vol. 9, no. 3

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

FREE SPEECH FREE PRESS FREE ASSEMBLAGE

“Eternal is the price of liberty.”

Vol. IX SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, MARCH, 1944 No. 3

RACIAL ISSUE WHITEWASHED

Servicemen Freed After Driving Car on Sidewalk and Killing Negro

A Negro was killed in San Francisco on February 14, and another injured, when two servicemen drove their car onto the sidewalk and ran them down.

The police, ' then the Coroner’s Jury and finally District Attorney Edmund G. Brown termed it “justifiable homicide.” To others, it seemed that the homicide was tantamount to a lynching, with the victims of a robbery undertaking to mete out justice as they saw fit, and the fact that the robbers were colored affecting the handling of the case.

Robbery Took Place

There is no question that a robbery took place. Pfe. George Arris and Boatswain - Anthony Battaglia, Caucasians, visited the colored district around 2:30 A. M. on Feb- There they met Charles W. Rupert, a colored man, who undertook to satisfy their request for girls. In the course of their conversation Rupert showed the servicemen his longshore badge which carries his picture. Absent mindedly, one of ' the servicemen put the badge in his pocket.

Rupert enlisted the help of Lewis Hili and Samuel! Richardson, whom he contacted at Brooks Cafe, in securing the girls. According to Inspector Corassa of the homicide detail, the men there arranged to hold up the servicemen, although Rupert was to act as though he had no part in it. The group walked up the street from the cafe and at a dark spot the servicemen were relieved of $17 and $8 respectively by Hill, while Richardson pointed a gun at them. One of the servicemen testified at the inquest that he was hit over the head with the gun but not injured.

Drove Car On Sidewalk

The robbers disappeared. The servicemen got into their car and claim they started toward Fillmore Street in search of a policeman. Five or six minutes after the robbery they saw the three robbers turning into Buchanan Street. They took after them in their car, mounted the sidewalk and then, according to Arris, driving in low gear at 7 or 8 miles an hour, they attempt-ed to corner the men in order to make an arrest. The robbers ran; one of them appeared to reach for a gun, and then Hill and Richardson were hit by the car. The servicemen continued on their way without stopping. They telephoned the police from a cafeteria on Fillmore street where they remained until the police picked them up.

The homicide occurred in front of the apartment house where Caleb Foote, Fellowship of Reconciliation secretary, resides. A noise of some kind awakened Foote and he went to the street to investigate. There he found Joseph Hill lying unconscious, his face badly torn, with a gun lying next to his body. An automobile door handle also lay near the body. Foote telephoned for an ambulance and police, and while he was gone the gun disappeared.

When the police arrived they made no effort to conceal their dislike of Negroes. Some colored eyewitnesses of the incident were interrogated and the information written down. Finally, when the ambulance arrived one of the policemen picked Hill up by the belt and placed him on a stretcher. He was dead on arriving at the hospital.

Longshore Badge Traps Rupert

Because he had left his badge with one of the servicemen, Rupert was readily picked up by the police in a restaurant on Fillmore St., while Richardson was apprehended after police received a report a man was (Continued on Page 4, Col. 2)

S. F. SCHOOL BOARD CONTINUES INDIRECT CHARGE FOR CIViC CENTERS

The San Francisco Board of Education has turned down the request of the Civil Liberties Union to change its regulation requiring the filing of a public liability policy in the sum of $100,000/$400,000 where the use of an auditorium or gymnasium is sought as a meeting place.

The Union had argued that since the policy in question costs about $45 ‘‘the Board is accomplishing by indirection that which it may not do directly—place a charge on the use of Civic Centers where no admission fee is required.’ Since the Board’s regulations also exempt certain groups from filing the policy, the Union pointed out that there is an unlawful discrimination against other groups who are permitted the use of meeting places under the Civic Center Act.

The local Executive Committee has authorized appropriate legal action unless the regulation in question is changed to conform to the Civic Center Act.

