Alma record. (Alma, Mich.) 1878-1928, 1894-03-09
WOULD END STRIKES.
|yyers Say That Would Be the
fleet OF Judge Jenkins Rule.
ri to Secure a Modification of His
Iorthern Pacific Order-Its Contin-
nance Would Place Labor In
an Attitude of slavery.
IMPORTANT LEGAL rIaHr.

IMPORTANT LEGAL FIGHT.
uwAUKEE, March 5.-Capital and
n met face TO face In Judge Jen-
court here Friday and began what
Misses To be battle over principle
is of national Importance. II
a bold stand that capital, repre-
d by the attorneys of the Northern
fic railroad, took-the position
a Judge could by writ compel men
,frain from quitting the service of
Employer. In opposition TO this the
rney for the United Organiza-
of Railway Employees took the
md that il was the right of
V man 10 quit the service of any
n man, 10 work when he pleased
TO rest when he pleased. Involved
veen these two widely divergent
was the question of the right of
,r to organize, TO act in unison or
n any way combine to advance its
rests.
le arguments Friday were upon the
ton to Judge Jenkins TO have him
ify his famous strike order wherein
enjoined the employees of the
thern Pacific railway from
ting the service of the road.
TO combat this the receivers
e represented by full array of
lsel, with eX-United States Senator
a c. Spooner at their head. The
pr organizations were also well pre-
ID for the struggle, having Attorney
w. Harper, of Terre Haute, Ind,
Quarles, Spence & Quarles, of this
The courtroom was crowded all
Simply Wanted Better Wages.
ttorney Harper began the argu-
Is for the plaintiff He discussed
original and supplemental petitions
he North Pacific receivers, which
fred that the Northern Pacific en-
res were all mem bers of the eight
1t railroad organizations and asked
an injunction restraining the chiefs
5hese orders from advising or order
the men TO strike, without which
pr or advice they would not strike.
e went on TO say that there was
a single allegation that if every
on the road quit work Others
d not be found TO take their places.
petition did not aver that the men
Id quit for the purpose of crippling
road; it simply alleged that
they did quit it would Grip
the road. The crippling of
road was an incident TO- not the
of, their quitting. The end was
ply TO get higher wages elsewhere.
Harper said that the men had the
lt to sell their services TO the high
bidder.
Judge Interrupts the Attorney.
Who disputes that?" interrupted
ge Jenkins, somewhat petulantly.
This order, as | understand it," re-
ed Mr.. Harper, somewhat savagely
IL does not then ! am about
Dugh. 1t not only enjoins them
n quitting to receive higher wages
where; it enjoins them from oven
King about quitting.
he attorney followed in this vein,
said the liberties of the people
st be carefully guarded and the men
n perfect right TO work when they
lsed and loaf when they pleased
fter some further talk Mr.. Harper
suddenly interrupted by the court
banding what a strike was, anyway,
there was a lively spat between
judge and the lawyer.
Before get through" roared the
yer, IL will show you a special act
congress giving the men the very
hts you have enjoined them from ex-
ising."
he judge seemed disposed to argue
h the attorney, and said that one
Sc of the misunderstanding be-
zen the parties in the case was a
apprehension of what strike really
Ir. Harper read the act of congress
pviding for the establishment of ma
nal labor unions, which declared
It the men had the right TO combine
regulate wages, reduce the hours of
'or or improve their condition in any
nner. What they could not do was TO
titute a boycott or keep other
from working, and the men
not ask 10 have those restrictions
moved. He stated to the court that
+ chiefs who had been restrained
nd not order strike. All they
lid do was to consent TO a strike
er two-thirds of the men on a road
4 voted TO strike, and it was their
ecial duty TO see that two-thirds of
= men had voted to strike before
| ey gave their consent.
Calls 1t Involuntary servitude.
de then referred to the amendment
the constitution, which declares
at there shall not be slavery nor in
luntary servitude in the United
ites except as punishment for crime
re there had been no crime, and if
ere had been the men should have
en- tried and convicted before they
re compelled to work. 1t was a
ar case of involuntary servitude
ie men were not working because
az wanted to or out of love for the
seivers, but under the mandate of the
|urt.
MIR. QuarIes' Argument.
Charles Quarles, of this city, followed
:. Harper. He had not got fairly
rrted before Judge Jenkins inter
pied with the remark: Twill you
Ease point out the clause which pro-
bits the chiefs from comforting with