everywhere; but because we are fighting the German Kaiser we give him a extra kick." That was in June, two or three days after Harris left. I have never played up or given the best of it to the Berlin News or the Berlin dis patches. As to that I know personally what the files would contain. I know how I handled it; I saw the proofs and the paper, of course. The files wi show, that as to my best knowledge as a newspaper man, I played up the most important dispatches, regardless of where they came from or the course of their origin. Mr. Berger distinctly warned me against making the headlines in favor of or against anybody; did that time and again. In the winter of 1915 or 1917 Mr. Berger met me in the Auditorium and inquired how I like 1043 it on The Leader by that time, and I said I liked it very much, and te said "Isn't it because there is so little interference, or absolutely note. from down stairs." Mr. Berger's office is downstairs. I told him the reason I liked it was that men in that capacity are never absolutely at ease unless the are let alone by the men downstairs.

I was one of the four signers of this protest against the St. Louis platform Mr. Harris said we ought to sign the protest. I signed it for two reasons, first. out of deference to the managing editor; and, again, if it would be protection I was not averse to being protected. The Berlin dispatches were usually dated "Berlin, via London," and so we assumed that they came through London and probably were treated by a censor there.

I had the privilege of Mr. Hessner's acquaintance; as to the relations betwee him and Berger all I know is from hearing Karl Hessner say that he and M Berger did not agree, and he said once that Berger regarded him as pretty erratic.

Cross-Examination by Mr. Fleming.

I have been with the Milwaukee Leader since March 13, 1916; knew nothing about the paper prior to that time by actual experience; know nothing about the arrangement of the press dispatches in that paper prior to March 13, 1916, or . which dispatches were given preference prior to the time of my arrival on the paper. I began as copy reader and became telegraph editor July 17, 1916 1044 Ernest Untermann was still in charge handling the war dispatches at that

time. I knew him as a newspaper man, through his writings. I haven't the slightest idea where he is now; he hasn't written to anyone on the Leader's stai as far I know since he left there. He left in November or December, 1916 No one succeeded him; his work was apportioned among the men in the office. Mr. Harris, managing editor, was my superior, and A. M. Simons was his su perior; Simons resigned long before Harris' resigned, but he was Harris' su perior Harris left in the latter part of May, 1917, and Simons must have left four or five months before that. After Simons left Harris was the managing editor.

In signing the protest against the war proclamation I don't believe I considered Mr. Berger at all; I signed that protest; I was not there when it was presented. Mr. Harris laid the matter of it before me; he did not tell me he had conferred with counsel. I heard that Harris had conferred with counsel regarding the filing of a protest with Mr. Berger at that grand jury investigation in Milwaukee; they told me Mr. Harris had taken this protest to an attorney The matter was small conversation among the staff afterwards, the matter of signing that protest. I have no recollection that Mr. Wyrick ever told me that Mr. Harris had conferred with counsel.

Usually large papers have a makeup editor and he attends to the make 1045 up upon a dummy or sketch presented to him by someone in the editorial room; ordinarily the final hand in the shaping of a newspaper, items and dispatches, is not the managing editor; sometimes it is a news editor placed in between the managing editor and the heads of the telegraph and local depart ments. Nominally Mr. Harris would have had the review of arrangements; be very rarely exercised it, if he had; he had the power.

I saw our attorney last night; I don't think Hessner's name was mentioned during the time I was speaking to the attorney. I don't know that Hessner had any relation to the Y. P. S. L. in Milwaukee; I sustain absolutely non whatever; am not a member of it, I am too old.

Redirect Examination by Mr. Cochems.

Mr. Harris remained more than a year after I came on the paper.

EORGE HAMPEL, called :

Direct Examination by Mr. Cochems.

My name is George Hampel; my home is in Milwaukee; have lived there 11 my life; I am 33 years old; am a member of the Citizens Commission on Hoving Pictures, a censorship board, for which the City makes an appropriaion, and have been a member going on three years; there is no compensation or that. I was elected County clerk last fall. I am a member of the Socialist party, secretary of he executive board of the County Central Committee. 046 It is the duty of the executive board to take up matters appertaining to the activities of the party, in order to expedite the work, and make recommendations to the County Central Committee; which is the governing body of the Socialist Party in Milwaukee County, its membership consisting of delegates of the various branches of the body, of which there are about 75 in Milwaukee, And the total membership in all branches about 140. The County Central Comnittee did not ever take up the question of conscription or the draft law; the executive board did, of the county; both before and after the legislation was proposed in Congress. Upon request from the members I had the secretary of he County Central Committee call a conference of lawyers in the party, together with the executive board, to discuss ways and means by which we could arrive at some understanding in the matter; the committee met and the matter was taken up and we had before us the statement of Hanness Taylor, a recognized authority on constitutional law; we arrived at no definite conclusion, except that we felt it advisable that we call in some lawyer outside of the party who had quite a reputation as a constitutional lawyer; Mr. W. L. Pierce, of Janesville, Wisconsin, who is not a Socialist, was suggested. John Kleist, Victor Berger and Albert A. Adelman were appointed a committee to go to Janesville, but the

