vol. 30, no. 5
Primary tabs
American
Civil Liberties
Union
Volume XXX
SAN FRANCISCO, MAY, 1965
Army and Private Business
curity Cases
Favorable decisions were handed down in three security
cases last month. Two of the cases involved Army veterans
while the third case involved the application of the Federal
industrial employment security program to a private em-
ployee. All three cases were resolved only after lengthy
' hearings and, in one instance,
the filing of a suit.
Inactive Reservist
The first case started in March
of 1964 at which time security
charges were filed by the Army
against an inactive reservist who
had received an honorable sepa-
ration after two years of active
duty in the Army which ended in
November 1960. He was sched-
uled to receive a final discharge
from the Army in November,
1964, after four years of service
in the inactive reserves.
_ Instead, he received security
charges which alleged that 1.
"Between 5 January 1961 and 27
September 1962, you maintained
a close continuing and sympa-
thetic association with the Young
Socialist Alliance"; and, 2. That
"On 12 June 1962 you became an
active member of the Socialist
Workers
numerous party meetings from
that date to 24 September 1963."
Secret File
At the hearing, in which he
was represented by Ernest Be-
sig, the Army relied upon a
secret file that was introduced
into evidence over the objections
of counsel, who was not allowed
to examine it. At the outset the
panel of three officers admitted .
that they had reveiwed the
secret file in preparation for the
hearing. A motion to disqualify
the panel was denied. There-
after, the board recommended
that the reservist be discharged
on security grounds. The ACLU
filed an appeal arguing, among
other things, that the Army had
lost jurisdiction of the case be-
cause the man's legal discharge
date had passed. On March 31,
1965, he suddenly received an
Honorable Discharge dated No-
vember 12, 1964.
Second Case
The second case involves a
senior engineering student at the
University of California who had
belonged to the Chinese Ameri-
`ean Youth Club. The Immigra-
tion Service apparently believes
that the group, which is now dis-
banded, is not politically pure
and consequently has harassed
its members. .-
In this particular case, nine
days before his normal discharge
date from the Army about two
years ago, the draftee was dis-
Party and attended
charged and handed a General
Discharge under honorable con-
ditions. Such a discharge lacks
the dignity of an Honorable Dis-
charge. The excuse for this ac-
tion was that the man had en-
tered the country. fraudulently.
On the other hand, his service in
the Army was excellent. It can
only be assumed that the dis-
charge was at the instigation of
the Immigration Service.
Suit Filed:
When the problem got beyond
`the local level, attorney Mark A.
Weiss of the Washington, D.C.,
Area, branch of the ACLU
handled the appeal. After ad-
ministrative relief was exhaust-
-Continued on Page 4
Contra Costa
Commitment
Challenged
Another facet of the problem
of alcoholism is raised. by an
ACLU suit filed last month, with
the cooperation of volunteer at-
torney Ruth Rathke. This suit
`challenges the right of Contra
Costa authorities to detain a per-
son who is civilly committed as
an alcoholic in a jail facility for
the confinement of persons who
have been convicted of. criminal
offenses. Contra Costa resident
Archie Halverson was not con-
victed of a crime, but was found
in need of treatment for the
disease of alcoholism. However,
instead of. providing treatment
for Halverson, the county put
him in the jail farm where he is
treated exactly the same as all
other prisoners, most of whom
have been convicted of crimes.
Besides objecting to the place
of his confinement, ACLU attor-
neys also point out that Halver-
son receives no medical treat-
ment whatsoever at the jail farm.
In a petition for a writ of habeas
corpus, which will be heard in
the Superior Court in May,
ACLU attorneys state that if the
government wishes to confine a
`person for a medical problem it
has the obligation to give that
person treatment for the medical
problem or else the confinement
exceeds the power of the govern-
ment and results in cruel and un-
usual punishment.
Belmont-Redwood City-San Carlos
Area Meeting, May 14 |
A local committee organized by Messrs. Charles
Ewing, John Eige and Leo Nelson has scheduled a meet- |
ing for the benefit of current and prospective members
in Belmont, Redwood City and San Carlos. Ernest Besig,
Executive Director of ACLUNC will speak on "Your
Privacy and the Bill of Rights." The meeting will begin
at 7:30 in the evening and will take place im the audi-
torium of the John F. Kennedy School, Goodwin and
Connecticut Avenue, Redwood City, on Friday, May 14.
Number 5
jembership
Stands Aft
Record 6275
As we go to press, the paid-up
membership of the ACLU of
Northern California has reached
a record high of 6275 or 255 be-
yond the previous record of
6020 attained last October 31.
