Evening star., 1944-06-18
Will Lift !
Of Secrecy
In Sedifion Case
Defense Request for
Directed Verdict to
Bring Disclosures

Directed Verdict to
Bring Disclosures
BY CARTER BROOKE JONES.
Part Of the secrecy which stili
curtains most os the evidence stored
against the. 20 defendants In the
edition case viii be lifted tomorrow,
he Government promises, when the
iefense asks Chief Justice Edward G.
Eicher in District Court to end the
mass trial in q directed verdict Of
The defense has cited the week
Did decision in the Hartzel case, In
which the Supreme Court reserved
on q similar charge. The
Government has denied the Hartzel
decision applies and has agreed to
disclose enough Of Its carefully
guarded evidence to convince tho
court that the two cases are not
parallel.
Chief Prosecutor o. John Roege,
who win reply to the defense, is ex-
pected to explain, In particular, how
he expects to prove intent to carry
out the crime charged In the indict-
ment. The Hartzel case resolves
around intent.
Only Outline Presented.
Mr.. Rogge's opening statement to
the jury was only q broad, brief out.
line Of the long and complex case,
and the Government did not disclose
the name OF single witness before
testimony started. Defense attorney
repeatedly demanded List Of Cow
ernment witnesses. but the court
sustained the prosecution,s refusal
to supply 1t. While Mr.. Rogge does
not plan to show all his cards to-
morrow and perhaps will still refrain
from naming any Of the many Wit
nesses who have yet to appear-he
has promised to reveal more Of his
case than he did in the opening
statement.
The defense motion, to be pre-
sented by E. Hilton jackson, senior
counsel for the. Rev. Gerald B. Win.
rod, Wichita CKans) evangelist and
pubhcist. IS based on the opening
statement and on the evidence pre-
sented by the Government to date.
The whole nature OF the proof Of.
fered and promised brings 1t within
the scope of the Hartzel decision,
Mr.. jackson contends.
Elmer Hartzel was convicted Of
attempting to obstruct recruiting
and to undermine the loyalty of the
armed forces and incite them to
mutiny.5 The 20 defendants on trial
in District Court are charged with
conspiring to commit q similar Of
fense. The Hartzel Indictment was
brought under the EspionaSe Act
OF 1917, which forebade ss1ch acts
In time of war. The present prose-
fcution charges vioIatinn of an act
1Of 1910, making such attempts to
interfere with military duty crime
In War or peace.
j In the majority opinion reversing
| HArtzcl1 conviction, Justice Murphy
gfWTots TIT Although ne defendant
printed t11d mailed, during the war,
'tpamphlets containing vicious and
iunreasoning attacks on one Of our
military Allies, fragrant appeals to
false and sinister racial theories
Il and gross libels Of the President" /"
and at least four Of these were sent
to high-ranking Army officers, there
was not sufiicient evidence OF his
intent to cause INSTRUMENTATION,
disloyalty. mutiny or refusal Of
duty" In the military forces. It was
conceded the Government proved
two Of these pamphlets were read
BY the commanding general Of the
Army Air Forces and colonel at-
/ tached to the general staff and that
others were addressed to individuals
registered for selective service.
Even 50, held Justice Murphy, the
inclusion OF these in mailing list
OF 600, addressed to various organ
izations and individuals, "is quite
consistent with a mere intent to in
fluence public opinion and to circu-
late malicious political propaganda
among outstanding personages,
whether they be In the armed forces
or not" Such statute, he and four
other members of the high bench
decided, must be construed strictly,
with intent to violate shown specific
cally.
One of the several counts in the
Hartzel indictment charged conspir-
acy with two other defendants to do
the alleged acts. The other two de-
fendants were cleared before the
case reached the Supreme Court.
The indictment against the 20 per-
sons on trial charges only conspir-
acy.
| Conspiracy Is Charged.
There is, however, an important
point of divergence between the
two cases, as the Government will
point out to Justice Eicher Hart
eel was charged with acting on his
own hook. The 20 defendants are
alleged to have conspired with on
cials of the German government
and leaders Of the Nazi party to in
cite trouble among the armed forces
as part of a plan to overthrow the
United States Government and set
up a national socialist state.
Mr.. Jackson plans to urge as an
alternative in case Justice Eicher
denies the motion for a directed yer.
dict at this time that the Govern
ment's evidence thus far be thrown
out and the prosecution be required
to start all over in orderly fashion"
by connecting the defendants with
any alleged conspiracy and showing
acts in furtherance of it in the
District.
The Governments early testimony
has been designed largely to show
there was a Nazi conspiracy and
that the German American Bund, to
which some Of the defendants be-
longed and with which others as
sertedly were in contact, provided
the point of attack.