Kansas agitator. [volume] (Garnett, Kan.) 1890-1905, 1898-07-15

At Washington, D. c., several indict-
ments have been found against GER
tain officials of labor organizations, the
trials under which may result in de-
termining what restraint, If any, is i'm
posed upon labor organizations by the
act of congress Of July 2, 1890, entitled
"An act to protect trade and commerce
against unlawful restraint and mon
opoly," commonly known as the anti
trust law.
The law was primarily erected for
the purpose Of preventing abuses that
had arisen in the conduct Of trans
portation and manufacturing enter
prises where great sums of money are
invested. About year ago United
States court had occasion to interpret
some sections of this law, and from
the points made in the argument before
the court, 1t was inferred by many per-
sons that the law was equally as APP
plicable to prevent and punish some
acts labor organizations were more
or less accustomed to do, as it was to
restrain syndicates and other aggrega-
lions of great wealth. This point will
now be tested. The circumstances of
the Washington case are as follows:
Some time ago Mr. Charles c. Walter
took contract to make five wagons
for the Times, Washington newspa-
per. 1t was stipulated that he was to
employ only union labor. Instead of
doing so, 1t is charged by the Knights
of Labor, he sent to the Keystone Wag-
on Company, Reading, Pa, and there
had them made by non-union labor.
Further, 1t is charged, they were
brought, to Washington under cover
and secretly placed in carriage re-
pository on Pennsylvania avenue. Lat
er they were delivered to the Times,
and the newspaper, on the protest of
the Carriage Makers assembly, refused
to accept the wagons. The matter was
referred to an arbitration board, which
decided that the carriage makers had
no case against the Times, but that the
real grievance was against the Walters
Company. Thereupon the carriage
makers recommended that Mr.. Walters
be placed on the unfair list. The Dis
trict assembly then gave Mr. Walters
chance to explain before the district
executive board, and he appeared and
said that II he had violated union prin-
ciples he had done it innocently. He
was placed on the unfair list. Then let
tiers were sent to merchants, supposed
to be friendly to organized labor, ask
| ing them to withhold their patronage
from Mr.. Walters until the grievance
was settled. Explanations to them
| were made, and some agreed to boycott
him. Mr.. Walters took the matter to
| the district attorney and he laid 1t be-
fore the grand jury, with the result
that the most prominent of the execu-
tive board, Knights of Labor, Of the
District of Columbia, were placed under
arrest, charged with violation Of the
| law above referred to. The defendants
gave bail, and the trial will occur in
| October. 1t promises to be celebrat-
| ed case in labor annals, as the indict-
ment in substance accuses them of
Conspiracy" The antitrust law was
chosen to cover the case, as it is be-
| lieved to be wider in application and
scope than the common law of con-
spiracy. The antitrust law is very
drastic in some of its provisions and
/ II II shall be determined that it Is ap-
plicable to cases such as this one, it
will go far to make boycott" as that
: 80. u ,,4f,cor;1x, underatood an inn