Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-03-26

Ey effort SO ill-directed and Inadequate as
to aggravate all the evils of the situation"
ment to step in, not only in defense of in
dividuals, but in obedience to It's obliga-
tlons to protect interstate commerce, and
because it Is the duty of every govern
ment to exercise its functions whenever
occasion requires
Mr.. Olney then passed on to the consid-
Grafton of the means at the command Of
the government for the suppression of the
strike. the principal of which was the
courts, which must be depended upon, SO
far as practicable, to deal with 1t. Ger
ta1nly the government could arrest and
prosecute men for interfering with the
mails. but in dealing with mobs of thous-
ards that process was inadequate.
Remedy Furnishcd by the Courts.
Had the United States any other rem
edy? 1t had" he said. 'I submit with
great confidence the exact remedy which
1t did apply for, and which the courts did,
IN fact, furnish. 1t had the right to go
into Its courts of equity, to set out the
Iacts by proper bill. and to ask that upon
these facts the defendants and their con-
Ieoerates should be restrained from
wrongful interruption of Interstate rail-
road transportation, which was WORKING
prlVate ana public injury of the most wide
spread and most irreparable character.
hao the right to bring such a bill and
To ask and to get such relief on the most
fncontestable grounds. The sovereign can
always resort to it's own courts under cir
cumstances which authorize private fndi-
Viouais to resort to them, and for the same
purposes. The United States by the hill
IN question presented a case of equitable
cognizance beyond all cavil-a case to
wnlcn criminal prosecutions and actions
LOT damages were wholly inadequate, a
case involving innumerable suits and great
ana entirely 1rreparable injury unless the
imminent and impending mischiefs were
averted through the restraining orders of
court of equity. That private party
plaintiff having the proper interest would
under the circumstances stated in the gov
ernment bill have been entitled to MAIN
tain such a bill and to receive the equitable
question If. for example. all the twenty
one or two railroads entering in Chicago
had been owned by one individual or one
corporation, that owneg might without
doubt have successfully appealed to court
of equity for protection against acts such
as those set out in the government bill.
The petitioners will hardly take issue on
that point and l do not understand that
they do so. The inherently equitable ma
ture of the case made by the government
bill being conceded because; indisputable,
the real contention is that the United
States was not proper plaintiff to any
such bill, and had no right to bring it. Hav
ing no direct property interest involved,
the United States. it is claimed, could not
be plaintiff in such bill without express
enabling legislation on the part of Con-
neither sound in principle nor supported
by precedent. A trustees right and duty
to protect by suit the subject matter of the
trust are in nowise affected because he is
without private interest in that subject
matter. Yet. as regards interstate rail-
road transportation, what is the United
States but a trustee for all parties and in
terestS concerned a trustee bound by it's
relations to the states, as we'll as individu-
ais to sue at law OR in equity whenever
such suit will aid In the discharge OF the
trust?"
Congress having provided the means. 1t
remained for the executive to put the law
into execution, and that division of the
government was bound under these laws to
deal with the situation in Chicago in 1S4
Mr.. Olney then proceeded by quoting pre-
cedents to show that the Application of
these laws to similar cases WAS not new. to
consider the assertion that the Chicago
affair was exceptional and to controvert
the allegation OF errors In the court below,
and in closing, said:
His Closing Remarks.
What was done by the government and
it's courts at Chicago IN the summer of
1894 was done on a conspicuous theater, and
dealt with events striking in themselves
and in the scale on which they We're con-
ducted and which strongly appealed to
the Imagination as well as the passions of
men. Its action was denounced from the
outset as novel and unprecedented, SO that
1t even became expedient to publicly pro-
claim the trite and familiar principle that
for the execution of national functions
every foot of every state Is national sell
and national property. Since then the
same policy has been persis.ently pursued,
and the government bill in equity, the in
junction. and the proceedings for contempt,
have all been loudly condemned as
anomalous, extraordinary and revolution
ary. To such charges there could he no
more decisive answer than is furnished by
this debate and by the contentious of the
respective parties. Who is compelled to
claim here that the sovereign is not COM
petent to protect public rights by enjoin-
ing their violation through its own courts
of equity: that acts which threaten prop
erty cannot be arrested ny injunction be-
cause they are also crimes; that court IS
helpless as against contempt because 1t
is also a crime, and that the Jurisdiction
in equity and the power of every court to
try and punish contempts of its authority
is not as surely provided for by the Con-
stitution as the right of trial by jury itself?
1t is not the government who is driven to
make these or any other like novel conten-
tions. On the other hand, having to zeal
with an extraordinary and unique situa-
tion, 1t had the good fortune to find that
nothing was needed but the firm and fear
less application of old and well-establisned
principles. 1t did apply them, and applied
them with success which is the root of
all the bitterness with which its action has
since been asSailed. 1t vas success i'm
mensely important in immediate results as
well as greatly reassuring for the future.
1t demonstrated the inherent excellence
of that system of Jurisprudence with whose
Inheritance we have been blessed and
whose principles and methods have never
failed to be adequate to the varying eX-
igencies Of a progressive civilization. 1t
further demonstrated that there still sur
wives that ingrained and deep-seated re-
gard and respect for the laws of the land.
as administered through the courts, which
has ever been characteristic as well as
chief safeguard for our institutions, and
which enables us to present 20 the world
the astonishing spectacle of nation of
70,00O,0O0 of people to whom standing
armies and all the burdens and evils CT
military service are practically unknown"
Mr.. Olney closed at l o'clock and was
followed by Mr.. Darrow in the interest of
the petitioners.
The court will announce it's decision
probably before adjournment in May.
PROMINENT DOSTONIAN ARRESTED,
George ID. Burton, Inventor of the
Stock Car.