Evening star., 1895-01-24

that not only the police force of the city,
but also over 900 soldiers, are preserving
order. and 1 cannot believe that this com
pany is not protected in its rights. nor DO l
think any question of fact is fairly raised
on that head. -s ~
Besides, the persistence of the company
ally get employees TO accept it's terms. be-
ing in itself unlawful, as have SHOWN,
must necessarily, by its bad example. tend
to public disGuiet. IL not TO some disorder.
Rights of the People.
'In respect to the question of hours and
of wages between the company and it's en-
ployes. it's duty was to have gone on. and
now is to go on with its full complement
of employees, having the right gradually
and from day to day to supersede its em-
ployes If IL can by new employees who Will
work on its terms, or TO superSede them all
at once when il has obtained suf1cient
number OF hew employees for that purpose;
but in such controversy 1T has not the
right to stop its cars While It is thus grad
ually getting other men. IL the people or
tho state were running these roads they
would not thus incommode and damage
themselves and 1T must not be forgotten
that this Corporation is intrusted with the
running of these roads as the servant or
the people of the state.
Form of the Writ.
'1t therefore only remains for me to de-
termine the form of the writ, whether 1t
shall be peremptory or alternative. In one
aspect of the case there seems to be an
issue of fact presented. and IL such an is
sue be presented the law does not permit
me to decide IT.. and allow a peremptory
writ. but requires me to allow an alterna-
tive writ, which has the effect of reserFing
such issue of fact to be tried by jury or
by the court if so agreed upon.
"At one place IN its answer the company
AYERS that reason why Its employees
Il NJ tr1f inc for I-tc
that IL refused to run its cars as required
by said employees in respect to the fire.
quency with which cars Should be run and
the number of cars to be rum The num-
Der of cars or trains which railroad
shall run Is left to the sound discretion
of it's directors. subject to review by the
courts upon an application for writ OF
E,andamus to make them run more lr me
public convenience require it, Its en-
ployes may not assume to determine the
number of cars to be run.
IF, however, this allegation In the an
swer refers TO the controversy In respect
of what are called trips, then 1t has 10
force, for that controversy is In its eS-
sence one in respect of hours and wages
Il concur in Snat MIR. Justice Cullen said
in the other case IN that respect, namely:
L do not regard the alleged attempt to
abolish tripperS as interfering with the
running management of the road. be-
cause 1 imagine the company wodli be
allowed to run as many trlpperS as ii
chose, ii 1t would only pay the men two
dollars day Tor running the trips. IN
that case L imagine there would be no
trouble. So that this is really question
of wages. Each party has the right to
obtain the best terms Ii can. and, as was
said ia the freight handlers case. if the
company cannot get nlen at price that
ii thinks fair. Ii is bound 10 get them at
price il may deem eXorbitant, because it's
duty is to run its road
Such was the disposition of that point by
the learned justice.
The counsel for each side will be heard
at 10 O'Clock tomorrow as to which form
of writ shall be issued.
Leader. upon whose application the writ
Of mandamus is issued. is a merchant.
who alleges that his business suffers by
reason of the failure of the company to
operate it's lines.