vol. 29, no. 1

American

Civil Liberties

Union

~ Volume XXIX -

Househo!

Right to Privacy

SAN FRANCISCO, JANUARY, 1964

"4 Section 503 of the San Francisco Housing Code provides

that authorized city employees "so far as may be necessary

for the performance of their duties" shall have the right to.

enter at reasonable times any building or premises in the

pal code. Section 507 of the Code

_ provides that any person who op-

poses the execution of any of the

city to perform any duty imposed upon them by the munici-_

provisions of the Code shall be

`guilty of a misdemeanor and up-

en conviction shall be punished

by a fine not exceeding $500 or

by imprisonment not exceeding

six months or by both fine and

imprisonment.

"Routine" Inspection

These Sections were brought

to the attention of the ACLU

when a San Francisco health in-

_ spector, making a "routine". in-

_ spection, desired..to enter. the

private apartment of a San Fran-

cisco resident. The resident in-

quired whether there was any

warrant authorizing the entry or

whether there had been any com-

plaint or probable cause that

some violation or

was taking place on the prem-

ises. The health inspector denied

that anything more than a rou-

' tine inspection was involved and

claimed that every apartment in

the City of San Francisco is so'

inspected once a year. The resi-

dent denied entry to the inspec-

tor and he now stands charged

with the crime of a misdemeanor

for violating Section 507 of the

Housing Code.

Board Authorizes Intervention

The ACLU's Board of Direc-

tors has agreed to defend the

resident in the criminal prosecu-

tion and challenges the constitu-

`tionality of the ordinance in-

yolved. It is the position of the

Telephone

Case Opinion

In response to the ACLU's pe-

tition for a rehearing, the Cali-

fornia Supreme Court modified

its opinion (described in the De-

cember News) prohibiting Edgar

J. Sokol to proceed with his dam-

age action pending in the supe-

rior court. The modification states

that Sokol may proceed with the

suit if he is successful in retro-

actively setting aside a 1948 de-

cision of the Public Utilities

Commission which holds that.no

telephone subscriber may sue for

damages even though his tele-

phone is removed without notice

or hearing on a false charge of

aiding and abetting an illegal

purpose.

To accomplish this purpose

Sokol has now filed a new com-

plaint before the Commission

`and after its decision will once

again be able to bring the ques-

tion before the Supreme Court if

the Commission decision is not

favorable. It had been the

ACLU's position, now rejected

on procedural grounds by the Su-

preme Court, that since the 1948

decision of the Commission was

unconstitutional it could be ig-

nored and the Commission need

not be asked to rescind it,

irregularity.

ACLU that a person's private

home or apartment is inviolate

from snooping or inspection by

government officials absent a

proper search warrant or prob-

able cause that some matter re-

quiring inspection actually exists

on the premises. The case is now

pending in San Francisco mu--

nicipal court but could con-

eeivably go to the United States

Supreme Court to obtain a final

decision on the privacy issue.

Two Similar Cases .

Two similar cases have reached

the United States Supreme

Court in recent years and in both

convictions of home owners were

affirmed over the dissent of four

members of the Court on the

basis that health inspectors and

the. like, since they are not spe-

cifically searching for evidence

of criminal violation, are not

governed by the same rules

which govern search by police-

men. In. the first of these cases,

Frank "vy. Maryland, the record

contained evidence that probable

cause of a health violation exist-

ed on the premises even though

the majority did not base its de- .

cision on this fact. The second

of these cases, Ohio v. Price, was

affirmed by an equally divided

court and the majority wrote no

opinion. There is some hope for

a reversal of these cases, since

the four dissenting members are

still on the court and there has

been a change in the balance of

the membership of the court.

Number 1

Foreign

Propaganda

- ACLU staff counsel Marshall

Krause would appreciate being

contacted by any person who re-

ceived a card from the Post

Office notifying him that "Com-

munist political propaganda" ad-

dressed to him was. being held

but who did not return the card

asking that the mail be delivered.

This information is needed to aid.

in the presentation of evidence

challenging the constitutionality

`of the Post Office labeling of for-

eign mail.

" @

U.C. Extension |

Offers Course on

ozo (R)

Political Rights

University of California Ex-

tension (Laguna and Market

Streets, San Francisco) will offer

a 3 unit, 18 weeks course begin-

ning early in February on Civil

and Political Rights in. the

United States. Teaching the

course will be Ephraim Margo-

lin, San Francisco attorney, who

pioneered the course four years

ago.

The course will begin with a

consideration of civil rights, and

particularly California law. After

that, the First Amendment free-

doms will be examined, including

separation of Church and State.

The course will conclude with a

study of criminal procedure.

While the course is geared

principally for persons. who do

not have a basic knowledge of

the subject, it will also be useful

to lawyers and other professional

persons, who will be given an

opportunity to specialize. :

Further information about the

course can be secured by calling

the University of California Ex-

tension office. Interested persons

should act promptly. Some schol-

arships are available.

Girlie Magazines: `Rotten

Apple" Case on Appeal

On December 4 Federal District Court Judge William T.

Sweigert entered his final order in the "rotten apple" phase

of the case of the Customs Service seizure of 12,000 imported

Girlie magazines. The judge's order reaffirmed his previous

position that there was no authority under the law to seize

and hold for forfeiture maga-

zines which the Government did

not claim were obscene merely

on the ground that they were

contained in packages also con-

taining magazines which the

Government alleges are obscene.

Thus, the historic "rotten apple"

theory was scuttled.

Notice Of Appeal

The United States has filed a

notice of appeal to the United

States Court of Appeals where

- it hopes to continue the fight,

but Judge Sweigert refused to

stay the execution of his order

requiring the non-obscene mag-

azines to be immediately turned

over to their claimant, Dr. Earl

Sass. A temporary stay of the

order, to expire December 24,

was issued by Chief Judge

Chambers of the Court of Ap-

peals pending a December 23rd

hearing on the Government's

motion for a stay of execution

during the pendency of its ap-

peal.

ACLU Opposes Stay

The ACLU will oppose the

granting of a stay on the basis

that there is small probability of

the Government winning its ap-

peal and to condone the con-

tinued seizure of material pro-

tected by the First Amendment

would be a violation of the Su-

preme Court's warning that there

must be prompt procedural due

process in cases even potentially

abridging free speech and press.

A jury trial has been requested

on the issue of whether the

Magazines the Government

claims to be obscene are in fact

obscene.

No Suit in

Doctor Case

The August issue of the News

earried a story that the ACLU

would intervene on behalf of Dr.

