vol. 18, no. 12

American

Civil Liberties

Union-News

Free Press

Free Assemblage

Free Speech

"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."

VOLUME XVIII

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, DECEMBER, 1953

No, 12

t

Broadcast of ACLU Program

A tape recording of the speeches delivered

by Rev. Harry C. Meserve and Prof. Joe Tuss-

man at the Union's nineteenth anniversary

meeting last October 27 on the subject of

"Congress and the $64 Question," will be

broadcast over Station KPFA, the FM station.

in Berkeley (94.1 mg.) Tuesday evening, De-

cember 8, at 8:20 o'clock. The program,

which includes some of the question period,

consumes almost an hour.

Please spread the news of this timely pro-

gram to your friends!

KPFA, Dec. 8, at 8:20 P.M.

_ Velde Comm. Charged

_ With Violating Own Rules

The Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts

last month condemned the tactics used by the

House Committee on Un-American Activities in

publicizing "confidential" testimony defaming a

number of clergymen, some of whom are citizens |

of Massachusetts. :

The statement, released by Dr. Allan Knight

Chalmers, chairman of the ACLU affiliate, com-

mented on the fact that the Committee, under

cover of Congressional immunity, has "elicited

hearsay evidence denouncing decent persons with-

out any attempt to substantiate the truth of such

assertions," and referred to its "utter lack of

responsibility for . . . the rights of our citizens

which has damaged the respect for the Congress

which is so necessary to our system of govern-

ment." It concluded by saying that "such tactics

will not cease until the American people insist

that Congress adopt fair play procedures which

give due process to every witness or person de-

famed by a witness."

The Massachusetts CLU charged the House

Committee with denying due process by releasing

"as public testimony private hearings which de-

famed American citizens without first giving such

persons the right to be heard. It has thereby

violated the spirit if not the letter of its own

rules of procedure which were promulgated at

the very time these hearings were being held.

Specifically, it violated the spirit of Rule IV and

Rule X which provide that interrogations of wit-

nesses which might unjustly injure the reputa-

tions of other individuals shall be kept secret and

shall not be released without the approval of a

majority of the Committee, that notice shall be

given to such person so injured by public testi-

mony who may request the opportunity of testify-

ing in public after such accusations have been

made against them."

The CLU's comments were directed at the

House Committee's recent release of testimony

presented to a sub-committee probing alleged

Communist activities in the New York City area.

Witnesses accused several clergymen of Commu-

nist sympathy and activity.

Use Of Secret Evidence By

Immig. Service Challenged

The ACLU has sought a preliminary injunction

in the Federal District Court in Washington, D.C.

enjoining Attorney General Brownell from de-

porting a Spanish-born couple who had been

denied suspension of deportation on the basis of

confidential information never disclosed at. the

hearing.

The couple, Mr. and Mrs. Carlos L. Maeztu,

who returned to this country from Spain in 1934,

have over-stayed their leave and were ordered to

depart by the Attorney General. As the parents

of two American children, they requested suspen-

sion of deportation on grounds of hardship, but

were turned down on evidence which was not

disclosed.

ACLU To Represent 8 Witnesses Before The

San Francisco Hearings Of The Velde Comm.

The ACLU of Northern California has agreed

to appear on behalf of eight persons who have

been subpoened to appear as witnesses in San

Francisco before the House Committee on Un-

American Activities (usually referred to as the

Velde Committee) from December 1-11. The eight

will be represented by Staff Counsel Lawrence

Speiser and George Olshausen.

The Union's Executive Committee voted to in-

tervene in these cases because it is opposed to

political inquisitions. It believes that the Govern-

ment has no right to inquire into the political

opinions and associatons of the persons who have

`been subpoened, and that is precisely what the

Committee is undertaking to do.

As the News goes to press, the Union has filed

a suit against the Velde Committee in the U.S.

District Court in San Francisco asking for decla-

ratory relief in connection with the subpoenas that

have been served on its eight clients. Are these

subpoenas in proper form so that the witnesses

are required to respond to them, is the question

before the court.

In connection with that suit a motion hag been

"made to quash the subpoenas. The Union contends

the subpoenas are deficient in that they fail to

specify the place where the hearings are to be

held. After the subpoenas were served, the Com-

mittee sought to supply this deficiency by tele-

grams setting forth the time and place the wit-

nesses were supposed to appear. In one case, the

deficiency was supplied by letter.

In announcing the San Francisco hearings, Rep-

resentative Harold Velde declared it was the pur-

pose of his committee to investigate reported

Communist efforts to infiltrate "the various

phases of vital defense and other Communist ac-

tivities in the Northern California area." Then the

Committee went on its usual headline hunting by

announcing that it had subpoened one of the prin-

cipals in the Harry Dexter White case.

It is rather difficult to square these declarations

of purpose with the records of the eight persons

whom the Union will represent at the hearings.

All of them either dropped out of the Communist

Party or were expelled from four to eight years

ago. Several of them have had repeated visits from

FBI agents who have sought unsuccessfully to se-

cure names of persons who were in the party with

them, One witness, who lives in a small town, has

had two agents come to his home once a month

during a six months period. The agents suggested

that unless he cooperated with them he would not

be able to stay in the town. As a result of the

Velde Committee subpoena and his refusal to

testify he will undoubtedly he ostracized, forced

from his job and then compelled to leave the com-

munity. Others tell similar tales of hounding and

disturbance of their peace by FBI agents.

