Illinois vs. August Spies et al. trial transcript no. 1. Direct examination by Mr. Ingham. Cross-examination by Mr. Foster. People's Exhibits 10 (p.468), 10a (p.470) and 10b (p.469) introduced into evidence. Testified on behalf of the Prosecution, People of the State of Illinois. Testified on various topics (page numbers provide a partial guide): Most, Johann (vol.I 476), socialists and/or socialism (vol.I 473), anarchists and/or anarchism (vol.I 476), "Revenge" circular (vol.I 470), the Alarm (vol.I 483), the Arbeiter-Zeitung (vol.I 466), meaning of "Ruhe" (vol.I 468), discussion of legal procedure (vol.I 478), International Workingmen's Association (vol.I 473), Spies, August (vol.I 467), Parsons, Albert (vol.I 467), Lingg, Louis (vol.I 477), Schwab, Michael (vol.I 467), Fielden, Samuel (vol.I 476), Engel, George (vol.I 474), Neebe, Oscar (vol.I 473), Fischer, Adolph (vol.I 472), People's Exhibit 10 (vol.I 468), People's Exhibit 10a (vol.I 470), People's Exhibit 10b (vol.I 469).
Testimony of Theodore Fricke, 1886 July 20.
Volume I, 466-494, 29 p.
Fricke, Theodore.
Superintendent of Arbeiter-Zeitung; German immigrant.
Go to Next Witness | Return to Previous Witness | Return to Trial TOC | Return to the HADC Table of Contents
[Image, Volume I, Page 466]
THEODORE FRICKE,
a witness for The People, having been duly sworn, was examined in chief by MR. INGHAM, and testified as follows:
Q What is your name?
A Theodore Fricke.
Q What is your business Mr. Fricke?
A I am Superintendent of the Arbeiter Zeitung.
Q The business superintendent?
A Yes sir.
Q How long have you occupied that position?
A Since the 5th of May.
Q What was your business before that?
A I was book-keeper there.
Q For what.
A Before the 5th of May.
Q Bookkeeper for what?
A For the Arbeiter Zeitung.
Q Do you understand English thoroughly?
A No sir. I would like to speak German.
Q How long have you lived in this country?
A Nearly three years.
Q How long were you bookkepper for the Arbeiter Zeitung?
A About two years.
Q Did you have charge of all the books of that company?
A Yes sir.
Q Do you know August Spies?
A Yes sir.
Q What was his position?
A He was the superintendent and editor of the paper.
Q The chief editor?
A Yes sir.
Q Do you know Schwab?
A Yes sir.
Q Did he have any position with the Arbeiter Zeitung?
A A. Well, he was one of the editors too; yes sir.
Q Under Spies?
A Yes sir.
Q Do you know Parsons?
A Yes sir.
Q Did Parsons have anything to do with the Arbeiter Zeitung?
A No sir.
Q Did he publish a paper?
A The Alarm.
Q Who was the editor of the Alarm?
A Mr. Parsons.
Q Where was the Alarm published?
A 107 Fifth Avenue.
Q Is that the Arbeiter Zeitung office?
A That is the Arbeiter Zeitung building.
Q Was it at that time?
A Well---
Q Is was at that time?
A Yes sir.
Q Have you ever seen August Spies write?
A Yes sir.
Q Do you know his handwriting?
A Yes sir.
Q Did you ever see Schwab write?
A Yes.
Q Do you know his handwriting?
A Yes sir.
Q Look at the paper which I now show you (handing witness manuscript containing the word Ruhe). In whose handwriting is that?
A Spies' handwriting:
Q August Spies?
A Yes sir.
Q The defendant Spies there?
A Yes sir.
Said paper here offered in evidence and marked People's Exhibit No. 7, and also marked by Mr. Zeisler for identification. (Copy of above marked "People's Exhibit 10" in Vol. of Exhibits hereto attached.)
THE COURT: In what language is it?
MR. INGHAM: German. Anybody can read the second word there R-u-h-e (To witness) What is the first word? What does that mean in English
A Letter box.
Q The word under it is the German word Ruhe, is it?
A Yes sir.
The introduction of said manuscript was objected to by defendants in behalf of the defendants other than Spies generally.
