vol. 8, no. 12

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

FREE SPEECH FREE PRESS FREE ASSEMBLAGE

“Eternal is the price of liberty.”

Vol. VIII SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, DECEMBER, 1943 No. 12

NEW EXCLUSION TEST SUIT

Continued Exclusion of Citizens of Japanese Ancestry to Be Challenged

A case in the federal courts to test the right of the military to continue to exclude from the West Coast military area a loyal Japanese American solely because of race has been authorized by the national board of the American Civil Liberties Union. Action was taken following the completion of the process of separating Japanese Americans held to be disloyal from the loyal. The disloyal are confined at the Tule Lake Center in California; the others are permitted conditional freedom outside the West Coast area. Only Japanese American soldiers in uniform are allowed to enter the zone.

Case Not Yet Selected

The selection of a test case and the time and place of bringing it have been referred by the Union to Southern California counsel, A. L. Wirin, who is also counsel for the Japanese American Citizens League. Both organizations joined in the previous test cases in the U. S. Supreme Court, which upheld the right of the military to enforce curfew rules against Japanese Americans, and by implication sustained their evacuation aS an emergency measure to control sabotage and espionage. Counsel for the Union believe that the Supreme Court would not now sustain their continued exclusion in view of changed circumstances.

Korematsu Case

Still pending in the courts are two other cases testing the rights of citizens of Jap- | anese ancestry. The first is the case of Fred T. Korematsu, who was convicted and placed on 5 years’ probation by the U. S. District Court in San Francisco for failing to obey the Military’s order to report to an Assembly Center for eventual evacuation to a relocation center. The case was argued before the Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting in bank, early last May. At that time the court certified to the Supreme Court the technical question whether an appeal could be taken from an order of probation. The case was returned to the Circuit Court early in June after the Supreme Court had decided the technical question in Korematsu’s favor. Ever since the Circuit Court has left undecided the question of the constitutionality of the Military’s evacuation of citizens of Japanese ancestry. Since then, too, one of the seven judges who heard the case has died. Korematsu is represented by Wayne M. Collins, the Union’s attorney.

Detention Case

The second case, that involving Mitsuye Endo of Sacramento, held at the Tule Lake _ Relocation Center for about a year and a half, has just reached the Circuit Court of Appeals. In that case, Federal Judge Michael J. Roche denied an application for a writ of habeas corpus which questioned the right of the government to detain American citizens of Japanese ancestry once they have been removed from a military area. Briefs are now being prepared by the respective attorneys, but the last brief is not due until February 6, so the argument in the case will not occur until sometime after that date.

The Northern California branch of the A.©.L.U., through Attorney Wayne M. Collins, filed an amicus curiae brief in the lower court supporting Miss Endo’s contentions, and the Executive Committee has (Continued on Page 4, Col. 1)

THANK YOU!

The office is taking this means of thanking its 246 supporters (a record number) who last month sent in contributions toward our $4540 budget for the fiscal year ending October 31, 1944. Approximately forty-five per cent of the budget has thus far been raised.

‘We hope that those who have not yet contributed will do so without delay. Also, about 50 of the couple of hundred persons whose memberships expired last month have not yet gotten around to sending in their renewals. Please do it now!

DENIAL OF PERSONAL HEARING LEADS TO DISMISSAL OF DRAFT CHARGES

Last month, Federal Judge A. F. St. Sure of San Francisco dismissed an indictment against John Gilbert Laier of Palo Alto who was charged with failing to report for induction in the Army. In doing so, the court upheld the contentions of Laier’s counsel, Clarence E. Rust of Oakland, that Laier had been denied due process of law because the draft board failed to accord him “an opportunity to appear in person,” as provided by the draft regulations.

The government argued that Laier could only challenge the draft board’s action if he first submitted himself to induction, and then sought a writ of habeas corpus. Judge St. Sure held, however, that ‘‘where, as here, the record itself shows that the draft board has disregarded the regulations and has exceeded its jurisdiction in classifying a registrant, the order to appear for induction is void as a matter of law and the in- dictment predicated thereon is subject to a motion to dismiss.”