“MARTINEZ INCIDENT” CLOSED

The “Martinez incident” is closed! A couple of bad neighbors, coupled with inaccurate newspaper reporting, led to stories that Mrs. June Terry, a Nisei married to a Caucasian, had been run out of town. But she is still there, although at a different location. Because her landlord had been so very cooperative during her brief difficulties, Mrs. Terry moved in with her husband’s relatives in Martinez when the house she occupied was sold.

Korematsu Case Filed In Supreme Court

On February 8 there was docketed in the United States Supreme Court a petition for a writ of certiorari in the case of Fred Toyosaburo Korematsu, who is challenging the constitutionality of the mass exclusion of Japanese from the Pacific Coast. It is the first test case to reach the Supreme Court on this important issue.

The previous Hirabayashi and Yasui cases passed only on the question of the constitu- tionality of the curfew regulation which Justice Murphy declared went “‘to the very brink of constitutional power.’ The present case may not only determine the exclu- sion question but also that of the continued detention of citizens of Japanese ancestry in concentration camps, euphemistically known as “relocation centers.”’ The latter question is also raised in the Mitsuye Endo case, now pending in the Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, in which the government’s brief is due on March 8, after considerable postponement. The government is reported to be making a serious effort to have the case dropped.

Attorney Wayne M. Collins of San Francisco, local A.C.L.U. attorney, prepared the petition and brief carrying the Korematsu case to.the Supreme Court. The documents were filed in the name of Judge Jackson H. Ralston, long a member of the Supreme Court bar.

The national office of the A.C.L.U. has filed an amicus curiae brief in the case which limits itself to a discussion of the questions of detention, classification of citi- zens based solely on ancestry and the denial of due process because of a lack of hearings.

Whether or not the Supreme Court will pass on the case ought to be decided early this month.

RACIAL DISCRIMINATION CHARGED AT JOE DI MAGGIO’S RESTAURANT

A $25,000 damage suit was filed last month by Myrtle Brown of San Francisco against Joe DiMaggio’s Restaurant and Cocktail Lounge. The complaint alleges that on January 17 at 6:15 o’clock, Miss Brown entered the restaurant and seated herself at a table. After a waiter had placed butter on the table he was stopped from giving further service by a second waiter.

Miss Brown alleges she remained seated at the table for approximately 30 minutes during which time no waiter approached except to remove the butter that had been placed there. In the meantime, seven Cau| casian parties entered and were served. Miss Brown is represented by Attorney Edward B. Mabson of San Francisco.

Page 2

General Emmons Sued By Three Excluded Citizens

The Military’s individual exclusion program on the Pacific Coast is again being challenged, this time in three separate suits filed in the United States District Court in San Francisco in which General Delos C. Emmons has been named as defendant. The plaintiffs, Erwin Paul Gerhard, Walter Gotthelf Jacobi and Dr. Hajo Plagge, who were exiled as “dangerous or potentially dangerous citizens’? between November, 1942 and January, 1943, have each asked the court for declaratory judgments as well as injunctions to restrain further enforcement of the exclusion orders.

The suits do not question the Military’s -right to exclude citizens from military -- areas on the ground of ‘“‘military necessity,” but insist that in these particular cases such military necessity does not exist.

The suits come at a time when the Military is gradually modifying its exclusion program. Many citizens of German and Italian extraction previously excluded from the area have been allowed to return. Searcely more than a month ago General Emmons lifted the ban on Homer G. Wilcox, one of the leaders in “Mankind United,” who had appealed a federal court order upholding his exclusion to the Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. Another court test, that of Kenneth Alexander, went to trial before Federal Judge Peirson M. Hallin Los Angeles on February 28.

The A.C.L.U. is particularly acquainted with the case of Walter Gotthelf Jacobi of Belmont, because Ernest Besig, local director of the Union, appeared with him at his star chamber hearing before a special Military Board. Jacobi came to this country “about 40 years ago because of religious convictions against military service. He re- turned to Germany only once, the occasion of his marriage. He owned his woodworking business as well as his home. The hearing before the Military Board was marked by questioning concerning his opposition to war and remarks which his wife is allezed to have made against the Roosevelt administration. He was not charged with poli-— tical activities.

