Evening journal., 1917-01-29
JUDGE DISNISSES
THE STRIKE PICKETS
Rules That State Failed TO
Prove Men Had
Violated Law
PROMISES FINES
FOR LAWBREAKERS

Otto Andrick and Edwin P. Whit
land, alleged strike pickets. charged
with disorderly conduct on several
counts. at the plant Of the American
Vulvanized Fibre Company. were dis
missed by Judge Churchman in City
Court this morning. ). Frank Ball,
counsel for the defendants. who was
unable TO appear, was represented by
James Salisbury The cases were dis
missed for want OF proof TO support
the charges alleged in the informa-
tion.
The judges decision against An
drick. which also applies to Whittland,
follows:
"The accused is charged with dis
orderly conduct on a public street. in
violation of the ordinance Of coun-
ell
''The information contains nine
counts The first three counts. upon
obiection raised by the defendant,
were rejected for want of proper form.
The other counts charge that the
defendant acted in a disOrderly man
ner: In the fourth, by uttering sour
rilously 'scab shop, why do you take
another mans jobg in the fifth, by
uttering profane words, to wit: Go
10 h--l;' in the sixth, by following
and annoying one George Russo in
the seventh, by following and annoy
ing one Warren Russo in the eighth,
by following and annoying James
Rainey,' and in the ninth, by uttering
profane words. to wit: To hi with
your orders
"The ordinance (Chart D. 1922 so
far as IL concerns disorderly conduct
on the public streets. reads as fol
lows
whoever shall in any street in
this city be guilty OF any
indecent or disorderly conduct, or
make any offensive outcries, or
loud noises. or utter, act, or sing
any lewd. scurrilous, profane or
obscene words or songs;
shall be deemed guilty Of a com
mon nuisance
The city produced sixteen wit
nesses to support the above allega-
tions. The evidence was taken down
in writing by me when given from the
witness stand
II find nothing in the evidence OF
the witnesses to support the allegation
in the fourth count. The evidence OF
all the witnesses is that the defend
ant. with another man. for from five
10 ten minutes every evening, and
sometimes at the noon hour, frequent
ly, If not daily, either stood or walked
upon the street using the expression
quoted sometimes in a low, ordinary
tone Of voice, at other times loudly
but did not direct the remarks to any
IL 10 q
with a change OF voice as a person
would do in using any other express
sion, which he desired persons. ia
hear. while either standing or walk
ing upon the street. There was nc
proof that the manner of the two men
was other than orderly. or that any
thing could be taken from the manner
used in speaking The charge is ut
tering scurriously' the words quoted
1. e., speaking OF using the words IN
a scurrilous manner. II is impossible Il
to conclude or even to infer that this
defendant uttered scurrilOusly' the
words above quoted, merely by using
the words in the amnner above stated
'T find nothing in the evidence to
support the allegations in the fifth
and ninth counts. The evidence OF
Two Of the sixteen witnesses discloses
that the profane words used were
not the words charged in the two
counts but other profane words. with
entirely different meanings. The cit7
must prove the profane words 10
charges the defendant wifa using Il
is hound by ita own allegations.
There is nothing in the evidence Z
support the allegations in the sixth
seventh and eight counts. Of following
and annoying the persons named. ON
Of the men named in the information
said that he was not annoyed, and an
other man. whom the defendant il
charged with annoying. says he was an
moved by the defendant standing tno
following1 at or near his car (auto
mobile1 and using the words quoted II
the information, there was no evldenc
produced to show that the defendan
both followed and annoyed any per
son. There was some evidence Of an
novance. But the charge is alleged II
the coniunctive, not in the distinctive
II was necessary for the city TO prov
the charge as IL alleged it Of boil
following and also annoying the per
sons named The defendant merely stoo'
or walked up and down the street. How