New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-01-25


sequences must be shouIdered and borne by. an In
psrcipsssd il the their "e causes. eThs PsopIs y:
Y.c H r. R: r Co. Ss Hun: s.s2 D., The :, court court
pei the corporation to do It's corporate duty.
THE LAW MUST BE ACCEPTED.
That private citizen has sufficient standing -
make this application. which could unquestionaoly
be made by the Attorney General OF the State. has
heretofore been twice decided by this court. and
must accept it as law. And It being admitted that
the company is not fully operating Its lines o.. OF
writ prayed for. either In its peremptory or alter.
made in law AS have said. the learned Judge
who heard the previous application decided that
raise a question OF fact. and only refused the wr1
in order to give the company more time. with az
admonion to 1t that It should not longer delay.
/ do not think the present answer Of the company
is sufficient to prevent writ from being issued
The claim Of violence amounting to a prevention
is not legally made out. Instances OF violence
generally by others than the former employees OF
the n.y. are peae force ea Of the city bu also
1909 soldiers are preserving order, and ! can:
hp' IN its rights. nor do think that any question Of
fact is fairly. raised on that head; Besides. ths
persistence OF the company in failing to run its
cars except as It may gradually get employees 70
have % shown. must necessarily by its bad example.
tend public disquiet. II not to some disorder
between ~ the company and its employees its duty
to have gone on and now Is 70 go on with its
ually and from day to day TO supersede ITS en-
ployes if it can by new employees who VII WORK WORK
when II has obtained a sufficient number OF new
troversy it has the right to stop its cars while
it is thus gradually getting other men, II the
people OF the state were running these roads they
is intrusted with the running OF these roads az
the servant OF the people OF the state
form OF the writ. whether 1t shall be peremptory or
oil paf
such an - issue be presened the law does not psr.
nit to decide II and allow peremptory witt,
but requires me to allow an alternative writ which
has the effect Of reserving such issue OF fact TO
be tried by jury. by the Court II 80 agreed
upon. At one place in it's answer the company
run it's required by said employees in respect
run. and the number OF cars. to be run:
The number OF cars or trains which a railroad
directors subject to review by the courts upon
application for n writ OF mandamus to make them
run more II the public convenience require II: us
OF cars to be IT, however this allegation In TIE
refers 70 the controversy in respect OF
what are called trippers; then II has no force Tor
that controversy is in its essence one In respect
OF hours and wages l concur In what Mr. Jus.
namely: II do not regard the alleged attempt to
abolish trppers as interrerins With With the running
the COMPANY would be allowed to run as many
trippers as II chose, II II would only pay the men
3 day for running the trips; In that case !
is really a question OF wages. Each party has the
right to obtain the best terms II can; and. as was
cannot get men at the price that 1t thinks fair it
is bound TO get them at price II may deem ex:
Such was the disposition OF that point by the
learned Justice. -
O'Clock January % as to which form OF writ
shall be issued.