The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1900-07-10
AGREEMENT IS DECLARED NULL
COMPANY MAKES A VAIN EFFORT
TO PREVENT RESUMPTION
OF HOsTILITTEs
BOYCOTT TO BE THE WEAPON
representation OF the Striker. sav
There VIII BE No More Law
lessness, but Boycott Will
Re Pressed.

ST. LOUIS, Mo. July 9-The strike
against the st. Louis Transit company
Dy It's former employees, which was de.
cIared of on July 2, was ordered renewed
To-Day at meeting Of the street raIlvav
mems union at the Westend Coliseum
tomorrow morning at O'clock was the
time fixed for the renewal of the bovcott
on all the company's lines
When the strike was settled. on JuIv
q there were some mutterings Of discon.
tent among the men over the terns of
settlement. and since that time the dis
satisfaction has grown daily. Charges
were made that the company had fatIed
10 Keep the agreement of July 2. and a
dozen more instances were cited tendfne,
TO prove that there had been a brcae1b
Oh laith' Meetings were held at several
places in the course of the week. and
committees were appointed to procure
proof Of inffdelity on the part OF the COM
pany At a meeting of the executive
committee Of the railway mems union
held on Saturday, a batch OF afidevtts
were to the effect that men had been en-
ployed by the company since July in
violation of the terms Of agreement OF
that date.
After session lasting several hours the
executive committee determined TO call
a mass meeting of the street railway men
for this morning, and to recommend To
the meeting that the strike be declared
on again.
The Central Trades and Labor union
met later and indorsed the action of the
executive con1nittea
CoMPANY's ACTION.
The representatives of the company met
and through President Whitaker. ad-
dressed a letter to the men, denying that
the company had Intentionally violated
the agreement of July 2. and declaring its
intention to live up to every condition of
the agreement. both in letter and spirit.
Fred W. Lehman, attorney for the
company. appeared at the meeting and
offered to submit the question as to
whether the company had broken faith
to Joseph w. Folk counsel for the men.
and bound the company to abide by Mr.
Folks judgment I'm the premises. The
proposition was ignored, and by a unani-
nous vote the strike was renewed.
A member of the executive committee
said today that this was the second time
this company had broken faith with It's
employees, and no agreement would be
accepted in the future that did not pro-
vide for the reinstatement OF all old en-
ployes In twenty-four hours after the ex-
ecution Of the agreement
NO LAWLEssNEss.
There will be no lawIessness or de-
monstrations of violence this time" he
continued. "By means of a vigorous en-
forcement of the boycott we hope to alb
solutely destroy the earning capacity Of
the company"
The whole trouble seems to hang upon
a question of facts, the men insisting
that the company had violated its agree
ment. while the company emphaucally
denies that such is the case.
The men claimed yesterday that a
verbal agreement was entered into, con-
currently with the written agreement,
and under the verbal agreement the com
pany had agreed to re-employ all the old
men In sixty days, seniority in the service
determining the priority of re-employ-
meut.
It IS claimed that the Rev. DR.. w. w
Boyd had assured the men that such an
agreement existed, in a speech at the
West End coliseum.
Tne officers Of the company declare
that there was no such verbal under
standing and that the only agreement
made by them was the written agree
ment, which was published a the time.
In proof of their contention on this sub
ject they show the original draft of tha
terms of settlement, gnsd and presented
by T. B. Edwards, chairman Of the
grievance committee, in which a clause
providing for arbitration and arother pro-
viding for the accomplishment Of the men
according to the seniority OF service, wers
stricken out. and the clause does not ap.
pear In the settlement signed by both
parties to the Controversy.