Custer weekly chronicle. [volume] (Custer City, S.D.) 1890-1931, 1902-08-02
WON'T GO TO JAIL.
Sentence Suspended in Mother
Jones Case--Court De-
tends InjunCtions.

Petersburg, w. Va, July 26.-Judg'
Jackson suspended sentence in the case
of Mother" Jones. whom, with others
he found guilty OF contempt Of court H.
that she violated an injunction forbid
ding anybody to inCite miners TO qui
work against their own judgment.
He stated that she had been found
guilty Of contempt, but as she wa!
posing as a martyr he would not seno
her to Jail or ALLOW her TO force hel
way into Jail"
lie said he would hold the conviction
over her, and If she again violated the
injunction he would sentence her heaN'
lily.
Thomas Haggerity got ninety days
and five others got sixty days each IT.
he Parkersburg Jail.
The Hungarians, who said they had
not understood the injunction, were
released upon the promise not to VIC,
ate 1t again.
The Austro-Hungarian consul a
New York was here TO represent them
Including some arrested later, there
were t~wcnty-four HunGarians released
in the same manner.
In his decision Judge Jackson
said:
What IS an Injunction? I answer
this question by affirming that the or
binary use of the writ Of injunction is
10 prevent wrongs and injuries to per.
SON and their property. or to rainstett
The rights of persons to their property
when thcv have been deprived Of 1t.
IT is the most efficient. if not the only
remedy, to stay irreparable injury ant
to punish those who disobey the order
IF the our granting the writ.
1T is n mistaken idea to suppose
that the courts of this country abuse
this writ. In my long experience or
the bench I canot recall Il single oCCa-
sion when any court, either federal or
state, ever abused ii In what is known
as strike questions. 1t is true that III
courts have been criticised severely by
persons who are inimiCal to the use Of
t and have denounced the courts for
governing by injunction. But this crit
lCism is so obviously unjust to the
courts that 1t is unnecessary TO enter
INTO q defense Of them.
Il do not question the right IF the
employees Of this company to quit work
at any time they desire to do so, unless
there is q contract relation between
them and the employer, which should
control their right to quit. At the
same time | do not recognize the right
IF an employer to Coerce the employees
to continue their work when they de-
sire to quit.
while / recognize the right Of all
aborers to co0IDina for the purpose of
protecting all * their lawful rights, ]
10 not recognize the right Of laborers
% Conspire together to compel m
2loyes who are not dissatisfied with
their work in the mines to lay down
their picks II to quit their work with
)ut n just or proper reason therefor,
merely to crafty a professional set of
nEitators, organizers and walking dele
gates, and roam owe the country as
agents for some combination, who are
vampires that live and fattcn on the
honest labor of the coal miners of the
country and who are b~usybodics Gre
iting dissatisfaction among a class of
people who are quiet, we'll disposed,
and do not want to be disturbed by the
~LnCcasing agitation Of this class of
people. In the case we have under con-
sideration these defendants are known
as professional agitators, organizers
lnd walking delegates. They have
lothing in common with the people
who are employed in the mines Of the
Clarksville Fuel company.
The strong arm OF the court OF
equity is !nvolved in this case, not TO
suppress lne right OF free speech, but
to restrain and inhibit those defend
lnts whose only purpose is to bring
about strikes by trying to coerCe peo-
pie who are not dissatisfied with the
.erms of their employment, which re-
suits in inhicting injury and damage
to their employers, as well as to the
employees.
The right of a citizen to labor fol-
wages that he is satisfied with IS a
Night protected by law, and is entitled
to the same protection as free speech,
and should be better protected tina the
abuse of free speech, In which the or
ganizers and agitators indulge in try
ing to produce strikes"