Bisbee daily review. [volume] (Bisbee, Ariz.) 1901-1971, 1921-10-04
To ARGUE TRUAX
CASE ONCE MORE
IN WASHING TON
Big Legal Controversy, Now
In u. S. Supreme Court, to
Be. Re-opened Wednesday

Clifton Matthews Of Globe, former
ly connected with the firm of Film
wood & Ross of this city, left Globe
Thursday for Washington to argue
again before the United States SUI
preme court the case of William
Truax VS.. Corrigan and the Bisbee
Cooks and Walters union. The case
Will be argued before the tribunal
wednesday.
This case is being watched with con
siderable interest by members of the
legal profession and others, and is
generally regarded as one of the most
important cases now penang in the
supreme court. 1t was begun in 1916
IN the superior court al Cochise coun-
ty, was appealed to, the supreme
court of Arizona and from there WAS
taken by writ of error to the supreme
court OF the United States.
Tests AntiJunetion Law
The suit was brought for the pur-
pose of testing the constitutionality
Oh Paragraph 1864 OF the Revised Sta
tutes of Arizona, commonly known as
the Gompers' anti-injunction law. This
statute was passed in 1913 and is sim
liar to statutes passed abeut the same
time in several other states as the
result OF agitation set on foot by SAM
uel Gompers, president 'oI the .smer1-
can Federation of LABOR, and other
prominent labor leaders.
The statute provides that, with GER
tain exceptions, no injunction shall
be issued in any case between an
NIL
growing out of a dispute concerning
terms and condition of employment
As construed and interpreted by the
Arizona supreme court, the statute
forbidS the issuance of an injunction
to prevent the boycOtting ana picket.
ing of an employers place of bust
ness by striking employees, although
it is conceded that such acts could be
enjoined if committed by other per-
sons or against, other places or Dusi-
ness.
Details of Truax Case
In this particular case certain en-
ployes of Truax went on strike and
organized boycott of his restauran:
business. In furtherance of the boy
colt the strikers stationed a number
of the restaurant at Bisbee, Ariz. The
pickets walked back and forth in
front of the door, carrying banners,
distributing circulars, accOsting pa
irons and passersby and calling ont
in loud tones and vociferous language
their admonitions not to patronize the
business. AS a result of this conduct
there was great falling off in Tru-
AXIS trade and serious danger that his
business would be destroyed
Truax alleged all these facts in his
complaint, and asked for an injunc-
ton to stop the boycOtting and picket.
ing, but it was held by the superior
court, and also by the Arizona SUI
preme court, that the statute in ques-
ton did not permit the issuance of an
injunction in such a case, although it
was conceded that if the strikers had
committed these same acts against
some one for whom they had never
worked. an injunction would be is
sued
Claims Gloss Legislation.
1t is commended by counsel for Tru-
ak that this statue is most glaring
example of class legislation, and that
it violates the constitution of the Unit
ed States. by taking away from some
citizens right freely accorded to all
others. thus denying them the equal
protection of the laws.
An unusual feature of this case is
that it has already been once argued
in the supreme court of the United
States and is now up for reargument.
The first argument took place in
April, 1920. at which time Mr. Math-
ews appeared for the plaintiff. The
court then took the case under adj
visement and considered it for more
than year without being able to
reachLany conclusion.
Taft Will Hear Case
Then followed the death of Cnscf
Justice White. after which the re-
naming members of the court, of
their own motion, ordered the case
to be restored to the docket for re-
argument at the present term. after
the appointment of new chief JUS
tice. Thus it happens that this noted
Arizona case will be one of the first
to be argued before Chief Justice
Taft