Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

granted by any court of the United States, or a judge or the judges thereof, in any case between an employer and employees, or between employers and employees, or between employees, or between persons employed and persons seeking employment, involving, or growing out of, a dispute concerning terms or conditions of employment, unless necessary to prevent irreparable injury to property, or to a property right of the party making the application, for which injury there is no adequate remedy at law, and such property or property right must be described with particularity in the application, which must be in writing and sworn to by the applicant or by his agent or attorney.

And no such restraining order or injunction shall prohibit any person or persons, whether singly or in concert, from terminating any relation of employment, or from ceasing to perform any work or labor, or from recommending, advising, or persuading others by peaceful means so to do; or from attending at any place where any such person or persons may lawfully be, for the purpose of peacefully obtaining or communicating information, or from peacefully persuading any person to work or to abstain from working; or from ceasing to partronize or to employ any party to such dispute, or from recommending, advising, or persuading others by peaceful and lawful means so to do; or from paying or giving to, or withholding from, any person engaged in such dispute, any strike benefits or other moneys or things of value; or from peaceably assembling in a lawful manner, and for lawful purposes; or from doing any act or thing which might lawfully be done in the absence of such dispute by any party thereto; nor shall any of the acts specified in this paragraph be considered or held to be violations of any law of the United States.

Sec. 20 Clayton Act.

It will be noted that this section is by its terms limited to cases between "employer and employees" or persons seekink employment, and then only when the case does not involve irreparable injury to property or to a property right. Par. 2 of the Section permits the doing of certain acts which some courts have held to be illegal. See 486 supra.

Notes of Decisions Rendered Since 1915.

Unlawful violence by trade unions may be enjoined notwithstanding this section. Alaska S. S. Co. v. International Longshoremen's Asso., 236 Fed. 964; Kroger Grocery & Baking Co. v. Retail Clerks, 250 Fed. 890; Dowd v. United Mine Workers of Am., 235 Fed. 1, 148 C. C. A. 495. Contra, Puget Sound Traction etc. Co. v. Whitley, 243 Fed. 945. Quoting the section Judge Sanborn in United States v. Norris, 255 Fed. 423, 424 says: "The strike in this case had nothing to do with a dispute over wages, as the jury found; so the Clayton Act is entirely inapplicable. I think that section 20 was intended to legalize lawful strikes, and peaceful, lawful persuasion of workmen. The orders which were issued to workmen in this case were dishonest and corrupt, and they were given no reason for their ceasing work. The statute has no application to such a situation. The Sherman Act is thus left in full force in cases like this. The Clayton Act does not authorize molestation of employees by strikers. Kroger Grocery, etc., Co. v. Retail, etc., Co., (D. C.) 250 Fed.

890."

See annotations to section 500 above.

§ 518. Disobedience of Orders of Court. -That any person who shall willfully disobey any lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command of any district court of the United States or any court of the District of Columbia by doing any act or thing therein, or thereby forbidden to be done by him, if the act or thing so done by him be of such character as to constitute also a criminal offense under any statute of the United States, or under the laws of any state in which the act was committed, shall be proceeded against for his said contempt as hereinafter provided.

Sec. 21 of Clayton Act.

§ 519. Same Subject, Procedure Prescribed. That whenever it shall be made to appear to any district court or judge thereof, or to any judge therein sitting, by the return of a proper officer on lawful process, or upon the affidavit of some credible person, or by information filed by any district attorney, that there is reasonable ground to believe that any person has been guilty of such contempt, the court or judge thereof, or any judge therein sitting, may issue a rule requiring the said person so charged to show cause upon a day certain why he should not be punished therefor, which rule, together with a copy of the affidavit or information, shall be served upon the person charged, with sufficient promptness to enable him to prepare for and make return to the order at the time fixed therein. If upon or by such return, in the judgment of the court, the alleged contempt be not sufficiently purged, a trial shall be directed at a time and place fixed by the court: Provided, however, That if the accused, being a natural person, fail or refuse to make return to the rule to show cause, an attachment may issue against his person to compel an answer, and in case of his continued failure or refusal, or if for any reason it be impracticable to dispose of the matter on the return day, he may be required to give reasonable bail for his attendance at the trial and his submission to the final judgment of the court. Where the accused is a body corporate, an attachment for the sequestration of its property may be issued upon like refusal or failure to answer.

