The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1923-07-03
UNION MEN ASK.
CONTEMPT
TRIAL
Appeal in Conviction in Shop
mems Strike Cites Clay
i ton Act.
BY JOHN ID. MUELLER.

international N0WB ScrVACGs
SUPERIOR, Wis, July 3.-Lone
q thorn In the side of organized
labor, the question of whether Fed
eral judges may continue to find
guilty and sentence persons cited
for contempt of court under the
Clayton act, is expected to be defl-
f1itely answered by a decision, ex-
pected shortly, from the circuit court
Of appeals in Chicago, on an appeal
from the decision of Superior,
Wis, Judge, in a case growing out
of the shopmen's strike last sum-
mer.
If the appeal is upheld, defend.
ants in such cases in the future
will be entitled to trial by jury.
If not, the only alternative will
be a fight in Congress to obtain
new legislation.
The case at issue is that Sam
Nicholson, ct al, including ten
former employees of the railway
company at Hudson, Wisconsin,
Omaha Railway Company, IN which
tempt by United States District
Court Judge C. z. LUXE, of SUI
perior. The A. F. Of L. has interested
itself in the case and has filed a
brief supplemental to the appeal
framed by Donald r.. Richberg,
counsel for the Railway Employees
Department of the A. F. of L., who
represents the convicted men.
Seek Precedent.
Substantiation Of the appeal py
the circuit court, it is pointed out,
would establish an important
precedent. There would be small
likelihood of convicting men Of
contempt Of court in their own
communities, where the populace
usually is~.in sympathy with the
strikers, it is limited.
The appeal is based on a writ of
error and was taken following de-
NAL of a new trial. The alleged
errors were embodied in denial of
q jury trial, "as provided by law;
alleged insufficiency of evidence,
the allegation that the court was
without jurisdiction to impose SEN
fences, and that in doing so the
court was in error, for the reason
that the sentence imposed was
without warrant in law.
Chief discussion has centered on
denial of jury trial, considered the
backbone Of the appeal.
that punishment for contempt is
entirely within discretion of the
court, sections of the Clayton act
specifically providing jury trial on
demand of the accused are cited.
The argument is made that Con-
er&ss obviously intended de-
parture from the common law in
the section which reads "sach trial
may be by the court or, upon de-
mand of the accused, by jury"
The brief filed with the Chicago
court by Attorney Richberg for the
Railway Employees Department Of
the American Federation of Labor
is devoted exclusively to a discus
sion of the following questions:
/. Does the relationship of en-
ployer and employee continue dur
ing a strike or lockout? !,
2. Is a jury trial mandatory in
contempt cases coming within the
terms of the Clayton act?
3. If the Clayton act requires a
jury trial in certain contempt
cases, are these provisions of the
act unconstitutional?
: mot Unconstitutional"
Attorney Richberg, who framed
the appeal, answers both of the
first two questions affirmativeiy
and with reference to the third
maintains the section is not uncon-
stitutional.
"All Federal courts" he asserts,
"are mere creatures of Congress
and possess no powers except
those specifically granted to them
by an act of Congress"
Following an argument that the
court includes not only the judge.
but the jury and clerk, as well,
Attorney Richberg concludes his
brief thus:
''For the Judge Of court to at
tempt to exercise alone the power
reposed Jointly in the Judge and a
Jury is to undermine this institn-
. ton, the preservation Of which is
commonly regarded as essential by
those who desire to maintain the
American form of government"