vol. 8, no. 10

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

FREE SPEECH FREE PRESS FREE ASSEMBLAGE

“Eternal is the price of liberty.”

Vol. VIII SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, OCTOBER, 1943 No. 10

EXILE OF CITIZEN UPHELD

First Ruling Approving Military’s Banishment of Individual Citizens

Despite the conclusion of an army board of three high-ranking officers that Homer G. Wilcox, San Diego, Calif., leader of ‘Mankind United,”’ should not be ordered out of the military zone, Federal Judge Harry A. Hollzer at Los Angeles has upheld the contrary findings of the U. S. Attorney and General DeWitt of the Western Defense Command in a decision handed down last month. The decision is the first in the country sustaining the removal of an individual citizen by military order.

Removed Forcibly

As soon as the decision was announced, a squad of officers and soldiers called upon Wilcox at his home in San Diego, forced their way into his house, and deported him outside the Pacific. Coast military area— the first instance of forcible removal. Lead- ers of ‘(Mankind United’ declare the case will be taken to the United States Supreme Court if necessary. Wilcox, with twelve other leaders of the group, was recently convicted at Los Angeles of violation of the espionage act. The case is on appeal and he was free on bail.

The California judge’s action contrasts with that of Judge J. Cullen Ganey of Philadelphia, who held in August that Olga Schueller, an American citizen of German origin, was not removable, despite the fact that she had been pro-Nazi and had once signed a letter ‘‘Heil Hitler.”” Judge Ganey voided an order by General Hugh Drum, holding that the Presidential order upon which military exclusion orders are based cannot interfere with a citizen’s liberty and property unless the danger to the country is “real, impending and imminent.”

No Subversive Connections

The military records in the Wilcox case, according to the brief filed by the attorney for Wilcox and countersigned by attorneys Arthur Garfield Hays, Osmond K. Fraenkel and A. L. Wirin in behalf of the A.C. L.U., showed that the military hearing board refuted all the evidence against Wilcox produced by the F.B.I. and the military intelligence. The board found that Wilcox “had no connection, contacts or communication with any persons known to be subversive or having subversive tendencies,” and that “the file contained no information that he ever taught, preached or spoke against the best interests of the United States, or that he ever advised any of the members of his organization to violate the Selective Service Law.”

Curfew Decision Relied On

Judge Hollzer, relying on the decision of the U. 8. Supreme Court upholding the Military Curfew orders as affecting American citizens of Japanese ancestry, declared that “the war power of the national government is not restricted to winning of victories in the field and the repulse of enemy forces. It embraces every phase of the national defense, including the protection of war materials and the members of the armed forces from injury and from the (Continued on Page 3, Col. 3)

Help Wanted

The local branch of the A.C.L.U. is in need of experienced office help.

The work is part-time, requiring about 20 hours a week, or the equivalent of four hours a day, five days a week, Any applicant must be a proficient stenographer and typist and have general office experience. The salary is $70 a month. Naturally, pref- erence will be given to a person who is devoted to the cause of civil liberties, Applicants should write to or ’phone Ernest Besig, 216 Pine Street, San Francisco 4, Calif.; EXbrook 1816.

Federal Court Overrules General Drum’s Order

For the second time within a month, a federal court has overruled an order by Lt. General Hugh A. Drum that a naturalized American of German birth should leave the eastern defense area. General Drum last April had ordered Maximilian Franz Joseph Ebel, a German-born American citizen to leave his Boston home and wood-working business in Cambridge.

District Judge Francis J. W. Ford of Boston overruled the order on September 21 by enjoining the military authorities, declaring that military necessity did not re- quire application of such drastic restraint on the liberty of an American citizen.

Less than a month ago, Federal Judge Ganey in Philadelphia voided an order by General Drum excluding Olga Schueller from her home and the restaurant which she conducted in Philadelphia on the grounds that she had done nothing that “warranted denial of her right to due process of law,” though she admitted proNazi connections before the war.

Conflict Over Martial Law In Hawaii At Standstill

The issues raised in Hawaii by the refusal of the military authorities to produce civilian prisoners in response to an order by Federal District Judge Metzger, and the subsequent military order penalizing all attempts to resort to habeas corpus, are still without solution while negotiations are understood to be going on between the Department of Justice, Interior and War.

