The provision of § 6 of the White Slave Act of June 25, 1910,
requiring filing of statements in regard to the harboring of women
brought into this country for purposes of prostitution is not
confined to persons who have had to do directly or indirectly with
the bringing in or sending forth of such women.
As the statute on which the indictment is based was enacted in
pursuance of an international agreement which requires every person
to perform an act which may be assistance to the governments, it is
construed literally, as reading it otherwise would deprive the
government of such assistance to no good end.
Where, as in this case, the writ of error was taken by the
government under the Criminal Appeals Act of March 2, 1907, on a
single ruling,
Page 235 U. S. 28
reversal of the judgment sustaining the demurrer is based on
that ruling alone, and is without prejudice to further action of
the court below consistent with the opinion of this Court.
The facts, which involve the construction of § 6 of the White
Slave Act of June 25, 1910, are stated in the opinion.
Page 235 U. S. 29
MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is an indictment alleging that an alien woman entered the
United States from Great Britain in 1913; that the defendants
knowingly harbored her in Denver for the purpose of prostitution,
and that they, so knowingly harboring her for that purpose,
willfully failed to file, within thirty days from the date of the
commencement of such harboring, with the Commissioner General of
Immigration, a statement in writing setting forth her name, the
place where she was kept, and the facts as to the date of her entry
into the United States, the port through which she entered, her
age, nationality, and parentage, and concerning her procuration to
come to this country within the knowledge of the defendants. The
proceeding is under the Act of June 25, 1910, c. 395, § 6, 36 Stat.
825, 827, which requires every person harboring an alien woman for
the above purpose within three years after she shall have entered
the United States from any country,
Page 235 U. S. 30
party to the arrangement for the suppression of the white slave
traffic, adopted, July 25, 1902, 35 Stat.1979, to file a statement
as aforesaid. A failure to do so is made a misdemeanor, and is
punished by fine or imprisonment or both. Great Britain is a party
to the arrangement. There was a demurrer to the indictment, and it
was sustained, as appears by a bill of exceptions, upon the ground
set forth in the opinion, that, as the court construed the statute,
the above requirement was confined to "persons who have had to do,
directly or indirectly, with the bringing in or sending forth of
such women or girls."
We see no sufficient reason for the limitation thus read into
the generality and literal meaning of the words of the act. It is
true that persons who have had to do with bringing the alien into
the country are more likely than others to know the facts to be
stated, and it may be assumed that others are not required to know
them at their peril. It is true that the immunity from prosecution
under the laws of the United States for any fact truthfully
reported which the section grants most obviously applies to those
who have taken part in bringing the woman in. But others who have
not taken part are very likely to know the facts or some of them,
and their knowledge may be of a kind to raise suspicion of guilt
under the act. The requirement is that "every person" harboring a
woman as above shall file the statement. It is, and purports to be,
in furtherance of the international agreement. That agreement,
among other things, is "to procure, within the limits of the laws,
all information of a nature to discover a criminal traffic," Art.
2, 35 Stat.1982, although perhaps those words look more immediately
to the points of departure and arrival and the journey. Taken
literally, the statute required the defendants to file a statement
of any of the facts mentioned that were within their knowledge, and
to read it otherwise would deprive the government of a
Page 235 U. S. 31
considerable source of information, to no good end that we can
perceive.
"We therefore reach the conclusion that the court erred in
sustaining the demurrer to the . . . indictment so far as that
ruling is based upon the construction of the statute in
question."
United States v. Stevenson, 215 U.
S. 190,
215 U. S. 199.
That is the only question brought up;
United States v.
Keitel, 211 U. S. 370,
211 U. S. 398,
and the reversal of the judgment is without prejudice to further
action of the court below, consistent with the opinion that we have
expressed.
Judgment reversed.