The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1909-03-13
eoMPERs' INJUNCTION MODIFIED
Federation May Refer to Boycott Of
Bucks Stove Co.

Washington, March 1S.-The Ameri-
can Federation of Labor hereafter
may freely refer to the boycott against
the Bucks Stove 4 Range Company
of St Louis, except by inclusion In
the We Don't Patronize" list This.
in substance, is the sweeping decision
handed down by the court of appeals
of the District of Columbia in the in
junction case of the Bucks Stove &
Range Company against the Ameri-
can Federation of Labor. which has
been before the courts of the District
of Columbia in various phases for
months.
In recent decision by Justice
Gould of the supreme court of the
District the American Federation of
Labor and the officers, Messrs. Comp
ers, Mitchell, Morrison and others
were enjohed from conspiring to boy
colt the Bucks Stove & Range com
pany and from printing or publishing
or distributing through the mails or
otherwise any copy of the Federation
list or other publication referring to
the complainant, its business or its
products in the I'VE don't patronize"
or unfair" list
The recent decision which was by
Justice Robb, modifies and aflirms the
decree of Justice Gould. The court
holds that the decree should be modi.
fed to the extent that it shall only
restrain the defendants from conspir-
ing or combining to boycott the bust
ness of the Bucks Stove & Range
company or threatening or declaring
any boycott or assisting therein, and
from printing the name of the com.
plainant, its business or products in
the We Don't Patronize" or Unfair
list of defendants in furtherance of
any boycott against complaintants
business or product and from inter
tering either in print or otherwise
with compliments business as in
We Don't Patronize" or Unfair" list
in furtherance of a boycott.
The court holds that the defend
ants cannot be restrained from all
publications referring to the Bucks
Stove & Range company, but only
such as are made in furthermore of
an illegal boycott.
In a partially dissenting opinion.
Chief Justice Shepard expressed the
opinion that the decree should be
modified so as to restrain the acts
only by which other persons have
been or may be coerced into ceasine
from business relations with the
Bucks Stove & Range company, but
so as not to restrain the publication
OF the name of that company in the
We Don't Patronize' column of the
American Federationist, no matter
what the object Of such publication
may be suspected or believed to be-"
Justice Van Orsdel concurred fully
IN the conclusion reached by Justice
Robb, but by a different process of
The sustaining Of such decree by
a court Of equity would violate the
constitutional rights of the citizen"
says Justice Van Orsdel, in referring
10 Justice Gould's injunction decree.
1t would mark the beginning OF the |
era OF judicial tyranny by the branch |
)f the government charged with the |
luty OF protecting the citizen in his |
or legal rights"
He says further, that the clause in
The Constitution guaranteeing the !
Tree speech and free press forbids |
government censorship In all forms.
1t would be difficult" he adds, ito
of a more effective method /
If establishing government censor
ship than through the writ of injunc.
ion"
The dissenting opinion Of Chief
Justice Shepard" of the Federation
says President Gompers, lis exactly
hat for which the federation has been
vi along contending so far as It re-
ers to the freedom of the press. The
light to freely express opinions is a
guaranty. There is
lothing libelous in anything the fed
ration has published in connection
With this whole case"