United States v. Blankenship, Cr. No. 8052.
| Decision Date | 10 December 1954 |
| Docket Number | Cr. No. 8052. |
| Citation | 127 F. Supp. 760 |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of West Virginia |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. William Richard BLANKENSHIP, Defendant. |
Duncan W. Daugherty, U. S. Atty., Huntington, W. Va., and Wm. T. Lively, Asst. U. S. Atty., Charleston, W. Va., for the United States.
Horace S. Meldahl, Charleston, W. Va., for defendant.
The defendant, William Richard Blankenship, was indicted on April 5, 1954, for violation of the Selective Service Act of 1948, as amended, Title 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 462, in failing and refusing to report for civilian work as ordered by the draft board. The case was heard by the court after jury trial was waived. It was submitted upon an agreed statement of facts, the records of the draft board, and a short amount of oral evidence. There is very little, if any, conflict in the material facts. Although no request has been made for same, I make the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
The defendant registered with Local Board No. 13 at Williamson, W. Va., on October 26, 1949, and thereafter filed his classification questionnaire on February 2, 1951. He there stated that he was a student preparing for the ministry under the direction of Watchtower Bible and Tract Society attending the Theocratic Ministry at Williamson, and that because of his religious training and belief he was conscientiously opposed to participation in war in any form. Pursuant to those representations the board classified him IV-E on March 8, 1951. Subsequently the board changed defendant's classification from IV-E to I-O pursuant to a new regulation for conscientious objectors, the former classification having been discontinued.
On January 10, 1952, Blankenship appeared personally before the local board, at which time he was asked if he knew of any classification other than I-O to which he should belong. He stated that he should belong to IV-E, which was for conscientious objectors. When informed that such classification had been discontinued, no other classification was specified by Blankenship. After such personal appearance, his classification was reviewed by the local board and he was continued in 1-O.
The defendant was ordered to report for physical examination and on November 25, 1952, he was mailed Defense Department Form No. 62 entitled "Certificate of Acceptability", which notified him that he had been found fully acceptable for induction into the armed forces. He was asked to select three types of work of national importance, in order of preference, which he was qualified to do. Subsequently, upon learning that he would have to perform civilian work of national importance under Title 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 456(j), defendant informed the board that he had not known that the 1-O classification would interfere with his duty of the ministry by compelling such work. Thereupon, defendant asserted for the first time that he was entitled to a ministerial classification. Prior to the time that he passed his physical examination and was found acceptable for service, the Selective Service file shows that he had informed the board that he was a steel worker employed by Republic Steel Corporation at Youngstown, O., working five days per week. At the time he asserted the right to a ministerial classification he also requested a personal appearance before the board, which was denied, but was later granted after he appealed to the state appeal board.
On March 3, 1953, the state appeal board classified defendant as 1-O, after the local board had been requested by him to forward his file to the state appeal board for consideration. On March 12, 1953, he submitted a special report for Class 1-O registrants to the local board. Again he refused to list any work except that of "minister". In that form under the heading "Important Civil Work Experience", he showed that he was still employed by Republic Steel with a final pay of approximately $65 per week.
On April 16, 1953, defendant again had a personal appearance before the local board with a representative of the State Selective Service Headquarters present. At that hearing he asked the local board to permit him to continue his job with Youngstown Steel Company, stating that such employment would permit him to continue his religious work and studies while being employed there. (See the summary of such meeting in the Selective Service file.)
Again on June 18, 1953, he requested and was given a personal appearance, and the summary of that appearance, marked "Defendant's Exhibit 12" in the Selective Service file, shows that Blankenship admitted that he was a full-time employee of Republic Steel, working five days per week; that he contended that all Jehovah's Witnesses were ministers even though they presided over no church; that he had charge of no particular group of communicants; that he received no direction as to the type of work he did after work hours at the steel mill; that he had received no certificate from the church giving him the right to officiate at marriages and funerals; and that he received no compensation from the church for any work done. Following this hearing the local board again reviewed his file and continued him in 1-O and denied his request for a IV-D ministerial classification. At defendant's request his file was again forwarded to the state appeal board for their consideration, and on July 17, 1953, he was retained in class 1-O by the state appeal board. Defendant was then ordered to report for civilian work, pursuant to Title 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 456(j), which order required him to report to that board on December 7, 1953. Defendant failed and refused to report to the local board as ordered, and was indicted for failing to so report, on April 5, 1954.
The record shows that on October 8, 1952, defendant filed a supplementary information sheet with the local board in which he stated that he was "still contributing my time to ministry schools and work amounting to around 25 hours per month". A paper signed by John L. Rankine, a representative of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, stated that defendant spent about 35 to 40 hours per month in such work, not to mention the preaching done by him in the local congregation.
Tony Dercoli, another member of Jehovah Witnesses, in a letter filed with the local board on June 18, 1953, stated that the defendant spends a "good number of hours weekly" in religious work. There is evidence by the defendant and other Jehovah Witnesses to the effect that in his spare time, defendant prepared Bible lectures, participated in world wide Bible Education, made house to house calls, attended church services and preached with others in the congregation and studied to prepare for the ministry. The record in all the hearings before the local board and defendant's testimony at the trial show that he worked at least 40 hours per week as a steel worker, five days per week, eight hours per day.
Upon this record the local board found that he was not a minister within the meaning of the Selective Service Act. His classification and his requests for personal appearance were reviewed a total of twelve times by the local board and the state appeal board, and there was never a dissenting vote of either of the two boards when his request for a hearing or his classification was considered. On the witness stand at his trial he testified that the board never denied him an opportunity to present any evidence to support his claim.
At the beginning of his trial, defendant urged (1), that the order to report was invalid because work at Weston State Hospital was not work of national importance and (2), that there was not sufficient evidence in the file to support a finding that he was not a minister of religion. The first defense was waived by defendant when he testified at the trial that he would not have served in any capacity under the Selective Service Act because he would not be his own boss, and to make himself so available would be to break his covenant with God. Counsel for defendant then informed the court that the defendant relied "solely and exclusively on his right to a ministerial classification" (Tr. p. 20), and upon that issue the case was tried.
The provisions of the Selective Service Act of 1948, relative to this issue, Title 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 466, provides as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Woo v. United States
...F.2d 607; Badger v. United States (9 CCA 1963), 322 F.2d 902; Smith v. United States (4 CCA 1946), 157 F.2d 176; United States v. Blankenship (S.D.W.Va.1954), 127 F.Supp. 760; United States v. Messerman (M.D.Pa.1955), 128 F.Supp. 759. To hold otherwise would create a shambles of this area o......
-
United States v. Phillips
...to be within the group entitled to the ministerial classification. United States v. Simmons, 7 Cir., 213 F.2d 901; United States v. Blankenship, D.C., 127 F.Supp. 760. It was the opinion of the Board, and it is the opinion of this Court, that the defendant failed to sustain that burden. Fur......
-
United States v. Miller
...to be within the group entitled to the ministerial classification. United States v. Simmons, 7 Cir., 213 F.2d 901; United States v. Blankenship, D.C., 127 F.Supp. 760. It was the opinion of the Board, and it is the opinion of this Court, that the defendant, Miller, has not sustained that bu......
-
United States v. Capehart
...be within the group entitled to the ministerial classification. United States v. Simmons, 7 Cir., 213 F.2d 901, 903; United States v. Blankenship, D.C., 127 F.Supp. 760, 765. In the case of Estep v. United States, 327 U.S. 114, 66 S.Ct. 423, 427, 90 L.Ed. 567, it was decided: "The provision......