New-York tribune., 1920-08-31
Charges by Both Sides of
Breach of Faith Be-
come So Acrimonious
Session Is Adjourned
Union Would Bar Mayer
Federal Jurists' Demand
to Review Any Award
Protested by Workers


\ At the conclusion of the hearing
designed to bring out the merits of
both sides in the controversy and to
suggest a possible mode of settle.
ment, the situation did not move for.
ward toward solution in any wav
Patrick j. Shea, international organ.
izer and executive board member of
the Amalgamated Association of Stree,
and Electric Railway Employees of
America. and Louis Fridiger, counsel
for the association. maintained that
only unlimited arbitration" with no
interference. either on the part Of
Judge Mayer or any one else. would he
acceptable to the men.
Promise to Abide by Award
I'VE will abide by any award If the
aroitrators," said Mr.. Fridiger. "even
II 1t grants US not nickle of increased
wages. put we demand that the com
pany abide by the arbitration clause ot
the agreement concluded with us Az. ~
gust 8. 1919, and signed, among Others
by Judge Mayer himself"
On this point Mr.. Fridiger and Mr.
Shea repeatedly charged the company
with having violated the agreement
Mr. Frldiger asserting that Clause 3 OF
the agreement, which. he said, was die.
tated by Mr.. Garrison himself, in the
presence of Judge Mayer, distinctly
provides for arbitration of ali diffsr.
ences arising thereafter" between the
company and its employees. The in
slstence of Judge Mayer and Mr.. Gar
rison upon review of any award in
the present controversy by the Federal
Court, Mr.. Fridiger charged, consti-
tutes violation of the agreement.
Mr.. Garrison contended that the
agreement was violated by the men
and not by the. company, because the
men failed to give the company thirty
days notice of the termination os the
contract, as proved for in the
copies of three tentative drafts Of
changes sent him by the union leaders
on July "a, 1920, four days before
expiration of the agreement of August
y, 1919. These proposals, Judge Garri-
son said, he regarded as constit, ting
proposals for new agreements and not
changes in the old one. Both Fridieer
and Shea. however. maintained that
the mere sending of these tentative
drafts to Mr.. Garrison as changes to
be arbitrated constituted in themselves
notice of the desire on the part of
the men to change or terminate the
old contract
Quibbling Over Law
gust 29 before venturing to call a
strike said Mr.. Fridiger. "Or does
Judge Garrison regard this action on
our part as q mere coincidence ?"
We are not here to discuss points
OF law, shouted Commissioner Con-
nelly in impatience. supporting Mr..
Barrett. Mr.. Fridiger. while you are
qulbbling here the people of Brooklyn
are walking"
Fridiger replied that the point of the
legality of Judge Mayors insistence on
reviewing any award made by a board
OF arbitration was very important
one. 1T is the crux of the situation, "
cried Fridger. Il challenge any one
TO produce any court decisions, or
precedents, to the effect that receiver
Of company cannot enter into arbi-
tratlon agreements, as is contended by
Judge Mayer and Judge Garrison If
this be true why did they do so last
year?"
s40,ooo,ooo Outlay
Mr.. Garrison maintained that "this
year conditions are different" and
cited in support the fact that wage in
creases demanded by the men would
place an additional burden of
No,O0o.OO0 annually upon the company
ana would necessltate an outlay of
"o,ooo,OOO year in wages. This
amount. Mr.. Garrison said. would be
equal to the entire annual receipts OF
the company. Unless the court can
\ put its foot upon any such exorbitant
award, should the arbitration board
grant the wage demand of the men
Mr. harrison said, the company will be
driven out of business.
4 10 this argument Mr.. Fridiger re-
phed that the men we're perfectly con-
scious of the fact that they cannot ex-
pect the arbitration board, if any be
named, to grant their full wage de-
manos, and that, in addition, if the
..onpany can convince the arbitrators
mat 1t cannot grant the demand of the
men or any wage increases, the men
decision.
The very fact that Judge Garrison
anu Judge Mayer insist that any award
oe subject to Judge Mayors approval
i.huicates that they realize the men
nave good case and fear to submit the
usSpute to the impartial adjudication
A said
Considerable acrimonious debate was
produced by the communication flee
WIN S'h the commission by the Brooklyn
Ihsmoer of Commerce, condemning the
strikers for violating their agreement
uus oHering to act as mediator between
'he company and the men. Fridiger de,
manded that the communication be ex-
eiuded from the record and bitterly ar
la'gned the Brooklyn Chamber of Com.
merce for FIRST condemning the mer
ana then offering its mediation in the
controversy" He asked why the
Brooklyn business men did not first
consult the strike leaders, as they did
tae g. K. T. officials, before condem
ing the men "for violating their agree
1 And do they expect US to take their
professions Of friendship seriously
1,ter such a glaringly prejudiced han
aihg of the problem on their part %
shouted Fridger.
commissioner Barrett declined to ex-
eiude the communication from the
record. but assured Fridiger that the
opinion of the Brooklyn Chamber OF
commerce "is not the opinion Of this
commission"
% dhe hearing was adjourned until
S;So o'clock this afternoon. Following
soJ'urnment, however, Commissioner
garrett went nto private conference
VII Mr.. Fridiger, Mr. Shea, James
sheridan and George Tracey, mem
ssers OF he strikers executive commit
see, IN effort to devise ways and
means OF reaching an agreement be.