New-York tribune., 1908-01-11

the most convenient method of defendinig Injunction
to e apply TO court Of equity for OF ther ae intention
against those who give indicauoh vi
10 carry on such methoos
CRITICISM OF INJUNCTION REAEDi
This remedy by injunction has been very fsf Il
denounced and criticised on the gitative judicial
places in the haRaS noeTs OF that it enables him to make
the law for one case a agaSSd aSde by il 10 try him
and punish him When this objection Is ""'''
it is found to oe suit does not differ the slightest
degree from suit after the exent II 80 s9eciarn the
I nHcent that the court declares the Ia" ~
spect of antcipated fa1ner,sd facts rs9nef IMAM
70 He has no authority make law IN an
@ uoh SUI SUIT nd annIies il to the circumstance Hls ms
judgment in the one case nv fe- ~ law as in
same oder to save the party plaintiff from
having bring suit to recover his ITF an is an 1niaw
fuI injury, and as you threaten to do 1t en'0h'
you from doing IT,
PREVENTION BETTER THAN CURE
r,o-tainIv prevention is better than cure, and Il
&, a oSer that a man who is about to have his
business injured or his property DESTROYED preIeTs
tocT to RrevSNt Ntther fh4 Insult snt in criminal
prosecution is likely TO bring him h PACK ca ms boycott
In many states there is no provision for criirinai
prosecution.
HISTORY OF WRIT OF INJUNCTIoNs-
"ish iI ~ is one of the most beneficial remedies
known to the law and to trace its history ana ana
purpose of preventing injustice ,,,, w.. e,s+ o,r
Originally, in England, from WnlGn M D.; We ss g. s1n
posed to decide cases through his judges OF Ine
NOM NV was rather rigid and especially in
bnding persons to the letter of their contracts and
Wfnd ba ra rea f the
And so. while. the people began 70 aPPsdt d
own courts He turned the matter oyer to the lord
keeper OF be the grea' The Way the lord keeper
worked not to issue any dlrecrion - I ss
bUt he o. took hold Of the plaintiff the suit and
threatened him with exeommunlcaIlphi !, tv M t re-
st0n the suit and do that justice whlch equity le
qured qdP i.'' 49, ,,.,r+,r fror,
nroceeding with the suit In the court of the Kings
bench or of the common pleas, as the case Iasnt t
6 0e eav ami R9en as the court Of chancr As the
lord keeper in those days was an eec Of the liti-
gants. and the threat Of excommunieanon wa Wa
generally sufficient to enforce ssd whd 10 be bishop
and became known the lord chanceor anu iolat;o
Of the injunction was punished by imprisonment in
stead of excommunicatlon
USEFULNESS OF WRIT.
Let me take case that illustrates the usefulness
man wished to borrow $500 on his farm @hich Tss
worth $4,000 he gave moPtgage 70 fb ttie to the
land With the condition that the title should be
come absolute If the money not paid on tne
date mentioned in the mortgage If the money
was not paid, the creditor could put the debtor OUT
Of aOf1'3 farm Which was worth $4,000
In such case the n 2Td feePef e g hs farm 9 for 500
when it is worth $lOo0o. That is not equitable and
continuing that suit, because you are after some
thing that is unjust. and will make you come IN
able to pay the $500 and interest we will seti
tnfn raven over a9 the Balance 9 to the defendt That
equitable decision, and it was made enec-
tive by the power of injunction ,..,s,
trees to tenant The tenant advises i him that ne
What is the landlord to do? Is he to let the tenant
Of the S trees So Equity e suggests remedy that
he go into court and enjoln the man and prevent
injury which could not be compensated for In
A owns a lucrative business. and a numer-
or desire 10 injure him. and institute BOYCOTT
their patronage which is valuable from anybody
that has anything to do with him. In that way ne
Now. is not it better that he should apply to
the courts TO enjoin them from taking that course
ure in damages than that they should be per-
the burden of a lawsuit afterWard. with all the
uncertainty as to damages and the doubt about
so 5oo where body Of strikers by co6tinued
sance and attempt to stop his business the injury
he suffers il is peculiarly difficult for ad him to be es
very inadequate remedy.
ABUSE OF WRIT OF INJUNCTION
But il is said that the writ of injunction has
been abused in this country in labor disputes and
ought never to have been issued | agree that
there has been abuse in this regard. President
Roosevelt referred to 1t In his last message think
it has grown chiefly from the practice & OF issuing ing
ice or he hearing to the defendant
The injustice that is worked is in this wise.
duct themselves peaceably and within the law.
The counsel for the employer visits judge. pre-
that violence threatened injury to property and
fdavit the judge issues temporary restraining
9pmed 0rde f9 N Re RaFfe pea or b tie WHO
The broadest expressions are used, in the writ
Ireguenty TOO proa4 e Inc nai seS io the proc
esses of the court. The expressions OF the writ
TO the legality of what they are about to do The
senns Is taken out 10 OF Sns nd All beoTe fhe
have had a chance in court 20 demonstrate as they
might that they had no intention of doing any
thing unlawful or doing any violence
FAvoRs REQUIRING NOTICE
not permissibe for the federal courts TO issue an
Injunction without notice. There had TO be notice
tireiy right in this class OF cases amend the
law and Provide i that m m no until er ynoffce and
hearing Then the court could be advised by both
danger of issuing a writ too broad or of issuing
writ without good ground would generally De
There is another objection made. and that is
sensitiveness in respect TO its violation that gives
him bias when he comes to hear contempt pro-
and makes it unfair for him to impose a punish
ment if conviction follows. | think few judges on
feet them. but agree that there is popular doubt
of the Judges impartial attitude in such case.
For that reason | would favor u provision allow
ing the defendant in contempt proceedings 10 chal-
Ienge the Judge issuing the Injunction and to call
for the designation of another judge 10 hear the is
sue | don't think ii would seriously delay the
hearing of the cause and IL would give more conf
dence in the Impartiality of the decision. IL is
almost as important that there should be the ap-
prarance of Justice that there should be
actual administration of il.
But now il is said. Why not have "A trial by jury
The reason why this is Objectionable is because of
the delay and of the character of jury trial IL
ken he hor nf an