The Washington herald., 1910-08-28

New York. Aug. PA strike which de-
mands the CLOSED shop" Justice Goh de-
cided to-day. was a conspiracy IN restraint
Of trade. and, therefore, illegal This rul-
ing came in his opinion granting the in
junction asked for by the cloak makers
against the $1,000 strikers who have been
fighting for several weeks. 1t was in the
suit Of Max Swsrtz. treasurer Of the
Cloak, suit, and skirt Manufacturers
Protective Association against the Ladies
international Garment Workers Union
and others.
This is the strongest decision against
labor unions that has ever been handed
down in an American court - said julius
Henry Cohen, counsel for the manufac-
turers
Thus the court granted the injunction
asked for by the lawyers, While there are
other demands OF the cloak strikers.
among them shorter hours and more pay,
It is possible that an agreement for set
t1ement might have been reached several
weeks ago had the workers given in on
the single point about the closed shop.
Demanded "CIosed Shop"
In all their demands 10 the employers
they have insisted that the shops should
be unionized. The employers. who feared
that that meant the end Of their freedom
in employing whom they chose. have re-
agreements. but the majority refused. and
since then the negotiations for the end
Of the strike have not progressed
smoothly.
'In 1893 New York. the decision OF the
Appellate Division in McCord against
Thomps Company" Judge
Goff aid. the Court Of Appeals has de-
clared that It is against the public policy
OF the State for employers who control
practically the whole trade in a com
munity 10 combine for the purpose OF
compelling workmen to join particular
union. as a condition OF employment.
If the rule laid down in the McCord
case be the law. and il must be accepted
as such, being the latest expression OF the
Court of Appeals. II must be applicable
20 workmen as well as 10 employers. II
would be repugnant 90 reason 70 hold
that it applies to one and not 10 the other.
What the employers may not do the
workmen may not do. II a combination
OF one 10 refuse employment, except on
condition OF joining a union, be against
public policy, a combination of the others
10 cause refusal OF employment, except
on condition Of joining a union, is alike
against public policy.
Demands of Employees.
This refusal was sought TO be caused
by the demand OF the defendant unions
made upon all the employers in the trade
that the nonuniOn men already employ
ed should be discharged in two weeks
unless they joined the union. This
charge under such circumstances would
be a refusal TO employ"
Further on the court has this to say:
THE primary purpose Of this strike is
not 20 better the conditions Of the work
man. but it is to deprive other men OF
the opportunity 20 exercise their right 20
work, and 10 drive them from an indus
try in which by labor they may have
acquired skill. and which they have a
right 10 pursue to gain livelihood
without being subjected 10 the doing Of
things which may be disagreeable or re-
pugnant. That this IS the motive which
animates he combination Of defendants
is clear from the correspondence, the ne
gotiations. the conferences, ard the ac-
tions disclosed in papers before the
court