Evening star., 1917-01-09
RAILROADS ARGUE
NADAMSON TEST
Companies Side Presented by
Attorneys in United States
Supreme Court.
CLAIM LAW is .ONE-SIDED

The Supreme Court of the United
States continued today hearing of the
test case brought to decide constitu-
| tionality of the Adamson act, with the
railroads presenting their side Of the
controversy. The roads counsel were
expected to occupy the entire day with
their arguments. leaving Frank Hager-
man, special assistant to the Attorney
General, to conclude for the govern
ment tomorrow
In outlining the railroads attack
! upon the law. Walker d. Hines. chair
man of the railroads general commit
| tee of attorneys. who opened today's
hearings. laid stress upon the carriers
contention that the law is not a limita-
ton of hours of employment but mere
ly a wage-fxing statute. He denied
that Congress is given power to fix
wages under the Constitution.
j. G. johnson to Close.
John G. Johnson of Philadelphia was
chosen to close the case for the rail-
roads. Arthur Hitler of Kansas City.
and Gulf railroad, whose attack upon
the law was chosen to test it's national
application, will not participate in the
oral presentation.
That the law operates to increase the
wages of the best paid railroad men
and therefore. discriminates against
those receiving less pay was another
line of attack taken by the carriers
It's operations. it was insisted. would
add many millions of dollars to rail-
Joad expenses, with proba bic conse-
quent increase of rates
Claim Law Is One-Sided.
The railroad employees, the carriers
also contended. are not bound by the
law to remain in service and not strike.
although the law is binding upon the
railroads in the mandates enacted when
national railroad strike was threaten
ed last summer.
The roads counsel insisted that the
law cannot be upheld upon any theory,
and asked that Circuit Judge Hook
decision declaring the law void and en-
joining it's enforcement be affirmed.
Argument for Railroads.
Another large crowd attended the
court hearings today, including rail-
road attorneys and congressman. At
torney General Gregory and his staff
were present.
In opening the railroads argument
Attorney Hines denied statements of
opposing counsel that railroad officials
in the hearings on the bill before Con-
gress, had agreed to accept and a bide
by what Congress should enact. That
agreement, Mr.. Hines said. applied to
the Presidents whole program and not
merely a single feature Of it,
The railroads protested against
adoption of only portion Of the pro-
gram" he said.
The railroads chief counsel denied
was an after thought, Citing the
haste in which the law was passed, he
added:
1T is not unnatural that legislation
passed in this way should be disap-
pointing. Not grant what 1t was in
tended to grant and be unworkable."
Questions Use of Power.
Attorney Hines argued that Congress
has not the power to increase wages of
railroad employees. and even If it should
be held by the court that such power
does exist, it was improperly exercised
in the Adamson act
Chief Justice White and Justices Day
and Brandeis frequently interrupted
with questions
Can Congress authorize the inter-
state commerce commission to fix rail-
road wages?" Justice Day asked. and
Mr.. Hines said it was doubtful unless
wages were abnormally low and should
interfere with transportation.
Asking if the brotherhoods' wage
contracts were fixed prior to 1919 JUS
tice Brandeis said:
Shouldn't this court take judicial
notice of the fact that there has been
a great increase in the cost of living
since these wages were fixed"
The railroads attorney answered that
the fact would not justify the court
in holding that evil existed which