vol. 17, no. 12
Primary tabs
American
Civil Liberties
Union-News
ee tia
Free Assemblage
Free Speech
"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
VOLUME XVII
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, DECEMBER, 1952
Bill of Rights Day
December 15, 1952 marks the 161st anni-
versary of the final adoption of the Bill of
Rights. The President has issued a special
proclamation and many observances will be
held throughout the land.
This is a time even for civil libertarians to
rededicate themselves to the principles enun-
ciated in the Bill of Rights. After all, they
are not immune from the pressures of the
times and a tendency to secure community
approval by compromising. Indeed, when our
national organization now asks me be sub-
scribe to a conformity statement (the contro-
versial Resolution of .February 5, 1940), I
begin to wonder whether the Union has not
succumbed to the hysteria of the times.
Most people still say they believe in liberty,
`but what they mean is that they believe in
liberty for themselves, not for the other fel-
low. And, the rub really comes when the
other fellow is spouting ideas we loathe and
believe to be fraught with danger.
Also, while many people give lip service to
freedom, they actually mistrust it. Harried by
their fears and questioning the intelligence
and judgment of the other fellow, they place
all kinds of restraints on freedom in the name
of security.
Of course, people are going to utter state-
ments we regard as footish, stupid or danger-
ous. That is the inevitable risk we take under
the Bill of Rights. But in such freedom lies
our greatest security. So long as people are
free to discuss public issues, we have a chance
of finding a peaceful solution of our problems.
So, on Bill of Rights Day in 1952, let us
resolve once again to defend the civil liberties
of all without distinction and without com-
promise. Eternal vigilance is still the price of
liberty.-E.B.
Prop. 5 and 6 Adopted by 2 to I
Vote; So. Cal. Votes 3 to 1
The voters adopted Propositions 5 and 6, the
conformity test legislation, by a vote of better
than 2 to 1 at California's general election, The
final tally is not available at this writing, but the
Union does have before it almost complete figures
from the larger counties.
While the vote in Northern California was fairly.
close, Southern California piled up huge major-
ities in favor of 5 and 6. In populous Los Angeles
county, for example, the vote stood, No. 5-Yes,
1,276,766; No. 523,000; No. 6-Yes, 1,308,627;
No, 466,880.
In San Diego county the vote ran better than
3 to 1 in favor of both measures, The tally was
as follows: No. 5,-Yes, 151,709; No, 45,552;
No. 6-Yes, 154,403; No, 50,331.
Santa Barbara county turned in the best record
for Southern California. The vote there stood
21 to 12 for No. 5 and 21 to 11 for No. 6.
In San Francisco county the vote ran about 1.7
to 1 for these propositions and the tally was about
the same in Alameda county where the returns
were as follows: No. 5-Yes, 191,520; No, 110,771;
No. 6-Yes, 193,403; No, 108,202. Santa Clara
county ran 77 to 42 in favor of No. 5 and 78 to 41
in favor of No. 6.
Halfway in the tally in San Joaquin county
both propositions were losing, while in tiny Cala-
veras county, according to the last published tally,
the voters turned down No. 5 but favored No. 6
in close votes.
The vote was quite close in Sacramento coun-
ty. The last figures that were announced ran
45 to 42 in favor of No. 5, and 47 to 39 in favor of
No. 6. The returns were also fairly close in Yolo,
Fresno and Kings counties. Possibly the opposition
of the MaClatchy papers, together with the last-
minute opposition of Gov. Earl Warren, brought
Federal Judge McLaughlin Tells Why
He Denied Citizenship to Atheist
On October 17, ten days after an appeal was
filed and almost two months after denying the
naturalization petition of Wladyslaw Plywacki,
Federal Judge J. Frank McLaughlin of Honolulu
filed a memorandum stating the reasons for his
decision.
The transcript of the record of the hearing
on August 28, which has just reached the Union,
does contain Judge McLaughlin's reasons in the
following terms:
Well, our government, you know, is founded
upon a belief in God. You are asking for the priv-
ilege of being part of that government, but you
are apparently desirous of seeking admission to
this corporation, this political corporation, to be
admitted as a stockholder on your own terms. And
the Congress of the United States has provided
by express provision of law that a person who
wishes to attain, being qualified, the privilege-
not the right-the privilege of being an American
citizen, quoting Section 735 of Title 8, ``shall take
one of the following oaths''-and there are two
forms prescribed, both of which conclude ``so help
me God." It is not necessary in some respects, for
example, in testifying in court for you to take an
oath that so concludes. You may on those occa-
sions affirm that you will tell the truth.
But this is a matter of your petition to become
a citizen of the United States, and unless you be-
lieve in the principles of our government you are
not eligible.
I admire your honesty and frankness, but I
think you had better do a little further studying
about your own ideals and thoughts and see
whether or not you wish to revise them in good
faith so that you can qualify to be a citizen, be-
Take Lie Detector Test or
We'll Tell Boss, Say S.F. Police
The ACLU late last month protested to Chief
of Police Michael Gaffey against his officers de-
manding that persons submit to lie detector tests
on threat of being reported to their employers.
The protest arose from an investigation of a
robbery at Haas Brothers that was apparently
"an inside job." Consequently, many employees
were questioned. It is reported that one employee
has taken a lie detector test three times.
Inspectors Valentine and Keyworth interviewed
a long-time employee of the company, a natural-
ized citizen, and demanded he appear at the Hall
of Justice to be fingerprinted and to take a lie
detector test. When the employee objected to the
procedure as a Gestapo method, Inspector Valen-
tine replied that if he didn't like their methods
he could go back where he came from.
