The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-08-12

There are two points of view of the
injunction issued by Judge Jackson, Of
the federal court of the district of West
Virginia, on the application of stock
holder in the Monongah Coal company
against Debs and whosoever might be
associated with him in endeavoring to
procure the miners in the companys
employment to strike. The first bears
upon the practice of judges Of signing
injunctional writs on ex parte applica-
tiOns almost as a matter Of course, and
without examining the order signed to
see if the power assumed is within the
jurisdiction of the court. This careless
practice has grown out of the urgency
of cases, the desire Of the applying at
torney to cover all the ground he may
wish secured. and the opportunity the
alternative form of the writ offers the
enjoined TO obtain modification or re-
fusal within a short time. But it is.
nevertheless the most drastic of rene
dies. the exercise of what might be-
comes the almost tyrannicaI powers
OF courts, and one that no con-
scientious judge would use without the
most careful scrutiny of the powers in
Voked in the order presented him for
signature. There was a check given
this practice in the reversal on appeal
OF the sweeping order issued by Judge
Jenkins III the strike cases in 1894 by
Justice Harlan.
The other point Of view is from a
different angle and one from which not
only the enjoined miners but every
other wage Garner who is yet in the
delusion Of paternalism, may look and
get knowledge. This strike is for the
purpose of having restored the wages
paid prior TO their reduction made on
the plea that the cut in the tariff from
70 to AZ cents ton made wage reduc-
ton imperative if foreign competition
would be met. The tariff having been
raised to 81 cents a ton, with an artful
change that protects anthracite also
the miners ask that the operators share
the 81 cents Of their rise in protec-
ton with them by advancing their
wages % per cent, or from "a to So cents
ton, two cents more than the tax laid
TO "equallze the difference in labor
cost" Against this demand, not only
reasonable in itself, but absolutely I'M
deniable from the operators own posi-
ton before congress, the latter present
nn1ta6 ATAA
Iecting it, they send their attorneys to
The courts and procure injunctions that
not only enjoin strikers from trespass
On their property and from committing
acts OF violence, but, in this Monon-
gah case, from approaching" it's prop
Prty or "inciting" its employees to strike.
1t prohibits freedom of travel on the
kings highway" and freedom of
speech. Of course no such denial of
guaranteed and inherent right will
stand trial moment in any court. and
1t is charitable to assume that Judge
jackson did not know what the order
contained
But that is not the important aspect
the case presents to these miners and
to every worker for wage in our nursed
and bottle-fed industries 1t is the atti-
tude towards them of their guardians
that should strike them and strike
them hard. If they are not hope
iessly blind, they cannot but see the
heartlessness and hypocrisy under all
this pretense Of anxiety about the eco
ncmic conditions Of their employees,
their apprehension that, if they are no:
safeguarded in their products against
competition, they will have to reduce
wages to the "pauper" point of Eu-
rope, and when they have induced con-
gress by such representations to shell
Ter them, they ignore requests and de-
mands of workmen for the donations
of congress, lock them out where that
method will induce submission, and.
when strikes are ordered, invoke courts
% enjoin the strikers from exercising
fundamental rights. If this incarnated
spirit of protection is willing to de-