These ex-Communists won't "cooperate" with

the Government because they say they cannot

do so in good conscience. It is not a question of

loyalty to the Communist Party, and they insist

that they never committed espionage or sabotage,

nor did they knowingly advocate the violent over-

throw of the government. "Why," they ask,

"should they help to persecute persons, as they are

being persecuted, who once associated with them

in what were then regarded as perfectly lawful

activities?"

Of course, if they do cooperate with the Gov-

ernment they are running a chance of perjury in-

dictments. If, for example, a witness testifies that

he dropped out of the Communist Party in 1946,

how does he know that someone won't come along

and swear that they still knew him in the party

in 1950? And, if the witness does ``cooperate,"

what assurance is there that he won't be forced

into a position of testifying against some person

whose membership in the party he isn't sure

about? In short, these people decline to play the

part of informers.

Without exception, these witnesses will refuse

| Sponding to the initial appeal.

to answer questions on First and Fifth Amend-

ment grounds, and take the economic consequen-

ces, Those consequences will be serious. One school

teacher knows now that under a new State law

he will be suspended from his job when he refuses

to testify, even though he admitted on the reverse

side of his Levering Act oath that he had former-

ly been a Communist.

This law became effective last September 14,

and it requires all public school teachers to answer

five kinds of questions if they are subpoened be-

fore legislative investigating committees. In this

case, the law requires the witness to answer

"Questions as to knowing membership in the

Communist Party within five years prior to the

effective date of this section."

Another witness faces possible expulsion from

the Carpenters' Union. When he joined that Union

several years ago he took an oath that he was not

a Communist. Now he will refuse to tell the Velde

Committee whether he is now or ever hag been a

`member of the Communist Party. Will such re-

fusal result in disciplinary action against him in

the Union carrying with it possible expulsion? Is

that the sort of thing the Velde Committee anti-

cipated ("to tear Communism out at the roots")

when it subpoened these seven witnesses? Is this

part of the hounding that is visited upon persons'

who refuse to "cooperate" with the Committee?

And, what will happen to the livelihood of these

witnesses when they refuse to testify? One wit-

ness holds a position with the U.C. Extension

Division. Except for the public school teacher, the (c)

others hold jobs in private business, Will their

economic security be destroyed because they re-

fuse to testify before the Committee?

Once again we have a situation where in an'

effort to protect the country from Communism the

Government is using the very tactics of totali-

tarians.

Record Budget Response

. The Union's membership made a record re-

sponse to the budget appeal last month. Stated

in round numbers, $8500 in cash was received

from 1050 members who thereby joined the

"Ten Percenters Club"-the members who

stretch their contributions ten percent by re-

As is the Union's custom, no receipts or ack-

nowledgments were sent to subscribers unless

cash contributions were received. That thrifty

procedure saves the Union time and money bet-

ter spent on the business of defending civil lib-

erties.

While the budget drive has made an excellent

start, there is still a long way to go to meet the

Union's goal of $28,200 for the fiscal year end-

ing October 31, 1951.

If you have not yet contributed, a follow-up

appeal will reach you about the same time as

this issue of the "News." You can still save the

Union money, and stretch the value of your con-

tribution, by responding to this second letter

and thereby saving the expense of the final fol-

low-up letter which will be mailed January 1 to

all members who have not been heard from by

that time.

Even if your membership does not expire just

now, the `Union hopes you will be willing to

make your PRESENT AND FUTURE contribu-

tions at this time. Don't forget that this enables

the Union to concentrate its fund-raising activi-

ties with a minimum of interference with its job

of defending civil liberties. Your cooperation

will be greatly appreciated.

And, if you are among the 275 persons whose

subscriptions expired in November and who

have not yet renewed, you too can save the

Union a lot of office work by sending your re-

newal just as soon as possible.

Page 2

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

ACLU In Snarl Over

Proposed Policy Statements

The ACLU has gotten itself into a curious snarl

over the three policy statements which were re-

cently submitted to the members of the corpora-

`tion ina referendum. At first, the final vote

showed the three proposals were defeated by al-

most 2300 votes. Then, a couple of weeks later,

"mainly on the strength of a reported switch in

Chicago's vote, the national office announced that

the proposals were adopted by 2500 votes. But, on

November 12, Chicago's Executive Committee

adopted a motion to return to its original vote as

the official one, so, once again the national office

announced that the proposals were defeated by

about 2500 votes. That is where the matter rests

at this writing. .

When the referendum was submitted to the

corporation members for a vote, no `"`deadline'"' was

set for the voting, although the letter of submis-

sion said, "If it is impossible for you to return the

ballot by September 15, in time for report to the

Board meeting of September 21, I hope it will be

possible for you to return it by September 30, for

report to the Board meeting of October 5."

After the final vote was announced on October

19, the national office nevertheless solicited votes

from national committeemen who had not voted,

" and, because of the small vote cast by the Chicago

Executive Committee, Mr. Malin telephoned to the

local director and asked him to canvass his vote

again. Apparently, this second vote was taken

mainly by telephone. The Chicago results were an-

nounced as 11 to 8 in favor of the proposals, al-

though Chicago now reports that the vote stood

9 to 10 against the third statement. Since the cor-

poration voted on the three statements as a whole,

it would appear that even on this second vote Chi-

cago turned down the three proposals.

