A Federal District Court judge ruled yesterday that jurisdiction in the case involving the right of waitresses at Cronin's Restaurant to picket lies exclusively in federal court.

Judge Anthony Julian of the Federal District Court for eastern Massachusetts also ruled that a written stipulation by the attorney for James D. Cronin, owner of the restaurant, permitting peaceful picketing, will sufficiently "cover" an earlier restraining order. The stipulation will clarify the right of members of the Harvard Square Waitresses Organizing Committee (HSWOC) to resume picketing.

Patricia Welch--one of the eight waitresses whom Cronin fired last week--said yesterday that the picketers will return today.

The hearing was held late yesterday afternoon following the morning decision of Judge Frank W. Tomasello of the Superior Court of Middlesex to extend indefinitely the restraining order forbidding the picketing, and to postpone all further procedures in state court until the issue of proper jurisdiction in the case was settle in federal court.

Contempt Hearing

The morning hearing had been scheduled for HSWOC to show cause why it was not guilty of contempt of the restraining order. The defendants named were Stephen R. Domesick, who presented the case of the defendants yesterday afternoon, Kathi Allen and Steven Kehoe. The three are attorneys for HSWOC, which was founded in December as the official bargaining agent of waitresses at Cronin's Restaurant.

James C. Gahan Jr., the attorney for Cronin, presented the plaintiff's case challenging Federal authority in the litigation. Following a rebuttal by Gahan on the decision of the court, Julian said, "I don't think you've understood what I've tried to tell you."

"The fact that the motion to remand (to state court) was filed by you, indicates that you yourself acknowledge that the case is here." Julian said to Gahan. Julian added that the entire case will remain in his court "until it is remanded to state court, if it is remanded to state court."

Julian spent the first 35 minutes of the 75-minute hearing attempting to determine the chronology of legal events surrounding the case.

Julian said that the rapid succession of petitions filed in several courts during last week had caused extensive confusion. Both litigants said that, in several instances, there was no "reasonable notification" of filing to the other party.

Gahan reported that his client filed a petition to restrain the "criminal acts of violence" allegedly committed by picketing HSWOC members on Monday of last week. Cronin alleged that the union members had threatened employees who wished to work and had harassed customers who tried to enter the restaurant. Tomasello issued the restraining order in his chambers.

Restraining Order

The restraining order commanded that HSWOC "desist from and refrain from (1) illegally picketing: and (2) annoying, harassing and intimidating employees or customers while on the picket line."

Domesick denied yesterday that anyone has ever defied this code. "The picketing has always been peaceful," he said. "Our peaceful picketing is now being enjoined."

Domesick explained yesterday that picketers have attempted to "dissuade" customers from entering. Julian concurred that the function of picketing is "persuasion" and that this is not legal.