New-York tribune., 1918-09-21
Seven Favored Acquittal of
Editor and Publishers in
Loyalty Trial
Court Continues Bail
Six Hours Deliberation After
Hours Charge by Judge
Leads to Disagreement

NEWARK, n. j., Sept. 20.--Aftcr six
hours dcliberation the jury that has
heard the trial of William Won Katzler
and Benedict and Edwin Prieth, editor
and former publishers of the New Jer-
scy "Freie Zeitung," on the charge of
conspiring to obstruct recruiting, re-
ported that they were hopelessly dis
agreed as to the guilt or innocence of
the defendants. Judge Thomas Haight
then discharged them, saying he had
no desire to force any of them to vote
contrary to their conscientious beliefs
by confining them in the jury room for
a longer period.
The jury retired with the case at
1890 p. M, after Judge Haight had
addressed them for one hour At 4:45
the jurors filed back into court and
the foreman grimly announced that
they were unable to agree. They were
sent back to discuss the case further,
but at 6:30 again came in to report
that they were unable to break the
deadlock.
Present Bail Continued
Counsel for the Cefcndants asked
that the present bail be continued, and
the court issued an order to that Ct
feet. The wives Of the Prcth brothers
and two daughters of Benedict, nine
teen and seventeen years of age,
waited in the courtroom during the
period of the jury's deliberations
Aftcrward it was learned the jury
stood seven to five for ncquittal.
Assistant District Attorney Joseph
Bodlnc, who argued the case for the
government, said he did not know
whether the defendants would be
brought to trial again under the same
indictment.
the Pricths and Won Katzlcr charges
them with treason The twenty ty-ninth
count Of this indictment sets forth
that the defendants "did unlawfullv
maliciously cause to be printed, pub
iished and circulated an issue of the
New Jersey 'Freic Zeitung,' dated Sep
tembcr IS. 1917, that contained an
article headed 'rhe Meaning Of Swc-
den's Enmity."
Benedict Prieth and Edwin Prieth
have both said that since they were
brought to trial their IDEAS about the
war have undergone great changes.
Judge Haight's Charge
In his charge to the jury Judge
Haight said the defendants were not
Oh trial for having entertained or cx-
pressed the opinions that appeared in
Zeitung" set forth in the indictment
except as tho expression of those opin
ions might be evidence of the specific
crime charged The judge also said:
at appeared to ne that if articles
such as these appearing at such a time
were not expressions OF the honest be-
iefs of those who wrote them or who
were responsible for their publication
it would be a very material cir
cumstance in determining what the
motive was Of the person who wrote
them or was responsible for their pub
lication If, on the other hand, they
did believe in them, then that is cir
cumstanco which you can take into
consideration"
At another point he said:
"If it was the conspicuous purpose
Of the defendants to state the truth
as they saw it and to do this in order
to lead others to see things in the
same way, with the object of bringing
about Il modification, reconstruction or
reshaping Of the national policy, in
accordance with what they believed
right and true, ard if obstructing of
the recruiting or enlistment service of
the United States was not their object
or purpose then you should acquit
them"
Judge Haight told the jurors he
defendants had right to publish ar
ticlcs showing the effectiveness of
German submarines, some of which
were included in the indictment, but
he added:
"Quite different are articles which
seek to impugn the motives that
actuated this country in entering the