The Idaho Springs siftings-news., 1912-06-01
MEASURE is SWEEPING
AN1I-INJUNCTION BILL UNDOUBT-
EDLY GOES FAR
Wisdom of Its Passage, With the I'M
portlrt Provisions 1t Contains, He-
mains to Be Justified-is Now
Before the Senate.

The house of representatives has
passed the so-called antl-inJunetlon
bill There are many who feel that
the courts have gone too far in grant
ing injunctions in labor disputes who
nevertheless believe that the courts
ought to have considerable power in
such cases 1t is to be remembered
that lnJunctions are not reSorted TO 10
prevent strikes, but only to prevent
destruction OF property and interter-
ence with the orderly prosecution OF
lawful business. The power to pro
teCt property and business in THIS way
ought to be preserved. Ii this method
were forbidden all that would be lett
would be the police and the mill
tary.
But the bill does not abolish the in
junction The question is whether its
effect will be unduly to limit the
Jurisdiction OF the courts in such
cases, Under its terms no injunction
can issue without notice being served
on those affected, This, of course, VIII
mean a great change in procedure
For as it is now, temporary restrain
ing orders are granted without notice,
the idea being to maintain the status
quo till rights can be defined linen,
ii there is no proper showing, the
permanent injunction is denied. 1t
seems to us that it would be better
to hold to the old restraining order
theory, and provide for a prompt
hearing Of the question. There are
cases, and not all OF them labor cases,
in which important rights might be
lost during the period that must elapse
before notice can be given, under the
provisions of the bill as it is now un-
der consideration
Under the proposed bill the injunc-
ton would be effective for seven days
only though it could be renewed when
the court was convinced that the in
Junction was necessary to protect
property rights. The important change
is the provision that there must be no
tice before temporary injunction can
issue 1t is generally agreed that there
ought to be some limitation which
viii make it impossible for the courts
to abuse their puwers-as certain
courts have done The question is
whether the bill goes too far 1t seems
radical, and yet it must be remem-
! bered that in our use OF the injunction
! in labor disputes We have gone further
/ than any other country
There is another phase of the ques-
ton that is important Many object
to the use of the injunction in labor
cases, because they think it better to
arres, and punish men for crime than
to enjoin them from crime and then
punish them not for the crime. but
| for the contempt Of court involved in
the olation of the injunction. That.
| 1t must be confessed, is the usual and
| ordinary course of dealing with crime
! In our opinion it is the best way. But
| though we are predisposed against the
| injunction in labor cases, and are op-
posed to the wholesale use that has
! sometimes been made of it, we still
think that the remedy Is a valuable
and necessary one The bill goes to
| the senate where we hope it will re-
ceive ihe most careful consideration.
1t certainly ought not to be passed
merely because there is a demand for
1t by a certain class of oar citizens.
Reform is needed, but it should be re
form, and not revolution -Indianap-
oils News