Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1898-11-28

-
| be amended to restrict immigration more
| than it Is now restricted.
| .. There should DE q provision in The law
guarding against criminal and paupcr ele-
ments entering into the United States
J. The foreign consular service and our
| immigration department should be III
trusted with greater powers to enforce i'm
migration laws
4. The violation of the alien contract la
| Dor law by employers should be punishable
by Imprisonment.
8. The steamship companies should be
| held responsible for a term Of years for the
character Of their passengers.
q. A stricter civil and educational test
should be enforced as to qualification for
naturalization.
I. Every Immigrant should be compelled
| to declare his intention of becoming cit
iZen of the United States.
Injunctionx Against Labor.
Within the past few years a new weapon
has been brought into play in the disputes
between employer and the employed hereo-
fore unknown to the law. so far as it has
been applied to either the criminal the
political or the police powers Of the state
the now well-known weapon Of the judicial
injunction restraining workmen from doing
certain things recognized by the codes
perfectly within the lawful limit of their
rights AS d layman, 1t g not within my
province to discuss the legal rights ana the
legal restrictions Of the Worhman' OF the
citizen: but the thought is nevertheless
uppermost in my mind that 1t is a we'll
established principle in law that an in
junction should never lie when there is an
other complete remedy at law. Nor should
the people be deprived Of the exercise or
their rights by the Issuance of a writ never
contemplated by our system OF Jurlspru-
dence.
1t is sometimes urged that wheT in
junction may DC issued that. If the acts
enjoined ere lawful, the writ will be dis
missed and no injury accrue 10 the party
enjoined. Ordinarily this may be true, but
in the case Of labor Disputes the very re-
verse is the fact. Quite recently in a labor
dispute writs of injunction were issued
made returnable fully seven weeks after
their issuance. In other words, the men
were enjoined from doing those ordinary
and lawful things that they are required 10
do during the tendency OF trade disputes
and with the positive knowledge that to
comply with the conditions Of the tnjUnc-
ton in the meantime would destroy any ef-
fort at resistance of wrong in the move
ment for the Improvement of the condition
of labor.
Nor is the court injunction in its modern
application alone injurious and wrongful in
the disputes which arise in relations be-
tween the workers and their employers.
but is equally menace to republican in
situations. Recently a citizen of one of
our great cities secured an injunction from
judge enjoining the municipal Legislature
from passing law, or ordinance. II is al
legged and generally admitted that the ordi-
nance which this municipal legislature con-
tcmplated passing was conceived in vicious
ness and corruption. but IT is simply re-
ferred to here to call attention to the fact
that if the ordinance was contrary to law,
violative of rights. ii could, even II
passed, be annuled by the duly constituted
courts. II is further submitted that IL
court issue Injunction restraining a
municipal legislature from passing vicious
law, it may also exercise that right under
misrepresentation that the contemplated
Legislation is vicious and corrupt; that If IL
is within the province of court to
enjon a municipal legislature, it is
within the power OF a state court to is
injunction enjoining legislation by
the state legislature and within the power
of the federal court TO enjoin the Congress
Of the United States from passing any leg
isiation which may be deemed in the IN
terest of the people. 1t may seem stretch
of the ina ginatiOn and fearful TO contem-
plate, but if the exercise of this function
of the courts is not soon curbed. we may
some day witness not only Congress en-
joined but the President of the United
States served with injunction prohibit
ing him from placing his signature to
law passed by Congress, and perhaps
brought TO the bar for contempt. Who
dency of the United States decided upon a
writ issued by federal judse2
The genius of our institutions conten-
plates the separation of the functions of |
government into the legislative, executive |
and judicial. Unless the people Of oul |
country take warning from the imminent /
dangers which menace them, We may soon |
witness that instead of three coordinate |
branches of the government we shall have |
the judicial to which all Else VIII b. sukor- |
dibate.
Judicial Views.
1t may not be amiss to here quote a few \
opinions of eminent jurists who realize the /
oanger involved in the use of tie writ of |
Injunction. In a decision of the cour: of |
appeals of the state of Colorado, the court
said:
I'VE cannot approve q practice nor SUBJ
scribe to a doctrine which permits the exer-
else by the court Of the extraordinary
power of iniunctive relief for every wrong
or infringe ment upon the rights CT another.
Such a course of procedure Il carried to its |
ultimate natural conclusion, would tend TO
entirely subvert the fundanen;ll principles
upon which our system IF law is founded
In a recent paper, the Hon. Judge HargIs
eX-chi9f Justice Of the supreme court of the
state of Kentucky, speaking Of the modern
use of injunction, says:
Since the dawn of judicial history no
government, save the United States, under
the last administration, is recorded as hay
Ing resorted TO an injunction 10 keep the |
peace, prevent crime. quell domestic vio- |
lence. stop invasion. suppress insurrectiol1
and rebellion, or to enable fIle government |
TO perform its political md poli.s functions |
The earliest cases in Engian'i -5ns.e !
VIC derived our system Of INV and e.,ui:x !
in be Constitution III, !