The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-09-27
WoRkINGsIEN AND THE SUPREME
COURT.

COURT.
There has been persistent effort in re-
cent years to create the impression that
the United States courts, and especially
the Supreme Court, We're hostile to work
ingmen. This attempt, originating with So
called labor leaders. has been aided and
abetted by certain class of political lead
ers. 1t has never been worked more Wig
orously or with more manifestly evil
purpose than it is during the present cam
paign, when the demand is openly made
that the Supreme Court shall be reorgan-
lied or reconstructed in the interest of JUS
tice to workingmen
If it were true that the Supreme Court
is hostile to workingmen, or to any other
class of citizens, or that any of it's de-
cisons have not been based upon law and
equity, it would be justly obnoxious to
the charges brought against it, but it is
not true. No courts in this country are
further removed from the charge of class
hostility or favoritism or of pandering in
any way to popular clamor than the
United States courts, and especially the
Supreme Court. The judges are men of
the highest character, learned in the law,
with keen moral perceptions and cultivated
sense of right and justice, and they hold
practically for life. 1t is impossible to con-
ceive of judges less likely to do wrong or
to be biased by personal or class preju-
dices of any kind. The charge that they
ever have been is monstrous. No better
answer to it could be made than the de-
cison of the Supreme Court giving the
claims of workingmen and wage earners
against railroads precedence over those of
first mortgage creditors. Attention has al
ready been called to this decision, but it's
Importance calls for more particular COM
ment. 1t was rendered nearly twenty
years ago, in the case of Fosdeck VS..
Scholl, Otto, 235. Judge Drummond had
decided in the United States Circuit Court
at Chicago that the owner of cars which
had been sold to d railroad before it went
for, could reclaim the cars and recover
rent for their use by the receiver and that
his claim had precedence of that of first
mortgage creditors When this decision
was rendered the attorneys of the mort
gage creditors said it was not good law
called it sentimental equity, and said it
would not stand It was new departure,
but it proved to be good law. The case
was appealed to the Supreme Court and
affirmed, and the principle was even
tended to cover claims for labor. The opin-
ion of the court was read by Chief Justice
Waite, and following is an extract:
We have no doubt that when a court of
chancery is asked by railroad mortgag gees
to appoint receiver of railroad property
n n md i16f
cial discretion, may, as a condition of issu-
ing the necessary order. impose such
terms in reference to the payment from
the income during the receivership of out
standing debts for labor, supplies, equip
ment or permanent Improvement of the
mortgaged property as may under the
circumstances of the particular case APP
pear to be reasonable. The bust
ness of all railroad companies is done to q
greater or less extent on credit This
credit is longer or shorter as the necessf-
tles or the case require and when compa-
MES become pecuniarily embarrassed 1t
frequently happens that debts for labor.
supplies, equipments and improvements are
bonded interest may be paid and a fore
closure postponed, if not altogether avoid
ea In &c TINS way the daily and monthly
pay the daily and monthly expenses are
kept from those to whom in equity they
Delong, and used to pay the mortgage debt
The income out of which the mortgage is
TO be paid is the net income obtained bv
deducting from the gross earnings what is
required for necessary operating and man
aging expenses. proper equipment and use
full improvements
This decision placed claims against rail-
road companies for wages among most
favored claims, and gave railroad employees
of all kinds precedence of first mortgage
creditors. From that time to the present
1t has been held that when a railroad goes
into the hands of receiver, owing wages
to its employees, they must be paid by the
receiver out Of the first earnings of the
road. Under this decision receivers OF
railroads have been required to pay en-
ployes millions of dollars of arrears of
wages out of the first earnings OF the
roads, which otherwise would have been
"gobbled" by mortgage creditors. Intelli-
gent worbingmen must see that the deci-
sion has been of immense benefit to them,
yet it not rendered to favor them as
a class, but because it was right. This
shows the falsity of Of. the charges
against the Supreme Court. All others are
equally unfounded. unjust and unpatrotic