The Connecticut labor news., 1922-04-14

 hts.
 tive of the provisions of the federal constitution.
 From the beginning of the use of | the labor injunction, the wage earn
 CTS have been informed by many of the country's ablest jurists that courts of equity had no legal, statu- tory or constitutional right to issue I linlunctionS which commanded the workers to surrender the enjoyment of their inherent and constitutional rights. Many of the nations lead | ing publicists have also directed at tention to the dangerous and sinis- ter power which equity courts were usurping.
 Injunctions, in addition to limit ing or nullifying constitutional rights have also restrained Workmen from committing certain spec1hed msde- meanors or crimes, a direct upset ting of all of the heretofore ruels and practices of British courts of equity. With this we shall deal under sep arate heading, for we are noW con sidering the equity courts invasion of constitutional rights. The record of these invasions in clue so many cases and such lengthy restraining orders and court opinions that they number volumes. In federal injunction issued in favor of the Northern Pacific Rail way Company in 1893, the trainmen were restrained
 From combining, or conspiring to- gether, or with others * * with the design, or purpose of causing a strike * * and from ordering recommend ing, or approving, or advising others to quit the service of the receivers of the Northern Pacific road on January I, 1894, or at any other time A similar injunction was issued i'll 1894 by Federal Judge Dundy in which railway trainmen were in- structed to
 Refrain and desist from ever com together with others, * with the design, or for the purpose of induc ing. O rcausing a strike by any of the employees of said receivers" In addition to issuing injunctions prohibiting workmen from going on strike, equity courts have enjoined Workmen from continuing on strike. In the injunction granted to the Thomas c. Plant Shoe Company, Boston, the members of the United Shoe Workers Union of America, and those who might thereafter be come members of the union, and their agents, servants and attorneys were l lperpetually restrained.
 From siding with, or in any way encouraging, or supporting the strike described i'll this bill of complaint or any further strike called for any of the purposes alleged in the bill; and from paying strike benefits to any Of
 the former employees of the plaintiff now on strike
 Strikers also have been prohibited I from making any public reference to a strike, or to the fact that dis 1 pute exists, or had existed between | themselves and their employer. | In a permanent injunction granted
 in 1920 by Judge Harvey A. Axe, Stark County, Ohio, the striking nlolders were ordered to refrain 1 From publishing, advertising, or | circulating any statement, or declara-
 ton that there is strike on or pend
 ing at the plant of the plaintiff com pany, or that there Is trade dispute
 between the plaintiff company and
 the defendant"
 l The same prohibition of free ! speech is found in an injunction
 issued a- Minneapolis, Minn,. 1902,
 to the Wonderland Theater Mem ! berS of the Trades and Labor Assem- | bly of Mlnntapo were restrained | From carrying, or in any manner,
 or 1n any wise, exhibiting any ban
 ner, sign, reading, printing, dodger,
 card, or notice of any character hav- ing upon the same any statement that plaintiff is unfair to said defendant. l From conveying, directly or ndi- h1y of
 statement, or printing ot any kind, in the Minneapolis Labor Review, or
 any other publication of said defen-
 dants, any statement of the
 facts, or from which such fact could
 be reasonably inferred, that the plain
 tiff and his said theater, * was, or
 IS unfair to organized labor"
 The right to organize, or attempt
 to, organize has also been restrained
 In the injunction granted by Fed
 eral Judge Anderson to the Border
 alnd Coal Company in 1921, mem
 bers of the United Mine Workers were restrained
 ! Prom advising, assisting, encour- aging, acting, abetting, or in any way
 or manner, and by any and all means
 whatsoever to the unionization, or the attempted unionization Of the
 non-unoin mines in Mingo County, w. Va, and Pike County, Ky" ! In the injunction granted by
 United States Circuit Court, West Virginia, in 1907 to the Hitchman
 Coal Company, the union miners are
 restrained
 From interfering and combining, lconspiring, or attempting to interfere
 with employees of plaintiff for the pur-
 pose of unionizing plaintiffs mine without plaintiffs consent"
 Through an injunction granted by
 Judge Anderson, United States Cir
 cult Court, Indiana, in Ioo6, strikers
 at the Pope Motor Car Company
 were restrained
 From picketing at, or tear
 the premises from compelling.