The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1898-03-09
BOTH PARTIES
HAVE RIGHTS.
No Law to Prevent Strikes; Strikers
Cannot Prevent Work.
OBEDIENCE TO THE SHERIFF
ys Duty Implied i'm His Right 10 ire
serve Ordcr--If His Intent Was To
Prevent Riot He - GuiitIcss--f
Malice was Motive ~ Guilty

ILKESBARRE PA. March &-sher-
IN Martin and his deputies viii probably
know tfcir fate tomorrow morning.
Arguments were concluded to-day and
iato this evening Judge Woodward chars-
ed tho jury. No word having been re-
ceived from the jury room up to o'clock
tonight court was adjourned until 10
o'clock tomorrow morning
Judge Woodwards charge was exhaust
i've. re discussed the power Of the sher-
an 10 summon "a posse and maintain or
der. Continuing the Judge said:
"Thero is no law either by statutory en-
actmcnt or by any decision Of our courts
10 prevent laboring men from stopping
work and going upon strike. whenever
iu their own opinion. 10 IS for their IN
torest go 20 do Nor is there any law
which makes 80 o conspiracy for work
ingmcn. in any department of human
industry. 10 combine together and by mu-
fuaI agreement 20 refuse employment
until there has been brought about
satisfactory adjustment between their
employers and themselves upon tho points
al issue.
BOTH HAVE RIGHTS.
"The liberty OF contract IS not 10 be
infringod either by tho employed or by
tho employer As the employer has no
right 90 compel % man To- work. who
does not wish 90 work so also is IL true,
that the employee has no right 10 COM
pei his fellow workmon % quit work If
he wishes t0 work.
'It IS certainly true that both at West
Bazelton and al Lattimor The great body
q the strikers failed 10 obey the sheriff
when he ordered them to dispense. and
insisted on pushing on. Nor can II be
doubted that the sheriff had the right.
in the exercise of the discretion vested IN
him by the law. to issue the order. And
81 30 was tho right of the sheriff TO com
mand the crowd to disporsc then II was
the duty of The crowd 90 obey his COM
man0s
The right 10 give tine order implies the
duty of obedience to the order and dis
obedience OF 10 is evidence of rotous
purpose II 1 push ON whom tho sheriff
orders me 90 stop DO SO at my peril
OF course this obligation OF obedience
20 the authority OF the peace officer of
tho county is not confined TO laboring
men. 10 extends % and embraces all the
inhabitants OF the county. rich or poor,
high or low
TIE DECISION.
III YOU are satisfied. gentlemen from
the evidence that the purpose of the sher-
~ and his posse was 10 preserve order
and prevent riot. then ~ would follow
that their intent ano object was not a
criminal or unlawful one. and the rule
of the law which makes the act of one
the act OF all has no application TO the
facts Of this case
"If on the contrary YOU arc convinced
by the evidence that the sheriff was not
actuatcd by desire and intention t0
preserve the peace but that boz summoned
his posse with the idea of infictlg upon
tho body Of men known in the case as
strikers. with wantou and unnecessary
outrage and injury without reference 10
their action and conduct; if in short his
purpose was q base. malicious and wick
ed one then so far as Doc was concerned
and SD Ear as the deputies were concern
ell. ~ they understood IBIS motive and act
cd with tho same intent the fact of q.
criminal and unlawful combination would
b. established and then all the defendants
might be convicted. although the shoe
which took the life of the deceased was
fired by d. single one of the defendants.
The oet of any one would. in that event
DC The act of 400.