2. Shall existing law be so amended or supplemented as to provide that, upon any board of investigation or arbitration of disputes between railroad carriers of interstate commerce and their employees, the employers and employees shall have equal representation, and the public, as having paramount interest, shall have a majority representation?

3. Shall existing law be so amended or supplemented as to establish a separate, permanent division of the existing statistical department of the Interstate Commerce Commission, the functions of which shall be to make a continuous study of all questions relating to wages and conditions of service upon railroad carriers of interstate commerce and to compile statistics which, together with the records and services of such division, shall be immediately available to any and all boards of investigation or arbitration created to consider disputes between such carriers and their employees?

CHARLES F. WEED, Chairman,

F. C. DILLARD,

R. H. DOWNMAN,
THOMAS F. GAILOR,

EMORY R. JOHNSON,
GEORGE A. POST,
WILLIAM Z. RIPLEY,
G. W. SIMMONS,

ALEXANDER W. SMITH,
EDWARD P. SMITH,

CHARLES R. VAN HISE,
HARRY A. WHEELER,

Railroad Committee.

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF THE COMMITTEE'S REPORT.

I. The interests of the public are paramount.-The maintenance of transportation service continuous and unimpaired is of vital importance to every industry in the United States and to every citizen. Therefore the public has a right to insist that transportation service shall be continuous and uninterrupted. Every industry of any importance must of necessity depend upon the railroads to bring from a distance at least a part of the raw materials it uses and to take to market the greater part of its products. If he railroad service is interrupted even for a short time many industries would close their doors, their employees would be thrown out of work, and their customers would be unable to secure deliveries, and the results of this interruption of the public service would extend to every part of the industrial field. Unemployment would be widespread and the national commerce and industry would be paralyzed.

Every citizen of the United States, especially those who live in cities and constitute about two-thirds of the entire population, must of necessity depend upon the railroads to bring him from a distance a large part of the food and other household supplies that he needs in his daily life. If the railroad service is interrupted even for a day, he would feel it very acutely. For example, in New York City the milk supply would last but a day, the supply of perishable foods less than a week, and the staple foods not more than three or four weeks, so that if there should be a continued suspension of railroad service almost the entire population of the city would face starvation in less than a month.

It is therefore clear that if any interruption of railroad transportation is threatened the public has a right to insist that it must not occur before complete and authoritative information in regard to the causes of the threatened interruption has been obtained and laid before the public.

II. The right of the public to uninterrupted transportation service is superior to any private right.-The Constitution of the United States gives to every citizen certain rights and guarantees that he shall be protected in their enjoyment just as far as it does not interfere with the rights of others. The Constitution does not, however, give to any group or class of men rights that are superior to or equal to those rights of the public which are essential to the public welfare.

The public welfare demands that at all times the enormous population of our cities shall be supplied regularly with food and other necessities, and that the industries of the country shall be able to depend without question on continued transportation service for both freight and passengers.

Therefore, the public authorities have a right to insist that when there is any conflict between the rights claimed by a particular group of men and the unquestioned rights of the public the welfare of the public shall first be considered, and the rights of the public shall be regarded as superior to the rights claimed by any particular group.

III. The plan recommended to Congress by the President of the United States is shown by experience to be the most successful plan that has yet been devised for the prevention of strikes and lockouts or for the mitigation of their evils.— The plan recommended by President Wilson in his message to Congress December 5, 1916, is similar to the plan adopted by Canada nine years ago when Parliament passed the Canadian industrial disputes act. This plan has not resulted in preventing strikes entirely in the public utilities of Canada, but it has very greatly reduced their number and lessened the evils resulting from them.

The Canadian Government feels so confident that this is the best plan that has yet been devised that within the last year it has extended the operation of the law to all industries producing war materials, and now proposes to extend certain provisions of the law to private industries.

It is thus evident that the principle involved in the recommendation of the President has been tested successfully by a people similar to our own, and that if we should adopt the proposed plan we would be taking a very important step toward the satisfactory settlement of railroad labor disputes.

