Waterbury evening Democrat., 1908-07-28

formidable document restraining a number of defendants from doing a great many different things which the plaintiff ayers they are threatening to do. often so discourages men always reluctant to go into a strike from con- tnuing what is their lawful right. This has made the laboring man feel that an injustice is done in the issuing of a writ without notice. I 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 to be unjustly treated, as well as from that of the community at large. have sug- gested the remedy of returning in such cases to the original practice under the old statute of the United States and the rules in equity adopted by the Su- preme Court, which did not permit the issuing of an injunction without notice. Tn this respect, the Republican Conven- ton has adopted another remedy, that without going so far, promises to be efficacious in securing proper consider ation in such cases by courts, by for. mulating into legislative act the best present practice.
 Under this recommendation. a statute may be framed which shall define with considerable particularly, and empha- size the exceptional character of the cases in which restraining orders may issue without notice, and which shall also provide that when they are is- sued, they shall cease to be operative beyond short period. during which time notice shall be served and hear ing had unless the defendant desires a postponement of the hearing. By this provision the injustice which has some times occurred by which preliminary restraining order of widest application has been issued without notice, and the hearing of the motion for the in- junction has been fixed weeks and months after its date, could not recur. Small Number of Cases Furnishing
 Grounds For Complaint In Federal
 Court.
 The number of instances in which restraining orders without notice in industrial disputes have issued by Fed eral courts is small, and it is urged that they do not therefore constitute an evil to be remedled by statutory amendment. The small number of cases complained of above shows the careful manner in which most Federal judges have exercised the jurisdiction. but the belief that such cases are nu- merous has been so widespread and has aroused such feeling of injustice that more definite specification in pro- cedure to prevent recurrence of them is justified if 1t can be effected with out injury to the administration of the law.
 No Provision In Democratic Platform
 as to Notioei Only Recommendatio
 Trial by Jury.
 With respect to notice. the Democrat e platform contains no recommenda- ton. Its only ineligible declaration in regard to injunction suits is a reit- eration of the plank in the platform of 1896 and 1904 providing that in prose lcutions for contempt in Federal courts, where the violation of the order con- stituting the contempt charged is in- direct, | e., outside of the presence of the court, there shall be a jury trial
 Dangerous Attack on Power of Courts.
 This provision in the platform of 1896 was regarded then as a most dan- gerous attack upon the power of the courts to enforce their orders and de- crees. and 1t was one of the chief req sons for the defeat of the Democratic party in that contest, as 1t ought to have been. The extended operation of such provision to weaken the power of the courts in the enforcement of its lawful orders can hardly be overstated.
 Effect of Jury Trial.
 Under such provision a recalcitrant witness who refuses to obey a sub poena may insist on a jury trial before the court can determine that he re- celved the subpoena. A citizen sum- moned as juror and refusing to obey the writ when brought into court must be tried by another jury to determine whether he got the summons. Such q provision applies not alone to injunc. tions, but to every order which the court issues against persons. A suit may be tried in the court of first in- stance and carried to the Court of Ap- peals. and thence to the Supreme Court. and judgment and decree en- tered and an order issued. and then if the decree involves the defendants do- ing anything or not doing anything. and he disobeys 1t. the plaintiff who has pursued his remedies in lawful course for years must, to secure his rights. undergo the uncertainties and the delays of jury trial before he can enjoy that which is his right by the decision of the highest court of the land. say without hesitation that such a change will greatly impair the Indispensable power and authority of the courts. In securing to the public the benefits of the new statutes enacted in the present Administration. the ul- timate instrumentallty to be resorted 10 is the courts of the United States. If now their authority Is to be weak ened in a manner never known in the history of the jurisprudence of Eng land or America. except in the constI- tuition of Oklahoma. how can we ex-