The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1911-07-29
JUDGMENT 0 COURT
IS now FOREcAsIED
Justice Wright May Rsimposs
Jail Sentences IN Alleged
Contempt Gases.
PRELIMINARY RULINGS
ARE QUITE SIGNIFICANT
Dissemination Of Court to De-
prive Labor Officials Of LIB
erty Very Apparent.

erty Very Apparent.
WASHINGTON. July 27.-If there
had fingered any doubt In the minds
of anyone Interested In having set
aside the jail sentences imposed upon
Samuel Gompers, Frank Morrison and
John Mitchell, that doubt has been
Immediately subsequent to
the decision handed down by the s
United States supreme ) court. and
even before It was possible to pro-
cure the official decision, Justice
Wright, Of the supreme court Of the
District Of Columbia, who sentenced
to Jail the above officials. took steps
to reimpose the sentences which has
been set aside by the United States
supreme court. A committee OF att
torneys. comprising those who were
Grafton officials, were instructed to
to investigate and report whether
In its opinion there had been con-
tempt committed. This committee
reported and July II. 1911, was the
date set when President Gompers.
Secretary Morrison and Vice President
Mitchell were summonded into court
to show cause why they should not
be held In contempt. When the Of
flcrs Of the American Federation OF
Labor appeared in court their at 8
tornys took the position that the
committee had been exercising judi
cial function, and that, In the exer-
else Of that function by prejudiced
men, the ends Of Justice could not
be reached, and motion was made
by attorney Ralston to set aside the
report Of the committee.
Judge Parker's statement.
Judge Parker then made the follow
Ing statement:
brosso mi s toafr,sSly ID ii
eye OF the law, an unprejudiced re-
presentative Of the people. even Of tho
man accused, and It is his duty 60
see that the accused be not prose-
.cuted, Il, In his Judgment, the. prose-
cution would be an injustice and IN
vain, and 1t is for that reason that the
courts, sensitive Of their own honor
and dignity, have ever taken pains,
unless the contempt were committed !
in the immediate presence Of the
court, to have an investigation. Judi
cial in its character, to see. s.whether
or not, not whether contempt had
been technically committed, but
whether under all Of the circum-
stances the person should be charged
with having committed the crime Of
contempt Of court 81 5ss
It had been contended by the at
torneys for the accused that the COM
mittee was composed of men who
We're employed by the American An-
tf-Boycott association, whose sole mis-
sion was to prosecute organized la
hor Taking up that phase Of the
question, Judge Parker said:
n My learned friend (Mr. Daven-
port has admitted here purposely
what our papers tend to show and
that is. that he was counsel for the
American Anti-Boycott association
that that association takes up and
prosecutes cases nation wide In their
character against the Organization OF
labor on the other hand He 80 IN
that position now. He was IN that
position representing this association
when entrusted with this high duty
by your honor. He sat upon and In
vestigated, not merely what was done,
but with the purpose of investigat-
Ing and recommending whether. this
tremendously powerful weapon OF the
court. which is SO seldom used that
the supreme court of the United
States says ait is sparingly employed,
to say whether, under the circum-
stances. proceedings should be taken
charging men OF character and stand
ing with having committed q crime.
Therefore, 1t seems to me. and sub
nit It most humbly to your honor,
that the dignity Of the courts OF
which We are 50 justly proud IN this.
country, is best maintained by pre-.
serving. even at the expense Of an-
8noyance, and trouble. that orderly
procedure by which there is brought
comely to the court after q judicial
Investigation by memberds Of the bar
who represent no clients to ,advise
the court on their professional honor:
that in their Judgment there should
be some one charged with the Of
fense OF criminal contemp Z
z. Judge Wright,s Statement
Justice Wright, In passing upon the
motion offered by Attorney Ralston#s
made it convincingly clear an to what
will be the final outcome Of the scase
The following by Justice Wright ept-
tomizes the prediction ma de:
Passing the question whether Or
not they (the committed had Dor
ideaa already put forward. the court