MASTER NEGA TIVE NO. 91-80416 MICROFILMED 1992 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES/NEW YORK as part of the "Foundations of Western Civilization Preservation Project" Funded by the WMENT FOR THE Reproductions may not be made without permission from Columbia University Library COPYRIGHT STATEMENT The copyright law of the United States - Title 17, United States Code ~ concerns the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material... Columbia University Library reserves the right to refuse to accept a copy order if, in its judgement, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of the copyright law. AUTHOR: SCHROEDER, THEODORE ALBERT TITLE: UNCONSTITUTIONAL! TY OF ALL LAWS.... PLACE: NEW YORK DA TE : [1 908?] COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES PRESERVATION DEPARTMENT BIBLIOGRAPHIC MICROFORM TARGET Master Negative # Original Material as Filmed - Existing Bibliographic Record 176.8 v.l Albert, Schroeder, Theodore, a 18^4- 19b3« Unconstitutionality of all laws against "ob- scene" literature, asserted in a brief by Theo- dore Schrooder... Hew York, Free speech league 1910? 3 15 p« 24 on* Volune of pamphlets I U Restrictions on Use: FILM SIZE: "^S^V^ TECHNICAL MICROFORM DATA REDUCTION RATIO:__\V_]< DATE FILMED: illlL^Jz^ INITIALS__-__!^_^Sj FILMED BY: RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS. INC WOODBRIDGE. CT IMAGE PLACEMENT: lA OiS) IB IIB Association for Information and Imago Managemont 1100 Wayne Avenue. Suite 1100 Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 301/587-8202 Centimeter 1 2 3 iiMiMiiiiiiiiiiiiiiMiiiiMlii nhmln I I T Inches 1 5 ml 8 10 11 i^ll^^lj^^J^^i^i^J^^h^J^^ r^ 1.0 I.I 1.25 mi |50 ¥' 2.5 1^ 2.2 Itt lU u Uo 1.4 2.0 1.8 1.6 12 13 14 liiiiliiiiliiiiliii ill! 15 mm MPNUFRCTURED TO OHM STfiNDPRDS BY APPLIED IMfiGE, INC. /«^> A ^^ ^ '% ^:z--^ Uo 4- UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF ALL LAWS AGAINST "OBSCENE" LITERATURE, ASSERTED IN A BRIEF BY "^ THEODORE SCHROEDER, A 63 East Fifty-ninth Street, New York City. published by the FREE SPEECH LEAGUE, 120 Lexington Avenue, New York City. it »* Indeed, no opinion or doctrine, of whatever nature it be, or whatever be its tendency, ought *' to be suppressed. For it is either manifestly - true or it is manifestly false, or its truth or false- - hood is dubious. Its tendency is manifestly good, - or manifestly bad, or it is dubious and concealed. *' There are no other assignable conditions, no other " functions of the problem. »* In the case of its being manifestly true and of '♦ good tendency there can be no dispute. Nor in •• the case of its being manifestly otherwise ; for by *• the terms it can mislead nobody. If its truth or * its tendency be dubious, it is clear that nothing can ♦* bring the good to light, or expose the evil, but full *' and free disdussion. Until this takes place, a plaus- ** ible fallacy may do harm ; but discussion is sure to *' elicit the truth and fix public opinion on a proper " basis; and nothing else can do it."— Prof. Thomas Cooper. •* It is a truth that men ought no longer to be led, and it would be a joyful truth, if truth it were, that they are resolved no longer to be led blindfolded in ignorance. It is a truth that the principle which leads men to judge and treat each other, not ac- cording to the intrinsic merit of their action, but* according to the accidental and involuntary coinci- dence of their opinions, is a vile principle. It is a truth that man should not render account to man for his beliefs,"— even on the subject of sex. \ ALL LAWS AGAINST "OBSCENE" LITERATURE ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Revised from TAe Albany Law Journal, Nov. 1907, where all decisions upon the subject are reviewed. I am now making a statement of the questions to be discussed •n a forthcoming book. I will here briefly outline them with references to a few preliminary discussions in professional peri- odicals and pamphlets. These contentions, when adequately presented. I believe must result in the judicial annuUment of all present State and Federal laws against "obscene" literature n i^ /{'""> ^'^^ Journal, for November. 