Ben Rosner whose application

for membership on the staff of

the San Mateo County General

Hospital was denied without a

statement of reasons or an oppor-

tunity for a hearing. Dr. Rosner

has now informed the ACLU that

he believes he can work out his

problems with the hospital

privately and therefore the AC- .

LU is withdrawing from his case.

`better

Fair Trial Questions

Convictio

The conviction of Alvin Maurice Parham for bank rob-

bery was recently affirmed by the California Supreme Court

and thereafter his court-appointed lawyer brought to the at-

tention of the ACLU several factors in the case which he

believed violated Parham's constitutional rights. The ACLU's

board of directors agreed to take

Parham's case to the United

State's Supreme Court and a -pe-

tition for certiorari will be filed

in January by. staff counsel Mar-

shall Krause. ae i

CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES

There ate two constitutional

issues involved in the case. The

first arises from the fact that

bank robbery is both a state and

a federal offense. Thus when the

crime involved in this case was

reported the eye witnesses were

interviewed by agents of the Fed-

eral Bureau of Investigation and

these agents took their written

statements. It was later decided

to proceed against the accused

robber under State Law and not

Federal law.

The statements

Grizzled

Veteran

Razor Victim

Edward Chay, Director of the

Log Cabin Ranch for the Youth

Guidance Center, is the latest

victim of Center Director Stry-.

eula's dislike for beards. He has

worn his beard for the past

several years and continued to

wear it through the hearing on

probation officer James Forst-

ner's right to wear a beard where

Forstner's right to do so was de-

fended by the ACLU. But what

the San Francisco Examiner de-

"-seribed as "one of the Bay area's:

known beards" was re-:

-moved last' month .and Chay

characterized t he reason as.

"pressure."

At Forstner's hearing Director

Strycula said that he did not ap-

ply the same order to Chay. as.

he did'to Forstner because Chay

is older and would not be identi-

fied with beatniks and further

his job does not require as much

public contact. Forstner's case is

now on appeal to the Civil Serv-

ice Commisison and will be

heard on the evening of January

9 unless plans are changed.

Palo Alto

Meeting Reset

For January 10

Mid-Peninsula's meeting on the

right to travel, originally sched-

uled for that catastrophic day

November 22, will be held Fri-

day, January 10 at the Palo Alto

High School, Embarcadero and

El Camino Real, 8:00 p.m.

The announced panel will lead

the discussion: author-lecturer

Milton Mayer; Luria Castell, one

of the students who visited Cuba

despite the ban; and Prof. Wil-

liam Baxter of the Stanford Law

School. The chapter is still hope-

ful the State Department will

send a representative to present

its point of view on travel rights.

If not, attorney Walt Hays will

explain the Department's po-

sition.

Milton Mayer, NEWS readers

may remember, has filed suit

against the Communist-oath re-

quired. in applying for a pass-

port. The ACLU has entered an

amicus curiae brief supporting

his case against any political

questions restricting the right to

travel.

The January 10

open to the public.

meeting is

this case).

eal force which

taken by the FBI agents. were

made available for inspection by

the prosecuting attorney but not "

by defense counsel:-At the trial

after the eye witnesses had testi-

fied and identified Parham as -

the robber defense counsel asked -

that he be allowed to examine

the previous statements of the

witnesses to ascertain whether

they had given inconsistent de-

scriptions or otherwise made in-

consistent statements.

STATEMENTS WITHHELD

The district attorney stated

that. he did not have possession

of the statements and the FBI

had refused to release them te-

him. The FBI agent who took the

statements was then subpoenaed

`and asked to bring the state--

ments to court. He did so but re-

fused to divulge their contents

relying on an order of former

Attorney General (now Mr. Jus-

tice) Clark that FBI files may

not be disclosed without permis-

sion of the Attorney General

(which was evidently refused in

:; The trial judge re-

fused to hold the witness in con-

tempt and Parham was found

guilty.

STATE COURT'S RULING

When the appeal was brought

.to the California Supreme Court

-that Court. held: that the states

were bound to obey the Attorney .

General's. order under the su-

. premacy clause of the U.S. Con-

stitution and that therefore the

State could not be charged with

failure to produce relevant. evi-

dence in the case and Parham

was not deprived of a. fair. trial

by any action of the State. The

Court did recognize that if Par-

ham had been prosecuted in Fed-

eral court he would have been

entitled to the statements under

the Jencks Act. Also if the state-

ments had been in the hands of

any State officer failure to pro-

duce them would have been an

error. But the imposition of a

different sovereign evidently

changes the right of a defendant

to discover relevant evidence.

SECOND POINT

The second point which will be

raised in Parham's petition is the

California Court's finding that

evidence used against him had

been obtained illegally by phys- |

"shocked the

conscience" within the meaning

of Rochin v. California, a famous

Supreme Court case where a con-

viction based on evidence ob-

tained by pumping the defend-

ant's stomach was held to violate

the Fourteenth Amendment. The

California Supreme Court did not

reverse Parham's conviction be-

cause it was "clear" that had the

evidence obtained in violation of

the Rochin rule not been be-

fore the jury the same result

would have been reached be-

eause of the "overwhelming" ad-

ditional evidence of guilt before

the jury.

REVERSAL SOUGHT

The U. S. Supreme Court will

be urged to overturn both of

these holdings and decide that

the Attorney General's order de-

prived Parham of his right to a

fair trial and that allowing a

conviction to stand when the

Rochin rule has been violated is

a deprivation of due process of

law. :

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION NEWS

Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

Second Class Mail privileges authorized at San Francisce, California

ERNEST BESIG ... Editor .

503 Market Street, San Francisco 5, California, EXbrook 2-4692

Subscription Rates - Two Dollars a Year

Twenty Cents Per Copy

Ralph B. Atkinson

Dr. Alfred Azevedo

Prof. Arthur K. Bierman

' Lee Borregard

Rev. Richard Byfield

Prof. James R. Caldwell

William K. Ceblentz

Richard DeLancie

Rabbi Alvin. I. Fine

Mrs. Zora Cheever Gross

Albert Haas, Jr.

Prof. Van D. Kennedy

Rey. Ford Lewis

Rev. F. Danford Lion

Honorary Treasurer:

Joseph S. Thompson

Honorary Board Member

Sara Bard Field

Mrs. Gladys Brown

- `Mrs. Paul Couture

John J. Eagan

Joseph Eichler

Morse Erskine

Dr. H. H. Fisher

Mrs. Margaret C. Hayes

Prof. Ernest Hilgard

Mrs. Paul Holmer

Mrs. Mary Hutchinson

Richard Johnston

Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California

CHAIRMAN: Howard A. Friedman

VICE-CHAIRMEN: Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn

Helen Salz

Rev. Harry 8B. Scholefield

SECRETARY-TREASURER: John M. Fowle

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Ernest Besig

Committee of Sponsors.

