vol. 25, no. 1
Primary tabs
American
Civil Liberties
Union
Volume XXV
Lundquist Trial Jan. 7
San Francisco, California, January, 1960
Frank Lundquist's suit to secure reinstatement to Local
97 of the Marine Engineers Beneficial Association of San
Francisco will be tried in the San Francisco Superior Court
on January 7.
Lundquist, 65, a marine
security risk by the Coast Guard
in 1951 mainly because, in 1936.
while he was at sea, his wife
joined the Communist Party.
Upon his return she quit.
Lundquist Cleared
When the Federal Court of Ap-
peals in San Francisco ruled that
the Port Security program was
invalid because it did not allow
screened seamen to face their ac-
cusers, Lundquist was given a
validated seaman's document.
Having secured a voluntary with-
drawal card from the union in
1954, Lundquist applied for re-
instatement to his union in No-
vember, 1956.
Kangaroo Court
The union officals procrasti-
nated. Finally, a committee was
appointed which questioned
Lundquist on May 17. He was not
served with charges, the purpose
of the "hearing" was not dis-
closed, counsel was not allowed
and no record of the proceedings
was taken. At this "kangaroo _
court," Lundquist was questioned
solely about "security" matters
with which he was confronted in
his Port Security hearing. The
conclusion is inescapable that the
union was substituting for the
Coast Guard in carrying out an
illegal screening program which
the Government was prevented
from enforcing. Since the Coast
Guard hearing was "confiden-
tial," the only source of the union
committee's information about
Lundquist was the Coast Guard,
which violated its own regula-
tions and circumvented the Court
of Appeals' decision by disclos-
ing information from its secret
files to the M.E.B.A. in order to
have the latter carry on its out-
lawed security program.
Suit Filed
A petition for a writ of man-
date to compel the union to rein-
state Lundquist and for $45,000.
for loss of earnings and for gen-
eral and punitive damages was
engineer, was screened as a
filed on March 11, 1958. The case
will be tried without a jury.
Lundquist is represented by
ACLU Staff Counsel Albert M.
Bendich.
Four Subpoenaed
Teachers |
Have Problems
Two subpoenaed teachers
whose files were turned over to
the San Francisco school depart-
ment by the House Committee on
Un-American Activities were
questioned under the terms of
the Dilworth Act as to their
political activities as far back as
October 3, 1945 by Irving Breyer,
counsel for the San Francisco
Unified School District, in the
presence of Superintendent
Spears late last month. A recrea-
tion director who was also asked
to appear for questioning sub-
mitted her resignation instead.
She had been planning to resign.
Apparently, one of tne teach-
ers was cleared, while no deci-
sion has been made in the other
ease. Thus far, no report has
been made to the Board of Edu-
cation. Ernest Besig, local ACLU
executive director, represented
two of the above persons.
In South San Francisco an-
other subpoenaed teacher was
questioned by school authorities
and cleared. Apparently, these
are the only teachers subpoenaed
by HUAC who were questioned
by local school districts after
they received files from the
HUAC.
In another case, a subpoenaed
teacher lost her job because the
California Credentials Commis-
sion failed to act within 90 days
on her application for an elemen-
tary school credential. In accord-
ance with the law, she has
elected to treat their failure to
act as a denial of her application
and has filed an appeal.
FRANK AND BETTY LUNDQUIST
Number 1
S.F. Anti-Smut
Group Says It
Wants New Law
The San Francisco Committee
for Decent Literature, headed by
Molly Minudri, met last month
and denied it intends to burn
books, impose its ideas of obscen-
ity on anyone else, boycott deal-
ers, or behave as vigilantes. All
they intend to do, according to
Val King, a prominent Catholic
layman, is to propose an ordi-
nance to the Board of Supervi-
sors which their legal committee
is now drafting. Then, according
to Mr. King, they are going to
leave enforcement of the ordi-
nance to the police.
Just what kind of an ordinance
that will be was not indicated, al-
though it is rumored that it was
_to be patterned after the one in
Los Angeles which made a dealer
criminally liable for mere pos-
session of an "obscene" book,
ete. Of course, that ordinance was
struck down as unconstitutional.
Apparently, what the Committee
wants to get away from is the
State law which requires any act
to be done `wilfully and lewdly"'
in order to be punishable.
The Committee also indicated
it will adopt By-Laws at its meet-
ing next month.
ACLUN_1960 Membership
Drive Planning
Session Jan. 14
A planning committee for the
1960 membership drive will
meet after the monthly Board
of Directors meeting, at 2 p.m.,
Thursday, January 14, at the
Women's City Club.
Attending the meeting will be
Mrs. Zora Cheever Gross, the
1959 drive chairman, Fred H.
Smith, IV, Theodore Baer, and
Mmes. Robert Lauter, Jacob
Kahn, Alec Skolnick, Arthur
Bierman, Joe Madore, and Leon
Ginsburg.
As in past campaigns, names
referred by ACLU members will
be the basis of solicitation. A
letter will be sent to all ACLU
members shortly requesting that
names of prospects be sent in to
the office. Your cooperation in
returning these names will con-
tribute
success of the 1960 drive.
The inauguration of the 1960
drive will create an acute need
for volunteer help. Please plan
now to give a little of your time
to aid the 1960 membership
drive. There are a variety of
jobs to be done. Call the office
(EXbrook 2-4692) or sign up on
one of the forms that will reach
you soon.
Anyone interested in attend-
ing the drive planning session is
welcome.
Ap pe Ci
An administrative hearing will
be held on January 12 in the case
of a private school teacher whose
application for a General Ele-
mentary teaching credential was
denied by the Credentials Com-
mission of the State Department
of Education on grounds of "un-
professional conduct" because he
resigned from his public school
job in 1950 rather than sign the
Levering Act oath.
This teacher joined with others
in testing the constitutionality of
the law in the courts. His name
does not actually appear in the
test suit because only four per-
sons were selected from the
group to serve as plaintiffs.
The Credentials Commission
claims the teacher had "a duty to
take and subscribe to the oath or
affirmation required by the Lev-
immeasurably to the
Phe Two Lucys
ay
urrieta Out on
Freed by Twins
The California District Court of Appeal.on December 11
issued an order, directed to the Sheriff of Contra Costa
county, to show cause why Mrs. Lucy Turrieta should not
be discharged from custody because of the failure of
the Justice Court of the Pittsburg Judicial District of Contra
Costa County to advise her of her
right to counsel at the time she
was sentenced to six months in
the County Jail. The matter is
scheduled to be heard on January
26. In the meantime, Mrs. Tur-
rieta was released on $1000 bail
provided by the ACLU.
