Devils Lake inter-ocean and Devils Lake free press. (Devils Lake, Ramsey County, N.D.) 1905-1909, 1908-07-31

a Fundamental rule Of general 5uris-
prudence that no man shall be affected
by judicial proceeding without notice
and hearing. This rule. however, has
sometimes had an exception In the fs.
suing Of temporary restraining orders
commanding q defendant In effect to
maintain the ss0tus gao until a bear
ing. Such a process should issue only
IN rare cases where the threatened
change Of the status quo would infiici
irreparable injury If time were taken
to give notice and a summary bearing.
The unlawful injury usual IN indus.
trial disputes, such as have descrfb.
ed. does not become formidable except
after sufficient time In which to give
the defendants notice and bearing.
i do not mean to- say that there may
not be cases even in industrial dis
putes where q restraining order might
properly be issued without notice, but
generally, think 1t Is otherwise. In
some State courts, and In fewer Fed
esal courts, the practice Of issuing a
temporary restraining order without
notice merely to preserve the status Qso
on the theory that it won't hurt any
body. has been too common. Many OF
us recall that the practice has been
pursued In other than industrial dis
putes, as. for instance, In corporate
and stock controversies like those over
the Erie railroad, In which a stay or
Ger without notice was regarded as a
step Of great advantage to the one who
secured it. and corresponding disad-
vantage to the one against whom it
was secured Indeed. the chances Of
doing injustice On an ex-parte appiica-
don are much increased over those
when hearing is granted, and there
may be circumstances under which it
may affect the defendant to his detri-
ment In the case Of lawful strike,
the sending Of formidable document
restraining number Of defendants
from doing great many different
things which the plaintiff ayers they
are threatening to do. often SO dis
courages men always reluctant to go
into strike from continuing what is
their lawful right This has made the
laborfng man feel that an injustice Is
done in the issuing Of a writ without
notice. | conceive that In the treat
ment 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
unjustiy treated. as we'll as from that
OF the community at large. have
suggested the remedy Of returning in
such cases to the original practice IN
der the old statute of the United
States and the rules in equity adopted
by the Supreme Court. which did not
permit the issuing of an injunction
without notice. In this respect, the
Republican Convention has adopted
another remedy. that. without going
90 far. promises to be etficacous.
Effect Of jury Trial.
Cnder such provision a recalcit7ant
witness who refuses to obey a sulpoe,
ma may insist on jury trial before the
court eau determine that BIZ. rt-.eived
the subpoena. 4 citizen summoned. As
juror and refusing to o:sey tia. Wit
when brought into court r:,Ys; TX ,-i..l
by another jury to deter'niA, Whittier
be got the SURVIVORS, Such i provision
applies not alone to in;unctio;S but To
every order which the cour: issues
against persons a suit may be tried
In the court Of first instance and car
ried to the Court OF Appeals. and theme.
to the Supreme Court and a judgment
and decree entered and an order is
sued, and then If the decree. involves
the defendants doing anything or no,
doing anything. and he disobeys it. the
plaintiff who has pursued his rem dirs
IN lawful course for Years must. to ST.
cure his rights. undergo the uncertain
ties and the delays Of jury trial bt-
fore be can enjoy that which is his
right by the decision of the highest
court Of the land | SAY without hest
tation that such = change viii: greatly
Impair the Indispensable power and
authority OF the cnu:.:> Securing to
the public the s,e:irf::S Of the new stat
ufes enacted in the present Admins
ratfon. the ultimate inS.r,lmenrality to
be resorted to is the courts of the Cnit
ed States II Eow their authority is to
be weakened in a manner never known
In the history OF the Jurisprudence OF
England or America. except In the con-
sdtut1on OF Oklahoma. how eau we ex-
pect that such statutes will have eff
Client enforcement! Those who advo-
cate this Intervention Of jury In such
cases seem to suppose that this change
In some way will inure only to the ben
et't Of the poor workingman. AS a
matter Of fact, the person who will Sc
cure, chief advantage from 1t is the
wealthy and interruptions defendant,
able to employ astute and cunning
counsel and anxious to avoid justice.
The administration Of justice lies at
the foundation Of government. The
maintenance Of the authority of the
courts fs essential unless we are pre-
pared to embrace anarchy. Never in
the history OF the country has there
been such an insfdious attack upon the
Judicial system as the proposal to inter
5ect jury trial between all orders of
the court made after full hearing and