The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1906-08-16
HEARING STARTS IN
TELEGRAPHERS' CASE
Order of Railway Operators VS.
Louisville & Nashville
TWO WITNESSES EXAMINED
The Hearing to Be Finished Today Be-
fore u. s. Commissioner Watts.
Technicalltles Argued Yes
terday CONSUMED Time.

The preliminary action brought by As
sistant United States District Attorney
w. II. Stanifer against four officials of
the Louisville and Nashville Railroad at
the instance of the Order of Railway
Telgraphers. who claim that the road has
discharged telegraphers because OF their
membership in the order, in violation Of
a federal act, was begun yesterday after
neon before United States Commissioner
R. D. Watts, Lee Brady representing the
Louisville and Nashville.
The officials connected with the road
against whom warrants were sworn, but
not served, as their prompt appearance
was promised, are J. r. Wheeler, super
intendent at Nashville, formerly super
intendent In Birmingham; ]. w. Leach,
formerly chief dispatcher in Birmingham
now occupying the same position with
the Mobile and Ohio at Tuscaloosa; M. b.
Drennen, trainmaster in Birmingham, and
E. G. Evans, chief dispatcher in Birming-
ham.
L. A. Tanquary, deputy president of the
Order of Railroad Telegraphers was first
put on the stand. He testified as to the
grounds of complaint M Eady, tele-
graph operator, formerly In the employ
OF the Louisville and Nashville, whom, 1t
Is alleged, was discharged because he
was member of the union, was then ex-
amined He stated that In November
1903 when he was working at Warrior
he had been told by Trainmaster Bremen
that he must either quit the order or the
service of the road
Cross-ExaminatIon.
On cross-examination, he stated that
about ten days before his discharge, while
In the capacity of agent as we'll as op-
orator at Warrior, he had overlooked
getting some mail off at the proper time
for which he was asked for an explana-
ton by the road-he didn't remember Just
| what explanation he had given-and was
told that he would be fined 81. He heard
nothing more of the matter, he said, be-
fore his discharge papers came, which
bore the Endorsement for misrepresent-
ing facts" He said that in order to get
a job he promised that he would quit the
Order of Railroad Photographers, to which
he was then In arrears for dues and not
in good standing, and that he was SUBJ
seduently employed by the Louisville and
Nashville three times. as clerk.
When ]. G. Mechanism came to the
stand his testimony was objected to by
the defense ON the ground that his name
was not mentioned In the affdavits. and
there, therefore his testimony was incom-
petent. After a lengthy argument on
both Sides the prosecution contendine
that the testimony was admissible. as 1t
would help to show the roads habit Of
discrimination against union photographers.
the complaint was amended, and the tes-
timony was taken. 1t was finally strick-
en- from the records.
The case will come up again this morn
ing at 10 o'clock, and it is expected that
1t will be finished today
The cases follow the one against Chief
Dispatcher j. r. Scott of the Louisville
and Nashville at Louisville, the first Of
the kind. which was instituted several
weeks ago by L. A. Tanquary, deputy
president of the order. 1t will come up
before the United States grand jury in
October.
There, as here. the order bases its con-
tention on alleged violations of section
10 Of an act on the federal statute en-
| titled: IAN act concerning carriers en-
gagged In interstate commerce and their
employees passed June l, 1893
Question of constltutionaIty.
In the Louisville case the railroads de-
Tense was that the act was unconstitu-
tional, and that teegrapher is not an
employee in the sense of that word as
defined In the act.
Mr. Tanquary has been In Birmingham
for several weeks investigating matters
with reference to the relations Of his