New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1916-08-18

the board Of directors had gone over
the matter Of men convicted of various
offences and decided that they should
rot be taken back into service.
Mr.. Quackenbush explained that at
the conference between Mr.. Shonts and
himself, representing the company, and
Mayor Mitchell and Oscar Straus, the
question of unemployment for such
men was taken up, Messrs. Mitchell and
Straus expressing the opinion that
separate clause should not be inserted
into the agreement TO cover such cases,
but that a general clause should be in
serted, giving the company direction
and control of the men IN the matter
of efficiency.
This, he said, the company maintains
covers the case of men who were con-
victed of various offences.
If" he added, "there is any lack of
agreement as TO what the agreement
really means, we are perfectly willing
to have it 60 back to a conference with
the Mayor and Chairman Straus."
Mr. Fitzgerald, replying. insisted that
nothing was said about what men were
TO return to work.
at was the agreement" he continued,
"that all men should return to their
former places. The wording on that
point is very clear"
Mr.. Fridiger asked il the men were
refused employment because of Mr.
Hedley's understanding Of the agree
ment or the orders of the directors, Mr..
Hedley answering that the directors
and Mr.. Shonts had stated that they in
tended the employment clause to mean
that men convicted of offences during
the strike should not be reemployed.
Hedleys Power Limited.
"Why," asked Mr. Vahey, when the
language used is so clear. should you
expect us 10 let our men suffer? IL
that was in your mind when you made
the agreement | cannot imagine why a
provision to that effect was not inserted
in the agreement"
Mr.. Fitzgerald ended long discus
sion of the lawyers by asking if Mr..
Hedley had power to treat with the
committee, or if the power lay with the
directors or President Shonts, and on
receiving reply that the power was
with the president and directors, re-
quested q conference between the COM
mittee and the directors and Mr..
Shonts to discuss the matter.
Mr.. Fridiger and Mr.. Quackenbush
then resumed the discussion as to the
meaning of the agreement, and the
conditions under which il was made,
counsel for the company saying that
the question of reemploying lawbreak-
ers was considered by the representa-
tives of the company and Messrs.
Mitchell and Shonts.
Efficiency Question Discussed.
"a great many things were men
ought not to be the subject of confer
ence. There was some talk about un-
dertaking to enumerate the question
of discipline and insubordination. the
failure to return fares, breaking the
rules Of the company and various other
things Of that sort, and then the sug-
gestion was made about getting it
down in a comprehensive way. II was
finally provided that the direction and
control of the men in regard 10 eff
cheney should not be the subject of
arbitration, and we made provision for
arbitration in case OF dispute as TO
whether or not the matter pertained
10 efficiency. The Mayor and chairman
of the Public Service Commission have
not committed themselves in any way
regarding the reinstatement OF men
convicted of crime"
Fitzgerald again interrupted the
lawyers argument by asking Mr.. He'd
ley about arranging a meeting with
the directorate.
ut is not" said he, "a question of
these fourteen men-it is Q question