Richmond planet. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1883-1938, 1922-06-10

StalCS uuHutN uo"uH.oh iooI Noho"s
another doubled barreled" decision
In other words, 1t is decision tha'
looks both ways and affords Il measure
of comfort to both sides, while specifi
Gully satisfying neither. 1t was ar
opinion -in\the celebrated Coronado
coal case and dealt with important
questions affecting, tho flights, privilee
es and liability Of labor organizations
Specifically speaking the case was as
follows
The case which presented the Dues
tons passed upon by the court was all
appeal by the United Mine Workers OF
America, District No. 81 Of that or
ganization and its officers, twenty-sev'
ell local unions in that district anu
their officers and s.Xty-fivc individuals
some of the latter not members OF any
union from decision by the United
States District Court Of Arkansas, ap
proved by the Circuit Court OF Appeals
holding them guilty Of violating the
Sherman antitrust act during co VI
coal mine strikes n Arkansas III
1914 and imposing damages of 5000,
900 which were trebled under the anti
trust law.
In plain words. it was q rulini,
aga nst the labor organizations with
out assessing damages and it puts
these organizations on notice as to
what they may expect in the future
In doing this. the Supreme Court over
turned one Of the fundamental princi'
pies of law. 1t has always Deen under
stood that body secured charter OF
Incorporation in order that the COM
bine or body might exercise the rights
and privileges Of the individual to SIG
and to be sued.
BY this decision, the resting Of A
suit upon the Individual units in an
unincorporatcd body has been nullified
or course, good reasons foe this are
given, but 1t places the legal fraterni.
ty "at sea-" so to SPEAK. It used to be
said that no one ever knew what a
jury was going to do. 1t is now rho
rule that no knows Just what the Su.
preme Court Is going to rule. 1t renG.
ers dccis'o on today. which decision Ia
nullificd tomorrow. If unincorporated
bodies can be held responsible rs part
nerships and he sued without resting
the suit upon the individual members
Of the partnership, then what is the
need of so pany corporate bodies and
why go to the expense of being incor
poratcd?
The mine-owners wanted money for
their property that had been destroyed
and Their business that had been
ruined. The United States District
Court Of Arkansas gave them damages
in the sum of two hundred thousand
dollars. which under the Sherman anti
trust act became six hundred thousand
dolMrs orothrce times the original
amount. This view of the situation
was concurred in by the Court Of Ap
peals and null:fied by the Supreme
Court Of the United States, while sus
tanning all other grounds Of contcn
ton.
This is the way the Supreme Court
"wigglcd" out OF this embarrassing sit
uation:
The authority placed by members OF
District No. 81 IN their officers to order
strike, it was held, made the district
organization responsible for any unlaw
full injuries inflicted during the con,
duct Of the strike and made the fund
accumulated for strike purposes by
the district subject to the payment OF
any judgment which Is recovered.
1t was necessary, however In order
TO hold District No. 81 liable in this
case under the antitrust act, to estab
FISH that the conspiracy to attack the
Bache-Denman mines and stop non
union employment there was intent to
restrain inter ST tie commerce, to mon
opol.Ze it and subject 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 ia not direct obstruC
ton TO interstate commerce: In coa'
Congress has the power to subject such
acts to national supervision and re
straint. 1t also has the power. the
court held, to punish conspiracies in
which such practices are part Of the
plan to hinder, restrain or monopoll7e
Interstate commerce.
While unincorporated labor organ!Ln
tons could b sued under the Sherman
ANTITRUST. for triple damages 70 rlosses
TO property caused by them. there was
nothing in the evidence in the present
case, 1T was declared, to show that the
acts complained Of were aimed by the
labor unions to restrain interstate
trade. Questions relating to the clrar rec
to the jury were dismissed without es