New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-11-16
TIFFANY & Co.
ANTIQUE ENGLISH SILVER
AND REPRODUCTIONS
3 BIG SYSTEMS
in S-HOUR FIGHT
Continued from page !

vania's complaint AYERS that the law is
illegally invalid and imperative" be-
cause of the many possible neon
sistent and conflicting interpretations
Of il and because there is not now and
never has been "any day, whether
measured by hours or work done, that
could be regarded lin railroad service
as a standard day or wage paid that
could be regarded as standard wage
for railroad employees"
The Pennsylvania roads bill also
charges that the law is invalid and in
operative because Congress IS not
lawfully empowered to require the
complainant to pay after January l,
1917, for an eight-hour workday not
less than what is defined Tin the law
as the standard days wage" at the
present time. The complaint alleges
that the Adamson law violates the
fifth amendment to the Constitution by
depriving the road Of "liberty Of con-
tract in respect to the terms OF en-
ployment and the wages to be paid
therefor" Emphasis is also laid upon
the fact that inasmuch az Congress has
not defined how the law should be APP
piled the road runs the risk OF many
prosecutions by its own Interpretation
Of the law.
Section OF the Adamson law, the
Pennsylvania complaint charges, is
unconstitutional and invalid because
of its manifest tendency and purpose
to coerce this complainant into course
of action which will deprive it OF prop
erty without due process OF law, con-
trary TO the fifth amendment to the
Constitution of the United States
Section provides fine and imprison-
ment for violation OF the law with re-
spect to each employe. The road there
fore seeks injunction restraining the
employees or Federal district attorneys
from prosecuting under this section or
the act.
Every Employe Free to Sue
The point about the controversy em-
phasized yesterday by the railroad
managers was this: Even if they did
not discard the old schedules and ap-
piled the eight-hour basic pay day to
those schedules, the law as 1t stands
is so uncertain that each individual
employe who did not like the roads
application OF the law to his particular
run and schedule of pay, would be free
10 begin suit under section 4 OF the
Adamson law. So what the roads want
4
stitutionality but an opinion on how
it is to be applied to their complex
schedules.
Elisha Lee said in this regard:
Opinions have been expressed by
eminent authorities that the law is un-
constitutional and there are conflicting
opinions as to how the law, II consti-
tutional. should be applied. Therefore
the railroads must, as matter OF
duty. ask the courts If the law IS
within the power Of Congress. II IL
duty they owe not alone to the owners
Of these properties, but also to the
public that provides the revenues TOR
the payment of wages.
"If the law is declared constitutional,
it is expected that the courts WIN
make clear its meaning, and the rail,
roads. it is unnecessary to say, WIN
faithfully follow the instructions o,
the courts.
Speedy Decision Sought
'In the bringing of suits throughout
the country the railroads have no de-
sire 10 delay action or TO resort 70
technicalities. The railroads are anX-
ious TO have a speedy decision on the
points at issue. These separate suits
are necessary to protect the individual
roads. A single suit would protect TIE
individual road only in the particular
jurisdiction within which the test case
wa, brought and would leave all roads
subject TO prosecution in other juris-
dictions.
"The railroads have chosen Whist
seem. TO be the shortest and most
practical method Of reaching an enrly
decision. and in the meantime avoid
ing a multiplicity of prosecutions and
suits. The railroads earnestly desire
IN take the right road and IL is for
this reason that they have asked the
courts for light to show them the