At this same time last year,
there were only 5469 paid-up
members, so there has been an
increase of 806 over a year ago.
Also, there are 182 separate
subscribers to the "News" com-
pared with 162 a year ago.
The membership growth
comes about largely in response
to various mailings made by the
office in the current member-
ship drive with names supplied
by our members, as well as yeo-
man work in the non-chapter
areas. At this point, none of the
eight chapters have started on
their follow-up campaigns.
Credit for the membership
growth and the successful drive
goes to Mrs. Pamela Ford, our
part-time able Membership Di-
rector, the members who sup-
plied the names of more than
three thousand "prospects," and
the numerous volunteers in the
office and in the non-chapter
areas who have put in a fantas-
tic amount of time. The chances
are good that before the end of
the fiscal year on October 31,
the membership will stand at
well over 6500.
Girlie Magazines
The case of United States vs. 18 Packages of Magazines
came to a sudden hait last month when the United States an-
nounced that it was dismissing the appeal which it had filed
to the United States Supreme Court from an adverse decision
of Federal District Judge Stanley Weigel. Judge Weigel
had ruled that the Government
must turn over to importer Dr.
Earl Sass about 2,000 "girlie"
magazines which had been seized
on the ground that they were
obscene because the statute
under which they were seized
(19 U.S.C. 1305) did not provide
for a hearing before the seizure.
Not only did the Government
abandon its appeal and agree to
turn over the magazines to Dr.
Sass, but the United States At-
torney wrote to ACLU staff
counsel Marshall Krause indicat-
ing that the Collector of Customs
is being advised to release all
other books and magazines which
~ he may be holding on grounds of
obscenity. 5
Rotten Apple Theory
In earlier proceedings Federal
Judge William T. Sweigert had
released 10,000 of the magazines
to Dr. Sass on the basis that the
Government had not charged
that they were obscene and
could not hold the magazines
merely because they were found
in packages containing other
magazines which the Govern-
ment did allege were obscene.
This decision resulted in the end
of the "rotten apple" theory in
the administraton of the censor-
State Supreme Court Will
Hear ACLU Prop. 14 Case
As of this writing, the California Supreme Court has of-
ficially accepted jurisdiction in two cases objecting to the ap-
plication of Proposition 14 (now Article I, Section 26 of the
`California Constitution) on the basis that it is invalid under
the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitu-
tion. It may be recalled that'
Proposition 14 was an initiative
measure adopted by a vote of
2-1 forbidding the State govern-
ment and governmental subdivi-
sions from denying the "right"
of any person to sell or rent real
property to "such person or per-
sons as he in his absolute discre-
tion chooses." The effect of this
initiative amendment was to
nullify existing anti-discrimina-
tion in housing laws and to pre-
vent the State in the future from
passing further anti-discrimina-
ton in housing laws, without an
additional constitutional amend-
ment.
ACLU Case
The two cases which the Su-
preme Court has indicated it will
hear are Thomas vs. Goulis and
Grogan v. Meyer. Both of these
cases involve alleged discrimina-
tion in the renting of an apart-
ment to a Negro plaintiff. The
alleged acts of discrimination oc-
curred before the adoption of
Proposition 14. The attorney for
the plaintiff in Grogan vs. Meyer
is ACLU staff counsel Marshall
W. Krause and the plaintiff in
the Thomas case is represented
by private counsel. Both of these
cases started out in the San
Francisco Municipal Court where
a panel of three judges granted
a defense motion to dismiss on
the basis that Proposition 14 had
nullified the causes of action.
The three-judge panel said that
they had grave doubts about the
validity of Proposition 14, but
wished the question to be passed
upon by higher courts. An ap-
peal was taken but transfer to
the District Court of Appeal was
refused. Thereupon the appeals
were decided by the Appellate
Department of the Superior
Court, affirming the judgment of
the Municipal Court. Then the
District Court of Appeal did take
jurisdiction and transferred the
-eases to itself. On the day after
the cases were transferred to the
District Court of Appeal the Cali-
fornia Supreme Court, on its own
initiative, ordered that the cases
be transferred to its court, where
they are now pending.
Fresno Case
Last month another important
case was filed regarding the
validity of Proposition 14. This
is a direct action filed in the
Supreme Court of California ask-
ing for a Writ of Mandate on
behalf of a Fresno redevelop-
ment agency whose chairman re-
fuses to sign a nondiscriminatory
pledge in the contract (as re-
quired by federal law) because
he feels that he cannot guarantee
nondiscrimination because of the
existence of Proposition 14. The
Supreme Court will most likely
keep this case because it pro-
vides a convenient vehicle for
the testing of the reach and
validity of Proposition 14. Other
eases will be brought to the Cali-
fornia Supreme Court on appeal
from superior courts in Sacra-
mento and Los Angeles. All in-
dications are that the California
Supreme Court will decide the
significant question of the valid-
ity of Proposition 14 sometime in
the late summer after all pend-
ing cases have been argued.
ship provisions of the Cus`oms'
laws.
