The New York herald., 1921-03-08
LUMBER EXPORTER
WINS INJUNCTION
AGAINST UNIONS
Five Steamship Lines Also
Enjoined From Refusing
to Handle Shipments.
COERCION is DECRIED
Acts of Defendants Amount
in Law to a Conspiracy,
Court Asserts.
REVIEWS PORT CONDITION
Burgess Brothers Co., Inc,
Had Refused to Unionize
It's Plant.
REVIEWS PORT CONDITION

Supreme Court Justice Callaghan In
Rrooklyn yesterday granted a perma
nent injunction to the Burgess Bros.
Co, Inc, exporters of lumber, restrain
ing the Transportation Trades Council
of the Port of New York, a labor body;
local unions and steamship lines from
refusing to handle Burgess Bros lum-
Der for shipment Justice Callaghan
said that "the various acts of the de-
PENDANTS amount, in law, to a con-
spiracy against the plaintiff"
When Burgess Bros. last spring re-
fused to unionize its plant at the de-
rnand of the teamsters' and lumber
handlers unions, according to Justice
Callaghan, the unions determined to
force compliance with their demands.
They enlisted the aid of the long
shoremen's union and as result en-
ployees Of stevedores and of the steam
ship companies handling lumber re-
fused to have anything to do with the
Burgess Bros. product. The annual
sales of Burgess Bros. exceeded $780,
900 a year.
Reviews Port situation.
The conditions prevailing in the port
of New York at the time In question"
said Justice Callaghan, were and are
a matter of common knowledge. There
was a great shortage OF labor due TO
the then existing abnormal conditions.
Steamship owners were at the mercy
OF the labor unions and they felt, no
doubt, that it was more profitable to
tolerate and, In fact. to openly counte-
nance. the unjust and Illegal acts OF
the unions than to discharge those OF
their employees who refused to handle
plaintiffs lumber
Justice Callaghan said that the em-
ployees had the right to work for whom
they pleased and when they pleased.
but Ii would be absurd to permit The
employees to continue on course of
conduct which makes the steamship
owners guilty of a violation of the
statute in discriminating unlawfully
against the shippers of goods IL such
a course of conduct is countenanced II
must, If carried to n logical conclu-
sion, result in destroying all who 10
not employ union men, coercion greater
in fact than that Of which some of the
Those defendants who We're owners
or agents of steamships were required
to serve the public without discrimina-
tion, and IL their employees continued
voluntarily in their service tho same
obligation rested also upon the en-
ployees This record is barren Of any
evidence which would indicate desire
on the part OF the steamship repre-
sentatives to receive or handle plain
tifrs lumber. They did not discharge
or reprimand any of their employees
for discriminating against the plaintiff.
but openly sanctioned such conduct
and connived at 1t on the theory, no
doubt, that 1t was better that plaintiff
should suffer than that the movement
of freight In the port be tied up.
Five Lines Enjoined.
Justice CaIlaghan added that it was
apparent the plaintiff would suffer ire
parable damage for which it had no
adequate remedy at law, and issued the
Injunction. The case was tried last
November, a temporary injunction hav-
ing been previously issued.
The defendant steamship lines included
the Cunard, Norton, Lilly & Co.. United
States Steel Products Company, keppe
& Co. and Furness Witty Co.
The principle that public utilities
must serve the public without discrimi-
nation has been indelibly written into
our American institutions" said Walter
G.. Merritt, counsel for the plaintin
yesterday. but organized
labor still voices resentment and indig-
nation whenever court illustrates its
efforts 20 use these public utilities as in
struments OF class aggression. Fortu-
nately for the life of this republic, public
opinion Is firmly set against action OF
this kind, whether emanating from en-