The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1899-11-27


Sun for an injunction
from court restraining number of
labor leaders from Q) advising or re-.
questing advertising customers to de-
sist or refrain from advertising in the
Sun and (2) from resorting to any spe-
cies of threats, intimidation, force or
fraud for such purposes, or procuring
other persons so to do, and from pre-
venting or attempting to prevent news
dealers from selling the Sun; (3) from
making any requests, giving any ad-
vice or resorting to any species of per-
suasion, threats, intimidation, force
or fraud to bring about such result;
from "picketing" the establishment of
the plaintiff or any of it's branch offices
and by request, advice, persuasion, in
timidation threat, force, fraud or de-
famatory publications, inducing its en-
poyes to quit the employment Of the
plaintiff; and az from, in any other
manner or by any other means, inter-
fering with the Suns property, prop
erty rights or business.
On Friday of last week Justice Book
staver in special term of the Supreme
court of New York city rendered his
| decision upon this application, and 1t Is
an interesting one. The facts of the
! boycott against the Sun do not need
| to be reviewed; the law, as now inter-
preted, is as follows:: "The rule ap-
plicable to such a situation is that per-
sons can lawfully combine and make
effort to benefit themselves to any ex-
| tent, so long as they do not by force,
| threats, intimidation or fraud seek to
hurt others in order to so benefit them
selves. At that point their acts become
unlawful and it matters not that such
| injury does not consist in taking away
| anything which another possesses, but
only in interfering in such a way that
he shall not receive benefit, such as
patronage advertising and sale of
papers in this case), employment or
other advantages that might be re-
ceived but for such interference"
The court complimented the defend
ants for their intelligence, capability
and self-possession and expressly de-
clined to pass judgment as to where
the chief blame rested for the trouble
between the Sun and the union print
ers; but it Immediately added: Let IT
be assumed, for the purposes of this
argument, that the plaintiff was in
fault, was arbitrary and unconcill-
atory; and that the defendants have
just ground for complaint and that
their acts have been only such al
human nature is prone to, under thu
provocation I have assumed to exist
Concede also, what is undoubtedly tn,
case, that they have not carried or
their contest, as is too often done under
similar circumstances by ignorant men
In blind spirit OF resentment, seeking
only to injure the plaintiff, regardles!
OF whether they would be thereby bene.
fted or not; but that they have, oil
the contrary directed their efforts II
most rational and skilful manner L
. proving their organizations dangerou
, antagonists and have thus insured thei
own ultimate benefit by rendering i
, easier In future to maintain rates AM
, to secure other advantages for thei
. members, Notwithstanding all this, tn
) fact remains that the law does not per
r nit such warfare by such method
, whatever the provocation, unless, In
' deed, the complaining party has em
A ployed against the defendants the sam
q methods complained Of But that
I not the case here, There
a some uncertainty, upon the aftidaviti
: as to how far the defendants arc re