ment of good relation under ordi- actual everyday labor question nary circumstances; hence, in the from one considered as a quarrel appointment of Mr. Clark receiver between inferiors and superiors, on the Union Pacific that point is between masters and servants, in entirely eliminated. S. H. H. which no one directly interested Clark, receiver of the Union was concerned, to one between Pacific, will be the same Mr. man and man, and one in which Clark, President of the Union the nation is interested, and should Pacific. Consequently, the em- use its offices to see that justice ployes of the Union Pacific have results to all concerned. It has, not as much cause for anxiety as consequently, made the possible to what future relations are to be methods of ascertaining this of a as they would have had there been more rational nature, opening up a change in management. This possible avenues that it is hoped does not necessarily mean, how- will be explored. ever, that because certain condi- It has been widely circulated tions have existed in the past that through the newspapers that the were satisfactory to the mass of appointment of a receiver abrothe employes that they have no gated all contracts or agreements cause to look after their interests that had existed between the comand be prepared to protect them pany and the employes, but so far when necessary, or that there is no employe has been able to disnot likely to be changes offered, cover anything to substantiate it. but not any more so than if no re- It would be inferred from the receiver had been appointed. The ports that by some hocus-pocus of influences that would press in that the law, that gave authority for the direction under a company man- appointment of a receiver, nullified agement exist just the same under contracts, agreements and obligaa receiver, but cannot be any tions that existed prior thereto stronger or results any different between parties interested. Such if the same counter-influences are must be considered nonsense. continued under one as the other, Receivers were made a creation of though a different line of action law that all parties interested might be found best to be pursued might be equally protected in under a receiver than would most their rights in the enforcement of generally be considered proper contracts and obligations, hence, under the corporation when certain contingencies arise, such as a breach or inability to agree, but it might be developed that such a course would be the proper one at all times.

could not, by the simple fact of the appointment of a receiver, change anything of that nature that had existed prior thereto, and a receiver could do no more in disturbing the relations between The differences that have arisen company and employes than he in the past between employers and could as simply president or genemployes have done one thing eral manager. Such as had rested that gives much hope for the on the grace of either party the future; it has brought the question receiver might withdraw his grace into general consideration, espe- from, but he could do the same cially those affecting means of thing in the capacity of general transportation. It is demonstrated manager. Being an officer of the that these differences have affected court makes no difference as to the whole of society, and, conse- the doing of it. That rests enquently, have a serious interest in tirely in the person, and, if done, the matter, and it has raised the would imply that protection from

the consequences of it was to be sideration then formerly, and that expected from the court. Many of those rights are not altered in the understandings regulating or the least by the fact of a receiverdesignating the relations or duties ship, but there is a possibility of between such parties have been of their being more surely defined. such a nature that they remained There is, apparently, therefore, in force only at the grace of either nothing for the employes to fear party, but not all of them. But it resulting from the appointment of is hardly to be expected or thought a receiver that will handicap them of that Mr. Clark would change in pressing claims for just comhis personality by a change of pensation for services and protecoffice. Whoever sent out reports tion of their rights. The same that such agreements were abro- duties in the performance of their gated by the change for such labor, and to themselves, devolve are the only ones that could be so on them now as before. They have reached certainly have implied that Mr. Clark was possessed of a very mean character, which those who know him best do not believe, and will not believe until it be demonstrated.

The employes, however, must not lose sight of the fact that the interests they desire most to protect are under the pressure of influences outside of the personality of the management, but which must be perceived through that personality. It comes from those interested in gaining wealth out of the operation of the railroad. The more they take in, and the least they pay out, the better it suits them, and as wages are one of the largest pay-out items and the one most common of attack, it must be expected has and is having due consideration. It must be taken as a fact that that influence is for a reduction in wages, and that it is not particular from where it comes, so long as it lowers the outgo. Now, it is charged on the management to make that gain in wealth, and the receiver has much the same on him. He must seek to make the property meet the obligations of the corporation and put it in shape to continue to do so.

the same interests to protect, and methods that would be right before will be right now, organization being as surely necessary and recognition being in proportion as that is in thoroughness.

THE RIGHTS OF LABOR AND THE
COURTS.

