Wagging Tongues and Empty Heads: Seditious Utterances and the Patriotism of Wartime in Central Alberta, 1914-1918 (From Law, Society, and the State: Essays in Modern Legal History, P 263-289, 1995, Louis A Knafla and Susan W S Binnie, eds. -- See NCJ-166852)

• NCJ Number: 166861
• Author(s): J Swainger
• Date Published: 1995
• Length: 27 pages
• Sale Source: University of Toronto Press
• Publication Type: Historical Overview
• Language: English
• Country: Canada

Annotation

This study of dissent in central Alberta during the First World War examines relevant court cases.

Abstract

The Alberta courts took the unusual position of gradually restricting the interpretation of political dissent, to the extent that by 1918 few individuals could be convicted. Using a strict application of proving "intent," the Alberta courts set a new standard for civil liberties in Canada and upheld the ideology of the rule of law. In so doing, they restricted the state's field of legitimate action in favor of abstract notions of fairness and justice. They also provided a clear alternative to the legal reasoning adopted by the United States Supreme Court in 1919, one that permitted a wide definition of the terms under which a person could be convicted (Schenck v. U.S.). What made the Alberta Supreme Court rule significant is that it resulted clearly from judicial support for the perspective of the local community. This was the view that working-class European immigrants who had settled the farms of central Alberta had pro- German and anti-British, pro-peace, and anti-war cultural mindsets, which entitled them to opinions that were not actionable unless there was evidence that the expression of those opinions in public places could be tied directly to hindering the prosecution of the war in Europe. 75 notes