Morris tribune., 1894-01-03
WOULD NOT ENTER IT
A NEW PHASE OF THE NORTHERN
PACIFIC INJUNCTION CASE.

The United States Court at st. Paul Re-
fused to sanction That Part of Judge
Jenkins Order Preventing the Men
From Striking-What Judge Caldwell
Would Have Done In the Premises.
LITTLE Rock, Jan. 2.--Apropos the
threatened strike which was to have
taken place Tuesday on the Northern
| Pacific and the recent order of Judge
| Jenkins at Milwaukee enjoining the
strike and the subsequent order OF Judge
Caldwell at st. Paul, the following will
be of interest to the public. The gem
eral administration of the receivershlp
devolves on the United States circuit
court at Milwaukee. That court is
called the primary jurisdiction, the re-
celyers having first been appointed and
the property turned over to them under
the orders of that court. But it was
necessary that the United States courts
in the other states through which the
road runs should confirm for that district
the action of the Milwaukee court.
This was Gone by filing bill and pro-
curing ancillary receiverships IN each
state. All orders of the court of primary
jurisdiction requiring to be enforced IN
the other states are usually entered as
of course, and presented to those courts
Refused to Enter the Order.
But a gentleman in the city from
st. Paul says the United States circuit
court in that city refused to enter that
part of the order of the Milwaukee court
enioining the officers of labor organiza-
tions from ordering a strike on the road
or the employees from striking on ac-
count of a reduction of their wages, but
did enter SO much of the order as en-
Joined the employees in case they struck
from interfering with the property or
men employed to take their places.
When Judge Caldwell was appealed
to for information on this point he de-
clined to say more than that the writs
issued by the two courts will disclose
the the difference between them. 70
an Associated Press reporter who asked
Judge Caldwell if there was any danger
of strike on any of the roads in this
circuit in the hands of receivers, he an
swered that there was not as far as he
knew.
What Caldwell Would Do.
Upon being asked what he would do
if strike was threatened on account of
a reduction of wages on any of the roads
for which he had appointed receivers,
he replied:
eff receivers should apply for leave to
reduce the existing scale of wages, be-
fore acting upon their petition 1 would
require them to give notice of the appli-
cation to the officers or repr esentatives
of the several labor organizations to be
affected by the proposed change, of the
time and place of hearing and would
also require them to grant
such officers or representative
leave of absence and fur
1aish them transportation to the place of
hearing and substituting them while in
attendance, and I would hear both sides
in person or by attorneys, if they wanted
attorneys to appeal for them. The en-
ployes on a road in the hands of re-
ceiver are employees of the court, and as
much in its service as the receivers
themselves, and as much
Entitled to Be Heard
upon any proposed order of the court
which would affect the whole
body of employees. If, after a
full hearing and consideration, I
found that it was necessary,
equitable and best to reduce the scale of
wages, would give the employees ample
time to determine whether they would
accept or reject the scale. If they re-
jected it, they would not be enjoined
from quitting the service of the court
either singly or in a body; in other
words, would not enjoin them from
striking; but if they made their election
to strike would make it plain to them
that they must not, they quitting the
service of the court, interfere with the
property of or the operation of the road
or the men employed to take their
places.
"a United States court can very
readily find the means to effectually
protect the property in its possession
and the persons in its employ have
in one or two instances pursued the
policy have indicated, and the differ
ences were satisfactorily adjusted"