Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1903-07-03
TEST BOYCOTT LAW
State of Texas Brings Suit
Against Labor Unions us
Test Case.
FIRST OF THE KIND KNOWN


State Law to Boycott of Building
Put Up by Firm Employing Nom
Union Men-Other Interesting News
Items.
San Antonio, Tex, July 3.-The state
of Texas has brought suit against labor
charging them with violation
of the antitrust laws in instituting a
boycott against building put up by a
firm which employed nonunion men,
The section Of the antitrust law.
under which the suit is brought is as
Where any two or more persons,
firms, corporations, or associations of
persons shall agree to boycott, or
threaten to refuse to buy FROM, or sell
to, any person, firm. corporation or as
ISOLATION of persons. for buying from
or selling to other persons, firm, corpor-
alton, or association, of persons
The punishment for violation of this
law is penalty of $50 per day for the
duration of the offense, or imprson
ment for one year in the penitentiary.
This is believed to be the first time
in the history of the country that q
state government has brought such a
suit against labor union. 1t is in
tended that the suit shall be taken to
the supreme court with as little de-
lay as possible, SO that this application
of the antitrust law may be decided
the defendant unions have ordered the
boycott suspended in order that an in
junction may be avaolded.
The state is represented by Attorney
General C. X. Bell and District Attor-
ney Carlos Bee, and the suit is brought
in the district court against Paul Stef-
tier, acting president of the San An
tonic trades council; Walton Peteet,
acting secretary of the same body;
Frank Vanriper, vice president of Elec-
trical Workers union, No. 60, the In
ternational Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers: L. Stanley, secretary OF the
union; j. p. Broderick and John
Thompson, together with other persons,
members thereof, for $4,000 penalties.
The boycott was brought against the
new Herff building at the corner of
Commerce and Alamo streets, and was
the result of Ferdinand Herff, ST., the
owner of the building, giving the cleo
trical work to A. II. Schafer, who has
been on the unfair" list of the union.
on account of the severity of the
the attorney general and
district attorney decided that 1t would
be better not to proceed by Indictment.
owing to the difficulty OF obtaining
a conviction, especially as the inn
portant result, the test of the validity
of the law, would be effected by civil
The remedy has usually
been by Injunction. at the instance of
the aggrieved individual.
The petition also prays for an in
junction restraining the defendants
from further interference with the
rights of Ferdinand Herff Sr., owner OF
the boycottsd building, and from fur
Their conspiracies against the citizens
of the state of Texas. but this is not
necessary, owing to the action of the
defendant unions.
Details of Boycott.
The petition represents that on June
IL, 1908, the defendants named, both
in their official and individual capaci-
ties, and acting respectively for the
San Antonio Trade council and local
union No. so, International Brother
hood of Electrical Workers, and with
other persons unknown, members of the
trade council and electrical workers
union, entered into an agreement and
with each whereby they
agreed to boycott and refuse to buy
from or trade with or patronize any
firm. corporation, or association of per
sons who rented or occupied any por-
ton of the building at the corner of
Commerce and Alamo streets, owned
by Ferdinand Herff Sr., and known as
the Herff building. Their reason as
stated is that A. Schafer, the plumber
and electrical contractor, had done all
the plumbing and electrical work on the
Herff building and furnished and sold
the supplies for 1t, and because Schafer
did not employ in the work, men who
We're members Of local union No. 60,
Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers, and who We're by reason of
in said union affiliated
with the San Antonio trades council
A further reason is alleged to be be-
cause Ferdinand Herff ST., had given
the contract for the electrical and
plumbing work on the building to Scha-
fer without inviting bids from other
contractors.
1t is charged that circular letter
was issued by Paul Steffer, acting
as president of the San Antonio Trade
council, and by Frank Van Ripper as
president and l.. Stanley, as secretary
Of the local union, No. 60, which was
a warning to parties then in negotia-
ton for leases in the Herff building
not to have anything to do with the
under penalty of being boy
cotted themselves The petition states
that in consequence the owner is unable
to rent the building or any portion of
1t, and since the sending out of the cir
cular letter has had no applicants to
rent.
Judgment is prayed for against Stef-
fer, Peteet. Van Ripper, Stanley, Thorn
son, and Broderick in the sum of $50
per day for every day from June H.
1903, to the present time. amounting