The decisions of Judges Taft and Ricks, in what is known as the Ann Arbor cases have been considered by many as a blow at labor organization, taking from them their weapon of defense or severely crippling them, especially those whose members are engaged in those industries relating to interstate commerce.

It would seem to be a matter of great value to find out whether this is so or not, and if so, whether another weapon is not provided, far more powerful than the strike has been, which practically has been a form of civil war, in which a question of justice was never settled. It simply settled, for the time being, which side was strongest.

If, as some say, these decisions are the death blow to organizations of men employed on railIt must be remembered that roads, then it must be true that workmen have rights that courts, the principle on which such oreven, are bound to respect, and, ganizations rest must be wrong, too, that they have a higher con- or, if right in principle, it is pos

"I believe most thoroughly that the powers of a court of equity are as vast and its processes and procedure gencies of increasingly complex busias elastic as all the changing emerness relations and the protection of rights can demand.'”

The court also quoted similar words of Justice Blanchard of the Supreme Court.

sible for right to be forever illegal burdens on the other, new remcrushed out. The latter cannot be edies and unprecedented orders are entertained. by any thinking per- not unwelcome aids for the chancellor son, and that they have been to meet the constantly varying deformed for a right purpose is now mands for equitable relief. Mr. Justice generally admitted, their method Brewer, sitting in the circuit court of being what calls forth the main Nebraska, said: criticism, and it must be from those who consider the method of operation, as commonly practiced, essential to their existence, that believe they have received their death blow by the decisions referred to, they dealing entirely with the method and not with the right of organization itself, but, impliedly, recognizing that right, "Changing emergencies," etc., for the court taking cognizance in are arising more over the protecequity of men acting together, tion of rights through the increascharged with wrong-doing, must ingly complex relations of emlikewise admit them into court, ployer and employe than anywhere should they come for protection or else. There is certainly a demand defense. It is a poor rule that for "equitable relief." If corpowill not work both ways. Conse- rations can find it there, why can quently, instead of accepting this not their employes? If new predecision as a death blow or even cedents can be established in the crippling them, it suggests meth- favor of corporations, why can ods of procedure that can give they not be established in protecthem increased power and import- tion of interests on the other side. ance, and more in keeping with We believe they can and should the age, by a resort to the same be attempted pending a more genpowers that their natural oppo- eral adjustment of social relations nents have, i. e., courts of equity, which must take place before aband if justice does not result stract justice can be assured. every time, it certainly will quite earlier days when people differed as often as by past methods, while and they could not argue it out yet the power to correct the defect they fought it out. The strongest rests largely in those who seek won, but strength was not always those powers. Courts are but a on the side of justice. These quarpart of government, and the rels interfered with the interests powers of government come from of other people in their belief. the people. That the field is open The opponents were compelled to here is shown by the following submit their differences to a deciwords of Judge Ricks:

"It is said the orders issued in this case are without precedent. Every just order or rule known to equity courts was born of some emergency, to meet some new conditions, and was, therefore, in its time, without precedent. If based on sound principles,

sion of the people. Theoretically it was the right way, though practically it has not always given justice.

The changes of method in carrying on industry have brought a new form of differences to be adjusted between parts of society and for the same reason demand forcement, affording necessary relief rational methods of adjustment. to the one party without imposing Heretofore, this has been practi

and beneficial results follow their en

cally done on the barbaric meth- The court, in rendering the deciods of force and has proved, as sion, says: then, that the strongest won and that justice was not always on the side of the strongest. Society, for no other reason than its own protection, should provide the means or open the avenues already in existence for the adjustment of those differences.

Practice has demonstrated that

"Cases are frequent where persons interested with corporate properties vention or redress of grievances threathave applied to the courts for the preened or inflicted by labor organizations. This is the first instance of which we have any information where members of such an association have,

ment."

differences arising between parties by concerted action, in an orderly way, in any industry of a public nature sought the arbitrament of a court to cannot be settled by methods of adjust a controversy relative to the force the strike, etc.-without wages and conditions of their employinfringing on the interests and rights of other parties. It was restraint of this that was the real effect of the decisions in the Ann Arbor cases, nothing further.