Interior Secretary Harold L. Ickes, commenting on General Richardson’s order banning all habeas corpus proceedings, stated, ““We cannot agree that any Army general has the right to issue such an order as the one General Richardson did.”

Edward J. Ennis, chief of the Alien Control unit of the Department of Justice, was sent to Hawaii late last month to investigate the entire matter as the personal representative of the Attorney General. It will be recalled that Mr. Ennis argued the Zimmerman case for the government before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. That case raised the question of the constitutionality of martial law in Hawaii, but the courts were prevented from determining the issue when Zimmerman was suddenly released from custody. Meanwhile no further action in the courts can be taken by the two German-American citizens (one a San Franciscan) who sought release, since they cannot appeal from a favorable order. The Department of Justice evidently will not appeal until the military authorities agree to accept the decision of an appellate court. The legal issue involves the question as to whether the right to the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus was restored when the civil courts in Hawaii were reopened last spring, despite a definite provision that the right to such a writ was suspended. Judge Metzger held that no agreement between the civil and military authorities could suspend a constitutional provision. The Northern California Branch of the Union is prepared to enter a test case in the courts when an opportunity for intervention offers.

MILITARY DEFIES UNITED STATES COURT IN SEATTLE

Last Month Federal Judge John C. Bowen of Seattle ordered the War Department to relinquish a building taken over at the Seattle Port of Embarkation as an Army warehouse and to return the property to a transfer company which previously operated it.

The judge had previously ruled against the War Department in a condemnation proceeding, so the Army took over the building without benefit of court sanction. The Government contends that under its war powers the seizure of the building is justified, and has indicated it will appeal the court’s decision.

Page 2

Peacetime Sedition Law Upheld; Appeal Sought

An appeal to the U. S. Supreme Court from the decision of the Circuit Court of Appeals at St. Louis on September 20 sustaining the conviction of 18 members of the Socialist Workers Party at Minneapolis in 1941 under a peacetime sedition statute will be taken at once, according to the American Civil Liberties Union. The Union aided the Civil Rights Defense Committee in presenting the case to the Court of Appeals. The conviction, according to the Union, is the first in American history since 1798 in peacetime under a sedition law punishing “advocacy of the overthrow of government by force and violence” and encouraging “disaffection in the armed forces.”’ The law was passed by Congress - in 1940. The appeal attacks it as unconstitutional under the free speech and free press clause of the Bill of Rights.

The trial involved speeches and publications by members of the Socialist Workers Party, a small organization following the teachings of Leon Trotsky. The prosecution arose out of a trade union conflict between the A. F. of L. and C. I. O. teamsters in Minneapolis. The C. I. O. union was led by members of the Socialist Workers Party.

OKLAHOMA HIGH COURT VOIDS LAST OF COMMUNIST CONVICTIONS

In a decision on September 15 the Oklahoma Criminal Court of Appeals reversed the conviction of a Communist in 1940 under the criminal syndicalism law for possessing and selling Party literature. The court had previously voided a conviction arising out of the same prosecutions based on membership in the Party. Although the appeal involved one man, Robert Wood, four others were similarly convicted, and the charges against them as well as Wood will be dismissed. All were under sentences of ten years, unprecedented in syndicalism cases.

The socalled “book trials” attracted national attention. The defense was directed by the International Labor Defense. The Civil Liberties Union assisted by briefs as friend of the court, signed by Arthur Garfield Hays, and filed on the appeals in both cases.

The court’s decision did not void the statute, but held that its application required the test of “clear and present danger.” The court relied heavily on the recent Supreme Court opinion in the Schneiderman case as to the proof of advocacy of violence by the Communist Party.

WARTIME PROSECUTIONS FOR SPEECH AND PUBLICATION DROP

A memorandum of federal prosecutions for speech and publication revising a report first issued by the ACLU in June shows even fewer cases because a number of those then reported were found not to involve speech or publication. The record up to September 1 shows that 26 federal cases have been brought under the Espionage and Selective Service Acts involving utterances or publications with 130 defendants. Eighty-three were convicted in 19 cases, 5 cases are on appeal involving 46 persons. Thirty-nine persons await trial in 3 cases, 32 in the seditious conspiracy case in the District of Columbia. That major prosecution has been delayed for trial for over a year because the main count in the indictment was thrown out by the District Court and the government is seeking a new basis for another indictment.

