vol. 6, no. 4

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

FREE SPEECH FREE PRESS FREE ASSEMBLAGE

“Eternal is the price of liberty.”

Vol. VI SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, APRIL, 1941 No. 4

SUPPRESSION ON THE MARCH

Numerous Gag Measures Make Rapid Progress in State Legislature

The threat to “civil liberties on the legislative front in Sacramento becomes more serious with each passing day.

Already, one house or the other of the worst California Legislature i in years has adopted repressive bills that will shackle unpopular political minorities, aliens and labor. At this stage of the proceedings it looks as though as many as a dozen anti-civil liberties bills will reach the Governor’ s desk.

“Registration Act”

In the Assembly, three bills aimed at alleged “Fifth Columnists” have already been adopted. Assemblyman Tenney’s much amended “Subversive Organization Registration Act,” A. B. 271, was finally adopted without a dissenting vote.

ment, and those which advocate any “‘doctrines, principles or activities” practiced in a foreign country to register with the Secretary of State. Since the information required of registrants is detailed and exceedingly burdensome, the Act is tanta- mount to the outlawing of organizations covered by it. As amended, however, the Act now covers only groups ‘‘which regularly drill, parade, meet or assemble,” and which directly or indirectly advocate racial prejudice, or the violent overthrow of the government. That isn’t quite like the Voorhis Bill enacted by Congress, under which no group has registered, but it is a close approach to it.

Boy Scouts Rowse! !

The second bill adopted by the Assembly is Mr. Tenney’s A. B. 2348, barring the wearing of uniforms of a foreign military or semi-military organization, or UNIFORMS SIMILAR THERETO. I suppose no one could object to the barring of military uniforms, because they suggest force and not persuasion, but how about uniforms that are SIMILAR to those of semi-military organizations. How about the Boy Scout, Girl Scout and Hiking Club uniforms?

The third bill adopted by the Assembly is A. B. 102 by Mr. Dilworth which would make ita felony for anyone who has taken an oath “TO SUPPORT, MAINTAIN OR FURTHER the military or POLITICAL activities or policies, or to obey the orders or directions, of any foreign government or of any official, SOCIETY or ASSOCIATION therein,” to hold a public office in California. If this bill is adopted, office holders who are proverbial joiners had better make sure they don’t belong to foreigneonnected organizations that may be held to be furthering the political aims of another country.

No Communists Wanted

Awaiting action by the Assembly are two bills which have received favorable Com

In its original form it would have required groups which advocate a peaceful change in the govern

pose.

mittee action. The first of these is A. B. 155, by Mr. Tenney, of course, which spe- cifically forbids the employment of Communists or members of other greups advocating the violent overthrow of the government, and prohibits the payment of any funds from the State Treasury for that purThe. second is A. B. 1475, Dy Vir. Pfaff, which seeks to bar refugee doctors from the practice of medicine in this State. The State Senate has directed its activities essentially against Labor. Already adopted is the Model Anti-Sabotage bill, S. B. 180, considered elsewhere in this issue, and S. B. 877, by Senators Gordon, Rich and Hays, outlawing “hot cargo’’ and “secondary boycotts.” The Senate has also adopted Senator Kenney’s S. B. 29., which makes it unlawful for everyone but the police officers to install dictaphones without the consent of the owner of property. The exception would seem to us to be the chief source of the evil, but Mr. Kenney says he’ll go after the police two years from now. On the other side of the ledger, Senator

(Continued on Page 4, Col. 3)

GOVERNMENT DRAFTS MAN WITHOUT A COUNTRY

The United States Government has placed itself in the curious position of trying to get rid of an alien and still wanting him to serve in the armed forces. That situation is presented by the case of Jack Warnick.

In October, 1935, Warnick, a cdo of this country since he was two years of age, was arrested for deportation because of past membership in the Communist Party. Subsequently, he was also charged with illegal entry because of an alleged one-day visit to Canada.

After a hearing, Warnick was avdered deported to Canada, but Canada-.refused to take him because it could find no record of his birth in that country. While Warnick, now 33, continues to stay in the United States, the deportation warrant is still outstanding against him and he is reduced to the status of a man without a country. Yet the country that does not want him insists that he should serve in its Army. Warnick has taken an appeal from the ruling of his draft eee placing him in Class 1-A.

