vol. 7, no. 4

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

FREE SPEECH FREE PRESS FREE ASSEMBLAGE

“Eternal is the price of liberty.”

Vol. VII SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, APRIL, 1942 No. 4

POLL FAVORS HEARING BOARDS

Citizens Affected By Evacuation Orders Should Receive Hearings

Hearing boards should be established for citizens subject to the exclusion orders of General DeWitt! That is the judgment of an overwhelming majority of members of the A.C.L.U. in the poll conducted by the Union last month. 188 voted for the proposition, while 67 voted against it (with 20 persons not voting). Many persons insisted that hear- ing boards should also be available to aliens coming under the exclusion orders, and es- pecially to anti-Fascist and anti-Nazi refugees. Others suggested that the boards be under civil rather than military control (and vice versa), while there was some dis- agreement expressed as to whether hear-. ing boards should function before or after removal of the persons affected. In principle, however, there was agreement that such boards should be established.

Supports Position of National Board

The vote of the local branch supports the position of the national office, which has requested President Roosevelt to establish hearing boards, before or after removal, for all citizens and aliens affected by the evacuation orders, in order to permit those found loyal to remain. The Union cited a similar recommendation by the Tolan Committee of Congress for hearing boards to examine Italian and German aliens and urged its extension to American citizens of Japanese ancestry. Recognition of the difficult situation on the Pacific Coast, according to the Union, does not “‘preclude reason- able modifications of the order in an effort to reconcile civil rights with military ne- cessities.”’

Favor President’s Order

A majority of those voting supported the President’s order authorizing the estab- lishment of military areas from which, at the discretion of the Army, all persons might be removed. But the vote was split 110-113 against General DeWitt’s order establishing the military areas (apparently because his action appeared too sweeping).

On the remaining two questions those voting were equally divided. 117 favored legal action to test the constitutionality of the orders, while 120 were opposed. 110 favored modification of the orders to have them apply only to regions in the immediate vicinity of the coast and near defense plants and military establishments, while 120 were oppesed.

Exactly 281 ballots were cast in the poll. Six ballots bore no votes on the various - propositions but carried remarks instead. In two cases, selective evacuation was fav- ored. In another instance, the person wrote “Leave Japs where they are.” On two other ballots, the persons were willing to rely upon our judgment, while‘in the last instance the card carried the notation ‘‘Insufficient knowledge.”

Final Victory for Union In Socialist School Case

The California Supreme Court has denied the petition of the San Francisco Board of Education to hear an appeal in the Socialist school case. The District Court of Appeal had previously held that under the Civic Center Act schools are open as meeting places to ALL groups and that a school board may not pass upon the questions to be discussed at such meetings. A San Francisco regulation providing that “‘the use of a building will not be given for... political, or partisan purposes” was held to be invalid, and the board has altered its regulation to forbid: the use of schools for sectarian purposes. The decision is binding on all school boards throughout the state.

A.C.L.U. attorney Wayne M. Collins of San Francisco handled the case since its inception, and the costs of the suit were borne by the A.C.L.U.

In this particular case, the School Board refused to allow the Socialists to discuss the question of ‘‘Peace.’”’ On another occasion, the America First Committee was denied the use of an auditorium because the meeting would be ‘“‘too highly contro- versial and might lead to disorder.”’ ;

Other school boards have banned Upton Sinclair rallies, C.I.O. meetings at which Harry Bridges was to appear and gatherings in support of the Spanish loyalists. Under the Supreme Court’s decision, such discrimination is unlawful. However, school boards may “deny permission to use the schoolhouse by subversive organizations, the burden of proving the character and affiliation of the group being upon the board.” :

Opinion By Hays On The Evacuation Order

The order providing for wholesale evacuation of Pacific Coast areas is bound to re- sult in grave injustice. The clearly constitutional way to accomplish the objective of protecting defense areas is to declare martial law at strategic points, as has been done in. Hawaii. This would apply generally and would not discriminate against particular groups of residents. A dangerous and new precedent is established when, without martial law, military authorities are given such vast power over large sections of the civilian-population.

