The Tokyo Rose Case: Treason on Trial

Introduction: Guilty!

{ 1 } i n t r o d u c t i o n Guilty! Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. . . . The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attained. u.s. constitution, article iii, section 3 On September 29, 1949, at 6:04 p.m., the jury that had been deliberating for over seventy-eight hours, instead of going to dinner as the judge had suggested, filed back into the courtroom just thirty-three minutes after they had left. Judge Michael J. Roche of the federal district court for the Northern District of California in San Francisco, who had presided over the trial for almost three months, asked, “Has the jury arrived at a verdict?” “We have, your Honor,” replied the foreman of the jury, John Mann, and handed the verdict to the court clerk, James Welch, who in turn passed it on to Judge Roche. He read it without expression and handed it back to the clerk. The defendant, Iva Ikuko Toguri d’Aquino, stood in front of the defense table facing the judge, flanked by her lawyers. She was wearing the same plaid two-piece suit that she had taken to Japan eight years previously and had been wearing every day throughout the trial, ironing it every night in her cell. She was a slender, “birdlike,” and alert Japanese American woman. Her beautiful shoulder-length, raven-black hair (midori no kurokami, the kind of hair the Japanese admire) was, as Masayo Duus describes it, “neatly bobbed and swept back by a band.” In the hushed room Clerk Welch announced in a clear voice: “Guilty.” As a moan of disappointment arose from the courtroom audience, Iva slumped into her chair, staring at her hands. Her face clearly revealed 2 { Introduction } expressions of shock and incredulity. The verdict, however, was guilty only on one count but not guilty on the other seven counts. A week later, Judge Roche sentenced Iva to ten years in prison and fined her $10,000, in accordance with the U.S. statute stipulating that “a person convicted of Treason shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than 5 years and fined not less than $10,000 and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.” She was ordered imprisoned in the Federal Reformatory for Women at Alderson, West Virginia, where Iva’s German counterpart, Mildred (“Axis Sally”) Gillars, had already been serving her time and where, more recently, Martha Stewart served for five months. What exactly had Iva T. d’Aquino, a Japanese nisei woman, who went to Japan just before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, done to have been declared guilty of such a crime as treason, the “gravest of all crimes”? She was accused of having broadcast propaganda from Tokyo to the American GIs fighting in the Pacific, saying things like “Give up fighting” and “Now, you fellows have lost all your ships. . . . How do you think you will ever get home?” How could anyone, let alone a college graduate, not understand that making such announcements over the enemy radio was a grievous betrayal of country? What specific work did d’Aquino really do that would constitute a treasonable act? Or was she convinced that whatever she was doing was not treason because she was either doing her broadcasting under duress or making only innocuous announcements? Under Anglo-American law, as in other legal systems, treason has been considered one of the most serious crimes. The essence of treason is the violation of the duty of allegiance owed by a citizen or subject to the sovereign . In English law, however, treason was construed broadly and often used for political purposes, to punish and eliminate political enemies or those who criticized and challenged the monarchical authorities. It was the American Revolution that forced the colonists to seriously reconsider the problem of treason. The colonists who declared independence and challenged the British Empire were, in British eyes, traitors and rebels, guilty of treason. At the same time, they had to deal with the internal enemy within the colonies. In accordance with the recommendation of...