The employee then consulted the Union, which
contacted Inspector Valentine by phone. The
Union informed Mr. Valentine that while the em-
ployee was willing to be interrogated, he was not
willing to take a lie detector test. The Inspector
replied, "I will have to report to the company those
who refuse to take the lie detector test."'
The Union pointed out that Inspector Valentine
had no authority to compel such a test, and that
he was limited solely to persuasion. To threaten
to tell a man's boss that he is not cooperating with
the police in submitting to a lie detector test
(which is not accepted by the courts as evidence)
and thereby jeopardizing his economic security,
is nothing short of intimidation.
about the close vote in the Sacramento and San
Joaquin Valleys.
The tax exemption measure for private (mainly
parochial) schools, which the Union opposed, ap-
parently squeaked by. On the other hand, Propo-
sition 14, repealing an anti-Chinese provision of
the State Constitution, was adopted by an almost
4-to-1 vote.
cause at this moment, if you are not willing to
take this oath in good faith, the oath prescribed
by the Congress of the United States, I cannot
grant your petition . : . So at this time, for your
failure to in good faith take the prescribed oath
in either of its two alternate forms, I must deny
your petition. The alternate forms relating, for
your information, to the bearing of arms, not to
one's belief in God. All right.
Judge McLaughlin has now set forth his views
in more rounded sentences in a very brief mem-
orandum. After setting forth the facts, Judge
McLaughlin stated:
"From his frank answers it clearly appeared
that as an atheist he could not take the prescribed
oath and he, of course, would not attempt to de-
ceive the Court by taking the oath falsely.
"Observing (a) the Declaration of Independ-
ence; (b) the inscription of `In God We Trust' upon
the Liberty half-dollar and other United States
coins; (c) decisions of the Supreme Court of the
United States, such as United States v. Macintosh,
283 U.S. 605 at 626, and United States v. Bland,
283 U. S. 636, holding that courts may not make
bargains with those who seek the privilege of cit-
izenship but must adhere to the precise terms of
the legislative mandate; (d) that no constitutional
question of freedom of religion is even remotely
involved by an alien atheist seeking naturalization,
and the sole question is whether the petitioner
believes in all of the principles which delicately
support our free government; and (e) that as re-
cently as April, 1952, the Supreme Court in Zorach
v. Clauson, 343 U. S. 306 at 318, has not deemed
it to be old fashioned to declare, `We are a religious
people whose institutions pre-suppose a Supreme
Being,' WLADYSAW PLYWACKI's petition for
naturalization as a citizen of the United States
must be and the same hereby is denied because of
his inability to subscribe to a statutory oath of
allegiance."
Attorney Thomas P. Gill of Honolulu handled
the preliminary steps on the appeal to the Ninth
Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco. The
Union's `local Staff Counsel, Lawrence Speiser,
now has until December 17 in which to prepare the
points on which he intends to rely and to file the
record on appeal with the Court of Appeals.
A Record Response
The ACLU wishes to express its thanks to
the more than 800 persons (a record number)
who last month contributed over $7000 in
cash (a record amount) towards the Union's
$27,600 budget for the fiscal year ending
October 31, 1952. As is the Union's custom,
no receipts or acknowledgments were sent to
subscribers unless cash contributions were re-
ceived. That thrifty procedure saves the
Union time and money better spent on the
business of defending civil liberties.
If you have not yet contributed toward the
Union's 1953 budget, won't you please do so
as soon as possible. While the budget drive
has made an excellent start, there is still a
long way to go. Also, the Union would like
to dispose of its fund-raising activities just
as swiftly as possible in order to be able to
concentrate on its main job. And, once again,
even if your membership does not expire just
now, the Union hopes you will be willing to
make your PRESENT and FUTURE contri-
butions at this time. Your cooperation will
be greatly appreciated.
And, if you are among the 250 persons
whose subscriptions expired in November,
you can save the Union a lot of office work
by sending us your renewal just as soon as
possible.
2
Page 2
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS
P.O. Bans Leaflets; Might
Cause Soldiers to Mutiny
The Solicitor of the Post Office Department in
Washington, D.C., on October 9 banned from the
mails two leaflets,-"Traitors Paradise," by Mrs.
Harvey Sydow, Lyons, Nebraska, and "I am a
Traitor to Wall Street," by Basil Maddy of
Oakland.
The ruling came about when Mr. Maddy, on
September 13, presented six parcels for mailing
in Oakland containing the banned literature. These
parcels were addressed to various addressees, and
inasmuch as they were of the fourth class they
were subject to examination.
Upon examining the contents of these parcels,
the Postmaster decided they "appeared to be of
a non-mailable character.'' Consequently, they
were withdrawn from the mails and copies of the
leaflets were submitted to the Office of the Soli-
citor of the Post Office Department for a ruling
as their mailability.
The Solicitor charged that the leaflets violated
that portion of the law which makes it an offense
for anyone who "attempts to cause insubordina-
tion, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the
military or naval forces of the United States, or
willfully obstructs the recruiting or enlistment
service of the United States, to the injury of the
service or United States, or attempts to do so..."
The Solicitor went on to explain that "It is not
any isolated portion of the printed articles that
is questioned, but rather, the over-all character
thereof. It is the effect of the articles as a whole
that is involved."
Mr. Maddy has until December 4 to appear be-
fore the Solicitor of the Post Office in Washing-
ton, D.C., to show cause why the parcels should
not be disposed of as non-mailable. Mr. Maddy
has asked the ACLU to intervene in the ease, and,
since the matter has to be handled in Washington,
it has been referred to the Union's national office
for action.
"Traitors Paradise," is a violent attack on the
United States and Wall Street for United States
involvement in the Korean conflict. The tone of
the leaflet may be judged somewhat by the open-
ing sentence which reads, "Why should soldiers
honor the army oath when traitors in Washing-
ton ignore their oaths of office and trample our
Constitution and Bill of Rights? Answer THAT!"
