NOT TO GO TO GAOL.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1129, 17 May 1911, Page 5

NOT TO GO TO GAOL.

AMERICAN LABOUR LEADERS RELEASED. By Telesraph-Press Association-Copyriibt. Washington, May 15. The Supreme Court has decided that Samuel Gompers and John Mitchell, leaders of the National Federation of Labour, shall not go to gaol for advertising the Bucks Stove and Eango Company in tho federation's "Wo don't patronise'' list in defiance of the Court's orders.

At the beginning of 1909 Samuel Gomoers, John "Mitchell, and Frank Morrison, wore sentenced to prison for tho periods of ono year, nine months, and six months respectively. The issues involved in the case wero of groat importance. In the city of St. Louis is a manufacturing plant called the Bucks Stove and Range Company. It has a capital of ono million dollars, and employs 750 men. Its president, J. W. Van Cleave, is also president of the Manufacturers' Association. It has an "open shop"—that is, it employs both union and non-union labour. In the nickel-plating department tho thirty-five union men had a dispute with their employer over the hours of labour. There was up to this time a standing agreement to arbitrate such disputes, but this dispute was not arbitrated. A striko ensued. The contest followed much the usual lino of such contests, until it was actod upon by tho Federation of Labour, which endorsed the causo of tho union men and ordered a boycott of the products of the Bucks Stove and Range Company. The company took tho case to Court, claiming that such a boycott is iia illegal conspiracy in restraint of trade. Tho Supremo Court of tho District of Columbia decided against the labour men, and issued « preliminary injunction against their advertising tho company in the- Federation's "Wo don't patroiiife" list, and against their further interference with tho business of tho company by means of request or advice to others not to buy' its wares. This injunction was later mado permanent. The labour leaders, claiming that the injunction interfered with their constitutional rights in forbidding them to advise or request others not to buy the company's wares, refused to obey it. They wero accordingly cited beforo tho Court for contempt, found guilty, and sentenced as already stated.

An appeal to tho Supreme Court was lodged after the decision and tho defendants released on bail. '