Objection overruled and exception.
MR. INGHAM: Look at the paper which I now show you (showing manuscript). In whose handwriting is that?
A Rau.
Q What Rau?
A Balthazer Rau.
Q Who is Balthazer Rau?
A He was advertising agent for our paper.
Q Who do you mean by our people?
A Our paper.
Q Our paper? The Arbeiter Zeitung?
A The Arbeiter Zeitung and Fackel and Verbote.
Q Was he in the habit of being around the office? Was he there often?
A Yes sir.
Q Everyday?
A Every morning.
Said manuscript is here marked for identification People's Exhibit 8.
(Said manuscript and translation thereof introduced in evidence on behalf of People, and marked People's Ex. 10B contained in Vol. of Exhibits hereto attached.
Q Look at the manuscript which I now show you, (handing witness large bundle of manuscript) in whose handwriting is that manuscript? Look through it so as to see every scrap there. In whose handwriting is that manuscript?
A August Spies.
Q Both the English and the German?
A Yes sir.
Counsel for the People offer in evidence the English part of the manuscript last identified, and counsel for defendant, Mr. Black marks each sheet of both English and German thus for identification. (Copy of same hereto attached, marked Peoples' Ex. 10 A, contained in Vol. of Exhibits hereto attached)
MR. GRINNELL: You might offer in evidence, the German too, Mr. Ingham, and the translation we will take care of later.
MR. INGHAM: The English part of it I will offer in evidence now.
Q Look at the manuscript which I now show you (handing witness another batch of manuscript).
MR. BLACK: We object to the introduction of this manuscript last identified, in behalf of all of the defendants and in behalf of the defendants other than Spies specially.
MR. INGHAM: I offer in evidence these articles so far as they have been identified.
MR. BLACK: Do you wish to read the English portion of the manuscript?
MR. INGHAM: There is no need of reading it; it is just the same as the "Revenge" circular that has been read already.
Q In whose handwriting is this package (Referring to manuscript last shown witness)
A August Spies.
Said manuscript is handed to defendants' counsel and Mr. Black marked the same for identification.
Q Look at the package of manuscript which I now show you, (handing witness another large package of manuscript) In whose handwriting is this manuscript?
A Schwab's, except this (a few pages). I don't know this.
MR FOSTER: Mr. Ingham, you stated a moment ago to the Court and they jury and to us, that the circular was the same as the "Revenge" circular which you have identified.
MR. INGHAM: I understand it is.
MR. FOSTER: Mr. Spies tells me he never wrote that word "Revenge" that it is the work of the compositor. Will you see whether the copy furnishes that word or not?
MR INGHAM: The sheet has been torn off across the top. It begins with "The masters sent out their bloodhounds, the police.
MR. FOSTER: Then the word "Revenge" is not in there?
MR. INGHAM: I have not read it over myself. We shall introduce it in evidence and let it be read of course.
Q Do you know in whose handwriting this is? (Referring to manuscript last before shown witness)
A Well, that is Schwab's, and I do, not know---that is some corrections, (Referring to one or two sheets)
Q You say the corrections there are in Schwab's handwriting?
A Yes sir.
Q This is manuscript written by somebody else, but corrected by Schwab. It is all Schwab's except those two last sheets, and those are written by somebody else and corrected by Schwab.
A All Schwab's.
Q Except this here (a few sheets).
Said manuscript is handed to defendants' counsel and Mr. ZEISLER marks the same for identification.
Q Look at the manuscript which I now show you (handing witness a few sheets(
A Schwab's.
Q It is all Schwab's?
Said manuscript identified by defendants' counsel.
Q Do you know Fischer?
A Yes sir.
Q What was Fischer's business?
A Type-setter.
Q Where did he set type?
A In the Arbeiter Zeitung Office.
Q Was the Arbeiter Zeitung the property of an individual or of a corporation?
A Of a corporation.
Q Was Fischer employed by the company to set type?
A Yes sir.
Q Do you know whether he was a stockholder or not?
A Yes, he was a stockholder.
Q Were you employed by the corporation?
A Yes.
Q Were you a stockholder or not?
A Yes sir.
Q How is it about Spies?