1907, I reviewed all the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States refer- ring to the constitutionality of these laws, to show that every question which I am about to raise is still an open one, free even from every suspicion that such problems exist. That such laws have been enforced vigorously for nearly half a century, without having their constitutionality seriously questioned is as unusual as are the factors to which the Constitution must be applied in order to reach the result. Most of the problems here involved are difficult of solution to those who are not trained specialists in psychology and especially in sexual psychology. Later on. in the completed argument, when we come to study the nature and psychology of modesty, we will find the explanation of this lonir acqu^scence to be of the very essence of our emotional life which coupled with the general absence of psycho-sexual intelli- gence, have so befogged the critical capacity of the members of the profession as even to preclude a search for the discovery of such questions as I am about to raise. My contention is that the postal laws (and all state laws as well) against "obscene and indecent literature are unconstitutional for each of the foUowine- reasons: * 1. Because not within any expressed or implied power of Congress to enact. Syllabus of the Argument: The power to create a posUl system implies the power to pass all laws "necessary and proper to the end of executing the power to establish post offices and post roads, but it does not authorize Congress under the pretext of creating and maintaining post offices to make the postal system a means to the accomplishment of ends no entrusted to the care of Congress. The very creafon of a posta system necessarily involves a determination of the gross physical characteristics of that which is to be carried or excluded and therefore implies the power to determine such qualities A like implication cannot be made in favor of a power to determine what are mailable ideas, because a differential test of mail mat- ter, based upon the opinions transmitted through the mails, or the psychlogical tendencies of such opinions upon the addressee of the mails, or a differential test based upon an idea which is not actually transmitted, but is suggested by one that is trans- mitted, bears no conceivable relation to the establishment of post offices or post roads for the transmission of physical matter only. It may be admitted that the power granted implies the power to preclude the use of the mails as an essential element in the commission of a crime otherwise commitable, and over which Congress has jurisdiction (such as a fraud and gambling), within the geographical limits of its power. But it is claimed that the power of Congress is limited to the use of means which are a direct mode of executing the power to establish post offices and post roads, or some other power expressly granted, and it can- not, under the pretence of regulating the mails, accomplish objects which the Constitution does not commit to the care ol Congress. Such as unconstitutional object is the effort of Con- gress, under the pretext of regulating the mails, to try to use the mails as a means to control the psycho-sexual condition of postal patrons. , "On the Implied Power to exclude ' obscene ideas FROM THE MAILS." Central Law Journal, V. 65. p. 177- (Sept. 6, 1907-) Neither can the exercise of the present power be justified as an incident to the power to regulate interstate commerce be- cause the censorship is not limited thereto. It includes Intra- state transmission as well as that of private letters, or gifts which « ;. are not at all matters of commerce either Inter-state or otherwise, and so cannot be upheld as a regularion of Inter-state commerce. Howard vs. 111. Cent. R R., 28 