Fitzgerald leader enterprise and press. (Fitzgerald, Ben Hill County, Ga.) 1921-1964, 1922-03-02
JUDGE SIBLEY'S DECISION IN FULL
IN A. B. & A. INJUNCTION CASE
Draw Your Own Conclusions as To
Who Won the Victory!

which they obtained possession of the
entire correspondence of the head
quarters quarters in Atlanta of the
Striking Employees of the A. B. & A.,
and to which the attorneys for the
STRIKERS demurred, became a total
wreck when Judge Sibley made the
temporary injunction against the U.
). Courts own attorneys and Receiv-
er B. L. Bugg, permanent since our
last issue.
Former District Attorney Hooper
Alexander, and Howard and Branch,
the Union Officials attorneys in At
lanta scored heavily when the court
made this decision against its own
officers. The papers were returned
to the Strike headquarters in the
Piedmont Hotel in full possession OF
the official in charge.
The case is being further investi-
gated this week. Mr.. w. M. Martin,
general chairman and Ben Reid. of
this city are in attendance at court
in Atlanta, being subpoened before the
federal grand jury.
The case will no doubt develop var
lous features which will have a tend.
ency to bring the entire strike cues
tion into court, as both sides are de-
termlned to fight the issue to finish.
Case Totally Collapsed When
Called Wednesday
Hearing on the motion to quash a
subpoena duces tecum, issued by Clint
w. Hager, United States district at
torney, on ]. B. Hogsed, and other
members of the joint officers commit
tee handling the A. B. & A. employees
strike case, was continued Wednes-
day by Judge Samuel H. Sibley. in
Federal court. An order was issued at
the same time discharging all witness
es who had been summoned to ap-
pear before the grand jury in connec-
ton with the investigation of the
strike until further orders from the
court
Hooper Alexander and James A.
Branch, representing Mr.. Hogsed,
and J. M. Larisey, custodians of the
documents n controversy, asked that
the subpoena be quashed on the ground
that it was equivalent to making those
named testify against themselves.
The objection was also based on the
charge that J. B. Wall, solicitor gen
era1 of the Cordele Circuit. who has
been acting as a special assistant to
the district attorney in this matter, is
local cousel for the A. B. & A. Rail-
road; that there had been a purpose
for some time to obtain the papers,
and that copies had been made and
other uses made of the documents
when first obtained until ordered re-
turned by the court. 1t was further
alleged that the subpoena issued was
too extensive to be relevant.
In the argument it was charged that
]. B. Wall is hostile to Mr.. Hogsed.
1t was also charged anew that the
papers had been used by B. L. Bugg,
receiver of the A. B. & A.
An attempt was made by Mr. Hager
to hold the witnesses subject to the
subpoena Until called again.
A vigorous protest to this was led
by Mr.. Alexander, who told the court
that a subpoena duces tecum was no
different from any other subpoena ex-
cept that it called for documents to be
produced and that witnesses thus sum-
moned were entitled to the same privi-
leges and protection as under any
other form of subpoena.
One or two things is certain, said
Judge Sibley. either these witnesses
must be held here at the governments
expense or released.
M uana.- eoS5 +6aA oe xxyara
entitled to no pay unless they had ap-
peared before the grand jury. 1t was
contended by counsel for the union
leaders that the men had reported for
appearance, but had not been called in
to testify, but were due compensation.
Judge Sibley ordered that the wit
nesses be paid for each day that they
had been summoned In his order is
also a provision for the clerk to hold
the subpoenas that have been issuel
until otherwise ordered by the court.
The grand jury met for few min
utes Wednesday but was released
when formal action to quash the in
dictment was brought. The same grand
jury will meet again Friday and will
then be discharged. The next grand
jury will begin March IS at which
time it is believed probable that inves-
tigation of the A. B. & A. strike will
be resumed.
In u. S. District Court, Northern Dis
trict of Georgia:
PROCEEDINGS FOR RETURN of
PAPERS, ETC,
J. M. Larisey, ct al, VS.. Clint w. Hag-
er, District Attorney, ct al;
Petitioners having on the 18th day
of February complained that certain
papers had been illegally taken from
their custody by officers of the United
States and that copies of the same were
being made, the Court issued an injunc
ton against further inspection or copy
ing of said papers, ad required that
they be brought into court with re-
spouse on the 18th. Various circum-
stances produced delaying the hearing
of hte matter, and the same was heard
at different times on the 18, %, % and
"a, Oral directions were given on the
18th instant that all of said papers and
copies be put into the custody of the
clerk. Various papers were put into
the hands of the clerk on the 18, 81,
%, and %. At the conclusion of the
nearing on the oath, "a large mass of
papers being then in court, purport-
ing to be the originals ad copies, but
there beig practicable way to fully
determine which was which, or of fulfA
identifying the papers, the Court indi-
Gated his purpose to restore the Gus
tody of the original papers to petit
TONERS, and o cautse all copies to be
IL L.. Al. Il 4