Slike strani
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

is responsible. Critics of trade unionism do not make a distinction. between the making of law and its enforcement. The state of Illinois or of New York, specifically condemns murder, arson, burglary, and theft, but the governments of these states are not necessarily responsible when these crimes are occasionally committed. A trade union, moreover, is not even in the position of a sovereign state, it has not the right to punish the offender. The United Mine Workers of America was accused of aiding and abetting violence because, in advance of the trials of a few perpetrators of such violence, it refrained from expelling them from the union. It would be as fair to condemn the Christian Churches for failing to exclude from membership men who were accused, but not convicted, of crime. These churches are sincerely opposed to the perpetration of crime, but do not conceive it to be within their province to inflict a punishment of this nature, especially in advance of action by the courts. The attitude of the trade union is identical.

During the five months of the anthracite strike eight men were killed, three or four of these deaths being caused by men on strike or claiming to be in sympathy with the union, while if the mines had been operated during this period and had maintained the average number of accidents, two hundred men would have been killed and six hundred seriously maimed or injured. Of course I do not put the murder of men in brawls upon a par with the killing of men as a result of dangerous occupations, or through the negligence of operators or their foremen. It is well, however, that acts of violence not only diminish, but absolutely disappear. Life is sacred, though it be in the body of an incurable, a lunatic, an epileptic, a criminal, or a professional strike breaker willing to assume the risk of his profession; and the union should assist the state in the maintenance of order and the preservation of the life of even the men opposed to it. With the advance in strength and the growth in age of the unions, the amount of violence accompanying strikes, small as it now is, will be even lessened, and strikes will be in practice what they are in theory, simply and solely a peaceful abstention of men from work.

A most important feature in the conduct of a strike is the collection and distribution of funds. No protracted strike can be carried on without money, and since the burden of the strike, no matter when it comes, must fall largely upon the strikers, all unions, however peaceable, should provide themselves with a defense fund, to be used only if absolutely necessary. Strikes called by or with the approval of a national organization should receive the entire financial support of the union. The maxim should be, "Beware of entrance to a quarrel, but being in, bear't that the opposed may beware of thee." The union should be chary of engaging in strikes, should not call them as "bluffs" or threats, but when once launched upon a justifiable conflict, in which there is the slightest hope of success, it should be determined to sacrifice the last penny of its funds.

There needs more than good intention in this matter; more is necessary than money. Some system must be arranged, efficacious, reliable, and not open to abuse either in the collection or the distribution of the funds. During the anthracite strike of 1902 a well-thought-out system was perfected. The money contributed to the support of the strike was sent by the national union to the district organizations, by the districts it was forwarded to the locals, and by the locals in turn, was given to the strikers, in the form of store orders, and according to the needs of each. A system of checks and balances was devised, so as to prevent the slightest misappropriation of the money. Thus, as contributors to the fund were assured of the proper use of their money, outside support was willingly given, so that the men were stronger and more able to resist at the close of the contest than at the beginning.

CHAPTER XXXVII

THE INJUNCTION IN LABOR DISPUTES.

Injunctions against Strikers. History of the Injunction. Temporary Injunctions. Contempt of Court. No "Trial by Jury." Nullifying Fundamental Constitutional Rights. Injunctions in Criminal Cases. Injunctions, the Anti-Trust and Interstate Commerce Laws. Blanket Injunctions. Government by Injunction. The Bias of the Appointed Judges. Judge Jackson and the "Vampires." Injunctions against "Feeding the Hungry." Attempts to Abolish the Use of Injunctions in Labor Disputes. The Liberties of the Whole Nation Assailed. The Virginia Law Unconstitutional. Deep Iniquity of the Injunction. Ceaseless Agitation. An Amendment to the Constitution.

[ocr errors]

JO weapon has been used with such disastrous effect against trade unions as the injunction in labor disputes. By means of it trade unionists have been prohibited under severe penalties from doing what they had a legal right to do, and have been specifically directed to do what they had a legal right not to do. It is difficult to speak in measured tones or moderate language of the savagery and venom with which unions have been assailed by the injunction, and to the working classes, as to all fair-minded men, it seems little less than a crime to condone or tolerate it.

