Kansas agitator. [volume] (Garnett, Kan.) 1890-1905, 1897-12-24

Pursuing the subject suggested in
previous article regarding injunction
proceedings, an investigation has been
made, covering several important
points, namely: Has congress the pow
er to legislate against the alleged
abuse of power by the judiciary, and,
If it has, what kind of legislation can
it provide?
AS to the first proposition, it might
be said that it is not as easy for con-
gress to interfere in this matter as
some would suppose. 1t is true that
congress has the power under the con-
stitution ito ordain and establish
courts inferior to the Supreme
court of the United States" and has
authority ito make all laws which
shall be necessary and proper for car
rying into execution the provisions OF
the constitution" But when it comes
to passing a statute which has for its
object curtailment of courts juris-
diction, it is approaching serious
matter. A~s'
Courts proceed under well-defned
and established system of laws, which
has grown up with the progress OF
civilization, and it does not lie within
the province of congress, even though
it were so inclined, to change the
present system of legal procedure ex-
cept within constitutional limits. In
order for congress to deal with the
present issue, that of injunctions, 1t
must presume to know just what the
circumstances will be at the time when
court is called upon to exercise its
authority, for no statute can be passed
to cover injunction proceedings with
out setting forth certain limitations
and restrictions. At present the
courts authority is entirely discre-
tionary, governed, of course, by the
principles of equity Jurisprudence.
Congress cannot pass unconstitu-
tional laws, and law which would de-
prive courts of the power of equity
Jurisdiction would certainly be I'M
constitutional, for in Article III, Sec.
2, of the constitution, it distinctly
states that "the judicial power shall
extend to all cases, in law and equity,
arising under this constitution"
Injunction proceedings are actions
coming within equity jurisprudence,
which is a system of law that compre-
bends every matter for which common
law provides no remedy. 1t had its
origin during the reign of Richard II.
of England, and was invoked by the
chancellor as "the keeper of the kings
conscience" in moderating the harsh
ness of the common law according to
equity and good conscience when its
rules worked hardship in particular
cases. In the present age, however,
the king seems to have lost his con-
science, and instead of preventing
hardships it invites them. At least,
this is the view the workingman en-
tertains Notwithstanding this, how
ever, equity proceedings are sometimes
harsh and extremely mandatory.
Through 1t the humblest citizen can
restrain a whole state from doing him
an injustice, provided he has no other
remedy at law; for equity does not
have jurisdiction when the common
methods of law are available.
Note.-In the previous article, I'M
der the heading Government by In
junction." 1t was stated that injunction
proceedings were actions Of common
law, which was an error, and which
is corrected in article above. The
writer misunderstood his informant,
who intended the word common in its
Aneral sense and not as applied to
that system of law H. c. Y.