The second leaflet is more temperate. The main
target is Wall Street and there is little reference
to the Korean conflict and Wall Street's relation-
ship to it. At one point, the writer states, "Al-
ready, Wall Street's armies have burnt up with
gasoline jelly one city of one hundred thousand
people in twelve minutes, another city of four
hundred and fifty thousand people in four and
one-half hours of bombing; in one incident they
burnt up 7,000 refugees."' At another point, the
writer declares, "`There's a reason why the Ameri-
can people have come to live off the Korean War
(and the prospects of a more extended war) which
General Holdridge says makes us `figuratively' a
race of cannibals."
The concluding paragraph of the article reads:
"T define Capitalism as that system of society
which puts private profit above community wel-
fare, and communism as that system of society
which puts community welfare above private
profit. I am not a capitalist. 1am a traitor to Wall
Street because Wall Street is treason to the Ameri-
can people. Wall Street is the drive shaft of all
efforts to stop Social Progress in the world today,
that is of American Imperialism."
First Arrests Under Louisiana
Communist-Control Law
Louisiana's state police has made its first ar-
rests under the state's new Communist control
law. The law, signed by Governor Kennon last
July, requires Communists to register or face
imprisonment for two to 10 years, pay fines of
$1,000 to $10,000, or koth.
The first arrests were two Negroes, Robert
Burns and Louis James Lockett. Both denied that
they were Communists, contended that their ar-
rest was the result of an error in filling out vote
registration forms. The two said they had mis-
read a line on the form calling for a write-in of
party affiliation. They thought the line read "T
am not a member," whereas the actual wording
was "I am a member." They automatically filled
in "Communist Party."
Burns and Lockett said they were `good Dem-
ocrats," and that if they had been Communists
they would never have said so in a public form.
They both said that as veterans they had signed
many non-Communist oaths before.
Post Office Delermines What Subscribers
The Post Office Department was criticized
sharply last month by the American Civil Liber-
ties Union for its policy of deciding what sub-
scribers to Soviet publications may receive them.
In the course of investigating what appeared to
be censorship on the part of the Department, the
ACLU discovered instead that Post Office offi-
cials are acting as "judges of academic stand-
ards" by determining to which institutions or re-
searchers Soviet publications will be delivered.
"We do not believe that this should be a func-:
tion of the government if our institutions and
scholars are to remain free," said the ACLU in
a letter to Louis Doyle, acting solicitor of the
Post Office Department. It was signed by Elmer
Rice, chairman of the Union's National Council
on Freedom from Censorship.
"Freedom from government control, which we
believe to be the essence of education in a de-
mocracy, requires that information, education or
other similar material, should be available to. all
without governmental interference or selection."
Rice first wrote the Post Office on October 23
after the anti-Communist weekly magazine, The
New Leader, disclosed that the Department had
refused to deliver Soviet magazines to "hundreds''
of subscribers, including anti-Communist publi-
cations, researchers, writers, scholars, libraries,
and institutions. At the same time the Post Of-
fice apparently has permitted 211 subscribers to
receive the Soviet newspapers Pravda and
Izvestia.
Protesting such an "unreasonable restriction
upon the public's right to receive and read news
and information" Rice wrote then:
"In these critical days when, for our country's
security, as much information as possible is re-
quired in order to understand and evaluate the
Soviet Union's actions and positions, the net re-
sult of the Department's refusal (to deliver the
publications) is to cut off important sources of
knowledge from our scholars and researchers.
Their failure to obtain information is not only a
violation of their civil likerties, but of the civil
liberties of the country as a whole, which is en-
titled to the benefit of their research work."
"The magazines in question are not basically
different from the Soviet newspapers which are
admitted entry and delivery by the Post Office.
We can conceive of no reason for this unreason-
able distinction. In any event, as we see it, the
duty of the Post Office Department is to carry
and deliver the mails, and as the courts have con-
sistently ruled, not to act as a censor."
The Post Office Department's policy of deliv-
ering Soviet magazines to some while withhold-
ing issues to other subscribers was disclosed in
Doyle's reply. He pointed out, according to the
Attorney General, political propaganda distrib-
uted in violation of the Foreign Agents Registra-
tion Act provisions may be considered non-mail-
able. He added:
"In administering the law as interpreted by the
Attorney General, the Post Office Department has
Executive Committee
American Civil Liberties Union
of Northern California
Sara Bard Field
Honorary Member
Rt. Rey. Edw. L. Parsons
Chairman
Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn
Helen Salz_
Vice-Chairmen
Fred H. Smith, IV
Secretary-Treasurer
Ernest Besig
Director
Philip Adams
Prof. Edward L. Barrett, Jr.
Albert Brundage
Prof. James R. Caldwell
_ Wayne M. Collins
Rev. Oscar F. Green
Alice G. Heyneman
Prof. Van D. Kennedy
Ruth Kingman
Seaton W. Manning -
Rey. Harry C. Meserve
Rabbi Irving F. Reichert
Clarence E. Rust
Prof. Laurence Sears
Prof. Wallace E. Stegner
Beatrice Mark Stern
Stephen Thiermann
Kathleen Drew Tolman
Franklin Williams
To Soviet Publications May Receive Them
not withheld: the publications in question from
delivery to universities of known standing when
it appeared that the material was being received
for study purposes. Such mailings have also been
delivered to certain researchers upon receipt of
evidence of the nature of work being carried on
by them."
In a rebuttal, after complaining that the De-
partment "is setting itself up as a judge of aca-
demic standards," Rice commented:
`If your position is sustainable, it would seem
to place political commentators, many of whom
rely on Soviet publications for background mate-
rial, completely at the will of Post Office offi-
cials. .. . The mere assertion of the power to with-
hold constitutes an inherent threat to freedom of
opinion of these and other journalists."'
