The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1902-12-21
VICTORY FOR FREE LABOR.
ENGLISH COURTS CHECK on
UNION INTIMIDATION.
Verdict Secured by the Tan vale Railway
Company for Damage Because OF
Strike Causes Rejoicing In Indus
thai C1rcles-l MON Must Pay 90 900
Special cabis Despdteh TO tbs SUN.

thai C1rcies-l MON Must Pay 81 20 900
Special Cable Despatch to THs sun.
LONDON. Dec. 20.-Yesterday's verdict
against the Amalg amated Society Of Rail-
way Servants for conspiracy In ordering
. strike against the Taft Vale Railway
Company 10 August. 1900. is welcomed
by everybody except trade union dema-
gogues as the most important victory for
free labor and industrial progress In many
yeSrs. II has changed the whole indus
trial situation Of Great Britain. The de-
PENDANT society, with it's war chest OF $780,
900 invested In bonds. lie deprived Of its
power OF inducing workmen to break their
contracts and coercing non-union men
by its iniquitous ticket system.
Amid the universal comment upon the
decision the prevailing note is one OF re-
joicing that the greatest tyranny known
10 modern society has been broken. The
trade union demagogues are naturally
disheartened. II they thought at first
20 carry the issue into politics and over
throw the happy results Of the long It'll
CATION, the dominant voice OF public senti-
ment throughout the land to-day will
probably teach them the folly OF such an
attempt.
The Tai Vale railway ST. ike began sud-
denly at midnight on Aug. 10. 1900. when
more than 1900 men quit work. More
than 500 had not received notice to end
their contracts. The company asserted
that the Ralwa y Mems Union maintained
the strike by intimidation and picketing.
and that the union officials induced the
workmen to break their contracts. The
Jury yesterday, without leaving the box.
returned a verdict for the plaintiffs. who
will collect 81 900 from the Railway Men
Union.
In the earlier stages OF this important
labor litigation the argument centred on
the question whether union could sue
or be sued. The legal members Of the
House of Lords, sitting as a final court Of
appeal. decided: "A labor union can sue
for wrongs committed. for or against 1t, '
as il it we're a corporate body.
The railway company then proceeded
10 try the facts of their case against the
officials Of the union in an action in the
Kings Bench Division of the High Court
Of Justice before a jury. AS the appeal
courts reverse decisions on questions OF
Law. but scarcely ever on questions OF fact.
Il is expected that the Railv ay Mems Union
will abide by the result and pay the money.
The two principal defendants were Richard
Bell, NJ p, General Secretary. and James
Holmes, organizing secretary Of the ANAL
gsmated Society of Railway Servants.
The facts which the jury found to be
proved as to the conspiracy TO modest and
irju the plaintiffs in their business in
cuued pcketing and arrangements for pay
ing money to induce men who had been
hired by the company TO withdraw without
performing their contracts. There were
several cases Of assault on non-strikers,
who were called "black legs" 'the scum
Of he'll and 'diabolical humbugs and
scabs."
The union officials commended that they
we're not liable for acts OF violence which
they had not ordered. The jury refused
20 take that view Of the case. ard. keeping
IN mind the natural consequences OF the
conduct Of the officials, held that they
had assisted in carrying out the strike by
unlawful means.
Yesterdays verdict Is regarded as the
clearest statement Of the limits beyond
which trade unonism must not go since
the famous case Of Allen vs. Flood, when
the final court Of appeal held 'to induce a
person net to enter into a contract with
another though such inducement is offered
with malicious intent. does not constitute
an actionable wrong. II Is actionable to
procure breach of an visiting contract. v