St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-04-08
JUDGE JENKINS, DECISION

The decision of Judge jenkins on the
rehearing of the application for an in
junction restraining the employees of
the Northern Pacific railroad from strik-
Ing, and the officers OF the labor organi-
cations from ordering strike. is not
breakdown from his original decision.
but rather reaffirmation of the opinion
then expressed, together with an ey.
pldnatory paragraph or two designed to
remove some erroneous ideas as to the
effect OF the courts dictum. The Judge
Is as emphatic in this as he was in his
previous declaration in his statements
of the law bearing upon the question.
and has taken pains to make his posi-
ton as clear as language can express it.
The modification" hoped for by some
has not come.
AS matters now stand, the law de-
clares that it is illegal and reasonable
Tor any man or combination of men to
interfere with the operation of a rail.
road which is in the hands of receivers
appointed by the federal courts. Such
interference constitutes an overt act
rebellion-against the United States
government. and is punishable as trea-
son. The judge shows that the law is
capable of being interpreted in no other
way. 1t is not for him TO say whether
or not the law is just and equitable.
That question was not at issue
Since the congressional committee
was appointed to Investigate this de-
cision there has been change in the
sentiment both of the public and the
members of the committee. The chair
man, Mr.. Boatner, expresses the opin-
ion that the investigation is not
neceSsary-that the recourse of those
who feel themselves aggrleved is an
appeal to the supreme court of the
United States. The question is not one
OF sentiment. In all probab ility, Judge
jenkins would have preferred to ac-
cord to the employees of the railroad the
privilege of compelling an increase of
their wages. but the law stood in his
way, and his mandate was issued &C :
cordingly. Ii he had decided other.
wise than as he did, he would have been
false TO his oath of Office and to the
trust reposed i'll him. and would have
forfeited the respect Of all right-mind.
ed citizens.
1t appears as if nothing would come
of the investigation soon 10 be made.
The members OF the committee cannot
condemn the judge for enforcing the
laws enacted by the body of which they
are members. They may differ with
him AS to the intent of the law. but they
cannot assume to say that his interpre-
tatlon is erroneous. They can but re-
port that an injustice was done, due to
the imperfectiOnS of the law, and rec
Ommend that it be amended or repealed.
But before this is done the advice of
Chairman Boatner should be followed,
and the case appealed to the supreme
court, where the decision of Judge
Jenkins may be reviewed, and, if found
erroneous, reversed; but if in accord
ance with the letter and intent OF the
law, sustained. This is the proper
course for the parties interested to pur-
sue. Any other savorS of an attempt to
coerce and intimidate the judiciary-a
course that should be summed by every
law-abiding citizen.
The GLOBE has full confidence in the
ability of Judge Jenkins as an inter-
prefer of the law, and in his personal
integrity. He cannot be swerved In his
course, if he believes it to be right, by
any threats of impeachment. He is an
honorable man, whose motives are
above reproach, and has ever had
kindly leaning towards the -laborin
men, and no one vino knows him will
doubt that if it lay III his power to assist
them he would stretch point TO do so.
But if he failed to interpret the law
according TO his convictions of its mean.
ing. he would surrender both his hon.
esty and his dignity as jurist.
As the GLOBE has before stated, and
as Chairman Boatner now advises, the
best course for the officials of the labor
organizations to pursue is 10 take the
questions at issue to the supreme court,
where the consttuticnalitY of the law
NAV. he finally determined and nc