Up in the Air
The dismissal of the Govern-
ment's appeal in the remaining
portion of the case leaves the
matter of continuing enforce-
ment of obscenity laws by the
Federal government very much
up in the air. The statute allow-
ing the Post Office to declare
obscene items "non-mailable" is
of doubtful validity after the de-
cison of the United States Su-
preme Court in Manual Enter-
prises vs. Day. In that case, some
of the Justices were of the opin-
ion that the statute was unconsti-
- tutional, while others did not
reach the constitutional issue but
merely decided that Congress
had never authorized the Post
Office to seize allegedly obscene
material. Now the importation
section, Section 1305, will prob-
ably not be enforced because of
Judge Weigel's decision that it is
unconstitutional since it does not
provide for a due process hear-
ing to protect First, Fourth and
Fifth Amendment rights. How-
ever, the Government's dismissal
of the appeal prevents a defini-
tive ruling on this question since
Judge Weigel's decision is tech-
nically effective only in the
Northern District of. California.
Remaining Federal Law
This leaves on the books only
the Federal statutes punishing
as a crime the mailing of obscene
articles. It is likely that the Post
Office and the Customs Bureau'
will go to Congress to attempt
to get new legislation so that
they can continue their past
practice of censorship by ad-
ministrative action. The Ameri-
can Civil Liberties Union has
long held to the position that the
people of the United States
should decide for themselves.
what they are to read, and do
not need Government protection _
from reading material. Until
recent years, Section 1305 had
damaging effects on our culture
since it prevented the importa-
tion of books such as Henry Mil-
ler's "Tropic of Cancer" and
"Tropic of Capricorn," many of
the works of Jean Genet, and
other authors of note. However,
since these books have been pub-
lished in the United States, it
has been easier to get them im-
ported.
Elect Atkinson
Monterey
College Trustee
Ralph B. Atkinson, a member
of the ACLU board of directors
during the past few years, was
elected to the Monterey Penin-
sula College Board of Trustees
last month. He resides at Bixby
Landing, Coast Route, Monterey.
There were five candidates for
two positions and Atkinson led
all of the candidates with 4088
votes. He will serve a four-year
term,
_ Atkinson is a licensed chemical
engineer. He holds degress from
M.I.T. and Cal Tech. He is the
founder of Atkinson Laboratory,
Inc., and President of Ferroprint
Corporation. He presently has a
Research Laboratory in Mon-
terey.
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION NEWS
Published by the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California
Second Class Mail priviteges authorized at San Francisco, California
ERNEST BESIG ... Editor
503 Market Street, San Francisco 5, California, EXbrook 2-4692
Subscription Rates - Two Dollars a Year
z Twenty Cents Per Copy
Ralph B. Atkinson
Dr. Alfred Azevedo
Leo Borregard
Rey. Richard Byfield
Richard DeLancie
~ Rabbi Alvin I. Fine
Mrs. Zora Cheever Gross
Atbert Haas, Jr.
Howard A. Jewel
Rey. F. Danfoerd Lion
Prof. Seaton W. Manning
John R. May
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
Mes. Mary Hutchinson
`Richard Johnston
Board of Directors of the American Civil Liberties Union
: of Northern California
CHAIRMAN: Howard A. Friedman
VICE-CHAIRMEN: Helen Salz ,
Rey. Harry B. Scholefield
SECRETARY-TREASURER: John M. Fowle
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Ernest Besig
Committee of Sponsors
. tes. Ruth Kingman
Prof. John Henry Merryman
Prof. Charles Muscatine
Pref. Herbert Packer
Clarence E. Rust
John Brisbin Rutherford
Mrs. Martin Steiner
Gregory S. Stout
Stephen Thiermann
Richard E. Tuttle
Donald Viai
Richard J. Werthimer
GENERAL COUNSEL
Wayne M. Collins
Reger Kent =
Pref. Theodore Kreps
Prof. Carlo Lastrucci
Norman Lezin
Rey. Robert W. Moen
Dr. Marvin J. Naman
Prof Hwhert Phillips
Prof. Wilson Record
Dr. Norman Reider:
Prof. Wallace Steqner
Mrs. Theodosia Stewart
Rt. Rey. Sumner Walters
Punishment of Alcoholic
Conviction
ppea
On April 2nd Oakland Municipal Court Judge Zook Sut-
ten found Thomas F. Budd guilty of a violation of Penal Code
Section 647(f) which punishes a person who is in a public
place in such a state of intoxication as to be unable to take.
eare of himself or others. At Budd's trial, where he was rep-
resented by ACLU attorneys,
Oakland policeman Roy Harri-
man testified that he arrested
Budd after observing him stag-
gering down the street. Budd
testified that he had consumed a
considerable amount of beer on
the evening in question, but that
he had no memory of the actual
arrest, or any other incident
after a certain point in his drink-
ing had been reached, until he
woke up in the drunk tank. It
was also established at the trial
that Budd has a record of 53 ar-
rests most of which are for being
drunk in public.
