Wheeling Sunday register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1882-1934, 1900-06-03

took to enforce the criminal laws of the
state in an action in a court of equity.
He asserted that there was too much
government by injunction" He said
the base ball players had been arrested
and held TO the grand jury and it was
wrong for private citizens to rush in
and interfere with the natural order of
things. 1t was highly improper to in
st;tute proceedings in a court of equity
when the statutes afforded the proper
relief. The law is presumed to be
adequate.
In concluding Mr.. Caldwell stated
that defendant demurred to the bill
and asked time in which to file an an
swer Judge Melvin took the matter
under consideration and promised to
notify the attorneys when he was ready
to pass upon 1t.
At 4:30, the attorneys having been
notified, the judge delivered an oral
opinion, it being explained that time
had not been afforded for a written n
We give an outline.
The suggestion for delay with a view
to an answer was not favorably con-
sidered, it being regarded as doubtful,
under recent expressions of opinion by
IAlO SOQlI VI AppCd1o, MACIuOty O1 LILO
preliminary application, more than the
bill should be considered.
1t was held that the bill contains
enough to warrant an injunction, con-
sidering solely the allegations tending
to show the existence of a nuisance
during the performance of games, and
especially on Sundays, the crowds in
attendance being larger and more DEM
onstrative on that day. 1t AYERS loud
talk, unusual noises, profane language
and interference with property rights
by persons attracted by the game. A
case decided by the Court of Appeals,
Snyder VS.. Cabell, 20 w. Va, cited IN
argument, was referred to as indicat-
ing clearly the law applicable to this
case.
Regarding the claim that this is in
/ effect an attempt to invoke the aid of
a court of equity to restrain the com
mission of an offense against a statute,
which is inadmissible, it was said that
this does not appear. 1t may be con-
coded that an injunction will not issue
to enforce penal enactments, but it is
not seen that the present is "a case of
that character. The plaintiffs sue not
as officers of the law or guardians of
peace, and order but as property own
ers and heads of families, claiming that
their property is depreciating by the
acts OF the defendants, and the health
and comfort of wives and children af-
fected. While equity may not enjoin
acts lone on Sunday merely because
they are done on Sunday, it will en-
join acts that do or may affect health
and comfort, whether they do or do
not involve a criminal offense. In so
enjoining, courts will not regard it as
an objection that a better observance
of the Sabbath is incidentally upheld
and enforced.
Regarding the suggestion that the
prayer for inhibition of the Sunday
games only, shows that the plaintiffs
are simply seeking to give effect to the
statute against laboring on that day, it
was noted that the averments of the
bill, which must be taken as true until
an answer is filed, distinguish be-
tween the Sunday games and those on
week days, by stating that the case is
worse on Sunday; and it was said that,
in any event, the defendants could not
complain if the plaintiffs refrained
from asking for an injunction except
against the games deemed most objec-
tionable.
At the conclusion it was announced
, that. a temporary injunction was
awarded, in substance restraining the
defendants from meeting, managing
or participating in any game Of base
ball at the Wheeling Base Ball Park
on June Sd or on any Sunday there
after, until the further order of the
court, the injunction to take effect
when the plaintiffs give bond with Sc
curity conditioned for the payment of
costs and damages.
The penalty of the bond was fixed at
$500, but was afterwards raised to 81
500 on motion of the defendants coun-
sci, the attorney for the plaintiffs not
objecting.