vol. 21, no. 12

American

Civil Liberties

Union

Volume XXI

San Francisco, California, December,

1256

Number 12

UN-AMERICAN COMM. (c)

TO ARRIVE HERE

DECEMBER 10-11 |

The House Committee on Un-American Activities is scheduled to

_ hold hhearings at the Post Office Building, Seventh and Mission

_, Streets, San Francisco. on December 10-11. According to announce-

"ments, ten witnesses: have been subpoenaed to testify,

FORI

AER CP MEMBER

FACES DEPORTATION

The Board of Immigration Appeals, on November 13, 1956, denied

an application for suspension of deportation to an alien who had

been a member of the Communist Party for four months in 1934.

Under the provision of the immigration law, membership in the

Communist Party at any time is grounds for deportation. However,

supension of deportation may be

granted at the discretion of' the

Attorney General. The Board of

Immigration Appeals makes the

decision for the Attorney Gen-

eral and, in this case, ruled

against this 49-year old man who

has resided in the United States

continuously since he was 2 years

old.

While he was in college in 1934,

he joined the Communist Party

for several months and was ex-

pelled in 1935 for being a dis-

sident. The board's decision was

based on its doubt that the

alien was attached to the prin-

ciples of our Constitution. This

doubt exists, the board said, be-

cause of the following factors:

1) The alien's thorough indoctri-

nation with communism; 2) his

view that while he was a member

of the Communist Party it did not

teach the overthrow of the gov-

ernment by force and violence

whereas we found to the con-

trary raising a question as to

whether the alien and_ this

board speak the same language;

3) it appears that in recent years

- the alien has publicly and iorce-

fully proclaimed adherence to

views concerning this nation's

conduct of foreign affairs which

are similar to views presented

by the communists-views that

in the minds of the majority of

Americans would advance the

cause of communism to the detri-

ment of this nation. He has also

opposed this nation's handling of

domestic communism."

OTHER CHARGES

The Board also went on to say

"Respondent has taken the pains

of expressing his views in such a

manner that he has received a

public `reputation for being in

favor of socialistic or commun-

istic views. We ask why he does

not have a public reputation for

supporting democratic - institu-

tions or being opposed to com-

munism." The board quoted at

length from testimony given by

the alien in his trial on a charge

of criminal syndicalism held in

1935 from which he was ac-

quitted after a jury trial. The

board also pointed to the fact

that he subscribed to `"Stone's.

Weekly," written by I. F. Stone,

and "Today," a mimeographed

sheet put. out by Anna Louise

Strong. I. F. Stone was described

as "a left-wing communist who

has defended the Communist

Party and its leaders repeatedly."

Anna Louise Strong was identi-

fied as a member of the Com-

munist Party. The board failed to

- acknowledge the fact that she was

expelled from the Soviet Union

within the past 2 years.

NO HARDSHIP

The board's decision upheld

the ruling of a Special Inquiry

Officer denying the alien's appli-

cation for suspension of deporta-

tion. The Special Inquiry Officer

- had found that deportation would

not result in exceptional aad un-

usual hardship to the alien even

though he was the major support

of aged parents and for his two

minor children. Several - wit-

nesses appeared on behalf of the

alien at the hearing in which he

was represented by Ernest Besig,

Director of the ACLU.

The Immigration Service on

its part submitted an invesiga-

tive report which stated that the

"subject bears the reputation in

having been engaged in left-wing

activities, vociferously defensive

of socialistic (or as some put it in

substance, `communistic') theo-

ries of economics and govern-

ment and in his home community,

notoriously -.outspoken against

United States participation in the

Korean crisis." However, it was

brought out at the hearing that

people who gave derogatory in-

formation to the investigator

were business competitors, one

had been given an eviction no-

tice by the alien and most of

them he had not known _inti-

mately and did not discuss poli-

tics with.

The history of this case ex-

tends back to 1935 when the Im-

migration Service obtained an

order of deportation against the

alien but were unable to carry it -

out because there was no evi-

dence of his birth in his native

land, Canada. It is probable that

the order of deportation now

pending against him wWiil also be

ineffectual.

Southern ACLU

Seeks Defeat

Of Filibuster

The Southern California branch

of the American Civil Liberties

Union is taking the initiative in

California in organizing support

for the defeat of the filibuster in

the next Senate. By organizing

public support in California, the

ACLU plans to submit to Sena-

tors Kuchel and Knowland the pe-

titions of civic and church groups,

veterans' organizations and city

councils, requesting that the fili-

buster be outlawed.

TIME IS RIPE

In finding a climate conducive

to the defeat of Senate Rule

XXII, which provides for the fili-

buster, Willard Carpenter, assist-

ant director of the Southern Cali-

fornia ACLU, said: "As we inter-

pret the current political scene,

all Republican politicians are go-

ing to search for ways to appro-

priate to themselves the shift in

Negro votes, which went to Eisen-

hower last month. This seems to

us to be especially true for Sen-

ator Knowland; first, he runs for

re-election in 1958; second, be-

cause of growing strength of the

Democratic Party in California."

"So far as we know, Senator.

Knowland has never... opposed

outlawing the filibuster, but nei-

ther has he ever voted to outlaw

it. Senator Kuchel was one of

about 22 Senators who voted NOT

to table.the necessary prelimi-

nary motion in 1953."

Organizations interested in

bringing the support of their

membership to defeat the fili-

buster, should contact Willard

Carpenter, Southern California

branch of ACLU, 2863 West Ninth

Street, Los Angeles 6,

ACLU QUERY:

Must Religion Include

Belief In a Diety?

The American Civil Liberties Union filed an amicus curae

brief in the District Court of Appeals in San Francisco on

November 6, on behalf of the Fellowship of Humanity, an

organization denied religious tax exemption by the Alameda

County Tax Assessor, on the

used for purposes other than

"solely religious," and that the or-

ganization, which does not believe

in God, does not qualify as a re-

ligion.

EMPHASIS ON MAN

The Fellowship of Humanity,

located at 411 28th Street in Oak-

land, assays a non-theistic religi-

ous humanism. On the hasis that

they do not believe in a deity, but

emphasize instead the "relation

of man to man," the organization

has been disqualified from tax

exemption granted to all religious

organizations.

INFRINGEMENTS

The ACLU brief, written by

ACLU volunteer attorney George

Brunn, and signed by ACLU staff

counsel Lawrence Speiser, and by

George Halcrow of San Mateo,

contends that a denial of exemp-

tion based on. the requirement

that "religion and religious wor-

ship must include God as an es-

sential deity," is contrary to the

First Amendment, which guaran-

tees freedom of religion. Citing

the Unitarian Church as an organ-

ization that for over one hundred

years has been considered as an

integral part of the religious com-

munity and professes no belief in

God, the brief states that `"human-

ism is widely accepted by reput-

able scholars in the field of bona

fide religious movement...and

that any decision to the contrary

...is an arbitrary and unjustifi-

able discrimination in violation

of the due process and equal pro-

tection guarantees of the Four-

teenth Amendment, and in violat-

ing freedom of religion protected

by the First Amendment."

In 1947-48, the Fellowship of

Humanity was granted tax exemp-

tion; in 1949-50, their application

for exemption was filed too late

to be granted, and in 1952, exemp-

tion was denied on two counts;

that the church was not using its

premises solely and exclusively for

religious purposes," but held so-

cials and forums, hosted meetings

on controversial subjects, and per-

mitted non-religious groups use

of their premises, including left

wing groups; specifically, the

East Bay Peace Committee; and

that a religion without a God, is

no religion at all.

