Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1914-06-06
LABOR EXEMPTION
N ANTITRUST BILL
CLAUSE CAUSES WIDE DIFFER.
ENCE OF OPINION AMONG
STATESMEN.
COURTS MAY HAVE TO
DETERMINE MEANING
Different Interpretation Might Be
Placed on What Constitutes Organ.
ization For Profit-Courts Likely to
Give Definition-Present Law Com.
promise.
Especial Correspondence

Washington, June 6.-N:de differ
ence OF opinion still prevail here and
probably will continue TO prevail about
the effec. of the labor exemption
clause which the house has adopted as
a part of the Clayton trust bill. 1t is
not the clause for which labor leaders
have been working, aitho it has recent
II received the support of the legisla-
Federation of Labor. on the theory.
doubtless, that il marks some step in
advance 1t is compromise provision.
agreed on only after the house mem
bers who favor union labor had pre-
pared themselves for decisive battle
with administra ton forces in congress.
The wording of the section which
has caused SO much dispute is as fol-
lows
That nothing contained IN the anti
trust laws shall be construed 10 forbid
the existence and operation OF fraternal
labor. consumers. agricultural or horti-
cultural organizations. orders or asso-
Citations instituted for the purposes OF
mutual help, and not having capital
stock or conducted for profit or to for
bid or restrain individual members OF
such organizations. orders or associa-
tons from carrying out the legitimate
objects thereof; nor shall such organ
izations. orders or association. or the
members there. be held or construed to
be Illegal combinations or couspracies
in restraint OF trade under the anti
trust laws
This provision was defended by the
administration leaders in tie house.
Congressman Bartlett of Georgia.
author of the original bill for outright
exemption, declared in a speech that
the hour was at hand when the
shacklas placed by miSconstruction
of the Sherman antitrust law upon Ia
Dor and like organizations shall be
stricken from them, and when they
shall stand before the country free to
exercise their right TO perform and do
those acts as organizations tina, they
are entitled TO do and those things
which no one should ever construe
they we're forbidden TO do by the Sher-
man antitrust law"
Mr.. bartlett. however, indicated he
was in some doubt as TO the exact ef
| feet of the amendment ard said what
ever the resul, Of il, he claimed no spe-
cial credit for II but did insist he had
la bored at all times TO have the injus-
| tice Of making labor and farmers or
CARNATIONS subject to the Sherman
law remedied by proper legislation.
Congressman Thomas, OF Kentucky.
democrat declared on the other hand
that labor organizations were not ex-
| empted by the compromise provision.
Must Organize LesitimateIy.
| President Wilson takes the view. and
! has so stated 1t. that the amendment
merely makes it plain that labor or
CARNATIONS and the others alluded to
can not be prosecuted for organizing
They are given the right to organize
SO long as they proceed along legiti
mate lines.
| Much OF the opinion expressed in the
house debate was that the courts
would have to give final explanat ton
TO the meaning OF the provision. Tha,
/ Is TO say. the courts will have to dc
so IL II ever becomes law, which Is BY
70 means a certainty.
Abiding to It's construction. Victo,
Murdoch said: Who knows? No mar
on the floor of this house. Who VIII
determine? The courts"
| Congressman Thomas. Of Kentucky
in effect said the provision added moth
ing TO the law. He asserted that ever
f, without II, labor organizations were
not illegal combinations and that II
spite of it. the very moment that az
agricultural association or laborers
! organization violates any provision o.
this law ii is applicable TO such as
sociation, and they can and will be
punished under the law. Any mar
knows that"
Not Definite Enough.
An Interesting view was that Of Con
gresham Macdonald, Of Michigan
who has a large labor district. Point
ing out that the provision exempted
labor organizations not conducted 80
profit he said the courts after al
would have 70 decide what organiza
tons were mot for profit" and tn
same old battle for definite construc
ton" would have TO be fought over
Therefore, he said, you have 70
certain purposes and as to certain act
brought these organizations where tn
courts may hold them expressly within
the operation Of the Sherman law"
One Of the phases OF the situation
which calls for comment is that Will
a good part Of the labor Ieades profes
to be satisfied with the provision man
me-. in and out of congress who do no
want exemption profess to be satisfied
on the theory that the courts now ar
as practical fact not interfering wit
the right of labor to orga nize but tina
the moment such organizations TAX
unjust measures they will be liable t
prosecution.