The Owosso times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1897-1926, 1908-06-26
The Injunction Plank.

10, Tedu up on the statutes regarding
the issue Of injunctions or he would
not have made the statement that the
injunction plank in the Republican
platform meant the continuance Of
the law unchanged. IF the conven-
ton had been frank" he says, Gin
the statement Of its position it would
have quoted the present statute and
said that it was in favor of enforcing
the law just as It is" AS the law Is
now there is not any federal statute
prescribing procedure in such cases.
The Republican platform calls for
the passing of sucn a statute as will
establish uniform practice and will
restrict the issue of injunctions with
out notice to the party enjoined to
cases of exceptional urgency.
The letter of a correspondent
printed in The Tribune of yesterday
explains in detail the present state
of the law upon injunctions and
shows clearly enough why there is
need of legislation regulating the is
sue of the writ. The original statute
of 1898 provided that no writ of in
junction should be granted without
previous notice to the person en-
Joined, but that provision was
dropped out of,the revised statutes,
leaving it to the Supreme Court to es-
tablish rules of procedure in such
cases. The Supreme Court laid down
the rule that no Especial injunction"
should issue without due notice, but
the distinction between special and
common injunctions was not made
clear, with the result that the prac-
tice Of different circuits has varied,
some giving notice before granting
injunctions and others not, and there
has been tendency of federal courts
to conform to the laws of the vari-
Gus states where they sat, giving
notice where the state law required it
and otherwise not.
The Republican platform calls for
the establishment by statute7of a uni
form practice of giving notice before
the issue of an injunction unless the
delay incident to the granting of
such notice would result in irrepar-
able damage to the petitioner. Such
statute would work a desirable re-
form in judicial procedure, for it is
in accordance with the principles of
justice that notice and hearing
should precede the issue of an injunc-
ton wherever possible and unless the
delay required for them would defeat
the purpose of the injunction. Such
law would prevent the abuse of the
writ, which proceeds from it's issue
upon eX parte statements, while at
the same time it would not impair its
effectiveness to prevent irreparable
damage. 1t would be fair alike to
rich and poor, to labor organizations
and to employers, not favoring any in
terest above any other. The Repub-
lican plank is not, as Mr.. Bryan says,
a fraud and a sham, pretending to
do something while it really does
nothing. but it proposes a definite
measure of reform in the use of in
functions and one which will COM
mend itself to the public sense of
justice. 1t strikes at the real posi-
bility of abuse in the present unregu-
lated practice in their use-namely,
the power of temporarily interfer-
ing with the rights or liberties of the
parties enjoined on mepe ex parte
statement, while it leaves the writ
with all its prompt effectiveness in
extraordinary situations. 1t does not,
as Mr.. Bryan charges, leave the stu
alton unchanged, nor does it go to
the revolutionary extent that he and
his ally, Mr.. Gompers, as a mere mat
ter of political opposition, loudly de-
mand that it should by creating
class exempt from in
functions.
Mr.. Bryan and Mr.. Gompers would
forbid the use of the injunction writ
to protect property and property right
in labor disputes. They are not con-
cerned over a general reform in the
use of this remedy, ending its posi-
bic abuse without regard to whom
that abuse affects. They would leave
the procedure as it is, except where
labor is involved and there they would
deny the courts the authority to
issue injunctions. The difference be-
tween the Republican and the DEM
ocratic position on this issue is this:
The Republicans would end the abuse
of the writ wherever it occurs; the
Democrats would leave its abuse UNI
in all the infinite variety
Of cases to which the remedy is APP
piled save only in labor cases, and
in labor cases they would wipe out
both it's use and it's abuse at once.
The one position is justice, and the
,ther is demagogy.-New York
Tribune.