The Wilmington morning star. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1909-1990, 1946-01-01
Fair Enough
BY WESTBROOK PEGLER
Copyright, 1915, By King Features Syndicate

tCopyrlght, 1945, By King Features Syndicate.)
NEW YORK, Dec 31-Challenged on re-
cent assertion in these dispatches that vic
TINS OF outrage by unions, could sue them for
redress, whether the violence were done by
SANDER, breach of contract or organized and
directed assault or vandalism, I should like
TO present the gist of that interesting dissent
then shall offer another opinion, by Judge
Unexpectedly UNFOLDING my own belief AS
preliminary, let me say that most Americans
including, believe, most lawyers, think that
nelther an individual nor a corporation has
any remedy in such circumstances. Thousands
OF victims have endured gratuitous abuse
without protest, and the union executives re-
fleet belief that their unions cannot be held
responsible.
My theory that they can be sued and pun
ished has elected the following discussion by
an attorney in Washington:
''Your statement, unfortunately, is not cor
rect or to put it more accurately, is correct
only to a very limited EXTENT he writes.
whether union is suable in its own name
or as an entity is entirely dependent on the
law Of the particular state in which the suit is
brought In New York, for instance unions
can be sued in their own names In major
ity. of the states, however, it is not true.
Where it is not true, the only recourse is to
sue individual members who may be difficult
to identify A suit against Individual members
who may not be financially able to respond to
a judgment is a poor substitute for suit
against the union, itself, which, under modern
conditions is ordinarily quite able to respond
in damages
mot only is this condition chaotic because
dependent on varying state laws but, to make
1t worse, the federal courts are required to
apply the state laws. 1t has seemed to me
that function 2
are to make contracts under which they as
sumo definite obligtions, they ought to be
ansWerable universally in suits filed against
them as entities in breaches of contracts"
The effect of the enforcement of the Wagner
Act, is that the national government compels
employers who are suable for breach of con-
tract or other misconduct to make contracts
with unions which cannot be punished for
their own violations of those agreements.
do not know whether the Supreme Court ever
had decided whether such contracts, entered
by the employers only under government COM
pulsion, are valid Obviously they should not
be but considering the present makeup of the
court, it is almost safe to assume that the
majority, by some twisted reasoning, would
hold that the parties were equals and that the
employer must fulfill his obligations while the
union need not The combined effect of opin-
ions written by Felix Frankfurter and by
James Byrnes, in the teamsters' case, has
been to confirm the vast powers of unions
for evil and to hold them irresponsible and
immune.
Coming now, however, to recent decision
of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals
in libel suit by the Pullman Standard Car
Company against Local 1928 of the CLIO.
Steelworkers, We find all three judges in
agreement that the law of Illinois governs
the case. On that basis they found that certain
ivi67 ant yJho 1,I1h1 Sfotp.
ment alleged to be false and harmful to Pull
mans reputation could be sued. A decision
of the District Court dismissing the suit
against them was reversed.
Judges Kerner and Major held, however,
that The Illinois law did not permit Pullman
to sue the union, itself. They held that even
though Congress did endow unions with legal
entity Congress could not and did not intend
to deprive state of the right to determine
who could be sued in its courts.
Dissenting and contendng that the union
may be sued, Judge Sparks wrote: 'In 1845,
Illinois enacted statute that the common
law of England, so far as the same is appli-
cable and of a general nature, and all acts
or statutes of the British Parliament made
in aid of, and to supply defects in the COM
mon law shall be the rule of
decision in Illinois, Admitting that under the
original rule union was not recognized as
sude, as such, he argued, however, that the
British courts had since held the contrary and
that the Illinois courts were bound to regard
the steelworkers local as legal entity.
An English opinion which he cited, said
1.-THE principle on which corporations have
been held liable in respect of wrongs COM
mitted by its servants or agents
is as applicable to the case of a trade
union as to that of corporation. If the con-
tention of the defendant were we'll founded,
the legislature has authorized the creation of
numerous bodies of men capable of owning
great wealth and Of acting by agents with
absolutely responsibility for the wrongs
they may do. They would be at liberty to
disseminate libels broadcast and their victims
would have nothing to look to but the pockets
of the Individuals
Judge Sparks pointed out that many citizens
of Illinois had been compelled to deal with
unions as legal entities much to their sor-
row., and that unions make leases and con-
tracts in their official names.
The union, he observed, had been given the
right to act in its own name and, as an
entity, to enforce contracts and had voluntar-
lily accepted that status. Therefore it must be
assumed that Congress intended that the en-
ployer could seek relief from the union in
court.
I seem to remember that the same conten-
ton has been advanced here, though in less
stately language, several times in the last
few years And for answer l have heard only
the paradoxical plea that the giant unions,
with hundreds of millions in their treasures,
are so puny that they cannot accept equality
in the courts but must have an advantage
over widow running a roadside hamburger