Outside of his affiliation with a German organization which spent its time in social pursuits and a transfer of a couple of hundred dollars to Argentina for business reasons, the hearing developed no reasonable basis for regarding Jacobi as a “dangerous or potentially dangerous citizen.”’

Supreme Court Will Review Chicago Sedition Case

The U.S. Supreme Court has just agreed to review the conviction in Chicago under the espionage act of Elmer Hartzell, for writing and distributing mimeographed circulars alleged to interfere with the armed forces in time of war. Hartzell was indicted with two others and brought to trial in October, 1942. The convictions of the other two defendants were set aside; Newell McCartney, attorney, was freed when the government decided not to retry him, and the case against Elmer Soller, mimeograph operator, was reversed by the Circuit Court of Appeals. Hartzell’s conviction was upheld on appeal.

Another decision in an espionage act case by the same Circuit Court of Appeals late in the year upheld the conviction of two St. Louis Negro leaders of an anti-war movement, General Lee Butler and David D. Irwin, officers of the Pacific Movement of the Eastern World. They were charged with making statements at meetings of members to the effect that “Japan would soon invade and conquer the United States and would be friendly to the colored people of America.” The Circuit Court held that the statements were calculated to cause “disloyalty in the military forces,’ maintaining that it was not “‘necessary to prove, that they actually obstructed the recruitment and enlistment service or brought about disloyalty” but that they ‘‘were of such nature that they would have a ten-— dency to bring about such results.”

Following a hearing on February 15th before the full committee of the House Post Office Committee, called at the request of the ACLU, the chairman indicated that a bill favorably reported. by a subcommittee would be revised to eliminate features objected to by the Union, the N.A.A.C.P. and the Union for Democratic Action among other agencies. The bill would bar from the mails all matter held to arouse racial and religious hatred and would penalize persons placing such matters in the mails.

Ernst Appears

Morris L. Ernst, general counsel of the Union, suggested that the power of censorship be transferred from the Post Office Department to the courts and that the evils of anti-racial and anti-religious propaganda be reached by forcing the disclosure of the distributors and their backers. The proposal for disclosure was made by Mr. Ernst personally, since the Union regards anonymity as desirable in protecting certain mi- nority rights.

A leaflet setting forth the Union’s position on the proposed bill has been pub- lished for distribution to congressmen, the press and interested organizations.

Chicago Civil Lib. Comm. Statement

In the meantime the Chicago Civil Liberties Committee has adopted the following statement with reference to the bill:

H.R. 2328 introduced by Mr. Lynch of New York aims to exclude from the mails all literature containing defamatory and false statements which tend to expose any racial or religious group to hatred, contempt or ridicule. Power is conferred on the Postmaster General to exclude such matters from the mails, and the mailing of such matter is made a criminal offense punishable by imprisonment up to 5 years, or a fine up to $5,000, or both.

The Chicago Civil Liberties Committee is today devoting the major portion of its energies toward combating racial and religious discrimination and intolerance. Its methods have been that of education and propaganda, the exposure of those elements who foster racial and religious bigotry, and the organization of various civic groups in a concerted campaign to combat these evils. :

Danger to Free Speech

Anti-racial propaganda cannot be sup-pressed by this bill without serious danger to freedom of speech and press. This danger was recognized by the United States Supreme Court in the recent Cantwell case, in which the court reviewed the conviction of a member of Jehovah’s Witnesses for inciting a breach of the peace. The Court summarized the evidence as follows:

“The record played by Cantwell embodies a general attack on all organized religious systems as instruments of Satan and injurious to man; it then singles out the Roman Catholic Church for strictures couched in terms which naturally would offend not only persons of that persuasion, but all others who respect the honestly held religious faith of their fellows. The hearers were in fact highly offended. One of them said he felt like hitting Cantwell and the other that he was tempted to throw Cantwell off the street.”