Expert Testimony
Serving as volunteers for the
ACLU in the case were two ex-
perienced physicians who are ex-
-perts on the disease of alcohol-
ism, Dr. Bernard Diamond and
Dr. David Rubsamen. Diamond
testified that he had given Budd
a complete physical and mental
examination and had come to
the conclusion that Budd is a
chronic alcoholic. Dr. Diamond
said that Budd is not only a
ehronic alcoholic but that he is a
compulsive alcoholic so _ that,
when certain mental tensions are
present, he has an uncontrollable
compulsion to drink.
Diamond went on to say that
Budd can function almost nor-
mally between his alcoholic
binges and that is why he is able
to hold down a job. However, in
Dr. Diamond's opinion, during a
period of stress Budd was not
responsible for even taking the
first drink of alcoholic beverage,
since this was a symptom of his
ACLU NEWS
MAY, 1965
Pade 2
illness rather than a voluntary
act.
Dr. Rubsamen's Testimony
Dr. Rubsamen testified out of
a long experience in dealing with
the problem of alcoholism, since
he is a former director of the
San Francisco Adult Guidance
Center. Rubsamen said that a
sober alcoholic is still a sick man
and that jail is not an appropri-
ate treatment for an alcoholic.
Jail is "antitherapeutic" and
serves to strengthen the alco-
holic's self-image as a worthless
person, and thus add to the prob-
lems which make a person an
alcoholic. Dr. Rubsamen _ con-
cluded that alcoholism is a cur-
able disease, but that it requires
much patience and a good thera-
peutic relationship to effect a
cure.
Law Inapplicable
Defense counsel then argued
that the penal code section was
not meant to apply to an alco-
holic, and if it was, it resulted in
eruel and unusual punishment in
violation of the Eighth Amend-
ment te the United States Con-
stitution, since what was being
punished was a symptom of an
illness and not a voluntary act.
Judge Sutton denied defense mo- .
tions and found Budd guilty.
The case will now be appealed
to the Appellate Department of
the Alameda County Superior
Court. The case may go on to
higher appellate courts and it is
hoped that the courts will rule
that it is unconstitutional to pun-
ish a person for doing nothing
more than exhibiting the symp-
toms of his illness in public.
Prof. James R. -
Caldwell Dies
Prof. James R. Caldwell, U. C.
English professor and a_ he-
loved and valued member of
the board of directors of the
ACLUNC died last month of a
' heart ailment at the age of 65.
He had served on the boars
since 1946 and was also a mem-
ber of the ACLU's National
Committee since early 1951.
(See Howard Friedman's tribute
te Jim Caldwell elsewhere in
this issue of the `"News.'")
e
Livermore Now
Se
Permits Some
we. pege e :
Political Signs
The Livermore City Council
eapitulated last month aon d
amended its zoning ordinance
forbidding the posting of politi-
cal signs in residential areas. The
amendments allow one sign to be
displayed for no longer than 30
days at any house and limits the
size of such sign to no more
than four square feet. :
Whether or not the amend-
ments are reasonable is open to
question. Four square feet does
not allow a sign that will attract
much attention.
Last summer Mrs. C. Ann
Burton, a physicist at the U. C.
Radiation Laboratory urged the
City Council to change the law
but she was turned down.
Thereupon she placed a bumper
strip size Goldwater sign on her
front lawn and when, at the re-
quest of the Livermore Planning
Director, she failed to remove
the sign she was threatened
with prosecution.
The ACLU agreed to repre-
sent Mrs. Burton if she were ar-
rested but the District Attorney
apparently decided that there
was no substantial basis for
prosecution. Mrs. Burton's
eourageous fight. for political
freedom is to be commended.
National ACLU |
Opposes Capital
Punishment
Last month, the national
board of the ACLU adopted the
following brief position with re-
spect to capital punishment:
"The American Civil Liberties
Union is opposed to capital pun-
ishment and will both assert
this position .in appropriate
court cases and attempt to se-
cure legislative repeal of laws
authorizing the death penalty."