Supt Ct. Rep. 141. For these reasons the power exercised is not vested in Congress at all. 2. The postal laws against "obscene" literature are void under the constitutional prohibition against the abridgement of freedom of speech and of the press. Likewise all similar State legislation is void under State Constitutions. Syllabus of the argument: This constitutional guarantee of freedom of the press is violated whenever there is an artificial legislative destruction or abridgement of the greatest liberty consistent with an equality of liberty, in the use of the printed page as a means of disseminating ideas of conflicting tendency. The use of printing is but an extended form of speech. Free- dom of speech and press is abridged whenever natural opportu- nity is in any respect denied or its exercise punished, or when by legislative enactment there is created an artificial inequality of opportunity, by a discrimination according to the subject matter discussed, or a discrimination as between different ten- dencies in the different treatment of the same subject matter, or according to differences of literary style in expressing the same thought. All this is now accomplished under obscenity laws as at present administered, and therefore our laws upon the subject are unconstitutional. This contention involves the establishment of new definition of "freedom of the press" based upon the viewpoint that the framers of the constitution intended by that clause to enlarge the intellectual liberty ol the citizen beyond what it had theretofore been under the English system. Some State courts have erro- neously assumed that the only purpose was to exchange a censorship before publication to criminal punishment after publi- cation, without the least enlargement of the right to publish with impunity so long as no one is injured. The contention will be that the constitution changed liberty of the press by permission, to Liberty as a right because thus only can all citizens be protected in their proper opportunity to hear and read all that others have to offer, and without which freedom unrestricted there is no intellectual liberty at all as a matter of right. •THE JUDICIAL DESTRUCTION OF FREEDOM OF THE PRESS," in Government, for Angr:^) 1908. {} Q/klA^ ^H aU-au^ ^ /r^*'--'^^^. V "THE SCIENTIFIC ASPECT OF "DUE PROCESS OF LAW,' " in American Law Review, for June. 1908. -LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE, SPEECH AND PRESS," in The Liberal Review, for August and Sept., 1906. ••FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AND OBSCENE' LIT- ERATURE," N. Y., 1907. (Published by The Free Speech League, 120 Lexington Avenne, New York.) (Also many other articles now being prepared, and more to the point on the precise question of constitutional law here in^ 3. The ' 'obscenity' ' laws violate the constitutional guarantee of "due process of law.*' Syllabus of the argument: The statute furnishes no sundard or test by which to differentiate what book is obscene from that which is not, because of which fact the definition of the cr.me .s uncertain. Furthermore, it is a demonstrable fact of science that obscenity and indecency are not sense-perce.ved qualities o a book, but are solely and exclusively a condition or effect in the reading mind. This is evidenced in the result that it has been and always will be impossible to state a definition or test of obscenity in terms of the qualities of a book, or such a one that, solely by applying the test to any given book, accuracy and uniformity of result must follow, no matter who applies the test, nor such that when there is no dispute about any physical fact of present or past existence, any man may know in advance of a trial and a verdict, solely from reading the statute, what the verdict must be as to the obscenity, and consequent cr.mmality, of every given book. Neither the statute, not the judicial test of obscenity or indecency, furnish any certain advance informa- tion as to what must be the verdict