The Tabor independent. [volume] (Tabor, S.D.) 1913-19??, 1917-01-18
Diggs and Caminetti Must Serve
Sentence for Trip With High
School Girls Under
Decision.
EFFECT UP TO CONGRESS
Court Declines to Knock Out
Law Because It Is Said
to Open Door to
Blackmail.

Washington, Jan. 16-Interpreting
the Mann white slave law, the supreme
court today decided that prosecutions
under the law for transporting women
in interstate m are not limited
to commercialiZed vice n include per-
sonal immoral escapades. Conviction
Of +. Drew Camtnetti and Maury |.
Diggs, of Sacramento, was affirmed.
The court was divided. M majority
Chief Justice White and Justices Nc
Kenna and Clarke dissented. Justice
McReynolds took no part in consider
ton OF the cases.
"The plain terms of the act must
take precedence over the designation
and the report that accompanied it to
congress-" said Justice Day. ut Is said
1t will open the door to blackmail, but
that is to be considered by congress
We think the power OF congress to reg
ulate transportation of passengers at
fords ample basis to exercise authority
in the case OF this. statute"
Following Interpretation Of the Mann
act, the court also affirmed conviction
Of l.. 7. Hays, of Alva,. Okla.
Laws Validity Upheld.
Although the supreme court had pre-
V1OuSly upIelU IlSlltuLlOHdiit vi tHe
Mann white slave law, the question OF
whether it prohibits interstate trans
portation of women only for CONNER
cialized vice or applies to mere per
sonal immoral escapades having no
element Of commercialism or coercion
has been disputed ever since the laws
enactment.
Interpretation by the supreme court
Of the disputed point was asked in the
celebrated Diggs- Caminetti ceases and
In the case of l.. T. Hays, of Alva, Okla
In all three cases, the government con
ceded, there was no element of traffic
for gain.
Caminetti was sentenced to IS
months imprisonment and fined Sl,5O0;
Diggs to two years and a $4,000 fine.
Hays had ar Is months prison sen
tence. All have been at liberty under
bail.
Lower federal courts and different
administrations of the department Of
justice have differed over the laws in.
depreciation. Various women's clubs
and other organizations have agitated
for an Interpretation to curb all m
morality. whether commercial or not,
Other Questions Raised.
Two other important questions raised
were. whether women were accompliCeS
and, whether men might be convicted
solely upon a woman's uncorroborated
testimony.
Diggs and Caminetti were tried and
convicted separately, the former on Au-
gust 20. 1913, and the latter on Septem-
Der S, 1913. Their cases were consoli-
dated and affirmed March 10, 1915, 10y
the Ninth circuit court. In the supreme
court all three cases were advanced,
both sides desiring early settlement OF
the disputed questions. INC argued to-
gether in November. 1916. Assistant At
torney General Wallace representa-
the government and former Senator
Bailey, Of Texas, Marshall b. Wood
worth, of San Francisco n Harry o..
Chaser. OF Enid, Okla, the defend
ants.
Upon the supreme courts decision
future prosecutions under the Mann
act are defendcnt, including several
persons under indictment and awaiting
trial. including Jack Johnson, the negro.
pugilist, convicted at Chicago in 1913
Johnson now is a fugitive from justice
in Europe.
Less Serious of Offenses.
Justice Days majority opinion said:
In lone OF the cases was 1t charged
or proved that the transportation CofI
the women involved) was for gain OF
for the purpose OF furnishing womer
| for prostitution for hire There is M
ambiguity in the terms of this act. lt
Is elementary that the meaning OF al
| statute, must, in the first instance, bel
sought in the language of the act as|
framed, and If that is plain the sole
function of the courts is to enforce ii
according to its terms.
ITO cause a woman to be Transporter
for de~bauchery or for an mmOra pur.|
pose, for which Diggs and Caminetti
were convicted, would sec by the very
statement Of the facts to embrace
Il fpa xaaYN 49, t@. Co.. lnl
by the act. While such immoral pur-|
pose would be more culpable In morals
IL accompanied with expectation Of
| gain, such considerations do not pre-
vent the lesser offense against moraisl
from the execution Of purposes within|
the meaning Of the law. To say the|
contrary would shock the common un-|
Outstanding of what constitutes an I'M
moral purposes"
Whether the women involved bscame|
technically accomplices, argued in bel
half of the three defendants, was not
decided by the court. 1t dispOses OIL
that feature as follows:
Dodses Woman Question.
1T Is urged as further ground OF red
versal OF h judgments below the trial
court did not instruct the jury that the|
testimony OF the two girls was that I'll
accomplices n to be received with
great caution and believed only when|
corroborated by other testimony adj
/ duced in the case.
while this is so. there Is no abso-I
lutte rule OF law preventing convictions
on this testimony of accompices n
%juries believe them"
In conclusion, the court said:
Much Is said about the character II
the testimony adduced and as TO certaidI
facts. tending to establish the guilt 81
innocence OF the accused. This courI
does not weigh the evidence IN q proI
ceedinS of this character, and It 81
enough to say that there was substanI
tial testimony tending to support M
/ verdicts rendered in the trial courts.