The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1915-03-27
Producer Always :s:: =;
EH.r - -<.'rs.ts
Will Need Courts;

Producer Always :.::=: ID =: D: 2; ss. 4.
Will Need Courts ;: I: :: 8. !;
By W. r. RUBIN - :. :. +.
Whether we like or dislike our
present social status : we are apidly
passing out of it, and as to what will
follow. only a vague: pFegramist will
venture prescience,~ no, true
student of sociology or%econpnlica, will
prognosticate, though he may conjec-
ture or :inetaphysicize. '..:.: !:
Full Product Of Toll.
Conceding that the next phase OF
society has come into being with the
legal code-that only the producer
shall consume. and to him and to him
alone shall belong the full product OF
his eil-=yet knowing ntankind as we
do and understand ding mankind as IT
will ever:'be, We mnsttrea1ize that even
with the elimfn ation De. business cons
petition and the struggle, for exist
ence, diffcultiesswi will: arise and dis
putes will be engendered ~:over' wha,
constitutes the fun product Of ones
toll. II 49,. =, - : =.
Then someone will have to be
chosen to sit in. Judgment The WORD
court" may be distastefuL We can
call it, by another unconstitutional or
mediation party or arbitration board
still 1t Will require someone, some
ones time, someone's attention to sit
In Judgment. Then, of course, ad-
vocates will be required to aid such
person in interpreting some of the
disputes.
VIII Need Courts.
So here. at the very outset. we
have an exception; to the rule, that to
the producer alone shall belong. the
full product. of his toll.
In my first years of practice, and
in my mingling with labor leaders
and laboring men, working with them
in all labor disputes, I had but one
chief aim and desire, as they had had
for years before, and that was to, get
away from courts, perhaps to- de-
stroy them. We. felt that courts were
not made for adjustment between
Capital. and labor, and that labor
could. hope for nothing from courts:
that, it was to no purpose of labor to
spend its time and efforts in going to
courts: Or. in doing anything with
them in labor's behalf
-!.v: " Way of Relief.
But a very few years of actual con-
tact with life and the wrestling with
the problems of life convinced me
that was wrong and that every labor
leader who took the same stand or
assumed the same attitude, was wrong:
L saw the necessity Of turning to the
courts mot away from them-for re-
lief; that courts would ever be a part
Of government and that If any one
branch of government, even the judi
ciary, had gotten away from the peo-
pie, then the way to- labor's relief
was not by leaving the judiciary so
that it could get farther, away from
labor and the people, but by going to
the courts and getting them to be with
labor and the people.
I shall concede that courts should
continue to exercise the function Of
granting injunctions, but an ex parte
Injunction should be sparingly grant
ed, as that is a matter of timely ex-
pediency only and does not go to the
real root Of the trouble.
Question of InjunctiOns.
Then the subject of this discourse
is-When- should an injunction be
granted? Why grant one at all? The
criminal code is ample to take care Of
every offense that can possibly be
committed by an Individual during a.
strike.
I will even go so far as to say, al
though it is in conflict with my own
ideas, that punishment for contempt
without a jury trial should be allowed
In the event of violation of a labor
injunction, though if charged with a
like Offense under the criminal code,
the alleged violator would have his
constitutional trial by jury. I will go
one step further, and concede the in
voking of the law of conspiracy
against labor in strikes, perhaps the
most hated weapon against labor as
an inquisitorial harassment of the
most cruel type.
Thus you see that / have yielded to
courts all the powers and rights they
have heretofore had and have in labor
disputes to the end that I may drive
home the one thought uppermost in
my mind at this time. If an injunc-
ton In labor strikes is to be issued,
then when and under what circum-
stances shall it be done?
An injunction should not he grant
ed unless it appears affirmatively and
to the, clear satisfaction of the court,
that the plaintiff who seeks equity
has done equity, in that the stand that
he takes in the strike, and his de-
mand, is just and equitable and that
the demands of the strikers and lock-
out employees are unjust, unreasonable
and ruinous to his business discipline
and profit, -
! bottom the claim upon the fol-
lowing two axioms in law: He who
seeks equity must do equity; he who
comes into a court of equity, must
come into court with clean hands:
-.
City Attorneys ~.