As previously reported, the national board voted

only 13 to 14 against setting aside the first vote

that was announced and having the proposals

stand adopted. That motion was offered under an

extraordinary provision of the By-Laws empower-

ing the national board to act in accordance with

the majority recommendations on a referendum

"except where it believes there are vitally impor-

tant reasons for not doing so which it shall explain

to the corporation members." _

On the second occasion, when it appeared that

- the three proposals had been adopted by 2500

votes, the Board instructed the director to re-

write the proposals in line with criticisms as to

their form but not to alter their substance.

The present difficulties may possibly be ex-

plained by the strong disagreement on this issue

between the national board and national commit-

tee on one hand and the affiliates on the other. The

former favored the proposals by a vote of 3 to 1,

while the affiliates cast all but 600 of their 16,000

votes against them,

0x00B0

Me o%e Me 0% 0% 5% sees he oho o%eMosPoctastactectoc'

52 ME 19 10 19 19 H9 1S U9 19 19 00 VO VO U0 1.9 1.0 00: res

| Executive Committee

~ American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California

Sara Bard Field

Honorary Member

Rt. Rev. Edw. L. Parsons , |

Chairman

Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn

Helen Salz

Vice-Chairmen

Fred H. Smith, IV

Secretary-Treasurer

Ernest Besig

Director

Lawrence Speiser

Staff Counsel

Philip Adams (c)

Arthur P. Allen

Albert Brundage

Prof. James R. Caldwell

os

re

os

Oo

"se

ae

Se

%

s

OM

ee

Se

So

*0x00B0

a

Se

Se

Se

Se

oe

%

eo

Se

eoegeeseen,

Me aM

CO e9

Go aM

OG

Me 5% Me 0% Me oe Me eo i

go Wo MO WO 0 00 MO U0 1 Me

}

",

%

1%

e

e

1%

50% 0,0:

Cae Sacs

Ko ho0%

$0 aF0 af0 9%

e

e

oe

Mo %e

00 90 00 0

e

,

OS

e

Me Me

oo MP

e,

Ge ofoeo-ofo of afonZeeLoo goose ofooge

%

e

o,

soo

Lakack

PMO

e

%

ee

1%

eo

CORO

So afe c$e eGo efor

OO, %. %, .%,

$0 0S $0 of0 efeofoage:

oe

%

ee

%

Me

2

%

0 %S

o

0

e:

e

0

1%

Me 6%

9%

s

RD

e

A

%

e

e

oo

,

Oe 6%

O%O% oe,

2

eM

Oo o%

OF 2

DD

ee

`

Mo aXe Mee

COMO Oe

Wayne M. Collins .

% Rev. Oscar F. Green pe

Alice G. Heyneman %

: Ruth Kingman ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log

ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log Seaton W. Manning .

~ Rey. Harry C. Meserve

x William M. Roth +

Clarence E. Rust .

% Prof. Laurence Sears . =

. Prof. Wallace E. Stegner and

= Theodosia B. Stewart =

ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log Stephen Thiermann .

ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log Kathleen Drew Tolman %

ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log Franklin Williams =

Oo %

Se

?

2

Oo

My a% Me oe 6% 0% 0% oe oe oe Me Me oe Me On Mo 0%, Mn Me 1%, (R), o, 2

50x00B0 8 C9 908 M0 0 9 90 0 050 050 050 050 150 950 950 O50 OL 050 450 050 00 050 080 Se 050 50-080 080 080 120 080 aoe,

es

fe

Se

Se

%

Se

ee

`Guilt --- and Innocence --- by Association',

Following are excerpts from an article by

Prof. Henry Steele, Commager of Columbia Uni-

versity, which appeared under the above title in

the November 8, 1953 issue of "The New York

Times Magazine": :

First, then, the doctrine of guilt by association

is unsound in logic. It is unsound because it as-

sumes a good cause becomes bad if supported by

bad men; perhaps it assumes the reverse as well

-as it logically should-that a bad cause becomes

good if supported by virtuous men . . . If a par-

ticular cause is worthy of support, it does not

cease to merit support because men we disapprove

support it. :

Guilt Is Personal

Second, the doctrine it wrong legally. In Anglo-

American law guilt is personal, not collective. It

does not spread, by a process of osmosis, from the

guilty to the neighboring innocent. And guilt at-

taches itself to illegal acts, not to dangerous

thoughts or suspicious associations. . . .

The Supreme Court has itself repeatedly re-

pudiated the notion of guilt by association, and

repudiated, too, the notion that any one man can

decide what organizations are illegal. Further-

more, in our legal system, guilt is not retroactive,

and the Constitution specifically prohibits the Con-

gress from passing a bill of attainer or an ex post

facto law. ..

. . To punish, either by law or by destruc-

tion of character or by forfeiture of job, the join-

ing of an organization in. 1937 or 1945 which was

not held to be subsersive or even suspect until

1950 is a violation of the spirit if not of the letter

of the Constitution and revolts anyone familiar

with the history of Anglo-American justice.

' The Doctrine Is Wrong Practically

Third, the doctrine is wrong practically. It is,

after all, neither possible or desirable that we en-

gage in a check of the membership, past as well as

present, of all organizations to which we belong

or which we are asked to join. . . . Do we start

with our church? with our labor union? with our

fraternal society? with our veterans' organiza-

tion? with our professional group? If the presence

of subversives in an organization is enough to

persuade us to drop our membership, all that the

Communists need to do to destroy any society is

to join it.

