F O 00 m < •I BANCROFT LIBRARY THE LIBRARY OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA No. 3187 Itttlri ^tat^fl OKrnttt fflnttrt nf AppmlB Jfar tl|p Nitttlj ffltmttt. AUGUST^SANDBERG, Plaintiff in Error, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant in Error. WxmBttxpt nf SwnrJn* Upon Writ of Error to the United States District Court of the District of Arizona. Filmer Bros. Co. Print, 330 Jackson St., S. F., C-al. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2007 with funding from IVIicrosoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/augustsandbergplOOsandrich No. 3187 Oltrtmt (Slttmt of Appeals Jfor % Kmtif dirntit AUGUST SANDBERG, Plaintiff in Error, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant in Error. 5Fratt0rrlpt nf Sworft, Upon Writ of Error to the United States District Court of the District of Arizona. Filmer Bros. Co. Print, 330 Jackson St., S. F., Cal. WZS3 INDEX TO THE PRINTED TRANSCEIPT OP EECORD. [Clerk's Note: When deemed likely to be of an important nature, errors or doubtful matters appearing in the original certified record axe printed literally in italic; and, likewise, cancelled matter appearing in the original certified record is printed and cancelled herein accord- ingly. When possible, an omission from the text is indicated by printing in italic the two words between which the omission seems to occur.] Page Acknowledgment of Service of Draft of Pro- posed Bill of Exceptions 41 Assignment of Errors 44 Bail Bond 47 Bill of Exceptions 17 Certificate of Clerk U. S. District Court to Tran- script of Record 52 Citation on Writ of Error 55 Demurrer to Indictment 8 Indictment 2 Judgment 14 Minute Entry Made and Entered on May 18, 1918 1 Minutes of Court— May 18, 1918— Order Setting Cause for Trial and Fixing Amount of Bail Bond ^ Minutes of Court— May 22, 1918— Order Sus- taining Demurrer to Fourth Count of In- dictment and Overruling Demurrer as to All Other Counts, etc 9 Minutes of Court— May 28, 1918— Plea 10 Minutes of Court— May 28, 1918— Trial 10 ii August Sandherg vs. Index. Page Minutes of Court— May 29, 1918— Trial 12 Minutes of Court — June 1, 1918 — Order Enlarg- ing Time to File Bill of Exceptions, etc 15 Minutes of Court— June 11, 1918 — ^Order Re Confinement of August Sandberg 16 Minutes of Court— June 27, 1918— Order En- larging Time to Prepare Bill of Exceptions, etc 16 Names and Addresses of Counsel 1 Order Allowing Writ of Error 46 Petition for Writ of Error 42 Praecipe for Transcript of Record 50 TESTIMONY ON BEHALF OF THE GOV- ERNMENT: BLOCKENSDERFER, F. C 26 BROUGHTON, E. H 22 CAMERON, ROBERT E 25 In Rebuttal 39 CRAMER, WILLIAM 19 In Rebuttal 40 DASPIT, JESSE C— In Rebuttal 37 GRAHAM, EDWARD M 21 In Rebuttal 40 MURRAY, JOHN W.— In Rebuttal 40 TESTIMONY ON BEHALF OF DEFEND- ANT: BUTCHART, W. A 37 DOUGLAS, G. M 36 DOWELL, GRANT H 35 KING, WILLIAM B 36 KNOWLES, J. B 36 United States of America. iii Index. Page TESTIMONY ON BEHALF OF DEFEND- ANT — Continued : LA GEANDE, C. E 35 EOAEK, C. E 36 SANDBEEG, AUGUST 29 Verdict 13 Writ of Error 53 Names and Addresses of Counsel. Hon. THOMAS A. FLYNN, United States Attor- ney, Phoenix, Arizona, Hon. CLIFFORD R. McFALL, Assistant United States Attorney, Tucson, Arizona, Hon. JOHN H. MARTIN, Assistant United States Attorney, Tucson Arizona, Counsel for United States of America. A. A. WORSLEY, Esq., Tucson, Arizona, Counsel for Defendant, August Sandberg. [1*1 In the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Minute Entry Made and Entered on May 18, 1918. Docket No. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Comes now the Grand Jury aforesaid, and through their foreman report that they have found a true bill of indictment against the defendant herein, charging him with violation of Section 3 of the Espionage Act. [3] *Page-number appearing at foot of page of original certified Transcript of Eecord. 2 August Sandberg vs, 0-704— TUCSON. Vio. Title I, Sec. 3, Act of June 15, 1917, Making False Statements With Intent to Interfere With Military and Naval Forces, etc. United States of America, District of Arizona, — ss. Indictment. In the District Court of the United States in and for the District of Arizona, At the May Term Thereof, A. D. 1918. The Grand Jurors of the United States, im- paneled, sworn and charged at the term aforesaid, of the Court aforesaid, on their oath present, that August Sandberg, on the 15th day of December, A. D. 1917, and within the said District of Arizona, the United States being then, and at all times herein mentioned, at war with the Imperial German Gov- ernment, did, with the intent, on the part of him, the said August Sandberg, to interfere with the opera- tion and success of the military and naval forces of the United States, willfully, unlawfully and feloni- ously make and convey certain false statements, in this, to wit, that he, the said August Sandberg, then and there, and in the presence of, and to Robert E. Cameron, and other persons to the Grand Jurors un- known, did state in substance, the following : That our entry into the war was brought about by the Wall Street interests in order to protect our foreign loans to the Allies ; which said statements were false, as he, the said Au- United States of America. 3 gust Sandberg, then and there well knew, contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and pro- vided, and against the peace and dignity of the United States of America. SECOND COUNT. And the Grand Jurors aforesaid, on their oath aforesaid, do further present, that August Sandberg, on the 22d day of July, A. D. 1917, and within the said District of Arizona, the United States being V then, and at all times herein mentioned, at war with \ the Imperial German Government, did wilfully, un- I lawfully and feloniously cause and attempt to cause 1 insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny and refusal of \ duty in the military and naval forces of the United i States, to the injury of the said service and of the 1 United States, in this, to wit, that he, the said August ^ Sandberg, did then and there, and in the presence of, and to E. M. Graham, and other persons to the Grand Jurors unknown, state in substance, the following: That the German government was much more democratic than ours; that the German people enjoyed greater liberties than the Americans; that it will be a great blow to civilization if Ger- many should lose ; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the United States of America. THIRD COUNT. And the Grand Jurors aforesaid, on their oath aforesaid, to further present, that August Sandberg, on the 22d day of July, A. D. 1917, and within the said District of Arizona, the United States being 4 August Sandberg vs, then, and at all times herein mentioned, at war [4] with the Imperial German Government, did wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously cause and attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny and re- fusal of duty in the military and naval forces of the United States, to the injury of the said service and of the United States, in this, to wit, that he, the said August Sandberg, did then and there, and in the presence of, and to Eugene H. Broughton, and other persons to the Grand Jurors unknown, state in sub- stance, the following: That the Germans had a better form of gov- ernment than the people of America ; that Presi- dent Wilson was a weak character to allow Eng- land to dictate its policy and then the President coming out and making speeches to back up the British policies; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the United States of America. FOURTH COUNT. And the Grand Jurors aforesaid, on their oath aforesaid, do further present, that August Sandberg, on the 15th day of September, A. D. 1917, and within the said District of Arizona, the United States being then, and at all times herein mentioned, at war with the Imperial German Government, did wilfully, un- lawfully and feloniously cause and attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny and refusal of duty in the military and naval forces of the United States, to the injury of the said service and of the United States, in this, to wit, that he, the said Au- United States of America. 5 gust Sandberg, did then and there, and in the pres- ence of, and to John B. Murray, and other persons to the Grand Jurors unknown, state in substance, the following : The German Government is the most demo- cratic government in the world; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the United States of America. FIFTH COUNT. And the Grand Jurors aforesaid, on their oath aforesaid, do further present, that August Sandberg, on the 15th day of December, A. D. 1917, and within the said District of Arizona, the United States be- ing then, and at all times herein mentioned, at war with the Imperial German Government, did wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously cause and attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny and re- fusal oi duty in the military and naval forces of the United States, to the injury of the said service and of the United States, in this, to wit, that he, the said August Sandberg, did then and there, and in the presence of, and to Robert E. Cameron, and other persons to the Grand Jurors unknown, state in sub- stance, the following: That the invasion of Belgium by Germany was justified; also that the submarine warfare carried on by Germany was right and legitimate, and that the sinking of the ^^Lusitania" was jus- tified on account of its carrying arms, ammuni- tion and supplies ; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made 6 August Sandberg vs. and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the United