Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1903-02-07
SHOULD LABOR UNIONS
BE INCORPORATED?


ly made that the United Mine Work
ers should become an incorporated
body. New prominence has also been
given TO the whole subject of trade
union responsibility by discussion of
the Taft Vale decision in England the
chief points of which are set forth in
the Review of Reviews by Mr.. A. Maur-
ice Low.
Looking at the matter from the point
of view of one who believes thoroughly
in the value of labor unions and APP
preciates their services to the COM
munity, Mr.. Louis ID. Brandeis gives
in the Green Bag for January certain
reasons which seem to show the ad-
visibility of incorporating the unions
for their own good as we'll as for the
public interest.
Taft Vale Principle Not New.
AS to the responsibility of the unions
for illegal acts, under our present laws,
Mr. Brandeis says:
When. in the course of a strike, il
of violence or of undue oppression.
the individual committing the wrong is,
of course, legally liable. If the act is
a crime. the perpetrator may be arrest
ed and punished IL it is mere tres
pass. he may be made to pay damages,
If he is financially responsible: and II
money damages appear not to be an
adequate remedy, and injunction
against the wrongful acts may be
granted by court of equity. If the
is disobeyed, the defendant
may be imprisoned for contempt.
Now, it seems to be a common be-
lief in this country that while the IN
dividual may be thus proceeded
against in any of these ways, the la
Dor union, as such, being unincorpor-
ated-that is, being mere voluntary
association-cannot be made legally
responsible for It's acts.
THE rules of law established by the
courts of this country afford, 1T Is
true, no justification for this opinion.
A union. altho voluntary unincorpor-
ated association, is legally responsible
for it's acts in much the same way that
an individual, partnership, or a
is responsible. II union,
thru its constituted agents. commits
q wrong or is guilty of violence or OF
illegal oppression, the union, and not
the individuals who are the d.
rect instruments of the wrong. can be
enjoined or made liable for damages
to the same extent that the union could
be II it were incorporated; and the
funds belonging to the unincorporated
union can be reached to satisfy any
damages which might be recovered for
the wrong done The Taft Vale Rail-
way case, decided last year in Eng
land. in which it was held that the
Society of Railway Ser
wants could, as union, be enjoined
and be made liable in damages fol
wrongs perpetrated in the course of i
strike, created CONSERVATION among
labor unions there. but 1t laid down
no principle of law new to this coun
try"
Practical, But Not Legal. Immunity.
Labor unions have often been en-
joined by the courts in this country
and in Massachusetts. more than thir-
ty years ago, an action was maintained
against union for wrongfully extort-
ing from ar employer penalty fo:
having used the product of "scab'
labor. The rules of legal liability APP
ply to the unions. whether incoi-
rorated or not; but, as a matter Of fact,
it is more difficult for the plaintiff to
conduct an unincorporated association
and it is especially difficult to reach the
funds of union in order to satisfy any
Judgment that may be recovered. The
unions as such. therefore, enjoy a prac-
teal immunity for wrongs committed
SO far from regarding this immunity
as an advantage to the unions, MIR.
Brandeis looks upon 1t as positive
ut tends to make officers and mem
bers reckless and lawless, and Thereby
to ALLEVIATE public sympathy and bring
failure upon their efforts. 1t creates,
on the part of the employers, also. a
bitter antagonism, not so much on ac-
count of lawless acts as from deep
rooted sense of injustice, arising from
the feeling that while the employer is
subject to law, the union holds uosi-
ton of legal irresponsibility.
This practical immunity of the labor
unions from suit or legal liability IS, In
my opinion. largely responsible for the
existence of the greatest grievances
which labor unions consider they
have suffered at the haEds of the courts
that is, the so-called government by
1t has come about In this
way: An &C. believed to be illegal Is
during a strike. III that act
IS q crime, a man may be arrested,
hut in no cass can he be convicted OF a
crime except on proof beyond a reason
able doubt and verdict of the jury,
which liz apt 10 contain some members
favorable to the defendant Many acts.
however, may be Illegal which are not
criminal, and for these the only remedy
at law is civil action TO- damages
but as the defendant is usually fnancl-
ally irresponsible. such action would
afford TO remedy.
1.-THE courts. therefore. finding acts
or threatened for which the
guilty parties can not be punished as
for a crime, and can not be made to pay
damages, by way of compensation. have
been induced to apply freely, perhaps
too freely, the writ of injunction. Ihey
have granted, in many instances, tins
writ according to the practices OF the
court of equity upon preliminary appn-
cation, wholly eX parte, and upon ann
dayits, without any chance OF cross
II the courts had been
dealing with a responsible union In
stead of irresponsible defendants, they
would doubtless, in many of the cases,
have refused to interfere by injunction
and have resolved any doubts for de-
PENDANTS instead of plaintlfrs.
Advantage of Jury Trials.
"In another respect, also, this pracu-
cal immunity of the unions has been
very dearly bought. Nearly every large