfeit all claims upon the
brotherhood treasury. The constitution
and rules of the brotherhood are as
follows: The subordinate lodge is be-
tore the court part of the petition.
NO controversy or antagOnism has ever
arisen or existed between the Reading
railroad and the brotherhood and any
OF its lodges, or the Reading road and
any members as such members.
AS it is claimed, the Reading rail-
road has for some years adopted the
rule that it would not have in its service
any member of labor organization. it
is a rule which has not been uniformly
nor invariably acted upon, since there
has been a Philadelphia lodge of the
brotherhood of the Reading line for
nearly eight years and it's existence
cannot have been unknown to the
Reading officials. What has now
happened and what has led to the
present petition is this: The Reading
officers have notified the members of
the brotherhood on it's line that unless
they cease TO be such members they will
be discharged from their present en-
ployment on or before Oct. 8. The re-
celvers make no complaint of the man
ner IN which the brotherhood 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 bv
Grand Master Wilkinson, in reply to |
his remOnStrance against the course
to be taken:
1.-The policy of this company is well
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
with their duties to their
This position was taken
advisedly and we have no intention of
from it.
Joseph H. Harris,
president and Receiver
"Thus if the receivers are right and
heir rule is to prevail, membership of
he brotherhood by and of itself inca
oacltates, for services on the Reading
Dad, it is respectfully submitted that
he receivers are wrong and that the
act1on proposed by them ought not to
De sanctioned by the court.
IN THE COURTS HANDS.
.SecOnd-It will help to make plain
hat precise question before the court
o note the opening words of the tele-
gram just quoted. This policy of the
company is we'll known to be-, etc, etc.
Mr.. Harris, who signs the telegram
10Th as president and receiver, evidently
'orgets that the company is no longer
n control-that it can have no present
policy on that subject and that what
is past policy was, is of slight conse-
luence. The Reading road, now being
n the hands of the receivers, the re- i
eivers and the employees of the com
'any are officers of the court. The
curt, therefore, and not the company.
5 the employer of all persons engaged
n the operations of the road. The
resent policy of the court and not the
asst policy of the company is the ma
erial thing to be considered, and hence
he precise question is, will the court S
OW law down the rulp that man, howe