The advocate., 1897-08-25
JURISDICTION OF UNITED STATES
COURTS,
O0URTS,

a ROOQ zeal II uSlub bdAu dDOuL LuG
Jurisdiction of our Federal courts
They are charged with assuming un-
authorized powers, and 1t is suggested
that all Of them except the Supreme
court ought to be abolished.
There is one good thing about this
discussion, and it is the only good fea-
ture which we have thus far recog-
nized. It is attracting the attention of
the Judges, and will serve as a caution
and a warning to them. They will see
in these criticisms of their official con-
duct sparks from the peoples fOrges.
The force Of public opinion is all pow
erful when fully aroused. It always,
sooner or later, controls public affairs.
AS Is usual in the first Outbursts Of
opposition, some men are speaking on
this subject without due consideration.
From some things seen in print and
heard in conversation, 1t would seem
that the critics regard proceedings by
injunction as something new and there
fore outside the constitution and laws
The truth is, however, that the writ
or order of injunction is older than
our constitution, older than our laws.
So old Is it that it Is recognized in
the constitutions and laws of all the
States as something long established
and we'll understood before the powers
Of our government were organized.
Proceedings by injunction descended
to us with the common law Of Eng
land. None of our State laws nor those
Of the United States either establish or
define the writ of injunction any more
than they establish or define the writ
Of mandamus or any Of the old proc
esses Of the courts; but they do provide,
in some cases, how the writ may be
procured, that is, prescribe a. method
Of proceeding; and in some cases,
statutory injunction is provided. For
example, paragraph 1882 of the Cen
eral Statutes Of Kansas 1889 provides:
"The injunction provided by this code
is a command to refrain from a par
ticular act. It may be the final judg-
ment in an action, or may be allowed
as provisional remedy, and, when SO
allowed, 1t shall be by order, The writ
of injunction Is abolished"
In other words, the word "Order" is
to supersede the word writ" and that
the provisions Of the Kansas code re-
lating to an order OF injunction shall
supersede the old proceeding relating
to the writ But the injunction itself
is substantially the same now that 1t
was hundred years ago. 1T is more
generally used as a preventive than as
restorative process, although by no
means confined TO the former"
1t is not necessary in all cases that
notice be given to the other party; the
order usually issues without notice in
any case where the Judge or court does
not deem notice necessary. The Kan
sas statute provides: "If the court or
Judge deem it proper that the defend
ant, or any party to the suit, should
be heard before granting the iniunc-
ton, it may direct a reasonable notice
to be given to such party to attend for
such purpose, at specified time and
place, and may, in the meantime, re-
strain such party"
Usually all that is required to pro-
cure temporary order of injunction is
case made on paper. If what the
petition sets forth be true, and il on
that showing the defendant ought to be
restrained, a temporary order issues as
matter Of course, and notice is served