Par. 1, Sec. 22 Clayton Act.

§ 520. Right to a Trial by Jury Provided for. In all cases within the purview of this act such trial may be by the court, or, upon demand of the accused, by a jury; in which latter event the court may impanel a jury from the jurors then in attendance, or the court or the judge thereof in chambers may cause a sufficient number of jurors to be selected and summoned, as provided by law, to attend at the time and place of trial, at which time a jury shall be selected and impaneled as upon a trial for misdemeanor; and such trial shall conform, as near as may be, to the practice in criminal cases prosecuted by indictment or upon information.

If the accused be found guilty, judgment shall be entered accordingly, prescribing the punishment, either by fine or imprisonment, or both, in the discretion of the court. Such fine shall be paid to the United States or to the complainant or other party injured by the act constituting the contempt, or may, where more than one is so damaged, be divided or apportioned among them as the court may direct, but in no case shall the fine to be paid to the United States exceed, in case the accused is a natural person, the sum of $1,000, nor shall such imprisonment exceed the term of six months: Provided, That in any case the court or a judge thereof may, for good cause shown, by affidavit or proof taken in open court or before such judge and filed with the papers in the case, dispense with the rule to show cause, and may issue an attachment for the arrest of the person charged with contempt; in which event such person, when arrested, shall be brought before such court or a judge thereof without unnecessary delay and shall be admitted to bail in a reasonable penalty for his appearance to answer to the charge or for trial for the contempt; and thereafter the proceedings shall be the same as provided herein in case the rule had issued in the first instance.

Paragraphs 2 and 3 Sec. 22 Clayton Act.

The use of the word demand would seem to give an absolute right of trial by jury, and the only discretion left to the judge is to decide whether the jury shall be impaneled from "jurors then in attendance" or from others "to be selected and summoned."

§ 521. Review of Convictions for Violation of Court Orders. -That the evidence taken upon the trial of any person so accused may be preserved by bill of exceptions, and any judgment of conviction may be reviewed upon writ of error in all respects as now provided by law in criminal cases, and may be affirmed, reversed, or modified as justice may require. Upon the granting of such writ of error, execution of judgment shall be stayed, and the accused, if thereby sentenced to imprisonment, shall be admitted to bail in such reasonable sum as may be required by the court, or by any justice, or any judge of any district court of the United States or any court of the District of Columbia.

Section 23 Clayton Act.

§ 522. Provision for Trial for Disobedience to Orders of Court Not Applicable to Contempt Committed in the Presence of the Court. - That nothin herein contained shall be construed to relate to contempts committed in the presence of the court, or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice, nor to contempts committed in disobedience of any lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command entered in any suit or action brought or prosecuted in the name of, or on behalf of, the United States, but the same, and all other cases of contempt not specifically embraced within section twenty-one of this act, may be punished in conformity to the usages at law and in equity now prevailing. Sec. 24 Clayton Act.

§ 523. Limitation in Proceedings for Contempt. - That no proceeding for contempt shall be instituted against any person unless begun within one year from the date of the act complained of; nor shall any such proceeding be a bar to any criminal prosecution for the same act or acts; but nothing herein contained shall affect any proceedings in contempt pending at the time of the passage of this act.

Sec. 25 Clayton Act.

§ 524. That Part of the Act Invalid, Not to Affect Validity of Other Portions. - That if any clause, sentence, paragraph, or part of this act shall, for any reason, be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such judgment shall not affect, impair, or invalidate the remainder thereof, but shall be confined in its operation to the clause, sentence, paragraph, or part thereof directly involved in the controversy in which such judgment shall have been rendered. Section 26 Clayton Act.

§ 525. Dumping Prohibited. - A manufacturer by making or selling a certain quantity of goods at a fixed price may earn a fair return on his investment and for his services. Additional goods manufactured may be sold at cost. This sale of a surplus at cost or less is called dumping, and is generally considered unfair competition. Congress has passed an anti-dumping law. (See Appendix A. post.)

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »