Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-02-25

Firemen against the Wabash Railroad
The case is fully reported in volume III
of the Federal Reports, page 56;'. The
railway company applied for an inJunc-
ton forbiddng the Trainmen and Fire
men from calling a strike on the ground
that the officials of those unions were not
employees of the road. that such action
would be direct interference with inter-
state commerce, and was, therefore, an
unlawful conspiracy.
Frederick N. Judson attorney for the
officials of the Trainmen'S and Firemen S
unions. cited Judge Tafts decision in the
Phelan case to define the legality of labor
organizations and the right of their Off
Gals to act for their members In trans
acting their business and in carrying out
the purposes for which the organizations
had been formed. Judge Adams of the
United States circuit court of st. Louis
accepted Judge Tafts doctrines, and de-
MED the injunction on the ground set
forth by him in the Phelan case.
Taft's Attitude Toward Labor.
Referring to these incidents. and to
Secretary Tafts habitual attitude to-
ward labor. Judge 3. S Amber of Ohio
said the other day:
Now, the fact is that Judge Tafts
position upon the so-called government
by injunction proposition is conserva-
tive and consistent. 1t is warranted by
statutes LOT MANY years, ana Is Sllll III
force and in line with precedcntS and
decisions which have come down to us
from time almost immemorial by the
English courts, and always recognized
by our courts, federal and state, and till
political capital was sought to be made
of it in the campaign of 1896. We're uni
versally looked to as proper expoSitiOns
| of right and remedies: and the same
position has been taken by all Judges
| from all time, with the exception of one
n recent who cared more for
! votes than he-did for his conscience,
and probably no reported case in all
| time can be found in conflict with
| Judge Tafts position.
He has always construed the law
| literally to the wOrkingman. and as a
| judge has been pioneer in consist
! emily constituting laws for the benefit of
the employed to their protection, help
and advancement so that the intended
| purpose of the laws might be enjoyed
| by the class sought to be taken care of.
and as his reasoning is so sound and
| consistently convincing that 1T always
| becomes the recognized law when re-
| ported, his decisions have been of the
| greatest value to those forming the
unions and, labor organizations. by his
| blazing the way in their direction and
| l think their leaders recognize this.
LAS an instance l have in mind the
/ case of NarramOve VS.. Cleveland, Co
lumbus and, Cincinnati Railway Com
! pany, where the lower court had held
that the Ohio state statute making IT
obligatory upon railroads TO block
| switches and guard rails, and providing
| a severe, penalty for neglectinG to do
so, did not make the company liable in
| damage to an employe injured through
| the neglect of the company to provide
such safety appliances, when such en-
ploye had knowledge of the failure OF
the company to install the same, on the
ground that the servant assumed the
| risk incident to the employment with
| ho unnliancec n
tributed to the injury.
In the Laborer's Behalf.
among other things Judge Taft sale
that the evident intention of e~legisla
ture was to protect the employees of rail
| ways from injury from very frequent
source Of danger by compelling the rail
way company to adopt well-known safe
| ty device. 1t expressly provided as one
mode of enforcing it for criminal pros
ecutiOn of the delinquent company. The
h expression of one mode of enforcing 1t die
not exclude the operation of another. and
in many respects. more efticacious means
to wit: The right of civil action against
a delnquent railway company by one OF
4 the class sought to be protected by the
statute for injury caused by FAILURE tt
comply with its requirements. There car
be no doubt that the act was passed tC
secure protection and newly defined right
to the employee. To confine the remedy
to a criminal proceeding in which the fine
to be imposed upon conviction was moi
even payable to the, injured employe Woulo
make the law, not much more than d aaC
| letter
"Of course this case applies to all So
called assumed risk cases where the dan
ger arose from the neglect of the en-
ployer to provide the required safety ap
pliance of whatever character. be it saw
guard, safety rail improved car coupler
or any of the hundreds of appliances pro
.Ia.l fn,. l,1rl nd nh lnl
coveries in the thousands of cases where
by tho previous holdings, recovery was
impossible.
Many of the state courts still hold 4