Evening star., 1940-05-27
c. |. 0. Union
Held Not Liable
In Apex Strike.
6-to-3 Supreme Court
Decision Refuses
Sit-Down Damages
BY ]. A. FOX.

~ - <1s EOAs
The Supreme Court held today
that a G. I. o. union was not
liable under the Federal anti
trust laws for damages resulting
from a sit-down strike at the
plant of the Apex Hosiery Co. of
Philadelphia.
The courts 6-to-3 decision in
the celebrated strike case was
read by Justice Stone.
Chief Justice Hughes wrote a dis
senting opinion in which Justices
McReynolds and Roberts joined.
The court, however, refused to
write a blanket immunity for labor
from the provisions of the Sherman
Antitrust Act for which unions
are contending in the current drive
OF the Government against abuses
In the building industry.
Subject in Some Cases.
While we must regard the oues-
ton whether labor unions are to
some extent and in some circum-
stances subject to the act as settled
IN the Affirmative" the court said,
1T Is equally plain that this court
has never thought the act to apply
to all labor union activities Affect
ing interstate commerce."
Five Roosevelt appointees -
Justices Black, Reed. Frankfurter,
Douglas and Murphy-joined with
Justice Stone in the majority ruling.
The Apex company had won a
District court verdict for $711 932
damages under the Antitrust Act
after its plant was wrecked by a
mob and its business INTERRUPTED
during strike In May, 1887. The
strike was called by local OF the
G. I. O. hosiery workers union in an
effort to enforce demand for a
closed shop.
The Third Circuit Court Of Ap-
peals set aside the verdict, however,
declaring that the seizure and &C.
cupation of the plant had only an
indirect and remote effect on CON-
merce and that the record did not
support the jury's findings thst the
union intended to restrain cotn-
merce."
Appeals Court Sustained.
The Supreme Court decision af.
firmed this finding.
IT." the majority said, without
such effects on the market, we were
to hold that local factory strike,
stopping production and shipment Of
its product interstate, violates the
Sherman Act, practically every
strike in modern industry would be
brought within the jurisdiction Of
the Federal courts, under the Sher.
man Act, to remedy local law vic.
lations. The act was plainly not
intended to reach such a result.
its language does not require it, and
the course Of our decisions pre-
cludes it."
The courts decision is viewed as
of sweeping importance in the light
Of the Governments present cam.
paign directed at restraints In the
building industry. In this campaign
prosecutions under the Federal anti
trust laws have been instituted
against numerous building trades
unions of the American Federation
Of Labor and employer groups In
the building industry.
Strikes as agreements not to
work." the court said, entered into
by laborers to compel employers to
yield to their demands, may restrict
to some extent the power Of employ.
ers who are parties to the dispute to
compete in the market with those
not subject to such demands. But
under the doctrine applied to nom
labor cases the mere fact of such
restrictions on competition does not
In itself bring the parties to the
agreement within the condemna.
ton Of the Sherman Act"
Some U. s. Efforts Nullified.
This principle apparently would
nullify the efforts of the Govern
ment to prosecute jurisdictional
strikes such as was attempted In
the local teamsters' union case and
in another case hanging fire in
st. Louis, where carpenters and
machinists are engaged In an intra-
family row. It apparently, however,
would reach combinations Of en-
ployers and employees.
The American Federation of Labor
has contended for q blanket I'm.
munity for labor from the Sherman
Act prosecution on the grounds that
(See APEX, Page A-l2.)