The herald and news. [volume] (Newberry S.C.) 1903-1937, 1908-02-07
TWICE A WEEK. 81 so A YEAR
DFCJDES AGAINST BOYCOTT.
Supreme Court Opinion Adverse to
Unions Contention.

Washington. February }.--Tnday,
fo: Tie third time within Il month.
the Su,rrnr Court Of the United
States promulgated an opinion con-
STRUNG laws adversely to the contcn-
tons Of organized labor.
The first of the decisions was rem
drrrd nl .Iuauary Is, in thr ease of
some railway employees who sought
to secure damages under what is
known as the "EmploycrS Liability
law.' making railroads responsible
for injuries resulting from the newli-
"cnrr of fellow servants. which law
the court held to be unconstitutional.
The second important finding in this
line was announced on thr Bird ulti-
mo. when the Erdman Arbitration
Act. fnrhiddin" the discharge Of en-
ploycrs bcraus" they arc members Of
labor unions, WAS also declared to be
! invalid.
The verdict rendered today was in
| the ease OF l,;wlur vs. l.urwr. the
former Il member Of the IIHttrrS' I'm
ION and the latter II hat manufacture
cr Of Danhrry. Connecticut. The
ease involved the applicability Of the
1th section OF the Sherman antitrust
law in regard I" ronSpiracicS by la
Dor unions tn hnyc"tt articles eater
mo into lntrr-StatH trade. Under
the terms Of ihat provision the COM
plainin" party may collect three times
the amount Of his loss If the CHARGE
is sustained. The union Fought the
case ON the ground the law was inap-
plicablc to such organizations. but
the court. whose opinion was an
n"uncrd BY thirf Justice Fuller.
failed t" accept this view aad in rf-
feet hrlI that tn, unions cuuld not
be permitted to Interfere by boycott
with the free exchange Of commerce
between the States. There was no
dissenting opinion.
The suit was instituted by Locwc
& Co. in the United States District
court for Connecticut. The company,
allr"in" damages by boycott against
thrir.iactory to the extent Of ESQ .000
asked for judgment for %2lO. 900 in
in accordance with the terms Of the
Sherman Act. Not olly the members
of :hr llnl:rrS' ',ni"r. but the AMER
lean FcA,''l',nl ni lni."I. vas in
clule,l in IL" bill. In HE coml,lairt
ii WAS alleged that the Labor "r"aniza-
ton nad undertaken 10 compel thy
manufacturers to uniuniZr their fac
ln.V and il wAS asserted that when
they failed in this effect the nnn;l
hattrrS Withdrew and induced other
.'mpirV :; in Il, = This Arl Wa>
i. frlluwrI by Tie drrlarnliou ni' a boy
cnli ;,?ainSt I"rwr hHt> Anl Is IL!
! tirm controlled an extensive trade
throughout the country thr hnvcutt
extended to many States. which. L.
the lan"ua"" nf the bill. constituted
4 combination to restrain Infer
State commerce. The Circuit Com
declared that as neither the nlan.,-
farturr nor distribution Of na:> is
Interstate in character the court
found it necessary to decide whether
a combination which seeks to inter
frrc with both the manufacture and
distribution simultaneously is one
which directly affects transportation
from the State to another. The r.
feet Of that decision wa, favorable
to the union. as it held that The su-
prrmr court had not broadcnrI the
Sherman Act $" a. tn make : fit
such Il c,"hition. ArroILin"Iy rhc
compIaint was hi,liSs, 4 Oh Il lrmrlr-
- ANA the Iimis@?l was affirmed by
the court Of appeals. tn" decision
Of the appellate cou:l waS today in
turn "vrrrulrd by tn" supreme court.
The country has not time TO shut
up shop and complain of hard times