The Washington herald., 1908-03-15
TAKE LABOR STINGS
FROM SHERMAN LAW
Continued from Page One.

have eventuated. which is probably the
same thing as saying until after the
nomination and election OF a candidate
for the Presidency-preferably the ad
ministration's candidate. The foregoing
is given substantially on the authority of
Charles J. Bonaparte. the Attorney Cen
eral.
Mir. Bonaparte stated the matter In
a somewhat different way. but in terms
having the same purport, in reply TO
questions
He was asked IL il was true he had in
structed the United States attorney at
New orleans 20 suspend action In the
case OF a number Of lOngshoremen there
who had violated the Sherman antitrust
law as expounded in the Danbury hat
ters' case. His reply was the attorney
had been Informed by the Department Of
Justice that the administration wished in
all cases TO be advised In advance as to
contemplated actions under the Sherman
antitrust law or any interstate commerce
! laws.
we have here in the department e"
said Mr.. Bonsparte, IAN expert in such
matters, and perhaps more than one eX-
pert. We have had certain experience
and have established or availed ourselves
of certain precedents that may not be
well known to the various district at
torneys
Jealous District Attorney.
/ 81 do not wish to be misunderstood az
/ having censured the district attorney at
New Orleans. We have not done SO. He
is a new appointee and has been some
what Jealous"
! Mr.. Bonaparte talked further about the
/ llOnEShOTemen's case at New Orleans He
said indictments were found by the grand
jury and the district attorney bad. he be-
/ lieved. written the indictments upon re-
quest OF the grand jury
| He did not know the attorney had
/ pressed for indictments nor that ne had
not done so. But the feeling Of the De-
partment of Justice was that district
attorneys ought TO advise the department
in advance Of such proceedings. for rea-
/ sons stated.
! Then Mr.. Bonaparte was asked II ii was
true that the department had given in
/ structions to district attorneys generally
\ TO bring no actions in Law against labor
unions until after consultation with the
administration authorities AZ Washington.
! The Attorney General denied that such
/ instructions had been given. il was pos
/ sible, he said, that attorneys in the field
/ had been told I'm certain instances not TO
/ institute any action of any kind under the
/ commerce or antitrust laws until they
/ had held consultation with the Depart
ment Of Justice.
Has complaint been made 10 the De
partment OF Justice against any labor
| union or labor unions rs result or re-
! cent court decisions" the Attorney Gen
eral was asked.
Yes Mr.. Bonaparte replied A COM
I plaint with request for action has been
made in a certain case"
Mr.. BOnaparte said he did not care 10
mention the particular case or the form
Of the complaint. He made the significant
statement. however. that no action on the
part OF the government was contemplated
I at present.
Mr.. BOnaparte Explains.
The reason for inaction was frankly
given by Mr. Bonaparte.
He said the decision OF the Supreme
! Court OF the United States in the hatters
case was made on a demurrer. and testi-
mony had not been taken. The case was
remanded to the Circuit Court. Pending
SuhlAllSSAflt VI AtSNllblAf Nlt = GQeIIl IQ-
ministration would 90 nothing in the way
Of prosecuting labor union men accused
OF violating the Sherman law
In making this statement. the Attorney
General compared the governments po-
sition TO the position which il had as
] sumed toward the suit Of an independent
sugar refining company In Philadelphia
against the sugar trust. The Attorney
General was asked 10 intervene on behalf
of the government in that case. but de-
declined.
He said the government was not party
70 the suit, one for triple damages. and
he had not felt justified in Intervening
until such time as the facts should be
brought out in the tria, Of the suit insti-
tuted by the independent sugar concern.
Government Not Party.
Neither was the Federal government a
party in the Danbury hatters' case the
Attorney General remarked. The govern
ment should contemplate no action in
the premises until after the final adjudi-
cation Of the case, which will not take
place until after the taking of testimony
as provided by the decree
The events which the Attorney General
IS waiting for Will not happen. Of course
for some time. That fact makes il GER
tain the administration will not bother
the labor unions with proceedings in the
courts for some months 70 come, II at all