Evening star., 1940-05-28
Abandons Appeal
lin Teamsters' Union
Monopoly Case
Action Follows Decision
Limiting Responsibility
Of Labor Groups
BY ]. A. FOX.

; Of Labor Groups
BY ]. A. FOX.
T, IN the wake of q Supreme Court
decision yesterday holding that
labor unions are subject to the
Sherman Anti Trust Act only when
they are responsible for some form
of commercial competition in the
marketing of goods and services" +"
the Justice Department today an
nounced the Government was
dropping plans to appeal from the
District Court ruling which freed
four teamsters' union officials from
monopoly law charges here early
this month.
The department assigned no rea-
eon for the decision which was said
to have been reached several days
ago. It was believed in some quar-
ters, however, that the principle laid
down by the Supreme Court would
have made prosecution difficult in
q case such as this, where the Gov
ernment alleged that iurisdic-
tional strike involving two American
Federation of Labor unions had re-
strained trade.
AS one phase Of the Nationwide
drive against abuses in the building
industry, which are being prosecuted
under the Sherman Act, the Gov
ernment charged that the Team
sters' Union had brought about a
strike which caused a tie-up in con-
struction here last fall in an effort
to replace members Of the Oper-
ating Engineers Union with their
own members on concrete-mixer
trucks. The defendants denied that
p jurisdictional dispute caused the
strike, contending that it was called
IN an effort to increase wages.
Verdict Is Directed.
After arguments were concluded
Justice Let's granted defense mo-
tion for directed verdict. saying
the action Of the defendants was
~just as consistent with innocence
rs with guilt"
The four defendants were Stuart
M. Keyser, Charles j. Bell, Linwood
A. Trainham and Aubrey w. Stream.
The Government has appealed to
the Supreme Court in a similar
case from st. Louis where the Dis
trict Court quashed the indictment
Of a group of union officials. There,
It was pointed out today, however,
the element OF boycott is present
along with the jurisdictional strike
issue.
With the Supreme Court decision
under study today at the Justice
Department, the opinion was voiced
by Thurman Arnold, Assistant At
torney General in charge of the
Antitrust Division, that it would
reach the building industry re-
straints which the Government seeks
to curb, through indictments In a
number of large cities where unions
and employer groups are accused
OF combining to raise prices.
The status OF labor under the
Antitrust Act was defined by the
court In holding that the Apex
Hosiery Co. of Philadelphia could
not collect damages under the
Sherman Act from a G. I. O. local
which staged a sit-down strike in
which the Apex plant was wrecked
by rioters. and its normal operations
hated for six months in 1887.
Slaps at "sit-Down."
The 6-3 decision of the court was
read by Justice Stone. who said that
the sit-down constituted a "lawless
invasion and destruction of property
by force and violence Of the most
brutal and wanton character" but
that it did not fall within the scope
OF the act.
The American Federation of Labor,
whose building trades unions are
targets of the Government drive, has
been contendin2 thai the Clayton
Act exempts labor from prosecution
under the Sherman Act, which pro-
hibits restraints of trade, but the
court brushed aside this contention.
While we must regard the ques-
ton whether labor unions are to
some extent and in some circum-
stances subject to the act as settled
In the affirmative, it is equally plain
that this court has never thought
the act to apply to all labor union
activities affecting interstate COM
merce," the decision said.
In sharp dissent, Chief Justice
Hughes, who was Joined by Justices
McReynolds and Roberts, declared
the majority Interpretation of the
act was too narrow" and that 1t
opened "vistas of new uncertainties"
in the application of the law.
Restraint on Competition Needed.
This court" said Justice Stone,
'@has never applied the Sherman Act
In any case whether or not involv-
Ing labor organizations or activities
unless the court was Of the opinion
that there was some form of re-
straint upon commercial compe-
tition in the marketing of goods and
services; this court has re-
fused to apply the Sherman Act in
cases like the present. in which
local strikes conducted by illegal
means in production industry pre-
vented interstate shipment of sub
stantial amounts of the product, but
in which it was not shown that the
restrictions on shipments had op-
Grated to restrain commercial COM
petition in some substantial way.
I'm the cases considered by this
court since the Standard Oil case
of 1911, some form of restraint of
commercial competition has been
sine qua non to the condemnation
OF contracts, combinations or con-
spiracies under the Sherman Act,
and, In general. restraints upon
competition have been condemned
only when their purpose or effect
was to raise or fix the market price
This Is not case of labor or
ganization being used by combina-
tions Of those engaged in an in
dustry as the means or instrument
for suppressing competition or fix
inc nFiceS Hero IL is r,lain that