Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1893-03-27

The Judges OF the United States Cir
cult Courts, whenever the question has
come under their jurisdiction, appear
to be rendering decisions adverse to the
power Of labor unions, workingmen's
councils or trades assemblies TO order
boycotts, or the enforcement Of the rule
that none but union men be employed.
Immediately following the decisions Of
Judges TAFT and KICKS, in the Toledo
boycott case, comes the decision Of
Judge BILLINGS, Of the United States
Circuit Court, at New Orleans, rendered
last Saturday. It also. as we under
stand It, grows out of an alleged viola
ton Of one Of the provisions Of the in
ter-State commerce statute.
This proceedings grew cut Of strike
in that city last fall, being the United
States against the Workingmen's Anal
gamated Council Of New Orleans and
other labor organizations. Before the
suit was closed the strike ended, but
the Judge holds that he ought TO pass
upon the questions involved. The
opinion is very elaborate, and is in
tended to cover the rights Of labor
unions. 1t is so sweeping in its char
acter that we look upon it as more rad
ical and OF greater importance TO both
employer aud employee than the re-
cent decisions at Toledo.
While recognizing that the labor or
CARNATIONS, against which the suit was
decided. were originally innocent and
lawful in their purposes, the Judge
says that this does not affect unlawful
combinations made by them. On the
issue raised that a combination to Sc
cure or to compel the employment Of
none but union men Is not question OF
commerce, the Judge said:
The case is this: The combination set
ting out 10 secure and compel the employ
ment of none but union men ia given
business as q means 70 effect the compul-
sion. finally enforced q discontinuance OF
labor in all kinds Of business, including
the business Of transportation Of goods aud
merchandise which were in transfer
through the city Of New Orleans from
State 10 State and 20 and from foreign
countries. When the case is thus stated
and 10 must be so stated, to everybody tue
facts here proved do not thiRk there
can be any question but that such a COM
bination was in restraint Of commerce.
''ln some branches of business the effect
was 10 replace the union men by other
wOrkmen. This was resisted 0y intlmida-
tion from vast thTOngs Of union men as
sembling in the streets, and in some IN
stances by violence. The result was that
by the dOings Of these defendants not a
bale of goods, constituting the commerce
Of the country, could be moved.
''rhe question is: DO these facts eStao-
lish a case within the statute! 1t seems
20 me this question is tantamOunt 10 the
question: Gould there be case under
the statutep III is conceded that the labor
organizations were at the outset lawful,
but when lawful forces are put into I'M
lawful channels, that is, when lawful asso-
Citations take on unlawful purposes and do
unlawful acts, the associations themselves
become unlawful. The evil as well as the
unlawfulness of the act Of the defendants
consists in this, that until certain demands
of theirs were complied with they sought
TO prevent and did prevent everybody from
moving the commerce of the city.
at was the successful effort of the COM
bination of the defendants TO intimidate
and Overawe others who were at work in
conducting or carrying on the commerce Of
the country ia which the Court finds their
error and their violation of the statute.
For these reasons L think the injunction
should issue"