That the means adopted to bring about the contemplated restraint of commerce operated after physical transportation had ended is immaterial.

—the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit had affirmed a conviction of Michael J. Boyle, its International Vice-President, and severely condemned his methods in labor matters.

—trade agreement whereby manufacturer agreed not to hire non-union labor and union members agreed not to install non-union appliances

In the case of Boyle v. United States, decided on April 4, 1919, the same Circuit Court of Appeals which had passed 521 F (2) 889.

And where an indictment charges various means by which the conspiracy is effectuated, not all of them need be proved.

The courts have not been concerned whether the motive or objective of the union was in furtherance of its own interests, or whether the end sought was socially and economically good or bad.

6i S. Ct. 839 (I94I), combination to exclude labor-saving truck mixers from the market held not violative of the Sherman Act.

Although part of the Clayton Act, 38 STAT. 731 (914), 15 USCA § 17 (I927), preserves to labor the right to strike, labor may in other respects still be guilty of unlawful restraint of commerce.

[CITATION] NLRB v. Indiana & Michigan Elec. Co.