The citizen-Republican. (Scotland, Bon Homme County, S.D.) 1???-19??, 1908-08-06

crty rtght but such i propagation Il wnotiy
inconsistent with all the decistonn OF the
4 courts Ihs supreme court Of tho United
I SSatea says that the ~in5unction 10 rem
ID 70 protect property or rights OF Aspe-
cnniary nature h we may well enbfnit
sn tas soH 9ss judgIaent ot AZ isymen
ness Is not as distinctly d right Of u PEE
\ eunlary nature as the right to his horse
shelf, and the instances In which fniunc-
lions. TO protect business have been upheld
BY al courts are SO many that Ii Ii futile
81 Is difhcuit Is te j paep msasins Of tie
sdeTaocratic platform upon this subject. 1t
Questions OF judicial practice have
arisen especially in connection with IN
dustrial disputes. We deem b the
parties to nl judicial proceedings should
an1uncftonS should not be Issued In any
cases In which injunctions would not iusue
& T rD iaaIallaaao n's = dist, wese Y &c.
to have been loosely drawn with the pur-
pose Of rendering It susceptible to one
n,sapre : a,ao 3. Dy one set OF men ana to
another. 1t does not aver that ~injunctionss
should not issue in Industrial disputes, but
only that they should not issue because
they are Industrial disputes, ana yet those
responsible for the declaration must have
\ known that no one ever maintained that
any basis for Issuing an Injunction in
reference thereto. TEie declaration seems
to be drawn in Its present vague n
that il Is q declaration against the issue
OF intunctions In my industrial dispute.
while at the same time It maybe possible
who objects. to class distinctions that no
Clear and uneauivocai. We aps anxious Il
justice to labor In Issuing tnjunctions.
not In the spirit OF .favoritism to any set
Ct y fellow citizens, but In the interest
cising or refusing to exercise the power
OF injunction must be found In tho char
acter OF the unlawful injury and not In
the character or class of the persons who
intttct the injury.
The man who has a business which is
being nnlawfully injured Is entitled to
given him, no matter who has inflicted
the injuries. Otherwise we shal have
class legislation unjust in principle and
likely to sap the foundations OF q free
government.
Issue Of Injunction.
I come now to the question OF notice
before Issuing an Injunction. 1t is q
that norman shall be affected by q judi
cial proceeding without notice and hear
had an exception in the issIing Of tenn
porary restraining orders commanding a
defendant in effect to maintain the status
Y until a hearing. Such q process
should issue only in rare cases where the
threatened change of the status quo would
, n1rc irreparable injury iftime
hearing. The unlawful injury usual In
industrial disputes, such as I have de-
scribed. does not become formidable ex-
cept after sufficient time in which to give
the defendants notice and a hearing. I
do not mean to say that there may not
be cases even in industrial disputes where
issued without notice. but generally I
think 1t is otherwise. In some state
courts. and in fewer federal courts. the
practice Of issuing a temporary restrain
ing order without notice merely to pre-
serve the status quo on the theory that
Il mn Won, Mtlhnunr hurt anybody has been too =. com.
has been pursued In other than indus-
trial disputes, as. for instance, in COR
over the Erie railroad, in which a stay
order without notice was regarded as a
step of great advantage to the one who
vantage to the one against Whom It was
secured. Indeed, the chances Of doing
injustice on an ex parte application are
ing is granted, and there may be circum-
stances under which it may affect the
defendant to his detrilnent. In the case
Of a lawful strike the sending of a for
midable document restraining a number
of defendants from doing a great many
different things which the plaintiff ayers
courages men always reluctant to go into
a strike from continuing hat is their
lawful right. This a made the labor
ing man feel that an injustice is done
In the issuing OF a writ without notice,
I conceive that in the treatment of this
question It is the duty of the citizen and
the legislator to view the subject from the
standpoint of the man who believed him
self to be unjustly treated. as well as
from that Of the community at large. ]
have suggested the remedy of returning
In such cases to the original practice un-
der the old statute of the United States
and the rules in equity adopted by the
issuing of an injunction without notice.
In this respect the republican convention
has dopted another remedy that, with
out going so far, promises to be effica-
cious In securing proper consideration In
such cases by courts, by formulating into
q legislative act the best present prac-
Under this recommendation a statute
may be framed which shall define with
considerable particularly and emphasis
the exceptional character of the cases in
which restraining orders may issue with
out notice, and which shall also provide
that when they are issued they shall
cease to be operative beyond a short
period. during which time notice shall be
served and a hearing had. unless the de-
fandant desires q posttponement Of the
hearing. By this provision the injustice
which has sometimes occurred by which
a preliminary restraining order Of widest
applicadon has been issued without no
t1ce and the hearing of the motion for
the Injunction las been fixed weeks and
months after its date could not recur.
~ 1iuiuDer OIL Instances IN which re-
strainfng orders without notice In in
dustrtal disputes have issued1by federal
courts Is small, and 1t is urged that they
do not therefore constitute an error to
be remedied by statutory amendment.
The small number of cases complained
of above shows the careful manner in
which most federal Judges have exercised
the jurisdiction, but the belief that such
cases are numerous has been SO wide
spread and has aroused such feeling of
Injustice that more definite specification
In procedure to prevent recurrence of
them is justified IL 1t can be effected with
out injury to the administration of the
law.
With respect to notice the democratic
platform contains no recommendation. It's
only Ineligible declaration in regard to
Injunction suits is a reiteration of the
plank In the platforms Of 1896 and 1904
providing that in prosecutions for con-
tempt In federal courts, where the viola
ton OF the order constituting the contempt
charged is Indirect. /. e., outside of the
presence OF the court, there she'll be a
5rry trial.
This provision In the platform of 1896
was regarded then as a most dangerous
attack upon the power of the courts to
enforce their orders and DEGREES, and 1t
was one of the chief reasons for the
defeat OF the democrats In that contest,
as 1t ought to have been. The extended
f@--A- 49,