The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-04-14
sxAryla. .ArcsDAE. ArxII -.



JKNKIns.
when the Uaion Pacific raiiroad system
went into the hands Of 3 receiver last year
the receivers Immediately applied TO Judge
Dundy, OF the United States district court
81 Omaha, first, that their own compensa-
tion he tixed al $1,000 each year There
being i've OF shem1 and next, that the
wages Of employees be reduced. Judge
Dundy 1t once issued orders in execution
Of both propositions, and at the came time
enIoinsd the men from interfering with
the operation Of the road in any attempts
they might make to resist the reduction Ia
wages. The judges OF the United States
district court in Colorado at the same time
refused TO indorse the order As TO redue-
sson Of wages until both sides had been
heard.
The employees thercupon appealed to
Judge Caldwell. Of the United States cir
cult court. lie Immediately declared that
It was proper that the employees should DO
heard as veil as the receivers In such
case. The former were ~ much In the en-
ptoy of the court a. the receivers.
We quote from Judge Caldwell ~ fol-
lows:
.If. after . full hearing and considers.
tion. found that it was necessary, equit-
able and lust to reduce the scaic OF wages,
/ would give the employees ample fims to
determine whether they would accept or
reject the new scale. Ii they rejected i.
they would not be enioined from quitting
shc service Of the court, either sinssy or Ia
. body. In other words, would not en-
fnin them from striking. but If they made
their election 10 strike, would make II
plain TO them that they must not. after
quitting the service ot the court interfere
with the property or the operation OF the
road or the men employed to take Their
places. A United States court can very
readily find the means TO eiecsuasiy pro-
tecs the property In Its possession and shs
persons In It's employ.
In the subsequent hearing Judge Cald-
well denounced the receivers for attempt
ing wage reduction without first notify
ing the men and giving them q chance TO
speak on the matter. lie asked them how
they would Ike decree from the court.
without notice, reducing their $4,000 sal
aries, and then wanted to know whether
court of equity ''onght to change rule
that has been in force for eight long years
DO you think IL right, morally or other.
wise, that you should put upon this court
the responsibility for the changing Of this
rule when the management of this road
could not change itf'
Judge Caldwell evidently held that the
men we're being paid no more than their
due whether tho road paid or not. aud be
took the sound position that bankrupt
railroads are really run by the United
States eoarts and not wholly by the receiv
ers who happen 20 he in charge. United
States Judge jenkins. OF Milwaukee. va,
asked by the labor leaders to strike cut SC
much of his ants-ssrske orders in the
Northern Pacific case as enjolned the EN-
pieyes
"Frnm combining aud conspIring %
auit. with or without notice. the service OF
the said receivers. with the object and in
tent of gripping the property In their Gus
tody or embarrassing the operation Of tbs
said railroad, and from quitting the sesvies
81 the said receivers, with or without no
tice 50 a. ~ cripple the property or pre-
road"
The labor leaders further asked ths, hs
strike out so much of the decree as en-
joiaed the men from combining or con
spiring together or With others, as with
the chiefs ar committees of labor crgani
nations. tor the purpose Of etfeeting q
strike, and ordered such chiefs and com
mltiees not 10 advise or approve employe,
to iniu in strike.
Here We have one United States eouf,
Ia charge Of q railroad At variance with
another court Of the same rank In reis
Judge Caldwell, in the Union Pacific case
maintains the right of the workmen &c
Quit singly or in . body at any time. but
they must not thereafter interfere with
the operations Of the read. Judge Jenkin,
denies the right Of tae employees 10 Quit
In body with or without notice" And
his course further deviates from that ol
ladge Caldwell in that he approved d
Two reductions ~ ths wages of Northern
fseiae employees without giving the ey,-
bsNstf - "t%A%~+ NV ~ &AAAANF w - hSSFI.
Judge Jenkins holds that be is decsdins
In accordance with the law os the land
nus Judge Caldwell evidently thinks this
IL an assumption that requires 90 ID
proved The Springfield tNss.A Repwk
,sea recltes these facts and then saws,
docs the law prevent or permit vailssv
employees from quitting the service OF !
Yoai in q Scayr Is there one faw TO- RAJ.
WAYS aud another Ter oihsr industrial m
dersakings On thss posngT We AAwe neye-
heard that there waS But mantsr~tlv
there righE we'll he Interruption of raj.
war traffic - a grest public eva. &na Il tAs
quitting OF emanioyes in body results IL,
such interruption, ~ 1t usually FAUST. then
the railway strike becomes a great gualss
eva IA be averssd il IL eau be ssergsa
shut any such interference vita she
freedom 81 railway employees can e< jus.s-
q ~ onIv on the theory thst Tier Sre en-
gagged essentially IN = public ssfysee and
are entitled GA The other hand 81 paal.s
PROJECTION lEogn tae Oppressive acts If re
sesseFs ar Managers acting I'm behalf oi
private interests, Judge Jenkins. there
fore, pats asta>esf IN n singular ai:ssGsss
~aen, IA eeaal. % those private snseresss,
he .enss ihs power Of Tie ualssd states