Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 09.pdf/583

 540

GOVERNMENT BY INJUNCTION. BY BEN. S. DEAN". AGREAT political party, in its platform of principles, declared, in 1896, that "We denounce arbitrary interference byFederal authorities in local affairs as a vio lation of the Constitution of the United States and a crime against free institutions; and we especially object to government by in junctions as a new and highly dangerous form of oppression by which Federal judges, in contempt of the laws of the States and rights of citizens, become at once legislators, judges and executioners." This language, directed against the inter ference of the Federal courts, supported by the regular army, on the occasion of the great Pullman strike in 1894, gains a new signifi cance from the recent action of Federal courts in the great coal strike, and it is emphasized by the fact that in nearly every State where conventions have been held, this platform has been reaffirmed by the parry which first promulgated it, and in many cases with special reference to its new application. It thus becomes, if not a leading issue, one of great collateral importance, and one which is destined to play no inconsiderable part in coming campaigns. It is important, there fore, that the matter be impartially considered at a time when the people are prepared to give it candid consideration, to the end that in the effort to correct abuses, we shall not go to the extreme of creating a greater evil than that which we have been called upon to endure. There is no doubt that " the arbitrary inter ference by Federal authorities in local affairs" is a violation of the Constitution of the United States. Not only is no such power granted (and the powers of the Federal Constitution are entirely dependent upon their delegation) but it is expressly provided that the United

States shall protect each of the States against invasion; and, on "the application of the legislature, or of the executive ( when the leg islature cannot be convened), against domes tic violence." If the legislature, or the ex ecutive, fails to call upon the Federal govern ment, it can have no authority for interfering in " local affairs," and this brings us to the consideration of what may be fairly under stood as belonging to " local affairs." The mere fact that violence is confined to a given locality does not of itself constitute " domes tic violence," or " local affairs." It must be a matter of purely local concern to bring it within that definition. It is possible to con ceive of a condition of actual public warfare. in which the interests of the entire nation might be involved, and which was yet with in a given locality, and within the jurisdiction of a single State. It would then be the duty of the Federal government to interfere, and to extend its strong arm, even though the governor and the legislature refused or neg lected to ask for this aid. This was prac tically the condition existing in Chicago at the time that the Federal authorities took it upon themselves to interfere. The Consti tution of the United States gives to Congress the power to " regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several States," and, acting under this authority. Congress has enacted what is known as the Interstate Commerce Law, giving a general superintendence of the railroads engaged in interstate commerce to a commission. The strike, which found its focus in the city of Chicago, and which was nominally directed against the Pullman Palace Car Company, as sumed such proportions, and embraced so wide a field of activities, that it undertook to, and actually did, interfere with the transit of