The potters herald. [volume] (East Liverpool, Ohio) 1899-1982, 1948-07-15


until Auguts |, 1914, and that,
therefore, the resolution introduced
while SIS was in effect was of
no effect until ratified by referen-
dun of the trade; this being an
equity case the Plaintiffs may be
defeated if they have been guilty
of laches. 21 o. JUR. 1896 to 1880,
s37 under the Title '1NJUNC-
TION."
The increase in officers salaries
at the Convention was matter of
general interest to the members
lof the Brotherhood and there was
nothing to have prevented the
Plaintiffs from bringing this suit
Immediately, However, quoting
from 21 o. JUR. 1899, '1t should
be observed that while lapse of
thine is the primary and essential
element Of laches, yet standing
alone, and without the addition of
some other element, it is Of no
significance, as laches is princi-
pally a question Of the inequity of
permitting a claim to be enforced
because of some change in the con-
dition Of the property or the rela-
ton of the parties. 1t is here that
laches shades over into or comes
to form an element in estoppel.
Mere delay may deprive a party of
the right to an interlocutory injunc-
tion, but it viii not, especially in
the case of injuries of a constant
ly increasing character, deprive
him Of relief on final hearing. The
courts are particularly reluctant
4 to deny an injunction merely be-
cause of delay in asking for it,
where it is sought by or in the in
terest of the public"
Therefore, while this Court will
not order the Defendants to make
restitution for the increased sal
aries they have received by reason
of the action of the Convention of
1914 it will order them to cease to
receive such increase until such
time as it is given them by vote
of the trade in accordance with
SIS.
We now come to the question Of
the right of the Defendants to take
a percentage increase based on the
flat hourly increases given the
members of the Brotherhood.
Under s277 Of the Constitu-
ton of 1916 the President and Of
ficers of the National Brotherhood
do have the right to determine the
true intent and meaning of any
Section Of the Constitution should
any doubt arise in respect thereto.
They say that because of the
flat hourly increase where before
all increases had been by percent
a doubt did arise as to the true in
tent and meaning of s78 of the
4 CONSTITUTION Of 1916 (s76 of the
Constitution Of 194D.
This would be true if there were
a reasonable doubt as to the ap-
lplication of such wage increases.
1878 is, however, very clear =
I"whenever the general ware and
china war trade is granted an in
crease in wages the same amount
of increase shall also be passed
along to the President, Secretary
Treasurer" and so forth.
Each Of these increases was
flat increase in the hourly wage of
the members of the Brotherhood re-
gardless of the amount they had
been earning. There was no rea-
son on earth for the officers of
the National Brotherhood to inter
pret to themselves alone a percen-
tage raise when all members of
the trade had a flat hourly wage.
The only treason" was that by
strained construction they saw a
way to get substantially larger
increase than the other members
of the trade They did have the
right to set the number of hours
their rate figured being 60 hours a
week or an increase to each Off
Ger of S1110 a week.
There was no general publica-
! ton of the increase they actually
took nor of the retroactive pay they
allowed themselves except as APP
peared in the Financial Reports. 1t
! would not be laches for the mem
bers of the Brotherhood to fail to
go through the Financial Reports
to determine the increases the Of
ficers were allowing themselves.
1t is therefore my opinion that
the Defendants were entitled to a
raise of S11.10 per week from June
/, 1916; to an additional raise of
$50 per week from February /,
1947; and to a further additional
aries of $3.50 per week from Sep
tember IL, 1947, and that all in
creases in excess of these amounts
} should be paid back by said Off
) GERS to the Treasury of the Nation
al Brotherhood.
While the salaries of other Off
GERS of the Brotherhood are men
| toned in the Petition and in the
, answer, nevertheless the Petition
: being against but two Defendants,
/. James Duffy and Charles P. Jor-
dan, / am without authority to