The Bridgeport times and evening farmer., 1919-09-08

9. Amy person who promotes disor- der or eNcites revolt against an es- 1 tablished rule, law or custom"
 The United States Supreme Court have sanctioned these definitions in 1 the following language:
 | Anarchist" l. one who aGvO- ! cates anarchy or the absence of gov i ernmcnt as a political ideal; 9 belev- | CT in an auarchic theory of society; | especially, an adherent of the social ! theory of pr0udhgl.
 9. In popular use. one who seeks 1 to oVe-rurn by violence all constitute" forms and institutions of society and . government, all law and order, and all rights of property with no pur- pose of establishing any other system of order in the place Of that destroy ed; especially, such q person when acuatcd by mere lust of plunder.
 9. Any person who promotes dis order or cNcitez revolt againsr an Cs- tabIi=hed rule. law or custom
 "Onc who urges and seeks the over throw by force of all government.
 There are several other definitions
 given by various authorities, but all
 arc substantially alike
 l. is Eour province, gentlemen, to
 determine what was meant by the
 term in this case. and what was un- . dersJood by The term, in your juds-
 ment, by readers or the papers in
 which tho article appeared
 You are nor to do this by testimony
 as to what the intentions of the par
 ties writing tho article were in their , hearts or minds. but by an eNamIna- tion of tho article itself within its four corners. For instance, in this case you have a right to consider the . fact that the basis of the editorial { was MT. Ford's intended treatment of his men.
 Take the contents of the editorial and arrive at. from it, if you can, fairly. a correct idea Of what meaning the editorial was intended to convey, and what meaning would probably be understood by the readers of the Tribune. because the entire article. as well as the headlines must be taken into account in determining what the real meaning of the article was Every person has a full and abso- . lute right to use any word of the Eng ] fish language in any sense or mean ing recognized by the dictionary Thus. to illustrate, by contrasting eN- trcmes, the word 'auarchist' may be used as mcaniu- merely one who be- 1ieves in the absence of government as a. political ideal; and, on the other hand. as meaning one who engages Fin violence, throws bombs 10 destroy the government and social institutions for mere lust of pIunder. The ques- ton always is, in what sense or mean ing would the word. as used. reason ably be understood. In this case the defendant contends that the word .sanarchIst' was not used in either or these extreme senses, but in one or
 the intermediate senses-that IS to say. as meaning one who advocates condition of affairs in which the force of government ls insufficient to perform badly or not at alL
 Whatever MT. Ford said or did, if anything, with the intention of ob- etructing the government in its legiu- mate purpose to make such prepara- ton as fl saw fit to make, you may consider in this connection
 We are not to look to the uneN-
 Drps=od intention Of the writer and publisher. because a person is in tho law deemed to have that intention which his open. overt or expressed acts. words or conduct, indicates; yet for this purpose we are to look among other things. to the context in con nection with which the word was
 used, to determine whether or not the word was used in one sense or the other. As I say, that is a matter solely for your consideration. You may determine. as a matter of fact, what. in your opinion, the meaning was intended to be, what, as a matter of fact. the average reader would receive and take from 1t.
 Consider. all Circumstances. You may also look to the occasion
 of the writing and the period of time when the editorial was written and published, and to the facts and cir cumstances in relation to the subject or person. and the attitude of the person toward the subject. which may reasonably have been in the minds of reasonable persons of ordin- ary intelligence. experience and read ing. to whose attention the editorial might reasonably have been expected to come. And we should also con slider the purpose of the writer and publisher as to what purpose would reasonably appear to such reader jus- mentioned from the editorial as whole and the ocoa sion of the writing, period Of time. facts and circum- | stances which have just been men
 toned
 | In other words. + is for you to i consider what you believe honestly the | average reader would get from the article. You cannot tell what some [ individual man might get, to a cer- ] tainty, of course. There is no way ] of proving such thing as that. An ! editorial goes broadcast to the world, ! and the best the jury can do is to de- 1 tcrmine from their experience in life, | and the testimony in the case, as | to what the thing was, what the aver 1 age reader, in the place where the i article was circulated, would get from l 1t.
 l Much has been said about MT. 1 Ford's writings. advertisem ents, inter | views and other parts of his propa- l ganda against mflitarisn, and think l all of them, at least, all of them l which came to the knowledge of the 1 Tribune Company. may be taken into | account and cnpsidered by you as | bearing upon the intention of the | Tribune and what was intended by the 1 use of the terms they did use. Some controversy has arisen as to | the introduction of MT. Ford's saying 1 and interviews and advertisements | and the claim is strenuously made 1 that Ford was only exercising tho l rights of free speech guaranteed tc