Evening journal., 1909-06-03
LONG ARGUMENT
In CLICK CASE
Court Denies Motion Of De-
Tense for Discharge Of
the Defendant

Judge Bradford in the. United States
Court yesterday afternoon refused the
motion made by counsel for the defense
in the case Of Ulysses G. Click. for the dis
charge of the defendant Mr.. Click who
is accused Of soliciting subscriptions for
political purposes from employees Of the 4
government while on government prop
erty. showed the disappointment he felt. 1
at the failure OF II. II. Ward. Of his coun-
sci. who had argued the points he offered
in his contention for four hours.
in his contention FOR four hours. and in
an able and eloquent manner.
Judge Bradford in summing UP the argu-
ment said that the Supreme Court frowns
down the attempt OF a lower court TO de-
clare an act unconstitutional unless IL is
palpably so. but in this case. he was OF
the opinion that the act was constitu-
tional The court then went into details
carefully going over the argument and
touching on all vital points. Judge Brad
ford said the idea of Section y. under
which the charge was drawn, was not 10
take in any certain territory but room
or building in which the governments
business was transacted. was sufficient.
He said he could not see why Congress
could not pass an act, to secure order and
decency to tie efficient conduct of the
governments business.
The court said that the practice Of So
licitng and making assessments for politi-
cal purposes undermines the very prin-
cipals of good republican government 1T
has frequently happened" said Judge
Bradford. that the very best citizens
change their political sentiments and may
wish to support either one or the other
party. Is he to be committed by having
political assessments imposed upon him
p and TO continue his support OF the party
which he no longer looks upon with favor7
This practice is antagonistic to Republi-
can principles"
Referring to Section p the court set
out plainly the meaning Of the act. It pro-
vides that 10 person shall in any room OF
building occupied by the governments
solicit subscriptions of money for any po-
litcal purposes, whatever. The court said
that If Congress had undertaken to say
that no person was allowed to solicit such
subscriptions then it might be construed
that that body had overstepped its power.
The court added that the United States,
in his opinion. had a right to see to il
I. that any room or building which It occu-
pies shall not he the scene Of objection
able practices Of office holders or private
individuals.
The court said there is no invasion Of
: the law IL persons soliciting step outside
the building. There is more room or
the outside than on the inside said th'
Court land IL persons insist on coming
4 inside they do so on their own responsi
biity."
Judge Bradford called attention to tn
point brought up relative to persons hav
ing conversations In a government build
ing beyond the hearing OF others. He sail
that any undertaking on the part Of Con
- gress to restrict solicitations TO person
who solicit within the hearing of people
would be a very lame restriction. "Con
gress' he said, had declared broad
q that the solicitation is d violation, II mad
within the building" The court then an
= nounced that the motion Of the defendan
was denied.
- Mr. Ward noted an exception.
m Indictment Sufficient.
& The questions concerning the legality {
j. the indictment and the deeds Of postoffc
sites which were admitted as evidenc'
with a reservation that they be argue
n upon later, were also passed upon by N
court The court considered the indictmer
- sufficient and ordered the deeds ruled
on the ground as tending to confirm th
oral testimony of WITNESSES that the place
in question are occupied as postofhces
The court announced that there was "
D. a half hour before o'clock, the time fC
- adjournment for the day to proceed, b'
Mr.. Ward asked that the case go ov'
until this morning as he was physical
\ unfit, he said. after his four hours effo
y. in arguing before the court. to procee
= with the case. The court readily consente
=. to the adjournment.
y. Following Mr.. Ward. who finished h
% argument in the afternoon, District A
IS torney Nields in making his reply SAT-
= THE learned counsel has occupied fo'
hours in discussing the consututionaii
Of the act" He then took up the dinerei
: points brought out by Mr.. Ward. He sa
the $1,000 or $4,000 raised every year
a political organization under manage
is not likely to preserve the fundament
~ or charter rights of the people.
Mr.. Nields said that section II, und
which the Indictment was drawn. provid
- against the abuse of Federal patronal
and was passed twenty-six years ago
NJ Congress with both parties IN accord al
led on one side by Thomas F. Bayard' al
~ others.
" He contended that the act was design
TO protect the government in the tran
~ action OF its business and IL was on II
- that the present case was drawn. "secu
Rt r. he said, was to protect the public Sc
- vice and not the public morals" He sa
the wrortg to solicit contributions for ?
ne litical purposes was not in receiving I
~ money from individuals, but from 90
~ ernment officers and employees in ROOF
~ or buildings occupied by the United stai
90 IN the business Of the Government
Mr.. Nields contended that while to
State belonged the police power. Congr'
. also had police powers to guard the bu
ness OF the government. He said Congr'
surely had powers TO pass an act TO
move such influences from Federal e
ployes as Is set forth in the case at
sue.
N Mr.. Nields occupied hardly more til
half hour and Mr.. Ward made rep
He contended that the entire argum'
of Mr.. Nields was based on the prot
ton Of the public service He said the s
tion passed by Congress made no ref