The Lake County times. [volume] (Hammond, Ind.) 1906-1933, 1921-04-19
WAS BOYCOTT
INSTEAD Of
Of STRIKE
PiCketS Merely On The Street
To Enforce Boycott Is
Contention.

Proof that the disagreement between
the managers of the three department
stores of Hammond and the labor organ
iz@tons has for months been really a
boycott instead of strike was the bur
den Of the evidence introduced bv at
torneys for the plaintiffs today when
Judge Harry Cumpackcr assumed juris-
diction In the Injunction suit in the su-
perior court Mt Hammond
ORIGINAL BILL IN EVIDENCE
The Michigan city jurist reached this
city al 70 o'clock and promptly started
the machinery moving. Attorneys W.
J. McAleer and Gerald GiIlett appeared
for tho majority of the defendants.
while two were represented by Attorneys
J. X Stinson and II. Z. Granger. L. L.
Romhergcr and c. Is. Tinkham we're at
torneys for the department stores man
ayers.
Mr.. Tinkham introduced the original
bill in evidence setting out the details
of the strike which was called last Sep
tember and telling Of the boycott and
secondary boycotts which were later in
stituted by the labor organizations in
their efforts to help the retail clerks win
their fight.
READ SERIES OF AFFIDAvITs
Attorneys Bombergcr and Tinkham
then took turns reading a series Of af-
hdavits which were introduced along
with the complaint. Each of the store
owners made at least one affidavit to
bear out the statement that the pickets
We're on the streets 10 enforce the boy
colt and not to persuade the employed
clerks not to work in the stores.
The a6davts related how the pickets
never assumed their beats until an hour
or more after the clerks had come TO
work and that they were always most
numerous when trade was heaviest and
most patrons were entering and leaving
the stores. They left the streets. 1t is
said at the time for the stores o close.
or even earlier.
wRrTS SIGNED by CLERKS
Another afeidavit~.was signed by 1O7
persons employed In he Lion store and
stated that they had not been inter-
viewed by union representatives or de-
manded to cease work since carly i'm De
cember. Another was signed by rs
clerks OF the Minas store and third
was signed by 13 peIAons from the store
Of N-hitczcl & Rces. The object Of
these afTidavlts was to bear out the con
tcntion Of the owners that there IS no
labor trouble between the store manag-
ors and their help
Numerous affidavits were then in
troduccd. signed by individual employees
Of the three stores, relating interviews
which they had had with people who cx-
pressed fear that it would become known
that they were trading at tEe stores and
that their relatives or friends would he
nucd because OF their presence in the
boycotted stores.
BOYCOTT EFFECT SHOWN
Many instances were cited in which
! former patrons after long absence had
finally entered tho stores through rear
doors and refused to leave by the front
entrance lest they be seen bv agents of
The unions. Some of them had thcir
purchases carried to q >tomobilcs quite
distance AVA; others insisted that
articles be wrapped i'm plain paper: and
some did not wish the store trucks to
deliver articles but that asked that boys
on bicycles or similar convcyances. not
SO easily Identified. be used. All feared
the $50 fine which the unions were said
to have announced would be imposed on
persons violating the boycott ruling
Attorneys for the labor organs izations
entered obJcctiors to all Of these on the
basis that they were for the mos. part
conclusions and hoersay and not state
iaents of far - his was Nicely the
preliminary hearing on tho temporary
i.1nnction -'lcsc were overruIcd l,ot will
~ tqkcn un n octa all later whom tl.,- final
hearing IS hold.
Tho plaintiffs had completed tho in
PRODUCTION Of aGldavits at two O'Clock
t1,{. ,r4or-,or ,,al,i irr- tho +o4o1 t,f1tDIor r