MINISTERS TESTIFY

In May, 1955, at a unique trial

in Superior Court in Oakland, the

defense for the Fellowship of

Humanity, subpoened to the wit-

ness stand, other Oakland minis-

ters and questioned them about

their church activities outside

the purely religious. The Fellow-

ship of Humanity won their case

when the Superior Court upheld

the tax exemption. County Tax

Assessor Russell Horstman has

appealed the case to the District

Court.

The American Civil Liberties

Union filed a brief on only those

portions of Horstman's conten-

tion which infringed civil liber-

ties.

On November 16, the reply to

the amicus curiae brief of the

American Civil Liberties Union

was filed by J. F. Coakley, dis-

-Continued on Page 4

grounds that the premises were

COAST GUARD

TO `UNSCREEN'

By ERNEST BESIG

Seamen who were screened by

the Coast Guard as_ security

risks under unconstitutional pro-

cedures became eligible for sail-

ing documents late last `month.

After fighting a delaying action

for over a year, the Coast Guard

finally agreed to comply with

Federal Judge Edward P. Mur-:

phy's order directing the Govern-

ment to "unscreen" the seamen

by validating their Merchant

Mariners' documents. -

At press time, two seamen who

were kepresented by the ACLU

lave already icceiveti ineir vali-

dated documents. But before

they can sail again, they will have

to be reinstated to their labor

unions.

`That's where the big hitch is

going to exist trom now on for

screened seamen. The chances

are that very few of the "un-

screened" seamen will ever re-

turn to the industry.

The Marine Engineers Benefi-

cial . Association, for example,

says it has only one man who

continued to pay his dues while (c)

he was screened. The others

`either took withdrawal cards or

permitted their memberships to

lapse. Those who took with-

drawal cards may apply for rein-

statement which is determined by

a vote of the Union's member-

ship. Those who allowed their

membership to lapse must not

only be reinstated by a vote of

the membership but must also

pay hundreds of dollars in back

dues. On the other hand, the

Seattle branch of the Marine

Firemen recently went on record

to ship any member who got back

his validated papers.

Even though the Coast Guard

has lost the legal battle, its pur-

pose has been pretty well ac-

complished. Seamen with left-

wing associations are not sail-

ing and most of them have either

left the industry or have little

prospect of sailing. Indeed, the

Coast Guard may still proceed

against any alleged security risks

who have their papers restored to

them. But, if it does so, it must

give them hearing at which they

must be confronted by their ac.

cusers. And, pending a decision

in such cases, the seamen remain

on their jobs. Such impedi-

ments to swift action-may impel

the Coast Guard to abandon its

retailored security program. _

The "unscreening order" given

to the Coast Guard by Judge Mur:

phy is the resuli of a legal test

of the Coast Guard's so-called

Port Security Program which

goes back to 195]. Some 500 local

seamen and 2000 in in other

ports will be affected by the

court's decision. (c)

-' 'Phe-purpose of the hearings is to inquire into opposition to anti-

~ Communist laws and' especially McCarran - Walter (Immigration)

entra -----= Act, which was co-authored by

the chairman of the Un-American

Activities Committee, Francis E.

Walter (D-Pa.). Walter claims

that the movement against the

law is part of "a broad and devi-

ous campaign of political sub-

version" by the Communists in

FRANCIS E. WALTER (D.-Pa.)

One Hundred Percent American

order "to create, by means of

hundreds of Communist fronts, a

clamor for the amendment or re-

peal of anti-Communist legisla-

tion.

Prior to coming to San Fran-

cisco, the Committee will hold

hearings in Los Angeles from |

Dec. 5-7 and follow up its San

Francisco hearings with sessions

in Seattle Dec. 13-14. Both in Los

Angeles and San Francisco offi-

cials of the Committee for the

Protectizn of Foreign Born were

subpoened and ordered to bring

their records to the hearing.

The ACLU has consistently op-

posed the activities of the House

Committee on Un-American Ac-

tivities. It is a headline hunting

group that infringes on the free-

dom of speech and association of

citizens and, in effect, tries peo-

ple for their political opinions,

thereby assuming judicial func-

tions.

The last visit the Committee

made to San Francisco occurred

December 2-6, 1953. At that time,

the ACLU appeared on behalf of

eight "unfriendly witnesses."

Earlier this year, the ACLU also

appeared on behalf of a Bay Area

witness who was subpoened to

appear in Los Angeles.

ACLU FORMS (c)

SPEAKERS GROUP

The first meeting of the American

Civil Liberties Union Speakers' Bu-

reau of Northern California was held

November 27, at the Unitarian Church

at Franklin and Geary Streets.

Under the chairman of Board Mem-

ber Alice Heyneman, the committee ~

will make available to interested civic,

church and educational organizations

in the Bay Area, speakers on current

civil liberties issues, on the ACLU

program, on the intrepretations of

the Bill of Rights.

The luncheon. meeting was attended

by Mrs. Alec Skolnick, San Mateo;

Mrs. Sandor Burstein, San Francisco;

Mrs. Kenneth Arrow, Menlo Park;

Mrs. Wallace Stegner, Los: Altos:

Mrs. Suzanne Hughes, Menlo Park;

Mrs. Marvin Chodorow, Menlo Park,

who will head up the bureau in, their

Own communities. Marin County will

be under the direction of Mr. and

Mrs. Wyman Hicks of Sausalito.

"In this way,'' commented Mrs.

Heyneman, `"`we should be able to

reach 2000 concerned community peo-

ple, who should `know more about

the ACLU. We can develop a core of

informed persons who can recognize,

and provide the leadership in com-

batting any infringement of civil

liberties in their own communities."'

| [HOTOGRAPHER

NEEDED...

A photographer is needed

for shots of community activi-

ties for publicity purposes.

You shoot, we pay. (for film).

Carpet...

Roll out the Red

The stage is being set for another appearance of the House Un-

American Activities Committee in the San Francisco Bay Area.

A press release was issued by the comittee, indicating they would

hold hearings on December 11th in San Francisco, as well as hearings

in Seattle and Los Angeles during the same month.

It was almost three years ago that the House Committee last paid

a visit to this area and left in its wake a number of unemployed, some

cost-consuming court suits-all without any apparent benefit to

national security. At that time the ACLU represented 8 witnesses who

were subpoenaed, all of whom refused to cooperate with the com-

mittee. The ACLU in the past has opposed the establishment and

continuation of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, and

will continue to do so in the future. It might be wise, however, to re-

examine the basis for the ACLU's position.

The House Committee on Un-American activities was established

on May 26, 1938 to investigate: (1) The extent, character, and objec-

tions of un-American propaganda activities in the United States;

(2) The diffusion in the United States of subversive and un-American

propaganda that is instigated from foreign countries or of a domestic

origin and attacks the principles of the form of government as guar-

anteed by the Constitution; and; (3) All other questions related there-

to that would aid Congress in any necessary remedial legislation."

It became a permanent committee in 1946 and its present powers are

substantially the same as those conferred by the original resolution.

Even without the question of denial of due process to witnesses who

have been subpoenaed to appear before it, the House committee's

mandate is, the ACLU holds, unconstitutional. It is given authority

to inquire into the very area the First Amendment attempts to safe-

guard from congressional activity. Its mandate is filled with words

and phrases which have assumed importance in American life but

have as yet never been satisfactorily defined. In fact, the very title

of the committee, "Un-American Activities" has still never been de-

fined in a court of law nor in any legislation; and attempts to do so

have met with failure.

