Arizona republican., 1922-06-06
| |[Ab0RUN|0NS
HELD LIABLE.
UNDER AN Il
TRUST LAWS
Supreme Court Makes I'm
portant Ruling Govern
ing Organized Labor;
Unions May Be Sued

ing Organized Labor;
Unions May Be Sued
WASHINGTON. June 6-Deciding
the Coronado coal mines case, the
supreme court today held that la
Dor organizations. although unincor-
porated, are amenable to the Sher-
man antitrust act and that under
such organizations may be prosecuted
for restraint of interstate commerce.
The court also held that labor un-
ions may be sued.
Chief Justice Taft, in announcing
the decision. did not indicate any
dissent. The case which presented
the questions passed upon by the
court was an appeal by the United
Mine Workers of America, District
No. 21. officers, q local unions in
that district and their officers, and
65 individuals. some of the latter not
members OF any union. from decl-
sion by the United States district
court OF Arkansas, approved by the
circuit coIlrt of appeals, holding them
guilty of violating the Sherman anti
trust act during the coal mine strikes
in Arkansas in. 1914, and imposing
damages of 100000, which were
trebeled under the anti trust law.
The effect of the decision today VIII
be to set aside the damages, because
Of the finding that the acts Which
caused the destruction of property
were not melted for the purpose OF
restraining interstate commerce. Dur
ing the strike lawlessness prevailed,
and property damage was done to
the coronado and eight other mines
controlled by the Bache-Dennlan
Coal company The United Mine
Workers contested the jurisdiction OF
the federal courts on the ground that
being an unincorporated association
of mine workers, it was not subject
to prosecution under the Sherman
trust law.
Five Questions Presented
Five questions were presented by
the contl oversy, Chief Justice Taft
said. First. whether there had been
a, correct selection of the parties to
be sued: second, whether the parties
not being incorporated We're subject
to suit: tfird. whether the United
Mine Workers of America had been
engaged in a conspiracy or in the
destruction of property for which
that organization ard its officers
could be held liable: fourth, whether
there was evidence to show that the
conspiracy alleged did restrain or
monopolize interstate commerce; and
fifth. whether the trial court in charg-
ing the jisry, Rad coerced them into
returning tn, verdict. There had been
no misjoinder of the parties under
the laws of Arkansas, where the case
was tried, the supreme court held.
In view of federal legislation, the
court announced that such organi-
cations are suable in the federal
courts for their acts and that funds
accumulated TO pe expended in con-
Quoting strikes are subject to execu-
ton in courts for acts committed by
such unions in strikes"
On the ground that there was
nothing in the evidence to show that
the international union or interna-
tional board of the United Mine
Workers had authorized the strike,
or took any part in preparation for
it or its maintenance. or had ratified
il by paying any of the expenses. the
court concluded that the international
union and its officers should not
have been held by the trial court as
subject t. joint liability with the dis
trict and local organizations and Of
ficers for participation in the con-
spiracy or for the destruction of
property incident to the strike.
The authority placed by members
of District No. II in their officers
to order a strike, it was held, made
the district organization responsible
for any unlawful injuries inflicted
during the conduct of the strike and
made the fund accumulated for strike
purposes by the district subject to
the payment of any judgment which
is recovered.
No Commerce interference
1t was necessary, however, in or
der to hold District No. Il liable in
this case under the anti-trus act to
establish that the conspiracy to at
tack the Basch- -Denman mines and
stop nonunioi employment there was
within intent to restrain interstate
commerce, to nlonopolize it, and sub
ject it to the control of the union.
Chief Justice Taft stated, adding that
while coal mining is not interstate
commerce, and obstruction of coal
mining IS not a direct obstruction to
interstate commerce in coal, congress
has the power to subject such acts to
national supervision, the court held,
and to punish such conspira cies in
which such practices are part of the
plan to hinder, restrain and monop-
olize interstate commerce
While Lnincorporated labor organ
izations could be sued under the
Sherman anti trust law for triple
damages for losses TO property caused
by them, there was nothing in the
evidence of the present case, it de-
clared. to show that the acts COM
planned OF weie aimed by the labor
unions tt restrain interstate COM
merce. Questions relating to the
charge OF the Jury were dismissed
without examination by the court, in
view of the effect of its decision
holding that restraint of interstate
commerce had not been the object
of the strike
Labor leaders in Washington, in
Guiding officers of the American Fed
Grafton of Labor, while expressing
concern over the sweeping provisions
of the decision, decline to authorize
any statement in advance of a care
ful study of the finding of the court.
They were particularly interested in
that section of the opinion which held
that the treasury of labor organiza-
tions could be held liable for dam
ages caused by labor unions
Discussing the object and demands
OF the United Mine Workers of Amer
lea and >.te government of the or
ganizatio. between the convention for
the purpose of determining whether
organized labor, although unincorpo-
rated may be sued. Chief Justice
Taft review cd in detail it's strike rules
and other matters bearing on the
decision