There are, needless to say, dangers in promis-

cuous joining or name-lending. But we must leave

something to the individual judgment, something

to common sense, something to the operation of

the natural law of diminishing returns. Those who

join organizations without proper inquiry into

`purpose or direction, or who lend their names in-

discriminately to causes and organizations, will

soon discover that they are tagged as "joiners,"

that they suffer embarrassment and confusion,

and that they forfeit whatever influence they once

commanded. :

Character of Group Should Be Determined

Certainly no one should give his name to an

organization gratuitously without some investiga-

tion or assurance of its character. But clearly

there are practical difficulties here, for we cannot

spend all of our time investigating each organiza-

tion that appeals to us, nor do we want an official _

body to make investigations for us. . . .

On the whole it is certainly desirable that those

- who join an organization take part in its activities

and assume some share of responsibility for its di-

rection. If its character is not what it purports to

: be, if its activities are not in fact those they had

originally supported, they should either work to

change it, or, if they are unable to do this or do

not care enough to try, they should get out. If

they fail to do either they ay expect to he

charged with irresponsibility.

Voluntary Association Basic

Fourth, the doctrine is wrong historically, for

it flies in the face of our experience. If there is a

basic American principle and practice, it is the

principle and practice of voluntary association.

The voluntary association is at the basis of our .

constitutional system, of our democracy.

Our churches are private voluntary associa-

tions. Our political parties, our labor unions, our

professional societies, our fraternal orders, our

educational and charitable societies, all are private

voluntary associations. Most of our major reforms,

political, social, moral, were carried through by

private voluntary associations: women's rights,

temperance, educational improvement, the attack

on slavery, prison and penal reform, slum clear-

ance-these and a hundred others all got their

original impetus from such organizations.

. . . A government that may decide what or-

As Seen by Prof. Henry Steele Commager

ganizations are safe and what are unsafe must be

`strong enough to impose its ideas and principles

on everyone. Is it that kind of government that

we want?

Freedom Of Association In Peril

Our great tradition of voluntary democracy is

now in peril. For the logical consequence of the

doctrine of guilt by association is of course that

men will cease to join new organizations and will

drop away from old ones. Already ordinary men

and women are timid about joining-and who can (c)

blame them? Already college students refrain

from political or reform activity-and who can

blame them? You never know which organizations

may be found subversive twenty years from now.

Thus our present-day wrecking-crew may

knock out one of the props of our democratic sys-

tem. And while they are about this, they are en-

gaged in a related and equally subversive activ-

ity. That is the attack upon the right of petition, a

right so important that it occupies an honored

place in both English and American Revolutions.

The right of petition is not openly attacked, to be

`sure; even the McCarthys are not quite that im-

pudent. But the attack upon it is no less deadly for

that. After all, if a petition for clemency for the

Rosenbergs, for example, or for the abolition of

the Un-American Activities Committee is to ex-

pose men and women to investigation, to the

charge of subversion, they will think twice before

signing anything.

Guilt By Association Is Morally Wrong

Finally, the doctrine of guilt by association is

wrong morally. It is wrong morally because it as-

sumes a far greater power in evil than in virtue.

It is based therefore on a desperate view of man-

kind. It rests on what may be called the rotten ap-

ple theory of society-the theory that one wicked

man corrupts all virtuous men, and that one mis-

taken idea subverts all sound ideas.

Why is there no doctrine of innocence by asso-

ciation? Why is it that our present-day witch-

hunters pay this matchless tribute to the power

of communism or radicalism, that they think its

doctrines and its proponents irresistible?

It is, of course, because they are men consumed

with fear and hatred, they are men who know

nothing of the stirring history of freedom, they

are men of little faith. We may go further and say

that they are hypocrites in that they do not even

believe in the doctrines that they proclaim. For

if they did believe them, they would.not need to

fear counter-argument, but would be willing to

submit their beliefs to the competition of the mar-

ket-place of ideas.

It is time that we see this doctrine of guilt by

association for what it is: not a convenient device

for detecting subversion, but a device for subvert-

ing our democratic principles and practices, for

destroying our constitutional guarantees, for cor-

rupting our faith in ourselves and in our fellow

men. :

California Vagrancy

Statute Faces New Test

California's vagrancy statute, a law held by

the ACLU to be ``vague, indefinite, and uncertain,"

is under fire again, with pretty much the original

cast.

Irwin Edelman, soapbox orator, charged with

failure to register as a convicted vagrant, await-

ed trial as his counsel, A. L. Wirin and Herbert

Simmons, filed a petition for writ of review on

his behalf.

-Edelman's earlier conviction was appealed by

the ACLU to the U.S. Supreme Court last year

where it was dismissed with the instruction that

he might find relief from a 1949 arrest for va-

grancy through habeas corpus. :

Subsequently, however, Edelman's jail sen-

tence was remitted by a municipal court judge, an

action which confirmed his conviction and pre-

vented the relief action suggested by the Supreme

Court.

_ The new action filed by ACLU is an effort to

review the entire proceeding under which Edel-

man was originally convicted and to clear the

way for a full constitutional test of the California

statute.

Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes: It is the

essence of the institutions of liberty that it be rec-

ognized that guilt is personal and cannot be attrib-

uted to the holding of opinion or to mere intent in

the absence of overt acts.

f

rote

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

Page 3

Chinese Student Denied

Departure is Granted Hearing

The Immigration Service last month held, a

hearing in the case of a Chinese student who has

been kept in this country against his will during

the past two years on the ground that his depart-

ure would be prejudicial to the interests of the

United States.