Laier is a Jehovah’s Witness who sought classification as a minister.

S. F. Board Defers Action On Religious Teaching

The San Francisco Board of Education has postponed further consideration of a plan for “released school time for religious instruction” until August, 1944. The vote was 4 to 2, with Bart Supple and Richard Doyle, the latter recently defeated for reelection, constituting the minority. One Board member was absent.

The prevailing motion, made by Mrs. Edwin Sheldon, also provided that the: Board should canvass the opinions of various interested groups in the community between now and next August. Mrs. Sheldon explained that she had felt sympathetic to the plan until she discovered that there was eonsiderable disagreement among the various Protestant and Jewish groups.

President Harry I. Christie, in explain ing his vote, pointed out that while the pe- titioners, the Inter-Faith Committee of San Francisco, had invited some 200 persons, representing various faiths, to sponsor the released school time plan in San Francisco, only about 60 persons responded.

Rev. John C. Leffler, chairman of. the Inter-Faith Committee, was assured by the Board that the subject would come up automatically next fall, and that it would not be necessary for the committee at that time to renew its petition.

Monsignor James O’Dowd, spokesman for the Roman Catholic Church, following the board’s vote, arose at the meeting and expressed his deep dissatisfaction with the action. With some show of feeling, he declared the postponement constituted a “definite negative vote, and we are disappointed in no uncertain terms.”’

On the other hand, one board member, John D: McGilvray, expressed vehement opposition to any released school time proposal at the board’s preliminary meeting. “It seems to me,” said he, ‘‘the churches feel they have failed in the job and want to shoulder us with their responsibility.

The Public Education Society of San Francisco, the Scottish Rite Masons and the American Civil Liberties Union appeared in opposition to the proposal.

In the meantime, the City of Vallejo has © adopted a released school time plan for religious instruction in the “Steffan Manor school area,’’ which becomes operative on December 6, and San Jose has also adopted a plan. San Diego rejected a similar pro- posal last August.

VALIDITY OF ANTI-EVACUEE LAW ARGUED IN ARIZONA SUP. COURT

The Arizona Supreme Court on November 15 heard arguments on the constitutionality of a law which limits business dealings with Japanese and other persons whose movements have been restricted. A lower court held the law unconstitutional on July 6, but the State then appealed.

Page 2

U. S. Supreme Court Hears Negro Voting Case

The appeal of Lonnie E. Smith, Houston, Texas, Negro from a Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision sustaining the right of the Democratic Party to exclude Negroes from primaries, was argued before the Supreme Court last month. The case, sponsored by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, involves the important question of whether the right to vote in a staté primary in a general election is protected by the Federal Constitution. Whitney North Seymour, counsel for the ACLU, filed a briefas friend of the court.

“The commands of the Constitution,” Mr. Seymour declared, ‘Shave not been so uni- formly accepted as to absure full participation of our Negro citizens in their electoral rights. Many efforts have been made to frustrate these commands, as previous decisions of this court and common knowledge attest. Texas, as well as other states, has overlooked the constitutional injunctions. .. . In the present state of the world, a further declaration by the Supreme Court of the principles underlying the constitu- tional safeguards of the ballot, denying the power of the majority, on grounds of race or color, to repress a minority which is contributing so much to the nation’s cause, would be heartening to all who believe in human liberty and dignity.”

President Stands Firm Against Race Discrimination

To clear away any doubt concerning the power of his order requiring anti-race- discrimination clauses in all government contracts, President “Roosevelt has overruled an opinion by Controller General Lindsay C. Warren, and declared the order mandatory.

In a letter to Attorney General Francis Biddle, the President reviewed Controller Warren’s reason for interpreting the order merely as a’directive, then set the Control- ler’s interpretation aside, and declared that all government contracts with private com- panies must contain a clause forbidding discrimination against workers because of race, color, creed or national origin.

The President’s clear public statement, and a report on the long-delayed railroad hearings held in September, represent two advances for the Fair Employment Practices Committee. The orders expected from the hearings have not yet been issued because of hopes of voluntary acceptance by additional railroads of the principle of no discrimination. Efforts are being made to give the FEPC statutory authority, for which a bill is pending in the House.

