The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1908-12-23

upon the constitutional rights of
the villifer.''
The court inquired if those of
thoughtful and sincere reflection es
cape the unharm oniZatiOn claimed for
a right of utter license in speech and
press and the punishment by law of
hbels and the mulcting of ISLANDERS.
NO right " the court added. ito
publish either the libel or the SANDER
can be sustained, except upon the
theory of right to do wrong
The court after citing arguments
bearing on free speech and
press, declared that an elabora-
ton of his argument with respect to
~ be quite agreeable to my DESIRE"
yet, he said, these suggestions sound
the hollowness of the defense and to
essay more might SAVIOR of an inquiry
into the correctness of the injunction
ordered by Mr.. Justice Gould. a duty
already taken up and discharged by ADLER
hands than mine"
Question One of Social Order.
In dismissing from further consider
alton the contention that the injunction
invaded the right of free speech and of
the press the court held: The position
of the respondents involves questions
vital to the preservation of social order,
questions which smite the foundations
of civil government and upon which the
supremacy of the law over anarchy and
riot virtually depends. Are controver-
sizes to be determined in tribunals for
mally constituted by the law of the
land for the purpose or shall each man
who falls at odds with another take
his own furious way? Are causes pend
ing in courts TO be decided by courts
for Itigants; or the view of each dis
tempered Htigant imposed upon the
courts?
their execution to the supremacy of law
or to tumble in the wake of unsucces-
full SuitOrS who OVerSet them and lay
about the matter with their own hands.
in Turbulence proportionate to the frenzy
of their disappointment?
In the opinion of the court even when
tribunal had fallen into error in tho
determination of a cause which it was
invested with jurisdiction, ito hear and
determine, the duty and necessity OF
obedience remained nevertheless the
same.
And" said the court. II place the de-
cision of the matter at bar distinctly
on the proposition that were the order
confessedly erroneous yet it must have
been obeyed. CWOrden VS.. Searls, 121,
Z. S, -40
1t is between the supremacy of law
over the rabbIe or its prostra ton under
the feet of the disordered throng.
In Conclusion.
In conclusion the court said:
Before the injunction was granted
these men announced that neither they
or the American Federation of Labor
would obey It; they have refused to obey
it; and through the American Fedora
ton of Labor disobedience has been
successfully achieved. and the law has
been made to fail; not only has the law
failed in its effort to arrest a wide
spread wrong. but the injury has grown
more destructive since the injunction
than it was before. There is a studied
determined defiant conflict precipita-
ted in the light of open day between
the DEGREES of a tribunal ordained by
the government of the federal union
and of the tribunals of another fedora
other must succumb, for those who
would unlaw the law are public enc
mics.
''On the sociological aspect of the
situation some faith in the ultimate
rightness of American men whether
in labor unions or out. is to be enter
tanned. For l believe that the habit
of the land saturates them with a
readiness to abide by auth ority as ]
believe that this very readiness tc
yield to authority has undone them
before now. through the errors of mis-
guiding leaders, swollen by pigrny
power. 1t IS written in the record
that the labor unions and their officers
NEEDLE into a members daily affairs
deeper than does the law; restrict him
IN matters that the law leaves free:
authority upon his attention that in
sensibly he comes to regard them 8
of control in his affairs; the fact that
he regards them as authority leads
him to heed them because of his
readiness to yield to authority: his
very respect for authority assumes
that all authority is respectable; and