It

thereon. This was held erroneous. was held that the defendants had acted within their rights, and that they might for the purpose of strengthening their unions, either singly or collectively, refuse to work in places or on buildings on which non-union labor was employed. We adhere to this decision."

Associate Justice Hallam then referred to numerous parallel cases which justify the opinion rendered by the court. In the case of Meier vs. Speer, 96 Ark., 618, where the members of a labor union refused to lay stone for the foundation of a building in case an employer of non-union labor secures the contract for the superstructure, the court said:

"In the absence of a contract appellants had the absolute right, no public duty forbidding to prescribe the terms upon which they would work. They had the right to refuse to work unless these terms were accepted and contractual relations were created. This appellants had the right to do severally or in combination, in the union or out of it.

"In National Protective Association vs. Cumming, 170 N. Y., 315, members of a union notified certain contractors that if they did not discharge members of plaintiff association and employ members of defendant union, they would cause a general strike of all men of other trades employed on their building. It was held that if the primary purpose was to help members of defendant union, the conduct was lawful."

The court cited the case of Gill Engraving Company vs. Dorr, 214 Fed. Rep., 112, where it was held:

"That the object of a photo-engravers' union and its officers and members in warning employers that the members would handle the work of only such customers as had all their work done in union shops and in threatening to strike, was to increase the power of the union and get more, easier, and better paid work for the members and not to injure the proprietor of a nonunion shop, though such injury had

occurred and was foreseen that the object of the combination and the means employed were legal and hence gave such proprietor no right to injunctive relief."

The court, after citing a number of similar cases, concludes with the following statement:

"Some courts hold against the legality of organized action against an employer other than the one by whom complaining workmen are employed. But, as above noticed, this decision was repudiated in the Gray case. The interference with the trade relations of one with whom you have no trade relations yourself is presumptively unlawful, but conditions may be such as to furnish justification for such conduct. A person may justify such interference if he is in pursuit of some lawful object. Intent is not the test. The test is broader. A person in furtherance of his own interests may take such action as circumstances may require and so long as he does not act maliciously toward or unreasonably or unnecessarily interfere with the rights of his neighbor he can not be charged with actionable wrong whatever may be the result of his conduct in pursuing his own welfare."

All state federations of labor should urge upon legislatures now considering injunction legislation this splendid clear-cut decision of the Minnesota Supreme Court.-American Federationist.

SEAMEN'S ACT IS CRIPPLED. Washington. - President Furuseth, of the International Seamen's Union, has ordered the union's attorneys to file an appeal in the so-called Stratearn decision and has asked the union's executive board to sanction this procedure.

This decision was made by the Pensacola Federal Court, which rules that a seaman must be five days in port before he make a legal demand for one-half of wages earned. As many of the Atlantic liners and practically all of the vessels in the coastwise and great lakes trade can load or unload and leave a port in less than five days.

Those who sell their labor that they may earn money with which to purchase the comforts of life find it increasingly necessary to utilize collective bargaining through organization. For a hundred years, with increasing success, have workers united themselves in labor unions for this purpose in this country. These labor unions have raised wages, reduced hours, secured improved working conditions, wrung from unwilling industrial task-masters humane treatment and sanitary surroundings, and brought into the law books of the nation a recognition of the justice of labor's cause.

Yet a smooth-running, well-oiled piece of splendid machinery, animate

or inanimate, may sometimes be neglected; may sometimes be expected to continue at the highest point of efficient service without attention; may sometimes be expected to operate automatically without intelligent direction or close scrutiny. Even a labor union, having accomplished material benefits for members, may sometimes be expected to continue to achieve advantageous results without zealous participation in its workings by the majority of its membership; may, in a word, become rusty, or overconfident, or negligent.

There come times when business men take stock; when mothers give spring medicine; when accounting must be made of resources; when close

introspection can but prove wise. There come times when all men get apathetic, and need stirring up. The orderly operation of the labor union is a source of gratification, but its interest in itself can never be too active.