Prof. Seaton W. Manning

John R. May

Prof. Charles Muscatine

Clarence E. Rust

John Brisbin Rutherford

Mrs. Martin Steiner

Gregory 0x00A7. Stout

Stephen Thiermann

Richard J. Werthimer

Donald Vial

GENERAL COUNSEL

Wayne M. Collins

Reger Kent

Mrs, Ruth Kingman

Prof. Theodore Kreps

Prof. Carlo Lastrucci

Norman Lezin

Prof. John Henry Merryman

Rev. Robert W. Moon

Dr. Marvin J. Naman

Prof. Hubert Phillips

Prof. Wilson Recerd

Dr. Norman Reider

Prof. Wallace Stegner

Mrs. Theodosia Stewart

Rt. Rey. Sumner Walters

Ex-Mental Patient

Arrest for `Threat' Raises

Civil Liberties Issues

Robert B. Fennell, 29, was arrested by Berkeley police at

10 p.m. on December 19 because he failed to identify him-

self to the satisfaction of the officers. He gave his name and

stated his business but when the officers demanded documen-

tary identification he declined to produce it.

Fennell was charged with vio-

lating. subsection (e) of Sec. 647

of the Penal Code which declares

that a person is guilty of dis-

orderly conduct "Who loiters or

wanders upon the streets or from

place to place without apparent

reason or business and who re-

fuses to identify himself and to

account for his presence when

requested by any peace officer so

to do, if the surrounding circum-

stances are such as to indicate

to a reasonable man that the pub-

lic safety demands such identifi-

cation."

"Resisting"

Upon being arrested, Fennel

became limp and dropped to the

sidewalk. Because he failed to co-

operate with the police, he was

also charged with resisting ar-

rest.

The charges were dropped and

Fennell was turned over. to the

U. S. Secret Service when a

search of his hbillfold disclosed

four almost identical letters writ-

ten on note paper addressed to

two newspapers, the War Resist-

ers League and The White

House. The notes closed with the

following statement: "My im-

mediate goal: the assassination of

President Johnson. Yours in

peace and war, Robert Fennell,

secial psychiatrist."

Psychiatric Examination

Fennell was arraigned before

the U. S. Commissioner Cameron

Wolfe on a charge of having

made threats against the life of

the President. Bail was set at

$5,000 and Federal Judge Oliver

J. Carter signed an order for a

psychiatric examination of Fen-

nell while he is held in the San

Francisco county jail.

The scene at the arraignment

Was reminiscent of the Oswald

ease. The Commissioner's office

ACLU NEWS

JANUARY, 1964

Page 2

was over-run by camera men and

reporters. Mr. Wolfe stated that

the cameras were within a foot

of his face while he was trying to

do business and that it was diffi-

cult to hear. The ACLU will dis-

cuss this problem with the Pre-

siding Judge of the District Court

which makes rules for the con-

duct of the Commissioner's of-

fice.

Hearing January 3

Fennell is scheduled to have a

preliminary hearing on the

charges on January 3. Since he

did not communicate his "threat"

to anyone there would not seem

to be any violation of law. The

- ACLU is awaiting the results of

the psychiatric examination be-

fore taking action. Incidentally,

Fennell telephoned the ACLU

for assistanee after his arrest

and staff counsel Marshall

Krause visited him in the county

Jail.

Fennell's home is. in Sioux

City, Iowa. He says he has been

trying to re-enlist in the Air

Force. He spent four months in

the Cherokee Mental Health In-

stitute in Iewa in 1959 after he

allegedly threatened the life of

a girl friend.

Dedication

The ACLU office recently re-

ceived the following note from

Earl Dehart of North Highlands:

"I didn't join a social club as

some of your readers seem to

think but a group of dedicated

Americans who give their all to

protect our Bill of Rights. These

rights extend to all-from the

bearded minority to the rich and

influential. That spreads my $6

quite thin, but when I feel you

have strayed off the beaten path

of protecting the Bill of Rights,

that's when you will receive my

eancellation of membership. I

don't want parties and publicity

-Just dedication."

Berkeley -

= roup Asks

For Help

ACLU members in the Berke-

ley, Albany and Kensington

area are urged to assist the

chairman of three committees es-

tablished last month by the tem-

porary board of the proposed

Berkeley Chapter. -

John R. Walker, chairman of

the Nominating Committee, is

looking for the best possible per-

sons who are available to serve

on a permanent board. This is

most important. Please send him

your suggestions promptly at 9

Wilson Circle, Berkeley.

The chairman of the commit-

tee drafting By-Laws is Albert

M. Bendich, who also solicits the

suggestions and help of mem-

bers. He may be reached at TH 5-

4123.

Finally, a Program Committee,

headed by John Martin, is plan-

ning the next membership meet-

ing in March which, among other

things, will consider reports. of

the foregoing committees. If you

have any program suggestions

please call Martin at TH 1-6010.

At this writing, questionnaires

with respect to establishing a

Berkeley chapter are still being

returned to the office. 365 of the

1084 persons on the mailing list

have responded. About 150 per-

sons have thus far voted for a

chapter and agreed to participate

actively to some extent. In ad-

dition, 65 members voted for a

chapter but limited their partici-

pation to attendance at meet-

ings. 48 persons voted for a chap-

ter but are not even able to at-

tend meetings. 106 persons are

either opposed to a chapter, in-

different or failed to answer the

various questions. Under the

branch board's policies, at least

15% of the membership in the

area must be willing to actively

support a chapter in order for a

charter to be issued.

a @

Literal View of

e

Supreme Being

e

Not Required

. The Federal Court of Appeals,

Second Circuit, has just ruled in

the Jakobson case that in order

to be classified as a conscientious

objector under the Universal

Military Training and Service

Act a draftee does not have to

hold traditional views about the

existence of a "Supreme Being."

Under the law, in order to

qualify for the exemption the

draftee must establish that by

reason of religious training and

belief he is opposed to the bear-

ing of arms. Religious training

and belief is defined as "an indi-

vidual's belief in relation to a

Supreme Being involving duties

superior to those arising from

any human relations, but does

not include essentially political,

sociological, or philosophical

views or a merely personal moral

code."

