Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

Criminal Law: Criminal Syndicalist Act: Constitutional Law: Validity of the Act under the Free Speech Clause

H. R. M.
California Law Review
Vol. 10, No. 6 (Sep., 1922), pp. 512-518
DOI: 10.2307/3474218
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3474218
Page Count: 7
  • Download PDF
  • Cite this Item
Criminal Law: Criminal Syndicalist Act: Constitutional Law: Validity of the Act under the Free Speech Clause
We're having trouble loading this content. Download PDF instead.

Notes and References

This item contains 31 references.

[Footnotes]
  • 1
    Cal. Stats. 1919, p. 281
  • 2
    This reference contains 2 citations:
    • Chafee, Freedom of Speech, p. 190
    • Appendix IV, part 2, p. 401
  • 3
    This reference contains 2 citations:
    • New Jersey Laws of 1920, p. 448
    • New Mexico Session Laws 1919, p. 295.
  • 4
    (July 31, 1919) 180 Cal. 783, 183 Pac. 437.
  • 5
    (Oct. 18, 1920) 33 Cal. App. Dec. 346, 194 Pac. 48, rehearing denied Nov. 16, 1920.
  • 6
    This reference contains 3 citations:
    • April 15
    • 1921
    • 34 Cal. App. Dec. 1011
  • 7
    This reference contains 2 citations:
    • (Nov. 12, 1921) 63 Cal. Dec. 536, 203 Pac. 78
    • 33 Cal. App. Dec. 594
  • 8
    This reference contains 2 citations:
    • (Nov. 12, 1921) 62 Cal. Dec. 546, 203 Pac. 85
    • 34 Cal. App. Dec. 414, 193 Pac. 871
  • 9
    (April 25, 1922) 38 Cal. App. Dec. 26.
  • 10
    (Aug. 4, 1922) 38 Cal. App. Dec. 750.
  • 11
    (Aug. 4, 1922) 38 Cal. App. Dec. 743.
  • 13
    This reference contains 8 citations:
    • McDermott, supra, n. 4
    • People v. Malley, supra, n. 5
    • People v. Steelick, supra, n. 7
    • People v. Taylor, supra, n. 8.
    • People v. Moilen (1918) 139 Minn. 265, 167 N. W. 345
    • State v. Hennessey (1921) 113 Wash. 408, 195 Pac. 271
    • Fox v. State of Washington (1914) 236 U. S. 273, 35 Sup. Ct. Rep. 383, 59 L. Ed. 573
    • People v. Most (1902) 171 N. Y. 423, 58 L. R. A. 509
  • 14
    U. S. Const. Amendment I. "Every citizen may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of the right; and no law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press." Cal. Const., Art. I, § 9
  • 15
    This reference contains 6 citations:
    • Chafee, Freedom of Speech, pp. 3-39, 203-207
    • Thomas F. Carroll, Freedom of Speech and of the Press in the Federalist Period, 18 Michigan Law Review, 615
    • James Parker Hall, Free Speech in War Time, 21 Columbia Law Review, 526
    • John H. Wigmore, The Abrams Case, 14 Illinois Law Review, 539
    • Mr. Justice Holmes in Abrams v. U. S. (1919) 250 U. S. 616, 624, 40 Sup. Ct. Rep. 17, 63 L. Ed. 1173
    • supra, n. 11
  • 16
    "The Normal Criminal Law of Words" by Chafee in his Freedom of Speech, p. 169.
  • 17
    State v. Diamond (1921) 202 Pac. 988 (N. M.).
  • 18
    This reference contains 4 citations:
    • (1920) 182 Cal. 447, 188 Pac. 548.
    • State v. Tachin (1919) 92 N. J. Law 270, 106 Atl. 145
    • State v. Gabriel (1921) 112 Atl. 611 (N. J.)
    • State v. Gibson (1919) 175 N. W. 34 (Iowa).
  • 19
    Supra, n. 1.
  • 20
    (1918) 249 U. S. 47, 52, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 247
  • 21
    This reference contains 3 citations:
    • Supra, n. 5.
    • People v. Whitney
    • People v. Taylor
  • 22
    This reference contains 2 citations:
    • Roscoe Pound, The Interests of Personality, 28 Harvard Law Review, 343, and 445, 453
    • Chafee, Freedom of Speech, p. 38. "The true boundary line of the First Amendment can be fixed only when Congress and the Courts realize that the principle on which speech is classified as lawful or unlawful involves the balancing against each other of two very important social interests in public safety and in the search for truth."
  • 23
    This reference contains 5 citations:
    • Cal. Penal Code, §§ 181, 216, 217, 218, 524, and 664
    • People v. Stites (1888) 75 Cal. 570, 17 Pac. 693
    • People v. Mann (1896) 113 Cal. 76, 45 Pac. 182.
    • J. H. Beale Jr., Criminal Attempts, 16 Harvard Law Review, 491
    • Ex parte Floyd (1908) 7 Cal. App. 588, 95 Pac. 175.
  • 24
    This reference contains 3 citations:
    • People v. Rozelle (1888) 78 Cal. 84, 20 Pac. 36
    • People v. Nolan (1904) 144 Cal. 75, 77 Pac. 774
    • People v. Billings (1917) 34 Cal. App. 549, 168 Pac. 396. See 16 C. J. pp. 125-133.
  • 25
    This reference contains 3 citations:
    • Cal. Penal Code §§ 182, 184
    • People v. Daniels (1894) 105 Cal. 262, 38 Pac. 720
    • People v. Holmes (1897) 118 Cal. 444, 456, 50 Pac. 675.
  • 26
    This reference contains 5 citations:
    • People v. Steelick, supra, n. 9
    • People v. Taylor, supra, n. 8.
    • People v. Whitney, supra, n. 9
    • State v. Payne (1921) 200 Pac. 314 (Wash.)
    • State v Kowalchuck (1921) 200 Pac. 314 (Wash.).
  • 27
    Transcript of the record in People v. Whitney, Crim. 907 at pp. 296, 297.
  • 28
    Chafee, Freedom of Speech, p. 27.
  • 29
    Supra, n. 21.
  • 30
    John H. Wigmore, The Abrams Case, supra, n. 15.
  • 31
    "The one thing looked for is that which is demanded by the popular hatred, the confession of the name, not the weighing of the charge. Whereas if you were inquiring into the case of some criminal, you would not be satisfied to give a verdict immediately on his confession of the crime, unless you also demanded an account of the accessory facts, the character of the act, the frequency of its repetition..." Tertullian's Apol- ogy, translated by J. E. B. Mayor, p. 7
  • 32
    Supra, n. 15.