OCR Text |
Show 'baker defends TAXPUBLrGlTY JURY INSTRUCTED TO RENDER VERDICT OF NOT GUILTY BY JUDGE Acting As Counsel For Ballmore Port, Former Secretary Argues Demurrer In Federal Court New York, Federal Judge Knox in United Statep district court directed the jury to bring a verdict of not guilty in the case of the government against the Herald-Tribune, indicted for publication of income tax figures. Baltimore, In a striking analysis of the privileges of the press under the constitution, former Secretary ot War Newton D. Baker argued with demurrer of the Baltimore Post, a Scripps-Howard newspaper, indicted indict-ed by the government fo publishing income tax figures. Appearing as counsel for the Post before the United States district court here, Baker maintained that the newspaper was fully within its constitutional consti-tutional rights in exercising Its prerogatives pre-rogatives of freedom of the press when it printed the taxes paid by Baltimore residents. The basis of Baker's argument was that the collectors' lists were not returns re-turns as defined by the revenue bill, and that since the law directed that collectors make the tax figures available avail-able for public inspection, such availability avail-ability was in fact "publication." Were any other construction placed on the law, Baker argued, "we would have congress authorizing freedom of speech and denying freedom of the press as to the same data. This congress con-gress has no power to do. The freedom free-dom of the press means the right to print whatever anyone may lawfully say. Neither can be restricted whether the other is permitted." Quoting the first amendment to the constitution, which declares "that congress con-gress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press," Baker discussed questions ques-tions involving the right of free speech and press arising in the sedition sedi-tion and espionage acts and in libel and contempt cases. "The sedition laws," he said, 'were never tested in court; they are conceded con-ceded to have been unconstitutional. "The espionage acts have been applied ap-plied to the extent that they penalize language which excites crime, thus making the speaker or printer an accessory, ac-cessory, or an aider and abetter of criminal conduct. "In libel cases those who print, like those who speak, are held responsible for the consequences of their acts, but no attempt is made at imposing censorship in advance or requiring license. li-cense. In the contomp cases other principles are involved which are well known limitations on all conduct, but do not concern us here. "Nowhere in the literature of our law can there be found a legislative attempt to separate speech and press In the matter of freedom and no such attempt could or should succeed. "Congress has complete discretion to determine whether or not secrecy shall be preserved as to any of the facts in its tax policy. The protection of the revenue, the encouragement of complete disclosure an to taxable property, the promotion of business are all consideration which congress may weigh. "But when congress has decided that the collector shall publish a fan. it is incompetent to prohibit the publication pub-lication of the same fact by the press." |