Minneapolis Sedition Cases

The United States Supreme Court on November 23 denied an appeal in the case of 18 members of the small Socialist Workers Party—followers of Leon Trotsky’s political philosophy, who were convicted in Minneapolis in 1941 on charges of advocating the violent overthrow of the government. The case marked the first peacetime federal prosecution for utterances and publications since the cases under the Alien and Sedition Act of 1798.

The immediate cause for the prosecutions was the transfer of the Minneapolis Team- sters Local, which was under the leadership of members of the Socialist Workers Party, from the A. F. of L.-to the C. I. O., as a result of disagreements with Daniel Tobin, president of the International and a strong supporter of the administration, over na- tional policy in relation to the war.

The only overt act charged against the defendants was the formation of a Workers Defense Corps to protect union property against threats of vigilante violence, and its activities, entirely public, covered only the few months in 1938 when apprehension of attack was acute. Otherwise, the government’s case was based on the utterances and writings of the defendants. The A.C.L.U. assisted the defendants throughout the entire proceedings.

House Committee Warned Of Anti-Race Bill Backfire

Drawing attention to the anti-free speech implications of the two bills pending in Congress, H.R. 2328 and H. J. Res. 49 aimed at curbing racial and religious an- tagonism, the A.C.L.U. filed a memorandum with the Committee on Post Office and Post Roads urging that the bills be reported unfavorably.

The memorandum said in part: ‘These bills extend the arbitrary censorship powers of the Postmaster General. Legislation to punish or prohibit race hatred in their very nature are a limitation on freedom of speech. For what will be interpreted as ‘an expression of racial hostility would depend on the prejudices of particular au- thorities. The offense is not and cannot be made sufficiently definite not to be sub- ject to gross abuses, as all experience in the United States and abroad has proved. Racial hatred cannot be legislated out of existence. Only education and tolerance can overcome that.”

As General Counsel for the A.C.L.U., . Arthur Garfield Hays wrote Congressman S. A. Weiss, chairman of the sub-Committee of the House Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads calling attention to the fact that in 1941 the New Jersey Supreme Court declared a similar statute unconstitutional, and urging that the bills be reported unfavorably.

H.R. 2328, by Congressman Lynch, makes non-mailable “all papers, etc., containing any defamatory and false statements which tend to expose persons designated, identified, or characterized therein by race or religion ...to hatred, contempt, ridicule, or obloquy, or tend to cause such persons to be shunned or avoided, or to be injured in their business or occupation, are hereby declared non-mailable matter...”

The measure by Mr. Dickstein, H.J. Res. 49, is similar to that of Mr. Lynch. It pro- vides that “all papers... and things designed or adapted or intended to cause racial or religious hatred or bigotry or intolerance, or to, directly or indirectly, incite to racial or religious hatred or bigotry or intolerance are héreby declared non— mailable matter and shall not be transmitted through the mails nor delivered from any post office by any letter carVer.

Financial Report for Fiscal Year Ending Oct. 31

While the close of the fiscal year ending October 31 showed a surplus of $381.34 in the General Account, the Northern California Branch spent $1550.88 from the Thomas T. White Reserve Fund in the various Japanese exclusion, curfew, detention and citizenship cases, while receiving only $269.29. Consequently, the branch was $900.25 poorer at the end of the fiscal year.

The surplus in the General Account has been transferred to the Thomas T. White Reserve Fund, which, as of November 1, shows a balance of $425.88 in cash and 4 U. S. Treasury Bonds valued at $2,000.

Here is the way your money received in the General Account was spent from November 1, 1942 to October 31, 19438:

Income General Receipts .... $4,418.37 Expenditures Salaries 20 2. 52,692.42 Printing and Sta... 542.28 Rent 2 330.00 Postage == 150.91 Toles Tel 2. 101.71 Traveling 2. 110.72 Miscellaneous ..............-26.09 Waxes == 29.85 Publications*..... 2 53.05 $4,037.03 Cash on hand Nov. 1 $ 381.34 General Hershey Refuses to Revise Treatment of C.O.'s

In reply to representations from the National Committee on Conscientious Objectors, General Hershey has declined to consider proposals to put all civilian service for conscientious objectors under civilian — officials instead of military officers, and to extend the forms of service now provided.

