The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-07-09
dictated language declared in It's plat
form their unfaltering adherences.
Injunction and Contempts of Court.


Injunction and Contempts of Court.
Let me go on. There has been and
is now a public demand for legisla-
ton regulating, not abolishing, the
process of injunction and the power to
punish for alleged indirect or con-
structive contempts of court. Ever
since 1896 the Democratic party have
protested against hasty and ill-con-
sidered use of injunctions and has
been insisting on the right of fair trial
in all cases of constructive contempts-
The Republican party have been
avoiding this question. So the presi-
dent, in taking it up, and Mr.. Taft
in his letter to the labor unions adj
vocated a measure that the Demo-
cratic party. acting in behalf of the
corrupt administration of public JUS
tice, has been demanding for twelve
years. We are authorized to conclude
that in framing, revising or debating
the Chicago platform he suffered from
a lapse of memory or abandoned the
policy he had SO vigorously urged in
his official capacity, for he said in
message to congress-:
II also urge that action be taken
along the line of lamentations 1
have already made concerning in
functions in labor disputes. No tenn
porary restraining order should be is
sued by any court without notice, and
the petition for a permanent injunc-
straining order has been issued should
be heard by the court issuing the same
within a reasonable time-say not to
exceed a week or Decentralization
the date when the order was issued.
1t is worth considering whether it
would not give greater popular con-
fidence in the impartiality Of sentences
for contempt if it was required that
the issue should be decided by an
other judge than the one issuing the
injunctions, except where the con-
tempt is committed in the presence of
the court or other case of urgency"
Surely he and his party eulogists
forgot that he had but few months
before advised congress that "it is
worth considering whether 1t would
not give greater popular confidence in
the impartiality of sentences for con-
tempt if it was required that the issues
should be decided by another judge
than the one issuing the Injunction
There has not been a session Of
congress in twelve years at which the
Republican party could not have
passed law prescribing, defining and
regulating the issuance of injunctions
and providing for fair trials in con-
tempt cases. Yet nothing has been
done to give the wage Garner fair
treatment and less than nothing is
offered to him in the Chicago de-
liverance. The meaningless general
sttes of it's injunction plank are an
insult to the intelligence of those who
demand reasonable and substantial
legislation to prevent the admitted
abuse of this judicial process.
Again the president said to con-
gresS:
Twenty-Five years ago, by act of
June 90, 1886, trades unions were recog-
nized by law, and the right of laboring
people to combine for lawful purposes
was formally recognized, this right in
Guiding combination for mutual pro-
lection of the individual rights of the
workman in the prosecution Of their
trade or trades: and in act Of June i.
1892, strikes were recognized as legal
in the same provision that forbade par
ticipation in or instigation Of force
or violence against persons or proper
ty, or the attempt to prevent others
from working. by violence, threat or
intimidation. The business man must
be protected in person and property,
and so must the farmer and the wage
worker, and as regards all alike, the
rights of peaceful combination for all
lawful purposes should be explicitly
recognized
And in still another message he said:
ut must be remembered that a pre-
liminary injunction in a labor case if
granted without adequate proof may
often settle the dispute between the
parties, and therefore if improperly
granted may do irreparable wrong
Yet there are many judges who as
sumo a matter-of- course granting of
a preliminary injunction to be the or