The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1921-02-09
PiCketing By Strikers
Declared Unlawful By
State Supreme Court

Charleston. W. Va. Feb. S,-To carry
in front OF stores banners lnSCrloeu;
This store is unfricndly TO union LABOR
is unlawful when loss is irrcparapic' &C
CordinG to an opinion handed down by
the supreme court OF appeals TINS morn,
ing in the case Of Parker Paint 4 wall
Paper company against Local | mon 90,
Sl2, and others. which had been apHcdIeh
from CahCll county. r
The decision Of the circuit court OF
Cabell county was reversed and tho CaSc
remRrdcd. In the ruling the court sal"
an association Of persons Will not Nv
permitted Ia accomplish Il lawful rur,,
pose by tho use Of unlawful act, and
conversely, will not b. permitted 70 dc-
compliSh an unlawful purpiS" even ~.
means that would otherwise be lawful.
"WhCrC 4 person or combination OF
persons seeks TO destroy ~anothcrS trhd"
or business" the opinion continued, aNV
by their actions influence or inttmidnlc
others with whom he has Valuable con
tracts. causing said others to break such
contracts and discharge his employees
then actually performing the same, ih'
loss is aCtnHl. continuing anu irFcThFI-
bic. injunction Will lie I" compel SucE
person or combination Of persons 10 uC-
sist from such acts.
Brings Out Contract Break
""W'here 4 contractor has entered INTO
a contract to paint Il store hulldlnE WIFI
the owner who then ouduC u retail
merchandise business therein and Is ac-
etua!ly in the performance OF ms cor.
tract. il Is unlawful for others 10 carry
banners I'm front Of the Stor" Is unfair
words thereon: This store Is unfricndiH
TO union labor, or this store Is unfair
to union painters OF the Ike LEGENDS.
the said persons ScarrylnS S&ld naiiic'S
or CAUSING the same 10 be carried nav
ing no industrial dispute with thy St"r,
owner. thereby causing the said store
owner, in fear Of loss or violence 20
cancel said contract and discharge INC
contractor 10 his irrCparahic loss, ana
such bannerinE will be cnjoincd.
persons who conSptrc /" indHc'
tween other persons are liable TO action
therefor and Is the loss occastonrd
thereby is continuing and irr~cparaole'
injunction will lie to prevent II.
other Decisions.
The court handed down decisions IN
six other cases AZ follows; Harry I:
Miller against Cora l.. Warrington and
others, appealed from Monogahella
county. reversed and rcmandcd; QUO
Hoon against /. S. LYMAN and others,
Cabcll county. reversed and rr'nlhotd'
Lawrence Perky against Elsi" Prrky.
Cabell county. affirmed; MNrile Gihnaru
against Dorsey Evans. Cabell. affirmed
James w. jarrett against Mary +.
kimbrough. Putnam county. affirmed.
In the case Of Gihbard against Evans
the supreme court held that a verdict
Of 81. 900 in favor OF 3 woman VINO
had been permanently injured about the
head and neck was not excessive.
II was decided in tho case of FarKy
against Perky that section one. chapter
"a. Of tho code renders marriages nc
tween persons under the age OF consent
not absolutely void. but only roidabl",
and void only from the time they are
so declared by decree OF divorce ana
nullity.
The certificate In the case OF Wilson
burg NJ. +. church against Peter w.
Ash was dismissed. the court d"clar-
ing that the case was not renewable
by the supreme court. Tho removal or
r. w. ASH is desired by the pIaintlfs
on the ground that he refused to give
ministerial aid 20 the pastor because
he failed to endorse checks proper!
authorized and drawn and because OF
contempt OF order of the quarterly con-
ference. The case was appealed from
harrison county.