States of America. [5] SIXTH COUNT. And the Grand Jurors aforesaid, on their oath aforesaid, do further present, that August Sand- berg, on the 22d day of February, A. D. 1918, and within the said District of Arizona, the United States being then, and at all times herein mentioned, at war with the Imperial German Government, did wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously cause and attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny and re- fusal of duty in the military and naval forces of the United States, to the injury of the said service and of the United States, in this, to wit, that he, the said August Sandberg, did then and there, and in the presence of William B. Cramer, and other persons to the Grand Jurors unknown, state in substance, the following ; Germany is not as much of an autocracy as the United States because the United States does not permit criticism; there is not as much dan- ger of revolution in Germany as in the allied countries, including the United States; contrary to the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the United States of America. THOMAS A. FLYNN, United States Attorney for the District of Arizona. [Endorsements] : C-704 — Tucson. In the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. United States of America vs. August Sandberg. Indictment. A True Bill. R. K. Shelton, Foreman United States of America, 7 of the Grand Jury. Witnesses examined before the Grand Jury: Justin C. Daspit, William B. Cramer, Robert E. Cameron, F. C. Blickensderfer, John B. Murray, Eugene H. Broughton, E. M. Graham. Presented to the Court in the presence of the Grand Jury by their foreman, and filed this 18th day of May, A. D. 1918. Mose Drachman, Clerk. [6] In the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Docket No. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Minutes of Court^May 18, 1918.— Order Setting Cause for Trial, and Fixing Amount of Bail Bond. It is ordered that this case be, and the same is hereby, set for trial for May 25, 1918, and the bond of the defendant fixed in the sum of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000). Docket No. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMEKICA vs. AUGUST SANDBEEG, Defendant. 8 August Sandberg vs. Demurrer to Indictment. Comes now August Sandberg, the defendant in the above-entitled and numbered cause, by his attor- ney, and demurs to the indictment herein and to each and every count of said indictment upon the grounds and for the following reasons, to wit : 1. That it appears from the face of said indict- ment that the same, and each and every count thereof, does not state facts sufficient to constitute an offense, or any offense, against the laws or any law of the United States of America. 2. That it appears from the face of said indict- ment, and from each and every count thereof, that the said indictment, and each and every count of same, does not state facts sufficient to constitute an offense or any offense against that said act of, or law enacted by, the Congress of the United States of America [7] entitled ^^The Espionage Act," and of date June 15, 1917, or against the provisions of the said law or any part thereof. WHEREFORE, defendant prays judgment of the Court that the said indictment, and each and every count thereof, be quashed and dismissed and that the defendant be discharged. T. P. HARTE, Attorney for Defendant. [Endorsements] : In the United States District Court in and for the District of Arizona. Docket No. C-704 — Tucson. United States of America vs. August Sandberg, Defendants. Demurrer. Piled United States of America. 9 May 21, 1918. Mose Drachman, Clerk. By Effie D. Botts, Deputy Clerk. Docket No. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Minutes of Court— May 22, 19ia— Order Sustaining Demurrer to Fourth Count of Indictment and Overruling Demurrer as to All Other Counts, etc. This case came on for hearing this day upon the demurrer of the defendant to the indictment herein, Thomas A. Flynn, United States Attorney, appear- ing on behalf of the United States, and T. P. Harte, Esquire, appearing on behalf of the defendant, said demurrer was argued and submitted to the Court, and thereupon it is ordered by the Court that said demurrer be, and the same is hereby, sustained as to the fourth count of the indictment, and that the said demurrer be, and the same is hereby, overruled as to all others, to which ruling of the Court in overruling part of said demurrer, defendant excepts. 10 August Sandberg vs. Docket No. C-7(M— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Minutes of Court— May 28, 1918— Plea. The United States Attorney being present, comes now the defendant herein in person and by counsel, A. A. Worsley, Esquire [8] and upon being arraigned at the bar of this Court upon the Indict- ment herein, said indictment being read to him, a copy whereof with the endorsements thereon is handed to the said defendant, who states that his true name is as set out in said indictment. And now upon being called upon to enter a plea herein, said defendant pleads that he is Not Guilty, whereupon said plea is ordered entered. Docket No. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Minutes of Court— May 28, 1918— Trial. This case came on this day regularly for trial, C. R. McFall and John H. Martin, Assistant United States Attorneys, appearing on behalf of the prosecution, comes now the defendant herein in person and with United States of America, 11 counsel, A. A. Worsley, Esquire, into open court, and both parties announce ready for trial. Twenty- eight jurors were called and sworn and examined as to their qualifications and all found to be qualified. Both parties exercised their right of respective chal- lenge and the following twelve jurors were called according to law and duly sworn to well and truly try the issues joined herein: J. A. Hanovan, W. F. Murdock, R. P. Flynn, Roderick McNeil, Richard M. Johnson, Paul Gatlin, Paul Jones, James E. Tom- blinson, S. G. Bailey, J. F. McKale, Charles H. Pogue and W. B. Dolan. The prosecution then read aloud the indictment herein and stated the plea of the defendant thereto, to wit: Not Guilty, which is the issue to be tried herein. Lena Burgess was sworn as court reporter in this case. The prosecu- tion then to maintain upon its part the issues herein, called as witnesses : William B. Cramer, Edward M. Graham, John B. Murray, Eugene Broughton, R. B. Cameron and Frank C. Blickensderfer, who were duly sworn, e^tamined and cross-examined, [9] and thereupon the prosecution rested its case. The defendant then to maintain upon his part the issues herein, moved the Court for a directed verdict, which motion was denied by the Court, to which ruling of the Court defendant excepts. The defendant then took the stand in his own behalf and was duly sworn, examined and cross-examined, and called as wit- nesses G. H. Dowell, C. Le Grande, J. B. Knowles, B. King, G. M. Douglas and W. B Butchard, who were duly sworn and examined; and thereupon the defendant rested his case. The prosecution then 12 August Sandherg vs. called in rebuttal, Justin C. Daspit, who was sworn and examined; and R. B. Cameron, John W. Mur- ray, Edward M. Graham and Wm. B. Cramer, who were further examined, and thereupon the prosecu- tion rested its case. There being no further testi- mony offered and the evidence being closed and com- pleted, argument of respective counsel was had in part. The hour for adjournment having arrived and the trial of this case not being completed, the Court duly admonished the jury and excused them from further attendance upon this Court until Wednes- day, the 29th day of May, A. D. 1918, at 9:30 o'clock A. M., to which time the further trial of this case is now ordered continued. Docket No. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OE AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Minutes of Court— May 29, 1918— Trial. The trial of this case having been continued from a previous session of this court, comes now all the parties hereto, comes also the jurors herein, their names are called and all answering thereto respec- tively, the argument was completed, and the Court duly instructs the jury orally, and said jury retire in charge of their bailiff, J. E. Hogan, first duly sworn, to consider their verdict. Subsequently said jury return into [10] court, their names are called United States of America. 13 and all answering thereto respectively, upon being asked if they have agreed upon a verdict, report that they have agreed and thereupon present the follow- ing verdict: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Verdict. We, the jury, duly empaneled and sworn in the above-entitled action, upon our oaths, do find the de- fendant Guilty in the manner and form as charged in counts one, two, three, five and six of the indictment. S. G. BAILE, Foreman. Whereupon, it is adjudged by the Court that the defendant is so guilty of the crime charged, and it is ordered that he be remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal to await the passing of sen- tence herein. It is further ordered that the jury be discharged from this case. JUDGMENT MADE AND ENTERED ON JUNE 1st, 1918. Docket No. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. 