The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1894-04-07
THE ORDER MODIFIED.
A Slight Change in Judge Jenkins
Famous Ruling.
LEADERS MAY ADVISE A STRIKE.
Tho Judge Says His Order wns Only to
Prevent Destruction of Property and In
reference with tho Rights of others.

reference with tho Rights of Others.
No Restraint on Individual Liberty.
MILWAUKEE, April Judge Jenkins
has modified his injunctional order against
the striking OF employees of % Northern
Pacific railroad by striking out the clause
which reads: "and from ordering, recon-
mending, approving or advising others
TO quit the service of the receiver of the
Northern Pacific on Jan. !, 1894, or at any
other time" In all other respects the
Judge denies the motion OF the men.
The decision Of Judge jenkins grants
the technical modification of the supple
mental order asked for by the petitioners.
while IL reterates more strongly the real
position taken In the injunctional order.
In reality there is not point yielded The
order to strike out the offensive clause in
the supplemental injunction taken in con-
nectlon with what goes before is Il deli
cately pointed rebuke to the counsel for
petitioners for quibbling over the ambig-
uity Of n clause, the substance of which
was clearly and strongly stated in preced-
ing sentences.
In his decision the judge said: at is not
the province of the court to assume part
in the contest between capital and labor
which it is asserted to herein involved. IL
may be that the aggregated power OF com
bined copital is fraught with danger to
the republic. 1t may be that the aggre-
gated power of combined labor is perlous
to the good of society and to the right of
property. IL doubtless is true that in the
contest the rights of both have been in
vaded, and that each has wrongs to be re-
9 dressed.
'If danger to the state exists from the
G
quiring additional restraint or notifica-
tion of existing laws, IL IL within pecu-
liar provinceof the legislature to deter
mine the necessary remedy and to declare
the general policy of the state touching
the relations between capital and labor.
With that the judicial power of the gov
ernment is not concerned. But it is the
duty of the courts to restrain those war
ring factions so far as their action may In
fringe the declared law of the land that
society may not be disrupted or its place
invaded, and that individual and corpor-
ate rights may not be infringed.
"The receivers employed on the opera
tion of the property some 1900 men.
These men ure now vice officers Of the
court, and are responsible to the court for
their conduct. The petition represented
to the court--and the facts are confessed
by this motion-that some of the men
threatened to suddenly quit the service of
the receivers and to compel by threats and
force and violence to other employees, who
were willing to continue in the service, to
quit their employment; that by organized
force and intimidation they would prevent
others from taking service under the re-
cefvers In place of those who might leave
such service, and would therefore, ns a
means Of forcing the receivers to submit
TO the terms demanded. disable the re-
4eivers from operating their road and dis
charging their duty to the public as n com
mon carrier, and would so conduct them
selves by disabling locomotives and cars
and taking possession Of the property OF
the receivers as to destroy and prevent its
use
"The restraining portion of the writ
complained of, and now under considera-
tion, prohibited these men from combin-
ing and conspiring TO quit the service with
the object and intention of crippling the
property of the receivers and embarrass-
ing the operators of the roHd and from car
rying that conspiracy into effect The
writ was in prevention OF the mischief as
serted. In no respect as | conceive, does
that portion of the writ interfere with in.
diyldnal liberty.
an the case under consideration the re-
ceiyers sought to change the terms and
conditions Of service. The employees had
of course the right TO decline service upon
the terms proposed. Notwithstanding
the public character Of the service, upon
notification OF their declination at time
prior to Jan /, 1894, reasonable in view OF
the service in which they were engaged
they had the undoubted right to abandon
their employment upon that day. That
however, is not the case presented to and
dealt with by the court,
"Nor does The rectitude OF the writ OF
injunction rest upon any mere right of thu
employees in good faith to abandon their
employment. The restraints imposed were
with reference to combining and conspir,
ing to abandon the service with the object
and intent Of crippling the property. Its
Office was to restrain the carrying into
effect the conspiracy"
If Judge jenkins still holds that the
men cannot quit work in body an ap,
peal will be taken to the United States
circuit court of appeals, which will pass
upon the merits of the conflicting decis.
ions