didn't want me and they didn't want the other side to get me either. It close to 12 o'clock at night when I left the Federal building. I left my e in the evening with one of the Federal authorities. Mr. Schiller said Mr. Clyne had decided that I was of no use to him; that he could not use and that he did not want me there, and did not want the other side to got I left the building in the evening with Mr. Schiller,

Cross-Eramination by Mr. Fleming,

r. Schiller took me home. Prior to that time he was at my home last on Inesday, December 11th. I have been sitting in the hallway here since this I have not talked over this testimony with many of the men out there he hallway nor with Mr. Lloyd since I have been sitting out there, I have talked to Mr. Lloyd and I have not talked it over with anybody until I t on the witness stand. I have talked it over with Mr. Johnson, yesterday, t was not the first time. I don't recall when I spoke to him. I first learned ast Tuesday that I was to testify in this case, I had spoken to Mr. Johnthe lawyer, before that. I just gave him information once. I stated that Schiller called at my home on December 11th, just to Mr. Johnson. I I stated it to him because I considered that Mr. Schiller was doing Mr. Kruse an injustice. Schiller had been calling upon me for a long time we were very intimate and friendly and he called upon me steadily. I was asked by anybody to tell Mr. Johnson what was said there. My conscience bothering me knowing that Mr. Schiller was doing Mr. Kruse an injustice, appened to know about Mr. Johnson, because shortly before the armistice 3 signed my brother had received a questionaire and not being posted on how fill it out my mother had taken it to Mr. Stedman, who was out or was y, and Mr. Johnson had filled in the questionaire. That is the first time I : Mr. Johnson. He had misspelled a few names and I went to Mr. John's office the next noon. I worked not very far from him and asked him correct the names. That is the first time I saw him. Neither my father or ther or brother are Socialists. I happened to go to Mr. Stedman's office ause the young lady with whom I chum has a mother who is a member of Socialist party, and my mother did not know who to consult, and she recomaded Mr. Stedman. The young lady with whom I associate is a Yipsel, I e once been connected with the Yipsel organization. I was just there about nonth or so several years ago. I am positive my brother has never been a sel.

The two other men who were present on that night were Mr. Martin and Mr. Maleus. Mr. Martin is a friend of the family, not a Socialist. The other 2 was a friend of ours boarding with us now. He was there and heard what was said. When I came down here to this jury room I did not talk anybody in the hallway there about my testimony. I was asked to come wn by Mr. Johnson last Tuesday. I was here in the Federal building before t Tuesday on the day that the jury was being picked. I stayed in the court m at that time, a half day. I didn't know anything about it at that time, nterested myself in the case sufficiently to come down here, because I was erested in Mr. Schiller and I thought that he would be on the stand and I me down for that purpose. Mr. Johnson was sitting here, but I did not eak to him nor to any lawyer on that day. The next time I came here to is floor was the following Monday. I had to attend to some business down wn. I didn't know where to go and I just dropped in here, I have never opped into any other court room recently. I interested myself in this parular case because Mr. Schiller was a friend of mine and I was interested him and I thought he would testify. On that day Mr. Johnson, was in the urt room, but I had not spoken to him. I previously gave Johnson the formation about this conversation on the night of December 11th concerning hich I testified. I don't recall when, just now. It was before my appe this court room. I don't recall when it was. My first conscience first began

to hurt me when I went to bed. I did not sleep very well that night and 3 I got up with a disturbed conscience the following morning. I think my conscience disturbed me about a day before I went and now 11r. Joluson, it I don't recollect. It is not a fact that Mr. Johnson got in touch witti trime 'st and ordered me to come to the Federal building. I am positive of that. r. Schiller said that they were following him. Mr. Johnson didn't speak to e with reference to that Mr. Johnson was the first person who got la tosch

we me with reference to this story. I am sure that Johnson didn't call or send somebody to get in touch with me about this. My conscience is me! prompted me to go and tell that the man with whom I had been keeping st pany had been there on the night of December 11th, and had said certain th and I felt it was my duty to go and tell these other people. I did not Schiller at all that I had mentioned it to Mr. Johnson. Schiller has cale me several times since but I was afraid he would turn against me and that why I didn't tell. My mother was present on that night. I had been spea to people in the hallway, but I never mentioned the case. The deputies spoken to me. I know Mr. Rogers. We have not always been speaking of case; we have been speaking of other things. I have not spoken Rogers of the case. I don't know that Mr. Rogers is their investigator in t matter nor that he investigated this case for them. I don't know very ma of the parties at all; in fact I don't know Mr. Cunnea very well 1804 think I said "How do you do " and a few things with some pe sitting around this table. I spoke to Mr. Murphy. He came and to me and asked me if I was sitting there very long. I think that is the time I saw him. I didn't talk to him about the case. I don't know who be I didn't mention anything about the conversation that I testified to. It is a fact that I talked to Mr. Lloyd for practically half an hour out there in t corridor several days ago. I didn't talk to him at all.

