Waterbury Democrat., 1903-01-26

sss holiOWiliS 1S lAG ISDoIL Vt LAS SASA 6S men, who gave the trolley strike con- siderable of their time last week:
 The undersigned are committee to whom the trolleymens' union have by q unanimous vote referred the question of the position which the union should hold in regard to the reinstatement of A1essrs Barrett and Kelly, two dis charged employees of the Connecticut Railway and Lighting Go. MT Sewell, the general manager of the company. hfd stated over his own signature that the question at issue was whether the company has the right to discharge an employe for breaking it's rules. We had found that the members of the union took a very different view of this particular matter from that held by the general manager. and it seemed to Us that this was the point on which the whole case pivoted, and that if this question were disposed of, other ques- tions could soon be settled We of fefed our services for an investigation and the union has voted 10 abide by our decision.
 Tn pursuance of our task we first sought an interview with. the general manager to secure definite information in regard to the facts upon which he had proceeded in discharging the em- ployes. We avoided any such probing of the matter as might have been brought about by . cross examination of witnesses But in a friendly inter view with MT Sewell we ascertained the condition of things as 1t lay before his mind. He gave us. as we under stood it, the main facts in the case. We then had an interview with Mir Bar> rett in which with entire frankness. so far as we could judge, he told the story of his absences and his dismissal and gave his exclamation of certain charges brought against him.
 We have had no sinterview with MT Kelly, but we suppose that the conclu- sion reached in Mir Barretts' case would probably apply in MT Kellv's
 "We find these things 10 be true:
 T. Mr Barrett at the time of his dis charge had been an emp1ove of the company in the difficult position of mo- torman for seven or eight years, and during this entire period had served the company and the public faithfully and without bringing upon himself any discredif.
 ss2. On the Sunday and Monday pre- GCOi1IS@ HIS dl6GldISG HG WdE uDSEllL without leave and without notifying the management of his intentions.
 B. According to the published rules of the company. general rule 8, he thus exposed himself not to dismissal. but to suspension for limited period, al- though according to another rule, No 3s. employees may be discharged at the discretion of the superintendent
 sf1 Mir. ,GayvnII flntY1 ,, x>f l-ir,51.y nature and on fraternal relations with his men. the rules Of the company in regard to absences and even more se1i- ous offenses had not been stringently enforced. so that even suspension would have been q surprise to MT Bar rett under the circumstances.
 ss5. When. therefore, he found him. self discharged and without opportuni- ty to make any explanation, it seemed to him and to his friends that his em- ployers must have been affected in their action by some motive which did not appear upon the surface
 s'6. In view of the fact that MT Bar rett was the president of the trolley mems union-the members of that union having been stirred up to jeal- ousy concerning their rights by recent occurrences-it was natural enough they should attribute his discharge, where only suspension was called for by the rules of the company, to hostili- ty on the part of the company toward the union.
 ". The strike seems to have been or dered in spite of MT Ba1rett's protest against 1t. under the conviction that Mr Barrett had been unjustIy treated, and that the blow by which he had suf- fered was at the same time an attack on the union. We are assured by the management that there was no such underlying motive, but we find it inn possible to convince the union of this fact.
 IS. In the meantime 1t is evident to Us that MT Barrett by his absence and the Irregularities involved therein ex- posed himself to the reproduction of his employers and pursued course Ncalcu- lated to break down the discipline of a public service upon which the comfort, safety and we'll being of the communi- ty are greatly dependent. and that in view of all the circumstances of the case 1t is not to be wondered at that the company should uphold it's general manager and superintendent in the course they have pursued. We regret that they should have seen fit to apply the lash in the case of such n man--an emplove of so long standing and tho nresident of the union- esnecially when tho published rules of the company called for no such pena1ty.
 go. Nevertheless we recommend 10 the union to yield this point--Mr Bar rett heinz sufficiently vindicated hv this public statement of the case and nrobosals to provide for him In other ways having been mada--and to agree to return to work immediately provided the management of the company will agree to submit the other questions at issue to the arbitration of committee upon which hoth parties shall be even 1y renresented.
 sIf 1t seems to the union that we are calling upon It to make q great sacri- fee bv so doing. lot it's members con- slder that after all # is not sacrifice of princin1es and that Tn the eyes of a Ior~ s,lfrering community snchs sac- riIice will win for them n higher ap'