Nevertheless, the Court reversed the conviction, and said: “Although the contents of the record not unnaturally aroused animosity, we think that, in the absence of a statute narrowly drawn to define and punish specific conduct as constituting a clear and present danger to a substantial interest of the State, the petitioner’s communication, considered in the light of constitutional guarantees, raised no such clear and present menace to public peace and order as to render him liable to conviction.”

(Committee to

The Court further stated:

“Im the realm of religious faith, and in that of political belief, sharp differences arise. In both fields the tenets of one man may seem the rankest error to his neighbor. To persuade others to his own point of view, the pleader, as we know, at times, resorts to exaggeration, to vilification of men who have been, or are, prominent in church or state, and even to faise statement. But the people of this nation have ordained in the light of history, that, in spite of the probability of excess and abuses, these liberties are, in the long view, essential to enlightened opinion and right conduct on the part of the citizens of a democracy. The essential characteristic of these liberties is, that under their shield many types of life, character, opinion and belief can develop unmolested and unobstructed. Nowhere is this shield more necessary than in our own country for a people composed of many races and of many creeds.”

Trial By Prejudice Would Result

A defamatory statement concerning an individual presents a limited factual issue upon which reasonably definite evidence may be offered, so that the question can be readily decided by a court or jury. But remarks concerning religious or racial groups are frequently incapable of proof or disproof by legal evidence; they are in the nature of political controversy. Though they may be factual in form, they are often a blend of conclusion and opinion. Such statements refer to zroups comprising thousands and thousands of individuals. They often endeavor to evaluate the influence of such groups in political, social and economic matters. Their truth or falsity cannot readily be demonstrated by legal evidence, and any decision thereon would be influenced to a large degree by the individual’ experiences and prejudices of the public official, the court or the jury, as the case may be.

Would Suppress Legitimate Discussion

The Lynch bill would have the effect of suppressing legitimate discussion concerning religious, racial or cultural groups. Not only might such literature be denied access to the mails on the judgment of the Postmaster General, but the persons circulating the material would risk severe criminal penalties. No person could feel free to discuss matters affecting race and religion for fear that he may suffer serious consequences if a public official or a court or a jury should disagree with his conclusion or opinion.

The fanatic or professional bigot, however, would not be deterred. He would either risk the consequences, or more likely avoid violations by careful phrasing, which would not hamper his activities.

The Committee therefore opposes the Lynch bill.

A.C.L.U. NOT TO INTERVENE IN ASSOCIATED PRESS APPEAL

Reaffirming a position taken a year ago when the government’s anti-trust suit against the Associated Press was brought, the Board of Directors of the Union has agreed that “no issue of freedom of the press, properly speaking, is involved” in the appeal to the Supreme Court taken by the AP against a decision of the District Court at New York requiring changes in the AP by-laws. The board held that the issues are essentially economic, involving in substance the question of the relation of a competitor to a new applicant for membership. The District Court’s decision indicated that if the by-law removing a competitor’s influence in the election of a new member were revised, the other orders made by the court would be vacated or — modified.

F fc Results af Poll On Membership Meetings

The final result of the recent membership poll showed 282 returns, or 48% of the 655 ballots that were mailed. A majority of those returning ballots, but not quite 28% of the membership, expressed itself in favor of general membership meetings. A minority of those returning ballots voted for area meetings.

The Executive Committee, after considering the vote, decided there was sufficient interest manifested to hold a spring membership meeting in Berkeley, some time in April, and a fall meeting in San Francisco, which will mark the tenth anniversary of the reorganization of the local branch of the A.G.L.U. Area meetings may also be tried in localities where sufficient interest was expressed.

The final vote follows:

Not Yes No Voting

1. Do you favor general membership meetings?

2. Do you favor area meetings (limited to members in your particular community) ?

3. Would you attend an evening general membership

180 28 14 134 52 96

meeting held next Spring in Berkeley?

116 115 51 4, Would you attend an evening general membership meeting held next fall in San Francisco?

132 §=101 49

5. Would you attend evening area meetings (limited to members in your particular community) held on dates selected by those interested?

