vol. 16, no. 11

American -

Civil Liberties

Union-News

"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."

Free Press

Hree Assemblage

Free Speech

VOLUME XVI

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, NOVEMBER, 1951

Gems From An Informer's

Testimony in a Loyalty Case

In a recent hearing before the Regional Loyalty

Board in San Francisco, a federal employee was

confronted by three of his accusers. Such con-

frontation is a rare occurrence and is of particular

value in disclosing the kind of "evidence" that is

contained in the Government's secret loyalty files.

None of the witnesses supported the Govern-

ment's charges. The caliber of the testimony of the

lady who admitted she "turned in" the federal

employee may be gauged from the following ex-

cerpts from her testimony:

"Q These are the only things that you know

against Mr. ; is that correct?

"A Well, now, this may be my imagination.

I am not qualified to state this, but he would never

wear his tie home or his coat home. He would

hang them up in our locker and go home with his

shirt open; for a while he wore one of these great

big mustaches and I have heard people say ac-

cording to party lines those are indications that

he is not a capitalist that he doesn't wear a tie or

coat but that I couldn't swear to except that he

did do that because I would we walking up the

street and would catch up with me minus

_ his coat and tie which would be back in the office."'

; "Q

with Mr. :

"A Well, very, very few; in fact, I would

hardly call them conversations-just a `yes' or a

`no' about things. I have never went into any dis-

cussions with him because I don't consider that

worth while; I think that is a waste of time. f

"Q On what did you base your opinions about

him if you didn't have any conversations with

him?

"A Well, I forgot to mention, too, that he used

to cut out things out of the `Chronicle' and they

were always about our Government or about

Russia and any little article that was in there

about our Government or about Russia he would

cut them out of the `Chronicle.' I failed to mention

that. :

"Q What were those clippings about-do you

recall? :

"A Anything that was pertaining to our Gov-

ernment or Russia. Little paragraphs and little

squares he cut out of the paper.

"@ Would you say that is an indication of

possible disloyalty?

"A No, I wouldn't say that. I would say it was

perhaps to send them over to Russia to have them

see what our papers said; that is just my idea.

"Q What made you think that he might send

those clippings over to Russia ?

"A Well, I don't know what else he would do.

with them. I couldn't prove it. The only thing I

know he cut them out of the paper. One of the

girls used to have the `Chronicle' and she used to

match them on her `Chronicle' by matching them

to the holes.

Volunteers |

The ACLU could use some volunteers to

help with the mailing of the "News" the last

day of each month. If you wish to contribute

your labor to the Union, please phone the

office secretary, Florence Ohmura, at EX-

brook 2-3255.

Also, the office would like to have the

names of persons residing in the bay area

who have phones and are willing to use them

in telephoning reminders of ACLU meetings.

Miss Ohmura will be glad to add your name

to our "telephone committee."

How many conversations have you had

2

Regents' Meeting Of

Final

The Regents of the University of California

voted on the 19th of October to repeal the "loyalty

oath" so long an affront to the faculty, and a blot

on the fame of the university. Their action did

not however settle the issue. First of all since it

will be effective only as of September, 1951, it does

not effect the immediate restoration of pay to the

"non-signers." That point will be decided only

with the decision of the State Supreme Court.

Moreover the action itself was stayed for another

month by the now threadbare parliamentary

dodge of notice of a motion to reconsider. Regent

Ahlport put in the block this time obviously sub-

bing for Neylan. |

Nevertheless, it seems fairly certain that things

will be carried through when the Regents meet

in Berkeley on November 16, and that we ap-

proach the final scrapping of this notorious nui-

sance.

There is reason to believe that the action of the

19th though long abrewing was precipitated by

the startling emergence of a new crop of "non-

signers," some forty eight of them in fact,-facul-

ty member and employees who for a variety of

reasons found themselves unable to stomach a

second round of the rigamarol currently served

up with their contracts.

Regent Donald McLaughlin introduced the mo-

tion to repeal, and supporting arguments were

urged by that able and courageous group in the

Board, which centers around Governor Warren. It

includes, for the information of whoever wants

it, Regents Steinhart, Fenston, Haggerty, Heller,

Hansen, Simpson, Towle, Hagar, Olson, and Mer-

chant. These with the Governor, President Sproul,

and of course Regent McLaughlin, now constitute

a majority of the Board, and may be counted on to

Scientists Denied Entrance

To U.S.. ACLU Protests

Because of the provisions of the Internal Secur-

ity (McCarran) Act, the U. S. has denied visas to

several foreign scientists who were slated to

attend the International Congress of Pure and

Allied Chemistry. Last month the Union wrote to

Sen. Pat McCarran and Attorney General J. How-

ard McGrath about it.

