Morning journal and courier., 1886-05-10
THE BOYCOTT CASE.
The Walking Delegate The Court In. |
 hfcts sentence This Morntng-An Alp.
 peal Probable-The Amendments.

The Walking Delegate -The Court In.
 hfcts sentence This Morning-An App
 peal Probable-The Amendments.
 The case of the State vs. the walking dele 1 gate, Glidden, being the case of prosecution for boycotting in which the JOURNAL AND COURIER is interested, came up Saturday morning before Judge Pickett in the City court. Lawyer Platt was on hand for the defense and Judge Blydenburgh was present to assist the prosecution. The defense en- tered the plea of nolo contendere, being bent upon carrying the case to a higher court. The attorneys for the prosecution, John w. filling and Judge Blydenburgh, in co-opera- tion with and with the approval of the city attorney, notified last Wednesday or Thurs day Johnson T. Platt, lawyer for Glidden and the boycotting interest that they had filed with the court certain amendments to the original complaint Then it was thought advisable by the prosecution to add to their complaint, inasmuch as It was evident that the defense was intending to accept judg ment from the lower court and carry the case to higher court. It was also submitted so that Lawyer Platt could further plead to the amendments if he so desired, or deter mine whether to proceed to trial of the case on it's merits, which latter course would in- volve the hearing of the witnesses brought to prove the alleged bcycotting. MT. Platt was then given full notice regarding the introduction of the amendments, the ob- feet of which was to broaden the complaint so that the issue might be fairly and fully put before the higher court and boycotting receive an opinion of the higher court, which would be final. Saturday morning MT. Platt hurried to court and entered the plea of nolo contendere, the import of which was that the plaintiff would contend with the lower iD1 1oy fur hainO further to throw out the amendments and appeal the case By this action the defence do not propose to plead to the merits of the case. The prosecution hold that the first complaint is perfectly good, and that under the law of Connecticut any ordinary misdemeanor well specified, defined and set forth is sufficiently put before the court. We filed the amendment because if the question whether boycotting is crime is to go up to the Supreme court for adjudi- cation it is best for both sides to understand what the law and the issue is on the subject and what the facts were in full. So we set out all the facts necessary to show the nature of the thr ats and attempts at intimidation made in the boyeotting interest. We want a full and complete decision the boycott ting question.
 Judge Pickett adjourned the case until this morning at 10 o'clock when he will give his decision on the nolo contendere and regards the admission of the amendments. Either way the case is decided the prisoner receives sentence from the court. The case will undoubtedly be appealed. The defense appeal the case to the Supreme court, jump ing the Superior court, which can be done under a statute passed in 's2, which permits such carrying up of case from the judg- ment of city court on writ of error where questions of the law are involved. The question before the Supreme court will be then did the lower court err in overruling the demurrer, and whether threats made in the interests of boycotters who represent or assume to represent an organization or or ganizations is a crime, such threats being made with the object and aim of damaging the business of another.