Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1937-03-12
Member of the Associated press
Reckless Sowing.

one of the more obvious dangers in
carelessly sowing seeds of distrust and
rldicule of the courts is the rapiditv
with which they sprout and the nature
OF the harvest they may produce. The
situation in Detroit is possible example.
A few days ago the President, ad-
dressing his Sl00-a-plate partisans at
the victory dinner, referred generally to
court lnJunctions which, he said, have
paralyzed the machinery which we
created by the national labor relations
act to settle great disputes raging in the
industrial field, and, indeed, to prevent
them from ever arising" Within a week
the Attorney General, appearing before
the Senate Judiciary Committee, spoke in
condemnation of the impossible situa-
ton created by the reckless use of in
functions in restraining the operation
of Federal laws"
There was little attempt to particu
larlze, no attempt to weigh the merits
OF inJunctions granted by the courts
merely an attack on the use of injunc-
tons as whole and their classification
as one OF the alleged evils which would
be remedied by the Presidents plan.
Promptly taking his cue, Homer Martin.
president of the United Automobile
workers Union, commented as follows
on the attempt by the Chrysler CORPORA
ton to obtain an injunction against occu-
pancy of its plants by the sit-downers:
Again we see the corporation making
the same mistake that other CORPORA
tons have made, that of endeavoring to
institute law by Injunction These
methods do not settle any labor dispute
and will not settle this strike.
What, in Mr.. Martins opinion, will
settle this strike? Not recognition of
MS union. That has already been
granted. Not agreements on wages and
hours. There is no impasse there. Not
refusal TO negotiate. The corporation
has shown its willingness to negotiate
even while its plants are paralyzed by
illegal trespass. The "ultimatum" de-
livered to the corporation is in the form
OF demand for recognition of the union
as the sole bargaining unit for all
Chrysler employes-the same demand
that was waived in the case of General
Motors and was waived in the case of
the steel industry
Where is the Presidents machinery
Tor settling such disputes, or preventing
them? Paralyzed, it is true, not by the
courts and their injunctions, but by in
ability or unwillingness or both to move
IN such situation. Where can the
automobile manufacturer turn but to
the courts? What machinery exists out
side OF the courts for determining the
legality OF the seizure of his property,
with its attendant losses to employer
and employe alike? But the seed
has been soWn. An injunction from
the courts in Detroit has been la
beled In advance by the President of
the United States and his ATTORNEY
General as an instrument causing
paralysis" Of other machinery the
RECKLESS" use of which restraints the
operation of Federal law. Can any one
blame the striker in the ranks who views
the granting of an injunction as an
Invasion OF his rights, who looks upon
the courts as an alien enemy? Can any
one truly blame him if the disrespect he
has learned for the courts and their
opinions under the careful tutelage of
(ynUnro MI r,)
take the law in his own hands; Shed his
blood, If necessary, to protect what he
has been led to believe are his rights?
The use of the injunction by the courts
has not been nearly so reckless as the
condemnation of the courts by those in
high places, nor so capable of evil
consequences.