Espionage+Act+of+1917

__Need for the Espionage Act__ Before the United States entered World War I, there was strong resistance against the war among the American people. In fact, Woodrow Wilson’s reelection in 1916 was at least partly due to his success in keeping the U.S. //out// of the European war. Even before America’s entry into the war, the Wilson administration had sought legislation like the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918. Despite official neutrality, beginning in July 1915, the United States embarked on a program of military preparedness and financial and material support of Great Britain and its allies. As U.S. foreign policy shifted toward support of Great Britain, the administration became increasingly concerned about criticism of its policies and about pro-German propaganda.



__The People's Response to Treason__ Despite earlier widespread resistance to entering the war, once war was declared American society was overwhelmed by patriotic fervor, quickly rising to the level of wartime hysteria. Deliberately stirred up by an intense propaganda campaign to encourage enthusiasm for the war, this nationalism soon developed into rigid ideological conformity and outright suppression of all forms of dissent. All progressive, dissident, socialist, radical, or pacifist groups became targets of repressive actions by the government, and often also by private vigilante groups.

The American people were not above fretting about the possibility of treason in the U.S., and dealing with possible enemy associates in the mother country. For example, American citizens with German surnames, and those who taught German in schools were hounded and abused as subversives and traitors. One German-born man was lynched by a mob of over five hundred people. German books were pulled out of libraries and sometimes destroyed. Even foods like hamburgers, sauerkraut, and frankfurters were rechristened with American names. It was all in an attempt to eliminate anyone or anything that could potentially aid the enemy, criticize the war, or the government. People who dared to criticize the war were assaulted verbally at least, often physically as well – and sometimes even murdered. Unionists, socialists, and radicals of all stripes were subject to the same sorts of abuse, even if they never denigrated the war effort.

__What was the Espionage Act?__ On June 15, 1917, the Espionage Act was passed with enormous popular support. It was proposed by Representative Edwin Webb, of North Carolina, and Senator Charles Culberson, of Texas. Twice before the Act was passed, Attorney General Thomas W. Gregory had proposed legislation on behalf of the Wilson administration that would punish espionage and curtail disloyal speech. Congress declined to enact these bills in June 1916 and during the winter of 1917. The Webb-Culberson legislation closely resembled these failed bills.

The Espionage Act dealt with a wide range of issues, from criminalizing various acts of espionage to protecting shipping. Mostly it was uncontroversial. The act is remembered, however, for those provisions that affected civil liberties. First, Title 1, section 3, of the act made it a crime, punishable by up to twenty years' imprisonment and a $10,000 fine, to "make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States" and to "cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty in the military or naval forces ... or ... willfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States." Second, title 12 empowered the postmaster general to declare any material that violated any provision of the Espionage Act or that urged "treason, insurrection, or forcible resistance to any law of the United States" unmailable. Use of the mails to transmit such materials was punishable by imprisonment and a fine. Wilson’s postmaster general, Albert S. Burleson, seized and suppressed all kinds of publications that he deemed radical, dissenting, or otherwise suspect. Finally, as originally introduced, the bill gave the president the power to censor publication of material that he deemed potentially useful to the enemy.



The censorship provision faced stiff opposition from the press and from across the political spectrum. Opponents included Republicans from the progressive wing of the party, such as Senators William Borah and Hiram Johnson, as well as Wilson's constant critic from the party's conservative wing, Senator Henry Cabot Lodge.

__The Espionage Act in the Courtroom__ While most of the Espionage Act was straightforward and non-controversial, parts of this legislation curtailed freedom of speech in such a way as to draw an outcry from civil libertarians. It resulted in several important U.S. Supreme Court decisions regarding freedom of speech that continue to be studied. Those who spoke or wrote against the war were arrested in droves. Over fifteen hundred people were charged under these laws for the crime of expressing an opinion the government did not agree with. One socialist, Rose Pastor Stokes, was sentenced to ten years in prison for telling an all-female audience that she was for the people, while the government was for the profiteers. Eugene V. Debs, a prominent socialist leader, was sentenced to ten years in a federal penitentiary for a rather academic speech analyzing the economic causes of war.

Nor did the Supreme Court defend the basic constitutional rights of those convicted under these repressive laws. In 1919 the Court upheld the convictions of three people who had been imprisoned for speaking out against the war. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., justified such repression by saying that when the exercise of free speech constituted a “clear and present danger” to the nation, then the government could suspend the right of free speech. Of course, the government got to decide what constituted a “clear and present danger,” and both the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918 were wielded like blunt instruments against anyone who dared to disagree with the government.

=
Most judges and juries applied the act expansively. Judges routinely instructed juries that they could infer unlawful intent from the likely effects of the defendant's words. These judges often instructed juries that they could convict on the basis of the "bad tendency" of the defendant's language, whether or not prosecutors had shown actual bad effects, or that any soldiers or possible recruits had been exposed to the defendant's words. So instructed; juries usually convicted. A handful of judges construed the act narrowly in an effort to reconcile the act with First Amendment free-speech values======

Most notably, in //Masses Publishing Co. v. Patten// (1917), the publisher of the journal //The Masses// sought an injunction to prevent the seizure of the August issue as nonmailable because of its antiwar articles and cartoons. Judge Learned Hand granted that the material might undermine obedience in the military and, through its praise of jailed conscription opponents, might tend to obstruct recruitment. Nevertheless, he granted the injunction, because he concluded that Congress must have intended to prohibit only speech that advocated insubordination or resistance to enlistment. By enforcing the statute this way, he avoided deciding whether the statute unconstitutionally infringed on free speech. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit rejected Judge Hand's narrow interpretation of the act and reversed his decision.

//"The Masses"//, March 1917

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917

http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/espionageact.htm

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1344.html

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Espionage+Act+of+1917

http://www.espionageinfo.com/Ep-Fo/Espionage-Act-of-1917.html