Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1921-06-25
Decision Of Interest
Case gainsh Carpenters District
Council dismissed.

terday discharged a rule to show
cause and dismissed the petition 70.
writ of mandamus filed by William L.
Mabrey against the Carpenters Dis
trict Council of the/United Brother
hood Carpenters and Joiners Of
America. Thomas W. Woitz. District
Secretary Local N. 1872, CT the unit*:!
Brotherhood of Carpenters and join
ers of America, and L. w. Matte:
Financial Secretary CT said Local
This case has been pending in tie
Court for. some time, and testimony
was taken about year ago.
The petitioner. William R. Mabrcy,
claimed he was tircd $50 and suspend
ed, s:x months for refusing to join n
a strike while employed on govar-
ment work in the erection of the
Unior Plaza Dormitories. In seekinc,
dismissal he asserted that he regard
ed The oath of allegiance to the GOV
crnmcnt when doing government wor';
A., superior to that of the Union. II
developed upon the hearing befo'H
Mr.. Justice Httz that Mabrey was
ere Of about 800 men who were fined
and suspended by the Union, ami
Mabrey's was test case to determine
the right of all of them.
The Union officials denied that
Mabrey was bona fde employee ct
the government, but asserted that he
returned to work for the George y.
Fuller Company after a strike had
been declared and after having re-
ce:ved from the Union strike benefits.
In submitting the case to the court,
counsel for the defendants contend d
first that Mabrey was not entitled 20
resort to the civil courts for relief
without first exhausting remedies
provided by the laws of his union,
ard pointed cut that Mabrey had
never avaiIed himself of the rignt
s:ycr Elm to appeal to the hlghac
tribunals Of his own union. On The
Ser hand, Mabrey's contention Wa
TIA: the provision of the unions by
laws that he deposit the amount Of
his fine as a prerequisite to the a?-
peal was unreasonable and burden.
some. and for that reason he was not
called npon to pursue his remedy by
appeal.
The contention was also made o..
jbcka.t OF. the Union, that even thou@h
he Court should find that it was I'M
rcce for Ma5rey to exhaust tie
remedies provided by the laws Of his
union, before resorting to the ciyu
courts, that the finding of the car
renters district council on the char%e.;
preferred against Mabley were fira!
and conclusive upor the m arits
cf the case and binding upon the court.
n v.,x o. the fact that it WIS shown
.::"@.. = argos had been property re,
f:-rrgd gainst Mabrey, notice Q: ne
charges and Of the date OF trial ard
an opportunity to be heard were at
foried rim in conformity with the law
of he ur:on, ard trial was h4G =
.ccI faith.
tho r,':: liz ais are na'"fA y
elated over the outcome of this suit
as they feel that any other decision
would have destroyed discipline with
in TIE union, and practically prevented
.h,n from settling differences with.
in Their own ranks.
The court refused 10 uphold Nab
reys CAIN that he was working for
the United States Government, in
stead Of the George A. Fuller Com
many. The case was an outg"owth Of
bitter fight between the Master
Builders Association Of New York
and the Union officials. The union
Claimed in the suit that they had vol
uG:aray negotiated raise N wages
with many Independent contractors IN
New FORK after the war, wasn iSe
das..r Builders refused to agree to
.tr new wage agreement. and dec g.
red g Lockout against the union. re-
sulting in the latter calling of. all
their men on jobs being done by the
| members of the Master Builders a !
s1:.a.:sr. Tie Fuller Company was
| nncpjaer 9f, tbs association, and was
II that line doing work il Washing
ton. -
Leo p Harlow and Henry |, QulnT
appeared as counsel for the unions
and their officials, and Wilton .
K