A It is the same thing.
Q How with Schwab?
A It is the same thing.
Q Do you know whether Parsons was a stockholder or not?
A No sir.
Q How about Neebe, if you know?
MR. FOSTER: Does he know, or does he say he is not.
THE WITNESS: He is not a stockholder.
MR. INGHAM. That is the way I understand it.
Q How is it about Neebe?
A He belongs to this corporation.
Q How long have you known Neebe?
A Well, I think about two years.
Q Where did you used to see him?
A In picnies and in our office.
Q Was there a library in that building?
A Yes sir.
Q What was that library called? What kind of a library was it?
A Well, it was a library belonging to the International Working Peoples Association.
Q That is a socialistic association?
A Yes sir.
Q Who, was the librarian?
A Hirschberger.
Q Of what is that International workingmens Association composed, groups, councils, or what?
A Groups, yes.
Q How are the groups known, by name or by number?
A By names.
Q Did you belong to a group?
A Yes sir.
Q Which group?
A Karl Marx.
Q Where was that in the habit of meeting?
A I guess it was 63 Emma Street.
Q Did you belong to any group before belonging to that?
A The Northwest side group.
Q Where did that meet?
A Thalia Hall, 633 Milwaukee Avenue.
Q Do you know Fischer?
A Yes sir.
Q Did he belong to any of those groups?
A Yes sir.
Q Which ones?
A The Northwest Side.
Q Do you know Engel?
A Well, I know him, yes.
Q Did Engel belong to any of those groups?
A The Northwest side.
Q Spies belong to any?
A At that time, to the Northwest side, and sometime later to the American Group.
Q Parsons belong to any?
A American group.
Q Schwab?
A I guess to the North Side Group; I don't know for sure.
Q Did Engel belong to any?
A I guess to the Northwest Side.
Q Did Lingg belong to any?
A I don't know.
Q Do you know whether Engel did or not?
A I don't know it for sure. Well yes, he belongs to the Northwest Side Group.
Q Engel belonged to the Northwest Side Group. Did Neebe belong to any?
A I guess to the North Side Group.
Q Did these groups have any central organixation, central committee, or anything of that sort?
A Yes; besides this Northwest Side Group.
Q All except the Northwest Side Group?
A Yes sir.
Q Where did the Central Committee meet?
A 107 Fifth Avenue.
Q Is that the Arbeiter Zeitung Building?
A Yes sir.
Q You say the Northwest Side Group did not have any member of that committee?
A Yes sir.
Q Do you know why not?
A Well, they had other principle.
Q Well, what principle?
A Strong Anarchistic.
Q Didn,t want even that much government.
MR. BLACK: Do you ask that as a question or make that as a comment
MR. INGHAM: Well, both.
MR. BLACK: Well, if it is asked as a question I would like the answer to go in the record.
MR. INGHAM: (Q) Is that the reason they did not want that much government?
A I don,t understand such questions.
Q What group did Fielden belong to?
A I guess to the American Group.
MR. BLACK: Do you know anything about it. You say you guess, do you know anything about it?
A Yes sir.
Q Then why don't you say he belonged to the American or whatver it may be?
MR. GRINNELL: It is an expression he uses, evidently not being acquainted with our language.
MR. INGHAM: Look at the book which I now show you, (showing witness Johann Most's book, so called) Did you ever see that book in the library, in the Arbeiter Zeitung Building?
A Yes sir.
Q What is the name of that book?
MR. BLACK: I think we will object here to the contents of the library in the Arbeiter Zeitung Building. I do not see what tendency
it has to throw light upon this question that we are investigating.
THE COURT: What is the book we are talking about?
MR. INGHAM: Herr Most's Signs of Revolutionary Warfare, How to Make Bombs, &c.
THE COURT: If there is evidence tending to show whether the men had any views on overthrowing by force of society, then the possession of such a book would be admissible with other evidence. By itself, it is perfectly innocent. It depends upon other circumstances, whether the possession of it has any influence or not
MR. BLACK: We would like to have the other circumstances come in first.
THE COURT: Well, you have had the circumstance from Moulton, of what Spies said to him was the condition of things in Chicago.