The report emphasizes the striking fact that as the war has gone on prosecutions have dropped. Only six were brought in the first eight months of 1943. Less than a score of publications have been proceeded against by the Post Office Department under the Espionage Act, none in recent months.

The record in this war is in sharp contrast with World War I, when 1,500 persons were involved in almost 1,000 federal prosecutions for utterances or publications.

Publicly

The Executive Committee of the Northern California Branch of the A.C.L.U. has declined to file with the Tenney Committee a proposed affidavit prepared by Senator Tenney. The proposed affidavit resulted from a protest filed by the Union against the following charge made in the Tenney Committee’s recent report to the California Legislature:

“The American Civil Liberties Union may be definitely classed as a Communist front or ‘transmission belt’ organization. At least 90 per cent of its efforts are expended on behalf of Communists who come into conflict with the law. While it professes to stand for free speech, a free press and free assembly, it is quite obvious that its main function is to protect Communists in their activities of force and violence in their program to overthrow the government.”

No Proof of Charges

“We are of the opinion that there is no occasion for the Union at this time to submit an affidavit denying the committee’s charges,” said a letter to Senator Tenney, signed by Chairman Rt. Rev. Edward L. Parsons and Director Ernest Besig. “Instead,” the letter went on to say, ‘‘we think your own committee has the manifest duty of either supporting its reckless charges or issuing a public retraction. Certainly, before we are found guilty of any offense there must be proof of the charges. No such proof has been offered, and, we venture to say, it cannot be found, for any reasonable investigation by your committee would have shown the charges to be utterly without foundation.

‘Not only do we think that your commitshould be required to prove charges it makes against any person or group, but we also believe the rules of American fair play demand that the accused be given an op

Demand Tenny Committee Support or Retract Charges Against Union

portunity to be heard before any attempt is made to reach a verdict. Needless to add, that was not done in this case. In fact, we had no knowledge the A.C.L.U. was the subject of attention from your committee until we read the report you were good enough to send us.

No Previous Hearing

‘““Consequently,” the letter concluded, “‘at this time, we not only request your committee to support its charges against the Union or to make a public retraction, but we also request your committee procedure be changed to guarantee an accused an op- portunity to be heard before there is any finding of guilt.”

The affidavit proposed: by Senator Tenney did not specifically consider the charges made by the Tenny Committee against the Union. Ignoring those charges, it had the Union “condemn Nazism and Hitlerism,” as well as “Fascism in all its forms.” Finally it had the Union condemn “unequivocally the totalitarian objectives of the Communist Party of America as un-American.”

In a letter explaining his proposed affidavit Senator Tenney declared, “the issue, as far as the Joint Fact-Finding Committee is concerned, is very simple:

“What is the attitude of the American Civil Liberties Union and the members thereof on the subject of Communism?”

The Issue

Mr. Tenney, very likely, would find it difficult to understand that the A.C.L.U. has no political opinions, that it is a nonpartisan organization with one job, that of defending the civil liberties of all without distinction. The only issue between the Union and the Tenney Committee is on the truth of the statements it made against the Union, and the procedure whereby it arrived at its unwarranted conclusions.

URGE INVESTIGATION OF COURT MARTIAL FOR RACE DISCRIMINATION

A group of twenty liberals, among them Roger N. Baldwin, director of the American Civil Liberties Union; William M. Agar, director of Freedom House; and Morris Milgram of the Workers Defense League, have urged President Roosevelt to review the case of Alton Levy, former staff sergeant at the Lincoln Air Base, demoted-to the rank of private and sentenced to four months hard labor in the guard house because he criticised discriminatory treatment of Negroes in his camp. Levy, once an ILGWU organizer, spoke up at staff meetings and in camp against the treatment of Negro soldiers, urging they be given the same rights as white soldiers. The court martial has yet to be approved by the Judge Advocate General’s office, which automatically reviews all sentences.