Charged With Petty Theft
Mrs. Turrieta was charged with
petty theft because she failed to
report the whereabouts of her
common law husband while he.
was in Mexico. It was, therefore,
claimed she had been overpaid
$373 under the Aid to Needy
Children program. She has four
children.
Mrs. Turrieta pleaded guilty to
the charge and she was placed on
probation by Judge Michael J.
Gatto on December 3, 1957, for a
two-year period. Under the terms
of the probation order, she was
required to make restitution in
the amount of $50, to "cease her
common-law relationship with
John Lopez, and not establish any
other extra marital relationship."
Motherhood Penalized
A child was born to Mrs. Tur-
rieta out of wedlock on October
10, 1958 A year later, on Novem-
ber 6, 1959, on the recommenda-
tion of the Probation Officer,
Judge Gatto revoked Mrs. Tur-
rieta's probation and sentenced
her to serve six months in the
county jail. lee
The action of the District
Court of Appeal was in response
to a petition for writs of habeas
corpus filed on December 9, 1959
on behalf of Mrs. Turrieta and
Lucy Martinez.. In the case of
Miss Martinez, however, the court
denied the writ, apparently on
the ground that under circum-
stances similar to those of Mrs.
Turrieta, Judge Gatto had merely
modified probation and, in such
a situation, the defendant is ap-
parently not entitled to represen-
tation by counsel.
Saved by Twins
Two days later, however, Miss
Martinez, on December 13, gave
birth to twins and thereby won
cher release from jail. In modify-
`ing probation, last November 2,
Judge Gatto required that Miss
Martinez "be incarcerated in the
county jail for a period of two
months, incarceration not to be
continued past the time of the
birth of her unborn child." Her
probation was "modified" be-
cause she violated a condition of
probation which required her to
"refrain from extra-marital rela-
tionships with any man to whom
-Continued on Page 3
ering Act; and,...although in-
formed of this duty, and request-
ed to perform same by his said
employer, the respondent persist-
ently defied and refused to take
and subscribe to said oath; and
that as a result of such defiance
and refusal, respondent's employ-
ment aforesaid was terminated on
or about November 2, 1950."
The particular school district
had commenced dismissal pro-
ceedings against all of the teach-
ers who had refused to sign the
oath, but, after the court sus-
tained the law the teachers were
permitted to resign. The appli-
eant was among those allowed to
resign. Thereafter, however, he
allowed his teaching credential
to lapse.
Despite leaving public school
teaching, he has not wanted for a
In This Issue...
ACLU Court Docket ...... p.2
Anti "Smut" Group Plans
National Crusade ...... p. 2
Ban on Political and Religious
Meetings Ruled Uncon-
stitutional ........... p.4
High Court Rules Against
Arrest on Suspicion .... p. 3
High Court Upsets L.A.
Obscenity Law ....... p. 3
U.C. Revised Student Regula-
tions; ACLU Board Opposes
Three Provisions ...... p. 3
Officer Bigarani
Subject of One
More Complaint
During the past two years, Of-
ficer William C. Bigarani, who
operates in San _ Francisco's
North Beach area, has been the
subject of. numerous complaints
by persons who allege they have
been the victims of his lawless
enforcement of the law. Last
month, the following complaint
was made against Officer Biga-
rani:
On December 11, between 10:30
and 11 p.m., while walking along
Grant Avenue, Allan Roney and
Roberta Hogan were stopped by
Officer Bigarani and his partner
and interrogated. After the ques-
tioning, they were ordered to
leave the North Beach area, and
they were not permitted to leave
together.
Again, on September 12, while
seated at a table in The Village
on Grant Avenue, at about 10
p.m., they were ordered out of
the shop and again interrogated
by Officer Bigarani and his part-
ner. Information cards were
filled out by the officers. Miss
Hogan was told by Officer Biga-
rani that if she returned to the
area she would be "vagged" and
charged with suspicion of prosti-
tution. Mr. Boney was told to
stay off Bigarani's beat and not
to be caught out after 12 o'clock
at night. He also threatened to
"vag" Mr. Boney. The latter is
colored while Miss Hogan is
white. They were required to go
separate ways.
Chief of Police Thomas J.
Cahill was asked to investigate
the matter on December 17. At
this writing, no response has
been received from the chief.
| Denial of Credential to Teacher
Who Challenged Levering Act Oath
job. About four years ago, he re-
turned to the teaching profession
but in a private school where he
is not subject to the Levering Act
non-disloyalty oath, and where
he is not required to hold a Cali-
fornia teaching credential. Never-
theless, he would now like to se-
cure his credential in order to be
able to return to public school
teaching if he wishes to do so.
The issue in the case is appar-
ently the first of its kind. This
teacher is being penalized be-
cause he challenged the constitu-
tionality of a new law. Certainly
that is the right of every citizen.
Other teachers who resigned their
jobs because they did not want to
sign the oath have not been pre-
vented from teaching. No effort
has been made to revoke their
credentials.
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION NEWS
Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California
Second Class mail privileges authorized at San Francisco, Calif.
ERNEST BESIG. . . Editor
503 Market Street, San Francisco 5, California, EXbrook 2-4692
Subscription Rates-Two Dollars a Year
: Twenty Cents Per Copy
Philip Adams
Theodore Baer
William K. Coblentz
Richard De Lancie
Joseph L. Eichler
Samuel B. Eubanks
Rabbi Alvin I. Fine
John M. Fowle
Howard Friedman
Rey. Oscar F. Green
Zora Cheever Gross
Robert H. Hardgrove
Alice G.Heyneman
Mrs. Paul Holmer
Rey. F. Danford Lion
Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union
of Northern California
CHAIRMAN: Prof. John Henry Merryman
VICE-CHAIRMEN: Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn, Helen Salz
SECRETARY-TREASURER: Fred H. Smith, IV
HONORARY TREASURER: Joseph M. Thompson
HONORARY MEMBER: Sara Bard Field
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Ernest Besig
Rev. Robert W. Moon
Lloyd L. Morain
Rt. Rev. Edward L. Parsons
Clarence E. Rust
Rev. Harry B. Scholefield
Mrs. Alec Skolnick
Mrs. Martin Steiner
Stephen Thiermann
Franklin H. Williams
Harold Winkler
GENERAL COUNSEL
Wayne M. Collins
STAFF COUNSEL
Albert M. Bendich
ACLU CC
The ACLU of Northern Cali-
fornia, through its staff counsel,
Albert M. Bendich, with the co-
- operation of volunteer ACLU at-
torneys, is presently handling the
following ten court cases in-
volving civil liberties issues:
Dilworth Act Case
San Francisco Board of Educa-
tion vs. Mass. Dilworth Act dis-
missal of former San Francisco
City College English instructor
' who refused to answer questions
of House Committee on Un-Amer-
-ican Activities, reversed by State
Supreme Court on December 21,
1956, because Mass was not given
hearing as to his reasons for re-
fusing to answer the Committee's
questions. To be reheard in trial
court. Action on this matter is
contemplated in the near future.
