The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1921-07-30
M'kN|CHT QUOTED late DECISION
that FL00RED N0N-UN|0N CLAIMS
Attorney for Printing Trades Unions Took Opponents Off Their
Feet When He Cited Recent New York Decision IN Similar
Case vacatng An Injunction Right to Picket Upheld.

junction, thus shaping public opinion,
is often decisive.
Courts and Caution.
I'm exercising it's discretion the
court: cannot shut it's eyes to this
aspect of the case or ignore the far
reaching psychic effect Of its man.
date. Therefore, If equity is to be
DONE, the greatest caution should be
observed in issuing fnjuhctions in
strikes. There should be grave prov
ocation. Strained constructions of the
words employed by strikers is not
enough. Surmise and suspicion are
not sufficient. Unusual vigor Of
speech among the strikers, now and
then, or groups of laburers assem-
bled, here and there, will not SUI
flee.
"Injunctions cannot rest in such
grave controversies upon such ~triv-
ial foundations; and of course it is
idle to contend that the depredations
of unidentified miscreants, or the
crimes of unknown criminals, can
move a court Of equity to issue an
injunction in any case against any
citizen.
I'm view of, this reasoning, I have
concluded. that the injunction order
should be vacated in every particularly;
but think I ought to add that the
defendants should not construe this
as grant License to them. Any
or destruction Of property will re-
suit instantly in another injunction:
=. Sanctioned by Law.
THUS We find the right to picket
definitely sanctioned and rooted in the
statute laws of the federal govern
ment. This enactment does not. of
course; control the courts of the state
of New York in case of this char
acter; but it does put into federal
statutory form the law Of this state
as propounded by it's ablest jurists.
1t also sweeps away completely, from
consideration here. all that has been
previously written by the federal
courts in opposition to picketing, in
GLIDING Atchison, T. &, S. F.. Ry. Co.
vs. Gee, 139 Fed. 5S2, cited by the
| plaintiff.
And not only that, but. It sets
forth in bold. certain, statutory lam
guage, the trend of modern thought
| against injunctions in labor disputes.
| The: Clayton Act has in no degree
been. devitalized, as between the EN-
ployer and the employees by the de-
cision of the supreme court of the
United States In Duplex rintins Press
Co. vs.:;Deering;' 254 U. S. -, II su-
preme court ~172.E 65e L: Ed. -,
| handed: down Jan~,S, 1921: That case
| went off on another theory.
Pickcting Is Lawful.
Judge Andrews, now on the: court
| of appeals sitting then at special
| term, in a well-considered. opinion,
the best I: have read on the subject,
| correctly SETS forth the law of this
state on picketing. He said:
Mere picketing, therefore; if it is
peaceful, If there is no threat or in
timidation, if it is confined to simple
persuasion,- I do not regard in any
sense as unlawful. whatever may be
the motive of the picketers. Foster
VS.. Retail Clerks. ETC., 80 Misc. Rep.
4S, 78 N. Y. Supp. $50.
This is sound: 1t is just. It is the
law. 1t must forever remain the law.
until liberty of speech ceases to be
human right. .
Not Par1of Language.
If then. it is the law in this state
that strikers on picket duty may use
persuasion what is persuasion ?
What language is permitted? What
is prohibited?
1.-The nomenclature Of the strike is
not the language Of the parlor. Men
become earnest and excited and Wig
orous at such times. A vital prin-
ciple is at stake. 1t is not within the
limits Of human nature to remain
calm and gentle under such circurn-
stances. The fervor of argument is
| upon them; the stimulus of battle.
They forget etiquette and grammar.
They employ strong language. Some
times they go beyond the borders Of
decorum. But so do men in all walks
of life. 1nstigated by. emotion and
impelled by deep conviction men al
ways. employ strong words.
''1ThiS hannora dNring no1ific91 c9n-