The present order will result in injustice and hardship to American citizens of Jap- anese ancestry who are loyally serving by the thousands in our armed forces but whose citizen relatives are not permitted to-eecupy their homes. It will work-injustice even to American citizens with a single Japanese grandparent. This ominous precedent, once established, might be extended to other parts of the country where wholesale evacuations without inquiry into individual cases would affect refugees from Fascism, who though technically enemy aliens, are actually ardent supporters of the democratic cause.

The Civil Liberties Union, of course, does not oppose any necessary military measures, but we believe that our democratic structure is sufficiently elastic to reconcile military necessity with the fundamental civil rights of the citizen. We are hopeful that these rights will be recognized without resort to the courts, but if necessary, we are prepared to appeal to the courts to protect the rights of citizens under general orders which, even in areas where martial law is not justified, gives military authorities supreme jurisdiction.

RACE DISCRIMINATION FAILS IN AUDLEY COLE CASE

Audley Cole, San Francisco negro, is now operating a municipal street car. Refused training by members of the Carmen’s Union because of his race, Cole’s training period was completed under the direction of a supervisor. In the course of the dispute, fourteen motormen were suspended from their jobs. Cole is the first negro to secure a job onthe Municipal Railway.

RESULTS OF THE A.C.L.U.

Do you favor the President’s order ?.............----.-.0.----Do you favor General DeWitt’s order ?.....................----. Should the A.C.L.U. test the constitutionality of the orders insofar as they apply to citizens ?..................---Should the A.C.L.U. seek modification of both orders to provide hearing boards for citizens affected? Should the A.C.L.U. seek to have both orders modified by having them apply only to regions in the immediate vicinity of the coast and near defense plants and military establishments ?................

Not Yes No Voting 144 84 47 110 113 52 117 120 38 188 67 20 Ce 110 120 45

‘Page 2

COMMENTS

DO SOMETHING QUICKLY

From every point of view the present procedure seems bad. Expense to the govern- ment, violation of the American principle of equality for all citizens, danger in build- ing up resentment against our government in a minority that at present is largely loyal, and the similarity between what we are doing and what Mr. Hitler did to the Jews in Germany.

I do hope the A.C.L.U. will do something and do it quickly!

NONE OF OUR BUSINESS

The very fact that you make such an inquiry shows that the Union has completely lost its head. The question you raise is one of military strategy and the decision of the President and of the Army is definitely none of your business as an organization. If the Army chose to remove all civilians and to commandeer their houses and other property for military uses, it would still be none of your business. No question of civil liberties arises in such a case. Of course, as individuals the members of your board and others may from their knowledge of military science and tactics consider the wisdom of the various steps taken by the military; and also as individuals they may con- sider the economic and political problems ‘raised by the evacuation orders. But I re- peat that there can be no legitimate problem of civil liberties in such a situation.

The most unfortunate thing about your letter, to my mind, is that the people who contribute to the Union are not experts in this field and they look to the board to keep ‘its program clear and to avoid being drawn into such a mistaken and futile controversy as this. If the board can’t keep its proper functions clearly in mind, it ought to re- sign and not seek information of this sort from the general public.

PROTEST FOR THE RECORD

The discrimination against Japanese citizens seems to me well calculated to damage their loyalty and regard for the nation, and I am sure it is not good to have a precedent of this kind, which cultivates a feeling that certain classes of citizens can be isolated for suspicion and disrespect—I mean on the part of those of other national origins. Good Japanese friends of my family have been grievously hurt, to my knowledge, and have spoken bitterly about this situation.

I wish something might be done to give a positive impression that there.are groups definitely concerned about the correctness, the constitutionality of the proceeding, whether or not it eventuates in remedial action. I think it would do good, although it would be most unpopular. Sometimes one registers a protest against a program in the interest of the principle involved, for the sake of the record. This much I think should be done, if there is some way.

