The labor journal. [volume] (Everett, Wash.) 1909-1976, 1910-03-11

are mulcted in the sum of 1929 900! The
Taff-Vale decision of England against
the railroad employees which was wiped
out by the Trades Dispute act of the
British parliament of 1906 has been re-
vivified and applied to the organized
workers of the United States.
A brief resume of the important
events of the hatters' case may be help
full to better understanding of the
principles involved.
After a trial lasting more than sew
enteen weeks the federal circuit court
! for the District of Connecticut render
ed verdict of $222,000 against 200
North America in favor of Loewe hat
manufacturers of Danbury, Conn. The
case was brought under the provisions
of the Sherman antitrust law. The
complaint alleged that the hatters con-
| spired against Loewe & Co., to injure
the company's business, through boy
| cOlJ, anu lHdb VIllS was III lestldluo VI
trade in interstate commerce and in
violation of the Sherman antitrust law.
Damages in the sum of $4,000 were al
| legged and under the antitrust act three
fold damages were demanded. Upon
motion of the hatters the case in the
first instance was dismissed by the fed
! -. = oaf, rr,h
stantially on the ground that the or
ganization not being engaged in any
trade or commerce its act could not be
regarded as in restraint of trade and
hence its boycott" was not in con-
travention of the Sherman antitrust
law. Loewe took an appeal to the cir
cult court of appeals, and Loewe and
the hatters agreed that the circuit court
of appeals should certify" the case
so that the case could be passed upon
by the United States supreme court.
That court rendered its decision Feb
ruary 8, 1908, revising the decision of
the court below in dismissing the case
and remanded the case for trial on the
complaint. The trial commenced the
first Monday in October, 1909, and the
verdict for $4,000 damages was
awarded against the hatters on Feb
ruary a. 1910 The Judge in his charge
denied the jury the right to Judge the
facts. He instructed them to simply
determine the amount of damages the
hatters were to pay, with the result
stated above. An appeal will be taken
upon several important points involved
in the case, and new element in the
fundamental principles involved may
find its way into the case when the ap
peal is prepared, presented and argued,
The question which the supreme court
was called upon to decide was whether
under section seven of the Sherman
antitrust law the Loewe company could
maintain an action against the hatters
The court decided in the affirmative
(basing its decision upon the allega
tion that the Hattters' organization is
q
and its boycott" against the Loewe
company's hats was an interference
with a free flow of trade between the
states, and therefore in restraint of
trade) and that the Loewe company
might maintain the suit and recover
threefold damages. In coneetion here
with it must be borne in mind that
under sections one and two of the Sher-
man antitrust law, if the supreme
courts decision shall hold and remain
in force, the hatters organization and
every other labor organization may be
proceeded against by any prosecuting
officer of the federal government and
the men of labor punished by fine of
$1,000 and by Imprisonment for a year.
incidentally it may be mentioned that
since this decision was rendered the hat
manufacturers entered into eombi-
nation (which by analogy might be
termed conspiracy the effect of
which was a lockout to enforce nom
union conditions, tending TO a reduc-
tion in wages and with all of its other
evils; that after defensive struggle
of nearly eleven months the Hatters
won their contest, and that nearly al
the establishments in which the lock