New Britain herald., 1922-09-25
THE INJUNCTION.

THE INJUNCTION.
 Saturday, September 2, The Herald said editorially: Unless the court is prepared to say that the crisis is sucf that even the peaceable activities oi unions must be stopped il cannot make permanent such an or der" the reference being 10 the re- straining order then granted and re- gently made a temporary injunction The Herald said further: "In the present case the court, In order 10 be justified in making such an injunc- tion permanent. without modification must find that all official argument by unions tending to keep men on strike threatens life and property to such an extent that the highest power of the government must be invoked even though it takes fundamental rights from members of the labor unions.
 The court has found. practically that this situation exists-the situa- ton which would justify the making permanent of an order such as the one under discussion September ? to Judge Wilkerson has granted pre- liminary injunction restraining off cials of the Federated Railway Shop Crafts from doing any acts, which, in other circumstances might be lawful, would tend to encourage the interfer- ence with interstate commerce. This decision is based on his finding of fact that a conspiracy exists to ob- struct interstate commerce It is clear that the paralyzing of this com merce between states would threaten not only property property rights, but would endanger life throughout the country. Only great universal mas- sacre could equal the havoc that a cessation of transportation of life's necessities would bring.
 The law is clear" says a para graph of the opinion of the court, ''in my opinion, that If the dominating primary purpose of the combination is to restrain trade or to do things unlawful in themselves and which by reason of their inherent nature oper- ate to restrain trade, the purpose of the combination is unlawful, and that purpose may not be carried out even by means that otherwise would be legal"
 The government alleged an illegal combination. None of the defendants answered the allegation The only real question in dispute, the judge holds, is whether or not the unions could be charged with responsibility for the repeated acts of violence oc- curing where the strike activities were greatest. The judges compre- hensive opinion shows the "construc- tive" knowledge of the leaders of the strike that these outrages were occurring. He then quotes the state ment sent out to the union members by the leaders, two months after these outbreaks of violence had begun, urg- ing strikers to even greater activities, The court then says: These defend- ants will not be permitted to deny responsibility for these unlawful acts. They will not be permitted to continue acts, which, even though they may be peaceful and lawful in themselves it has been demonstrated are only part of program of un- lawful conduct and are done for the accomplishment of an un- lawful purpose" But, the opinion goes on to say-and this should be noted by those who will condemn the courts action, Tt need hardly be said that this conclusion is upon the record as it now stands, and leaves the de- fendants free to present their conten tion again if and when a different case Is made of the readings and proof"
 Thus the situation at present stands against the union. The merits have not been decided because the union did not answer the charges made. It would be difficult to decide those merits in an action of this kind. but the lack of presentation of a clear cut case, with a clear decision to be made on all the evidence, is to be regretted If the courts finding of fact that the leaders, the defendants. are responsible for the acts com plained of, pursuant to such conspir- scy, the granting of the injunction is Justified.