ACLU Besiseis San Mateo Ban on Known Subversives

The Américan Civil Liberties-Union has protested the San: Mateo Board of Super-— visors’ adoption of a: fesolution barring “all known members of-subversive groups” from appearing before the: Board: to speak. The protest followed reports that-under the new resolution the: Board liad ‘refused to allow. one Thomas F’..Crosthwaite, a former U. 8S. Census Bureau employee, and two companions to speak, and had further threatened to have Mr. Crosthwaite thrown out bodily if he persisted. in.an attempt te be heard.

“Tf these reports. re:correct,” stated Er“nest Besig,. Northern, California. director of the A. C. L..U.:{Sve.submit that the Board itself ig subverting the. Federal and State Constitutions by... denying: the. right. of petition . -...« Every. proponent of a new and strange. idea will run the visk of being de= nied a hearing. because he ig ‘subversive.’ On.the other hand, if the rule is to be enforced with all strictness, we think the Board would be ‘compelled to silence itself because it is subverting | the Constitutional Right of: Petition,”

Urging the Board t6* becuoke its gag rule in order to avoid “a legal test that can only result in the ‘Board suffering the ignominy of being held a subverter-of our Bills of Rights,” the Union’s ‘protest pointed out that the State Constittition specifically guarantees the’ right: of petition to all persons without’ distitiction. “The A.C.L.U., it declares, “‘does not question the right of the Board to-make reasonable-rules and regulations for the ‘presentation. of petitions for redress. But :those -rules. may. not discriminate against any groups of citizens. You may no more... bar. “subversives’. from the right to a -hearing thanyou may bar Negroes,: Gatholics, Jews, Christians, or any other: ‘group, SO: long as they. conduct them- selves in an;orderly manner.” .

The Civil Liberties Union oe referred the matter to the attention of Attorney General Warren and to the Civil’ Liberties Committee of the State Bar, and,’ if it becomes necessary, it is prepared to ‘test Ene resolution in the COURS. Poe

PARDON ‘DUE F FOR: ANOTHER VICTIM ce OF SYNDICALISM | LAW

The: AdvisoryPardon: Board has recommended to Governor Culbert L. Olson that the pardon=application of Charles Lesse, “one of the first victims of the California Criminal Syndicalism Law,, be granted. The Governor is expected to: act: on the recom- mendation in the pear future).

Lesse was arrested at Arcata, Humboldt County, on’ November 12,1919, shortly after the syndicalism law’ went into effect. The only charge: against him was that of membership in’ the Industrial Workers of the World, Lesse began: serving his eohitaune in San Quentin on January’ 23;:1920. In March, 1922, he was deported to Germany. Today he resides’ with his wife. in sa

Page 2

The Position of ihe A.C.L.U. In the Bridges Case

In August, 1939, we carried a statement in the A.C.L.U-NEWS on the Bridges deportation proceedings. Since the present hearings are merely an oppressive continuation of the original proceedings, without any essential difference in the charges, we submit herewith our 1939 statement on the case:

The question has been asked, ‘What should be the attitude of the A.C.L.U. in the Bridges deportation proceedings?” There can be but one answer, ‘‘The A.C. L.U. must unalterably oppose any attempt to deport a man because of his political beliefs or associations.”

It makes no difference what those political beliefs may be or what they are alleged to be, and whether we agree with them or not. And dislike for the man or the labor organization he represents cannot affect support of the fundamental right of freedom of opinion.

In the present case, the charge is made that Bridges is an alien who sometime after entering this country became a member of a group which advocates the violent overthrow of the government, namely, the Communist Party, and, therefore, should be deported. The provision of the immigration law that permits deportation of an alien because of mere membership in a proscribed -group is similar to the provision in the Califonia criminal syndicalism act. While the courts have upheld the constitutionality of such statutes, we have consistently urged their repeal and have sought to limit their application to cases where, as Justice Holmes put it, there is a clear and present danger to the government.

We have adopted that course because. experience shows that, “All laws aimed, at opinion and beliefs are notoriously difficult of enforcement, and wherever the attempt is made to eaieree them, grossly unfair. Prejudice inevitably plays a large part in all such proceedings. The history. of the present provisions. of the immigration law relating to opinions and beliefs bears con vincing testimony as to the difficulty. and unfairness of the administration.”

