vol. 16, no. 9

American

Civil Liberties

Union-News

"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."

Free Press

Free Assemblage

Free Speech

VOLUME XVI :

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, SEPTEMBER, 1951

No. 9

Changes of Address

Virtually every month the Union receives

notices from the Post Office that members

have moved without leaving forwarding ad-

dresses. We try very hard by one means or an-

other to locate such persons but we sometimes

fail to do so. This month especially with so

many persons returning to academic pursuits

there will be numerous changes of address

among our members. If you are moving some- '

time this fall, may we urge you to send us a

notice of change of address promptly. |

Released-Time Program `

By a six-to-one decision, New York's high court,

the Court of Appeals, has upheld the constitution-

ality of the state's released-time program. The

plan allows public school children to be released

from. classes for one hour a Wee to receive re-

ligious instruction.

In its ruling, the court denied an appeal by two.

Brooklyn parents, Tessim Zorach and Mrs. Esta

Gluck, who contended the practice violated the

constitution under the 1948 McCollum-decision of

' the U. S. Supreme Court. ACLU had filed a friend

of the court brief supporting the stand of the two

parents.

The state' s high court decided that the McCol-

lum case "is not controlling on us here since the

Champaign, Ill., plan...

York program in a number of important respects,

principally in that religious training took place in

the classrooms of the Champaign schools, and.

some public funds were spent in Champaign." The

court's majority opinion found that "govern-

mental aid to, and encouragement of, religions

generally, as distinguished from establishment or

support of separate sects, has never been consid-

_ ered offensive to the American constitutional sys-

tem." It is clear "beyond cavil that the constitution

does not demand that every friendly gesture be-

tween church and state shall be discountenanced.

This so-called `wall of separation' may be built so

high and so broad as to fash) both state and

church."

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

Loyalty Check for State's

Civil Defense Workers

_ Persons volunteering for civil defense work in

California are not only required to take the Lever-

ing Act loyalty oath but are also subject to a loy-

alty check. The loyalty check was authorized by

the last session of the State Legislature in a bill

that went almost unnoticed.

The new law, which goes into effect this month,

provides as follows:

_ "The Director of Civil Defense shall determine

the order of priority for screening volunteer civil

defense workers. Screening shall include such in-

vestigation, fingerprinting, photographing, de-

scription and information as may be necessary

to determine the loyalty of such volunteer civil

defense workers to the United States and their

general fitness to assume their civil defense pow-

ers and duties. The Director of Civil Defense shall

contract with the State Bureau of Criminal Identi-

fication and Investigation for the performance

of such screening functions and the cost thereof

shall not exceed the actual cost to the bureau for

performing such work."

_ Under the Levering Act all public employees

have been conscripted for civil defense work. Since

the new law applies to ``volunteers," it would ap-

pear that public employees are not subject to a

loyalty check.

differed from the New -

`Soviet Refugee, Imprisoned 7 Months, Faces

indefinite Detention by Immigration Service

A political refugee of the Soviet Union has been

imprisoned without a hearing by the Immigration

Service during the past seven months, and, at the

moment, seems destined for indefinite detention.

Though domiciled here for the past five years

while sailing American vessels, the alien has been

denied "admission" to the United States on the

ground that such admission would be prejudicial

to the interest of the United States.

While the Government has ruled that the alien

/may not enter the country, it has done little to

N. Y. Court of Appeals Upholds -

secure his removal. In fact, it doesn't quite know

what to do with him since he has no travel docu-

ments that would allow his admission to some

other country. At the same time, the Coast Guard,

Army Fails to Honor Coast

Guard Security Clearance

A year ago an engineer was screened from an

American vessel as a security risk because "you

are believed to be affiliated with the Communist

Party and sympathetic to its principles and pol-

icies."" Six months later he was given a hearing,

Last May 2 he was cleared. As far as could be

ascertained from the questioning at the hearing,

the man was screened because his sister is sus-

pected of being a Communist.

In any case, the man finally shipped out as a

Second Engineer on a vessel that went to Korea.

Even though he had been cleared by the Coast

Guard, the Army barred him from landing at

Pusan, as related in the following letter:

"After the long months of waiting and the

thorough hearing which you so efficiently handled

in clearing me I am once again in difficulty. The

C.I.C. has restricted me to the vessel in his area.

I had a `this is where I came in' feeling which was

very discouraging. '

"As you so well understand, it is not the single

factor of being restricted in any certain port, but

the many ramifications of being considered a `bad

risk.' At least now I am making a living, but how

long will that continue? Will I be able to sign on

again? Is it that the Army has been advised by

the Coast Guard? Have I been re-screened. If so,

why'? etc., etc.

"T can. readily sympathize with the men who are

fighting this war and understand how they must

feel toward someone who is identified as a traitor

or `potential traitor.' That is precisely the way

some of the authorities are treating me here and

it's pretty hard to take.

`If there is any information you can get from

the Coast Guard, any action you can take, any

advice you can offer, or any light at all that you

can shed on the situation, it would be very greatly

appreciated by me."

ACLU Opposes Excessive

Bail for "Communist 12"

The ACLU last month protested the excessive

bail set in the cases of the twelve Communists

indicted in Los Angeles under the Smith Act.

`In the East, 17 Communists `indicted in a "sec-

ond round" of Smith Act prosecutions have all

been released on bail ranging from $5000 to

$20,000. In California, however, the Federal Court

has set bail at amounts ranging from $50,000 to

$75,000.

A. L. Wirin, counsel for the Southern California

branch of the Union, is appearing as friend of the

court, not only to oppose the high bail, but to

oppose the prosecutions as a violation of free

speech and association.

also without a hearing, has assertedly ruled that

the alien is a security risk and, therefore, may not

ship out as a seaman, which is his usual occu- (c)

pation.

As a matter of fact, the Immigration Service

has never informed the alien why he is being de-

tained, nor what it intends,to do with him. Not

until he turned to the ACLU for help did he dis-

cover the general grounds for his detention. |

Moreover, the Government hasn't specified why

the alien's entry would be prejudicial to the inter-

est of the United States. Congress gave the Immi-

gration Service power to exclude aliens on such

vague grounds without a hearing, and the U. S.

Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of

such procedure by a split decision in the Ellen |

Knauff case. In the Valentina Ivanova Gardner

case, however, which the local ACLU handled,

columnist Art Caylor and the San Francisco News

exposed the case and caused a hearing and the

eventual release of the alien.

Apparently, the Immigration Service is fearful

that any refugee from behind the Iron Curtain is

@ spy and a saboteur. Consequently, all of the |

cnief investigative services of the federal govern-

ment have from time to time interrogated the alien

at length during the past 614 years. Despite such

careful investigation, there has never been any

indication that the alien was ever anything more

than he claimed to be-a political refugee from

the Soviet Union.

Now the alien has publicly offered to submit to

a lie detector test to establish that he is not a spy,

saboteur or assassin or anything else than a person

well disposed to this country and its democratic

form of government.

The alien is 42-year-old Alexander Lobanov,

who came to the United States from the Soviet

- Union in 1943 in order to help man a Lend Lease

vessel. After his arrival in Portland, Oregon, how-

ever, he worked for the Soviet Purchasing Com-

mission as a guard from September 1943 to De-

cember 1944. He was then ordered to return to

the Soviet Union but refused to do so.

o Russians came to his home and sought to

- escort him on board a Soviet vessel by force. He

tried to escape from their car only to be beaten up. -

A crowd gathered and someone called a police

officer. The Russians claimed Lobanov was a

drunken seaman who was being taken back to his

ship. This Lobanov denied and the police officers

took the group to the police station.

After being given medical treatment, the police

turned Lobanov over to the Immigration officials

in Seattle. On June 11, 1945, he was allowed to

ship from Seattle on a Belgian vessel, the Ville

d'Anvers. After a number of voyages, he was dis-

charged in New York in November, 1945, and

made his way to San Francisco, where he joined

the Sailors Union of the Pacific and ever since

has been sailing on American vessels.

From 1945 to 1948, because he has no passport,

Lobanov was denied shore leave in the United

States and was detained on board ship by Immi-

gration officers. On September 3, 1948, however,

he secured a continuing waiver of passport from

the State Department, which permitted him to

follow his calling as a seaman, including the privi-

lege of 29 days' shore leave in the United States

between trips.

Last January 31, however, while sailing on the

U.S. naval ship, Mission San Rafael, owned by the

Navy but operated under contract by Pacific

Tankers, he was again denied shore leave by the

Immigration Service in San Francisco on the un-

stated ground that his entry would be prejudicial

to the interest of the United States. Because the

(Continued on Page 4, Col. 2)

Page 2

(R)

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

ACLU Backs Right of Gov't

Employees to Join Labor Union

The directive of Police Commissioner George

P. Monaghan forbidding New York City policemen

to join any labor union "is an unconstitutional

interference with the right of government em-

ployees to join labor organizations of their own

choosing," the New York City Civil Liberties Com-

_mittee and the American Civil Liberties Union

declared last month. The statement was contained

in a "friend of the court" brief submitted by Lud-

wig Teller, vice-chairman and counsel to the

Union's labor relations committee, in a suit

brought by Patrolman Vincent L. Butler in behalf

of the CIO Transport Workers Union against Com-

missioner Monaghan in a New York Supreme

Court.

The Union's brief argued that when government

employees resort to membership in a labor organ-

ization "as a means of making their voices heard

more effectively ... they are doing no more than

exercising their constitutional right of free speech

and assembly . .. which both our federal constitu-

tion and our New York State constitution protect

against interference or impairment by government

officials." : 2s

Asserting that Commissioner Monaghan had the |

right to express his views on the subject of police- -

men's membership in labor unions, the brief said

a "different question is involved where (as in the

present case) coercion in the form of discharge

from employment is used to enforce such views.

It is precisely this kind of coercion against which

government employees are protected when they

seek to form or join labor organizations."

In answer to the charge that membership by

the police in a CIO union would impair their im-

partiality in preserving law and order in labor

disputes, the ACLU said this argument suffers

from the erroneous conclusion that labor organ-

- izations composed of government employees are

necessarily governed by the same rules, and have

the same consequences, as labor union member-

ship in private industry. "There is little evidence,

if any, to support either the charge or the belief

as to policemen's labor unions, and it seems out of

line with our Anglo-American system of law to

deny a right (to join labor organizations) simply

because of the unproved possibility or suspicion

that it may be put to unlawful uses in the future."

The ACLU stressed that it did not advocate

that government employees should join or not

join labor unions or that it took sides as to what

union should be chosen. `Our sole purpose is to

indicate that they (the employees) are constitu-

tionally protected when, in freely exercised judg-

ment, they decide their interests would be ad-

vanced by joining a labor organization for the

purpose of securing protection and betterment

in their employment conditions."

In urging the right of government employees

to join labor unions, the ACLU said this should

not be confused with the right to strike. It pointed

to a policy statement adopted by the ACLU Board

of Directors on June 25, 1951, which states that

"sovernment employees, recognizing their obliga-

tion to the public service, should voluntarily re- -

linquish any right to strike, provided adequate

and effective machinery for handling employer-

employee relations be established by the govern-

ment. All laws, regulations or practices prohibiting

or limiting the right to strike in government em-

ployment should be modified to incorporate the .

principles underlying such machinery, stressing

that wages, hours of employment and other, con-

ditions of employment should be on a par with

those prevailing in private employment, tenure of

employment should be achieved to the "greatest

extent possible since lack of job security is a ma-

jor cause of unrest," that adequate and effective

grievance machinery be available, and laws pro-

tecting government employees from involuntary

political contributions and involuntary services

to political parties were desirable. It also asserted

than no compulsory union membership require-

ments should be permited in connection with gov-

ernment employment.

Oppose Providence Criminal

Registration Ordinance

Providence, R. I., last month started a bill

through its city council that would require all con-

victed criminals to register with the police depart-

ment. The ordinance would cover both people liv-

ing in the city and those passing through. Anyone

convicted by a federal or state court in the last 10

years would have to be fingerprinted, photo-

graphed and interviewed. ACLU opposed the ordi-

nance on the grounds that it was in the nature of

an ex post facto law-that it imposed additional

penalties for crimes that bore wholly different

penalties when committed. Further, it questioned

the right of the city to impose any penalty for a

crime clearly beyond its jurisdiction.

ACLU Urges Substitution of Security

Program for Federal Loyalty Program

The American Civil Liberties Union has called

for the akaridonment of the present federal loy-

alty program and the substitution in its place of

a specific security program, with fair standards

and procedures. In a letter to President Truman,

the Union asserted that two recent Supreme Court

rulings on the federal loyalty program and the

change of standards adopted for judging the loy-

alty of federal employees made a re-examination

of the program necessary.

The Union's attack on the loyalty program was

directed at its inclusiveness, for covering em-

ployees in non-sensitive as well as sensitive posi-

tions. `"We believe .it is not a service, but a dis-

`service, to national security to require special

loyalty investigations of persons holding, or ap-

plying for, non-sensitive positions," the letter said.

The Union officials charged that the "all-inclusive -

loyalty program" has resulted in the creation of

an "atmosphere of repression, highly dangerous

to democratic government; it has envenomed and

terrorized government employees and prospective

employees, who are now afraid to practice the

`good old American habits of speaking one's mind

and joining organizations one believes in, to say

or do anything unorthodox, lest some administra-

tor later consider such things evidence of `dis-

loyalty.' "

`The discovery of relatively few `disloyal' per-

sons, out of the millions investigated, is ``a ter-

rible price" and is being paid for needlessly, the

Union declared, ``because the vigilant and efficient

work of the FBI and other law enforcement

agencies is successfully preventing or punishing

subversive acts wherever they may be found."

Charging that the change in standards in the

loyalty program-from "reasonable grounds" to

"reasonable doubt" of disloyalty-will shut the

door to government employment ``on all but the

most conservative, courageous or fool-hardy," the

ACLU said the change perpetuates the vagueness

which has marked so many of the loyalty pro-

gram's procedure. "For what does it mean to prove

one's loyalty beyond a reasonable doukt? If a

single voice is raised in derogation of an individ-

ual's loyalty, does that create a reasonable doubt?

In support of its argument that the current stan-

dards frighten away prospective government em-

ployees, the letter quoted the report of the U. S.

Advisory Council on Information to the Secretary

of State that better personnel could be obtained

for information agencies to carry out the U. S.

Information and Education Act of 1948 "if some

kind of exemption from FBI clearance prior to

hiring personnel can be legislated."

The Union also assailed the lack of cross-exam-

ination and confrontation of accusers in the pres-

ent loyalty program, and urged the President to

amend his order to provide for these procedural

rights. It pointed out that half of the Supreme

Court in ruling in the Dorothy Bailey case de-

clared that it was unconstitutional for the gov-

ernment to deny its employees in a non-sensitive

position this right: "If the situation was difficult

for Miss Bailey under the old standard-of rea-

sonable grounds of disloyalty-the situation will

be next to impossible if a `new Miss Bailey' has

to prove herself innocent beyond a reasonable

doubt-with no opportunity for her to confront

and cross-examine her accusers, or even learn

Supreme Court Fails To

Rule on Sunday Sabbath Law

An attempt to have New York's Sunday Sab-

bath law declared unconstitutional, when applied

to Orthodox Jews who observe Saturday as their

Sabbath, failed in the last term of the Supreme |

Court. The court refused to review a test case

challenging the law, which bans certain business

on Sundays.

The case was brought by two Orthodox Jews,

Sam Freidman and Sam Praska, who are retailers

of kosher meat. The two were convicted of selling

meat on Sunday and were fined $10. Freidman and

Praska contended that the law was an "unconsti-

tutional infringement on the liberty of those ob-

serving a day other than Sunday as holy time."

Besides they criticized the "crazy quilt pattern"

of allowing milk and eggs to be sold on Sunday,

but not meat and fish.

The high court, however, found there was no

substantial federal question involved. The case

was brought by the American Jewish Congress.

ACLU filed briefs in the lower court supporting

Freidman and Praska on the ground that the law |

as applied violated freedom of religion in that it

imposed severe financial penalties on Orthodox

Jews, who observe a Sabbath other than Sunday |

by forcing them to sacrifice 52 additional days

of labor a year.

who they are, and with no opportunity for the

loyalty board itself to do so."

_. Hitting hard at the government's plea that to

force the disclosure of its informants would jeo-

_pardize the government's counter-espionage ap-

paratus, the Union asserted ``there is nevertheless

no apparent reason why informants other than

counter-espionage agents and the like, whose fur-

ther usefulness may be impaired, should not be

required to testify and submit to cross-examina-

tion., At the very last, the hearing board should be

informed that the lack of willingness to openly

testify is an indication that the derogatory infor-

mation may not be credible where unsupported

by other evidence." The letter also urged that full

contents of FBI files be made available to hearing

boards, which will determine whether it would

endanger government security or sources of in-

formation if the identity of informants were re-

vealed and the informants subjected to cross-

examination. :

The Union spokesman also said that the Su-

preme Court's recent decision in the case of the

Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee and two

other groups who tested the constitutionality of

the Attorney General's subversive list `makes it

obvious that hearings should be held before any

organization is put or continued on any list pre-

pared for any security or loyalty program."

The Union laid down a four-point program deal-

ing with the list. It called for (1) immediate hear-

ings for all existing organizations listed, or con-

sidered for listing, and the serving of notice of

charges in as much detail as security will permit;

(2) hearings should be public, unless the organiza-

tion affected requests they be private; (3) whe-

ther the decision is for or against listing, the find-

itgs should be made public-in writing and with

detailed findings and reasons. "The findings

should also include a determination of the time

when an organization became subversive. Many

organizations which may have been captured by

Communist groups and presently exist only as

front organizations had an original period of in-,

dependent activity. Others have thrown off their

Communist control. Under the present set-up, no

distinction is made between membership in an or-.

ganization when it was subversive and member-

ship when it was not"; (4) persons belonging to

defunct groups listed as subversive who are ad-

versely affected by that listing should be granted

hearings, as well as past officers or directors of

the. group.

San Jose ACLU Meeting Oct. 5

A meeting of members and friends of the ACLU

in the San Jose area will be held in Room B, San

`Jose Civic Auditorium, Friday evening, October

5, at eight o'elock. Speaker for the evening will be

Ernest Besig, Northern California director of the

ACLU. His subject is, "Civil Liberties for Whom?" .

Admission to the meeting is free.

Executive Committee

American Givil Liberties Unio

of Northern, Galifornia

Sara Bard Field!

Honorary Member

Rt. Rey. Edw. L. Parsons

Chairman

Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn

Helen Salz

Vice-Chairmen

Joseph S. Thompson

Secretary- Treasurer

Ernest Besig

Director

Philip Adams

Prof. Edward L. Barrett, Jr.

John H. Brill.

Prof. James R. Caldwell .

Arnold F. Campo

Wayne M. Collins

Rev. Oscar F. Green

Margaret C. Hayes

Prof. Van D. Kennedy

' Ruth Kingman

Seaton W. Manning

Rev. Harry C. Mesevor

Rabbi Irving F. Reichert

Clarence E. Rust

Fred H. Smith, IV

Prof. Wallace E. Stegner

Dean Carl B. Spaeth

Beatrice Mark Stern

_ Dr. Howard Thurman

Kathleen Drew Tolman

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

`Page 3

"Tenney Committee"

Book Orders

The ACLU has available a limited supply

of "The Tenney Committee," by Edward L.

Barrett, Jr., Professor of Law, University of

California, and a member of the Union's local

Executive Committee. This 400-page book,

published by the Cornell University Press,

sells for $5. Members wishing to order this

book should send their checks to the ACLU,

503 Market St., San Francisco 5, Calif.

ACLU Joins In Defense

Of "Trenton Two"

Appeal on behalf of the two men convicted in

the Trenton Six case will be made to the Supreme

Court of New Jersey and, if necessary, to the

Supreme Court of the United States, according to

an announcement last month by Patrick Murphy

Malin, ACLU's executive director, Thurgood Mar-

shall, special counsel of the National Association

for the Advancement of Colored People and Dr.

Edward S. Corwin, chairman of the Princeton

Committee for Defense of the Trenton Six. The

Princeton committee, organized to aid the defense

in the Trenton case, is composed of 27 New Jersey

clergymen and professors.

Spokesmen of the three organizations, who have

joined to form the Joint Committee to Free the

Trenton Two, stated that every-legal resource

would be exhausted in order to secure the release

of Ralph Cooper and Collis English. Both were

sentenced, to life imprisonment on June 14, after

a trial of more'than 15 weeks. Four others, accused

with them of the 1948 murder of a Trenton second-

hand dealer, Fred Horner, were acquitted.

"We are convinced," the statement continued,

"that these men, who have already spent more

than three years in prison and have three times

been on trial for their lives, are victims, not crim-

inals." Neither Cooper nor English was charged

with the actual commission of the crime, the state-

ment points out. The jury, which rejected the

prosecution's case against the men accused of

striking the fatal blows against Horner and as-

saulting his common-law wife, and against two

others accused as lookout men, returned a verdict

of, guilty against Cooper and English who were

only accused of being present when the crime was

committed.

_Spokesmen for the three organizations stated

that complete financial and legal responsibility

for the appeal has been assumed by the Joint

Committee to Free the Trenton Two, whose attor-

neys, Arthur Garfield Hays, American Civil Lib-

erties Union lawyer of New York, and George

Pelletieri of Trenton, have already filed their in-

`tention to appeal in the New Jersey Supreme

Court. Mercer Burrell, NAACP attorney of New-

ark, will be associated in the appeal.

Spokesmen of the Joint Committee stated that

the Civil Rights Congress or any other organiza-

tion which speaks in behalf of the case or seeks to

solicit funds for the defense of the Trenton Two

does so without authorization by the defendants

or the organizations sponsoring the appeal. "We

are confident,' the statement concludes, "that the

many generous individuals who gave financial

support to the National Association for the Ad-

vancement of Colored People and the Princeton

Committee for Defense of the Trenton Six in de-

fending five of the men in the trial just ended, will

assist the effort to secure justice for Ralph Cooper

and Collis English."

Hawaii Enacts Loyalty

Program for Public Employees

Despite protests from ACLU, Hawaii's Gov.

Oren E.. Long has signed into law a bill setting up

a loyalty program for public employees eal offi-

cers in the territory.

ACLU Executive Director Patrick Murphy Ma-

lin had radiogrammed Long that'"it is obviously

a violation of the spirit of the Constitution to

require certification of candidates for public office

on loyalty grounds before the public can be given

a right: to vote. Nor is there any necessity for

loyalty checkups of persons other than those in

sensitive positions .

Long answered Malin that "while these bills

were not entirely satisfactory to anyone .. . the

best imterest of the community would be served

by signing the bills rather than by vetoing them."

_ Long added that the character of the seven mem-

bers of the Loyalty Board had largely disarmed

the fears of the people. `This, of course," he said,

"does not do away with the strong feeling of many

of our best citizens that the bills are wrong in

principle."

`The Tenney Committee:' Inquiry Into Character

Assassination and Guilt by Association

By Prof. LAURENCE SEARS

It would be a pity if any book review of Profes-

sor Barrett's "The Tenney Committee" were taken

as a Substitute for reading it. No summary could

do justice either to the wealth of material he has

amassed or the insights he has shown in evaluat-

ing the work of the Committee.

Professor Barrett starts quite properly with an

account of Mr. Tenney's own record and it will

probably come as a surprise to many people that

he was once named in an affidavit before the Dies

Committee as having been an active member of the

Communist Party in 1936 and 1937, as well as

having been listed in the Dies Report as a member

of the American League for Peace and Democracy,

and as a sponsor of Friends of the Abraham Lin-

coln Brigade. That may or may not be illuminating

to Mr. Tenney's later record but it does provide a

curious footnote.

Detailed accounts have been given by ean

Barrett of the more famous investigations, and

they need to be read in full if one is to understand

what was involved. It is that record which justi-

fied the conclusion that: "The Hearings of the

Tenney Committee were not conducted in a man-

ner calculated to permit rational findings of fact.

A' general view suggests that persecution rather

than investigation was the theme." In part this

was due to Mr. `lenney's approach. Impartiality is

not apt to characterize the attitude of anyone who

regarded all "unfriendly" witnesses as spies or

traitors. Furthermore, the hearings semed to have

been planned primarily for publicizing conclusions

rather than discovering the facts. People either

agreed or disagreed with the convictions held by

the Chairman prior to the beginning of .the investi-

gation,

"Friendly" witnesses were asked to testify as to

facts. "Unfriendly" witnesses were quizzed about

their affiliations and beliefs.

Finally the record would indicate that little of

the testimony of the Committee was tested for its

reliability. Individuals were not allowed to cross-

examine their accusers and there was little care

taken to define adequate tests of credibility.

If the right to a fair trial and the right of dissent

' are basic in the American traditions, then it seems

legitimate to raise the question as to whether Mr.

Tenney's Committee: did not strike deeply at two

of the basic rights of Americans. In the first place,

- It seems obvious that people subjected to investi-

gations by this Committee under the pitiless light

of publicity were actually in effect put on trial, and

yet a trial which was rarely surrounded with the

normal protections of due process. In the second

place, it operated to discourage men from differ-

ing with Mr. Tenney and his supporters. Men paid

a high price if they insisted on their right of dis-

sent. Professor Barrett quotes an unnamed Cali-

fornia Senator as saying:

"One hesitates to express his honest convic-

tions in a public forum because of the danger of

being misunderstood and forever labeled as be-

ing a `Fellow-traveler,' leftist, disloyal, or some

other derogatory term, which may prejudice

people against him and seriously handicap his

future usefulness."

It is interesting to note where the opposition to

Mr. Tenney arose, to discover the groups and in-

Discrimination Ended In

AFL Sailors Union

Two years ago, ACLU made a strong protest'

against discrimination in the Seafarers Interna-

tional Union (AFL). It called on the New State

Commission Against Discrimination to take imme-

diate action toward eliminating separate hiring

halls for Negroes and whites. It also demanded an

end to the union's practice of dispatching Negroes

only for jobs in the stewards department.

Last: month ACLU got the results it had hoped

for. The state commission and seamen's union an-

nounced an agreement to end all discrimination

in union hiring.

Said Patrick Murphy Malin, ACLU executive

director, in a letter to the state commission: "I

should like to express congratulations .

agreement. We are especially gratified `that it

covers the deck and engine departments as well (c)

as the stewards department ... We are also

happy to note... that the union is to supply such

information as the commission desires in order to

check on compliance. This satisfactory outcome

to the lengthy negotiations will not only benefit

the sailors ... but will also aid in the general cam-

paign to assure full equality to all Americans."

and labels were applied accordingly. (c)

. on the.

dividuals that had the insight and courage to pro-

test. Professor Barrett suggests that there were

not aS many as one might have hoped. The

academic world was distinguished almost entirely

by its absence of protest. Whether professors in

the main were timid, or merely uninterested isn't

clear, but both .as a group and as individuals they

were apparently interested in passing by on the

other side. Nor did the Labor movement seem to

do much better, though there were exceptions. The

League of Women Voters was prominent in the

fight against the Committee, but by-and-large

such protests as were voiced (in addition, of

course, to that of The American Civil Liberties

Union) came from the church and certain news-

"papers. Several denominations went on record in

opposition, and Professor Barrett notes a surpris-

ing number of hostile editorials. And yet as one

reads these pages, the impression is inescapable

that, for the most part, the citizens of California

did very little by way of making their criticisms

effective. -

In his closing chapter Professor Barrett does an

excellent job of appraisal. He makes clear that the

Committee was not primarily a fact-finding body

for the purpose of aiding the legislative process.

It became interested more in exposure and in the

punishment of `alleged subversives and their

sympathizers, as well as taking upon itself the

functions of prosecutor, judge, and jury." Further-

more, the emphasis of the Committee shifted from

actual subversives to those who might have asso-

ciated with them even casually, or even to those

who have supported any of their causes.

Also, in many cases the Committee went beyond |

investigation and report, assuming the functions of

a law enforcement agency. This was inevitable

for a committee that had come to assume that any

"unfriendly" witnesses were agents for Russia and

presumably traitors to their country.

"When a legislative committee believes it is

dealing with enemies of the country, it is not -

likely to be very concerned about their civil

rights. Witnesses before the committee should

-be treated as the traitors they are and made to

`reveal their iniquity. ... Why should they be

`given a chance to explain their affiliations when

all they desire is to use the committee hearing

as a sounding board for their propaganda? Why

should their counsel be accorded the privilege of

participating in the hearing?"

Perhaps no better summary of Professor Bar-

rett's conclusions can be given than is found in an

editorial of the San Francisco Chronicle, which

he quotes:

"One of the committee's troubles under Ten-

ney's leadership was that it roamed and rambled

into fields of character assassination and guilt

by association which had nothing to do with

overt subversiveness. Anyone who was in favor

of overthrowing Tenney, as distinguished from

overthrowing the Government, was likely to be

hauled up and smeared by inquisition and in-

nuendo. His methods have done more damage to

the cause of intelligently combatting Commu-

nism than almost any other one influence in

California."

It cannot be too strongly stated that this is a

book to be widely read and carefully pondered.

BOOKNOTE

NATIONAL SECURITY AND INDIVIDUAL

FREEDOM, by Harold Lasswell, McGraw-Hill,

New York, N. Y., 259 pages, $3.50. :

Protection of sensitive spots in a democratic

nation's defense system without creation of a po-

lice state is the problem with which Professor

Lasswell is concerned. In addition to giving posi-

tive suggestions on how to achieve this protection

with the lowest cost in terms of freedom, the his-

torical and theoretical aspects of the problem are

also considered.

Professor Lasswell is aware of a threat to na-

tional security other than from outside aggression.

Democratic principles in the United States are be-

ing threatened by lack of regard for individual

freedom during the current national crisis. In

Laswell's word "An insidious outcome of the con-

tinuing crisis is the tendency to slide into a new

conception of normality that takes vastly extend-

ed controls for granted, and thinks of freedom in

smaller and smaller dimensions." Lasswell offers

suggestions for positive steps to be taken to coun-

teract this trend. Suggestions are offered for ac-

tion by the Executive, by Congress, by the courts

and by the public.

_ 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 Northern California.

Phone: EXbrook 2-3255

ERNEST BESIG.- Editor

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

Post Office at San Francisco, California,

under the Act of March 3, 1879

Subscription Rates-One Dollar a Year. :

-151

ACLU Report Charges Inroads

On Speech and Due Process

Public officials and legislators, private pressure

groups, "and in some cases the courts," have made

serious "inroads on freedom of expression and

due process of law .. . in the name of national

security," the national office of the ACLU charged

in its annual report, "Security and Freedom-the

Great Challenge."

Chief among these "inroads," the 88-page re-

port - which covers the period from mid-1949

through 1950-declared, was passage of the Mc-

Carran Act, "the worst departure since the Alien

and Sedition Acts of 1798 from the central prin-

ciple of American law that a man is accountable

only for his own illegal acts, not for mere associa-

tion with persons who hold obnoxious opinions."

The report noted evidences of progress in the

effort to maintain both security and freedom.

"Happily," it said, "the concern over national

security and the concern over individual freedom

sometimes support each other. For example, in

1950, the recognized necessity for unity and high

morale at home and of sustained and enthusiastic

support abroad, accelerated our advance toward

effective equality for Negro citizens. And, on the

other hand, the preservation of civil liberties-

whose existence has too often in the past been

taken for granted, and whose dependence on a

foundation of national security and public order

has too often been ignored-awakened in 1950

their proponents to the danger of the forces of

Soviet Communist tyranny, from without and

within."

Drawing on their faith in freedom, the report

continued, the American people are still keeping

"many of their civil liberties in good working

order," although it cautioned against complac-

ency. Courts, state and local legislators, adminis-

trators, and private citizens were credited with

providing ``victories for equality and due process"

and with continuing "to reduce measurably the

area of segregation and other forms of discrim-

ination." f

On the debit side, the ACLU review continued,

is "the damage done by Senator McCarthy," which

"was somewhat limited by the fairness of ex-Sena-

tor Tydings' sub-committee in investigating his

charges. But the House Committee on un-Ameri-

can Activities-despite considerable improvement

in its methods-continues to exact a much higher

cost than a free people can afford to pay in terms

of reduced due process and free speech, with in-

significant gain for national security compared

with the results of the expert and relatively quiet

work of the FBI and other law-enforcement agen-

cies in ferreting out present and continuing trea-

son of really deadly sorts."

While urging scrapping of the all-embracing,

federal loyalty program in favor of a specific se-

curity program aimed at persons in sensitive posts,

the ACLU report said the loyalty program had

been administered efficiently and justly, "granted

the conditions imposed on those conducting it."

The report added: "There is a growingly inclu-

sive and persuasive social atmosphere of fear and

intolerance, stifling the good old American habits

of speaking one's mind, joining the organizations

one believes in, and observing the principles of fair

hearing and of holding a man innocent until he

is proved guilty. Guilt by accusation, or-worse-

by innuendo, is abroad in the land."

Among the civil liberties gains cited by ACLU

were U. S. Supreme Court decisions which opened

the way at last for truly equal facilities for Ne-

groes in higher education-an action that in effect

is hastening an end to segregation in schools; pas-

sage of FEPC's at local and state levels; outlaw-

ing of segregation in National Guard units by

- California, Oregon, Washington, Michigan, Con-

necticut and Illinois; prohibitions against discrim-

ination in housing projects; and slight improve-

ments in voting and fair trial procedures.

But ACLU pointed out that Congress continues

to block the President's civil rights program; the

President himself has failed to establish an FEPC

by executive order; "segregation still dominates

Southern race relations, especially in privately-

owned places of public accommodation"; and the

Army lags in ending discrimination.

What Constitutes "Reasonable Doubt" as

To a Federe! Employee's Loyalty?

On April 28, 1951, the President amended his

Loyalty Order of March 1947 to change the stan-

dard for removal from federal employment to "a

reasonable doubt as to the loyalty of the person

involved to the Government of the United States."

Previously in order to rule against an employee a

Loyalty Board had to find "reasonable grounds"

to believe that the person was disloyal. Obviously,

the new test, which apparently resulted from the

Remington case, imposes a much tougher standard

on an employee.

What does it mean for a person to prove his

loyalty beyond a reasonable doubt? If a person

has ever belonged to a Communist front organiza-

tion or associated with a Communist, is that suf-

ficient to create a reasonable doubt as to his loyal-

ty? If one voice is raised against a person's loyalty

does that establish a reasonable doubt?

After the President's new Order was issued the

processing of cases was suspended for a consider-

able time and it was not until late in June that the

first case was decided under the new standard.

The decisions that came down from the Regional

Loyalty Board of the Civil Service Commission

in this area at that time were alarming in that

they apparently established a stringent test of

"reasonable doubt." In the Union's opinion, per-

sons who previously would have experienced no

trouble in being cleared for loyalty were now found

to be disloyal on the flimsiest grounds. ae

The Union was involved in four cases at the time

the new standard was first applied. In one case an

argument might conceivably be made in support

of the Board's ruling, but in the other three cases

the decisions were appalling. :

The first case involved a young man who joined

American Youth for Democracy at the University

of California in 1945 believing it to be a liberal

organization. He attended only a few meetings

before dropping out. In addition he subscribed to

The People's World for a short time in 1942 and

the interrogatory charged that he received Com-

Soviet Refugee Faces

Indefinite Detention |

(Continued from Page 1)

vessel was going into drydock it was arranged that

he should be detained at the Immigration Service

Detention Quarters instead of being held on board

ship. Moreover, the company claims that they had

verbal notice from the Coast Guard that Lobanov

was a security risk and, therefore, barred from

sailing as a seaman on any other vessel.

Pacific Tankers paid for his first month's board

at the Detention Quarters, but thereafter denied

its liability and refused to do so. The Immigration

Service on the other hand has ordered the company

to remove Mr. Lobanov from the United States

because an exclusion order has been entered

against him. The company disclaims responsibility

because Lobanov was furnished to them here in

the United States by the Sailors Union of the

Pacific and since he was carrying proper docu-

ments they were compelled to hire him.

During the past seven months Pacific Tankers

has written and wired to the Adjutant General

asking him to work out the problem with the Im-

migration Service in Washington, but outside of

an acknowledgement nothing has happened. The

Immigration Service, however, has made no effort

to require Pacific Tankers to execute the exclusion

order.

Mr. Lobanov has had no hearing of any kind.

He once paid $250 for legal assistance that never

materialized and he recently asked the local bar

association to recommend an attorney. Thereafter

an attorney got in touch with the local immigra-

tion director after which she wrote a letter to

Lobanov saying there was nothing she could do

for him since he had been accorded due process of

law. . .

It would seem to the Union, however, that the

indefinite detention of any person who has `not

been accorded a hearing raises substantial legal

questions. Also, there is some doubt whether the

Immigration Service has been following the correct

procedure in dealing with the alien. For five years

immediately prior to his arrest the alien was

shipping on American vessels, which are regarded

technically as American soil. If the alien had ac-

tually entered this country, whether legally or not,

then the Government must file deportation pro-

ceedings under which the alien is entitled to a

hearing.

The chances are, of course, that the alien would

be ordered deported for a number of reasons, in-

cluding his membership in the Young Communist

League in the Soviet Union prior to 1930. In such

proceedings, however, the Government would be

required to accord the alien a hearing.

munist literature at the time and "was an avid

reader thereof." The final charge was that his

present library ``consists of Communist books by

Marx, Engel and Lenin," whereas among 200 vol-

umes in his library about three of them contain

Communist writings.

The second case involved a young woman of 28

who was charged with membership in the Amer-

ican Student Union in 1940. It was also claimed

that she had at one time had close association with

two women who were alleged to be Communists.

Finally, she herself disclosed that when she was a

child she had on two occasions atended a children's

camp operated by the International Workers

Order, besides attending for a short time a Jewish

language and history class operated by the same

organization.

The third case involved a woman of 40 who was

accused of making statements in conversations

with associates "that gave them the impression

you were sympathetic with Communism." It was

also alleged that her husband at one time had been

active in the radical movement and that she had

made a statement to an associate that she had at

one time been a member of a Communist group.

Finally, it was alleged that "you and your husband

attended a Communist Party meeting at the

Southwest Berkeley Community Church, Berkeley,

California, on April 21, 1944." Apparently, some

interracial gathering held at the church was la-

belled as a Communist meeting. The woman is an

outspoken: opponent of totalitarian systems of

government whether Communist or Fascist.

On September 11 and 12 these three cases will

be heard by the Loyalty Review Board. After

decisions are handed down the Union will be in a

better position to judge what constitutes a "rea-

sonable doubt' as to a person's loyalty. Either

the Regional Loyalty Board of the Civil Service

Commission acted arbitrarily in deciding the above

cases or the standard of loyalty is now so severe

that any person who has not at all times supported

the status quo would be barred from federal

employment.

"Mr. Roberts" Banned Fron a

U.S. Army Command In Europe

The U. S. Army's European Command will not

reopen the G.I. production of "Mr. Roberts," ban-

ned from Germany last May because of its strong

language. ACLU protested the action as a "serious

violation of freedom of speech, hardly consonant

with the American principle of democracy." But

EUCOM has reiterated `its original stand that the -

play is "not considered suitable for presentation

under official sponsorship on military posts."

The all-G.I. cast had made seven performances

of the Thomas Heggen-Joshua Logan play before

crowded houses when European forces command-

er Gen. Thomas C. Handy put a stop to it. The

banning drew fire from Variety and from the New

York Times, which commented that the play's

dialogue "is mild compared with the true speech

of service men.'"' Joshua Logan released a letter

from a former member of the cast charging that

most of the cast had been transferred to "degrad-

ing positions in the lowest echelon organizations"

of EUCOM.-

The ACLU letter to Gen. Handy pointed out that

the play "has been generally recognized and en-

joyed as one of the great theatrical productions to

come out of World War II and has never been

subject to prosecution for obscenity anywhere."

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION

American Civil Liberties Union of No. Calif.,

503 Market St.

San Francisco 5, Calif.

1. Please enroll me as a member at dues of

Gee ee: for the current year. (Types of mem-

bership: Associate Member, $3; Annual Member,

$5; Business and Professional Member, $10; |}

Family Membership, $25; Contributing Member,

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

- subscription to the "American Civil Liberties

Union-News" at $1.a year.) 4 :

12 { pledge $2.5. per month..~.....0r $2202 per yr.

3. Please enter my subscription to the NEWS ($1

per year) 2 0

Enclosed please find $.ccsccsccsece- Please bill

meni oe)

Name oo 2 ee

Strect) (2 ee :

Gityand Zone. ==.

pesseneseneeesaeessnerensecenenenanenneennasesaeees Occupation 25