satisfy the demands of organized labor and stand a legal test. Angered by the committee's delay, the federation's officials threw their support to an extreme and vicious measure, H. R. 23189, by Mr. Bartlett, which practically repealed the decalogue in labor disputes. In this situation, the Democratic majority of the committee finally agreed upon H. R. 23635, by Mr. Clayton, which was reported to the House. The bill was passed under suspension of the rules limiting debate and prohibiting amendments, and in the senate was referred to a special

JAMES A. EMERY,

The measure has now gone over until next session, when it is likely to receive the serious and careful consideration which its far-reaching proposals deserve.

Discussing trial by jury in contempt cases, the bulletin says that 11 bills proposing it were referred to the judiciary committee of the House, the Clayton bill being the chief of these. Organized labor demanded such. a measure, but the committee found, if anything, greater difficulty in satisfying its legal scruples in the matter than in that of restricting injunctions. A substitute was passed and is now before the senate judiciary committee, where it will be argued next session.

The organization of postal employes is touched upon, the bulletin saying:

It soon became evident that these measures (H. R. 5970 and S. 1162) were fathered by the American Federation of Labor for the purpose of unionizing the postal service and particularly the railway mail service, which distributes the mail en route

*

*

* * An amendment (in the senate) by Senator Reed was finally adopted (in the postal appropriation bill) prohibiting the affiliation of any organization of postal employes with any society which obligated them to strike against the government or offered to assist them in doing so.

As the result of the debate in the senate, the bulletin says that body and every member of it participating in the discussion went on record as denying the right of public employes to strike against the government, thus

sub-committee of the judiciary committee.

Members of the sub-committee, both Republican and Democratic, were so impressed with the gravity of the measure that they decline to be hurried in their consideration of it, although the Federation of Labor made. an effort, through Senator Martine, of New Jersey, to cause the judiciary committee to be discharged from further consideration of the bill and thus bring it into the senate.

trary to that which precipitated such. serious trouble in France and England.

What is described as a bitter attack on a so-called efficiency system is touched upon in the bulletin. The bills on the subject are awaiting action. on the House and Senate calendars. In discussing them, the bulletin quotes. The Federationist for June as saying of the labor committee of the House:

"A brief summary is interesting. As is well known, the chairman of that committee is W. B. Wilson, formsecretary and treasurer of the

er

United Mine Workers of America, who is not only a man of marked ability, but staunch and true to labor and all the people. Associated with him upon this committee are: James P. Maher, former treasurer of the United Hatters of North America; Frank Buchanan, formerly president of the Bridge and Structural Iron Workers, and David J. Lewis, of the United Mine Workers. The highest recommendation is deserved and accorded to them."

Commenting on the bills against the efficiency system, the bulletin says:

These measures appear to be manifest efforts to secure a condemnation by congress that will apply to every system operating to systematically stimulate the industrial efficiency of American workmen and create the public impression that all efforts of this character rest upon elements of brutality deserving public disapproval.

The establishment of a commission on industrial relations, the bill to create a department of labor, which passed the House but failed of action in the Senate, and the bill to revise the patent laws and create a patent appeal court which will receive consideration at the coming session of congress are all touched upon. Under the subhead "Business Men and Practical Politics" the bulletin then says:

This brief resume of the character and status of congressional legislation affecting industrial relations should impress every thoughtful business man with the necessity for immediate practical participation in the selection of his congressional representative. Hundreds of proposals seriously affecting the successful conduct of your business, the possession, use and protection of your property, are being constantly submitted to either House. You carefully weigh the selection of every agent who performs an important function in your scheme of operation. You spend sleepless nights studying the character, methods and purposes of every adverse commercial interest. Do you give any attention, much less any proportionate consideration, to the selection of the legislator who is making the rules under which your inter

ests must live, and through which alone they can be successfully perpetuated? How frequently do you scrutinize the character, extent, methods and purpose of the most powerful and systematically organized adverse interest, steadily endeavoring by the creation of a superior political influence to obtain a legislative condition in which it can shape the rules of the game so as to put you at a serious disadvantage under them?

Then follow the significant sentences quoted at the beginning of this article, the bulletin continuing, saying:

This gigantic force is actively interested in selecting congressmen on the one hand and threatening them with political opposition if they do not support its demands upon the other.

