The Connecticut labor news., 1922-04-28

We have shown that our American equity practice was based upon the English practice of the Chancery Court at the time when our Constitu- ton was adopted.
 We have shown that but two in functions were issued in connection with labor disputes in Great Britain; that one of these was set aside by decision of the Lord Chancellor sup ported by all of his associates; and that the other was overturned by ar act of parliament.
 We have shown that American courts of equity did not first issue labor injunctions until 1888 and that, when the first federal injunc- ton was issued in 1890, the court ad- mitted that it had no precedent to guide it, either in English or Amerl- can equity practice.
 We have shown that at no time since such injunctions were issued has any authority for issuing the same been granted or authorized by state legislatures or congress.
 We have shown that many of the nations leading jurists have held the equity courts have no authority to issue such injunctions in connec- ton with industrial disputes and that the terms of these writs are ire quently in contradiction and viola ton of the provisions of our Con stitution.
 The British equity practice, regu- lated and established by parliament which we inherited, provided that equity
 Was to be exercised for the pro- tection of property rights only.
 That he who would seek its aid must come with clean hands.
 That there must be no adequate remedy at law.
 "That it must not be used to pun ish crime.
 That it must never be used to cur tail personal rights"
 We have shown that since Ameri- can courts began the practice of issuing labor injunctions they have violated all of these basic principles of chancery or equity, for they have issued injunctions for purposes other than the protection of property.
 They have issued inj junctions to employers who had been the aggres- sors, who had struck the first blow and whose hands were unclean.
 They have issued injunctions when there were adequate remedies at law
 They have issued injunctions which they afterwards used to punish crime instead of contempt.
 They have issued injunctions which were intended to curtail personal rights.
 This record is amazing and causes us to marvel at the peoples patient submission to over-reaching courts It's implications are tremendous, fo1 ind authority without sanction of law ol constitution to set aside the basic principles upon which our equity courts were founded. They have put labor without the pale of our Con stitution in it's efforts to establish in dustrial justice.
 They have violated these basic principles and set up for themselve: a power and authority never con ferred upon them by the people, ol sanctioned by their representatives Having seized this power, they hav' proceeded to create class distinctions They have abolished trial by jury fo wage earners charged with contemp committed outside of the court presence. They have established government by judicial 'conscience in defiance of the provisions of tn OOHSl1lullOu vide that all legislation shall be con fined to the legislative branch of tn government
 The sinister condition established by these courts of equity has created problem of overwhelming i'm portance.
 The remedy lies in the legislativ field State legislatures and congres must assume the same responslbll1t, which was assumed by the Britisl parliament many years ago when 1 \ laid down the definite rules to gover1 courts of equity, and placed impass able barriers beyond which they coul' not go.
 The process of securing the resto ration of our rights which have bee1 destroyed by equity courts and of re storing these courts to their origlna function will be a long and arduou undertaking.
 Until this remedial legislation i secured, how is labor to protect it rights?
 A most practical and immediat problem exists because of the col lective efforts of organized employer to collectively de-unionize thei plants wherever possible and proven the existence of trade-unions. Trade unionists are being faced with tn alternative of immediately losin their job, or signing contract com polling them to surrender their trade union membership. When they hav gone on strike to resist such an in vasion of their rights, a court. c equity has declared the strike illegs and has enjoined others from givin assistance to the strikers
 Iniunctions are issued restrainin trade-unionists from referring to tn fact that they have dispute wit their employer, giving him free an open field to do or say those thing which will enable him, unhindere and nnhampered, to work his will.
 The court of equity restraints tn wage earners from any written, ora
 IL f