ORDERS VITALLY NECESSARY

I dislike intensely the pushing around of aliens and citizens with foreign connections, but in view of the fact that our defense plants, oil refineries, transportation facili- ties, etc., are not and apparently cannot be adequately guarded against sabotage, I think orders like those of the President and General DeWitt are not only expedient but vitally necessary.

I wish that there might be hearing boards for all persons affected, not merely for citizens, but I think it is too late for these to be used before evacuation, which I re- gard as very urgent. Undoubtedly it is not only unjust but extremely wasteful to treat all these people as actual or potential enemies. I think some agency should be estab- lished to look into the records of all people classed as enemy aliens, so that the country can avail itself of the reservoirs of needed skills that we have in our anti-fascist foreigners. But such a move hardly comes within the scope of the ACLU.

ARE WE TO BE JUDGED BY EXTRACTION?

We are alien residents with a child born in this country. We took out our first pa| Police and former’ Berkeley resident

KEEPING THE RECORD STRAIGHT

W. A. Gabrielson, Honolulu Chief of wired the Tolan Committee as follows: “Pursuant request Delegate King, advise you there were no acts of sabotage in city and county of Honolulu, December 7, nor have there been any reported to Police Department since that date.

“Police Department had charge of traffic on Pearl Harbor road from Pearl Harbor to Honolulu shortly after bombing started with several officers on duty there.

“There was no deliberate blocking of traffic during December 7 or following that date by unauthorized persons.”

pers in the summer of 1939. In doing so, we assumed that by acquiring U.S. citizenship, we should acquire the rights guaranteed to all citizens equally under the Constitution and Bill of Rights. We did not realize at the time that our “extraction” would have any bearing on these rights or on our future equality with all citizens of our adoptive country.

But perhaps we were a little vague in 1939 as to what our rights would be. It appears now that they include the following:

The right to lose our homes and unmovable properties by arbitrary decree.

The right to be forced to reside in or outside certain designated areas of our coun- ey ;

The right to be singled out as of doubtful loyalty and undesirable based on grounds of “ancestry”, a right which has so generously been granted to many German citi| zens in recent years. :

And these rights are automatically extended to our child born here, a U. S. citizen. !

We immigrants... no matter what our extraction, have come a long way. It required faith for ourselves and for our children to make this journey. We are told that we came for an ideal, as your founding fathers came in their day. This ideal, we are further told, is one that we shall realize in full and in our lifetime by becoming citi- zens. For our children, born citizens, it will be realized from birth. They are born free and equal among the free.

Are they?

Or are they, because of still unforseen circumstances, to be judged by “extraction”, segregated and deprived of their livelihood?

That is something we ought to know. But the executive committee of the Civil Liber- ties Union is reported to be in a state of “considerable disagreement” as to the an- swer.

PROTECTIVE MEASURES

In principle, it is highly regrettable, of course, that the President’s order and Gen- eral DeWitt’s order should have been so sweeping. However, we are at war. If some drastic protective measures are not taken now, and a wave of sabotage should occur later, we might have to face an ugly situation in which an aroused populace should clamor for the merciless handling of evidences, aliens and citizens alike. When I consider these orders from that angle, I feel that, without being wholly justified, they are not without logic, and I think it would be unwise to challenge them.

What I would like is to see them modified only in regard to citizens affected. In my view they are fully entitled to a hearing. After all, they have taken an oath of al- legiance to this country and it seems unfair to me that our government should now as- sume, without providing any possible avenue of justification for the interested that all these oaths were actually taken by the’ new citizenry with mental reservations.

CLEAR-CUT INFRINGEMENT BY A.C.L.U.

I believe both orders represent a clear-cut military, I believe their judgment should

infringment on the provisions of the Bill of Rights. However, testing the constitution- ality of the orders may be a long drawn-out affair, and any temporary relief which can be obtained for innocent victims would be well worth the effort necessary to obtain modification.

UNDERMINING OUR WAY OF LIFE

I don’t think that any of us would question the right of our government to remove anybody, citizen or alien, for sufficient reason or enemy aliens as a group but to say that this edict should apply to any citizen of particular ancestry is to undermine our whole ‘‘American way of life’ and to say that no one is entitled to full citizenship unless he is of 100 per cent revolutionary an cestry.

