The Caldwell tribune., 1916-09-01
DECISION FIRST,
THEN EVIDENCE
President Wilson's Attitude in the
Railroad Complications Charged
With Being Injudicial.

| a means OF preventing general strike
| of the railway trainmen in the freight
service, the eight-hour day shall be
granted while other disputed matters
are held in allegiance o be inquired
into with a view to arbitration. Then,
| if the eight-hour day has not worked
fairly, provision may be made for ad-
justing that by arbitration. This is
distinctly reversal of judicial pro-
ceeding and unfair to the railroads;
and it is only to be explained as yield
ing to threat to throw the whole
business of the country into confusion
which ought not to be tolerated for a
moment
Facts Should Be Weighed.
The eight-hour day demand is in
fact the main issue, and granting it
and, adjusting conditions to it's re-
quirements. assuming the demand to
be in itself justified, ought most GER
tainly to be the result of careful and
dlSinterested examination of facts, and
not preliminary to it-granting that
first would be prejudgment of the
whole case. 1t is not as though it
we're mere question of the proper
length of days work in this particu-
lar service. The day now is ten hours,
with liberal scale of wages, and the
demand is for eight hours with the
same wages and time and half rate
for overtime, which latter is regarded
as punitive device to prevent exact
ing overtime service. 1t should be un-
derstood that fixed limit for the
days work is not practicable in this
service or running freight trains on
account of the varying distances that
are run between terminals of stations
where much loading and unloading is
to be done. Often the time occupied
on the same day is less even than
eight hours, and sometimes as low as
five or six: and yet the full wages
must be paid while extra is paid for
overtime.
Increase That Means Receive. ships.
If the service now paid for should
be reduced from ten hours a day to
eight without reduction OF wages, it is
obvious that more men would have to
be employed to run the same number
OF trains and keep up the traffic, with
considerable increase In the expense
of operation. The managers say that
this increase would be as much as 20
per cent and would not amount to less
than $lOO.OO0,OOO year on the whole
railroad system of the country. The
union leaders deny this, but there Is
no more reason for accepting their
opinion in advance than that of the
men who have to do with the finances
OF the companies and are responsible
for the results. 1t is not matter to
be assumed without evidence That 1t
would add largely to the expense of
operation is certain, and there are
many roads upon which it would cause
serious embarrassment. 1t is said by
some of those in the best position to
Judge that, if kept UP long, it would
result In putting even some strong
lines into she hands of receivers.
IT the railroad corporations were at
liberty to increase their rates and ad-
just their receipts to meet the added
expense. the question would be quite
different; but they cannot do this
without the consent of the Interstate
Commerce Commission, after thor
ough investigation. To put them un-
der this restriction and allow power
ful combination Of employees essential
to their service to dictate the cost of
labor is a manifest injustice. If this
added cost can be met by icreased
charges for the service, the public will
have to pay the difference through the
effect upon the prices carried. That
may be justified, but compelling the
roads to bear the loss, regardless of
whether they can afford it or not, can
not be justified on any sound prin-
ciple
Deciding in Advance of the Evidence.
Now it ought to be obvious to any
intelligent mind, that there is no
justice in upholding the demand for
the eight-hous day at the same wages
as for ten hours, to the heavy cost of
the railroads without any power to in
demnify themselves by any increase in
their income, in advance of any in
uiry into the conditions to be affected
by it or the results to the public. 1t
is euivalent to deciding the case first
and hearing the evidence afterwards.
There should first be an investigation
to determine what the real facts are
and afford guide to judgment This
should certainly be by some agency
not controlled by either side and in a
position to render fair decision, and
until final judgment is reached there
should be no compulsion exercised on
either side. Fair-minded men who
ask Tor nothing but what can be
shown to be just would not only be
willing to submit to this judicial pro-
cess of determining the merits of the
case, but would prefer it as means OF
justification in the eyes of the public.
No Surrender Before Trail.
In case of this kind, widely affect
ing public interests and private rights
the country over, it ought to be too
plain for dispute. that there should be
an orderly and authoritative method of
determining rights in accordance with
the merits of the demand and of the
defusal to comply, and not yielding
in advance to one side on the pivotal
uestion of the whole controversy. AS
we have said nothing but the bold
threat of a strike and fear of the con-
sequences can explain the advocacy OF
surrender before trial. and that is
precisely what should not be yielded
to bv any man in authority or In DO
- ( IL