MR. FOSTER: I am informed that it does not belong to the Arbeiter Office at all. This witness says that it belonged to some labor union.
MR. INGHAM: It belonged to the International Workingmens Association of which all of these men, except perhaps one, he has identified as being members.
MR. BLACK: I will make a special objection there in behalf of Louis Lingg. I believe there is a failure yet to connect him with any branch of this International Association. So I will make a special objection on his account as to books and papers; said objections were overruled and exceptions taken.
MR. INGHAM: (Q) Have you ever seen that book sold any place?
A Yes sir, by picnics.
Q Who have you seen it sold by?
A Hirschberger.
Q Hirschberger, the librarian of that library?
(No answer)
Q Look at the paper which I now show you (showing manuscript) Whose handwriting is that?
A Parsons'.
Q At what picnic have you seen this book sold?
A I cannot remember.
Q What kind of picnics-- what class of people?
A Socialistic picnics and mass meetings.
Q Were any of the defendants present at any of those meetings, mass meetings or picnics?
A Yes sir.
Q Who? Which ones were present?
A Spies, Parsons, Fielden, sometimes Neebe.
Q Who else?
A Spies, Neebe Parsons, and Fielden.
Q Ever see Schwab at any of them?
A Yes.
Q Fischer?
A Well, maybe.
Q You can't say as to that.
MR. BLACK: It strikes me, if your honor please, that this thing has got about far enough; it is getting to be farcical. Here is a
proposition by the State to prove that this man has seen certain of these defendants at picnics, sometime or other, some place or other, the Lord only knows when and the Lord only knows where-- perhaps the State knows.
THE COURT: At which those books were sold.
MR. BLACK: Suppose they were present, he did not say that they knew of or participated in the selling, or that they had anything to do with the selling, or that they saw the selling. Suppose they did, what has it to do with the case?
THE COURT: If men are teaching the public how to commit murder, it is admissible to prove it, if it can be proved by items.
MR. BLACK: Well, does your Honor know what this teaches?
THE COURT: I do not know what the contents of the book are. I asked what the book was and I was told that it was Herr Mosts' Science of Revolutionary Warfare, and taught the method of preparing deadly weapons and missiles and that was accepted by the other side.
MR. BLACK: Does that justify your honor in the construction that it teaches how to commit murder, or in stating that in the presence of this jury.
THE COURT: If a society or any men not in a society have for their object the overturning of civil order by force, that is, if there is evidence such as has gone in here, tending to show a state of things, tending to show objects which individuals have in view and that those objects are the overturning of civil order by force, then the means by which it is proposed to
be accomplished, are admissible in evidence, and if among those means are books treating of and instructing how to do it, the possession of those books is one thing that may be proved.
MR. BLACK: That is one thing. Now it seems to me that Your Honor has not caught the point of my objection. My objection was to the form of expression which Your Honor adopted for the purpose of characterizing something that you did not know anything about, something admittedly that you did not know anything about, something that has not yet been put in evidence, to-wit, the contents of this book.
THE COURT: It is a book which I am told is so and so.
MR. BLACK: I understand, but Your Honor's own statement of what you have been told Don't justify the characterization which Your Honor gives it.
THE COURT: If it is a book teaching how to make bombs and explosives, as was said, and not disputed, my characterization is all right. But then upon the objection as to the character of the book itself---if that is the ground of the objection then we will find out what the character of the book is.
MR. BLACK: Your Honor used some expression which I criticise and want to except to.
THE COURT: The only question as yet before the Court is whether it might be proved where he had seen that book, and the objection was made that it should not be shown where he had seen that book and I inquired then what sort of book it was, and it was stated by the other side what sort of book it was, and you said nothing about it; so that I in ruling upon the question whether it may
be shown where it was to be found, where it had been seen, must take the character of the book into consideration in determining whether it is admissible. Whether it is of that character or not will appear when it is translated, I suppose. I suppose the book is not in the English language.
MR. BLACK: I understand it is not.
THE COURT: Now, if by translation they do not show that it is a book of the character which they say it is, why then it cuts no figure.
MR. INGHAM: (Q) Now, who were the speakers, if there were any, at the picnic at which you have seen this book sold----that is, were any of these defendants speakers?
