Evening star., 1947-03-07
Supreme Court Rules
Against Mine Chief on
Contempt and Fines

Contempt and Fines
Following are tertual excerpts
from the opinions OF Supreme
Court justices IN the John L.
LetDis case:
CHIEF JUSTICE vINSON.
THE Majority Decision.)
In October, 1916, the United
States was in. possession of, and
operating, the major portion of the
country's bituminous coal mines.
Terms and conditions Of employ
ment were controlled "for the pc
Rod Of Government possession" by
an agreement entered into on May
%, 1916, between Secretary of In
terror Krug, as Coal Mines Admin
istrator, and John L. Lewis, as
president of the United Mine Work
ers Of America. -
On October 81, 1916, the defendant
Lewis directed a letter to Secretary
Krug and presented issues which
led directly to the present contro-
versy. According to the defendant
Lewis, the Krug-Lewis agreement
carried forward article IS of thu
National Bituminous Coal Wage
Agreement of April II, 1915. Under
that section either party to the con.
tract was privileged to give 10 days
notice In writing of a desire for a
negotiating conference which the
other party was required to attend
Is days after the beginning of the
conference either party might give
notice In writing of the termination
of the agreement, effective five days
after receipt of such notice. As
serting authority under this clause
the defendant Lewis in his letter OF
October 81 requested that con-
ference begin November i for the
purpose of negotiating new ar
rangements concerning wages,
hours, practices, and other pertinent
matters appertaining to the btu
minous coal industry.
Captain N. H. COLLISION, then
Coal Mines Administrator, answered
for Secretary Krug. Any contract
ual basis for requiring negotiations
for revision of the Krug-Lewis
agreement was denied. In the opin-
ion of the Government, article Is
of the 1945 agreement had not been
preserved by the Krug-Lewis agree
ment; indeed, article Is had been
expressly nulli1ed by the clause of
the latter contract providing that
the terms contained therein were to
cover the period of Government
possession. On November IS the
union, by John L. Lewis, notified
Secretary Krug that "15 days having
now elapsed since the beginning OF
said conference, the United Mine
Workers of America, exercising its
option hereby terminates said Krug-
Lewis agreement as of IL O'Clock
pm. midnight, Wednesday, Novem-
ber 20, 1946." ** =
U. S. Complaint Filed.
The United States on November
18 filed complaint in the District
Court for the District of Columbia
against the United Mine Workers OF
America and John L. Lewis, indi-
vidually and as president of the
union. The suit was brought under
the Declaratory Judgment Act and
sought judgment to the effect that
the defendants had no power uni
latera1ly to terminate the Krug-
Lewis agreement. =
The court, immediately and With
out notice to the defendants, issued
a temporary order restraining the
defendarltS from continuing in ef-
feet the notice of November 15.. - :.
A gradual walkout by the miners
commenced on November Is, and, by
midnight of November 20, consistent
with the miners mo contract, no
work" policy, a full blown strike was
in progress. -
On November 81 the United States
filed Q petition for a rule to show
cause why defendants should not
be punished as and for contempt,
alleging a willful violation of the
restraining order. The rule issued,
setting November Is as the return
day and, if at that time the con-
tempt was not sufficiently purged,
setting November u as the day Tor
trial on the contempt charge.
On the return day, defendants,
by counsel, informed the court that
no action had been taken concern
ing the November IL notice and
denied the jurisdiction of the court
to issue the restraining order and
rule to show cause. Trial on the
contempt charge was thereupon
ordered to begin as scheduled on
November 26, the defendants filed
a motion to discharge and vacate
the rule to show cause. Their
motion challenged the jurisdiction OF
the court and raised the grave ques-
ton of whether the Norris-Laguar-
dia Act prohibited the granting OF
the temporary restraining order at
the instance of the United States
After extending the temporary
restraining order on November 21,
and after full argument on Novem-
ber 27 and November 20, the court
on the latter date, over-ruled the
motion and held that its power to
issue the restraining order in this
case was not affected by either the
Norris-La Guardia Act or the Clay
ton Act.
Tried on Contempt Charge,
The defendants thereupon pleaded
not guilty and waived an advisory
Jury. Trial on the contempt charge
proceeded, =" At the conclusion
of the trial on December 3,
both defendants were found guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of both
criminal and civil contempt dating
from November 18. The court en-
tered Judgment on December 4, fin
ing the defendant Lewis $4,000 and
the defendant union S3,500,00
Defendants first and principal
contention is that the restraining
order and preliminary injunction
were issued in violation of the Clay
ton and Norris-La Guardia Acts
We have come to a contrary deci-
sion.
It is true that Congress decreed
In Article 20 of the Clayton Act
that mo such restraining order OF
Injunction shall prohibit any person
or persons from recommend.
s-- odx,;c;y,n 0r y,orS11o dino others