The Washington herald., 1910-03-30
GOMPERO qAUNTO
JUSTICE WRIGHT
Says He Sidestepped Issue
in Senator's Case.
SOUNDS JEFFERsoNS WARNING
Labor Leader, Commenting on Ac-
tion IN Paper Contract Proceed
ings, Says District Supreme Court
Verge Near Danger Line-Sc0reE
Faint-heartednessO OF House.

In the current Issue Of the American
Federationist. Samuel Gompers taunting-
ly charges Justice Wright of the SUI
preme Court Of the District, with having
sidestepped the issue as to jurisdiction,
presented by the Ignoring Of his writ by
the Senate OF the United States. for fear
of the consequences, while at the same
time imposing a sentence Of imprlson-
meRt upon representatives Of organized
labor for a less pronouncedly contemptu-
Gus proceeding.
Mr.. Gompers quotes from Jefferson a
warning that the dissolution Of the gov
eminent lies in an irresponsible judiciary,
and declares the present attitude OF the
District Supreme Court verges danger
eusly on the conditions foreseen by that
statesman.
Now No Distinction,
Under the decision of the Supreme
Court Nh. Gompers asserts, there is now
no distinction recognized in the law be-
tween flesh and blood and soul (the work
ers, in the disposition OF Jneir labor pow
err, on the one hand, and on the other,
the corporations and combination owning.
cornering, and gambling in cattle. iron,
and coal, IN all the material products
the necessities of life.
After reviewing the circumstances In
cident TO the federation officers icing de-
clared in contempt in connection with the
now famous boycott cases, and the sub
sequent action of Justice Wright in
sentencing them to terms of imprison-
ment, Mr.. Gompers takes up the recent
mandamus proceedings against the joint
printing committee of Congress in con-
nection with certain paper contracts, and
says:
AT the time we asserted Justice Wright
would insist upon his Jurisdiction, but
that he would dismiss the writ on its merits
and would arTaign the Senate committee
or the Senate, upon whose authority the
committee was acting, TO appear before
him and answer for contempt OF his order.
And so it has come TO pass Justice
Wright asserted the jurisdiction OF his
court TO issue the writ, and then dis
missed the writ on its merits
Then the writ OF mandamus and the
writ Of injunction differ in this particular
only The first is a courts order compel
ling the doing OF certain act The sec
ond IS the courts order prohibiting the
doing of an act. If a court has the right
TO issue mandamus a writ compelling
the doing of a certain act by Congress or
one OF its committees a court has also
the right 10 issue an injunction forbidding
It to do that same act.
Helped Establish Precedent.
The House Of Representatives, in yield
ing 10 Justice Wright's assumption of au-
thority and jurisdiction. has helped TO
establish precedent that may, and no
doubt WILL return to plague that august
body
The Senate, standing on its right as
coordinate branch OF the government,
Insisted that the judicial branch could not
by any process invade its authority and
field of activity. AS we have said the
House yielded the right and independence
for which the Senate contended. But
what could be expected of a House OF
Representatives so long dominated by
that Msphistophele Of American politics
its Speaker. and his henchmen, and hav-
ing an opposition largely without pur-
pose or backbone?
If ever men placed themselves in con-
tempt OF court, the committee Of the
Senate and afterward all the Senators.
placed themselves in that position and
yet what has Justice Wright done with
these contemners? The mere fact that he
later dismissed the writ does not change
the situation one jot If he had the
authority and the jurisdiction to issue the
writ, the Senators were bound to obey
and IN refusing to obey they were in
contempt. II they were in contempt why
does ne not exercise his power and sum-
mon them before him for their refusal TO
obey his mandate?
Justice Wright has not hestitated mr.
failed 10 hale other men before him for
alleged contempt Of court. to punish and
sentence them TO long terms Of imprison
ment when merely standing on their
g-acknowledged rights as citizens
Why should he hesitate in the case Of
United States Senator's? The reply is
that he realizes that if he attempted n
bring the Senators before his bar for
contempt, IL would raise a storm Of in
dgnation and resentment throughout the
country. The courts invasion Of the do
main Of the legislators, as well as the
domain Of the constitutional rights of the
citizen, would be thrashed out In such 2
manner as would bring the entire issue Of
judicial usurpation TO the forefront 10
be settled and settled right.
A Significant Fact.
It is highly significant that when the
House of Representatives had under dis
cussion the subject as to whether Justice
Wright's writ OF mandanius should he
recognized or ignored. the burden of the
speeches in favor of yielding rested unon
the cases of the labor men whom Justice
Wright had sentenced to imprisonment
for long terms for alleged CONTEMPT of
court in other words for their refusal
to surrender their rights of free speech
and of free press. These speeches in
the House all smacked much of the
'holier than thou type. The House pusil-
lanimously surrendered its independent
legislative field of jurisdiction to a court
striving to extend its authority.
But the time must Gene when the
House of Representatives will be COM
posed of men not quite so faint-hearted
as those who surrendered its Independent
and coordinate rights"
HOnOring the Donor.