Objected to.
MR. BLACK: Before going into this rambling and absurd investigation they must fix the time and place, so as to make it possible to contradict it, if we choose to contradict it.
THE COURT: I think that is true---that you should single out the occasion. You cannot classify picnics as having a general character.
MR. INGHAM: (Q) Where were the picnics at which you have seen this book sold?
Defendants' counsel object to this evidence as immaterial and incompetent; objection overruled; exception by defendants.
THE COURT: The evidence must be in detail. The witness cannot classify them generally.
MR. INGHAM: (Q) Well, specify any one picnic at which you have ever seen this book sold?
A I think it was Ogden's Grove.
Q At Ogden's Grove?
A Yes.
Q Where is Ogden's Grove?
A It is on the north side, I guess, on Willow Street.
Q When was that picnic?
A Last year.
Q About what time last year?
A July.
Q Do you remember who were the speakers at that picnic?
A No sir.
Q Were any of the defendants there that you remember?
A Yes.
Q Which ones?
A Well, there was Spies and Neebe, I think Parsons and Fielden; I don't know more.
Q Did you ever see it sold at any other picnic?
A Maybe and maybe not.
Q Well, any that you can remember?
A I think in Sheffield.
Q Where is Sheffield?
A Indiana.
Q When was that picnic?
A Last September.
Q Were any of the defendants present at that Picnic
A Yes sir.
Q Was that a socialistic picnic?
A It was.
Q Have you ever seen it sold at any other picnic?
A I cannot remember.
Q Which of the defendants were present at Sheffield?
A Spies, Neebe, Parsons and I guess Fischer.
Q You say that Parsons was the Editor of the "Alarm?"
A Yes sir.
MR. SALOMON: You are going onto a new subject now. We move to strike out the testimony in regard to these picnics.
Motion overruled; exception by defendants.
MR. INGHAM: (Q) How long was he editor of the "Alarm," so far as you know of your own knowledge?
A From the first number.
Q Where was the office of the "Alarm", its publication?
A 107 Fifth Avenue.
Q Is that in the Arbeiter Zeitung Building?
A Yes sir.
Q Was that a daily or a weekly paper?
A Semi-monthly.
Q Take the papers which I now show you and look at them and see whether or not those are numbers of the "Alarm", Parsons' paper. (Handing witness newspaper file which he examines.) Are these the files---
A All the "Alarm" except this one (indicating).
Said papers are here shown to defendants' counsel for identification.
Q Look at the paper which I now show you, marked "Exhibit 3" (handing witness paper). What paper is that?
A "The Fackel".
Q What is the "Fackel"?
A Sunday paper from the Arbeiter Zeitung.
Q It is the Sunday edition of the Arbeiter Zeitung, is it?
A Yes sir.
Q Who, was the editor of the paper?
A Mr. Spies.
Q On the date of that issue--was Schwab the assistant editor at that time?
A Yes sir.
Q Look at the paper which I now show you, marked "People's Exhibit 4" (handing to witness). What paper is that?
A Arbeiter Zeitung.
Q Was Spies the editor of it on that day?
A Yes sir.
MR. BLACK What is the date of that paper?
A The 4th of May.
MR. INGHAM: Schwab the assistant editor?
A Yes sir.
Q Look at the paper which I now show you called the "Vorbote" (handing witness paper). What is that?
A It is the weekly paper from the Arbeiter Zeitung, weekly edition.
Q Is that the weekly edition?
A Yes sir.
Q Who was the editor on that day?
A Mr. Spies.
Q Was Schwab connected with it at that time?
A Yes sir.
MR. BLACK: What is that date?
A The 5th of May.
MR. BLACK I guess he was in the bastile on that day.
THE WITNESS: Well, that is printed the day before, in May; that was the weekly edition; it was printed the day before.
Said paper is marked Exhibit 9.
MR. INGHAM: Look at the paper which I now show you (handing to witness)
A First of May, Arbeiter Zeitung.
Q Who was the editor on the day of that issue?
A Spies.
Q And was Schwab the assistant?
A Yes sir.
Said paper is marked "People's Exhibit 10".
Q Now just run over these packages (handing witness packages of the Arbeiter Zeitung paper.)
