age Law. If that does not prove that the business office and editorial office never co-operated at all, and did not know anything about what each other was doing, what could prove it? I was writing to Burleson telling him I was going to change the policy of the magazine—he was writing to a subscriber telling him that he was not. And that is all the evidence that there is after the passage of the Espionage Law to prove that Merrill was in combination, conspiracy, cooperation or any kind of agreement or communication with any of us.
As for Art Young, he was in Washington—he was in Washington practically all of the time described in the indictment. He was the political correspondent in Washington for the Metropolitan Magazine, and his pictures and his comments on Congress were published there every month. He came up here to New York to attend the argument before Judge Hand in this Court on the exclusion from the mails of the August number, and that is the only time that any of us can remember that he came, and after that conference we left him, and I don't remember meeting him again until late in the autumn. And the District Attorney has offered no proof either in letter or in testimony of anybody who saw him in town—no proof whatever that he was ever here or ever communicated with us in any way, except to mail his cartoons in to the Masses. Can it be asserted that Art Young was involved in a conspiracy during those months, which took place at 34 Union Square, New York?
Reed was acting at that time as a reporter for one of the New York papers—was extremely busy as I remember, earning his living, and although he had a house in Croton he was very rarely up there, and I very rarely saw him when he was there. And then early in August—that is just about
7