. Jakobson's Views

The court pointed out that

Jakobson's religious views were

not easy to summarize. "He rec-

ognizes an ultimate cause or

ereator of all existence that he

terms `Godness.' For him God-

ness can be approached only

through psychic involvement in

the three-dimensional world. He

accepts a `horizontal' relatienship

to Godness that requires him to

bind himself to the qualities of

Godness that exist in every cre-

ation of mankind and throughout

the world." -

The Court of Appeals held that

the Draft Act did not intend the

term "Supreme Being" to be in-

terpreted literally or traditional-

ly. And it decided that Jakob-

son's religion met the statutory

test for exemption from the

draft.

Unanswered Question

Of course, this decision begs

the fundamental question wheth-

er Congress may grant an ex-

emption to a religious conscien-

Free Speech Case

Suspension

On December 18 the Personnel Board of the City of

Berkeley sustained the thirty-day suspension without pay

meted out to fireman Claude T. Belshaw after Belshaw had a

letter to the editor published in the Berkeley Gazette. fhe

Board's decision was by a 3 to 1 vote with member Harry

Polland dissenting. Belshaw was

represented, at the hearing be-

fore the Board by ACLU Staff

Counsel Marshall Krause and

volunteer attorney Albert M.

Bendich. |

ACLU Pasitiecs

It is the position of the Civil

Liberties Union that fireman

Belshaw cannot be disciplined

for expressing his opinion as a

citizen through a letter to the

editor of the Berkeley Gazette on

an issue of public controversy.

Belshaw's letter argued that the

Salary differential newly created

by the Berkeley City Council be-

tween members of the police de-

partment and members of the

fire department was unfair and

based upon an incorrect analysis

of the facts. Evidently, the most

damaging aspects of the letter

were "the Berkeley: Police De-

partment must be laughing up

their sleeves now that they have

fooled the City Manager, the

Personnel Department, and the

City Council." This phrase was

said by the majority of the Per-

sonnel Board to accuse the po-

lice department of unethical tac-

tics in gaining: the differential

pay raise.

City Manager's Position

City Manager John B. Phillips

also took issue with the aspect

of Belshaw's letter which stated

that the police department policy

of making younger men work on.

night shifts increased the turn-

ever in policemen. Belshaw then

stated, "I think the people would

feel a little safer if there were

more experienced men assigned

to night duty, as this is the time

when most of the serious crimes

occur." City Manager Phillips

testified that in his Opinion this

statement was "designed to

ereate unease in the people of

Berkeley and a doubt as to

whether they are receiving

proper protection at night."

Rule Violated

The three-man majority of the

Personnel Board found that the

Belshaw letter violated Rule 20

of the Personnel Rules and

Regulations, which reads as fol-

lows: "Employee conduct - em-

ployees are required at all times

to conduct themselves in such a

manner as to reflect no discredit

upon the City of Berkeley." The

majority also said that the letter

injured the good name of the fire

department and "amounted to

criticism of superrors." In an-

swering the argument of Bel-

shaw's counsel that Rule 20 was

so vague as to be meaningless,

the majority said, "If there is

lack of clarify an employee or .

any group of employees has

merely to request clarification

... if there was doubt on any

point, to request an interpreta-

tion." ae

Dissenting Opinion

Dissenting opinien of Board

member Polland makes these

_ points: "There isn't the slightest

evidence that the city has been

discredited. Nor that the public

has lost confidence in our city

tious objector while denying such

exemption to a person with `"po-

litical, sociological, or philoso-

phical views or a merely per-

sonal moral code." Is this per-

missible under the establish-

ment clause?

At this time it is not known

whether the Government will ap-

peal the decision to the U. S.

`Supreme Court.

government or any of its depart-

ments by reason of this letter.

Indeed, the city has produced no

evidence to support this allega-

tion. . . . If anything, it is the

Suspension, not the letter, which

is creating a storm in the com-

munity. ... If the city officials

were seriously concerned with

the effect on the community of

Belshaw's letter, they would have

replied publicly with facts and

information. However, there ap-

parently was more interest in

punishing Belshaw than in recti-

fying any false impressions he

might have created in the com-

munity. ... The suggestion that

this letter created interdepart-

mental friction or even low mo-

rale in the fire department is

sheer nonsense. The _ establish-

ment of the differential, not this

letter, caused animosities, anger

and keen disappointment in the

fire department. ... In my opin-

ion, the city's interpretation of

rules and their application to this

case deprive Belshaw of his right

to free speech protected by the.

federal and state constitutions. -

... Moreover as citizens they (pub-

lic employees) have the right to

express views on matters of pub-

lic concern."

Additional Charge Frivolous

On one point the Personnel

Board was unanimous., That. is,..-

that the additional charge

against Belshaw that he main-

tained a sloppy locker at an in-

spection was frivolous and did

not constitute a sound basis for

suspension or even a partial _

cause for disciplinary. action.

Only A Recommendation

Since the Board's decision is

technically only a recommenda-

tion to the City Manager, when

that officer approves the decision

the ACLU attorneys will be in a

position to take the case to su-

perior court where a petition for

a writ of mandamus will be filed

seeking to set aside and expunge

the suspension, reimburse Bel-

shaw for the salary he lost dur- (c)

ing this period, and compensate

him for the loss of use of this

money by the payment of inter-

est for its wrongful withholding.

The suit will allege that punish-

ment of a city employee for ex-

pressing honestly held views on -

an issue of public controversy is

inconsistent with guarantees of

free speech and press. =

Hearings

Scheduled

The following cases are sched-

uled to be argued during Jan-

uary by ACLU

Marshall Krause:

January 2, 10 A.M., U. S. Dis-

trict Court, Heilberg v. Fixa re _

mailing of "communist political

propaganda." =

January 9, 7:30 P.M, S. F.

Civil Service Commission, dis-

missal of James Forstner for

wearing beard.

January 14, 10 A. M., District

Court of Appeal, State Building,

S. F., Mack v. Bd. of Education, -

teaching credential revocation

for "false" Levering Act oath.

January 22, 10 A. M., District

Court of Appeal, State Building,

S. F., Mass v. Bd. of Education,

reinstatement and back pay fer

teacher dismissed after Un-

American Activities Committee

appearance.

staff counsel -

Following is the statement of

the ACLU national office, is-

sued last month, commenting on

the civil liberties aspects of the

Lee Harvey Oswald case.