It reverses a longstanding AC-
LU position that capital punish-
ment does not per se raise a
civil liberties issue.
The national board's new po-
licy is at variance with that of
the ACLU of Northern Califor-
nia. Recently, a board commit-
tee reconsidered the matter
but reached t he same con-
clusion. One member took the
position, however, that since
"the death penalty bears so
heavily on other constitutional
questions, we should support
legislation leading to its aboli-
tion." Consideration of the com-
mittee's report by the board was
recently laid on the table. (c)
ACLU Meeting
In San Mateo
On May 7 |
_ As part of the 1965 member-
ship drive, ACLU members and
their friends in Burlingame, Hills-
borough, Millbrae and San Mateo
are cordially invited to a coffee
and brandy hour, Friday, May 7,
starting at 8 p.m. at the home
of Dr. and Mrs. Alec Skolnick,
345 Parrott Drive, San Mateo.
Ernest Besig, Executive Direc-
tor of the ACLU of Northern
California will speak on "The
State ef the American Civil Lib-
erties Union.
Friedman's Tribute to |
Prof. James R. Caldwell
Following is the statement made by Howard A. Fried-
man, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the American
Civil Liberties Union of Northern California at the memorial
service for Prof. James R. Caldwell, held at the Faculty
Club, University of California, Berkeley, on April 9, 1965: -
I am more touched and
moved by the honor of being
here than I am rational and re-
alistic in the belief that during
the next few minutes I can do
justice to a summary of Jim
Caldwell's contribution to civil
liberties, or effectively convey
the magnificent spirit he
brought to us.
At best, from the 20 years he
had served as a Director of the
American Civil Liberties Union
of Northern California and the
15. years he had served as a
member of the National Com-
mittee, only a glimpse of this:
gentle rebel, as we knew him,
is possible.
Gentle Rebel
And a gentle rebel he was,
making his quiet but firm voice
_ echo in the quest for civil liber-
ties with his special accent on
academic freedom and the free-
doms of individual expression
and thought and assembly.
Even as far back as 1940, to-
gether with his colleagues, Prof.
George Stewart, Prof. Alexan-
der Kidd, and Mrs. Kathleen
Tolman, among others, he was
instrumental in the formation of
a Berkeley unit of the ACLU; a
unit formed in the fire of a
School Board issue involving
the use of Berkeley schools as
a meeting place for contro-
versial groups.
Family Tradition
And he came to the ACLU
carrying with him a family tra-
dition steeped in the search for
truth and freedom. Col. Charles
Erskine Scott Wood was a
founder of this branch of the
ACLU, Sarah Bard Field con-
tinues as an honorary member
of our Board, and Kay Caldwell
as recent as last fall, became in-
volved in a civil liberties conflict
involving art and sculpture.
And with his advent to the
Board in 1946 and the years to
follow, he guided and enlight-
ened us with the bright clarity
of his own thought, seasoned
with an ever present wit and
humor, courage and intellect. As
his devotion and support of our
cause became apparent to us,
equally so did his. strong per-
sonal affection and devotion for
this University and his belief in
the fundamental tenets of aca-
demic freedom. In this area, he
became our conscience and
forced us to examine carefully
and constantly each issue and
even to a point of restraint; on
our sometimes impatient and vo-
cal board members, from inter-
vening in campus issues before
the remedies of faculty and self-
government had been ex-
hausted.
Total Man
It is here from this vantage
point where we could see the
measure of this man. Jim Cald-
well knew what it meant to be
a.total man; a scholar, a teacher,
a poet with a deep love and a
profound loyalty to the Univer-
sity, to the students, to his col-
leagues, and to his friends. He
had a profound capacity to love
and a profound capacity for
loyalty.
And if he had stopped right
here, he would still have been
admired and respected and been
none the less virtuous.
But he also had a profound
belief in the freedom of the hu-
man spirit and the freedom of
the human mind. And once
again, had he stopped right here
and pursued these beliefs as he
did within the confines of the
University, he would not have
been the less virtuous nor the
less admired.
Yet instead, this gentle man
with great desire and great prin-
ciple entered the arena of civil
liberties and took his place on
the Board alengside men who
could perhaps make decisions
much' more easily than Jim
Caldwell, particularly on certain
issues, since their decisions
were not afflicted with the deep-
rooted love and loyalty and re-
lationships he had from within
the academic structure. It would
have been easier for this gentle
rebel not to ask for the conflicts
he encountered; conflicts in his
own backyard and, at times, in-
volving those he eared for and
those traditions he cherished. It
would have been easier for him
to have remained aloof.
