The Mathews journal. (Mathews C.H. [Court House]) 1903-1937, 1911-05-25
LABOR LEADERS
ARE RELEASED
Famous Case Instituted by Buclu
Stove Company At An End-Tt
was Placed Upon the I'm
fair List" in Union
Organ.


dent and secretary. respectivaIr- :.
the American Federation of Isbo~
va" not have TO serve Jail senfeD~es
TOT contempt of the Supreme C,,r-e
IN the Bucks stove and Range Csor,r
80 SaSe' according 10 a decision
/ handed down tOdan by the SuDre11-.
/ Court of the United States
ne IdbOr leaders were connpIefe1v
lI1uh phant IN their case the So
~ enc Court dismissing the cases on
the ground that they were NOT oro1-
CAiy contempt Judgments but sbouTF
nave been damage suits NV tbe p,,.i
stove Company ~
ne decision was read bv Assoc5at.
is, uSC'Ce lamar, one of the new mem
oeIs OF the bench.
ms IS one OF the most svveenjD-
victories for union labor in its 80
'oLG IN the United States.
ne defendants We're not in cont
DuL the news vas quickly cor,,.l,-,S
10 them at American Federatio, ,e
LABOR headquarters. where a 49,.
number OF labor leaders had gafbaS-
W. would IA expectation a station that a verdic4
GOmpers and Morrison reCaf,',,, as, IL
ovation. GU AZ
Opinion Of Court.
me courts opinion SAYS:
for 1 ne lower OF the courts TO punish
toI contempt is sacred" said liz
zee Lamar i'm rendering the decisioT
NHnout II courts become rDerSsIv
oOardS OF arbitration. Congress ~
etIeu on the courts power "a
PUNISH contempt with either fne ~
I'm prlSOnment, but the very aynnti
luue Oh this power is a warning =,
use II with discretion. -
"a FuhltiNe contempt is to be MN
,siieu with mprisonment-that il
NHere the defendant has refused -
perform an act required bv the co,,rf
Such as the nOn-payment Of aIir1o1v
~ IN TINS case there was no refusal
~ D., 90 an act required by the court
uHIShWeAt IN punitive conteuDt -
an act OF coercion by the court -
Cht punishment should end when
ue'eHuaht agrees TO bow TO the de-
49, % the court in a private pro
CeediuSS and obviously the riwbf a.
uon should have been a suit for -.
ages by the plaintiff
IL appears that the Dlairtiff b,5
no, no suit Tor damages. because the
/ points OF contention in the ,,,air -
were settled out of court. ana 81
''cLD'N becomes a moot case
but this contempt Droceedin-
ere" out OF the main case. and ~
, rnertIore must now be regarded as a
IF the Bucks Stove and Ra,-.
/ company has settled its differences
with the American Federation of -
/ Dot IL can hardly claim TO have q
HaHu contempt case against GOrnperS
| Morrison and Mitchell. on the f-ronnT
/ tnat a boycott was formed in vioTs-
/ Jion OF the courts order To fine the
~ SIeHuatts on account Of the courts
oTuerS II would be necessary to sbou
/ ne amount Of damages sustained Inv
/ the plaintiffs ~
If the plaintiffs claim that ths
/ boycott was in restraint of trade tbaS-
Suou!u nave sought relief by present.
/ lnS thelr case before the Attornev
Neneral and showing a violation OF ~
interstate commerce act
1hat the proceeding was nor q
VIlIilInal one is shown by the fact that
the defendants were conneIIad =.
testify on the stand. In \ trua c-sv.0
maj proceeding no man can he CO
| creed into testifying against himself
ne contention OF the defendants
has been three-fold:
Il. They claim that there p~,s -.
intention OF violation of the lav
That there was no violatioD OF
the injunction. ~
). That the injunction was nun ana
OIu because 1t abridge the liberty OF
tuition.
This last claim. however. mag Ia
dismissed. In the first instance So
. ,ti3S Oh the press applies to iu1E-
NlGuals and not to organizations
The decision OF the court was man
imOus.
MorriSon's Brief Statemf.1t.
me decision OF the Supreme Cour1
remands the case without preiu6fss :.
as 10 the right of the District Su1rS,T,s
court 10 punish for any contempt 49, :
may nave been committed againstssr 5.
II Is not thought. however. that .b~
DlStrlct Court will ever take any fur
ther steps in the matter.
We have always commended thai
the wright decision was wrong" So
retary Morrison said, when he hears
the news OF the Supreme Court iudas- n
Hieht IN his favor. Il am pleased that q
the supreme Court has Sustained our
position. our lawyers have aIvvo~~
Deen convinced that the judgmenF
would be in our favor"
History OF Case
me sucks stove and Range Com
ptthN, OF 81. Louis. Mo- obtained on
injunction in the supreme Court 90
lne District of Columbia. December "a
I'V" against the American FedsTs.
non OF Labor. its officers and agenex
49,, ,,.'t"S I1e latter from publishing
,.tC name OF the former under thu
'HIair List i'm the official organ or
,Lr american Federation of Labor
I"e FeoeFaJonlst,' and also forbid
.-I-@ 'Ae latter from Interfering v7iSft
tliH business OF the Bucks StOVe,,S,.JT
Range Company hy means of !, - ,
rntL which the Federation had 81
Sttyted.
ON December 18TH the injunctior
".nt into effect. DC was made $3.50,
'"nt Nr Justice Clalau-h. Chief y,e--
&c. n. t'e Supreme C.u-- OF mo ~
tri-t r0 March 1G 1908
tr't Cd the time that the ini6nc-
- made permareUt there ap-
-ito IN the American Fcderati0uisf
name or the Bucks Stove and
.,'-I-' company under the Unfair
Violation or The terms of the
A.,'rneys for the Bucks Company
t-N uctuorso The court ia
'r-" Samuel Gompers. president.
I'D o. Vice president. ma
.A'''. secretary on the