14 August Sandberg vs. Judgment. The defendant being present in open court in per- son, and by Ms counsel, A. A. Worsley, Esq., The United States Attorney for Arizona present on the part of the United States. And this being the time heretofore fixed for passing judgment on the defend- ant in this case, the defendant, August Sandberg, was duly informed by the Court of the nature of the indictment found against him for the crime of viola- tion Title 1, Section 3, Act of June 15, 1917, making false statements with intent to interfere with mil- itary and naval forces, etc., committed on the 15th day of December, A. D. 1917, of which crime defend- ant was found [11] guilty by a jury on the 29th day of May, A. D. 1918. The defendant was then asked if he had any legal cause to show why judgment should not be pro- nounced against him ; and no sufficient cause being shown or appearing to the Court, thereupon the Court renders its judgment: That, whereas you, Au- gust Sandberg, having been duly convicted in this court of the crime aforesaid, it is found by the Court that you are so guilty of said crime. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED, and the judgment and sentence of the Court is, that you, August Sandberg, be pun- ished by imprisonment in the United States Peni- itentiary at Leavenworth, Kansas, for a term of two years to date from June 1st, 1918, and that you pay a fine of Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) and in de- fault of the payment of said fine that you stand committed. United States of America. 15 The defendant was then remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal for said District, to be by him delivered into the custody of the proper officer of said United States Penitentiary at Leav- enworth, Kansas. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that a cer- tified copy of this judgment shall be sufficient war- rant for the said marshal to take, keep and safely deliver the said August Sandberg into the custody of the proper officers of said United States Peniten- tiary at Leavenworth, Kansas, and a sufficient warrant for the officers of said United States Peni- tentiary at Leavenworth, Kansas, to keep and im- prison the said August Sandberg. [12] Docket No. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OE AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Minutes of Court--Juiie 1, 1918 — Order Enlarging Time to File Bill of Exceptions^ etc. It is ordered that the defendant herein be and he is hereby granted thirty days from this date within which to file bill of exceptions, assignment of errors, petition for writ of error, and other necessary papers to perfect an appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 16 August Sandherg vs. Docket No. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Minutes of Court— June 11, 1918— Order Re Confinement of August Sandberg. It appearing to the Court tliat the defendant in the above-entitled case expects to perfect an appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit that an order has been heretofore entered granting said defendant additional time to prepare and file bill of exceptions herein, it is ORDERED by the Court that the United States Marshal for the Dis- trict of Arizona do hold and confine the said August Sandberg in the custody of the proper officer of the county jail of Pima county, State of Arizona, until the further order of this Court. Docket No. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OP AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Minutes of Courl^-June 27, 1918— Order Enlarging Time to Prepare Bill of Exceptions, etc. Por good cause shown, it is ordered that the de- fendant [13] above named, he and he is hereby United States of America, 17 granted an additional thirty days from the time of the expiration of the order heretofore entered grant- ing addition time, within which to prepare and file his bill of exceptions, assignment of error, petition for writ of error and other necessary papers to per- fect an appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. In the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Bill of Exceptions. BE IT REMEMBERED that on the first day of June, 1918, at a regular and stated term of the United States District Court for the District of Ari- zona, the same being one of the regular judicial days of the May Term of said court, of 1918, begun and held in the city of Tucson, county of Pima, State of Arizona, be and before his Honor, W. H. Sawtelle, District Judge of said District, the defendant, Au- gust Sandberg, appeared in person, and by his counsel, A. A. Worsley, to receive judgment and sentence and he was thereupon adjudged guilty and sentence to serve a term of two years in the Federal Prison at Leavenworth, Kansas, and to pay a fine of Five Hundred Dollars, and the defendant is ag- 18 August Sandherg vs, grieved thereby and by the effect of such judgment and sentence, and desiring to have the same reviewed by the Circuit Court of Appeals of the Ninth Cir- cuit, hereby submits to his Honor, W. H, Sawtelle, the following as his bill of exceptions : To sustain the defendant's contention that the Court erred in denying defendant's motion for an instructed verdict of acquittal, defendant says that at the close of the testimony [14] on the part of the Government the defendant moved the Court to instruct the jury as follows: That it does not appear from the evidence in the case that there was any in- tent, either express or implied, and that the evidence does not tend to show any false statements made or circulated for the purpose of hindering, delaying, corrupting or in anywise interfering with the United States Government, or its army or forces in this war. On the further ground that the evidence does not bring the offense within the Act designated as the Espionage Act, and that such offense, if any offense, had been shown or stated, does not come within the purview of the law. On the further ground that to construe the evi- dence in this case, as bringing the case within that act, would be a violation of the provisions of the United States Constitution, with reference to the freedom of speech and the freedom of the press. On the further ground that there is no evidence tending to show that any of the statements claimed to be false and claimed to be falsely circulated in the indictment are false or true or whether they United States of America, 19 were known to be false or known to be untrue at the time, and the Court or jury without any testimony could not find, and would not be justified in finding, that the statements were either true or false, with- out any evidence as to the truth or falsity of the statements. On the further ground that there is no evidence tending to prove any overt act on the part of the defendant from which criminality could be im- plied. The motion was by the Court then and there de- nied to which the defendant duly excepted. / Now, therefore, to sustain defendant's said mo- tion, defendant here gives in substance all the mate- rial testimony introduced by the Government wit- nesses, to wit: [15 J Testimony of William Cramer, for the Government. WILLIAM CRAMER, the first witness for the Government, testified as follows: One statement Dr. Sandberg made on or about February 13th, 1918, I remember very well and in particular was that he said to his mind the entry of the United States into the war was brought about by Wall Street interests for the purpose of protect- ing our loans to the Allies. He stated that Ger- many was perfectly justified in the invasion of Bel- gium and made the inference — Worsley objected to the inference. Objection sustained by the Court. And stated that it was a well-known fact that if Germany had not invaded Belgium that France or 20 August Sandherg vs, (Testimony of William Cramer.) England had planned to go through to Germany in that way. He stated that the sinking of the ^^Lusi- tania" was justified, inasmuch as it carried arms and munitions, and when I remarked to him, ^^Can you possibly say that that you think the sinking of the ^Lusitania' w^as justified 'Fihe said quite heat- edly that Germany had not starred this submarine warfare until England had strewn the North Sea with mines and that we read only of boats and peo- ple lost as the result of German submarines, but heard nothing of the ships that went down asa re- sult of the laying of mines in the North Sea. j He stated that to his mind the ruthless subntsHHhfl^cam- paign of Germany was all right. He stated that Germany was not as much an autocratic country as the United States. That there was a whole lot more danger of revolution in the Allied countries, in- cluding the United States, than in Germany. He stated that Germany and the Kaiser did not start the war, and went on to explain that the Kaiser did not have the power to start the war, as he had to be backed by the Reichstag and the Bundersrat, and he laid the blame for the war particularly on Eng- land. He said England was to blame for the war. He said Earl Gray was to blame for the war. He said he did not think President Wilson was doing right appealing to the German people to overthrow the Kaiser and stating, as the President did at that time, that he would not consider making [16] peace with the present ruling powers. He said that President Wilson was wrong for stating that in United States of America, 21 (Testimony of William Cramer.) States like Alsace-Loraine it was to be left to the people with what large powers they were to be allied. A great many of the statements that Dr. Sandberg made on that day were much the same as made ten days before, and in addition the doctor delivered a very interesting discourse on the history of the for- mation of the German Empire, and he traced that from the time of inception, up to the present, and enlightened me on a great many points I had not known as to the powers of the Reichstag and the Bundersrat, and the form of their government. The witness stated that no one else was present. The witness stated that it did not cause him to have any disloyal feelings towards his country. The witness stated that he