The National Committee addressed General Hershey in view of the expiration on December 31 of the present contractual arrangements with the National Service Board representing the religious agencies conducting work camps. The committee has urged that these camps be considered as only one form of service and that men — be not required, as now, to render «heir initial service exclusively in them.

In reply General Hershey said: ‘‘Your suggestion as to the surrender of control both in degree and in method seems a statement in interest. The responsibility under such arrangement would rest, as it does now, on the Director of Selective Service. The control would be in the hands of a large number of individuals who by their refusal to accept full responsibilities to their government have created the problem which we now try to solve.

“The method of assignment suggested varies little from present practices except in so far as the personnel who would carry it out for the director, and the addition of services more acceptable to the individuals who choose the alternative of civilian pub- lic service in lieu of accepting their responsibilities as citizens to defend their nation in time of war.

“My observation leads me to believe that efforts to satisfy objectors may easily be carried to the place where considerable proportions of our citizenry will refuse to tolerate the present methods of supervising civilian public service.” >The committee points out that General Hershey takes a “punitive attitude” to ob jectors, not according them the “status — granted by law.”

“Trial” of Jehovah's Witnesses Taken to Supreme Court

The case of Nick Falbo, Pennsylvania Jehovah’s Witness, sentenced to five years’ imprisonment for refusal of C. O. workassignment while claiming military exemption as a minister, was argued last month before the Supreme Court of the United States. Falbo’s appeal was assisted by the A.C.L.U. in a brief as a friend of the court, with Julien Cornell representing the Union as counsel, joined by Harold Evans, Ernest Angell and Osmond K. Fraenkel, of counsel.

The brief states that Falbo was “‘tried,” convicted and sentenced by a court which excluded evidence offered to show he was . a duly ordained and acting minister of re- ligion and that the draft board had erroneously classified him.

According to A.C.L.U. counsel more than a thousand young men of Falbo’s status as Jehovah’s Witnesses have been imprisoned for draft service refusal without trial at law. The Supreme Court was urged to strike out procedural rules which prevent conscientious objectors from interposing any defense.

BOOK ON LEGAL PROBLEMS AFFECTING CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTORS

Lawyers defending conscientious objectors will find helpful information in a new book, “The Conscientious Objector and the Law,” by Julien Cornell, counsel for the N.C.C.O. Written in popular style, Mr. Cornell’s book deals exhaustively with legal problems which arise in cases of conscientious objectors. Published by the John Day Company, the book is priced at $1.75. Copies also may be purchased from the Metropolitan Board for Conscientious Objectors, Room 414, 2 Stone Street, New York 4, New York.

Page 3

Let Freedom Ring

Bill of Rights Day

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise therecf; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”’

So reads the First Amendment to the Constitution — the heart of the Bill of Rights. December 15 marks the 152nd an-niversary of the adoption of the first ten amendments to the Constitution, which are commonly referred to as the Bill of Rights.

Business With Alcatraz

Last month we received a telephone call from Warden Johnston at Alcatraz concerning an inmate, J. L. Stewart, who died Nov. 3. The warden had been unable to locate any relatives so he communicated with us because in ‘looking over his papers the Record Clerk found a statement indicating that in case of death he desired his personal belongings to be given to the Civil Liberty League.’”’ The warden construed the “Civil Liberty League” to be the A.C.L.U. Stewart had no money or property of any kind, but in the course of many years (he was serving a 26-year sentence) he had filed seemingly endless habeas corpus proceedings in an effort to gain his liberty, and the A.C.L.U. fell heir to all of these papers which it will take a week to read.

Some Exiled Citizens Allowed to Return

A number of American citizens of German and Italian extraction previously excluded from the Western Defense Command as “dangerous or potentially dangerous” have recently been allowed to return to the Pacific Coast. Modification of the Army’s individual exclusion program was contained in the following announcement from Lieut. General Delos C. Emmons’ office: .