The Bridges deportation ope acer are no exception. The government, upon: the hysterical demands of patrioteers, ‘the Hearst press and others, has chosen to rely upon the testimony of perjurers, stoolpigeons, apostates, seekers after revenge and notoriety, and others whose credibility is open to serious doubt. In fact, the whole case is clearly a monstrous witch hunt that has been carried on ever since Bridges became a powerful figure in the labor movement...

Indeed, the conclusion is inescapable to anyone who has followed the activities of Bridges since 1934, that certain interests have been out to get him because of his waterfront activities, and deportation proceedings offer a convenient means of ac- complishing the trick. Now those interests are sitting back quietly and seeking to give the impression that they had nothing to do with the plot.

Their motives are the same anti-labor motives that inspired the prosecutions on criminal syndicalism charges of the union leaders who sought to organize agricultural workers in the Imperial and Sacramento valleys. In short, the present deportation proceedings are nothing les than an attempt at union smashing. Consequently, we must oppose the deportation proceedings against Mr. Bridges.

A.C.L.U. IS HEARD ON WIRE-TAPPING BILL

Testifying before a sub-committee of the House Judiciary Committee holding hearings on the Hobbs Wire-tapping Bill (H.R. 2266) Osmond K. Fraenkel, counsel to the A.C.L.U. in Washington expressed opposition to the bill, which would permit the head of any executive department of the Federal government to authorize wire-tapping if he has “reasonable ground for believing that a felony may have been committed; or may be about to be committed.”

Statement of A.C.L.U. On the Model Anti-Sabotage Bill

The American Civil Liberties Union is ofcourse in favor of legislation designed to prevent unlawful acts in connection with national defense. But it believes that the model anti-sabotage bill for the states is so far-reaching that it may readily be used not as much to protect against acts of sabotage, as to hamper labor’s right to strike, picket and conduct its other legitimate activities.

Our objections are based on the following points:

1. The bill goes far beyond anything previously embodied in our criminal law by punishing not only conspiracies to perform unlawful acts (and attempts to perform those acts) but also any solicitation to commit such an act—whether or not the act is ever committed. The far-reaching implications of this penalty on speech are further em- phasized by provision punishing not only actual injury to property, but any ‘“interfer- ence’’ with property, if there is reasonable ground to believe that defense activities will be hindered.

2. The bill punishes anyone who intentionally omits to note any defect in any article used in defense work. This provision would, make it easy to frame an empires incur- ring an employer’s hostility.

3. The bill sets up machinery to shut fe. highways abutting on plants engaged in defense work. Obviously it could be applied practically to destroy the right of picketing.

4. While a paragraph of the proposed law attempts to safe-guard the rights of labor, it seems wholly inadequate. If the rights of labor are to be fully protected, the law should include a specific clause “that nothing herein contained makes unlawful any conduct not otherwise unlawful. when carried on in connection with a labor dispute,” together with a definition of a labor dispute at least as broad as that in the Norris LaGuardia Act.

5. Despite whatever improvements that might be made, no necessity appears to exist for such state legislation. The Federal government has entirely adequate power to punish actual sabotage in connection with defense work, or any conspiracies to commit it. Independent state legislation runs the risk of putting into the hands of local prosecutors powers more likely to be used against the rights of labor than national laws.

The A.C.L.U. recommends that in all state legislatures where this bill is introduced the Union’s local committees and representatives oppose it ELEN :

Tenth Anniversay > Of Scottsboro Case

Tuesday, March 25 marked the tenth anniversary of the Scottsboro Case, which became a iationwide sensation when the chief complainant retracted her testimony against the nine Negro boys arrested March 25, 1931, declaring them ‘innocent of the charge of criminal assault. Four of the boys, Roy Wright, Eugene Williams, Olen Montgomery, and Willie Robertson, were freed in 1937. Haywood Patterson, Andy Wright, Ozie Powell, and Charlie Weems are serving sentences ranging from 20 to 99 years. Charles Norris is serving life imprisonment. The American Civil Liberties Union has been active in the case since 1934. It participated in the appeal of two of the cases to the U. 8. Supreme Court early in 1935. The Supreme Court upheld the defense in the contention that the boys had been deprived of their constitutional rights by the systematic exclusion of Negroes from petit juries in Alabama.