Said the Union: "Immigration or entry laws

which adversely affect the circulation of inter-

nationally renowned scientists as they go about

their professional work and which thereby also

adversely affect the exchange of knowledge and

thought are harmful to the interests of this coun-

try in several ways. American scientists and

American technical advancement suffer by an

actual deprivation of essential knowledge in a

_time of national emergency. . . . Communist dic-

tatorships, hostile to the United States, are given

effective ammunition with which to attack what

they claim to be our false liberalism.

"... ACLU urges that careful consideration be

given to the drafting of legislation which will

remedy this intolerable and dangerous situation."

Earlier, ACLU had protested to the Army

against its action in barring Harvard Professor

John K. Fairbank from entering Japan. Fairbank,

a Far East expert, has been under occasional at-

tack in the Senate because of alleged bias against

the Kuomingtang. He has been a frequent con-

tributor to publications of the Institute of Pacific

Relations, which is now being investigated by Sen.

McCarran's Internal Security Committee. Fair-

bank has sworn he has never been a Communist.

Action To Repeal

U.C. `Loyalty

push matters through to a conclusion at least

tolerable to the faculty.

The solution will probably not be an ideal mon-

ument to intellectual liberty. It will include a

reaffirmation of the Regents' anti-communist po-

licy, enjoin on the faculty the duty of implement-

ing it at all levels of appointment, and reserve to

the Regents the right to decide when an appoint-

ment violates it. The feeling in the faculty seems,

however, to be one of confidence in the spirit now

at least prevailing in the Board. There is also the

perhaps rueful recollection that the faculty itself

was at times euchred into an endorsement of the

non-communist line.

The meeting was a slam-banging sort of affair.

It afforded to this observer at least a demonstra-

tion of cynical effrontery on the part of Regent

Neylan surpassing even his own earlier perform-

ances in Board-meeting, and it was dazzling in a

horrid way. His bitter personal attacks on Presi-

dent Sproul, his shifty insinuations that the meet-

ing was "rigged," his general bullyragging were (c)

no novelty to those of us who have watched him

operate in the past year or so. What was new,

and to some at least alarming were the unctuous

protestations of good will toward the university,

even the faculty, and the words of high and pacific

motive in which he wrapped a proposal for direct

contact between Regents and faculty. It sounded

lovely but the faculty has had some vivid exper-

ience of direct contact with a Regents' committee

headed by Mr. Neylan. It has likewise been re-

cently described by him in terms more picturesque

than flattering. It is not surprising that this sud-

den gush of benignity on his part gave some of us

the creeps. As a matter of fact, this gimmick

could easily become the move most destructive of

the President and the Academic Senate, for it

makes possible the circumventing of the one and

the division-and-rule of the other. It was fortu-

nately quickly aborted via reference to a Com-

mittee "for study."

Regent Haggerty expressed what I imagine

would be the attitude of most observers when he

said that in a body supposedly composed of gentle-

men seriously concerned with the welfare of the

university he had, since his appointment, wit-

nessed mainly recrimination and parliamentary

trickery. Fortunately these aimable traits charac-

terize not the majority, but the Neylan crowd

only, and it is a group becoming steadily more

impotent. ~

Large Crowd Attends Union's

17th Anniversary Meeting

About 450 persons turned out for the 17th An-

niversary meeting of the ACLU of Northern Cali-

fornia held at Marines' Memorial Auditorium on

October 19. They heard an inspiring address by

Dr. Laurence Sears of Mills College on "Our Un-

certain Unalienable Rights."

Dr. Sears declared that the present security

hysteria is a threat to three basic American rights

- free association, the "right to differ or dis-

sent" and the right to a fair hearing. In whip-

ping ourselves into a "panic over security," there

is a "real danger that we will become like those

whom we oppose."

Rt. Rev. Edward L. Parsons, the Union's local

chairman, presided at the meeting. Ernest Besig

reported that the Union's business during recent

months falls principally into three categories: 1.

Federal employees' loyalty and security cases; 2.

Coast Guard security screening cases, involving

workers in the maritime industry; and, 3, The

application of the McCarran Act to aliens.

TORT OMe

Page 2

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

@,0x00B0e ) ss

ACLU Criticizes Court

Decision in Remington Case

The American Civil Liberties Union expressed

the hope last month that the U.S. Supreme Court

will accept the petition filed by William W. Rem-

ington for review of the decision of the Court of

Appeals for the Second Circuit (NY) holding that

his indictment for perjury was valid even though

the Grand Jury foreman had a financial interest

in a book written by the government's chief wit-

ness. Remington was convicted for perjury `in

denying membership in the Communist Party but

the conviction was reversed by the Court of Ap-

peals last August mainly on the ground that the

trial judge's charge to the jury was too indefinite.

The Appeals Court refused to accept Remington's

contention that the indictment was invalid because

of the connection between the chief prosecution

witness, Mrs. Elizabeth Bentley, and Grand Jury

foreman John Bruinini.