- Luckel Act Case
Wolstenhotme vs. Oakland Li-
brary Board. Reinstatement suit
filed after dismissal of senior li-
brarian for refusing to answer
certain questions of Oakland Li-
brary Board. Alameda County
Superior Court Judge Cecil Mos-
bacher upheld the Luckel Act and
ruled that petitioner had delayed
too long in filing suit. The deci-
sion was unanimously reversed
by the District Court of Appeal,
but the California Supreme Court
voted 4 to 3 to review the case.
The case has not yet been placed
on the court calendar for argu-
ment.
Deportation
Suit filed in U.S. District Court
on December 31, 1956, enjoining
attempted deportation of native-
born citizen, whom government
claims expatriated himself while
in the Soviet Union. Immigra-
tion Service ruled plaintiff is
deportable for prior membership
in Komsomo] in the U.S.S.R,
Unemployment -
Insurance
Syrek vs. State Unemployment
Insurance Board. Denial of un-
employment insurance benefits
for refusal to accept Civil Service
employment because of loyalty
oath requirement sustained by
Alameda County Superior Court.
An appeal has been filed in the
District Court of Appeals, where
a decision is being awaited.
False Arrest and
imprisonment -
Himphill vs. Pedrini. $10,000
damage suit filed July 3, 1957, by
a U.S. mail clerk who was picked
ACLU NEWS
January, 1960
Page 2
up by two plainclothes officers
on Market Street early -in the
morning of April 1, 1957, mugged
and fingerprinted, and booked as
a vagrant. Next morning the case
was dismissed by the District At-
torney for lack of evidence. Co-
Counsel: Fay Stender of San Jose.
People vs. Wendy Murphy. The
U. S. Supreme Court has been
asked to review the conviction of
barefoot Miss Murphy on charges
of battery and resisting arrest.
Those charges and two others
sprang ffom her attempted entry
into San. Francisco's Bagel Shop
over the objections of Officer
Wm. Bigarani. The resulting vag-
rancy charge was dropped and
she was acquitted on a charge of
malicious mischief. The question
to be decided is whether the con-
stitutional right to be free from
arbitrary arrest includes also the
right to be free from criminal
conviction for resisting reason-
ably a wholly illegal arrest. Co-
counsel: Kurt Melchior.
Williams vs. D. Dillon, et al.
Upon leaving a restaurant and
while on his way to work, plain-
clothes officers arrested the plain-
tiff, had him mugged and finger-
printed as a "$1,000 Vag." Next
morning the case was dismissed
for lack of evidence. A $20,000
damage suit was filed July 3,
1957, against the arresting offi-
cer and the Chief of Police. Co-
counsel: Fay Stender of San Jose.
In re Lucy Turrieta. Petition
for a writ of habeas corpus filed
in the California District Court
of "Appeal for a woman whose
probation on a petty theft charge
was revoked because she violated
an order not to have extra mari-
tal relations. The petition chal-
lenges the constitutionality of the
condition of. probation and also
asserts that Mrs. Turrieta was
denied counsel both at her trial
and when probation was revoked.
Pending a hearing on January 26,
1960, Mrs. Turrieta is free on
$1000 bond. Co-counsel: H. Leroy
Cannon of Pittsburg.
' Labor Union
Discrimination
Lundquist vs. Marine Engineers
Beneficial Association. Mandam-
us action filed in San Francisco
Superior Court March 11, 1958,
to compel reinstatement in labor
union of seaman rejected by un-
ion because he had been screened
by the Coast Guard, under screen-
ing procedure declared unconsti-
tutional by the 9th Circuit Court
of Appeals in Parker v. Lester.
The case is scheduled to be tried
on January 4.
Contempt of Congress
U.S. vs. Hartman. Appeal from
a conviction on July 27, 1959,
in Federal District Court on 7
20-Year-Old
Charged With
@
"Congregating
Nineteen-year-old Thor Mich-
elsen of San Francisco was ar-
rested at 12:30 am., December
20, and charged with violating a
San Francisco ordinance that
makes it "unlawful for three
(3) or more persons under the
age of twenty-one (21) years to
congregate or assemble, or en-
gage in any sport or exercise, or
to make or endeavor to make
any noise or disturbance, on any
public street, between the hours
of 8 o'clock p.m. and daylight of
the following morning."
Thor and two friends, one 17
and the other 18, the latter on
leave from the Army, had at-
tended "The Crown" theatre.
They got out of the movie about
midnight, stopped at Hunt's res-
taurant on 20th and Mission
streets for a cup of coffee, and
then headed for a friend's house.
Two officers in plain clothes
stopped them as they were head- -
ing up 14th street. The officers
jumped out of a car (part of the
S squad, no doubt) and one of
them started to search Thor.
The latter wanted to know
whether the man had any right
to search him. "Do you want to
be put under arrest?" the offic-
er is reported to have replied.
"What for," Thor asked?.
When the officer started push-
ing him, Thor tried to get away,
but he was tripped and his head
was cut as it hit the sidewalk.
The other two boys were not
arrested. Thor is charged with
"congregating" and with resist-
ing a police officer. The unusual
case is scheduled for trial before
Municipal Judge Albert J. Axel-
rod on January 5. Thor is repre-
sented by the Public Defender.
ACLU Seeks
Fair Hearings
For Deporiees
A new rule of the Immigra-
tion and Naturalization Service
withdrawing from aliens request-
ing a stay of deportation on
grounds of physical persecution
the right to appear in person
and plead their case was assailed:
recently by the American Civil
Liberties Union.
The ACLU made public a let-
ter sent to Lt. General Joseph
M. Swing, commissioner of the
Immigration and Naturalization
Service, criticizing the rule as
denying the due process right
of a fair hearing and urging the
government official to reconsid-
er the agency's position.
"Elementary considerations of
due. process militate against the
procedure sought to be instituted
by the rule," the ACLU wrote.
"Where fact-finding is the essen-
tial element in a proceeding, and
the determination revolves
around the acts and beliefs of
an individual, to arrive at a con-
clusion of fact without affording
the individual the right to ap-
pear in person, is illogical and
unrealistic. A partial hearing is
not a fair hearing."
