The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1897-10-21

A MUCH-ABUsED TERM.
Tie Danvilc Register in speaking about
tie TRADE against the government by in
junction says that it is something that
works both ways and calls attention to
the fact that when the Chicago City Rail-
way Company recently discharged num-
Der Of its employees for no other reason
than that they were members Of the
union and issued an order forbidding
their employees under penalty to pay
their dues to the union, the union has APP
piled for an injunction against the com
pany to restrain it from enforcing the
order. The Register adds:
In our opinion the union has the best
enc OF Tho string the union is right and
when the courts so decide, as unquestion-
ably they must. the demagoSucs who
have been ranting so much about gov
eminent by injunction will have at least
one of their guns spiked.
The prejudice against government by
injunction" so-called. grows largely out
Of the fact that it has % happened that
these injunctions have usually been OBJ
tanned by corporations to prevent outsid-
ers from in. iring or interfering with their
business.
If the case had been different, if it had
so happened that in most instances cor
porations had been enjoined from tres
passing upon the rights Of working
those who now are loudest in their de-
nunciatiOn Of the injunction would have
thought it = most benefcent measure Of
protection.
Like all other good things the injunc-
most cases it is the only adequate pro-
lection that man or a corporation has,
no one can dispute.
In This connection, we find an admirable
article on the subject in the Nashville
American of recent date, which con-
cludes as follows:
No Injunction has ever been issued to
"restralD strikes Such writs have re-
strained strikers from destroying proper
lFtyf trespassing and interfering with men
who wished to work. Judge Gibbons
Seems TO painfully contradict himself in
urging that 'this'is government of law,
not force. While he is inveghing against
a resort 70 the law to prevent force
NO striker has ever suffered any sort
Of injury from an injunction. II an in
junction wrongfully Restraints any mans
right he can 90 into court and have 1t
dissolved. To argue otherwise is to i'm
peach the entire system of American judi
ciary.
II is said that instead OF the obnoxious
injunction, criminal process is the proper
legal method OF preventing lawless action,
yet everybody knows that these same par
ties Chat make such an outcry against
injunction would be much more bitter in
their protests if a criminal procedure
should be effectually enforced against
them.
Disguise 1t as you may, TIL sort Of talk
Is but an apology for the resort TO vio-
lence on the part Of strikers and a con-
demnation of legal methods used 10 re-
strain il.
Every man has n right 10 strike when
ever ne pieases. No injunction can force
him to labor against his Will. and nobody
has ever complained Of an injunction who
did not contemplate violation of the
law.
It is altogether probable that the in
Junction process has been overdone. A
rigorous enforcement of criminal statutes
where they apply would be much moro
wholesome, but if in response to this out
cry against injunctions 1t is sought to
abridge the powers Of the courts TO issue
such writs or TO punish for contemDt. 4
violent assault viii have been made on
the bulwark Of the law.
The truth OF the matter IS that this
plank in the Chicago platform was con-
ceived in no desire 10 correct an abuse
but was put in simply and solely 10 catch
votes and we honor those members of the
their sanction when the vote was polled.
Virginia delegation who refused to give it