MR. FOSTER: If it will save any time we will admit any paper that you want to introduce, or any part of it, provided that any of the publications are by any of the defendants.
MR. INGHAM: That is, you will waive the formal proof?
MR. FOSTER: Certainly. Pick out any paper at any time that any of the defendants has published and we will admit anything from the files of the Arbeiter Zeitung.
MR. INGHAM: And "The Fackel"?
MR. FOSTER: "The Fackel", The Vorbote", the "Arbeiter Zeitung" and "The Alarm".
MR. INGHAM: That is, you waive all question of the technical proof in regard to it?
MR. FOSTER: The technical proof.
MR. INGHAM: (Q) What circulation had the Arbeiter Zeitung on the 4th of May?
A I cannot tell that for sure.
THE COURT: Well, about how much?
A About thirty-six hundred.
Q What circulation had "The Alarm"?
A About two thousand.
Mr. BLACK: I do not see the materiality of all that, Your Honor.
THE COURT: That depends upon what is in the paper.
MR. BLACK: I mean its materiality with reference to the issue we are trying here.
MR. SALOMON: We move to, exlude the testimony given by this witness.
Motion overruled, and exception by defendants.
MR. BLACK: And especially we move to exclude the portion particularly objected to as they came in.
Motion overruled and exception by defendants.
Cross-Examination by
MR. FOSTER.
Q Mr. Fricke, who was it sold these books of Herr Most at the picnic in Indiana?
A In Sheffield, Indiana, I think.
Q Did any of the defendants have anything to do with selling them?
A No sir, except Hirschberger.
Q He is not a defendant?
A No sir.
Q Any of these eight men, did they have anything to do with the selling of these books?
A No sir.
Q Was there a large audience at that picnic-- a good many people?
A Yes, I think about two thousand.
Q And the man who had these books conceived the idea of disposing of them down there, took them down there to sell?
A Took them down there to sell.
Q And did sell?
A Yes sir.
Q And the defendants had nothing to do with it, or any of them?
A No sir.
Q In any manner, shape or form?
A No sir.
Q Did you ever see any of the defendants sell any of these books?
A No sir.
Q Anywhere?
A No sir.
Q Then there was another picnic you say up here at Ogden's Grove
A Yes sir.
Q Some time last year, and this same man who had a mania for selling these books---and a profit in it--- he had his books there to sell?
A Yes sir.
Q And sold them there?
A Yes sir.
Q Did the defendants have anything to do with it?
A No sir.
Q Any of these eight men?
A No sir.
Q Nothing whatever?
A No sir.
Q To do with the transaction?
A No. Sir.
Q Do you know of your own knowledge whether they knew that he was selling them or not before?
A No sir. That I do not know.
Q They did not know anything about it so far as you know?
Q Well, just so much; they know just so much as myself.
Q That is, you think they may have known that he was selling the book?
A Yes sir.
Q You had nothing to do with the sale of them, did you?
A No sir.
Q What do you mean by knowing an their knowing as much as you did, that you happened to see that he was selling books?
A Yes sir.
Q And they might have seen the same thing?
A Yes sir.
Q You do not know whether they did or not?
A No sir.
Q How long did you say you had been connected with the Arbeiter Zeitung?
A Nearly three years.
Q Almost ever since you have been in this country?
A Yes sir.
Q At that time, was it the principal paper published in the German language of the workingmen and their societies--- in May?
A Yes sir.
Q It was the principal paper that was published in the interests of the workingmen of Chicago?
A Yes sir.
Q I suppose at that time there was a great many unions, labor unions and trades unions, of the German citizens and persons who spoke and read the German language, was there not, in the city?
A Yes sir.
Q Now I will ask you whether it is not true that about the first of May and the 4th of May and along about there, what there was not sometimes almost a column in the Arbeiter Zeitung of notices of meeting at different places and halls.
A Yes sir.
Q That is so, is it?
A Yes sir.
Q That there would be almost one column?
A Yes sir.
Q From the top of the paper to the bottom?
A Yes sir.
Q That would contain notices of meetings?
A Meetings.
Q Such an organization or union would meet at such a place at a certain night?
