The West Virginian. [volume] (Fairmont, W. Va.) 1914-1974, 1922-06-01
MINER @ RGED
WITH co MT; EN- ri
ON TRIAL TODAY
20. Tsaal's.l- 5.,oEH.=aE3 rIra- - ~, 4
tContirued from page one,

Campbell.
Joseph Godoy. another accused.
is still in a Wheeling hoIpital re-
covering from wounds received in
clash wits strike breakers and
Guards. Andy Morovitch. :. D.
Griffith and Alex Campbell, not
yet apprehended. q. S. Marshal
Short, who brought seven prison
ers to the local Jail Tuesday
brought John Nicholas, another
min Ter, among the number, mistak-
ing him for Alex Campbell. at
whose home he resides. No
charge pending against Nicholas,
he was discharged.
Attorney Howard suggested
that instead of a plea being enter
ed in the cases "a general denial be
made by the defendants. owing to
the fact that the injunction grant
ed by Judge Dayton originated in
chancery cause, while the con-
tempt proceedings were criminal
prosecution. Judge Baker asserted
that the denial would stand until
the character of the case develop
ed when an order might be enter
ed appropriate to the nature of the
cases as developed,
Jury Selected
In selecting the jury to try the
case, in which a severance was
elected by the defense, the venire-
men were asked if they were pre-
JUDGED for or against unions, or
foreigners, if they had coal inter-
ests or were prejudiced favorably
or against coal operators and If
they were union members. The jury
was selected as follows:
A r. Homer, city; T. J. Clarity,
city; Henry Shelf, Wood County;
Samuel R. Mayfield, Tyler County
B. b Hoopkin, Calhoun; Dave
Kahn, city; c. w. Bowling, Wood
County; Sam Keehan, city; W. H.
Dunbar, city; Walter E. Stout city;
Abner Smith. Tyler County and Al
vim Cooper. Pleasant County
In his opening statement. Attor-
ney Howard briefly related the fact
the issuing of the in
junction in 1913 by Judge Dayton
in a suit styled the West Virginia
Pittsburg Coal Co.. against Thomas
E. White, which restrained the de-
PENDANTS and all others from in
terfering with the operation OF the
plant by threats, lntim-
idation, force or other means.
Occurrence Reviewed
On February Il, 1922. Mr.. How
ard stated the defandent, Splnosa
and others gathered before day
break at a subway near the mines,
where the Bethaney pike passes un
der railroad track. A party OF
workers going to the mine In
charge Of Daniel Altman were &C
costed and shots fired by Spinosa
and his party, which wounded the
deputy in the thigh. The officer
returned the fire and the attack
ing party fled, said Mr. Howard.
The clash, however, frightened and
the workers, many OF
whom returned home. the action OF
Spinosa and others preventing the
operation of the mine constituting
in Mr.. Towards opinion the overt
act of contempt.
Attorney Parriott made motion
% dismiss the proceeding because
the charges were punishable under
the state law, because it was not
shown that Spinosa was party 70
tha original suit which resulted in
me anu was AACf -
praised of the court order. Judge
Baker over ruled the motion.
Claims Breach of Contract
Attorney Gardner, in his opening
statement for the defense, said
hat the officers of the company
n 1916 repeatedly solicited United
Wine Workers officials to organize |
he mines and finally appealed to
he national organization of the
miners after the local had refused
q organize the mine because OF the
,ourt order. He also said that
contract was made by the company
md the union. Objection to this
vas raised by Mr.. Howard who
,uestioned it's relevancy. Mr.. How
lrd said he intended to show the |
.oal company was coming into
.ourt with. hands besmirched by !
preach OF contract. Judge Baker
.uled that it should be left out or
he statement until the case de-
reloped. Spinosa was unfamiliar
With English, the attorney stated
md was unaware of the court or
Ter Speaking of the clash at the
;ubway near the mine, Mr.. Gard
Ter charged that the deputy mad
ired promiscuously into the crowd
# union miners, wounding Spinosa
-odoy and Sam Solo, Spinosa be- ,
ng about three yards away when
Altman shot.
In closing his statement, Mr.. Ho-
ward. for the prosecution, said that
t could be shown that copies of the
INJUNCTION order had been printed
n Spinosa's language and explain
d to him by an Interpreter. i
One Charge Withdrawn
One of the charges against Spin
,sa was Withdrawn this morning
" the prosecution. Section one
II the injunction prohibits the
United Mine Workers, their agents
,r members from combining or
hitting employees of the company,
! charge of violating which was
contained in the specifications hled
" the government in addition to
,ther overt acts of contempt
charged.
This charge was withdrawn by
.r-NSy Il IL