St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-10-02
JENKINS SAT UPON.
His Famous Anti-Strike In
junction Modified by
Judge Harlan.
STRIKES DECLARED LEGAL
IfProperly Conducted and Not
a Conspiracy to Do
Damage.
MEN MAY QUIT IN A BODY,
And Are Not Liable for Injury
Resulting From Their
Action,
STRIKES DECLARED LEGAL
MEN MAY QUIT IN A BODY,

CHICAGO. Der. 1.-Judge Jenkins
famous strike injunction was overruled
today by the United States circuit court
of appeals. and the cause was remanded
with directions TO strike out from the
restraining order of the court the clause
which aroused the country when The
order was issued and which resulted n
the Boatner investigating committee of
congress. The interveuurs, representing
the leading labor organizations Of the
country, asked that two sections of the
injunction be eliminated. The court of
appeals decided that no court could
enloin man or body of men from
quitting individually or in body the
service of an employer.
The court said that Judge Jenkins
had exceeded his powers when he EN-
Joined the employees OF the receivers
of the Northern Pacific Railroad COM
pany from quitting the service of said
receivers, with or without notice, SO as
to cripple the property or prevent or
hinder the operation of said railroad"
1t. however. held that the section should
stand in which the men We're prohibited
"from combining and conSpiring to
Quit, with or without notice, the service
OF said receivers. with the object and
Intent of crippling the property in
their custody or embarrassing the opera
ton of SAID railroad"
The decision was considered by the
lawyers who packed the court room as
one of the most important opinions de-
livered in the u nit d States in decade.
1t defines the status Lef0re the law of
labor organizations in their conduct of
strikes, and attirms the powers of courts
of equity to interfere by injunction
when there is reason to believe that the
law Will be violated. 1t holds that
Wen May Withdraw in Il Body
from the service of an employer, using.
however, neither force, threats, perse-
cution nor intimidation toward employees
who do not join them, Dor must they
use any device to molest. hinder,
alarm or interfere with others who de-
sire to take their places"
Justice Harlan, of the supreme court,
delivered the opinion. Sitting with him
were Judges Woods. Bum. Grosscup
and Jenkins. The last-named sat with
his eyes fixed upon Justice Harlan as
the latter read the opinion reviewing
the circuit judges action. Judge Jen-
kins appeared undisturbed by the opin-
ion.
The audience which listened to the
reading of the opinion was most dis
tinguished one. Ex.President Harrison
and his partner, Mr.. Elamay, sat side
by side we'll up toward the bench. After
dispcsing of other cases in which the
findings of the court were merely an
nounced by Judges Woods and Jenkins,
Justice Harlan began the reading of the
opinion in the case of P. M. Arthur ct
al, intervenors, against Thomas F.
Oakes, Henry C.. Payne and Henry G.
Rouse, receivers of the Northern Pacific
Railroad company, as this celebrated
cause is known on the docket.
Men May Strike
The decision i'll part reverses the
famous anti-strike order of Judge
jenkins and in part sustains it. That
part of the jenkins injunction which re-
strained the employees of the road from
striking, or in the language of the in
junction from so quitting the service
of the said receivers, with or without
notice, as to cripple the property or
prevent or hinder the operation of the
road" the court of appeals declares was
violation of the rights OF the EN-
ployes, who could not legally be re-
strained from leaving the employ of the
receivers and 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 combination
or conspiracy to quit with the intention
of Gripping the property and prevent
Ing the operation of the road, is
sustained. On the whole the decision,
which was read by Justice Harlan, who
presided over the court, is a clear recog
milton of the right of the employees to
strike.
Justice Harlan, before giving the con-
clusi0ns ofthe court, reviewed the his
tory OF the celebrated Injunction. The
receivers of the road in December last
gave notice of reduction of wages all
along the line. and when the men
threatened 10 strike, Judge jenkins
issued the injunction on Dec. 10, pre-
venting q Strlke. WO uayS lateC he
amended the I'M junction making it more
stringent. The Brotherhood of Locomo.
tive Engineers joined with the other
labor unions TO which the men belonged,
and applied to Judge Jenkins for a
modification of the order. Judge Jen>
kins refused to strike out the clause
enj0ining strike, and the labor unions
appealed to the higher court. The
decision says that the injunction
against employees so quitting as
to cripple the property or prevent
or hinder the operation of the road
was equivalent to command by the
court that they should remain in the
active employment Of the receivers and
perform the services appropriate to theil
respective positions. until they could
quit without cripping the road. The
time when they could quit was not indi
Gated by the order of court.
Cannot BE Restrained.
Under what circumstances" saw:
the decision. may the employees of the
receivers have the right to quit the
service in which they were engaged
Much of ihe argument of counsel wa.
directed TO this question. We shall no
attempt &c lay down any rule applicable
TO every case that may arise between
employer and employe. II an employ,
quits without caNSe and in violation o
an express contract to serve for a state(
GLe, then his qgiStiuS would Iot bs O