The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-04-05

TO ASK FOR AN INJUNCTION
FROM THE FEDERAL COURTS.

Two publications that came to our of
flee yesterday may serve to throw light
upon the recent mysterious visit of Gov
ernor Russell TO Washington city. Tn
til the adjournment of the Legislature
he was very quiet and caused it be nois-
ed abroad that he would not obstruct
Democratic legislation and the Demo-
cratic programme. 1t seems that he
was only lying low and saying muffin"
to escape Impeachment, which he richly
deserved. and is now getting ready 70
invoke the help of the Federal courts to
annul the proposed Constitutional
Amendment by a final injunction.
This weeks Progressive Farmer
which has been the Governors organ
since its editor was made secretary of
the Board of Agriculture, writing of the
amendment says:
I'VE understand that there is move
ment on foot to have the constitutional.
ty of the proposed constitutional amend
date-that is. the constitutonality Of
the grandfather clause. the other sec
tions being clearly constitutional. By
all means let this be DONE Shrouded
in uncertainty as the question is at this
time the people are not prepared to
say whether or not they will support
the amendment. The people should
know for what they are to vote: rather
than take risks, thousands will vote
against the amendment.
The other publication. dated Raleigh,
March 25th, signed HI" which reads
like it was written by J. C. l.. Harris. is
as follows:
Referring to the proposed constitu-
tional amendment. which is to be voted
upon by the people of this State on the
first Thursday of August. 1900. a mum
her of lawyers have been investigating
the question of how to get the constitu-
tionality of the amendment before the
United States court in advance uf the
approval or rejection by the people at
the polls. Gov. Russell takes great in
terest in this question He is easily one
of the rest lawyers III the state. and
ne gives it as his opinion that the proper
remedy is by filing what is known
among the lawyers as a ''bill in equity
in the circuit court of the United States.
and TO ask for perpetual injunction
against the secretary of state and other
election officers to restrain them from
submitting the proposed amendment to
vote of the people, on the distinct
ground that section ; violates the 10Th
amendment Of the United States consti-
tuition.
Gov. Russell is well aware that the
courts have frequently held against is
suing injunctions to prevent popular
election. These, cases went off upon the
doctrine that there was some sort of
legal remedy that might be resorted to
instead of the equitable remedy. That
is, that the law would allow the election
TO be held and then try the title to the
offices in contest between the persons
claiming to be elected. But Gov. Russell
intimates that in recent years the fed
eral courts of equity have so far ex-
tended their jurisdiction as to almost
abolish the old rule that equity would
not interfere when there was Il good
remedy in the law courts. He says that
the federal equity courts will now enter
tain any complaint which makes ease
for relief, unless it is apparent that the
plaintiff can obtain a complete remedy
in the law courts in every particular.
He says that it can be clearly sh own
that there is no remedy in this case for
the 100000 defrauded voters, except by
suit in equity in the United States
courts.
'.As to the jurisdiction of the court, ii
is claimed that there can be no question
because it is now settled that the cour:
will take jurisdiction to try any consti-
tutional question that is raised by state
law which the party plaintiff claims TO
be in violation of the constitution ana
affecting his substantial rights. In all
such eases the federal courts take jur-
isdiction without regard TO the residence
of the parties to the suit.
1T is reported that Gov. Russell fur
ther sees that there is nothing unan-
swerable in the point that the courts
cannot issue an interlocutory injunction
because that might prevent the election
and the court might afterward hold that
the election ought TO be held This might
b. Il good reason for the refusal of AN
interlocutory injunction, but ii is no rea-
son for the refusal of Il final injunction.
THE rule concerning the granting nf
injunctions has been relaxed very much
by the courts during the past 10 years.
according to the old practice iniunctive
relief was not granted until the wrong
sought to be prevented was being carried
out. or some overt act was committed,
but now the practice is to prevent and
not to cure, on the principle that an
'ounce of prevention is worth n pound
of cure" This principle has been in