The right of the alien to plead
his cause at his hearing is "an
indispensable aid in establishing
the bona fide claim of physical
persecution," the civil liberties
spokesman said. "It is the most
effective way to establish the
truth and the weight of a claim
of persecution. Since these two
factors are crucial, to be deprived
of the right to testify in person
will seriously prejudice depor-
tees. The cold documentary rec-
ord, although important .. . is
not a sufficient record where a
life is at stake."
counts of contempt of Congress
growing out of Hartman's reli-
ance upon the First Amendment
in refusing to answer questions
put to him by the House Commit-.
tee on Un-American Activities in
the course of the June, 1957,
San Francisco hearings. Record
on appeal to Court of Appeals be-
ing prepared. Co-counsel: Hartly
Fleischmann. -
The Citizens for Decent Literature is planning'a crusade
to stimulate the organization of branches in every community
of the United States. Encouraged by results of its efforts in
Cincinnati, Ohio, where it was formed in 1956, in other areas,
and by inquiries from more than 500 towns and cities, CDL
will seek adherents across the
nation.
Enlightenment and Law
Enforcement
"The first thing we want to do
is to enlighten the public," Dr.
Bernard E. Donovan, national
CDL chairman and an assistant
superintendent of schools in New
York, explained recently to a
Chicago Sun-Times reporter.
"The people are too apathetic
about dirty literature and the
harm it does. We want people to
understand the problem and de-
mand. action from the police offi-
cers, the courts, and the juries.
Our second objective is to see
that the laws now on the books
are enforced. There are many
adequate laws against obscenity,
but they've never been invoked.
We want to start a national drive
to see they are enforced. We
simply want to trigger action and
arouse the public. It is the busi-
ness of law enforcement officers
to bring the violators to justice.
We feel they will if they know
the public is in back of them."
Community Standards
The reason for this mode of
action is made clear in a booklet,
"Fight Newsstand Filth," pub-
lished by the organization. In it,
Charles H. Keating, Jr., of Cin-
cinnati, founder of CDL, reminds
that the Supreme Court-in the
precedent -setting Roth case -
ruled that material was obscene
if the average person, applying
contemporary community stand-
ards, found that the dominant
theme taken as a whole appealed
to prurient interest. CDL's aim
is to win enough vocal support-
ers so that they will set "contem-
porary community standards" in
opposition to what the organiza-
tion considers pornographic liter-
ature. Prosecutors then could
cite the mass opinion expressed,
when seeking convictions of pub-
lication dealers and distributors.
"If we can get an awakened
public to continuously advise the
police, prosecutors and other pub-
lic officials that their manners
and morals are being contra-
vened by the cancerous flood of
obscene literature, then we'll get
arrests, prosecutions and convic-
tions," Keating asserted. "This
is not a matter of `pressuring'
public officials. It is merely the
exercise of every citizen's right
to stand up and be counted, to
state his belief in what should be
allowed and prohibited in so-
ciety."
How They Work
Citizens for Decent Literature
is concentrating its campaign in-
itially on allegedly obscene pub-
lications sold by newsstands and
drug stores. Both Keating and
Donovan denied that CDL at-
tempted censorship or cam-
paigned by boycott. Rather, they
said, the organization urged peo-
ple to express their opposition to
obscene materials in letters to
police, prosecutors, and news-
papers and to attend trials of per-
sons charged with selling pornog-
raphy in order to indicate their
support.of prosecution. CDL has
also organized a speaker's bureau
and assists local prosecutors with
legal assistance and in securing
"expert witnesses" who will seek
to prove a casual relationship
between "obscene" reading ma-
terial and delinquent behavior.
"It's now very important to
state clearly what our moral
standards - legally - are in our
communities," Keating comment-
ed. "The Supreme Court decision
may prove to have been the legal
knife that slashed through the
confusion and provided a stand-
ard by which communities may
x
safeguard themselves against the
traffic in obscenity."
Cincinnati Raids
Allegedly obscene periodicals
were the prime objective of po-
lice raids upon newsdealers in
Cincinnati. Eight dealers were
convicted as a result of the drive.
A major distributor who received
a heavy fine has since dropped
25 publications from the group
he handles.
Cincinnati's police chief, Stan-0x00B0
ley R. Schrotel, an honorary mem-
ber of CDL, said his department
had turned down requests from
many magazine dealers to pub-
lish a "forbidden" list of periodi-
cals. "Our action is in no way to
be construed as police suppres-
sion of freedom of thought, free-
dom of expression and freedom
of the press," Schrotel remarked.
"We avoid this by careful selec-
tion of personnel who enforce ob-
scenity laws. We base our arrests
on the language of the law rather
than personal feelings." Schrotel
added: "We will not be truly
successful until we have persuad-
ed newsstand dealers to be their
own censors." :
The police chief of Stamford,
Conn., Joseph Kinsella, claims
outstanding success in his "anti-
obscenity" campaign through per-
suasion.
Police Persuasion in Stamford
"We have won our battle be-
cause we have educated the local
news dealers and distributors
about the evils of smut," he told
the Chicago Sun-Times reporter.
"And once they have seen the
light, they have cooperated in
every way. Our state statute
against smut and pornography is
tough. ...So what we tried to do
is go to the little guy who owns
the corner store and appeal to his
better instinct. And then we did
the same with the distributors.
We wanted to convince them that
certain magazines were filthy;
that they were corrupting our
youth. We tried to show them
that it was wrong to bring these
magazines into our community.
The way it now works is if I get
a bad complaint on a certain pub-
lication, I call up the major dis-
tributor of magazines in the area.
I tell him such and such a maga-
zine is bad. And he takes it off
his list. Strictly voluntary."
A list of "objectionable" maga-
zines is compiled by a member of
the Stamford police department's
youth bureau, who frequently. in-
spects newsstands. "Kinsella's
sincerity of effort soon won the
support of all parties involved in
distributing and selling maga-
zines,' the Sun-Times reporter
stated. "Now all he has to do is
submit his list of objectionable
magazines and they are removed
from the racks."
Marin Meeting
The fifth annual meeting
of the Marin Chapter of the
American Civil Liberties
Union of Northern California
will be held at the Jewish
Community Center, 1618
Mission Ave., San Rafael,
Sunday evening, January 31,
1960 at 8 o'clock.
The principal speaker will
be Ernest Besig, local execu-
tive director of the ACLU.
Milen Dempster, chairman of
the chapter, will preside.
There will also be an elec-
tion of members of the chap-
ter's board of directors as
well as its officers.
The meeting is open to the
public. Refreshments will be
served after the meeting.
January 31
Knowledge of Obscenity Required
scenity
The United States Supreme Court on December 14 de-
clared unconstitutional a Los Angeles city ordinance making
it a crime for a bookseller merely to have an obscene book
in his possession. As Justice Frankfurter in a concurring
opinion put it in his wordy style, "The court does not reach
. .. the issue of obscenity. The
Court disposes: of the case exclu-
sively by sustaining the appel-
lant's claim that the `liberty'
protected by the Due Process
Clause of the Fourteenth Amend-
ment precludes a State from mak-
ing the dissemination of obscene
books an offense merely because
a book in a bookshop is found to
be obscene without some proof of
the bookseller's knowledge touch-
ing the obscenity of its contents."