“The Commanding General, Western Defense Command, is now reviewing all nonJapanese exclusion cases, giving full consideration to improved internal security measures, additional information developed by the various intelligence services, and the improved military situation.

“In a number of cases, the exclusion orders are being suspended or rescinded.”

The Union knows of at least three cases in which exclusion orders have been re- scinded.

When An Exile Returns

A recent communication from A. C. Wamser of Alaska relates the loss of his business and the disappearance of his fishing boat during his year’s absence at the request of the Military. Wamser repossessed the boat when he discovered it, but the present claimants now charge him with larceny, so, thanks to the Army and the Alaska Packers Association whose representatives swore to rid themselves of his competition, Mr. Wamser must spend his time and diminished resources in the courts trying to get back what he had at the time the Army, without the benefit of a hearing, excluded him as a “dangerous or potentially dangerous” citizen.

Membership Report

The Union’s membership showed a very slight increase during the fiscal year ending October 31, 1943. There were exactly 624 members in good standing as against 621 on October 31, 1942. The turnover in members, however, was somewhat larger than usual. Members moved around more, and often got lost in the moving. Some disappeared into the armed forces without notifying us of their whereabouts, and still others moved to distant states and, therefore, discontinued their affiliations.

In addition to the 624 regular members, the branch had 112 separate subscribers to the “News” on October 31. Why not give a Xmas gift subscription to some friend whom you want to interest in the cause? The price is 75c.

Scileri Returns to Find Himself Expelled From Carpenters Union

After being released from almost a year’s internment by the Military in Hawaii, Erwin R. Seifert return to San Francisco to discover the incident had led to his expulsion from Local 22 of the Carpenters Union. Seifert and three other citizens, the last of a Caucasian group detained by the Army under martial law as dangerous or potentially dangerous, were shipped to the mainland in an Army transport and released in San Francisco.

Seifert and another internee named Glockner had secured writs of habeas corpus charging illegal detention which General Robert C. Richardson refused to obey. In consequence, Federal Judge Metzger fined General Richardson $5,000 for contempt. When the men were released and Richardson withdrew his order prohibiting the filiig of any habeas corpus proceedings, the fine was reduced to $100. The fine has not yet been paid, but Richardson has until January 25 to pay or take an appeal.

Expelled in Absentia

Seifert’s expulsion from the Carpenters Union was accomplished in his absence and without any notice to him. The Union’s Con. stitution requires notice by registered mail of the filing of charges and an opportunity to appear with counsel at any trial to con- test such charges, but the Constitutional procedure was totally ignored in this case. Indeed, when a telephone inquiry as to the procedure was made of Dave Ryan, secretary of the Bay Counties District Council of Carpenters, he responded by saying, ‘‘No-. ‘body’s going to tell us how to run the Union...

Seifert’s wife had been paying his dues while he was interned, but last May, without informing her, he asked the Union to excuse him from further payments until his release. Instead, without responding, the Union proceeded to file charges against him under the following catch-all provision of its Constitution: “Sec. 55. Any officer or member who becomes an habitual drunkard, or is guilty of improper conduct, or wrongs a fellow-member, or defrauds him, or commits an offense discreditable to the United Brotherhood, shall be fined, suspended or expelled.”

Mock Trial

On August 6, the charges (which have never been specified) were filed by the President of the Union, and finally, on September 8, a Trial Board considered the case and its verdict of expulsion was concurred in by the District Council on September 15. Three days later, the Secretary of the Union, Martin L. Bavage, finally sent a letter to Seifert in Honolulu advising him of the expulsion. Seifert did not. receive the letter before he left Honolulu and the first word he had of the Union’s action was when he landed on the mainland on October 29.

By that time, Seifert’s right of appeal to the General President, Wm. L. Hutcheson, in Indianapolis, had also lapsed because the Constitution requires an appeal within 30 days of a verdict. Further appeals lie to the General Executive Board and finally to the General Convention of the Union.

