Norwich bulletin., 1911-04-11

mere fact that any individual defend ant was a member of and contributed money to the treasury Of the United Hatters' association made him princi- pal of any and all agents who might be employed by it's officers in carrying out the objects of the association, and responsible as principals if such agents used illegal methods or caused illegal methods to be used in undertaking to carry out their objects. We cannot as- sent to this proposition. Something more must be shown, as for instance, that with the knowledge of the mem bers unlawful means had been so fre- Quently used with the express tactt approval of the association that it's agents were warranted in assuming that they might use such unlawful means in the future that the associa- tion and it's members would approve or tolerate such use whenever the end sought to be obtained might best be obtained
 Incompetent Evidence Admitted.
 The trial court admitted evidence of the payment of their dues to the union by defendants, after complaint was served. The court of appeals holds that this was not competent either as showing ratification of acts of union agents or that their acts were au- thorized at the time they were per- formed previous to their suit. Hearsay Testimony Admitted.
 The trial court also permitted a salesman of the plaintiffs to testify NSt customers told him that at some time prior they had been interviewed by some labor representative who told them that unless they ceased to ham dle the plaintiffs goods they would get into trouble with the union. The court of appeals holds that this was improper hearsay. testimony
 term. The quintette were convicted of
 Case in Courts Since 1908.
 Danbury, Conn, April 10.-The de- cision handed down today by the United States circuit court of appeals in New York reversing the decision of the United States circuit court, in which $232,340 damages were awarded the D. E. Loewe & Co. of this city, against the United Hatters of North America, and remanding the case for @ new trial, will further extend a case which has been in the courts since 1903 and which at it's close practically resolved itself into a contest between the American Anti Boycott associa- tion and the American Federation of Labor.
 Factory Run as Open Shop.
 The history of the case dates back to 1901, when the union hatters em-
 
 out The factory up to that time had been run on the open shop plan and after the departure of the union men it was continued on a non-union basis. From 1901 until 1903, when the suit was brought. D. E. Loewe & Go. claim ed that their business was being in jured by a boycott, especially in the west. Suit was brought against Mar tin Lawlor and 239 other members of the Hatters union, and damages of s25o,000 claimed The complaint al- legged that the alleged boycott was a violation of the Sherman ah~ trust law in that it was in restraint of 1n- terstate commerce.
 Hatters Backed by A. F. of L.
 The case was first brought to the United States district court, and the superior court of Fairfield county, but was not tried there. it being taken to the supreme court of the United States on the question as to whether the al- legations made constituted viola ton of the Sherman antitrust law. In February. 1908, the supreme court handed down a decision to the effect that allegations constituted a violation of the law and in October, 1909, the case was begun in the United States circuit court at Hartford, and after three months trial the jury found for the plaintiffs, and Judge Platt hWdIU lllclIl uduld6CS OI PGAH,OOu, which with costs brought it up to s232640. That the American Fedora ton of Labor was back of the hat ters was brought out in the trial of the case at Hartford.
 Hatters Carried Case Up.
 At the close of the case in Hart ford the defendants carried the case to the United States circuit court of appeals of New York.