True Civil Libertarian
And so he joined us in ceun-
cil and in debate, and at times
he chose to walk or stumble or
halt rather than run, if in run-
ning he would hurt someone or
some place he loved. Yet
through all the years he re-
mained a true civil libertarian,
loyal to his concepts and his
friends and preserved his Uni-
versity and his beliefs to the
highest degree and with the
strongest effort he could mus-
ter.
And in his lifelong attempt to
achieve this, he taught us bal-
ance; a balance articulated in
his quiet, firm and_ sensitive
manner; a balance of judgment
and action tempered with com-
passion and restraint. We trust
that this balance will remain as
our heritage from him.
In the rather brief nine
years that we worked together,
I eannot recall Jim Caldwell
ever abstaining from a vote or
backing away from a controv-
ersy. Upon me he conferred
maturity, patience and strength.
Alec and Jim
In fact, I cannot disassociate
through these years, the recol-
lection of Jim Caldwell and
Alee Meiklejohn. Each had af-
fection and great love for the
other. Each in his own way
earried forth the high principles
in their respective search for
truth. They came to the meet-
ings together. Invariably they
sat next to each other and in-
variably, they left together. We
miss Alec-our militant rebel-
and we now have another great
void without Jim, our gentle
rebel.
Bendich Speaks
At Mt. Diablo
Chapter Mtg.
"Changing Concepts of Free-
dom in the Sixties," will be the
theme of the talk at the Annual
Meeting of the Mt. Diablo Chap-
ter on Sunday, May 9. The guest
speaker, Mr. Albert Bendich, will
discuss new and evolving con-
cepts in civil liberties issues. Mr.
Bendich, former staff counsel fer
Northern California Branch, cur-
rently is on the faculty of the
University of California and
maintains a practice in Berkeley.
The meeting will be chaired by
Chuck `Weidner, Vice-Chairman
of the Chapter. Chapter members
will cast ballots for a new Board
of Directors, and a summary of
Chapter activities this year will
be presented by Bob Suczek,
Chairman of the Chapter.
The meeting will be held at
7:30 p.m., Sunday, May 9th, in
the Diablo Room, Diablo Valley
College, Golf Club Rd., Concord.
All members are urged to. come
and to bring their friends. Coffee
will be served.
It was recently disclosed that
oil interests and PG E are
among the financial supporters of
California State Senators, who,
under the guidance of Whitaker
Baxter, are leading a national
campaign for adoption of the
Dirksen Amendment to the Unit-
ed States Constitution. The fol-
lewing analysis of the Dirksen
Amendment was made by
Charles S. Rhyne of the Wash-
. ington, D.C. bar and Past Presi-
dent of the American Bar Asso-
ciation before the Legislative
Conference of the American
Nurses' Association in Washing-
ten, D.C. on March 19, 1965:
I wish to discuss specifically
Senator Dirksen's proposed `"Un-
equal Vote" constitutional amend-
ment which would permit (under
the appealing disguise of major-
ity vote) the destruction of the
one-man, one-vote principle. I
realize that many proposals have
been introduced in this session of
Cengress which are aimed at pre-
venting in one way or another
the equal vote principle of the
reapportionment decisions. How-
ever, since most of the publicity
has been directed to Senator
Dirksen's Amendment, I will con-
fine my remarks chiefly to his
proposal. Senator Dirksen's pro-
posed amendment reads as fol-
lows:
"The right and power to de-
termine the composition of the
legislature of a State and the
apportionment of the member-
ship thereof shall remain in
the people of that State. Noth-
ing in this Constitution shall
prohibit the people from ap-
portioning one house of a bi-
cameral legislature upon the
basis of factors other than pop- -
ulation, or from giving reason-
able weight to factors other
than population in apportion-
ing a unicameral igeslature, if,
in either case, such apportion-
ment has been submitted to a
vote of .the people in accord-
ance with law and with the
provisions of this Constitution
and has been approved by a
majority of those voting on
that issue." (S. J. Res. 2, 89th
Cong., Ist Sess. (1965))
The Dirksen Amendment
Subverts The American Principle
Of Equality
By condoning unequal voting
rights for state legislatures, the
passage of the Dirksen amend-
ment would be the first blow in
the history of our Nation chip-
ping away the rock of constitu-
tionally - protected rights and
guarantees. The right to an equal
vote is the bedrock of our democ-
racy. Upon it rests all other
rights. And implicit in the. Su-
preme Court's reapportionment
' decisions, against which the Dirk-
sen amendment is aimed, is the
fundamental precept of judicial
protection of this personal consti-
tutional right te an equal vote.
Under the Dirksen amendment
that judicial protection is gone
ferever.