Mrs. Seifert discovered the situation when she sought without success to pay her husband’s dues. She immediately wrote to Mr. Hutcheson, but has never received a response. At her request, the local director of the Union sent a letter to Mr. Hutcheson explaining the legal situation in the Seifert case and pointing out the failure of the Union to adhere to its Constitution in expelling Seifert. No response was ever re- ceived.

Seifert Appeals to General President Now, Mr. Seifert has also written to Mr. Hutcheson and when it pleases that gentleman there may be an acknowledgment, not to speak of a decision. In the meantime, Seifert cannot secure a job in his trade because he no longer holds a Union card.

The foregoing case comes at a time when the A.C.L.U. has just published an 88-page pamphlet on “Trade Union Democracy,” which we announced in the November issue of the ‘‘News.” The report was not released until November 21, and we expect to have a supply available early in December. The report presents the results of a twoyear survey of democracy within trade unions. In endorsing the pamphlet 26 authorities on industrial relations warned that unless abuses in trade unions arising from the lack of democratic practices are curbed, unwarranted restrictions may be imposed on labor’s rights.

Two Legislative Measures Advocated The report advocates two legislative measures for the insurance of members’ rights within unions. The first would provide penalties for Union discrimination on racial, religious, political and sex grounds; the second would afford relief to members who complain of unfair expulsions from unions, through State and Federal agencies with a right of appeal to the courts.

Those endorsing the report include Monsignor John A. Ryan of the National Catholic Welfare Conference; William Allen White, editor of the Emporia, Kansas, Gazette; William Draper Lewis, director of the American Law Institute, Philadelphia; and James. Myers of the Federal Council of Churches.

National Board Member Visits Coast | The local Executive Committee last month met with Osmond K. Fraenkel, mem| ber of the national. board of the A.C.L.U. Mr. Fraenkel is a New York lawyer who was counsel in the Scotsboro, Bridges libel and other noted civil liberties cases. The discussions at the meeting dealt largely with the national board’s ‘Resolution of Oct. 19, 1942,” under which the national board now refuses to intervene in cases “where, after investigation, there are grounds for a belief that the defendant is cooperating with or acting on behalf of the enemy.” The resolution has resulted in numerous differences between the local and national offices.

Harold Chapman Brown Dies

We regret to report the death on November 9 of Dr. Harold Chapman Brown, who was Professor of Philosophy at Stanford University until ill health forced his retirement last spring.

Dr. Brown was closely associated with the work of the Northern California Branch of the A.C.L.U. ever since its reestablishment in the fall of 1934. He was one of its original Executive Committee members and continued to hold such a post in the Union. until poor health caused him to resign a couple of years ago.

UNION TAKES UP INTERNATIONAL ISSUES OF CIVIL LIBERTY

The Union’s Board of Directors has authorized a special committee to examine the possibility of useful action concerning American responsibility for civil rights in the international field, both during and after the war. The extension of American authority in conjunction with Allied governments to occupied and liberated areas has raised questions as to the application of civil rights, together with the larger issues involved in the application of the “Four Freedoms” to the peace settlement.

In addition the committee will examine the basis for international ‘Bill of Rights” af- fecting communication by radio, cables, the mails, the control of the import and export of motion pictures, and the problems of migration and refugees involved in immigra- tion laws.

A memorandum outlining the problems has been submitted to a number of experts for their opinion as to the role the Civil Liberties Union might play. Their replies will constitute the basis for consideration and report by the special committee,

Page 4

American Civil Liberties Union-News Published monthly at 216 Pine Street, San Fran- cisco, 4, Calif., by the Northern California Branch — of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Phone: EXbrook 1816 ERNEST BESIG .. ... Editor fntered as second-class matter, July 31, 1941, at the Post Office at San Francisco, California, under the Act of March 3, 1879.

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

NEW EXCLUSION TEST SUIT TO BE FILED

(Continued from Page 1, Col. 2)

authorized the filing of a brief in the Circuit Court.

