Page images

House of Representatives, U. S.

Washington, D. C. July 8, 1917.
Mr. J. L. Engdahl, Editor,
The American Socialist,
803 West Madison Street,

Chicago, Illinois. My dear Mr. Engdahl :

I have examined the Liberty Editor of The American Socialist, a copy of which you sent with your letter of the 5th inst. Since you quoted from my speech in the isue in question, I presume I should be modest about passing judgment of the mailibility of the paper. However, my opinion is that under no reasonable interpretation of the law can the paper be held to be unmailable This is still a people's country, and the masses are educated and discriminating. If the matter printed in your paper is true, then who shall deny its relevancy? If untrue, in whole or in part, a public already schooled in dissecting newspaper stories will not be misled. Yours very truly,

B. C. HILLAED. 1079

House of Representatives, U. S.

Washington, D. C. July 10, 1917. Mr. J. L. Engrahl, Editor, The American Socialist, 803 West Madison Street,

Chicago, Illinois. Dear Mr, Engdahl:

Your letter of recent date, enclosing copy of the edition of The American Socialist of June 30, 1917, in which you ask whether or not I think this paper should be unmailable under the espionage law which was recently passed by Congress, is at hand, and in reply I desire to say that I do not think so.

Some of the statements printed in that paper I know to be false, and some conclusions and charges I consider unfair; but if false statements and unfair charges are to be considered seditious or traitorous, there are but few papers that could survive the test. Statements which are true certainly are not objectionable, and statements which are false will not be seriously harmful to those misrepresented. Public officials need not fear the newspaper so long as it tells nothing but lies about them.

As for the using of strong language, you have not, in anything you 1080 have said, gone nearly so far as the newspaper editors who persuade

so many of the American people, and a majority of Congress, to favor this country's entrance into this European war, because they have not hesitate! to call men who honestly disagreed with them, “ Traitors, cowards" and "proGermans." I find no language as strong as that in your charges. Simply because the strong language used or false statements made happen to be disagreeable to the post office officials, is no reason in my judgment for suppressing the publication. Anyhow, why should government officials be so fearful of criticism? If they have done right, time will vindicate them; and if they have done wrong, they should be shown the error of their ways, so that the mistake may be corrected. The abolition of the freedom of the press in this country is a kind of Prussianism for which there is much less defense than there has been for some of the stringent measures which have been passed in the interests of the winning of this war. I believe in the American principle of fair play, and I think you are entitled to that in the publication of your newspaper, and so long as you do not publish military secrets, or advise forcible resistance to the law of the land, I think your publication should be allowed to circulate freely. Sincerely yours,


United States Senate.

Washington, D. C. August 20, 1917. J. Engdahl, Editor, The American Socialist, 803 West Madison Street,

Chicago, Illinois. Mr. Engdahl: ur letter of August 16, together with copy of The American Socialist for ist the 18th, has been received. I am very sorry indeed to learn that the

Master General should see fit to exclude from the mails The American alist. While I am not a member of your party, I want to assure you that nt to see fair play. More than that, I believe that if the administration

continue to exclude from the mails newspapers which may differ with also criticise the administration, it will be the means of creating dissatison, and will ultimately destroy the party now in power. is not necessary for me to call your attention to the first amendment to Constitution of the United States. That provision is so plain that no rican citizen can fail to understand it, and I am sure that it was the ition of the fathers who made that constitution, that we should enjoy speech and freedom of the press.

In my judgment, no government can continue to be a free democracy if cherished principles of free speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of conscience and religion, are to be hampered and discriminated against fficial censorship. Of course, I am speaking of and having reference to papers which will criticise but not slander the administration. Very truly yours,


House of Representatives, U. S.

Washington, D. C. July 14, 1917. J. L. Engdahl, Editor, The American Socialist, 803 West Madison Street,

Chicago, Illinois. · Sir: ill, free and frank expression in the press and speech make for enlighteni and toleration. In an imperfect world, as man has made this, nothing justify one man in an attempted suppression of the views of another man. exclusion of your publication from the mails is wrong, and must fail of purpose. The blank columns will not be lost on the people, never so ghtful as now,

Yours very truly, “The Price We Pay," and ad for “ The Price We Pay," articles by Mr. Germer on “ Bonds and Bondage" and a short article entitled me, Ye Slaves" were published on June 2, 1917. "The Price We Pay d, war pictures and "Not a Man for the Trenches ” were published SaturJune 9, 1917. I did not know the Espionage Law had been passed until after the 15th. I had some difficulty in getting a copy of the law as it ied to Socialist papers or as it applied to the press of the country, the s censorship provision and I did not receive a copy of the postal regulation hat subject until I went to see Mr. O'Malley, on Saturday, June 30th. [ was the first time I received a copy of the postal regulations covering

section of the Espionage Act. iere was a very small item in the newspapers about the 15th or 16th to effect that a law called the Espionage Law had been passed. The issues d Saturday goes to press on the Monday previous, that is, we go to press or six days before the date of issue. The first issues run off are used for files. The edition of June 16th would go to press on June 11th. The

forms of that edition were not opened after that. The article “ Cheer Up" by Cary E. Norris which is mentioned in the indictment in this case

