The Washington herald., 1908-07-21
Buck 5 Stove and Range Com
pany Alleges Contempt.
JOHN MITCHELL IS INCLUDED
With Frank Morrison, Labor Lead
ers Are Charged with Violating
Injunction of March Last by Terms
of which They Were Forbidden to
Continue Unfair List Publication.

. day on behalf Of the Bucks Stove and
Range Company. OF ST Louis. asking for
a rule against Samuel Gompers. Frank
Morrison. and John Mitchell, requiring
them 70 show cause why they should not
be adjudged as in contempt Of the decree
Of the court. entered March ., 1895 per-
petually enjolning the defendants and
others from boycotting the plaintiffs
business.
The petition was fled by Daniel Daven-
port, Of Bridgeport, Conn. and W c.
Sullivan. Of the District Of Columbia. who
were the attorneys for the Bucks Stove
and Range Company in the hearings had
on the petition for the original injunction.
The petition fled reviews at length the
attitude Of Gompers. Morrison, and
Mitchell, all Of whom are officers Of the
American Fedora ation Of Labor. The orig
inal petition Tor a temporary injunction
was fled August 70. 1871 The temporary
injunction was granted after hearing on
December IS. 1877. by Associate Justice
Ashley NJ Gould. OF the Supreme Court
Of the District Of Columbia and the TEN
pOrary injunction was made permanent
after a hearing before Chief Justice Harry
NJ Clabaugh. OF the Supreme Court OF
the District Of Columbia, on March 3,
1915.
Terms Of the Decree.
The final decree vas directed against
the American FEDERATION Of Labor,
Samuel Gompers. and Frank Morrison.
president and secretary, respectively, and
John Mitchell and other members Of the
executive council Il forbade the pub
fishing Of the name Of the plaintiff firm
in the so-called We don't patronize''
and unfair list usually run in the
American Federationist Official organ OF
the American Federation Of Labor. Il
was the most sweeping injunction that
has been issued against the labor boy
cott-
The defendants were enjo!ned from
~conspiring. agreeing. or combining IN
any manner 10 restrain. obstruct, OF de-
stroy the business Of the complainant.
or to prevent the complainant from car
Tying on the same without interference
from them or any OF them. and from in
teTferi1B IN any manner with the sale
Of the product OF the compliments fac
tory or business by defendants. or by
any other person. firm. OF corporation.
and from declaring or threatening any
.
business OF she prodlct Of its factory or
against any person. frlu. or corporation
engaged in handling OF selling the said
product and from abeItiug aiding, or
assisting in any such boycott"
The defendants were also enjoined from
publishing OF distributing through pub
Ecati0ns OF the malls any matter re-
ferring 20 the complainant or its bust
ness as unfair, or attempting 10 inter
I'D
others not 20 patrocize the firm
When the final decree vas entered.
G0mpers. Morrison. and Mitchell noted
an appeal 10 the Court Il appeals Of the
District Of Columbia and fled the neCes-
sary bond. but .OOk no action for super
sedeas 10 stay the decree pending the
determination OF the appeal The petition
ers claim that thelr failure 20 do this
leaves the final decree in fun force and
effect. and they charge II has been vio-
lated IN unusual ways Among other
things, It IS charged by the petitioner that
Goupers. Morrison. and Mitchell not
withstanding the temporary Injunction
and the final decree made later. have
''frequently. regularly. and systematically.
wilfuIIy. and with premeditation. violated
the order and final decree alike and to-
tally dis-egarded the same"
Refers TO a Statement.
The petition refers 20 a statement made
ten years ago by Gompers before the con
ventiou OF the Federation OF Labor at
Nashville. Tenn. while he was president
Of that organization. in which he advised
the publication in Official papers OF the
fact that the courts have enjoined from
boycotting certain concerns. adding that
in this way notice could be given Of the
unfair firms. The petitioners charge that
this advice has been followed IN the case
Z the injunction obtained by the Bucks
Stove and Rang Company. After review
ing various Utterances Of Gompers. in the
last ten years. which. in effect. urges
members OF the federation 70 disobey in
functions against the boycott, the peti-
rioners allege Gompers has repeatedly
said since the fling Of the original petit
ton FOR the injunction IN this case. that
he would never obey the injunction.
The petition sets out the language used
by Gompe-s in a Labor Day speech at the
jamestown Exposition, in September. fol-
lowing the filing Of the petition for a
temporary Injunction. IN which ne inti-
mated he would refuse TO obey the In
junction Il is alleged he made similar
statements In the editorial pages Of the
Federationist. Numerous quotations are
atiCnist for October. and subsequent Is
sues while the injunction proceedings
were pending, 70 show q spirit Of de-
fance on the part Of Gonpers-
It is charged after a hearing on the Pc
tition Tor the temporary Injunction. and
while the court had the matter under ad-
visement before issuing the decree, that
Gompers and Morrison issued a circular
directing q general boycott OF the firm. OF
which eco copies were issued The al
legation is made that following the order
for a temporary injunction made on
December 3. GomPers and Morrison
took no action 20 recall the circular they
had previously issued OF in any other
manner arrest the instrumentalities they
had set IN motion TO boycott the St
Louis firm
The further charge is made that Com
Pers rushed" the publication Il the Janu-
airy issue Of the Fede-at0nIst. which car
ried the name Of the frm in its unfair
list and that bound copies OF the Fed
eratonist containing this have since been
circulated extensively by G0mpers anu
Morrison Reference is made in the petit
ton TO the February number OF the Fed
eratiOnist. which contains the urgent
appeal" signed by Gonpers and the other
defendants. which is combined protest
against the order Of the court and an IN
vitation to the members OF the fedora
ton 70 continue the boycott.
John Mitchell. former president Of the
United Nine Workers OF America. is
alleged TO have printed the urgent ap-
peal editorial IN the January issue of
the United Nine Workers Journal. and
70 have procured the passage by the an
nual convention OF the mine workers held