The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1894-07-24
sneeial Ito the RrcoRp-ux1ox.

Special to the REcoRD-UNToS
CHICAGO. July 23.-What is considered
BY labor leaders one of the most impor-
tant legal battles in the Nations history,
was begun in the United States Circuit
Court to-day, when President Debs,
President Howard. Secretary kell-
her and Director Rodgers of the Ameri-
can Railway Union, by their attorneys,
W. w. Irwin, S. S. Gregory and Z. ,.
barrow. filed their answer to the con-
tempt rule.
Tue defense proposes TO carry the case
TO the Supreme Court, in the event OF an
adverse decision here, and, if defeated.
appeal to Congress. twill be contended
that what the court has done amounts TO
usurpation of power. The defense will
follow closely the lines of the report OF
the Boatner Committee of Congress
which investigated Judge Jenkins.
If the Supreme Court declares the in
junction and contempt method good law,
Congress will be asked, local labor lead
ers say, to amend the statutes and curD
the power OF the courts, and every candl-
date for Congress will be asked TO pledge
himself to such reform.
The answer was filed to-day by the
officers of the American Railway Union
IN contempt proceedings in the United
States Court, growing out OF the alleged
violation of Federal Injunction against
the interference with the mails and the
interstate commerce.
The defendants deny that it was the
purpose of the American Railway Union
or themselves to vest the management OF
the union with the power TO order strikes,
as alleged in the Information, and say
that the strikes are declared or discontin-
ned by vote OF the majority OF the men,
bers in the service affected. They deny
that they ordered the strike on the Hi
nois Central, and declare that the en-
pIoyes struck of their own accord, but
not for the purpose of hinderlng the
transportation of the mails or interstate
commerce. They deny that after the is
suance OF the injunction the organization
of unions was continued otherwise than
by generally advising the railway men to
become memb ers. They deny that any
kilograms, set forth in the information,
except one-counseling the men to stand
1rm-were sent by them. They deny
that they advised, approved or partlcl-
pated in acts of violence.
A great crowd of spectators thronged
the corridors of the Federal building and
struggled tor places in the court room
Judges Wood and Grosscup occupied the
bench, and Immediately after taking their
seats ordered the court room cleared OF
the crowd which stood in the aisles.
Mrs Debs, Mrs. Keliher and Mrs. Rodg-
ers were in court early, and greeted the
four prisoners when they were brought
in. The prosecution was represented by
District Attorney Milchrist, special coun-
sci Edwin Walker and Assistant District
Attorney Hand, while the Santa Fe Rail
road was represented ex-Corporation
Counsel John Miller and 4. a. Bancroft.
Attorney Gregory opened the main
case with the suggestion that the hearing
of Debs and the others be postponed I'M
til after this trial under the indictments
pending against them, but the suggestion
was not sustained by the court
After the reading OF the information by
the District Attorney and the hearing of
the answer by the defendants lawyer.
Attorney Erwin moved formally that the
defendants be dismissed. he also asked
that the Government elect whoever 1t
would to try the prisoners on the orlgl-
nal Indictment on the Injunction.
Judge Woods replied that the Govern
ment would elect by going on now, and
Attorney Gregory began his argument In
support of the motion to dismiss the bill.
Mr. Gregory said the injunction was an
order restraining the defendants from
preventing Tie Gil plOS0S ny lhlSslISs III
timidation, force, violence or persuasion
from performing their duties. or induc-
ing them by threats, violence, force or
intimidation to leave the service OF the
roads. In the injunction the word per
saasion" was stricken out.
This called out a statement from Judge
Woods, who said the court had refused TO
enioin men from inducing 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
TO interfere with it.
Gregory said the injunction did not
enioin the leaders of the union from adj
vising men to quit work.
1.-The Injunction said Judge Woods,
s'was a general order not to interfere
with the operation of the roads. Whether
advising was an interference is ques-
ton to be decided"
Mr. Gregory was followed by Mr..
Walker for the prosecution, who attacked
the answer vigorously.
At the conclusion of Walkers argu-
ment the court adjourned until to-Inor-
row morning, when Attorney John S.
Miller, who represents the Santa Fe, VIII
speak for the prosecution.