Union. The remaining defendant, Joseph Samuel,
ig not a member of the Committee and there is
nothing to indicate that he attended any of its
meetings.

The witnesses called on behalf of the plaintiffs
were: the plaintiff Gertrude O’Neal; her sister,
Linda O'Neal, Victoria Frederick and Clarine
Knight, all of whom work as clerks in the Drug
Store; Cardigan Stevens, Comptroller of Customs,
Antigua, whose offices throughout the picketing
have been close to the plaintiffs’ premises; Iris
Barrow, clerk at Jos. Dew & Son, a firm in the
vicinity of the plaintiffs’ premises; Veronica
Harris, a school girl who was sent on an errand to

O’Neal’s Drug Store; Neville Lowen, a wood-.

carver, who sells his goods to the plaintiffs and
visits their business premises regularly; Assistant
Superintendent Blaize and Sergeant Roberts, both
of the Leeward Islands Police Force; and Clement
Neison, a carpenter, who deals with ONeal’s

Drug Store.

The witnesses for the defence were: the
defendant Hurst, General Secretary (and as such
chief executive Officer) of the Union; Joseph
Huches, a clerk of the Magistrate’s Court which
occupies the upper storey of a building opposite
O’Neal’s Drug Store; the defendant Levi Joseph,
who holds the post of Organiser in the Union;
Joseph Laurent, a former druggist of O’Neal’s
Drug Store; the defendant Lake, Second Vice-
President of the Union; Ernest Athill, a carpenter,
and Norris Abbott, estate manager, both of whom
are customers of the Drug Store.

Evidence was given by the defendants Hurst
and Levi Joseph to the effect that at some time
after the meeting of the Executive Committee of
the Union on 9th September, 1955, they engaged
six persons to picket the plaintiffs’ business
premises, and that these persons were given
directions with regard to their duties by the
defendant Hurst.

On the morning of Saturday, 17th September,
1955, at 8 o’clock, the hour at which the plaintiffs’
business premises are normally opened, the pickets
arrived outside the premises. That they were
accompanied by a steel band, playing, and a large
crowd, and posted around the premises by the
defendant Levi Joseph, is beyond dispute. A good
deal has been said about this steel band, for the
presence of which Levi Joseph disclaims all respon-
sibility. From the evidence before me I have no
doubt that the pickets and the band were led to
the premises by Levi Joseph in the manner alleged
by Gertrude O’Neal and Victoria Frederick and
that the installation of the pickets, generally, was
attended by much flourish, fanfare and noise; it
was apparently during this early phase of the
picketing that Cardigan Stevens telephoned and
complained of the din to the Commissioner of
Police. I cannot accept Levi Joseph’s statements
that even at the time of giving evidence in this
Court he knew nothing at all about how the pickets
(who had assembled at his home) happened to be
accompanied by the band, and that the band

simply passed by, without stopping outside the
plaintiffs’ premises.

The pickets were carrying placards marked:
‘Workers must be respected”; “Strike on
here. Protest against unjust dismissal” ; “ Hold
the line. The Workers’ security is challenged ” ;
and “Join the fight against injustice.” As they
walked to and fro outside the plaintiffs’ premises,
the pickets repeated the words written on the
placards, particularly the words ‘‘ Hold the line.”
The only placard to which it seems to me any
objection could seriously be taken is the one
marked “Strike on here. Protest against unjust
dismissal.” There was, in fact, no strike on.
Levi Joseph, who was cross-examined about the
wording of this placard, at first tried to justify its
use by saying: “I call a trade dispute a strike
eawawene .... Because I considered this the last resort
I considered it a strike.” His final explanation,
which was corroborated by the defendant Hurst,
was that the placards were not made specially for
this occasion; Joseph added that the Union does
not possess any placard bearing only the words
“ Protest against unjust dismissal”.

This would be a convenient point to mention
briefly, and as far as possible in their proper
sequence, a number of specific allegations. I will
make further comments on some of them at a later
stage.

Gertrude O’Neal states that on the morning
of the 17th September the pickets, in, addition to
repeating the words already mentioned, were
shouting, ‘‘ Don’t buy from O’Neal’s Drug Store”;
she says she saw some of the pickets surround
people trying to enter the store and heard Tilton
Theophile, one of the pickets, threaten to knock
down several persons who were attempting to
enter; she did not see the defendant Samuel with
any bell, but on this, as on other days, she heard
him saying “ Don’t buy from O’Neal’s Drug Store.
You no hear you no foo buy from the Drug
Store’’; during the afternoon, while the pickets
were around the premises, she saw the defendant
Ireland standing on the Post Office gallery just
opposite the Drug Store.

Linda O’Neal asserts that on the morning of
17th September she heard Levi Joseph shouting
“Don’t buy from O’Neal’s Drug Store, people;
don’t goin there to buy”, and that later in the
day she saw and heard the defendant Samuel ring-
ing a bell and shouting “ Don’t buy from O’Neal’s
Drug Store, people. Don’t go in there”.

Victoria Frederick says that on the 17th
September, some time after Levi Joseph had
launched the picketing, he returned and told one
of the pickets he must “shout behind people while
they are going in the Drug Store”, and that
pickets shouted accordingly and the people did not
go into the store. She further states that she saw
the defendant Ireland in the vicinity of the plain-
tiffs’ premises practically all day, and that around
2 o'clock in the afternoon the defendants Bird,
Lake, Carrott and Williams came; she saw Mr.