139 66 TT

JAPANESE EXPATRIATION BILL UNDER CONSIDERATION BY CONGRESS

With the support of the Attorney General, the House on February 23 adopted, by vote of 111 to 33, a bill permitting the renunciation of United States citizenship while a person is within the United States. The proposal, H.R. 4103, amends the Nationality Act of 1940 by providing that a person may lose his citizenship by “making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attor“ney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense.”

“The immediate purpose of the proposed legislation,” according to the Attorney General, “is to deal with the problem presented by a group of persons of Japanese descent who are native-born United States citizens but presumably are, according to the laws of Japan, Japanese nationals, and who assert their loyalty to the Emperor of Japan and their desire to renounce their United States citizenship and to be recognized as Japanese nationals. This group, the members of which have almost without exception been placed in the segregation center at Tulelake, Calif., by the War Relocation Authority, is variously estimated to number between 300 and 1,000 persons.”’ Some West Coast Congressmen, spurred on by the Hearst press, have opposed the measure because it would require a new renunciation of citizenship by Japanese born in this country. But a bill by Representative Johnson (Calif.), permitting past expressions of disloyalty to be used against Japanese to effect their expatriation, was rejected by a vote of 82 to 76.

“View” Magazine Ban Lifted

The Post Office Department through Solicitor Vincent Miles, has restored the mailing privileges for the December issue OL oe magazine, which had been barred for ‘‘obscenity.”’ Reversal of the Post Office order came after counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union had joined with counsel for the publishers in asking for specification of the objectionable matter and for a hearing.

Siipreme? Dane Upholds Ban on Jehovah Witness Child Peddlers

By a five to four decision the U. S. Supreme Court on January 31 upheld the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the case of a nine year old child prohibited from selling literature on the streets under a law denying street trades to boys under twelve and girls under sixteen. The child was a member of Jehovah’s Witnesses, whose counsel appealed the case on the ground that religious freedom is impaired by denying the right of anyone to sell religious literature.

“Parents may be free to become martyrs themselves,” said Justice Rutledge in speaking for a majority of the court. “But it does not follow they are free, in identical circumstances, to make martyrs of their children before they have reached the age of full and legal discretion when they can make that choice for themselves. ... We think that with reference to the public proclaiming of religion, upon the streets and in other similar public places, the power of the state to control the conduct of children reaches beyond the scope of its authority over adults, as is true in the case of other freedoms, and the rightful boundary of its power ‘has not been crossed in this case.”’

A dissenting opinion by Justice Frank Murphy held that Jehovah’s Witnesses are a “militant and unpopular faith harassed at every turn” and that the dangers to such children selling literature on the streets are so “exceedingly remote” that there could be no excuse for prohibiting it.

Another dissent by Justice Jackson, concurred in by Justices Roberts and Frank- furter, was limited merely to the grounds of affirmance. “Religious activities,’ said he, ‘“‘which concern only members of the faith are and ought to be free—as nearly absolutely free as anything can be. But beyond these, many religious denominations or sects engage in collateral and secular activities intended to obtain means from unbelievers to sustain the worshippers and their leaders. ... All such money-raising activities on a public scale are, I think, Caesar’s affairs and may be regulated by the state .

“WITNESSES” MAY — BE DENIED USE OF SAN JOSE AUDITORIUM

In. a move directed at Jehovah’s Witnesses, the San Jose City Council on February 7 unanimously amended its ordinance governing the use of the Municipal Auditorium to prohibit such use ‘“‘for any meeting likely to cause or contribute to riot, racial prejudice, breaches of the peace, or destruction of life or property, ...”’

In order that there might be no mistaking their meaning, the council then passed a resolution “‘recommending” that the auditorium manager deny the use of the audi- torium to Jehovah’s Witnesses, who had on file an application covering a convention next August 9 to 18. The vote was 4 to 2.

The auditorium manager has declined to pass on the pending application until the ordinance becomes effective on March 15. At that time, then, he will rule whether the proposed meeting is likely to cause or contribute to riot, breach of the peace and de- struction of life and property.

