Picketing is a common practice, but is stubbornly resisted by employers. In 1913 Judge Sater (Ohio) declared that picketing was lawful when done uin a peaceful manner and by such limited numbers as not to awaken the fear and lead to the intimidation of workmen," but the following year the majority of the Supreme Court of Michigan held that there could be no such thing as peaceable picketing (In re Langwell) and quoted several cases to sustain the opinion.
The boycott has been declared legal by the courts of California and Montana. Elsewhere it is illegal, unless made legal by legislation. California, Maryland and Montana have legal ized the peaceful boycott. Alabama, Colorado and Illinois have outlawed it by name. The publication of (unfair° lists has been held illegal several times (Buck Stove case, and Loewe v. Lawler), but the union papers con tinue to print them. Suits for damages have been instituted, the most noted of which was the Danbury Hat case (Loewe v. Lawler), in which the court awarded damages against the members of the union. Several decisions have held that the unions, not being incorporated, are not liable. For that reason suits are brought against the members as individuals. However, in a few recent cases (1917) suits have been brought against both the individuals and the unions, and the courts have declared the unions liable.
Several acts have been passed to exempt unions from the operation of anti-trust laws (restraint of trade) and they have been held not to violate that clause of the Constitution which guarantees to all the equal protection of the laws. The Clayton Act (1914) gives a
very limited legality to the peaceful boycott and the peaceful picket so far as the Sherman Act is concerned.
On the other hand, the very existence of certain unions has been declared illegal. Unions may exercise considerable control over their members, even to the collection of 'fines, but there are limits of control over members and of interference with outsiders to which they may not go. The Amalgamated Window Glass Workers had rules forbidding any except mem bers and apprentices to work at certain trades and fixing the number who should be allowed to work in certain departments. Every mem ber of such a union, declared Judge Phillips (Ohio), had surrendered his industrial freedom, making a contract he had no right to make. For this reason he ordered the dissolution of the company and the appointment of a receiver. For similar reasons Judge Dayton declared the United Mine Workers an illegal combination, though be did not order a dissolution and some points of his decision were overruled. So far full legal responsibility has been avoided by refusing to incorporate and the exact legal status is yet to be determined. See ARBITRA TION, INDUSTRIAL; EIGHT-HOUR LAW ; LABOR LEGISLATION; LABOR MOVEMENT IN AMERICA.
The Trade Union Woman) (New York 1915) ; Marot, 'American Labor (New York 1914) ; Wolfe, 'Admission to American Trade Unions) (Baltimore 1912) ; Whitney, 'Jurisdiction in American Building-Trades Unions> (Baltimore 1914) ; Wolman, The Boycott in American Trade Unions) (Baltimore 1916).