———-
Hellraisers Journal – Wednesday July 6, 1910
New Castle, Pennsylvania – Free Press on Trial for “Seditious Libel”
From the International Socialist Review of July 1910:
The Free Press Fight at New Castle, Pa.
By FRED D. WARREN
———-[Part I of I.]
HE case against the comrades comprising the committee engaged in the publication of the New Castle Free Press, charged with “seditious libel,” was tried under what was known as the old English common law. This law against “seditious libel” was framed at a time when kings ruled by divine right, and in order to establish the guilt of the “pestiferous” McKeever, Hartman, McCarty and White, the prosecutor of Lawrence County, Pennsylvania, cited a case that occurred during the reign of Charles II. A score of Irish peasants raised a rebellion, so the prosecutor read, against the English land lords. These Irish peasants were arrested, charged with “seditious libel” and sentenced to prison. That was nearly four hundred years ago, yet we find a fossilized county prosecutor referring to it today in an effort to convict these four comrades of ours. It would be laughable were it not for the serious consequences that are likely to follow this New Castle trial for “seditious libel.”
After a six days fight, in which each point was vigorously contested, Judge Porter, the presiding magistrate, elected on the democratic-populist ticket by the working class of New Castle, charged the jury, in a lengthy communication in which he explained, in a ponderous and patronizing way, that while the constitution of Pennsylvania guarantees the right of free press, the state must, if it was to be preserved, reserve the right to protect itself against “seditious and pestiferous persons, who sought by means of the press to bring the reins of government into contempt and ridicule.” So nicely balanced were the scales of justice, under these instructions, that it required only a breath from the steel trust attorney, who was in constant attendance at the trial, to turn the balance in favor of the prosecution.
After twelve hours deliberation, the jury returned for instructions as to where the cost of the prosecution should be placed. Under the laws of Pennsylvania, the jury may place the cost on the defendant, even though the defendant be found not guilty, or it may place the cost on the county or on the prosecutor. The jury again retired and in a few minutes returned. With a solemnity that fitted the occasion, Judge Porter opened the envelope in which the jury’s verdict had been placed and silently read it. Hesitatingly picking up his pen, he started to attach his official signature to the document that would have set our comrades free.
There was a moment’s silence disturbed only by the ticking of the court room clock. The judge closed his eyes. It could readily be discerned that the judicial think box was at work. He opened his mouth as if to speak. The spectators leaned forward expectantly. The judge cleared his throat, readjusted his wig and then said: “Gentlemen of the jury, you have brought in a faulty verdict. You cannot place part of the cost on the prosecutor and the balance on the other parties. You will retire and bring in a verdict in accordance with my instructions.”
For the third time the jury retired. After an hour’s deliberation, the twelve men returned to the court room and announced that they were unable to agree! The jury was thereupon discharged and the case now stands just where it started, as though it had not been tried!
If the verdict had been “guilty,” there would have been no question of costs, as the verdict of guilty carries with it the expense of prosecution. This fact is taken as conclusive evidence that the twelve men had decided that our comrades were not guilty of “seditious libel,” but they had in the minds of two members of the jury “acted badly” and should therefore pay a part of the costs. When I left New Castle Sunday night, it was the talk on the street that the twelve men voted “not guilty” on the charge of “seditious libel” and that it was divided 10 to 2 on the question of costs.
And so this case—fraught with so much concern to the working class of this nation,——must be fought all over again at an expense of thousands of dollars. Trust magnates of Pennsylvania hope by this means to break the spirit of our New Castle comrades but, if I am any judge of men, I am quite sure that it will have the effect of increasing their enthusiasm and determination.
[Emphasis added.]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SOURCE & IMAGES
Quote BBH, Win Workers to Revolution, ISR p1096, June 1910
https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=MVhIAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&pg=GBS.PA1096
The International Socialist Review, Volume 11
(Chicago, Illinois)
-July 1910 to June 1911
Charles H. Kerr & Company, 1911
https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/isr/
https://books.google.com/books?id=8-05AQAAMAAJ
ISR – July 1910
https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/pubs/isr/v11n01-jul-1910-ISR-gog-Corn-OCR.pdf
https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=8-05AQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&pg=GBS.PP5
page 34: “The Free Press Fight at New Castle”
-by Fred D. Warren
https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=8-05AQAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&pg=GBS.PA34
See also:
Hellraisers Journal – Saturday June 4, 1910
From June 1910 ISR: Big Bill Haywood on the Jailing of Staff of Solidarity Newspaper in New Castle, Pennsylvania, for Displeasing Steel Trust
Part I & Part II
Tag: New Castle Free Press
https://weneverforget.org/tag/new-castle-free-press/
Tag: Fred Warren
https://weneverforget.org/tag/fred-warren/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This Land Is Your Land – Tom Morello, The Nightwatchman
Lyrics by Woody Guthrie