The tragedy of John F. Ken-

nedy's assassination defies ade-

quate description. It was a brutal,

evil deed that may change the

course of history. The personal

tragedy involved-for members

of his family and even those who

did not know him-is of unmeas-

urable dimension. We all mourn

his death.

At the same time, it would be-

tray John F. Kennedy's own de-

votion to the traditions of free-

dom that are at the root of Amer-

ican life, if his death were per-

mitted to obscure the gross de-

partures from constitutional

standards which, in the opinion

of the ACLU, marked the events

subsequent to his assassination.

1. TRIAL BY TELEVISION,

RADIO AND THE PRESS.

Justice Felix Frankfurter,

while sitting on the Supreme

Court, said that "not the least

significant test of the quality of

a civilization is its treatment of

those charged with crime, par-

ticularly with offenses which

- arouse the passions of a com-

munity." One of the absolute es-

sentials of the civilized treatment

about which Justice Frankfurter

spoke is that an accused receive

a fair trial before an impartial

jury. It is our opinion that Lee

Harvey Oswald, had he _ lived,

would have been deprived of all

opportunity to receive a fair trial

by the conduct of the police and

prosecuting officials in Dallas,

under pressure from the public

and the news media.

Convicted In Newspapers

From the moment of his ar-

rest until his murder two days

later, Oswald was tried and con-

victed many times over in the

newspapers, on the radio, and

over television by the public

statements of the Dallas law en-

forcement officials. Time and

again high-ranking police and

prosecution officials stated their

complete satisfaction that Oswald

was the assassin. As their investi-

gation uncovered one piece of

evidence after another, the re-

sults were broadcast to the pub-

lie.

The accumulation of evidence

was damning. The Dallas officials

announced that the rifle was

traced to Oswald; that Oswald's (c)

handwriting matched the hand-

writing of the letter ordering the

rifle; that palm prints found near

the warehouse window were Os-

wald's; that his wife said a rifle

like the one used in the assass-

ination had been in the garage of

her living quarters but was now

missing; that a photograph of

Oswald holding the identical pis-

tol and rifle used in the police

officer's and President's slaying

was found; that a paraffin test

showed that he had recently fired |

a weapon; that Oswald had car-

ried a long package to work on

the day of the assassination; and

that he was in the building from

which the assassin's shots came.

All this evidence was described

by the Dallas officials as authen-

tic and incontestable proof that

Oswald was the President's assas-

sin. The cumulative effect of

these public pronouncements was

to impress indelibly on the pub-

lie's mind that Oswald was in-

deed the slayer.

Fair Trial Impossible

Under the best of circum-

stances, the enormity of. the

erime, which so inflamed the

community, would have made it

very difficult to find an unbiased

jury. But the vast publicity in

which the law enforcement of-

ficers participated made it sim-

ply impossible for Oswald to

have received a fair trial on any

of the charges. against him.

Where in Dallas, or anywhere

else in the State or Nation for

that matter, could there be found

twelve citizens who had _ not

formed a firm and fixed opinion

that he was guilty?

Supreme Court Precedent

Not six months ago, the Su-

preme Court of the United States

in Rideau v. Louisiana reversed a

murder conviction in Louisiana

`because a motion picture was

made of a twenty minute "inter-

view" between the defendant and

the sheriff in which the defend-

ant admitted committing the

crime. The film was broadcast (c)

three times over local television.

Pointing out that the "interview"

was carried out with the "active

cooperation and participation of

the local law enforcement offi-

cers," the Court said:

"For anyone who has ever

watched television the conclusion

cannot be avoided that this spec-

tacle, to the tens of thousands of

people who saw and heard it, in

a very real sense was Rideau's

trial-at which he pleaded guilty

to murder, Any subsequent court

proceedings in a community so

pervasively exposed to such a

spectacle could be but a hollow

formality."

Oswald's trial would likewise

have been nothing but a "hollow

formality."

Pressure On Police

We grant that the pressure on

the police was extraordinary and

the demands of the press enor-

mous. This indeed was the crime

of the century and the public's

interest was intense. But pre-

cisely because of these circum-

stances, it was the responsibility

of the Dallas officials to resist

this pressure to assure that Os:

wald would be fairly tried on the

monstrous charge against him.

It is an ironic note that, if Os-

wald had lived to stand trial and

were convicted, the courts would

very likely have reversed the

conviction because of the preju-

dicial pre-trial publicity. Thus,

the spectacular publicity in

which the officials took part

would likely have defeated them

in the end.

Vexing Problem

Although the primary respon-

sibility for assuring that an ac-

cused is not prejudiced by pre-

trial publicity necessarily falls

upon the law enforcement offi-

cials, television, radio and the

press are not themselves without

responsibility. Certainly the

rights of a free press (and the

right of the public to be in-

formed) compete with the right

of an accused to a fair trial. This

raises a vexing problem to

which there is no easy solution.

There is a legitimate interest-

most intense in this case-in ob-

taining information which satis-

fies the public concern for ener-

getic law enforcement. Failure to.

satisfy that interest might even

have contributed to public un-

rest. Moreover, it could be ar-

gued that public exposure of po-

lice conduct will deter improper

police practices Nonetheless, put-

ting these competing interests in

the balance, we believe that the

paramount interest rests with the

defendant's right to a fair trial

and that the other interests are

adequately served by the orderly

disclosure of evidence at trial.

Self. Restraint Needed

If anything useful can emerge

from the tragedy of the assassi-

nation, we hope that it would im-

press every local community-

including its news media, police

and prosecutors-with the im-

portance of self-restraint where

publicity in criminal matters is

concerned. The primary concern

must be focused on the rights of

the accused. The administration

of our criminal law, like the suc-

cessful functioning of our demo-

cratic society in general, depends -

in the last analysis on the intelli-

gent cooperation of all citizens.

Without an abiding concern for

the preservation of an impartial

atmosphere in criminal prosecu-

tion, the deterioration of fairness

jn criminal prosecutions is inev-

itable. Even when a crime of

such enormity as the President's

assassination occurs, law enforce-

ment officials must exercise self-

restraint. The news media must

themselves accept their share of

the responsibility to assure fair

trial by curbing their pressure

on the police and prosecuting

officials to publicize the case.

2. POLICE RESPONSIBILITY

FOR OSWALD'S KILLING.

In our view, Oswald's killing:

is directly related to the police

capitulation to the glare of pub-

licity. Having surrendered to the

public clamor during the preced-

ing two days, the police arranged

Oswald's transfer from the city

to the county jail to suit the con-

venience of the news media and

thereby exposed Oswald to the

very danger that took his life.