MILITARY’S JUDGMENT SHOULD PREVAIL

First generation Japanese, since they cannot become American citizens, cling to the mother country, and their influence on their children is so strong that a large proportion of their offspring follow their lead. Our Japanese-American population therefore, constitutes a large group, part of which is intensely loyal to Japan, and the bulk of which is in great ferment — probably, almost certainly, incapable of overt acts against the United States of their own volition, but susceptible to the enormous forces which their parents and other Japanese can bring into play against them.

In. view of what has already occurred in so many parts of the world, I think it would be foolhardy to ignore the potential menace of this large group of undecided loyalty. In | themselves, I for one think they are harmless; I am inclined to think they would be harmless in any case, but it is not a risk to be taken lightly. Scornful as I am of our ‘prevail in the disposition of this group. AS for Japanese aliens, many of them are equally harmless and, as the F. B. I. raids have indicated, many of them definitely are not. Again, the judgment of the military” should prevail, for it is they who will even- tually be called to account.

TOO SWEEPING

I certainly oppose any such sweeping order as General DeWitt’s. I believe the Government should be permitted to move Aliens and all Japanese, from vital points such as harbors, dynamite plants and from Military airports. Say for a distance of ten miles from the neighborhood of all military airports. There I think a line should be drawn. Japanese who are American-born citizens should not be required to move from any other section, without trial and charges being presented against them. Not knowing what the Government in tends doing, or what it will do, I can’t make my opposition more definite, but I think the A. C. L. U. should take pretty near the same stand in wartime that it does in peacetime. With, however, a little lee-way provided in certain cases. For instance, citizen or no, we shouldn't carry civil rights to such a length as to permit Japanese to live inside important shipping zones such as Terminal Island down at L. A. We certainly shouldn’t allow them — to operate boats of any kind for any pur| pose along the Pacific Coast. (Unless it is” far up a river.) And we certainly shouldn’t permit them to live too close to powder plants such as are found around Pinole and Hercules on the Contra Costa Shore. And it isn’t too unreasonable to draw a circle around airports of military importance, and require aliens and Japanese to live outside of those circles. But that seems to me the limit. Anything more than that is sheer hysteria, and should be opposed to the limit by the A. C. L. U. And aliens who have sons in the Ameriv can army should most emphatically be given every ‘‘break”’ whether Italian, German or Japanese.

ON EVACUATION SOOTHING EFFECT :

This exacuation is to the German, Italian, Japanese no injustice and may be to their welfare. It will also have a soothing effect on many honest, well-meaning folks who in peace display good common sense but in war see a spy in most people of German, Italian, and Japanese origin.

PUT THEM ON CO-OP FARMS |

It seems to me, and there are a great many people of the same mind, that probably no great amount of good could come merely from trying to fight in the courts the orders of President Roosevelt and General DeWitt at this time. Not only would it probably result in nothing but a bad black eye for the civil liberties union from its ene| mies, but also there are many very well intentioned people in the country who, while sorry for the hardships caused by the orders, actually feel them necessary as safety measures. To fight both one’s friends and one’s enemies in war time is too much.

Rather it strikes me that the most hopeful course of action is to accept the evacua- tion order as a fait accompli and begin working from that point to see that the hardship really is minimized. Some plan whereby the evacuees would be settled on huge government-sponsored cooperative farms seems the logical solution, and an issue on which the American Civil Liberties Union might turn its guns with some hope of succeeding. These cooperative farms or better yet entire communities would at one time give the Japanese people a chance to go on earning their own living and permit them to contribute to the war effort by producing badly needed food. Those afraid of Japanese sabotage should have their fears appeased by the plan, too, for it’s patently impossible to sabotage anything on a farm but the farm produce. Finally, the F. B. I. shaouldbe pleased for if they feel suspicious of certain people, no easier check could be kept than by having the suspects together — within easy observation. Doubtless it would be more humane than is the present policy of sending anyone subject to suspicion on any grounds at all to a concentration camp in North Dakota..

AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW LOYALTY

General DeWitt’s order is probably too broad and therefore unconstitutional. What the courts will decide, however, is problematical. It must be remembered that Ex ‘parte Milligan was decided after the Civil War was over. In the face of imminent danger, real or imaginary, action will be taken, Constitution or no Constitution, and the courts are very likely to acquiesce. Personally I prefer the English unwritten Constitution. In England the power has been given to a responsible official, the Home Secretary, and he reports to Parliament the number of persons he has interned. In other words, the English are perfectly willing to grant the power where necessary if the spirit of the Constitution is observed in its exercise. When it is not and persons have been badly treated, an action against those responsible has recently been sustained. I therefore think it best for all loyal citizens, including Japanese citizens, to make the necessary sacrifice. Our young men go to camp and then go to war to be killed. It is not asking too much that those of alien enemy race show their loyalty by voluntarily consenting to withdraw. If it is done voluntarily and with cooperation, good feeling will be created which will be valuable for all parties concerned during and after the war. The best work of the American Civil Liberties Union would be, I think, to join with other groups in seeing that the removal and resettlement is done under as favorable conditions as possible. I understand that General DeWitt himself suggested he would like to consult with local committees.

THE HARM OUTWEIGHS THE BENEFITS

The harm being done by the order—hardship on people being required to leave their

Page 3

ORDERS PEARL HARBOR “ESPIONAGE”

According to a story in The Washington Merry-Go-Round, by Drew Pearson and Robert S. Allen, under date of March 24, a small Japanese submarine collected information on the disposition of the U. S. war vessels at Pearl Harbor and radioed the exact location of each ship to the waiting Japanese air carriers. The submarine was sunk but subsequently raised. Its navigation chart when translated showed that it sneaked into the harbor at 4:20 a. m., when the submarine net was lowered to allow a garbage scow to get out, and that it left the harbor at 5:25 a. m.

homes; difficulties of obtaining work in the new place; difficulty of changing type of occupation; hostility of other people in the new places; difficulty of getting the work done here with them gone; possible loss of sympathy and help from thousands of our best citizens (the Japanese as a whole can well stand on their records as citizens in this country) ; its encouragement of hysteria; its contradiction of the principles for which our country is supposed to be fighting, and therefore its tendency to change people’s attention from fighting for or promoting democracy to matters of nationalism and race hatred with consequent endangerment to the kind of program our country is likely to promote after the war—is greater than the harm that the few hundred sabo- teurs could do who might possibly be moved out of the way by the order. It would be far cheaper and more satisfactory to double the guards around vital points.

If innocent Japanese, citizens or not (after all, the more recently arrived can ap- preciate this country all the more), are moved out anyway, the A. C. L. U. should certainly try to see that they receive civil treatment wherever they move to.

NO CIVIL LIBERTIES AS USUAL

I do not think that the A. C. L. U. should attempt to carry on business as usual in war time. Emergencies and great dangers always need special emergency measures. For example, houses are quarantined in epidemics, streets are roped off in big fires. This does not mean that the authorities are trying to do away with our rights to enter friends’ houses or to have freedom to walk where we will on public thoroughfares, but are making temporary restrictive moves for the safety of the community.

I believe that the danger of permanent loss of civil liberties through war time acts is greatly exaggerated. No possible infringement of individual rights can compare with conscripting of men and shipping them to war fronts to be killed, yet I do not see how else a nation can defend itself against brutal, regimented Totalitarian gangsters.

So far in this World struggle between Fascism and its opponents the latter have always done too little and too late. To provide hearing boards for all citizens affected by Gen. DeWitt’s order, while it sounds plausible, would in practice, I fear, mean endless delays and loopholes for spies and saboteurs that would be very dangerous. This is No. 4 on the ballot. Nor do I think (No. 5) that the A. C. L. U. should try to tell the Military Authorities what regions should be designated as restricted areas. Too many military affairs are necessarily a secret from the general public.

