50 A FEDERAL anronrmn. »
prevent the plaintiff from carrying on any business as common carrier,
» or from using or employing its vessels, lighters, etc., in that business.
and endeavored to stop all dealings of other persons with the plaintiff, by »
sending threatening notices or messages to its various customers and pa-
trons, and to the agents of various steam-ship lines, and to wharnngers
and warehousemen usually dealing with the plaintiff`, designed to in-
timidate them from having any dealings with it, through threats of loss
and expense in case they dealt with the plaintiff by receiving, storing, or
transmitting its goods, or otherwise; and various persons were deterred
from dealing with the plaintiff in consequence of such intimidations,
f and refused to perform existing contracts, and withheld their former cus·
tomary business, greatly to the plaintitf’s damage. .
(d) The acts last mentioned were not only illegal, rendering the de-
fendants liable in damages, but also misdemeanors at common law, as
well as by section 168 of the Penal Code of this state. ._
(e) Associations have no more right to inflict injury upon others than
. individualshave. All combinations and associations designed to coerce
workmen to become members, or to interfere with, obstruct, vex, or,an4
noy them in working, or in obtaining work, because they are not mem-
bers, or in order to induce them to become members; ·or designed to
prevent employers from making a justdiscrimination in the rate of wages
paid to the skillnil and to the unskillful; to the diligent and to the lazy;
to the efficient and to the inefficient; and all associationsdesigned to in-
terfere with the perfect freedom of employers in the proper manage-
ment and control of their lawful business, or to dictate in any particular
. the terms upon which theiribusiness shall be conducted, by means of
threats of injury or loss, by interference with their property or traffic,
or with their lawful employment of other persons, or designed to abridge
any of these rights,——arepro temto illegal combinations or associations; and
all acts done in furtherance of such intentions by such means, and ac-
companied by damage, are actionable. j See Greenh. Pub. Pol. 648, 653;
People v. Fisher, 14 VVend. 1; Tarleton v. MbGawley, Peake.,*205; Rafael v.
Verelst, 2 W. Bl. 1055; Lumley v. Gye, 2 El. & Bl. 216; Bowen v. Hall,
’ 6 Q. B. Div. 333, 337; Gregory v. Duke qfBrunsunZck, 6 Man. & G. 205;
` Gunter v. Astor, 4 J. B. More,,12; Reg. v. Rowlcmds, 17 Ado]. & E. (N.
S.) 671, 685; Mogul St. Cb. v. 1|42:Gregor, 15 Q. B. Div. 476; Walker v.
Orowin, 107 Mass. 555; Oarew v·.,Ruther_ford, 106 Mass. 1; State v. Don-
aldson, 32 N. J. Law, 151; .Master Stevedoreef Assn v. Walsh, 2 Daly, 1,
13; Johnston Co. v. Meinhamdt, 60 How. Pr. 168; Slaughter-house Cases,
*16 Wall. 36, 116. , t . ·
3. There is no such doubt concerning the p1aintiff’s legal rights as
should debar it from the usual remedy. The motion to discharge from
arrest is therefore denied. · -