What are you doing to meet this situation? Are you so blind to your own interests, so indifferent to the certain consequences of inaction, that you will not co-operate with your fellow business man, competitor or not, for the necessary protection of your common interest? A very small fraction of the time and intelligence you so successfully devote to the systematic organization and conduct of your business will assure, in co-operation with your fellows, the nomination and election of men of character, intelligence and experience, with a sympethetic understanding of the rights and duties of business men. You have the right to fair-minded, intelligent representation, no more, no less. You can obtain it in but one way-by giving to the choice of your legislative representative the same care and attention which you now give to the selection of your business representative.

If you do not now, in the present campaign, assert your influence to practically protect your just rights, the adverse interest will boast the possession of a preponderating political influence and timid legislators may accept the result as a demonstration of the assertion.

The bulletin is signed by John Kirby Jr., chairman; J. P. Bird, secretary and treasurer, and James A. Emery, general counsel,

DECLARED VOID

Law Relating to Employing Non-Residents Unconstitutional

This was an action by Jos. Josma to recover damages from the Western Steel Car & Foundry Co. because of alleged deception in a contract for his employment. The company is a manufacturer of cars in Cook county, Ill., and secured Josma, a resident of Muskegon, Mich., through an agent employed for that purpose. There

was at the time of the making of the contract a lockout in the company's works, and Josma was employed to take the place of one of the locked-out employes. No reference was made by the agent to the labor trouble, nor was there any inquiry by Josma as to conditions in this respect. A law of the state of Illinois, act of April 24, 1899, Hurd's Statutes, 1909, page 1088, makes it unlawful for any employer to bring workmen from another place in the state, or from another state, under misrepresentations or false pretenses concerning the kind and character of the work, the compensation, the sanitary or other conditions of employment, or as to the existence of any labor dispute. Failure to give notice of a labor dispute is declared to be misrepresentation. A penalty is provided for violation of this law, and any person affected or injured by such violation is given the right of action for damages, together with an attorney's fee.

There was no question as to the facts in the case, Josma having accepted employment and made the journey to Chicago, at which point he learned of the lock-out and found it inadvisable to enter upon the work

contracted for. The company was in no way at fault except in so far as the statute referred to made the action of its agent in contracting with Josma without notice of the lockout an offense. The lower court gave Josma damages in the amount of the expenses of his trip and the loss of his time, together with an attorney's fee. From this judgment the company appealed, maintaining that the act in question was unconstitutional. This contention was sustained by the supreme court of the state in an opinion which was delivered by Judge Dunn.

Having stated the facts, Judge Dunn said:

Under the constitution of this state no person can be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, and these terms, 'life', 'liberty' and 'property', embrace every personal, political and civil right which any person within the state may possess, including the right to labor, to make and terminate contracts and to acquire property. (Gillespie vs. People, 188 Ill. 176, 58 N. E. 1007.) By no authority can any person be deprived of any of these rights or restricted in their exercise except by due process of law, by a statute general in its operation and affecting in the same way all persons similarly situated.

it to a criminal liability. Such a misrepresentation could at common law be no more than a mere private cheat, which was a civil injury only, for which an action to recover damages would lie, but which was not an indictable offense. 2d ed., 797.)

(12 Ency. of Law,

Where money, personal property, or a signature is obtained by false pretenses, a criminal prosecution will lie under our statute, but a parole executory contract is not within its terms. The law has not denounced the misrepresentation of a fact in ordinary business dealings as a crime. So contracts for the sale of personal property or of real estate, for the erection of buildings, for the hire of personal property or the leasing of real estate, for the loan of money, for insurance, for the employment of attorneys, physicians, agents or workmen, may be voided for fraudulent misrepresentation by which they were procured, but the misrepresentations. will not constitute a criminal offense. or sustain an action for anything more than the damages suffered. The act in question leaves all these contracts unaffected by its provisions except in the single case of the employment of workmen, and even in that case its effect is limited to workmen who may change from one place to another in this state or be brought into this state.

Truth and fair dealing should beobserved in all business transactions, but the law should treat all men alike. It should not impose upon one class of men a liability for attorney's fees in a civil suit and a criminal liability for deceit in obtaining a contract, while leaving all other men subject only to the civil liability imposed upon them by the common law under like circumstances.