The Ordinance
The ordinance makes it unlaw-
ful "for any person to have in
his posession any obscene or in-
decent writing [or] book... in
any place of business where...
books . . . are sold or kept for
sale."
The court acted unanimously
in setting aside the conviction of
Eleazar Smith, a 73-year-old
proprietor of a book store who
was sentenced to 30 days in jail
for having in his store a novel
about lesbianism, "Sweeter Than
Life," by Mark Tryon.
Some Disagreement
Justice Harlan dissented in
part, and Justices Black and
Douglas, in separate opinions,
argued that obscenity should be
protected under the First Amend-
ment guarantee of freedom of
speech. Justice Harlan was not
eoncerned with the question of
knowledge; he felt that the trial
court had prevented the defend-
ant from introducing evidence as
to community standards of ob-
scenity. Justice Frankfurter con-
tended that the right to intro-
duce the testimony of experts
should be regarded as an element
of due process of law.
Main Opinion
In the main opinion, written by
Mr. Justice William J, Brennan,
Jr., it was pointed out that the
court had recently held in the
Roth case "that obscene speech
and writings are not protected by
the constitutional guarantees of
freedom of speechyand the press.
But our holding in the Roth
ease," said the court, "does not
recognize any state power to re-
strict the dissemination of books
which are not obscene; and we
think this ordinance's strict lia-
bility feature would tend serious-
ly to have that effect, by penal-
izing booksellers, even though
they had not the slightest notice
of the character of the books
they sold.
Restrictions on the Good
"By dispensing with. any re-
quirement of knowledge of the
contents of the book on the part
of the seller," the court went on
to say, "the ordinance tends to
impose a severe limitation on the
public's access to constitutionally-
protected matter. For if the book-
seller is criminally liable without
knowledge of the contents, and
the ordinance fulfills its purpose, ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1957.batch ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1958.batch ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1959.batch ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1960.batch ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log
he will tend to restrict the
books he sells to those he has in-
pected; and thus the State will
have imposed a restriction upon,
the distribution of constitution-
ally protected as well as obscene
literature. . . . And the book-
seller's burden would become the
public's burden, for by restrict-
ing him the public's access to
reading matter would be re-
stricted. If the contents of book-
shops and periodical stands were
restricted to material of which
their proprietors had made an
inspection, they might be de-
pleted indeed. The bookseller's
limitation in the amount of read-
ing material with which he could
familiarize himself, and his timid-
ity in the face of absolute crim-
inal liability, thus would tend to
restrict the public's access to
forms of the printed word which
the State could not constitution-
ally suppress directly. The book-
seller's self-censorship, compel-
led by the State, would be a cen-
sorship affecting the whole pub-
lic, hardly less virulent for being
privately administered. Through
it, the distribution of all books,
both obscene and not obscene,
would be impeded."
The ACLU filed an amicus
curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme
Court.
High Court Rules
Against Arrest
On Suspicion
In a 7 to 2 decision, the U. S.
Supreme Court on November 23
decided that suspicion alone is
insufficient grounds for FBI
agents to make an arrest.
John Patrick Henry was con-
victed of unlawfully possessing
three cartons of radios which
were not disclosed until after
an arrest had been made. The
issue in the case was `whether
there was probable cause for the
arrest leading to the search that
produced the evidence on which
the conviction rests."
The agents followed Henry
when he entered his car with
another man, "saw it enter an
alley, and stop. Petitioner got
out of the car, entered a gang- -
way leading to residential prem-
ises and returned in a few min-
utes with some cartons. He
placed them in the car' and
drove off. The agents lost track
of the car but later found it
parked near where they had first
seen it. They again saw Henry
and another man enter the car
and drive in the same alley as
before. Henry again entered the
residence and returned with
more cartons. As the car drove
off the agents followed it and
finally, when they met it going
in opposite directions, waved it
to a stop.
"On the record,' said the
court, "there was far from
enough evidence against (Henry)
to justify a magistrate in issuing
a warrant. So far as the record
shows, (Henry) had not even
been suspected of criminal activ-
ity prior to this time. Riding in
the car, stopping in an alley,
picking up packages, driving
away-these were all acts that
were outwardly innocent. Their
movements in the car had no
mark of fleeing men or men act-
ing furtively. The case might be
different if the packages had
been taken from a terminal or
from an interstate trucking plat-
form. But they were not... . The
fact that packages have been
stolen does not make every man
who carries a package subject to
arrest nor the package subject
to seizure. The police must have -
reasonable grounds to believe
that. the particular package car-
ried by the citizen is contraband.
Its shape and design might at
times be adequate. The weight
of it and the manner in which
it is carried might at times be
enough. ... To repeat, an arrest
is not justified by what the sub-
sequent search discloses. Under
our system suspicion is not
enough for an officer to lay
hands on a citizen. It is better,
so the Fourth Amendment teach-
es, that the guilty sometimes go
free than that citizens be subject
to easy arrest."
Civil Rights Act U.C. Revised Student Regulations
Covers Real
Estate Business
Real estate brokers and sales-
men are covered by the Unruh
Civil Rights Act and in supply-
ing their services may not dis-
criminate against persons by
reason of their race, color, re-
ligion, ancestry, or national
origin. This was the recent rul-
ing of Attorney General Stanley
Mosk in response to a request for
an opinion by Assemblyman
John A. O'Connell of San Fran-
cisco.
The Attorney General also
ruled that the previous provi-
' sions of the Civil Rights Act.
(Sec. 51 of the Civil Code), pro-
hibiting discrimination in places
of public accommodation and
amusement, are also covered by
the Unruh Civil Rights Act. That
law reads as follows:
"All citizens within the juris-
diction of this State are free and
equal, and no matter what their
race, color, religion, ancestry, or
national origin are entitled to the
full and equal accommodations,
advantages, facilities, privileges,
or services in all business estab-
lishments of every kind whatso-
ever.
"This section shall not be con-
strued to confer any right or
privilege on a citizen which is
conditioned or limited by law or
which is applicable alike to citi-
zens of every color, race, religion,
ancestry, or national origin."
ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1956.batch ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1957.batch ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1958.batch ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1959.batch ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1960.batch ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log In ruling on the law, the Attor-
ney General declared that "The
language used in the 1959 amend-
ment shows an intent to broaden
the application of section 51 to
cover not only the entities listed
in that section prior to 1959 but
also to include all other business
enterprises." :
Freed by Twins
Continued from Page 1-
she is not legally married." Miss
Martinez now has eight children
although only 24 years of age, as
is Mrs. Turrieta.
