The Fairmont West Virginian. (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1904-1914, 1909-11-02
JAIL SENTENCE
LABOR LEADERS
IS AFFIRMED
Gon1pers, Mitchell
and Morrison.
Must SerDe
3 United Press.)

wASHIN6I ON, o. Va NOV gu
an opinion to-day the Court of Appeals
of the District Of Columbia affirmed
the Judgment of Justice Wright of the
supreme court Of the District of CO
Iumbia in imposing jail sentences on
President Gompers, Vice President
Mitchell and Secretary Morrison of
the American Federation of Labor, for
contempt of court in violating the in.
junction in the Buck stove Range Co
dlse.
The sentences are, Gompers, one
year; Mitchell, nine months; Morr'eon,
six months. The opinion was render.
ed by Associate Justice Van orsdel
and eoncurred In by Justice .Robb'
Chief Justice sheppard, dissenting.
Van orsdeI sofd: "IndfviduaI interests
dwindIe into insisniffeance when corr.
pared with higher principles inVo'"eo
in this cause. The fundamental issue
is whether constitutional agencies of
government shall be obeyed or defied.
The fact that the defendants are off
GERS of organized labor of America
lends Importance to the cause and
adds gravity to the situation, bit II
shouldn't influence the result.
aft an organization of eitfzens, no
matter how large, disobeys the man
dates Of court, the same reasoning rem
ders them subject as Individual def
ance; n has no greater right in the
eyes of the law than the other.
"Roth are subject to the law, neitli
err are above"
compers and Mitchell are in New
York.. Morrison is in this city
All are under bond. GomPers has de-
cEared he would appeal to the Supreme
Court.
The case of to-day grew out of the
Federation placing the Bucks Slows
Company on 1--WE don't patronize" list
in the monthly organ, following a fall
ure to adjust a dispute with the Metal
PoIishers stove Co. The company Sc
cured an injunction and the Publiea'
ton was stopped but Gompers and 9TH
ers attacked the company in speeches.
The Jail sentences followed afte: a
scathing decision by Wright.
The decision continues that the
court realizes the far reaching I'M
p~ortanee of the Ease and is not I'M
mindful of the high position Of the de:
but their intelligence forbfds
any inference or conclusion that the
acts charged were committed in iGno'
rance Of duty to the courts. 1t con-
tfnues that the sole question hetor"
the court is the guilt or Innocence OF
Che defendants. Justice Van or5de'
states I belief that the defendants
committed the acts charged "for the
express purpose of multiplying the court
order In the belief that they were tech
nIcaIIy avoiding the charge OF con-
tempt" He says the acts produce hut
one impression, "ecneerted, we'll pIar'
ned effort to encourage the member
ship of the Federation of Labor to dis
regard and dlsobey orders of court and
create lack Of respect for the author
ity and dignity Of The Court"
OF Mitchell, who presided over tic
miners convention, placing the stove
Co. on the unfair list, the justice says
"the act constituted a separate and
complete oftense committed in open
and brazen dlsobedience to the CON-
mands of the Court" Justice shep'
pard based his disagreement on the
grounds that the district court hadn't
authority to issue an injunction on the
broad grounds the defendants "ele
| charged with violating.