The great American ideal is
characterized by the principle of
equality of man.
The Declaration of Independ-
ence boldly proclaims: "all men
are created equal."
Thomas Jefferson, the author
of this great document, stated:
"For let it be agreed that a gov-
ernment is republican in propor-
tion as every member composing
it has his equal voice in the di-
rection of its concerns."
Addressing himself to the prin-
eiples of the Declaration of Inde-
pendence, Abraham Lincoln
stated that: "Equality ... is basic
to a consideration of political and
ecenomic rights."
In keeping with America's con-
eept of human equality, the Four-
teenth Amendment to the United
States Constitution forbids a state
to deny any person the "equal
protection of the laws."
Today especially, equality of
voting rights vitally concerns all
citizens of the United States. As
stated by President Johnson:
"It is wrong to deny Ameri-
cans the right to vote. It is
wrong to deny any person full
equality because of the color
of his skin. The promise. of
America is a simple promise:
Every person shall share in the
blessings of this land, and they
shall share on the basis of
their merits as a person. They
shall not be judged by their
color or by their beliefs, or by
their religion, or by where
they were born, or the neigh-
borhood in which they live."
That this towering ideal of
equality is non-partisan could be
proved by quotes from many Re-
publicans. I choose to quote the
greatest leader of that party
Richard M. Nixon who Said last
Friday: "The Republican Party
must support both legislative and
other programs that will serve
the cause of equal rights for all
American citizens. It must not
compromise its strong position
on civil rights for the purpose of
gaining votes."
Adoption of the Dirksen amend-
ment would be the first constitu-
tional provision in the history of
our Nation empowering the
states to give voters unequal
treatment. An equal vote cannot
now be denied by a state because
of where a voter's home is locat-
ed. Under the Dirksen Amend-
ment it can. An equal vote can-
not now be denied by a state be-
cause of a voter's religion. Under
the Dirksen amendment it can.
An equal vote cannot now be de-
nied by a state because of a vot-
er's occupation. Under the Dirk-
sen amendment it can. An equal
vote cannot now be denied by a
state because of all the other un-
defined, arbitrary factors con-
tained in the words "factors
other than population." Under
the Dirksen amendment it can.
And, regardless of what some
may think, today constitutional
rights are the same in all states.
Under the Dirksen amendment
they can vary from state to state
depending on a majority vote of
the people of each state.
Tyranny Of The Majority
The Dirksen amendment works
its evil in destroying the ""Ameri-
can promise" of equality under
the guise of another American
principle - majority rule. But
up to now a citizen's constitu-
tional rights could not be in-
fringed simply because a major-
ity of the people choose to do so.
The % vote by both houses of
Congress and %4 vote by state
legislatures or conventions
(which are to be chosen by mal-
apportioned legislatures) hardly
connotes wiping out of constitu-
tional rights by a majority vote.
Moreover, our forefathers were
familiar with the power of a
tightly organized minority to out-
vote a majority so they did not
write Senator Dirksen's proposal
into the Constitution of the Unit-
ed States. Constitutional rights
are not "rights" if they depend
on-the outcome of elections. Now
`a highly-organized minority com-
posed of incumbent state legisla-
tors and lobbyists who live off of
them hope te use the Dirksen
amendment to fasten upon the
unorganized majority perpetual
minority control. Go back and
read the Dirksen amendment. It
does not allow a re-vote when the
unorganized majority awakens to
what the organized minority has
done to it. Small wonder the rush
act is on. It is hoped that the
awakening comes late or never
so that the current legislatures
controlled by the minority can
vote in the Dirksen amendment,
thus assuring themselves a veto
control over all state legislative
action forever. The stakes are
high. They always are when such
a "fast deal" is attempted.
A full vote should not be de-
pendent upon where a man lives.
History has repeatedly warned of
the "tyranny of the majority."
Let us not close our eyes to his-
tory's teachings. The Dirksen
amendment contains the seeds of
this "tyranny of the majority" by
allowing a.majority of the voters
of a state to debase, dilute and ef-
fectively destroy the most sacred
right of equal franchise.
The Genesis Of Malapportioned
State Legislatures
The precise concept of one
house based on population and
the second house based on ge-
ography or other arbitrary fac-
tors was not found in any of the
original state constitutions. The
original constitutions of 36 states
provided that representation in
both houses would be based com-
pletely or predominantly on pop-
-ulation. Congress provided in the
Northwest Ordinance of 1787
that: `The inhabitants of the said
territory shall always be entitled.
to the benefits . . . of a propor-
tionate representation of the peo-
ple in the Legislature."