THE PUBLIC SERVES AS JUDGE

Above and-beyond that, there are other major objections to the

committee's existence. The committee's belief that it has the power to

try people by publicity without any of the guarantees of due process

of our constitution. The committee has described its function as fol-

lows: "It has been the established policy of the House Committee on

Un-American Activities since its inception `that in a great, virile, free

republic like the United States, one of the most effective weapons

against un-American activities is their continuous exposure to the

spotlight of publicity .. .

. As contrasted to the FBI and the Grand

Jury, the House Committee on Un-American Activities has a separate

and a very special responsibility. It functions to permit the greatest

court in the world-the court of American public opinion-to have

an indirect, uncensored and unprejudiced opportunity to render a

continuing verdict on all of its public officials and to evaluate the

merit of many in public life who either openly associate and assist

`disloyal groups or covertly operate as members or fellow-travelers of

such organizations. It's as necessary to the success of this committee

- that it reveal its findings to the public as it is to th

_ FBI that it conceal its sperations from the public

there's the rub. Congressional investigating committees have tradi- |

success; of the

iew." `Aye---and

tionally had three proper functions: they may seek information that

will enable Congress to legislate wisely; they may undertake to check

administrative agencies in their enforcement of law or expenditure

of public funds; and, they may attempt to influence public opinion.

It is fairly apparent that the Un-American Activities Committee's

major interest is the' last. However, they have gone beyond even

these, and have developed two additional functions of their own.

WHAT IS "UN-AMERICAN"?

First, it has tried, in a non-statutory way, to define "subversive" or

"un-American activities" and thereby to set the standard of American

thought and conduct with respect to orthodoxy and heresy in politics.

Secondly, it has tried, in varying ways, to take over the functions of

administrative or judicial agencies in publicly trying people for un-

defined crimes. These trials-and trials they are-are conducted

without any. of the protections of due process, which it has taken our

`system of law so many centuries to develop. People are tried without

opportunity of cross-examining their accusers; they are tried without

opportunity to subpoena witnesses or hold a defense of their own;

they are tried without any statement of the charges against them. In

a "trial" before the House Un-American Activities Committee in

which a person's reputation, livelihood and professional career are

at stake, he has no rights other than the rights the committee chooses

to give him.

It is for these reasons that the ACLU of Northern California,

three years ago, represented all witnesses who were subpoenaed by 7

the House Committee on Un-American Actiivties who requested our

aid.

It is evident that there will be civil liberties issues arising wher-

ever and whenever the House Committee on Un-American Activities

holds hearings by reason of its very existence, its mandate, its

methods of procedure, of denial of due process, as well as its history

of trying people by publicity. It is for this reason that the ACLU

again, at this time, offers its services to. any and all individuals who

"sare subpoenaed by the House Committee on Un-American Activities

_,and will continue to do so.

Lawrence Speiser

YOUR BOARD MEETS...

The ACLU Board meets the

first Thursday of every month

at the Sutter Street YWCA. On

October 4, among other things,

. . recognized the Student Civil

Liberties Union at Berkeley for

the coming year. (Each year,

the group is formally recog-

nized as "an off-campus group

affiliated with Stiles Hall, and

as a co-operating group with

the ACLU.")

. established an Education,

Membership and Fund-raising

Committee, which would give

direction to the ACLU's edu-

ACLU NEWS

December, 1956

Page 2

cational program and make

recommendations to the Board

in these three areas

. granted permission to the

office to intervene in the secu-

rity case of Private E. L. H.

... granted authority to the of-

fice to negotiate with the San

Francisco Superintendent of

Schools, concerning the exclu-

- sion of Bernal Housing project

. children above the first grade,

from the Le Conte School

. granted authority to file a

court suit in behalf of Rufus

Bean, an American-born citi-

zen, who, according to the Jus-

tice Department, has lost his

citizenship by leaving the coun-

try to evade the draft.

SANTA CLAUS IS COMING

TO TOWN...

ae

Seeley

ni he "

OH, YOU BETTER WATCH ,

~(OU BETTER NOT CRY

OV BetrTere pe GOOD.

We eG. You a. nt

CIVIL LIBERTIES RECORD

OF PAST DECADE REVIEWED

By EDWARD L. BARRETT, JR.

Civil Liberties in the United States-A Guide to Cur-

rent Problems and Experience.

The directors and officers of The Fund for the Republic

asked Professor Cushman, Goldwin Smith, Professor of Gov-

ernment in Cornell University and a distinguished scholar

with a long-time interest in civil liberties, to prepare for their

use ``a summary which would present a bird' s-eye view of the

entire field of civil liberties since

the close of World War II." The

result, which fortunately has been

made available to a wider audi-

ence, is a little paperbound book

which should be of tremendous

interest to all who are concerned

with problems of civil liberties.

The amateur will learn much

that he never knew about current

problems and doctrine; the expert

will find the over-all view and

synthesis of great value in put-

ting into a larger perspective the

immediate problems with which

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_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch 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_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_1999 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 he is concerned. -

A LITTLE MEAT

Professor Cushman states that

the book is "designed to be an

outline of the entire area with

perhaps just a little meat on the

bones." He adds: "In dealing

with each problem, I have sought

to do three things: first, to indi-

cate the status of each civil lib-

erty at the close of World War II;

second, to summarize the princi-

pal developments with respect to

these liberties during the last dec-

ade; and third, to indicate in each

case what the current or unsolved

problems appear to be, together

with some of the more important

proposals for dealing with them

which have been put forward. I

have not undertaken to volunteer

solutions of my own."

The coverage of the book in-

cludes freedom of speech, press,

assembly, and petition; academic

freedom; freedom of religion;

separation of church and state;

the right to security and freedom

of the person; military power and

civil liberty; the civil liberties of

persons accused of crime; civil

liberties and national security;

civil liberties of aliens; and racial

discrimination.

AREAS OMITTED

Political rights, civil liberties

in the armed forces, economic

rights in the international field

were not discussed by Professor

Cushman.

Within the selected areas, the

book gives a succinct and clear

statement of the current problems

and of the current law. In addi-

tion each chapter closes with a

brief, critical bibliography which

should be of particular value to

(Ea'; s note: Mr. Barrett is pororeedor

of constitutional law at the University

of California, Boalt Hall; a former

ACLU board member, and present

legal advisor to Clark Kerr, Chan-

cellor, University of California.)

fe

lawyers since reference is made

to the most important general lit-

"erature which would: not be

reached through case digests or

the Index to Legal Periodicals.

The book gains in strength and

should appeal to a wide audience

because it is an honest and fair

attempt to state the issues in con-

troversial areas without polemics.

People of widely varying views on

the subjects covered should find

the book a useful one even though

Professor Cushman sees fit to

note that "it could be that, as one

who has spent many years work-

ing in the civil liberty field, I

shall not have succeeded entirely

in concealing a bias in favor of

the adequate protection of civil

liberty."

FRED SMITH IV

The resignation of Fred Smith

IV, as treasurer and member of

the Board of ACLU, became ef-

fective November 1. Under his

guidance, the northern Cali-

fornia affiliate embarked upon

its first membership campaign

in 1952. The growth in mem-

bership in 1952, from 2862, to the

present 3550, is in a significant

part, due to Mr. Smith's direction

and efforts. The Board, at its

October meeting, thanked Fred

Smith for his "great contribu-

tion to the Union's work," and

expressed the hope that he will

be willing to return to the

Board in November, 1957. Mr.

