Wheeling majority. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1907-192?, 1915-07-15
How The District Court
Reversed Judge Dayton


That Judge Dayton was reversed
by the District Court of Appeals, at
Richmond, on May A. has been prev
iously told in these columns, but it is
now possible to give the full text Of
that decision.
It is given in full herewith, because
of its Importance. The reader will
note that Judge Dayton is reversed,
and ordered to hereafter make his
decisions conform with. the law as
laid down by the Supreme Court.
The Decision.
The decision, as read by Judge
Woods, reads as follows:
WOODS, Circuit Judge:
In these contempt proceedings the
plaintiffs in error were found guilty
of violation Of a temporary restrain
ing order of 20 Septembeey 1913, made
IN une case of West Virginia+Pitt
burgh Coal Company ~eainst John P.
White and others. The tenor OF 49,
order was to enjoin interference with
plaintiffs business by using threats,
force, intimidation, or persuasion to
induce it's employees to break their
contracts or leave their work, or by
| using like means to induce any per-
son to refuse to accept employment
with plaintiff, and to enjoin trespass-
ing on plaintiffs premises for the pur-
poses above indicated. The District
Judge made specific findings of mum.
Der of acts of disobedience of the
order by each. of the parties charged.
and the sentence imposed on each de-
PENDANT was the payment of the costs
and imprisonment for six months.
| The questions here made recently
considered and decided in SchWartz
VS.. U. s. pit Fed, S66, and Scoric Va.
U. S., 217 Fed, 81, will not be
reconsidered.
There was before the District Judge
competent evidence sufficient to war
rant a finding of contempt in disFe-
gerding the orders Of the court
against all Of the plaintiffs in error.
AS to some Of these findings there
was indeed no conflict of evidence.
AS to others, however, there was con-
| flicting evidence, and hence it was
important that irrelevant and incom-
petent evidence should be excluded
from consideration. Numerous objec-
lions were made to testimony as hear
say which were either overruled or
left for future consideration. 1t is true
the court in its decree recites that 1t
bases its finding upon 1.-THE legal evil
dence produced upon the trial reject
ing all improper and irrelevant parts
thereof" but hearsay evidence was
admitted, and it is impossible for this
court to say from the record what the
District Judge ultimately rejected and
whether any of the incompetent testi-
mony influenced his findings or the
extent of the punishment inflicted. :
| The decree further recites:
"This court takes judicial notice Of
the fact that in the chancery cause Of
the Hitchman Coal and Coke Co. vs..
John Mitchell, ct al, on January 10,
1913, it filed an opinion found in 202
Fed, SIP, wherein, based upon rec
ord and oral evidence of some 5000
pages, It determined that the United
Mine Workers Of America as an or
/ ganization was an unlawful one, for
that by its obligation. constitution, by
laws, rules and regulations it under
| takes, (a) to require its members to
surrender their individual freedom OF
action; o. TO coerce non-union min
| ers to join the union, whether wishing
to do SO or not, for they must be mem
bers (who work in and around the
mines); (c) to control or rather
abrogate and destroy the right Of the
employer to contract with the men
| Independent of the organization; (d)
to exclude his right to employ nom
union labor If he desires; (e) to limit
his right, in the absence OF. contract,
to discharge whom he pleases, when
he pleases, and for what reason he
sees fit, and, (f) to assume the right
on the part Of the organization,
through its officers, to control the en-
ployer's business, to shut down his
mine by calling out the men in obedi-
ence to their obligation, whenever 1t
is deemed to the interests of the I'M
ion, regardless of the employers in
terests or the effect that such action
may hav upon him, as regards loss,
damage and necessary violations, on
account thereof, Of his existing con-
tracts with others To such extent in
this direction does such assumption
Of power and control go, that it is
directly provided by the laws On
organization that such suspension Of
operations may be ordered, even