was thirty-seven years old and not of draft age. The witness said that he did not mention anything about the matter for about three weeks afterwards. Witness said he did not know abso- lutely whether the statements made by the defend- ant were true or false. Testimony of Edward M. Graham, for the Government. EDWARD M. GRAHAM, another witness on be- half of the Government, testified in substance as fol- lows : My name is Edward M. Graham; am 38 years old; represent W. S. Tyler Company, manufacturers of mining machinery. I have known August Sandberg for four, about four years, in a business way. He 22 August Sandherg vs, (Testimony of Edward M. Graham.) talked once with me regarding this war, July 22, 1917, at the Gadsden Hotel, in Douglas, Arizona, starting the conversation. No one else was present. He, Mr. Sandberg, said that Germany had a more democratic government than the United States. That the people had greater liberties in Germany. He gave me the name of a book to read on that sub- ject. The name of the book was ^'Comparison of Constitutional Law," by Prof. Burges. He re- ferred me to another book concerning [17] Eng- land in the war by Thompson. That was in connec- tion with England being to blame for the war. He stated that it would be a great blow to civiliza- tion if Germany should lose the war ; that President Wilson was Pro-British and led the American peo- ple into the war. Witness said he did not know whether the statements made with reference to Gov- ernments, including Germany and ours, were true or false. He did not mention it to anyone for a long time afterwards. Testimony of E. H. Broughton, for the Grovemment. E. H. BROUGHTON, a witness for the Govern- ment, testified in substance as follows : I am thirty years old. I know Dr. Sandberg in a business. He talked with me about the war in the office of the test-mill at Bisbee, between December 5th, and December lOth, 1917, and also in June or July, 1917. Dr. Sandberg said to me that in a speech that the President had made he said that America and the Allies will fight Germany and her United States of America, 23 (Testimony of E. H. Broughton.) Allies until the German people will overthrow the present form of government and establish demo- cratic form and will not make peace with the present rulers of Germany. He said the President was wrong in saying that, because the German people did not want a different form of government. That their form of government was more democratic than the Government of the United States. That Presi- dent Wilson had more powers that the Kaiser. That President Wilson could declare war and the Kaiser could not. He said the President had a weak character in allowing the British to dictate his poli- cies and the President to make speeches on those pol- icies so the people would back the President up in his policies. The witness said there was an article written in a magazine, the ^^ Review of Reviews," November 17th, by Frank Simonds, entitled *^ Eng- land's great Fight," part of this article was about the gradual wearing away of the male mem- bers of the German army, or the killing off of the male Germans. Mr. Simonds compared the present conflict with a hare and hound chase ; hounds are em- ployed to run down a hare, [18] one hound would run the hare until he was tired, and then the second hound would take up the chase, and so on. France was compared to the first hound, England to the second, and the United States the third. United States was to deliver the final blow, or kill the males of the German army. He said it was the most brutal thing he ever heard of. That it was like the American savage of long ago ; that if that was the 24 August Sandberg vs, (Testimony of E. H. Broughton.) opinion of the American people, it showed a very un- civilized people. He said the President had a weak character in allowing the British to indicate his poli- cies. He said that if the American people were of the opinion of the writer, it showed a very uncivil- ized people. This conversation was called out by a magazine containing the article lying on my desk, and Dr. Sandberg saw it. One other thing I can re- member he said when I told him about the things I had been through in training camp, as a reserve offi- cer in the regular army. He said the rate of deaths per thousand in the cantonments in the middle west was very high, much more as to number, as he re- membered, in this country, than they were in his country, when they were mobilized. Worsely moved that it be stricken out as immate- rial. Overruled by the Court, and exception. Witness said he did not regard any of the state- ments as an attempt to influence him to be unpatri- otic, and that the discussion came up, and that there was no feeling manifest one way or the other. He said that he had full confidence in Dr. Sandberg, in every way. That he had no suspicion whatever of Dr. Sandberg, the defendant, was an enemy of the country, and that his conduct and what he said did not lead him to believe that he was attempting to hinder the operation of the war. He did not men- tion it to anyone for quite a long time afterwards. United States of America. 25 Testimony of Robert E. Cameron, for the Government. EGBERT E. CAMERON, a \\itness on behalf of the Government, testified in substance as follows: [19] I am thirty-six years of age ; am the testing engi- neer for Phelps-Dodge; have known Dr. Sandberg four years; we talked about the war on two occa- sions, December 6th and 26th, 1917, on the way from Douglas to Bisbee. He talked almost continuously about the war, saying that the United States was more autocratic than Germany, because it suppressed criticism. He said the American people thought the income tax was higher in Germany, but that taxes were getting much higher in the United States, and the people would not stand for it. He talked about Dr. Dye, formerly assistant general manager of the Phelps-Dodge corporation, being in the diplomatic service, and having gone to Norway! to investigate con- ditions in Sweden, and that he might see Dr. Dye over there, as he had a position there, if he could get out with his stuff. He explained ''his stuff" as meaning his notes. He said he would not take his money to Sweden, as American money is only worth sixty cents on the dollar. He said the submarine warfare was right and legitimate. His reasons for it I do not remember. He said the sinking of the ''Lusitania" was right, on account of it carrying munitions to the allies. The witness said he didn't remember whether these statements were made in 1915 or 1916. He 26 August Scmdberg vs. (Testimony of Eobert E. Cameron.) said lie did not mention it to anyone for a long time afterwards. He said the American Diplomatic ser- vice was about as useful as a bunch of ten year old boys. I do not know what Dr. Sandberg's inten- tions were in talking about the war and did not think about it at that time. I did not mention the con- versation to anyone except one party until the secret service asked me about it, three months after the first conversation, and two months after the second. Testimony of F. C. Blockensderfer, for the Government. F. C. BLOCKENSDERFER, a witness for the Government, testified in substance as follows : I have known Dr. Sandberg about five years. I am metallurgist and assistant superintendent of the Burro Mountain Branch of the Phelps-Dodge cor- poration. In the month of April, 1917, the latter part, shortly after the entrance of the United States into the war. Dr. Sandberg [20] made statements to me in conversation, as follows: The defendant said to me shortly after the United States entered the war that the Allies, composed of Britain, France, Russia and Italy, realized that they could not win the war and effectively destroy the economic and and political unity of the Triple Alliance, composed of Germany, the Dial Empire and Turkey, conse- quently, England instructed Lord Northcliffe to exert his influence upon our weak and politically in- clined President Wilson to bring the United States into the war. That President Wilson and his clique United States of America. 27 (Testimony of F. C. Blockensderfer.) of conspiring politicians drew this country into war. The mass of the people of the United States are not in sympathy with the war. Our weak President and his damnable policy toward Germany is wholly wrong and not the best interest of this country. No one except he and I were present. ^, I fix the time of the conversation because I wrote a letter to a friend of mine who was a Major in the United States Army, asking for information about my enlistment. I told the defendant I had written the letter and I was making an attempt to get into the United States Army. The defendant said noth- ing about that to me. I will be thirty-seven years old the coming 23d of July. To sustain the contention of the defendant that the Court erred in denying the defendant's motion to strike from the record, and the consideration of the jury, the testimony of F. C. Blickensderf er here- inbefore set forth, the motion and the action of the Court thereon, are herein set forth. Motion by Mr. Worsley, made at the opening of court on the morning of May 29th, 1918, before he resumed his argument to the jury, and after both sides had rested, and the argument to the jury had been partially made : I now ask the Court to strike from the testimony, and the consideration of the jury, I mean to strike from the record the testimony of one Blickensderfer, the witness who testified as to what took place over at Tyrone, on the grounds that it would be a violation of the provisions of the United States Constitution, with reference to ex post 28 August Sandberg vs, facto laws and the punishment of a man for an [21] act committed before the law was passed. The tes- timony is that it occurred that last week of April, and the law was not passed until the 15th day of June following : The COUET.