In November, 1935, the grand jury at Scottsboro returned new indictments against all nine boys, based on new warrants sworn out by Victoria Price, the one remaining complainant. In December of that year the American Civil Liberties Union joined the Scottsboro Defense Committee, which included the International Labor Defense, the National Association for Advancement of Colored People, the Methodist Federation for Social Service, the League for Industrial Democracy, and other agencies. A new series of trials followed. Rape charges were dropped against five defendants but one, Ozie Powell, who was sentenced to 20 years for alleged assult of a deputy sheriff. Norris’ death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by Gov. Bibb Graves of Alabama who refused, however, to intercede in other cases after the pardon board insisted that sole authority rested with the governor.

N. Y. COMMITTEE HITS FINGERPRINTING BILL

In a message to the members of the Codes Committees of the New York legislature, the New York City Committee of the A.C. L.U. has urged opposition to the Coughlin fingerprinting bill, which would compel all persons over eighteen years of age to be fingerprinted and registered. The Committee declared that “the bill would subject the whole population of this state to police surveillance, introducing the evils of a pass- port registration aes like that of European countries.

STATE BAR NAMES CIVIL | : LIBERTIES COMMITTEE

“A statewide Civil Liberties Committee of fifteen members has been appointed by Lloyd Wright, president of the State Bar, with the approval of his Board. Newton M. Todd of Long Beach is chairman of the new. committee, and T. P. Wittschen of Oakland is vice- chairman.

The Committee has no authority to act on issues unless the President or Board of the State Bar authorizes such action. In this connection, the resolution establishing the Committee reads “. . . said Committee to function for and in the name of the State Bar only when such action is directly authorized by the President or Board of Gov- ernors.’

“The A.C.L.U. recently referred to the Gontititiee the matter of the San Mateo Board of Supervisors denying the right of petition to ‘known subversives.”’ We have. not yet been informed whether the Committee will intervene in the case.

Northern California members of the Committee besides Mr. Wittschen are Morse Erskine of San Francisco, Harry J. Bias of Santa Cruz, Hubert H. Briggs of Stockton, Lewis H. Cromwell of Petaluma, J. W. Hawkins of Modesto and Hugh L. Preston of Ukiah.

NATIONAL BOARD MEMBERS ELECTED

-The annual election of members of the National Committee and Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union added to the Board, Rev. Allan Chalmers, Quincy Howe, and Prof. Eduard C. Lindeman.:New members of the National Committee elected were former assistant Attorney General of the United States Alfred Bettman, of Cincinnati; Prof. George S. Counts of Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, president of the American Federation of Teachers; Emerson Fosdick of Riverside Church, New York; Marvin C. Harrison, Cleveland attorney and former Ohio State senator; Freda Kirchwey, editor of The Nation, and Prof. Kirtley L. Mather of Harvard University.

Members whose terms of office expired were A. J. Isserman of the Board and Prof. Sophonisba Breckenbridge, Dr. George W. Kirchwey, and James H. Maurer of the National Committee.

Rev. Harry —

“ SUPREME COURT DECISION ON PICKETING CRITICIZED

Commenting on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in the Medowmoor picketing case, the American Civil Liberties Union in a memorandum to its local committees and state representatives has expressed the hope “that the court will either withdraw from the position it adopted or restrict the ‘effect of the decision to situations where it ‘clearly appears that violence on the part ‘of the union and its picketing will be in- extricably entwined.”

‘The Supreme Court upheld a state court injunction prohibiting peaceful picketing ‘on the ground that the strike had been accompanied by considerable violence. Justi ces Black, Douglas, and Reed dissented. In the minority opinion, Justice Black pointed out that the state court had granted its injunction, not on the ground that violence would accompany further picketing, but in the belief that the strikers had no right to interfere with the distribution of milk. He declared that the majority decision had opened up “new possibilities for the invasion of rights guaranteed by the first amendment.”’

The decision has been widely criticized as opening the door to injunctions banning peaceful picketing. It is-feared that unscrupulous employers may themselves in- stigate acts of violence in the hope that an injunction against all picketing may be obtained.

