New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1921-07-26
Appellate Court
Grants Plea 10
Stop Picl&eting
Reverses One Order Which
Denied an Injunction
Against the Clothing
Union; Ai1irus Another
Threats Also Forbidden
Contractors TO Whom Work
Is Sen: Projected From
Acts of intimidation

Employers are entitled to relief by
injunction against persons who picket
thair establishments and interfere with
loyal employees and with the tran
saction of business, the Appellate Divi.
sion of the Supreme Court held yesser-
day. The court reversed an order bv
Justice McAvoy, denying petition for
injunction to Marks. Arnheim {, Co,
clothing manufacturers, and affirmed
an order by Justice Erlanger, granting
an injunction to Joseph Skolny & Co,
clothing makers. Justice Victor ].
Bowling dissented.
In both cases the defendants were
Sidney Hillman, president OF the Anal
gamatcd Clothing Workers, and other
officials of the union. BY the courts
action these persons are enjoinel from
making any further threats or commit
ting acts of intimidation against the
employees of the plaintiffs or against
the employers.
In the case of Marks Arnheim, Inc.
the application of this concern for an
injunction was denied in the Supreme
versed this decision and held that the
petitioner was entitled to an iniunc-
ton.
The application of Joseph Skolny
was granted in the Supreme Court and
the higher court sustained this finding.
Charges Illegal Campaign
In the Arnheim case forty afidavits
were submitted In support of the all
legations, which, Justice Greenbaum,
of the Appellate Division, said, dis
close a persistent and organized cam
paign of unlawful acts, of assaults,
abuse, threats and intimidation toward
the employees of the plaintiff and also
toward the contractors to whom the
plaintiff was sending the work.
Justice Greenbaum said that the de-
PENDANTS denied any guilt ia the mat
ter, and added, con the other hand it
is a matter of common knowledge that
one charged with the commission of a
crime is not prone to admit his guilt.
The answering afidavits indicate clear
" that troublous incidents occurred,
in which the plaintiffs employees and
members of the defendants union
were involved"
Justice Greenbaum states that it is
"alleged that the Amalgamated Cloth
ing Workers Of America is not an or
binary trade union, but is a radical de-
parture in unionism by the revolution
airy element of clothing workers, who
openly preach violence to attain their
purpose of securing the means and in
struments of production and destroying
all private and individual ownership"
Radical Charges Ignored
Eve shall on this appeal disregard
the serious accusations against the
Amalgamated Clothing Workers of
America and assume that it is a loyal
American association and consider the
question before us upon the features
Of the case" said Justice Greenbaum.
He also decided not to pass upon the
merits of the controversy between the
parties because of the conflicting afi-
davits on that subject. In explaining
why he grants the injunction, Justice
Greenbaum says:
Direct proof of conspiracy is rarely
available. Conspiracies are ordinarily
Matched in secret, the discriminating cir
cumstances surrounding the acts of the
conspirators, the circumstances and tes-
timony of many witnesses who have no
apparent reasons for inverting occur
rences or falsely testifying and the
strong probability that the Incidents
narrated took place, justify the conclu-
sion that members of the defendant
union were guilty of many acts of law
lessness and unjustifable interference
with the plaintiffs business and that the
picketing was not peacefully nor law
fully c0n1uctod,