The St. Louis Republic., 1903-04-02
COURT IN DISSOLVING INJUNCTION
ADVISES ARBITRATION OF TROUBLE

ice to cease from work what oos may DO an
may do
Tney may seek and obtain. coznsel and al
vice concerning their rghts duties and ooiiga-
tons In relation to ther employer: and persons
interested In their welfare may advise aid ana
assist them In securing such terms and ecndi-
terests: and what they may lawfully do slngiy
or together. they may organize and combine TO
accomplish
In Ike manner. AZ capital Is combined for
legitimate purposes. labor may combine for
legitimate purposes but this right Of oornbina-
ton and the resulting right to quit their en-
pioyment is = wesDcn for the defeDse OF en-
ployes and net for attack They nay By pesce-
full and lawful combination and concert of ac-
ton De able 10 90 control the supply OF laeor as
to compel the employer to coma 70 their terIns,
weapon TO interfere otherwise inturs the en-
ployer or coemploye
DEFINES THE LAWFUL STRIKE
AS ONE DEVOID OF VIOLENCE
ne clear line Of denarkAtion. recognized By
all lawful authorities. d ;ha; the lawful and
permissible strike must not be attended By vio-
lence to or destruction Of property or By other
coerciye measures intended TO prevent the en-
p:oyer from securing other employees or other
wise carrying On his business according to his
Judgment.
II is argued that INSTRUMENTATION were made
by the Defendants in their circular. ADDRESSED 70
their fellov-merabers. setting forth the negotia-
tions and proceedings leading up TO failure 70
agree with the complainant. and that a.result
the vote Tor q strike was Drought about By fRi9e
representation and coercion think this charge
IL not sustained By the proof. Thsre may have
been and probably was magnifying Of the pree-
dents indi<pcsition 10 meet the Defendants for
consideration OF their claims but In my opinion
neither this any other statement made IN the
circular WAS Intentionally false Or nisrepreeent-
ing. and. taken q whole. Il fairly represented.
80 far the evidence before me discsoses. the
situation as It existed Er the time Il was sent
to the employs
FINDS NO EVIDENCE
OF A CONSPIRACY.
After considertrg all the evidence bearing On
the issue now under discussion. and carefully
weighing the foregoing and ell other Arguments
Of counsel. am not able to ind the existence
Of conspiracy to secure recognition as charged
In this fully confirmed by the fact that
whatever may have been the ioose talk between
the defendants. or either OF them. and com
plainants president. At any OF the personal IN
ter<iexs bstvecn them. all the co-reSpondence
making formal statements Of the Demands Of the
employees, and especially the letter Of March J.
1870. written IN reply 70 the prcsitsnt's request
for specific statement Of the Erisyances for the
redress OF which they proposed &c strik-. con-
Of service only Not q word is found N that
ultiretum about recognition OF he b-othertoods
or committee. unionizing the roads. o. any
thing else except tie subject Of wages. working
rules and the ifk.-
This leads next to consideration of the ailefed
conspiracy TO Interfere with the complainauts
railroad IN the discharge Of It's duties prescribed
BY the statutes Of ths United 5tztezs relative TO
Carrying tie nails cf the United States and
relative 70 interstate cogrrnc-ce- Thers n no
specific proof Of any threat te fzfsrfers VIII ths