Charges Against Lewistown

3 “Syndicalists’” Dropped Dropping of criminal syndicalism charges against four Chicago Communists by prosecuting authorities in Lewistown, Ill.,; marked the end of a case which had drawn, nation-wide attention. Arrested last July: while circulating petitions to put the Communist Party on the ballot, George Gibbs, Mary Wilson, and Jane Curtiss were in-, dicted by the Fulton County grand jury in, September on the charge of ‘ ‘unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously aiding in the. organization of. a group whose purpose is, the overthrow of the present form of government of the United States by force.”

The three were accompanied to Lewistown. by their attorney, Ira I. Silbar, who was also, arrested and indicted on the same charges.

. Charges were based on the defendants’ mere possession, at the time they were ar- rested, of literature of the Communist Party. Ten year sentences might have been imposed if the charges had been pressed and convictions obtained under. what we American Civil Liberties Union termed ‘ discredited law that has been virtually s dead letter for many years.’’ The defendants were at first held for bail in the amount of $80,000. Later, the amount was reduced to $14,000.

The defense was aided throughout both by the American Civil Liberties Union and its affiliate, the Chicago Civil Liberties Committee. Both the national and the local organizations contributed toward bail for the defendants.

THE STATUS OF FOUR A.C.L.U. CASES NOW ON APPEAL

‘.Owing to a continuance granted the District Attorney of Yuba County, the constitu- tionality of California’s ‘“‘Anti-Okie law” will not be argued in'the U. S. Supreme Court until March 31 or April 1.

Also before the U. S. Supreme Court is an appeal in the case of Frank Connor, who claims he was denied the right to counsel when tried on criminal charges in the Los Angeles Superior Court.

The California Supreme Court has had pending before it for almost a month the case of George Bogunovich who was denied citizenship for subscribing toaJd ugoslavian Communist paper in 1932. A decision is expected i in the near future.

-In the school case, involving the refusal of the San Francisco Board of Education to grant the use of a school for a series of meetings under the auspices of the San Francisco Local of the Socialist Party, arguments are expected to be heard before the District Court of Appeal in San Francisco sometime this month.

a, A.B. 1475, now before ae Assembly for consideration, is directed at -refugee doctors. Two years ago a move to bar such doctors by requiring citizenship of all ap- plicants for physician’s and surgeon’s licenses, was vetoed by Governor Olson. To- day, A.B. 1475 seeks to accomplish the same purpose by a so-called reciprocity requirement. It provides that graduates of foreign medical schools must furnish docu: mentary evidence that the countries where they practiced admit United States doctors on the same basis as we admit their graduates in this country.

The effect of the proposal would be to exclude most graduates of foreign medical schools. Since Mr. Hitler and his fellow dictators do not grant reciprocity we are, in effect, requiring refugee doctors to do the impossible, and, therefore, barring them from the practice of medicine.

Doctors Needed For Defense Pioeranr

Furthermore, this bill flies in the face of rising defense requirements in the United States. As the war crises grows, there is an ever increasing demand for physicians and surgeons for military service. The Army. will require one doctor for about every 700 men. The Navy, in addition to caring for its expanded personnel, has to provide medical care for the huge number of civilian workers in the dock and shipyards and their families. Since a substantial majority of the entire number of such military doctors must come from the civilian population, this means that already the number of doctors available to the general public has decreased, and all indications are that. this trend will continue for some time. > °

Unfortunately, this decrease comes at ‘2 time when many hospitals, such.as, the Los. Angeles County Hospital, already find themselves. without. sufficient internes and residents due to. the fact that (1) the reservoir of potential doctors was materially: cut down .during the depression : period when students had not the requisite. means to embark on the long course of study; and (2) many graduating students today are taking their interneships.in Army and Nawy: Hospitals.

Refugee Doctors Are Few —

There is no real need for the legislation. The number of persons affected by it is relatively small. A recent survey showed, that from the year 1933, when Hitler came to power, to 1938, inclusive, a little more. than 50 foreign physicians were admitted. to practice in California. During the past couple of years, not more than 25 or 30 more have been admitted. It is submitted that 75 or 80 foreign doctors in 8 years present no real problem, and do not alter materially the financial well-being of our own medical school graduates.

Our law already requires graduates of foreign medical schools to complete the senior year in an approved medical school in the United States or to serve a year’s residence in an approved hospital located in the United States. If the present proposal is adopted, such persons who have not completed the year’s training or residence will have served that period in vain unless they can show the impossible—that Mr. Hitler grants reciprocity to graduates of United States medical schools.