— What act do you mean? Mr. WORSLEY.— The Espionage law. The COURT.— I do not think I could strike it out now. I could charge the jury in reference to it, but I could not strike it out now without opening the en- tire case. The motion to strike it out will be denied, but I shall charge the jury, and I now instruct them, that the defendant cannot be convicted in this case for what he then said to the witness at Tyrone. In other words, that statement, according to the undis- puted testimony, was previous to the passage of the Espionage Law, and therefore he cannot be con- victed for making those statements. The jury may consider that testimony under the present condi- tions of the record for the purpose of determining what the defendant's intent was at the time he made the alleged statement, if he did make the alleged statement, as set forth in the indictment, and what his purpose was at the time of making such state- ments, if he did make them. Mr. WORSLEY.— Exception. To sustain the defendant's contention that the testimony introduced at the trial and the whole thereof does not make out a case under the indict- ment or any of the counts of said indictment, and that the evidence at the trial was insufficient to United States of America, 29 (Testimony of August Sandberg.) justify the verdict of the jury, the defendant herein sets forth in substance the testimony in behalf of the defendant. Testimony of August Sandberg, in His Own Behalf. AUGUST SANDBERG, a witness on behalf of the defendant, testified substantially as follows: I am the defendant in this case; I live at Douglas, Arizona, and have since the fall of 1913, and am a native of Sweden, and have never been in Germany; came to the United States in 1896, but have lived part of the time in Mexico and about one and a half years in Canada. My business has been chemistry and metallurgy, was [22] employed by Phelps- Dodge Company from 1890 to 1903, then by an English Company in Chihuahua, Mexico. Later by the Transvaal Copper Company in Mexico, an American Company operating in Sonora. Then went to Canada in exploration for one and a half years. Then when I came back was employed by Phelps-Dodge until February of this year. Am not a citizen of the United States, but made application in December, 1912, have three brothers who are citi- zens of this country, and two nephews in the navy who volunteered last year — my brother's sons. I own Liberty Bonds of the third issue. Was in the capacity of consulting metallurgist of Phelps-Dodge, and head of the metallurgical department, am a graduate of the University of Sweden in chemistry, geology and mineralogy. Have never been accused of wrong before nor in trouble of any kind. 30 August Sandberg vs, (Testimony of August Sandberg.) I did not say to William Cramer on or about De- cember 15tli, 1917, that the entry of the United States into the war was brought about by Wall Street interests to protect our foreign loans to the Allies. I deny that I said to Mr. Cramer upon that or any other occasion that Germany is not as much an aristocracy as the United States, because the United States does not permit criticism; there is not as much danger of revolution in Germany as in the allied countries, including the United States. I did have a conversation with Mr. Cramer on our trip to Bisbee, and I think the discussion was about the submarine warfare. I made a statement that Ger- many did not start the submarine warfare until England had strewn the North iSea with mines, and I simply made that as a quotation from one of the United States Senators. On another trip we made together from Nacozari to Douglas on February 13th, we talked about Germany being a democracy. Lloyd George had made a speech and President Wilson shortly afterwards issued a message in re- sponse to the Reichstag's peace proposal. Mr. Cramer had a newspaper containing this speech of President Wilson's and he gave it to me to read, and after reading the speech we talked about it. I did designate Germany as a democracy, that is, the Im- perial German state. In that I [23] based my assertion upon such good authority as Prof. John W. Purges. I have his books and have read them more than once. They contain lots of information on the constitutional laws of the four principal countries of United States of America, 31 (Testimony of August Sandberg.) the world. I never asserted to Mr. Cramer or to anybody that the form of government in Germany is more than the United States, because it is contrary to my better knowledge. I had reference to results and not the form. But what I may have said about the government of Germany being more democratic, which I am not denying, I undoubtedly had refer- ence to results and not the form. Prof. Surges stated in a book published in 1915, called the European War, as far as the equitable dis- .tribution of wealth and intellect is concerned that Germany is the most democratic government that the world has produced. The two legislative bodies, the Reichstag and the Bundersrat, make the laws of Germany and the Emperor has certain great powers on certain questions of the army, navy and taxation. They have twenty-five separate states in Germany, each with separate constitution, and the members of the Reichstag are elected by universal suffrage. I referred Mr. Cramer to that work of Prof. Burges to substantiate my statement. I did not have any in- tention to refer to the military operations of the United States. I did not say that President Wilson was a weak character, in talking to Mr. Broughton. I told Broughton that Germany was more democratic than this country, and simply referred to the results of the government and not the form of it. I deny ever stating to anybody that the German form of govern- ment is more democratic than the Government of the United States. I know different. I doubt very 32 August Sandberg vs. (Testimony of August Sandberg.) much that I used the attribute ^^weak" to express my opinion of the President. If I used it it is a very bad choice, I intended to say ^inconsistent." I regard him as a very strong and forceful man. [24] I did not say to Robert E. Cameron on or about the 13th day of December, 1917, or to any body that the invasion of Belgium by Germany was all right and legitimate, or that the sinking of the ^^Lusitania" was justified on account of its carrying arms, am- munition and supplies. I discussed these proposi- tions with him and simply pointed out the other side of the question, and the motive and causes of Ger- many for these acts. But I never justified them, and I do not think they are justified. I simply tried to show that other people have other points of view. That does not mean that I made those points of view my own. In giving utterances to those statements I absolutely did not have in mind any harm to the United States of America or any interference with its operations in the war. I have no recollection of the conversation testified to by Mr. Blickensderf er at Tyrone in the latter part of April, 1917, with reference to the President and his clique. I may have compared the power of the President of the United States and that of the Ger- man Emperor. I never said that the President of the United States could declare war. I know better. I have been at work all of the time I have been in this country. I never have at any time done or said anything with the intent of hindering delaying or United States of America, 33 (Testimony of August Sandberg.) causing mutiny or disturbance, or preventing regis- tration, or interfering in anywise with the operation of the United States Government, or its carying on of the war. My sympathies lie with this country since the war is declared. I have not a desire that this country or the Allies should lose the war. I did not say it would be a blow to civilization if Germany should lose in this war, but that it would be a blow to civilization if Germany was crushed and made impotent. This opinion and statement was caused by the fact that I believed there is needed in [25]' Central Europe a strong power to prevent the Slav domination of Western Europe. My own country has had several centuries of experience with that. I believe that it would be a blow to civilization if Ger- many were crushed. I may have said to Mr. Graham that France would become a second or third rate power, but I do not think I said it deserved nothing better. I did state at the preliminary examination that I refused to answer the question as to what my sym- pathies were in the present war. I took the stand of a Swedish subject at that time. I did say at the preliminary examination that I had not argued about the war with anybody since the country had gotten into the war. But I told Mr. Daspit that it was a a subject no man could avoid talking about. I took the stand against England before the United States went into the war and favorable to Germany. I probably did refuse at the time Mr. Daspit ex- amined me to state which side of the question I was 34 August Sandherg vs. (Testimony of August Sandberg.) on. I said I am not taking sides. I take a more impartial view I think than most people. I own some third Liberty Bonds; I bought them after this trouble came up. I did not buy any before I was not in a position to before, because the means I had were pledged for other purposes at the time. I was getting a reasonably good salary in excess of five thousand dollars a year. I am a single man. I do not think I said to Mr. Cramer at the Gadsden Hotel with reference to the Y. M. C. A., Eed Cross drives and prior to the Third Liverty Loan, ^^I am not afraid to turn them down. ' ' I did not give as my reason that the sinking of the ^'Lusitania" was justified because it was carrying arms and ammunition. I did not say either to Mr. Cramer or to Mr. Cameron that the ruthless sub- marine warfare was right or justified and that Ger- many was within her rights. I explained the other side of the question. For instance, in the case of the ^^Lusitania," if the ships were carrying contra- band of war, arms or ammunition. I understood that [26] the Collector of the Port made a state- ment to the effect that they had arms on the ^'Lusi- tania," but I did not give it as a reason why Germany should sink the ^^Lusitania." I never took the side of the United States in any of those issues. I was going at the time of my arrest to California and from there to New York and from there to Sweden, going home for a visit. That was my only reason. I did not say I had a position with Sweden, and would take it if I could get out of the United United States of America. 