The Government apparently figured that since

this `boy had studied physics he might go back to

China and help construct weapons that might be

used against this country. The fact is, however,

that he was dropped as a candidate for a docto-

_ rate degree last June after showing no aptitude

for research. Consequently, he does not possess

the scientific knowledge and training that would

make his return to China prejudicial to our in-

- terests.

The local Immigration Service apparently acted

on instructions from Washington after the Union,

in petitioning for a hearing, rested on a court de-

cision, reported below, which requires hearings

in just such cases. However, the Service refused

to call it a hearing because one is not provided

for in its regulations. A decision as to whether the

student will be allowed to depart is expected later

this month.

An important decision defining the rights of

aliens has been handed down by the U.S. Court of

Appeals in the District of Columbia. It holds that

under the Passport Act an alien is entitled to a full

and fair hearing before permission to leave the

country can be denied him.

The case involves Han-Lee Mao, a Chinese stu-

dent who had finished his studies in this country

and wished to return to his native land.

Mao came to this country in 1947 as a tempo-

rary visitor under the sponsorship of the then Na-

tionalist Government of China. He studied at the

University of California and Scripps Institution of

Oceanography. In 1951, he applied for reserva-

tions on the American President Lines for himself,

his wife, and infant daughter.

He was then called in to talk to an Immigra-

tion Inspector, subsequent to which he was denied

permission to leave the country because he has

"scientific knowledge and training" which "might

be utilized by Communist China." During his in-

terrogation he was not advised of his right to have

counsel. -

The refusal was made under the McCarran-

Walter Immigration Act, which continues the

- emergency powers of the Passport Act to deny

exits of aliens during a declared state of emer-

gency. A U.S. District judge sustained the action.

In reversing this decision, the Court of Appeals

affirmed Mao's right to seek the fair hearing guar-

anteed under the Fifth Amendment. The court re-

ferred to a past Supreme Court decision that an

alien is so entitled if he is a "lawful permanent

resident" of the U. S. Said the Court of Appeals:

"We do not think that the court intended, by

using the word `permanent' . . . to hold or imply

that a resident alien, in order to be entitled to

Fifth Amendment protection, must intend to spend

his life here. The statement was carefully worded

to fit the case in hand and was not intended, we

think, to limit constitutional protection to an alien

whose residence is permanent in the strictest sense

of the word."

Union's Biennial Conference

Postponed to Feb. 20-23, 1954

-' The first biennial conference of the ACLU

scheduled for New York from November 28 to

December 1 was postponed for a second time early

last month to February 20-23, 1954. The action

was taken by Patrick Malin, the Union's national

director, after consultation with Ernest Angell,

- chairman of the national board.

Mr. Malin stated that the condition of his health

was such that he could not prepare for the con-

ference and at the same time handle pressing civil

liberties problems. Originally the conference was

scheduled for last Spring but it was called off on

financial grounds.

The By-Laws, dated 1951, under which the

Union ig presently operating, provide that "A

biennial conference of the corporation members

shall be held, at a time and place to be fixed by

the national Board of Directors... ." A conference

should, therefore, have been held sometime in

1953.

Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn who, together with

Ernest Besig, was an official delegate for this

branch, had arranged his plans in order to attend'

the conference. Now he has left for Europe and

will not return until next summer. Consequently,

another delegate will have to be elected in his

place.

Alien Seaman With First Papers Fights

`Exclusion' From U. S. Without a Hearing

Federal Judge Louis Goodman on November 12

took under submission a petition for a writ of

habeas corpus filed on behalf of Ruben A. Barrow,

who was ordered excluded from the United States

by the Immigration Service without the benefit

of a hearing. Barrow is represented by ACLU

Staff Counsel Lawrence Speiser.

Barrow was admitted to the United States as

a non-quota immigrant from Honduras in 1951

after sailing on American vessels since 1944. His

application for citizenship is pending with the

Naturalization Service.

Last July, he married Mabel Maxine Smith and

they established a home at 942-63rd Street, Oak-

land. They are expecting their first child this

month. It is quite possible that Barrow won't be

here for the event. At the moment, he is locked

up in the Immigration Service detention quarters

in San Francisco.

The problem arises from the fact that Barrow

shipped out as a messman aboard the American

President Lines freighter Sword Knot for voyages

carrying war supplies between Yokohama and In-

chon, Korea. On September 14, 1953 Barrow, while

serving supper, got into an altercation with a sea-

man that ended in blows. As a result of the fight,

the seaman was injured and hospitalized for seven

days. Other crew members were incensed at Bar-

row and threatened to kill him. A petition was

signed by all but two of the crew members warn-

ing the captain to remove Barrow from the ship

and suggested that there would be dire conse-

quences unless this was done.

The captain had Barrow stay in Inchon over

night and in the morning changed his duties in or-

der to keep him from contact with the crew. Since

he could not leave the ship in Korea, the captain

ordered Barrow to sleep on a cot on the bridge

away from the other crewmen.

On September 28, Barrow, accompanied by the

purser, went to see the United States consul in

Yokohama. The pursuer told the consul that Bar-

row's life was in danger and requested permission

to pay him off by mutual consent, under which ar-

Coast Guard Now Furnishes

Charges In Security Cases

After Federal courts on two different occasions

had ruled that maritime workers screened as se-

curity risks are entitled to bills of particulars set-

ting forth the charges against them, the Coast

-Guard on November 3 announced new rules of

procedure under which specific statements of

charges will now be granted. The new rule applies

to persons previously screened as well as to future

cases.

