The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1909-11-17

Writing the opinion
Van Orsdel says ct found by the below
that these made charged but that they
made with the intent of melting the membership of the American Fed
Grafton of Labor and their friends continue the boycott against the
decree of the court The defendants having been found guilty of the
the sole question left for to consider whether under the ccum
stances, they constitute contempt of court
at that injunction affected directly and
indirectly several millions of the people of the United States The
did alone against defendants against
members of the American throughout
the HENCE consider the
the defendants upon this membership and the persons who had former
been prevented by boycott patronng complainant
While these acts they had affected only the conduct of the defend
ants the injunction had been against them alone might have
amounted to than criticism of
court yet the remarks when published uttered such
tend to naame their followers into feeling the
the and lead dsobednce of its commands
would be cargeabe with contempt producing
Contempt be committed by nnuendo and suaon may
st in maciousy saying doing anything that will have tendency
to induce others to disregard the authority of the
while the publications and uterances before may when
orally interpreted constitute technical contempt yet if the
intent OF the defendants not only dsob the order OF the
Themselves but also inspire their followers do likewise may
regarded punishable contempt We think is this
ofense of which the defendants here guilty
The boycott waged by the American against
the business of complainant had become and extensive thai
the terms boycott unfair and we don't paonze when used
necon with compliments had acquired such significance
organization and its friends that the printing uterng of th
name IN that connection was signal to the membership and he
friends not to deal with the complainant having business
relations with AS Mr. Justice Robb said in the opinion of m
court IN the former case 33 App d. c. 3D. referring to the una
we don't patrone list Th below found and in this find
ing concur that this list this constitutes taismanic sym
Dol indicating the membership of the federation that boycott
and should be Observed The mention of compliments
by these leaders the columns of the Fedeaton the public
platform in connection with the expressions boycott unfair W.
don't patronz might tend influence disregard the decree
of the thus effective notice their followers
had formerly when published unfair don't
ronize list We convinced that the charged committee
by the defendants for the purpose of multiplying the order
the in the belief that they technically avoiding the charg
Of contempt The of these defendpt taken whole
dce the mind of any reasonable person but impression
planned encourage the membership of the Amer
Federation of Labor and then Trends disregard and dso
the of among their followers and hei
ypahze lack of respect for the authority and dignity OF tn
court.
I'm paragraph S of the petition the defendant John Mitchell
charged with presiding and taking part the deliberations OF
convention of the Union Mine Workers of America the 18th
January 1908 which resolution adopted placing the prodc
complainant unfair list and hnng member OF tn
organization SIS purchasing manufactured by complainant
providing that for nonpaymen of the fine expulsion from the or
should imposed penalty The defendant in his answer admit
present presided the convention but dscm an
knowledge of either the consideration OF the resolution unit
attention called by filing of the petition herein UPo
this important issue of fact owing to the absence OF the evidence %
accept the conclusion of the trial justice as to tn
truth of these charges the guilt the defendant
"The adoption of this resolution could accomplish but one end
the perpuaon the boycott labor organization