Refugee Doctors Face Starvation

' This bill virtually takes a man’s job from him and makes it most difficult for him to earn a livlihood. What is a foreign physician to do who comes here at the age of 45 or 50? All his training and experience have been in the field of medicine. Yet, unless he ‘can be trained to do another job he faces starvation. If we admit refugees, the only fair thing is to allow them to make a living in the field in which they are trained. Whether it igs ever wise to limit the

lm Californ

Bar Retr

number of ‘scientifically trained men in a state is dubious. Moreover, the field of med‘icine is. peculiarly. rich in examples of tremendous benefits accruing to men through the interchange of ideas and procedures between practitioners from different coun‘tries. But on practical. considerations alone this bill merits defeat.. Not only is. the general population already facing a potential shortage of-trained physicians, but the federal: government has before it proposals for the safeguarding of the national health dur ing: this period of strain and Crisis, a program which*will eall for additional physicians. In a time when medical associations are concerned over a probable lack of available..medical ‘care, when medical schools are; daily. losing. staff members to the armed forces, when potential medical students are withdrawn from their schooling for military training, and when the federal government is considering. an expanded program forthe maintenance of public health and morale, it i is apparent that our policy should be one of welcome to all qualified physicians and surgeons. who can help toremedy our present deficiencies eS augment our delense: program.

NATIONAL COUNCIL CONFERS WITH “LA GUARDIA ON CENSORSHIP

eheemiac methods used by’ Mayor FH. La Guardia, of New York, in his campaign to rid ‘the * ‘city’s ” newsstands of “indecent” literature, the National Council on Free-— domi'* ‘from Censorship in conference with the™ mayor “has* urged him. not to proceed exe vethe a asia or oe a outa establish a harmtut se Cee a te censorship,”

neil’ ‘Said. phe, Council Was repreone by a ‘committee ‘consisting of Quincy Howe; ehairman of the Council, Elmer Rice, playwritht, and‘ Roger N: Baldwin, director of ‘the ‘American’ Civil Liberties: Union. |

The ma or’s. campaign | began last July with hig declaration that he had the “power of sewage disposal”. nd if” necessary could get..rid of objectionable magazines “as lth A conference with newsdealers resulted in their voluntary withdrawal of a number. of magazines from the stands. The mayor sat as committing magistrate to hold a leading distributor, na the ead jury later: refused to indict.

; “Only | a’ fair trial can determine the ighly deb; table character of material sold on. the newsstands.

contro] by hainistrative Ofoces: not only opéns. ‘the door to personal prejudices and conceptions. of morals, but is in itself without legal sanction,” the Council declared.

LOS. ANGELES GETS UNION” 5 0: ae ON . HANDBILL. ORDINANCE

Bipeent: action: iby: the City Council of Los Angeles in passing an amendment to the hardbill ordinance prohibiting the distribution of commercial leaflets on the streets but permitting the unlimited distribution of leaflets dealing with political, social and religious subjects, was taken after consultation with the Southern California branch of the A.C.L.U. Asked for an opinion by the city attorney, A.-L. Wirin, council for the Union, stated the A. c. EL. UL Ss ppsitipn as follows:

“Kae Béhevs the digemetion Between commeércial.and non-commercial handbills is a valid one::Under recent decisions of the U. S. Supreme Court, the streets of a muni- cipality belong to the people for the purposes,of expression, of opinion on all politieal; social, labor, and other subjects... So far as the sale or advertising of wares, goods; merchandise and. services is concerned, the. same .constitutional right to make useof. publie.places for such purposes has not. been held:to. obtain.’

Page 4

American Civil Liberties Union-News Published monthly at 216 Pine Street, San Fran- cisco, Calif., by the Northern California Branch of The American Civil Liberties Union.

Phone: EXbrook 1816 ERNEST BESIG ... Editor. PAULINE W. DAVIES.......... Associate Editor Subscription Rates—Seventy-five Cents a Year. Ten Cents per Copy.

OPEN FORUM

Following are the main portions of a letter sent by one of our members to Chief of Police, Charles W. Dullea of San Francisco.