The new rule states that if a screened worker

appeals "`such person will be furnished with a

statement or bill of particulars setting forth the

alleged acts, or associations, or. beliefs or other

data which formed the basis for the determination

that such person is a poor security risk or is not

entitled to security clearance." At the same time,

"This statement or bill of particulars shall not be

worded with such particularity or specificity as to

disclose the source of such information or data,

nor the identity of any person or persons who may

have furnished such information or data, to the

appellant or to other persons."

An appellant has 10 days in which he may file

a written answer to the charges, and the Appeal

Board must meet within 15 days to hear the ap-

peal. An appellant is entitled to 48 hours notice

of the hearing.

Persons previously screened who have appeals

pending must file new appeals within 60 days of

the announcement of the new regulation or Janu-

ary 2, 1954, unless good cause is shown for not

doing so. :

The ACLU has thus far intervened in 62 Coast

Guard security screening cases of which 37 have

been favorably disposed of. Two favorable deci-

sions were handed down on November 23 after

appeals had been taken to the Commandant in

Washington. Of the remaining 25 cases, six are

awaiting the original appeal hearing, while in two

other cases decisions are still being awaited after

such hearings.

In the remaining seventeen cases adverse deci-

sions were handed down after the original appeals

and further appeals are now pending before a

special appeal board in Washington.

While new appeals were filed by the ACLU in

various cases on November 12, no bills of parti-

culars have as yet been furnished. It is expected

that the new procedure will work very slowly be-

one oe local appeal board is not adequately

staffed.

rangement Barrow would pay his own passage to

the United States. The Consul disapproved the

arrangement unless the company agreed to pay

Barrow's passage to the United States.

The captain contacted the company offices in

Yokohama but reported that the officials would

not agree to pay Barrow's passage home. The cap-

tain then suggested Barrow get sick in order that

he could be hospitalized in Yokohama, but Bar-

row insisted there was nothing wrong with him.

The captain then suggested that Barrow remove

his possessions very gradually from the ship and,

if they sailed without him, he would not be classed

as a deserter but as having `"Fdiled to join the

ship." t `

Instead, Barrow stowed away on the President

Wilson, leaving all of his gear aboard the Sword

Knot. Once out of Yokohama he gave himself up

and worked his passage back to the United States.

In Honolulu, however, he pleaded guilty before

Federal Judge J. Frank McLaughlin to a charge

of stowing away. It is not clear what action the

court took. The Immigration Service claims the

Judge made no decision and simply kept the case -

on file.

The Immigration Service contends that under

the McCarren-Walter Act, since Barrow returned

to the United States as a stowaway, they were not

required to give him a hearing of any kind. On the

other hand, the Union contends that Barrow's ac-

tion was not voluntary and that he was forced to

leave his ship.

Bruce Barber, District Director of the Immigra-

tion Service, suggests that the Government is do-

ing Barrow a favor. For once he is sent to Hon- |

duras, Barber said, his wife can then petition to

bring him back to Oakland as the husband of an

American citizen. Mr. Barber forgot to add that

the Consul has the discretion to grant or with-

hold the necessary visa.

Cancer Research Technician

Receives Security Clearance

A. technician on a cancer research project, who

was questioned as a security risk by the AEC be-

cause of his father-in-law's past political activities,

received a clearance last month. The man was

given what is termed "security approval `P'."

While he himself does not handle classified in-

formation, he works in an area where other peo-

ple have access to it. |

The Union was concerned about the case because

someone from the AEC apparently suggested to

the employer that the simplest way to handle the

problem was to fire the young man on some pre-

text. The Union was also concerned because there

seems to be no procedure whereby the employee

can receive charges and an opportunity to be

heard. oS

On the latter point, the AEC Deputy General

Manager confirmed that there is no appeal pro-

cedure in this type of case. "Due to the nature of

the work being performed at certain of our in-

stallations," said he, `the Commission permits its

Managers of Operations to make such checks as

they deem appropriate on individuals who are to

be employed by contractors on AEC work not re-

quiring access to `Restricted Data,' and thereafter

to approve or disapprove the employment.

"In the event information is received as the re-

sult of these checks by the Manager which raises

the question as to the advisability of granting se-'

curity approval, the individual is generally afford-

ed an interview which permits him the opportunity

to offer an explanation and clarification concern-

ing the matters in question."

Thus, it appears that people who are employed

in more menial jobs get different treatment than

the scientists who have access to classified infor-

mation. If the latter are questioned as security

_risks, they are entitled to written charges and an

opportunity for a hearing.

BOOK NOTE

CIVIL RIGHTS IN IMMIGRATION, by Professor

Milton R. Konvitz; Cornell University Press;

216 pages; $3.50.

An outstanding authority on U. S. law con-

cerning aliens, Professor Konvitz analyzes for

the general reader in terse, clear language, the

recent restrictive laws developed mainly by Sen-

ator McCarran. He prescribes bold reforms couch-

ed in lofty concepts both of morality and Amer-

ican liberties, As a study of the wrong and right

ways of dealing with aliens, the book is a policy

guide to highly desirable but presently unlikely

-reforms in the immigration system.

Page 4

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

American Civil Liberties Union-News

Published monthly at 503 Market Street., San Francisco 5,

Calif., by the American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California.

