The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1900-06-25
STRIKERS ENJOINED
From Interfering With Mail Cars on
St Louis Transit Lines.

St. Louis, June 25.-Judge Elmer B.
Adams of the United States district
court today granted a temporary in
junction in the case of w. D. Mahon
and all the members of Division No.
131 of the Amalgamated Association Of
Street Railway Employees of America,
restraining them from interfering in
any way with the running of mail cars
over the lines of the st. Louis Transit
company.
None of the defendants were pres
ent. They We're represented by w. S.
Anthony, while District Attorneys
Hitchcock and Roster acted for the
government
IN summing up the contents of the
affidavits presented, Mr.. Anthony de-
clared that it was not shown that any
of the defendants had been guilty of
lawlessness. ION the contrary he
added, the strike leaders and all the
members of the Street Railway Mems
union have counseled law and order.
The Transit company is not responsible
perhaps for the unsettled conditions
which existed. 1t is the union man who
has been made to suffer and bear the
hrunt of all distur Dances. The pres
ident of the union, Sherman Patterson,
is now dying in the hospital as the re-
suit of being stabbed by an assassin. .
At the conclusion of the arguments
/ Judge ADAMS rendered MS decision SUD-
| Stantially as follows:
| 1T is conceded by the defendants that
| this court has jurisdiction over the
/ question al issue. In the case of the
| United States against Debs it was held
| where it was shown there was unlawful
/ interference with the mails or inter-
/ state commerce the power of the court
! of chancery could be invoked. The
! authority of the government is binding
! upon all the people. No distinction is
! obi for nIs OlH "a
rich or the poor.
THE question here is whether the de-
! PENDANTS have been shown by the aft
davits to have been interfering with
the Observation-Disclosures and the agencies
of the federal government. The court, in
| passing on the point, does not under
| take to punish if the affirmative posi-
| ton is sustained. The injunction pro-
| cess is intended as a deterrent, a pre-
| ventive of lawlessness and is a dec
| laratiOn and warning to all the peO-
| pie. The issue as set forth here is not
| between the Transit company and
/ the members of the street car union
| but of the United States against the
strikers and all persons who may in
| terfere with the operation of the mails
Irrespective of whether this or thai
person has been guilty of an act of law
| lessness a reasonable apprehension as
to violation of the laws of the United
States is practically all that is neces-
sary to determine the issuance of ar
Injunction.
soon after the present strike here
referred to was inaugurated there were
scenes of lawlessness throughout the
city. It is admitted that the mail cars
have been interfered with and theil
prompt operations at times rendered
impossible.
THE defendants and those who hav'
acted in concert with them ordered TIL
strike. From this it follows that wheth
er they are guilty of lawlessnesS or no
as complained Of they must be held ac
countable for the necessary conse
quences of their acts.
IF it is true, and I hope it is. tina
none of the defendants has been guilt,
of interfering with the mail cars, the
the injunction certainly can do no harm
However, my ruling is not based upol
that conclusion. The motion for TEN
porary Injunction is according
-, Ill