The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-03-09


maintain the peace. The sheriff may
avail himself of the services of mill
tary organizations He may order them
into his posse, not as soldiers, but as
citizens trained and disciplined for ef-
fective service in critical emergencies.
The posse comitatus signifies the whole
power of the county and all able
bodied male persons over the age of Is
years may he summoned to act as
members Of it. To dsobey the sum
mons of the sheriff is to be guilty of
"A misdemeanor and may subject the
offender To the punishment of fine and
Imprisonment.
WHAT CONSTITUTES RIOT.
I'VE have a statute in Pennsylvania
passed in 1905 entitled An Act Against
Riots and Rioters;' it reads as follows:
IF any persons to the number of
three, shall meet together with clubs,
stones, or any other hurtful weapons,
to the terror of any of the peaceable
people or inhabitants of this province,
and shall commit or design to commit
violence or injury upon the person or
goods of any of the said inhabitants,
and shall be convicted thereof such
persons shall be reputed and punished
as rioters according to the law of Eng
land; and such act of terror or violence.
or design of violence shall be deemed
and accounted a riot"
And the definition in the English
law, is this: Where three or more ac-
tually do an unlawful act of violence
either with or without a common cause
of quarrel, or even to do a lawful act
in a violent and tumultuous manner
1t is not my purpose i'm this charge
to enter upon any extended discussion
of what are known as strikes, or the
right of laboring men to form them
selves into organized bedies for the
purpose of securing better compensa-
ton for their labor. l shall content
myself with a brief statement of the
law as / find ii to be in the statute,
and the adjudicated cases. And we say
To you, gentlemen, that there is no law
either by statutory enactment. or by
any decision of our courts, to prevent
laboring men from stopping work and
going upon strike, whenever. in their
own opinion, ii is for their interest so
to do. Nor is there any law which
makes it a conspiracy for workingmen,
in any department of human industry,
to combine the ground, and by mutual
agreement to refuse employment until
there has been brought about a salts
factory adjustment between their en-
ployers and themselves, upon the points
at issue. The liberty of contract is not
to be infringed either by the employed
or by the employer. AS the employer
has no right to compel a man to work
who does not wish to work. so also is
II true, that the employe has no right
to compel his fellow -workmen to quit
work If he wishes to work The dis
tinction between the right to strike
and the right to compel others to strike,
is natural and palpable one, and is
approved by the instructive law of
right and wrong as well as by the
statutes and the decisions of the courts.
And the compulsion denounced by the
law is not alone that which consists in
actual physical force, applied by one
set of men upon another. 1t may con-
sst in a course of action and to over
awe, to frighten or stampede a body
of men who are anxious to work, as
well as in laying a violent hand upon
the individual workmen and forcing
them by main strength to abandon
their employment and unite in a strike.
QUESTIONS OF LAW.
THE defendants as we again remind
you, are all and Jointly indicted for
the killing of the deceased. The COM
mOnwealth, in the absence of any proof
as to who fired the fatal shot, asks for
the conviction Of all the defendants on
the ground that the action of the sher-
iff and posse was a criminal action
that the original call for the posse
was unnecessary, or even justifiable,
that the subsequent action and espec-
tally the shooting on the 10th Of Sep
tember, cannot be justified under the
evidence. and that therefore the act Of
any member of the posse was the act
of all the members of it, for which,
each and every one is responsible in
the contemplation of the law. This
raises another question of law upon
which we now proceed to instruct you.
And we say to you, that the law is,
that where several persons take part in
the execution of a criminal purpose all
are equally liable for the acts of each,
and for the incidental and probable
consequences of the Joint purpose. The
question whether the purpose of the
sheriff and his posse on the 10th of
cannot be fairly answered. without a
comprehensive review Of all the facts
and occurrences which led up to, and
eliminated in the final volley fired by
the deputies on that day, and which
resulted I'm the death of the person
named in the indictment. The events
of the week preceding the 10Th are so
knit together in the fabric of the case,
ha he
tirely independent and separate trans
actions, but must be regarded as con-
stituting together the history of the
case. II the sheriff became satisfied
after careful examination of the sit
uation in and about Hazleton that the
public peace was threatened, that the
people were terrorized, and there was
danger of riot, If the demonstrations of
the men engaged in the strike We're
allowed to proceed, he had the right,
as the chief officer of the county to
summon a posse to assist him in the
preservation of order, and in the pre-
vention of riot. For it cannot be doubt
ed that the duty of a sheriff is to pre-
vent the danger, as well as to suppress
a riot, which has become fragrant and
destructive. Leaving out of view all
the facts on this branch of the case
which are controverted, and in refer
ence to which the witnesses differ, II Is
certainly true that both at West Haz-
Teton and at Lattimer the great body
of the strikers failed to obey the sher-
if when he ordered them to disperse,
and insisted in pushing on. Nor can it
be doubted that the sheriff had the
right, in the exercise Of the discretion
vested in him by the law to issue the