CANCEL CITIZENSHIP OF MAN WHO HAD HIS FINGERS CROSSED WHEN HE TOOK OATH

Last month Federal Judge Louis Goodman of San Francisco cancelled the nat- uralization papers of Otto Dietz. It was the first decision in the more than fifty denaturalization proceedings pending here in San Francisco.

The government also dismissed three cases against former Bundists, for lack of evidence.

In the Dietz case, there was no Bund membership but witnesses testified that Dietz had declared he had had his fingers crossed at the time he took the oath, and that he had raised his left hand instead of his right. The defendant admitted the remarks but claimed they were made jocularly.

The court decided that Dietz’ testimony was unconvincing, and that “ defendant’s statements, together with other acts on his part as disclosed in the record, convince me that his citizenship was fraudulently and illegally procured.”

Treatment of C. O.’s At Springfield, Mo., Hospital Scored

The treatment in the U. S. hospital at Springfield, Mo., of two conscientious ob| jectors, Stanley Murphy and Lewis Taylor, recently transferred from. the Danbury, Conn., prison, was scored last month in a report made to the Bureau of Prisons by Austin H. MacCormick, executive director of the Osborne Association, New York.

In a press release given out to the Bureau of Prisons, Mr. MacCormick was quoted as saying that while he approved their transfer to a hospital he criticized the use of force in putting them in isolation “strip cells” and in adopting punitive measures for their refusal to work. Murphy’s charges of a beating could not be substantiated, he | said.

Independent reports on the treatment of the two men were made by Charles W. . Palmer of the American Friends Service Committee and Dr. M. R. King of the U.S. Public Health Service. They both took a more favorable view of the treatment by the authorities. Federal Director of Prisons, — James V. Bennett, commenting on the re| port said that Murphy and Taylor continue “to display marked rigidity of attitude, rejection of authority and such extreme ideas on a number of subjects, including the war effort, as to constitute serious personality problems in need of psychiatric case.” Bennett added that the two C.O.’s “hold the key to their own fate and by complying with the provisions permitting them to take up non-combattant service or other work of national importance, they can be released on parole.”

The American Civil Liberties Union announced it would continue efforts to obtain a writ of habeas corpus for the release of Murphy and Taylor on the ground that the condition of their detention in a psychiatric — hospital for their refusal to work constitutes a “cruel and unusual punishment.”’

New Jehovah's Witnesses Appeals Supported By Union

Despite the Supreme Court decisions prohibiting local restrictions on the public dis- tribution and sale of literature, in cases brought by Jehovah’s Witnesses, new at- tempts to restrict their activities have cropped up in several localities.

In the town of Cransville, West Virginia, a local court has enjoined two Witnesses, Bessie Mathews and Labon Kelly, from selling literature. An appeal is sought to the United States Supreme Court in which the Union will file a brief in support of the contentions of the Witnesses.

In McCormick, South Carolina, a member of Jehovah’s Witnesses, one Lester Follett, was convicted as an itinerant peddler for selling literature without paying a license tax. The town’s representatives contended that he had no other means of support and was engaging full time in peddling literature and therefore comes under the peddling license law. Folett contended that he did not sell books but asked for contributions. The State Supreme Court affirmed his conviction. An appeal is sought to the United States Supreme Court. The attorneys for the Civil Liberties Union are examimine the record with a view to participa ion.

ACLU To Aid In Court Tests of Anti-Labor Bills

The American Civil Liberties Union is preparing briefs as friend of the court in suits started by the AFL and CIO in six states to test the constitutionality of recent laws to restrict the right to strike and other trade union activities. The CIO has initiated suits in Kansas, Colorado, Texas and Alabama and plans a similar suit in Florida. In Colorado the CIO has combined its suit with that of the AFL. In Kansas the labor organizations have filed separate suits, but have combined them for argument. The AFL is filing its own suit in Idaho.