Minimum security consid-

erations would dictate that the

transfer of this prisoner at least

ought not, in effect, have taken

on the quality of a theatrical pro-

duction for the benefit of the

television cameras. These conces-

sions to the demand for publicity,

however, resulted in Oswald's be-

ing deprived not only of his day

in court, but of his life as well.

Police Responsibility

The police have the respon-

sibility of assuring the safety of

their prisoners. Due process re-

quires not only that the accused

have a fair trial, but it also re-

quires, of necessity, that no mat-

ter how heinous the charge

against him, he may not be de-

nied his day in court because of

gross negligence by the police

which results in his death or in-

jury before trial.

3. THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL

AND THE INTERROGATION.

The circumstances surround-

ing Oswald's detention are still

ambiguous. We lack answers to

such fundamental questions as:

How much time elapsed before

he was advised of his right to

counsel? How much time elapsed

before he was permitted access

to a telephone to call his family

and an attorney? During what

periods and for how long was

Oswald interrogated? W hat

methods of interrogation were

used? Was he advised of his right

to remain silent?

Right To Consult Counsel

Oswald should have had the

right to consult counsel from the

moment of his arrest if he so de-

sired. Whether or not he wished

immediately to avail himself of

that right is uncertain, for the

reports go both ways. At one

point on Friday night, when Os-

wald was passed before the tele-

vision cameras, he said he had

been denied "legal representa-

tion." On the next day, however,

the President of the Dallas Bar

Association reported: over tele-

vision, just after a conference

with Oswald, that he had offered

the prisoner the services of the

Association in arranging for

counsel. He said that Oswald

had declined for the time being,

for he preferred John Abt, a New

York attorney, or if he were not

available, a lawyer connected

with the ACLU. Until further in-

formation is disclosed, no pur-

pose would be served by specu-

lation on this issue.

ACLU Function

(The ACLU ordinarily does

not provide counsel for individ-

uals merely because they are

charged with crimes. It is not a

legal aid organization providing

counsel for indigents accused or

for those who think they want to

be represented by ACLU volun-

teer lawyers. That is not its func-

tion. It intervenes in cases when

`the constitutional rights of an

accused are violated, but the ex-

tent of its intervention depends

on the facts of the individual

ease, Ordinarily where there is a

factual controversy as to whether

the accused did or did not com-

mit a crime, such as murder, the

ACLU does not provide counsel

to represent him at the trial. In

such cases the Union usually

files a friend of the court brief

on the constitutional points

either at the trial or appellate

level. Because the crime with

which Oswald was charged was

of such ugly proportions, he

might have had difficulty in ob-

taining counsel. That problem

seems not to have been present,

however, because the Dallas Bar

Association, consistent with the

highest standards of professional

responsibility, offered its serv-

ices in supplying counsel to Os-

wald. If it had become impos-

sible for Oswald to obtain coun-

sel, the ACLU because of its con-

cern that all persons are en-

titled to legal defense, no matter

how unpopular their case, would

have helped to secure the inde-

pendent services of a lawyer.)

Declined To Request Counsel

(The ACLU did exhibit an or-

ganizational interest during the

period of time when Oswald was

being interrogated because of his

public complaint that he was be-

ing denied the opportunity to

consult counsel. Three ACLU

jawyers and the President of the

Dallas Civil Liberties Union did

go to the city jail late Friday

night but were informed by po-

lice officers and the Justice of

the Peace before whom Oswald

had been first arraigned that Os-

wald had been advised of his

right to counsel and that he had

declined to request counsel.

Since the attorneys had not been

retained by either Oswald or his

family, they had no right to see

the prisoner nor to give him

legal advice.) :

Oswald's Interrogation

The related question of Os-

wald's interrogation is difficult

to assess with the iimited in-

formation at our disposal. The

ACLU has never said that the

police are forbidden to interro-

gate a person taken into custody.

We have said that any interro-

gation which takes place while

a person is under arrest and in

the police station must be sur-

rounded by the strictest safe-

guards. Thus, before such ques-

tioning begins, we believe the

prisoner should be taken before

a magistrate and explicitly ad-

vised of his right to counsel and

that he is under no compulsion

to answer. We also believe that

he should have the indefeasible

right to consult with an attorney

before any questions are put to

him and. during interrogation.

The right to counsel is not satis-

fied merely by advising the ac-

cused of the right. He must be

permitted to call an attorney, his

family, or a friend in order to

secure the services of an attor-

ney. If he cannot afford to hire

counsel, a lawyer

promptly appointed to represent

him. In this case, the advice of

an attorney may well have re-

sulted in the reduction of adverse

publicity. In addition, an attor-

ney might have objected to Os-

wald's public transfer and thus

might have averted his murder.

Right To Keep Silent

Tf the right to keep silent or to

consult an attorney is not made

clear to the suspect, it is our view

that any admissions or confes-

sions should be inadmissible

against the accused at trial. More

than that, any set of circum-

stances-such as the duration

and intensity of the questioning

-which results in the involun-

tary extraction of incriminating

statements from a prisoner ren-

ders those statements inadmis-

sible.

In Oswald's case, it appears

that the police interrogation did.

`no part in generating or

should be

not yield a confession. It is re-

ported that Oswald continually

asserted his innocence. Under

those circumstances, the nature.

of his interrogation did not yield

an unconstitutional confession,

but the question whether the in-

terrogation-given all. the at-

tendant circumstances-violated

any constitutional standards

must nonetheless be further ex-

plored.

4. THE RUBY CASE.

The disaster of Oswald's mur-

der seems to have had its effect

on the handling of the Jack Ruby

case. Immediately after the

shooting, Ruby was taken out of

the sight of the reporters and,

as far as we know, was by and

large kept from the news media

thereafter. Official] statements

about Ruby to the press were ap-

parently kept to a minimum.

There was considerable publicity

given to Ruby and his back-

ground, but the bulk of this in-

formation seems to have come

from private sources and his at-

torney.

Conflicting Rumors

The greatest danger to Ruby's

opportunity for a fair trial stems

from conflicting rumors that he

was part of a conspiracy. The

rumors say that he was both in

- league with Oswald and in league

with Oswald's enemies. What-

ever the truth, if any, about these

rumors, the officials must have

per-

petuating them, He is charged

with murder and should be tried

for murder. Any official state-

ment connecting him-however

tenuously-with a plot, will de-

feat his right to be tried by an

unbiased jury.

5. THE PRESIDENTIAL COM-

-MISSION.

