April 14, 1922 - May 2, 1922
Petitioned on April 20, 1922
Filed before the US District Court for the Western District of Washington (Seattle, Washington)
Case ID: hc.case.wa.0550
Daniel O'Connell, the petitioner, was prosecuted in District Court for the violation of Section 3 of Title 1 of the Espionage Act of June 15, 1917, by conspiring to obstruct recruiting and enlisting, and alleging a conspiracy to evade the provisions of the Draft Act of May 18, 1917, in violation of Section 37 of the United States Penal Code. O'Connell's petition for Mandamus and Habeas Corpus states that both violations were the same and based on the same facts and evidence and, therefore, invalid. In reality, the petition stated O'Connell had not committed a crime but instead was targeted because of his association with the corporation American Patriots. The purpose of this was to raise money to test in the courts the constitutionality of the use of the Draft Act and the draft army in Europe to carry out the war objects of the Allies.
Unknown
Unknown
RG 21 U.S. District Court for the Southern Division of the Western District of Washington Civil, Criminal, Admiralty, and Bankruptcy Case Files, 1890-1950, No. 0550
Section 3 of Title 1 of the Espionage Act of June 15, 1917|Draft Act of May 18, 1917, in violation of Section 37 of the United States Penal Code|People vs. Joyce, 246 I11. 124|92 N.E. 607.|20 Ann. Cas. 472|7 L. R. A. (N. S.) 125.|7 L. R. A. (N.S.) 126|7 L. R. A. (N.S.) 128|Ex Parte Roberts, 9 Nev. 414|16 AM. Rep. 1. 8 R. C. L. Sec. 258, page 283|Howard vs. United States, 75 Fed. 986|34 L.R.A. 509|7 L. R. A. (NS) 127|United States vs. Carpenter, 151 Fed. 214|10 ann. Cas. 509|9 L. R. A. (N.S.) 1043.|Ex Parte Gafford, 25 Nev. 101|57 Pac. 484|83 A. S. R. 568.|in re Breton, 93 Me. 39|44 Atl. 125|54 A. S. R. 335.|Ann. Cas. 1913-E, 1250|Ex Parte Duckett, 15 s.c. 210|40 Am. Rep. 694.|Weems v. United States, 217 U.S. 349|Note 55 A. S. R. 264.|Munson vs. McClaudgery, 198 Fed. 72|42 L. R. A. (N.S.) 390|Note 31 L. R. A. (N.S.) 693|Bell vs. State, 48 Ala. 684|17 Am. Rep. 42|Weems v. United States, 217 U.S. 349|Ex Parte Gibson, 31 Cal. 619|19 Am. Dec. 546|Note 45 L. R. A. 136|Ex Parte Cox, 3 Idaho 530|32 Pac. 197|95 A. S. R. 29|Note 1. Ann. Cas. 734.|Ex Parte McGuire, 135 Cal. 339|67 Pac 327|87 A. S. R. 105|People vs. Liscomb, 60 N. Y. 559|19 Am. Rep. 211|Note 7 L. R. A. (U. S.) 124.|Ex Parte Cox, 3 Idaho 530|32 Pac. 197|95 A. S. R. 29.
Lakin, Edm. (deputy clerk)
Harshburger, F. M. (clerk)
Henry, Alex (deputy)
Katrina Jagodinsky, Cory Young, Andrew Varsanyi, Laura Weakly, Karin Dalziel, William Dewey, Erin Chambers, Greg Tunink. “In the matter of the application of Daniel O'Connell for Mandamus and Habeas Corpus.” Petitioning for Freedom: Habeas Corpus in the American West, 1812-1924, University of Nebraska–Lincoln. Accessed November 23, 2024. https://petitioningforfreedom.unl.edu/cases/item/hc.case.wa.0550