The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1930-07-19
The Evidence in the Mooney Case

But Oxman's testimony was hardly given
when it established out of letters written
by himself that Oman was not in San Fran
cisco on the day of the explosion; that Oxman
was not a rich cattle raiser and ranch owner
from Oregon; that he was a resident of Illinois
and had been brought to San Francisco by his
brother-in-law who lived there. This brother
in-law had promised him in the name of Flick
ert a substantial remuneration for his tes-
timony.
The scandal was so outrageous that Oman
had to be arrested for perjury. Immediately
upon the disclosures concerning the perjured
testimony of Oxman, there appeared Sammy
Shortridge, at present United States senator
from California and them as now, corporation
lawyer, as special attorney for the United
Railways Fickert, who was the suborner of
the perjury of Oxman, was his prosecutor and
the U. R., which paid for Oxman's perjury,
was the defender. The outcome was never in
doubt, although Oxmans perjury was estab-
lished beyond even the shadow of doubt.
Oman was never convicted of his self-con-
fessed perjury. His testimony is still in the
records and helped to convict Mooney.
The Supreme Court of California knows
this; so does Governor Young yet with serene
disregard of the fact, they continue to keep
their victims in prison They continue to speak
of the validity of the testimony against them.
The frame-up against Billings and Mooney
was so outrageous that the prosecution of the
other defendants had to be dropped. This was
public admission of the frame-up This fact
too is known to the Supreme Court of Cali
fornia and to the governor of California.
The frame-up against Billings and Mooney
was so outrageous that the public indignation
took the form of a recall movement against
Fickert This recall carried majority of the
electorate and Fickert was driven from the
office of district attorney. This fact too is
known to the Supreme Court of California and
to the governor.
The case against Billings and Mooney was
from beginning to end a deliberate and das-
tardly frame-up. Billings and Mooney were
class struggle victims For their activities in
the work of organizing the slaves of the Pa
cific Gas and Electric Company and the United
Railway, these corporations sent them to prison
for life. Only the international action of the
revolutionary working class and first of all
of the workers of Russia in 1917 prevented
the execution of Mooney.
The mumblngs of the Supreme Court of the
state of California and of the governor Of
California concerning the validity If he testi-
mony is a desperate effort to cover up the
outright class persecution against Billings and
Mooney with the suggestion of a possible but
not probable mistaken justice. The case
against Billings and Mooney is exactly the
same the recent case against the vegetable
workers of Imperial Valley. The bosses want
ed to get rid of organizers of workers, so they
gave orders to the capitalist court to send them
to prison. The district attorneys heard the
voice of the master, produced the perjured tes-
tmony. and sent the organizers to the peni-
tertiary.
The liberal campaign for the freeing Of
Billings and Mooney works into the hands OF
the conspirators that framed up Billings and
Mooney. The socialist party as part of this
liberal campaign thereby continues its role DIS
part of the frame-up. In 1915 it participated
in the frame-up; in 1880 it is busy engaged
in covering up the frame-up.
The frame-up against Billings and Mooney
was so undenabe, that the judge who tried
them subsequently, had to state his belief in
their innocence And ten of the twelve jurors