of a jury upon the specula- tive problem of the psychological effect of a given book upon an undescribed hypothetical reader. Their verdict is, therefore, not according to the letter of any general law. but according to their whim, caprice and prejudices, or varying personal experi- ences and different degrees of sexual hypersstheticism and varying kinds and quality of intelligence upon the subject of sexual psychology, or moral idiosyncracies. In consequence. every such verdict is according to a test of obscenity personal to the court or jury in such a case, and binding upon no other court of jury and not according to any general law or uniform rule. One of the reasons underlying this uncertainty is the fact that "obscenity" is not a quality inherent in a book or picture, but wholly and exclusively a contribution of the contemplating mind, and hence cannot be defined in terms of the qualities of a book or picture, but is read into them. "WHAT IS CRIMINALLY 'OBSCENE'" Proceedings XV. International Medical Congress. Lisbon, Portugal, April. 1906; A/bany Law /oumai, (or July, igo6. "LEGAL OBSCENITY AND SEXUAL PSYCHOL- OGY," in TAe Medico- Legal Journal, for Sept., 1907, and The Alienist and Neurologist, for Aug., 1908. •VARIETIES OF OFFICIAL MODESTY," in rh^ Amer- ican Journal 0/ Eugenics, for Dec, 1907.- a/^»u^Ji^Jn^'^^2t^-/f4l "FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AND 'OBSCENE' LIT- ERATURE," N. Y., 1906. (Published by The Free Speech League ) Also other articles now being prepared. , ^ ^ -^ A.- ,m^ {a) The first result of this uncertainty is that the statute of Congress herein involved creates no certain or general rule of conduct for the guidance of citizens, and does not enable them to know if their proposed act is in violation of law, and therefore every indictment and conviction under said statute is without due process of law. Unless the statute so defines the crime that by the application of its letter alone every person of ordinary intelligence must always draw the same line of demarkation between the books or pictures which are prohibited and those which are not, then the statute is void for uncertainty under the the old maxim, "Where the law is uncertain there is no law," and consequendy there is no "due process of law." {b) Furthermore: ' The doctrine is fundamental in English and American law, that there can be no constructive offenses." These are of two kinds. First, where the act to be punished is by judicial construction brought within a statute whose plain and literal meaning does not cover it. Because of the indefinite- ness of the "obscenity" laws nothing is ever unavoidably certain within the letter of the statute. It is necessary in order to secure conviaion that judicial constructign, or more accurately speak- ing judicial legislation, be enacted which creates the criteria of guilt not furnished by the statute, from which it follows that all guilt hereunder is but constructive guilt, and the crime only a constructive, that is a judicially created crime, and not due pro- cess of law. , u- u a^ The second class of constructive crimes are those which do come within the actual and literal definition of the criminal statute but where that predicates crime upon conduct which is only a constructive, and not a real and actually achieved material injury, to any living being, n.,r conditioned upon any immment danger thereof, whose existence is determinable by any known law of the physical universe. In such a case, the reality and materiality of the injury which is an indispensible foundation of all criminal statutes is entirely absent, except as a matter of legal fiction, and not as a matter of the letter of the law. The same proposition may be thus stated: One is being punished for a constructive crime whenever the alleged crime consists only in the dissemination of ideas, if under the statute the penalty attaches upon conditions other than that the ideas have actually resulted in material injury to some