He urged Doyle to "authorize delivery of all
Soviet publications without discretion to anyone
who requests or subscribes to them."
Official Balks at Superior's
Ruling on Use of S.F. Hall
T. A. Brooks, the Chief Administrative Officer
of the City and County of San Francisco last
month overruled his Director of Properties,
Eugene J. Riodan, and told the Union that the San
Francisco Committee to Save the Rosenbergs
could use the Civic Auditorium for a public meet-
ing but Mr. Riordan refused to abide by the
decision. Instead, he insisted that he alone has
jurisdiction over the Civic Auditorium. He then
asked the City Attorney to advise him as to his
rights.-In the meantime, of course, the Committee
held its meeting in a private hall.
In his letter to the Union, Mr. Brooks stated
that Mr. Paul Schnur, spokesman for the group,
"could have the use of the auditorium on the same
basis as other groups or organizations." Mr.
Brooks also stated that points made in the Union's
protest to him were factors in influencing him to
reverse Mr. Riordan's decision.
The Union had pointed out that while it had
found no civil liberties issue in the Rosenberg
case, "we do believe in freedom of speech and
assembly even for those with whom we disagree.
...". The effect of Mr. Riordan's ruling would be __.--
virtually to exclude any discussion of controversial
issues from the Civic Auditorium.
"Moreover, Mr. Riordan's action is hardly con-
sistent with the past practices of the City in rent-
ing the auditorium. I seem to recall occasions when
Tom Mooney meetings were held there and no
riots ensued.
"It seems to me the Police Department (which
was apparently not consulted), if put on notice,
can prevent any lawlessness in connection with the
use of the auditorium. Indeed, when Gerald L. K.
Smith did use Commerce High auditorium there
was extensive picketing by radicals but no violence
of any kind. The police department had no trouble
in handling the matter. ...
"Incidentally, may I point out that the group
in question, and its cause, received a lot of un-
deserved publicity by reason of Mr. Riordan's
action. I am confident the matter would have
attracted little attention but for Mr. Riordan's
action. It seems to me Mr. Riordan played right
into their hands."
Federal Court of Appeals
Upholds ACLU In Kutcher Case
A federal court of appeals in Washington, D. C.,
recently ruled unanimously that the single fact
of membership in a subversive organization listed
by the U.S. Attorney General is not sufficient
grounds for firing a federal employee.
The court's decision came in a case involving
James Kutcher, a World War II veteran, who was
once employed by the Veterans Administration.
Kutcher was dismissed from hig job after loyalty-
board hearings. He admitted belonging to the So-
cialist Workers' Party, an organization on the
Attorney General's subversive list. The ACLU
appeared as friend of the court.
~The court's opinion, written ky Judge James R.
Proctor, said that membership in a subversive
organization may support disbelief in an_em-
ployee's loyalty, and so force a firing. But, Proc-
tor said, "it rests with the head of the depart-
ment or agency to make the final and controlling
determination. In this case the vital decision still
awaits the administrator's decision.
"Neither Congress nor the President has seen
fit to make membership in any organization des-
ignated by the Attorney General cause for `re-
moval from government employment." And the
`decision to fire Kutcher, Proctor found, was not
"based upon any declared belief" in his disloyalty,
but entirely on his admission of membership.
New Trice
Two of `1
FLASH!!!
on. November
Collis Englis
cedural groun
lower court fe
time the high
The New Je!
arguments on
Collis English
der of a Tren'
decision. The
the four-year
of the defenda
interest.
Arthur Gar
ACLU, was or
by. the Joint (
Two to argue
mittee coordin
Association fo:
ple, ACLU an
case.
Originally 1
"Trenton Six,'
Cooper and E1
1948 of Willis
dealer. All six
1948. In June
quitted after t
versed the fir:
During the
ruled out seve
cured by poli
promises, and 1
In the cours
Court, Prosect
we did was prc
know who kille
Prosecutor `
scores of time:
"Doesn't your
promise verdic
Volpe replie
ing out the con
Connecti
Commiss
Connecticut
its-report fol
progress" in e
ployment, hote
housing proje
changes in th
commodations
needed.
Here are 0x00A7s
group's 47-pa:
Governor Johr
The number
races, religion.
as are the ty]
there is still cent
skilled, skilled
fessional posit
Negroes car
given to othe:
tourist establi:
Every com)
during the ye:
evidence-was
ciliation and p
The commi:
in the law wo
wants: (1) p
hiring, reinst:
ployee; (2) |
Accommodati
pend on patr
clause in the
discrimination
opportunity ir
e
Revised
e "
And Civi
The ACLU
"The Supreme
larged and re'
out in 1937
In the new 9
Osmond K. F:
ing with freec
contempt of |
bined them w
of Expression
ing with proc
`ers in detail cent
attainder, fre
ligion and ass
incrimination
report sell fo
writing to tk
Francisco 5.
ers
hem
in question from
vn standing when
ras being received
es have also been
s upon receipt of
being carried on
ling that the De-
s a judge of aca-
`ted :
le, it would seem
s, many of whom
background mate-
Post Office offi-
the power to with-
`eat to freedom of
lists."
ze delivery of all
cretion to anyone
em."
iperior's
F. Hall
inistrative Officer
an Francisco last
r of Properties,
Jnion that the San
_ the Rosenbergs
for a public meet-
to abide by the
hat he alone has
litorium. He then
vise him as to his
`se, the Committee
Mr. Brooks stated
ian for the group,
orium on the same
ganizations." Mr.
ade in the Union's
influencing him to
that while it had
in the Rosenberg
ym of speech and
vhom we disagree.