plan was not carried out because Mr. Pierce came to the city here and he 1047 said we could save that expense of coming up there, he was here on

business any way. We met in Milwaukee and this matter was taken up and argued from the standpoint of the party members, and also Mr. Pierce presented an opinion. At that time there was pending a case in Cleveland, Reuterberg I think was the name, and we decided to wait until the Supreme Court had decided this matter to make our report to the County Central Committee. Mr. Pierce expressed the opinion that technically the draft law would be a violation of the constitutional rights, yet under the circumstances he thought there would be no question but that any judge would make no such ruling, that the proposition would be construed that Germany was planning an invasion of America and therefore an army of defense was necessary. Upon his advice we left the matter in abeyance until this decision. Upon receipt of the decision the committee of which Mr. Berger was a member recommended that every member of the Socialist party be required to subscribe to all laws and rules laid down by the Government, which report was made to the County Central Committee and it was accepted at a meeting held probably in September.

(Witness withdrawn).

FRANK P. WALSH, a witness on behalf of the defendants, sworn and testified:

Direct Examination by Mr. Stedman.

My name is Frank P. Walsh legal residence in Kansas City, Missouri; 1048 I am at present residing in New York City. I am an attorney at law; was the joint chairman of the National War Labor Board; I was chairman of the Industrial Commission created in the closing days of the Taft administration to inquire into labor conditions throughout the United States and Europe and ascertain, if possible, the causes of the industrial unrest which was believed by Congress to be in existence at that time. It involved a research into industrial conditions by experts employed for that purpose, professors of various universities who have given particular attention to those matters; also the statute required public hearings in the principal industrial centers of the United States. The board consisted of nine members, three representatives of employes, three of employers, and three representing the general public. I was a representative of the public and was the chairman. President Wilson appointed me. There were five mem

bers of the War Labor Board representing employers, and five representin employees; the joint chairmen were William H. Taft and myself. There we ten arbitrators, selected by the President of the United States. It was the duty of the board, which was created by presidential proclamation on Apr 9. 1918, to intervene wherever there were industrial disputes in the Unite States. The main object was to prevent strikes and to keep up maximumproduction in war industries while war was going on. We intervened in cass where the number of employes involved would run into the millions in the a gregate. 1049 On July 16, 1917, or a short time before July 24, at Washington, wher Mr. Darrow, Mr. Hillquit, Mr. Irvine, Mr. Engdahl, one of the defen ants, and Seymour Stedman were present before Judge Herron, the followits occurred: I had been consulted by Mr. Hickey who was publishing a pape in Texas as to his publication rights, his paper having been stopped from go through the mails; he asked me to appear there as his attorney; later, and a the same morning, Mr. Stedman with Mr. Engdahl called, with Mr. Darrow, a said they had employed Mr. Darrow, and wanted to know whether we coul not present the matter all together. I agreed and we had a long conferene together. Upon that or the following morning we appeared before Mr. Herra assistant attorney general of the United States, who was in charge of this pa ticular matter, and presented our arguments. Mr. Darrow or Mr. Stedms: spoke first, and I second; and we told him it was highly necessary that the men should know what they were entitled to publish. Every one that spoke there said there was a very intense desire upon the part of everybody not to violate any law, and at the same time believed it was very necessary that t clean strain of public thought should be maintained even in as critical a time as when war was going on; and the question of the publication of the Socialis platform came up, which was presented largely on Mr. Engdahl's behalf, but

Mr. Hickey was also interested in it and I presented it. Mr. Herron 1050 without quoting him, in a general way agreed with the necessity of

having some clear definition as to what people could do during the war, what they could publish, and stated he would advise us later as to his cor clusion. Some discussion came up between Mr. Stedman and Mr. Herron ove the phrase "Wall Street War," and Mr. Stedman said if men had an honest contrariety of opinion on that subject, it was a proper subject of discussion and it was very necessary that men should be advised so that they could make up their minds. I think everybody there finally took some part in the dis cussion. I never received any statement about it from Judge Herron after wards. The Four Lights, the Socialist, Tom Hickey's paper, the Rebel, and all these papers and leaflets, also the American Socialist, the New York Call Scandinavian papers, Lithanian papers, and a large number of papers, were there.

