The Evening statesman. [volume] (Walla Walla, Wash.) 1903-1910, 1908-07-28

proper position In such controversy,
to enable them to maintain them
selves against their employers having
great capital, they may well unite. be-
cause in union there is strength and
without it each individual laborer and
employee would be helpless. The pro-
motion of industrial peace through
the instrumentality of trade agree
ment is often one of the results Of such
union when it is intelligently con-
Quoted. There is a large body of la
borers, however, skilled and unskflled,
who do not organize into unions.
Their rights before the law are
exactly the same as those of union men
and are to be protected with the same
care and watchfulness.
I'm order to induce the employer
into compliance with a request for
changed terms of employment, work.
men have a right to strike in a body.
They have the right to use such per-
suasion as they may, provided it does
not reach the point of duress, to lead
reluctant co-laborers to join them in
the union against the employer and
have the right if they choose, to accu-
mulate funds to support those engaged
in strike, to delegate to officers the
power to direct the action of the union
and withdraw themselves and their
associates from dealing with, or giving
custom to those with whom they are
in controversy. What they have not
the right to do is to injure the en-
ployer's property, to injure the en-
ployer's business by the use of
threats or methods of physical duress
against those who, would work for him
or deal with him, or by carrying on
what is sometimes known as a second
airy boycott against customers or those
with whom he deals in business
Reads Like an Injunction.
"All those who sympathize with
them may unite to aid them in their
struggle, but they may not through
the instrumentality of threatened or
actual boycott compel third persons
against their will, and having no in
terest in the controversy. to come to
their assistance. Threatened unlawful
injuries to business like those de-
scribed above can only be adequately
remedial by injunctions to prevent
them. 1t has been claimed that injunct-
ions do not issue to protect anything
but property rights and that business
is not property right but such a prop
osition is wholly inconsistent with all
remedied by injunctions to prevent
the decisions of the courts
1T is the fundamental rule of juris-
prudence that no man shall be af-
fected by a judicial proceeding with
out notice and hearing. This rule, how
ever, sometimes has exception in the
issuing of temporary restraining or
ders commanding the defendant, in
effect to maintain status-quo until
hearing Such process should issue
only in rare cases where the threat
ened change in status quo would inf1ict
irreparable injury if the time were
taken to give notice and hold a sum-
mary hearing
In some state courts and in fewer
federal courts the practice of issuing
temporary restraining orders without
notice merely to preserve status-ouo
on the theory that it will not hurt any
body, has been too common. This has
made the laboring man feel the in
justice done in the issuance of writ
without notice. 1 conceive that in
the treatment of this question it is the
duty of the citizen and the legislator to
view the subject from the standpoint
of the man who believes himself tn he
unjustly treated as well as that Of the
community at large.
Il have suggested the remedy of re-
turning in such cases to the original
practice under the old statutes of the
United States and the rules I'm equity
adopted by the supreme court, which
did not permit the issuing Of an tniunc-
tlon without notice. In this respect the
republican convention adopted an
other remedy that, without going 80
far. promises to b. ef1cacious in Sc
curing the proper consideration in such
cases by courts by formulating into a
legislative act the best present prac-
tice
With respect to notice. the demo-
cratic platform contains no recomd-
alton. Its only Ineligible declara ton
In regard to injunction suits is the
re1teration of the plank in the Mat.