State v. Hartung
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Defendant was indicted by the grand jury of Martin county charged with the crime of seditious and disloyal teaching, tried in the district court for that county before Tifft,’ J., who at the close of the testimony denied defendant’s motion that the proceeding be dismissed, and a jury which found defendant guilty as charged in the indictment. From an order denying his motion for a new trial, defendant appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtHallam, J.
1. Defendant was convicted of violation of the provisions of section 3, chapter 463, p. 765, Laws of 1917. This section reads:
“It shall be unlawful for any person to teach or advocate * * * by oral speech, that the citizens of this state should not aid or assist the United States in prosecuting or carrying on war with the public *209enemies of the United States.”
The specific charge in the indictment is, in substance, that at the village of Welcome, Martin county, Minnesota, on June 6, 1917, while the county was at war with Germany, and while the citizens of this state were endeavoring to obtain…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. AmesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1903
- State v. KlitzkeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- United States v. PierceDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 1917
- State v. DowdSupreme Court of Kansas · 1888
- State v. MacDonaldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. WhippleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919
- State v. RoodOregon Supreme Court · 1963
- State v. LudemannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1919