The afternoon session was held with Postmaster General Burleson. Mr Darrow spoke, then I at some length, then Mr. Hillquit for the New York Call. and I think Mr. Stedman closed it. Mr. Burleson assumed quite a knowledg of the entire matter, but the discussion was so broken with interruptions that the thread of the discourse could not, I am quite sure, be repeated at this late date. Mr. Burleson assumed that the procedure was somewhat different from what actually did occur in the Department, as I had noticed it; for instance, he

assumed that notice was given and things done in the way of creating 1051 a procedure of fairness before a man would be condemned or his prop erty taken away from him by exclusion from the mails. I explains that the people I represented had no desire, far from it, of violating the law that the publications we represented were very poor, and I believed the rules ought to be so clear that persons would be thoroughly advised as to what their rights were in the matter that they would not lose their property or liberty under any mistaken construction of the law. I presented it in detail and thes other gentlemen followed me, and a few days later I wrote a letter to the Postmaster General. I will read my letter and his answer. I told my clients and Mr. Stedman about the letter! I don't remember telling Engdahl; we were a ing in concert; I advised Mr. Darrow and Mr. Stedman about it, and if I saw Mr. Engdahl again I advised him, but I can't say whether I did or not. My letter to the Postmaster General, dated Washington, D. C., July 24, 1917, was in substance that a grave danger to free expression on the part of the press of the country exists in your department on account of the ultra-bureaucrati method adopted for suppressing newspapers by you. The business may be destroyed by the action of Assistant Solicitor Sutherland, and also the impres

52

on seems to be that Mr. Solicitor Lamar exercises very weighty powers in is regard. So that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, for the ordinary citizen to locate the definite source of the power which is exercised in the suppression of publications; creating a most intolerable and dangerous situation. The obvious misapprehension under which you seemed to be boring at the beginning of the discourse would suggest that much harm as been done to many small publishers without your direct knowledge or quiescence. No newspaper should be denied the use of the mails nor any xisting privileges be taken away from the publisher of a newspaper, no matter ow poor, without your personal direct attention.

The letter next requests him to so indicate, in order that appeal may be ade to the President for what I deem some very necessary check upon the otential abuse of the vast powers over the press exercised by the Postal Deartment, as well as the fixing of the official responsibility, if the exigencies the time preclude the Post Master General from giving these matters peronal attention.

I also took the liberty of enclosing in the letters an editorial from the New ork American of July 21st, which was principally against the Espionage Bill. I received his reply on August 3rd, acknowledging receipt of my letter, adising that he considered it as impertinent and evidently intended to be ofensive; that neither Mr. Lamar or Mr. Southerland deserved censure at my ands, as he assumed responsibility for the action taken by them. His letter advised me that my letter would be referred in the usual way and 053 receive such consideration as it may deserve; and that I could, of course, take such action as I saw fit with reference to the appeal hreatened; and that the delay in answering my letter was occasioned by the act that it had that day just been brought to his attention.

Mr. Lamar is Solicitor General for the Post Office Department, and Mr. Herron is one of the assistant attorney generals of the United States under Ir. Gregory.

I recall that we urged before Mr. Herron that they have a uniform policy etween the Post Office Department and the Department of Justice, so we would not be innocent in one office and criminal in another; and Mr. Herron vas anxious that it should be so and we advised him that we were going before he Postmaster General. Two or three days after receiving that letter I drew up certain rules of procedure and submitted them to the head of the Department of Public Information for transmission to the President, and he advised me that he did so. And with them I submitted a brief comment for the necessity of it, the rules for the O. K. of the President. The document was entitled 'Rules of Procedure for Exclusion of Illegal Publications from the Mails under the Espionage Act." The substance of the rules was: That no publication shall be excluded from the mails except upon the formal order of the Postmaster General; that no postmaster or other official shall exclude or delay the trans

mission of any such publication; no publication shall be excluded on 1054 the general tone of either its editorial or news columns; exclusion

