« PreviousContinue »
Such hearing shall be held after due and personal notice thereof has been given, in such manner as the court shall direct, to all known persons against whom relief is sought, and also to the chief of those public officials of the county and city within which the unlawful acts have been threatened or committed charged with the duty to protect complainant's property: Provided, however, That if a complainant shall also allege that, unless a temporary restraining order shall be issued without notice, a substantial and irreparable injury to complainant's property will be unavoidable, such a temporary restraining order may be issued upon testimony under oath, sufficient, if sustained, to justify the court in issuing a temporary injunction upon a hearing after notice. Such a temporary restraining order shall be effective for no longer than five days and shall become void at the expiration of said five days. No temporary restraining order or temporary injunction shall be issued except on condition that complainant shall first file an undertaking with adequate security in an amount to be fixed by the court sufficient to recompense those enjoined for any loss, expense, or damage caused by the improvident or erroneous issuance of such order or injunction, including all reasonable costs (together with a reasonable attorney's fee) and expense of defense against the order or against the granting of any injunctive relief sought in the same proceeding and subsequently denied by the court.
The undertaking herein mentioned shall be understood to signify an agreement entered into by the complainant and the surety upon which a decree may be rendered in the same suit or proceeding against said complainant and surety, upon a hearing to assess damages of which hearing complainant and surety shall have reasonable notice, the said complainant and surety submitting themselves to the jurisdiction of the court for that purpose. But nothing herein contained shall deprive any party having a claim or cause of action under or upon such undertaking from electing to pursue his ordinary remedy by suit at law or in equity.
Sec. 8. No restraining order or injunctive relief shall be granted to any complainant who has failed to comply with any obligation imposed by law which is involved in the labor dispute in question, or who has failed to make every reasonable effort to settle such dispute either by negotiation or with the aid of any available governmental machinery of mediation or voluntary arbitration.
Sec. 9. No restraining order or temporary or permanent injunction shall be granted in a case involving or growing out of a labor dispute, except on the basis of findings of fact made and filed by the court in the record of the case prior to the issuance of such restraining order or injunction; and every restraining order or injunction granted in a case involving or growing out of a labor dispute shall include only a prohibition of such specific act or acts as may be expressly complained of in the bill of complaint or petition filed in such case and as shall be expressly included in said findings of fact made and filed by the court as provided herein.
Sec. 10. Whenever any court of the United States shall issue or deny any temporary injunction in a case involving or growing out of a labor dispute, the court shall, upon the request of any party to the proceedings and on his filing the usual bond for costs, forthwith certify as in ordinary cases the record of the case to the circuit court of appeals for its review. Upon the filing of such record in the circuit court of appeals, the appeal shall be heard and the temporary injunctive order affirmed, modified, or set aside with the greatest possible expedition, giving the proceedings precedence over all other matters except older matters of the same character.
Sec. 11. In all cases arising under this Act in which a person shall be charged with contempt in a court of the United States (as herein defined), the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the contempt shall have been committed: Provided, That this right shall not apply to contempts committed in the presence of the court or so near thereto as to interfere directly with the administration of justice or to apply to the misbehavior, misconduct, or disobedience of any officer of the court in respect to the writs, orders, or process of the court.
Sec. 12. The defendant in any proceeding for contempt of court may file with the court a demant for the retirement of the judge sitting in the proceeding, if the contempt arises from an attack upon the character or conduct of such judge and if the attack occurred elsewhere than in the presence of the court or so near thereto as to interfere directly with the administration of justice. Upon the filing of any such demand the judge shall thereupon proceed no further, but another judge shall be designated in the same manner as is provided by law. The demand shad be filed prior to the hearing in the contempt proceeding.
SEC. 13. When used in this Act, and for the purposes of this Act,
(a) A case shall be held to involve or to grow out of a labor dispute when the case involves persons who are engaged in the same industry, trade, craft, or occupation; or have direct or indirect interests therein; or who are employees of the same employer; or who are members of the same or an affiliated organization of employers or employees; whether such dispute is (1) between one or more employers or associations of employers and one or more employees or associations of employees; (2) between one or more employers or associations of employers and one or more employers or associations of employers; or (3) between one or more employees or associations of employees and one or more employees or associations of employees; or when the case involves any conflicting or competing interests in a "labor dispute" (as hereinafter defined) of "persons participating or interested” therein (as hereinafter defined).
(b) A person or association shall be held to be a person participating or interested in a labor dispute if relief is sought against him or it, and if he or it is engaged in the same industry, trade, craft, or occupation in which such dispute occurs, or has a direct or indirect interest therein, or is a member, officer, or agent of any association composed in whole or in part of employers or employees engaged in such industry, trade, craft, or occupation.
(c) The term "labor dispute" includes any controversy concerning terms or conditions of employment, or concerning the association or representation of persons in negotiating, fixing, maintaining, changing, or seeking to arrange terms or conditions of employment, regardless of whether or not the disputants stand in the proximate relation of employer and employee.
(d) The term "court of the United States” means any court of the United States whose jurisdiction has been or may be conferred or defined or limited by Act of Congress, including the courts of the District of Columbia.
Sec. 14. If any provision of this Act or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, the remaining provisions of the Act and the application of such provisions to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
Sec. 15. All Acts and parts of Acts in conflict with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed. (Act of March 23, 1932.)
(National Industrial Recovery Act) Sec. 7. (a) Every code of fair competition, agreement, and license approved, prescribed, or issued under this title shall contain the following conditions: (1) That employees shall have the right to organize and bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and shall be free from the intefference, restraint, or coercion of employers of labor, or their agents, in the designation of such representatives or in self-organization or in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection; (2) that no employee and no one seeking employment shall be required as a condition of employment to join any company union or to refrain from joining, organizing, or assisting a labor organization of his own choosing; and (3) that employers shall comply with the maximum hours of labor, minimum rates of pay, and other conditions of employment, approved or prescribed by the President.
(Sec. 77B of the Bankruptcy Act) (1) No judge, debtor, or trustee acting under this section shall deny or in any way question the right of employees on the property under the jurisdiction of the judge, to join the labor organization of their choice, and it shall be unlawful for any judge, debtor, or trustee to interfere in any way with the organizations of employees, or to use funds under such jurisdiction, in maintaining so-called company unions, or to coerce employees in an effort to induce them to join or remain members of such company unions.
(m) No judge, debtor, or trustee acting under this section shall require any person seeking employment on the property under the jurisdiction of the judge to sign any contract or agreement promising to join or to refuse to join a labor organization; and if such contract has been enforced on the property prior to the property coming under the jurisdiction of said judge, then the judge, debtor, or trustee, as soon as the matter is called to his attention, shall notify the employees by an appropriate order that said contract has been discarded and is no longer binding on them in any way.
TO PROMOTE THE DEVELOPMENT OF INDIAN ARTS AND
CRAFTS AND TO CREATE A BOARD TO ASSIST THEREIN, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
May 21, 1935.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state
of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. ROGERS of Oklahoma, from the Committee on Indian Affairs,
submitted the following
(To accompany H. R. 6468)
The Committee on Indian Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 6468) to promote the development of Indian arts and crafts and to create a board to assist therein, and for other purposes, having considered the same, report thereon with a recommendation that it do pass with the following amendment:
Strike out all of line 22 on page 5 and insert in lieu thereof the following: "be Indian product or products or to be Indian product or products of a particular Indian”.
This bill has the approval of the Department as will be seen from the following letter from the Secretary of the Interior:
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
Washington, May 18, 1935. Hon. WILL ROGERS, Chairman Committee on Indian Affairs,
House of Representatives. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Further reference is made to your request for report on H. R. 6468, a bill to promote the development of Indian arts and crafts and to create a board to assist therein, and for other purposes.
This bill creates board of five unpaid persons, within the Department of the Interior. This board would have for its purpose the enlargement of the market for the arts and crafts of the Indians; the improvement in methods of production; and the protection of the Indian arts and crafts from spurious imitation. The board would direct and guide the activities of a full-time marketing and production specialist, with authority to employ for specific projects ceramic, textile, and other experts. The bill contains provisions, based upon wide commercial experience in trade-mark protection, for distinguishing real, authentic Indian bandcraft products from spurious imitations.
