The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1909-11-27
DISSENTING OPINION
Of JUDGE SHEPPARD
CLEAR EXPOSITION.
OF CONTEMPT CASE
Main Contention in Favor of Con-
victed Men Is That Injunction
Was Void Because It Abridged
Constitutional Rights of Ac-
cused.

In the court of appeals trial of the
contempt case of Gompers, Mitchell,
Morrison, ct al. for the alleged viO-
lation of the anti-boycott Injunction,
the dissenting opinion og Chief JUS
tice Sheppard is quoted below, as a
clear and logical exposition of the
great American Federation of Labor
Is grateful, coming as it. does from
one of the wise and conservative
jurists Of the next to the highest court
In our land. 1t follows:
LAS regards the conclusion that
this proceeding must be regarded as
criminal solely and in consequence
that the evidence upon which the
conviction rests can not be considered,
because not presented in bill of
exceptions reversed on the hearing, I
will content myself with saying that
am not clearly convinced that it
must be so regarded.
Crime Is Mere Assumption.
assuming that the proceeding is
criminal in it's nature, there being
no bill of exceptions, the presumption
follows that the allegations of the
complaint found to be true were sup
ported by satisfactory evidence.
THE first fifteen paragraphs charge
conduct and language used by respon-
dents in public meetings, language
antedating the commencement of the
original suit, some occurring in the
year 1897, and long before any con-
troversy had arisen.
The order was announced Decem-
Der II, 1907, and entered on Decem-
Der 18, directing the Injunction to
,, issue upon the execution of bond
=, In the usual form by the complain
ant. The order was to the effect
that. the injunction shall be in full
1orce, obligatory, and binding upon
the defendants ETC., provided the
; complainant shall first execute the
! necessary bond. This bond was not
! given until December %.
Beat the Bondsmen to IT.
The specific charge is that, after
the granting of the order, and before
| the giving OF the bond, the respond
ents' Gompers and Morrison, FASTENED
to deposit in the mails the already
printed January number of the Amer.
! lean Federationist, which contained
! the publication of compliments name
IN the unfair list It is not charged
that any subsequent issue of the
| journal contained a similar publica-
! ton. The gist of the charge is this
rushing Of the journal in the mails
between December II and 23. The
! decree convicting the respondents car
not be supported on this charge be.
| cause the order for the injunction
did not become operative and effec.
tive before compliance with the pre-.
cedent condition. In the earlier equity
practice an injunction was ISSUED
without bond, and was, therefore
eHectlve from the moment of grant.
ing the order.
! Bond Made Injunction Valid.
"By modern statutes, the rules O.
court authorized b. statute, have, IL
general, gone much further and re-
,quired bonds as conditions preceden
i to- the taking effect of the order
Equity rule ~ is one of these. ADOPT
ed by express authority of congress
1t has all the force Of a statute
Until the bond is given, the order TO,
injunction is clearly imperative
without effect or obligation.
There is another and stronge
reason for my dissent so far as tn,
respondents Gompers and Mitchell
are Involved. The specific act
charged against them relate, who'll,
to declarations and publications which
violated the preliminary Injunction a
issued. I have heretofore expresse,
the opinion that so much of the in
junction order was null and void be
cause opposed to the constitutions
prohibition of any abridement of tn
freedom of speech or Of the press.