The Irish standard., 1914-12-26

toward the end there he promises to
remain a member of the Catholic Or.
der, in there by implication, if not ex-
pressed.
@. l will ask you, is this all the
obligation of the fourth degree? A
That is our obligation i'm the fourth
degree.
@. Do any of the other obligations,
first, second or third degrees, have
reference to mono Catholics in any way,
directly or indirectly? A. None what
ever.
@. You have heard this purported
oath in the criminal warrant read,
have you? A. Yes, 1 have.
@. Have you seen that elsewhere?
A. I have.
The defendants testified and also
called Mr.. Lawless, who had testified
for the State. They were not cross
examined by the County Attorney.
1t is unnecessary to go into the re-
cital of the other evidence in this
case. Suffice it to say that the de.
PENDANTS made no attempt to estab-
lish the authenticity of the bogus oath,
but threw themselves on the mercy of
the court and tried to show that there
was no intentional libel on Mr.. Law.
less.
The jury returned a verdict Of
guilty, which was read by the fore
man, Rev. Thomas Billing, and the
court imposed Jail sentence of thirty
days on each of the defendants, from
which they took an appeal to the Dis
trict Court on the following day, each
giving a bond Of $500, with H. B.
Oblinger and w. Knaack as sureties.
Referring to the foregoing trial, we
set forth below the correspondence
between the Rev. Mr.. Billing and Hon.
Fred Bierman Of DEBORAH, Iowa, who
we believe, is the publisher of the
DEBORAH journal:
DEBORAH, Iowa, Aug. IA, 1914.
Rev. Thomas Billing,
Pastor of Methodist Church,
Waterville, MINI.
Dear Sir: have noted with in
terest that you were a juror in the
prosecution Of A. M. and G. E. Morri.
son of Waterville for criminal libel
by E. M. LaWless of the Wateryille
Sentinel
| The reports are that the jury unani-
mously voted for the conviction of
A. M. and G. E. Morrison. May not
ask you to write me a line or two
stating whether or not this report is
a fact? And also give me any bit of
information that may be of interest in
the case.
This anti-Catholic agitation, in my
judgment, is very discreditable to all
the Protestant churches that do not
seek in the spirit of Christian charity
to quiet it. Furthermore, it is a
menace to the best conduct of political
affairs, and breeds very regrettable
bitterness and suspicion among PEG.
pie who otherwise would be friends.
If you have no objection, I should
thank you very much for the privilege
of publishing your reply in the Journal.
Sincerely yours,
FRED HERMAN.
Waterville, MIMI, Aug Is, 1914.
Mr.. Fred Bierman,
DEBORAH, Iowa.
Dear Sirs: Yours of the 14th re-
ceived. And while l do not care for
publicity, must admit that either the
irony of fate or by the Hand of Provi-
dence, found myself upon the jury
empanelled to find verdict in the
E. M. Lawless criminal libel case
against A. M. and G. E. Morrison of
the Mankato Journal. l did not know
until reached the court room of the
case. Had known what awaited me
that day l would probably have been
absent when the sheriff came three.
quarters of an hour before the trial to
summon me. But when summoned
did not inquire or learn for what pur-
pose However, never having run
away from anything that looked like
duty, and not being challenged by
either party, stood my ground, and
notwithstanding much adverse local
criticism, am glad to have the privi-
lege of helping to nail down SO ugly
and diabolical lie as the pseudo oath
so widely published and attributed to
Ed. Lawless was proven to be.
Furthermore. my district superin-
tendent and other of my ministerial
brethren (all of whom l have hitherto
metz have expressed themselves as
being perfectly at one with me.
The case was very simple.
1. The publication Of the so-calleo
oath in the defendants paper was
proven.
2. Its diabolical character was
proven.