The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1903-10-26
UNIONS LIABLE To DAMAGES
Indiana Decision N In Rrspensiblli,, f.-
the Z se Of the Uoyc1tt

INDIANAPOLIS, Oct q The fact thai
lat o. union ~ not incorporated doe, tot
necessarily prevent jury from hodnr
responsible for injuries to Il third pa,
when the mi lries complained of are A..
result Of an act for which the union as l.
i'.sociation of indiv iduals is Responsible.
for tie law will assume that an inuu.
act, coming as direct result of resolutIur
rule or settled policy Of an organiSatI.r
must be compensated for by the body from
whose resolution, rule or settled policy p
results
This, IN substance, Il the ruling Of sc
Gibson Circuit Court in a case involving
the question %! responsibility of Iabur
union for injuries resulting from IA boycott,
established against "A contractor, for which
he sought TO recover damages He had been
an employer of union labor, but had Resisted
the demands of the union and whenhl,
employees refused to work for him he hired
non-union men A resolution was adopted
by the union placing him on the unfair
list
Dealers were threa tened with a boycott II
they sold him ma terials and he was forced
TO buy in distant markets. Pickets we're
placed about his shops. his men were har-
rassed and his patrons were subject Ia
constant annoyance.
Under the ruling Of the court on the re-
spohsbility Of the union which had ordered
the boycott. the jury found for the plaintif
but the verdict was a compromise 30 far 40
the questions Of fact were concerned
The case will doubtless 90 to the Supreme
Court of the State for further adjudication
and II the ruling ia sustained the principle
will be fixed in Indiana at least that failure
to incorporate does not relieve the union
from responsibility for injuries growing
out Of its acts.
! Some of the best lawyers OF the State sav
that the decision is fraught with mportan,
consequences to laboring men and EN-
ployers. and that it's affirmation by the
Supreme Court, which they confidently
expect, will he the death OF the boycott III
Indiana.
! They say in respect to the present case
! that the court will issue an order for the
assessment of each member Of the union
when the final decree is entered, and that
il the officers should refuse to levy the
assessment or the members refuse to paw
it, they would be in contempt and could
be. sent to Jail.
The union which was sued in the Gibson
Circuit Court, and against which damages
were awarded, is local OF the Brother
hood Of Carpenters and Joiners Of America
and the parent body will doubtless make
a determined fight in the Supreme Court.
Already the decision is bearing fruit in
suits against unions in other counties Of
the State. One of the most important
was instituted in this city last week agains,
the International Plasterers' Association
asking for $4,000 damages. The suit
was brought by Glenn Bros. a firm Of
contracting plasterers, who allege that
they we're employers Of union labor up
to August. 1902. At that time the union
held a meeting and imposed a fine Of $eoo
against the firm. The Glenns refused to
pay it, Their men went on strike and a
boycott followed their employment Of non
union labor.