I came to the United States Attorney's office and met Mr. Plummer and the was a stenographer there and Mr. Plummer asked me to tell what I knew anything about the conversation. I remember he asked whether Mr. Selfwas at my home on the night of December 11, and I answered "Yes": n he asked how long he stayed and I said "I didn't know, until possibly o'clock" and he asked who else was at my home and I said Mr. Martin Mr. Maleus, my mother and myself. And he asked whether during the tie Schiller was there anything was said by him or any of them about the tr of the Socialists, and I answered the only thing said was that he might be t the witness stand to-day. I remember the question being asked "Was the some comment made at the time about what he said"? and I answered "m" I was asked whether I asked him when he would be on the witness stand an I answered "Yes", and I was asked whether the name of any of the v 1805 defendants was mentioned and I answered "no", and whether sour

body spoke of Kruse and whether Mr. Schiller had said "He wo rather see him dead than alive" in substance, and I answered "no" to protect Mr. Schiller, because he answered before I did. I remember being aske whether Schiller said anything like "I don't care what happens to Kruse. 1 hope he gets what is coming to him and I answered "No". I remem« Plummer asking me the question "are you sure that Kruse's name was n mentioned by Schiller or anybody at the time he was in your house?" and answered "positive". I remember being asked "How long after Mr. Schilk arrived there did Mr. Martin leave the house?" and I answered "half or hour". And this question "How long a time were you and Mr. Schiller aloc before he actually left the house"? and I answered "about five minutes Mr. Schiller gave that answer. I didn't answer at all. I remember the question by Mr. Plummer "During the time that you and Mr. Schiller were alone wi there anything said about the trial," and that I answered “No”. And I als remember Mr. Plummer's question "Was Kruse's name mentioned by either of you?" and I answered "no".

Redirect Examination by Mr. Johnson.

They wanted me to sign this statement and I didn't because I knew the everything mentioned therein was untrue. I made those answers to protect Mr.

Schiller because he had answered "no" before I had a chance to say 1806 anything. He made a threat to do injury to me, and answered first and then I made the answers after him. The night before Mr. Schiller WIS to go on the stand he said Tomorrow the dirty work begins." I am judge of

the democratic election.

66

Recross Examination by Mr. Fleming.

I day before Mr. Schiller went on the stand was Tuesday. During that week I don't recall how many times I was at my home. It is not a fact that he wa there only once during that week. I remember he was there the day befo

stified, and during the time he testified. Before that he was last there a ago Saturday. That was the last time I saw him. I don't recall when saw him before when I had this conversation. I don't recall telling Mr. mer that I didn't want to sign the statement because I didn't want to e mixed up in this case or something to that effect. I told him it was se the answers I had made therein were untrue. I told him I was not sted in the case. I did not want to become involved in it; not that it or that reason that I wouldn't sign the statement, among others.

OR L. BERGER, defendant:

Redirect Examination (Resumed) by Mr. Cochems.

e speech shown me purporting to have been made at Madison Square Garden a portion of which was introduced by the prosecution is the substance of the speech I made. It was not a prepared speech.

(Said document previously marked Government's Exhibit was read to ury.)

at was the speech in substance, almost verbatim. I only had ten minutes, ereupon Defendant offered in evidence Mr. Berger's speech, page 130, nal Socialist Convention of 1912 and same was read to the jury.) this same convention in 1912, page 199, is Section 6 of Article 2, that was estion, which we adopted at that time on which that debate was held, and e time I made that short speech, the Section is as follows: ection 6. Any member of the party who opposes political action or advocrimes, sabotage or other means of violence as a weapon of the working to aid in its emancipation, shall be expelled from membership in the . Political action shall be construed to mean participation in election ublic office and practical legislative and administrative work along the of the Socialist party platform."