was included in the edition of June 16th. y locking the forms is meant that a page is made up in a chase, we call ind it is locked up and sent to the stereotyping room. If we could get pages made early enough Monday edition would be stereotyped Monday afternoon or Tuesday Morning. It would be on the press, run off and maile out by June 12th (issue of June 16th) “The Price We Pay Was published in May 5th issue. The Proclamation and War Program was published about the middle of April, 1917. “Why You Should Fight" June 9th edition, the poem Show The Flag by Cary E. Norris on June 23th, and it was on the press and sent out June 18th. The poem “Show The Flag” came into the office just like other large number of contributions. It was a short poem. I could not see where it violated any law. I did not know of the Espionage Law at that time. I had nothing to do with the issuance of the leaflet entitled “ Proc lamation and War Program” in any form or manner exception the edition which appeared in May in the American Socialist. Referring to the edition of June 9, The American Socialist article entitled “Why You Should Fight " I had nothing to do with causing it to be published as a circular leaflet or

pamphlet and nothing to do with the publication or circulation of it after 1086 it appeared in the American Socialist. “Cheer Up" by Cary E. Norris

was never published or circulated by us other than on June 12 1917. The organization leaflet was in charge of the Executive Secretary of the party and I had nothing to do with that. Referring to an article “Wake Up! Washington ” of June 23, 1917, a portion of which was read by Mr. Fleming, referring to the first 16 lines which were read, the rest of the article was then read. There is mention of Wall Street there in quotations, that portion is quoted from the New Republic, a weekly magazine. I will read the article:


(American Socialist, Chicago, Saturday, June 23, 1917.)


Wake Up Washington.

The People Do not Want War, Conscription, Prussianism and Two Billion

Dollar Loans; They Want Peace and Plenty. To Get It-Wake Up Washington.

It is now getting popular even here in the United States to predict a revolution for America—something that will make the overthrow of the czar in Russia look tame and insignificant.

These predictions do not come from Socialists. They are made by respectable democrats and republicans who have lost faith in their own parties and are looking elsewhere for hope and an escape from the present dilemma.

When the situation has been boiled down it all amounts to this—Washing ton has been screaming to the nation, “Wake Up America!" when the cry should have been, “ Wake Up Washington !"

Since Washington has failed to awaken itself, the people of the nation must awaken it. All the people must join in this campaign to “Wake Up Wash ington !"

1088 “Wake Up Washington!” The People didn't want this war. That

is why our young men did not volunteer even under the spur of " Catch Villa !"

“ Wake Up Washington!” The people are not in favor of your Prussian conscription measure. That is why 10 per cent failed to register and twothirds claimed exemption.

“Wake Up Washington !” The latest and most crushing argument against war and the militarization of America was the failure of the masses to volustarily subscribe for the Two Billion Dollar Loan. You had to drive them to buy, threatening to rob them of their jobs if they refused.

“Wake Up Washington!” The people are starving. Mrs. Vanderbilt mas save $1,500 a month on her three-course breakfasts, but the breakfast tables of the masses are almost bare.

N. D. Cochran, editor of The Day Book, Chicago, who shouted long and lout for Wilson last fall, has been down to Washington.

[ocr errors]

e has sized up the situation and says it will take more than two years to one million men into France. He has written an article telling Washington orget about the big army because that isn't the big question. He says:

“ The really big thing they talk about in whispers and don't print in newspapers is the fear of revolution right here at home-unless the high

cost of living is knocked down quickly. Men who see ahead are afraid of this winter, when people may be both gry and cold. That means that the food problem is the most vital and imant one congress has to tackle. If flour goes to $20 a barrel wages will have to be doubled or we'll have

riots. Hoover says the Russian blowup was one gigantic food riot. I ned the food hogs in a former story. I Now Repeat This Warning. Armour his pals ought to get busy two ways-raising wages and reducing prices. hat Has this vicious system of rob and starve made of us——the millions of American people. Let Dr. John H. Quayle, of Cleveland, sum it up: It would be impossible to get more than 2,000,000 from the 10,000,000 men have registered. Between 5,000,000 and 7,000,000 would be barred for sical defects." r. Quayle claims that $100 for each man would be enough to reclaim these ions from the ravages of the capitalist system upon human health due to

unwholesome conditions in tenements, factories, mines and shops every| where, the inability of the great working masses to buy proper nourish

ment and take necessary precautions against the inroads of disease. ut Washington is not even dreaming of spending these dollars on the physiy unfit who cannot help themselves because their wages can not now purze even the necessities of life. Washington is only trying to conscript the sically fit. “Wake Up Washington !" to These Horrible, Brutalizing Conons.


1 ever.

