TRADE UNIONS ABOVE THE LAW.

Evening Star, Issue 12942, 4 May 1908, Page 5

TRADE UNIONS ABOVE THE LAW.

JUSTICE DARLING'S SCATHING COMMENTS.

Tho hearing was resumed in tho King's Bench, London, on March 16 of an action brought by George Moir Bussy, a journalist, against, the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants and Mr 11. Bell, M.P., general secretary, for damages for alleged mischievous prosecution. The plaintiff brought out a souvenir of the Railway Women's Guild Congress, held at Leicester in 2906, and he says that defendants prosecuted him, caving that be obtained money under ('also pretences by alleging tho souvenir was brought out under the authority of the Railway Servants' Amalgamated Society. At the trial of the plaintiff the Judge stopped the case and discharged him.

Mr Gill, at tho close of tho plaintiff's case, submitted that there was no evidence of malice. Mr Justice Darling said lie had carefully considered the points raised on behalf of the defendants and tho exact words he would' use. because the question was not only one of difficulty, but one of extreme importance, and it camo to be decided for the first time upon this Act of Parliament, which was passed two years ago. In his lordship's opinion, that statute obliged him to enter judgment for the society. He then decided against the society. From the humiliating position of being on a level with other lawful associations of His Majesty's subjects the statute of 19C6 had relieved all registered trade unions, and they were now super legem, as the medieval emperor was supra grammaticum. The defendant society was, therefore, entitled to judgment. Mr Bell, by his defence, claimed that he, being an official of the union, was personally entitled to the same immunity as was now to be enjoyed by his employers. His lordship, however, could not think that this was the meaning of the statute. In his opinion, the officials or members of unions wero not liable to be snod on behalf of themselves and all other members of the trade union in the sense that they could not be sued ?o as to make the trade union, as such, and the funds of it liable for their acts. The words of the section were not explicit, but unless they were to be understood as his lordship thought, it would follow that not only a trade union, but all its officials, in number unlimited, might without liability to make reparation in damages be guilty of any and every wrong known to the law, such ai> slander, libel, assault, wounding, false imprisonment, and even the wrong complained of in this action. The immunity claimed for Mr Bell appeared inadmissible, since it would involve that, where all the members of a trade union were officials of it, there would be absolute irresponsibility for them all and singly. His lordship therefore decided, though not without doubt, that as regarded Mr Bell tho Court was not precluded by the statute from entertaining the action.

The case then went on against Mr Bell. After Mr Bell had given evidence, and having heard counsel, Mr Justice Darling, on the question of there being reasonable and probable cause for the prosecution, held there was evidence that Mr Bell had reasonable and probable cause, as the circumstances of the publication bv plaintiff which came to Mr Bell's knowledge were very suspicious. Under these circumstances there was no need to leave to the jury the question of malice, and therefore judgment would be for the defendant.