Smith plans to continue to work

on the Education, Fundraising

and Membership Committee, as

an ex-officio member, before his

scheduled trip to Europe this

spring.

ACLU Board member Laurent

Frantz, attorney and author, has

reviewed three recent books on

the Rosenberg case, in the Na-

vember issue of FRONTIER

MAGAZINE.

ACLU LACKS

EFFECTIVENESS

FIELD TRIP SHOWS

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_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch 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_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_1999 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 Priscilla Ginsberg returned on

November 26 from a ten-day field

trip to Sacramento, Stockton, Mo-

desto and Fresno, where she

talked with ACLU members and

community leaders about securing

a better climate for civil liberties,

and greater support for ACLU.

"Bach valley community has dis- -

tinct needs and resources which

differ from the other commu-

nities. No generalization about

approach, support for ACLU, or .

about the state of civil liberties

can be dumped upon all four

towns. I think it is accurate to

say that all are experiencing en-

croachments of civil liberties in

their own communities; that they

are interested in ACLU, and feel

somewhat isolated from the body

of civil libertarian concerns of

the Bay Area; that they are con-

fused about what the ACLU pro-

gram actually is, about the sep-

- aration of the northern California

members from the national organ-

ization," stated Mrs. Ginsberg.

Steering committees have now

been established in each of the

four communities to undertake

the sponsorship of a forum meet-

ing and a spring membership

drive.

Mrs. Ginsberg also visited the

Los Angeles ACLU office, to learn

about their educational and chap-

ter program.

- A full report will be made in

the January issue of The News.

ACLU CLEARS

NAVAL LT.

On November 14, the ACLU of-

fices received notification from

the Department of the Navy that

a Naval Reserve Lieutenant, rep-

resented by ACLU Staff Counsel

Lawrence' Speiser,

took 14 months from the time

charges were pressed for the de-

cision to be made that this offi-

cer's continued retention in the

Naval Reserve was "clearly con-

sistent with the interest of na-

tional security" and for an order

to be made that the charges

against him be dismissed.

On September 9, 1955, he first

received charges against himself

and his wife, alleging that: (1)

they had made financial contribu-

tions to the Joint Anti-Fascist

Refugee Committee; (2) that he

had associated with Communist

Party members as late as 1951;

and (3) that his wife had been a

subscribed of the Daily People's

World; (4) an employee of the

California Labor School, and (5)

had been active in the affairs of

the Independent Progressive

Party. He was offered the alter-

native of having a hearing or ac-

cepting a discharge under condi-

tions other than honorable.

A hearing was held on October

12, 1955, at Treasure Island, in

which he was represented by

Speiser, where some 10 witnesses

testified on his behalf and in

which many affidavits were also

submitted. It was brought out at

the hearing that the reserve lieu-

tenant was a person who had no -

interest in politics and that he

and his wife's major activity for

the past several years was help-

ing to establish a library and

nursery school in their commu-

nity. The wife had belonged to

the WACS during World War II.

The officer had an excellent war-

time record.

OTHER CASES

So far Speiser has handled six

Naval Reserve Officers' cases, all

of which have ended favorably.

In 4 of the cases, the reserve offi-

cers were retained in the Naval

Reserve and in 2 of the cases they

were given General Discharges

under honorable conditions.

Recently, one other Naval Re- -

serve officer case has come into

the ACLU` office and a 3-day

hearing was held in October at

Treasure Island. It is not expect-

ed that a decision wili be forth-

coming in this case of at least a

year.

had been_

cleared. of security charges. It

Je

ACLU Spends $40,820

in Record Financial Year

The American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California spent a record $40, 820. 42 during | the Fe :

cal year ending October 31, 1956; while its income from: all sources. was about S00 aE or $35, 312. aq.

The income was up about $190 over the previous year.

Because of expanded operations undertaken in January 1956, a "deficit was. anticipated oien the

which is now reduced to exactly $229.

Expenditures from the Oper-

ating Fund were $38,690.37, while

$2083.27 was spent in Defense

Funds. The remaining $46.78 was

spent from a special fund fi-

nancing the changed format of

the Monthly "News" for six

months. :

The ACLU also wound up the

budget was adopted in 1955. The deficit has been met a money set aside in the Expansion Fund,

fiscal year with a paid-up mem-

bership of 3539, compared with

3347 the previous year and 3474

on October 31, 1954, the previous

high point in the Union's history.

Here is the way your money

was spent from November 1,

1955, to October 31, 1956:

OPERATING FUND

Income

Membership Receipts 4 $28,868.19

Special Events 3 ee 2,098.86

Bamphiets: 08 ce 63.34

From 1956 Special Fund Appeal (Expan. Fund) 2: 1,848.70

Transferred from Expansion Fund ............-.----c--::.00-00------- ee 5,811.28

Total... Se $38,690.37

Expenditures

salaries and Retirement =. = $26,005.77

Printing and SULGUSY ee eee 4,825.72

Rent 2,573.99

POStASG) ee 1,247.27

Telephone and Telegraph... 1,493.57

maxes and Insurance = 23 3 895.04

Kurniture and Kquipment 1,123.43

Traveling and Transportation =. 494.76

Publications "35 2 57.73

Miscellaneous = 5 63.09 38,690.37

Total Expenditures ............0.00........ $38,690.37

Balance on Hand =. 2. 0.00

: _RESERVE FUNDS

On Hands 1151-55 2 ee $4,739.32

Receipts (ee 374.93

Total Receipts 2... $ 5,114.25

Expenditures-None

ACLU-NEWS-New Format.

Receipts 6. ee $205. 00

IX PONGIbULCS 7 oe ye ee 46.78

Balance on"sHand =. ee. $158.22

' DEFENSE FUNDS

: Receipts. Expend. ' -On Hand

John W. Mass. $ 46.00 ~$ 194.45 - $ 172.94

Tax Exemp. Loy. Oath ............ 378.06 858.14 (289.13)

schuyten, Cases 2 14.00 95.20 579.80

Mollie Thormner,. 3. 2 15.00 0.00 69.25

Wancock v. Burns =) - 60.45 148.24 (72.54)

Buchalter Case 0.00 9.12 0.00

Rebecca Wolstenholme .......... 10.00 32.87 36.63

Wallace and Aykens .................. 97.00 113.13 16.13

Jathrow Bentley ........0..000000... 0.00 112.70 (112.70)

fmmig. Cases 4 10.00 - 0.00 - 10.00

Legal Def. Fund (eee -$ 482.93 $ 528.54 $1,799.69

Total 22 $1,113.45 $2,083.27 $2,177.81

EXPANSION FUNDS

Receipts

On Hand Bll) ee $5,291.28

Marin Chapter... ee 500.00

Sp. Kunds Ap. 502 Ce 20.00

eSp. Hund Appeal 56 = 2 38.50

-Sp Fund Appeal-Not Earmarked .................... 2,030.20

Total Receipts -00. 4 $7,879.98

Expenditures

Transferred to Operating Funds ........................ $7,659.98

Balance' on Hand 2.000. 3 $220.00

RECEIPTS FROM ALL SOURCES, 1955-1956

Membership Contuibutions -- = 8 868 19

ppecial: Wivents 1 ee ee 2,098.86

Expansion Funds: 22 2,588.70

Detense Hunds = Pe es Ee 1,113.45

- Reserve; Funds 92 ee ee 374.93

ACLU-NEWs-New Format .....1....000000000. - 205.00

Pamphlets =. ee 63.34

Total Receipts == = 8) = eee $35,312.47

Total Receipts, 54-55 35,122.58

Christmas gift cookbooks

published by the Marin Coun-

ty ACLU are now on sale. The

books, bound in a red, silk"

screen cover designed by Miy-

eko Budnick, is entitled POT-

LUCK, and Sells for $1.50.

