FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN WAR TIME 933 prosecutions and other judicial proceedings during the war, involv- ing speeches, newspaper articles, pamphlets, and books, have been followed since the armistice by a widespread legislative considera- tion of bills punishing the advocacy of extreme radicalism. It is becoming increasingly important to determine the true limits of freedom of expression, so that speakers and writers may know how much they can properly say, and governments may be sure how much they can lawfully and wisely suppress. The United States Supreme Court has recently handed down several decisions upon the Espionage Act,^ which put us in a much better position than Cases," 32 Harv. L. Rev. 417 (1919); "Threats to take the Life of the Pres;^ent," 32 Harv. L. Rev. 724 (1919); "The Vital Importance of a Liberal Construction of the Espionage Act," Alexander H. Robbins, 87 Cent. L. J. 145 (1918); "Sufficiency of In- dictments under the Espionage Act," 87 Cent. I . J. 400 (1918). The Espionage Act is one of the topics covered by Judge Charles M. Hough, "Law in War Time — 1917," 31 Harv. L. Rev. 692, 696 (1918). The issues involved in the current decisions are pre- sented in nontechnical form by these articles: "Freedom of Speech," Z. Chafee, Jr., 17 New Republic, 66 (November 16, 1918); "The Debs Case and Freedom of Speech," Ernst Frexmd, 19 New Republic, 13 (May 3, 1919); 19 ih. 151 (May 31). William Hard, "Mr. Burleson, Espionagent," 19 New Republic, 42 (May 10, 1919), and "Mr. Burleson, Section 481 3^^ B," 19 New Republic, 76 (May 17, 1919), reviews exclusions from the mails. "The Trial of Eugene Debs," Max Eastman, The Liberator (No- vember, 1918), gives a defendant's impression of the operation of the act. The history of freedom of speech in America has not yet been fully investigated, but Clyde A. Duniway, The Development of Freedom of the Press in Massa- chusetts, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1906, is extremely useful. Much light is thrown on the problem by sedition trials in England, before our Revolution and during the French Revolution. The best account of these is in Erskine May, 2 Constitutional History of England, 2 ed., 191 2, Chaps. IX-X, summarized by Charles A. Beard in 16 New Repu:blic, 350 (October 19, 1918). See, also, 2 Stephen, History of the Criminal Law, Chap. XXIV; and G. O. Trevelyan, The Early History of Charles James Fox, for the Wilkes and Junius controversies. The legal meaning of freedom of speech cannot properly be determined without a knowledge of the political and philosophical basis of such freedom. Four writings on this problem may be mentioned as invaluable: Plato's Apology of Socrates; Mil- ton's Areopagitica; the second chapter of Mill on Liberty; and Walter Bagehot's essay, "The Metaphysical Basis of Toleration." The second chapter of J. F. Stephen, Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, has an important critique on Mill. See, also, J. B. Bury, A History of Freedom of Thought, the first and last chapters; Grote, Plato, Chap. VI; Graham Wallas, The Great Society, 195-98; H. J. Laski, Authority in the Modern State, passim. For a caustic point of view, see Fabian Franklin, "Some Free Speech Delusions," 2 Unpopular Rev. 223 (October, 1914). The proper course in war is discussed by Ralph Barton Perry in a book review, 7 Yale Rev. 670 (April, 1918). The difficulties of the problem as seen from actual experience on both sides are presented in Viscount Morley's Recollections.
- Schenck v. United States, 249 U. S. 47, 39 Sup. Ct. Rep. 247, Bull. Dept. Just.,
No. 194 (1919), is the leading case. See, also, Frohwerk v. United States, 249 U. S. 204,
