Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1908-07-20
INJUNCTION PLANkS
OF BOTH PARTIES WILL Be A
LEADING ISSUE.
''GOvernment bY InjunC ton" is on
Trial in the Present Campaign.
Upon no Issue are the Parties so
SquareIv Divided, nor so MANY
Voters Interested.

That the country is aroused over
the usurpation of Legislative functions
by the courts was well evidenced by
the struggle in the republican national
convention over what is called the
injunction" plank of the platform,
and the plank on the same subject
adopted at the democratic convention.
The result leaves the issue plainly
defined.
In this connection, the following
article on Government by Injunc-
ton" in a recent number of "The
Public" will be interesting:
"All these efforts to make it appear
that opposition to government by in
junction is an assault upon legitimate
judicial functions are childish They
cannot deceive many people at all,
nor any very long. There are three
principal points involved in this issue
One relates to the injunctive function.
Legitimate injunctiOns are solely for
the protection of rights in property.
But they have been perverted by the
courts to the purpose of regulating
personal conduct with reference to
bargaining for the hiring of workers.
Inasmuch as there has been no legal
property right in workers in this
country since the Thirteenth Amend
ment, there can be no basis for in
functions of that kind. Personal
rights can neither be protected nor
invaded by injunction without substi-
tuting judge-made law for the law of
the land.
A second point raised by this judi
cial novelty called government by
Injunction" is the question of legis-
lation. 1t is for the legislature, not
for the courts, to prescribe what shall
be lawful and what not. Yet labor
injunctions elaborately define offenses
unrecognized by the statutes, actions
that no legislature would dare to pro-
hibit in statutory form, and forbid
them under penalty of punishment for
contempt of court. The third point
of the proceedings for violation of
labor injunctions. Evidence of guilt
is upon atfidavits prepared and sworn
to in the offices of the lawyers for the
parties obtaining the Injunction.
There is no opportunity accorded the
persons prosecuted to confront OF
cross-eXamine the witnesses as matter
ofright. The hearing is before judge
without jury. The penalty is in the
discretion of the Judge. If the act
charged be a crime, the conviction
however unjust, is no bar to crimi
nal prosecution. Nor does the penalty
however harsh, prevent the imposition
of a second penalty for the same of
fense upon a criminal conviction.
The question of notice of hearing
is indeed important. Injunction.
without notice are not only preiudg
ments, but in labor troubles they are
practically conclusive in their effect
Yet the question of notice is compar
atively a minor one. The real ques
tions raised by labor injunctions are
those noted above. All the safeguard
of the law for the protection of limo
cence with reference to accusations
of crime are violated; the judiciary
not only adjudicates but legislates
and the emergent process of injunc
ton is extended from the protection
of property rights to the regulation O
personal rights