Trade unionists do not object to the injunction in itself. If properly used in its own sphere, as determined by English and American judicial decisions prior to 1890, the injunction may be useful and necessary. An injunction was merely an order by a court in equity, commanding a certain person or persons to desist from some action proposed or actually begun, and it had been effectively used for the protection of property where the injury contemplated would have been irreparable, or of such a nature that adequate damages could not be calculated. The injunction was in the nature of an ounce of prevention, and was intended to obviate certain civil injuries. by applying to them what was practically, though not technically, a criminal punishment.

It was not until the opponents of trade unionism and the enemies of the working classes decided upon concerted movement against labor organizations, that the full possibilities of the injunction, as distorted and perverted by the courts, became apparent. The method of procedure in injunctions is inimical to the perpetuity of free government, since it sweeps aside all constitutional safeguards. The judge, upon application and under certain prescribed conditions, issues a preliminary injunction against a person or persons, known or unknown, or against all those engaged in a given industry, without service upon any of these parties and without an opportunity to them to appear and be heard before the preliminary injunction is granted. This restraining order may be and often is issued upon false information and perjured statement, by illegal and improper method, and upon a matter entirely beyond the legitimate province and jurisdiction of the court. The preliminary injunction is usually prepared by the plaintiff's attorney, who states therein whatever he wishes; and no opportunity is offered to the defendant before the granting of the order, to make counteraffidavit or to show cause why the preliminary injunction should not be issued. During the often unreasonably long time which elapses between the grant of the preliminary injunction and the time set for the hearing to determine whether that injunction shall be continued, a strike may be lost and thousands or tens of thousands of men defrauded of their rights and disappointed of their justifiable expectations. The preliminary injunction thus produces exactly the evil which it was intended to obviate or prevent, but for the workingman there is no remedy against the incalculable and irreparable damage inflicted upon him by a temporary injunction illegally and wrongfully granted. If, during the time before the hearing, anyone in the whole wide world is known or is supposed to be guilty of a violation of any part of any clause of any section of an injunction, he may be summarily arrested, either then or later, and put upon trial. Upon such trial he may insist upon none of the rights guaranteed to him as a citizen of the United States. A trial by jury is denied. to him, and the judge passes sentence

upon the sole ground of whether or not the preliminary injunction, issued without a hearing, has been disobeyed. The constitutional guarantees of liberty and property are denied and nullified by this judicial process. The court, after hearing the case in its own way, decides in its own way. The man is condemned to pay such fine or to suffer and undergo such punishment as the court in its supposed wisdom may determine. In a civil action the amount recovered should not be greater than the proved damages, but by injunction a man who commits precisely the same offense for which civil action is brought, is punishable by fine or imprisonment according to the discretion of the court. In a criminal action the law specifies a maximum punishment that may be inflicted, but if the same offense is committed in violation of a temporary injunction, issued without a hearing, or without personal service, the punishment may be whatever the judge decrees, however much in excess of the maximum punishment fixed by the law of the state or the nation. From this decision of the judge there is no appeal, and even if an appeal is taken upon the question of the jurisdiction of the court issuing the injunction, it is possible that the active men of the union may lie in jail during the appeal. In many cases, however, the striking workingmen are not in possession of sufficient funds to take an appeal, and generally the injury inflicted upon the defendants and those they represent is irreparable, even if the temporary injunction is eventually set aside.

It would naturally be supposed that the courts would exercise this extraordinary power of injunction in a conservative manner and with the most scrupulous care, but this has not been the case. Injunctions in labor disputes have been granted by judges in chambers, without notice and without a hearing of the parties against whom they are issued; or they have simply been written out by some clerk of the court in the absence of the judge. Such an injunction thrown out upon the spur of the moment may restrain the union or its members from giving food or money to strikers, forbid peaceful picketing, or prohibit other actions equally lawful. Under this injunction persons or parties who might be punished civilly are made criminally liable for offenses or for actions which are not offenses at all.

« PrejšnjaNaprej »