The Oskaloosa herald., 1913-11-27

Slue. va
i This agreement and the provision
, thereof shall continue in force and b
binding upon the respective partie
hereunto until October LIST. 1913, an
from year to year thereafter. unles
changed by the parties herenntt
Either of the parties hereunto desil
ing change In any section OF sec
tions Of this agreement, shall motif
the other party In writing OF the de
sired change. thirty (30) days prio
to the ending OF this contract, whicl
is the first day OF October. 1913. Up
on such notice the agreement shall b.
opened to consider the change o
changes to be desired.
This Contract to be binding on tn,
! Oskaloosa Traction & Light Com
pany, or their successors.
All extra car men now In emplo.
of Company to receive minimum o
sl.60 per shift.
CLARENCE GARRETT,
CHAS. STRINGFELLOW. Pres
e. e. EDWARDS.
OSKALOOSA TRACTION &
LIGHT co.
BY H. w. GARNER. Mgr.
w. w. WILLIAMS, Pres.
H.
The first material question involy.
| ed in this controversy is: Did saiu
contract, under which the employees
had been working for the last three
years, terminate by it's terms on
October /, 1913? The provisions OF
that contract bearing on this ques-
ton are as follows;
"u) This Agreement shall con-
stitute the conditions under which
said employees shall work for the per-
ioi of time beginning October /, 1910,
upto October l. 1873"
And that part OF paragraph (15)
which is as follows:
This Agreement and the provis-
ions thereof shall continue in force
and be binding upon the respective
parties hereunto until October LIST,
1913, and from year to year thereaf-
ter unless changed by the parties
hereunto Either of the parties here
unto desiring a change in any section
or sections of this agreement, shall
notify the other party in writing of
the desired change, thirty $500 days
prior to the ending of this contract,
which is the first day of October,
1913. Upon such notice the agree
ment shall be opened to consider the
change or changes to be desired"
These provisions are apparently
conflicting. But the agreement
should, IL it can be done reasonably,
be so construed as to give effect and
meaning to each clause thereof. We
think that can be done by keeping in
mind the specific purpose of each
clause. The first paragraph quoted
we think, a three year
contract, without any changes there
in. The second provision above
quoted was intended to avoid the ne
cessity OF a new contract unless the
parties were able to agree upon some
change in the existing one, and to fix
a time when changes might be made,
and the notice necessary to bring
about the consideration of the same,
and in doing that, the clause refer
ring to the contract ending October l,
1913, may, we think, be reasonably
construed to mean the date when 1t
would END il change was agreed
upon That conclusion is strength
ened by the last sentence of said par
agraph: Upon such notice the agree
ment shall be opened to consider the
change or changes to be desired"
. If the meaning of the parties was
TO terminate the contract on October
|, 1913, then the clause that il shall
continue from year TO year unless
changed by the parties has no mean.
ing; neither is the clause that the
agreement shall be opened to con-
slider the desired changes consistent
with the thought that the contract
ended by its terms October l, 1913.
Therefore, we find that the contract
did not expire or terminate on Octo-
her |, 1913.
That on September /, 1913, the AS
ISOLATION gave the Company notice
in writing OF desired change in said
contract relating to an increase of
wages.
That on September 10, 1913, the
Association proposed and offered to
the said Company for its acceptance
a proposed written contract, similar
to the existing one, except as to an
increase in wages on an average of
about ten per cent.
V.
That said Company, on September
20, 1913, sent a letter to each of its
employees, stating in substance that
the present wages paid were we'll
in line and above the average, and
that the Company's earnings had de-
creased, while the cost had increas-
ed to the Company" and also stating
that the present scale of wages would
be continued for the present.
vi.
AS to the dehand for an increase in
wages, we find that the wages paid
under the existing contract were a.
bout equal to those paid for like SER
vices in Iowa cities and towns of the
class in which Oskaloosa belongs, and
that the demands of the employees in
that respect are not justified by the
facts and circumstances disclosed by
the evidence, but, while that Is true,
still we find that the question OF
wages was one that the employees had
the thunder the contract, to have
submitted to arbitration, and that the
Company was In the wrong in not so
submitting said question to arbitra-
ton.
VII.
That between September 20, 1913.
and October l, 1913, the members of
tsNf a. 80. Aaft