"At a time when there is widespread recognition

of the need for improvement in the ethical stand-

ards of public service, a high Federal Court

should not condone the eroding of a cornerstone of

our federal criminal jurisprudence, the Grand

Jury, guaranteed by the Constitution itself,"

ACLU Executive Director Patrick Murphy Malin

said.

"We cannot agree with the Court of Appeals

that such an indictment is valid unless the defense

is able to prove the foreman exercised undue in-,

fluence-an almost impossible burden. Certainly

no indictment handed down by a Grand Jury whose

foreman has an adverse interest to the defendant

should stand in an American court of law. The

Supreme Court has recognized the validity of this

point when it has held that indictments obtained

in violation of a constitutional principle must be

thrown out-irrespective of whether or not undue

influence could be shown in the particular case.

To state as the Court of Appeals did that this is

a mere irregularity and that `an indictment is,

after all, no more than an accusation' is to ignore

the fact that it is an accusation which puts a de-

fendant to thousands of dollars of expenses on a

trial, to the expense of furnishing bail, and to the

deprivation of his liberty in a very real sense. It

seems to us clear that it is a deprivation of liberty

without due process of law in violation of our

cherished constitutional traditions to permit any

conviction based on an indictment to stand under,

such circumstances. be

"It is to be hoped that the Supreme Court will

take a more realistic view of what an indictment

entails, and will condemn in no uncertain terms the

validity of an indictment obtained under such dis-

honest circumstances.

"Tn all fairness to the Court of Appeals, we must

also point out that its decision was in accord with

the principles of civil liberties insofar as it held the

judge's charge on perjury to be indefinite, that the

references by the prosecutor to the illegal Attor-

ney General's list of subversive organizations dur-

ing the trial was improper, and insofar as it ad-

monished the prosecutor for his emphasis on a

witness' change of name."

Press Legal Fight Against |

Peekskill Riot Laws

Echoes of the two-year-old Peekskill riots

sounded again when ACLU appeared in a New

York Supreme Court in White Plains to have two

ordinances of the Town of Cortlandt declared un-

constitutional as restrictive of free speech and

assembly. The legislation was passed by the town

-as an aftermath of the violence which marked two

concert appearances of singer Paul Robeson in

August, 1941. One ordinance requires licenses for

parades and other public gatherings on streets and

"public assemblages' in any public place. The

other prohibits various acts when done "with in-

tent to provoke a breach of the peace" and dis-

turb "the public peace and quiet of the commun-

ity by causing consternation and alarm" and pro-

hibits arrangements for a "meeting held for the

purpose of breaking down or tending to break

down law enforcement."

A brief filed by ACLU general counsel Arthur

Garfield Hays and ACLU attorney Osmond K.

Fraenkel, attacked the licensing ordinance for its

lack of adequate standards. "We submit," it said,

"that under the repeated decisions of the U. 8S.

Supreme Court no municipality may condition the

holding of meetings on the grant of a permit with-

out setting forth standards which will ensure that

permits are withheld only on grounds of public

safety."

Challenging whether anyone can know what

conduct will cause `consternation and alarm" or

"tend to break down law enforcement," the ACLU

lawyers also attacked the second ordinance. "The

subdivisions objected to are so vague and all-

embracing that they constitute a threat to freedom

of assembly... ."

New Mexico High Court

Decides Church-State Case

For years, Roman Catholic brothers and sisters

had taught in New Mexico public schools. Many

parochial schools had received state aid. To many.

people that looked like a violation of the principle

of separation of church and state. |

New Mexico's highest court finally spelled out

its opinion of the system. The conclusion: educa-

tors had indeed violated separation, but there was

no cause to ban all members of religious orders as

teachers from the schools. :

The issue came before the court after a group

of Dixon County parents brought an action: (1) to

have the teaching of sectarian religion in public

schools declared illegal; (2) to bar permanently

certain teachers from teaching in the public

schools for having taught religion; (8) to have

all members of the Roman Catholic religious

orders declared ineligible to teach in public:

schools; and (4) to have the spending of public -

funds in aid of Roman Catholic parochial schools

declared illegal.

The bulk of the court's decision ran in favor of

the parents. It decided that the furnishing of text-.

books and free transportation for parochial school

children was in violation of the constitution, that

the teaching of sectarian religion must be banned

from public schools, and that certain teachers

should be barred permanently from teaching in'

public schools.

However, the court drew a line on stopping all

Catholic clerics from holding public school jobs. ,.

It did say that if nuns or brothers were hired as -

teachers again (none are on the state payroll now)

they should not be allowed to wear religious garb.

`But it saw no reason for restricting academic free-

dom to bar any teacher "because of his or her re-

ligious beliefs."'

Essentially, the decision upheld the stand taken

by ACLU in a friend of the court brief. ACLU had -

urged that teachers who did use the classroom for

dissemination of religious doctrines should he :

barred from the public schools, but that there .

should not be an automatic prohibition against all :

members of religious orders. It also argued that

the wearing of religious garb was a violation of -

the church-state separation principle.

