Daily Arizona silver belt., 1907-08-27

Dor, which contains the name of the
 Don t Patronize'' or ''Unfair' list, or
 which contains any statement that the
 plaintf is or has been unfair; from
 publishing or circulating in any way in pursuance of the alleged conspiracy, in writing or orally, any statement to the injury of the product of the plaintiff or dealers or public that the plaintiff s factory has been boycotted, and that it's goods should not be dealt in, or for the purpose of eoercing any dealer or person not to purchase the plaintiff s products from threatening or intimidat- ing the customers of the plaintiff or from doing any acts in aid of the con spiracy or combination alleged; from giving any orders or directions to com mittees, associations, officers, agents or others for the performance of any acts or threats which would impede, obstruct or interfere with the conduct of the plaintiff s business; from carrying on the alleged conspiracy to restrain and prevent the plaintiff from conducting his proper business in any other states or territories of the Union, and from doing any acts or using any of the means in the complaint for that pur- pose.
 Other Boycotts Recalled
 The complaint then goes on to de- clare that the American Federation of Labor has repeatedly declared boycotts against the business and product of the customers of numerous individuals and concerns, and has actively prosecuted them by using its combined power for that purpose, to wage destructive at tacks upon any person or business ''un- der its ban, - and that the power is now being directed malieiously against the business of the plaintiff.
 The steps leading up to this action are set forth in the complaint to be the outcome of strike. According to the complaint, August go, 1906, without previous notice, the members of the Metal Polishers Union, No. l3, of St. Louis, in the employ of the stove com pany, struck in body, and without nos tico to or conference with the company, or waiting for an adjustment of griev ances, which is set forth to have been in violation of an agreement between the International Union of Metal Pol ishers and the Stove Founders National Defense association, of which the Bucks is member, and under which all differences have for fourteen years been successfully adjusted by . con ference committee.
 On the failure of the strike, it is said, the International Union of Metal Pol ishers declared a boycott against the Bucks company, and its product, in serted the eompany's name in its "un fair list" and published it in the union paper, the Journal. The local union, No. l3, also joined in the boycott and procured it's indorsement by the Central Trades and Labor Union of St. Louis and the Metal Trades Council, also of St. Louis, both subordinate unions of the American Federation.
 In November, 1906, at the annual con vcntion of the American Federation, in the products of the com pany were placed on the "We Don't Patronize list of the federation, and was published in this list in the Ameri- can Federationist in the June and July, 1907, issues.
 The complaint says that the fedora tion has greatly diminished and in many places destroyed the company g trade.
 The sweeping nature of this action is indicated by partial list of national