The Birmingham age-herald., 1903-02-02

| in the bill of complaint have, there fore given the matters the most careful
 consideration, and have made a prolonged
 and extensive examination of the numer- | ous decisions which bear upon the mat ters presented for consideration and deci- | sion.
 l Counsel for the respondents urge that
 the writ of injunction issued in this cause
 violates; Q) the constitutional right of the respondents to peaceably assemble; @
 the right of free speech; (3) the right of
 free locomotion; (D the right of trial by
 jury. They further contend that the com | plainant has complete and adequate
 remedy at law, either by criminal pros- | eeution or by civil action at law; though | they contend that the bill does not aIlege
 that the respondents have committed any
 unlawful acts in violation of complain | ants rights
 The proposition, thus asserted, bring
 up for consideration important questions | of the respective constitutional rights of
 the parties to this suit The several provisions of the constitution of Ala
 bama which are involved are contained in | the bill of rights prefixed to the constitu- | ton of 1901.
 Section 1 of the bill of rights reads: That all men are equally free and inde- pendent; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights |
 the pursuit of happiness"
 Section four reads: That no law shall ever be passed to eurtail or restrain the liberty of speech or of the press; and any person may speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being respon- sible for the abuse of that liberty" Section six in part reads: That in all criminal prosecutions, the accused has right, and in all prosecutions by in- dictment speedy, public trial, by an | impartial jury of the county or district | in which the offense; was committed" Section eleven reads:' "That the right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate.'' Section twenty-five reads: That the | citizens have right, In peaceable man | ner, to assemble together for the com
 mon good, and to apply to those invested with the power of government for re- | dress of grievances. or other purposes, | by petition. address or remonstrance." | Section thirty-f1ve reads: That the sole object and only legitimate end of | government is to protect the citizen in the enjoyment of life, liberty and prop erty and when the government assumes other functions 1t is usurpation and op- | pressive."
 | It will be observed that the constitu- tional guarantees apply to property as 1 well as to life and liberty. Indeed, the constitution assumes that rights of prop | erty, as we'll as rights of persons, are 1 nOl created Dy that instrument, that they 1 exist apart from and independently of written charters and constitutions; that l they are inalienable, and God-given; that | the written law merely gives clearer | form and expression to these rights, and | throws about them the solemn sanctions | of the most unchangeable and unbending | fundamental forms of law The exercise l of the guaranteed constitutional rights | of property cannot conflict with the sim | liar exercise of the rights of person. If | they come into collision, the conflict is | apparent only; the ascertainment of the
 respective rights, in the premises, will
 reconcile seeming conflicts.
 1 Counsel for respondents concede, in
 their argument. that the protection of the lands, machinery and other physical property of the complainant would be a | proper exercise of the power of a court | of equity. But, are the courts restricted
 to the protection of such property rights? | Are there not other valuable property rights, which require, when they are in- l vaded, the protecting power of the l courts? The ownership and possession | of it's plant by the complainant would be | incomplete If it were limited to mere l dominion over the tangible things de-
 scribed; lands, machinery, horses, wag-
 ons and other accessories of a manufac | turing enterprise, would be dead, inert | things unless the complaint has the | right to use them; unless it can go Into l the labor market and hire labor. to | give life to these things; and unless it
 may, free from unlawful restraint, seek | customers. have free access to Its works, | and, in short, manufacture and sell the | articles 1t desires to produce and sell. 1 These rights are as necessary and are | as valuable, as the right to own and l dominate the physical property 1t owns. | They inhere in the very conception of property; and they come as fully as all | Iotb r.tO hfc yyffl 10
 antees of the constitution. Nearly all of | the questions involved in this suit have l been the subject of consideration, In an | opinion of great learning, clearness and l candor, by Vice Chancellor Green of | New Jersey, in the case of Barr vs. | Essex Trade Council. 30 Att Rep. S31. | Barr sought an injunction against the Trade Council and number of individu- als to restrain a boycott of his news | paper. The boycott was ordered, at the
 instance of his employees. because he
 used ready-made plate matter, in the | publication of his newspaper The learn-
 ed chancellor. at page 1885, says: Are the
 defendants then privileged knowingly to
 infiict this injury on the complainant? | Harv. Law Rev. 1. A mans business l is his property. By the first section of 1 the bill of rights of the constitution of New Jersey the right of acquiring, pos 1 sessing and protecting property Is class
 ed as natural and inalienable right.
 which all men have, with those of en- loving and defending life and liberty. l and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness. This Is an echo of Mag
 ma Charta, repeated in the Declaration | of Independence Mir. Justice Bradley, in the Slaughter House cases, 16 Wall. 36, | mage 116. says: For the preservation, | exercise and enjoyment of these rights 1 life liberty, pursuit of happiness, the | individual citizen, as necessity must i ba Jeff free to adopt such calling, pro- | fassion or trade that may seem to him | ,oost conducive to that end. Without ] +bis ripht he cannot be free man. This 1 rigbt to choose ones calling Is an essen- 1 tiaI mart of that liberty which Is the ob- | iect of the government to protect, and | oalI;ne when chosen, Is mans property | and right. Liberty and property are not
 nrotected when these rights are arbitra- | r;lv, assailed." MT. Barnes business or publishing a paper, with the incidents | of It's circulation and advertising, was as | much his property as were the presses and type upon which the paper was l printed A harmful interference with the circulation and with the advertising Tn | his paper was, therefore, an injury to ms property. It was Mir. Barnes personal | right, without interference or dictatloh | from any person or persons, to employ 1 in the prosecution of his business sucn
 mechanical appliances as were safe and
 helpful. and to employ in the production | of his paper such persons and law1ul
 means as he might choose"
 l The chancellor continues: sir William l Earle in his book entitled. '"The Law Re-
 lating to Trades Unions" which Lord