at passed and settled the affair in this way: that some six to 10,000 left arty and the question of sabotage and the I. W. W. ceased to bother us at It became a dead issue, and it is not an issue to-day and has not been for some years, nor since. It was at that time that William Haywood left. At that time they had made headway and they were using our party as a cloak in some places, especially in the far west. They withdrew and ded the issue. We have had hardly any I. W. W.'s to my knowledge since time in 1912. The expulsion was in 1913 sometime later. The vote upon Haywood expulsion was initiated in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. My position been consistent on that in my writings ever since. hann Most used to come to Milwaukee and try to organize a group. He there quite often for awhile and then less often-more than once a year ow. I always watched him because I did not want him to make any ins on any reform movement. I was afraid of the anarchistic ideas as far as eform movement was concerned that they might ruin it. After 1887, after hanging of the anarchists, everybody was afraid even to attend or to be at such places. I myself was never afraid. I would listen to any man, her an anarchist, socialist, individualist, commonist or any other "ist ". member that one evening there was a small crowd and none would take the and he just dared me to take the chair to see if I would have the courage troduce him, for that was all that was to be done, and I did so, explaining I did not believe with Mr. Most, but did believe in free speech and I be d the man ought to have the right to express his opinion in a free country, especially in ours. That's the only connection I have ever had with Mr. Most. I remember Mr. Jensen, the man who testified here, the chief of police was also present, at that meeting. In 1910 following this article s elected to Congress up there.

e article shown me in the American Socialist of January 15, 1916 was ten by myself. I came to write the article in this way: In 1916, in the g, the great question before our country and also before our party was the tion of preparedness. This is the only point where I was really at variance a good many people and members of my party. I always believed in an ed nation, something similar to the people of Switzerland, not in a defensepeople; that was one of the points where I disagreed and our party went • to the other extreme and became ultra-pacifists. I was a candidate for

the German navy boys in Kiel for a revolution and he was sentenced to years for trying to incite mutiny and he was also freed a few weeks befo the revolution. The German minority became stronger and stronger, T they split again. They have three parties there now, I judge from the paper They have the Scheidemann and Haase-Bernstein, and the third is the Spar cus group, of which I have only a hazy idea, because we have had nothin from Europe for years, but seems to be very much like the Bolshevik grop in Russia which is led by Liebknecht. Seventy-nine per cent of the Russia can neither read nor write and education there was exceedingly difficu There are three Socialist parties in Russia, the Socialist democratic part the Socialist revolutionary party and the Menshevik. The Social Democr!! party split again into three parts and every one of these parts was repte sented at the International Bureau. In 1910 they tried to unite the severi Social democratic groups and they split again while uniting. One o wanted the Socialist program complete carried through over night, very mu

like what we considered our impossibilities, and that group had a ma1787 jority. Both of them stood for peace and for Socialism, but the gro that wanted Socialism at once had the majority at that convention The majority" is expressed by Bolshevism; and they passed their progra in that convention. That is the Bolshevik group. The other is called the Menshevik, and they have the same program but they want to bring it abo gradually without violent methods; that is the minority. The head and braits of that extreme group was a man by the name of Nicholai Lenine, whom ! have met a few times. He represented the extreme of the international; t» and Rosa Luxemburg and a few others; but most of the men who wrote boog and edited papers in Russia belong to the Menshevik group. But in my revolttion it happens, it is the law of all uprising, all changes, whether political social, economic or religious, the most extreme group gets on top for awhile That was the case when Christianity was introduced; during the French reve lution and also our own. I don't say there is any violence in Russia in estnection with Bolshevism in the sense that they would be violent to any person. but they stand for an extreme, a violent, program, and want to carry it out a once, which they did in Russia so far as the papers tell us. That is not in har mony with myself and my friends as possibly has been proven here. (Following editorial under heading of "Liberty Bonds" in the Milwaukee Leader under date of April 20, 1918, read to the jury:)

1788

"The Socialist party has always insisted upon obedience to all laws as long as they are in force, reserving, however, at all times, the right to i ask and agitate for the repeal of such laws as we consider dangerous and harmful to the common weal. This rule holds good in relation to all legislation per taining to war. Therefore, the Leader has never even suggested opposition to the conscription law after it had become a law. Nor has the Leader at any time discouraged the sale of Liberty Bonds. Where the Socialists are repre sented in city administrations and legislative bodies and the question of purchase of Liberty Bonds arises, these officials should, of course, insist that there purchases be made in such a manner that the burden will fall upon the profiteers and others best able to bear the burden, in accordance with the Socialist party platform.

