Workmen's advocate., 1888-12-01
INTRODU( rION.

The following two letters, addressed iu behalf of tue doomed Chicago Anar- chista, to their chief counsel, Capt. Black, iu September and October, lSS1, have nothing to do with anarchy, nor with the question of the guilt, under She existing laws of the Chicago anarchists.
 As to me, aut not an anarchist, but q Socialist
 IL will rather be shown that, irrospec- tive of the judicial yalue of the decisions of the Courts in this case those laws of actessoryship, under which tine anar- chi9ts were tried and sentenced, are grossly immoral and unconstitutional. IL will also be shown that those laws are liable to }OSicr crime and eHodHvcr nun hiui. And finally it will be shown that my argument, which was suggested tO the defense of the sentenced men, would have offered them an opportunity of escape, of which no Use was made by their counsel. nOr notice was taken by the friends of the doomed men.
 1 don't blame Capt. Black for having neglected my theory. Capt. Black was overworked at that time; he sought re- lief and aid in the advice and cu-Upera- tiOn of the three eminent jurist7, General Pryor, General Butler and Hon. J. Ran dOph Tucker, and those three lawyers, at the cheap rate of Sl ,0OO or more, sub mtted to the U. $. Supreme Court arg,l- ments which were blown away by the mere unfolding of the records of the lower Courts, showing the lack of legal foundation of their arguments in error.
 The power of the Supreme Court of the United States i'll the Chicago case, as presented to them by counsel for plaintiffs ln error" was similar to that of tirst-Class professor of medical college, whose help is sought for by other physicians attending dying man.
 The Chicago bomb case was hopelessly lost at the very beginning of the cOtiec- tlre trial of the eight defendants, WheR considered in the tigM of the dccesSoryshi1 idc. There was only one means of es- cape, and it consisted of the radical mea- ure of d legal contra-bomb. directed at the coaStit,tionaiity Cf Htot laa0 aself.
 To this end my suggestion was direct ed, but It was not fully appreciated by counsel for the defense, and wholly ignored by the sOCiallstiC press
 l am not ashamed at all of my failure My argument involves so deep cut in- to the old English-American law tradi- tion, that 1t IS no wonder American Jurlsts should hesitate to suddenly in- dorse my theory. My argument means nothing less than the abandonment of an old cOmmon-law notion, nothing less, than the eradication of the idea of legal identy of principal and accessory.
 My last effort to give publication to my argument consisted in the following telegram, sent to the Chicago Herald on Monday, November ', 1887, and pub llshed by that paper in the issue of Tuesday, November 5, 1887, stating the jurisdiction of the U. $. Supreme Court | and reading as follows:
 PHILADELPHIA, Nov. 7, 1887. |" Editor of the Chicago 'Herald'
 "ln response to the opinion con- tained in your leader of yesterday plead | ing for Executive clemency to some of | the doomed anarchists) reading as fol- | lows:
 "' Common sense dlsCriminates be- | tween the chief and the merely incidental | criminals and in further reference to | the fact that the eight Anarchists were | tried and sentenced as accessories, not as | principals, submit to you for publica- ton the following statement relating to | an opportunity neglected by counsel of |