A famous business man once made a wise remark, applicable to all lines of endeavor: "I must push my business, or soon I will have no business to push." So with the labor union. It must be urged onward, new members must be brought in, new unions constantly organized, or there will soon be an end of labor unions and their usefulness to the workers cease to exist.

With a desire to spur on to greater activity and interest the existing organizations of labor with the hope and expectation of bringing new unions in the Central Councils and new members into existing unions, as well as organizing new organizations wherever possible, a Union Labor Forward Movement has been started under the auspices of the Central Labor

Councils and the State Federation of Labor, large committees are already organized and at work, and plans are being made and will be worked out that will doubtless be of benefit to all concerned. There will be work to do; there will be interest to arouse; there will be friendships to make, entertainments to enjoy; there will be an extension of the organization of labor to the home and fireside, an organizing of the women and the children of the workers' families, and lastly, perhaps, but not by any means least, there will be the revival of the enthusiastic spirit of union labor, the consecration to that cause which makes us all feel, in the language of the poet Burns:

"For a' that, and a' that,
A man's a man for a' that."

COURT HUMOR.

"She lammed me with her umbrella, your honor."

"Weren't you making sheep's eyes at her?"

In a recent issue of the Boston Post appeared an interview with Matthew C. Brush, who has recently been advanced to the position of president of the Boston Elevated Railway Company. Mr. Brush, in an interesting matter-of-fact way, relates his experience with President Mahon, which averted a tie-up and brought about the last contract settlement in Boston. Apparently there are no frills about Brush. His talk indicates an advanced type of the new school of traction management, revealing democratic ideals and a belief in social justice. The interview follows:

Head of Boston Elevated Hates Frills and Formalities.

How he locked all the doors, banished the stenographers and dictagraph, drew the curtains, and talked for eighteen and a half consecutive hours with W. D. Mahon, head of the Amalgamated Association of Street and Electric Railway Employees, and so settled the threatening strike in Boston, was revealed recently in a talk with Matthew C. Brush-"Matt" Brush, as every "L" employee knows the new president of the Boston Elevated Street Railway Company.

Here is how it happened, in Mr. Brush's own words:

"I said to Mahon: 'We're here in my office. The doors are locked. There is no stenographer concealed anywhere. No dictagraph. Nobody to listen. Curtains are drawn. We are alone. Now, before we can do any thing I've got to know you and you've got to know me. You tell me all about yourself, and I'll tell you all about myself.'

"We stayed in that room for eighteen and a half hours. I found out that he was square; he found out that I am. He was on the level-to the very end, when the difficulties were adjusted to the satisfaction of all.

That settled the strike-just being on the level."

Although up to his ears in work, on Sunday, Mr. Brush-or just "Brush," as he calls himself in conversationfound time to tell the Post reporter something of his personal ideas. Things were busy, for he expects to move into the office reserved for the company's president Monday.

Mr. Brush is a young man and dresses unobtrusively, extremely so. The most conspicuous thing about him is his lack of pose or "presidential" airs. Anybody can see him and talk to him. While he conversed his secretaries, Mr. Potter and Mr. Gilman, and other people came in and went out without ceremony.

"Now, that session I had with Mahon was only an instance of maintaining a human relation with your fellow humans. That's what has made Henry Ford." He explained: "I admire Ford. His success is due to this as much as anything else, that he knows human nature. He's about two laps ahead of most business men." This switched him to Government ownership. He never ducked the ticklish questions-just seized them, and spoke right out.

"I don't disbelieve in govermnent ownership," he said, with a little hesitation. "But I think that private ownership, with proper State control, is more efficient. Government ownership brings in politics; politics brings on frequent changes in office; such changes don't work out well in business, Again, under government ownership the honor of holding public office plays a big part, and the nonbusiness man with political ambitions is too likely to be put into a place that really needs a business man, who is attending stricly to business.

"Anyway, why should railroads be government-owned, more than the milk. bread, telephone or electric