The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1903-03-09
THAT WABASH FIGHT.
Railroad Hen Ask for Dissolu-
ton of Injunction.

st. Louis, March "a motion for the
dissolution with an answer TO the IN
junction secured last Tuesday by Presi-
Railway company. restraining the ofn-
GERS OF the Brotherhoods represented IN
the controversy and the employees OF the
road serving on grievance committees
from calling a strike. was filed with
Judge Elmer Is. Adams in the United
States district court here at 1905 this
morning. AfddaSits of many brother
hood officials were simultaneously filed
with the answer
Until last night work on the important
document had been carried on unremit-
ungly since Friday last by Judge W. 7.
Irwin Of Peoria. H., q. J. Pinneys OF
Cleveland, and John H. Murphy of Den
yer, counsel for the Brotherhoods inter
ested. IT contained about 5000 words
A synopsis follows:
The answer as filed is joint and sew
eral answer of all the defendants named
in the bill of COMPLAINT and against
which the injunction issued. It is a
specific denial that the Wabash rail-
way was ever q union or brotherhood
employing exclusive union or brother
hood members in its service, and also
denying that the Brotherhood of Rail
way Trainmen and the Brotherhood of
Locomotive Firemen, the organizations
involved in this proceeding ever made
any demand or attem9t to compel the
w dDdS4l railway 10 L3idCt any IESIIAC-
tons upon its employees as to their con-
nection with any brotherhood or union.
It specifically denies that such Organl-
cation ever participated in any way in
the Pullman Palace car employees strike
IN 1894 as charged in the biH on com
plant. and admits that the Wabash
Railway company never made any dis
tinction in the selection of its employees
as to whether they were members Of
any brotherhood or union, since or prior
n T14 r1e3 n Z
employees strike of 1894. It specifically
denies all allegations in the bill of COM
plant that the Wabash Railway COM
pany ever had any complaint from their
employees respecting wages and rules
regulating their employment in their re-
spective seISice since 1894 but states the
fact to be that the employees in the sew
eral lines of service of the Wabash com
pany have for years had grievances and
differences with respect to the amount
of wages paid and the rules and regu-
lations governing the service of their
employees in their respective lines of en-
ployment. and that this controversy
arises not only from complaints of mem
bers of the respective brotherhoods. but
from the ranks of the employees not
members of the respective bfotherhoOds
involved in the injunction proceedings,
and that the effort on the part of the
grievance committees and the officers of
the Brotherhood Of Railway Trainmen
and the brotherhood of Locomotive
Firemen are as representa- tiVes OF over
1.200 employees of the Wabash Railway
company engaged as switchmen, brake
men and hremen upon its several lines
of railway in the United States.
The answer states that the several
employees engaged in the train service
of the Wabash Railway company have
frequently presented their grievances to
the Wa bash officials for adjustment and
a settlement, and that the officers of said
company have persistently refused to
take up and consider or discuss such
grievances with its several employees
from time to time during the past few
years or make any reasonable perTna-
nent rules or regulations governing the
service Of their respective employees and
that this continued Vacillating policy on
the part of the officials of the company
finally eliminated in presenting the
grievances and complaint to the several
boards of adjustment and grievance
committees of the two labor oTganiza-
lions known as the Brotherhood of Iso-
conceive Firemen and the Brotherhood
of Railway Trainnen.
The first presentation of their COM
plants and grievances through the re-
speetive committees and boards of said
organizations was about four months
Louis endeav0ring to take these mat
ters of complaint up with Mr.. Joseph
Ramsey, jr, president of the Wabash
Railway company, during all that
/ DGilbd ana nave JGEf SIdttGQ Dt1CI Ills
terviews only about three different
times and at each interview they We're
put off by some alleged excuse or other
and were compelled to leave without any
satisfaction or definite understanding as
to what the officers of the road would
do with reference to such complaints.
The defendants deny that the labor or
CARNATIONS named in the bill of com
plant have unlawfully or malieiously
conspired, combined or confederated to-
gether to force the complainant tC
/ recognize such organizations as repre-
senting and controlling its employees ir
/ all their relations with the complainant
and deny that any demand or any at
/ tempt has been made by said Organiza-
/ tons to compel the Wabash railroad
! lines within the United States to be
/ come and be operated as exclusively
union or brotherhood roads as therein
/ alleged. It is denied that any attempt
or demand has ever been made by saiC
i labor organizations or any of its officers
with it's employees in respect to any diff
4 ference or controversy. or from adjust
/ ing any differences or controversy di-
rectly with its employees, or IN any way
+ compel the complainant to discharge, Il
discriminate against or keep out of it.
employ any person or employees what.
ever not members of either of said or.
CARNATIONS as alleged in the bill o.
complaint
It is denied that any demand or at.
/ tempt has been made by either of the
labor organizations upon the Wabasf
to employ exclusively in its service
such persons as are members of saiC
organizations and denies that said or
CARNATIONS in any way unlawfully o.
! maliciously attempted to induce o.
/ compel the employees of the NVabasl
/