The strongest groups of unions at the end of 1911 were those of the Metal Workers (17,481); the Building Trades (15,987); the Printers (11,472); and the Woodworkers (10,880). The total income of the Hungarian trades unions in 1911 was 2,017,264 crowns, and expenditures amounted to 1,767,098 crowns, of which 258,166 crowns were spent on unemployed benefits, 263,457 crowns on sick and maternity allowance, and 130,991 crowns on widows', orphans' and invalid pensions. No details in regard to expenditures on strike benefits are given as they are prohibited by law in Hungary.

Italy.*

At the beginning of 1912 the number of members of industrial unions (federazioni di mestiere) was 205,825, comparing with a membership of 218,734 in 1911, and showing a decrease of 12,909 members. The following table gives number of unions and membership, by trades, in 1911 and 1912.

*Statistica delle organizzazioni di lavoratori al 1° gennaio, 1912.

§ Not reported in Supplemento al Bollettino dell'Ufficio del Lavoro, Roma, 1913.

Unions of agricultural workers, at the beginning of 1912, numbered 2,626, with a total membership of 408,148.

The Netherlands.

According to the Dutch government report on labor organizations, the number of unions increased between January, 1911, and January, 1912, from 2,359 to 2,529, and the number of members from 153,689 to 169,144. The following table gives the membership of trade unions in Holland for the years 1910, 1911, and 1912:

The following trades had the most organized workers: Transport workers (28,750); building trades (18,540); food products workers (15,535); commercial employees (12,211); diamond workers, (10,380); and textile workers (9,225).

Norway.t

The membership of Norwegian trade unions increased from 46,397 on January 1, 1911, to 53,475 on January 1, 1912, showing a gain of 7,078 members for the year. The unions with the largest membership were: unskilled workers (20,557); metal workers (10,914); wood workers (3,500); and compositors (2,

*Beknopt overzicht van den omvang der Vakbeweging op 1 Januari, 1912. † Ninth international report of the trade union movement, Berlin, 1912.

275). The income of all unions for the year 1911 was 2,085,603 crowns, expenditures were 1,963,445 crowns, and accumulated funds on January 1, 1912, amounted to 1,299,623 crowns.

Switzerland.*

The number of members of Swiss trade unions affiliated with the National Federation rose from 75,344 in 1910, to 78,119 in 1911, and the distribution of the membership by trades was as follows:

There were, besides, a certain number of unions not affiliated with the national centre, whose membership is estimated as follows:

Ninth international report of the trade union moremen', Berlin, 1912. † Crown 26.8 cents.

7,000

35, 100

DECISIONS OF NEW YORK COURTS

Prohibition of Sunday Labor by Penal Law.

Defendant was repaving a street in New York city. He prosecuted the work on Sunday although his contract with the city did not require him to work on Sunday nor had he been directed to do so by any city official. Action was brought in the City Magistrates' Court charging him with violation of section 2143 of the Penal Law. The conviction there was afterward affirmed by the Court of General Sessions. On appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, by a vote of four to one, sustained the conviction. The section in question reads as follows:

"All labor on Sunday is prohibited, excepting the works of necessity and charity. In works of necessity or charity is included whatever is needful during the day for the good order, health or comfort of the community."

The majority were of the opinion that street paving was not a work of necessity but that if any city official "charged with the conservation of the good order, health or comfort of the community had directed the defendant to proceed with the work on Sunday we are disposed to think that he would have been absolved from the imputation of a criminal intent if he had complied with the direction."

The dissenting justice thought that street paving was a work of necessity" within the meaning of the section and furthermore that if it were not so no direction by any city official would override the statute. People v. Lynch, 156 App. Div. 601.

Suppression of Riots - Power of Justice of Supreme Court to Call for Military Aid.

In consequence of disorder attendant upon a street car strike in Buffalo a justice of the Supreme Court called upon the militia for aid, which was promptly rendered. Section 211 of the Military Law provides that payment of the militia when called out by the civil authorities shall be made by the county in which such military service is rendered. The county treasurer, however, refused to issue the certificate required by law upon which the money should be raised to pay the troops on the ground that the judge had exceeded his authority and, furthermore, that, even though the authority were his, the necessity for the use of the military power at any given time and place is one of fact to be passed upon by a court and jury. A peremptory writ of mandamus was then applied for directing the county treasurer to issue the certificate. After a hearing before Justice Marcus in the Supreme Court, Erie County Special Term, the application for the issuance of the writ was granted, the court holding that the judge had acted constitutionally in issuing the order for military aid and that under sections 102, 104, 111 and 112 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and section 115 of the Military Law he had the right to so act. Welch v. Bard,

81 Misc. 262.

Rights in Relief Association Not Affected by Rights Under Employers' Liability.

Plaintiff, a railway mail clerk, sued defendant, an association of railway mail clerks, to recover fifteen dollars per week from the association's benefit fund for loss of time resulting from bodily injuries received in a railway accident. In the Supreme Court in Monroe county defendant wished to prove that plaintiff had already received from the railway company a sum greater than the amount of his claim against defendant and that, therefore, the latter should be relieved of any payments. Permission to prove this was denied and judgment was rendered for plaintiff. The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, affirmed the judgment unanimously on the ground that an accident insurance contract is not one of indemnity but one of investment, and that plaintiff had the right to recover on his contract regardless of any right he may have had against another party. Suttles v. Railway Mail Association, 156 App. Div. 435.

Employers' Liability.

UNDER SECTION 18 OF LABOR LAW (SCAFFOLDING, ETC.)

Relative Liability of Owner and Contractor.- Plaintiff was in the employ of a firm of contractors who were repairing an iron smokestack seventyfive feet high which ran through the roof of defendant's brewery. The contractors furnished all the materials necessary for the repairs except a steel "gantline with its pulley and hooks, which belonged to defendant. Plaintiff, after having tested the strength of the gantline, which was new, was drawn to the top of the stack. On being drawn up a second time, the hook in the pulley block broke and plaintiff fell to the roof and was injured. Action was brought against the brewery company in the Supreme Court, Kings county, and a nonsuit was granted defendant. On appeal, the Appellate Division, Second Department, reversed the nonsuit, two judges dissenting, and ordered a new trial. As to the liability of defendant, who had furnished the gantline, the court said:

While defendant may not have in express terms assumed responsibility for the safety of the block and gantline, when it so located a hoist or mechanical appliance that the contractor must of necessity or under the requirements of reasonable convenience in the performance of his work use the same, defendant may be held to have anticipated such use and to have assumed liability to the contractor and his employees for the safety thereof. (Quigley v. Thatcher, 207 N. Y. 66.) Pedersin v. Michel Brewing Co., 156 App. Div. 383.

Liability of Municipal Corporation.- Plaintiff, while engaged along with others in painting the ceiling of a ferryboat belonging to and operated by the City of New York, was injured by the breaking of a scaffold and recovered a verdict for $200 in the Supreme Court in New York county on the ground that the scaffold was not up to the standard required by sections 18 and 19 of the Labor Law, especially section 19, which requires that, “All scaffolding shall be so constructed as to bear four times the maximum weight required to be dependent there from or placed thereon The Appellate Division, First Department, finding unanimously that there was nothing in the evidence to sustain the inference that the scaffold was improperly constructed or was lacking in strength, reversed the judgment and ordered a new trial. The court in the opinion rendered passed upon the

"