Phone: EXbrook 2-3255

ERNEST BESIG. Editor

Entered as second-class matter, July 31, 1941, at the

Post Office at San Francisco, California,

under the Act of March 3, 1879.

Subscription Rates-One Dollar and Fifty Cents a Year.

Fifteen Cents per Copy -151 ee

Financial Report For Fiscal

Year Ended October 31, 1953

As a result of the first full year of expanded

operations, the ACLU of Northern California end-

ed its fiscal year on October 31, 1953 with a deficit

of $2,184.34 in its Operating Fund. This deficit

was met out of a surplus of $3,145.05 resulting

from the 1952 special membership campaign

leaving a balance in that fund of $960.71.

While the income for the year showed an

increase of 8 per cent over the previous year,

expenditures were up one-third over the previous

year because of the doubled size of the staff. The

`problem during the current fiscal year is to secure

an 11 per cent increase in the Union's income in

order to balance the budget.

Reserve Funds on October 31 consisted of

$4,000 in U. S. Treasury bonds and yee 75 cash in

the bank as reported below.

The Union served as a denoditaey for funds to

pay the costs of the Levering Act appeal to the

State Supreme Court. When the case was con-

cluded, the $590.04 in the account was turned

over to the attorney handling the case.

On the membership side, the Union ended its

fiscal year with exactly 3,221 paid-up members, a

record number, compared with 3,029 a year ago.

There has been a steady rise in the Union's mem-

bership since 1943 when the membership stood at

624. Of course, the. big increase occurred in 1951-

1952 when, mainly as a result of the special mem-

bership campaign, the membership increased

1,174.

The year also ended with 227 separate sub-

scribers to the monthly "News," compared to 262

a year ago.

Here is the way your money was spent from

November 1, 1952 to October 31, 1953: -

OPERATING FUND

Income

General Receipts. 0... es $25,539.74

Expenditures

Salaries and Retirement. .$18,057.29

Printing and Stationery... 3,441.05

Rent ee: 2,140.00

Postage (hee. 1,338.07

Telephone and Telegraph. . 602.07

Taxes and Insurance..... 437.77

Wravelling 2... .25...% 188.23

Furniture and Equipment. 221.94

Publications ....20....-- 59.75

Miscellaneous ........... 126.14

Contingent Hund ..::..:. 613.47

Membership Campaign. . 498.30

Total Expenditures.......... ees $27,724.08

Deficit. ie $2,184.34

Reserve Funds

A year ago there was $4,151.79 in Reserve

Funds. The income during the past year consisted

of interest on U. S. bonds and on a savings account

amounting to $185.96. Consequently, there is

presently $4,337.75 in Reserve Funds.

Vague Charges Given

In Security Case

Security charges are often so vague and indefi-

nite that an employee has no reasonable opportu-

nity of defending himself. Here is a "Statement of

Reasons" for classification as a security risk just

received by an employee of a private contractor

handling military contracts. How would you like

to have to answer charges such as. these?

"1, Your membership in and your close associa- -

tion with activities and persons established as

fronts for the Communist Party.

"2. Misrepresentation or omissions on your Per-

sonal Security Questionnaire regarding organiza-

tional membership.

The Industrial Personnel and Facility Security

Clearance Program has been asked to furnish the

employee an amplification of the charges.

Since this agency was established several

months ago, the ACLU has disposed of four cases.

In each instance the employer indicated that the

employee had no access to military information

and that a clearance was, therefore, unnecessary.

Besides the foregoing case, the Union hag one

other case pending before this agency.

Spirit Of '76 Got

Lost In Shuffle

In Indianapolis, the trustees of the Indiana

War Memorial closed their hall to a meeting on

civil liberties sponsored by the American Civil.

Liberties Union. Pressure had come from the

American Legion and the organization known as

Minute Women. The trustees' excuse was that the

meeting would be "controversial."

Why a discussion of civil liberties is "contro-

versial" in Indianapolis escapes us, but even if it

is felt to be so, we wonder why the trustees of the

War Memorial want nothing to do with a "contro-

versial" discussion. It took controversy, plenty of

it, to get our civil liberties written down in the

Constitution as the first ten amendments. The

subject wasn't too "controversial" for 1787; why

is it for 1953?

By protesting against the meeting, the Minute

Women have shown an ironic disregard for the

principles that animated their revolutionary pro-

totypes of Lexington and Concord. And the Amer--

ican Legion's opposition seems even more ironic.

As soldiers, the Legionnaires fought for the pro-

tection of American liberties, among them the

right of the people peaceably to assemble. The

dead, whose memories are kept alive by the In-

diana War Memorial, are not honored by this act

of the Legion, we think, nor have the trustees hon-

ored their trust. It is a `pitiable kind of fear which

fears the liberty to discuss liberty.-Kditorial,

San Francisco Chronicle, November 21, 1953.

Denied the use of the Indiana World War Me-

morial Auditorium, the ACLU held its meeting in

the social center of St. Mary's Catholic Church in

Indianapolis on November 20. The Rev. Victor L.

Gossens, pastor of the church, said he received no

criticisms from either church officials or parish-

ioners for offering the ACLU use of the church

hall. The meeting, attended by 350 persons, was

addressed by Arthur Garfield Hays, prominent

New York attorney and counsel for the Union.

