Newspaper articles

Working to Help Murderers Printed October 20, 1915

In April, 1915, The Woman Citizen and the California Penal Improvement Association, both of San Francisco, accepted Leigh H. Irvine's challenge to debate in favor of capital-punishment in the columns of the Woman Citizen. For reasons not yet made public the sentimentalists quit after the appearance of the first installment, and Irvine's challenge to anybody in California or elsewhere still stands. By Right of Sword, (Leigh H. Irvine, author) is the most exhaustive work extant in favor of the death penalty.

After reading By Right of Sword Doctor Sherman L. Axford, a writer for Harper's Weekly, and a formeradvocate of the anit-capital-punishment cause, writes: "You have deprived me of my last argument, so I throw up my hands and quit. I have read and re-read By Right of Sword, and it is surely an unanswerable argument. You have shown me the light. Human life in Kansas, where life-imprisonment is a farce, is about the cheapest commodity in that state. The three persons who are to debate with you in the Woman Citizen have my sympathy, for they are strictly up against it."

Leigh H Irvine debated with Rabbi Nieto, several socialists and assemblymen before the Judiciary Committee of the California Assembly in March, 1915; his book, By Right of Sword, was freely used in the subsequent discussion of bills to abolish the death penalty, and every such bill was defeated.

Still, the Anti-capital-punishment Society has opened headquarters in San Francisco and is circulating a petition to abolish the gallows in California by the initiative, in face of the fact that Ohio defeated a similar measure by a majority of 43,540, and sixteen legislatures in 1915 retained the death penalty, after thoroughly investigating every phase of the question. Many newspapers, labor-union men, and socialists---all the Darrows and McNamaras-- are working to make murder a light offense in California and elsewhere.

Doctor Sherman L. Axford shows that life-imprisonment for murder is a farce in Kansas. Of 339 murderers sentenced to life terms during the last 31 years, how many are in the penitentiary? Only 96. Where are the others? Forty-two died, one escaped, two went insane, four were freed by the courts, and ninety-four were pardoned. What kind of men were pardoned: Here is a sample: Case No. 1. Man who shot at his mother, then murdered his wife while she was giving birth to a child. Pardoned after eight years because a Methodist preacher testified that the prisoner had "got religion." Soon after his release, the convert was returned for grand larceny.

Case No. 2. Murderer squandered father's estate; tried to swindle sister; failed, then cut the tongue from her favorite horse and choked her to death with his bare hands. Pardoned after four years and ten months. The heo in obtaining this pardon was also a Methodist preacher.

Case No. 3. Prisoner was intimate with his benefactor's wife. He and the wife murdered her husband and burned the body. She escaped by confessing and testifying against her paramour. Pardoned after three years and three months.

Case No. 4. Man with a prior criminal record, a fugitive from justice at the time of his crime, called his former employer to the door of his fiancee's home and shot him through the heart. Pardoned after seven years, although he had a bad prison record and had assaulted a guard just before he was freed.

Do we want such a system in California? There is no such thing as actual life imprisonment anywhere.

All this happened in Kansas, certainly said to be a model state, whose population will stand chemical analysis, if the anti-capital-punishment people may be believed. Then what might happen if we should abolish the death penalty in California?

The (S.F.) Daily Commercial News, of October 3, 1915, says: "At the recent New York Constitutional Convention, where more than 800 measures were introduced, the Massachusetts Civic Alliance and the American Law and Order League fought the four provisions that sought to do away with capital-punishment. The Massachusetts Civic Alliance is a nation-wide organization favoring capital-punishment. The American Law and Order League, of which Leigh H. Irvine is president, is also opposed to the abolition of capital-punishment. Scores of copies of Irvine's book, By Right of Sword, were used on the convention floor by the Massachusetts Civic Alliance, which credits the book for its great service. Every bill seeking abolition of the death penalty was defeated. Irvine, a former San Franciscan, is now secretary of commercial organizations at San Luis Obispo, Cal. He has held many public debates on the theme of his book."

Read the strong indorsements of the press on the sheet inclosed, and note photographic reproduction of each. The Revernd Charles F. Aked says the book can not be answered, and he doubts whether anybody will try to answer it.