Compiled by Barbara Mc-

Gowan, the book includes over

260 hundred potluck recipes,

contributed by ACLU mem-

bers, who, for years, have

brought the best of their pot-

luck cookery to the Annual

Marin County Potluck, held

each spring. Money orders or

checks for the books should

be sent to: POTLUCK, Anne

Coolidge, 1 Buckeye Way,

Kentfield, Calif. An additional

10c should be enclosed to

cover the costs of mailing.

The Marin County branch of

ACLU held a Spaghetti Soiree

at the Corte Madera Recrea-

tional Center on Friday eve-

ning, November 30. Jim Chest-

. nut's band provided the music _

for the Soiree, which was a

`dinner dance beginning at

7 PM, and ending at one

o'clock. Marin County ACLU

members "catered the affair",

and The Lions' Club ran the

. bar. Co-chairmen of the Soiree

were Helen Kerr and Henry

Arian; Allan Schwabacher was

responsible for decorations.

`Tickets sold for $3.50 each; a '

final financial report will be

made the first week in De-

cember.

Churches Ase

School Facilities

In Contra Costa

Higth of the ten Protestant

ministers in Rodeo, Contra Costa

county, last month petitioned the

school board to allow church

services to be held in school audi-

toriums. The ministers argued

that since Catholic school chil-

dren are transported to paro-

chial schools in public buses,

Protestant congregations should

be allowed to use school audito-

riums for their services.

The U. S. Supreme Court has

sustained the furnishing of buses

to parochial school children and

defended it on the ground that

buses were furnished to school

children as such and without re-

gard to their religious denomina-

tion.

The ministers are not prepared

to rent or lease public space.

They say they are prepared to

pay the costs of light, heat and

janitorial services as well as li

ability insurance.

A State Constitutional provi-

sion declares that "Neither the

Legislature, nor any county, city

andand county, township, school

district ... shall ever ... grant

anything to or in aid of any re-

ligious sect, church, creed, or

sectarian purposes."

District Attorney Max W. Col-

lins, legal advisor for the school

`board, referred the matter to the

California Attorney General for

an opinion.

Lawrence Speiser, ACLU staff

counsel, returned to the office on

November 26, after a three-week's

absence for a major operation.

While in the hospital, he pro-

duced two briefs and several

cases of hysterical nurses.

News Across The Nati

HENDERSON, Ky. (Sept. 24,

1956)-A student boycott, led by

parents, today hit a school that

had been quietly integrated since

September 4. There was no diffi-

culty until W. Wright Waller, Jr.,

head of the Union County White

Citizens Council, spoke here Sat-

urday night.

WASHINGTON, D. C.

1956)-Warning local law enforce-

`ment officials against the use of

unauthorized FBI identification

records in political campaigns,

FBI head J. Edgar Hoover assert-

ed recently that `""The person who

improperly discloses an identifi-

eation record, for any reason, no

matter how worthy it may appear

on the surface, places himself in

an indefensible position. No good

intention can justify the folly of

allowing this data to become the

potential tool of selfish ambition.

An agency which countenances

the misuse of police records is

unworthy of the confidence and

cooperation of other police or-

ganizations."

FLORIDA (Nov. 1956) - The

Florida legislature recently

passed a bill setting up a legisla-

tive committee with subpoena

power and authority to investi-

gate any person or group whose

activities are conducive to vio-

lence, violate state law or are det-

rimental to the state. The bill

does not mention the NAACP by

name, but Senate sponsors said

that group was the prime target.

Governor Collins said the lan-

guage of the bill was broad:

enough to permit an investigation

also of the Ku Klux Klan. :

(Nov.

LAE

HAT IT MEANS TO BE

SELED "SECURITY RISK'

(Ed's note: Highteen months following a dishonorable discharge from the

Army, the Adjutant General issued Robert Martinson of Monterey, an honorable

discharge. The following remarks `are' taken from a letter to the ACLU from

Martinson, whom the ACLU defended.)

"On May 12, 1955, the first ser-

geant had informed me, with ob-

vious relief, that I was to be. dis-

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_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch 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_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_1999 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 charged that `morning; reports,

details, inspections, K. P.-these

"were well within his ken, but this.

subversive business! It was swel-

tering as only a hot Georgia day

can be. I slowly walked the half

mile to the discharge point. I was

afraid to be happy, to have any

emotion, since no one had in-

formed me what type of discharge

I was to receive.. I had lived daily

through the regime of suspicion

for almost a year. My records

were "flagged"; I had been taken

from my job and frozen as a pri-

vate in another job much below

my capacity. I religiously stood

K.P. once a`month. I had spent

my extra nights for months writ-

ing letters through channels,

which were never answered, see-

ing lawyers who were afraid to

help me, taking expensive trips

to New York to dig up favorable

evidence.

ARMY HEARING

I had just recently undergone

the shock of a shoddy ludicrous

farce which the Army generously

called a "hearing." I had been

forced to stand before a lieuten-

ant colonel and two majors in the

military police corps to tell the

story of my life in detail. These

gentlemen had the thankless task

of determining whether my reten-

`tion in the Army was "in the in-

terests of national security." The

Army had charged me with being

a Socialist...had lifted a few

words from the beginning of one

of my writings, added a few from

the end, connected the entire

amount by a series of modest dots,

and proved conclusively that I

was ...a Communist! They backed

up this charge with a huge, five-

pound secret file, containing, I

imagine, all the assiduous dig:

gings of the FBI.

Thus you may Ve able to im-

agine my feelings on that particu-

lar day, walking slowly through

that Army camp in Georgia. The

Army had spent thousands of dol-

lars giving me a "hearing." Doz-

ens of witnesses were called, hun-

dreds of documents inserted,

HAVANA, Cuba (Nov. 2, 1956)

Six countries were blasted for

having virtually no freedom of

the. press. by the 12th annual

meeting of the Inter-American

Press Association, which ended

here yesterday. The six countries

were Venezuela, Nicaragua, Co-

lombia, the Dominican Republic,

Bolivia and Paraguay.

_ SACRAMENTO (Sept. 21, 1956)

All State employees have the

right to campaign and vote for

political candidates of their

choice, Governor Goodwin J.

Knight said today. In delineating

a sort of Magna Charta for State

workers, both civil service and

appointive, Knight declared, "I

believe a man's job shouldn't be

dependent upon the old political

machine theory that he must do

as the boss says." (Ed's note: No

mention was made of the Little

Hatch Act.)

TOKYO, September 24 (AP)-

Captain Thomas W. Wagner,

"commander of the Iwakuni: Na-

val Air Base in Japan today an-

nounced a "drive to stop Ameri-

can servicemen from living ille-

gally with Japanese women." He

emphasized, however, that he had

issued no specific orders, but

only gave them strong advice.

"Tt told them such living arrange-

ments could make them suspect

as possible security risks,' he

said.

NEW YORK (Oct. 29, 1956)-

Edward J. Fitzgerald, 44, a for-

mer Federal economist and re-

searcher, today became the first

person imprisoned under the

Compulsory Testimony Act of

1954. Under the act, a witness

who has been granted immunity

thousands of words inscribed into

the. record. Yet I knew that the

real decision would be made by

some phantom in the Pentagon.

