The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1909-10-14
OF
 DANBURY HATS
Circuit Court Hears About LOewe Case - Federation of Labor Called
 PrOpagandizing Body.

AoPdSouuiLiDS DUuys
 The first day of work on the case
 of D. B. Leowe and others, against
 Martin Lawlor and others. the famous
 Dan nbury matters case which is ex-
 pected to take up the time of Judge James P. Platt and the jury for a
 month or more at the United States circuit court, at Hartford, began yes terday, though not a word of teSti-
 mony was taken. The morning was taken up with the reading of the conn., plaint and the answers and the after noon was devoted to an explanation of
 the case to the jury by Daniel Daven- port of Bridgeport, counsel for the plaintiffs. D. E.. Loewe and others, means the firm of D. E. Loewe & Co.,, of which MT. Loewe is senior partner, and Martin Lawlor and others means Secretary Lawlor of the United Hat ters of North America and 241 matters in Danbury, Bethel and Norwalk.
 The first proceeding was the reading had died since the original bringing of the action. They were twent y-five, making the number of living defen- dants at the present time 216.
 The complaint set out that the plain tiffs in the summer of 1902 had plans made for an unusually successful trade in the sale of hats. It alleged that the defendants were members of the United Hatters of America, an or ganization numbering over 5000 mem bers and having 5000 members in Con- necticut alone, that the organization published a very effective paper known as the Journal of The United Hat ters of North America that it own ed and made effective use of a union label. It alleged that the defendants were also members of the American Federation of Labor which had over 100000 members and published the American Federation It alleged that the United Hatters of America assisted by the American Federation of Labor had for a number of years been making a strong effort to get manufacturers of hats to .'unionize their shops" and seventy companies throughout the United States were named as employing only union men, leaving only twelve companies which had open shops. It alleged that March 1, 1901. the defendants through their agents demanded that the plain tiffs unionize this shop and that the Roelofs & Co.,, of Philadelphia had been forced to unionize their shops, the union leaders next directed their attention to the plaintiffs. It alleged that on July 25, 1902, a conspiracy was entered into by the defendants to dam- age the plaintiffs, that their employees went out on strike and that a boy colt was begun against the sale of the plaintiffs hats. Letters were read tending to show boycott instituted at San Francisco against dealers who offered hats for sale that were made by the plaintiffs and as result of such letters it is alleged the plaintiffs suffered much loss in trade.
 A number of answers were read by Robert E. DeForest, counsel for the defendants. Six of the defendants de- nied membership in unions of any kind. Martin Lawlor! who is secre- tary of the United Hatters of America, filed an answer which explained the ed Matters of America. The remain ing defendants admitted being mem bers of a local union, but denied mem bership in the United Hatters of Ann had "a right to vote for delegates to attend the convention which elected the officers of the United Hatters of America. The allegations as to con- spiracy and boycott were denied.
 The afternoon session was taken up plaintiffs case made by Daniel Dav- enport. He said that under the Sher- man Antitrust Act conspiracy in restraint of trade between the states provides that any person injured in business by anything forbidden by the act may sue, the parties responsible and recover three-fold damages and costs of the. suit. The plaintiffs all legged that injury to their business amounted to $soOoO and they claimed damages of $24O,000. The amount for attachment was put at $250,0O0 The matters of law in the case had been referred to the Supreme court and ev- erything was settled except the trial of the facts. It was the purpose of the plaintiffs to show that the Ameri- can Federation of Labor is power ful organization whose chief object is the facilitation of boycotts; that the United Hatters Of North America is a member of the American Federation of Labor, and the defendants as mem bers of the locals are members of the United HatterS' organization. A large mass of testimony including constitu- tions, reports and letters would be in- troduced to show what powerful ma chine the American Federation of La bor is and to show that the defend ants were part of the machine. It was called a great crusading propa- gandizing body" having at least 1,2OO agents working in its behalf.
 A member of a local union has a right to vote for the delegates sent to the convention of the United Hat ters of North America which elects the officers and directors of that or ganization. Again when convention of the American Federation of Labor is to be held local unions vote on the delegates, by which the United Hat repre- scented in the American Fedora ton of Labor. Written testimony would be introduced to show that D. B. Loewe & Co.,, would be the next object of attack after H. H. Roelofs of Philadelphia had been subjected. It was stated that at the time of the strike, all but seven men left the fac tory and that labor representatives were sent far and wide throughout the country to bring pressure to bear against the sale of the D. E. Loewe & Co.,, hats.
 Owing to the. failure of the secre- taries of the labor unions to have on hand records of membership the trial was adjourned at 3:45 until to-day