In the meantime, difficulties have arisen at the Tule Lake Relocation Center which have been magnified out of all proportions by the Hearst press, the Dies Committee and a State investigating committee, and others. The following statement issued November 15 at the headquarters of Major General David McCoach, Commanding General of the Ninth Service Command at Fort Douglas, Utah, though brief, helps to clarify the picture as to what is happening at Tule Lake:

Army’s Statement About Tule Lake

“On. November 4, 1943, at 9:50 P. M. (PWT), at the request of the Project Director of the War Relocation Center at Tule Lake, the troops normally stationed at the camp moved in and took over control of the Center. At this time a small group of evacuees was dispersed from the administrative area.

“Since the Army assumed control of the Tule Lake Center there have been no dis- turbances. While there have been work stoppages among the evacuees in the Center the normal operation, such as feeding, housing, and medical care, has continued without interruption under the supervision of the military authorities. The troops are policing and patrolling the entire area and no incidents or signs of resistance or unrest have occurred.

“In the investigation by the Army which followed occupation, a few articles of con- traband were discovered and confiscated. No firearms or explosives have been dis- covered. The duration of Army control will depend upon future developments.” Dillon 8. Myer, director of the War Relocation Authority, in a lengthy statement, did not minimize the disturbances at Tule Lake ‘preceding the Army’s entry, but insisted that many of the stories being circulated are at variance with verifiable facts. He pointed out that the story that evacuees sought to burn down the administration building was not confirmed, and he also asserted that the first blow was struck by a camp employee.

Gov. Maw Answers Rabble-Rousers Also last month, Governor Herbert B.Maw of Utah courageously attacked discrimination against citizens of Japanese ancestry. “It has been suggested that the constitution be amended or laws enacted so that American citizens of Japanese ancestry may be removed from this country or denied privileges which our constitution guarantees to all Americans,” said the governor.

“I hope that the time never comes when the liberty of any American citizen is limited or restricted merely because his skin is dark, or his eyes appear slanted or because he belongs to a minority religious or racial group. If the time comes when this should be done, I would ask: What did we fieht for! —

TEST CASE ON C. O. PAY

Test cases challenging the constitutionality of the present laws and regulations drafting conscientious objectors for work without pay have been instituted in the U.S. District Courts at Buffalo, Los Angeles and Denver. The American Civil Liberties Union has retained counsel to aid C. O.’s interned in work camps near these cities.

Att’y General Biddle Examines Our Treatment of Japanese-Americans

Following is an extract from a speech by Attorney General Francis Biddle, on the subject “Democracy and Racial Minorities, delivered before the Jewish Theological Seminary of America at New York City on November 11:

When in April of 1942, the United States Army decided to exclude the 110,000 persons of Japanese origin, citizens and noncitizens alike, from the West Coast as a military precaution to protect our Western Defense Command, the treacherous attack by the Japanese on Pearl Harbor was four months fresh, and there had been movements of airplanes and submarines which indicated the possibility of an attack. On June 3, 1942, Japanese planes raided Dutch Harbor in Alaska. The Japanese in the United States were concentrated*in vital spots along the West Coast—in Portland, San Francisco and Los Angeles. It was not Surprising that public opinion in those States where Japanese were concentrated in great numbers was deeply disturbed over the possibility of sabotage and reacted violently against all persons of Japanese origin, loyal and disloyal alike. The legal theory on which they were excluded was that anyone — citizen and alien alike — could be moved out of a war area for its protection. The theory was valid enough. But, like most theories, its ultimate test depended on the reasonableness of its exer- cise. To say that citizens could be moved out of a war area might depend on the size of the area. If they could be moved away from the two ‘coasts, away from possible points of attack, how far inland could they be taken? Could citizens be retained in any specified part of the country? Roughly two-thirds of the persons moved were American citizens by reason of their birth in the United States, under the provisions of the American Constitution which protected them as effectively as it protected other citizens, irrespective of the color of their skins or the nationality of their ancestry. But in terms of public antipathy no distinction was drawn between citizens and aliens, between loyal and disloyal. In the eyes of the public, all persons of Japanese ancestry were Japs; and we had seen what the “Japs” had done to our soldiers.