Maryland ACLU Helps Secure -

High Court i

The Maryland Civil Liberties Committee, an" ,- gh Refuses Review

affiliate of the ACLU, was instrumental in ar- .

Counsel in Smith Act Case

ranging for adequate defense counsel for Com-

munists in Baltimore indicted under the Smith Act. :

Despite the fact that they had money to pay a

lawyer, Dorothy Blumberg and Philip Frankfeld,

two former Maryland Communist officials, ap-

parently couldn't get one. Finally, Mrs. Blumberg

wired Carl Bassett, chairman of the Maryland

Civil Liberties Committee, for help.

Bassett told Mrs. Blumberg that ACLU itself

couldn't provide a lawyer. But he did go to see

Federal Judge W. Calvin Chesnut about the case.

Chesnut agreed to have a talk with any attorney

whom Mrs. Blumberg: requested, if the lawyer

refused to take the defense. He also mentioned

making competent counsel available if necessary.

Said Bassett: "It seems to me that persons ac-

cused of crime should be able to get a lawyer

qualified to handle their case if they need and _

want one, regardless of the nature or gravity of

the charges against them. That many thoughtful

citizens have held similar ideas is illustrated by

the language of the Sixth Amendment: `the ac-

cused shall have the right . . . to have the assist-

ance of counsel for his defense.' "'

Refuse Disclosure of Names

From Grand Jury Testimony

ACLU has commended Judge Samuel S. Leibo- ~

Charge Race

witz for his refusal to allow the names of persons

mentioned in Grand Jury testimony by Harry

Gross, Brooklyn ex-bookmaker, from being read

before the Special Sessions Court in New York

City. Judge Leibowitz acted after the New York -

Committee of ACLU had dispatched a letter to

withholding of names on the basis that to disclose

them would "result in public denunciation of in- -

dividuals without their having an opportunity to

cross-examne or confront Mr. Gross."

"To publicly condemn these individuals," con-

tinued ACLU's letter, "on the basis of grand jury

testimony, which has previously always been held

to be secret-in order to prevent condemnation

without a fair hearing-strikes us as a definite.

violation of the spirit of due process of law."

Following Judge Leibowitz's action, ACLU .

praised the removal of names as "a fine example

of how civil liberties can be safeguarded by our

judicial system."

Neo Freedom of Discussion

For U.C. Students on Campus

Dr. George A. Pettitt, Assistant to the Presi-

den of the University of California, has pro-

tested that a statement in the Octoker "News,"

that meeting places on the campus are not avail-

able to students is inaccurate. The "News" agrees

that the statement is inaccurate and is pleased to

make a correction. Now, what are the facts?

Dr. Pettitt calls attention to the following pub-

lic statement made by Dr. Hurford Stone:

"Complete freedom is given for student forum

discussion and debate on campus with respect to

all public issues regardless of their controversial

nature with no restriction whatever or special ap- -

proval required for any faculty member or student

speakers. Numerous off-campus speakers are

brought in for these discussion groups, the only

restrictions being that the off-campus speakers

must be prepared by training and experience to

make a contribution to the education of University

students and that no Communists will be brought

in as speakers for these forums. Care is taken to

see that both sides or all sides of controversial

issues are presented." .

In the opinion of the "News," this statement by

Dr. Stones does not coincide with the policy ex-

pressed by the University's Regulation No. 17.

That regulation starts out by saying that "Only

the President of the University or his direct rep-

resentative may grant permission for the use of

University grounds, buildings or other facilities;

or for the appearance of outside speakers on the

campus...." :

It would seem clear from the language of the

regulation that the President controls student

discussion on the campus through the discretion

which he exercises in granting permits for meeting

' places. Moreover, the regulation specifically pro-

hibits use of University facilities to political

groups, and "Only recognized organizations may

obtain permits."

No, it was not correct for the "News" to say

that meeting places on the UC campus are not

available for students. What the "News" should

have said was that the University exercises ab-

`solute control over student discussion on the cam-

pus, and that there is not the "complete freedom''

for student debate on the UC campus as asserted

by Dr. Stone. oe -

in Nisei Renunciation Cases

The suit to set aside the war-time renunciation

of citizenship of 4400 Nisei because of govern-

mental coercion, which has been pending in the

courts for five years, will be back in the Federal

District Court in San Francisco following last

~month's refusal of the U.S. Supreme Court to

accept appeals by both the Government and the

renunciants.

Under the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals deci-

sion, which now becomes final, about 1000 renun-

ciants, most of whom were under 21 when they

- renounced, will have their citizenship restored to -

them. The remaining 3400 face further hearings

in which the burden is on the Government to prove

- that in each case the renunciant acted voluntarily.

Such hearings could result in keeping the issue

in the courts for many more years.

Exactly 138 renunciants are technically in cu-

stody of the Justice Department for removal to

Japan as alien enemies. In addition to seeking

restoration of their citizenship, they also sought

their liberty. Refusal to review their appeal means

that the District Court must now decide whether

under Japanese law they automatically acquired

. Japanese citizenship when they renounced their

U.S. citizenship. Once peace is established between

_ Japan and the United States, however, these re-

nunciants could not be shipped to Japan as alien

enemies, no matter what happens in their cases.

, Discrimination

in Transfer of School Pupil

Is

Pablo Board of Education from transferring 35

Negro children from the Broadway School to an

_ older school further away from their homes. Pend-

ing a hearing on November 1, a temporary re-

straining order has been issued.

It is alleged that the only children involved in

the transfer from an admittedly modern but

crowded school are Negroes residing in Parchester

Village, although many white children live much

closer to the schools that are not crowded. Trans-

fer of the Negroes would reduce the Negro popu-

lation of the Broadway School to six children.

The plaintiffs are represented by Joseph Land-

-isman of Richmond.

A suit has been filed in the Federal District -

District Attorney Miles F. McDonald, asking for . Court in San Francisco seeking to enjoin the San

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

Let Freedom Ring

A Unique Opportunity to Help

Roger Baldwin has advised the ACLU of North-

ern California that a German Civil Liberties dele-

gation sponsored by ACLU is now in the United

- States and six of its members will visit San Fran-

cisco. The group is studying civil liberties in the

U.S. for three months, and is traveling under the

auspices of the State Department. All of the dele-

gation are active in civil liberties work in Germany.

"Each member of the delegation," says Roger

Baldwin, "has a travel allowance of $200-which

requires close figuring for those attempting a Pa-

cific Coast trip-and $10 a day for expenses. Any

`accommodations which can be given them in pri-

vate homes would be appreciated, not only for

economy, but for an acquaintance with American

life."

It will be sometime in the later part of Novem-

ber or early December before members of the

group reach San Francisco. The following com-

munities are represented: Regensburg, Berlin,

Stuttgart, Augsburg, Frankfurt and Heidelberg.

If any member of the Union would like to offer

hospitality to any member of the group, please

contact the ACLU office.

|

Censorship Rejected

_ Last month both the California Library Associ-

ation and the League of California Citizens re-

jected resolutions endorsing a plan to put stickers

in public library books listing: pages containing

anything said to be "subversive or immoral."'

Sponsors of the idea were two members of the

Burbank Public Library Board of Trustees. They

-. stated that the idea had been suggested to them

by Norman Jacobs and Edward H. Gibbons, the

co-publishers of a red-hunting periodical called

Alert.

Berkeley Street Meetings

Two proposed ordinances limiting street meet-

ings and the use of sound amplifying equipment

were scheduled for redrafting last month follow-

ing a public hearing before the Berkeley City

Council. Judging from the views expressed by

some of the Councilmen, it seems most unlikely

that the new ordinances will outlaw meetings at

Sather and West Gates,-the Hyde Parks of U.C.

students. Before any ordinance is adopted the

public will ke given an opportunity to express its

views. The ACLU argued against the proposed

ordinances.

Truman Intervention Sought

[nm Indian Bureau Row

The ACLU called on President Truman last

month to intercede with Interior Secretary Oscar

L. Chapman to halt the promulgation of new reg-

ulations regarding contracts between Indian tribes

and their attorneys proposed by Indian Commis-

sioner Dillon S. Myer.

The proposed rules permit the Indian Commis-

sioner to disapprove attorneys' contracts for a

complex and numerous variety of reasons. Osten-

sibly they are designed to protect Indians from

being defrauded at the hands of unethical lawyers,

but the Commissioner has offered no evidence that

such dishonesty has taken place in recent years.

The Union's letter, signed by Patrick Murphy

Malin, ACLU Executive Director, and Dr. Jay B.

Nash, Chairman of the ACLU's Committee on

Indian Civil Rights, said the new rules:

(1) "transcend" authority given by existing

law;" (2) "deprive Indians of the basic right to

employ counsel of their own choosing;" (3) are

largely "based on an 1872 law which applied such

regulations to Indians not citizens of the U. S."-

whereas Indians have been citizens since 1924;

(4) "repudiate, in effect, many gains won for

American Indians by the Indian Reorganization

Act of 1934," which the U. S. "cited not long ago'

before the UN as an example of a concrete step

this country has taken to improve its treatment of

minorities;" (5) permit the Indian Commissioner,

against whose Indian Bureau much of the tribes'

legal action is brought, to disapprove attorney con-

tracts for so wide a variety of reasons to "violate

a sacred principle of American liberty: that no

man shall be a judge in his own cause;" (6) are

wanted by no one other than the Commissioner

himself and opposed unitedly by Indian tribes and

organizations; (7) ``would constitute the first

major backward step taken by the government in

its dealings with Indians since before the turn of

the century."

e,.

