Just about the time that one Portland, Oregon, newspaper had smugly
remarked, editorially, that Portland was far ahead of many other cities
in its treatment of Emma Goldman in that it ignored her altogether,
pandemonium broke loose. Within a few days, that paper and all the
others in town gave Miss Goldman such front page notices and such
flaring headlines that the war in Europe seemed quite an insignificant
thing compared to the peril which seemed to be threatening the “Rose
City” on account of her presence in our midst.
The apparent reason for this agitation was that one little, old woman by
the name of Mrs. Josephine Johnson had heard through a friend, whose
name she refused to divulge (even when so ordered by the court) that on
the evening of the lecture on Friedrich Nietzsche somebody had
distributed a pamphlet on birth control.
The real reason for the arrest was that the police wished to break up
the meeting. They had previously sent Miss Goldman a notice that she
could not speak any more in Portland on any subject whatever. This order
could never have been carried out as we have free speech in Portland, so
they used another method.
Miss Goldman and Dr. Reitman were arrested on the evening of August 6
just after the meeting began, and at 10:30 at night all bail except cash
was refused, which is contrary to all idea of justice. But for the
efforts of Mr. C. E. S. Wood, who has always been a staunch friend of
all free-thinkers, Miss Goldman would have been thrown into jail in a
city where she has been allowed to lecture every year for nearly twenty
years and where her friends have come to look forward to her annual
visits as we do to all the other good things that come to us, like the
spring and the rain and the sunshine; for of just such healing and
life-giving qualities are her inspirational messages.
There were two trials. The first was the usual sort and really is of
small interest. At this trial held in the Municipal court, Miss Goldman
and Dr. Reitman were found guilty of distributing obscene literature and
fined $100 each. As a matter of fact, Miss Goldman knew nothing about
the distribution of the leaflet, but she certainly would have approved
of it if she had.
This sentence of the lower court was promptly appealed, and in the
second trial, which took place in Dept. 5 of the Circuit court under
Judge William N. Gatens, the case was dismissed for lack of evidence.
When we remember that one of our bravest rebels, Margaret Sanger, will
soon have to face a trial on a similar charge we can only hope, vainly
and wildly perhaps, that she will be fortunate enough to have a
presiding judge as fair-minded as Judge Gatens.
Some of his remarks were so refreshing, coming as they did in such fine
defiance of the usual attitude of those on the bench towards those who
are accused, that they are worthy of quoting:
During the trial Judge Gatens said:
“The Court says the defendants are not here charged, as has been stated
by the council, with creating anarchistic tendencies, or with being
anarchists; they are here to be charged for the offense set forth in the
information and for no other offense.
“Every person, when charged with a crime, should have the right to know
the nature of the crime with which he is charged, meet the witnesses
face to face, and be tried without prejudice; not to be tried on the
ground that you don’t like this person or that person because they have
some view different from yours.
“Now it seems to me that the trouble with our people today is that there
is too much prudery. Ignorance and prudery are the millstones about the
neck of progress. Everyone knows that. We are all shocked by many things
publicly stated that we know privately ourselves, but we haven’t got the
nerve to get up and admit it; and when some person brings our attention
to something we already know, we feign modesty and we feel that the
public has been outraged and decency has been shocked when as a matter
of fact we know all these things ourselves.
“I am a member of the Oregon Hygiene Society. We get out literature and
place it in the toilets all over the state, telling people how to guard
against the evils of venereal diseases and so forth. We do that for the
uplift of humanity, to protect society from all those things, and the
public does not seem to be very much shocked about it.”