At the same time, in an address to forty offi-

cials of the State Legion, a Catholic priest de-

nounced Hays as a member "of subversive organi-

zations," while the Legion commander charged the

Union was under control of individuals "who are

either outright communists or fellows with long

records of affiliation with groups cited by the at-

tornel general as subversive."

Two V.A. Consultants Learn

About Guilt by Association

The ACLU has intervened in behalf of two con-

sultants for the Veterans Administration who

have received security questionnaires. One of the

consultants is employed full-time by another fed-

eral agency that has not raised any security ques-

tion about him. Indeed, the agency that has ques-

tioned his trustworthiness does not even pay for

his expert advice. Moreover, the questions that are

being asked raise only trivial issues.

About eight years ago, for three or four months,

this consultant belonged to an organization NOT

on the Attorney General's list that apparently had

some Communists in it, and then on exactly two

occasions around the same time he delivered

speeches about his subject to obscure organiza-

tions that were allegedly Communist dominated.

That is carrying guilt by association pretty far.

The other consultant likewise belonged for a

- few months to an organization that allegedly had

some Communists in it and, in addition, she at one

time knew three people who were allegedly Com-

munists. One she knew only as a student in her

classes; the second she knew only from profes-

sional contacts; while the third person apparently

acquired her interest in politics only after she had

had a close association with her..

These two people are still awaiting their clear-

ances.

Rabbi Reichert Retires From

Comm. After Long Service

Rabbi Irving F. Reichert, who has been a loyal

member of the Union's local Executive Committee

for the past eleven years, has elected to give up

that membership because of inability to attend

Committee meetings regularly.

Rabbi Reichert is going on a trip to Europe,

after which he will do considerable travelling on

speaking engagements. Under the circumstances,

`he felt that his name should not be considered for

renomination to the Committee at this time.

The ACLU of Northern California is grateful to

Rabbi Reichert for his many years devoted and

loyal service to the ACLU.

Public's Right To Hear

At Stake In Jelke Case

Judge Francis L. Valente's decision to hold the

prostitution trial of Minot F. Jelke behind closed

doors violated the public's constitutional right of

access to information, the New York Civil Liber-

ties Union declared last month.

Jelke was convicted last February in a cele-

brated case in which Judge Valente barred the

press from attending the trial during the prosecu-

tion's presentation of evidence. (c)

In a "friend of the court" brief filed with the

New York State Court of Appeals, the Union ar-

gued that the jurist's action contravened the First,

Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments. The brief

was filed in support of an appeal by the United |

Press Association, the New York Herald Tribune,

Inc., the Heart Consolidated Publications, Inc.,

the Hearst Corporation, the News Syndicate Co.,

Inc., and the New York Post Corporation from

lower court rulings upholding Judge Valente. The

case was heard by the Court of Appeals on No-

vember 13 and Charles Ballon, an attorney for

the NYCLU, local affiliate of the American Civil

Liberties, Union, who prepared the brief, argued

the civil liberties points.

The NYCLU made clear that it backed the

plaintiffs only in their role as members of the

public at large.

"In the case at bar," the brief asserted, "it is

not merely the press that is asserting the freedom

to print what it chooses; it is not merely the ac-

cused who claims a right to public trial. Rather,

it is the public itself that requests recognition of

its fundamental democratic right of access to in-

formation of public interest .. .

"There is abundant support for See the

_ public right to attend the trial in the case at bar.

Both the paramount purpose of the Bill of Rights

. and the common law history of the public

trial provision itself, compel the conclusion that

trials must be kept open to the public to afford

free access to information on matters of pubes

interest."

This public right, the brief contended, is guar-

teed both by the First and Sixth Amendments,

which have been made applicable to state counts

by the Fourteenth Amendment.

Of applicability of the First Amendment, the

brief commented:

"Stated simply, the First Amendment guar-

antees the public the right to know-and the right

to know is hollow without access to information

and ideas."

Jelke did not waive his right to a public ae

on charges of compulsory prostitution. But even if

he had, the brief argued, he could not have waived

the public' s right to a public trial.

"All the evils which the requirement of a pub-

lic trial was designed to avert are invited by grant-

ing to the defendant the power, by waiver, to per-

mit the trial to be conducted in camera," it said.

Finally, the Civil Liberties Union brief argued,

Judge Valente's order excluding the press and

public from the Jelke trial was "a classic example

of an unconstitutional `prior restraint'.

"We are faced with an example of unrestrained

censorship, Rather than rely on the good taste of

the press and the intelligence of the public (or

`even Section 1141 of the Penal Law of the State of

New York, which provides punishment for those

publishing obscene material), the Respondent has

taken it upon himself to be the sole and final

guardian of the public morals . .!. Our democ-

racy cannot survive if determinations of the `pub-

lic good' and `public morals' are left to the veeans

of individual Judges."

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION

American Civil Liberties Union of No. Calif.,

503 Market St.

San Francisco 5, Calif.

I. Please enroll me aS a member at dues of

See for the current year. (Types of mem-

_ bership: Associate Member, $3; Annual Member,

$5; Business and Professional Member, $10;

Family Membership, $25; Contributing Member,

$50; Patron, $100 and over. Membership includes

subscription to the "American Civil Liberties

Union-News'"' at $1.50 a year.)

2. I pledge $.......... per month........ Or $e per yr.

3. Please enter my subscription to the NEWS ($1.50

per year)

Enclosed please find Ge ee, Please bill

MC@n eee

{| Name

Street

City and Zone .....

Occupation: 2.2.2... a