Waterbury evening Democrat., 1904-06-09
RORABACk'S
DECISION
COnCering Danbury
Hat Case.
The Defendants Win in
Several Important Points
PARAGRAPH Which Said
Union Men We're Trying
to Force Manufacturers
Was Stricken Out.

Bridgeport, June 9.-In an import
ant decision just handed down by
Judge Albert Il. Roraback on the de-
fendants' motion for correction of the
complaint in the suit of ID. Loewe &,
Co, against Martin Lawlor and others,
the defendants secure approval of
their motion in several important par
ticulars. The motion to expunge
parts of the complaint is granted only
in degree. The motions to correct
or to make more specific Is successful
and counsel for the plaintiffs Is given
two weeks in which to file his amend
ed complaint.
Judge Rorabacl's decision covers
motions which have recently been ar
gued at short calendar session Of the
superior court in this city. The de-
PENDANTS asked that paragraph one of
the complaint. which recited the Of
fetal position of the men sued, their
connection with the labor unions in
volyed and the Loewe suit be strick-
EN- out This Is denied. The court
grants the motion to expunge para
graph four, which presents no issu-
able fact, merely stating that the pol
icy Of the company In running it's
own business, hiring whom it pleased
and its intention to continue to do so.
The court denied the motion to
strike out those paragraphs In the
complaint from the ninth to the
eighteenth inclusive. Judge Rord-
back says: These paragraphs contain
statements of fact showing the nature,
extent and magnitude of the alleged
conspiracy and also the means and
methods of infiicting the alleged in
jury and the damage resulting there
from"
The court permits to be struck out,
the following statement in paragraph
13 of the complaint that "the Ameri-
can Federationist was used to injure
two hat manufacturing concerns, 9th
er than the plaintiff. .
Paragraph is stating that the de-
PENDANTS and others are engaged In a
scheme to force hat manufacturers to
recognize union labor against their
will lis practically stricken out by the
comment of Judge Roraback: ''At this
time the court cannot approve of alle-
cations which are at the utmost evi-
dential."
Another reference is made to other
hat manufacturers in paragraph 19
and Judge Roraback strikes it out as
he does all reference to other hat man
ufacturing concerns. Judge Roraback
says:
1T ought to be more specifically
stated what threats and coercion
were used, as alleged in paragraph
20. He adds: Labor unions. like
individuals, have the right to accom-
plish their objects by all methods not
condemned by laws. Allegations and
threats of coercion are mere conclu-
sion on law which should be made
more specific by stating the facts upon
which these ayerments are based that
it may appear whether or not the de
PENDANTS acted within their legal
rights When the complaint is cor
reeted in this particular it will show
just what is intended to be alleged by
the word boycott. 1t should be stat.
ed more specifically what orders the
plaintiffs were prevented from filling
then on hand as alleged in paragraph
21 of the complaint The first and
second counts of the complaint should
be corrected as hereinbefore sci
forth"