Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1908-12-28
SOMETHING STARTED
Sentencing of Labor Leaders For
Detying Court Order Revives !
Injunction Issue
MEANS \ LONG CONTEST
MEANS A LONG CONTEST
National and State Lawmakers Get
Busy With Proposed Legislation
Bearing on Varying Questions Raised
Clash Between Courts and Lesisa-
lures Not improbable.
Especial Correspondence

junction against their boycott Of al
alleged unfair" manufacturing con
Germ, there will be a myriad of legis
lative efforts in the immediate flu
ture.
Not only congress, but the state leg
islatures which will meet this win
ter will be fairly obsessed with bills as
Stunning to define the powers of TIN
courts and to determine the rights O
labor in cases Of strike and boycott
The whole question of the injunction
both as relates ITO labor and in tn.
wider aspects in which the writ ha!
been used, will be aired. There is al
ready intimation that the famous dis
cussion Of the right of congress to lint
the exercise of the injunction power b,
the courts, will be repeated in con.
gress, apropos of efforts to prohibit
the minor federal courts issuing in.
functions in certain cases.
ent a sharp drift of interest toward the
general question of whether the courts
should not be restricted in the matter
of interfering with the work Of the
legislature. All this is carried back
by the constitutional lawyers to the
famous old decision by John Marshall
in which he maintained that the SUI.
preme court had the power to annul q
law of congress. That decision was tbs
beginning of the development of pow.
ers in the courts which have made
many people charge that the courts
have become superior to the legislature
Right or wrong, Marshall assumed thai
power to the supreme court, and there
1t has remained and has develops
ever since. There was tremendous
protest against it at the time; blu,
Marshall with his towering intellect
and wonderful analytic powers defeated
all critics.
Injunction Issue Paramount.
The question of injunction, thus
viewed, is vastly greater than the is
sue which Mr.. GNnpers and his asso.
ciates raised in the late campaign
They demanded that injunctions ought
not to issue In labor disputes. But be-
yond all this the question of the in
junction being employed by the fed
eral courts in ways which have re-
peatedly complicated the administra-
ton of the laws of congress. has for q
long time been allying a strong ele-
ment on the side of the critics of the
counts.
An illustration-a score of them, in
deed-may be drawn from experiences
of the interstate commerce commission
The rate-making function has been
exercised more frequently and effect
lively by the courts than by the com
mission. When the railroads year
or more ago announced an increase Of
rates on lumber from the far north
west to the east and central sections
of the country, appeal was instantly
made to the commission. Before that
body, with its slow and cumbrous pro-
cesses, could investigate, hear and de-
termine, a federal court had issued an
injunction against the change.
Milk Rate Case Similar.
In the middle western milk-rate
cases there was like experience; the
court stepped in and enjoined the
rates. The courts in such cases have
proved themselves more prompt In
giving relief; they have been employed
on both sides, by the shippers and by
the railroads. The complaint of the Of
fcials entrusted with the administra-
tion of the interstate commerce act is
that by the time the counts have
handled such, cases, there is mighty
little jurisdiction left for the commits
sion to exercise.
Still farther, 1t is constantly COM
planned that the courts seem to take
especial delight in overturning the de-
cisions of the commission, in all sorts
Of cases. "The commission" explained a
member of that body, lis an arm of the
legislatures; 1t is vested with a certain
part of the legislative power over
rates. That is not judicial but a leg
islative business. Yet in practical oper-
alton the legislative commission gets
little chance to exercise the power, be-
cause it is so consta ntly 1lampered
and dnterfered with by the quicker
procedure of the courts. Theoretically
at least, the commission Is presumed
to possess an expert knowledge of
these questions. 1t has an organization
and facilities for getting at accurate
knowledge of the elements which
should go to determine the reasonable
ness Of rates and their relations If it
is not to be granted the privilege of
exercising that function, 1t is of small
use"
In the matter of distribution Of cars
among shippers, the commission made
an order. Before it was fairly in effect,
it was overturned by three or four fed
eral courts, each making ruling of its
own, issuing Writs for their enforce
ment. The result is that in some
places the order of the commission is
in effect; in the jurisdiction Of one
court another rule prevails, under the
courts mandate; in another jurisdic-
ton, an entirely different rule is en-
forced; and so on. Uniformity of eff
fectiveness, it is protested, is impossi-
BILE in such situation. The question
of courts intervening and assuming
such authority is very big and very
live question with the men who have
to administer the laws relating to in
terstate commerce.
Long Contest in Prospect.
That anything like determining leg
islation on the great question Of in
Junction will come soon, is not be-
lieved even by the people who are
most anxious for settlement Of these
issues But the decision of the supreme
court Of the District Of Columbia is re-