The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1875-08-06


to combine and agree together to proven
another portion Of tho congregation by fore,
OF arms, from using the English language il
the worship of God among the congregation
SO n conspiracy to assist Il female infant tC
escape from her fathers control with view
to marry her against his will, is ndictabl,
as conspiracy at common law, while j
would have been no criminal ollense if one
alone had induced her to olopc with ant
marry him. Mifllin VS.. Commonwealth {
w. IL ;, 4Gl. One man or many may hiss
an actor; but if they conspire to do it they
may be punished: per Gibson, @. J. Hood
VS.. Palm s, Barr 23S Russel on crimes 556
And action for a conspiracy to deiame vii
be supported though the words be not ac-
tionable, if spoken by one: Hood VS.. Palm
supra. Defamation by the outcry Of num-
bers, says Gibson, Q. j., is. as resistless a.
defamation by the written act of an individ-
uaL, And says Coulter, j., 'the concentra-
ted energy Of several combined wills, ope-
rating simultaneously and by concert upon
one individual, is dangerous even to the
cautious and circumspect, but when brought
to bear upon the unwary and unsuspecting,
it is fatal Twitchell vs.. Commonwealth, 8
Barr 2ll. There is potency in number.
when combined, which the law cannot over
look where injury is the consequence. Ii
the conspiracy be to commit crime or an
unlawful act, it is easy to determine its in
dictable character. 1t is more difficult when
the act to be done or purpose to be accom-
pIished is innocent in itself. Then the of
Tense takes its hue from the motives. the
means or the consequences. If the motive.
OF the conledoratC5 be to opp ess, the means
they use unlawful, or the consequence to
others injurious their confederation will
become conspiracy. Instances are given
in The Commonwealth vs.. Carlisle, Bright
Rep, 20. Among tLose mentioned a3 crimi-
nal is u combination Of employers TO depress
the wages Of jourptymen below what they
would be, il there W IRE no resort TO artilicial
means and a combination of the bakers of
a town to bold UP iho Article Of bread, and
by means of scarcity thus produced to ex-
tort an eXorbtant price for ii. The latter
instance is precisely parallel with the pres
ent case, 1t is the effect of the act upon the
public which gives that case and this it.
evil aspect as the rc>alt Of onfederation, for
any baker might choose to hold up his own
bread or coal operator his coal, rather than
sell at ruling prices but when he destroys
competition by a combination with others,
the public can buy of no one.
lnreX vs.. De. Befepquetal, 3 NJ & S. 81,
it was held to be conspiracy to combine to
raise the public funds on particular day by
false rumor. The purpose itself, said Lord
Peterborough, is miSchieyOus. 1t strikes at
the price of valuable commodity in the
market, and if it'gives q fictitious price by
means of false rumor, it is fraud levelled
against the public, for it is against all such
as may possibly have anything to do with
the funds on that particular day. Every
corner" in the language of the day, wheth.
er it be to affect the price of articles of com.
vendible stocks, when accomplished by con-
federation to raise or depress the price and
operate on the markets is Il conspiracy The
ruin often spread abroad by these hearyless
cOnspira' les is indo 'cribable, frequently fill.
ing the land with starvation, poverty and
woe. Every association is criminal where
the object is to raise Or deptess the price o
labor beyond what it would bring if it were
left without artificial aid or 1imuIus. Rex
VS.. Byerdyke NJ. & S. 179. In the case oI
such associations the illcgalits consists mos
frequently in the means employed to carry
out the object. To fl, standard OF price
among men in the same employment, as
free bill, is not in itself criminal, but may
become so when tue parties "esort to coer
cion, restraint or penalties upon the On.
ployed or employers, or what is worse, tc
force Of arms If the means be unlawfu
the combination is indicta0le. Common
wealth vs. Hunt, Metc, Ill, A conspiracy
Of jOuIneymcn of any trade or handicraft tC
raise the wages hy entering iuto combina
ton 10 cOerce journeymen and master work
men employed in the same branch of indus
try, to conform to rules adopted by sucl
combination for the purpose of regulating
the price Of labor aud carrying such rule
into 'ect by overt acts, is indictable as
misdemeanor. Wharf, C. L, citing III,
ople VS.. Fishblee, II Wend, Q. Withou
multiplying examples, these are sUilicien
to ilusr G'e the true aspect Of the case befor
Us, and TO show that combination such a
these companies entered iuto 20 control tn
supply aud price of the Blossburg aud Bar
c'aJ regions is Illegal, and the contract there
fore void
You see, therefore, that any agreemen
comb lation or confederation to increase q
depre5s the price Of any veudble commodi
ty, whether labor, merchandise or anythiu
else is indictablc as a conspiracy under tn
| Jaws of Pepnsy ylYanl. Each individual Ia
unlouhtel right 10 demand whatever pric
he pIeases, for his labor or properly eve
| though it should be twice or thrice its MAJ
kct value but if he enters into combina
ton with othe;s TO compel the employer {
purchaser 10 pay the price thus demande
by dest coying competition, the combinatio
become, Gn indctable oiIense. So with Il
employ ycrs, whether coal operators or other
if they enter in,o combi1aion TO redut
the price of Labor. it is conspiracy and il
dictable in the courts. Each individual mG
determine to pay no more than certa
price for a given kind Of labor, but if he e.
ters into a combination with other employe
to control the price by destroying compel
ton, he and his Conlederates are guilty
conspiracy, This always has been the la
not oply with regard to labor, but everythil
else, ald still remains the law, except
modified by an act of the Legislature
June IT, 1872. l will read that act au e
plain the change it has made in the law
laid down by Chief Justice Aguew.