The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-10-21

Soor.
We do not for moment conceal from
ourselves the insidiousness and the dan
ger OF this argument, and unless 1t is
promptly and decisively met 1t will
furnish fertile soil for Altgeld's doctrines
OF anarchy TO grow In, for II most plau-
slbly appeals TO our institutions them
selves as authority for everything that
he claims, and. In a way that few, II
any, laymen can answer. while many
lawyers even will be misled by 1t.
The vice In his argument is at this
point. What he says OF our instilu-
lions securing TO every person the risht
10 have every alleged violation OF law
tried by jury Of the vicinage Is true
OF those institutions in their original
form. That was the theory OF our
An.lo-Saxon ancestors when they were
little more than barbarians. But. as
their civilization improved. it was seen
that there were certain injuries incl
dent TO improvement. that were IRE
parable in their nature through the pro-
cess of Jury trial, and that unless they
were prevented at the outset, injustice
would be done that could never be COM
pensatcd at all. Therefore, the spirit OF
a progressive age demanded that the
old-time institutions should be made 10
bend and accept as graft upon them
the proposition that when the injury
threatened was of a character that could
not be compensated in the damages that
the verdict OF a jury would award inc
courts should issue their writ OF inJunc-
ton forbiddng the party in advance TO
perpetrate the injury that was threat
ened. And the life of this graft was
the right, equally conceded 10 the courts
10 make their injunctive orders efiectual
by a process for Furnishing violators OF
those orders summary, as for a con-
tempt of the court. An advancing civil
lizatiOn insisted that the injunction was
absolutely necessary TO it when the
threatened injury could not be comDen-
stated in damages. and it equally claimed
that the injunction would be imperative
and void unless the court awarding 1t
had the authority TO enforce obedience
to the injunctiye order BY Furnishing for
contempt
There was a great struggle in England
amongst our ancestors over the graft
ing of this new principle upon the old,
but nearly three hundred years ago the
new principle won, and it was as firmly
inbedded into our institutions as the old
principle that when the injury can be
compensated in damages the alleged vio-
lation of law shall be tried by a Jury.
If has remained fixed in our insttu-
lions from the day of its adoption until
now. and is expressly recognized as the
basis Of our jurisprudence by the Con-
stitution of the United States when 1t
declares that "the judicial power of the
United States shall extend to all cases
I'm law or equity arising under the Con-
stitution or laws Of the United States"
The word equity" had a perfectly set
tied technical meaning when the Consu-
tuition was adopted. and that meaning
included the authority TO issue injunc-
tons. and to punish for violations Of
them.
The Supreme Court Of the United states
has many times held that this word
equity" had a settled, technical mean
ING when it was incorporated into the
Constitution. and that its use there i'm
bedded forever in that instrument all
that course Of judicial procedure which
was known in England as equity juris-
prudence at the time the Constitution
was adopted.
Ii is as much therefore. n part OF our
institutions tia courts OF equity shall
enjoin threatened injuries that cannot
be compensated in damages. and shall
punish tor violations OF those iujunctions,
as It is that injuries that can be COM
-ensatcd in damages shall be passed upon
ry Juries Of TIE vicinago.
A,tgeld says in his speech. when 'he
law forbids a thing there IS no need
for an injunction" This is specious, but
utterly ilusory. and it is. IN fact, the
gist OF his case. Wicked men pay no at
tcntion to the commands of the law un-
less there is an effective agency at hand
to make them suffer if they violate it,.
When ir poE~ib rioters arc about TO
barn all the cars of q railroad company
ana break down their bridges, Of what
avail is 1t to say that jury VIII
subsequently award the raiiraod company
damages against these men FOR the in
Jury they are about 20 commit. whoa lt
las been completed. 1T would be a mere
mackery. though Altecld contends 1t IS
an they have q right TO. and. therefore,
our Constitution has said that in such
cases the courts of equity shall cnjoin
the threatened injury ana punish those
who violate the injunction summarly 10
compel them TO obey it. This principle
Is the very life of our civilization.
Altgelds argument cannot be needed at
all. but il might have been listened TO
with greater patience If it had been de-
nyered under different inspirations. But
IL comes from Il man who pardoned avow-
ed Anarchists. condemned for numbering
policemen. who were endcavoring to make
them submit TO the CONSTANTS of law.
II was delivered 10 a meeting which was
attended by all the avowed Anarchists in
New York city, AID these took advan-
taco OF every opportunity 10 cheer him