from mails shall be based only upon specific articles which may be violative of the Act; when such articles are found in a publication, the postmaster shall forthwith send the copy to the Postmaster General, with the article plainly marked, at same time telegraphing the article in full or the substance thereof, with name, place and date of publication; that the Postmaster General, before excluding any publication from the mail, shall notify the pubisher by telegraph of his intention so to do, unless good cause be shown to the contrary, giving description of article and date of publication; upon receipt of such notification the publisher, upon his request, may demand a hearing, in case of a daily paper, instanter, in case of a weekly, not more than four days from date of request, and in all other cases within a reasonable time thereafter; all such hearings shall be had without regard to technical rules of pleadings or evidence, and findings shall be made immediately upon conclusion of the hearing; whenever the Postmaster General shall order any publication excluded from the mails, such order shall be made of record, open to public inspection, setting forth the reason together with copy of the illegal article found to be in violation of the Act.

With these rules went a suggestion that because the regular officials of the Department are already burdened with important duties, it would be wise to

appoint a new solicitor or assistant whose sole duty would be to prepare 1055 these cases for action of the Postmaster General, making recommenda

138525-19-VOL 2-23

tions as to findings, etc.; this assistant to be a man of broad democr view, temporate judgment, whose name would inspire confidence, and wh work should be in the nature of patriotic service of high order; and he shout not be a lawyer.

My suggestion that he be not a lawyer was to remove it from the realm technical construction. The editorial shown me from the Chicago Examiner Tha July 20th is probably the editorial I enclosed in my letter to Mr. Burleson. Mr. Stedman: I want that identified in the record. I think it is.

Cross-Examination by Mr. Fleming.

I probably have read some issues of the American Socialist since our entr in the war; I could not swear that I have read any subsequent to April 1917. I did not take up a consideration of the contents of the Americ Socialist after April 6, 1917, prior to my appearance before Judge Herr don't recall that I read any of the contents of that paper after April 6, 193 I have no recollection of the contents of the June 30, 1917, edition of the paper, except that it was there; I think I read a number of those prior t proceeding to the office of the Attorney General. I don't recall being told that

the issue was suppressed because of the insertion of an advertisement 1056 of "The Price We Pay." I don't remember a bit of that pamphlet, an couldn't say that I ever read it or saw it; I have very likely read all those things but they did not make an impression on me. I say I read this publication (American Socialist) because my recollection now is they were presented to me at that time; I saw a number of copies of the Americ Socialist while this was going on. I probably read the Proclamation and War Program; I was as deeply interested in that as any of you were. The state ment in it branding the declaration of war by our Government as a crime did not make any impresesion on my mind; none of those statements that I rea made sufficient impression for me to quote them now. All those statements including the one you have just quoted to me about there having been no wit in modern history more unjustifiable than the war in which we ar about to engage, did not make any impression on my mind, because I coul not have quoted it unless you said it was there. I do not say, however that they made no impression; I have argued and made speeches abou them. The quotation you have read about demanding that the capitali class pay the cost of the war, and letting those who kindled the fire furnish the fuel, made no impression on my mind that it came from a particular publication. Your quotation about the war of the United States against Ger many cannot be justified even on the plea that it is a war in defense of

I made

American rights, made no impression on me as being in that paper: 1 1057 don't even know what you are reading from; I have heard the state ment you have just read made many times. Undoubtedly when I read the pamphlet, "The War Proclamation and War Program" it made a very keen impression on my mind. I do not think that matters of that kind, whe the United States is at war with the Imperial German Government, should be transmitted in the mails, but I would like to explain my answer. addresses to thousands of people and the burden of my address was "He kept us out of war," referring to the President, and that was the state of my mini When war was declared I know that no one had as fundamental opposition to the Espionage Acts as I had, but from the day war was declared I tried to give them my whole-hearted support; and when I heard that such matters had been excluded from the mails I thought it was on account of the technic application of the law. I will say that what is said in there about the capita ists, I think there were a lot of capitalists that were fooled about the wat some had gone so far on profits that that influenced them, and I hope that the government will take some of the profits from them so that argument will not be used when some one else wants to go to war.

I don't remember "The Price We Pay." I know there was such a pamphlet. and that it was extremely critical, but I could not quote it and I do no

know that it was in that publication that I saw; don't remember seein 1058 it in the American Socialist. I remember hearing the quotation yo

have read, "Into that seething, heaving mass of torn flesh and floati entrails they will be plunged, in regiments, divisions and armies, screaming as they go." That sentiment made an impression on me all through the wa and for many years prior thereto. Just what you read there, I would sa certainly I think should not be denied the use of the mails, and I think war is all of those horrible things.