New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1918-12-11
CASE IS
FINALLY SBl ! ED.
SUPREME COURT AFFIREfa HE:
VERDICT GIVING DAMAGES
TO PLAINTIFF
kAERCHER ESPIONAGE CASE IS
AGAIN RETURNED TO THE
LOWER COURT

Among the cases decided by the Supreme
Court last Friday was that of Anna
Peterson VS.. The Mystic Workers Of
the World, appealed to the highest
tribunal of the State from an order of
the District Court of Brown County
denying motion for new trial. The
Supreme Courts decision affirms the
verdict of the lower court.
Lower Court Gives Verdict
This case was brought by the plaintiff
as beneficiary to recover the sum of
$1,20O.00 due on an insurance policy
held by the plaintiffs husband in the
defendant association and was originally
tried at the May 1917 term Of the District
Court of this County. The jury re-
turned verdict in favor of the plain
tiff for the full amount stated in the
policy and accrued interest.
Upper Court Sustains Lower
A new trial was granted by Judge
Olsen on the ground of error in the
admission of testimony, and the case
was again tried and resulted in verdict
for the plaintiff in the sum of 81, 800
Upon being at the December term Of
the District Court, denied a new trial,
the Mystic Workers Of the World APP
pealed to the State Supreme Court with
the above result, thus losing and for
the third time.
kaercher Case Again Up
Another case decided by the State
Supreme Court Friday, which is of
general interest, was the Kaercher.
appeal from an order overriding his
demurrer to an indictment which had
been brought against him for a viola
ton Of the act Of 1917 legislature max
ing it unlawful for any person to in
terfere with or discourage enlistment in
the United States. army or navy. TIE
Supreme Court holds the act valid in
its entirety and afErns the order of
the Big Stone County Court oyerruling
the demurrer interposed by Aaron B.
Kaercher an attorney from Ortonville.
Attacked Law in Demurrer
Kaercher is county attorney of Big
Stone county, and two trials of the
charges against him, both resulting in
jury disagreements, attracted wide at
tention. After the second trial he de-.
INJURED to the Indictment on the ground
that the facts stated did not constitute
a public offense, and attacked the law
contending that section three, prohibit
ing persons advocating citizens should
not aid in prosecuting the war, was
not within the act.
The Indictment charging Kaerchert
with violation of section 3 of the law
accused him of questioning the right
of the government to send men over
seas and Of asserting that it was mot
the PEOPLES war, but the war Of East
ern influences. .
All Three Sections Upheld
Ruling that the purpose Of the law is
clear, the opinion, written by Judge
Quinn, points out that section / makes
it unlawful to publish printed or writ
ten matter advocating that men should
not enlist; that section 2 prohibits ut
terances at meetings of more than
five persons, and section makes it
unlawful to teach by written or printed
matter whatsoever or by oral speech
that a citizen Of this country should
not aid or assist the United States in
prosecuting war with it's public enemies.
Having upheld the first two sections
in earlier decisions, the supreme court
then makes a like ruling in section 8.
The case is ren1anded for further
proceedings in the lower court.