The Washington times., 1894-07-24
DEBS' TRIAL has now BEGUN
He and His Brother Officials Of the
A. X. U. File Their Answer.
ARGUMENT BY THE DEFENSE
General Denial Set Up That Defendants Have
Interfered With the Orders Of the Courts
Advice to Quit Work Did Not Constitute
Such Interference.

CHICAGO, July 23.-A great crowd Of specta
tors thronged the corridors OF the Fedora
building and struggled for places in the court
room when the case of the United States vs.
Debs and the officials of the A. r. U. began
United States Judges Woods and Grosscur
occupied the bench and Immediately after tax
ing their seats ordered the courtroom cleared
OF the crowd which stood In the aisles and
about the door.
Mrs. Debs, Mrs. Keliher, and Mrs. Rogers
were in court early and greeted the foui
prisoners when-.hey were brought in. The
prosecution was represented by District At.
torney Milchrist, Special Counsel Edwin
Walker, and Assistant District Attorney
Hand, while the Sante Fe road was repre-
sented by Incorporation Counsel John
Miller, and E. A. Bancroft.
Attorney Gregory opened the main case
with the suggestion that the hearing of Debs
and the others be postponed until after the
trial under the Indictments pending against
them, but the suggestion was not entertained
by the court
After the reading OF the information against
the prisoners by the district attorney and the
hearing of the answer as read by the
formally that the defendants be
dismissed. He also asked that the
government elect whether it would try the
prisoners on the original indictment or on
the injunction. Judge Wood replied that the
government would elect by going on now,
and Attorney Gregory began his argument in
support OF his motion to dismiss the bill.
LAWYER GREGoRYs ARGUMENT.
Mr.. Gregory went on to argue that as this
was criminal proceeding an answer
under oath that he was not guilty was
all the defense a person cited for criminal
contempt could be held called upon
to make. He could be tried for crime
only by jury. Proceedings OF this
kind should not be resorted to
or permitted TO take the place
of the laws OF the land. The court should
decide in favor OF liberty. He said he was
not one of those who. in supposed friendii-
ness to the defendants, were disposed
to criticise the action OF the court
in issuing the Injunction. He did not
the criminal statutes by means of an iniunc-
ton or that the court would issue an iniunc-
tion for any such purpose.
THE doctrine OF this in junction is" inter-
rupted Judge Woods, that it is not TO be used
to restrain crime. Injunctions are not issued
for that purpose, yet an order may be entered
to restrain acts which involve crime. The court
acted on that theory"
Mr. Gregory, resuming, said the injunction
restrained the defendants from preventing
the employees by threats. intimidation, force.
violence. or persuasion from performing their
duty, or inducing them by threats, violence,
force. or intimidation to leave the service OF
the roads. In the injunction order the word
persuasion was stricken out
This called out another statement from
Judge Woods, who said that the court had
refused to enjoin men from soliciting other
men to leave their work. The question is
now in the court of appeals in the Northern
Pacific case, and the court had no desire 20
interfere with il.
Mr.. Gregory said the Injunction did not en-
join the leaders of the Union from advising
men to quit work.
WAS ADVISING AN INTERFERENCE?
"The injunction" said Judge Woods, twas
a general order not to interfere with the
operation of the roads. Whether advising
cided''
The attorney contended that as long as peo-
pie obeyed the laws they could not be
held responsible for the lawlessness of
others. He admitted that there was
violence in the recent strike and the
men who committed it were guilty
of violation of the Injunction. The people
who advised violence were also guilty, but
there was not line in the information that
the defendants either committed or advised
any violent acts.
Judge Grosscup said the theory OF the gov
was that violence was the natural
of telegraphic orders sent by the
Mr.. Gregory was followed by Mr..
Walker, for the prosecution, who at
tackled the answer vigorously. He said
the answer Was not a full reply
to the charges in the information. 1t denied
all knowledge of the kilograms. with one ex-
ception. and the government would like to
have the opportunity to show that there was nm
answer received TO each message. and that it
was received by the officers of the Railway
Union.
All the strike or rders which had resulted in
The stoppage OF commerce and the mails
came from the Office of the union in
Chicago and they were responsible for
that happened in conse-
luence, even to the loss of life. He said
an answer in a court proceeding was sufli-
:ient to discharge the accused at common
aw, but in an equity proceeding the court
could hear the evidence OF both sides.
At the conclusion of Mr.. Walkers argu-
nent the court adjourned.