Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1949-10-16
GuiIty Communists

So far as popular judgment goes, the
conviction of the eleven Communist lead
ers IN New York is tantamount to con-
Vlctlon OF the Communist Party as being
criminal conspiracy to bring about the
forcible overthrow of this Government.
And as practical matter, though not as
matter of law, this is true
The distinction, however, is an important
one. The Communist Party, as such, was
not on trial in the New York courtroom. It
continues to be legal party. And the
conviction Of the eleven Communist lead
ers on the conspiracy charge imputes no
guilt in the legal sense, to other Ameri-
can Communists. The most that the jury's
verdict does Is to affirm that communism,
as practised by the eleven defendants, is a
criminal offense. Other Communists, If
they wish, may continue to be active. But
they Will have to reckon with at least two
factors. One is the knowledge that activi-
ties paralleling those of the defendants
may expose them to criminal prosecution.
The other Is that henceforth they may find
1t harder to bemuse the gullibIe with their
claim that the objective of communism is
a better America, for the evidence pro-
duced at the trial proves beyond question
that the real aim is the destruction, not
the betterment, of our society.
There Is another aspect of this trial
which should be clearly understood. The
Jury's verdict is merely the beginning of
the trial of communism as practiced by
these defendants. long and possibly
difficult journey through the appellate
courts lies ahead.
Federal Judge Harold r. Medina, pre-
siding at the trial, ruled as matter OF
law that the activities Of the defendants.
If proved by the evidence, amounted to
such substantial evil and threat that
Congress was justified In forbidding them,
despite the constitutional protection of
free speech assembly and press. In other
words, he held that the Smith Act (spor-
sored, incidentally, by Representative How
ard Smith OF nearby Virginia) does not
trangress the first amendment in the
circumstances OF this case.
The controlling judgment on this point,
however, will be rendered by the Supreme
Court. Unless the conviction should be
set aside on the basis of some error in
procedure, the highest court will have to
determine whether the defendants in
teaching and advocating the forcible over
throw OF the Government, have raised that
clear and present danger" to the Govern
ment which the late Justice Holmes held
necessary to sustain any law abridging the
guarantees of the first amendment. How
far must subversive conspiracy progress
before it can be punished as crime? Can
it be nipped in the bud, or must we risk
waiting, as the Czechs did, until 1t is too
late to act successfully against the con-
spirators? This is the heart of the matter.
and the Governments effort to curb the
Communists will stand or fall on the view
that the Supreme Court takes of It,
No comment on this trial would be ade
quate without word OF appreciation for
the jury and the Judge. Through nine long,
exhausting months the jurors have listened
to testimony and arguments, rendering a
service which comes close to being above
and beyond their duty as good citizens.
And Judge Medina, both in his admirable
conduct of the trial in the face of the
heckling from defense counsel and in his
eminently clear and fair charge to the
jury, has set an example of which the
judiciary may we'll be proud The Nation
owes them-judge and jury-a vote of
gratitude.