There are several Indian tribes which even now rely on the sale of their handcraft output for a major portion of their total income. Among the Navajos, the output of the looms and of the silversmiths produces a gross revenue in excess of a
H. Repts., 74-1, vol. 2- -66
half million dollars a year. The pottery of some of the Pueblos is probably the largest single source of their cash income. Indian baskets, bead, quill, and leather work make contributions of lesser importance to the income of various tribes.
The protection, development, and expansion of Indian arts and crafts is an immediate, pressing necessity. On nearly all reservations employment opportunities are very scarce except as relief work fills the gap. On many reservations such opportunities do not exist. The one chance to obtain cash to supplement the bare living derived from subsistence farming is through self-employment. The development of Indian handcraft offers such a chance. Already a small part of the American buying public appreciates Indian design, decoration, and workmanship. This appreciation can be broadened and extended; with it the market and the value-of Indian handcraft products can be increased, self-employment opportunities and supplementary income can be multiplied.
Numerous obstacles must be removed, however, before Indian crafts and arts can reach the place which is rightfully theirs. The appended report of the Committee on Indian Arts and Crafts describes these obstacles in detail. This committee of nine volunteers includes two outstanding Indian leaders, Thomas H. Dodge, chairman of the Navajo Tribal Council, and Diego Abeita of Isleta Pueblo;
two leading Indian traders, Berton I. Staples, president of the Navajo Indian Traders’ Association, and Lorenzo Hubbell of Oraibi; James W. Young of Chicago University, one of the country's leading authorities on distribution and marketing, in addition to such connoisseurs of Indian life, arts and crafts as Kenneth M. Chapman of the Laboratory of Anthropology; Oliver La Farge, president of the National Association of Indian Affairs; Charles de Y. Elkus, presikent of the Indian Defense Association of California, and Mrs. Leslie Van Ness Denman of San Francisco.
The report of the committee was formulated after investigations and discussions lasting more than a year. Its recommendations support the provisions of the bill under discussion.
The functions of the board to be established under the bill would fall into three principal parts:
(a) Extension of the market for Indian handcraft products.
The report of the committee describes present methods of distribution and marketing in detail. It does not mention, however, that during the last 6 months individual volunteer efforts have demonstrated that a broadening of the market for Indian handicraft products is possible, that a systematic effort in this direction by an experienced commercial-marketing personnel should produce excellent results of benefit to large numbers of Indian producers within a short time.
One of the important factors limiting the distrubution and holding down the price of Indian handicraft products is the deluge of factory-made low-cost imitstions that is flooding existing markets. The public desires to buy only the genuine Indian handicraft product, but under present conditions it frequently requires the trained eye of an expert to determine what is genuine and what is spurious imitation. Hence it is proposed to give the corporation the right to design trade marks warranting the trade-marked product to be genuine Indian handicraft and to finance its operations in part by charging licensed distributors a small fee for the use of this trade mark. It is believed that through such a method the market for real Indian handicraft products can be greatly enlarged within a short space of time and that better prices can be realized as the public becomes familiar with the trade mark and its significance.
Experience has shown that the protection of a trade mark against commercial pirates is most expensive and frequently is ineffectual, so long as the civil law is the only recourse. Therefore it is proposed to give the Indian-product trade mark the more effective protection of the Federal criminal law. Without such protection, the bulk of the corporation's time and efforts would have to be spent in endless litigation, its constructive work for the Indians would be nullified, and the commercial imitator would continue in command of the market as at present.
At the present time there are practically no standards by which to measure the quality and value of the bulk of Indian handcraft products. Most of the Navajo rugs are bought by the traders on a weight basis; differences in quality are disregarded, with the result that the incentive for improving the quality of the product is lacking. By establishing price differentials on the basis of quality the board could in time improve the quality and increase the value and price of the entire output. At the same time it could carry on experiments to determine whether production methods could be improved and hourly earning capacity of