The Montgomery advertiser., 1908-12-24
Court Sounds Death
 KneN of Boycotts

ants, letters, circulars, etc. The court referred to the use of the I've don't patronize' list and unfair list of the labor organization and said that members of labor unions were forced and coerced into support ing 1t. whether individually willing or unwilling. approving or disapproy ing by various methods. The court read extracts from numbers of resolu- lions Of labor organizations bearing on the Bucks case as tending to show the methods of influencing members of unions.
 And these methods' the court re. marked. seem to be known as per suasion.' D
 The customers of the stove com pany the court said, had been intimi- oated, browbeaten and coerced out of their business relations with their customers by direct interference with and boycott of their (the GUS tomeTs) trade relations with their own customers and the public gen. erally."
 Following an exhaustive discussion of eonspiracies in restraint of trade Justice Wright said:
 From the foregoing 1t ought to seem apparent to thoughtful men that the defAndants to the bill, each and all Of them, have combined together for the purpose of.
 "1-of bringing about the breach of plaintiffs existing contracts with oth- CTS
 "2-Depriving plaintiff of property
 the value of the good will of its business). without due process of law.
 Restraining trade among the several States.
 "4--Rasfrai inino sor,,,o-a. the several States"
 Pending an appeal to the United states Court of Appeals of the District Of Columbia all three defendants were released on ball the amounts being fixed as follows: Gompers s5.O00: Mitchell $4.000 and Morrison S3,0Oo. A local surety company furnished the bonds.
 Each of the defendants before sem tence was passed on them made state- hehts Tn response to the usual i'm qulry if they had anything to say.
 The ultimate purpose of the defend ants. the court says in this Connection. was unlawful. their concerted project an offense against the law and it add ed they were guilty of crime.
 Coming to the question of the viola. tion of the courts injunction Justice Wright said:
 That Gofnpers and others had in advance of the injunction determined to violate 1t if issued and had in ad- vance of the injunction counselled sll members of the labor unions and of the American Federation of Labor unions and of the Anaerfcan Federa- ton of Labor and the public generally to violate It In case It Saloula be iss sued, appears from the following which references point out also inc general. politics and mutual under standing of the organizations and their mutual understanding"
 The court here read mass of ex- tracts from reports of proceedings of conventions of the Federation. renorts of President Gompers edltorials froro the columns of the American Federa- tionist and the labor press generally In support of his statement that there was predetermInation to violate.
 Conduct of Defendants. Discussing the actions of the de- fendants since the issuance of the In- junction Judge Wright said:
 Having in mind what may be in the foregoing delineation which indicates that either of the three respondents did before the issuance of the injunc- ton deliberately determine to wilfulIv violate 1t and did counsel others to do the same. let me now turn to their sayings and doings since the decision Of Mir. Justice Gould was formally an- nounced and the order of injunction It. self put Into technical operation bv tha giving of the injunction bond.
 On December IT. 1907, the opinion of the court was filed in the case; the order of injunction was entered on De- eember IS; the giving of the undertak ing required by 1t was consummated on December 2S and I am disposed now 70 look at the separate conduct of each respondent with a view of recording his individual responsibility in sufa cient detail"
 The Court, after quoting at great length the attitude taken by Mir. Com pers since the injunction was issued his writings, interviews and public ad- dresses, remarked:
 All of which was done. all of which was published, all of which was cir culated in wilful disobedience and de- liberate violation of the injunction and for the purpose of melting and accom- plishing the violation generally and in of the original common de- sign of himself and confederates. to bring about the breach of plaintiffs contracts with others; to de- prive plaintiff of property (the good will of it's business) without due pro- cess of law; restrain trade among the several States; restrain commerce among the several States"
 As to Secretary Frank Morrison the Court held that he had full knowledge of what was being done. took part in the preparation and publication of The American Federationist of April. 1908, with complete knowledge of it's con tents.
 With knowledge and approval of the other writings and { speakings specified against Comp ers, he (Morrison) took part in the cir sulation and distribution in large nufn- bers of each and every issue of The F'ederationist containing them as here nbefore specified against Gompers and With the same purpose and intent"
 Acts of John Mitchell.
 Concerning Mitchell, the court point | d to various acts by hlm which, he 1 iaid placed him within the pale of the 1 aw.
 He quoted from Mitchelrs book on | 'Ohganized Labor. Its Problems Pur- | poses and Ideals" certain paragraphs | wherein Mitchell declared that 1t was | be duty of all patriotic and law -ahid- | ng citizens to resist or disregard in- l unctions when they forbid the doing | f thing which. is lawful, Mitchell | -lso was credited with signing with | ull Knowledge The Personal Appeal | which accompanied the 27.000 or more | rcular letters to the various secre- | aries as heretofore speciftd against | sompers and Morrison and with fun | of their contents. counsel | ng their distribution and with the | anne purpose and intent" The court also referred to the pres nee of Mitchell in the chair on Janu- | ry 25. 1908. at the annual convention |