one. Every psychologic crime so long as it remains a mere . psychological offense whose iniury is constructive only, can never become anything except a constructive crime. Such purely constructive wrong and con- structive crime cannot be penalized in any country whose consti- tution was ordained to promote liberty, and therefore such a statute cannot constitute "due process of law." "THE SCIENTIFIC ASPECT OF 'DUE PROCESS OF LAW " in The American Law Review, for June, 1908. "STATUTORY UNCERTAINTY AND DUE PRO- CESS OF LAW,' "in The Central Law Journal, for Jan, 3, 1908. - THE HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION OF ' LAW,' " in The Albany Law Journal, for April, 1908. -DUE PROCESS OF LAW/ IN RELATION TO STATUTORY UNCERTAINTY AND CONSTRUCTIVE OFFENCES," N. Y., 1908, published by THE FREE SPEECH LEAGUE, 120 Lexington Avenue, N. Y. City. -CONSTRUCTIVE OFFENCES DEFINED," in The Central Law fcnimal, Auffd^ 1908. 4. The statute in practical operation violates the constitu- tional guarantee against ex post facto laws. Syllabus of the argument: The second result of this uncer- tainty of the statute is that every indictment and conviction under said statute is always according to an ex post facto law or standard of judgment, specially created by the court or jury for each particular case. The Congress of the United States has no power to authorize a jury to determine guilt of crime according to varying personal standards, such as must control the opinion of a jury on the psychological tendency of a book upon an unde- scribed hypothetical reader, and which standard, because it is personal to the juror, in the nature of things cannot be known at the time the alleged act was committed, nor before the rendition of a verdict thereon. A conviction and punishment under such circumstances is always by virtue of ex post facto legislation on the part of the court or jury, and is none the less unconstitutional because the attempted delegation of power to enact it was made before the conduct to be punished. All the criteria of guilt must be found in a prior statute. ♦•THE SCIENTIFIC ASPECT OF DUE PROCESS OF LAW,' " in The American Law Review, for June, 1908 •♦STATUTORY UNCERTAINTY AND 'DUE PRO- CESS OF LAW,' " in r^r Central Law Jour7ial, for Jan. 3, 1908. •THE HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION OF 'LAW,' " in The Albany Law Journal, for April, 1908 " 'DUE PROCESS OF LAW' IN RELATION TO STAT- UTORY UNCERTAINTY AND CONSTRUCTIVE OF- FENCES," N. Y., 1908, published by THE FREE SPEECH LEAGUE, 120 Lexington Avenue, N. Y. City. Also other articles now being prepared. I 5. The statute in its practical operation violates the seventh amendment to the constitution in this: By reason of the want of definition of the crime, by a statutory statement of the criteria of guilt, the courts submit to the jury a determination of the question of law as to what shall constij^te ^'obscenity." Congress has no power to make juries the judges of the law. especially not in cases wherein they were not authorized to be such judges under the common law of England. No such acts as are now punished under "obscene" literature were ever included under the com- mon law crime of "obscene libel.'* -OBSCENE LITERATURE UNDER THE COMMON- LAW," Albany Law Journal, May, 1907. All of the foregoing propositions are to be fully defended in a book entitled "Obscene Literature and Constitutional Law," copyrighted February, 1908, and now in preparation. If these problems shall be submitted to any court for adjudication it is hoped that an opportunity will be given me to furnish a completed argument, because I should dislike very much to have an adverse precedent established upon a presentation less perfect than the best I am able to make. Upon request from any judge I will forward all those portions of the argument which at that time I may have ready. THEODORE SCHROEDER, 63 East 59th Street, New York City. FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND PRESS has been defended by Theodore Schroeder, attorney for the Fi ee Speech League, in the following magazine articles: Albany Law Journal, (Albany, N. Y. ) July, 1906. WHAT IS CRIMINALLY "OBSCENE?" "OBSCENE" LITERATURE AT COM- MON LAW. THE CONSTITUTION AND OBSCENITY POSTAL REGULATIONS. THE HISTORICAL INTERPRETATION OF "LAW." May, 1907. Nov., 1907. April, 1908. 