The suits are filed in state or federal courts for declaratory judgment and in- junctions to prevent the state authorities from enforcing the anti-labor laws, most of which are patterned after the 1941 Texas statute virtually outlawing labor’s right to strike and picket. The laws contested in Colorado, Kansas and Texas provide for state control of internal trade union affairs. Idaho forbids the organization of agricul- tural workers. The Colorado law requires .the incorporation of trade unions and public reports on union finances, and forbids the use of trade union funds for political purposes.

FCC CHAIRMAN FLY WARNS RADIO TO GIVE BOTH SIDES

Radio is under an obligation to ‘“safeguard the presentation of fair and honest news broadcasts and to present both sides of all controversial questions,” according to a recent statement by James L. Fly, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. Mr. Fly, in a Washington press conference, warned radio broadcasters about “‘peddling ideas from their sponsors’ headquarters.”

Should the broadcasters fail to safeguard the public, the protection of the public mind from exploitation will become a matter for consideration by the commission, he warned.

In an earlier rebuke, Mr. Fly had charged that the practice of radio networks do- nating but not selling broadcast time to labor organizations and cooperative groups is nothing but a “backdoor handout.”

“There seems to be something of a tendency in the industry generally to restrict and exclude rather than to lay down sound policies that will give us broader and more wholesome public service,” he said. ‘““From the standpoint of ideal service it may well be that there ought not be any sponsorship of news or comment.”

Issue of Separation of Church and

Page 3

State Raised by Church School Plan

The San Francisco Board of Education late last month was confronted .with the question: whether children should be released from school for religious instruction. The question was submitted to the Board by the Inter-Faith Committee of San Francisco under a controversial law adopted by the last session of the State Legislature, which went into effect on August 7. Since the law is ‘‘permissive,’” the School Board alone has the power of deciding whether ‘released school time”’ for religious instruction shall be established in San Francisco.

The Denominations Involved

The committee that appeared before the board represented certain Protestant de- nominations, reformed Jewish congregations, and the Roman Catholic Church. The Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists, Unitarians, some Baptists and Lutherans, to mention just a few Protestant denominations, were not represented by the committee. Moreover, the representative of the Jewish group explained that his group had been opposed to “released school time;” that they had advocated “dismissed school time,” under which all pupils on a particular day would be dismissed at say 2:30°p.m. instead of 3:30 p.m., and under which plan any student could avail himself of the opportunity of attending church school. Although they are still opposed to “released school time,’ under which pupils are excused during ordinary school time, they are willing to cooperate in any plan that may be established.

No precise plan was offered by the InterFaith Committee, composed of Dr. John Leffler, Monsignor O’Dowd and Rabbi Goldstein, when the matter was brought before the Board of Education. In fact, Ernest Besig, local director of the Union, contended that no plan could be offered which did not trench on constitutional and statutory provisions aimed at securing the separation of Church and State.

Plan Ordered Submitted to Supt.

The School Board, after hearing arguments, declined to act without having a de- tailed plan before it. At the same time, the superintendent was authorized to hold a meeting at which the proponents could submit the details of their plan, and at which opponents could state their objections, for report to the board.

The plan that was finally submitted to the superintendent proposed a gradual in- troduction of “released school time,”’ confined in the initial stages to grades 38, 4, 5, and 6, and limited, at the beginning, to particular schools in the city. “Schedules of classes,” says the statement outlining the plan, “shall be arranged for the opening and closing hours of the morning and afternoon sessions on one day a week in each school. For example, classes in religion might meet as follows: 9 a.m., grade 5; 11 a.m., grade 3; 1 p.m.; grade 4; 2:10 p.m., grade 6.”

Many practical objections were raised to the proposal. The contention was made that the curriculum is already crowded with required subjects, and that the school day is too short even as it stands today. Moreover, since all the students would not desire the religious training, the proposal would inevitably disrupt the teaching program.

Public School Teacher Participation

But the most serious objections, from the civil liberties standpoint, touch on the par- ticipation of the public school personnel in the program. The proposal, for example, provides that ‘duplicate attendance cards shall be distributed by the teachers (of the public schools), together with a clear, concise statement of the plan for the informa- tion of parents, both to be provided by the Inter-Faith Committee.” The plan then goes on to provide that “these cards, signed by the parent and designating the religious school he desires to attend, shall be returned to the school. One half of each card shall be retained by the public school, the duplicate by the religious school.”

