The sun., 1893-03-26
GENERAL STRIKES ILLEGAL
IF IN ANY TAY THEY RESTRAIN I'M
FREEDOM OF COMMERCE.

An Important Decision By = Scuthesu Jssgs
on the Complete stoppase OF Bssfsess =
New Orleans last November-Drsynep
and Others Engaged In T~.nsrortstssa
May Not strike. Under This Decisios.
NEW ORLEANS. March 25.-In the UnitsA
States Circuit Court to-day Judge Z. q Billings.
in very elaborate opinion. rendered his
decision in the proceedings brought By the
United States against tho Workinemen's
Amalgam nted Council OF New Orleans and tho
various labor organizations which were en-
gagged In the big strike last November. This
suit was brought during the strike Before II
was argued the strlko ended. The decision
contains full discussion Of the rights OF labor
| unions. ~
Tho Judge holds that he ought to pass on
the questions involved. although the strife
ended four months ago. While recognizing
that the labor organizations against which the
suit was decided were originally innocent and
lawful in their purposes. tho Judge says that
this does not affect unlawful combinations
made by them. On the issue raised that
combination to secure or compel the employ
inent OF mono bur union m men Is not q question
OF commerce. the Judge said: 1t
THE case is this: the combination setting
| out to secure and compel tho employment of
none but union men in given business a. .
forced dlscontinuance OF labor In all kinds Of
business. including tho business OF tranepor.
tatlon OF goods and merchandise which were
in transit through tho city Of New Orleans
from State TO State. and to and from foreign
countries When the cnee Is thus stated. and
1t must be 30 stated to embody tho facts here
proved. do not think there can be any question
but that such q combination was In restraint
OF commerce. A difference has sprung UP boz
tha ahp,,a ople ehatr r,1pv
and draymen and thoir subordinates. organ
lied with the view and purpose to compel an
| acquieacence on the part OF tho employers In
the demands OF the en- ployed 1t was finally
brought about by the employed that all the
union men. that is. MI the members Of tho
various labor associations. were clothed By
their officers with authority under the vnrlous
charters to discontinue business. and one Of
these kinds Of business was transporting
goods which were being conveyed from State
to State. or to and from foreign countries. In
some branches Of business the effect was to re-
plac the union men By other workmon. This
was resisted by intimidation from vast
throngs OF union men assembling In the
streets and in some instances. by violence
The result was that. by the doinRs ofthese de-
PENDANTS. not q bale OF goods constituting the
commerce OF the country could be moved.
" The question Is. Do these facts establish
u
this question is tantamount to the question.
Gould there be a case under the statuteT It
as ths sSSr Mss
are put into unlawful channels. I; q. whom
lawful associations take on unlswful purposes
and do unlawful acts the associations them.
the unIaviaIHess o. the act Of the defendant
consists In this. that until certain demands Of
theirs were com piled with they sought to pre-.
vent. and did prevent, erybody from moving
the commerce Of the city ltwasthe successnl
to intImidate and overawe others who were 81
work in conducting or carrying on the COM
merce Of the country In which the Cenrt hnds
their error and their violation Of the statnte.
One OF the intended results Of their combined
action was the forced stagnation Of ell the cone
intent and combined action are none the less
unlawfu! because they included In their scope
the paralysis OF all other business within the
city AS we'll
For these reasons think tho Injunction
should issue"
tiop against the defendants would probably
lie. but II j. NOT yet known whether the United
States authorities will proceed further against
the alleged labor leaders.