The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1894-10-03
JUDGK JENKINS ORDER.

ONDaN'
When. more than year ago. Judge
Jenkins made his now famous order
forbiddlng men 10 break their contract
with their employer by quitting WORK
at their pleasure. The Times at once
denounced the act as one that was re-
pugnant 10 the very foundation upon
which Anglo-Saxon liberty and civiliza-
ton rested. We pointed out that the
idea Of compelling men TO specifically
perform contracts when made was one
that belonged to the Roman civilization
Of slavery, but that the Anglo Saxon
would not tolerate IT, The Anglo-Saxon
was a freeman In all things and he
broke his contract after he made 1t at
his pleasure, substituting in place or
performance the payment OF such
damages as a jury Of twelve men, who
knew all the facts and circumstances
Of the case. might determine TO beNjus'.
That. we said, was the distinguishing
characteristic Of Anglo-Saxon ciyiliza-
ton that had made the race the strong
and virile race OF the world. We said,
therefore, that Judge jenkins order was
at war with the very foundation upon
which our laws and institutions rested
The United States Circuit Court of APP
peals has had this order before 1t, and
II has sustained the view Of the case
which The Times presented. but IL mas
drawn distinction between one man
breaking his contract and quitting work
and number Of men doing the same
IN execution of an agreement, the object
20 xrhI io ipftiGt a W4ntOD and
malicious injury upon the employer. In
the case Of the single individual the
court, speaking through Justice Harlan,
of the Supreme Court Of the United
States, pointed out that 10 forbid a per-
son 10 quit work was the same thing
as 10 assume a power 70 order him to
continue work and lat that was invol-
untary servitude. The court declared,
therefore, that that part OF Judge Jen-
kins' order was erroneous and must
be reversed. But the court pointed out
that IL was one thing for a single in
diyiduai to do this, but quite another
thing for a number of individuals to do
the same thing by agreement and in
concert for the purpose OF bringing
wanton injury upon the employer, and II
affirmed Judge jenkins right TO entoin
q number of men from quitting work,
when they were quitting for the express
purpose OF inficting wanton injury ana
damage upon the, employer.
Ii IL very questionable whether any
distinction between the liability of one
person infiicting a wanton injury and
many persons INJECTING such an injury can
ina lots
wanton injury he is liable for it. and so
all may II they do the same thing. SO
we are compelled to say that we see no
ground for distinguishing between the
kind OF procedure which will be applied
20 one person for infiictng a wanton in
Jury and that which will be applied to
many when they inhct the same. IL
forbidding one man to quit work would
be he same thing as asserting right
10 make him work. forbidding many men
TO quit work would equally be asserting
a right TO make them work and would
be reducing them to Involuntary servi-
tude. This is repugnant 10 the whole
theory OF our laws and institutions. and
IS also repugnant 10 the thirteenth
amendment to the Constitution of the
United States. which declares that neither
slavery nor involuntary servitude. except
as a punishment for crime, shall exist
within the United States.
When men quit work by agreement
for the purpose of causing their en-
pioyer n malicious and wanton injury
they do an unlawful act for which they
are liable TO him in damages. But we
can never agree that a court can forbid
them to do II. for that would be 10
assert that It can force them to go on
with their work. which would be reducing
them 10 a state Of Involuntary servitude
or slavery. The only resort OF the en-
ployer is TO an action for damages or to
a criminal prosecution. The report OF the
case is not perfectly clear. 1t may be
that the court only intended to forbid
the men TO combine and conspire TO
quit and not TO forbid them to quit II
the first is all that is meant We have
nothing to say against the decision,
though II would be of about as much
practical value as an order that man
should not think.