Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-03-14
Attorney Ralston Says It Is Made
Up of "Shreds and Patches"
STATE BEGINS IT'S ARGUMENT
Mr.. Davenport Expects to Review
the Entire Proceedings From
Their Inception.

SomperS, mitchell and Morr1S0n as
"shreds and patches gathered to make up
straightjackets for men who. although
they are known prominently for many
years as supporters and observers of law,
may have technically violated a single
sweeping injunction Of the court"
Jackson H. Ralston today concluded
the arguments for the defense Of the
labor leaders in the proceedings before
five justices OF the District Supreme
Court.
Mr.. Ralston claimed the common voice
of men would cry out against conclu-
sion of contempt against men who stood
upon their constitutional rights and did
or said nothing to further an unlawful
boycott within the definition of that word
set out In the opinion of Justice Gould.
concurred in by Justice Wright in his
opinion in the case and not amended by
the District Court of Appeals.
Daniel Davenport, foe the prosecutors,
was reviewing the entire proceedings
from its inception late this afternoon.
Statements Taken From Record.
Mr.. Davenport referred frequently to
the record. and when he read some state
ment made by Mr.. Gompers he was TAX
en- to task by Mr.. Ralston. who inquired
If that portion read was a part of the
record.
L
Davenport, you Will be surprised to
see what you really did put in the
record as evidence. You put this in
yourselves"
NO" quickly responded Mr.. Ralston.
I will not be surprised at anything
after seeing what you put in the
record"
Mr.. Davenport is expected to con-
clude his arguments this afternoon or
tomorrow morning.
Thnx Co
sociates did. said or wrote nothing
which violated the law as expressed in
the opinion Of Justice Gould in the
original Bucks Stove and Range case
in which he set forth the rights Of
labor was the keynote of the closing
argument in defense OF the labor lead
ers made by Mr.. Ralston.
He urged that the Injunction signed
by Justice Gould did not follow the
opinion Of that Justice.
Cites Justice Gould's Opinion.
Citing from the opinion, Mr.. Ralston
said Justice Gould had laid down the
right Of labor to either individually or
collectively sell their labor to whom they
please. on such terms as they please. and
to decline to buy plaintiffs stoves; they
have also the right to decline to trafic
with dealers who handle plaintiffs
stoves" Nothing done. said or written
by Gompers went beyond the scope of
that definition Of right, contended the
lawyer for the defense.
On the question of boycott the striking
difference between Justice Gould and Mr..
Gompers, Mr.. Ralston asserted, was one
of definition merely. Such differences are
and nations and not infrequently the
cause of war, he stated. When Mr.. JUS
tice Gould used the word boycott he
intended to include within the scope OF its
da<inifinn he ~ nY
intimidation.
Mr.. Ralston pointed out when Mr.
Gompers said Il boycott +" he had no in
tention OF using either coercion or In
timidation.
The language Of the order which tho
labor leaders are charged with violating.
Mr.. Ralston declared, Mr.. Gompers had
the right to construe as Justice Gould
had construed II when in his opinion he
defined the rights OF laboring men
Takes Exception to Remarks.
When he began his address late yester-
day afternoon Mr.. Ralston paid his re-
for the committee of prosecutors, in
which suggestion had been made that the
title of the contempt proceedings should
read Law against Anarchy" He said:
If there are any men in this country
who have had the superlative opportunity
Tor standing up and fighting any sugges-
ton In the line of anarchy it Is the three
respondents in this case, and IL there are
any men in this country who have awaited
themselves of that opportunity and on
every possible occasion have stood for or
der against disorder, who have stood for
the faithful observance of the laws of
this country, they are these three same
gentlemen.
so / say, / resent courteously, forci-
bly,, If you will. but resent this sugges-
fnH t.
the proper title to this case Anarchy
is a subversion Of all law, departure
from all law. Mr.. Gompers in his fire.
quent addresses and editorials has plant
ed himself upon what he conceives to be
the very foundation work of the Con-
stitution. He believed 1t was his duty,
the duty of the courts, the duty of the
public officials. to abide to the last de-
gree by the provisions OF that Constitu-
ton. Does that spell anarchy?'
Reminded of Belgian Practice.
Referring to the manner Of Mr.. Darling
ton in concluding his opening statement
for the prosecutors. Mr. Ralston said he
was reminded Of the practice existing in
Belgian courts. where the speaker con-
cludes his remarks with the expression
al dit, meaning II have spoken
When Mr.. Darlington closed his remarks.
Mr.. Ralston said. the atmosphere was
charged with fnality. as though all had
been said that could be said in the mat
ter.
Mr.. Darlington's associates twitted him
on the statement Of his opponent. suR-
costing that Mr.. Darlington change his
initials from u. j., to J. D." (Jai dit).
Referring to the closing statement OF
District Attorney Wilson, In which he had
set forth his opinion on the recall OF
judges or the doctrine of repeating court
decisions, and asked the court to STAMP
out the heresy. Mr.. Ralston said:
The district attorney has appealed to
You to exercise q new function, q func-
ton absolutely unknown to courts. He
has appealed to the court to stand as an
impregnable bulwark." explained the law
yer. against coming danger the nature
of which. however. Mr.. Wilson fails &c
disclose. and he would have this court
depart from it's usual and well defined
functions and rules to check this wrong
full act, whatever 1t is. He would have
this court throw these men down to this
minotaur OF his imaginary danger"
Precludes Fair Decision, He Saws.
Counsel for the accused labor leaders
said that the offense charged against his
clients was too personal for the Justices
sitting in Judgment to try 1t, as 1t con-
Sned an offense committed against
them. precluding. no matter how hard
they might try, an absolutely fair deci-
sion and judgment.
We are living in a reconstructive age
continued Mr.. Ralston. People are
more independent than ever in theII
opinions and conclusions as to what con.
stitutes right and wrong. The action to
be taken by this court is not to be meas
ured by prejudices, passions or impulses
of the hour Thu decfaiop ~ tho co,,rt