The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1903-03-25
Kohlsaat's Injunctions.

SAoAAC
day at Chicago in the federal circuit court
by Judge Kohlsaat, who granted 1njunc-
lions against twenty coal companies and
individuals of Indiana to restrain them
from combining and conspirlng to raise
the price of coal and regulate the out
put in violation of the laws Of the United
States. Judge Grosscup has already en-
joined the combination known as the
beef trust for conspiracy in restraint Of
trade.
1t is noticeable that these injunctions
issued from federal or state courts
against monopolistic combinatio In re-
straint of trade do not meet with the
usual damnatory assaults Of people who
declaim very vigorously against what
they call government by injunction.
whenever such judicial process is re-
sorted to to restrain assaults upon pub
lie law and order or combinations to OBJ
struct the transaction Of Interstate COM
merce. The phrase government by In
junction. was coined by the late Governor
Altgeld and Eugene Debs to aid them
in their efforts to incite labor against Or
ders of the courts to restrain the violence
and lawlessness Of militant strikers:
Leaders like: these have objection to
government interposition to stop monopo-
listic excuses which destroy competition
and raise the price of fuel. meat and
other things, but they do very strenuously
oppose injunctions when they interfere
with a strike accompanied by violence
and traffic obstruction, as an assault upon
human liberty.
This is not a tenable position for in
tellgent citizens to take, is it? The op
ponents of injunctions assume that they
alone are to receive the benefits of human
liberty and they take the false position
that the term human liberty means
that if they want to accomplish a certain
object for themselves, it does not make
any difference what the means are by
which they accomplish the purpose The
majority of people believe that it is in
every way better for every interest in
propriate judicial processes, or within the
pale of the law. 1t is to be deplored that
such an intelligent leader as Samuel
Gompers went so far as to advise the
striking cigar makers of New York to
defy an order of the court. Mr.. Gompers
is a sincere advocate of human liberty
but he unfortunately does not believe in
the liberty Of a man not in the labor union
to get a job in a shop by which. he can
make living. T.
This view will ultimat eIy disappear as
enlightened public opinion asserts ITSELF
as it does in the report of the anthrac cite
strike commission, which sets the seal
of condemnation upon strikes and boy
colts and lays down the basis for the or
ganizatiop of boards of Cancellation and
arbitration tribunals. The antagonism
toward writs of Injunction by labor lead
ers is distinctly ex parte. and does not
take the public into account The validity
of injunctions and the right of courts
to Issue them can and should always be
tested in the courts, not by physical re-
sistance. The injunctions issued by the
: federal courts have been sought SO far
as strikes are concerned, for the protec-
ton of both public and individual rights,
which are distinctly based upon law Just
as are such rights with respect to the
obtrusion of monopolistic greed, whether
In the form of coal, beef or bread COM
bines or any other.
This is not to say that the power of
injunction may not be, or has not been.
abused. Undue restraint of liberty of
action has furnished occasion for fair and
legitimate and severe criticism of the
courts. But such occasions have been
rare and do not justify the prejudice
against the proper exercise of a func-
ton Of the. judicial power which is a
means Of quick and ready protection Of
the weak against the strong and merci-
less .-- -.'s--- - - 5.-"ss,
Under such circumstances it is not likely
that the injunction process, which is a
recognized restraint upon various forms
OF oppression, will ever be removed from
the category of judicial orders 1t is
capable of too much for the protection of
human rights.
A bill was introduced in the senate
yesterday by Senator Calhoun providing
that the county commissioners Of Hen
nepin county shall give bonds in the sum
Of $4,000 each. It seems strange, but it
appears to be the fact, that the county
commissioners who are the whole thing
in the administration of county affairs,
and handle nearly half a million dollars a
year, should never have been required
to give bonds of any kind. 1t is true that
the actual cash Is not III their keeping
but all expenditures are by their authori-