If the Witnesses are denied the use of the auditorium a court test will, no doubt, follow. The novel position taken by the council means that law abiding citizens may be denied privileges to which they are clearly entitled because a lawless element in the community might cause trouble. It would seem obvious, however, that the proper course in such a situation is to allow the law abiding citizens to enjoy the privileges to which they are entitled and to extend them all possible police protection in the enjoyment of their rights. If any action. is to be taken, it should be against those who disturb the public peace, not against those whose peace is disturbed.

Opposition to the use of the auditorium by the Witnesses springs from their refusal to salute the flag. American Legion posts, Disabled Veterans, Veterans of Foreign Wars and Spanish War Veterans all joined in opposing use of the auditorium by the Witnesses.

ter of the First Congregational Church, and other ministers, opposed any discrimination against the Witnesses.

NEW MEMBERS ELECTED TO UNION’S NATIONAL BOARDS

At the annual election of the Union, held on February 12th, four new members were elected to the National Committee: Louis Adamic (New Jersey), author and editor; A. Philip Randolph (New York), president of the Sleeping Car Porters’ Union; Rep. Will Rogers, Jr. (California); Lillian E. Smith (Georgia), editor of ‘South Today.”

Elected to the Board of Directors were Varian Fry, contributing editor of New Republic and C. Dickerman Williams, New York lawyer.

The Rev. S. C. Peabody, minis-.

PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION OF PAROCHIAL STUDENTS IN © TULARE COUNTY CHALLENGED

Pending before the Superior Court of Tulare County is an injunction proceeding which seeks to restrain the Porterville School District from furnishing transportation to parochial school students. The case was argued January 27, and all briefs must be filed by March 17.

Affording free transportation to. parochial school students would seem to be in clear violation of Art. IV, Sec. 30 of the Constitution of California, providing that “Neither the Legislature ... school district, or other municipal corporation, shall ever make an appropriation, or pay from any public fund whatever, or grant anything to or in aid of any religious sect, church, creed, or sectarian purpose, or help to support or sustain any school, ... controlled by any religious creed, church, or sectarian denomination whatever; = ”

New York, Delaware, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Kentucky and Washington have all swept aside as unconstitutional the granting of free public transportation to private or sectarian school children. The New Jersey Supreme Court has under consideration at the present time the action of the Board of Education of the Township of Ewing in agreeing to pay the costs of transportation for parochial school students. The Union has filed an amicus curiae brief challenging the Board’s action. Only in Maryland, where the State Constitution limits expenditures of school funds ‘‘to purposes of education,” has transportation of children to private or sectarian schools been allowed.

NEW DRAFT RULES WILL INDUCT JAPANESE AMERICANS

Under new draft regulations, Americans of Japanese ancestry will be eligible for military service. A special provision in the changed rule allows Japanese Americans to apply for service outside the Pacific theatre of the war, so that they may not be obliged to fight against an enemy of their own blood.

It is understood that Japanese Americans, deferred by selective service since May, 1942, will be trained in separate battalions, and will not be admitted to the air force, the navy or specialized services. The Civil Liberties Union, among other agencies, has long sought to open military service to Japanese Americans on'the same basis as all other citizens, and has protested proposals to segregate them. Since their number will be small, it is understood that the army will use them for replacements in the volunteer regiments from Hawaii and the mainland, now fighting in Italy.

Page 4

American Civil Liberties Union-News

Published monthly at 216 Pine Street, San Francisco, 4, Calif., by the Northern California Branch of the American Civil Liberties Union. Phone: EXbrook 1816

ERNEST BHSIG Editor

Entered as second-class matter, July 31, 1941, at the Post Office at San Francisco, California, Subscription Rates—Seventy-five Cents a Year.

Ten Cents per Copy.

S. Circuit Court Upholds Race Draft Calls

The United States Circuit Court of Appeals of New York on February 2nd upheld a decision of a district court that draft boards may legally establish separate quotas for white and colored in calling men to the army, despite a prohibition in the Selective Service Act against “discriminaae against any person because of race or color.”