‘“Anti-Religious Propaganda”’

A few days ago it came to my knowledge that you recently made written request of San Francisco publishers that they furnish .

your department with the name and address of anyone who, in future, offers them, - for printing or publishing, material dealing with “anti-religious propaganda” as well as propaganda of certain other kinds, telling them, in justification of your request, that such propaganda is, at this time, “not conducive to the well being, peace and se- curity of this country.”

Now I am sure, sir, that you must have been taught as a boy that our national con- stitution expressly forbids any suppression, either by force or by intimidation, of the precious personal right to speak or write for or against any religious, or other, doc- trine or belief—a constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech and of the press that was meant to hold good for the atheist no less than for the Roman Catholic or the Protestant. In fact, the opening words of the Bill of Rights (which you possibly have read but which, if so, you apparently do not fully understand) are ones which, assured- ly, every citizen of these United States ought to know by heart, for they constitute an indispensable part of the fundamental law of this nation. Indeed, as the late Chief - Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once said, “Tf there is one principle of our constitu- tion that is more worthy of attachment than another it is the principle of freedom. of thought — not freedom alone for the thought with which you agree, but freedom also for the thought which you hate.”

When you requested San Francisco publishers to serve your department in much the same manner as the German Gestapo and the Russian G.-P. U. are served, what (let me ask you) did you mean by the term “onti-religious propaganda?” Did you mean propaganda against Roman Catholicism or Methodism or Presbyterianism or, possibly, all the various conflicting sects into which Christianity is divided? If so, what about Mohammedanism, which has a greatly larger number of devotees than all the Christian denominations combined? And what about Budhism and Brahmanism and Shintoism? If you did not mean Christianity, in one or all of its denominations (though I have no doubt that you did), did you have solely in mind what is generally called ‘natural religion,” namely, the bare belief in a supreme being and a life after death? If so, let me remind you (if you once learned but have since forgotten) that the first article of the Bill of Rights was enacted because its framers knew (as apparently you do not know) that not only is no religious creed demonstrably true but that even the mere belief in a deity (of any kind) and in a life beyond the grave is also open to question.

I should like to believe, sir, that when you made your request of San Francisco publishers (a request which I hope you have already been induced, because of many protests, to revoke) you included this item of anti-religious propaganda only because of pressure brought to bear upon you by clergymen and chureh-going people, who are always eager and ready, even, in most instances, to the extent of contravening our constitutional guarantee of liberty of speech and of the press, to seize an Op- portunity such as the present world crisis to identify anti-religious views with certain doctrines and theories which, quite rightly, I believe, are popularly regarded as being

Bigotry Cannot Be Stopped By Law, ACLU Warns

Warning that “we cannot combat movements, which may menace democracy by adopting the principle of repression which these very groups espouse,’ the American Civil Liberties Union has sent a memorandum to its local committees for use in opposing bills in state legislatures penalizing propaganda “promoting hatred of — any race or religion.’”? The Union opposes the bills (1) as unconstitutional, (2) as restraints on freedom of expression, (3) as unnecessary, and (4) as likely to penalize groups to which they were not intended to apply.

‘Because of their vagueness none of the proposed bills sets up any definite test of guilt,” the Union declared. “Under their broad terms any outspoken criticism can be construed as advocacy of hatred or hostility. Any criticism of a race, a people, a nation or a particular religion might be so interpreted.”

Modelled closely on the New Jersey antiNazi law which the A.C.L.U. is testing in the higher courts, most of the bills now pending make it a crime to:

“1, Write anything which incites, counsels, promotes, or advocates hatred or vio- lence or hostility against a group of persons in this state by reason of their race, color or religion; to have such provisions in the by-laws of an organization; to pro- duce a picture, photograph or emblem, ete. having such effect.

2. To possess literature, a constitution and by-laws above described or a picture, emblem, etc. having such effect.

“3 To display an emblem, picture, etc. having such effect.

“4. To make a speech having such effect.

“5 To permit the use of a building for | a meeting where any of the above provisions are violated. |

“6. Po speak over the radio or to permit a radio station to be used for a speech where these provisions are violated.”

incompatible with the ideals of true democracy. I cannot, however, believe that this pressure from the groups wholly accounts for your action, for it is hardly likely that you are ignorant of the fact that the atheist has as much legal right to publish, or to offer for publication (and without police or government surveillance or documenta- tion), a treatise against religion as a Roman Catholic has to publish, or to offer for publication (and without police or government surveillance or documentation) a treatise against atheism.

