| Show CONTRACTS WITH A decision baa just been rendered by judge judee speer of the united states circuit court at macon la is of interest aa as bearing upon there the relations between railway companies and their employed emp loyes especially in regard to strikes the case in which the was rendered arose upon an application by certain engineers in the empl amply y of the cent central ral railroad and banking company of georgia f ajr r an order requiring the re ceaver of the road to sign IL a contract for the ensuing year with the brother hood bood of locomotive engineers it appeared upon the hearing of the application that out of locomotive engineers in the employment of the receiver upon the various divisions of the central railroad and banking company of Geor georgia georgala gla were members of atie brotherhood of L locomotive engineers that they had been fr sev oral years yearb working under a contract made between a general committee of the brotherhood and the officers of the railroad that since the first day of Do december cember 1891 they have been work ing under a contract which expired on the first day of december 1892 that a few days daya prior to that timothey tim timi 3 they gave notice t t the general superintendent of the company that they desired certain changes in the contract and that they had bad rem remained aued in the service of the company though the and receiver had refused refined to enter into any new contract or consider the old contract longer in force unless ordered to do so by the court meanwhile pending the adjustment of the controversy which was postponed for ninety days by virtue of a clause of the contract which entitled the receiver reo eiver to notice for that period and of which he claimed the benefit the court continued the contract in force in opposition to this application the receiver objected that the brotherhood of locomotive engineers WAS not in corp orated that many of its rules and regulations which have a bearing upon any contract its members might make are withheld from the public thus placing the receiver at a disadvantage and rendering uncertain the altitude ati tude of the brotherhood in any difficulty which might arise in connection with the contract that a number of the locomotive engineers employed by him were not members of the brotherhood ol and that it was not proper tr fr t r him ti contract in thle this way with certain a employee while others were amply d without such a contract that such a contract rendered it impossible for the of officers floers charged with the operation of the property to have such freedom in its administration as was necessary to its prompt and efficient management that as ao a common carrier the railroad under his control was liable for damages which might result from the disorganization of its services ces and that the brotherhood of L locomotive co motive engineers was bound by secret obliga eions dionn to withdraw from the service of railroad companies in a body causing great damage that the receiver should be at full liberty to eel select bot the best beat men and means of managing the business without regard to organizations izat ions of any kind that it he should contract with the brotherhood it would be holding out a premium for his em aloyes to become members of that order which was not to the interest of his trust and finally that the brotherhood rendered it impossible for the officers of the railroad to come into direct contact with the employed emp loyes and prevented such u entree free intercourse as was necessary to good and efficient service judge beeer decided against the contention of the receiver and in favor of the application of the engineers engine ere afar some reference to the import to ance of the function diso discharged barged by the engineers and to the subject of the power of the court to require the r making of such a contract as that suggested judge speer 8 peer said certainly it follows then that it IS if in the power of the court in the il terest of public order and for the protection of the property under the COL arol to direct a suitable arrangement wah w th Us its employed emp loyes or officers to provide compensation and COndIt conditions lODS of their employment employ ment and to avoid if possible po sible an interruption of their labor and duty which will be disastrous to the trust injurious to the property there is no reason why the receivership in this respect should be conducted in a malner differing from the large pre 14 arice ance of the successful and prosperous railroads of the country it appears from the abe proof tabt about 90 per cent of the ra froada of the united culled states make contracts or schedules ot of rates and regulation for the employment oi 01 their operatives which are agreed to by the representatives natives of both the parties and which serve for abe guidance of all while they the remain in force many of these contracts or schedules are in evidence we are satisfied irom these facts that such arrangements under proper restrict restriction ioup are praiseworthy and beneficial to both pait pai tieN lem and we therefore shall no longer hesitate to direct the receiver to enter into an appropriate cun contract tract or schedule ot 01 rates and regulations with the el gir ginders gi leers the judge however directed that the contract be not restricted to mem bers of the brotherhood of locomotive engineers though he said that membership bero hip if i f the order was and would be no disqualification to service on railroads under the control of the court su so long as the rules and regulations of the order were treated as subordinate to abe law of the land this at once brought up the question whether rule 12 ot oi the brotherhood so much uis cussed of late was ws in with the law jaw odthe of abe land this rule was held by the court to no DC plainly a rule or agreement in restraint of trade or commeree commerce bino so obnoxious to the provision of the federal antitrust anti trust law of 1890 bet illegal combinations or contracts colu tracts to iu restraint of cf trade or commerce among the several statts statis or with foreign nations and to other provisions of the feutral statutes cited in the opinion juige however that even it if there were no statutory nonstatutory upon the subject no court of equity could justifiably Justi flatly direct its receiver to 10 enter into a oun contract tract with a body ot of men who h hold 0 I 1 a themselves bound to repudiate their contract and disregard a grave public duty because of areal a real or alleged grievance which come other person or corporation not dot a party to the contract inflicts or la in alleged to inflict in flitt nit upon a party to the contract bur bui upon somebody some bouy else tile engineer ho however having tn ahr ugh luear counsel declared that upon thin as upon every other subject they were willing an aej i anxious to take the direction ot the court this declaration dechi ration ws accepted us tie made in good fai falt thaud hand was made part pan of the contract the court required the receiver to maue the old contract was ordered to remain in force until the terms of tao new contract should be settled after specially directing that no engineer or other person in the employ ot of the calir ad should be discharged or in any way injured in his station on account of the proceeding or of any part taken therein judge speer laid down this rule as to the right of the engi engineers nears to q it the service of the while any en engineer ginver may at all any time exercise his bis right as an individual to leave the service of the receiver ae may not do so in such a manner as to injure the properties or impede their proper management by the receiver and that in ease case of any issue with the management in which the brotherhood or iti it i members are concerned and the members in the employ of the receiver shall desire to leave his bis service in a body r otherwise in such manner as may iu in any way impede the operations of the road they will be required do so u on OB such terms and conditions as the court may think proper for the protection of the interests of the property and the maintenance of justice and fair play to all concerned |
