Opinion ID: 1474108
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 11

Heading: Flanders Hall.

Text: Flanders Hall was incorporated in 1939 as a small New Jersey publishing house by the Hauck brothers. It came to pass that Sigfried Hauck, the President of Flanders Hall, Inc., met defendant after defendant had praised Hauck's book, published by Flanders Hall. This was the only book Flanders Hall had published; as it turned out it was the only book published by Flanders Hall from some time in 1939, when it was incorporated, until after defendant took over in August, 1940. Similarly, defendant's commendation was one of only a few received by the author. The defendant became interested in Flanders Hall. After a time, on August 3, 1940, defendant and Flanders Hall, Inc., executed a written contract prepared by defendant. Part 2 read: I [defendant] have from time to time certain works which I would like to see published and distributed and I am willing to advance the necessary expense for this purpose under proper terms and conditions. This is probably not the usual publisher-author arrangement. Defendant, may it be remembered, registered as an author and journalist. Part 5 read: In view of my interest in the company and the obligations which I am taking upon myself, you agree to make no disbursements, large or small, without my written consent; to furnish me weekly with a statement of expenses; to give me or my deputies access to the books of the company whenever requested and to incur no liabilities on behalf of the company without my knowledge and consent. Failure to abide by this clause will invalidate any obligation on my part toward the company. Part 6 provided:    Flanders Hall, Publishers, give me the option to purchase 66 2/3 per cent of their outstanding capital stock at a price not to exceed $500. Again, this is probably not the usual publisher-author relationship, and it definitely put defendant in financial control of Flanders Hall. Defendant was concerned with policy as well as with financial control. Flanders Hall set out on a series of Books-of-the-Hour. In one of its circulars, drumming up a market for this series, appears a letter by the editor-in-chief which it was shown was prepared by Hauck and the defendant. Dear Fellow American: I am writing to you because I am sure that you are anxious to see the United States stay out of all foreign wars.       We are urged to give our blood and our treasure to make the world safe for British `democracy'. Common sense dictates a rigid examination of the `democracy' we are asked to redeem. Books-of-the-Hour vividly illustrate, among other vital issues, the workings of this `democracy' in India, in Ireland, in Egypt, in Palestine and elsewhere. These books are based on authentic material from many sources.    The facts were known to every schoolboy in the past, before skillful propaganda gradually erased them.    In this spirit, Flanders Hall has embarked upon a campaign of education. Ours is a patriotic task, for which we freely ask the support of all those who believe with us in America First and America Only. Yours for our country's sake, With an expressed effort to show the American people the inside information on how badly democracy is working, particularly in the British Empire, and with the revelation that Flanders Hall has embarked upon a campaign of education, it is certain that activities are revealed which are within the scope of the Act. Clearly, defendant's work in Flanders Hall was more than that of author and journalist. Assuming for the moment that the revelation of all the details of a registrant's business is not required, this designation of author and journalist does not even summarize the outer confines of defendant's occupational pursuits. When defendant, in another separate registration, registered as agent for one Wirsing, Editor of the Munich Newspaper, to handle a book in this country which was put out by Flanders Hall in a fashion similar to that of the Books-of-the-Hour, he designated himself as author, journalist, and publicist. So when defendant controlled a publishing house, when he supervised a circular that was its chief means of advertising, he was at least a publicist by his own better judgment, irrespective of how much more he may have been. Moreover, defendant had said that Flanders Hall interested him; he liked the idea of running a publishing house because it would give him something to fall back on. After the idea was realized, then, it would seem that the running of Flanders Hall was a part of his business. Merely giving the most generic terms possible in describing the nature of registrant's business is not, we believe, a compliance with the spirit of the Act. This is brought out in bolder relief in this case when it is realized that some of the publishing done by Flanders Hall was surreptitious. There was proof that two of the books published by Flanders Hall concealed the source of their texts. One purported to be from the French of La Touche. Another purported to be from the Dutch of Vroom. In fact both of these books were translated from the German of other authors and had been published by the German Information Service. One other book purported to be compiled from British sources by an Ethiopian, when in fact its author was German. Defendant directed Hauck to change the names of the authors on two additional manuscripts. When books are written on international problems and the author is shifted from one country to another under a fictitious name, it can readily be appreciated that at least one object of those in control is to mislead the reader. Flanders Hall embarked upon a campaign of education, but much of its work was secretive. The defendant reminds us: Propaganda may insidiously disguise itself as education. It may pretend that it is merely a straightforward campaign for publicity. But it varies from both education and publicity in that the element of camouflage in one form or another is always present. [14] Defendant was in control of Flanders Hall. As such he was at least a publisher, a propagandist, and a publicist as well as being an author. Defendant failed to state this kind of work that he was doing, and his interest in, and operation of, Flanders Hall.