The New York herald. [volume] (New York, N.Y.) 1920-1924, 1922-09-12

ask the court for an order making the
Injunction permanent. Mr.. Rlchberg In
terrupted him before he had spoken a
dozen words. The labor lawyer said
he had filed a motion for dismissal sof
the injunction last Saturday and there
fore his petition should receive first
consideration.
Mr. Esterline protested against the
interruption and was sustained. He
then finished his formal motion and
Mr.. Richberg again took the floor.
The union attorney entered an ap
pearance for b. NJ Jewell, president OF
the Federated Shop Crafts. and John
Scott, secretary. He gave notice also
of the presence in court of Frank l..
Mulholland. representing others OF the
persons named in the temporary injunc-
tion; Thomas Stevenson for the Brother
hood OF Locomotive Engineers. and
Oscar J. Horne representing the Fire
mems Brotherhood The brotherhood
lawyers reasons for being present were
not stated.
Mr. Richberg was given permission 10
argue his motion for dismissal of the
temporary injunction ahead OF the Gov
ernment's petition for making the in
junction permanent.
Denounces Daugherty.
He attacked the order as unconstitu-
fional and unjustihed, then made his
speech denouncing the Attorney General
After being ordered to confine himself
10 the law. Mr.. Riehberg began going
through the voluminous injunction for
support Of his contention that If the
conspiracy clauses are removed this in
junction amounts to nothing hut an
order against criminal acts by unnamed
persons"
The Government, he asserted has no
evidence against Jewell or Scott or
other union officials. Essentially, he
said. the temporary injunction is based
on the allegation that the officials of the
shop crafts conspired to obstruct rail-
road transportation. and this allegation
is based in turn on the presumption that
the crafts are bound by law to obey the
decisions of the United States Railroad
Labor Board.
Such a presumption Ire said, is I'M
justified. Not only is the renoting to
that effect in the transportation act. but
IL there were such clause it would be
unconstitutional. Even If the boards
decision were legally binding they could
not be used to prevent the workers from
Withdrawing from service" He quoted
Congressman Esch, one Of the authors
OF the act, as saying In Congress that
there is nothing of an aPti-strike
nature in this law"
Quotes Harding Message.
Continuing. he read from President
Hardings recent railroad strike message
TO Congress in which the chief executive
remarked the absence OF provisions for
enforcement OF the boards decisions.
Attorney Richberg called the courts
nf - Il
by the Attorney General at the time of
the temporary injunction, in which Mr..
Daugherty asserted his purpose to fight
for the open shop.
The Attorney General has no right to
use the power OF the Government TO
light for the open shop he asserted.
Whether the pen shop or the closed
shop prevails is entirely outside the
province of the Attorney General. 1t is
a question which only the legislative
branch of the Government can pass on
If IL comes under the jurisdiction of the
Government at ALL" he asserted.
Mr.. Richberg quoted from recent de-
cision Of the United States Circuit Court
of Appeals on the famous Anderson in
junction against striking coal miners to
show that .either employers or union
men may have free access and appeal
10 unemployed workers. to win en-
ployees on the one hand or union ad-
herents on the other" This right, he
said. the Daugherty injunction fatty
takes away from the striking shopmen.
Mr.. Richberg charged q difference
between the Debs case. cited by the
Attorney-General when he applied for
the temporary restraining order, and
the present case. He said that in the
Debs case a strike was called on the
railroads 10 bring about a boycott
against the Pullman Company. while
in tho present instance. he said. no
boycott was attempted