New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-08-20
Why Arbitration Is Asked.

"The intricate and technical nature
Of the case and the completely of the
facts make the controversy prominent
" one for arbitration by an impartial
t-ibunal, with authority to examine
! TO every factor and reach a decision
fair and just, to the employees, the own
ers and the public. which ultimately
must bear the burden. To refuse to
arbtrate is an admission OF the un-
reasonabeness of the demand. More
over. the refusal is by those demanding
vital change in an existing status.
For a party to demand change of such
status and accompany the demand
with a refusal to arbitrate is in conflict
with right standards of conduct. In this
instance, for those demanding a change
TO refuse TO submit their demands to
arbitration is indefensible.
"To say that such a demand as that
now presented for a revolutionary
change in the arrangements that have
grown up in the development of the
railroad business and involving so many
complicated facts and relations and
such vast additions to the cost OF the
country's transportation is not arbi-
trable is to destroy the principle OF
arbitration, and if successful would in
our judgment, tend Immediately TO dis.
card all Of the legislation. state and
national, which has been enacted in re-
cent years and set the country back TO
the old days of strikes, lockouts, pub
lie disorder and business anarchy for
the settlement of questions inherent in
the relation of employer and employe.
Sees Widespread Danger.
"The view that so important an issue
as this may not in conscience be hor-
estly debated and therefore arbltrated
raisese this question above and beyond
the lesser contentious Of hours OF ser
vice or payment of wages-it raises I,
in gravity beyond the social or none
tary questions affecting the parties be
fore YOU, because il tends to force, by
the great weight of your spoken word,
the railroads TO surrender right TO
be heard-a right expressly recognized
by the policy of the Federal legislation
enacted for the purpose of adjusting
these disputes, and under the ban OF
your disapproval, expressed before the
bar of public opinion, to accept an in
disputable condition requiring, as we
believe. an enormous sacrifice in eff
cheney of service and cost of operation
of these properties. An adjustment il.
this manner will not stop with this con-
troversy. 1t will be repeated in every
industry wherein to-day industrial
peace exists without controversy.
Asks Presidents Report.
at will, by the force of this high
precedent, place in peril all that has
been accomplished in the peaceful ad-
iustment of labor controversies by
methods of arbitration, and, therefore,
we present to you our respectful but
earnest request that you do not lend
the weight Of your great influence
against this right, which we claim, TO
be heard, but support the railroads In
this crisis in the effort to maintain this
great principle of arbitration"
The statement concludes with this
addition:
"Mr. Holden then explained that in
accordance with past custom and the
requirements Of the situation, complete
authority to conduct negotiations in
behalf of the railroads in the present
controversy had been conveyed to the
conference committee of managers. He
further explained that the executives
present had authority only to speak
for the properties each represents. 1t
is understood that kilograms were sent
from the White House to other rail
road executives of the country, and
the conference adjourned pending their
arrival"