St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-03-03
JUDGE JENKINS AROUSED.
A LABOR ATTORNEY SHAKES HIS FIST
At THE COURT.
CAN Mp. EMPLOYEES STRIKE :,
The Judge, Much Annoyed by the
Labor Lawyers. Says the North
ern Pacific Men Can Stop
Work, Either Singly or in a
Body, and Go to Texas If They
Desire,

MILWAUKEE, March 2.-Judge Jen-
the application of Chief Arthur, of the
Brotherhood Of Locomotive Engineers:
Chief Sargent, OF the Brotherhood of
Firemen, and other labor leaders for a
modification Of the order issued by
Judge Jenkius prohibiting the employees
Of the Northern Pacific road from en-
tering upon strike. 7. w. Harper, of
Terre Haute, Ind, opened In behalf of
the petitioners. The court room was
crowded with labor people and their
friends. During his argument Mr..
Harper had hot set-to with the court.
Judge Jenkins broke in on him at one
time, and asked him what he meant by
the term striking" Harper replied:
ut is simply quitting OF work."
mo, sir" said the judge.
"Then what is striker" retorted
Harper.
1T is quitting for the purpose of
enforcing certain conditions" replied
the judge.
Mr.. Harper could not agree with the
judge, and did not seem to be very much
awed by the dignity of the court, which
usually keeps even the greatest attor.
neys very careful and courteous.
before ain done with you," shouted
Harper, shaking his fist at the judge,
VI will show you special act of con-
gress which gives the men
THE VERY RIGHTS
which you have enjolned them from
exercising" Mr.. Harper then resumed
his argument. Attorney Charles
QuarleS followed in an argument OH the
application of the federal law to the
point at issue. Under the natural con-
struction of the language of the order
the restrictions were very broad. 1t
restrained the men from striking from
any and all causes, present and future,
and it would not even let the chiefs of
the railroad orders confer with the
men.
"Will you please point out the clause
which prohibits them from SO comforting
with the men% asked Judge Jenkins,
who exhibited an unusual amount of
feeling throughout the argument, and
was frequently vehement in his re-
marks.
Mr. Quarles then gave his definition
of strike, and gave several references
to sustain his definition.
The judge said there never was any
intention to prevent the men from quit
ting. That was their legal right, and, if
they wanted to, they could stop work
singly or in a body, and 20 to Texas if
they wished.
That's all we want" shouted man
from the rear OF the court room. Court
soon after took recess until afternoon.
The receivers were represented by
Gen. Mcknight, ex-senator Spooner and
George p. Miller.
RECEIVERS PAYNE AND oAKEs
were in court, as were MesSrs. Arthur,
Sargent, Ramsey. Clark, Wilkinson.
Wilson and the other labor leaders.
Robert Schiling and bevy of local
labor men occupied seats on the spec
tatOrS' behcnes. There were also
number of attorneys and prominent
business men in court as spectators.
When Attorney Quarles resumed his
argument in the afternoon he quoted
definition OF strike given by one of the
labor chiefs present, Mr.. Clarke, which
denied that force and intimidation have
anything directly to do with strikes.
Judge Jenkins asked Mr.. Quarles if it
would be legal for men to conspire
against the receivers to cripple the
property.
''In some cases." replied Mr.. Quarles,
L IiiiNh III WOulu, DcCduSc lb 10 uU6 tuc
primary object of the combination to
cripple the property, but only all Incl
dent of it.''
Mr.. Quarles went on to argue that the
court had no right to interfere with the
right OF the men to peaceably persuade
other men to quit work.
This court may extend its jurisdic-
ton, but not its power" he said. ''It
has not the power to change rights, no
matter what hardships may result from
the conflict. The police power is the
only one which can interfere here"
j. H. Mcknight opened for the re-
ceivers. He said the injunctional order
had been misunderstood. 1t was not
intended to limit the right of employees
to quit. because he remembered that he
asked the court to make the writ read
that the men could quit at any time re-
gardless of consequences. and the court
refused to include that. Before Mr..
Mcknight had concluded, court ad-
journed until tomorrow.