THE TENDENCY OF THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY.
By W. N. G.
FEW, if any, legal questions have called out more press discussion than the injunction issued against the striking miners of West Virginia by Judge Jackson, of the U. S. Circuit Court. In the light of past strikes in the coal regions the aggregation of large bodies of men did look ominous, but the miners had as yet committed no depredation; and if they had, the State courts were the proper tribunals of appeal. On this point the Hartford Courant says:— "Take the case of the Monongahela Company. If trespass upon their property had been committed or was threatened, the State laws were there to punish. The only peace in any possible danger of being broken was the peace of West Virginia. . . . How does Judge Jackson of the Circuit Court of the United States come to be meddling in the domestic affairs of West Virginia? His apologists now say that he did nothing but forbid acts that are unlawful. The laws themselves had done that long before the public ever heard of him. That is what the laws are for." It is an indisputable fact that the Judicial Department of our Federal Government has been inclined to deem itself the higher of the three governmental functions. And the people have in a measure conceded this assumption by referring to the Supreme Court as the "highest authority in the land," and by taking as precedents its rulings (sometimes by the barest majority), which were contrary to the spirit of the Constitution. On this point the Kansas City Times says:— "The Federal Judiciary does not appear now for the first time in the rôle of a usurper. From the beginning it has steadily striven for more than its due share of power. Now boldly, again craftily, it has reached out to grasp the supreme sovereignty. Foreseen by Jefferson, watched with apprehension by later patriots, this process has gone on until in our own time the Federal Judiciary aims daringly at open government." There is another peculiarity of the Federal Courts which is worthy of attention, namely, it is practically a tribunal for the benefit of the rich and combinations that are otherwise powerful. And for this reason the laboring classes seldom have access to its bar only as they come as defendants on unequal terms with the wealthy. Hence the tendency of Federal Court proceedings in such cases is to bring on a fulfilment of the prophecy of James 5. Still another significant characteristic of the U. S. Courts is the one point in which the State laws are held in high esteem. It is well known that State Legislatures are not, as is Congress, forbidden by the Federal Constitution to pass laws establishing religion; so when an individual is prosecuted in a State for exercising his constitutional and religious right to do honest labor on the first day of the week, the Federal Court affords him no protection, because it will not interfere with the State law and decision of the State Court. Yet we have seen that, in other respects, State law and State Courts are both ignored. So it is manifest that the effect of Federal Court rulings (the so-called "highest authority") is to cater to the power of wealth and to set up a system of religious doctrine recognized by the government. Yet to protest against such tendency, either from a political, industrial, or religious standpoint, is more and more coming to be classed as anarchy. W. N. G.