Wood River times. [volume] (Hailey, Idaho) 1882-1915, 1885-02-13

the Court still persist in trying the
defendants who will then be charged
with no crime whatever?
One point in the complaint had been
overlooked by the counsel who had
preceded the speaker. He then com
pared the averments OF the complaint
with the subdivisions Of the only Sec
ton Of the statutes relating to con.
spiracy. Was there in this complaint
such allegation as would bring defend
ants within the purvi, of the section
quoted? Was there single legal
charge in the complaint? If it be
true that such an organization as the
Bradford Miners Union is in exis.
tence, is it legal organization? The
complaint did not aver that it was IL
legal. The complaint alleged that
the Minnie Moore and Queen CT the
Hills were the most valuable mines
in that vicinity. So far the de-
PENDANTS were not criminals. Then
came a word which forever silences
all questions as to the validity Of the
complaint, to wit : "FEARlNG ant
believing that," etc. This mean.
what? That they feared the mine
managers were aboutto reduce wages
clearing that the companies woult
no longer Fay them 81 per day.
that conspiracy? Yet that fear
and that fear alonc-is the only over
act alleged in that complaint whicl
would constitute conspiracy. If
conspiracy was formed, it was when
as charged in this complaint, the
feared that they would cease gettin!
81 day. What one act did they d
that is prohibited by law: Not one
Every authority in the land says tina
there must be proof of overt acts a
the time the conspiracy was forme'
to constitute = crime--a conspirac,
Does the complain, state a singl
overt act: The complaint charges n
overt acts, but charges that 'thes
persons x d,d conspirc t
feloniously and riotously, with fore
and arms, and ininriously to trade
to prevent every and all persons from
laboring IN said mines, for wages, Q
under contracts, or under lease" etc
1t is not the act which constitute
crime, but the criminal intent.
these acts alleged in the complaint ar
taken as true, where is the conspi
acy? The complaint should stat
when, where and how the conspirac
was formed. Counsel for the prose
cution had held from the beginnin
that the complaint was all good
all legal. The facts attempted to
stated must, if true, constitute the O
Tense with which the defendants al
charged Have they so stated then
Not at all. 1t is Indispensable tn
the complaint should state when al
where the conspiracy was formed, al
the object for which it was forme
' That is conspiracy, such as couns
learned it from the books VIII,
conspiracy is charged, it must
charged as the law defines it-whi,
the complaint does not. But the pre-
ecution aimed to substitute eviden
for the complaint that instrume
" which caused the defendants to
i brought to the bar of this Court. 7
{ complaint charged an intention to i
II lure trade or commerce. 1t shou
= show how and in wha. manner it h
u been sought to injure trade. VIII
trade? What commerce? There
not court in the land that wou
k hold this complaint valid.
TT Judge Street asked Mr.. Waters
e read from the complaint regarding
g means charged to be employed to c
'e ccute or accomplish the conspiracy
J, Mr.. Waters did not seem to und
:, stand, or to want to understand I
a Judge, who h; to repeat his requ
"a four times before Mr.. Waters co
n piled. After reading he continue
t. care not what may have taken pla
he without the averment Of the CIV
&c act or acts, and how they were p
re formed, in the complaint, it is illee
G and we ought not to be called upon
to answer it in this form. If the &C
OF plant fails to show thYt the defenda
OF have committed the acts they