There is, however, in my opinion a very vital function which the A. C. L. U. should play in War time. This is to be eternally vigilant to see that no war-time measure is used as a cloak to persecute individuals or minorities FOR OTHER THAN MILITARY REASONS.

If Fascism is beaten on the military field, I feel confident that there will be a renaissance of liberalism all over the world. The greatest danger, I think, is that too many of the military minds and the F. B. I. look on this as a National War instead of a world civil war. Only in Russia have the native Fascists been treated as enemies more than the foreign Anti-Fascists.

EXEMPT REFUGEE ANTI-FASCISTS

The A. C. L. U. should not spend its energies in opposing but controlling the situa- tion in providing the machinery for hearings and for discriminating between aliens who have escaped from Hitler and are profoundly anti-Fascist and those whomight be used for betrayal and espionage. There are many citizens who are far more Nazi than aliens of German race. The Anti-Nazi aliens, as Thomas Mann suggested, are the best checks that we have on their countrymen with Nazi purposes. Let’s use these aliens in our problem and investigate the individual cases. England modified her first orders and we should benefit from her experience.

NO MASS REMOVAL

It seems to me that the President and the military commanders have the right to make any order that they consider is in the best interests of the country, even if it in- volves drastic changes for some of the citizens.

However, from the data that I can gather, it seems quite unfair to subject all Japa-— nese-American citizens to mass removal. I believe that they should have the chance, - before-boards, to present evidence of their loyalty. Undoubtedly, many of them should be removed; also, many other citizens who are definitely promoting the interests of the enemy.

FOLLOWING THE NAZI TECHNIQUE

I think constitutionality should be tested since all infringements which go uncon- tested probably operate in the long run to destroy constitutional guarantees.As a practical matter, however, such action would probably not help the present situa— tion inasmuch as any final ruling would probably be handed down long after the injury to the present group had been done. L also dislike suggesting action which would seem to be divisive in time when unity is so important. However, on the other hand, unity might well be better promoted by protecting. the rights of our rather large minorities including, negroes, ets., as well as the Nisei who are involved in the immediate issue. Roosevelt has asked us to ‘CRemember the Nazi technique: ‘Pit race against race, religion against religion, prejudice against prejudice, Divide and Conquer!’” (Statement by the President January 2, 1942.)

It would appear that the General’s present orders do not heed this warning since they do, in part, provide for discriminatory action against citizens on the basis of race.

I feel that the effort and money put into these wholesale evacuation proceedings could be more effectively spent in more careful watch over suspicious persons by the F. B. I. And furthermore, that if protection of aliens and Nisei is the purpose of evacuation, that the answer is not to run away from the danger of violence but to prepare adequately against it. The army could do this if it wanted to. The Federal government, press, etc., could also do a much more effective job of education along the line of prevention of race riots, etc., than has been done.

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION REVOKES LIQUOR LICENSES OF JAPANESE AMERICANS

The State Board of Equalization has ordered the revocation of all alcoholic bever- age licenses held by citizens of Japanese extraction. The Board’s resolution, adopted on February 27 last, questioned the loyalty of such Japanese, and argued “‘that licensed premises could constitute a meeting place for those who would form a Fifth Column in this state, and a center for dissemination of enemy intelligence.”

Page 4

American Civil Liberties Union-News

Published monthly at 216 Pine Street, San Francisco, Calif., by the Northern California Branch of The American Civil Liberties Union. : Phone: EXbrook 1816 ERNEST BESIG Editor Entered as second-class matter, July 31, 1941, at the | Post Office at San Francisco, California, under the Act of March 8, 1879. Subscription Rates—Seventy-five Cents a Year. Ten Cents per Copy. . ce Jehovah's Witnesses And the Law (Less) By CLARENCE E. RUST

Tire Jehovah Witnesses have their own religious convictions, which they are de- termined to propagate. Equally determined — are many public officials, particularly in the smaller communities, that those convictions shall not be propagated. The ir- resistible has met the immovable and so we have the ‘“‘Cases of the Jehovah Witnesses”’. So numerous have been the conflicts between this group and the “law” that to recount them, one might begin most any place, but for the purpose of this story we begin at Yreka, Siskiyou County, California, February 21, 1942. :

