The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1893-04-06


toners OF the clothing manufacturers
association were begun to-day before
Judge Barrett in supreme court cham
bers.
Colonel Johnson, OF Hoadley, Lauter'
bach & johnson, appeared for the
manufacturers, and Herman Fromme
for the striking cuttera, After aome
argument us to whether there was an
injunction out against the defendants
or merely an order~to show cause, on
which point Mr.. Fromme appeared TO
be confused, Judge Barrett disposed OF
the matter by saying that he would
permit the copy OF the undertaking to
be served and filed at once il necessary.
Mr.. Gott then showed to the court that
the papers contained only general
allegation that the American Federation
OF Labor had conspired with the other
defendants to do certain unlawful
things, but did not set out any overt
acts, showing how and in what way the
federation had engaged in any con-
spiraCy.
Mr.. johnson tried to get Mr.. GoG to
stipulate for his client that it would
have nothing to do with the boycott
and said that he was not anxious to
keep the federation in the fight.
Mr. Gotf insisted that in tho absence
Of case against it on the face of the
papers the federation was entitled to be
dismissed without condition.
The absence from the injunction pa
pers OF any specific charges against the
federation having been made to appear
clearly, Judge Barrett then denied the
motion for an injunction against that
body.
Mr.. Golf then retired, having tri-
umphantly borne his client out OF the
litigation.
Colonel Johnson then stated the case
against the garment workers, laying
stress on the fact that tho acts sought
to be enioined were endangering the
safety OF millions OF capital invested by
his clients in their business. lie read
the circulars issued by tho garment
workers.
Mr.. Fromme then outlined his do
Tense, which was that the plaintiffs
came seeking equitable Intervention
with unclean hands. They had de-
ceiYed tho court, for II there be any con-
spiraCy to do al illegal act the plain
tifIs were leagued together to injure the
defendants.
1he trouble between the parties was
then told briefly, Mr.. Fromme stating
that the cutters were locked out because
they would not agree to abanuon their
labor organization. AS a result 90l per-
sons were thrown out Of work.
Mr.. johnson in reply said that nine
tenths OF Mr.. Fromme's assertions were
false. Judge Barrett inquired: "Do
YOU dispute that resolution OF the man-
ufacturers locking out the union men ?"
"There Is no dispute as to tho ground
OF it," said Col. Johnson.
"1hen were not those people dis
charged by a resolution passed by
conspiracy on the part OF the plaintiasW
Col. Johnson having given his ac-
count Of the troubles between the cut
ters and manufacturers, Judge Barrett
remarked: "Those very disputes make
it very evident that there was u war.
fare"
"None at ALL" interrupted tho law
yer.
al don't know what you call war.
fare" replied Judge Barrett, "but 1t
seems to mo that your clients, after
conspiring to exclude the defendants
from employment, have come into a
court OF equity to ask that the other
side bo stopped from using their only
weapon"
"But it is an unlawful weapon" said
the lawyer.
"It the circular in itself is unlawful
continued the Judge, then would not
your clionts be left to an action at law or
to u criminal prosecution"
10 show that they were not com
pelled to resort TO these latter remedies
MIR. johnson attempted TO cite Judge
Taips decision against the engineers
the other day.
Judge Barrett said, however, that the
principle OF tho decision has no appli.
cation to tho present controversy, as II
was rendered under tho inter.state
commerce act
Tho crowd listened quietly, but broke
into u great laugh during ono Of tho
Colloquies between Judge Barrett aud
Colonel johnson, whom tho judge said,
replying TO the lawyeF'a aVeFment that
the cutters Lett the firm OF Sheinmeyor
& Levonsohn because the firm persisted
In employing q non.union cutter, "and
your clients revcngod themselves by
discharging the entire union"
After tho hrlot recess Judge Barr ett
announced that ho did not deem II
necessary to protract tho discussion
OH, tho motion further 40 the point
mado by the deionse was clear, that
the action could not bo maintained by
more than ono individual plaintiff.
There was no BuCh thing rs a combin.
alton OF plaintiffs. There had been no
joint circular issued against u joint
number OF manufacturers, There was
no principle. oil law or equity that en-.
abled an action 10 10 brought In such q
combined form. II seemed TO him that
tho plaintiffs were fundamentally
wrong In thoir form Of action. There
was combination on both sides, We
have what amounts to substantially q
mercantile warfare. We find q number
Of mon with immonso capital on ono
side and a number OF men
with no capital OH tho other
side. Each side seemed able 10
tako care OF itself. Tho court should
keep It's hands oil, Both parties wero
Just Ia that position that they must
keen within tho law They worO at
arms lengths aud II one came into court
| .-..1 II. - - t-.... Al. IT.. ...a.-f... 4