Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1922-06-20

, have been brought BY operators against
union officials and members.
In only one instance has labor sought
to use the injunction against employ
ers. That came as an unexpected de-
velopment of a controversy in the gar
ment making industry in New York,
when the union secured a court order
restraining the employers from break
ing a contract which had been entered
into with the union, and was SO
singularly successful that it was
thought labor might undertake to make
frequent use of the weapon SO often
used against it. However, union lead
ers are so vehemently opposed to the
injunction in industrial disputes that
it seems they Will not seek to use it
even when it might be to their advan-
tage. F..
JoIts From t,e Supreme Court
First of a series of jolts which labor
! received in the Supreme court of the
United States was the decision hold
ing the secondary boycott to be illegal.
That was not regarded as vital to the
cause of the workers, but nevertheless
it was a defeat. Then came the de-
cision declaring the new child labor
law TO be unconstitutional. The
unions had fought long to get some
kind of a law regulating or a%bolishing
child labor, and their hopes in that
direction have now been twice blasted
by the highest court in the land.
The more recent decision of the
supreme court in the Coronado case is
the most signal defeat that labor has
met with, however. Under that deci-
sion the liability of the unions to be
prosecuted for restraint of interstate
commerce in violation of the Sherman
antitrust law has been established,
whereas the leaders of labor have al
ways believed, and had reason to be-
lieye, that they and their %organiZa-
tons were immune from any such at
tacks. There was a crumb of comfort
for the union in the decision, for it
set aside a judgment against the de-
PENDANTS, which with costs and fees
amounted to some $7OO,00 and funds
of the mine workers to that amount.
which had been tied up by the lower
court, will eventually be released.
The full force and effect of this de-
cision may not be known for some time
not until it has been interpreted and
applied by the courts in other cases.
On the face of it, however, it appears
that any union that calls a strike that
can be alleged or shown to be a con-
spiracy in restraint of interstate COM
merce may be subjected to an attack
similar to the proceedings in the
Coronado case.
Senator LaFollette. of Wisconsin.
criticized the decision in this case in
a vigorous public statement in which
tic remarks at Chief Justice William
Howard Taft. Mr.. Taft. it is interest
ing to recall. was one of the joint
chairman of the National War Labor
Board during the war emergency, and
in that position was generally regard
ed as eminently fair to labor.
while the Coronado Coal company
decision sets aside the money judgment
rendered against the defendants" said
Senator LaFollette, sit is the most
ominous in what it foreshadows for the
future of union labor in this country"
In these dark hours labor is in a
peculiar position. Nothing would be
so helpful to its cause as a return of
general business and industrial pros
perity, while if it ~resists the agrees
sions that are made against it condi-
tons are created that necessarily re-
tard that return more or less. Work
ers can drive their best bargains with
capital when business is booming and
when the demand for labor equals or
exceeds the supply. Some of the radi-
calls among them may not realize this.
but the conservative leaders are keenly
alive to the fact that it is safe to
say that at this time no group of men
in the country is pulling harder for
the return of Old General Prosperity.
For this reason it is quite possible
that some of the strikes now on and
threatened may not be carried as far
as has been predicted. Intelligent
labor does not want to obstruct unnec-
e~ssarily the generals progress.