The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-08-13
GOVERNMENT BY INJUNCTION.
Republican Application of 1t Comes
in for Roast.

To the Editor of the Globe.
In this mornings G o b e is an editorial
headed Better Let That Alone" You state
that Mr. A. c.. Bentley, secretary of the state
committee of the Democratic organization OF
Illinois, is giving counsel to the Democracy
Of this state. You say:
1t will crafty Democrats of all shades
to have the assurance of Mr.. Bentley that the
Democratic platform of 1900 will contain
modihed declaration of the objectionable
clauses against government by injunction and
the like because it indicates re-
turning sanity.
There is nothing in the Chicago platform
that any Democrat should blush for or de-
sire to have eXpunged. 1t denounces ''arbi-
trary interference by federal authorities in
local affairs as a violation of the constitu-
ton of the United States and crime against
free institutions" Is not this Democracy? Is
it not good law? Is it not the embodiment
Of the highest patriotism?
1t says further: eve especially object to
government by injunction as a new and dan
gerous form of oppression by which federal
judges in contempt of the laws of the states
and rights of citizens, become at once legis-
lators, judges, eXecutioners," and goes on
favoring the passage Of a bill then pending
in congress providing for trials by jury in
certain cases Of contempt.
Why should this declaration Of principles
be "modifed?"
Is it not time to call halt upon the contin-
ued and dangerous usurpations of the federal
Judiciary? Is 1t not Democracy to insist upon
upholding by all constitutional methods the
liberty Of the citizen as well as the reserved
rights of the states. Ever since the war ouI
courts have been the playthings of the Re-
publican party. Their shibboleth has ever
been: ''If the constitution stands in the way
so much the worse for the constitution
Is it not history that the Republican
party in 1861 proposed to abolish the su-
preme court as it then existed and appoint a
full new court protesting Republican princi-
pies?
On March 8, 1868, this court consisted OF
nine judges six of whom were Democrats.
CONGRESS- PASSED adding another
judge, declaring six a quorum and President
Lincoln appointed political friend to the
office. Oct. II, 1864, Chief Justice fancy died
and S. P. Chase was appointed in his place
The court then stood five Democrats and five
Republicans. May 80, 1865. Justice Catron
died, which left only four Democrats on the
bench. President Johnson proposed to fill
his place with Democrat. The Republicans
controlling congress- to obviate this and Sc
cure a majority of Republican judges, on July
%, 1866, passed an act to reduce the number
of judges from ten down to six.
Why follow this further?
The supreme court was again increased un-
der Grant by the addition of two members,
Bradley and Strong. to obtain a favorable de-
cision on the legal tender act. And their ia
vorable opinion was known before their ap-
pointment was made.
bia was abolished under Lincoln, and Judges
Dunlop, MorrelI and Merrick, although hold
ing life positions, were retired on account of
their political opinions. And this court was
recognized for political purposes.
We might follow this record indefinitely.
Cui bono?
The shameful record of the Republican
party in reference to our Judiciary is not
more startling than the growth of dangerous
and demoralizing powers assumed as the pre-
rogative of the judges. This government is
fast becoming a government by injunction.
Men are imprisoned WITHOUT lawful convic-
ton, preceded by indictment and trial by
jury. Our courts have lately so construed the
doctrine of contributory negligence as renders
it nigh impossible for a claimant to recover
damages from a corporation for personal in
juries inflicted.
Our supreme court in the income tax case
reversed its own decisions of a century, the
effect of which was to allow aggregated capt.
tai to escape paying it's fair share of the
burdens of taxation.
The Democratic party, alive to the price
which threatens the liberty of the individual
and constitutional government itself, at Chi
cago sounded the alarm. We have nothing to
modify Principles are eternal in their ma
ture. The grand truths of Democracy viii
survive when the names of partisan judges
are lost in the twilight of tradition.
Hope is our brthright. Faith is our duty.
The Democrat who despairs of his party de-
spairs of American liberty.
j. N. Rogey.
Princeton, Aug. II.