IV. The committee's proposal would not supersede any existing methods for adjustment but would add a new and important procedure.-Federal law, in the Newlands Act, now provides for three kinds of governmental intervention in railroad labor disputes-mediation, conciliation, and arbitration. The committee's proposal supersedes none of these but adds an efficient supplemental procedure. Whereas the methods of Federal intervention now existing are wholly ineffective without the consent of both employees and employers who are concerned and are thwarted by rejection on the part of either side, the new method would leave no choice to the parties with a narrow interest, having its effect by virtue of the will of the public exerted in its own interest.

V. The public should have a majority representation on any board appointed to investigate or arbitrate a dispute between interstate railroads and their employees.--The present law provides that when a board of investigation or arbitration is appointed to deal with a railroad labor dispute each party to the controversy—the railroad, the employees. and the public-shall have equal representation in the board.

This plan has been objected to on the ground that the representatives of the direct parties to the controversy, i. e., of the railroads and the employees, are necessarily advocates, so that the representative of the public becomes in reality an umpire who is called upon not to adjudicate a controversy, but to settle a dispute.

It is deemed important that the direct parties to the controversy should continue to have on each board representatives who are entirely familiar with the question in dispute and are in a position to lay before the board all of the facts that have a bearing on these questions, but it is equally important that a majority of the members of the board should be free from any obligation direct or indirect to advance the interests of one or the other of the direct parties to the controversy.

It is therefore proposed that the public shall have a majority representation on every board.

VI. The public interests demand that a board of investigation or arbitration shall have from the beginning of its work all of the assistance that can be furnished by expert Government statisticians who have for a considerable period made a continuous study of railroad labor conditions on the transportation systems of the country as a whole.-The present law provides for the voluntary arbitration of each railroad labor dispute by a special board, but it does not make adequate provision for a full public investigtion of the facts. This is a serious defect in the present plan and should be remedied.

It is not possible for a board of investigation or arbitration to prepare for itself all of the statistics in regard to railroad wages and working conditions that it will need in order to decide the questions in dispute. There should be some authoritative source from which the board can secure these facts as soon as it is appointed.

74873-17- -5

It is therefore proposed that Congress create in the Interstate Commerce Commission a division of railroad labor statistics, fully equipped and properly representative. The duties of this division would be to assemble and maintain a complete statistical statement of all of the facts which either the railroads or their employees believe will be needed in future disputes; to secure in advance agreement by both sides, as far as possible, on the facts; to advise boards of investigation or arbitration as to the procedure and standards adopted by previous boards, the difficulties they have encountered, and the methods used in dealing with those difficulties; and to furnish information in regard to railroad labor conditions not only to the Interstate Commerce Commission and the special boards of investigation or arbitration appointed under the Newlands Act, but also to Congress and the public.

VII. The committee's proposal provides a method of utilizing the impartial power of public opinion, a form of compulsion manifestly appropriate in a democracy. That public opinion is capable of forcing partisans to come to a settlement which is just between themselves and fair to the public has been admitted by both sides in recent controversies in their wide appeals through the press and other mediums of publicity. At present such appeals and most of the information received by the public inevitably have partisan bias. The committee's proposal, however, would provide the public with unprejudiced, nonpartisan, and essential information and thus afford a sound basis for public judgment. Such a public opinion will either bring the contending parties to an amicable adjustment between themselves or will force them to submit their differences to arbitration, in either event avoiding an interruption of the transportation services upon which every community must rely. That arbitration has been distasteful to either side in some instances is no objection, since any just reason for finding fault with boards or methods as now provided by law can be obviated through amendments.

Public opinion is the basis of our law and of all our institutions. It is the highest force to which we appeal in our public affairs. It is peculiarly appropriate as the power which, when impartially informed, will deal justly and effectively with differences arising between two such important parts of the public as railway employees and railway managers and the persons they rep

resent.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE COMMITTEE'S REPORT.

