The Boise citizen., 1910-07-15
Labor Injunctions
lThe Public.


Complaint of farness by organs business interests is made
by Samuel Gompers the of the Federatonist re
charges those organs with deliberately conceang the essential pom
when they argue that nmcton against labor organizations arc
IN the legal category with ordinary nunctons he gt
Ordinary nunctons for the protection Of property rights IRON
threatened emedab injuries There those
accusation within the criminal law Consequently the right TO
trial for alleged abrogaed But labor nJuncoS
fall into radically different category place they
not for the protection OF property rights No any longer has
property right in the labor OF another there being no con-
tract In the second place they restraint OF alleged crime
These differences completely distinguish the labor injunction from
the ordinary injunction The second difference attaches to labor
functions fundamentally vicious characteristic Not that crime
ought not to be prevented ought be- if possible But nn
o can no more prevent crime than statutes can All hat etae
puneI hPuarI AoIL 9q "A sheme po9lmIenS uoloes9rS
The essential difference between them that punishment under
statutes cannot be inflicted until jury has determined the guilt OF
the accused whereas punishment under injunction may be inflicted
regardless OF guilt without jury trial for protection Of the innocent
without even the appearance OF witnesses court but mere
aldavls prepared by the complaining parties out of and
simply the arbitrary sayso of Judge The labor Injunction
IS subteruge for evadng jury trial the interest of business
classes and against working classes All this well known thar
1t difficult any longer believe in the good faith Of any
speaker who defends labor nncons legally identical
with ordinary nncons All intelligent writers and speakers on
the subject must know that the element property right
from labor inuncons that the element of criminal accusation r
present and that either absence of the presence of the
vtates all ncons except labor nunctos would have
afed these before corporation LAWYERS on the bench made their new
departure in injunction law.
Another form of deceit which very with writers and
speakers who oppose labor organization has do with the
ton OF the Senate striking from prosecution bill %
po9 House clause intended to protect labor organizations from
awful persecution by Federal officials and public expense Pres
lent laf insisted that this clause giving his rea
son tat labor organizations must not be allowed by law the
aW Tor that would be class legislation There gueessness
bou Mr. TAFT mental drowsness which will tempt consideate
PERSONS to attribute his misrepresentation of the labor clause cues
ION to any old thing rather than evil purpose But the New
ok Times the New York Sun the President the National Man
crers Asociatlonthese and their like not lacking in wake
uness and they like President Taft refer clause as
oud have exempted labor organizations prosecutions for law
ssness What would have exempted them from and all # world
ave protected them rom not awessness their part bur
secuton by an lnerestoWned government for not unlawful
ead e rejected clause yourself and definite were the
rms OF this rejected clause that only three differences regarding
lose VINO oppose IT. from the President along the line are noss
e. FIRST ignorance of the fact that clause exemnted labor
ganzatons only from prosecution for lawful ac second ac
Us neence to that TACT third desire leave the way open
labor organizations? N9 =