Previous Petitions Denied
An earlier petition for writs of
habeas corpus on behalf of
the women was turned down
by the District Court of Appeal
on December 4, 1959. On Novem-
ber 23, Superior Court Judge
Wakefield Taylor of Contra Costa
County denied a petition for the
writs.
On December 14, Deputy Dis-
trict Attorney Samuel Mesnick |
sought to have Mrs. Turrieta re-
sentenced by Judge Gatto in or-
der to correct the alleged denial
of counsel, Judge Gatto will rule
on the matter on February 1.
Doubtful "Fraud"
Incidentally, Mrs. Turietta was
convicted of two charges of petty
theft on December 3, 1957. The
basis for these charges is some-
what obscure but they apparently
relate to alleged overpayments of
-Aid to Needy Children of $373
from December 1955 through
March 1956 because of Mrs, Tur-
rieta's failure to provide the
county with the address of the
father of two of her children,
John Lopez, who had been de-
ported to Mexico. There does not
appear to be any evidence of in-
tent to defraud the county, but
Mrs. Turietta, without the advice
of counsel, pleaded guilty. She
states that she wasn't advised of
her right to counsel or of the
willingness of the court to pro-
vide counsel for her.
Personal Liberty
Mrs.. Turietta is being repre-
sented by ACLU Staff Counsel
Albert M. Bendich and attorney
H. LeRoy Cannon of Pittsburgh,
Calif. In the petition prepared by
Bendich he argued that "sexual
intercourse between two adults,
freely consenting persons, in the
privacy of their own home, is a
fundamental aspect of personal
liberty and privacy guaranteed by
due process of law and by the
constitutional limitation of offi-
cial power to specifically dele-
gated areas, together with the ex-
press reservations in the Ninth
Amendment to the United States
Constitution, of powers not so
specifically delegated."
CLU
Opposes Three
Provisions
In consequence of the issuance by President Clark Kerr
of the University of California on November 30 of revised
regulations concerning student government, recognition of
student organizations and use of campus facilities, the Board
of Directors of the ACLU of Northern California last month
reconsidered its position with re-
spect to the directives.
Changes Good
`One of the changes by Presi-
dent Kerr allows recognized stu-
dent organizations to take posi-
tions on off-campus issues so long
as they `take reasonable precau-
tions to make clear that they are
not acting in the name of the
University or with its approval
or sponsorship and that they do
not represent the student body
as a whole." Another change ex-
tends to all student publications
the privilege of taking editorial
positions with reference to issues
of the day. The special committee
which considered the directives
and the board of directors found
itself in sympathy with these
changes.
Recognized Student Groups
The board, however, voted to
oppose a number of provisions of
the revised directives. The first
of these is subsection v of section
3 of the "Regulation on Student
Organizations,' which provides
that a recognized student "organ-
ization must not be affiliated
with any partisan, political or re-
ligious group, or have as one of
its principal purposes the taking
of partisan positions identified
with such a group."
Use of Univ. Facilities
The second provision which
the board opposes appears in sub-
division cent of section II, "Regula-
tion on Use of University Facili-
ties," which reads as follows: "An
off-campus speaker may be in-
vited by a student organization to
address a meeting on University
facilities only with the assent of
the faculty or staff adviser of the
organization, Also, whenever an
off-campus speaker is to be in-
vited by such student organiza-
tions, notification prior to the in-
vitation shall be given to the
Chief Campus Officer or his des-
ignated representative; and he,
following such notification, may
- deny the use of University facili-
ties if he deems the meeting to be
incompatible with the educa-
tional objectives of the Univer-
sity."
_ Student Government
The third provision of the di-
rectives which the board voted to
oppose is that portion of Rule 4
of the "Regulation on Student
Government," which reads,
"Therefore, student governments .
and their subsidiary agencies may
not take positions on any such
off-campus issues without the ex-
press consent of the Chief Cam-
pus Officer. Any questions of
jurisdiction arising under this
rule shall be determined by the
Chief Campus Officer or his duly
designated representative."
Also, with respect to subdivi-
sion A of section III of the "Reg-
ulation on Use of University Fa-
cilities," the board recommended
the substitution of the following
affirmative language for the
present language: "A. University
facilities may be used for the pur-
pose of soliciting political party
membership and supporting and
opposing particular candidates
and propositions in local, state
and national elections, under the
following conditions" etc.
Distribution of Leaflets
The board also requested its
special committee to consider and
report back concerning section
IV, D of the "Regulation on Use
of University Facilities," which
reads as follows: "No literature
may be distributed free or sold in
connection with meetings or
events without permission ob-
tained in advance."
Urge Due Process
In Student
Ouster Cases
The American Civil Liberties
Union has strongly recommend-
ed that colleges carefully ob-
serve due process in all cases
involving expulsion of students,
except for failure to meet aca-
demic standards.
The ACLU contended that
students are entitied to the safe-
guards of due process, just as
are teachers. Its proposal was -
embodied in revisions to the
pamphlet, Academic Freedom
and Civil Liberties for Students,
which the Union first prepared
and published in 1956.
The revised pamphlet calls
for the "utmost procedural pro-
tection possible" in cases in-
volving expulsion of students.
Where guilt is acknowledged, it
stated, a review board rather
than a single administrator act-
ing without advice should study
the case and recommend penal-
ty. Students who do not admit
guilt should be granted hear-
ings, be permitted to confront
witnesses, and be entitled to ap-
peal to a review body. In any
cases involving expulsion or
other major disciplinary action,
except for failure to meet aca-
demic standards, the pamphlet
emphasized, students should be
advised in writing of charges
against them, be present at.
hearings, have counsel if they
wish, and confront and cross-
examine witnesses.
The revisions, in effect, ex-
tended to students the same
kind of provisions for due proc-
ess which ACLU. and its Aca-
demic Freedom Committee have
long recommended in civil liber-
ties cases generally, including
those affecting teachers.
The revised pamphlet also
deals with the need for students
_to have a larger degree of inde-
pendence in meeting, choosing
speakers, discussing controver-
Sial issues, and in certain cases,
harrying their college adminis-
trations, and with their right to
speak off campus as individuals
or as part of student groups,
while making clear they are not
spokesmen of the institution
they attend.
"Responsibility for regulations
on academic matters naturally
rests with the faculty and ad-
ministration,' a new section of
the ACLU policy statement de-
clared. "Regulations governing
the extra-curricular activities of
students should be _ enacted,
amended and supplemented by
a committee composed of facul-
ty members and students"
chosen respectively by teachers.
and students.