I. An investigation and publication of the results will not always serve to enlighten public opinion, since many controversies involve questions different from the justice of an increase in wages or of a decrease in hours.-The situation caused by four large bodies of employees on roads throughout the country acting in unison in making certain demands, perhaps simple in substance but intricate in form, at least from the point of view of the public, is abnormal. However useful investigation might be in such cases, it might not serve a useful purpose in many other controversies which arise regarding the interpretation of written agreements, substitution of negroes for white firemen, the jurisdiction of a union over certain employees, various questions arising out of "open or closed" shops, methods of promotion such as the use of the "seniority" rule, justification for the discharge of employees, etc. In other words, the remedy of compulsory investigation can at most be suitable only for exceptional cases, such as the concerted action of four brotherhoods of employees on practically all the railways.

II. Employees are entitled to act collectirely, even when they are in the service of enterprises of public utility.-Concentration of capital and management is practiced by the railways, as by other modern enterprises. In the case of the engineers in eastern territory arbitrated in 1912 the arbitrators said that although 52 roads were nominally before them a large number were controlled by a comparatively small number of systems. Whether roads are consolidated in management or separate, the men are justified in acting collectively to care for their interests. Being employees of large private enterprises managed primarily upon ordinary business principles for private gain, they can not rely upon individual bargains or upon the liberality of managers who are employed for the purpose of making their roads successful investments. To collective bargaining a right to act promptly and in concert is essential. A suspension of this right even for a brief period would very seriously impair it. III. Eren temporary prohibition of strikes and lockouts may be ineffectual.—Possibility of fine and imprisonment will not deter men from leaving their em

ployment in concert, if they feel they have sufficient cause to act together. They can proceed in such a way as to make proof of their violation of any prohibitory law well-nigh or quite impossible with our present means for detection of lawbreaking. Even if detection were possible, the jails would not suffice to hold the men who might be involved.

Similarly, a railway might by gradually lessening its services achieve the results of a lockout without affording such evidence as would serve to convict its officers in court.

IV. The proposal makes no provision to protect the public after a board of investigation has made its report, except in so far as public opinion may be effective. The report of a board of investigation has no effect otherwise than by informing public opinion. Except in so far as public opinion may have coercive effect, either employees or employers may disregard the report, and the employees may go on strike because of their original contention or for like reason the employers may take any action that is now legally open to them. In other words, the committee's proposal does not indicate a method by which, upon the failure of public opinion to bring about an amicable adjustment, the public interest in unimpaired and uninterrupted transportation service will be protected.

V. Any prohibition of strikes contains an element of incompleteness unless there is regulation of other items of railway expenditure than labor.-The public's final interest may be in uninterrupted railway service, but its immediate interest, and the interest most often appealed to, is pecuniary-the rates it pays for transportation of persons and foods. These rates are influenced by expenditures of the roads for all purposes. It is unjust to deal by restrictive legislation with one element-expenditures on account of labor and its conditions of work—and not deal with other elements such as the prices paid for equipment and supplies, the consideration received for securities on which interest and dividends are paid, etc. In the 12 months ended with June 30, 1915, expenditures for wages were approximately $1,150,000,000, for interest and dividends about $1,088,000,000, and for supplies of all kinds, including coal, in the neighborhod of $700,000,000. In the year ended with June 30, 1914, these figures were approximately $1,345,000,000 for labor and about $930,000,000 for interest and dividends; and in the year ended on June 30, 1913, the corresponding figures were $1,330,000,000 and $834,000,000.

VI. The public's fundamental interest is not primarily in the rates it pays for transportation but in the welfare of a large body of its own members; this interest is not necessarily promoted by having on boards a majority of members representing the public.-Even though railways are public utilities they are private enterprises privately operated. Their size is so vast, and their operations are on such a large scale, that members of the public who have no earlier knowledge of the intricacies and difficulties of the railway industry will not be able readily to grasp the problems at issue. These are matters for experts. Consequently, the public's best interest will be served by having problems of railway labor passed upon by men who have experience with these problems. Otherwise the results of investigation and arbitration may be acceptable to neither side and instead of composing differences may result in further controversies.