A Yes sir.
Q They would bring that notice to the Arbeiter Zeitung?
A Yes sir.
Q Or they would come and say to Mr. Spies, "Put so and so under the column of meetings"?
A Yes sir.
Q Now, you say that these words, "Letter Box", "Ruhe", is in Mr. Spies" handwriting?
A Yes sir.
Q Do you know how he come to write that? Did you see him write it?
A No sir. Well, I see him write it sometimes, but not this word.
Q Now, was it often the case about that time that men would come in the Arbeiter Zeitung office with a notice and Mr. Spies would put it in shape and send it up---would rewrite it?
A It may be. I did not see that.
Q Or come by postal card? Wasn't it a common thing for postal cards to be received at the office of the Arbeiter Zeitung, and Mr. Spies and Mr. Schwab would take it and read it him over and then revise and alter and send it up for publication?
A Yes sir.
Q In the "letter Box"?
A Yes sir.
Q Or in this column where these notices were appearing. You do not know then in regard to this word "Ruhe", whether it was received in that way or not?
A I do not know that.
Q You do not know whether somebody told Mr. Spies to call a meeting by inserting this notice in the "Letter Box"?
A No sir.
Q Or whether he simply requested them to make that insertion under the "Letter Box"?
A I do not know that.
Q You do not know whether it came by postal card or by letter?
A I do not know.
Q You do not know whether it came by verbal communication or whether it came by a messenger, written on a piece of paper?
A I do not know that.
Q In any event, Mr. Spies or Mr. Schwab was likely to take his pen and write upon a piece of paper the proper notice and send it up for publication?
A Yes sir.
Q And then these societies were charged, I suppose, for the publication on the books?
A Yes sir.
Q And the collection was made afterwards? ----"The Alarm" is not being published now, is it?
A No sir.
Q But the Arbeiter Zeitung is?
A Yes Sir.
Q How is it with those other papers, the "Vorbote" and "Fackel"?
A They are published regularly.
Q That is the Sunday edition and the weekly edition?
A And the weekly edition.
Q Of the Arbeiter Zeitung?
A Yes sir.
Q You probably misunderstood, or else I misunderstood you, or else I am misinformed. Was there a charge for inserting notices of the meetings? Was there a charge entered on the books, or was it not a gratuitous service by the Arbeiter Zeitung?
A It belongs to the editorial.
THE COURT: Did the Arbeiter Zeitung receive pay for inserting notices?
MR. INGHAM: He said it belonged to the editorial. Now, what did that have reference to?
THE COURT: Well whether these notices were put in gratuitously or paid for. Was the paper paid for the notices?
A They are free of charge.
MR. FOSTER: Free of charge?
A Yes sir.
Q All of them?
A Yes sir.
Q All under the head of "Letter Box", or in the call of meetings was free of charge to the societies?
A Free of charge.
Q You had a column set apart to that business?
A Yes sir.
MR. ZEISLER: First column of the last page?
A Yes sir.
MR. FOSTER: So then if a communication was sent in for the "Letter Box" or for this column, there was no charge made, and it was published?
A Yes sir.
MR. INGHAM: Who published it?
A The editor.
Q Did they always go through the hands of the editor?
A Yes sir.
Q Look at the paper which I now show you, the Arbeiter Zeitung of Monday the 15th of March, 1886---look at the sentence which I now show you (showing witness). Is that an advertisement or in the editorial department?
Objected to as new matter, and also that it speaks for itself.
THE COURT: Well, whether it is a paid advertisement or free of charge don't appear.
MR. INGHAM: (Q) Is that a paid advertisement?
A No sir.
Q It is not?
A No sir.
MR. SALOMON We would like to see it before he testifies.
MR. FOSTER: What is it?
MR. INGHAM: The announcement that Most's "Science of War" are ready for distribution.
Q I wish you would translate that?
Objected to as immaterial.
THE COURT: There is a large body of matter which I suppose you have got to have translations of by and by.
The paragraph in the paper shown witness is marked for identification "A.M.G."
MR. BLACK: That is March 15, is it?
MR. INGHAM: Yes sir, at least I read it so.
Q Is that marked (showing witness same paper)?
A Yes sir.