The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1894-05-04
COURTS DANGEROUS.
Congressional Committee to In
vestigate Judge jenkins,
Finds Nothing Warranting an
Impeachment.
BUT HE WAS GUILTY
Of Gross Abuse of the Courts
Power.
Power of Courts is Growing
nonnaroYr~ Tbou Gov
BUT HE WAS GUILTY

w WASHINGTON, May 4.-1n0 report OF
Boatner. chairman of the special judi
ciary committee of the house, appointed
to investigate the Northern Pacific de-
cisions of Judge jenkins, today submit
ted in behalf of the majority of the in
vestigation committee, a report to the
full judiciary committee. After reciting
the well-known fact and circumstances
leading up to the granting of the two or
ders of injunction by Judge Jenkins, the
report proceeds as follows:
Notwithstanding the suggestion by the
employees that they desired to confer,
the orders were Immediately obtained
without waiting the result of confer
ence, or being in possession of any defin-
ite information of the intention of the
employees with respect to the schedules
upon which they solicited conference.
Gross Abuse of Power.
Your committee has no hesitation in
declaring that the orders rendered grant
ing injunctions against striking were a
gross abuse of the power of the court;
were supported by neither reason nor
au b )rity were beyond the jurisdiction of
the judge and were therefore void The
second or supplementary writ was more
reprehensible than the first, because the
judge was advisedbefore he rendered it of
the exact object and purposes sought to
be accom- plished.
these letters of any fear from any illegal
acts but the fear from suspen-
sion of traffic of an attending dam
age to the road and inconvenience to
the public. were the sole reasons for the
action which the Judge took. Your com
mittee also finds that no measures look
ing to a strike had been iuaugurated,
nor does any seem to have been in con-
temptation, nor does it appear that any
of the persons named or referred to in
g
the service of the company against their
| will
1t does not appear, however, that while
| they regarded the writs void, they believ-
ed that SO long it was in force, they
were bound to obey it under penalty of
punishment for contempt if they violated
it and this consideration might have
been more effective than they were
aware of in inducing them to remain in
the service of the receivers.
Possibly He Was Sincere.
The conclusion of the judge, that the
employees of the Northern Pacific Rail-
road company might be forced by him
by writs of Injunction to protect that
company from loss and the public from
inconvenience by remaining in its SER
vice at rate wages to which they had
| not given their assent is one in which we
cannot concur, and which in our judg-
ment is supported by none of the decis-
| ions which he cites. Your committee
finds nothing in the testimony, nor sees
any corrupt intention on the part of the
| Judge to render these orders.
1t is altogether possible that he is sim
| cere in the conviction that he properly
exercised the equity jurisdiction of his
court in preventing loss and damages
which would have resulted from law
full strike against the Northern railroad
company. This view of the case pre-
vents US from recommending any pro-
ceedings looking to his impeachment,
but in order that there may be no fur
ther excuse for the rendition of any such
orders or DEGREES, and that the courts of
equity of the United States may not be
deceived as to the extent of their
powers in enforcing contracts for per-
sonal services by legal process, we rec
commend the enactment of a statute
which will prevent them from doing so.
| We also feel constrained to call atten-
| ton to the abuses which have grown up
under the powers assumed by the judges
of the courts of the United States to APP
point receivers for railroad. corporations.
Power of Courts Dangerous.
The powers exercised by the courts
/ through the receivers are purely of their
| own creation. the result of judicial con-
struction not ascertained or limited by
statute and therefore dangerous. Your
committee is of the opinion that the
cases for which receivership may be
| ordered in the courts of the United States
should be declared by statute.
| The anomaly has been presented for
years of great railway corporations be-
| ing operated and the business of COM
mon carriers being carried on by the
| United States through the Judicial lines
| of the government, and of the judges
possessing at once the powers pertaining
! to other judicial officers, and combining
with these, the powers of the president
! and directors of corporations united in
one and the same person.
The committee is also of the opinion
| that the powers asserted by the judges
of the United States courts to
| punish for contempt is dangerous
and should be limited by law: In the
case eported-federal report in re Rig
| ms, Judge Pardee declared that his pow
er to punish for contempt was unlimited,
both as to the amount OF the fine and
duration of imprisonment. In his judg-
ment he could decide without appeal
| what constituted contempt, who COM
mitted the act and the extent of the pun
ishment to be inflicted.
If this principle be a correct one the
limitations contained in the constitution,
viz; providing for trials by jury, being
confronted by witnesses, being repre-
sented by counsel. etc, would be re-
lieved Without taking issue with the
81,