Who the petitioners are and the fact that they had had a contract with the company which had expired, which the receiver refused But if, impliedly, the workings to recognize or renew, is then of labor organizations on trans- stated at length. The receiver in portation lines were handicapped his answer said in substance that by the decision of Judges Ricks the engineer organization was not and Taft, they were directly broad- incorporated and many of its rules ened and made more powerful by and regulations were secret, which the decision of Judge Speer of the made uncertain the attitude of the district court of Georgia. organization in any difficulty that might arise in connection with the 66 'In equity. Petition by Water- contract. That a number of engihouse and others, styling themselves neers, employed by him, are not the committee of adjustment of the B. members of the brotherhood and of L. E. against H. M. Comer, receiver that it was not proper for him to of the Central Railroad and Banking contract with certain employes Company of Georgia, asking that the receiver be directed to make a contract with the locomotive engineers. Granted." (Vol. 55, Federal Reporter.)

while others are employed without such a contract. That such a contract rendered it impossible for the officers charged with the operation of the property to have such If, in the Ann Arbor cases, the freedom in its administration as is strike was made impracticable on necessary to its prompt and effirailroads to enforce the rights of cient management. As a common workmen, in this case а new carrier, the railroad is liable for method of guarding those rights damages which may result from was established. Organizations of the disorganization of its service. workmen were given proper recog- That the B. of L. E. is bound by nition in the court and were prac- secret obligations to withdraw tically declared a necessity for the from the service of railroad comadjustment of differences that panies in a body, causing great arise between corporations en- damage. That he should be at gaged in interstate commerce and full liberty to select the best men the operating workmen. In this and means of managing the busias in the Ann Arbor case, a new ness without regard to organizaprecedent has been established. tion of any kind. That his super

intendent has prepared a proper can be protected from the inevitable schedule of wages and conditions hardship and loss which all must enof employment. That if he should dure from the frequently recurring contract with the brotherhood it strikes. It will not be wise for those would be holding out a premium engaged in the maintenance of pubfor his employes to become mem- lic order to ignore the immensity of bers of the order, which he states the changes in the relations of the emis not to the interest of his trust. ploying and the employed classes, ocThat the brotherhood rendered it casioned by the phenomenal developimpossible for the officers of the ment of commerce and the prevalence railroad to come into direct con- of labor organizations. We are in this tact with the employes and pre- case directly concerned with a corporvented such free intercourse as is ation and a labor organization, both necessary to good and efficient ser- engaged in railroad transportation." vice. That no contracts had been entered into with orders of conductors and firemen and he had had no difficulty with them.

The court then refers to the size the railroad business has grown to be and the immense responsibility The court in its decision says: connected with it, and declares it "It will be observed that much of proper for the court to adjust diffithe receiver's answer is an argu- culties between the receiver and ment against the propriety and the employes. Citing that the policy of contracts of any charac- power of the court has always been ter between the officers of railway exercised to protect the properties corporations and the representa- from the damaging results of a tives of labor organizations."

All familiar with the work of labor organizations will recognize in the receiver's answer all the argument they usually have to meet. Their very right of existence is at issue here. The court says:

strike of the laborers and was satisfied that contracts and schedules of rates was praiseworthy and beneficial to both parties and accordingly directed the receiver to arrange such with the engineers, stating that the contract would not be restricted to members of the brotherhood, but will compre"The gravity and importance of the hend all engineers employed by considerations thus presented are ex- the receiver, whether members of ceedingly great. The control, under the brotherhood or not. any circumstances, by the courts of The court declares that the obcontracts between representatives of jection of the receiver as to being the immense values invested by cor- handicapped by such a contract porations engaged in the public duty depended solely upon the arrangeof transportation and the laborers em- ment of details. "There is an ployed in the same service will un- apparent dispute about the effect doubtedly appear to many as novel of seniority of service of an engiand dangerous. It is well, however, neer as affecting promotion. The to consider if a proper provision by court will provide, however, that appeal to the courts in the frequent where merit and ability are equal, and destructive conflicts between or- seniority of service shall prevail, ganized capital and organized labor and will arrange a fair tribunal for will not afford the simplest, most satis- the purpose of testing the merit factory and effective method for the and ability of various candidates settlement of such controversies. Is it for promotion, with the privilege not the only method by which the pub- of either party, in cases not reconlic and, indeed, the parties themselves cilable, to appeal to the court."