United States ex rel Kasparian v. Hughes

Decision Date17 January 1922
Docket Number2441.
Citation278 F. 262
PartiesUNITED STATES ex rel. KASPARIAN v. HUGHES, Immigration Com'r.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Fred J Shoyer, of Philadelphia, Pa., for relator.

John Robert Jones, Asst. U.S. Atty., and George W. Coles, U.S Atty., both of Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant.

THOMPSON District Judge.

The relator, an alien, 19 years of age, born in Armenia, Turkey landed at the port of New York in May, 1920. In the latter part of April, 1921, about 11 o'clock at night, he was observed in company with another Armenian, Pilbosian, in the neighborhood of Fifty-Second and Walnut streets Philadelphia, distributing circulars, some of which were headed 'May Day. Red Labor Day,' and the others 'May Day of Revolution.' The two men were arrested by a policeman, and charged, under the Pennsylvania Act of June 26, 1919 (P.L. 639; Pa. St. 1920, Secs. 8040, 8041), with sedition. The act, as far as it applies to the present case, defines and punishes sedition as follows:

'Be it enacted, etc., that the words 'sedition,' as used in this act * * * shall also include: * * *
'(g) The sale, gift, or distribution of any prints, publications, books, papers, documents, or written matter in any form, which advocates, furthers, or teaches sedition as hereinbefore defined. * * *
'Section 2. Sedition, as defined in section 1 of this act, shall be a felony, and any person convicted thereof shall be sentenced to a fine of not less than $100 and not more than $10,000, and to imprisonment not exceeding twenty years, either or both, in the discretion of the court.'

He was tried and found guilty. While confined at Moyamensing Prison, a warrant of arrest, issued by the immigration officials of the Department of Labor, was served upon him, and a hearing had upon the charge that--

'he knowingly had in his possession for the purpose of circulation or distribution printed matter advising the overthrow by force or violence of the government of the United States or of all forms of law.'

Upon the recommendation of the Commissioner of Immigration, the Acting Secretary of Labor issued an order of deportation upon the ground that from proofs submitted to him, after due hearing before the immigrant inspector, he had become satisfied that the alien was in the United States in violation of the Act of October 16, 1918, as amended by the Act of June 5, 1920, to wit:

'That he writes, publishes or causes to be written or published or knowingly circulates, distributes, prints or displays or knowingly causes to be circulated, distributed, printed, published or displayed or knowingly had in his possession for the purpose of circulating, distributing, publishing or displaying written or printed matter, advising, advocating or teaching the overthrow by force or violence of the Government of the United States or of all forms of law.'

From the evidence at the hearing, it appears that the relator was employed as a coffee man in a restaurant at Fifteenth and Chestnut streets, and, upon the night in question, he was with Pilbosian, distributing circulars which clearly by their terms advise, advocate, and teach the overthrow by force or violence of the government of the United States. The relator, who was examined through a Turkish interpreter, stated that when he was with Pilbosian that night a man gave them the papers to be distributed, paying them $3 for their services, and promising that, when they got through distributing them all, he would give them more money, and that the papers were grocery advertisements. The relator admitted the distribution of the circulars, and stated that he had been distributing them two or three minutes when he was arrested. He stated that he could not read any of the circulars, and that he could not read or write English. The officer who arrested him was the only other witness examined, and he testified merely to seeing the papers distributed and taking some of them from the relator's possession.

In the petition for the writ the relator alleges that at the time of his arrest he was unable to read, write, or fully understand the English language, and that he was unaware of the contents of the circulars distributed; that he was at no time prior to his arrest or subsequent thereto connected or associated in any manner with any so-called 'Red' organizations or associations for the spread of seditious or anarchistic doctrine or propaganda. The Act of October 16, 1918, 40 Stat. 1012, as amended by the Act of June 5, 1920, 41 Stat. 1008, authorizes the exclusion and expulsion from the United States of--

'(d) Aliens who write, publish, or cause to be written or published, or who knowingly circulate, distribute, print, or display, or knowingly cause to be circulated, distributed printed, published, or displayed, or who knowingly have in their possession for the purpose of circulation, distribution, publication, or display, any written or printed matter, advising, advocating, or teaching: * * * (1) The overthrow by force or violence of the government of the United States or of all forms of law.' It is contended on behalf of the relator that the order of deportation was issued in pursuance of a hearing at which the evidence adduced did not establish...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Morissette v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • February 5, 1951
    ...commission of an unlawful act does not warrant the presumption that the accused had the requisite specific intent. United States ex rel. Kasparian v. Hughes, D.C., 278 F. 262. Where a statute, 18 U.S.C.A. § 87, provided that anyone who should steal, embezzle or knowingly apply to his own us......
  • Dunat v. Hurney
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit
    • May 29, 1961
    ...such officer or agency must entertain and exercise its discretion in the manner prescribed by Congress. See United States ex rel. Kasparian v. Hughes, D.C.E.D.Pa. 1922, 278 F. 262; United States ex rel. Cavanaugh v. Howe, D.C.S.D.N.Y.1916, 235 F. Here, there are no issues of fact to be reso......
  • Ex parte La Matina
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Connecticut
    • May 14, 1925
    ...in reviewing the findings of the Department of Labor made after a hearing, has certain limitations as set forth in U. S. ex rel. Kasparian v. Hughes (D. C.) 278 F. 262. On page 265 Judge Thompson said: "It is well established that, in reviewing departmental action under a statute of this na......
  • Willingham v. Panick
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit
    • May 7, 1947
    ...Words and Phrases, Perm.Ed., Permit, page 144; 48 C.J. page 924; Commonwealth v. Wills, 121 Ky. 103, 89 S.W. 144; United States ex rel. Kasparian v. Hughes, D. C., 278 F. 262; Beale v. Yazoo Yarn Mill, 126 Miss. 807, 88 So. ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT