The Washington times., 1920-08-23
[DDOM|N|ON
SUIT TAKENUP
Railroad Attorney Asks Dismis-
sal Of Injunction Bill by
rs Employees.

Arguments by attorneys for the
and Old Dominion Rail-
road against the injunction suit
brought by twenty-five employees or
the road, asking that officials OF tho
corporation be restrained from dis
charging the compIainants because
they AFFILIATED with the Brotherhood
OF Railroad Trainmen, were begun
this morning before Justice siddons
in the District Supreme Court.
Attorney Wilton J. Lambert, for
the railroad, iled a motion to dis
miss the bill OF complaint on the fol-
lowing grounds:
THAT said bill does not set forth
any facts warranting the granting Of
the relief prayed for.
That the said bill contains no
equity
That the said bnl contains no
facts waTranting the relief sought
under the Railroad Transportation
Act referred to therein.
And for other reasons apparent
upon the face OF the said bilI'
Lambert contended that Title }, Sec
tion 361, OF the Culnmins-Esch bill
does not apply to the Washington
and Old Dominion Railroad" holding
that the act does not affect 'interur-
ban electric lines.
CLASHES BETWEEN ATTORNEYS.
Several times there were clashes
between Lambert and Crandall II.
Mackay. who represented the en-
ployes over the character of the road.
During the war when the Govern
ment took over the railroads. Lam
bert declared the character OF the
Washington and Old Dominion road
was established when the Railroad
Administration held that II had no
Jurisdiction over IL, for the reason
that the law exempted street rail-
ways and interurban electric lines.
Questioned by the court. Lambert
declared electrifcation of line was
regarded as sufficient test OF the
law.
Mackay interjected that the Wash
ington and Old Dominion road was
not a standard interurban system:
that IL operated in connection with
the Southern and Norfolk and West
ern lines: that ii engaged further
more in interstate commerce.
Despite the freight business which
the line admittedly conducts, Lam
bert insisted the road was held to be
exempt from the Transportation act
by the Railroad Administration it
self.
'It performs no service in Potomac
Yards" he said. at does not own a
dollars worth OF interest in the yards
nor does it pay dollar of rent in
the yards"
PHRAsEOLOGY IN DISPUTE.
Much of the argument today re-
lated to the phraseology OF the trans
portation act. Mackay contended the
act clearly holds that all wage dis
putes should be taken before the La
Dor Board recently appointed by Pres
ident Wilson.
The Washington and Old Dominion
operates fifty-four miles of track of
interstate railway from the District
to Bluemont, Va, and from the Dis
trict to Great Falls and from Blue
mont Junction to Alexandria.
Colin II. Livingston, president of
the road; J. V. Davis, general man.
ager D. II. Hinegardner, chief clerk,
and h. L. Prince, trainmaster, are
named defendants in the INDUCTION
suit brought by the employees.
1t is claimed the twenty-five COM
plainants were discharged because
they had Joined the r. E. Lee Local
Union OF the brotherhood OF Railway
Trainmen at Alexandria, Va. They
declare they were refused a hearing.
The court asked If the complainants
had not claimed they had been dis
charged because they had Joined the
union. Lambert replied the bill of
complaint did not go as strong as
that, merely stating that it was be
lieved" this was one of the reasons
for the discharge of the twenty-five
men.
Justice Siddons asked if there is
any kind of agreement between the
Old Dominion and any of the lines
from which it receives freight. This
brought an emphatic denial from
Lambert.
good deal of the time was spent
arguing the jurisdiction of the Cum
mins-Esch act and the meaning of
the sections relating to the Labor
Board and the Interstate Commerce
Commission,