"I had quite an interesting experience for a few months prior to being kidnapped by the military authorities in May, 1918. Altho opposed to war, I wrote an article advocating that the rich be taxed to pay for the war. It may seem inconsistent that an opponent of war should propose a method of financing it, but, up to the time that I wrote the article there had been 7,925 new millionaires produced in America as a result of the war (the number finally reached 17,000) and, in writing the article referred to, I proposed that, since the people permitted the war to continue, why not let the rich bear their share of the burden? I proposed that wealth be conscripted just as men were being conscripted, not that I favored conscription, but men were being conscripted so why not wealth? My proposal provided for the conscription of all incomes in excess of $5,000 annually to pay for current war expenses and for liquidation of the debt at the end of the war. It may seem a little harsh to cut a rich man’s income down to $5,000 per year, but the rich were having their wealth protected by the blood of the poor -- at least it is claimed that wars are for protection -- and, it seemed not unreasonable that the rich man be asked to worry along on $5,000 per year during the war, and then, after the war was over and all debts paid, he could resume his luxurious living. When one considers that the vast majority of poor people were living on less than $1,000 per year, a war-emergency proposal that would allow the rich to spend five times that amount for their daily bread and a few clothes and other living expenses should not meet with much opposition.
The plan proposed that a petition containing two million signatures be presented to President Wilson, who, upon request of the signers was to urge the passage of this wealth-conscription bill in congress. This wealth-conscription article was printed in pamphlet form and circulated thruout the United States. The masses favored it, judging by the thousands of signatures that flooded into the collecting point. But the privileged classes disliked the proposal, judging by the storm of opposition that soon manifested itself. Hon. R. B. Tedrow, the U. S. District Attorney for Colorado, told me that he was getting complaints from all over the country. The newspapers attacked the idea, and one evening I was called to the office of the agent of the building in which I had my office, shown an article that appeared in that evening's issue of The Denver Times, and told that I would have to vacate my office as I was giving the building -- the Cooper Building -- a bad name. My rent was paid until the 10th of the following month, so I was permitted to stay until the next month’s rent was due; a few days before the time expired, the agent of the building reminded me that I must vacate, which I did. The post office authorities finally refused to allow the pamphlets to go thru the mail, and pressure was brot to bear that resulted in the Express Company refusing to accept shipments of the pamphlet. All this in spite of the fact that the U. S. District Attorney admitted that, from a legal point of view, the pamphlet was faultless. And yet, despite its being within the law, the head of the Department of Justice told me I would be prosecuted for publishing the pamphlet were it not for my pending difficulties with the government over my refusal to answer the Questionnaire, and they did not want to indict me on too many charges at the same time.
Well, it was unnecessary to indict me for advocating wealth-conscription, for a grand little scheme landed me in the hands of the military authorities where I have since remained. I have related only the essential features of this successful attempt to obstruct agitation for the passage of wealth-conscription; there are dozens of interesting details, how letters were held up, how workers in the cause were spied on and intimidated by secret operatives of the government, etc., but I will not waste time telling about these incidents. My only excuse for even mentioning the affair was to produce evidence from my own experiences to prove that, not only are the ordinary newspapers and magazines opposed to anything that will interfere with the war profits of their bosses, they not only will condemn such activities, but they will incite public officials to suppress all attempts to secure even a small amount of justice. Yet, the average person swears by what he reads in the daily papers."