The Pullman boycott

by W. F. Burns

At the conclusion of the reading he said that the defendants had made and filed a motion to quash, holding that the information was not sufficient. They now asked that the defendants be discharged, and also that the district attorney and government counsel to elect whether they should proceed under the indictment or under the contempt cases. No man could be tried twice for the same offense. Judge Wood said that the counsel for the government could proceed with either case. Attorney Walker elected to go ahead with the contempt proceedings.

Attorney Gregory in the opening made an eloquent appeal for a trial by jury instead of a criminal proceeding in a contempt case, as he held the present proceeding to be. He cited a number of authorities in support of his position. He argued that it was the rule that there could be no appeal from the decision of a federal court in a contempt case, and that consequently, where the question of a crime was involved, a sentence from the court would practically be a conviction on the original criminal charge without a trial by jury which is guaranteed by the constitution.

Mr. Gregory then took up the question of the motion to dismiss the bill on the grounds that the information did not set out in specific forms any violation of the specifications in the injunction granted by the United States court.

He held that the men had a right to combine, choose leaders to advise, and quit work if they wished to do so and persuade others to quit work, that the injunctions did not prohibit them from doing so. Judge Wood asked if he considered that the defendants had a right to ask men to tumble goods out of cars that were ready for transportation. Mr. Gregory replied that he did not consider that they had any such right, and claimed that there was nowhere in the information a distinct allegation that the defendants had counseled violence or infractions of the orders in the injunction. While he was willing to admit that violence had been done during the present strike, nothing was charged in the information that the violence was due to the acts of the defendants.

Attorney Walker for the government followed. He held that the defendants had no right to go into other states and persuade men to quit work for the purpose of paralyzing railroads, and that the issuance of these orders was a willful and vicious violation of the order of the court.

Mr. Walker said the telegrams were the strongest evidence in the hands of the state to show that this had been done. He spoke for three quarters of an hour and directed his remarks more to the general charge against the defendants for violation of the injunction, than to the legal points raised by Mr. Gregory.

It will be remembered that the answers filed by the attorneys for the defense, was a complete denial of the charges.

After hearing all the arguments, Judges Wood and Grosscup decided that the contempt proceedings against Mr. Debs and the others, were in the nature of proceedings in equity, and therefore the defendants could not be discharged on their denial of the charges under oath.

Mr. Walker gave as an excuse for wanting the case heard at once, that the defendants were liable to continue calling out the men unless they were restrained from so doing by the court.

"Then," said Mr. Gregory, "you wish the court to practically call the strike off."