Evening star., 1942-05-29
Proposed Legislation
Nay Control Unions
Writer Believes House
Will Puss Bill
To Discipline Labor
By Bertram Benedict.

BIZ Bertram Benedict.
The Hobbs bill specifically bringing
trade unions under the 1884 anti-racket-
eering act was reported favorably to the
House of Representatives by the Judici-
ary Committee on Tuesday. Two other
bills recently reported by the Committee
would require unions to file periodic
financial statements and would place
them under the antitrust laws.
The House may pass the Hobbs bill
aimed at trade union racketeering. For
one thing, politically powerful farm Or
ganizations seem to be supporting the
measure. Also, last December the House
passed, by almost to vote, the much
stronger Smith anti-strike bill. (How-
ever, 1t must be admitted that at the time
the House membership was profoundly
disturbed by the captive coal mine strike
and other defense strikes. The Smith
bill went to the Senate Committee on Ed
ucation and Labor, which so far has
shown no disposition to act on it.
The anti-racketeering act covers "any
person who {. obtains, or attempts to
obtobip Ny VAC ooC Va, Va dOCCllpI W use OF
threat to use, force, violence, or coercion,
the payment Of money" However, the
act goes on to make this exemption:
mot including. however, the payment Of
wages by bona fide employer to a bona
fide employe."
This exemption was pointed to by
the Supreme Court on March 2 last in
upsetting the conviction of members OF
the Teamsters Union in New York City.
These had stopped out-of-State vehicles
coming into the city and by violence had
compelled the vehicles to be turned over
to them for driving to the point of de-
livery, at the union rates of pay. The
majority decision by Justice Byrnes
Justices Roberts and Jackson not par
ticipating) practically invited Congress
to enact something like the pending
Hobbs bill. The court observed, after
holding that Congress had meant to ex-
empt such activities as those of the New
York teamsters: This does not mean,
however, that such activities are beyond
the reach Of federal legislative control"
In sharply worded dissent, Chief
Justice Stone declared that a truck
owner who only because Of fear Of vio-
lence paid the New York teamsters to
take over his truck could not be con-
sidered a bona fide employer" of the
teamsters, nor could the "extortioners"
be called his employees.
Until 1914 the Sherman Antitrust Act
OF 1890 was held to cover trade unions.
In the Clayton Act of 1914 (Sec. 2o) Con-
gress was generally believed to have ex-
empted unions from antitrust suits, but
that Interpretation was later upset by
court decisions.
On February 3, 1941, the Supreme
Court, In a decision by Justice Frank
furter. held trade unions exempt from
antitrust suits in the pursuit of normal
trade union activities. Justice Murphy
did not participate; Justice Stone filed
separate concurrent opinion holding
that the indictment did not properly
charge violation for the Sherman Act
In st. Louis the carpenters union had
struck against the Anheuser- Busch Com
pany, in juridictional dispute with
the machinists (also A. F. L. as to
which should do certain millwright
work. The carpenters also had called
a boycott of Anheuser- Busch beer. The
Frankfurter decision declared that in the
Norris-La Guardia Act Of 1882 Congress
had clearly shown its intent to exempt
trade unions from antitrust prosecution,
as Congress thought it had done in the
Clayton Act. True, the 1892 act only
limited the issuance Of injunctions, but
1t showed what the thought Of Congress
was.
The Roberts-Hughes dissent called the
majority decision a process of con.
struction never heretofore INDUCED
IN by this court No court has ever
undertaken so radically to legislate where
Congress has refused to do So"