right which belongs to every citizen, laborer or capitalist, and it is the plain duty of the state to protect them in the enjoyment of it." The organization and plan of campaign of the Advisory Committee were reviewed at length, its chief object being stated as "to deprive the company of the use of its property and to prevent it from operating its works by the aid of men who were not members of the Amalgamated Association." Then followed a narrative of the Sheriff's preliminary manoeuvres and of the Pinkerton expedition, as viewed from a strictly Paxsonian standpoint. After recounting the details of the battle at the mill landing, the surrender of the Pinkertons, and the occupation of Homestead by the military, the Chief Justice went on to say: "We can have some sympathy with a mob driven to desperation by hunger as in the days of the French Revolution, but we have none for men receiving exceptionally high wages in resisting the law and resorting to violence and bloodshed in the assertion of imaginary rights, and entailing such a vast expense upon the taxpayers of the commonwealth. It was not a cry for bread to feed their famishing lips, resulting in a sudden outrage, with good provocation; it was a deliberate attempt by men without authority to control others in the enjoyment of their rights. * * * It is much to be feared that there is a diseased state of public opinion growing up with regard to disturbances of this nature, and an erroneous view of the law bearing upon these questions has found lodgment in the public mind. This is evidenced by the accounts of portions of the press, and it finds expression in the assurances of demagogues who pander to popular prejudices and in the schemes of artful politicians." Proceeding to the law in the case, the Chief Justice held that when the Carnegie Company employed watchmen to guard its works, "it mattered not to the rioters, nor to the public, who they were, nor whence they came. It was an act of unlawful violence to prevent their landing on the property of the company. That unlawful violence amounted at least to a riot upon the part of all concerned in it. If life was taken in pursuance of a purpose to resist the landing of the men by violence, the offense was murder, and perhaps treason." The legal definition of treason was then read and its supposed application to the Homestead conflict pointed out as follows: