New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1907-02-09
INJUNCTIONS UPHELD.
House Committee Reports on Rights
of Labor and Business.
[rrom rne rrIhun. Bureau.l


Washington Feb S-AntI-iujunction legislation
received a serious blow to-day when the suo-con1-
mittee Of the House judiciary Committee reported
to the whole committee, In substance, that such
measure would be in violation OF the principles or
law as interpreted by the courts The report was
based on two resolutions which had been referred
to 1t. The first inquiry as 10 Whether OF
not United States courts have Jurisdiction to issue
iniunctions to protect the exercise OF personal
rights. as distinguished from property rights This
with certain reservations the committee answered
afTirmatively. The second was whether the right
carry business is property right OF such a
character TO be entitled TO the protection OF IN
junction in proper This was decided In the
affirmative The subcommittee consists OF Repre-
sentatives TirreII, of Massachusetts; Sterlnk' or
Illinois, and Bartlett OF Georgia. The latter did
sign the report
In considering the first resolution the report says
If the sole question the right to labor, the right
ter and sell. and trade. separated from
personal rights, which the courts have projected
so long that they may be CONSIDERED q, nX ' anu
tive Since Adam was driven from Eden a s a9
that one should not breathe or eat or sleep as 10
say he shall work AS unavoidabiy y VIII re-
1t follows therefore that unless ones labor mill
tates against the public good he has Gonst n16
wherever he chooses II the PGbo YEA rS rs Of
eeted the Eat Of 0ne Hs 20 follow other lines
OF labor in which the public morals nealtn; peaT e
not injuriously affected.
As 20 the second resolution. the decisions are
numerous and substantially support, the sub-com-
mlttee says. a long list OF principles OF law which
II gives Among the principles given are these;
That business a valuable property right entitled
under the Constitution protection from unlawful
interference that the right to carry on business
without obstruction IS property right; that II Is
such property that any attempt 70 injure or de-
stroy II VIII be restrained by injunction. long
list Of authorities cited bear out these state
ments The Sherman Antitrust act Is pointed
10 as showing that treble damages are given Tor
an injury to business. and the Wilson and Dingley
tariff acts as showing that business is considered
property right
Further authority is found in the opinion Of Sec
rotary Taft. or him the report says:
The opinion OF one who has held important
judicial position and who is now conspicuous In
tho public service Is valuable Therefore. We quote
from Secretary Taft, who in discussing the Ques-
ton, said: The question at issue is whether the
unlawful injury TO going commercial or trans
portaon business IS an interference or INJURY with
either q right property u right OF a pecunary
nature. This question would seem to answer It
self IN the Affirmative. The good will OF business
which is really the things a man has In the custom
ne has built UP by his business. is so much q
property right that II s frequently bought sold
Indeed, a mans busneas has been frequently pro-
competition oven II It be conceded that property
right be limited TO one growing out OF owner
ship Of tangible property, certainly right in
going business Is a right Of a pecuniary nature