We wholeheartedly support

the appointment of a Commission

by President Johnson to investi-

gate the assassination of Presi-

`dent Kennedy. The Commission

undoubtedly will concentrate on

the facts of the assassination and

all the relevant information that

bears unon it. In addition, the

public interest would be served

if the Commission were to make ..

a thorough examination of the

treatment accorded Oswald, in-

cluding his right to counsel, the

nature of his interrogation, his

physical security while under ar-

rest, and the effect of pre-trial

publicity on Oswald's right to a

fair trial.

Normally, the ACLU would op-

pose any judicial or quasi-ju-

dicial inquiry into the facts of

a erime charged against a man

now dead. In the extraordinary

circumstances of a presidential

assassination, however, nothing ~

is normal. .

Accused Not Present

To hold an inguiry into the

facts of the assassination in the

absence of the

the major objection that he is

unable to provide his counsel

with information bearing on his

defense and the evidence against

him. Evidence damaging on its

face has, in other cases, been ex-

plained satisfactorily to jurors.

No matter how scrupulously fair

an inquiry now might be, there

can be no substitute for the

presence of the accused. 2

On the other hand, the ambi-

guities of the present state of

facts about the crime and the

major suspect ought to be re-

solved if possible. It would be

dangerous, we think, to allow

any lingering uncertainty over' -

who killed the President.

Public Interest

On balance, we think a com-

plete and impartial presentation

of all the evidence will best serve

the public interest. As' matters

-Continued on Page 4

ACLU NEWS

JANUARY, 1964 Page 3

individual -

- charged with the crime presents

iCiIAL REP

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

For Year Ended October 31, 1963

December 10, 1963

Board of Directors

American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California

503 Market Street

San Francisco 94103

AUDIT OF BOOKS AND RECORDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR

ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1963

. We have examined the balance sheet of the American Civil Liberties Union

"ef Northern California as of October 31, 1963, and the related statement of

income and. expense. for the year then ended. Our examination was made in

' accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, and accordingly in-

cluded such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedure

as we considered necessary in the circumstances. 2S eS

The records are maintained on a -cash basis; and accordingly reflect no

accrual of liabilities. Our examination indicated no material liabilities outstand-

ing. Amounts payable for payroll: taxes and minor items were subsequently

promptly paid and. did not differ in any significant amount from those payable

at the close of the previous year. ee

-In our opinion. the accompanying balance sheet and statement of income .

and expense, subject to adjustment for the difference between book and market

value of treasury bonds, present fairly the financial position of the American

Civil Liberties Union of Northern California at October 31, 1963, and the results

ef the year then ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting prin-

ciples. - Horwath - Horwath, Certified Public Accountants, 821 Market St.,

San Francisco 3, Calif, i

Balance Sheet

_ AS AT OCTOBER 31, 1963

Challenge Use

Of Lie Test in

ANC Pregram

The American Civil Liberties

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_1961.batch ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1962.batch ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1963.batch ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1964.batch 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 A $500 bond is posted as bail in each of three different cases,

ASSETS

CURRENT ASSETS:

Cash |

Wells Fargo Bank

General account 0... 5 ...$ 4,502.00

Sayings account 20 12,789.00

San Francisco Federal Savings and Loan Assn........... 10,357.00

Security Sayings and Loan Association 10,000.00

Home Mutual Savings and. Loan Association 9,124.00

Argonaut Savings and Loan Association .._........ 2,000.00

Petty cash@ funds.) (ee ee 10.00

United States Treasury Bonds (at cost)* 4,500.00

TOVAUCEASSET Ses ets Soe ee es ee $53,282.00

: LIABILITIES AND NET WORTH

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_1961.batch ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1962.batch ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1963.batch ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1964.batch 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 CURRENT LIABILITY i

Employees' payroll taxes withheld Se ee eee $ 671.00

Provision for 1963 Triannual report 1,800.00

' Provision for 1964 Biennial Conference |. EI ee 200.00

Obligated funds (see Schedule) 20.0000. REET Shsumire eae ce 15,838.00

NET WORTH: :

`Balance at October 31, 1962.0: $31,152.00.

Excess income over expenditures-

Year ended October 31, 1963 3,621.00

Net worth as at October 31, 1963 34,773.00:

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND NET WORTH $53,282.00,

Statement on Oswald Case

Continued from Page 3-

now stand, Oswald has been pub-

licly condemned by the officials

charged with his prosecution. If

he and he alone did the act it is

best that this be demonstrated

as conclusively as is now possible

so that whatever doubts there are

may be settled. Likewise, if this

is not so, that too must be estab-

lished so that the search for the

killer may be continued.

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_1961.batch ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1962.batch ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1963.batch ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1964.batch 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 % 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_1961.batch ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1962.batch ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1963.batch ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1964.batch 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

Great care must, be taken that

these events do not lead to a po-

litical witch-hunt either of the

left or right. The assassination

should not be made an excuse

for impairing any of our political

freedoms.

Atmosphere Of Reason

There may be, in the days and

months ahead, in the emotion

discharged by the assassination, a

demand for restrictive action, in-

cluding legislation, against cer-

tain political organizations and

individuals - restrictions which

eould do great harm to such fun-

damental civil liberties as free-

dom of speech, press and associa-

tion. Fortunately, there seems

up to this point to have been a

mature and sober reaction, in

contrast to earlier periods of na-

tional distress. We are confi-

dent that this atmosphere of

reason will contribute to the con-

ACLU NEWS

JANUARY, 1964

Page 4

tinuing strength of our free so-

ciety.

President Kennedy would have

been the first to decry any as-

sault on vital American free-

doms, for he clearly understood

the need for exercise of such

freedom to keep our country a

thriving, healthy democracy. As

he said in a message to the

ACLU in 1962:

"This country has passed

through many periods of national:

peril. Now we are again in a

period when risks are great, our

burdens heavy, and our problems

incapable of swift or easy so-

lution,

"Tt is in times such as these

that many men, weak in courage

and frail in nerve, develop the

tendency to turn suspiciously on -

their neighbors and leaders, Un-

able to face up to the dangers

from without, they become con-

vinced that the real danger is

- from within. Our hard-won free-

doms are frequently abandoned

in an effort to escape the bur-

dens of responsible citizenship.

At this moment in our history,

the energies of all patriotic

Americans must be focused pri-

marily on our vital central prob-

lems.