The part of the population which depends for its livelihood upon employment by the railroads is very considerable, reaching a figure which is between 5 and 10 per cent of the whole population.

[Appendix A.]

PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS TO CONGRESS DECEMBER 5, 1916-PART DEALING WITH

RAILWAYS.

GENTLEMEN OF THE CONGRESS: In fulfilling at this time the duty laid upon me by the Constitution, of communicating to you from time to time information of the state of the Union and recommending to your consideration such legislative measures as may be judged necessary and expedient, I shall continue the practice, which I hope has been acceptable to you, of leaving to the reports of the several heads of the executive departments the elaboration of the detailed needs of the public service and confine myself to those matters of more general public policy with which it seems necessary and feasible to deal at the present session of the Congress.

I realize the limitations of time under which you will necessarily act at this session, and shall make my suggestions as few as possible; but there were some things left undone at the last session which there will now be time to complete, and which it seems necessary in the interest of the public to do at once.

In the first place, it seems to me imperatively necessary that the earliest possible consideration and action should be accorded the remaining measures of the program of settlement and regulation which I had occasion to recommend to you at the close of your last session in view of the public dangers disclosed by the unaccommodated difficulties which then existed, and which still unhappily continue to exist, between the railroads of the country and their locomotive engineers, conductors, and trainmen.

I then recommended:

First, immediate provision for the enlargement and administrative reorganization of the Interstate Commerce Commission along the lines embodied in the bill recently passed by the House of Representatives, and now awaiting action by the Senate, in order that the commission may be enabled to deal with the many great and various duties now devolving upon it with a promptness and thoroughness which are, with its present constitution and means of action, practically impossible.

Second, the establishment of an eight-hour day as the legal basis alike of work and of wages in the employment of all railway employees who are actually engaged in the work of operating trains in interstate transportation.

Third, the authorization of the appointment by the President of a small body of men to observe the actual results in experience of the adoption of the eighthour day in railway transportation alike for the men and for the railroads.

Fourth, explicit approval by the Congress of the consideration by the Interstate Commerce Commission of an increase of freight rates to meet such additional expenditures by the railroads as may have been rendered necessary by the adoption of the eight-hour day, and which have not been offset by administrative readjustments and economies, should the facts disclosed justify the increase.

Fifth, an amendment of the existing Federal statute which provides for the mediation, conciliation, and arbitration of such controversies as the present by adding to it a provision that, in case the methods of accommodation now provided for should fail, and full public investigation of the merits of every such dispute shall be instituted and completed before a strike or lockout may lawfully be attempted.

And, sixth, the lodgment in the hands of the Executive of the power, in case of military necessity, to take control of such portions and such rolling stock of the railways of the country as may be required for military use, and to operate them for military purposes, with authority to draft into the military service of the United States such train crews and administrative officials as the circumstances require for their safe and efficient use.

The second and third of these recommendations the Congress immediately acted on: It established the eight-hour day as the legal basis of work and wages in train service, and it authorized the appointment of a commission to observe and report upon the practical results, deeming these the measures most immediately needed; but it postponed action upon the other suggestions until an opportunity should be offered for a more deliberate consideration of them. The fourth recommendation I do not deem it necessary to renew. The power of the Interstate Commerce Commission to grant an increase of rates on the ground referred to is indisputably clear, and a recommendation by the Congress with regard to such a matter might seem to draw in question the scope of the commission's authority or its inclination to do justice when there is no reason to doubt either.

The other suggestions-the increase in the Interstate Commerce Commission's membership and in its facilities for performing its manifold duties, the provision for full public investigation and assessment of industrial disputes, and the grant to the Executive of the power to control and operate the railways when necessary in time of war or other like public necessity-I now very earnestly renew.

The necessity for such legislation is manifest and pressing. Those who have intrusted us with the responsibility and duty of serving and safeguarding them in such matters would find it hard, I believe, to excuse a failure to act upon these grave matters or any unnecessary postponement of action upon them.

Not only does the Interstate Commerce Commission now find it practically impossible, with its present membership and organization, to perform its great