IMPORTANT LABOUR DECISION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 12551, 3 January 1903, Page 3

IMPORTANT LABOUR DECISION

A UNION'S LIABILITY TOR PICKETING. • Mr Justice Walker delivered liis reserved judgment in Sydney iu respect to the recent shearing dispute at Coonarnhle, when certain shearers wore intercepted as they wore about to proceed to. Warrana station. Plaintiff, William Eeogli, is a' pastoralist at Warrana station, near Coonamble. The defendants to tho suit are the Australian Workers' Union. His Honor said that the union,. which on the Hth February was registered, first as a friendly society and secondly as an industrial union, was insisting on shearers being paid higher rates, and the whole Coonamble district was in a state that might fairly be described as a' state* of war, certain of the pastoralists, including the plaintiff, declining to recognise the A.W.U, terms, and' the union' endeavouring to prevent shearing on any other terms. One of the two belligerents had established' "strike camps," the term being a misnomer, for there was no strike. A camp on the outskirts of the township was formed, and consisted of some hundreds .of men, partly members of the union and partly of men who sympathised with its objects. All ot these men were maintained by tho union out of its funds. The camp was.under the control of one Murray, a representative of the union, who had been elected by tho campero. The chairman of the camp was surrounded by pickets or guards, and the neighbouring railway and roads,in the district were also systematically picketed. The other belligerent, who had engaged his men in Sydney and Melbourne, brought them at his own expense itnder the escort of pugilists to Guhtrgambone railway station. Thence he drove them in drags to Warrana. On the 22nd August, at a certain point on the run, .ho and his men were met by a considerable party of men from tho Coonamble camp, who surrounded the drags, unfastened the traces, and, after a scene of excitement, .plaintiff's employees wont with tho other men to an hotel in Coonamble, and were day led in triumph to the camp. At and in the camp they were maintained by and at the expense of the unjpn.

The facts, as so.far stated, were not denied. Plaintiff's- affidavits -made •■ grave ■' allegations of violent nbtion.saii'd language on tho part of those who:'interfered with the plaintiff's employees, but/, tliepe were strenuously denied. His Honor-said lie was of opinion that if'the'uhjon 'established.it.camp for the purpose -of. preventing plaintiff from obtaining shearers', except at union rates, and with the view of making the camp effective for that purpose,'and. called into it not only its own' members;'..but others, then if any of'those men, whether officials or members of the union of not, But acting in furtherance. q[ the purposes of the camp, com-

mitted illegal acts for tho benefit'of the union, the. union itself- was liable to anyone who .suffered ,damage from those acts, being the acts of persons who fbr this pur■pose were in law the. agents ur servants of tho unions. Plaintiff therefore had made out..his..caso-oh..tlie v .injuneliou motion, hut as in the circumstances the injunctions were no.longer required, his Honor merely ordering defendants ; other- than the trustees to pay/.the' costs, personally, and as regarded] the liability of the'iiniou, ho directed do- ] fondant, trustees to pay the costs out of tho | union's funds; '•■• Cdming -to the motion to I make abjolute'the rule nisi for sequestration ' in consequence of breaches -wliich plaintiff 'alleged' the 'defendant union committed in respect of tho uitcrim injunction which had j been" granted resti'aihnig 'defendant's union and.vits servants other than trustees from detaining..any of .plaintiff's employees by force or threats, liis Honor, after quoting certain .legal decisions, said he was of .opinion that the uiiinn,. was responsible for the breaches-that had becii committed, and he must mako. the rule for sequestration absolute .with cpsty.hut,inasmuch, as he believed that thVunioii had acted on erroneous advice .with the.belief that since the Plying of the Industrial Arhilralin Act their funds coiild bo made amenable to tho process of'the court,'!-ho would' limit the writ:, of sequestration -' to the time during which payment of the cost» of tho two m6tions andof the'expanses of'sequestration should remain unpaid. On payment of these costs" and "cxVicii/cs the writ would be discharged. His Honor referred to (he oppressive, and vexatious way in winch on (he plaintiff's '.part affidavit had been filed on affidavit, and he directed tho Maxtor in Equity.' in taxing the costs of which he ordered payment, to look into tho affidavits and seo whether'.'any costs had not been unnecessarily and vfixatiously incurred; and if ho found that any' bad been, to disallow them. Notice of appeal was given.