If you want to show the open-minded voters of California the danger of this anti-capital-punishment movement, help to circulate By Right of Sword. Price £1. Order from Leigh H. Irvine, room 1315 Claus Spreckels Building, San Francisco, or through the Baker & Taylor Co., trade selling agents for the volume, 354 Fourth Avenue, New York City. Write to Irvine for rates on quantities.

STOP This "Legal" Murder Of Joseph Hillstrom Sentenced To Be Shot Oct. 16th.

[image sketch drawing of a man facing a firing squad] [with the caption: JOE HILL. HE HAS EARNED THE HATRED OF THE MASTER CLASS AS A FIGHTER FOR HUMANITY, AS A CHAMPION OF THE WORKINGCLASS AND AS THE POET OF THE AMERICAN PROLETARIAT. SHALL THE MASTERS HAVE THEIR REVENGE?]

Send in your protest again and demand that he should get a fair trial and not railroad him as before.

Send protest to Gov. Wm. Spry Salt Lake City, Utah.

Governor of Utah, Dear Sir:- If you wish to hasten the "The ending of the controversy between Right and Wrong", let Joseph Hillstrom die without a fair trial. Repectfully,

W. J. Aydelott Greenfield, Tennessee. Lock Box 145.

[image black and white photograph of: Joseph Hillstrom in handcuffs]

I.W.W. FIGHT

Burning of Buildings Follow Circulation of Stickers Declaring That Slayers "Must Be Free"

Idustrial Workers Organization Starts World-Wide Boycott on California Canned Products

BY INTERNATIONAL NEWS SERVICE SACRAMENTO, September 1.-- Numerous incendiary fires, resulting in thousands of dollars of loss, have occurred in the grain fields and commercial establishments of the Sacramento valley and Central California this summer. Currently these fires are attributed to the I.W.W. or itinerant members of the organization throughout the valley.

The basis for the charge is the fact that hundreds of thousands of stickers covertly advocating reprisal for the life imprisonment of Ford and Suhr have been pasted on the various highways and byways of California as well as abroad. Ford and Suhr are in Folsom prison for the murder of District Attorney E.T. Manwell of Marysville in the Wheatland hopfiled riots of August, 1913. "WE DON'T CARE"

When asked if the I.W.W. were responsible for these incendiary fires, Secretary C.L. Lambert of local No. 71 of the I.W.W. of Sacramento said:

"We don't care what the papers print about the organization in regard to the incendiary fires. But Ford and Suhr must be free."

The first petition of character for the pardon of Ford and Suhr was presented to Governor Johnson in February __ about six months ago.

In March Governor Johnson met labor leaders, I.W.W. members and others in the Mills building in San Francisco, who urged that Ford and Suhr be pardoned.

STATMENT IS ISSUED

Following this hearing, the Sacramento headquarters of the I.W.W. issued a circular letter, sent broadcoast to "all local and camp delegates, Nulletin No. 64," which said in part:

The petition for pardon of fellowworkers Ford and Suhr was placed in the hands of Governor Johnson on March 5. What action will he taken in the matter will very likely depend on your action during the coming summer on the job.

The letters told of a boycott declared on all California canned goods

Save Joe Hill

"I have lived like an artist and I shall died like an artist."

These are the soul-stirring words of Joe Hill, facing death in a prison cell in Utah.

Joe Hill was railroaded to prison by an unfair trial, convicted of the murder of a man whom he did not know and whom he could not have possessed the slightest motive for killing. Joe Hill protested his innocence, but he was not allowed to prove his innocence. He had no money to employ legal aid, so the court appointed two lawyers to defend him: these lawyers displayed no interest in the case and did not try to defend him, so Hill dismissed these shyster parasites and would have pleaded his own case but the court told him he must put up with the services of men whom he knew were betraying him.

Joe Hill had no chance in that prejudiced court. He was a friendless stranger in a strange land, and had neither money nor influence. Moreover, he was known to be an obnoxious labor agitator and had participated in a number of prominent strikes in the west. The court was against him, the witnesses (whom Hill charges with committing perjury) were against him, the prejudiced sentiment of the community was against him and the whole machinery of injustice was oiled to move smoothly on its murderous way.

Put yourself in Joe Hill's place; let the thought of his unjust treatment sink deep into your justice-loving soul and then write to the Governor of Utah, Salt Lake City, telling him that as an American who advocates fair play and believes in a square deal you demand a new trial and a fair hearing for Joe Hill, or Joseph Hillstrom, which is his real name.

