The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-08-27

half Of the prosecution and stated that when Mr..
pawson's son had been in his employment some
weeks ne wished to have him bound as an appren-
tice. lie was not, however and considerable dis
satisfaction was manifested throughout the building
by the bricklayers. Finally matters went on and
TO tell the boy repeatedly to get himself bound but
not having done so, he discharged him. for the men
mad already struck. Van Nostrand one of them.
stating that he could AFFORD to pay as day fine
AT that time witness did not know OF his belonging TO
any association On cross Examination the witnssss
stated that there objection offered TO the CON-
palnants work; he was learned his trade and the
only solid objection him was his not he NO honnT
az an apprentice, there was any violence used
towards him, and there would not have been ~
trouble II he had been bound
TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM NJ. DAWSON.
This Witness the complainant, briefly corroboratea
In general terms the statements already given. He
was never used with violence, but Van NOstrand
told him that either OF them leave II witness
was not bound as an apprentice; he received In
structlons from Van Nostrand and was anxious to
be bound.
JOHN T. CoNovER ON THE sTAND-HIs TESTIMONY IS
DECLINED.
When Mr. Conover came upon the stand mis- ex.
animation was just being proceeded with when
counsel for the defendants nteposed and objected to
the reception OF his testimony upon the ground that
although his statements might refer to unions gene
rally they could not possibly bear upon the present
case. Counsel for the prosecution commended that
ton, about which Mr. Conover would testify, their
actions were in accordance with one another.
Moreover, he would show the disastrous.
erect upon trade which strikes created
After considerable discussion the subject
the Court declined 10 proceed WIN tNe evidence OF
Mr. Conover on the ground that inasnuch as he lid
not pretend to know anything about Union No. II Of
Morrisana or Its operations 1t would be Irrelevant In
Tie present prosecution
This clooed the for the prosecution.
TESTIMONY FOR THE DEFENCE.
The first witness called the part OF the defendant
was Mr. Garvin, President OF the Union. His EVIL
dence was very brief the principal point being that
the brcklayers struck because MIR Dawson Jr was
not bound rs an apprentice, not because he was
non-nember OF the club
Mr.. Dyckman then proceeded to address the Jury
a nH hnt hnra
had been no conspiracy under the statute-none
against trade or commerce. lie attributed the en-
tire proceedings to the master masons OF New York,
who were trying TO battle the brcklayerS of that
city, 1t was true, he said that such the policy
OF the master masons for they wanted apprentices,
for whose work they could probably charge full
prices. He concluded by calling on the jury to acquit
the prisoners as no overt act had been proved against
them.
Mr.. Herring followed, who was succeeded by Mr..
Chathed, on behalf of the prosecution. lie dilatee
at some length upon strikes generally and comment.
cd severely upon the present movement, contendng
that voluntary labor was curbed by such proceed
in0s
The Court in charging the Jury dweit at length
upon the law bearing on the several more important
features of the prosecution. The question naturally
arose, what right had the Union TO compel Mr. Daw-
son to article his son to interfere, and had Mr..
Dawson right to make his own contract? But to
support the prosecution three propositions must be
established That the jury may be satisfied II was
first necessary to establish combination of two or
more. and in the present combination of the
defendants. Secondly they must establish that that
combination was made FOR the accomplishment OF
unlawful purposes and In this case for the purpose
OF injuring the public trade. Having established the
combination and that that combination was for the
preparation of unlawful things, some overt act
must be established. Unquestionably the cOnfede-
racy was admitted, and having dilated upon the law
of conspiracy the Court went on to state that the
Union had no right TO make any regulation or bind
together for any purpose resulting IN the public re-
sources being impeded. Having reviewed the facts
OF the case citing throughout many cases bearing
upon the present question, Judge COchrane con-
cluded shortly before i've O'Clock.
The jury then retired, and after consulting for
some time brought in verdict OF guilty Sentence
deferred.