The labor argus. [volume] (Charleston, W. Va.) 1906-1915, 1909-01-06
GOMPERS ON
THE MESSAGE.

relating to Labor is a recommendation for
law providing that no injunction shall
be issued without previous notice, unless
1T shall appear to the satisfaction of the
court that the delay would result in ir-
reparable injury to the complainant
After quoting the plank on the subject
the President says:
recommend that, in compliance with
the promise thus made, appropriate legis-
lation be adopted. The ends of Justice
will best be met and tho chief cause of
complaint against i'll considered injunc-
tons without notice will be removed by
the enactment of a statute forbidding
hereafter the issuing of any injunction or
restraining order, whether temporary or
permanent, by any Federal court, without
previous notice and reasonable oppor-
tunlty to be heard on behalf of the par
ties to be enjoined; unless it shall APP
pear to the satisfaction of the court that
the delay necessary to give such notice
and hearing would result in irreparable
injury to the complainant, and unless also
the court shall from the evidence make
written finding, which shall be spread
upon the court minutes, that immediate
and irrcparabe injury is likely to ensue
to the complainant, and shall define the
injury, state why it is irreparable, and
shall also indorse on the order issued the
date and the hour of the issuance of the
order.
Moreover, every such injunction or
restraining order issued without previous
notice and opportunity by the defendant
to be heard should by force of the
statute expire and be of no effect after
seven days from the issuance thg-sof or
within any time less than the period
which the court may fix, unless
within such seven days of such less period
the injunction or order is extended or re-
newed after previous notice and oppor-
tunity to be heard.
My judgment is that the passage of
such an act, which really embodics the
best practice in equity and is very like
the rule now in force in some courts. will
prevent the issuing of ill-advised orders
OF injunction without notice, and will rem
der such orders when issued much less
Objectionable by the short time in which
they may remain etfective.'
OF course every expression of opinion
of the President is entitled to respectful
and thoughtful consideration; when that
utterance is officially communicated to-
Congress with recommendation for its
enactment into law it becomes of still
greater Importance. The President 8
recommendation should be read and re.
read, each thought very carefully weighed
IN relation to the other, and the test of
TACT and experience applied thereto.
For instance, of what practical use
would the enactment of a law based upon
the President s recommendation prove ?I
What tangible reform or relief would be
achieved? There has not been an iniunc.
tlon granted by any of the courts, Federal
or state, but that was based on the COM
plalnant s allegation to the court s sat
lsfactlon that unless the injunction was
granted 'irreparablc injury would fol
low
Take the case of the Buck s Stove and
fange Company against the American
Federation of Labor, its officers it's affili- |
ated organizations, their two million mem |
bers, and friends. That company, in its
petition for the Injunction alleged that
unless the writ was granted it would suf- |
fer irreparabe injury That company
sought and obtained its injunction from
Justice Gould after snotice' and "hear-
lng,' and yet the outrageous injunction
1orblddlnS and emf joining free speech
and tree press was issued, under which
three American citizens were sentenced
TO long terms of Imprisonment. It is
true that the Court of Appeals later modi-
he'd the terms of the injunction, but the
same court held that no matter what the
original and unmodifed injunction for
oade Mitchell, Morrison, and Gompers
were compelled to obey.
Justice Wright declared that he placed
the matter at bar distinctly on the prom
oslt1on that We're the order confessedly err
roneous yet it must have been obeyed ,,
lhe Court of Appeals of the District of
Columbia, IN affirming Judge Wright IS
ieclslon and sentence, declared that '.the
iecree became a final and binding iud-
nent against the defendants until re-
'ersed or modified on appeal 1t is not
he contention that in the case which
Ne are discussing the matters involved