Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-12-14
RIGHTS OF STRIKERS
Cases of Debs and His Associates
Decided.
THEY IGNORED THE COURTS INJUNCTION
Exhaustive Opinion Rendered by
Judge Woods.
F ED ERAL REG LATIONS S

CHICAGO, December 14.-"Guilty as
charged was the finding announced today
by Federal Judge William A. Woods
against President Eugene v. Debs Of the
American Railway Union, charged with
contempt Of court in ignoring an injunc-
ton of the court directed against the strike
last summer. The same finding was reach
ed against the other American Railway
Union leaders on trial with Debs. Debs
was sentence ed to six months in the county
Jail. The others on trial were given three
months each, except McVane who was re-
leased because there was no evidence
against him.
The finding Of the court is that the de-
PENDANTS are guilty of contempt, but any
punishment inflicted would not be cumu-
lative.
In other words, there were two cases be-
fore the court. one for contempt and the
other for violation of the federal statute.
The latter cause is merged into the former.
Judge Woods. after announcing that the
defendants were found guilty as charged,
said 1t was not in accordance with pro-
ceedure in such cases to permit the de-
PENDANTS to say why sentence should not
be passed, but in this case the court would
allow 1t.
The cramped court room was crowded to
overfiowing when Judge Woods first en-
tered the court room and took his seat
upon the bench.
President Debs and the other defendants
were present and in various attitudes of
anxious interest listened to the reading
of the decision. With Judge Woods. Judge
Jenkins occupied the bench, and many
prominent attorneys were present to hear
the outcome of the proceedings against
the leaders of the great railway strikes Of
last summer
Points in the Decision.
Judge Woods opinion was extremely long,
and, owing to the Importance of the sub
Ject, t was eXhaustvely treated. AS he
remarked. there were inquiries involved
which in some respects go beyond the lines
Of established or unquestioned precedent.
The case of jurisdiction was first discussed.
then the guilt of the defendants. Judge
Woods says: without going into the de-
tails of averment, the charge made against
the defendants was that they were engaged
in a conspiracy to hinder and interrupt
interstate commerce and the carriage of
the mails upon the railroads centerinS in
Chicago, by means and in a manner to con-
stitute. within the recognized definitions. a
public nuisance"
The act OF March 2, 1889, Is quoted as
showing that national control had been
extended over the channels of interstate
commerce, including railways and naviga-
bic waters. 1t is also held that the federal
government has property right in the mails.
and can, therefore, protect mail trains as
well mail wagons.
Judge Woods, referring to the position Of
the defendants in respect to the act of July
=, 1880, that 1t lis directed at dangers sup
posed to result from vast aggregations of
capital, and not of force and violence,
wholly against trusts and net at organi-
cations OF labor in any FORM" said: 1T is
plain that a clear and more comprehensive
purpose came to be entertained and was
embodied in the final form of the enact
ment. Combinations are condemned not
only when they take the form Of trusts
but in whatever form found. if they be in
restraint of trade. That is the effect of the
words or otherwise. l have no doubt that
this statement. in SO far as it is directed
against contracts or combinations in the
form. of trusts, or in any form OF con-
tractural ch;.r racter, should be limited to
contracts and combinations SUCH in their
general Characteristics, as the courts have
declared unlawful. But to put any such
limitation upon the word conspiracy Is
neither necessary nor, as 1 think, permis-
sible.
''To do so would deprive the word of all
significance. Any posed restraint Of
trade, though 1t be in :tself innocent II 1t
is to be acco mplished by conspiracy, is un-
lawful.
THAT this case is one of equitable char
acter Is clear and as understand, has not
been Questioned by counsel-their conten-
tion being that neither by this statute nor
upon general principles is the case within
the Jurisdiction of a federal court
Reference IS made to the case of Phelan
at Cincinnati, held by Judge Taft to be n
conspirator. Judge Woods went on:
The facts of this case suggest illustra-
tons of the improperly as we'll as incon-
slstency OF putting upon the statute the
restrictive construction proposed. IT, for
exc mple. the manufacturers of other sleep
ing cars, In their own interest should en-
list the brakemen and switchmen or other
employees Of the railroads. either individual
~ or in associated bodies, in a conspiracy
to prevent or restrain the use of Pullman
sleepers, by refusing to move them by Sc
crctly uncoupling them. or by other elusive
means, the mcnopOlistic character of the
conspiracy would be so evident that, even
on tho theory that the statute Is aimed at
contracts or combinations intended to en-
gross or monopolize the market, it would
be agreed that the offense ought to be
punishable. But, If in such case the officers
or agents or the car companies, who might
or might not be capitalists, would be in
dividually responsible for violating the
statute upon what principle could the fire.
men or switchmen be exempt? Can work.
ingmen, or, If you will, poor men, acting
by themselves, upon their own motion and
for their own purposes whether avowed or
secret, do things forbidden by the statute
without criminal responsibility and yet be
criminally responsible for the same things
done at the instance and to promote the
purposes Of others? Or will it be said that
under this statute one who Is not q capital
ISL may without crlmlnallty assist capital
lists In doing OF things which on their part
are'criminal? If that be so, then IL a cap
italist and one who is not a capitalist Join
In doing things forbidden by this statute,
reither can be punished, because one alone
cannot be guilty Of conspiracy"
Further on Judge Woods said: The right
OF men to strike peaceably. and the right
to advise a peaceable strike, which the law
does not presume to be impossible, is not
questioned. But If men enter into a con-
spiracy to do any unlawful thing and in
order to accomplish their purpose advise
workmen to go on strike knowing that
violence and wrong will be the probable
outcome. neither in law nor in morals can
they escape responsibility.
Pullman cars in use on the roads are in.
strumentalities of commerce, and it fol-
lows that from the time Of the announce
ment Of the boycott the American Railway
Union was committed to conspiracy in
restraint of interstate commerce, in VIOLA
ton Of the act of July 2. 1890. and that the
members Of that association and all others
who Joined In the movement became GRIM
inally responsible each for the acts Of 9TH
ers done in furtherance Of the common
purpose, whether intended by him or rot.
The officers became responsible for the
men and the men for the officers.