Write now. Unless something is done before October 1 Joe Hill will be shot and an innocent man will die.

This is a most important fact to bear in mind, as the whole case against Hill is based on his discovery with a bullet wound in his chest on the night of the murder. The failure to prove that the unknown murderer was shot entirely frees Hill from any suspision on account of his wound and leaves the case against him practically without foundation.

A lot of expert testimony (which is generally about as far from being expert as the most ignorant testimony that could be found) was introduced to show what position Hill might have been standing in when he was shot, what place in his body the wound shoud have been, etc., without proving a solitary thing. The only genuine evidence introduced against Hill during the entire trial of the case, both in the lower and higher courts, was the fact that he had been shot on the night of the murder.

THAT HILL DID NOT receive a fair and complete trial seems to be suggested by the facts. He did not have the chance to defend himself that a man should have who is accused of such a grave crime. At the preliminary hearing in the lower court Hill acted as his own attorney, being unable to hire a lawyer and not yet realizing the seriousness of the case. In the higher court he was defended by two lawyers, but during the trial he became convinced that they were not trying to defend him as they should and immediatley discharged them. However the court told Hill that he would have to keep these same lawyers, regardless of his inclination in the matter. It is the opinion of Hill that he would have gained a much fairer and more favorable trial had he been granted the aid of different attorneys.

We believe, in view of the doubts and irregularities surrounding the case, that Joe Hill should be given another trial. He should be given every legal and moral advantage in defending himself and should be given the benefit of several doubts. The deliberate taking of the life of a human being is a sufficiently serious matter to inspire the keenest inquiry into the circumstances of the case, that it may be discovered whether an innocent man is about to die or whether a human life is on the point of being taken under the shadow of incomplete evidence that leaves the question of guilt in a measure doubtful.

We believe that the life of Joe Hill, for no other reason than that he is a human being possessing the divine gift of life of which no man or human law has the right to lightly deprive him, is important enough to justify and make imperative a fair and careful consideration of his case. If Joe Hill is innocent, or if there is the faintest reasonable possibility of doubt as to the question of his guilt, Joe Hill out not to die and his legal execution by the state of Utah will be plain murder and a crime against humanity that will cry to heaven.

The Joe Hill Case

JOE HILL has again been sentenced, this time to die on Novemebr 19. We protest against the execution of Joe Hill until he is given another, a complete and fair trial and the fact of his guilt proved beyond doubt.

Let us review Hill's case. We have read the statements of Hill and the statements of the authorities who prosecuted and sentenced him. The case against Hill seems to rest solely on the fact that he was shot by some one in or near Salt Lake City, Utah, on the same night that some one else was murdered in Salt Lake City. Hill denies that he killed any one, but refuses to tell where and by whom he was shot. The authorities of Utah insist that Hill must be considered guilty and made to pay the penalty of his crime unless he proves an alibi by revealing the circumstances under which he was shot.

The story given by Hill, and which so far as we know has not been denied, is that he was arrested on a night in January, 1914, in a small town near Salt Lake City, and accused of murder. He was accused of having killed a Salt Lake City merchant named Morrison, and the latter's son, while attempting to rob the store owned by Morrison. At the time of his arrest Hill was suffering from a bullet wound in the chest, but he was taken to jail and an attempt made to sweat a confession out of him. Hill said he knew nothing about any murder, but was held in jail and finally given a perliminary hearing.

AT THE PRELIMINARY hearing there was no evidence introduced except the most meager and even ridiculous circumstantial evidence. No one could be secured to positively identify Hill and connect him in any way with the Morrison murder, save one witness who swore he saw Hill in the Morrison store on the afternoon of the day the murder occurred. This witness, however, failed to appear again in the trial in the higher court and his testimony was not included in the records of the preliminary hearing, so his testimony counts for nothing.

It was not conclusively proved that any one was shot in the Morrison store but the murdered man and his son. The records of the preliminary hearing were changed, according to Hill's statement, in order to prove the mere charge that the man who murdered the Morrisons was himself shot. One woman testified at the preliminary hearing that she saw two or three men outside the Morrison store a short while after the murder, and that she heard one of them say, "Bob," or "Oh, Bob." In the records the witness was made to testify that she heard a man say, "Oh Bob; I'm shot." This false record was accepted in the higher court as good evidence and effectively used against Hill.