The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-12-05
MESSAGE OF PRESIDENT TO CONGRESS
I'M IMNM MNM IMNMMM ME MN NIA M VI ML MN n WnR m II

case is, that the defendant, Pomeroy for each of the six offenses upon which he has been convicted. be fined the amounting in sll to the sum of $6.oo0 and the defendant, the New York Gen. f tral and Hudson River Railroad Com. pany, for each of the six crimes or which it has been convicted, be fined the sum of $1s,000, making SIX finoI | amounting in the aggregate to the sun of $1os,o00, and judgment to that et. feet will be entered in this case" Too Many TechnicaIItIes.
 In connection with this matter, l would like to call attention to tho very unsatisfactory state of our crimi the habit of setting aside the judg- ments of inferior courts on technicali- ties absolutely unconnected with the merits of the case, and where ther, is no attempt to show that there ha been any failure of substantial justice It would be well to enact a law pro- viding. something to the effect that:
 No judgment shall be set aside or new trial granted in any cause, civi or criminal, on the ground of misdi rectiQn of the jury or the imprope admission or rejection of evidence. o for error as to any matter of plead ing or procedure unless, in the opinio- of the court to which the application Is made. after an examination of the entire cause. it shall affirmatively ap- pear that the error complained Of has resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
 InjunctiOna.
 In my last message ! suggested the enactment of law in connection witt the issuance of injunctions, attention having been sharply drawn to the mat ter by the demand that the right o1 applying injunctions in labor cases least doubtful whether a law abolish. ing altogether the use of injunctions in such cases would stand the test of the courts; in which case of course AIA r..1n hn Moreover, believe it would be wrong altogether 70 prohibit the 'lse of in- functions. It Is criminal to permit sympathy for criminals to weaken ou, hands in upholding the law; and if men seek to destroy life or property by mob violence there should be nc impairment of the power of the court. to deal with them in the most sum so far as possible the abuse of tho power should be provided against by some such law as l advocated last year.
 Tn this matter of iniunctions therF is lodged Tn the hands of the iudiciar' necessary power which IS neverthe- less subject to the possibility of Rravr abuse. It is a power that should bt exercised with extreme care and shoulf he subject to the jealous scrutiny o' all ren, and condemnation should h. r'eted out as much to the judge whr fails to use boldly when necessary III or onLressively. Of course a indge strong enough to he fit for his office will entotn any resort to violence ar introduction. especially bv conspiracy the rights of the orieinal nuarrel There must he no hesitation in dealine with disorder. But there rrust Ike tive mower as is implied in forbidding tahoring men to strive for their own hetterment in peaoeful and lawful .CA 1, gr,s,, I.A merely to aid some big corporation in carving ont schemes for it's own ag- erandizement. It must he remembered that preliminary injunction in a la bor case. if granted without adequate nroof (even when authority can be found to support the conclusions of settle the dispute between the partiesi and therefore if improperlv, granted may do irreparable wrong Yet there are many judges who assume a mat injunction to be the ordinary and prop CT judicial disposition of such cases and there have undoubtedly been flag rant wrongs committed by judges in connection with labor disputes ever within the last few years, although I think much less often than in former action immensely strengthen the hands Of those who are striving entirely to d, do away with the power of injunc- of the iniunctive process tends to threaten its very existence. for if thu American people ever become con vinced that this process is hahitually abused. whether in matters affecting labor or in matters affectin~ corpora tions, it will be well nigh impossible to prevent its abolition. @
 It may be the highest duty of a judge at any given moment to disre- gard, not merely the wishes of indi power, but the overwhelming tide of nublic sentiment: and the judge who does thus disregard public sentiment the plea of any special interest when the pleading is not founded on right eousness, performs the hi0hest service serving of all honor; and all honor car not be paid to this wise and fearless judge if we hermit the growth of an absurd convention which would forbid any criticism of the judge of anothsI type. who shows himself timid in the presence of arrogant disorder, or who on insuficient grounds grants an in- junction that does grave injustice or who in his canacit'- construer, and therefore in part maker of the law in fragrant fashion thwarts the cause a power over which no review can be exercised; he himself sits in review upon the acts of both the executive and legislative branches of the govern ment; save ir the most extraordinar! cases he Is amenable only at tho bar of public opinion: and it is unwise to
  ence to a man with such power shall neither he expressed nor led.
 The best judges have ever been fore most to disclaim any immunity from criticism. This has been true since the days of the great English Lord Chan cellor Parker, who said: Let all peo- pie be at liberty to know what I found my judgment upon; that. so when I have given it in any cause, others may be at liberty to judge of me" The proprieties of the case were set forth with singular clearness and good tenn per by Judge w. H. Taft, when a Uni ted States circuit judge, eleven years ago. in 1895:
 '"The opportunity freely and publicly to criticize judicial action is of vastly more importance to the body polite than the immunity of courts and judges from unjust aspersions and attack. careful in their decisions and anxious ly solicitous to do exact justice than the consciousness that every act of theirs is to be subjected to the intel ligent scrutiny and candid criticism of their fellow men, Such criticism is beneficial in proportion as it is fair, dispassionate, discriminating, and based on a knowledge of sound lega principles. The comments made by learned text writers and by the acute editors of the various law reviews up on judicial decisions are therefore highly useful. Such critics constitute more or less impartial tribunals of pro- fessional opinion before which each its merits and thus exert a strong in fluenca to secure uniformity of decis- ion. But professional criticism all Sd is by no means without its uses by a direct attack upon the Judicial fairness and motives of the occupant3 of the bench; for if the law is but tho essence of common sense. the protest