Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1908-05-23
CITES STRIKERS TO APPEAR
Injunction is Refused Until Strikers
Can Make Appearance in Court to
Show Cause Why It Should Not Be
Issued--Railroad Company Claims
City Has Refused It Protection.

borers the company has employed to
Ian the strikers places, or from inter-
fering with the company in the man
agement of its shops, and the inspec.
tion Of its cars. The petition for 9
| temporary injunction was denied by
Judge Smith Mcpherson. because Of the
lack Of sufficient notice, but he or.
dered the defendant. strikers to appear
in court ON June IL to show cause why
the restraining order should not be is
| sued.
City Blamed by Company.
The chief claim of the company why
the injunction should be issued Is thai
the city authorities have failed to pre-
serve order and have prevented the
strikers from picketing the shops. Re
| garding this phase of the case Judge
Mcpherson said most emphatically thai
lit was the duty Of the city and county
authorities to furnish protection for al
citizens.
Company Wanted Protection.
| In the early days Of the strike. after
II had been in progress not more than
two or three days. both Sheriff G. 8
Hutson and Mayor o. L. Ingledue were
| approached by representatives Of the
company. who sought additional pro-
lection for the strike breakers who had
been imported and the company's prop
erty. Sheriff Hutson was asked to
deputize q number Of men to patrol the
company's property. When this request
was denied he was asked to deputize
the guards which the company had
brought from Minneapolis. The first
| request was denied because the sher-
III deemed the action unnecessary, and
because there had been no acts Of in
timidation or violence. The second re-
quest was refused because the guards
from Minneapolis were non-residents
Of the county.
Mayor Ingledue was approached on
the subject, and he also refused the re-
quests for practically the same rea-
sons. Later an additional policeman
was put on duty In the depot districts
during the night He Is, still ON duty.
Serve Notice on Strikers.
Deputy United States Marshal Bid
we'll was in the city last night and to-
day, serving notice on the strikers to
appear in court at the time fixed. AL
tho w. s. Davis, an Iowa Central
blacksmith. Is the only striker named
In the conlpany's petition, 104 others
are included as defendants.
The petition sets up the claim that
three or four non-union workmen
have been assaulted. and that the
strikers are picketing the shops and
intimidating these workmen.
On four or. f7ua 6iffarant 0nooSi
during the past two weeks, strikers
and nom union laborers and guards
have FLASHED and fights have fol-
lowed. Non-union laborers who had
left the company's employ have been
hurried out of town by the strikers.
The picketing of the company's
property. which was kept up vigor-
ously for weeks, has not been quite so
active since Monday, when three coll
lisions between the strikers and q
strike breaker, a guard and q company
foreman, took place.
Judge MePherson's Opinion.
In, refusing the temporary restrain
ing order, Judge Mcpherson referred
to the failure Of the company to try
other means before applying to the
federal court for an injunction. He
said:
'This court does not complain be-
cause plaintiffs pass by the, state
courts. relieving those courts of the
work. embarrassments and criticisms,
and often abuse, and heaping the
same on the United States courts. But
what is claimed and stated Is that
some effort must be made, and some
= \ rx~ - k,,
and city authorities, resulting in the
failure or inability to maintain order
and to give the men who want to
work that right. The power to make
men work regardless of contracts is
slavery. TO make employers take men
into their service when they do not
want them is tyranny and despotism."
Order Might Be Injustice.
Continuing In his opinion, Judge
Mcpherson said that an injustice
might be done by a restraining order
at the time 1t was asked for. Touch
Ing on this point and on the subject of
violence by organized bodies. he said:
In one sense an injunction against
a party does him no harm, but to a
party who is innocent OF wrong doing
the service Of the writ is more or less
CALLING and offensive. And why should
party who is harmless and innocent
be subjected to that humiliation?
This is country of laws, and the
law is supreme and should be obeyed,
and should be enforced against those
who have no regard for law. Night
riders and others who seek to DOM
mate others by violence have the re-
spect and good will Of no law abiding
citizens. When places are vacated by
a strike or lockout.th places thus va
Gated do not belong to the former en-
ployes They at one time did, but are
lost, and the company has the right to
fill such vacancies by employing others
willing to work.
''That the defendants have no right
to assemble in crowds to terrorize or
do violence upon new employees Is true.
And that the so-called 'picketing is
usually pretense OF persuasion. but
in fact to terrorize, is known by all.
Will Fight Injunction.
The unions, represented by the strtk-
ers, will fight to the limit the efforts
Of the company to secure an injunc-