's ruling would be _. .
on of controversial
Ae
tion is hardly con-
of the City in rent-
all occasions when
1eld there and no
epartment (which
, if put on notice,
onnection with the
when Gerald L. K.
. auditorium there
sals but no violence
ent had no trouble
ut that the group
eived a lot of un-
of Mr. Riordan's
atter would have
for Mr. Riordan's
yrdan played right
peals
tcher Case
Washington, D. C.,
at the single fact
organization listed
| is not sufficient
nployee.
1 a case involving
[ veteran, who was
1s Administration.
s job after loyalty-
elonging to the So-
ganization on the
list. The ACLU
oy Judge James R.
p in a subversive
sbelief in an em-
firing. But, Proc-
sad of the depart-
nal and controlling
vital decision still
sion.
President has seen
7 organization des-
eral cause for `re-
yyment." And the
or found, was not
" in his disloyalty,
f membership.
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS
Page 3
New Trial Ordered for
Two of "Trenton Six'
FLASH!!! The New Jersey Supreme Court
on. November 24 reversed the conviction of
Collis English and Ralph Cooper, on pro-
cedural grounds, and sent the case back to the
lower court for a new trial. This is the second
time the high court has ordered a new trial.
The New Jersey Supreme Court recently heard
arguments on the appeal of Ralph Cooper and
Collis English from their conviction for the mur-
der of a Trenton storekeeper, and has reserved
decision. The hearing marked another point in
the four-year fight to protect the civil liberties
of the defendants. The case aroused world-wide
interest.
Arthur Garfield Hays, general counsel for
ACLU, was one of the three attorneys retained
by. the Joint Committee to Defend the Trenton
Two to argue the case for reversal. This com-'
mittee coordinates the efforts of the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored Peo-
ple, ACLU and the Princeton Committee in the
case.
Originally the case involved the so-called
"Trenton Six," including four other men besides
Cooper and English, charged with the murder in
1948 of William Horner, an aged second-hand
dealer. All six were convicted in the first trial in
1948. In June of 1951 the other four were ac-
quitted after the New Jersey Supreme Court re-
versed the first trial and ordered a second one.
During the second trial the presiding judge
ruled out several confessions as having been se-
cured by police through intimidation, threats,
promises, and the use of drugs.
In the course of argument before the Supreme
Court, Prosecutor Mario H. Volpe admitted, `All
we did was produce what evidence we had. I don't
know who killed Horner."
Prosecutor Volpe was interrupted by the court
scores of times. One of the court's questions was,
"Doesn't your suggestion show that it was a com-
promise verdict?"
Volpe replied that it was "the result of throw-
ing out the confessions."
Connecticut Civil Rights
Commission Reports Progress
Connecticut's Commission on Civil Rights, in
its report for 1951-52, has found "significant
progress" in eliminating discrimination from em-
ployment, hotels and restaurants, and from public
housing projects. But the commission feels that
changes in the state's FEPC law and Public Ac-
commodations Act, which it administers, are still
needed,
Here are some of the highlights from the
group's 47-page report, which was submitted to
Governor John Davis Lodge:
The number of employers hiring persons of all
races, religions, and national origins is increasing,
as are the type of jobs open to all comers. But
there is still discrimination, particularly in semi-
skilled, skilled, supervisory, white-collar, and pro-
fessional positions.
Negroes can now expect to get the same service
given to others in many hotels, restaurants and
tourist establishments.
Every complaint lodged with the commission
during the year-where there was substantiating
evidence-was settled through conference, con-
ciliation and persuasion.
The commission believes that several changes
in the law would make the record even better. It
wants: (1) power to issue orders calling for the
hiring, reinstatement, or upgrading of an em-
ployee; (2) broadened coverage for the Public
Accommodation Law to include all places that de-
pend on patronage by the general public; (3) a
clause in the same law to define segregation as
discrimination; (4) a new law to guarantee equal
opportunity in admissions to colleges and schools.
Revised Ed. of `Supreme Court
And Civil Liberties' Out
The ACLU last month reissued its pamphlet,
"The Supreme Court and Civil Liberties," in an en-
larged and revised form. The pamphlet first came
out in 1937 and was updated in 1942 and 1949.
In the new 90-page edition, the author, Attorney
Osmond K. Fraenkel, has rewritten sections deal-
ing with freedom of speech, freedom of the press,
contempt of court and censorship and has com-
bined them under the general heading, "Freedom
of Expression." There is also a new section deal-
ing with procedural problems. The pamphlet cov-
ers in detail decisions on minority rights, bills of
attainder, freedom of expression, freedom of re-
ligion and assembly, education, voting, aliens, self-
incrimination and other issues. Copies of the
report sell for 50c each; they can be had by
writing to the ACLU, 503 Market Street, San
Francisco 5.
Levering Act Cases Headed for U.S. Supreme
Court; Excerpts From Cal. High Court Opinion
~The California Supreme Court last month de-
nied a rehearing of its decision of October 17 up-
holding the constitutionality of the Levering Act
conformity oath. Attorney Wayne M. Collins has
announced that he now intends to ask the U.S.
Supreme Court to hear the cases.
The News is reprinting herewith that portion
of the court's opinion which discusses the question
whether the Levering Act oath violates that por-
tion of the Constitution which provides that
"...no other oath declaration, or test (than the
Constitutional oath) shall be required as a qualifi-
cation for any office or public trust." The court
had previously decided that the prohibition should
"he read as applying to every state and local offi-
cer and employee."
`"`We come now to the question whether there
is any substantial difference between the oaths
prescribed by the state Constitution and by section
3103 of the Government Code (the Levering Act).