Centers Designed As Places of Refuge — The relocation centers were not designed as places of internment but as a refuge. In most instances local communities at first would not have them at least in substantial numbers. Today the loyal Japanese who are American citizens are being gradually reestablished outside the centers in places where they may gain tolerance and acceptance. The Relocation Authority has no power to intern American citizens; and constitutionally it is hard to believe that any such authority could be granted to the government. The decision of the Supreme Court in the Hirabayashi case, decided last spring, indicates this conclusion. The court sustained the validity of curfew orders applied by the military authorities prior to the evacuation of the Japanese on the West Coast. The validity of the evacuation orders was not even considered, let alone the far more difficult problem of detention. Even the curfew order was said by Mr. Justice Murphy in his concurring opinion to go ‘to the very brink of constitutional power.”

I emphasize this particular problem— very special in its aspects—because it is far from solution; and public opinion, often hostile or indifferent, has made its solution infinitely more difficult.

Our Complacent Attitude

We have too casually accepted, I think, this perhaps necessary but obviously tem- porary meeting of the problem. We have hardly recognized its serious consequences and the fact that it has never occurred before. Would anyone, before the war, have complacently accepted the proposition that the government could move 75,000 American citizens out of their homes, and hold them with enemy aliens for relocation?

I do not believe that among those of Japanese parentage born and bred in America, graduated from our public schools, many of them speaking nothing but English, there are not men and women and young people who are loyal to our country. Of course 18 months in detention camps may have made some of them waver in their loyalty. But I am glad of the policy of the Relocation Authority which is directed towards sorting out the loyal citizens and returning them back into the community.

A Family Divided

Last August a group of Japanese aliens in one of the internment camps operated by the Department of Justice at Crystal City, Texas, was repatriated. This was a “family” camp, so-called because wives and children of the interned alien enemies were allowed to live with them in family groups. Among them was a Japanese family whose two sons, American-born, had already been released on their stated desiré to remain in the United States, even though their family was returning to Japan. The morning the repatriates were scheduled to leave, the two Japanese boys returned to the camp to say goodbye to their parents. Just at sunrise, as the American flag was being raised, and as the entire population of the camp gathered about the flag-pole for a farewell ceremony, the two young Japanese-Americans stepped forward, saluted the flag and sang “God Bless America.”’ They then left to join the American Army.

Recently a report from Fifth Army headquarters made special mention of Japanese Americans fighting side by side with other Americans in Italy. I am told that more than five thousand men of Japanese origin are today enrolled in our Army. Neither Japan nor Germany can boast of American battalions in their ranks. The Fifth Army says of these Japanese-Americans: ‘“‘They obviously believe in what they’re doing, and look calmly secure because of it.’’ Our sons are today fighting side by side with the sons of Italians, of Germans, and of Japanese. Is anything more needed to entitle the loyal Japanese-Americans to recognition.

We Are Tied Together by an Idea

For this is the very essence of our democracy in practice. The “Washington Evening Star” in a recent editorial, reporting the dispatch I have mentioned, made this ad- mirable comment: “All races, all colors, make us up. And when wars like the present engulf us, all races and all colors take up arms for America. When we strike back at our enemies, the American kin of those enemies do the striking—Americans of Italian extraction, of German extraction, even of Japanese extraction. We are of almost every extraction conceivable, black, white and yellow, and so we are tied together not by any mystical philosophy of blood. or common ethnic traits, but solely and simply by an idea—the idea of democracy, of individual freedom, of liberty under law, of a justice before which all of us stand equal.”

BLUE NETWORK TO PROBE FREE SPEECH ON THE AIR

Blue Network has announced the appointment of Thomas Porter Robinson, public relations and radio expert, as a research consultant for investigation of all matters concerning free speech and censorship on the air.

Other networks are also reconsidering their policies to determine what time should be sold to sponsors dealing with public issues, and what reserved for free time. Conferences have been held by the Union’s Committee on Radio with leaders in the industry to assist in formulating policy on the vexed questions of commentators, membership solicitation on the air, and the sale of time to labor unions.