The labor journal. [volume] (Everett, Wash.) 1909-1976, 1917-02-23
BOYCOTT DECISION
IN THE SCHUBERT CASE
VS.. CIGARMAKERS

|
Schubert injunction and damage suit is
taken from a circular letter of Presi-
dent G. M. Perkins of the Cigar
makers International Union of Amer
lea, addressed to local unions, and
| it is of interest to all unions. Read
| it:
Chicago, ILL.,, Feb. 1, 1917.
To the Officers and Members of Local
Unions:
Fellow Craftsmen;
On January 20, Judge Andrews rem
dered his decision in the long-drawn-
out Schubert injunction and one-hun-
bred thousand dollar damage suit. Be-
fore briefly analysing the decision, it
should be remembered that Schubert,
backed by the American Anti-Boycott
Association, charged the International
Union, Local Union No. 6, Syracuse,
the Central Labor Union, and other
unions of Syracuse, G. w. Perkins
personally and as President, the Of
ficers of Union 6, Syracuse, and the
officers of the Central Labor Union
and of cther unions of Syracuse, with
being engaged in an unlawful con-
spiracy and the illegal and unlawful
use of the union label, and monop-
oily under the laws of New York, and
with being engaged in restraining
trade and commerce, and calling an
illegal strike and boycotting Schubert
primarily and directly, and boycotting
other concerns which displayed and
handled Schubert goods, and asked for
a perpetual injunction, and damages
to the extent Of one hundred thousand
dollars.
The decision of the Judge, which
will be published in the February is
sue of the Official Journal, freed the
International Union and the Interna-
tional President on all counts, and
freed the local unions of Syracuse on
all counts except the secondary boy
colt, and denied the injunction in so
far as it primarily and directly ap-
plies to Schubert, but made the in
junction permanent in so far as it re-
strained the unions from boycotting
firms which handle Schubert goods, in
substance meaning that we have
right to boycott Seubert goods but
cannot boycott John Jones, the deal
err, simply because he handles Schubert
goods. This is known and referred
to as a secondary boycott. The de-
cision held that the strike was legal
and that we can quit individually or
collectively for cause or no cause;
that the label is legal, and that its
use is lawful. The Judge held that
the restrictions governing the use of
the label in the action before the
court were immaterial; that the use
of the label by many union manu-
facturers does not constitute an I'M
! lawful combination in restraint of
trade, a conspiracy, or a monopoly,
and further that the limitations as
to wages, and other restrictions are
not unlawful. The Judge held that
picketing in aid of the strike was not
itself illegal because pursued with
out violence, trespass, or other i'm
proper acts, and the decision so de-
clared.
| Thn 1saI,o CT oil daFn
ants in the case was dismissed ex-
cept against Cigarmakers' Union 6,
the Central Trades and Labor As
sembly, Division $50 Street Car Men,
Machinists' Union 381, c. F. Reiff,
Samuel Grouse, C. A. Yates, William
Geigler, D. Ring and j. Charles. Lo-
cal Unions, however, attached to the
Central Trades and Labor Assembly,
who were not mentioned in the COM
plant and who were not specified nor
convicted of any boycotting, are not
affected. The plaintiff was given an
introductory judgment continuing the
injunction against the foregoing
named defendants, and referee was
appointed to determine what damages,
if any, the plaintiff has suffered by
reason of the so called secondary boy
colt. The damages are limited to
Seubert's customers, that were men,
toned in the trial, and do not af-
feet more than six or seven all told
and the damages, if proven, through
loss of trade cannot possibly exceed
one thousand dollars at the utmost
and they will be lucky if they can
prove five hundred.
OF course Schubert was dissatisfied
and will appeal and an appeal will
also be taken on the pertinent in.
junction as it applies to the second
airy boycott, and against the decision
as it applies to the secondary boy.