The New York herald., 1920-01-31
Continued from Page one.)


the National Guard who served in response
to the call of the President.
The general appropriation act for sup
port Of the government.
An act TO provide for the requisition OF
labor of able bodied male persons between
the ages of eighteen and sixteen years.
Almost without exception the Socialists
alone opposed these measures. They stood
persistently agains' all measures giving
the State support through the war;
The state constitution, whihc all Off
cials pledge in heir oath of office 10 up
hold. requires giving aid to the state mill
tary forces and supporting tho government
in war emergencies. It is in effect the
loyalty pledge The Socialist constitution
requires members of that party 10 oppose
all military and naval appropriations
sees Clash with Constitution.
By tho evidence presented today, the
Stae claims to have shown the direct clash
oety~een the two constitutions and further
that the Socialiss "A all times obey heir
own party,
Algernon Ice secretary Of tho New York
County Committee OF tho Socialist party
was the principal witness. Martin Conboy
counsel for the State. read from Mr. Lees
book Labor and War" a passage in
which tho author declared that in this
solemn hour the Socialist party must give
ment"
'sDid you ever know of any Socialist
party or committee adopting a resolution
setting forth that sentiment Mr. Conboy
asked. The witness said he did not
Mr.. Leo then described at length what
Socialists mean by direct mass action and
the general strike He said the general
strike had been used with some degree Of
success in Russia and Belgium and that II
would be used here If conditions required
He admitted, however. that affairs in this
country were not as bad as in either Rus
STA or Belgium.
"Thc general strike is often used to back
up political action" the witness said. lie
justified combining economic strikes as "A
political weapon.
although conditions here do not Justify
a general strike. the Socialist party con-
sidered II necessary TO provide for il in its
national platform OF 1892" Mr. Conboy
asked. Mr. Conboy brought out that the
Socialists considered IL necessary TO nut
into their platform whatever measure they
proposed
You do not contend. do you. Mr.. Lee
that conditions now exist that would neces-
state a general strikeH"
at the present moment / do not know
or such conditions"
Questioned on strike Manifesto.
Then why the adoption Of this manifesto
in September OF 1919 by the eSocialst
party2'
"Thc Socialist party was then i'm convcn-
tion--it was not going to remain in con
tnuous convention. IL did not act with
reference TO the situation particularly eN-
istng on particular day IL outlined a
general policy, of political organization and
of Industrial organization, which was in
tended to be OF such a nature that IL could
last, at any rate. until the party might, If
necessary, revise It,"
"And understood from your explanation
with regard TO the elimination o fthe anti
sabotage planSing in your platform. that
the Socialist party does not adopt planks
or statements of policy where there Is no
necessity for them Am I correct in that
assumption
Where there is no necessity. assurcdly." D."
Lot rs assume Tor the moment" said
Mr. Conboy. that these five gentlemen
whose seats arc in question in this party
should present political programme here
in the shape Of proposal legislation, and
they were reinforced by the combination
IN ird't-'ri-' r~t'~N. ir~ludlns withir So