The news-democrat. (Providence, R.I.) 1906-1909, 1907-06-01

JuuSe bhheF To-Day neard the afRu-
ments OF counsel on both sides on the
demurrers fled by the indicted coal
companies and individuals TO the In
dictments for conspiracy found n
couple OF months ago.
Last week Judge Mumford refused
to uphold the pleas in abatement filed
by tho parties indicted. and the coal
dealers then filed demurrers TO the In
dictment- The coal dealers have Is or
Is objections to the indictments but
the chief objection IL that there Is no
crime legally charged In them. That
Is TO say, that in justice 10 the de-
PENDANTS the indictments do not pre-
sent any binding reasons for keeping
the defendants in court or forcing
them TO submit their cases to juries.
Counsel for the defendants also
wanted the demurrers certified at once
to the supreme court.
ATTACKS NEWSPAPERS.
Henry w. Hayes. counsel for some
defendants. In the midst OF an argu-
ment OF the nature OF "he is a re-
spectacle man, because he keeps a
gig" made a violent attack upon the
press. Judge Baker intimated that
he obtained the impression that certain
arguments OF Mr.. Hayes were ad-
dressed TO the general public. Judge
Baker took occasion. also. to remind
Mr. Hayes that the defendants rights
were preserved by the law and, while
all he said about prejudcing the pub
lie might be true. the court could not
see how there could be any distinc-
tion in legal way between the de-
PENDANTS In these cases and the ordi-
nary criminal.
TALKED OF "HOUNDING"
These later remarks were made by
his honor. after Mr.. Hayes had been
n ~ L..
clients and had declared they had been
"hounded by portion OF the press
The arguments made today were long
and counsel for the defendants were
given until next Saturday at 10 a. m
to file briefs
Frank l.. Hinckley and Dexter n. Pot
ter appeared for the defendants and
Attorney General Greenough and AS
sistant Attorney General Collins ap-
peared for the state
MR.. HAYES ARGUMENT.
Mr.. Hayes made the opening argument
He began by urging that the indictments
were so framed as TO be extremely preju-
dicial to the defendants IL might be that
the defendants had inadvertently STUN
bled upon a course OF action that was
criminal. and they should have at once
the decision OF the court OF last resort
on the indictments.
Mr.. Hayes declared the defendants were
entitled to fair hearing and as they
had always been respectable citizens 10
consideration.
This high class OF citizens. he de-
clared had been bounded as common
criminals, IL don't mean" he explained
''hounded by the attorney general, he is
doing his duty, but bounded by a por-
ton of the public press, I'm a manner
which IL done in Massachusetts would
have been treated as contempt OF court"
Counsel declared his clients should not
be prejudiced because they were fighting
TO the last notch for their rights.
A POINTED QUESTION.
Judge Baker: do you ask the court 10
certify them the demurrers without ar
gument'
Mr.. Hayes urged that the indictments
involved novel points OF law.
Judge Baker said Your argument
seems SO far TO have been addressed to
the great public"
After dwelling upon what he declared
were great principles Mr.. Hayes said,
THE press is endeavoring 10 mould pub
lie opinion against these respectable cit
izens. Now they are not TO be held as
criminals because they defend themselves
by technicalities which is their only
means OF protection" He said his clients
wished to continue business and he did
not believe four or ive out OF a possible
hundred coal dealers should be punished
On the question OF certifying the cases
TO the supreme court Judge Baker did
not seem TO agree fully with Mr.. Hayes.
His honor declared that you can't get
rid OF a question by certifying II up, you
have TO do something to consider ot at
least, that seems TO be the idea OF the
commission that framed the court and
practice act"
THOUGHT 1T WRONG.
Mr.. Hayes thought it very wrong,
however to force defendants 10 n trial
when they might be found guilty on
n technicality and might really have
done no wrong. There was no offence
against statute or common law
charged properly in the indictments.
he declared, and also that tho mere
statements that things were done In
restraint OF trade did not make the
indictments good.
After Mr.. Hayes had asked the court
to qdash the indictments, Mr.. Allen
began his argument. He went carefully
over what he claimed were weak points
I'm the indictments. He defined the
essentials TO a conspiracy charge and
said they were not to be found I'm the
indie tments before the court. No cases,
he argued could be found sustaining
such indictments as these.
THE STATES CASE.
Attorney General Greenouxh In his brief
makes these four points: First. the gist
OF the crime Of conspiracy is tho combina-
tion or agreement OF two or more persons
or corporations; second. n is a common
law crime 20 combine or enter into an
- a.