Contributions in
Memory of
Professor Tolman
Last month, the ACLU re-
ceived $215 in contributions from
20 sources in memory of Prof.
Edward C. Tolman, who died on
November 19. Contributions to
the ACLU were made in accord-
ance with the expressed wishes
of Prof. Tolman's wife, Kathleen
D. Tolman.
ACLU NEWS
January, 1960
Page 3
Radio-Television Programming
The American Civil Liberties Union declared last month
that the Federal Communications Commission should ``ener-
getically exercise" its power to require the radio-television
industry to provide "the maximum possible range and hal-
ance in subject matter me treatment" in its over-all
programming.
This would give "an iadicpen.
sable modern mass communica-
tion effect to the people's age-old
constitutional right of freedom to
speak and freedom to hear," the
civil liberties group said. At the
same time, the ACLU asserted
that the FCC should continue to
have no power of censorship over
`specific radio or TV programs.
Testimony Before Commission
The ACLU's views were pre-
sented by its executive director,
Patrick Murphy Malin, in testi-
`mony before the Commission at a
-public hearing in Washington,
D.C, The FCC opened a series of
hearings on its authority to check
into stations' programming, grow-
ing out of the current congress-
ional investigation of TV quiz
shows and related practices. "If
we want the advantages of pri-
vate radio-television," Malin said,
"we must run some of the risks
inherent in it. Government can
not do the whole job of seeing to
it. that the radio-television in-
dustry satisifies everyone. But
government can do part of that
job and must begin immediately
to do much more than it has been
doing." Otherwise, the ACLU
`testimony said, the `"people's
right to speak and hear" will be
left to the mercy of "irrespon-
.sible private management... or
desperate, last-resort rigid gov-
ernment regulation or monop-
oly...
' License a Public Trust
The ACLU testimony hit hard
at the radio-tv industry's failure
to use station licenses as a public
trust. "Networks and _ stations
have viewed (the right to broad-
cast) almost exclusively as an
open door to private gain, An un-
holy alliance of most broadcast-
ers, most sponsors and most ad-
vertising agencies has gravitated
to the sole criterion of salesman-
ship, and all but destroyed the
`standards for broadcasting. Nor
does the proper absence of gov-
ernment censorship of specific
programs mean that the people
are free to speak and free to lis-
ten. The industry has:a built-in,
extremely powerful private cen-
sorship which, for the sake of fi-
nancial gain, has _ substituted
rigged entertainment for straight-
forward information and... has
barred controversial discussion of
many important subjects von
prime weekday time.
' Combat Private Censorship
"Meanwhile, the FCC, com-
mendably anxious that its regu-
lations should not act as an un-
constitutional censorship of spe-
.cifie programs, has not taken
`nearly enough positive action to
promote the maximum possible
range and balance in over-all
programming," the ACLU testi-
mony added. More vigorous
action by the FCC, the Union
continued, would not only give
effect to the federal communica-
tions law's insistence on the full
responsibility of a stationfor all
the programs it broadcasts, but
"also would combat the private
censorship of the industry's un-
holy alliance. The positive pro-
motion of variety is not censor-
ship, but a means of removing
censorship-a means of guaran-
teeing the people that communi-
eation is honest, intelligent, and
representative of their society.
The ACLU, like the FCC, would
be utterly opposed to any gov-
ACLU NEWS
January, 1960
Page 4
ernment agency censoring a spe-
cific program .. .; but we em-
phatically support action by the
Commission to promote the max-
imum possible range and balance
in over-all programming, which
the `public interest, convenience
or necessity' obviously requires
of an industry holding in trust a
relatively scarce natural re-
source."
To promote range and balance
in over-all programming, the civil
liberties group offered these
suggestions to the Commission:
FCC Station Evaluation
1. The Commission
make an explicit and widely pub-
licized announcement that it is
firmly committed to using its
existing power and responsibility
to evaluate a station's over-all
programming. To aid in this
evaluation, it should continue the
use of and improve the Public
Service Form, on which a station
reports its intended and actual
programming, and issue an up-to-
date revision of its 1946 "Blue
Book" to provide `skeletal guid-
ance" for stations on the Com-
mission's policy on over-all pro-
gramming in applying the law's
standards of "public interest,
convenience or necessity."
Solicit Public Comment
2. The Commission should
make more meaningful its
authority "to license or not to
license," after having evaluated
a station's over-all programming,
by soliciting public comment on
stations' performance. This
would be done by requiring sta-
tions, at the time they apply for
renewal of their license, to broad-
east each day of the week in
prime evening time, the station's
obligations under the 1934 Com-
munications Act, the date of the
license's expiration, and that any
person may write the FCC in
Washington in support of or op-
position to renewal. Also, re-
sponsible persons who had writ-
ten the FCC about a station's per-
formance during its _ license
period would be informed that
" the license is up for renewal and
further comment solicited. If the
Commission decides that a hear-
ing is warranted on a station's
renewal application, the hearing
should be held in the city where
the station is located, and the
Commission should invite anyone
it believes should: be heard to
testify.
The ACLU also suggested an
"interim hearing" procedure by
which the Commission could hold
hearings during the life of the
license if the complaints of re-
sponsible persons warrant it.
Expansion Of Spectrum .
3. The Commission should give
increased support to the current
Congressional investigation of
expansion and re-allocation of the
television spectrum "so as to pro-
vide more channels and expand
diversity." This, the Union de-
clared, could increase the range
and balance in subject matter
and treatment of programs of-
fered to the viewing public.
4. The Commission should pro-
pose to the Congress that the
communications law be amended
so as to allow the Commission to
license the networks. This would
provide "the Commission the
power directly to regulate the
over-all programming of net-
works themselves, not only indi-
rectly through individual stations
as at present," the Union said.
should -
Free Speech Returns to Union Square
City Attorney Dion R. Holm
of San Francisco ruled last
month that regulations of the
Recreation and Park Commission
limiting use of Union Square "`to
projects of significant civic or
national importance," prohibiting
solicitation of funds, and prohib-
iting the use of the park "for
political or sectarian religious
purposes," are unconstitutional.
He also characterized an anti-
handbill ordinance which the
Commission sought to use as
vague and unenforceable. At the
same time, he approved regula-
tions requiring written applica-
tions for use of the park, prohib-
iting exhibitions of animals and
confining use "to the area of the
permanent stage."
The City Attorney's ruling
agreed substantially with the
position taken by the ACLU last
June in a letter to the Commis-
sion requesting reconsideration
of its announced regulations.
"We do not question the dauthor-
ity of the Commission to prohibit
_the use of Union Square for busi-
ness purposes," said the Union's
letter, "but we do question the
Commission's power to bar polit-
ical and sectarian religious meet-
ings in Union Square...
