State v. Gilbert

• Decision Date: 20 December 1918
• Docket Number: 21,089
• Parties: STATE v. JOSEPH GILBERT
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

169 N.W. 790

141 Minn. 263

STATE v. JOSEPH GILBERT

No. 21,089

Supreme Court of Minnesota

December 20, 1918

Defendant was indicted by the grand jury of Goodhue county charged with the crime of discouraging enlistment in the military and naval forces of the United States, tried in the district court for that county before Johnson, J., and a jury, and found guilty as charged in the indictment. Defendant's motion for a new trial was denied. From the judgment entered pursuant to the verdict, defendant appealed. Affirmed.

SYLLABUS

War -- discouraging enlistment -- intent.

1. Intent is not an ingredient of the offense created by chapter 463, Laws of 1917.

War -- assertions quoted in indictment constitute violation of statute.

2. The statements which the indictment charges defendant with making, if believed, would naturally and reasonably deter enlistment and giving of aid in the war; and constitute a violation of the statute.

War -- question for jury -- evidence.

3. The evidence made the question as to whether defendant had committed the offense, a question for the jury and is sufficient to sustain the verdict.

War -- remarks of auditors admissible.

4. Remarks made by members of the audience during defendant's speech, to which defendant made reply, were properly admitted in evidence in connection with such replies.

War -- when leading questions are inadmissible.

5. Leading questions, not otherwise admissible, are not made admissible by the claim that the purpose is to impeach an adverse witness to whom the same questions had been propounded, if the answer could have no tendency to prove that the adverse witness ever made any statement inconsistent with his testimony.

War -- statute valid.

6. That the statute, including section 3, is constitutional has been established by prior decisions.

George Nordlin, Thomas V. Sullivan, Frederic A. Pike and Arthur Le Sueur, for appellant.

Clifford L. Hilton, Attorney General, James E. Markham and John E Palmer, Assistant Attorneys General, and Thomas A. Mohn, County Attorney, for respondent.

OPINION

TAYLOR, C.

A public meeting, called by Louis W. Martin, an organizer for the Nonpartisan League, was held at the village of Kenyon in the county of Goodhue, on the evening of August 18, 1917. Some 200 people attended. Two officers of the league, N. S. Randall and the defendant, were present and made speeches. Defendant was subsequently convicted of having violated chapter 463, p. 764, of the Laws of 1917, by teaching and advocating, in the speech which he made at this meeting, that men should not enlist in the military or naval forces of the United States, and that citizens of this state should not aid the United States in prosecuting the war against the public enemies. He appealed to this court from the judgment.

The indictment charges that on the eighteenth day of August, 1917, at the village of Kenyon in the county of Goodhue, at a public place where more than five persons were assembled, defendant did "unlawfully and wilfully teach and advocate by word of mouth and oral speech that men should not enlist in the military and naval forces of the United States, and that the citizens of the State of Minnesota should not assist the United States in prosecuting and carrying on war with the public enemies of the United States," by then and there stating to those assembled: "We are going over to Europe to make the world safe for democracy, but I tell you we had better make America safe for democracy first. You say, what is the matter with our democracy. I tell you what is the matter with it: Have you had anything to say as to who should be President? Have you had anything to say as to who should be Governor of this state? Have you had anything to say as to whether we should go into this war? You know you have not. If this is such a great democracy, for Heaven's sake why should we not vote on conscription of men. We were stampeded into this war by newspaper rot to pull England's chestnuts out of the fire for her. I tell you if they conscripted wealth like they have conscripted men, this war would not last over forty-eight hours."

1. Defendant contends that this indictment is defective because it fails to allege that in speaking the words set forth therein he intended to discourage enlistment and the giving of aid.

The statute makes teaching or advocating nonenlistment or nonaid unlawful. It does not make the intent of the teacher or advocate an ingredient of the offense. The statute is a police regulation, and, under it, the doing of the forbidden act is a criminal offense regardless of the intent. State v. Sharp, 121 Minn. 381, 141 N.W. 526; State v. Lundgren, 124 Minn. 162, 144 N.W. 752, Ann. Cas. 1915B, 377; State v. People's Ice Co. 124 Minn. 307, 144 N.W. 962.

2. Defendant also contends that the statements set forth in the indictment do not constitute a violation of the statute.

The question is whether the natural and reasonable effect of the statements uttered is to deter those to whom they were made from enlisting in the military or naval forces and from aiding the United States in carrying on the war. State v. Holm. 139 Minn. 267, 166 N.W. 181, L.R.A. 1918C, 304; State v. Freerks, 140 Minn. 349, 168 N.W. 23.

The declaration that the world must be made safe for democracy had been acclaimed throughout the entire country as expressive of our purpose in the war. Defendant used a reference to this sentiment as a basis for casting aspersions upon the democracy of our own country. And after declaring in effect that his hearers had had nothing to say as to whether we should go into this war, and that, if this country was a democracy, we ought to vote on the question of conscription he asserted: "We were stampeded into this war by newspaper rot to pull England's chestnuts out of the fire for her. I tell you if they conscripted wealth like they have conscripted men, this war would not last over forty-eight hours." We think that people who heard these statements uttered, if th...