10 Alienist and Neurologist, (St. Louis, Mo.) Aug., 1908. LEGAL "OBSCENITY" AND SEXUAL PSYCHOLOGY. Altruria, (New York City.) Mar., 1907. THE EVOLUTION OF COMSTOCKERY. American Journal oj Eugenics, (formerly Chicago). July, 1907. OPPOSITION TO FREEDOM OF THE PRESS. Sept., 1907. WHY DO PEOPLE OBJECT TO SEX- DISCUSSION? Dec, 1907. VARIETIES OF OFFICIAL MODESTY. American Law Review, (Boston and St. Louis.) June, 1908. THE SCIENTIFIC ASPECT OF "DUE PROCESS OF LAW" AND CON. STRUCTIVE OFFENSES. Arena, The, (Trenton, N. J.) Dec, 1906. OUR VANISHING LIBERTY OF THE PRESS. June, 1908. LAWLESS SUPPRESSION OF FREE SPEECH IN NEW YORK. July, 1908. THE GROWING DESPOTISM OF OUR JUDICIARY. II Blue Grass Blade, (Lexington, Ky.) Nov 1906. WHAT IS CRIMINALLY "OBSCENE"? Mar. 17, 1907. THE FREE SPEECH LEAGUE TO THE RESCUE. . •'" Central Law JournaL (St. Louis, Mo.) Sept. 6, 1907. ON THE IMPLIED POWER TO EX- CLUDE ''OBSCENE" IDEAS FROM THE MAILS. Jan. 3. 1908. CONCERNING UNCERTAINTY AND "DUE PROCESS OF LAW." Aug., (?) 1908. CONSTRUCTIVE OFFENCES DE- FINED. Critic and Guide, (New York City.) Oct., 1906. PSYCHIC LASCIVIOUSNESS AND ''PU- RITY" LEGISLATION. Government, (Boston.) Aug (?) 1908. THE JUDICIAL DESTRUCTION OF FREEDOM OF THE PRESS. Liberal Review, (Formerly Chicago.) Aug. and Sept.. 1906. A MUCH NEEDED DEFENSE FOR LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE, SPEECH AND PRESS, WITH SPE- CIAL REFERENCE TO SEX DIS- CUSSION. Light, The, (La Crosse, Wise.) Jan.. 1907. MORE LIBERTY OF THE PRESS ESSEN- TIAL TO PURITY PROPAGANDA. An address before the National Purity Federation. Medico Legal Journal, (New York City.) Sept.. 1907. LEGAL OBSCENITY AND SEXUAL PSYCHOLOGY. Mother Earth (New York City.) Dec. 1906 OUR VANISHING LIBERTY OF THE PRESS ON SUPPRESSING THE ADVOCACY OF CRIME. AN UNANSWERED LETTER. OUR PROGRESSING DESPOTISM. Pacifiic Medical Journal, (San Francisco.) Nov. 1907. ON MORAL SENTIMENTALIZING. 12 Jan'y, 1907. June, 1907. April, 1908. Physical Culture Magazine, (New York City.) April, 1907. IN DEFENSE OF LIBERTY. May, 1907. CONSTRUCTIVE "OBSCENITY" AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL CRIME. June, 1907. OBSCENITY AND WITCHCRAFT, TWIN SUPERSTITIONS Sep., 1907. WHY THE OBSCENITY LAWS SHOULD BE ANNULLED. Proceedings, X V, Co7igres International de Medicine, (Lisbon, Portugal. ) April, 1906. WHAT IS CRIMINALLY "OBSCENE?" Public, The, (Chicago.) May 15, 1908. LEGAL LIMITATATION UPON THE USE OF LANGUAGE. Secular Thought, (Toronto, Can.) Feb'y, 1907. OUR VANISHING LIBERTY OF THE PRESS. Aug.. 1907. OPPOSITION TO FREEDOM OF THE PRESS. Sept.. 1907. CONCERNING OBSCENE LITERA- TURE. To Morrow, (Chicago). May, 1907. A TEST CASE ON OBSCENITY. Truth Seeker, (New York City). Mar., 1908. A LETTER ON THE VANNI CASE. (Unimportant.) Many more articles are in preparation. Some pamphlets have been issued containing collected essays selected from the foregoing list, and somewhat revised and en- larged, and for sale by the Free Speech League. These are: FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AND OBSCENE LIT- ERATURE; and "DUE PROCESS OF LAW" IN RELATION TO STATUTORY UNCERTAINTY AND CON- STRUCTIVE OFFENSES, 25c. each. It is intended, as soon as the work can be completed, to publish a collection of all Mr. Schroeder's works relating to the 13 II N suppression of sex -discussion under the title of "OBSCENE LITERATURE AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW." THE FREE SPEECH LEAGUE, 120 Lexington Avenue, New York City. June, 1908. June, 1908. July, 1908. Other articles in relation to FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND OF THE PRESS, can be found as