This statute imposes upon the employers of workmen coming from other places to their place of employment a different measure of liability, both civil and criminal, for their wrongful acts from that imposed upon other persons. It is therefore invalid unless circumstances exist making its enactment essential to the public health, morals, safety or welfare.

The legislature may in the exercise of the police power classify persons if the classification is based upon some reasonable distinction having reference. to the object of the legislation, but there can be no discrimination in legislation unless there is an actual difference of condition. The class to whom this act implies is workmen. changing from one place to another. The representations aimed at are those which concern the kind and character of the work, the compensation, the sanitary and other conditions of the employment and the existence of a strike or other labor trouble. These conditions or some of them are as important to the stenographers in an office, the clerks in a store or a bank, the teachers in a school, or any of the professional or semi-professional people who are employed by others, as to the workmen mentioned in the act. They are as important to the workman who does not leave his home for employment as to him who does. If persons entering into contracts of employment may be placed upon a different footing from persons entering into other contracts in the manner provided in this act, it can be only an act sufficiently comprehensive to include all persons subject to the evil aimed at the deception of employes as to the terms, character and conditions of their employment. A strike might exist among the telegraphers of a city, but the employer would not violate this statute if he employed other telegraphers without notifying them of the strike. A tailor shop might be unsanitary, but the employer would not violate this statute so long as he employed resident tailors. statute cannot be sustained which applies to some cases and does not apply to other cases not essentially different in kind. This statute is an arbitrary enactment, not operating equally on all persons under like conditions, but special in its operation, and it is therefore violative of constitutional rights.

A

The judgment of the circuit court will be reversed.-Josma vs. Western Steel Car & Foundry Co., Supreme Court of Illinois, 94 Northwestern Reporter, page 945.

Will Ask Reversal

A protest has started against the decision of the supreme court of Illinois, which returned an opinion upholding the right of employes to start a strike in cases even where there is no trade dispute existing between employes and employers. The decision is regarded by labor lawyers of Chicago as one of the most far-reaching labor documents that the high tribunal has handed down in years. Its effect is declared to be so momentous that a rehearing has been petitioned and an effort will be made to induce the court to reverse itself.

The case decided was that of Harry M. Kemp and others, appellees against Division No. 241, Amalgamated Association of Street and Electrical Railway Employes of America and others.

Kemp and his associates, employes at the time of the Chicago Railways Co., prior to May 8, 1908, were members of Division No. 241 of the Amalgamated Association of Street and Electrical Railway Employes of America. They objected to certain expenditures of the union. The result was that they withdrew from the union, the members of which then threatened to strike if Kemp and his fellow-seceders were retained in the railway company's employ, and they refused the offer of the railway company to arbitrate the question.

Kemp and his followers asked an injunction restraining the others from striking. The circuit court refused to grant the bill and the appellate court overruled the circuit. The supreme court reversed the appellate

ernment and courts would be useless if they failed to protect the laborer in the enjoyment of such a right.

can only lawfully be interfered with by one in the exercise of an equal or superior right and that is the ground upon which the right to obtain the place of another in direct and lawful competition is sustained. The right of a labor organization to enforce a closed shop for the mere purpose of strengthening the labor organization in future contests with the employer is not competition and is not of the same character of the right of the individual to dispose of his labor at his own will."

Knew of the Danger

At the Hamilton, Ontario, Assizes an action was brought by the Mercantile Trust Co., the administrator of a deceased Italian laborer, against the Canada Steel Co., to recover damages for the death of the man by reason of injuries received while he was working at the bottom of a vertical cylinder being erected by the defendants. The defendants were building a blast furnace, and in order to permit the firebrick and other materials to be sent up to the bricklayers for inserting a lining in the cylinder, a square shaft was inserted, running from the bottom to the floor upon which operations were carried on. This shaft was built at one side of the center of the cylinder and the tubs containing the materials for the bricklayers were sent up on it. The deceased was working at the bottom of the shaft when a portion of a brick fell down the shaft and inflicted injuries which resulted in his death.

It was contended that the employers should have had one or other of two appliances, one of which the evidence proved to be impracticable, and in the case of the other the jury, before whom the case was heard, were unable to agree whether the absence of the appliance was a defect or not, though deciding that the accident. would not have happened if it had been present.

It appeared from the evidence that