The Mankato free press., 1917-11-02

government and said the bulk of ii had
been allowed to stand uncontradicted. He
spoke of the big crowd assembling
out in the country in farming dis
trict a thousand people or more. on
ten or ewelve hours notice He spoke
of Sugarman coming at eleven
o'clock in the evening to address that
crowd, which had waited for several
statement of Sugarman that there was a
little town near Augusta, Maine, which
refused to obey the draft call of the gov
ernment for the Civil war and no punish
ment came to the people for it,
Mr.. Jacques spoke of the alleged state
ment by Sugarman that there were about
5000 socialists in st. Paul who did not
register and suffered no bad conse-
quences, because the Jail would not hold
them Mr.. Jacques himself declared that
in st. Paul everybody who could be
found that had refused to register had
been put in Jail.
New Way of Looking at Wars.
The district attorney spoke of the al
legged statement by Sugarman that the
various wars of this country had been
commercial wars; that the revolutionary
war was waged for the benefit of George
Washington, because he was a great
land-holder. This was indeed new way
of looking at the services of the father of
his country. The Civil war, too, he said,
had been spoken of by Sugarman as a
commercial war, and the present great
war, he said, appeared to be looked on
by Sugarman as something done for the
rich. Mr.. Jacques declared that never be-
fore had the wealth of America been
taxed as it was now being taxed for this
great war, and that the sons Of the
wealthy. and the poor were marching in
the ranks. side by side.
Mr.. Jacques declared that the evidence
brought out in the trial could point to but
one conclusion, and that was that Sugar
man was deliberately attempting to in
duce the young men of that farming
community to resist the call of the gov
ernment to military service.
Attorney Seymour Stedman of Chi
cago asked permission that he and the
other attorney for the defense, Louis l..
Schwartz of Minneapolis divide their
time in addressing the jury. Judge Booth
remarked that it was customary to have
the jury addressed by but one attorney on
each side, but the court would not object
to Mr.. Stedman's prosecution if the coun-
sci for the government did not. Mr..
Jacques remarked that there was no
fixed length of time for an address to
the jury, but he would not object to
having both the attorneys for the defense
make thier address.
Schwartz Addressed Jury.
Mr.. Schwartz now addressed the jury.
He went at some length into the funda-
mental principles of the constitution. and
the rights that this document guaranteed
to the people. He dwelt particularly on the
right of free speech and free assemblage,
and declared that without these rights on
the part of the people, democratic govern
ment would be impossible.
Mr.. Schwartz argued that if it had
been the intention of Sugarman to urge
the young men not to obey the call of the
government to military service, he would
not have done it at an open meeting
Such a thing would not be done in so
open a manner.
He accused John McGovern. secret serv-
ice agent of the government, of deliber-
ately trying to get Sugarman to say
things that would get him into trouble.
The attorney said McGovern listened to
the speech that Sugarman made and
Sugarman did not say what McGovern
wanted him to say. So McGovern pro-
ceeded to ask questions with the deliber-
ate purpose of inducing Sugarman to
say things that would bring in a clash
with the government. McGovern had his
brother Joe with him and told him what
to ask, the attorney said.
The attorney said the government had
tried to show in the testimony that a
certain man had asked Sugarman if he
should obey the call of the government
and that Sugarman told him not to, and
yet the government had not brought that
man himself as a witness. Why was that
man not on the witness stand?
After Mr.. Schwartz had concluded, the
court took a recess to $50 this morning.