Wood River times. [volume] (Hailey, Idaho) 1882-1915, 1885-02-21

WV CNCCpt SItN
Mr.. Ruick followed. After quoting a
few additional authorities, lie confined
himself to review of the testimony im-
plicating the defendants and the Miners
Union. McDcvitt. O'Brien aud Wright
son were shown to have attended the
meeting of the Union. Messrs. Johns
and McGee We're also present; Mr.. Hick-
ey was there; Mr.. Donahue was there
seven of the defendants were therefore
present at that meeting. Tie resolution
was to stop work by all men in the mines
at Broadford. The words used were that
"'all work in the mines ut BroadfOrd
MUST STOP" Frank Burt, Johns, Nc
Dewitt. O'Brien, McGee, Wrightson, Joe
WilhOit and Frank Thompson are identi
fled with the crowd that stopped Gal
braith. Petty accosted Maynard while
he was on his way to the mine. We have
shown that every defendant here except
Shay was Il member of the Miners Union.
AS to Mr.. Shay. we are willing that he be
discharged. O'Brien and McDevitt were
everywhere. They never missed Il single
overt act, with this exception, perhaps,
that McDevitt was not with the crowd
that stopped Maynard 1t has been nee
essary for the prosecution to connect this
testimony with the Miners Union at
every step, because the conspiracy, the
overt acts, and everything in pursuance
Herewith, seems to have been done by
and under its authority.
Recess until O'clock.
AFTERNOON SESSION.
Judge Waters closed for the de.
Tense. Much, perhaps, has been said
by the prosecution in this case that
could have been narrowed down. He
would endeavor to keep within the
bounds, and not 60 out of it. The
first question that he would ask would
perhaps cmbody the defense. The
defense invoked the sound logic of
that law which governs this case.
What are we here for? We are
charged with an alleged conspiracy.
What must be proven, what inferred.
and what the deductions to be drawn
therefrou In Broadford, the 18th
of last January, contentment rel gned
in the community-all was peace and
quiet. Nothing unusual had occurred
to disturb the equanimity of the COM
munity. Why? The doctrine that
"the laborer is worthy of his hire
was fully carried out. Who and what
caused the baleful change? The lec-
ord shows that January Is the Queen
of the Hills had decided to reduce
wages on the Goth. This cloud for
the first time appeared. What effect
did that cloud have upon the commu
nifty and the Miners Union ? This
Union had long been in existence,and
its demands acquiesced in. At that
time there was lawful organization
known as the Broadford Miners
Union. The association, born in legal.
ity, had been christened in usefulness.
This, then, was the condition in which
this Miners Union was found the goth
of January 1885. Then, what took
place? A fiat, binding declaration
had gone forth from the Queen of the
Hills. Whom did it affect? What
circle did it enter into? Whose heart,
or what aggregation of hearts, did i,
strike this first blow at a peaceful
lawful combination? This blow
reached it's heart, as it was intended
The Queen of the Hills had accepted
the terms of that ASSOCIATION, and paid
their men at the rate of 81 per day
Who struck the first blow? Resist.
ance to tyranny has been pronounced
obedience to God. When that blow
was struck, what had that association
done to provoke it? These motives
must be considered, because in ever,
crime known to law there must bs
action and intention. But it must be
admitted that all the acts alleged
against the Union, though they ma,
be proven, may be lawful or unlawful
Did we have right to resist the blow
struck at us by the two companies
The prosecution have, from the incep
ton of this case, claimed that we com
bined-for what? Was it to rails,
wages ? No! Then the law quotee
here by the prosecution regarding
conspiracies to raise wages, is not ap
plicable to this case. The common
law stating that it is criminal for me,
to conspire to raise wages, it als'
states that no comprehensive o
moroccan conspire to reduce wages
1t places both OH the same level. Yet
what have the companies done? The:
have combined, conspred, to reduc
} wages. Now we claim that if thes
: two companies did combine, agree