Evening star., 1917-01-08

As to Arbitration.
"In the Adamson law the idea Of the
board Of arbitration has been adopted
by direct action rather than through a
board. Wage regulation has a vital
connection with interstate commerce.
Congress power is ample enough
to authorize direct control over the
wage relation Of persons engaged in
interstate commerce. There certainly
falls within that power the right to
take all steps necessary to put down a
strike or prevent an mpending one"
A separate brief was fled by Frank
Hagerman Of Kansas City. Mo-, special
assistant attorney general In addition
to defending the law as within the
power of Congress Mr.. Hagerman con-
tended the railroads had previously ad-
mitted, but now deny. the law is capa-
BILE Of operation. Judge Hook. he said,
sustained Its practicability by ordering
the railroads to keep special account OF
wages due employees under the new law
to insure their prompt payment II 1t is
sustained by the Supreme Court.
Contention Of the Railroads.
The railroads in their brief contend
that the Adamson act is solely a regu-
lation Of wages and Is not limitation
Of the hours of service. II the Adam
SON act is limitation upon the hours
Of service then by Implication 1t repeals
or amends the sixteen-hour law OF
1907. they say. But no one pretends
that such Is the case. The Adamson
act leaves the sixteen-hour law unim-
paired and deals only with the estab-
lishment of permanent standard Of
wages with temporary provision as
to the amount Of wages to be paid dur
ing a period Of from seven to eleven
months. they claim.
An actual limitation OF the hours Of
service to eight could be accomplished
only by a relocation Of railroad termi-
mails or speeding up Of trains. In-
creasing the speed Of freight trains
train load Low freight rates have been
effected very largely by heavy train
loading. This economy would largely
be destroyed II train loads had to be
lightened, SO that they might be moved
at a higher speed.
Chief Attack on Constitutiona1ity.
The chief attack on the constitution
.ality of the law is directed at the third
section, which attempts to increase the
wages of a portion Of the railroad en-
ployes for a period Of from seven to
eleven months. The railroads argue
that this is q violation of the NTH
amendment to the Constitution, be-
cause it Is an extreme Interference with
the liberty Of contract, an appropria-
tion Of property without compensation
and legislation for the direct benedt OF
one class of tho community at the d.
rect expense of another class of the
community.
The apparent intent of the law, the
railroads claim. Is to give a large in
crease in wages to the best paid men
and a smaller increase to those less
well paid. 1t cannot be argued, they
say. that such wage increases would
promote efficiency or safety.
The act cannot be upheld, the rail
roads claim. on the ground that It's OBJ
ject was to avert the strike. No case
can be found that where the property
of one person was transferred to an
other merely to appease that other per-
son and prevent him from committing
an injury or doing harm to the com
munity. The act was not proper
means of settling a controversy, they
say, because there was no hearing or
the merits, and the act Is binding or
the railroads. but not upon the EN-.
ployes.
The railroads point out that. even
though the law were upheld to be
valid, it's meaning Is clouded in am
biguities, and that II could not be
obeyed without a judicial determine
tion of Its meaning.