Evening star., 1937-04-08

tons If ,,iI1io,s David Lawrence.
OF dollars of economic loss to innocent
persons, but now apparently those who
committed contempt" of court are
go free because certain safeguards G.
judicial authority have virtually gone
with the wind in Michigan.
The agreement just made settling
the Chrysler strike provides definitely
that both the automobile company and
the union now must withdraw their
court suits growing out of the "sit-
down" strike. While this does not in
any way relieve the courts of Michigan
OF their responsibility to secure respect
for their ORDERS it does to certain
extent make it difficult for witnesses to
be brought to testify as to the facts
or for proceedings to be continued in
contempt" cases because both the
unions and the company have agreed
IN writing to drop all court action
growing out of the strike
Dropped Under Duress.
1t might well be asked how public
sympathy can justly be mobilized on
the side OF any automobile COMPANY
again when two of the leading con-
Germs in the industry formally drop
proceedings against violators Of law
and trespassers. The answer presum-
ably given by the companies is that
they had to sign the agreements as the
only means of getting their plants re-
opened.
The State courts themselves, how
ever, are under no such duress and
II Michigan courts do not obtain pro-
lection, then Federal statute in force
since 1871 requires the President to
secure 1t for injured citizens.
some observers have said that Sec
ton 5299 of 1871 which is still in
force and is intended to carrv out
the mandate Of the Federal Consti-
tuition guaranteeing a republican form
OF government was adopted too long
ago to be applicable While this is
no excuse for non-enforcement. the
1act is there is a later Fedora! statute
which gives the Federal Government
power to intervene in "sit-down"
strikes and the law in question was not
only passed by Democratic Congress
but 1t was signed by President Roose-
Welt himself on June 18, 1884.
Applicable to Commerce Violence,
The pertinent sections of that law
rs they apply to forcible seizure of
property and attempted extortion are
As follows:
Section 2-Any person who, in con-
nectlon with or in relation to anv act
In any way or in any degree affecting
trade or commerce or any article or
commodity moving or about to move
In trade or commerce.
"(a) Obtains or attempts to obtain,
by the use of or attempt to use or
threat to use force, violence, or coer-
clon, the payment of money or other
valuable considerations, or the pur-
chase or rental of property or protec-
tive services, not including, however,
the payment of wages by a bona fide
employer to bona fide employe; or
CD Obtains the property of an
other, with his consent, induced by
wrongful use of force or fear. or
under color of official right, or
"(c) Commits or threatens to COM
NIT an act OF physical violence or
physical injury to a person or property
In furtherance of plan or purpose to
violate sections (a) or (b; or
"(c) Conspires or acts concertedlv
with any other person or persons to
commit any of the foregoing acts;
shall, upon conviction thereof, be
guilty of felony and shall be pun
hhed by imprisonment from l to
10 years or by fine of $4,000 or
both.
Section 3--aS used in this act, the
term wrongful means in violation of
the criminal laws of the United States
or OF any State or territory
State Laws Involved.
1t will be noted that the Federal
power specifically refers here 10 yio-
lation of State laws. This is not
novel because the Supreme Court has
already upheld antitrust laws and
other Federal statutes aimed at per-
sons who make combination which
tend to violate State laws.
But there is another important
paragraph at the end of the same
statute quoted above and it reads as
follows:
Section 6-Any person charged
with violating this act may be prose-
cuted in any district in which any
part Of the offense has been COM
mitted by him or by his actual asso-
ciates participating with him in the
offense or by his fellow consiprators:
provided, that no court of the United
States shall construe or apply any of
the provisions of this act in such
manner as to impair, diminish, or
in any manner affect the rights Of
bona f1de labor organizations In law
fully carrying out the legitimate
objects thereof, as such rights are
expressed in existing statutes of the
United States"
Now nowhere in the statutes of
the United States is the seizure of
property by a labor union justified
or validated. AS for the phrase "in
lawfully carrying out the legitimate
objects" of labor union, no court
Of law has ever considered it law
full for 4 labor union to seize property
OF an employer.
The Federal Government is now
prosecuting some leaders Of miners
unions in Illinois who are accused of
acts of seizure of the property Of
various companies, but these leaders
happen to be at the head of q
union against which John Lewis is
fighting. So the Department Of
Justice co-operates with him in ap-
plying the statute for his benefit in
Illinois, put does not apply it to
the disadvantages Of the Lewis unions
In Michigan.
Thus Is equal justice under law"
houted and Federal statute en-
forced only when political allies of an
administration and campaign contrib
utors insist upon 1t.
(Copyright. 1879
r