The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1898-02-27
Tho Long Trial at wilkesbarre.

The trial of Sheriff JAMES MARTIN and
his deputies for shooting down a crowd of
rioters at Lattimer, Pa, last September Is
about closing. The prosecution has pre-
sented all its witnesses, and the defence Its
most important witnesses. The evidence
OF those to come is merely corroborative of
what has already been presented. and Is all
of 1t in support of the plea Of justification
made by the indicted officials. Areview OF
the case at this time is possible, taking the
facts from the sworn testimony.
Trouble among the employees in the
mines In the neighborhood of Hazleton
had been brewing for some time prior to
the LIST of September last year. About the
LIST Of September the miners employed In
the breakers at McAdoo quit work. The
question as to the justice or injustice OF the
emand they made has nothing to do with
this case, though from the beginning siren
uous efforts have been made to bring about
the condemnation of Sheriff MARTIN and
his deputies, because the striking employees
were "~underpatd' and were lighting for
their rights Almost the first act of the
McAdoo men after they quit work was to
march in. a body to Harwood and compel
the men employed in the mines there to
quit work also, although the men at Har-
wood up to that time had had no complaint
to make. The HARDWOOD men. after they
had been forced out, marched to Cranberry,
and by force and threats compelled the men
working in the mines at that place to join
them. Finally all the mines In the region
were shut down except those at Lattimer.
On Sept. 10 the men who had worked In the
mines at Harwood and some of those who
had worked in the mines at McAdoo, in all
numbering several hundred, started for Lat
timer with the avowed intention of closing
the mines there. The shooting occurred in
sight of these mines, but before the striking
miners had had a chance to accomplish
their purpose. The Sheriff's deputies had
marched to Lattimer, and arriving there
ahead of the strikers were drawn up along
the road prepared to receive them n to
compel them to go back to their homes.
Upon the refusal of the strikers to obey the
Sherif's orders a volley was fired by these
deputies into the ranks of the mob and
nineteen of them were killed or mortally
wounded, and thirty-ive were injured in
less degree. Instantly there was a tremen-
dous public protest against the killing.
1t was fostered by the yellow journals,
who without waiting for any judicial in
v~estigation, and without even learning the
facts, denounced the shooting as cowardly
murder Inc demanded the hanging of the
Sheriff and all his deputies. From that
day to this they have left nothing undone
to bring about that result. In was in re.
Spouse to their continued and persistent
demand that the Grand Jury of Luzerne
NY,r f~IfpfAI Tho 4at4tola Co. -,,,,In.
These are the admitted facts in the case.
Now, what has been the evidenced
In the first place, the prosecution an
nounced that the State would prove that the
men who were shot down were unarmed,
that they were within their rights in
marching on the public highway to Latti-
mer, and that their mission to the mines in
that town was a peaceful one. The pros.
ecution put on the stand more than IF.
ty witnesses. Nearly all of them were
striking miners, who had helped make
up the party which was fired upon.
There were eight or ten outsiders who
either had seen the shooting or had encoun-
tered the Sherif's deputies when they were
on their way to Lattimer. and had heard
remarks and threats made that shooting
was to be done. But for the most part the
prosecution depended upon the men them
selves who had taken part in the events that
led up to the shooting. OF course, the tes-
timony of each one of these men without
exception was to the effect that the shoot
ing was not justified. In almost every in
stance, too, the witnesses swore that the
strikers were unarmed. They all swore
that the mission to Lattimer was peaceful,
and that nothing was intended except to
induce the working miners by peaceful ar
gument, not by threats or force, to strike.
AS to the details of the shooting, there
was a conflict of testimony. 1t was agreed
by all the witnesses that the Sheriff left his
deputies across and along one side of the
road and walked unaccompanied about $50
feet to meet the strikers. He commanded
them to stop and 10 back, and attempted to
read a paper. The strikers ignored his com
nan and hustled him about. He seized one
Of the men by the coat and pointed his re-
volver at him. About two-thirds of the wit
nesses for the prosecution swore hat the
revolver was not fired, but that while the
Sheriff was still pointing it at the man he
held there was a shot over near the school
house, which was 200 yards away, and that
q moment later the deputies fired the
volley that did such great execution. OF
the other witnesses for the prosecution
several OF them swore that the Sheriff,
holding his man at arms length, shot him
dead, and then called on his deputies to
fire. 1t is difficult to see how there could
be any honest difference of opinion about
this incident, yet the witnesses who swore
to each story insisted that they swore to
only what they saw with their own eyes
and heard with their own ears.
There was also a conflict of testimony
about the length of time the shooting by
the deputies was continued. Two or three
Of the witnesses said the firing lasted for
three minutes, that on the first fire the
strikers who remained standing turned
and fled, and that the deputies shot
them in the back as they ran. More
of the witnesses said that the shoot
ing continued for half a minute. Others