Strike Violence: the Need for Federal Injunctions
University of Pennsylvania Law Review FOUNDED 1852 Formerly American Law Register VOL. 114 FEBRUARY 1966 No. 4 STRIKE VIOLENCE: THE NEED FOR FEDERAL INJUNCTIONS FRANK H. STEWART f & ROBERT J. TowNsED * No country has a good code of laws. The reason for this is evident: the laws have been made according to the time, the place [and] the need. When the needs have changed, the laws which have remained have become ridiculous. Thus the law which forbade the eating of pig and the drinking of wine was very reasonable in Arabia, where pig and wine are injurious. But it is absurd at Constantinople. Voltaire, Laws, from the Philisophical Dictionary An assault is an assault and a battery is a battery. In every jurisdiction in the United States these common-law torts are actionable, civilly and criminally. One is not privileged to strike the landlord, the policeman, or the professor except in self defense. If one disagrees with an opponent he should seek legal redress-except in labor disputes. The mystique of labor law is that strike violence is an aberration so strange and perplexing that ordinary standards of assault and battery simply will not do. The theory seems to be that, since violence is a traditional part of labor disputes, tradition sanctions its use. This tA.B., Harvard, 1952; LL.B., Virginia, 1957. Associate, Taft, Stettinius & Hollister, Cincinnati. * B.A., Michigan State, 1960; LL.B., Harvard, 1963. Associate, Taft, Stettinius & Hollister, Cincinnati. We thank J. Mack Swigert W. Bruce Baird, W. K. Engeman, and H. F. McCann for their patience in reading this manuscript and for their helpful suggestions.
[Show full text]