Ten “Publishers”? On Street

It is Saturday morning. The toilers are in from the mines, the mills and the farms, and the sleepy village is awakening to its busiest day of the week. Jehovah Witnesses “publishers” are on the street, ten in number; they carry canvas bags advertising their magazine ‘‘Consolation”’ and they offer it to the passing throng. To the pedes- trian in general the presence of the Witnesses seems a matter of utter indifference —now and then a sour-faced soul passes, grumbling something about “those rats’”— and occasionally someone stops to buy a magazine. In these days of war excitement, one would scarcely call it an exciting scene. Certainly no act of the Witnesses was producing any thrill or commotion. But the super-patriotic (or at least so they imagine) we have always with us. And into the scene of tranquility they move, threatening violence and damnation. The local authorities are willing to ‘carry the gag’, so they “rescue” the Witnesses from the “threatened violence of the mob”.

“Whisked” Before Judge

Of the occurrence, the local Siskiyou | Daily News reported: ‘In a smooth raid, effected entirely without violence, Yreka police offieers, backed by some 40 American Legion members, whisked the Jehovah Witnesses before Judge H. A. White shortly after 1:00 p. m.”

Having “rescued” the 10 Witnesses, the latter were given the choice of leaving town, staying off the streets or of spending 50 days in jail, for allegedly violating a local ordinance requiring a license to distribute or sell magazines or papers.

If one is curious enough to ask what became of the mob from which the Witnesses were rescued and which membership was known to the authorities and whose “violence” was that from which the Witnesses were rescued, the answer is, “Nothing”’.

Fifteen Return—For 50 Days— Without Trial

-But what became of the Witnesses is a story for Gilbert and Sullivan, and might be entitled, “The Tale of the Judge Who Kept his Record in his Hat”. The Witnesses were brought to ‘“‘trial’’ or so it was said. Anyhow, they were brought into court, informed that there was such an ordinance, that they were “guilty”, that if they violated the ordinance again they would get 50 days—and released. We have said that the Witnesses are determined folks and so—the following Saturday found them back on the streets with the same magazine—and this time it was the Judge who was excited. He ordered the police to “bring them in”, meaning the Witnesses—but it seems that the 10 had increased to 15—and “bringing them in” not being a very definite description for culprits, the police brought them in—all 15 of them; whereupon the Judge carried

A. C. L. U. Urges President To Modify Evacuation Orders

The national office of the A.C.L.U. on March 20 sent the following letter to Pres- ident Roosevelt concerning the evacuation of citizens and aliens from the Pacific Coast:

We are greatly concerned over the execution of your order of February 20, 1942, giving the military authorities power to evacuate from any designatedarea in the United States all aliens and citizens alike. This unprecedented order, in our judgment, is open to grave question on the constitutional grounds of depriving American citizens of their liberty and use of their property without due process of law. It would appear reasonable to assume that the protection of our country in war-time can be assured without such a wholesale invasion of civil rights and without creating a precedent so opposed to democratic principle.

Order Open To Great Abuses

But quite aside from the constitutional aspect, your order is obviously open to great abuses in administration, for it clothes the military authorities with unchecked power to remove vast populations from areas which in their uncontrolled judgment are declared to be defense zones.

Under your order the military commander of the Pacific Coast area has set aside a zone running from the Canadian to the Mexican borders covering portions of eight states from which five designated classes of aliens and citizens are to be excluded. The first class to be evacuated is the entire Japanese population, whether aliens or native-born American citizens of Japanese ancestry.

Propaganda For the Axis This wholesale evacuation of citizens as well as aliens will, in our judgment, ad-versely affect our democratic practices and aims. This action will add substance to the agitation abroad of Axis propagandists who constantly attack racial prejudice and discrimination here as revealing the insincerity of our democratic professions. It will inevitably tend to undermine the loyalty of American citizens of Japanese ancestry, producing precisely the opposite effects to those intended. It already threatens cruel and unnecessary hardships in removing tens of thousands of peoples from their homes, depriving thousands of American-born students of their educations at schools and colleges, and from a practical standpoint offering no comparable opportunities to make a living or get an education elsewhere. It is likely to create a new set of problems possibly involving mob violence in the regions to which they are removed.