By. late afternoon I had gone

through the preliminaries. A med-

ical checkup, dental examination,

ete. I was called from a bench by

a sweating clerk. He began to

type out my final papers. Name?

Next of kin? Age? Suddenly I

objected. I had been at this all

day, and I still didn't know what

type of discharge. "Oh, let's see

now." The clerk fumbled through

various papers. Oh, yes, undesir-

able."

Now, 17 nr iae have gone by.

McCarthy is temporarily eclipsed.

The Pentagon has been under

pressure from the Hennings Com-

mittee. So one fine day I received

a short note from John A. Klein,

major-general, USA, announcing

my honorable discharge.

"A review of your records

has been made and it has been

determined that the character

of separation showing `undesir-

able' is recharacterized `honor-

able'."

No apology for the slight error

made? No attempt to explain

why? Small error.

WHO PAYS?

But who is to repay the months

and months of grinding humilia-

tion when I was separated from

my fellows, denied advancement,

frozen in my job, forced to par-

`ticipate in a ludicrous, dishonest

hearing? Who will wipe out that

moment when the clerk said: "Oh,

yes, undesirable." Who will wipe

out the horror of having to look

for work with an "undesirable

discharge" attached to one's

name? Who will repay the time

and effort of dozens of loyal

friends who grubbed for evidence,

or organizations like the Work-

ers' Defense League and the

American Civil Liberties Union

who came to my defense?

To my mind, one thing and one

thing only. Its fundamental spine

is still the monstrous "subversive

list" of the attorney general. This

list...the decisions connected

with `it must be completely opie

erated.

from prosecution is required to-

answer questions or face prosecu-

tion for contempt of court.

NEW YORK (November 26,

1956)-The national ACLU called

today. for removal of "loyalty

oath" questions from application

forms for insurance licenses is-

sued in the District of Columbia.

The ACLU pointed out that as

long ago as 1951 the U. S. Su-

preme Court ruled the Attorney

General's so-called "subversive"

list of organizations does not con-.

form to proper standards of due

process, since neither the groups

nor their members were granted

hearing to answer the designation,

and that the Supreme Court had

ruled in the SlochoWer hearing

to answer the designation, and:

that invoking the constitutional

guarantee of the 5th Amendment

is legally proper and "its use

does not necessarily mean an in-

dividual was involved in the com-

mission of a crime." ACLU na-

tional director Patrick Malin said

the ACLU is well aware of Com-

munist assaults on civil liberties

but cannot see how "the real

Communist danger can be dealt

with through the questions raised

in the application:"

DETROIT (Nov. 1956) - The

Detroit Police Department's sys-

tem of pre-censorship of pocket

books was scored recently by the

ACLU as "censorship at its un-

constitutional worst," in a memo-

randum filed with the U. S. Su-

preme Court by its Metropolitan

Detroit Branch in the case of Al-

fred E. Butler.

_ ACLU NEWS

December, 1956

Page 3

Unanimous Decision

Reverses Conviction

In Bentley

Case

The Appellate Department of the Alameda County Super-

ior Court, in an unanimous opinion, reversed a conviction in

the case of Jathrow Bentley,

attorney Lew Warden of Oakland.

handled by ACLU volunteer

Bentley was conviceted last spring by a jury on a charge

of obstructing the sidewalks,and -

refusing to move when ordered

to do so by a police officer.

The violation of due process in-

volved in the case was brought to

the attention of the ACLU by

Bentley's attorney, who later han-

dled the appeal as a volunteer

ACLU attorney. At the trial, the

District Attorney berated Bent-

ley over Warden's objections, for

`insisting on a jury trial. He also

questioned him as to whether he

planned to bring false arrest suit

against the arresting officer in

the event he was acquitted. With

Bentley's affirmative answer, the

District Attorney stated that the

defendant's testimony should be

discredited because he hoped to

have "some kind of financial re-

ward coming out of the experi-

ence that he encountered."

In Superior Court Judges S.

Victor Wagler and Thomas, J.

Ledwich, held that it was improp-

er for the District Attorney to

criticize the defendant for de-

manding a jury trial even though

only a minor violation of law was

involved. The Court stated that

`St is improper for the prosecu-

tion to draw an unfavorable infer-

ence from the refusal of the ac-

cused to give up a constitutional

right." They also held that the

judge presiding at the trial was

in error in allowing the District

Attorney to give his opinion to

the jury that Bentley wanted a

jury trial because "a false arrest

suit is probably pending against

the officers." The Court conclud-

ed its decision by stating: "A

careful analysis of the argument

of the District Attorney leads us

to conclude, as defendant con-

tends, that the jury was subtly

told that the police officer would

be sued for a large sum of money

because of a very little mistake,

if he made a mistake at all, un-

less the jury found the defendant

guilty. The total effect of this ar-

gument, together with the im-

proper criticisms of defendant's

request for a contitutionally guar-

anteed right to a jury trial, was -

that he did not have a fair trial,

and because the evidence in the

case as to the defendant's guilt

was extremely close, the judg-

ment of conviction is reversed."

DRAFTEE CLEARS

SECURITY HURDLE

A draftee who was separated

from the Army with the character

of his discharge "to be deter-

mined," pending disposition of se-

curity charges, has now been ad-

_vised that he has been cleared

and has received an honorable

separation. He was represented

by the ACLU of Northern Cali-

fornia.

The main charge against the

draftee was that he was "an ac-

tive member of, and currently

maintain a close association with,

the San Francisco Chinese Ameri-

can Democratic Youth League, an

organization which supports and

`serves the interests of the Peo-

ple's Republic of China and the

Union of Soviet Socialist Repub-

lics in preference to the interests

of the United States." It was also

claimed that he had falsified his

loyalty form by failing to list his

affiliation with the League.

The Chairman of the League's

board testified on behalf of the

draftee. and denied that the or-

ganization had any political pur-

pose whatever. While some of the

members may be sympathetic

with Red China, they hold such

sympathies as individuals and do

not thereby reflect the policies of

the organization.

The House Committee on un-

American activities committee is

holding hearings in San Francisco

December 10 and 11. The hear-

ings are open to the Public, and

will be held at the Post Office

Building at Seventh and Mission

Streets.

Sharp Park Police

Case on Appeal

On November 9, in the Superior Court of San Mateo County, the

ACLU filed an appeal brief on behalf of Randolph Wallace and

Frederick Aykens, who were found guilty by a jury, and fined heavily

for being "lewd and dissolute persons" at Hazel's Bar in Sharp Park.

Five reasons were presented in the appeal brief why injustice had

The ACLU Board has accepted

with regret, the resignation of

Ruth Kingman, who has been a

member of the board since 1942.

A resident of Berkeley, and former

president of the League of Women

Voters, Mrs. Kingman was identi-

fied with the opposition to the re-

moval and detention of West Coast

Japanese during and immediately

following World War II. Mrs.

Kingman indicated that her resig-

nation was dictated by her deci-

sion, and that of her husband, to

spend six months of each year in

Washington, D. C. Mr. Kingman

will be a volunteer lobbyist for

civil liberties ``on the hill," and

Mrs. Kingman plans to devote her

energies to home rule for Wash-

ington residents.

SECURITY RISK

Continued from Page 1-

trict attorney for Alameda Coun-

ty, and his four assistants. -

"The argument contained in

the amicus curiae brief of the

American Civil Liberties Union

is an example of tactics frequent-

ly adopted in modern times by

alien elements which seek to

clothe unlawful conduct in the

garment of constitutional sanc-

tity." Hoo;

Maintains Coakley, religious

freedom prohibits the imposition

of prior restraints on the practice

of religion, but does not preclude

an examination of conduct to de-

termine if that conduct is, in fact,

religious, in cases where such or-

ganizations claim tax exemption

as a religious group.

