New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1913-02-15
THE PUBLIC'S INTERESTS.

Saws the recent statement OF the ral'
roads regarding the wage controVerS!
with their tiremen: The railroads are
acting on the principle that the pun
Lies interests are paramount To tilei'
..nwn interests and to the interests al
the firemen" The public's interests
are paramount And the public's III
tcrests are plain. They are To get inns
controversy settled without strike. 10
avoid the loss and suffering involved III
having business tied up. wages stop
and food become scarce and procuraDle
only at famine prices. The Pubic
doesn't care how such a disaster is
avoided so much as that II shall ne
avoided. If the railroads believe that
the publics interests are paramount
Jet them save the public from the con
sequences of Il strike.
Why should any one who Is Jealous
for the public prefer strike 10 arp'-
traiion under the Erdman act: ArDi-
'tration 10y a commission of three. such
AZ that act provides for. would not be
4 catastrophe \ strike would he Il
catastrophe Do the railroads suppose
for one instant that the people would
rather go short of food and without
work for while than have this dis
putc settled by three men instead oil
five? Assume the worst that hlght
come from arbitration by Il small
board and it would not be one-tenth
as bad for the public as the tying up
of the nations business by a strike.
And why is it necessary To assume
the worst: The Erdman act has been
i'm operation for a long time and has
worked we'll The reluctance of the
railroads TO submit 80 big case as
this TO arbitration under ii is natural
enough. But the superiority of arb-
tration by larger board may easily
be exaggerated. The railroads in their
statement say: IF il were one rail
road il is conceivable that one man
sitting i'm the centre on an arbitration
board of three could comprehend the
conditions surrounding that one road.
'hut when ffty-four railroads an"
drought together the responsibility IS
too great and the points at issue are
too great TO Put in the hands Of one
man" This argument proves too
much If one man can comprehend
only one road. how are three men
enough to comprehend tifty-four roads:
No whatever defects arbitration 10y 4
commission of three may have. 1t IS
vastly TO be preferred to strike. II
The railroads are going TO act on the
principle that the public's interests are
paramount they will arbitrate under
the law which the public has enacted
emergency as this. When that form oil
arbitration may he had 10 sufficient
excuse exists for inficting upon the
public all the losses and suflerings that
would come from strike. Saying that
the public's interests will be promoted
10y strike won't make il so. and won't
fool the people into thinking that it is
50 when the disastrous effects Of
ing 10 do all that the law asks them
10 do in order to spare the public. The
railroads are not.
Meanwhile the firemen ought TO be
less impatient. They can afford to
wait With the law on their side they
are in strong position. which they
would forfeit by any hurried declara
lion of strike. They should also
give renewed consideration TO last
nights offer Of arbitration before Il
board Of six. They will lose moth
ing by waiting. In the case of the en-
sineers the wage award was made re-
troactive. And SO il should he and no
doubt would be i'm this case. The engi-
neers got S1.O00.O00 of back wages.
The situation has been critical for only
a few days II is too early for the
fremen To talk about being tired Of the
delay.