35 (Testimony of August Sandberg.) States with my notes. I deny that I had a position with Sweden. I have not been back to Sweden since I came to this country. In talking to Mr. Graham about going back and forth I meant back and forth to Mexico and Canada. I lived in Mexico perhaps ten years in the states of Sonora and Chihuahua. And that was the reason I had not become a naturalized citizen. Testimony of Grant H. Dowell, for Defendant. GRANT H. DOWELL, a witness on behalf of the defendant, testified substantially as follows: I live at Warren, Arizona; am manager of the Phelps-Dodge Corporation, Copper Queen Branch; I have known Dr. Sandberg about eight or nine years, more intimately during the last two or three years than before. I do not recall that I have ever heard anything against his reputation. I do not be- lieve I have ever heard his reputation as a law-abid- ing citizen discussed prior to April, 1917. Testimony of C. E. La Grande, for Defendant. C. E. LA GRANDE, a witness on behalf of the defendant, testified substantially as follows : I have lived in Douglas fifteen years. Am the mechanical consulting engineer for the Phelps- Dodge corporation. Have known August Sandberg about twenty years. I never have discussed his rep- utation with anybody, or heard it discussed. I have never heard anybody say anything wrong about him. 36 August Sandberg vs. Testimony of J. B. Knowles, for Defendant. J. B. KNOWLES, a witness on behalf of defend- ant, testified substantially as follows: [27] I live in Douglas, and have known August Sand- berg about five years. I am traveling auditor for Phelps-Dodge corporation. I never heard the de- fendant's general reputation for being a law-abiding resident in the community in which he lived ques- tioned or discussed. Testimony of William B. King, for Defendant. WILLIAM B. KING, being a witness on behalf of defendant, testified substantially as follows : I have lived in Douglas three years; have been a lawyer for a year and a half, and knew Prof. Sand- berg since 1905. I knew him both in Mexico and United States. I never heard anything against his reputation as a law-abiding resident where he lived. Testimony of G. M. Douglas, for Defendant. G. M. DOUGLAS, a witness on behalf of defend- ant, testified substantially as follows : I live in Cananea, and have for two years. Before that in Douglas. Am a mechanical engineer. I have known Prof. Sandberg for eighteen years, and know his general reputation as to being a law-abid- ing resident in the community in which he has lived. I never heard anything against him. Testimony of C. E. Roark, for Defendant. C. E. BO ARK, a witness on behalf of defendant, testified as follows, substantially : United States of America, 37 (Testimony of C. E. Roark.) I live in Douglas and have for four years and eight months. Am a mechanical engineer and have known Prof. Sandberg in Douglas, Arizona, for four years and eight months. I know his general repu- tation in that community for being a law-abiding resident. It is good. I never heard anybody talk of his reputation, and have never talked with any- body about it. I never heard anybody say anything against him. Testimony of W. A. Butchart, for Defendant. W. A. BUTCHART, a witness on behalf of defend- ant, testified substantially as follows: I live in Denver. I have lived there five or six years and have spent a great deal of time in Ari- zona. I have known [28J Prof. Sandberg for five years, and I know his general reputation for being a law-abiding resident in the community where he lives. It is good. I never discussed his reputation with anybody. I am a manufacturer of machinery. Testimony of Jesse C. Daspit, for Plaintiff (In Rebuttal). JESSE C. DASPIT, a witness on behalf of plain- tiff, in rebuttal, testified substantially as follows: I examined the effects of defendant, with his per- mission, at the time I investigated him. He was present during the entire time. He had three or four boxes of books of various kinds, including a number representing the German side of the war. A number of pamphlets, some blue-prints of the 38 August Sandherg vs, (Testimony of Jesse C. Daspit.) Copper Queen Smelter, or parts of the smelter, some note or data relating to mining proper- ties, and sketches or maps of mining proper- ties. He also had three trunks, two of which contained his personal effects and clothing, and some private papers, and one of the trunks was packed with these books and pamphlets and maps which I have referred to. A great many of them were written in German, some in French and some in English. The pamphlets were for the most part in German. I could not read them, but had two soldiers up there trying to read them. He had a speech of President Wilson, one of Secretary Mc- Adoo, and one by Senator La FoUette. I saw some of his notes in English. We consumed the entire day. I had him accompany me to the office about nine o'clock in the morning, and took a statement from him with a stenographer, and then had his effects, with the exception of those in his room, moved to the office, and they were examined off and on during the entire day up until about six or seven o'clock in the evening, and later we went to his room, and examined his two trunks and suitcase and handbag. Mr. Sandberg was not under arrest at that time. He was in custody. No complaint had been filed against him. The things were all re- packed and sent by me to the place from which I took them, at the Government's [29] expense. I asked him if he would permit us to examine the stuff he had packed in these boxes and in his trunks, and he evaded the question. He wished to know United States of America, 39 (Testimony of Jesse C. Daspit.) what authority I had to do that and why I wanted to see them. He wished to know my authority, and I told him I had to take a statement from him and examine his effects. I told him I was a representa- tive of the government, and he was a foreigner pre- paring to leave the country. He still was not very willing, and said it was a hardship. Upon referring to my record, to refresh my recollection, he stated, *^No, I do not object, but it seems to me that these effects will have to be examined again in the east, and I do not see why this should be done here." The maps and data pertaining to his profession. I re- member distinctly one map of some mining proposi- tion in Canada, and I have in mind now distinctly blue-prints of the Copper Queen Smelter at Douglas, which, of course, pertained to his business. I did not read all the notes he had. I did not do all the investigating. Mr. Tompkins assisted me, and Mr. Eausmann, who reads German, looked at some of the pamphlets, and there were two soldiers there who read some German, too. Testimony of Robert E. Cameron, for Plaintiff (In Rebuttal). ROBERT E. CAMERON, a witness on behalf of plaintiff, in rebuttal, testified substantially as fol- lows: On one of the trips between Douglas and Bisbee some time during the Month of December, Mr. Sand- berg made this statement: *^I have a position with Sweden, and I will take it if I can get out of the 40 August Scmdberg vs, (Testimony of Robert E. Cameron.) country with my stuff. ' ' I asked him what he meant by stuff, and he said his notes. Testimony of John W. Murray, for Plaintiif (In Rebuttal). JOHN W. MURRAY, a witness on behalf of plaintiff, called in rebuttal, testified substantially as follows : August Sandberg did state to me, on or about Sep- tember 15th, shortly after the first contingent left, that Germany is the most democratic government in the world. [30] Testimony of Edward M. Graham, for Plaintiff (In Rebuttal). EDWARD M. GRAHAM, a witness on behalf of plaintiff, called in rebuttal, testified substantially as follows : Mr. Sandberg, in the Gadsden Hotel, on the 22d day of July, 1917, when I asked him as to whether or not he was a naturalized citizen, said: That he was not ; that he went back and forth a good many times, and therefore had not become naturalized. Testimony of William Cramer^ for Plaintiff (In Rebuttal). WILLIAM CRAMER, a witness on behalf of plaintiff, called in rebuttal, testified substantially as follows : On the date they had a Knights of Columbus drive, I was coming out of the lobby of the Gadsden Hotel, with Mr. Sandberg, and he said to me; ''I United States of America, 41 am not afraid to turn them down when they come to me." And now Avithin the time aforesaid, so allowed therefor, the defendant does now present this, his bill of exceptions, and asks that the same may be ex- amined, approved and allowed by the Court, and filed and made and deemed to be and held a part of the record in this cause, and on the 6th day of July, 1918, in the presence of the parties in open court, the foregoing bill of exceptions was settled and ap- proved by the Court and having been engrossed now is signed and directed to be filed, and made a part of the record of said cause. Done in open court this 6th day of July, 1918. WM. H. SAWTELLE, Judge United States District Court for the District of Arizona. [31] In the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. No. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Acknowledgment of Service of Draft of Proposed Bill of Exceptions. The United States District Attorney hereby ac- 42 August Sandherg vs, knowledges service upon him this day of a draft of a proposed bill of exceptions in the above-entitled cause. Dated Tucson, this 2d day of July, 1918. C. E. McFALL, Asst. U. S. District Attorney for the District of Arizona. [Endorsements] : In the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. United States of America vs. August Sandberg, Defendant. C-704 — Tucson. Bill of Exceptions. A. A. Wors- ley, Tucson, Arizona, Attorney for Defendant. Filed July 6th, 1918. Mose Drachman, Clerk. [32'j In the District Court of the United States for the District of Arizona. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Petition for Writ of Error. Now comes August Sandberg, defendant in the above-entitled cause, and says that on the first day of June, 1918, this Court rendered judgment and sen- tence against this defendant, and sentenced the de- fendant to serve a term of two years at the Federal Prison at Leavenworth, Kansas, and to pay a fine of Five Hundred Dollars, in which judgment and sentence and the proceedings had prior thereto in United States of America, 43 this cause, certain errors were committed to the prejudice of this defendant ; all of which will more in detail appear from the assignment of errors which is filed with this petition. WHEREFORE, this defendant prays that a writ of error may issue in this behalf out of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Cir- cuit for the correction of errors so complained of, and that a transcript of the records, proceedings and the papers of this cause, duly authenticated, may be sent to said Court of Appeals. Defendant further prays that an order may be en- tered herein admitting the defendant to bail, pend- ing the determination of said writ of error in the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. A. A. WORSLEY, Attorney for the Defendant. [Endorsements] : In the District Court of the United States for the District of Arizona. United States of America vs. August Sandberg, Defendant. Petition for Writ of Error. C-704— Tucson. A, A. Worsley, Tucson, Arizona, Attorney for Defendant. Filed July 6th, 1918. Mose Drachman, Clerk. [33] 1% the United States District Court in ayid for the District of Arizona. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. 44 August Sandberg vs. Assignment of Errors. Defendant, August Sandberg, for his assignment of errors herein, alleges as follows : 1. That the Court erred in not sustaining the de- murrer to the indictment and to each count thereof, on the grounds that the allegations as set forth in the indictment, and in each count thereof are insufficient, and do not state a public offense, there being no allegation in the indictment that the statements al- leged therein to have been made by the defend- ant were made in the presence of any of draft age or in the presence of anyone connected with the military department of the United States, and that it appears on the face of the indictment and each count thereof, that the statements therein set forth were merely an expression of opinion by the defendant and not intended to violate any law or to case mutiny, disloyalty or any interference with the Military Forces of the United States, and that the statements set forth in the indictment, and in each count thereof, were a proper exercise of the freedom of speech as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States. 2. That the Court erred in not granting defend- ant's motion for an instructed verdict of acquittal at the close of the testimony of the Government at the trial on the grounds that it did not appear from the evidence, that there was any intent on the part of the defendant to hinder, delay, corrupt or in any wise interfere with the Military Forces of the United States, and that there was no evidence tending to United States of America, 45 show or prove that the statements in [34] said indictment alleged to have been made by the de- fendant were either true or false. Further that there was no evidence tending to prove that the defendant attempted to circulate said statements for any malicious or criminal purpose whatever, and that the evidence fails to show any overt act or any conduct on the part of the defend- ant from which an intent or purpose might be drawn other than a legitimate purpose. Further, that none of the evidence introduced by the Government in the case tended to show that the statements alleged to have been made by the defend- ant injured or in anywise operated to the detriment of the operations of the Military Forces of the United States. 3. That the Court erred at the trial of said case in denying defendant's motion to strike from the record and from the consideration of the jury, for any purpose, the testimony of F. C. Blickensderfer on the grounds that it clearly appeared from the testimony that said statements as testified to by said Blickensderfer were made during the month of April, 1917, and before the passage of the Espionage Act, under which the defendant is charged. Further that it appears from the evidence that at the time the defendant made said statements if at all, it was during a legitimate discussion and did not constitute an offense of any kind. 4. Further, that the testimony introduced at the trial, and the whole thereof does not make out a case imder the indictment, or any of the counts of said 46 August Scmdierg vs, indictment, and the evidence at the trial was insuffi- cient to justify the verdict of the jury. WHBREFOEE, the defendant says that for said manifest errors, the judgment and sentence of the Court should [35] be reversed. A. A. WORSLEY, Attorney for Defendant. [Endorsements] : In the United States District Court in and for the District of Arizona. United States of America vs. August Sandberg, Defendant. Assignment of Errors. C-704 — Tucson. A. A. Worsley, Tucson, Arizona, Attorney for Defendant. Piled July 6th, 1918. Mose Drachman, Clerk. In the District Court of the United States for the District of Arizona, UNITED STATES OP AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Order Allowing Writ of Error. And now comes the defendant by his attorney, and filed herein and presented to the Court his petition, praying for the allowance of a writ of error, and assignment of errors intended to be urged by him, praying also that a transcript of the record and pro- ceedings and papers from which the judgment was entered, duly authenticated, may be sent to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Judicial Circuit, and that such other and United States of America, 47 further proceedings may be had as may be proper in the premises; On consideration thereof, the Court does allow the writ of error and admits the defendant to bail, pend- ing the determination of said writ of error in the said Circuit Court of Appeals, upon his giving bond with two or more good and sufficient sureties thereon, in the sum of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000), to be approved by the Clerk of the United States District Court at Tucson, Arizona. Dated July 6th, 1918. WM. H. SAWTELLE, Judge. [36] [Endorsements] : In the District Court of the United States for the District of Arizona. United States of America vs. August Sandberg, Defendant. Order Allowing Writ of Error. C-704 — Tucson. A, A. Worsley, Tucson, Arizona, Attorney for De- fendant. Filed July 6th, 1918. Mose Drachman, Clerk. In the District Court of the United States for the District of Arizona. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Bail Bond. KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, August Sandberg, as principal, and Charles 48 August Sandherg vs, E. Walker and J. C. Etcliells, as sureties, are held and firmly bound unto the United States of America in the full and just sum of fifteen thou- sand dollars, to be paid the said United States of America, payment well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our executors and administrators jointly and severally by these presents. Sealed with our seals and dated this 6th day of July, in the year of our Lord, 1918. WHEREAS, lately, at the May term. A, D. 1918, of the District Court of the United States for the District of Arizona, in a suit pending in said court between the United States of America, plaintiff, and August Sandberg, defendant, a judgment and sen- tence was rendered against the said August Sand- berg, and the said August Sandberg has obtained a writ of error from the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, to reverse the judg- ment and sentence in the aforesaid suit, and a cita- tion directed to the said United States of America, citing and admonishing the United States of Amer- ica to be and appear in the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit at the city of San Francisco, California, thirty days from and after the date of said citation, which citation has been duly served. [37] Now, the condition of the above obligation is such that if the said August Sandberg shall appear in the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit on the first day of the next term thereof, to be held at the City of San Francisco, on the first Monday in October, A. D. 1918, and from day to day United States of America, 49 thereafter during said term, and from term to term and from time to time until finally discharged there- from, and shall abide and obey all orders made by the said United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in said cause, and shall surrender himself in execution of the judgment and sentence appealed from as said Court may direct, if the judg- ment and sentence of the said District Court against him shall be affirmed by the said United States Cir- cuit Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, then the above obligation to be void, else to remain in full force, virtue and effect. AUGUST SANDBERC. (Seal) CHAS. E. WALKER. (Seal) J. C. ETCHELLS. (Seal) United States of America, District of Arizona, — ss. Charles E. Walker and J. C. Etchells, whose names are subscribed as sureties to the within bond, being severally sworn, each for himself, deposes and says : That he is a resident and householder within the District of Arizona; that he is worth the amount for which he becomes surety on said bond over and above all debts and liabilities in unencumbered prop- erty situated within this district, exclusive of prop- erty exempt from execution and forced sale. CHAS. E. WALKER. J. C. ETCHELLS. