Norwich bulletin., 1922-06-06
Labor Organizations
 Suab|einU. s. Courts
Supreme Court Decides Lab- or Unions Are Amenable to Sherman Anti Trust Act.

or Unions Are Amenable to
 Sherman Anti Trust Act.
 Washinson. June 5.-Deciding tho celebrated Coronado coal case, the su- preme court today held that labor or- sanizations, although unincorporated, are amenable to the Sherman antitrust act, and that under it such organizations may be prosecuted for restraint of in- terstate commerce. The court also held that labor unions are suable. Chief Justice Taft. In announcing the decis ion, did not indicate any dissent.
 The case which presented the qIes- tions passed upon by the court, was an appeal by the United Mine Workers of America, District No q of that organi- zation and it's officers twenty-seven To- cal unions in that district and their oi- ficers and sixty-five individuals, some of the latter not members of any union, from decision by the United States district court Of Arkansas, approved by the circuit court of appeals, holding them guilty of violating the Sherman antitrust act during coal mine strikes in Arkansas in 1914 and imposing dam ages of $200, ,000, which were trebled url- der the antitrust law.
 The effect of the decision today will
 be to set aside the damages, because of the finding that the acts which caused the destruction of property were not in- cited for the purpose of restraining in terstate commerce.
 During the strike lawlessness prevail ed and property damage was done the Coronado and eight other mines con troIled by the Bache-Denman Coal com pany. The United Mine Workers of America contested the jurisdiction of the 1 federal courts on the ground that being an unincorporated association of mine
 workers it was not subject to prosecu- I tion under the Sherman antitrust law. | Five questions were presented by the controversy, Chief Justice Taft said.
 First whether there had been a correct
 selection of the parties to be sued; sec ond, whether the parties not being ln- corporated were subject to suit; third whether the United Mine Workers of America had been engaged in conspir-
 acy or in the destruction of property for which that organization and it's o. fcers could be held liable; fourth whether the United Mine Workers of America had been engaged in con spiracy or in the destruction of proper ty for which that organization and It's officers could be held liable; fourth whether there was evidence to show that 1 the conspiracy alleged did restrain or
 monopolize interstate commerce, anu fifth, whether the trial court, in charging the jury, had coerced them into return ling the verdict There had been no mls joinder of the parties under the laws ci 1 Arkansas, where the case was trleo, lhe supreme court held.
 In view of federal legislation, th' icourt announced, that such organiza' tions are suable in the federal courts fol itheir acts and that funds accumulated Ito be expended in conducting strikes ar' subject to execution in suits for torts icomn1itted- by such unions in strikes on the ground that there was nothing in the evidence to show that the inter
 national union or international board O. Ithe United Mine Workers authorized the strike, or took any part in prepara Ition for it, or in its maintenance, or hae Iratifed it by paying any of the ex penses. the court concluded that the in lternationaI. union and its officers should not have been held by the trial court a! Esubiect to joint liability with the dis trict or local organizations and officers flor participation in the conspiracy ol for the destruction of property inciden
 to the strike.
 The authority placed by members O District No. 21 in their officers to orde a strike, 1t was, held, mdQe the uiSIi4S organization. responsible for any unlaw ful injuries inflicted during the conduc
 of the strike and made the fund accum lulated for strike purposes by the distric subject to the payment of any judg lment which is recovered.
 It was necessary, however, in order u : hold District No. 21 liable in this cas under the antitrust act, to establish that the conspiracy to attack th' Rache-Denrnan mines and stop non tunion employment there was with inten to restrain interstate commerce, to mo nopolize it, and subject it to the contro of the union, Chief Justice Taft stated adding that while coal mining is not in terstate commerce, and obstruction O coal mining is not direct obstructio Ito interstate commerce in coal, congres Ehas the power to subject such acts t national supervision and restraint.
 Ialso has the power, the court held, t
 punish conspiracies in which such prac
 tices are part of the plan to hinder, re
 strain or monopolize interstate com
 merce.
 Labor leaders in Washington, includ
 ling officers of the American Federatio Iof Labor, while expressing satisfactio lover the sweeping decision, refused t ] authorize any statement in advance of careful study of the findings of til - lcourt. They were particularly interest ed in that section of the opinion whic
 held that the treasury of labor organiza
 ltions could be held liable for damage . caused by labor unions.