The Birmingham age-herald., 1908-10-26


 that decree had been entered in the United States circuit court at Mil waukee in tn summer of 1906 which he regarded IS grossly unjust and in- proper and as practically fatal to trades unionism. The case was that of the Iron Holders union against the Allis- Chalmers company of Milwaukee. The members of the union, having made certain demands for the betterment of their conditions of service. which were refused, went on @ strike, and an in- junction suit followed in the United States circuit court. The late employees were enjoined from alleged Illegal in- terference. The final decree was of the most drastic and far-reaching charac- ter, and besides enjolning the late em- ployes from doing acts which were clearly Illegal, 1t also enjoined them from any form of picketing from in ducing employees to leave the service of the Allis-Chalmers company by per suasion or otherwise, and from any kind of Interference with the company direct or indirect. So sweeping were the terms of this injunction that it practically forbade the union from . making any effort, no matter how ! peaceful and proper, to maintain their position in this trade dispute. The edi- tor of the Iron Molders Journal" MT.
 
 stating that the union did not know what to do; that it's funds were limited; f that he felt that they were suffering from gross injustice which they were powerless to remedy. I called in MT. Taft and aske MT. Fry to lay the case before him. as of course MT. Taft was far more competent than I was to ex- press his judgment as to the legality | and propriety of the action taken.
 Taft Recommended Counsel | Mir Taft satisfied himself of the facts and at once became exceedingly indig- nant at such an injunction having issued. He stated that in his opinion the position taken by the court in issuing the injunction was clearly un- tenable, and that what was needed was that the union should get some first-class lawyer to represent them and should bring the case before the higher courts. He suggested, in response to MT. Fry's request, that the union re- tain MT. F. N, Judson of St. Louis, who had represented the Broth erhood of Locomotive Bremen In the Wabash case in 1S93 and who. by the way, is the author of the review of the labor decisions of Judge Taft, published in the Review of Reviews" in 1907. Mir Taft explained that one of the trou- bles of the labor unions was that so often they did not get the best type of counsel, so that their cases were not properly presented and that in his Judgment MT. Judson would be sure to present this case aright He stated that the decision of the court ought certainly to be in their favor. The case was argued before the United states circuit court of appeals by MT. Judson and MT. Rubin of Milwaukee for the union and by MT. James M. Beck, counsel for the National Manufactur- CTS association, for the company. Court Agrees With Taft.
 The decision of the court was handed down in Chicago on the Sth day of this month, and it justifes Judge Taft's wis dom, for 1t sustains the most important contentious of the labor unions. The court holds that while under the facts of the case the company was entitled to some injunction relief, the decree went far beyond the proper limits. It struck out of the decree all of the provisions which prevented peaceful picketing or the exercise of the right of persuasion in inducing employees to join the strike and also all reference to boycotting on the ground that there was no boycott, as the members of the union had a right to refuse to handle struck work-that is, the work from factory where they were on a strike-wherever they found it. The opinion is important especially in showing that much can now be accom- plshed in getting the courts to correct abuses against employees in the exercise of the power of injunction, if such abuses are in effective form brought to their attefftlon, as, thanks to the advice of Judge Taft, they were brought in this case The right of peaceful picketng and persuasion, so that employees may by peaceful means induce other employees to join them Is forcibly set forth in this opinion, and it bases its decision largely upon Judge Taft's decision and upon the decision in the Wabash injunction case, which itself was largely based upon Judge Taft's decision; so that Judge Tafts de- cision is declared by the court to have settled the law as to the substantial rights ow the parties, leaving only the applica- tion of the principles so declared as new cases arose.
 Injunction Abuses Corrected.
 The great importance of this opinion is that it corrects abuses that have crept into iniunctions and labor disputes in the federal as well as the state courts. This decision goes far to protect the rights of workingmen and it does so because 1t Is explicitly based upon the labor decisions of Judge Taft; and this decision was se- cured only in consequence of following the advice given by Judge Taft as to the proper course of procedure. I speak from frst-hand knowledge, as I was per- sonally cognizant of all the facts. A more striking instance could not be imagined of the zealous effort of public servant. which Judge Taft then was, to secure justice for workingmen to whom he thought injustice had been done, although the matter was not within his immediate control at the time In this one instance MT Taft rendered to labor a great and signal service; a practical service, which shared the peculiarity of MT. Taft's other services, for his services take the form of deeds rather tha' of mere words.
 Taft and Narramore Case.
 While on the bench MT. Taft rendered a service to labor so great that it can hardly be overestimated. This was in the Narramore case against the C., C., c. & St. L. R. R. The plaintiff, while work ing in the employ of the company had been hurt because the, company had not provided the protection which the statute required it to furnish its employees. He got verdict from the jury. The railroad appealed, and it's counsel, MT. Judson Harmon, argued that the verdict should be set aside because the employe had lept at work although he knew the rail road had violated the law, and that there fore he had really contracted to take all the chances of being hurt. This con- clusion to my mind a cruelty iniqitous conclusion, had up to that time been sus- tained by most of the courts, including the New York state court of appeals. Nevertheless Judge Taft refused to follow