But we are frequently asked by individual workmen and women whether or not they should buy Liberty Bonds. We advise them to do so. We are called upon to explain why we give this advice, and we shall explain it with our ususi frankness. The only possible way in which we can avoid aiding the war is either by leaving the country and the national administration probably woni not give you a passport to do that, or by committing suicide. You simply

cannot continue to live in this country without aiding the war, just as 1789 you cannot practice Socialism while living under the capitalist system

It is true you have some little choice as to how much you will aid the war. It is true the conscription of your sons and brothers and the war taxes are matters of war, and you could not avoid them without violating the law. It is also true there is no law which says a person must buy a Liberty Bond but the circumstances virtually leave you no choice in the matter. You are expected to buy. You are expected in such a way that you don't know whit may happen to your person or folks or to your job if you don't buy. Therefore the buying of bonds is virtually a tax. We have not changed our belief about the war in the slightest degree. We could not do so, because we know it to be correct, but when all of us have to sacrifice our relatives in the trenches without questioning it, it does not seem wise to hesitate over a matter of dollars

A

cents. We advise all of our readers to look upon the bonds as a kind of and buy them in proportion to their ability."

th regard to the St. Louis Platform, they sent the war program out to a reflum, first, and after it was disposed of on one thing, they sent out the orm to the referendum. The war program was followed by the platform eing sent to the referendum of the party. Our repudiation meant a 100% taxes, but that might be and was misunderstood. We were attacked by some people as repudiators, while you can repudiate a national debt in different ways, but I believe that plank was cut out by the National mittee.

remember the cross examination as to whether I had printed an approval e “Platform" in the January 12, 1918 issue. The pamphlet shown me is constitution and platform we sent out all over the country. Those origy printed drafts of that type were changed and in book form the other one printed. This is the one that is sent out to use by the party now. The document referred to was marked Defendants' Exhibit 68.)

DEFENDANTS EXHIBIT 68.

Defts Ex 68.

Socialist Party Platform

Adopted by National Referendum July 24, 1917

Preamble

he majority of the workers in America, whether rendering service by hand rain, are victims of poverty, or near poverty; are insecure in their employt and ever live in fear of want.

his is the fact because they are underpaid. The wages or salaries they ree are only a small part of the wealth or value they produce and such wages salaries are insufficient to maintain a decent standard of life.

overty of the masses, in a land of abundance like America, is the greatest of modern crimes.

The wage worker is not free, because he can work only by the consent of the ers of jobs.

The owners who do not work and the workers who do not own the industries. h naturally seek to protect and advance their own interests. Both seek to intain the share they now get and to secure more for themselves by taking ething from the other. The clash of these interests creates the class struggle. Because of this class struggle the workers organize into labor unions, co-operae societies, and in the Socialist Party. The owners organize into employers' ociations, commercial bodies, and citizens' alliances. They also control and minate the great political parties. Labor's principal weapons are strikes and cotts. The capitalists respond with lockouts, blacklists, court injunctions, prisonments, hangings and even mass murder. This terrible class warfare is rld wide and a grave menace to civilization. Its abolition is the most imtant and vital issue confronting the human race.

The present system of production and distribution is known as the capitalist stem to distinguish it from the several systems which preceded it, such as attel slavery and the feudal system. Under capitalism there are two distinct sses, the capitalist class and the working class. The capitalist class is mainned by the taking of rents, interest and profits. The working class, owning no industries, lives by ls the only thing that he owns, his power to labor. th his advancing years.

getting wages. The worker This power to labor lessens

Controlling the government, the capitalist class makes laws in its own interest. Behind these class laws is every instrument of the government to defend 92 and make sacred the private ownership of land and industries and special privileges by which labor is robbed.

Thus the economic question is a political question. How you live is a political estion of momentous importance. The theory of a democratic government is e greatest good to the greatest number. The working class far out-numbers the -pitalist class. Here is the natural advantage of the working class. By uniting lidly in a political party of its own, it can capture the government and all its wers and use them in its own interest.

The Socialist Party aims to abolish this class war with all its evils and to subitute for capitalism a new order of co-operation, wherein the workers shall vn and control all the economic factors of life. It calls upon all workers to