The producers news. [volume] (Plentywood, Mont.) 1918-1937, 1918-07-19

OI Htota Of Minnesota, Plaintiff, 20927
ot" A c. Townley and Joseph
C;ibert, Defendants.
G'L0e'' SYLLABUS
defendants indicted jointly
d,cod with violations OF Chapter
c ,e@ General Laws 1917, joined in a
~ .raI demurrer to the indictment,
gen." was overruled and the pro-
~ ceadng certified to this court for de-
s.;no+ion. The matter set forth
tei No. Lhn indictment considered and held
IN 'A ~ constitute a violation of the
statute. o4 ,oo++ar of Soo+;o,
:, ,ri+bin the title of the act.
piovprsed and remanded.
OPINION
Those two prosecutions involve the
.on,a questions and are considered
S S~J |disnosed of together in one opin-
anu :nn defendants were jointly indict-
L ~ Nv the grand jury OF Martin
eeo :" and thereby charged by two
Gun" nrste indictments of violations of
sSpaID 463, General Laws 1917.
Haf ; joined in general demur-
~ to each Indictment, which were
Io l.op,1,Ied bv the trial court. Where
o ,non at the instance of defendants,
tEo proceedings were certified to this
o on1 for the determination of two
omestjons. applicable to both, name
=, IN. Is Section of the Statute
~ Which the indictments are found
vi vi Invalid as not within the subject
Of the act as oppressed in its title,
onJ l2). Do the facts stated In the
;Idctnent constitute violation OF
the Statute.
In the view we take of the Sec
orJ question, we make but brief
r,sntion of the first. The title to the
art names as the subject thereof
the interference with or discourage
ment of enlistments in the military
or naval forces of the United States,
W If the State of Minnesota. Sec
ton 3 declares it unlawful to advo-
Cstp or teach by written or printed
natter or by oral speech that citi
1sns of this state should not aid
~ assist the United States in prose
cutting or carrying on the war" The
contention is that the prohibition
against advocating that the citizen
should not aid or assist in the prose
cution of the war is not within the
title of the act, which names only
tho interference with enlistments,
and is therefore invalid. Whether
the provisions of Section 3 have ref
erence only to the sale of bonds and
stamps, or include as well interior
ence bv written or printed matter or
by oral speech, otherwise than pro-
lbited BY the former sections of
the act. we think the substance of
the provisions of Section 8 within
4 the scope of the title Of the act, and
& we so hold. Within further refer
ence thereto we come directly to the
second question, namely, whether the
facts stated in either indictment
show violation of the Statute, con-
sidering that they are founded in
part at least upon Section 8.
81 The Charge
sd l. The indictment in case No.
2O927 charges that at the time and
place stated therein the defendants
wifuIy and unlawfully advocated
that citizens Of the state should not
e. aid the United States in carrying
Il on the war with the public enemies
8H thereof, and to that end and for tina.
purpose did publish and circulate
certain printed leafet or folder con-
IS. tanning, among other things, the
following:
s The moving cause of this
world war was and is Political
vs. Autocracy used to perpetuate
and extend Industrial Autocracy.
8 1t is the struggle of political
OVerIordS to extend and perpet-
8 uate their power to rob and ex-
8 plot their fellowmen. Auto
cratic rulers who have robbed
and exploited the fathers and
@ mothers now. slaughter the chill.
# dren for the single purpose of
luItherlng entrenching them
selves in their Infamous position
Z and securing and legallzing their
possession of the fruits of 9TH
eTS, toll and thrusting the world
under the yoke Of political au-
0cIacy, which is ever the shield
and the mask of Industrial Auto
crazy"
lAlS language and the statements
y assertions thereof are to be con-
;ueIed and constructed in connee-
l0 5 with facts Of general notoriety
fnu OF common knowledge, and in
sL%s atmosphere and light we are to
e,ssLmlne whether the natural ten
Ivy y. thereof is the discouraging
'ilSlnents in the present war, or
"u'ocacy that assistance should
~, H. We extended to the Federal gov
Ss, nl,ehF IN the prosecution of the
on nts. II such be the natural ten
Sefo o5; and effect of the language
1 pts Snaants are presumed to have so
saT SLued, and the conclusion neces-
e. would follow that the demur-
60, n 10 the indictment was properly
Non ItIled; And the same result
sut u Follow If the language set
Il IN III the Indictment considered in
Il t5 S"lne light, leaves the question
e. m re. natural tendency thereof in
"a daf fspsct stated, and the purposes
d C1Ibl!uants IN circulating the same
on Vor,5 5or IN such case the ques-
~