Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-05-16
FINALLY is TO DECIDE
ON CONTEMPT QUESTION
Jail Sentence of Leaders Returns to
Judge Who Imposed 1t.
APPOINTS INQUIRY COMMITTEE
Bucks Stove Company Counsel EN-
powered to Inquire Whether
There Is Reasonable
Cause of Guilt.

Cause of Guilt.
Samuel Gonpers. John Mitchell and
Frank Morrison, the labor leaders. may
yet be punished for the alleged contemp:
of the Supreme Court OF the District of
Columbia in disobeying its injunctive or
der In reference to the Bucks Stove
and Range Company. despite yesterday 5
United States.
The highest court in the land having
set aside the jail sentences imposed by
Justice Wright against the three officers
OF the American Federation of Lab r.
suggested that the lower court mi
taken in the form Of procedure concern
ing the effort to punish the men Tor
tempt Of court.
District Court Acts
Acting on this suggestion. the District
Supreme Court. of it's own initiative, to-
day ordered It's clerk to institute an
equity proceeding, entitled Gin re Samuel
Gompers. John Mitchell and Frank Nor
rison. for alleged contempt" The case
is numbered 3O1sO on the equity docket.
Justice Ashley NJ. Gould, who signed
the order of injunction, and who is now
presiding in the Equity Court. certified
the question Of the alleged contempt to
Justice Dan Thew Wright. now on the
criminal bench. 1t was Justice Wright
who imposed the jail sentences on the
labor leaders.
Justice Wright, accepting the certifi-
cation, issued an order appointing Daniel
Davenport. Joseph j. Darlington and
James M. Beck, counsel for the Buck 8
stove and Range Company. a committee
10 inquire whether there is reasonable
cause to believe the labor men guilty Of
contempt Of court in willfully violating
the terms Of the injunction granted at
the request of the Bucks Stove and
Range Company.
The committee Is empowered and d.
rected forthwith to prepare. file, present
and prosecute AGAINST Gompers. Mitchell
and Morrison charges OF contempt of
court to the end that the authority of
the court be established, vindicated and
sustained.
The order of Justice Wright to the
rommittee OF lawyers directs the prep
Is understood this means at the earli-
lest convenience OF the members of the
commission
Mode Of Procedure.
The mode Of procedure to be followed
In this new attempt to have Gompers
and his associates answer for alleged
contempt Of court will be, first, the fl
ing OF the formal charges by the COM
mission. should II find the order Of
court willfully violated; second. a rule
will be issued s,yy by Justice Wright on
ing them a week or ten days in which
to answer the charges, copy of which
will accompany the rule.
Hearing will be had on the rule before
Justice Wright. as was done recently
when two local merchants were cited for
contempt based on effort to influence
the action Of the grand jury. One of
these paid a fine Of 500 and the other
was sentenced to serve three months in
Jail.
Up to Justice Wright.
i, Should Justice Wright find the labor
leaders named guilty Of the charge OF
contempt he would have the option Of
imposing jail sentences or fines as ir
the case above cited.
Hearing In the matter Of the alleged
contempt will probably not occur before
fall. as the vacation term of the court Is
not far off. and 1t is considered the rule
not to take UP contested matters during
the summer season.
Opinion at City Hall.
The general opinion expressed about
the city hall today is that the Supreme
Court OF the United States sustained the
findings Of Justice Gould and OF Justic,
Wright against the contentious of IN.
labor leaders The only point on which
the case was reversed IL was nnInted
out, was the one of procedure. the An
pellate Court holding that the contemnt
proceedings should not have been enti-
tied In the original equity case brought
BY the Bucks Stove and Range Comnsn,,
against the Federation Of Labor and w.
officers The court intimated that a nau,
case might have been stared by the
plaintiff or on the courts initiative.
ed. because the amicable apresn,an,
reached between the union and tho nIain
tiff precludes further prosecution hv the
plaintiff. ~ ''e
An Unusual Proceeding.
The mode OF procedure adopted todav
IN oesishatins committee of inquiry Is
faio 10 De novel proceeding in the
Dlstrac, courts. Heretofore the custom
mas peen 10 nave the United States At
torney CONSIDER the alleged derelction
eho NE charses H. In his opinion a con-
tempt Of court had been committed
The point on the propriety Of the ,na.h
cd adopted in Incorporating the con
tempt proceedings with the old eouity
case was not raised by counsel before
Justice Wright. nor in the Court of An,
peals. 1t was stated today. 1p
A Little Surprise.
Some surprise was expressed about N.
courthouse today that Justice wr,1,
shov1d take action in reference To III.
Gompers case before the mandate Of tb<
United States Supreme Court had beer
issued 1t was suggested that the lowe,
court was not officially cognizant OF tb.
action of the superior tribunal until i
had received the mandate. When mem
bers OF the bar were asked whether RI,
action of the court today was premature
they pointed out that the case institutes
today was an independent action. and hat
no connection with the old equity cas-,
which had been decided yesterday by tn,
United States Supreme Court
They suggested that the appointment
Of q committee Of inquiry was no par
Of q judicial proceeding and that ther,
CONTINUED on Second Pase.)