New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-09-13


participating in any movement toward
the betterment of his working condl-
lions or the increase of his wages, ana
in the event that Re sees fit to JOIN
such an organization with such objects
in mind it will not be considered
breach Of this agreement.
Might Have Averted Difficulty.
at appears from the minutes OF the
conference and the direct testimony
before US that II such a course had
been accepted difficulty might not have
arisen at this time. Mr.. Quacker. bush,
counsel for the company, testified that
il was his expectation that the Anal
gamated representatives would con-
tinue TO cndeavor TO raise the stand
ards OF wages provided in the work
ing agreement; that in all probability
in his opinion there would be an in
crease. and that in consequence the
standards would be advanced.
at ~ rcCrettable that al this point
the parties apparently became dlstrust-
full of each other. From the testimony
II appears that the men believed that
an attempt was being made to deprive
them OF the rights which had been
guaranteed 10 them by the agreement
Of August {. On the other hand. the
company officials apparently believed
that the officials Of the union were
seeking 20 prevent the men from eXer-
cislng their right 70 prefer the broth
erhood 70 the Amagamatcd.
ct appears that by September the
men were IN the frame of mind of be-
lleving that the company was seeking
as its counsel puts it, 70 'exterminate
their union and the company officials
were OF the opinion that the men were
seeking to 'paralyze' the entire transit
system of New York "a means OF
coercing the withdrawal Of the So
called working agreement
Facts Are Now Plain.
whatever the frame of mind OF the
parties, the facts are now plain. Just
as the company believed it had the
right TO discharge men who had been
convicted OF crime and to do SO within
the terms Of the agreement made on
August s, so 1t felt 1t mad the right TO
circulate these working agreements and
TO secure the mems signatures In the
first instance the Mayor of New York
determined that the men should be re-
nstated: in the second instance, the
company may have been right or may
have been wrong, dependent upon cir
cumstances which were subject to proof
and subject to investigation.
THE spokesmen for both parties now
testify before us that this latter ques-
tion could have been disposed OF by
processes provided for in the agree
mont OF August s. Nevertheless. on
September !, at a meeting OF the Inter
borough men. resolutions were adopted
demanding the return Of the working
agreement and authorizing their off,
GERS TO call strike l. necessary.
at is conceded by the Spokesman
for the men that at this time TO effort
was made 10 utilize the processes or
machinery Of arbitration provided in
the agreement OF August 30 and on the
LIST of September n communication was
sent 10 the chairman Of the Public
Service Commission by counsel for the
men, inclosing a copy of letter to
the Mayor.
No Complaint Made.
Attention is directed to the fact
that in this communication It is cx-
pressly stated that no complaint is
made at this time 10 the commission
or TO the Mayor or TO the cha Of
the commission. Nor does there appear
in the resolutions adopted by the men
anything indicative on their part Of
readiness 10 follow the methods pro-
vided for in the agreement for arbi-
tratlon. Yet the claim is made before
us by the spokesmen for the union
that on August 80 there was an obi
cation on the part OF the lnterborough
10 arbitrate all differences that might
arise, even though they involved ques-
tionS OF personal honor.
1T Is our opinion, after listening to
both sides and carefully reviewing the
testimony that whatever may be the
condition of the mind of the officers Of
the union or the officers of the COM
pany there Is clear duty to the pub
lie which the underwriters Of the
agreement Of August s, and this com
mission, have the right to assert. This
controversy does not involve the issue
Of trade unionism in this city.
To-day, as on August 6. the clear.
legal and moral principles governing
the situation remain the same. Each
side believes il is standing for its
rights, but the rights Of both sides are
subordinate 10 the rights Of the pub
lie. and It remains as true to-day as
on the 9Th Of August, that the publlc's
right to have controversy upon its
railroads settled peaceabiy and with
out resort 20 war of any kind is
right superior TO the rights Of either
the men or the company.
"Of course. one side or the other. or
both. might violate the agreement, but
they could not destroy their obligations
under It. for. after all, it merely stated
IN terms what both had admitted and
agreed were basic rights The agree
rncnt contains nothing about wages ~
hours or working conditions: II was
rot an ordinary contract, il was not
trf de union agreement. IL WAS an
agreement upon principles.
There should be effective legislation
70 meet such situations ms these. but in
the absence Of such legislation there
- no reason why the moral pressure
Of the whole community should not be
oIerted 10 compel both parties 70 OBJ
serve tho agreement which they state
was ia its essence fair aud reasonable
and which they regarded as sacred
We. Therefore. recommends
"GD That tho question whether the
distribution of the individual con-
tracts constituted a violation Of the