The constitutional oath consists of a declaration
or pledge of loyalty to the state and federal
Constitutions, and a promise or pledge of faithful
performance of duty. The first paragraph of the
oath required by section 3103 contains substan-
tially the same pledge of loyalty and faithful per-
formance of duty as that found in the constitu-
tional oath, with only immaterial differences in
language. In the second paragraph the affiant
swears to three matters, namely, (1) that he does
not advocate or belong to any organization that
advocates overthrow of the government by force
or violence or other unlawful means; (2) that
within the five years immediately preceding the
taking of the oath he has not been a member of
any such organizations except those which he
lists in the space provided on the face of the oath;
and; (3) that while employed by the designated
agency he will not advocate or become a member
of any organization that advocates such doctrines.
"It should be noted at the outset that the oath
provisions relating to memkership can reasonably
be construed as referring only to affiliation with
organizations known by the employee to belong to
the proscribed class, and each clause of the oath
must be interpreted as requiring knowledge of
the character of any group as to which a declara-
tion is required....
Doctor (Over 26) Saved from
Being Drafted As A Private
A loophole in the Selective Service Laws as
applied to doctors nearly resulted in the drafting
of a young research physician as a private last
month in spite of his repeated attempts to obtain
a commission. Prompt intervention by his counsel;
attorney William Coshow, supported by the ACLU,
resulted in the assurance by State Headquarters
of Selective Service that the doctor would not
be inducted unless a commission were granted.
The present Selective Service Regulations pro-
vide for the drafting of doctors, up to the age of
51 years, who do not apply for commissions after
being notified by their local draft boards that they
are to be called up for military service. The ques-
tion raised by the instant case, however, is what
happens to the doctor whose application for a
commission is still pending when his draft board
tells him to report for induction. He can't serve as
a doctor, because regulations limit such jobs to
commissioned officers. Will he be treated as an
ordinary draftee? If so, aren't doctors over 26
being discriminated against since the draft law
presently applies to men NOT over 26 years
of age?
The particular doctor, when informed that he
was to be called for service, applied for a com-
mission in the Air Force. Instead of receiving his
commission in a few weeks, as is usually the case,
several months went by without any action.
In the meantime, his local draft board assigned
him to the Army "pool," which automatically
cancelled his Air Force application. Thereupon, he
at once applied for an Army commission, and did
everything required of him. The application is
still "pending" after several weeks' wait. Uncon-
cerned, the doctor's draft board sent him a notice
to report for induction on November 28, 1952. It
was at this point that representations were made
to State Headquarters of Selective Service and
that assurances were received that there would be
no induction without a commission.
One can only speculate as to why the commission
is being held up. Thus far, no reason has been
given. It may be because the doctor at one time
had some very tenuous connections with organiza-
tions on the Attorney General's list (such as a
dollar contributed to the Joint Anti-Fascist Refu-
gee Committee), or because he has never served
an internship, while regulations restrict com-
missions to doctors who have served such intern-
ships.
"The first and third parts of the second para-
graph are essentially a declaration of present and
future loyalty to the government of this state and
of the United States. A person obviously cannot be
loyal to a government and at the same time ad-
vocate its violent and unlawful overthrow. By the
same token, voluntary unexplained membership
in an organization known by a public employee to
advocate such doctrines indicates that he has
interests which are inconsistent with his pledge of
loyalty and faithful performance of duty, and the
Legislature, by requiring this oath, has in effect
found that such membership is incompatible with
loyalty. In the recent case of Adler v. Board of
Education of City of New York, 72 S. Ct. 380,
.... the United States Supreme Court sustained
as reasonable an implied legislative finding that
`the member by his membership supports the
thing the organization stands for, namely the
overthrow of the government by unlawful means.'
"The middle part of the second paragraph of
the oath calls for disclosure of information re-
lating to past loyalty. In it the affiant is required
to list any organization, to which he has belonged
in the five years preceding taking of the oath, that
advocated overthrow of the government by force
or violence or other unlawful means. Information
as to past affiliations may be relevant in determin-
ing whether an employee can be placed in a posi-
tion of present or future public responsibility. . . .
Nothing in section 3 of article XX (the constitu-
tional oath) is intended to prevent the state
from requiring disclosure of facts relating to an
employee's fitness and suitability for public serv-
ice, and inasmuch as this portion of the oath, in
effect, calls for a statement of past loyalty which
is relevant to present and future loyalty, it is in
no way inconsistent with the spirit or intent of
the constitutional oath.
"The oath required by section 3103 is obviously
not a test of religious opinion. Neither does it
compel disavowal of any political belief or mem-
bership in any named political party. While it re-
quires the affiant to swear that he does not ad-
vocate, or belong to any party or organization
which advocates overthrow of the government by
force or violence or other unlawful means, these
may not properly be called matters of political
opinion, The word `political' imports orderly con-
duct of government, not revolution, and the term
is not applicable to advocacy of a belief in over-
throw of the government by force or violence. . . .
"We are satisfied that there is nothing in the
Levering oath which goes beyond the object or
meaning of section 3.of article XX and that it is
not the type of `other oath, declaration or test'
which was intended to be prohibited by that
section."
State Department Issues
New Passport Regulations
The State Department has taken one step to-
ward remedying some of the defects in the han-
dling of passport applications. For the first time,
it issued a formal set of rules and standards to
govern the procedure. And it set up an entirely
new agency the Board of Passport Appeals-to
rule on appeals in individual cases.
The Department's action came on the heels of
a federal court decision last July in the case of
Anne Bauer. The court had held that an appli-
cant for a passport had not received the benefit
of due process when the Department turned her
down without a fair hearing. The case was in-
itiated by the ACLU in its effort to' liberalize
passport procedures.
