The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1915-03-09


every one of the nine thousand mem
bers of the Hatters' association,
wherever over the United States they
were residing and having property,
ants upon precisely the same grounds
as your petitioners.
That said Sherman act was not de-
signed or intended to apply to or af-s
feet labor organizations or combine
lions OF working men. and this was
stated repeatedly in the discussion of
the measure In and by your honorable
body prior to- It's enactment into law,
and neither the subscribers nor any
other persons had any knowledge
that the law could be held to apply
to the normal acts of labor organiza-
ii onss until the question had been sub
1nitted to and decided by the supreme
court Of the United States, the matter
coming to said supreme court from
the decision of the trial judge by
whom. as a question Of law, it was
decided that the law did not apply to.
associations OF working men.
That through the construction and
Interpretation given to said law by
said supreme court a condition has
been created and now exists which
was not contemplated or intended
when said law was framed and en-
acted, in that labor organizations
have been held amenabIe thereto, and
the individual members thereof have
been subjected to the penalty Of triple
damages thereby provided.
4 That the condition above mention
ed has grown out of certain action
brought by D. e. Loewe and another,
In September, $685. under the said
act, against the subscribers, and a
number of others who have since de-
ceased in which action the homes and
bank accounts of the defendants
attached and held to respond to any
possible judgment recovered in said
action.
That the homes and bank accounts
so attached were the results Of work.
and savings and accommodations of
many years spent by the defendants
in their occupations as journeymen
hatters before the act referred to had
been conceived or enacted and the
efforts and Accomplishments of their
entire lives were affected by such at
tachment and possible Judgment.
That at the time said suit was COM
menced and said attachments made,
the defendants, in many instances.
were already old men who had ex-
hausted their earning capacity, and
twelve years ago. many others of the
defendants have ceased to have earn
Ing capacity or powers, and of the
original defendants, numbering two
hundred and forty7three, many
have passed away leaving widows
and children whose only inheritance
Is the little estate of the deceased der
PENDANTS encountered by the burden
of said attachment. Of those who
were made descendants at the insti-
tuition Of the suit! but one hundred
and eighty-eight remain to respond to
the final judgment.
That during the period mentioned
in the complaint in said action the
defendants were engaged in earning
the means of providing for them
selves and their families, and had no
knowledge that they or. the organi-
cation of which they were members,
or the officers thereof, had done or
were doing any act or acts in VIOLA
ton of the Sherman antitrust law, or
OF any other law.
That by reason of the decision of
the supreme court that the act re-
ferred TO covered the actions OF labor
! organizations and their members, a
| Judgment has been entered against
the subscribers in the action above
| mentioned and in favor Of said D. b.
Loewe and another for the recovery
/ of Two Hundred and Fifty-two Thou
sand Dollars ($252 ,O00) and interest
and costs, and said judgment and
costs, if satisfied, by the defendants.
must be satisfied through the loss of
their homes and bank accounts, and
the reducing of many of them and
possibly the widows and children of
deceased defen dants, to the position
1 practically of paupers, with the prob
able consequence of throwing upon
the state the burden Of their sup
port
That this situation is due to the
| construction Of the aforesaid Sher-
man Antitrust Law by the Supreme
Court in giving to 1T the not intended
effect OF applying to labor organiza-
tons, and in not limiting its applica-
| ton to combinations and monopolies
by capital and capitalists, as was in
| tended by your Honorable Body.
That such construction was made
possible through unfortunate phrase
oIogy in drafting said Act and by the
! misconception of its scope and
breadth; and hardship mas hereby
been brought upon the subscribers.
That your Honorable Body enacted
a law, approved by the President Oc-
tober Is, 1914, known as IAN Act to
/ supplement Existing Laws Against
Unlawful Restraints and MonopoIes,
and for other purposes and COM
monty known as the Clayton Anti
i Trust Law, and by the provisions of
| which labor organizations are ex-
empted from the operation and effect
of all antitrust laws, and such or
things for which, under the Act here
inbefore referred. to the Supreme
i Court held them AMI their members
to be liable; and said clayton law now
provides specifically for that which
was thought and intended to have
been provided. though indirectly, in
the Sherman Antitrust Law, and in
ferentialIy vindicate the belief of the
defendants and OF the members OF
the labor organisations generally
that they were intended to be and
s. were exempt from the effect of said
Act.
That from the hardship brought
upon the subscribers through the con
struction placed on said Sherman
Antitrust Law by the Supreme Cour1
and the loss of their homes and bank
accounts through the satisfaction OF
said judgment. and the evil conse-
quences resulting therefrom, the
subscribers have no recourse nc
source to which they can look for re.
lief, other than your Honorable
Body