The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1904-05-26
CONSPIRACY"
CASE TRIAL
Famous Rutland Case in
Court.
ARGUMENTS ARE STARTED
Patch Co. Of Ratland Verses Protection
Lodge Of Machinists Of That
City.

Montpelier, May 28.-After repeated
delays the Rutland county case Of the F.
4, Patch Manufacturing company vs.. Pro
lection Lodge, No, 215 international Asso,
citation Of Machinlsts was reached in su-
preme court yesterday afternoon. This is
a case which al its trial and since it was
docketed In supreme court has excited the
liylest interest throughout the state and
Is known as the conspiracy case
The + r. Patch Mannfacting company
Is Rutland corporation which makes a
speciality Of manufacturing machinery
used for marble and stone cutting IN
May, 1902, about 40 members Of Protec-
tion Lodge we're employed by the Patch
company and many others Of It's members
were employed by the Lincoln Iron works
and other manufacturing concerns in Rut-
land
On May IL, 1909, the Patch company
received a communication from Protection
Lodge under its seal dated May III, max
ing demand that "a hours should c0nsti-
tute weeks work overtime to be paid
for at the rate Of time and one half, and
that the company recognize the union and
union principles.
To this communication the Patch COM
pany made no reply and on the morning
Of May 20 all bnt nine of their workmen
struck. The men waited upon Mir. Patch
and explained that by recognition OF the
union they meant that shop committee
from the lodge should be recognized BY
the company III the arrangement of all diff.
iiculties with the men. Mr. Patch replied
that he would not recognize the union and
that he could not afford to pay the extra
wages.
/ AT the time ol the strike the company
had on hand uacompleted contracts to the
amount Of Si25,0 900. With the attempt ID
bring in men to take the place Of the strik-
ers serious difficulties began The rail
| way station at Rutland was picketed day
and night; the company had to resort tC
iartitiee to get the men into Rutland; tht
premises and approaches TO the work 81
the company were picketed aud threats of
boycott were made at stores and boarding
houses if they harbored the so-called
1scabs
on July % the company By Joel G.
Baker of Rutland, its solicitor. obtained a
temporary injunction against p Of the
striking machinlsts eni0ining them from
pieketlng the works Of the company and
from using threats, intimldations and op-
pr0brious epithets Is men employed BY
the company or seeking its employment,
and on September the Patch company
and the Lincoln iron works obtained an
injunction restraining from similar acts
Protection Lodge, the local Iron Mould
ers' Union, Carpenters and Joiners'
Union, Brotherhood of Blacksmiths, Fed
eral Labor Union and So individuals
named.
on November Is, 1902, the suit against
Protection Lodge for damages was begun
by the service Of writ and declaration
upon the president Of the lodge. This ser
vice was made under section 1909 Of the
Vermont statutes which provides for ser
vice Of process upon an incorporated asso.
citation composed Of five persons or more
by service Of the papers upon certain nam
ed officers of the association
| The case was tried at the March term
/ 1908, Of Rutland county court, the Hon
Seneca Haselton of Burlington presiding
! The attorneys for the Patch company we're
/ Joel G. Baker Of Rutland. o. NJ Barber
OF Bennington and NJ g. Wehber OF Rnt.
land. The attorneys for Protection Lodge
were James K. Batehelder Of Bennington,
/ r, f. MeManus and Thomas III Browne
Of Rutland. The trial of the case lasted
two weeks and after being out y hours
/ the jury brought 10 a verdict for the plain
/ tiff Ia recover 81, 800.
The case comes to the supreme court on
the defendants exception to certain evi.
denoe introduced 90 the refusal Of the
court to comply with i've Of its requests u
charge and on the refusal OF the court tO
grant a new trial after the verdict because
Of the prejudice shown BY the misconduct
and wrong doing during the trial OF Ly-
man Inglest0n of Castlet0n, one OF the
panel of Jurors that tried the case. The
defendants exceptions cover tf8 printed
pages and an attempt to condense thea
into a newspaper story would result in ex
| tending them over several columns. The
appearances in supreme court are M g
Webber and O. M, Barber for the plain
tit P F. McManus, ] + x. BatcheldeF and
/ II H Browne for the defendant. The
Hon. Joel G. Baker is I'll and has been m.
able to do anything in preparing the case
/ for supreme court