Under the new system, a person who has been
denied a passport will be able to appear-with
his lawyer-first before a hearing officer and, if
necessary, before the appeals board. The board-
made up of three officials who have had nothing
to do with the particular case-will make final
recommendations to the Secretary of State.
In each case the reasons for refusing a pass-
port will be spelled out, insofar as security re-
quirements permit. A person will have something
more definite to go on than the vague phrase,
"contrary to the best interests of the United
States." cent
Annual Report at the Printer
The annual report of the ACLU of Northern
California for the year ending June 30, 1952, en-
titled "Uneasy Interval," is now at the printer and
will be mailed to the Union's membership during.
the week of December 8.
As usual, the report will be 20 pages long, but
through the use of smaller but quite readable type,
there will be about a 25% increase in material
contained in the report. Seven thousand copies are
being printed.
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
eurontered as second-class matter, July 31, 1941, at the
Post Office at San Francisco, California,
under the Act of March 3, 1879
ACLU Campaigns Against
Movie Censorship
The American Civil Liberties late last month
offered its services to leading film exhibitors and
distributors to combat pressure-group drives
aimed at censorship of motion pictures.
In letters to more than 211 leading film ex-
hibitors and distributors, ACLU's National Coun-
cil on Freedom from Censorship proposed a three-
point program of assistance:
(1) "To eport to us all instance in which films
have either been, by public officials, censored or
withdrawn from exhibition due to pressure group
action; (2) the opportunity and our facilities to
discuss with us your problems of booking motion
pictures which have been, or are, under attack;
and (3) to advise us of the booking dates in
specific localities of all such films.
The action came shortly after the Union's anti-
censorship affiliate had alerted all ACLU branches
and state correspondents across the nation to
"support a local film exhiibtor's hooking program"
by organizing local campaigns against pressure
group challenges to film showings. The Council
said such groups had been responsible for more
suppression of controversial movies than had of-
ficial governmental censorship boards.
"We believe that motion picture exhibitors have
a special relationship to the public because of the
medium in which they operate," said the letter to
the movie officials, signed by Clifford Forster,
executive secretary of the Council. "They hold a
position to the community similar to that of news-
paper publisher and are to that extent concerned
with the public interest....
"In our judgment the motion picture is a potent
vehicle for the transmission of ideas and we have
consequently consistently opposed all efforts,
public and private, to censor films as a violation
of free speech and press. We believe that you too
favor this program, and wish to assist you in
furthering it.
"Although we are vigilant against the activities
of official censors, an increasing amount of censor-
ship is being effected through the operation of
pressure groups, each of which seeks to impose
their standards upon the rest of the community.
While we, of course, do not oppose the right of
these groups to propagandize for their views, we
also support the general public's freedom to see,
read, and hear everything, save that which is in
conflict with established law."
~ Subscription Rates-One Dollar a Year.
Ten cents per Copy
Elections to Union's
Executive Comm. Announced
Albert Brundage, San Francisco labor attorney,
associated with the law firm of Tobriner and
Lazarus, has been elected to the Executive Com-
mittee of the American Civil Liberties Union of :
Northern California for a three-year term begin-
ning November 1.
Re-elected to the Committee for three-year
terms were Attorney Philip Adams of San Fran-
cisco, Prof. James R. Caldwell of U. C., Ruth
Kingman of Berkeley, Dr. Alexander M. Meikle-
john, noted educator; Helen Salz, artist, who with
Dr. Meiklejohn has served on the Committee since
its inception in 1934, and Rev. Oscar F. Green,
Episcopalian minister of Palo Alto.
All of the elections were confirmed at the annual
membership meeting.
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
Goes 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.)
I pledge 0x00A7............ per month........ OL Se per yr.
Please enter my subscription to the NEWS ($1
per year)
Enclosed please find $..........2...2..-::::-+ Please bill
City and Zone ..... ..........
Occupation...
Intervene In Behalf
Of Suspended Doctors
ACLU has entered as a "friend of the court"
in the defense of the three New York doctors
suspended or reprimanded by the New York
Board of Regents following their conviction for
contempt of Congress when they refused to pro-
duce books belonging to the Joint Anti-Fascist
Refugee Committee.
Two of the petitioners before the State Court
of Appeals are Dr. Edward K. Barsky and Dr.
Jacok Auslander, both of whose licenses to prac-
tice medicine were suspended for three and six
months respectively, under the Board of Re-
gents' right to suspend or revoke where the
physicians has been found guilty of a crime. The
third petitioner, Dr. Louis Miller, was repri-
manded by the Regents.
The Appellate Division upheld the Regents'
action. The New York branch of ACLU, through
its counsel, Osmond K. Fraenkel, and Herbert
Monte Levy, staff counsel for ACLU, assert that
"to permit a suspension of a physician's license
for conviction of a crime not involving moral
turpitude and bearing any reasonable relation to
the physician's qualifications for the practice of
medicine, is a violation of the due process clause
of the Fourteenth Amendment."
The attorneys state that the three doctors in-
curred the contempt conviction when they fol-
lowed advice of counsel that `"`the questions asked
by a legislative investigation committee inter-
fered with their freedom of speech, in violation
of the First Amendment."
The ACLU lawyers admit that "certainly good
moral character may constitutionally be made a
prerequisite to the licensing of a physician." But
they go on to point out "how absurd a construc-
tion of a statute would be which permits suspen-
sion ... for crimes not involving moral turpitude."
"Were the law to be strictly enforced," they
continue, "all doctors whose wives had procured
New York divorces might have their licenses
suspended, if they were successfully prosecuted
for adultery-the only ground for divorce in New
York State."
"We therefore urge,' said the lawyers, `that
this court construe the statute to permit a suspen-
sion of license only upon the commission of a
crime which is a felony, or which involves moral
turpitude, or which otherwise bears a reasonable
relation to the qualifications of a licensee to
practice medicine."
Protest Denial of Meeting
Place for Nationalists
ACLU of Southern California recently pro-
tested the cancellation of a contract for use of (c)
the Los Angeles Shrine Auditorium ky the
Christian Nationalist Party.
The party, which backed General Douglas Mac-
Arthur and Jack Tenney as presidential and vice-
presidential candidates, had booked the hall for
an October 12 rally. The date was cancelled by the
auditorium board apparently because Gerald L.
K. Smith was slated to appear on the program.
ACLU made its protest on the grounds that all
people and groups have the right to express their
political views, regardless of the unpopularity of
such views. It said it had no sympathy for either
Smith or the party, but said the board should
carry through its contract regardless of the
speakers.
The rally was subsequently shifted to the Em-
bassy Auditorium.
Learned Hand Says America
Is Menaced by Suspicion, Fear
Judge Learned Hand, who retired last year
from the federal courts after a distinguished ca-
reer of 42 years on the bench, has warned that
unfounded denunciations in this country are rais-
ing fears and distrust that "subject us to a des-
potism as evil as any that we dread."
Judge Hand's remarks were made at an address
before the 86th convocation of the Board of Re-
gents of the University of the State of New York.
The 80-year-old jurist received the honorary de-
gree of Doctor of Law from the Regents.
"Risk for risk," said Judge Hand, "for myself
I had rather take my chance that some traitors
will escape detection than spread abroad a spirit
of general suspicion and distrust, which accepts
rumor and gossip in place of undismayed and un-
intimidated inquiry."
"T believe," he continued, "that that community
is already in the process of dissolution where each
man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible ene-
my, where nonconformity with the accepted creed, .
political as well as religious, is a mark of disaf-
fection."
He asked that the country "not yield a foot
upon demanding a fair field, and an honest race,
Financial Report for Fiscal
Year Ended October 31, 1952
Asa result of the special membership drive held
last Spring, the ACLU of Northern California
ended its fiscal year on October 31, 1952, with a
balance of $2,645.05 in its Operating Fund. That
surplus will serve as a cushion for the current
fiscal year with its increased budget of $27,600,
as compared with the previous budget of $17,200.
Both the income and the expenditures reached
record figures during the last fiscal year. Income
was up almost $8,000 over the previous year, while
expenditures were up about $5,400.
Reserve funds on October 31 consisted of $4,000
in U.S. Treasury bonds and $151.79 cash in the
bank, besides last year's surplus of $2,645.05.
A special account was set up for the pending
deportation case of Sang Ryup Park, Contribu-
tions in that case amounted to $270; disburse-
ments, $118.34; balance on hand, $151.66.
In connection with the campaign against Prop-
ositions 5 and 6 on the November, 1952, ballot,
the ACLU received $4,890.25 and expended a like
amount,
On the membership side, the Union ended its
fiscal year with exactly 3,029 paid-up members,
compared with 1,855 a year ago. There has been
a steady rise in the Union's membership since
1943, when the membership stood at 624. The net
increase of 1,174 for the past year almost equals
the net increase of the previous eight years, dur-
ing which an average yearly net increase of 154
was achieved.
The year also ended with 262 separate sub-
seribers to the monthly "News," compared to 272
a year ago,
Here is the way your money was spent from
November 1, 1951, to October 31, 1952:
OPERATING FUND
Income
General Receipts... 2.22. cs ee $23,398.52
Expenditures
Salaries and Retirement .. $11,131.88
Printing and Stationery .. 3,791.62
Rent 1,715.00
Rostage 3 1,236.35
Telephone and Telegraph. . 452.24
Taxes and Insurance ..... 310.21
Travelline@ was aoe) 2. 235.26
Furniture and Equipment. 880.33
Publications 142.22
Miscellaneous 139.48
Contingent Fund ... 718.88
Total Expenditures ............ 20,753.47
Surplus) 3 $2,645.05
Reserve Funds
There was $4,030.88 on hand in Reserve Funds
on Octoker 31, 1951, of which $530.88 was cash in
the bank. The income during the past year con-
sisted of interest in the amount of $104.57, An-
other U.S. Treasury Bond was purchased at a price
of $483.66, leaving a balance of $151.79 cash in
the bank on October 31, 1952, in addition to $4,000
in U.S. Treasury Bonds (face value). In other
words, the amount on hand in Reserve Funds on
October 31, 1952, was $4,151.79.
Booknote
POLITICAL AND CIVIL RIGHTS IN THE
UNITED STATES. By Thomas Emerson and
David Haber, Professors of Law, Yale University.
Foreword by Robert Hutchins. 1209 pages, $7.50.
Dennis and Company, Buffalo, New York.
The first case book on civil rights for law stu-
dents is indeed a landmark.
Comprising over 1200 pages, it is more than a
computation of cases. Reference material indi-
cating an awe-inspiring amount of research ranges
from obscure FBI reports to well-publicized books
on race relations. It is, in fact, a bibliography of
the main literature and case reports on civil lib-
erties.
There are nine fields covered, from academicc
freedom to security of persons. Substantial ex-
tracts from sixty leading cases are reprinted and
references are made to over nine hundred other
chief decisions. A pocket is povided for an annual
insert part.
The book outside of its academic importance is
a "must" for every lawyer interested in the broad
field of human and political rights.
to all ideas.' He named as essential to the pres-
ervation of a free society four things: Freedom
of speech and press, freedom of religion, due proc-
ess of law, and equal protection of the law.
Judge Hand said that he did not think it could
be left to the courts to construe and enforce the
freedoms and rights because "the powers of the
courts are too limited to reach the more contro-
versial questions that arise under them."
It is, he said, "the voters, speaking through
their delegates, who have the final responsibility."