The effect of these two provisions of the plan is to secure the assistance of teachers, paid out of public funds, in securing the registration of pupils in the church schools. We assume the church schools could conduct their registration in some other fashion without employing the teachers, for example, by public announcement that regis- trations would be received at a particular place at a particular time. The proposed plan, however, would seem quite clearly to require the expenditure of public monies for a sectarian purpose.

Constitutional Safeguards

Article IV, Sec. 29 of the State Constitution provides in unmistakable language that no school district ‘shall ever make an ap. propriation, or pay from any public fund whatever, or grant anything to or in aid of any religious sect, church, creed, or sec- tarian purpose, or help to support or sustain any school... controlled by any religious creed, church, or sectarian denomination whatever.’”’ Also, under Article IX, Sec. 8 of the State Constitution, ‘““No public money shall be appropriated for the support of any sectarian or denominational school, or any school not under the exclusive control of the officers of the public schools.’ Consequently, whether these schools be termed denominational, sectarian, or otherwise, their support by public funds is strictly forbidden.

By statute, too, the Legislature has expressly forbidden the distribution of any ‘“yublication of a sectarian, partisan, or denominational character,” and “No bul- letin, circular, or other publication of any — character whose purpose is... to foster membership in... any organization not directly under the control of the school authorities . . . shall be distributed or suffered to be distributed or shown to the pupils of any public school, on the school premises...” The Charter of the City of San Francisco also prohibits the superintendent from allowing the distribution of any sectarian publication or literature. Finally, it might not be amiss to remember that the State Constitution also provides that “The free exercise and enjoyment of (Continued on Page 4, Col. 2)

FEDERAL COURT UPHOLDS EXILE OF CITIZENS

(Continued from Page 1, Col. 2)

dangers which attend the rise, prosecution and progress of war.’ Judge Hollzer con- cluded that ‘“‘the conditions confronting the Commanding General of the Western De- fense Command and Fourth Army called for the exercise of judgment and discretion, and for the choice of means necessary for the protection of war materials and the. members of the armed forces from injury and from the dangers which attend the rise, prosecution and progress of war, and likewise gave to such commander wide scope for the exercise of judgment and diseretion in determining the nature and extent of the threatened injuryor danger and in the selection of the means for resisting it.”

Ground Found for DeWitt’s Belief

Reviewing the record before the military, in connection with the exclusion order is- sued against Wilcox, Judge Hollzer arrived at the decision that he could not “‘say that the Commanding General did not have grounds for believing that plaintiff had committed acts of disloyalty, that he had engaged in a kind of leadership which would facilitate the carrying on of espionage and sabotage, and that his continued presence in the area from which he had been ordered excluded constituted a danger to the military security thereof.”

Page 4

American Civil Liberties Union-News

Published monthly at 216 Pine Street, San Francisco, 4, 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 38, 1879.

Subscription Rates—Seventy-five Cents a Year. Ten Cents per Copy.

Let Freedom Ring

Board Defies Supreme Court

From Oregon last month came the report that four Powellhurst School pupils had been suspended by the principal, with the approval of the school board, for refusal to salute the flag. The principal is quoted as saying, “The question in our minds is whether the Supreme Court has the time and the right to step down in a little school district and decide its policies for'it.”

Anti-Poll Tax Hearings

The Senate Judiciary Committee has set October 25 for a public hearing on the Anti-Poll Tax Bill, and Attorney General Francis Biddle has been called as a witness to testify on the question of the constitutionality of the proposal. The constitutional issue arises from the Seventeenth Amendment which provides that in electing United States Senators, “The electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State Legislature.” If the states determine the qualifications of voters, then a serious question arises whether Congress may outlaw the Poll Tax.

Persons desiring to express themselves with reference to the legislation should ad- dress letters to the Hon. Frederick Van Nuys, Chairman, Senate Judiciary Committee, Senate Office Bldg., Washington, D.C.

