The Washington herald., 1907-08-31
SATURDAY. AUGUST 81. 1907.
Two Views of the Injunction.


While President Gompers, Of the Amer
ican Federation of Labor. was arguing
against the use OF the injunction in labor
disputes before the committee on labor
laws Of the Massachusetts legislature,
Secretary Taft was defending the injunc-
ton in Oklahoma. The contrast between
the view Of the statesman and jurist and
that of the labor leader is instructive.
Employers who think they are going to
stop strikes through injunctions are living
In a FOOLS paradise" declared Mr.. Com
pers TO the Massachusetts legislators. He
went On to this effect:
"Iniunctions have grown from a little inofensive
thing 20 the present day blanket affair which en-
Joins the labor man from doing almost everything
but breathing. Doubtless. If our opponents heard
some Of the prayers We would be enjoined for that
Nothing the employer can do arouses the latent
bitterness between classes so much these injmc-
tons. Laborers feel that these iniunctions are IS
sued 70 shackle them during dispute between them
and their employers
on the other hand, Mr.. Taft, in his
Oklahoma City speech, defended the writ
Of injunction as protective Of the rights
Of both rich and poor, He upheld the use
of the injunction to protect a mans busi-
ness from the ''lawless acts Of men who
interfere with Il" and denied that the in
junction deprived the workingman OF the
right OF trial by jury. No such right, he
said existed in equity cases. Though the
Secretary knew of no case in which the
finding of the court as TO the violation of
an Injunction against members OF labor
unions was unjust yet he admitted that
there was injustice IN granting an in
junction at the application OF attorneys
FOR an employer on ex parUe evidence.
which evidence subsequently turned out
to be untrue. He appeared TO favor the
legislation recommended by President
Roosevelt, providing that no ex parte in
junction be issued in any case-a provi-
sion that was, in fact. in the Federal
statutes some years ago, but was re-
pealed. Mr.. Taft then went on to show
how the injunction might be applied to
restrain the ''unscrupulous' acts Of labor
unions Admitting the legality Of labor
organizations, and the right to strike. Mr.
Taft said.
There are temptations to lawless violations and
10 illegal boycotts that become exceedingly danger
Gus because Of the immense power Of these trades
Unions f they choose 90 adopt such means. And
then these abuses are 10 be compared exactly with
the abuses OF the combinations Of capital which are
exceedingly useful If they Onlv eunohizs the cost Of
production and reduce il and divide the benefit Of
that reduction with the public: but If they uonopo-
Iize the market and shove up the price and at the
time lower the cost Of production. then the
law steps IN and they have got 10 be restrained.
Now, then, In every new law that you have for the
suppression Of unlawful combinations Of capital YOU
win find the provision that the writ Of injunction
shall issue against those charged with violation Of
law. and why? Because It is the most effective
remedy that can be used. Now on the other side
It these evils which have described as growing out
Of the INSCRIPTIONS use Of the power Of the trades
unions are to be suppressed. the Injunction is also
a formidable weapon in the hands Of the court. and
ought to be maintained"
Il viii be remembered that Mr.. Taft
when judge of the United States Circuit
Court. made use Of this formidable
weapon IN two notable cases where
strikes OF railway employees threatened to
interfere with interstate commerce. In
both cases Mr.. Taft upheld the right of
workers to organize and to strike, but re-
strained their organizations from actions
collateral TO strikes. but not directly in
volving the question of wages or other
terms Of employment. His decisions in
these cases have become classic, but it
is plain that Mr.. Gompers accepts neither
their lave nor Mr.. Tafts method of en-
forcing them.