The record-union., 1894-10-02
Special to the REcoRD-UNIov.

Special to the RECoRD-UNIoN.
CHICAGO, Oct. 1.-Judge Jenkins strike
Injunction was overruled to-day by the
United States Court OF Appeals and the
case remanded, with directions to strike
from the restraining order of the court
the clause which aroused the country
when the order was issued, and which
resulted in the Boatner investigating
committee of Congress. The intervenors,
representing the leading labor organiza-
tions of the country, asked that two sec
tions of the injunction be eliminated.
The Court of Appeals decided that no
court could compel man or body Of
men from quitting individually or in
body the service of an employer. The
court said that Judge Jenkins had eX-
ceeded his powers when he enjoined the
employees of the receivers of the Northern
Pacific Company from quitting the serv-
ice of the said company with or without
notice, so as to cripple the property or
hinder the proper operation OF SAID road.
The decision was considered by the
lawyers who packed the courtroom as
one of the most important opinions de-
| liVered in the United States in decade.
1t defines the status before the law of
! labor organizations in the conduct of
strikes and affirms the rights of courts OF
equity to Interfere by injunction where
there is reason to believe the law would
be violated. 1t holds that the men may
withdraw in a body from the service of
an employer, using, however, neither
force, threats nor intimidation toward
other employees who do not join them.
nor must they use any device" to mo-
lest alarm, harm or interfere with others
w Tho desire to take their place.
Justice Harlan of the Supreme Court
delivered the opinion. Sitting with him
were Judges Wood, Grosscup and Jen-
kins.
Judge Jenkins appeared to be undis-
turbed by the opinion. The audience
that listened to the reading of the opinion
was most distinguished one. X-Presi-
dent Harrison and his partner, Mr.. Elan,
sat side by side well up toward the bench.
After disposing of other business the
findings OF the court were merely an
nounced by judges Wood and Jenkins.
Justice Harlan then began reading the
opinionin the case of =. NJ. Arthur ct al,
intervenors, against Thomas f. Oakes,
Henry G. Payne and Henry G. House, re-
ceivers ofthe Northern Pacific Company,
as the celebrated case is known on the
docket.
Justice Harlan held that q body
of men had the right to quit, ire
/
result. They had, however, no right TO
conspire, do damage or embarrass the
! company. He did not agree with jenkins
in his famous definition of a strike, "that
it was necessarily illegal" Judge Harlan
held there was such thing as legal
strike. Judge Jenkins injunction was
modified.
That part of Jenkins injunction which
restrained the employees of the road from
striking or, in the language of the iniunc-
| ton, IRON so quitting the service of said
| receivers, with or without notice, as to
cripple property or prevent or hinder the
operation of the road" the Court of APP
peals declares was in violation of the
| rights of employees, who could not legally
| be restrained from leaving the employ of
| the recei\ ers of the company when they
saw fit to do so, whether they quit in a
! body or individually. That part Of the
| injunction which restrained the en-
| ployes from entering into a combination
or conspiracy to quit with the intention
of crippling the property and preventing
| the operation of the road is sustained.
| On the whole, the decision is a clear
recognition of the right of employees to
| strike.