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 6th day of July, 1918. [Notarial Seal] J. W. LEECH. My commission expires July 9, 1921. [38] 50 August Sandberg vs, I hereby certify that the foregoing is a good and sufficient bond. A. A. WORSLEY, Attorney for Defendant. Approved : MOSE DRACHMAlSr, Clerk of U. S. District Court. Approved as to form : July 6th, 1918. THOMAS A. FLYNN, U. S. Attorney. [Endorsements] : In the District Court of the United States for the District of Arizona. United States of America vs. August Sandberg, Defendant. Bail Bond. C-704— Tucson. A. A. Worsley, Tuc- son, Arizona, Attorney for Defendant. Filed July 6th, 1918. Mose Drachman, Clerk. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. District Court of the United States, District of Arizona. Clerk's Office. No. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Praecipe for Transcript of Record. To the Clerk of said Court : Sir: You will please prepare a transcript of the United States of America, 51 complete record in the above-entitled cause to be filed in the office of the clerk of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Judicial Circuit, under the writ of error to be perfected to said court in said cause, and include in said transcript the following proceedings, pleadings, papers, rec- ords and files, to wit: Indictment. Demurrer. Plea. [39] Transcript of minute entries. Verdict of jury and sentence of Court. Order allowing bill of exceptions. Bill of exceptions. Acknowledgment of service of bill of exceptions. Petition for writ of error. Order allowing writ of error. Bond. Writ of error. Citation. Praecipe for transcript ; — and all other record entries, pleadings, proceed- ings, papers and filing necessary or proper to make a complete record upon said writ of error in said cause, said transcript to be prepared as required by law, and the rules of this Court and the rules of the United States Circuit Court of Apeals for the 9th Judicial Circuit. A. A. WORSLEY, Attorney for Defendant. [Endorsements] : In the District Court of the United States, District of Arizona. United States 52 August Sandberg vs. of America vs. August Sandberg, Defendant. Prae- cipe for Transcript of Record. C-704— Tucson. A. A. Worsley, Tucson, Arizona, Attorney for De- fendant. Filed July 6tli, 1918. Mose Drachman, Clerk. In the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, C-704— Tucson. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Certificate of Clerk U. S. District Court to Transcript of Record. United States of America, District of Arizona, — ss. I, Mose Drachman, Clerk of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing pages numbered one to thirty-nine inclusive constitute and are a true, complete and correct copy of the record, pleadings and proceedings had in the case of United States of America vs. August Sandberg, Defendant, No. C-704 — Tucson, as the same is called for in the praecipe, a copy of which is made a part of this transcript, as the same remain on file [40] and record in the said District Court, and I also annex and transmit herewith the original Citation and Writ of Error in said action. United States of America, 53 I further certify that the cost of preparing and certifying to said record amounts to the sum of twenty-two and fifty hundredths dollars ($22.50), and that the same has been paid in full by the appel- lant herein, August Sandberg. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and afi&xed the seal of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, at Tucson, in said District, this twenty-fifth day of July, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and eighteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and forty-third. [Seal] MOSE DRACHMAN, Clerk United States District Court, District of Ari- zona. By Effie D. Botts, Chief Deputy Clerk. [41] In the United States District Court, for the District of Arizona, C-70^^TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, YS. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Writ of Error. The President of the United States of America, to the Honorable Judge of the District Court of the United States, for the District of Arizona, GREETING: 54 August Sandberg vs, BECAUSE, in the record and proceedings, as also in the rendition of the judgment of a plea which is in the said District Court, before you, between Au- gust Sandberg, plaintiff in error, and United States of America, defendant in error, a manifest error hath happened, to the great damage of the said Au- gust Sandberg, plaintiff in error, as by his complaint appears : We being willing that error, if any hath been, should be duly corrected and full and speedy justice done to the parties aforesaid in this behalf, do com- mand you, if judgment be therein given, that then under your seal, distinctly and openly, you send the record and proceedings aforesaid, with all things concerning the same, to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, together with this writ, so that you have the same at the city of San Francisco, in the State of California, within thirty days from the date hereof, in the said Circuit Court of Appeals, to be then and there held, th^t, the record and proceedings aforesaid being [42] inspected, the said Circuit Court of Appeals may cause further to be done therein to correct that error, what of right, and according to the laws and cus- toms of the United States, should be done. WITNESS the Honorable EDWARD D. WHITE, Chief Justice of the United States, the 6th day of July, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and eighteen. [Seal] MOSE DRACHMAN, Clerk of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. United States of America. 55 Allowed by [43] [Endorsed] : In the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. 0-704 — Tucson. Au- gust Sandberg, Plaintiff in Error, vs. United States of America, Defendant in Error. Writ of Error. Eiled July 6th, 1918. Mose Drachman, Clerk. [44J In the United Stages District Court for the District of Arizona. C-704— TUCSON. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. AUGUST SANDBERG, Defendant. Citation on Writ of Error. The President of the United States: To the Judge of the District Court of the United States, for the District of Arizona, GREETING. You are hereby cited and admonished to be and appear at a United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, to be holden at the City of San Francisco, in the State of California, within thirty days from the date hereof, pursuant to a writ of error duly issued and now on file in the clerk's office of the United States District Court for the Dis- trict of Arizona, wherein August Sandberg is plain- 56 August Sandberg vs, tiff in error, and you are defendant in error, to show cause, if any there be, why the judgment rendered against the said plaintiff in error, as in the said writ of error mentioned, should not be corrected, and why speedy justice should not be done to the parties in that behalf. WITNESS, the Honorable EDWAED D. WHITE, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, this 6th day of July, A. D. 1918. WM. H. SAWTELLE, United States District Judge for the District of Arizona. [45] United States of America, — ss. On this day of July, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and eighteen, personally appeared before me , the subscriber, , and makes oath that he delivered a true copy of the within citation to Thomas A. Elynn, United States District Attorney for the District of Arizona. Subscribed and sworn to before me at , this — day of July, A. D. 1918. Service accepted this 6th day of July, 1918. THOMAS A. ELYNN, United States Attorney. [46] [Endorsed] : In the District Court of the United States, District of Arizona. No. C-704— Tucson. United States of America vs. August Sandberg, De- fendant. Citation. Filed July 6th, 1918. Mose Drachman, Clerk. [47] United States of America, 57 [Endorsed]: No. 3187. United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. August Sandberg, Plaintiff in Error, vs. United States of America, Defendant in Error. Transcript of Rec- ord. Upon Writ of Error to the United States District Court of the District of Arizona, Filed July 29, 1918. P. D. MONCKTON, Clerk of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. By Paul P. O'Brien, Deputy Clerk. GAYLAMOUNT PAMPHLET BINDER Manufadurtd by 6AYLORD BROS. Inc. Syracuse, N. Y. Stockton, Calif. m