Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 13.pdf/539

 498

1893, a trade union society of journeymen butchers was registered. Leathern did not join it nor did his workmen, although he offered to do so and to pay the dues or sub scriptions of all of his employees to the society. This offer was not accepted, and a strike was declared against him. His cus tomer, Munce, was threatened with severe penalties if he did not cease trading with Leathern, and the defendant society and cer tain of its members decoyed Leathem's servants away from his service and paid them their wages while idle. They also pub lished a ''black list," in which they held up Leathern and his customers to ridicule. Leathern finally brought an action against the individual whom he could connect with these practices. The jury, upon questions being left to them, found that the defendants wrongfully and maliciously induced the cus tomers and servants of the plaintiff not to deal with him and that they blacklisted him, and they assessed the damages at £250, for which sum judgment was given against the defendants. This judgment was affirmed by the Irish Court of Appeals, and although with one dissenting opinion, now has been affirmed by the House of Lords. The case has especial interest because of the defence set up, and it was upon this ground that the appeal was made, that there was no privity between the defendants and Leathern, and that the acts of the defendants in refusing themselves to trade with Leathern and in per suading others not to trade with him, were legitimate, and they relied upon Allen v. Flood, which seemed to support their con tention. The Lord Chancellor distinguished Allen т1. Flood from the case at bar by saying that in the former case the defendants neither uttered nor carried into effect any threat at all. The other judges, although with apparent difficulty, got rid of Allen v. Flood in the same way, and from their ex pressions it is very fair to infer that they would be only glad if it was not hereafter to

be considered a precedent for anything. It is notable that Lord Lindley.who since his translation from the Mastership of the Rolls to the House of Lords, is looked upon as the strongest judge in that body, in his opinion used this language: "I an? aware of the difficulties which surround the law of con spiracy, both in its criminal and civil aspects, and older views have been greatly, and if I may say so, most beneficially modified by the discussions and decisions in America," and he quoted with approval Yegelahn v. Gunter (167 Mass., 92). The courts were closed earlier this year than usual, as the I2th of August came on a Monday, and but one court was at work on that day. Judges and counsel left town for the continent or the cool retreats of the seaside or the Scotch mountains early the week before. This year, as year after year for some time past, there has been the usual grumble at the arrangement of the legal term which keeps the courts open till nearly the middle of August, when judges and counsel and even jurors are stale, and then close them not to open again until nearly the first week in November. The popular change would be a vacation from the 25th of July till the 25th of September; but those who have the deciding of the arrangement do not sympathize with the desire for any change. Although the vacation is very young yet, one very sad accident has happened in the death by drowning of Lady Smith, the wife of the Master of the Rolls. The latter will have the sympathy of every member of the bar. His courtesy and common sense are as proverbial as his knowledge of the law and his facility in applying it. He has been ill and overworked recently, and a rumor of last term said that he was likely to resign. How far the shock of his great bereavement will affect his future cannot now be sur mised. STUFF GOWN.