The New Republic” is becoming greatly alarmed over some of the things just discovering. It declares that immediately the administration Shipping rd, headed by Goethals, decided on a steel construction program the stocks he United States Steel Corporations, the steel trust, began to climb higher

This publication finds its answer for this climb in the Wall Street rnal, which states that $100 a ton will be paid for steel to build these ships, I that could be purchased in 1910 for $31 a ton. Then it concludes: It is hardly credible that far-sighted steel manufacturers of the type of srs. Gary, Schwab, and Farrell should lend themselves to anything of this

At a time when the men of the country are being drafted into service,

perhaps to be maimed or killed, for a paltry $30 a month, it is inconceiv| able that the wealthiest industry in the United States should be willing

thus to coin more riches out of the nations peril. It would have a most ster aspect. Socialists and radical labor leaders have for years preached to their folers that war was an institution designed by the capitalist class to enable it xtort more profits out of the sweat of labor; unrest among workingmen the ld has been predicted on the supposition that while human beings were fted for war at nominal compensation, property was allowed to exact what market would bring. Would not hundred-dollar steel look like a startling confirmation of this rge? Politically, such a thing would be suicidal. It would supply deadly nunition to those who have maintained that the President plunged us into war at the behest of Wall Street interests." The Republic" then pleads with the steel robbers to be good. he Day For Pleading Is Over.


Wake Up Washington!” to a realization of the fact that the only solution o have the nation take over the steel trust and every other trust in the land, operate them for the benefit of all.

“Wake Up Washington !” to a realization of the fact that instead of 2 war, conscription, militarism, two billion dollar loans and starvation, we

want peace and plenty for all. Wake Up Washington!” to a realization of the fact that we know what we nt and that we are going to get what we want. Chat is going to be the battling and militant spirit of the Special Liberty ition of The American Socialist, out Next Week, dated Saturday, June 30, distribution during the week of Independence Day, July 4.

This issue is going to “Wake Up Washington !!” to a realization of the nex spirit of independence that is already showing its power the nation over. Help circulate this issue and “Wake Up Washington! !” Special stress to repeal the Conscription Law and to make America safe for real social-democracy. Join

in this great effort! 1093 Witness continuing: I was never present in Mr. Germer's room on the

morning, afternoon or any time on June 16th when Mr. Germer came in and Arnold Schiller, and Mr. Kruse were present, or at which time the four of you defendants excepting Mr. Berger were congregated there, at which time Mr. Tucker said in substance: “I am writing an article in reply to the Flag Day Speech and I will get hell from the Department of Justice". I was never present with Germer, Tucker or Kruse at which time Tucker made any remark with reference to getting hell from the Department of Justice or during which time there was any discussion on his article on the Flag Day Speech, nor any such conversation when Arnold Schiller was there. I saw Schiller about once or twice a week, usually Saturday afternoon, when he was going through the office I never talked to him at that time about the Yipsel Convention, and never told him I was going to back it up. I never had any conversation with him about the convention at all. I was never present at the Convention. Mr. Kruse sup

plied the material for the column of space in the American Socialist. He 1094 had entire charge of that department. I never wrote a word about the

Convention. Referring to the edition of May 12th with reference to the Convention I find a little eight line paragraph as follows: "The Chicago Yipsel's City Convention" in the Saturday, May 12th issue of the American Socialist: "The Second Annual Convention of the Chicago League, of which there are 13 in the City begun May 16th. Speeches were made by Kruse, Germer and Eng. dahl, Roderiques and Mills.

I attended the City Convention of the Y. P. S. L. on May 6th, 1917, and addressed them. No one reported to me that a resolution was presented at that convention to the effect that persons should decline to register or refuse to enlist or evade or fail to comply with the military laws of this country. The first time I heard of any such suggested resolution was in this court room. Generally speaking most of our paper was made up of articles on industrial problems, social conditions domestic problems in which the people of this country are interested, especially the working classes of the United States, that is questions of a political and economic character as Municipal, State, and Government owner ship. During June, 1917, I was preparing for the 4th of July meeting through advertising and circulation of petitions suggesting an appeal to Congress to

repeal the Conscription Law. On the last page of the June 30th issue in 1095 connection with the cartoon which has been shown to the jury there was

published the following: “ You Must Not Talk; You Must Not Protest; You Must Not Criticise; You Must Keep Your Mouth Shut and do as you are told; you must be taxed to the limit, representing a caricature of George III and the American Colonists. Alongside of this article it contains an article by Daniel Webster. This edition was promoting the 4th of July meeting.

Whereupon the article referred to as Webster's Speech was read to the jury by counsel, as follows: 1096 Daniel Webster Defeated Attempt to Conscript Army During War

of 1812.

Great statesmen in the past history of the United States, whose names are now written big in our memories, have been unalterably opposed to conscription

. Foremost among these have been Daniel Webster, whose speech against conscrip tion in congress, December 9, 1814, is a classic to be read and studied and passed on this year on Independence Day, when the forcing of our youth into this cause less war is the thing uppermost in the minds of the American people. Webster points out the unconstitutionality of the proposed act and it was his unalterable opposition in 1814 that prevented the passage of a conscription law. We repub

. lish Webster's speech in this Liberty Edition of The American Socialist as part of the campaign to repeal the conscription law already forced upon us. Here it is:

This bill. is an attempt to exercise the power of forcing the free men of this country into the ranks of the army. The services of the men to be raised under this act are not limited to those cases in which alone this government is entitled to the aid of the militia of the States. These cases are particularly stated in the constitution: “To repel invasion, suppress in

« PreviousContinue »