The record-union., 1894-12-15
Special to the RECoRp-UNIoN.

CHICAGO, Dec 14.-"Guilty as charged"
was the finding announced to-day by
Federal Judge William Woods against
way Union. The same finding was
reached against other American Railway
Union leaders on trial with Debs.
Judge Woods opinion overruling the
claim of the defense that an injunction
against the American Railway Union
leaders was invalid on the ground that
the court had no jurisdiction to deter
mine a case in which an injunction was
ordered, and that, though possessed of
such jurisdiction, the court lacked Or
ganic power to make the order in ques-
ton, was very long and cited many an
thorities.
The court held that the same protection
given to commerce on the rivers can be
extended under existing law 10 commerce
on railroads. Referring to the contention
that the Act of July 2, 1890, was directed
wholly at trusts and not against organ
iZationS of labor in any form. Judge
WOODS pointed out that wOrklngmen, II
they conspired with capitalists so prevent
the moving of Pullman cars, would be
guilty of conspiracy, and it would be ab-
surd to say they would not be equally
guilty if they did the same without the
aid OF capitalists.
In summing up the facts in the case
Judge Woods said: LAS officers of the
American Railway Union, it is beyond
question that the defendants had practi-
cal control OF the strike, guiding as they
chose the movements OF the men ac-
lively engaged. Under the conditions of
men seeking employment, it was impos-
sibIe that strike which aimed at gem
eral cessation of business upon the rail-
roads of the country could succeed with
out violence, and it is not believed that
the defendants entered upon the eXecu-
ton of their scheme without approaching
the fact and without having determined
how TO deal with it. The inference,
therefore, is q fair one, aside from direct
evidence to the point, that they expected
and intended that this strike should dit
fer from others only in magnitude of de-
sign aud boldness of execution, and that
the accustomed accessories of inLimida-
ton and violence, so far at least as found
essential to success, would not be omit
ted. For that much the striking work
men, acting on the promptings of self
interest, without instigation or digestion,
or even in spite of admonitions to the
contrary, may ordinarily be counted on.
Such admonitlons against violence were
sent out occasionally by the defendants,
but it does not appear that they were
ever needed, and | am not able to believe
on the evidence that in the fullest sense
it was intended or expected that they
should be.
Il am able ana quite ready to believe
that the defendants not only did not IA
yor, but deprecated extreme violence,
which might lead to the destruction OF
property or of human life; but the chief
aim, L am convinced, was to secure the
good will of the public. To that end the
warnings against acts of depreciation or
visible destruction OF property, it may
we'll be believed were insincere; but their
followers did not understand, and this
court cannot believe that it was intended
to forbid intimidation and the milder
forms of violence which did not directly
involve the destruction of property or
severe injury to persons, and which for
that reason it seems were assumed to be
not unlawful when employed in the in
terests OF organized labor in a contest
with 'an alliance of rich and powerful
corporations
Judge Woods said the alleged advice OF
counsel neither justities nor mitigates a
wrong committed in pursuance OF the
advice. After all that is said about guard
ing property, keeping the peace and be-
was arrested and no effort was made by
strikers or members of the American
Railway Union to preserve the peace or
to protect property. On the contrary,
many Of them were leaders in scenes OF
violence and disorder. If this strike,
like others, was understood to be war, not
necessarily of the blood and bullets, but
conflict between contending interests
or classes of interests, III which strategy
had to be employed to. keep the men in
line, it was more than peaceful strike,
or more than cessation from work. Had
it been only that, the injunction, instead
of being hindrance, would have been
in their hands the very weapon they
needed to enable them to suppress the
violence and disorder in which they say
they saw possible danger to the success OF
their cause.
1T is shown by the testimony of two
or more witnesses that on the night of
June 18th Debs, Howard and Keliher
attended meeting of the local union at
Blue Island, a suburb of Chicago, on the
line of the Rock Island and Pacific Rail-
road; that he and Howard each ad-
dressed the men; that on the next day
was inaugurated condition OF turbu-
lence which witness declared he did not
believe could exist, and Notwithstanding
the efforts of the nited States Marshal,
by reading the Injunction and otherwise,
10 quelI the disturbance, nothing was ac-
compllshed until the 9th of July, when
Federal soldiers arrived. These things
directly followed, and in large measure,
l think 1t not unwarranted to say, were
the natural and probable result of the
speeches made and the counsel given to
the men by Debs and Howard at the
meeting on the night of the 29th at Blue
Island. Suggestions calculated to incite
the acts of violence or intimidation were
contained in many of the kilograms
which were sent over the name of Debs,
for which, Notwithstanding the averment
of their answers to the contrary. it is no
longer possible for any OF the defendants
to deny some measure OF RESPONSE bility.'
Judge Woods concluded as follows:
"The right of men 10 strike personally
and the right TO advise a peaceable strike,
which the law does not presume to be
impossible, Is not questioned. But IL
they enter into conspiracy to do any
unlawful thing, and in order to accom-
plish their purpose advise the work men
to strike, knowing violence and wrong
will be the probable outcome, neither in
law nor in morals can they escape re-
sponsibility.
1.-The Pullman cars in use upon the
roads are lnstrumenIalities of commerce.
and it follows, from the time of the an
nouncement, that the boycott of the
American Railway Union was commit
ted to conspiracy in the restraint of the
interstate commerce, in violation of the
Act of July z, 1890, and that mem bers oi
that association and all others who Joined
in the movement became criminally re-
sponsible each for the act of others done