By your action you not only exceeded your authority but you also exhibited a per- nicious intolerance which is, in truth, the most dangerous kind of un-Americanism— the kind that Mayor Hague of Jersey City has made notorious—the kind that has been far too much in evidence during the last two decades—the kind which is more likely than any other kind of “ism” to destroy the well-being and peace and security of this country; for it springs from the failure to realize that the very foundationstone of genuine democracy is the full freedom of every citizen to have, and to express at all times, a difference of opinion, whether in religious, social, political, economic, or racial questions.

It is true, as science has proved, that man and the ape descended from the same an- cestral stock; but man’s intelligence, even at lowest, is now far superior to that of the ape, and the written history of human-kind makes it unmistakably clear that a wrong ‘opinion can always safely be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it, whereas, conversely, a right opinion may be crushed to earth for centuries where reason is not free to defend it. It is probable, however, that no democracy will ever be able to do without such protective organizations as The American Civil Liberties Union; but if constant vigilance is always to be the price of liberty, it is certainly not too high a price to pay for a thing so valuable. —Robert H. Scott.

SUPPRESSION ON THE MARCH

(Continued from Page 1, Col. 2)

Swan appeared before the Senate Education Committee and requested that his bill, S. B. 894, providing for courses of study in the King James version of the Bible, in the public schools, be tabled. .

WE OPPOSE

A. B. 56, requiring the dismissal of any state employee who refuses, or who in © the past has refused to answer any questions before a legislative committee.

A. B. 58, establishing membership in the Communist Party, etc., as a ground for disqualifying applicants for the Stat Bar, etc.

A. B. 102, in so far as it bars persons from holding office who have taken oaths to support political activities or policies of any foreign government, official, society or association therein. A. B. 155, prohibiting government employment of Communists.

A. B. 271, requiring the registration of groups advocating racial prejudice or the violent overthrow of the government.

A. B. 1475, barring refugee doctors from the practice of medicine.

A. B. 2229, in so far as it punishes membership in foreign-controlled political organizations advocating any form of government contrary to our present one.

A. B. 2348, prohibiting the wearing of “the “uniform of, or A UNIFORM SIMILAR — TO that of, a foreign military or semimilitary organization.

A. B. 2349, raising the presumption under the Civic Center Act that Communists ad- vocate the violent overthrow of the government.

A. B. 2545, permitting school buildings and grounds to be used for religious services, unless the bill carries an amendment de’ elaring that there shall be no discrimina- tion in granting such use.

§. B. 132, prohibiting employment by the — State, or the holding of office, of persons holding prohibited beliefs.

S. B. 727, establishing compulsory drill in Junior and State Colleges, unless it car. ries an amendment excusing conscientious objectors.

s. B. 1119, requiring aliens alone to show ability to pay judgments arising from «motor vehicle accidents.

NEW BOOKS ON CIVIL LIBERTIES

“Landscape of Freedom” by Mauritz A. Hallgren tells the story of the struggles for the protection of personal liberty in America from the arrival of the first white set- tlers down to the present. The book renders a distinct service in presenting its subject from the human interest point of view rather than that of dry legal controversy or philosophical argument.

Mr. Hallgren, who has for many years been a writer for the Baltimore Sun, achieves a style which is vivid and entertaining. His book is packed with interesting | and relevant material and the parts which describe the suppression of civil rights during the last war are particularly apt at the present moment.

Mr. Hallgren’s reporting lacks a welldefined argument, and its value would be greater if it distinguished more clearly be© tween fundamental liberties and personal freedoms expressed in customs. “Landscape of Freedom” is published by Howell, Soskin and Co., at $3.50.

ONE-ACT PLAY RECOMMENDED FOR AMATEUR PRODUCTION

The American Civil Liberties Union recommends to amateur theatrical groups interested in plays dealing with civil liberties “The Teacher,” a one-act play by Prof. Fred Eastman of the Chicago Theological Seminary. “The Teacher’ is an exceedingly amusing treatment of the issues of academic freedom. It runs half an hour and requires eight characters. Royalty is $5 per performance.