"It is one thing, in the interest
of all," the letter went on to say,
"to require persons to make
timely application for the use of
Union Square, but it is quite an-
other thing for the Commission,
in effect, to decide what ideas
may be expressed. In other
words, the Commission may not
discriminate in favor of `organ-
izations of local and national
significance' as announced in the .
press. In short, freedom of
Letters to the Editor...
Censorship
The following letter appeared
in the December 8, 1959, issue
of the Palo Alto Times:
The announcement of the
emergence of a _ self-appointed
committee of five to "stop the
sale of pornographic publica-
tions" in Mountain View illus-
trates the curious inversion of
rational procedures so common
in the censorial mind. Begin-
ning with a conclusion drawn
from a vacuum, this committee
has decided to invite the city at-
torney, the county district attor-
ney and Congressman Gubser to
discuss its "problem" with it.
Then, glancing over its shoulder,
it has happily discovered the
strong and experienced corps of
"women in the city's neighbor-
hood," prepared and willing to
sally forth in any good cause.
The committee is glad to note
the dependence of the merchants
on these women, on the good
will of the wives and mothers
whose trade make up most of
their business. The painful vul-
nerability of the news dealers,
druggists, grocers and other ven-
ders. of magazines and pocket
books to a threat of boycott from
this group is a bright beacon to
the eyes of the committee.
Despite this impressive start,
the committee has admittedly
not yet found time to proceed far
enough back to define pornogra-
phy, or to decide how such a
definition is to be applied. Ex-
cept to the extent, of course, of
the obvious determination that
the definition will not be one
established by legal precedent
and decisions resulting from its
application will not be made in
a court of law.
The committee members pre-
fer not to be called "censors."
The current substitute for that
unloved word seems to be the
toughly romantic "vigilante'-
but they don't like that either.
Perhaps a reader can suggest a
euphemism acceptable to these
sensitive guardians of our mo-
rally susceptible citizenry.
Meanwhile, those of us who
do not care to be _ stabilized at
the intellectual and emotional
reading level of a nine-year-old
(one without access to televi-
sion, naturally), are almost pow-
erless. We cannot prove a nega-
tive, arouse irrational mass emo-
tions or threaten anyone's liveli-
hood. Many of us hardly dare
speak, for any attempt to bring
reason and reality into the mat-
ter is likely to call forth vicious
personal attacks of a damaging
nature.
So Menlo Park's fever infects
its neighbors and an ugly rash
begins to appear on the Peninsu-
la. If the spread of this purulent
disease cannot be prevented,
every effort must at least be
made to expose its character and
to slow it down and minimize
the evil it does.
The _ specialist most often
called in when bigotry breaks
out in virulent forms is the
Civil Liberties Union. As with
most specialists, there is seldom
an overnight cure, but sometimes
a limitation of the growth and
often some repair of the dam-
age done. It would be a good
idea to send a donation to the
Civil Liberties Union today, at
503 Market St., San Francisco 5.
It looks like we'll be needing
their help out here before long.
G. R. WHITE, (c)
1877 San Ramon Ave.
Mountain View.
Fingerprinting of Psychologist
Editor: Psychologists applying
for certification under the new
state law have been asked to sub-
mit fingerprints with their appli-
eations. My experience suggests
that this requirement may not be
enforced.
My application form was ac-
companied by two official finger-
print cards, one of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation and one
of the California Bureau of Crim-
inal Identification and Investiga-
tion.
The dertificentation law contains
no reference to fingerprints. So
I completed my application and
returned it with the fingerprint
cards on which I wrote, "I do not
wish to be fingerprinted."
My application was acknowl-
edged by a form letter to which
was subscribed: `Fingerprint
cards are requested for proper
identification and to safeguard
licentiates."
In answer I wrote, "I am ade-
quately identified by my appli-
cation form. I prefer to forego
the safeguard and not to give my
fingerprints."
Three months late: I was noti-
fied that my application had been
approved.-s.C.D. -
ifutional
speech and religion is equally for
the lowly and insignificant as it
is for the prominent and impor-
tant person or group in our com-
munity." +
Holm declared that "public
parks are proper places in which
people may exercise their rights
of freedom of speech, assembly
and religion. These rights may
not be abrogated or unduly
abridged, but they are subject to
reasonable regulation. No agency
of the government may discrim-
inate in favor of one group or
against another."
The Northern California Divi-
sion of the American Jewish Con-
gress, in a letter signed by its
President, Morris Lowenthal, last
June also challenged the Com-
mission's regulations as an in-
fringement of freedom of speech.
Course On Civil
Liberties at
U.C. Extension
University of California Ex-
tension will offer an evening
course in "Political and Civil
Liberties in the United States"
at the San Francisco Extension
Center, 55 Laguna Street, begin-
ning February 17. The class will
meet on 15 consecutive Wednes-
day evenings at 7 p.m.
Ephraim Margolin, lecturer in
law at San Francisco Law School,
will conduct the course which
will deal with such Constitution-
al issues as censorship and ob-
cenity, military justice, the right
to a trial, the separation of
church and state, labor contro-
versy, racial discrimination, and
police powers.
"We expect to generate de-
bates in the classroom," Margo-
lin says, "and guest speakers
representing various interests
will be invited to attend. Case
histories will be used as illustra-
tions, with many examples from
the local courts."
A member of the S.F. Law
school faculty for the past three
years, Margolin is a graduate of
the Hebrew University, Jerusa-
lem, and served a year as clerk
to the Israeli Supreme Court. He
received his law degree at Yale
and was a fellow of the Univer-
sity of Pennsylvania Law School.
He is the author of many legal
articles, thes most recent of
which "Rights and Duties of
California Unions" appears in
the current issue of Hastings
Law Review.
Any adult may enroll for the
course for a fee of $25. Further
information and application for
enrollment may be obtained
from University Extension, Uni-
versity of California, Berkeley
4, California.
If the book be false in its facts,
disprove them; if false in its rea-
soning, refute it. But, for God's
sake, ee us freely hear both sides.
--Thomas Jefferson.
The first right of a citizen
Is the right
To be responsible.
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
Patron Membership ........ ee eo eS $100
Sustaining Membership' .2......... 50
Business and Professional Membership ........... ee 2S
Family. Membership... 054. ..32.50 52. ee: 12
Annual Membership... 3 eee 6
Junior Membership (under 21) .........)-..5...... 2
AGL News Subscription 2... $2.00
NAME, :
ADDRESS 322) 2 es i eee ia ee.
TELEPHONE NUMBER...........
oe AMT. ENCLOSED. .........
503 Market Street
San Francisco, 5
eM: