The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1924-03-31
UPHOLSTERERS
APPEAL FOR men
TAYLOR FRAMED
Raise Money to Fight A
Boycott Convictions

~0Ss ~OAAVA&@AOkA0
The UphOlsterers' District Council
Of Chicago announced yesterday it
viii appeal the case of their four
members who were recently found
guilty of conspiracy to boycott for
refusal to work with scabs during the
strike. The four men, who were all
officials of locals of the upholsterers'
union, were indicted thru the efforts
Of Dudley Taylor, attorney for the
upholstery bosses and the Illinois
Employers Association.
The unionists were tried before
Judge Hosea Wells in Superior court
and the jury found them guilty and
levied fine of $50 and 500 on each
of the defendants Fred Jurish, a
member. of the painters union, was
also tried and found guilty at the
same time, but the judge later re-
versed the finding Of the jury in the
case and released him.
40 Unions Fight Sentence.
Since then the upholsterers have
secured stay of sentence from the
court to permit them to prepare an
appeal to the Appellate Court. More
than forty unions were represented
Saturday at meeting in the Offices
of the Chicago Federation of Labor
where plans were made to raise
money to carry the appeal to the
higher court.
Attic the appeal will cost much
more than the paying of the fines
would be, the upholsterers feel that
to let the sentence stand unchal-
lenged would establish a dangerous
precedent on which other unionists
would be hauled into court to defend
themselves when the bosses failed to
break strike.
Bosses Use Boycott.
Capitalist courts have held in the
past that when group of business
men decide not to patronize a firm
and inform each other Of their in
tention, they are within their rights.
In the case Of the upholsterers, how
ever, the lower court has held that
when a group of union men attempt
to use the boycott they are subject
to the penalties Of the law.
The upholsterers were charged
with asking union men not to work
with scab upholsterers during the re-
cent strike of the upholsterers. That
and that only was the thing the state
proved against the union men.
The Federal court in South Dakota
IN the case of Montgomery Ward &
Go. vs.. Mannix, held that people
have the right to refuse to deal with
any firm or individual for any or no
reason and having that right they
necessarily have the right to Inform
others of their intention and the rea-
sons for it. But that was a case
where two rival commercial organ
izations were asking the protection
of the law. Will the law in this state
be interpreted in a different fashion
when labor organizations try to use
the boycott?
Federation Unions to Aid.
The meeting of union representa-
ives Saturday voted to send a letter
and speaker to all local unions af-
fliated with the Chicago Federation
of Labor and ask them to vote con-
tributions to help pay the cost of the
appeal. The upholsterers explained
that their union was not in position
to pay the costs of the appeal be-
cause of the long strike which they
have just gone thru and the fact that
they, unaided, paid all the costs of
their trial. They pointed out that
they were well ablL to pay the fines
levied but were appealing only be-
cause Of the trade union principle in
volved.
Fight Of All Labor.
UNLESS this principle is fought for
other unions will find themselves in
court for telling their fellow union
lists there is a strike. This appeal is
being made for the labor movement.
If we were in a position to pay the
costs of the appeal we would do it
gladly. But we are not. Since we
are fighting for the labor movement
and in order to protect its rights we
ask the labor movement to held pay
the costs of the fight" Thomas
O'Shea, business agent of Local No.
Ill of the Upholsterers' Union and
one Of the defendants said.
Union contributions should be sent
to Chicago Federation of Labor at
166 w. Washington street. Contribu-
tons should specify that the dona-
tons are for the Upholsterers' APP
peal Fund.