Sit-Down Sat On

On at least one occasion Secretary of Labor Perkins has indicated that in her mind the legal status of the Sit-Down was not proven. President Roosevelt, a lawyer by training, is known to have had no illusions that the Sit-Down was legal but to have deprecated it as no crime, just a misdemeanor. Last week in Philadelphia in the first Sit-Down ruling from the Federal bench, the Circuit Court of Appeals declared that sit-downers in a local hosiery mill were not only guilty of such crimes as forcible entry and forcible detainer but had violated the Wagner Act and the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.

The case originated early last May when 250 C.I.O. unionists took over Apex Hosiery's Philadelphia plant, refused to budge until they won a closed-shop contract. The company claimed the plant was stormed from without, that 2,500 workers were driven from their jobs, that $3,000,000 worth of damage was done during the rioting. For seven weeks the sit-downers held complete possession. After a Federal District Court judge denied Apex an injunction, the company appealed. Said the three Circuit Court jurists in last week's unanimous opinion:

"Underlying this case is the question of whether a few lawless individuals ignoring and condemning the Wagner Act and in defiance of all law and order, and in ruthless disregard of the rights of others, should be permitted, by assuming the name of a union, to deprive all others of their means of livelihood and compel them to contribute of their earnings to self-styled leaders. A few 'sit-downers' are keeping 2,500 persons, who were entirely satisfied with their positions, from working and from earning an honest living for themselves and their families. If an employer had denied to Labor any of its rights, the Wagner Act provided an orderly way of calling him to account."

Maintaining that the Apex sit-down was "in fact not a strike." the Court continued: "Not even counsel for the defendants condoned their lawless, criminal conduct in this case, but in open court condemned it." Attorneys for the sit-downers contended that "however unlawful their acts were, they were incidental, only a means to an end," and therefore did not constitute a conspiracy in restraint of interstate commerce. Said the Court: "This argument overlooks the fact that a strike if lawfully conducted is in itself lawful and its lawfulness now has statutory recognition. There could be no conspiracy under the Sherman Act or otherwise because of doing a lawful thing." But the sit-downers had done unlawful things, continued the Court, including restraining the company from shipping finished goods in interstate commerce, and "the ultimate objective which they had in view in no way exculpates them from violation of the Sherman Act."

Fearing this application of the anti-trust laws to labor disputes could be easily broadened into a major strikebreaking weapon, Labor proposed to carry the Apex case to the U. S. Supreme Court. Meantime the Apex officials gave the sit-downers 24 hours to evacuate the plant. As the zero hour approached, Philadelphia's Mayor Wilson persuaded the sit-downers to leave peacefully, led them out in person. After one look at the plant. Apex officials rushed back to the Courts claiming that on the last day the sit-downers had wrecked the mill from office to basement.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.