"If we are to give the leader-

ship the world requires of us,

we must rededicate ourselves to

the great principles of our con-

stitution - the very principles

which distinguish us from our

adversaries in the world,"

` Justice Department's

`Statement of income andExpense vrion ae eet

: curiae brief in the District Coar

Geo YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1963 of Appeal challenging the do

Memberships 200 6 1g 604 00 cision of the Contra Costa Coun-

Special funds appeals $4,638.00 ty Superior Court that a person

Less portions directed eligible for aid to needy children

to obligated funds 0... = 408. = may be denied aid because of her

ees Be : refusal to obey the order of the

eee oe ee os coos district attorney that she take a

Ce ee lie detector test, The district at-

Publication sales, notary fees and miscellaneous ____ -- 733.00 HAS ears the ieee these

Le cipient had previously given him

TSTAR INCOME pr $61,449.00 concerning the father' of her

bing Wetboly ou Ue osce se ee Star: appellant in the cate ie the

` : eee eee: ate Board of Socia elfare

- i ee = Peas represented by the Attorney Gen-

Cl 2 eee Bs eS oe 5 077.60 eral, which had decided that the

, OS ee 037. woman was eligible for the aid

Teche pO at reece 1,740.00 under the needy children pro-

pe sentence 1,126.00 gram. The ACLU's brief will be

etirement ______. portencosceseenncesenenseeete eeccescsicceee | 741.00 prepared with the aid of volun--

Travel and transportation: S20 Ad _ $28.00 teer. attorney. George Duke and

Provision for 1963 Triannual report eee 600.00 will argue that the use of the un-

Employee hospitalization and insurance... =~ 459.00 reliable polygraph as a require-

Oe 340.00 ment for aid recipients is an ar-

Publications... eet cetecreeeeeeeeesnscceesesaee sesetecnenessceceecsoe 483.00 bitrary discrimination as com-

Furniture and equipment se roaeesenmanctesbesteceeeeenety 242.00 pared with other recipients of .

Annual meeting expense (net) ioc ce 145.00 government benefits and implies

Conferences expenses ee Ee ' 252.00 an assumption of disbelief inthe

Membership campaign expenses cos 119.00 oral and written statements

Miscellaneolpy 2 135.00 which the recipient had previous-

ee ly made under oath concerning -

TOTAL: EXPENDITURES 230 Re ee ee 57,828.00 her eligibility for benefits. There

is also a problem of self-incrim-

EXCESS OF INCOME OVER EXPENDITURES _. micheen SE $ 3,621.00 ination in the lie detector tests

although the privilege was not:

"claimed" in this case.

Transactions in Obligated Funds .

DEFENSE FUNDS:

General Defense fund eG eee

John W: Mass vs. San Francisco

School Board

Hartman and H.U.A.C.

Heilberg case __ ae

Btaceto case. 2

Burks case) 6 oh ee

SQOKOl Case. cr ee ee

Belshaw: case eee

Eorstner case (eee

TOTAL DEFENSE FUNDS

OTHER FUNDS:

Beth Livermore Memorial Fund __

Lawrence Sears Memorial Fund ____

Boyd Memorial Libraty Fund

"Operation Correction'

Sacramento Fund Gre

TOTAL OTHER FUNDS ow.

TOTAL OBLIGATED FUNDS

Free Speech Case

Reversed for

Lack of Evidence

The U. S. Supreme Court last

month set aside the contempt of

court conviction of two racists,

leaders of the National States

Right Party. The case was car-

ried through the courts by the

' ACLU and received `the support

of the NAACP and the Justice

Department. In fact, it was the

proposal,

that the convictions be reversed

for lack of evidence, which was

adopted by the unanimous court.

The two men had allegedly

held a meeting and distributed

leaflets in defiance of an Ala-

bama court order not to hold a

Fairfield rally protesting de-

segregation. They were arrested

at the time and place of the rally

for telling people it had been

moved to another community and

for distributing copies of their

newspaper.

The Civil Liberties Union con:

Lundquist' vs)" MEBA*.

Postal Workers case

Teachers Loyalty Oath cases Spas

wWack-Owenscasa

Shiavet (case 8 ee ee

Goldberger case

Custom Services censorship cases __....

TELEPHONE NUMBER.

Receipts

~ Balance Special, Expen- Balance

10-31-62 Appeal Other ditures Transfers 10-31-63 (c)

o 495.00

cae $9,150.00 $4,418.00 $ 6.00 $ 248.00 - ($2,243.00} $11,083.00

a 925.00 45.00 869.00 101.00

ae (1,059.00) : 522.00 1,581.00 . -

Jae (117.00) a : 117.00 _. paca A

- 364.00 55.00 ~ 14.00 405.00

oe 72.00 11.00 398.00 (315.00)

ae (2,097.00) - 1,817.00 125.00 405.00. -

uu. {190.00} 62.00 : 12.00 140.00 - ;,

th 144.00 a 95.00 49.00

Le 193.00 800.00 30.00 963.00,

aS Cpe 0 35.00 (35.00)

ae 15.00 15.00

oe ees 329.00 109.00 220.00

aes "23.00: 23.00

cee 275.00 (275.00)

oe 14,00 (14.00)

Ss $7,385.00 4,629.00 2,952.00 2,746.00 -0- 12,220.00

- $ 166.00 106.00 272.00

_..- 495.00 a oe "495.00 |

3 260.00 3.00 _ 338.00 (69.00) :

a 1,088.00 or 1,395.00 - 563.00 1,920.00 (c)

2g 1,000.00 = 1,000.00: -

a $2,009.00 9.00: 2,501.00 901.00 3,618.00

ie $9,394.00 $4,638.00: $5,453.00 $3,647.00 $15,838.00

the test of immediate disobe. |

dience instead of having to be ap- |

pealed through the courts.

tended that in a case involving

free speech and assembly, a

court order should be subject to

eee

The first right of a citizen

Is the right

To be responsible,

JOIN TODAY.

OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA

Patron Membership. Ses Shes ce ees ess tees eee OB OU:

Sustaining. Membership ........ 7... ce 0x00A70

Business and Professional Membership .........0+cente.. 25.

Family Membership =... : oo... 1? :

Associate Membership Rr Se

Annual Membership. 0.2... 6

Junior Membership (under.21) ...0....... .+550.--. 2

ACLU News Subscription: ....2.54 sees +s. ec54-. 9200.

NAME

COPHHHRHAAH ETH HEOHE KLE HOO HEROS HTOEE AH OREO OR EH SHOU EHCSO

ADDRESS sist eee cere ese cesces nes serecerevesscrssceeseesssees

AMT. ENCLOSED.......0008

503 Market Street

San Francisco, 0x00A7