The New York herald., 1922-09-22
DAUGHERTY WANTS
MORE DRASTIC WRIT
WilkersOn Indicates He Will
Order Permanent Injunc-
tion Tomorrow.
BARS STRIKING BACK
Acknowledgement Says Tt Is
Government Duty to Com
pei Transportation.
BARS STRIKING BACK

Special DispatcI, to THE NEW York HERALD
CHICAGO, Sept. 21.-After intimating
earlier in the day that he would uphold
the drastic temporary injunction OBJ
tanned by Attorney General Daugherty
on the grounds that the striking railroad
shonmen were engaged in a gigantic con-
epiracy to wreck interstate commerce,
Judge wilkerson, in tho United States
Court. late to-day announced that he
would hand down his decision on Satur-
day. e..
In continuing the hearing the Judge
indicated that so far the Government
had presented the better case. Judge
Wilkerson also said that he wished
further to examine into the allegation
of the defense las to how far they chal-
1enged the evidence" and added that the
Government's appeared to be the con
trolling averment.'
Meantime the Judge concluded he
would enter an order continuing the
restraining feature of the temporary in
junction until Saturday. The Govern
ment writ in reality expired>to-night and
the effect of continuing the restraining
order regarded the same as making the
auJunCIlOu peImdueuls
New Defendants Named.
The court made the announcement
Daugherty gave the concluding argu-
ments In the Governments case. The
Attorney-Generalp presented a new draft
of the injunction which the Government
desires the court to issue.
) Virtually the only difference between
IL and the temporary restraining order.
tho Government attorney said, is the
list of persons named. The only modifi-
cation of the original restraining order
made in the Attorney Generals new
draft was paragraph stating there Is
no restraint on the use of union funds
for lawful purposes. Other provisions
checking the activities of union leaders
in promoting the strike were made even
moro drastic in the proposed new order.
Mr.. Daugherty's closing argument for
the injunction repudiated the charge that
the restraint interfered with the right
OF free speech and said that "the free
dom of speech was not interfered with
unless it was speech that incltes mobs
to violence and results in the commits
sion of crimes and offenses which the
Government is bound to prevent"
This order" he continued, does not
question I right OF a man or any num-
her of men to strike. but 1t restraints
them from striking back unlawfully.
On the other hand. 1t will afford pro-
lection to every man and woman equally
who come within its operation. in each
and every lawful right he said.
1T is the duty of the Government to
compel the railroads to furnish trans
portation. If the railroads are them
selves at any time or for any reason
not able to do so because of irterferences
IL is the obligation of the Government
to step in and prevent any and all
interferences
The Government Choice.
"The Government can do four things:
'First-As in this case 1t did. call
upon all persons responsible for the in
reference to disist and to cease to in
terfere. That failing, the Government
must decide promptly whether 1t will
resort, as 1t did in this case. to the civil
proceeding for an injunction to restrain
those who persisted in the interference.
''Second--It can step aside, inviting
every criminal act destructive of human
rights. of property, of life and of trans
rortation. and let those who bear the
torch and hold in their hand the dagger
proceed to the commission OF such
crimes against property persons. liberty
and Government and when all has been
accomplished prosecute and punish those
who are guilty.
''Third-It could. as was within the
power of the Executive. call upon the
military power. and in the performance
of it's legal rights NOV down and kill
how many? Nobody knows how many
American people.
"Fourth--It could adopt a policy OF
innocuous complacency and acauiescence
and let anarchy reign and the mob rule"