The labor world. [volume] (Duluth, Minn.) 1896-current, 1922-04-29
COURTS PLAY SIM STER PART IN
7 SUPPORTING CLASS DISTINCTION

refuse to compete with. any person
or persons or, class Of men as he
sees proper" - -. ..r - q :
In the federal case of the Ma
tfonal Fireproofing Company VS..
Mason Builders Association, the
United States Circuit Court of APP
peals declined to issue an injunction
restraining the Mason Builders AS
ISOLATION from boycotting the Ma
tional Fireproofing Company. and
in its opinion the court announced
the legal principles involved as fol-
lows:
"A laborer,. as well as builder,
trader, or manufacturer has the
right to conduct his affairs in any
lawful manner, even though he may
thereby injure others. Some several
laborers and builders may combine
for mutual advantage and SO long
ass the motive is not malicious. the
object not unlawful and
the means neither deceitful nor
fraudulent, the result is not a con-
spiracy, although it may necessarily
work injury to other persons. The
damage to such persons may be SER
tous, it may even extend to their
ruin, but If it is inflicted by a COM
bination in the legitimate pursuit
Of it's own affairs, it is damnum OBJ
seque injuria. The lawful object is
absent. > Nevertheless it
cannot be denied that the complain
ant had ground for complaining. It
desires to engage in a lawful and
legitimate way and is practically
prevented from doing SO by the
acts Of the defendants. It's right to
do business in the manner it desires
is interfered with, and the law al
fords it no remedy because such in
reference Is only incidental to the
exercise by the defendants of their
own right ito contract for their own
benefit. The complainant is in
| jured, but has no remedy. The law
could only make it possible for the
complainant to do business in the
| way it chooses by compelling the
they do not choose. But when equal
rights clash, the law cannot inter-
fere."
The early injunctions issued in
| labor cases did not tend to establish
class distinctions, but. the courts
finding that their occupation Of new
and unauthorized ground had not
met with successful opposition in
Congress or state legislature, en-
croached further by issuing manda-
| tory writs and edicts which in most
positive terms denied one group Of
citizens the rights affirmed as be-
longing to another.
The trade-unionist's boycott is re-
strained and condemned; the bust
ness mans boycott is upheld and
approved, what greater proof of
class distinction.
| The conflict created by these con-
flicting un-American and unconsti-
tutional judicial acts was eloquently
and forcefully described by United
State Circuit Judge Caldwell in the
case of Hopkins VS.. Oxley Stave
Company.
In part he said:
"English History, is replete with
examples showing that the King and
his dependent and servile judges
would have subverted the rights and
! liberties of the English people. but
for the good sense Of the English
juries and not the opinion Of judges,
that the English people are chiefly
indebted for some of their precious
rights and liberties
| ION the other hand when labor
ers combine ito maintain or raise
their wages; or otherwise to better
their conditions, or to protect them
selves from oppression or to attempt
to overcome competition with their
labor or the products of their labor,
! in order that, they may continue to
have employment and live, their ac-
ton, however open, peaceful and
orderly is branded as a conspiracy
WHAT'S competition when done by
capital is a conspiracy when done
by labor"
Referring to the restrictions i'm
posed upon labor by equity courts,
he added:
"They cannot help knowing that
| organized CdplLdl IL 1OL 1coI11SICu'
! And, when treatment apparently so
unfair, and discriminating is ad-
ministered through the instrument
tally of a court, the resulting dis
content and resentment Of employees
are inevitably intensified because
the law itself seems to have gone
wrong, and in some unaccountable
manner to have taken sid IS against.
them.
90 It cannot be the law
that the men and women who do
the work of the world and who pro-
duce its wealth, have no rights
against the wealth they create, and
NO rights to prefer and to promote
by lawful and peaceful means the
sale of the products of tfeir labor,
to secure for themselves continued
employment.
"The 'irreparable damage SUI
Il fered in business by a vanauished
competitor at the hands Of his sue
= cessful rival constitutes no cause OF
>! action. either at law or in equity.
It Is the result Of the Law OF compe-
tition to which all men are subject
They take their chances and must
abide the result. whether it brings
fortune or failure"
Can class distinction be made
more patent? Is the laborer-a
l 20