Le

aN

Late last month the American Civil Liberties

ed f

Union of Northern California sent a budget

appeal to all of its members and supporters, except those who contributed during the past couple

of months, soliciting their contributions towards the Union's budget of $17,200 for the fiscal year

which runs from November 1, 1951, to October 31, 1952. This is the Union's annual financial drive.

No other appeal for funds to carry on the Union's work is made during the year.

New York State Court of

Appeals Upholds "Miracle" Ban

By a split decision, New York's highest court,

the Court of Appeals, has upheld the ban on the

Italian film, `The Miracle."

In a five-to-two decision, the court held: (1)

that the state Board of Regents was justified in

calling the film sacrilegious because it "utterly

destroys" the concept of the relationship between

Jesus and his parents; (2) that the banning of the

film did not interfere with freedom of the press

because motion pictures are "primarily a form of

entertainment"; (3) that the regents had the

power to revoke the license granted to "The

Miracle" by the state Education Department (mo-.

tion picture division); (4) that the word "sacri-

legious" in the licensing section of the state edu-

cation law was a "sufficient definite standard" for

the regents to use in banning the film; and (5)

that separation of church and state was not vio-

lated by a ban on sacrilegious films, though some

incidental benefits did flow to religion.

Judge Fuld, joined by Judge Dye in his dissent-

ing opinion, took issue with every one of these

points. ACLU had argued against all except the

first point, not taking a position on whether or

not the film was sacrilegious. Of special interest

to the ACLU is the fact that Judge Fuld held that

motion picture censorship violated the First

Amendment. ACLU, for many years, has been

striving to establish this point so that consorship .

of films by state and local censor boards will ke " Pet80m could do some investigative work and lob- |

outlawed.

The movie, produced as part of a trilogy called

"The Ways of Love," tells of the story of a men- _

tally unbalanced peasant girl who is seduced by

a stranger. She believes the man is St. Joseph,

and that her child has been miraculously con- |

ceived.

"The Ways of Love" opened in New York last

December, was temporarily banned by the New

York City License Commissioner, and was finally

closed down when the Board of Regents revoked

its license. The film had been picketed by the Cath-

olic War Veterans, and had been denounced by

the Catholic clergy, including Francis Cardinal

Spellman.

ACLU has fought the banning of the film on

the grounds that it is an unwarranted use of cen-

sorship. An appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court is

planned by the movies distributor, Joseph Bur-

styn. ACLU will again support the case.

Angell Criticizes Govi.'s

Loyalty Procedures

Ernest Angell, chairman of ACLU's Board of

Directors, directed sharp criticism against -the

government's loyalty procedures before the 74th

annual meeting of the American Bar Association.

Other speakers on the program, which dealt with

"The Protection of Individual Rights and Govern-

ment Security in Times of Stress," included U. S.

Rep. Emmanuel Celler and Allan Barth, Washing-

ton Post editorial writer and author of `The

Loyalty of Free Men."

Angell stressed the manner in which the boards

take testimony. He thought thats the boards

should not give weight to reports of persons who

did not appear for questioning. Angell also thought -

that membership in an organization on the Attor- -

ney General's list of subversive organizations

should not be weighed against a person unless a ~

hearing on that organization had been held.

He criticized the Smith Act, under which the

eleven Communist leaders were recently sentenced,

and the McCarran Act, which he described as a

new kind of sedition act leading to totalitarianism.

Rep. Celler warned that the loyalty tests are

scaring away from government service people of

high caliber who are afraid of keing branded as

disloyal. Barth thought that though there is no

right to a government job, there is a right to

equality of opportunity to obtain it. There is also,

he said, a further right not to be punished by the

government unless found guilty of a crime.

80% Contribute Now

About 80 per cent of the Union's membership

send in their contributions at this time, and the

Union hopes that this practice will be adopted

generally. Supporters who contribute NOW for

the year's work will receive no further appeal for

funds for another year. That helps the Union tre-

mendously, because such concentration of fund-

raising activities causes a minimum of interference

with the handling of civil liberties issues. So, even

if your membership does not expire just now, the

Union hopes you will be willing to make your

PRESENT and FUTURE contributions in Novem-

ber. The Union earnestly solicits your cooperation.

Last year's budget, after some special authori-

zations throughout the year, finally ended up at

$15,361. Since this issue of the "News" goes to

press several days before the end of the fiscal

year, only estimates can be furnished at this time

as to income and expenditures. The income will

apparently be in the neighborhood of $15,500, and

expenditures will be slightly below that figure,

thus leaving a small surplus for the fiscal year.

The mounting budget not only reflects the in-

flated cost of doing business but also the growing

membership and the increased volume of work.

Indeed, the work has become so voluminous that

it is too great for the present staff to handle. Con-

sequently, the Executive Committee has allotted

$1000 for a part-time assistant. The exact func-

tions of such an employee are indefinite. In the

~ absence of professional help, the office could use

"someone with public relations experience to help

- with the publication of the monthly paper and an-

nual report, to issue press releases and handle

speaking engagements. If any time remains, the

bying as well.

How Much Should You Give?

How much should you give? On September 30

the Union had exactly 1871 members in good

standing. Therefore, in order to raise its budget,

the Union needs an average contribution of over

$9. Since a lot of people give less (some can afford

only the minimum dues of $3 a year), the Union

hopes that many of its supporters will GIVE

MORE than the average contribution. In fact, the

Union wouldn't be able to balance its budget un-

less it received many $25, $50 and $100 gifts.

Many members have been contributing the same

amount for years. Some have fixed incomes which

do not permit larger donations. However, there

are others who should be giving more, including

many who have contented themselves with paying

the minimum dues of $3 a year. The Union would

appreciate it if every member would once again

re-examine his support to see whether his gift

cannot be increased to enable the Union to do a

little more in fighting the current Communist hys-

teria. And, if you can't pay now, the Union will

be happy to receive a pledge.

_. Remember, all of the money used in the Union's

local work is contributed by members and friends.

It has no support from any foundation, the Com-

munity Chest, financial angels or the Union's na-

tional office. We would like to emphasize the last

point again, because some of our members occa-

sionally send money to New York, not realizing

that no part of it will be used for local work. Every

civil liberties issue handled by the Union of North-

ern California is paid for out of funds raised by

the local branch. The national office does not send

us a percentage of the funds it takes out of this

`area from some six hundred persons. -

The Budget

Salaries

Directot $ 6,000

Secretary = 2,922

Part-time Assistant __............... 1,000

Ketirement FAL

Printing and Stationery ___......_.. 3,200

Rent : 1,240

Postage 8%

Telephone and Telegraph ___......._... 325

Taxes and Insurance ...................... 250

draveling 200

Furniture and Equipment.._____....... 50

Miscellaneous ___....-.._......_.-..- 50 .

Publications 45

Contingent Fund -__..........-..-..- 2712

Total $17,200

Page 4

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

American Civil Liberties Union-News

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

Calif., by the American Civil Liberties Union

of Nerthern California.

Phone: EXbrook 2-3255

ERNEST. BESIG ...:... .. Editor

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

Post Office at San Francisco, California,

under the Act of March 3, 1879

Subscription Rates-One Dollar a Year.

Ten cents per Copy -151 " @

XS

"Excessive Bail"

Editor: As a subscriber to the ACLU-News, and

one who applauds the ACLU's constant vigilance

in defense of our liberties, I nevertheless find my-

self questioning the organization's stand against

the high bail for Communists (ACLU-News, Sep-

tember 1951, p. 1).

In connection with this thorny issue revolving

around the Smith Act, I have read carefully

Justice Douglas' statement in the July issue of the

ACLU-News (pp. 1, 2), and the ACLU Statement

of Policy on the Smith Act (ACLU-News, August

1951, p. 4). The strong point of the argument in

both instances is not that Communist leaders

should not have been imprisoned, but that the way

they were convicted endangers civil liberties in

general. Although I am no lawyer, I am prepared

to concede that this may be the case.

At the same time I am anxious that, in criti-

cizing the grounds on which the Communist lead-

ers were convicted, the ACLU be not maneuvered

into any defense of the Communists themselves.

I realize of course that there is no serious danger

of this. Repeated statements have made it clear

that the ACLU recognizes the anti-democratic,

conspiratorial nature of the Communist Party.

Parenthetically, I ought to confess my own feeling

that the upper leadership of the American Com-

munist Party should already be in jail. For we are

engaged in what amounts to a limited war with

Russia. All-out war is a fearful possibility. And

Communists, as Justice Douglas affirms, are

prospective saboteurs. a

- But what about the bail issue? We have this.

| situation: The accused Communists' bail is pro-

vided by the Communist network. The Party has

shown itself willing to forfeit normal bail sums in

order to retain some of the leaders of its under-

ground organization. If higher than ordinary bail

is needed for the purpose of insuring the accused

Communists' presence at the trial, I can see no

reason for objecting to this. The ACLU wishes to

participate in this case on the basis of its criticism

of the Smith Act. By extending its complaint to

the matter of the bail, I fear the ACLU is allowing

itself to be diverted from the central issue and,

furthermore, may be extending to the Communist

leaders a protection they do not deserve.

I look forward to learning your views on this

matter. Should you wish to discuss it in your

paper, you have my permission to publish this

letter in its entirety. However, should you wish to

Supreme Court to Hear Deportation Cases;

The United States Supreme Court last month

agreed to review several civil liberties cases con-

cerning national security. The high court also

rejected two petitions for a rehearing of its de-

cision last June upholding the constitutionality of

the Smith Act in the case of the 11 Communist

leaders.