The case was brought by Winifred William Lynn, a colored man in the army who sought a writ of habeas corpus to test the legality of his induction. The case was handled by the American Civil Liberties Union for Lynn through Arthur Garfield Hays, general counsel. A dissenting opinion was filed by Judge Charles E. Clark. An appeal will be taken to the United States Supreme Court to test a decision described by Judge Clark as having “serious social implications.”

The majority opinion by Judges Swan and A. N. Hand held that the “statutory provisions which the appellant invokes mean no more than that Negroes must be accorded privileges substantially equal to those afforded whites in the matter of volunteering, induction, training and service; in other words, separate quotas in the requisitions based on relative racial proportions of the men subject to call do not constitute prohibited discrimination.”

Judge Clark, dissenting, said: “In final analysis the case for the validity of the call here rests upon the policy of segregation, where equal facilities are afforded, as sanctioned by various Supreme Court decisions. But actually these precedents call for the contrary result. It must not be overlooked that they do insist upon equal ac- commodations which here must mean equal calls to service. However undesirable the colored people may regard service in segregated units, they are justified in asserting that it is less degrading than no service at all or service delayed, if not belittled, in the light of their available manpower.”

NEW PROCEDURE ESTABLISHED IN HABEAS CORPUS CASES IN HAWAII

Under the terms of an agreement between the military and civil authorities in Hawaii, effected by Edward J. Ennis, special representative of the Department of Justice, the civil courts may now hear applications for writs of habeas corpus on behalf of citizens interned by military order, and the military have agreed to produce the prisoners in court, contrary to their previous refusal. But it was agreed that a prisoner ordered freed by a civil court will be returned to military custody until an appeal has been taken and decided favorably to the prisoner. Only a few score remain in military internment among the several hundred taken into custody following the attacks on Pear! Harbor. Most of them are said to be Hawaiians of Japanese extraction. No applications fer writs are pending.

SUPERIOR COURT RULES “JIM CROW” UNIONS UNLAWFUL IN CALIFORNIA

In an unprecedented decision, Superior Judge Edward I. Butler of Marin County last month issued an injunction restraining the Boilermakers’ Union and Marinship from requiring Negroes to join “Jim Crow” auxiliaries of the union, whose membership with limited rights and privileges, is restricted solely to Negroes. Judge Butler held that “Jim Crow” unions are contrary to public policy in the State of California.

‘Servicemen Freed After Driving Car on Sidewalk and Killing Negro (Continued from Page 1, Col. 2). prowling about a doorway. He had a tear on the right knee of his trousers. Taken to the northern police station, he was identified by the servicemen.

The conclusion that the homicide is justifiable, is based on what is alleged to have been an immediate pursuit of the robbers by the holdup men, although 5 or 6 minutes elapsed before they were actually doing any pursuing. If there were an immediate pursuit for the purpose of making arrests of armed robbers, and not run them down, then, according to law, the homicide is justifiable. But a five-minute lapse of time after the robbery destroys the theory of an immediate pursuit.

District Attorney Brown was visited by a couple of representatives of the A.C.L.U. and Caleb Foote on the morning of February 16. He was incensed that the local director of the Union had expressed the opinion to reporters that the homicide was tantamount to a lynching. He felt the Union had insufficient facts at the time the opinion was expressed, and that in any case such statements might lead to racial difficulties in San Francisco. It was suggested, on the other hand, that the Union had its facts, and that racial troubles would certainly result in the colored district if there were no even-handed justice and if citizens were allowed to take the law into their own hands.

Eye-Witnesses Concealed

It was pointed out to District Attorney Brown that the police had failed to produce the eye-witnesses of the homicide at the coroner’s inquest. Not only Mr. Foote, but his wife and another person were ready to testify that such persons had given statements to the police. The District Attorney stated he knew nothing about the existence of such witnesses (and it must be remembered the D. A. has no investigators of his own, but is dependent upon the police), but he would secure their names and would give the A.C.L.U. director an opportunity to interview them before they were seen by the police. That was on February 16. The director saw Mr. Brown on the 17th when he renewed his promise (explaining he had forgotten to call the police), and on the 18th the director reminded District Attorney Brown by letter. No response has been received from the District Attorney. An independent search is, therefore, being made for the witnesses.

