City of Chicago v. Terminiello, 30365.
Court | Supreme Court of Illinois |
Citation | 400 Ill. 23,79 N.E.2d 39 |
Docket Number | No. 30365.,30365. |
Parties | CITY OF CHICAGO v. TERMINIELLO. |
Decision Date | 13 May 1948 |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from First Division Appellate Court, First District, on Appeal from Municipal Court of Chicago; John V. McCormick, Judge.
Arthur Terminiello was found guilty of disorderly conduct in violation of ordinance of City of Chicago, which conviction was affirmed by Appellate Court for the First District, 332 Ill.App. 17, 74 N.E.2d 45, after transfer of direct appeal by Supreme Court, 396 Ill. 441,71 N.E.2d 2, and the defendant appeals by permission.
Affirmed.Maximilian J. St. George and Albert W. Dilling, both of Chicago, for appellant.
Benjamin S. Adamowski, Corp. Counsel, of Chicago (L. Louis Karton, A. A. Pantelis, and Harry A. Iseberg, all of Chicago, of counsel), for appellee.
A jury in the municipal court of Chicago found the defendant, Arthur W. Terminiello, guilty of the offense of disorderly conduct, in violation of a city ordinance. Judgment was rendered on the verdict and defendant was fined $100. Upon direct appeal, we transferred the cause to the Appellate Court for the First District, no constitutional question being presented so as to confer jurisdiction on this court. City of Chicago v. Terminiello, 396 Ill. 41, 71 N.E.2d 2. The Appellate Court affirmed. City of Chicago v. Terminiello, 332 Ill.App. 17, 74 N.E.2d 45. We have allowed defendant's petition for leave to appeal.
The action grows out of a meeting held in an auditorium in Chicago on February 7, 1946. The meeting was held under the auspices of the Christian Veterans of America, Frederick Kister, director. Printed invitations, signed by Gerald L. K. Smith, were sent to persons on a mailing list. Each invitation was accompanied by several cards of admission. The invitations announced that Father Arthur W. Terminiello was the ‘radio Priest of the South;’ that he ‘is responsible more than any other single individual in America for bringing about the investigation of the Pearl Harbor scandal;’ that he ‘has been referred to by many as the Father Coughlin of the South,’ and that ‘the same people who hate Father Coughlin hate Father Terminiello’ and ‘have persecuted him, hounded him, threatened him.’ With reference to the extra admission cards, the notices read as follows: Each card states that it will admit the bearer and one friend and that admission is by card only.
The meeting was well attended. Persons desiring to hear defendant speak filled the 800-seat auditorium to capacity, others stood in the rear and about 250 were turned away. An hour before the meeting, a strong picket line was formed in front of the auditorium. The number in the picket line gradually increased to several hundred and a crowd estimated at 1000 persons gathered outside to protest the meeting. Despite the presence of approximately seventy policemen, a number of disorders occurred. Some persons braved the picket line. Others were escorted by police. Friends were separated. Clothing was torn. Missiles of all kinds were thrown at the building. Twenty- eight windows were broken. Stench bombs fell on the steps to the auditorium. Forty boys in a flying wedge bowled over policemen forming a cordon on the steps and almost broke into the hall. Other attempts were made to rush the meeting. Part of the mob tried to bash down the rear door of the auditorium. All during the evening there was much noise. Cries of ‘Nazis,’ ‘damned Fascists' and ‘Hitlers' greeted those attending the meeting and frequently the crowd shouted and chanted in unison.
Several persons took tickets at the door. Most of those attending the meeting entered by card of admission. Many came in without cards. The mailing list of persons to whom invitations and cards had been sent was not introduced in evidence nor was there any testimony relative to the source and composition of the list.
Smith opened the meeting and was followed by Kister and Terminiello. A transcript of defendant's speech was introduced in evidence. The following excerpts are illustrative: * * *
* * *
The testimony relative to the reaction of the audience during the speech is conflicting. The complaining witness, Ira Latimer, stated that the audience did not merely cheer and applaud; that the people were disturbed and angry, and that the reference to the actions of non-Christian doctors and nurses in Germany drew ‘Ahs,’ ‘Ohs' and other expressions of anger from the audience. Lucille Lipman, a Quaker of Irish extraction, testified that when defendant said there was no crime too great for the Jews to commit, the woman next to her said, and that, at the mention of the amputations performed on German prisoners, the people around her said ‘Oh’ and ‘Ah’ and ‘Isn't that terrible.’ On cross-examination, Miss Lipman related that she was so riled and wrought up at all the lies told she was tempted to commit violence. The last witness for plaintiff, Michael Karel, a Jew, testified that when Terminiello spoke of the Zionistic Jews threatening to undermine our county people shouted, ‘Yes, send the Jews back to Russia,’ ‘Kill the Jews,’ ‘Dirty kikes;’ that later, when the speaker referred to starving German mothers and the Morgenthau plan, persons close to him said, ‘They ought to starve the Jews' and ‘They ought to kill Morgenthau,’ and that, when the speech turned to non-Christian doctors and nurses amputating German men and infecting German women, several women next to him cried, ‘They ought to do that to the Jews, they ought to cripple them.’ On the other hand, witnesses appearing for defendant testified that the audience was quiet, attentive and orderly at all times, and denied that anyone shouted threats against Jews.
The ordinance under which defendant was convicted provides, in pertinent part, ‘All persons who shall make, aid, countenance, or assist in making any improper noise, riot, disturbance, breach of the peace, or diversion tending to a breach of the peace, within the limits of the city * * * shall be deemed guilty of disorderly conduct, and upon conviction thereof, shall be severally fined not less than one dollar nor more than two hundred dollars for each offense.’ City of Chicago, Revised Code of 1939, chap. 193, par. 1(1). The gist of the charge against defendant was breach of the peace or, in...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Collin v. Smith, 77 C 2982.
......Supp. 680 David A. Goldberger, American Civil Liberties Union, Chicago, Ill. for plaintiffs. . Harvey Schwartz, Schwartz & ...at 516, 59 S.Ct. 954; see also Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, 394 U.S. 147, 150-51, 89 S.Ct. 935, 22 L.Ed.2d 162 (1969); ...Terminiello v. City of Chicago, 337 U.S. 1, 69 S.Ct. 894, 93 L.Ed. 1131 (1949). ......
-
Grayned v. City of Rockford 8212 5106
...... identical with one invalidated as violative of equal protection in Police Department of Chicago v. Mosley, 408 U.S. 92, 92 S.Ct. 2286, 33 L.Ed.2d 212, is likewise invalid. P. 107. . ...New York, 394 U.S. 576, 592, 89 S.Ct. 1354, 1365 (1969). 19. Cf. Chicago v. Terminiello, 400 Ill. 23, 79 N.E.2d 39 (1948), reversed on other grounds, 337 U.S. 1, 6, 69 S.Ct. 894, 896, 93 ......
-
Village of Skokie v. National Socialist Party of America, s. 77-628 and 77-662
......[9 Ill.Dec. 92] David A. Goldberger and Barbara O'Toole, Chicago, for defendants-appellants. . Harvey Schwartz and Gilbert ...1972), 460 F.2d 746, 754.) Starting with Terminiello v. City of Chicago (1949), 337 U.S. 1, 69 S.Ct. 894, 93 L.Ed. 1131 and ......
-
City of Chicago v. Lord, Gen. Nos. 46231
......Terminiello, 400 Ill. 23, 79 N.E.2d 39; City of Chicago v. Williams, 254 Ill. 360, 98 N.E. 666, this does not preclude a violation of a municipal ordinance, ......