The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1914-11-14
DISTRICT COURT OF WINoNA sUs-
TAINS VERDICT OF THE MUNIC-
IPAL COURT AGAINST ANTI
CATHOLIC LECTURER - MUST
PAY FINE OR GO TO JAIL-oB-
SCENE LANGUAGE DEFINED.

In the District Court of Winona, on
November 9, Judge A, II. Snow hand
ed down a decision in the case of the
State Of Minnesota VS.. Anna Lowry
fully sustaining the decision in the
Municipal Court, from which an ap-
peal was taken, holding that Anna
Lowry used obscene language in
public address in WinOna and direct
ing that Anna Lowry must pay the line
If So imposed in the lower court, to-
Icther with the fee allowed by law 10
the clerk of the Municipal Court for
making the return on appeal and the
lawful fee of the clerk of the District
Court for his services, and that in de-
fault of immediate payment OF the
fine she stand committed to the county
Jail of Winona until the fine shall De
paid, not exceeding ten days.
Judge Snow in his findings holds
very plainly that the language attrib-
uted to Anna Lowry in lecture given
to women only at Philharmonic Hall
last winter was obscene and unfit for
utterance.
In the memorandum attached to the
case Judge Snow first calls attention
to the fact that on the appeal the
questions involved are to be deter
mined solely on the return on the ap-
peal and there can be no trial in the
District Court of any issues of fact.
The principal questions of fact de-
termined in the Municipal Court were:
1. Did the defendant use the Ian
guage attributed to her?
,. If so, was the language so used
in n place of public resort and with
in the hearing of other persons?
.. Was the language charged oO-
scene?
Finding in the affirmative on all
three of these questions was essen
tial to conviction of the defendant by
the Municipal Court Her conviction
presumed that such findings We're
made by the Municipal Court. For par
ticularity as to the language alleged
to be obscene Judge Snow refers to
the complaint and the return on ap-
peal, deeming it unnecessary to fur
ther sully the record with it. Consid-
ering the three questions on which
the Municipal Court answered affirm
atively as given above Judge Snow
says:
Concerning the second question
there is apparently little or no dis
Dute. 1t is here virtually admitted
that the place was one OF public re-
sort. and that whatever defendant
said on the occasion referred to was
within the hearing OF. other persons.
LAS far as relates to the element or
characteristic of obscenity there is no
substantial difference between the re
ports of the states witnesses and that
of defendant herself as to the Ian
guage actually used.
But the chief contention of defend
ants counsel is that the Munlclpa
Court was wrong in holding the Ian
ouaee used to be obscene. The weight
of authority is to the effect that
whether the words or utteranceS
charged are obscene or not is, as this
Court has hereinbefore classed it, one
of fact to be passed on like Other
questions of fact by the jury or judge
before whom the trial is had.
This question, like the other two
was. as already stated, necessarily de
cided against the defendant by th'
Municipal Judge, and his finding haV
ing evidence to support it is not to D