The Portland daily press., 1895-01-26

tions. But the directors of railroad
corporation may not do the like. They
are not merely accoun ia BILE to stockhold-
erS; they are accountable to the publlc
first and to their stockholders second.
They have duties to the public to per,
form, and they must perform them. II
they canuot get labor to perform SUCH
duties at what they offer TO pay, then
they must pay more, and as much as IS
necessary to get it. Likewise, II the
condions in respect of hours or other
wise which they impose, repel LABOR,
they must adopt more lenient or just
conditions. They may not stop their
cars for one hour, much less one week or
one year, to thereby beat or coerce tne
price or conditions of labor down to the
price or conditions they offer For them
to do so would be a defiance of law ana
of government which, becoming general,
would inevitably by the force OF exam
pie lead to general disquiet, to the dis
Indignation of the social order, and even
the downfall of government itself. Tx
peritnce shows the wisdom of our fath-
ers in retaining at least some control OF
corporations to whom are given puollc
franchises for the performance OF pupllc
duties.
Of course the strikers have received
this opinion with great joy, and it has
given them new hope. II it be good law
then every corporation charged with pub
lie duties which fails to perform them for
a single hour for cause not absolutely
non-preventable creates a sufficient
reason for the forfeiture of its charter.
That is to say if the employees of street
railway company demand higher wages
and leave their employment because their
demand is refused and the cars do not
make their trips in consequence OF this
refusal to work then sufficient reason
exists for the forfeiture of it's charter,
for the cause of the stoppage is preven-
table cause, inasmuch as the company
might have paid the higher wages de-
manded. If this is good law then the
employees of this class of corporations
have it in their power at all times to
compel their employers to increase wages
or run the risk of the loss of their fran
chise, which is practically equivalent to
the wrecking of the company and the
loss of all the money invested in the
enterprise. If this should be finally
held to be sound doctrine people will
fight very shy in the future of investing
money in street railways or general rail-
ways because the risk of losing their
money will be altogether too great.
The railway companies in this case
will probably reply to Judge Gaynor
that they areprepared to fulfill their du-
ties whenever their motormen and con-
ductors are protected from assault, and
their wires and rails SO guarded that the
former cannot,.be cut and the latter OBJ
structed-in short, that they will per-
form the.work they agreed to do when
ever the state performs the work it
agreed to do, that is, protect the compa-
ny's property from unlawful attack; and
they will plead the failure of the state
to keep it's part of the agreement as ex-
culpating them as long as the failure
exists. But this will apparently do the
companies no good if Judge Gaynor's
ion for the attacks on their property
might have been prevented by acceding
to the demands of theIemployes. If Judge
Gaynor's doctrine be sound, even if the
railroad companies had on hand when
it's employees left their service sufficient
men to take their places, and these men
were prevented from doing so by unlaw-
full threats of the strikers, and the run
ming of cars thus prevented, the railroad
companies would not be exculpated from
not running them, because it was with
in The power of the companies, by ac-
ceding to the demands of their employees
who deserted and who were threatening
the other men, to avoid delay and deten
ton.