Page:Cole v. State (214 Ark. 387).pdf/4

390

except the latter statute carries an emergency clause, whereas, ours does not. On December 10, 1941, the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas sustained the constitutionality of the Texas statute in Ex parte Frye, 143 Tex. Cr. R. 9, 156 S.W.2d 531. On the same date the same Texas court sustained the same statute, in Ex parte Sanford, 144 Tex. Cr. R. 430, 157 S.W.2d 899, on the authority of the Frye case. The Sanford case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, where it was dismissed on the ground that it did not involve a federal question. Sanford v. Hill, 316 U.S. 647, 62 Sup. Ct. 1292, 86 L. Ed. 1731."

But we are here concerned with a portion of § 2 of the Act 193, the constitutionality of which portion has not been construed in a case where its provisions were atissue. The information on which the defendants were tried has been previously copied. In effect, it charged that Walter Ted Campbell, acting in concert with other pgrsons, assembled where a labor dispute existed, andby force and violence prevented Otha Williams fromworking; and that "the said Roy Cole, Louis Jones and Jessie Bean did unlawfully and feloniously, acting in concert with each other, promote, encourage and aidsuch unlawful assemblage against the peace and dignity of the State of Arkansas." In short, the defendants, Cole and Jones, were charged with acting in concert, and promoting, encouraging and aiding the unlawful assemblage which prevented Otha Williams from engaging in a lawful occupation. So the defendants are charged with violating the final portion of § 2 of Act 193. Section 2 reads in its entirety:

"It shall be unlawful for any person acting in concert with one or more other persons, to assemble at or near any place where a labor dispute exists and by force or violence prevent or attempt to prevent any person from engaging in any lawful vocation, or for anyperson acting either by himself, or as a member of any group or organization or acting in concert with one or