The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-10-20
BESETTE WAS GUILTY OF yJoI.aTrx
RESTRAINING ORDER.
He Conspired with Others to Set tn,
Courts Injunction at Naugbt
Bond Not Accepted.

S1oO ana costs. According to the provisions
| OF the federal law, the court declined to
Tx pond pending the granting Of an ap-
| peal. Sixty days were given the defend
ants attorney to prepare his transcript.
In commencing his oral opinion Judge
/ Baker prepared to eliminate vast amount
| or evidence which was not material to the
point at issue. He stated that the court
was not concerned with labor unions: that
1t mattered not what the people thought of
labor unions, whether right or wrong It
does not matter, he said whether the
| original controversy between the Chicago
| Typographical Union and the Conkey COM
| pany was founded on right or injustice
| The merits OF the controversy between the
| Conkey company and its employees, or the
| question as TO whether or not the twenty
| thousand men who are said to have voted
| against Mr. Bryan did so because history
| Of his life prepared by somebody was
/ printed at the Conkey establishment, have
| nothing to do with the real point at issue
I'VE have. the judge stated. Ito COM
mence with the petition or information
which sets out that on Aug. "a the Circuit
| Court Of the United States for the district
| or Indiana issued temporary restraining
| Order restraining all Of the defendants
| named in the bill from doing certain things,
| among them from interfering with the
| business OF the COnkey company, interior
| ing with people employed by that COM
| pany, from trespassing upon its premises
! and from acts Of intimidation and vio-
| lence. In addition to naming certain spe-
cific persons restrained the order provided
| that all other persons aiding and abetting
the men named in the bill shall be re
| strained from acts of violence or other
acts from which the persons specifically
4 named were restrained"
THE ORIGINAL BILL.
| Attorney Rocker. for Mr.. Besette. at
/ tempted to show that the averment in the
| original bill was incorrect. but Judge
| Baker, in agreeing with a decision of the
| Supreme Court of the United States, de-
| clared that the question of the falsity of
| the allegation canot be cOllaterally raised
! in the case. In addition Judge Baker said:
\ Il know of no authority and never heard
| Of one that would authorize stranger 10
| a bill in equity, man who is not party
| TO it, to raise a question as TO whether or
| not the avernents in the sworn bill were
1 true or false. 1t cannot be DONE Judge
] Baker accordingly held that the question
/ of diversity of citizenship" raised by MI
| Rocker was not sufficient to destroy the
| jurisdiction of the court.
| The second point decided by the court
was, what renders person or persons
! amenable to injunction? The facts that
| Mr.. Besette was not a party to the original
i suit was not served with subpoena
/ nor had notice of the application made by
| the complainant for the mandatory in
iunction. nor was served by the officers
| of the court with such injunction, are Inn
material, said Judge Baker so long as II
| was made to appear that he had nouce
of the Issuing of an injunction by the
| court. Judge Baker said he understood
the law TO mean that II was h0t neceeT1'1 ~
\ with a COPY of the injunction; that the
| law in his opinion, contemplated actual
/ notice That he had had actual notice APP
| pears from the fact that at least five hun
| bred copies of the injunction were printed;
| that they were posted at all conspicuous
points in the town OF II H tbe ro0kev i plant
and were published in most OF the Chlcaso
| naners and in at least two OF the ham
| mOnd papers. :. ,;.
| Of the court showed conclusively that
| Resette and others hired by the chicago
Typographical 0n9 sla al r d sGa Vent %iG down
! from Chicago TO Hammond not IOi sle
| nurpose they declared they went for-that
| Is 10 notsfy the strikers when they might
| anDIv for reinstatement or readmlsSlon INTO
| The Typographical Union-but, instead,
| with the deliberate purpose or de1eaIhg
| and thWarting the VIII OF the CouIt, VI
trannIing il under foot. This Defendant,
sid Judge Baker, with his eyes vice
! omen. with perfect knowledge OF the oIuer
| ~ the court did unite, combine, coniedef-
o. and enter into a conspiracy with the
very men that this court had enJolneo; VIII
! Tho deliberate idea of setting at naught the
courts order"
A RULE OF LAW.
..1ooo,sa II is a rule OF law" said Judge
paIer eft is a rule of eternal right and
irstice also that every man who conspires
,+t, opotber man to do an unlawful act
sbou ha held responsible for that act when
| - a. aona nv his coconspirators. no matter
| H,be+her he be present or not. Men are
| hanee5 ON that theory; men are sent 10
prison on that Sn9GIyb be A dissolved on any
| other theory than that IN the admlmstrd-
| ton of human law But the eNluehCe
shows that there was actual Nlolehce' 10
S;oh this man Besette was cOcOnSplra-
| tor the Judge continues IL mas peen
shown that men were knocked DOWN IheT
lives imperied indecent epltaets "9 5,r, 6p
Shows that Besette, as cocohspHdCoI. VIZ
men who were enjoined against committing
acts of the kind referred TO, did the very
things winch the NONAS
Tbe testimony in the case further showed
+haf Resette was privy TO a gang OF thugs
49,, chicago being sent down 10 liam
,,Cnd for the purpose OF terrOrlzlnS anu
oI>erawing such persons as the sIrlkeTs
wished TO be terrorized ana oVeraWeu, II
" - h.. suDDOsed." said Judge Baker, .tnat
IL Resette and others implicated hdd oteIi
honestly DESTROYS or seeing mat 'ne laW W 4 vi
-. Of the court was carried out, they
S,1ia have taken steps by which these
thugs who affrighted the ears % Moihe. zen
and decent men with the IoulSst hl t ~, pd
language should have Deeh Sent JAN " inc
dapS of infamy from which they came
uI In Concluding his opinion Judge Baker
further said: Il have thus 1ar saiu eH i
- indicate that / think the court mas Juris-
S ~ under this petition to punish the
man and that, with the full knowledge OF
the restraining order, ne naSran',,y anu i lEi
li4S .;o 18th the silver pieces in his hands,
. down TO Hammond for the purpose OF
defeating the restraining order OF the court.
RE only question is as 10 what punlsnmeht
,o,,I5 he inflicted" Judge Baker said that
he thought the ends of Justice would pest
ne ne esrred bv a fine of $3.50 and costs, with
oe 80 in the county Jail of Marion
na,T1ntv until the fine and costs be PAID.
A. the conclusion Of the opinion and the
,,,SSnent Mr. Rocker. attorney Tor BeSette.
JrI,sd the court to name a bond, and the
court refused. An appeal was granted oue
the execution OF shs days were given by
We W. Court in which TO file bill of excep-
tons L.. &C. Aoh xvaS
so,ad in the county Jail IL was said
inst night that his friends would rafse the
money and get him out tomorrow.