Forced Labor

In South Carolina last month a statute providing that ‘‘any able-bodied, sane male person between the ages of 16 and 60” who refuses a job at prevailing wages “‘shall be guilty of a misdemeanor,” was held unconstitutional. Prevailing wages in South Caro- lina, according to reports, are anything a farmer chooses to offer. The first prosecu- tions under the law were aimed at the president of a local textile union, who had been discharged when a strike was called by members of the union, and who testified that the National Labor Relations Board had ordered his reinstatement, but that the mill had defied the order.

“Friends of Progress” Appeal

Constitutionality of California’s Subversive Organizations Registration Act, spon- sored by Senator Tenney, will be determined in the Third District Court of Appeals.

Noble and his co-defendants were charged with failing to register the Friends of Progress with the California Secretary of State in Sacramento in the case of People v. Robert Noble, et al. Arguments in the case have been set for November 4 or 5. The appellants have had no money to hire counsel, so no briefs have been filed by them. Nor has the State filed briefs. A. L. Wirin, counsel for the Southern California branch of the A.C.L.U., is planning to file a brief as “friend of the court” in attacking the constitutionality of the legislation.

Conscientious Objectors

2071 conscientious objectors were sent to jail up to June 30, 1943. The great ma- jority of these were Jehovah’s Witnesses who numbered 1253. The average sentence now being imposed on C.O.’s is 42 1-8 months.

As of August 31, there were 6608 men in Civilian Public Service Camps. We do not know how many C.O.’s have been inducted into the Army for non-combat service.

Issue of Separation of Church and State Raised by Church School Plan

(Continued from Page 3, Col. 3)

religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be guaranteed in this State.” Clearly, any released school time plan would favor the larger, better organized and better financed churches.

The Issues

The question before the School Board raises two important constitutional questions. The first, is whether the State law is constitutional on its face. Counsel for the Board of Education will no doubt advise the board that there is a presumption of con- stitutionality, and that they should, therefore, not concern themselves with that is- sue, which is properly one for the courts. Since the “released school time”’ is “per- missive,’’ however, it might well be argued that question of constitutionality may be considered by the board in determining whether the proposal should be adopted in San Francisco.

The chief question before the board, however, is whether from the standpoint of policy such a program should be introduced in San Francisco, and whether the precise plan squares with the State Constitution, the statutes, and the City Charter. These legal requirements are possibly the strictest of any State in the Union in safeguarding the separation of Church and State. And it would seem as though the proponents of the plan in question have not been overly cautious in adhering to these exacting legal requirements.

San Diego Board Votes ‘‘No’’

On August 27, the San Diego Board of Education denied the petition of an InterFaith Committee in that community for establishment of “released school time.” The vote was 4 to 1 against allowing such a plan “‘at this time.”’ One board member is quoted as saying that such a program might lead to a consciousness on the part of children of sectarian differences. Another raised constitutional issues, while still another argued “it seems to be a confession of weakness on the part of churches if they cannot reach the children in after-school hours, and without using the public schools as an attendance-getter.”

A North Sacramento school district is reported not only to have refused to allow the program to be established, but as having adopted a strong resolution opposing the entry of the Church into affairs of the State.

Commission Opposes Plan

In 1931 the California Commission for the Study of Educational Problems, established by the State Legislature, reported as follows on the “released school time’’ proposal:

“The commission believes in the policy of religious instruction outside of school time for two reasons:

First, it is definitely opposed to shortening school time for any cause, however worthy.

“Second, because it recognizes as an outstanding achievement of our system of pub- lic school education the harmony which has prevailed among pupils of many races, creeds and social conditions. The commission would, therefore, strongly deprecate the adoption of any school policy which, by separating school children into different religious groups, might tend to introduce a spirit of dissension and discord from which our schools have been free, and which our State Constitution so clearly seeks to avoid.”

Superintendent Studying Plan Superintendent Warren has indicated he will want to examine the specific proposal with his assistants and legal adviser before making a report to the San Francisco Board — of Education. While no date for the report. has been fixed, it is possible it will come before the board at its meeting on Tuesday, October 19, at 4 p. m., in the Civic Auditorium.

