The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1908-06-17
NOW COMES THE TUG OF
WAR IN THE CONVENTION
Continued From Pace I.

]
judge in Porto Rico, addressed the COM
mittee in support of the proposition TO
grant single statehood 10 New Mexico.
Mr.. ROdey said that New Mexico had
been kept out of the Union for twenty
eight years by the circumstances that
in 1880 a delegate. now Senator Elkins.
had gone out 10 shake hands with Sena-
tor Burrows al a critical moment when
the statehood bill was pending in the
house of representatives.
Governor Curry assured the commit
tee that if admitted, New Mexico would
send 10 congress two Republican sena-
tors and also Republican members of
the house. Committeeman Sloan of Ar
lZona advocated the admission of that
territory as state. Representatives of
both territories agreed that since the
experience of the last session Joint
statehood was no longer TO be consid-
cred.
A plank for Arizona statehood was
presented by r. E. Sloan of Prescott,
a member of the committee, and Perry
Ellis of Chicago was heard i'm favor of
a declaration against interstate ship
ments OF prisOn-made goods and then
came the public discussion of the in
junction question.
Injunction Plank.
H. r. Fuller, who said he represented
the Brotherhood of Locomotive En-
slneers, Firemen and Trainmen-23O,O 600
men-presented what is regarded as
the most radical of all Injunction
propositions in evidence. 1t read:
We pledge ourselves to such legis-
laUlon as will guarantee to workmen
those rights necessary to their indus
trial protection, including the right TO
strike and to induce or persuade others
to do so, and to such legislation as will |
prevent the issuance of restraining or
ders and inJunctions without hearing; |
and guaranteeing trial by jury to per-
sons accused of contempt of court. if |
such alleged contempt be not commit |
ted in the presence of the court or so |
near thereto as TO Obstruct the admin |
of justice"
In support of this plank and i'm ex-
PLANTATION of the position taken by his |
organizations, Mr.. Fuller dWelt at /
some length on several phases of the |
question. He made the point that |
law on the subject would be no more a /
reflection on the judiciary than a new |
law on any other subject, and asserted /
that for seventy-nine -rears. from
1888, the statutes contained a provision |
that no eX parte injunction would be /
Issued. This law, he said. was changed |
during a cOdificatiOn of the statutes
Hardship to Labor.
Mr.. Fuller made the statement that
an injunction was in effect law. Con-
sidering it from this standpoint, he
dWelt on the manner in which il was
formulated and often invoked by a
Judge without consideration, and en-
forced with great hardship 10 labor.
He wanted the right of labor TO strike
and to persuade others TO strike upheld
by law.
Questioned by Frank B. Kellogg. Mr..
Fuller said he not only wanted no in
junction to issue without preliminary
notice. but he wanted a guarantee of
a jury trial on the facts brought in
issue by Injunction proceedings. In
this connection he made a point that
personal rights would thus be con-
and such rights ought to be
held above property rights of any
character which might be involved.
Manufacturers Heard.
An answer 20 Mr.. Fuller was made
Dy J. A. Emery of New York, general
counsel for the National Association of
Manufacturers. Mr.. Emery pointed
)ut, first, that the legislatures of the
party in the house had determined that
As lawmakers they would not attempt
% invade the judicial realm by chang
lS Il pIdClict WnlCn ndQ been QeVel- |
'ped during the past 700 years for the
protection of both property rights and
mixed personal and property rights. !
rhe remedy, if in any single instance
Injustice had been done, was in the inn
1eachment of the judge, he said. 1t
would be as potent to sue the whirl-
wind or to bring a law action against
he storm or the earthquake as to be
compelled 10 rely for redress in some
abOr troubles on the law instead of the
guilty side of the court. .
Mr. Emery said. with some emphasis, !
hat his opponents had for two years /
lad a standing invitation 10 file with I
he judiciary committees of congress I
ii the cases they could find where in j
unctiOns had been misused in labor
disputes. The result had been that
ess than a month ago eighteen cases
lad been filed, covering a period of ! {
fifteen years, and in only one of these &
asses had the injunction been modi- 7
ed. 7
Mr.. Kellogg began a running fire of S
uestions when Mr.. Emery had concluded a
lis argument. y
What objection is there to requiring '
Otice?" he said
THAT iS tba nraSanf praotioa he an