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

associations, societies, and organizations,
which are perfectly lawful in themselves,
and there can be no proper complaint against
them, unless their members proceed to do
what is unlawful. While there may be Moth
ing in the constitution of "fhe Miners AS.
sociation" in conflict with the constitution
and laws of this State, the provision of Ar
ticle 8, concerning strikes, is not in harmo.
ny with the spirit of our govcrnmen and in
stitutons. TO transfer TO certain officers or
to a central committee, the power to legalize
or refuse 10 legalizc a suspension of work,
tends to take away from individuals the con-
troll over their owl time and labor, which
the law gives them. All organizations or ar
rangements which give to one person the
right TO say whether it is legal or proper for
another to work under any given state of cir-'
cumstances, must produce pernicious results.
The law recognizes the most perfect liberty
of each individual to control his own time
and labor, free from the coercion or dictation
Of any other individual or associations. But
whether the purposes of this organization
are cNpedient or not is not the question for
you to decide. The simple question for you
to determine is, whether these defendants
entered into a combination to do an unlaw-
ful act, or an act otherwise lawful but in an
unlawful manner. If they did they are
guilty Of a conspiracy and should be cOnvic-
ted. If they proceeded to curry out their
purposes at Goss Run, on the l1th of May,
4 81
so as to put pcaceable citizens in fear, they
are guilty Of a riot and should be convicted
under the first count of the indictment.
You must determine all questions Of fact,
including the credibiltv of witnesses. If
we ate mistaken in the law, rs we have laid
it down 20 you, and the defendants, or any
of them, are injured thereby, they have a
complete remedy under a recent statute by
removing the case to the Supreme Court for
review.
This case has occupied much time. Many
Witnesses have been called, and the facts
have been argued at great length by able
counsel on both sides. This was proper.
The case is OF great importance not only 10
the defendants, but the public. Probably
no calamity can beiall a community greater
than that riot and violence should prevail.
A popular writer in Il recent WORK, says: A
riot uopunished is revolution begun" 1t is
absolutely necessary for the peace of society,
and the maintenance Of Order that all com
binalicns resulting in violence, be put down
and properly punished. If The civU power
Of government administered by courts aud
iur,es is inadequate to do this, there is but
one other resource resort to military force.
Upon you rests the responsibility Of deter
| mining whether the peaceful machinery of
| the law is sufficient to maintain peace and
| order in your county, and to punish all often
| ders against the same, or whether hereafter
| resort must be had to the military power of
| the commonwealth in case of like combina-
| tious. If these defendants are guilty of the
ofeuse charged in the Indictment, they
should be convicted. If the evidence fails
| TO satisfy you of their guilt, they should be
| acquitted. OF course you must discriminate
| in individual cases. If the Commonwealth
has failed TO prove that any one OF the de-
, tepdants is guilty he is entitled to verdict
| of acqulital. You may convicS any of the
| defendants of one or both charges. Each
| individual defendant is entitled 20 every rea-
| sonable dodbt-such p doubt as would make
! a prddent man hesitate before coming TO a
| conclusion. As this is a misdemeanor, in
case of general acquittal, you have power
| over the costs and must say by your verdict
whether the county, prosecutor, or defend-
ants, shall pay the costs; or you may divide
| the costs betweea the prosecutor aud de-
! PENDANTS in such portion as you deem proper.
| II you impose any part of the costs on the
| prosecutor you must name him in your ver
| dict. If you convict any of the defendants
OF either oiiense, you say nothing about the
| costs.
| Counsel for the defendants have SUBMIT
ed certain points of law upon which they ask
| instructions. We will now read aud answer
| these points.
| Ftrst-The Court are requested to instruct
the jury that if they believe the miners act
ed under the organization Of The Miners
National Assertion, such organization was
not in law conspiracy, but justified by the
act of Assembly.
| AnS-We cannot so instruct you, for the
reasons already given in our general charge.
| The Miners National Association" may of
itself be lawful association. and yet its
members be guilty of conspiracy and riot.
| Second-The defendants are not under the
evidence guilty ola conspiracy, or of an I'M
| lawful combination or confederation, the
| overt acts, if any were committed, being the
acts of individual members, and not of the
| Association.
| Ans.-We cannot instruct you as matter
of law that the defendants are not guilty.
This is question of fact which you must
determine from the evidence under the in
structions we have given
Third-lf ac,e of violence or intimidation
were done, or if threats were made, the of
fence was that of individuals who alone are
responsible for their conduct.
Ans.-We are uncertain whether we nm
derstand the meaning of this point or not.
THE Miners National Association" is not
indicted here, The defendants are not in
dicted as corporation, but as individuals,
who are charged with having entered into
an unlawful combination to prevent men
from working, and are to be convicted, if at
all, as individuals, and not as members of
, The Miners National Association"
tourth-Under the evidence in this case
the only oftense that the defendants could il
, any way be convicted of, would be riot, and
the evidence does not justify that, as there
is no evidence that anything was done to in
spire the people with terror.
Ans.-We cannot instruct you as requested
) on this point. This is question of fac
which you must determine, lfthe defendant
entered into the combination alleged in tn
indictment, they are guilty of a conspiracy
Whether they did or not is aquestion of tac
e for you to determine.
:, Fitth-Acts aud language used by any in
+ diyidual towards Capt Clark in a persoua
alteration is not sufficient evidence upo
which to found conviction for riot 1h
acts must have been done by combinatio
q or confederation of three or more.
. Ans.--ln one respect this is true. Sing
y y acts, such as threats, or personal alteration
between one man and another, would nc
> be sufficient to constitute riot. If the
If was nothing but threats of one of the dt
g PENDANTS to do personal violence to CAP
a Clark, it would not justify conviction fC
=" riot; but you must take this with all 9TH
d evidence in the case and determine from
,e whether the conduct of the delandants