“FREE THOUGHT” BOOKS RELEASED BY CUSTOMS

Two books, “The Bible Handbook” and “Papacy in Politics Today” and a magazine, “The Free Thinker,” which had been held by Customs Collector Harry M. Durning in the Port of New York, since March, 1948, have just been released to the importer, the Truth Seeker Company, according to Huntington Cairns of the Bureau of Customs in Washington. The books had been imported from England by a company which has been in business for more than seventy years.

The Union had announced arrangements for entering a court contest of the seizure on the ground that it was an action “‘without precedent to hold books for the duration of the war and without submitting them to the U. S. Attorney as required by law.” The Truth Seeker Company had filed a complaint in the Southern District Court in New York on June 15, 1943. The release of the books followed an examination by the Chief Postal Censor.

AMERICAN LEGION, A. F. OF L. AND C. I. O. vs. CHINESE EXCLUSION ACT

Resolutions calling for the repeal of the Chinese exclusion act were passed in August by the state convention of the Ameriean Legion in Massachusetts and by the 80th annual convention of the New York State Federation of Labor. At the same time, Monroe Sweetland, CIO leader, in a nationwide broadcast called for the abolition of the ban on Chinese immigration. Bills for the repeal of the Chinese exclusion acts are pending before the House Immigration Committee, which held extensive hearings in the spring.

STATEMENT OF THE OWNERSHIP, MANAGEMENT, CIRCULATION, ETC., REQUIRED BY THE ACTS OF CONGRESS OF AUGUST 24, 1912, AND MARCH 3, 1933.

Of American Civil Liberties Union — News published: monthly at San Francisco, California, for October, 1943. County of San Francisco)

State of California

Before me, a Notary Public in and for the State and county aforesaid, personally appeared Ernest Besig, who, having been duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is the Editor of the American Civil Liberties UnionNews, and that the following is, to the best of his knowledge and belief, a true statement of the ownership, management (and if a daily. paper, the circulation), ete, of the aforesaid publication for the date shown in the above caption, required by the Act of August 24, 1912, as amended by the Act of March 8, 1938, embodied in section 537, Postal paw a and Regulations, printed on the reverse of this form, 0o-wit:

1. That the names and addresses of the publisher, editor, managing editor, and business managers are: Publisher—Northern. California Branch, American Civil Liberties Union, 216 Pine St., San Francisco. pies Hditor—Ernest Besig, 216 Pine St., San Francisco. Managing Editor—None. Business Managers—None.

2. That the owner is: (If owned by a corporation, its name and address must be stated and also immediately thereunder the names and addresses of stockholders owning or holding one per cent or more of total amount of stock. If not owned by a corporation, the names and addresses of the individual owners must be given. If owned by a firm, company, or other unincorporated concern, its name and address, as well as those of each individual member, must be given.) :

Northern California Branch, American Civil Liberties Union, 216 Pine Street, San Francisco. Rt. Rev. Edward L. Parsons, Chairman, 216 Pine St., San Francisco. Ernest Besig, Director, 216 Pine St., San Francisco.

38. That the known bondholders, mortgagees, and other security holders owning or holding 1 per cent or more of total amount of bonds, mortgages, or other securities are: (If there are none, so state.) None.

That the two paragraphs next above, giving the names of the owners, stockholders, and security holders, if any, contain not only the list of stockholders and security holders as they appear upon the books of the company but also, in cases where the stockholders or security holder appears upon the books of the company as trustees or in any other fiduciary relation, the name of the person or corporation for whom such trustee is acting, is given; also that the said two paragraphs contain statements embracing affiant’s full knowledge and belief as to the circumstances and conditions under which stockholders and security holders who do not appear upon the books of the company as trustees, hold stock and securities in a capacity other than that of a bona fide owner and this affiant has no reason to believe that any other person, association, or corporation has any interest direct or indirect in the said stock, bonds, or other securities than as so stated by him. ‘

5. That the average number of copies of each issue of this publication sold or distributed, through the mails or otherwise, to paid subscribers during the twelve months preceding the date SHOWN ABOVE (This information is required from daily publications only.)

ERNEST BESIG, Editor.

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 23rd day of September, 1942. (SBAL) MARIE H. STANLEY, Notary Public in and for the Co. of San Francisco, State of California. (My commission expires Nov. 20, 1943.)