The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1894-05-05


Boatuer, of louisiana, chairman of the
special committee of the judiciary COM
mittee of the house of representatives, ap-
pointed to investigate the Northern Pacific
decisions Of Judge Jenkins, today submit
ted in behalf of the majority OF the inyesti-
eating committee. report to the full ju-
dietary committee.
Alter reciting the well-known fact and
circumstances leading up TO the granting
of the two orders Of injunction by Judge
jenkins, the report proceeds AS fellows:
Notwithstanding the suggestion by en-
ploycs that they desired to confer, the
orders were Immediately obtained, with
out wait nc the results OF the conference
or being in possession OF any definite in
formation or the Intention of the en-
ployes with respect to the schedules upon
which they solicited a conference. The
original order received on the 18th of De-
cember had a two-fold aspect. 1t reduced
existing wages and enJoined aud prohib-
tied those who were to receive them il
they remained in the service of the
company from quitting the service with
or without notice, so as to cripple the
property or injure the operations of the
road. On being advised that il SO ordered
or advised By officers of organizations 10
which they belonged, the men would quit
service, the officers of the company imule-
di4tely asked for, and the judge granted
second order of injunction on tue 25rd Of
December
Your committee has no hesitation in de-
claring that the orders rendered were n
gross abuse of the powers of the court;
were supported by neither reason nor
authority; 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 advised before he rendered
it or the exact objects and purposes sought
TO be accomplished. There was no sugges-
gestion in either of these letters OF any fear
from illegal acts, but fear from traffic sus-
pension of an Attending damage to the
road and inconvenience to the public were
the sole reasons for the action which the
judge took.
Your committee does not concur In the
opinion of the judge that The decision rem
dered in the Toledo cases, page 81,
federal reports. by judges Taft and Kicks
at all supports his position in the
case under consideration. On the con-
trary. both cases clearly recognize the
that courts OF equity cannot in-
terfere with or enforce specific perform
ance of contract for personal service by
writs of injunction and other processes.
They also clearly recognize the right of
laboriDg people, as a means of selling their
labor at higher prices, of coerciug employ
ers to accede 20 their demands. In de-
the lawfulness of proceedings
Of this kidd, the judges justly take the law
as sustaining the employe, and iucon-
veuience to the general public cannot be
considered. If others would supply the
service which the strikers have aban-
doned, and are prevented from so doing by
intimidation, threats or unlawful
means. these acts are unlawful but ia
most instances would constitute viola
lions OF criminal laws and punishable rs
sucn
The conclusion therefore, of the Judge,
that the employees of the Northern Pacific
railroad company might be forced by him
by wrlts OF Injunction TO protect that COM !
pany from loss. aud the public from incon. |
venience by remaining i'll its service at "a |
rate of wages to which they had not given !
heir assent. Is one in which We Cannot |
concur and which in our Judgment is sup |
ported by none of the decisions which he |
cites.
Your committee find nothing in the tes- |
.imOny, nor see corrupt Intention On the 1
part of the Judge to render these orders. |
Il is altogether possible he is sincere in his /
that he properly exercised the |
OF his court. This view Of the !
;ase prevents us from recommending any |
LOOKING to his impeachment,
,ut Ia order that there may be no further
ACusc lOt reuClJlOn OF any -ucu orders or /
lecrees, and that the courts of equity of
II the United States may not be deceived as
o the extent of their powers in enforcing
'nntrocts TOR personal services by legal
process, we recommend the enactment OF a
tatate which Will prevent them from
Icing 30.
We also feel constrained to call atten-
ion to the abuses which have spruDg up
lnder the powers assumed by judges of
he courts of the United States, TO appoint
eceivers for railroad corporations. These
riders being rendered in court, under pro-
eedings instituted nomiuaiiy fer the pur-
'ose OF effectiug foreclosures, but really
or the purpose Of averting the pursuit of
redltors and the enforcement of lawful
bligations, are considered as interiocu-
DRY and not subject to appeal. We be-
eve the cases Tor which receivership
nay be ordered in the courts Of the United
tatss should be declared by statute.
lie anomaly has been presented for
ears, of great railway corporations being
perated, and the business Of common car
iers being carried on by the United States
nrough Judicial lines OF tie government