In the case of Luigi Mascitti, the court has been

asked to decide whether a resident alien may he

deported for belonging to the Communist Party

during a six-year period before enactment of the

deportation statute applied to his case. Mascitti

argues that the Alien Kegistration Act of 1940 is

unconstitutional because it is retroactive and

violates the due process provisions of the Fifth

Amendment, as well as the free speech and as-

sembly guarantees of the First Amendment. These

views have the "full support" of ACLU, according

to staff counsel Herbert Monte Levy.

The brief on behalf of Mascitti attacks the

retroactive feature of the 1940 statute, which

amended a 1918 law providing for the deportation

of aliens then members of subversive groups. It

contends that the constitutional prohibition

against ex post facto laws applies to civil as well

as criminal matters.

In the Carlson case, four alleged alien Com-

munists have petitioned the court tor release from

jail, where they have been held without bail since

October, 1950. A. L. Wirin, counsel for the South-

ern California branch of ACLU, has been among

those filing a petition for review of the case. The

plaintiffs - Frank Carlson, Miriam Christine

Stevenson, Havid Hyun, and Harry Carlisle -

contend that their continued detention is illegal

because: (1) No evidence submitted has tended to

show that they have or will commit unlawful acts.

(2) Their imprisonment for "security" reasons

violates the Highth Amendment. (3) Their de-

tention for alleged Communist Party membership

cannot be justified in the absence of more com-

plete evidence concerning the Party, and moreover

it violates the First Amendment.

Deportation proceedings had heen pending

against some of the plaintiffs since 1947 but all

had been free on bail until last October. At that

time they were taken into custody by immigration

authorities on behalf of the Attorney General. The

charge was that as alleged Communists the four

aliens would-if freed on bail-engage in activities

"prejudicial to the public interest and would en-

danger the welfare and safety" of the U.S.

The ACLU had supported the petition for re-

hearing submitted in the case of John Gates, one

of the Communist leaders. ACLU executive direc-

tor Patrick Murphy Malin, in pointing out that the

ACLU is still opposed to the Smith Act for its

violation of the rights of free speech, asserted

that ACLU had not supported any other petition

for rehearing because no new issues had been

Brief Argues Against

"Stomach Pump Confession"

ay: +e

Rehearing to Eleven Communists

raised. While only endorsing the Gates petition in

part, Malin said that certain new points should

now be considered by the court. `Among these,"

he said, "is the fact that the government could

have used laws such as espionage and foreign

registration acts to combat any Communist threat

to security without resorting to the Smith Act,

which restrains free speech." Malin also pointed

out that "in assessing the probability of the evil -

of revolution, the court did not consider the

present decline of the American Communist Party

and the unlikelihood of Communism triumphing

in the present period of prosperity."

Part of Deportation Section

Of McCarran Act Invalid

Over the past couple of months, ACLU has

entered two almost identical cases involving de-

portations under the McCarran Act. California's

southern district court has now decided one of

them, The verdict is the first federal court de-

cision to declare a part of the act unconstitutional.

Frank E. Spector, the defendant in the Califor-

nia case, had been indicted for violating a clause

of the act that makes it a public offense for "any

alien against whom an order of deportation is

outstanding . . . (to) willfully fail or refuse to

depart from the United States within a period of

six months from the date of such order of deporta-

tion, or from Sept. 30, 1950, which ever is the later,

or (to) wilfully fail or refuse to make timely ap-

plication in good faith for travel or other docu-

ments necessary to his departure."

Essentially, the decision by Judge William C.

Mathes held two things: (1) That the act is con-

stitutional in penalizing for failure or refusal to-

depart from the U.S.; (2) that it is not constitu-

tional in making it a felony to refuse to apply for

travel papers. The Southern California branch of

ACLU, in a friend-of-the-court brief, argued that

both provisions violated the Fifth Amendment.

The trouble with the second provision, the judge

held, is that it is so vague as to violate due process.

For what should a person apply? Where should he

go to make application? `The statute merely pro-

vides that timely application be made `for travel

or other documents necessary to his departure.'

Would timely purchase of a Sunday bus ticket to

Tijuana across the Mexican border suffice?

"Statutes making criminal an omission should

specifically declare what action is required for

compliance, to the end that all may know pre-

cisely what affirmative conduct is required to

avoid commission of a crime."

In the second deportation case, a federal action

in Iowa against Martin Karasek, ACLU has again

maintained in a brief that both parts of the alien

section are unconstitutional. The failure to depart,

it reasons, may hinge to a great extent on whether

timely application is made for travel documents.

The standard set there has already been held to be

too vague to be valid, the brief said referring to the -

Spector case. Further, a person may conceivably

try to depart, but be blocked by the unwillingness