THOMAS SCOGLEY,

A MEMBER OF THE BAR OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

AND AUTHOR OF COGLEY'S DIGEST.

WASHINGTON, D. C.

W. H. LOWDERMILK & CO.

1894.

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1893, by

W. H. LOWDERMILK & Co..

in the office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.

FROM THE PRESS OF SAPP BROS.,

117 LIGHT ST.. BALTIMORE, MD.

DEDICATORY.

In common with all other law students, who have had both the honor and privilege of hearing the law lectures of THOMAS M. COOLEY, at the University of Michigan, I early contracted the reverence for him that a son has for his father, and stood in awe of his legal learning. I am happy that I can place the testimonial of my profound respect for him in a permanent form, but at the same time am chagrined that the bearer of it is not worthy of so great a lawyer and so distinguished a citizen. It is, therefore, with trepidation that I lay this unpretentious contribution to law literature at the feet of the great jurist.

THOMAS S. COGLEY.

PREFACE.

An apology for writing a book always seems to be affectation. No one ever writes unless he wishes to and desires to see his productions in print. Consideration for the feelings of book-buyers does not enter into the calculations of the writer in submitting for their favorable consideration his last and of course greatest literary performance. But assuming that custom requires some exhibition of shrinking modesty on the part of an author, the fact that there is no other work in existence on the same subject should be accepted by the patient and long suffering book-buyer as fully complying with expectation in that direction.

This is the only law book in the world specially devoted to the subject of which it treats. Only fragmentary references are to be found in other works.

In England, Lord Erle wrote a small pamphlet of ninety-four pages on the subject of trades-union, in which reference is made to some of the leading cases on strikes, but it would be absurd to call it a lawbook, or to assert that it would be of any particular value to the practicing lawyer. Judge Erle was appointed a member of a commission to examine the laws relating to labor and trades-union, and to report such modifications to the law as might be deemed advisable. In prosecuting his investigations he came into possession of matter not strictly within the scope of his instructions, and which could not be embodied in a report. Not desiring to lose the benefit of his labor and research he