raising the bulwark of defense as to freedom of worship and freedom of speech, and that in the midst of global war.

After many battles in the lower courts, where license-tax laws designed for peddlers were made to apply to ministers of religion (that is, Jehovah’s witnesses in the distribution of their literature), the United States Supreme Court on June 8, 1942, had ruled against the Society in Jones v. City of Opelika (Alabama).g This opinion was aimed for dealing a body blow against the house-to-house work of the witnesses. It was, in fact, an outright suppression of freedom of worship, speech and press—in total disregard of guarantees in the federal Constitution. Undisturbed, the witnesses kept on with their preaching work, refusing to apply for licenses. There was thus forced an issue from a slightly different angle, to be brought again before the United States Supreme Court. This came in the case of Murdock v. Pennsylvania, where the high court remarkably reversed itself in favor of the witnesses on May 3, 1943. Note the following classical legal principles announced that day in the court’s opinion.

“The hand distribution of religious tracts is an age-old form of missionary evangelism—as old as the history of printing presses. . . . It is more than preaching; it is more than distribution of religious literature. It is a combination of both. Its purpose is as evangelical as the revival meeting. This form of religious activity occupies the same high estate under the First Amendment as do worship in the churches and preaching from the pulpits. It has the same claim to protection as the more orthodox and conventional exercises of religion. It also has the same claim as the others to the guarantees of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. . . . But the mere fact that the religious literature is ‘sold’ by itinerant preachers rather than ‘donated’ does not transform evangelism into a commercial enterprise. If it did, then the passing of the collection plate in church would make the church service a commercial project. . . . A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution. . . . The power to impose a license tax on the exercise of these freedoms is indeed as potent as the power of censorship which this Court has repeatedly struck down. . . . The judgment in Jones v. Opelika has this day been vacated. Freed from that controlling precedent, we can restore to their high, constitutional position the liberties of itinerant evangelists who disseminate their religious beliefs and the tenets of their faith through distribution of literature.”h

Grand, gemlike words these! Another signal victory to raise higher the growing bulwark against the invasion of freedom of worship. Before the witnesses there now lay a clear legal field for their house-to-house ministry. Their apostolic way of preaching had been written into the law of the land.i

(To be continued)

Preaching by Means of Truck Signs

In Italy two Christian ministers who are also natural brothers are engaged in a trucking business that requires them to make long trips from one end of the Italian peninsula to the other. Alert to their opportunities to preach they painted on one side of their truck in large gold-colored letters the text at Matthew 24:14 regarding this good news of the Kingdom being preached in all the inhabited earth, and on the other side of the truck the words: “If you want to avoid being deceived and want to know the truth of Jehovah God’s purposes, turn to Jehovah’s witnesses.” On a recent trip from southern to northern Italy they were stopped by four different highway police patrols who had become curious because of these signs. They had opportunity to preach. They enjoy many such experiences.