INJUNCTIONS UNDER THE FEDERAL ANTITRUST LAW.

The act of Congress of July 2, 1890 (26 Stat., 209), forbidding contracts, combinations, and conspiracies in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, popularly known as the Sherman Act, in its fourth section authorizes injunctions to prevent and restrain violations of the act. Certain lumber companies undertook to obtain an injunction against the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America and other labor organizations and their officials on account of alleged conspiracy to restrain interstate. trade and commerce in the products of the complainants' woodworking mills, the method used being mutual agreements and boycotts. The United States District Court, Southern District of New York, found that the defendant organizations were engaged in a combination directly restraining competition between manufacturers and operating to restrain interstate commerce in violation of both Federal and State acts. This court dismissed the bill for an injunction, however, on the ground that such relief under the Federal antitrust law could be procured only at the instance of the United States acting through its officers. The law of the State of New York was also relied upon (General Business Law, sec. 580, subd. 6). The court held that only the State of New York could act, so that the complainants were without power to obtain relief personally in this suit. (Paine Lumber Co. (Ltd.) v. Neal et al. (1913), 212 Fed. 259.)

The United States circuit court of appeals took the same view as the court below as to the nature of the combination between the labor organizations and affirmed a decree dismissing the complaint. This court took the ground that the acts of the organizations were not malicious and not directed against the individual complainants personally, so that relief by injunction could not be granted, irrespective of whether or not the particular combination in question was obnoxious either to the common law or to the statutes (same case (1914), 214 Fed., 82; 130 C. C. A., 522).

The case then came to the Supreme Court on appeal, the majority of the court holding (June 11, 1917) that violations of the Federal antitrust act were not to be remedied by an injunction on the suit of a private person, citing as authority their prior opinion in Minnesota . Northern Securities Co. (1904), 194 U. S., 48. This was held to be true even though the court should go behind the apparent conclusion of both courts below as to the absence of special damage shown, and reverse their conclusion of fact. This question was not discussed at length, however, Mr. Justice Holmes, who delivered the opinion of the court, saying, "Personally, I lay those

chapter 323, section 16, 38 Statutes, 730 [the Clayton Act], establishes the right of private parties to an injunction in proper cases, in my opinion it also establishes a policy inconsistent with the granting of one here. I do not go into the reasoning which satisfies me, because on this point I am in a minority."

Mr. Justice McReynolds dissented without opinion. A dissenting opinion was written by Mr. Justice Pitney, with whom Mr. Justice McKenna and Mr. Justice Van Devanter concurred. These justices did not regard the case of Minnesota v. Northern Securities Co. as an authority for the position taken by the majority of the court. The diversity of position of the lower courts is commented upon, and the basic decision on which the refusal to allow private persons the right of injunction under the Sherman (antitrust) Act rested was spoken of as resting on grounds that had been misunderstood, while few of the cases following this opinion contained any reasoning upon the question, and that of a meager and unsatisfactory nature. It was pointed out that the Clayton Act safeguards labor "organizations while pursuing their legitimate objects by lawful means, and prevents them from being considered, merely because organized, to be illegal combinations or conspiracies in restraint of trade. The section, fairly construed, has no other or further intention or meaning."

OVERTIME WORK AND WAGES FOR WOMEN IN CALIFORNIA

CANNERIES.1

In February, 1916, the California Industrial Welfare Commission issued orders fixing minimum wages, hours of labor, and sanitary conditions for women and minors in fruit and vegetable canneries. These earlier regulations have now been superseded by a set of revised regulations, becoming effective June 16, 1917.

The most striking change made by the new orders is the removal of the former limitation upon overtime work. The normal working hours are reduced from 10 per day and 60 per week to 9 per day for 6 days per week. But, on the other hand, unlimited overtime for women is now permitted upon payment of not less than 14 time for all excess up to 12 hours per day and at not less than double time for all excess over 12 hours. Under the original orders there was an absolute prohibition of overtime lengthening the hours of employment to more than 72 hours per week.

The minimum wage rates as earlier fixed are but very slightly changed in the new orders. The old and new rates are shown in the table following:

1 California Industrial Welfare Commission, orders Nos. 3 and 4, issued Apr. 16, 1917. in effect June 16, 1917.

Thus, 16 cents an hour is made the minimum rate for experienced time workers and is also the minimum hourly sum which, it was estimated, the piece rates agreed upon would produce under ordinary conditions. Provided the normal hours of 54 hours per week are worked, this rate is equivalent to $8.64 per week. This may be compared with the minimum wage rates for women cannery workers as established in the two other Pacific States-Washington, minimum rate, $8.90 per week, with no absolute limit upon working hours; Oregon, $8.64 per week in Portland and $8.25 in the rest of the State, for a 54-hour week.