In the case of German and Italian aliens, the order makes no distinction between those sympathetic with enemy countries and those refugees from their tyrannies who have sought asylum here.

Hearing Boards Advocated

May we earnestly urge upon you, Mr. President, the following suggestions to minimize injustice:

1. that any American citizens ordered out of the zone, be evacuated only after out his previous “‘sentence” of 50 days in jail to all and sundry present. The writer arrived in town a few days after the Witnesses were safely confined. After being satisfied from the interviews that no trial had in fact taken place, we. called on the City Judge and asked to see the record. The Judge seemed flabbergasted. He had no record; none whatever.

He produced a complaint in which a number of “John Does” were charged with vio- lation of the ordinance and a “John Doe” warrant. Neither of which had any description of defendants. There was no Docket and no court entry of any kind. There was no record that any defendant ever appeared in court; or that any either plead guilty or. was convicted, or that anyone was sentenced. But they were all in jail under commitments for 50 days, there was no individual examinations, before or after removal, of their conduct and records so that those whose loyalty and conduct put them above suspicion may be allowed to remain? Considerations both of public policy and of law are persuasive that the rights of citizens of Japanese descent, which are equal with those of other American citizens, should be given every possible protection ;

2. that the enemy aliens to be removed —Japanese, German and Italian—be examined, before or after removal, on the basis of their conduct and records in similar fashion to the examinations already provided for those enemy aliens interned by the Department of Justice?

Proposal Is Practical

It may be objected that from a practical standpoint the examination of so many people before evacuation is impossible. We are confident, however, that the information al- ready in the hands of agencies of the government would permit a reasonable degree of discrimination and that citizens’ committees of neighbors analogous to draft boards could, within a reasonable time, examine those whose loyalty is under suspicion. In the case of aliens of enemy nationality it might be more practicable to make the ex- aminations, at least of a considerable proportion, after removal.

We realize that the situation on the Pacific Coast is difficult from the point of view of public prejudice and possible mob violence, even in the absence as yet of any proved dangers. But we are confident that those who have demanded summary action would come to accept reasonable modifications. of the administration of your order to meet every practical requirement.

Not Alone In Urging Modifications

We are not alone in urging this course. Well-known agencies on the Pacific Coast have already urged modifications in enforeing the order. The recommendations to Congress of the Tolan Committee, which has just completed an exhaustive investigation, urge individual examinations by hearing boards of all Italian and German aliens after their removal with a view to the return of all those found loyal. Such a procedure would appear to us certainly equally desirable for American citizens of Jap-— anese ancestry. Considerations both of public policy and law would appear to bear out the wisdom of making all reasonable distinctions in an effort to reconcile, as far as possible, civil rights with military necessities.

Those signing the letter included, Rt. Rev. Edward L. Parsons, Joseph S. Thompson, and Attorneys Philip Adams, Charles R. Garry and Morris M. Grupp—all of San Francisco. Southern Californians signing the letter included, Mrs. John Beardsley, Dr. Edwin P. Ryland, Dr. Clinton J. Taft, Carey McWilliams, E. W. Camp and A. L. Wirin.

Please support the Union’s position with letters to the President, your Congressman and Senators.

doubt about that.

In view of the unusual situation of an unconstitutional ordinance and no record, we asked the Judge if he had any serious objection to signing an order releasing all defendants. He replied that he would do so if the City Attorney would agree. The City Attorney agreed; his lone condition being that defendants agree not to sue the city. And so in consideration of $1.00 (which was paid) and the freeing of the 15 defendants, the latter signed the agreement not to sue. We entered Yreka at 1:30; we left at 5:30; and the story of errors was at an end. Or was it? Before leaving the Judge confidentially informed us that he was in addition to being Judge, the local military commander and that if the Witnesses gave him too much trouble, he might have to “clear the area”’.