The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1894-05-11
SEVERELY REBUKED.
The Congressional Committee Reports on
the Injunction of Judge Jenkins

The Congressional Committee Reports ON
the Injunction of Judge jenkins.
WASHINGTON, May 5.-Representative
Boatner, of Louisiana, chairman of the
special committee of the judiciary COM
mittee of the house of representatives,
appointed to investigate the Northern
Pacific decision of Judge Jenkins, to-
day submitted in behalf of the majority
of the investigating committee re-
port to the full Judiciary committee.
After reciting the circumstances
leading up to the granting of the two
orders of injunction by Judge Jenkins,
the report declares that, notwithstand-
ing the suggestion by the employees
that they desired to confer, the orders
were obtained without waiting the re-
suits of conference or being in pos
session of any definite information
of the intention of the employees with
respect to the schedules npon which
they solicited conference. The origi-
nal order, received December 10, reduced
existing wages and enjoined and pro-
hibited those who were to receive
them, if they remained in the service
of the company, from quitting the
service with or without notice so as to
cripple the company or injure the
operations of the road. The second
order, granted December 23, was to in
sure to the company the compulsory
services of the operatives then in its
employ. The report continues:
"Your committee has no hesitation in
declaring that the orders rendered were
a gross abuse of the power 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 ad-
vised, before he rendered it, of the ex-
act objects and purposes sought to be
accomplished There was no sugges-
ton in either of these letters of any
fear from illegal acts, but the fear
from the suspension of traffic of an at
tending damage TO the road and incon-
venience to the public were the sole
reasons for the action which the judge
took.
"Your committee also finds that no
measures looking to strike had been
inaugurated nor does any seem to have
been in contemplation, nor does it APP
pear that any of the persons named or
referred to in the writs of injunction
have remained in the service of the
company against their will"
The report discusses the rulings of
Judges Taft and Kicks in the Toledo
cases and holds that these did NOT de-
clare strikes unlawful in themselves,
but should violence be done the en-
ployer by those who had combined
against him, or if others who would
supply the service which the strikers
had abandoned should be prevented
from doing so by violence, intimida-
ton, threats or other unlawful means,
these acts were not only unlawful, but
in most instances would constitute vio-
lations of the criminal laws and be pun
ishable as such. The report continues:
1.-THE conclusion, therefore. of the
judge, that the employees of the North
ern Pacific Railroad company might be
forced by him by writs of injunction to
protect that company from loss and the
public from Inconvenience by remain
ing in its service at a rate of wages to
which they had not given their assent,
is one in which we cannot concur and
which in our Judgment is supported by
none of the decisions which he cites.
your committee find nothing in the
testimony nor see any corrupt inten-
l1a 90 la I'D -,
these orders. 1t is altogether possible
that he is sincere in the conviction that
he properly exercised the equity juris-
diction of his court in preventing loss
and damages which would have re-
suited from lawful strike against the
Northern Pacific Railway Co. This
view of the case prevents us from
recommending any proceedings look
ing to his impeachment, but in order
that there may be no further excuse
for the rendition of any such orders or
decrees and that the courts of equity
of the United States may not be de-
ceived as to the extent of their powers
in enforcing contracts for personal SER
vices by legal process, we recommend
the enactment of a statute which will
prevent them from doing So"
The report discusses the present sys-
tenn of appointing receivers for rail-
road companies and declares that it is
dangerous and should be changed. 1t
also holds that the powers asserted by
federal judges to punish for contempt
are dangerous and should be limited by
law.