As regards sanitary conditions, the new orders slightly extend the requirements of the early order and make some of the requirements more precise. The original regulations have been published in a recent bulletin of this bureau. They are of interest as representing some of the most advanced standards of sanitation for canneries so far put into effect in any of the States.

1

RECENT COLLECTIVE AGREEMENTS IN VARIOUS EUROPEAN

COUNTRIES.

WAGE AGREEMENT OF THE DUTCH FURNITURE TRADE.a

The organ of the General Dutch Furniture Makers' Federation reports that a wage agreement was signed in February, 1917. between the Furniture Manufacturers' Association and the Furniture Makers' Federation. The agreement includes all furniture makers, chair makers, wood carvers, turners, polishers, upholsterers, and

1 Bulletin 211 of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, Labor laws and their administration in the Pacific States, p. 90.

2 Bulletin der Internationalen Union Der Holzarbeiter, No. 214, March, 1917. Berlin,

machine workers. The essential provisions of the agreement are the following:

Employers shall be entitled to issue rules and regulations with respect to the performance of the work and the maintenance of order in the establishment. These rules and regulations must not be contrary to the agreement.

Workmen shall be obligated to perform, on demand of the employer, work other than that included in their usual daily tasks, provided such work is connected with the establishment of the employer and within the ability of the workmen.

Workmen shall be held responsible for damage to or loss of tools and materials. They shall not be permitted to work during their leisure hours in their trade for any other employer or for private parties. Employers, on the other hand, shall not be entitled to request workers to perform strike work.

The minimum wage schedule agreed upon provides wage rates for the different branches of the trade according to locality and to the age of the worker, the country having been divided for this purpose into four groups of localities, with three wage classes each. The first group includes Amsterdam, The Hague, and Rotterdam; the second, Haarlem and Utrecht; the third, Groningen and Arnheim; and the fourth. Wageningen.

Workmen 24 years of age and less than 26 make up wage class I; those 26 years of age and less than 28 make up wage class II; those 28 years of age and over form wage class III. The following table illustrates the working of the system:

WAGE AGREEMENT OF THE DUTCH FURNITURE TRADE, EFFECTIVE MAR. 1, 1917, TO FEB. 29, 1920.

On the date on which the agreement becomes effective all wage rates are increased automatically by 1.2 cents and are made to tally with the above-mentioned classes. On the other hand, no reduction of wages is to result from the new classification. On March 1, 1918,

the wages per hour rise automatically 0.8 cent, and on March 1, 1919, 0.4 cent.

Pieceworkers shall under no condition receive less than the minimum time wage. The wages of time workers performing piecework shall not be reduced to the level of the rate for time-work.

The hours of labor, except in the case of upholsterers, shall be limited to 10 hours per day and 60 hours per week. In the case of upholsterers the hours of labor during March, April, May, and June shall be 11 hours per day, and during the other months, 10 hours per day. The minimum working-day shall be limited to 9 hours. In cases of shorter duration of the work wages are to be paid for 54 hours per week.

In establishments granting a half holiday on Saturday afternoon the working-day may be prolonged by one hour over the hours fixed in the preceding paragraph.

Overtime shall be permitted only in urgent cases. Up to 10 p. m. the men shall be remunerated with an additional rate of 25 per cent; on work from 10 p. m. to 6 a. m. at an additional rate of 50 per cent; for Sunday work the extra pay shall amount to 100 per cent, but no workman shall be bound to work on Sunday. No work shall be performed as a rule on Easter Monday, Ascension Day, Whitmonday, Christmas, and New Year, but wages shall be paid for these holidays if they do not fall on a Sunday. In case work is performed on these days an additional rate of 125 per cent is to be paid. No workman shall be bound to work on these days.

After having worked one year in an establishment workmen shall be entitled to claim an annual leave of three days with full pay. In case of shorter periods of employment one day's leave shall be granted for each four months of employment. This leave is to be granted during the summer months, i. e., between June 1 and September 30.

Disputes arising from this agreement which can not be settled by the executives of the contracting parties shall be submitted to the decision of the local magistrate.

The agreement is to remain in force from March 1, 1917, to February 29, 1920. In case one of the contracting parties desires to terminate or to amend the agreement, notice must be given three months before its expiration. Failing such notice the agreement shall be regarded as having been prolonged for one year.

During the period covered by the agreement the federations and their members bind themselves to abstain from strikes and lockouts for the purpose of altering the terms of the agreement, and to refrain from supporting measures and actions conducted for the same pur