The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1904-12-18

unfair list me crlm1naIty they
say, consists in the intent or purpose
with which these things are done
this they say Is a question for the jury
when the defendants admit the pur-
pose. etc. If that which they did is
lawful--if they had a perfect legal
right 10 do tive are unable to per-
Ceive how The publications renders it
unlawful. We are not aware of any
principle of law which makes It Grim
NAL tc publish that a person has done
an act which he had a perfect legal
right TO door that a person intends
to pursue q course of conduct which
he has a legal right to pursue Judge
Holmes says: AS a general rule. even
if subject to some exceptions, what
YOU may do in a certain event YOU
may threaten to do, that is, giving
warning of your intention To do IN
that event and thus allow the other
person The chance of avoiding the con-
sequences, so as to 'compllsion it de-
ponds upon how you compel Par
ker. c. j., in Nat. Protec. Ap. VS.. Cum
ming, 10 y. Y. 315 says A labor
organization is endowed with precise
ly the same legal right as an indi-
vidual to threaten to do that which
| it may lawfully do If an net be
| lawful, that is. one which a person
| has legal right to do-the fact that
| he may in doing it be actuated by an
| improper motive does not render 1t
| unlawful Bohm manfg. Co. VS.. Hol-
us, supra. 1t being properly conced-
| ed that it was not unlawful, that is for
the purpose of this discussion, Grim
| nal, for the defendants to declare Mr..
| Nlte 'unfair'-and 10 refuse to work
! his material, we can find nothing
| criminal in the publication made Of
| their opinion or purpose. Does the
| fact that the defendants intended to
| nduce persons who might otherwise
l purchase material from Mr.. Rice to
refrain from doing so make their con-
| duct unlawful? This brings us back
TO the original question. Persons who
| might wish to buy material from Mr..
| Rice had nc legal claim on the SER
| vices of the defendants--they were
under no obligation to work the ma
terial purchased from him-therefore
| in saying that they would not do so
they deprived such persons of no legal
right. If they could not have maintain
ed an action for damages against the
| defendants for refusing to work such
material or for saying so, how then.
II legal sense, can he be said To be
| injured. Ii is said that the purpose
| In making the publication was 10 in
| duce persons to refrain from purchas-
/ ing material for fear of mourning the
| IL will of the defendants. This GER
| tainly is not unlawful Bowen VS..
| hapman, So Mass. 499. If courts
| veer to maintain actions upon these
grounds society would soon be COM
1 yerted into an array of hostile liti-
| grants. AS is well said by Judge Black
| Jenkins VS.. Fowler, "a Penn. sos:
| Malicious motives make a bad act
| worse but they cannot make that
/ wrong which in its own essence is law
/ ul any transaction which
| would be lawful and proper If the
| parties are friends, can not be made
| The foundation of an action merely be-
| cause they happen to be enemies AS
| long as q man keeps himself within
| The law by doing no act which violates
t. we must leave his motive TO Him
/ who. searches. the. heart
| citing Haywood VS.. Tillson, rs Me-,
| 225; Cooley on Torts, 65; Cotterell VS..
! lanes. rs f. c. L. 713. Hunt VS.. Sim
onds, 10 Mo- $50. The case of Payne
| KS. w. & A. X. r., 3 Lea /, 49 AM.
Rep 666 illustrst ties the Principe as
| seen from the other view point The
tgent of the railroad caused TO be
posted by The yard master a notice liz
these words: ANY employee in this
company on Chattanooga payroll
who trades with l.. Payne from this
date will be discharged. Notify men
| iii your department. The plaintiff al
eyed that he was q merchant having
others That the act of the defend
mt was malicious, etc. The defend
ant demurred. The court sustained
/ the demurrer, in an able opinion,
holding that rs the act was not un-
| awful The motive with which 1t was
| dCne did not give a cause Of action.
| The Judge said that any other doctrine
| would lead to evils innumeraele 1T
would be increditable that cur courts
of law should be perverted to the trial
/ of the n1tives Of men who confessedly
| had done 40 unlawful act 1t is sug-
| 2estive of the days of constructive
| treason Phelps VS.. Nowlen, ~ N. Y.
50. In Richardson KS. r, r. 126 n. G.
| 100, Clark. j. says: But upon the
plaintiffs own showing his discharge
was within The right Of the defendant,
and not wrongful and malice discon-
Inected with the infringement of a le-
gal right can not be the subject Of an
| action. The principle is well stated
| by Bowen i. ]. jim Mogul Steamship
l CO. VS.. McGregor % @. B. j.. 612: We
were invited by plaintiffs conrgel to
accept the position from which their
arguments started-that an action
will lie if a man maliciously and
wrongfuliy conducts himself SO rs to
| ujure another in that others trade.
| nbscurity resides in the language used
to state this proposition. The term
1 DldIlClOUSIy, WTOnRLully, luIufc
are words all of which have
accurate meanings, we'll known
70 the law. but which also have
popular and less precise sterilization
| into which it is necessary to see that
| the argument does not slide. An in
| tent to injure' i'm strictness means
more than an intent to harm. 1t con-
notes an intent to do wrongful harm.
| 'Maliciously' in like manner, means
and implies an intention to do an act
which is wrongful to the detriment of
another. The term wrongful imports
| in it's term the infringement OF some
right The question as applied to a
disturbance of relations between an
employer and employed. underwent 4
rlost exhaustive examinations in Allen
VS. Flood, i. r. A. &. /, in which the
| conclusion was reached that IAN act
| lawful in itself is not converted by
| a malicious or bad motive into an un-
| lawful act so as to make the door
| liable" In the latter case of Quinn vs.
Leathem, L. r. A. c. (1901) the same
question. with some modifying facts
was discussed. The reporter says.
| "Allen VS. Flood explained and its real
| effect stated" An interesting discus
| sion may be found i'm the law Quar-
| Rev. January 1904.
1 XEifIo,,+ ,,-dat-t a