~ Report On Smith Act Hearings (c)

by Willard Carpenter

(Ed's note: the following is re-

printed in_part, from the November

issue of FRONTIER MAGAZINE,

with permission of Willard Carpen-

ter. In attempting to answer the

question ``Does the Smith Act af-

fect only Communists, or other dis-

senting political minorities?"', Mr.

Carpenter arrives at an answer

based on the hearings on the Smith

Act, which he attended last month,

held before the Supreme Court in

Washington, D. C.. Mr, Carpenter

is a former Los Angeles newspaper-

man, 2 contributor to NEW RE-

PUBLIC, FRONTIER _MAGAZINE,

and is now assistant director of the

southern California branch of the

American Civil Liberties Union.)

Last month the Supreme Court took

its long-awaited second look at the

1940 Smith Act, our first federal

eacetime sedition law since 1798.

Five years ago, in the Dennis case,

which involved 11 of the top Com-

munist Party leaders in the United

States, the Court upheld the consti-

tutionality of the Smith Act-Justices

Black and Douglas dissenting. Then,

however, the Court. examined only

the broad constitutional questions.

This time, a Court with two new Jer

ices, Earl Warren and John Marshal

Harlan, gave a full review, including

examination of the government's a

dence, and the _type of person cent

government produces as witnesses at

Smith Act trials ("Paid ate

Chief Justice Warren called them; the

government prefers "confidential in-

formants.'') :

ment was heard first in_the

california ie the first, since as

nis, of 13 Smith Act trials, (wit ae

total of 95 persons convicted) | we ee

reviewed by the Court. The Cali on

defendants were convicted of qd) a

conspiracy to advocate violent oer

throw of the government as Epes ty

as circumstances permit, and e a

organize a group te so advocate. Sern

was fined $10,000 and sentence

five years pene Seeapolls

"L ngeles attorney Ben Ma

nae aica ihe argument for 11 of ne

California Se eer 8

teinberg, : ; .

Tina. Tapert Kusnitz, Fox, Dobbs,

Healey and Carlson. Robert W. rt

ney, former attorney-general of ee io

ornia, represented William Schnei oer

man of Oakland. Republican_and ae

mer vice-president of _the California

State Bar Augustin Donovan, repr

sented Richmond and Connel wae

jtors of the Daily eee hee ce

lis first contrast e Den

Ge ith this trial: these were en

Offiaicls of the Communist Party, ane

the Court must, for the first ne

decide what type of ``overt act pe

government may prove, the two overt

acts charged by. the government a

two public meetings sponsored by

Communist Party. te te ae

was questioned closely =

bees Frankfurter and Reed. Q. (Jus-

tice Frankfurter): In consDe

cases, the overt act, need not in itse

be unlawful, need it?

A. But advocacy as an overt uk a

other test; as speech, 1 )

Bea -100 per cent by the First

ae oed): Do you mean that

speech which is incitement cannot be

rt act? :

nS nis is not what I mean. oe

ig no evidence here that language 0

incitement was_ used. _ These were

nothing but Pue. see call oO

is: rren : =

a arzuicd an additional point

for another of the California defen-

dants, Schneiderman. In 1943 Schnei-

derman was represented by the late

Wendell Willkie, the Court had

Leninist books in Schneiderman's de-

naturalization case. The Court said

then that Schneiderman's belief in

Marxism-Leninism was not necessa-

rily inconsistent with the oath he took

on becoming a U.S. citizen, Kenny

argued it was not just to subject him

to a second trial on the same issue.

Justice Harlan said his understand-

ing of the real issue in the first

Schneiderman ease was that the gov-

ernment had not proved its case,

that the Court had not reached the

issue of Schneiderman's belief, and

therefore Kenny was wrong in saying

the government could not readjudicate

his belief and intent.

FREEDOM OF THE PRESS

INVOLVED

Finally, Mr. Donovan argued for

the remaining two California defen-

dants, Richmond and Connelly. Dono-

van. said the government had admitted

in its brief that there has never been

one word in the newspaper advocat-

ing violence. The only evidence, he

said, against these two was their long-

standing membership in the Party.

"Many times,'' Donovan added after

listing the political issues advocated

in the paper, ``they were in the

minority, but it will be a sorry day

in America when the only safe side

is on the bandwagon.

"There is just no evidence,"' he con-_

tinued, ``that, Richmond and Connel-

ly did anything illegal; in fact, it is

just the contrary. All the govern-

ment''s evidence consists of perfectly

legal writings.'' ;

THE POSITION OF THE

GOVERNMENT |

U. S. Attorney Philip R. Monahan

presented the government's case.

"The defense attorneys were talk-

ing about the relatively minor posi-

tions held in the CP by these Califor-

nia defendants,'' Monahan began. "If

it is true that the Dennis defendants

were the four-and five-star generals,

then these Communists were the brig-

adier and major generals. They are all

in the same army."'

justices sharply questioned

Monahan.

A. (Black): What about the pri-

vates? Is there any reason why an

ordinary member couldn't be_con-

victed under the same charges?

A.-It would depend upon the evi-

dence. : =

Monahan read from a CP "`classic.

`A majority of the workers (or at

least. a majority of the class conscious,

thinking, political active workers)

should fully understand the necessity

for revolution and be ready to sac-

rifice their lives for it. It is only

petty-bourgeois democrats who call

themselves socialists who say the

party of the proletariat should take

power only when a majority of the

population is convinced.' '"

A. (Frankfurter): What is the date

of this. book? :

A.-1924. The government is not

selecting these passages; the CP did

in their schools. g 2

Q. (Black): Would it be sufficient

if a defendant handed one of these

books to someone pone out these

violent passages? Would e have to

add, `I urge you to do this?' A.-He

would have to make `that clear.

Q. (Black): Do you have such evi-

dence? A.-Remember that this is a

conspiracy case. There is no need that

each defendant say this out of his

own lips. So long as he is a knowing

member of the conspiracy he can be

be- |

held responsible for any act of an-

other member. - :

Q. (Frankfurter): I'm still in a

cloud whether the indictment means

advocate idezs or action. Advocate is

a dubious term. In the Dennis case

there were charges which gave the

unequivocal character of incite to the

meaning of advocacy. In a trial of

this complexity, lasting over six

months, a jury of ordinary men and

women must have illuminating gui-

dance from the court so they could

act on the central issue. If they did

not that is suffiicent for this court

to reverse. I don't, mind telling you,

I have the greatest difficulty with the

adequacy of the court's charge. A.-

There is nothing sacrosanct about the

word incite. It's the idea behind it

that is important. And Judge Mathes

got this idea across to the jury using

different words.

Q. (Douglas): Were overt acts

charged? Were they anything more

than mere advocacy? A.-Attendance

at CP meetings, Lenin rallies, and so

forth.

Q. (Douglas): Were they sabotage?

A.-No, advocacy of sabotage.

Q. (Douglas): What took place at

these meetings?

`Both honored the memory of

Lenin, the hero of the Russian Revo-

lution. They were not limited to Par-

ty members and the evidence shows

they were heavily attended. One was

a protest against the Dennis trial in

New York City. At the other, defen-

'dant Schneiderman spoke on _ the

China situation; among other things,

he charged that this Government's

sending of assistance to the Chinese

Nationalist Government was part of

`a cold-blooded plot to make war on

the Chinese people.' The evening's

program included an appeal for funds.

recruits new members and interests

It is at such meetings that the Party

outsiders in its program with the

objective of winning, if not new mem-

bers, at least passive allies-people

who won't oppose them when they

make the move and strike for power.

