Evening star., 1940-03-26
Labor Unions
Held Subject 70
Antitrust Act
D. c. Court UphoIds
Indictment of
Teumster Heads
BACKGROUND

BACKGROUND
Proceeding against restraints in
the building industry, the Justice
Department in the past teD
months has obtained indictments
In a number OF cities against
union and industrial officials and
organizations. The driDe has
been bitterly opposed by the
American Federation OF Labor,
Dhose po1Dertul building trades
unions are tnuolped.
Labor unions are subject to the
Sherman Antitrust Act, Justice
Peyton Gordon of District. Court
ruled today in sustaining an indict-
ment against American Federation
of Labor Teamster Union officials
growing out of row with operating
engineers over the ALLEGATION of work
which tied up large Government
building projects here several months
ago
Giving an important victory to the
Government in the current-anti-
trust drive against the building in
dustry, Justice Gordon overruled a
demurrer to the indictment and de-
MED a motion to Quash the -accu-
sation. It was the first time the
Sherman Act had been invoked
against tie-ups flowing from inter-
union wrangles.
Justice Gordon gave the defense
20 days within which to plead to
the indictment. and counsel an
nounced that plans would be made
to 60 to trial.
Defendants Listed.
Named as defendants are Drivers,
Chauffeurs and Helpers Local, No.
639. Of the International Brother
hood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Stablemen and Helpers of America; !;
Thomas O'Brien. representative of
the International; Stuart M. Keyser,
recording secretary and business
representative of the local. as we'll
as Charles j. Bell. president and
business representative; Linwood A.
Trainham, secretary-treasurer, and
Aubrey w. Stream, business repre-
sentative of Local Union No. 639.
The indictment charged a criminal
conspiracy by the defendants to re-
strain trade and commerce in con-
junction with the construction of
buildings and other public and
private works here.
In his memorandum opinion.
Justice Gordon hit at the union
contention that the Clayton Act
frees labor from prosecution under
the Sherman Act. He said: II find
nothing either in Section 6 or in
Section 20 of the Clayton Act which
makes legitimate and lawful either
the object of this conspiracy or the
means, set forth in paragraph four
of the indictment, to attain that
object"
Two Groups in Dispute.
The Cover ment indictment
charged the defendants had dis
pute with the International Brother
hood of Operating Engineers, Local
No. II, who for years had been
employed as driver operators of
concrete-miXer trucks, and that the
members of Local No 639 contended
that they, rather than members of
the engineers union, should be
employed by companies operating
mixer-trucks.
The Justice Department charged
that the defendants tried to induce
companies operating the mixer
trucks to employ members of the
teamsters' union rather than the
engineers; coerced the companies to
break contracts with the engineers
local; coerced drivers to resign from
the engineers local and join the
teamsters; called and assisted in
calling strikes on number of con-
struction projects here with view
to stopping construction work and
prevent or threaten to prevent deliv-
cries to construction projects by
trucks driven by non-members of
the teamsters' union.
"Direct Restraint"
In his opinion Justice Gordon
said:
defendants further rely upon the
provisions of the Norris-La Guardia
Act, which extends the prohibitions
of the Clayton Act in respect to the
jurisdiction of Federal Courts to
grant injunctions in labor disputes.
This act is limited by its terms to
civil injunction suits, the purpose
of the act being further to limit the
use of the injunctive remedy, and
prevent possible abuse of that rem
edy in labor controversies.
Irrespective of whether the con-
troversy which appears from this
indictment is or is not labor dis
pute' within the broad interpreta-
tions which have been upon Section
l3 of the Norris-La Guardia Act, and
regardless of whether the conduct set
forth in paragraph four of the in
dictment is enjoinable or not, such
conduct Is unlawful, and when an
indictment alleges a conspiracy by
any persons formed to employ such
unlawful conduct as a means to at
tain an object, legal or illegal, and
(See LABOR UNIONS, Page A-50
DhiIinninoe cnuIdn'f pnnnI