Car Was Speeding

There are a couple more flaws in the conclusion that the homicide is justifiable.

Practically the only injuries Hill received were around the head. He had no skull fracture but deep lacerations around the mouth and neck besides broken jaws. There were also some brain injuries. Hill was apparently pitched into a garage door, because 21 inches above the ground is an indentation 3 inches long and 1/4 inch deep containing deeply matted black hair. If an automobile were traveling at only 7 to 8 miles an hour in low gear, as the driver testified, then it seems very strange that Hill’s body was driven with such force against the garage door that. it left a deep indentation. The indentation, it is quite clear, is more consistent with information the Union has that the car was being driven at a tremendous rate of speed at the time the homicide occurred.

The servicemen, in failing to stop when they hit the robbers, placed themselves more or less in the position of hit and run drivers. If they were intent upon making an arrest, as they claimed, then they should have stopped in order to effect the arrest.

Finally, there was little need for the servicemen to take over the work of the police. They had Rupert’s badge, which proved an adequate means of picking him up. The chances are that once Rupert was caught he would have revealed the identities of his companions.

Brown Issues Statement

District Attorney Brown issued a statement clearing the servicemen and assuring the people of San Francisco that ‘“‘the District Attorney’s office is carrying on its in- vestigations with the strictest impartiality possible and such extrinsic factors as race, color, nationality and social condition never enter into consideration in the slightest de-. gree where the investigation of crime is concerned.

“An attempt on the part of some individuals to inject a race issue,’ continues Mr. Brown, ‘“‘ill serves the cause of justice and introduces an element which is and must remain foreign to the administration of justice under American law.”

If there were not a concealment of disinterested witnesses, the open hostility of the police investigating the case to Negroes in general, and some unexplained facts con- tradicting a conclusion of justifiable homicide, we might be able to agree with Mr. Brown. The precedent does not augur well for the Negro community in San Francisco. As it stands, they may well draw the conclusion that anyone can go into the Negro section and take the law into his own hands with impunity.

GOVERNMENT PROSECUTES NUDIST LEADER

For receiving allegedly obscene material “from a common carrier,” presumably an express company, the Rev. Dr. Ilsley Boone, national secretary of the National Sunbathing Assn. and editor of “Sunshine and Health”, its official organ, was arrested on February 10th at. May’s Landing, New Jersey, seat of the Sunshine Park Nudist Colony. His arrest followed some months of investigation by FBI agents of nudist propaganda in various parts of the country. The case is the first in years Of a prosecution for receiving obscene matter. Practically all previous cases have been brought against senders, and by agents of the Post Office.

The A.C.L.U. will assist in the defense.

A Post Office censorship case contested by the Union was recently lost in the Dis- trict of Columbia where the Union aided the publisher of “Give Out” a song-book for soldiers approved by the War and Navy Departments in contesting an order barring it from the mails. The decision will probably be appealed.

DIES COMMITTEE LIFE EXTENDED AS IT GETS ANOTHER $75,000

The House of Representatives by voice vote recently appropriated $75,000 to the Dies Committee on un-American Activities to continue its work for another year. It has received a total of over half a million in the six years of its existence—more than any committee of the House in history.

No campaign was made against the renewal of the Dies Committee appropriation this year as in the past, evidently on the ground that it was hopeless. Furthermore, the committee has switched its attention from Communists, New Dealers, and leftwing unions to Japanese-Americans, the “Peace-Now” movement and union politics in the presidential campaign. Only one voice was raised in opposition on the voice vote, that of Rep. Vito Marcantonio of New York.

The American Civil Liberties Union did not as in previous years attempt to organize opposition to a renewal of the committee’s appropriation when it became evident that there was no substantial support for the campaign.