Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1894-05-05

mands, or securing the highest wager
and best terms possible, that right can.
not DO remedied by the fact that Its ex.
ssrcises levied on the interest OF othcrs
It's principle applies OF course oni,
10 those strikes which exist In thu
withdrawal from service by concert Rnt
combination. Should violence be don't
To the person or property OF the EN-
ployer by those who have combined
against him. II others would supply ths
service which the strikers have aban.
doned and are prevented from doing 70
by violence, intimidationl thrca.s oi
any unlawful means, MI these acts arr
not only unlawful but IN most insinn'
ces would conatitnse Violations Of tht
criminal lrwa and he punishable ns
suoh. The conclusi,r therefore of tht
Judge that the employees ~ .he North,
ern Pacific ratircad might be forced
by him by wits Of injunction TO pro.
tect that company fiom loss ami thu
public Inconvenience by remaining II
Ito service nj 4 ratio Of wages to which
they had not Eiven their assent, II one
in which We cannot concur and whict
m our tudginen. " supported by hont
OF the declsions W hich no cites.
No Corruption Found.
Your committee md nothing In the
testimony to soc any corrupt intention
on the part OF the Judge 10 rcnde,
these orders.
1t is altogether possible that he II
sincere IN the conviction that no prop
erly exercised the equity jursdlctior
OF his court In preventing loss and dam
nHe which would have resulted frou
lawful strike against the Northern
Pacific Railroad company, This view
OF the case prevents us from recon
intending amy proceedings leading to I'M
impeachment, but In order that then
may be no further excuse for rcndi
tlon OF my such orders or dccrocs an,
that the courts OF equity OF the Unite,
States may not bo deceived ns TO thi
extent Of thcir powers In enforoinf
contracts for personal services by le
enl process. we recommend the enact
ment OF Il statute which will prevent
them from dolng 30. We also feel CON
strained to call attention 10 the ahupcl
which have grown un under the pow
era assigned 10y tho judges OF the court
OF the United states to appoint receiw
era for railroad corporations.
Powers of Receivers.
These orders being rendered In court
under proceedings instituted nominaily
for the purpose Of erecting foreclosure
hut really FOR the purpose OF nvcrtina
| pursuit. Of creditors and the enforce.
nient Of lawful obligations, are consld.
cred ms interlocutory mud not subject
! Ca appeal II. however, an appeal IL
suspension OF the decree and the road
| pnases into she hands OF receiver,
| who operates II at least pending the
| appeal. and the sanction Of the Judge II
| entirely independent OF any control
| whatever by the owner or creditors OF
| the property. The powers exercised by
| the courts through the receivers ara
| purely of their own creation, the result
| OF judicial construction not ascertnincd
| or limited by statute and therefore dam
| ftaf.afplltaa. u NJ fltp Anln.
| Ion that the causes for recclverahip that
| may be received I'm the courts Of tina
| United states should be declared by
| statute, Tho anomaly has been pre-
scented Tor years OF great railway cor
| porntiona being operated and the huai.
ncns of common carriers being carried
| ON by the United states through ths
| judicial lines OF the government ana
the Judges possessing Mt once the pow.
era pertaining to other judicial officers
and combining with those the powers
OF the president and directors Of cor.
poratlons united IN one and the SAINT
person,
Coutrnpt OF caurt.
The committee Is also OF the opinion
that the powers asserted by tho Judges
OF the United States court 10 punish
for contempt ~ dunEgrius, aud he
should be limited By law, In the case
ieported--Fedoral report IN re Higgins
Judge pardee declared that his power
To punish ,or contempt WIS unlimited.
both az to thctuniount % The me nni
duration OF iInDriHonmcut. In ms 1udg-
mcnt he could decide without appear
what constituted c0nten pt who coni'
mittcd tho act and the extent pf pun
lshmcnt 90 be Inflicted. In thar case he
held number OF violations OF the
criminal laws Of the state NJ TeNna
ligewlae 20 be IN contempt ~ his court,
Under his construction nm nssaul'
and battery or any other violence OF
unfairnoss committed by an employe or
servant OF a railway company In the
hands OF receiver would DO COM
HIdorcd u contempt az HIS court II
this principle be correct nnd tho de-
cislon seems To be cited ~ other
courtD ana were approved. II would
he extremely convenient to snhatitute
for criminal laws OF the state.
should he Limited by Law.
The exercise OF the police power
and tho protection % lie and prop
erty by those agencies would be re.
lleved by the authority NJ United
States judge who instituted proceed
if.gs for sonter'pt. The intimationf
contained In the cnnsttution, viz, pro-
yiding for trials by jurics. being con-
fronteh by wltnoA3si. represented by
counsel. etc. would ilnewiac be re-
licvod. Without taking issue with the
judges M whether they have correctly
or Incorrectly stated the law on
this important subject. your commit.
toe IN OF the opinion that the protection
Of property rights should be left In
the hands OF executive oiilccrn, and
that violations OF laws should be pun,
ished by proceedings defined and pro
vided by law. and that IN order e
prevent the abuse OF authority claimed
by the judiciary their power TO pun
lsh for contempt should be defined
and limited by law.