follows : Arena, The (Trenton, N. J.) Oct., 1906. THE ANGLO-SAXON CRIME, by the Hon. Thomas Speed Mosby. DENIAL OF FREE SPEECH IN MASSA- CHUSETTS, by the Rev. Elliot White. THE SINISTER ASSAULT ON THE BREAST WORKS OF FREEDOM, by B. O. Flower. FREE SPEECH AND GOOD ORDER, by Louis F. Post. Fortnightly Review, (Great Britain). March, 1884. BLASPHEMY AND BLASPHEMOUS LIBEL, by Fitz James Stevens. Government, (Boston.) Oct., 1907. THE AMERICAN POSTAL CENSOR- SHIP, by Louis F. Post. Harper's Monthly, (New York City.) Sep., 1907. DECISIVE BATTLES OF THE LAW. A FIGHT FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS, by Frederick Trevor Hill. Public. T^i? (Chicago, 111.) This live weekly journal has published a score or two of brief but pointed editorials in advocacy of Free Speech, and is persistently spreading the alarm at every succeeding abridgment of freedom of speech and press. North American Review, (New York City.) A BLOW AT FREEDOM OF THE PRESS, by Hannis Taylor. HOW THE UNITED STATES CUR- TAILS FREEDOM OF THOUGHT, by Ernest Crosby. Dec, 1892. April, 1904. Open Court, (Chicago.) Oct., 1900. ON CURBING THE SPIRIT OF IN- QUIRY, by Carus Sterne. Nov. 1900. THE UNSHACKLING OF THE SPIRIT OF INQUIRY, by Dr. Ernest Krause. Physical Culture, (New York City.) Oct., 1907. FREEDOM IN LITERATURE, by Robert Buchanan. During 1907 and 1908 this periodical had numerous articles of less permanent value, but designed to secure larger liberty of the press. Secular Thought, (Toronto, Can.) June, 1908, et seg. SHALL SPEECH BE FREE? by George Allen White. Truth Seeker (New York). A quarter of a century ago this paper pioneered the opposi- tion against the abridgment of sex-discussion. It still publishes many articles of minor importance. 15 J.^^ .) THE FREE SPEECH LEAGUE, 120 Lexington Avenue, New York. Offers the Followhig List of Publications, some of which can be had in large lots at reduced rates for free distribution. The Declaration of the Free Speech League. . . free Constructive Obscenity, etc., re Harmon case of 1905, free Liberty in Literature, by R. G. Ingersoll, . . $0.25 Do Vou Want Free Speech ? by James F. Morton, Jr. .10 Liberty versus Assassination, by E. C. Walker, . , .05 Who is the Enemy, Comstock or You ! by E. C. Walker. 20 Administrative Process of the Postal Department, by Prof T. B. Wakeman, 05 Our Advancing Censorship, by Louis F. Post, . .05 Our Despotic Censorship, by Louis F. Post, . . .05 An Essay on Liberty, by John Stuart Mill (cloth), . .50 Martyrdoms of Literature, by R. H. Vickers, (24 and 451 pages) 2.00 John Turner Case before Supreme Court, argument by his attorney, Clarence S. Darrow (concerning deportation of anarchists) . , . . . .50 Why Heywood Should be Released, by E. W. Cham- berlain, ... 05 A Good Man Sent to Prison (Harman), by H. O. Pentecost, 05 In Behalf of Personal Liberty, by Julian Hawthorne, .05 An Appeal for Liberty and Justice (to women) by C. L. James, 05 Primary Causes of Disease, Insanity and Death, by E. B. Foote, Sn, M. D 05 Pamphlets or Books Written or Compiled by Theodore Schroeden Our Vanishing Liberty of the Press, from the Arena, .05 Culture and Culturine, 05 Paternal Legislation, a study of liberty, . . . .05 Freedom of the Press and Obscene Literature, a col- lection of three essays, including "What is Crimi- nally Obscene ?' ' etc , . .25 Free Press Anthology of classical arguments and ex- tracts culled and compiled from wise men ol all ages, .... ... i.oo /' // IV r^ in ^ UJ ql >0 D o> K r<% < en CL o u \ £!^J!!!BIA UNfVERSfTY ( /V^.g" ■■; '.v^'fV » "ir .> • •4 v-jf^'"'*'*'^''' ■ ' ' ■^o < o ^ fsj l-l \ M. %' ^(ii um0¥' ^f^^^ ,>f-^^ '*»V-!fc ^mm" ■'./Mi.-' i,^- r f _"- 5.,.»«I- ;*,!.' **'i"' ..^♦u-;;'- ■■., . r-t^:^'*.: i.T v-- - ^■n If-f > ^'Cfi .X' .%t^ -.._ --Itl «. m -f^C' t Br^iiZTS, .^il^^^M^:^: u3S5»'E |£0i|:^;^' ,>, **. »^ %-' T": -*1 %' *'^* ^M-i'^'f'y^ WPM r*^ .'• &Vfa** ■^\ ,'^K- €'|5 .J^^' ^fPi^- - .^-,?^ <% "#.- 'SiS ^i ■M'^-:,, "W- :w A> "'■ /M ri* '^.^l if^^T'^ ■ *^.., ■'•^j-