KENNY'S ARGUMENT

UNDER ATTACK

Monahan read from the Court's 1943

Schneiderman decision to dispute

Kenny's argument that Schneider-

man's beliefs had been the real issue:

"We do not say that a reasonable

man could not, possibly have found, as

the district court did, that the CP

- in 1927 actively urged the overthrow

of the Government by force and viol-

ence. But that is not the issue here.''

Q. (Frankfurter): What then were

all those Marxist quotations doing in

the decision? What did the Court de-

cide then but that the lower court

was wrong in its interpretation of

those readings? Isn't the bulk of your

evidence this time the same stuff?

Q. (Harlan): Do you have enough

different evidence in this case to hold

Schneiderman without considering the

duplicated evidence? A.-Yes. -

Q. (Frankfurter) : How do you know

the jury would have so found since

all the evidence was presented to

them? This is not for us to decide.

A.-I would like to point out that Mr.

Kenny called the first Schneiderman

case his client's certificate of sanity.

I add that this certificate is dated

1927 and it doesn't say Schneiderman

is sane, but that the government

didn't prove him insane.

Several other cases involving Smith

Act defendants also were argued. Mrs.

Yates, one of the California defend-

Page 4 ACLU NEWS

December, 1956

ants, had received an additional one-

year sentence for contempt of court.

fore it many of the same Marxist-

Los Angeles attorney A. L. Wirin

and Leo Branton argued for Mrs.

Yates; Kevin T. Maroney for the gov-

ernment. oe

The Court reversed the conspiracy

convictions of five Pittsburgh Smith

Act defendants, including Steve Nel-

son, and ordered a new trial after

the government admitted their star

-witness Joseph Mazzei had a ``psychi-

atric condition.'' There were three

dissents; Justices Burton, Frank-

furter and Harlan announcing they

would let the trial judge make the de-

cision on a new trial. Up to press-

time, this has been the only decision

on_any of these cases. :

, Questions by the Justices seemed to

indicate that the Court was disturbed

about the constitutionality of the

membership clause (of the Smith Act).

(This section does not require proof

of a conspiracy-mere membership in

the Communist Party, plus personal

knowledge of its advocacy of violence

suffices). Justice Harlan questioned

its broad scope: He asked, ``Suppose

a person got a letter which said, `Our

party is dedicated to force and vio-

lence, and we want you as a member.'

Suppose he signs up and does nothing

More Wouldn't the statute reach

im?

The issues in these cases strike

deep to the heart of the meaning of

free speech in a democracy. There

have always been persons advocating

ideas abhorent to many Americans.

Legally, these_principles were recog-

nized by the Founding Fathers when

they added the free speech require-

ment to the Constitution. Only when

there is a clear and present danger of

unlawful action following advocacy

should the government restrict speech.

These conceptions have been the foun-

dation stones of our form of govern-

ment.

In discussing the clear and present

danger posed by American Commun-

ists, it is easy to become confused

with phrases such as ``tightly dis-

ciplined army,'' "`force and violence''.

and with examples drawn from other

countries. It is the United States of

mid-20th Century with which we are

concerned-powerful and prosperous,

with a people whose respect for law

and order ranks second to none. We

must. examine the real danger to

America, and weigh that against the

loss we all suffer when any idea is

proscribed.

Contrast the internal danger posed

by the Communists in the United

States with the recent riots in Ken-

tucky and Tennessee fomented by the

White Citizens Councils. If ever a

tinder-box. situation called for restric-

tions on free speech it was in these

border states when school opened this

fall. ho can imagine similar riots

anywhere in the U. S. following ad-

vocacy of violent revolution to estab-

lish the dictatorship of the prole-

tariat? It can be argued that even in

the South how much better it would

(c) 14th

been done: 1) The three (one was

acquitted) came to trial 37 days

after their arrest. The law pro-

vides a legal limit of 30 days;

thus the due process clause of the

amendment was trans-

gressed. 2) That the words of the

law under which they were found

guilty-"willfully and unlawfully

a vagrant, in that he was a lewd

and dissolute persons"'-is of it-

self indefinite and fails to pro-

vide certain standards of guilt.

"Vagrancy," maintains the ACLU

brief, "is a crime of condition, of

status; one in which character is

involved." Can a person be ar-

rested and found guilty of a con-

dition, and can one "dissolute"

act (men dancing together) pre-

clude that a person then has a

condition of "dissolution?" Here

there is question as to the consti-

tutionality of such a law. 3) All

three of the cases were lumped

together in one trial, over the ob-

jection of the counsel, rather

than weighing each case indi-

vidually, which is deprivation of

due process of law. 4) The deci-

sion rendered by the judge at the

jury trial, was to banish them

from San Mateo County for a two-

year probationary period, which

is not provided for by any law of

the State of California, and is

therefore unlawful, claims the

ACLU. 5) That the heavy sen-

tence and fine imposed (9 days in

jail or $500) was all out of pro-

portion to the fines levied upon

those who jumped bail or pled

guilty ($10), and yet they were

all charged with the same of-

fense. This, says the brief, is de-

privation of equal protection and

process of the law.

CASE HISTORY

The case began when Sheriff

Earl B. Whitmore of San Mateo

County received several com-

plaints that Hazel's bar in Sharp

Park was catering to homosex-

uals. Undercover investigation by

plainclothesmen confirmed this,

he maintained, and on weekends,

between 200 and 400 homosexuals

could be found dancing together.

Then shortly after midnight on

February 19, 1956, he conducted a

police raid, arresting over 80 per-

sons (the number was never defi-

nitely established, but set at 88

persons). They were arrested,

photographed, fingerprinted im-

-mediately, and their bail was set

at $50. On February 24, 1956, sep-.

arate formal complaints were

issued on each defendant. Only (c)

those who "were dancing to-

gether ... who were committing

an act not a credit ... to men

of average intelligence' were ar-

rested, said Whitmore.

Wallace and Aykens have

stated under oath that they ar-

rived at the bar after midnight,

had one drink each, were con-

versing with-each other, and at

no time engaged in dancing.

be to allow all agitators a platform

with sufficient police in the area to -

prevent advocacy from being trans-

Jated into unlawful action.

The review of the Smith Act cases

before the Supreme Court must be

considered against the background of

American political history of the past

ten years of loyalty oaths, loyalty-

security programs, political investiga-

tions by congressional committees,

and use by the government of paid

political informers, not a few of whom

have proved perjurers. Zechariah

Chafee wrote recently that these prac-

tices recall `nothing I know of in his-

tory since the hysteria over the

Popish Plot in England around 1680."'

If members of political minorities,

no matter. how repugnant their views

may be, can be jailed for their ideas,

this law becomes an instrument that

dual or group whose ideas may be op-

posed to whatever political party

happens to be in power.

_This, in essence, is the question now

before the Supreme Court.

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS |

Published Monthly at 503 Market Street, San Francisco 5, California

EDITOR: Ernest Besig

STAFF: Lawrence Speiser, Priscilla Ginsberg

GUEST CONTRIBUTORS: Edward Barrett, Jr.

Bob Bastion

Willard Carpenter

Second class mail privileges authorized at San Francisco, Calif.

SUBSCRIPTION RATES: $1.50 yearly; 15cent per copy