When deviations from the equal-
population principle came along
they were clearly motivated by
considerations of selfish advan-
tage to particular interest groups.
With the shift and concentration
of population in the urban areas,
the politicians representing the
people in sparsely populated
areas did not want to lose their
offices or the power and other
benefits that go with them. This
is the genesis of our malappor-
tioned state legislatures. It is a
false idea to assert that it is the
tradition of America to have one
house of a state legislature mal-
apportioned.. America's tradition
is equality. Ours is a government
"of, by and for the people." We
should never define equality to
mean inequality.
By Not Providing For Judi-
cial Review the Dirksen
Amendment Allows The Mal-
apportionment Of Both Heuses
Of A State Legislature; Sanc-
tions Discrimination Based On -
Race, Religion, Sex or Other
Arbitrary Criteria In Deter-
mining The Composition Of
State Legislatures; And Per-
mits The Freezing Of the Sta-
tus Quo.
The very first sentence of the
Dirksen amendment provides
that "The right and power to de-
termine the composition of the
legislature of a State and the ap-_
portionment of the membership
thereof shall remain in the peo-
ple of that State." This sentence
may be construed to allow the
malapportionment of both houses
of a state legislature, and federal
and state courts weuld be power-
less to interfere. While there
may be some question as to
whether judicial review is denied
under the first sentence of the
Dirksen amendment, under the
second sentence no judicial re-
lief is available once a particular
apportionment scheme has re-
ceived the approval of a majority
of the people of a State.
Thus, absent judicial review,
states would be at liberty to sanc-
tion discrimination based on race,
religion, sex or other arbitrary
criteria in determining the com-
position of their legislatures.
Moreover, state legislative appor-
tionment would undoubtedly re-
vert to the pre-Baker v. Carr era
where less than 1/10 to 1/3 of
the rural voters controlled one,
or in many instances, both houses
of the legislature. You will recall
that pre-Baker v. Carr was an era
in which 27 states had not been
reapportioned in 25 years; 8
states had not been reapportioned
in 50 years - even though their
state constitutions required de-
cennial reapportionment. Indeed,
under the Dirksen amendment,
state legislators could have a
"field day' knowing that they
could apportion and determine
the composition of their legisla-
tures without fear of judicial re-
view.
Once a majority of the people
in a state had approved an appor-
tionment scheme under the Dirk-
sen amendment, the apportion-
ment may never be changed.
Senator Dirksen's amendment
does not provide for change ever.
Regardless of how inefficient the
malapportiened legislature might
function or how long a majority
might be frustrated, the majority
would be powerless to alter the.
existing apportionment set-up.
Thus, by denying judicial review,
by not providing for the subse-
quent submission of an approved
apportionment plan to the peo-
ple, the Dirksen amendment per-
mits a perpetual freezing of the
status quo. That is why I say the
stakes are high - very high -
for the current political bosses
of state legislatures and their lob-
byist friends.
`Majority Voter Approval Of A
Malapportionment Plan Is
Misleading
The Dirksen amendment ex-
pressly provides for the malap-
_portionment of one house of a
state legislature so long as a ma-
jority of those voting express
their approval of the plan. I have
already stated that an American's
basic right to an equal vote is not
now and never should be depend-
ent upon elections. However,
voter approval of a reapportion-
ment plan does not necessarily
mean that the majority approves
apportionment based on non-pop-
ulation factors. To the centrary,
the "approval" may indicate only
that the plan offered is an im-
provement over the existing man-
ner of apportionment. In other
words, the Dirksen amendment
does not require that the people
of a state be given a fair choice
of voting upon a system of repre-
sentation based upon population
or upon some other basis of rep-
resentation. It is only common
sense that the voters who are be-
ing discriminated against would
approve any proposal which
would even minutely increase
their voting rights.
How the majority may react is
proved by the recent vote of the
majority in Colorado for a mal-
apportioned legislature when oth-
er advantages for that majority
were provided in the same refer-
endum. The U. S. Supreme Court
properly ruled that a majority
vote in one state cannot now
amend the Constitution of the
United States. Senator Dirksen's
amendment would change that.
The Dirksen Amendment Fails
To Provide Standards For The
Malapportioned House
Under the Dirksen amendment
`it is provided that: "Nothing in
this Constitution shall prohibit
the people from apportioning one
house of a bicameral legislature
upon the basis of factors other
than population."
It is readily apparent from this
provision that standards are total-
ly lacking in governing the ap-
portionment of the malappor-
tioned house of a state legisla-
ture. Thus, the Dirksen amend-
ment allows for legislative dis-
tricting based on racial or other
factors. And the courts would be
powerless to interfere.
The Dirksen Amendment Is Not
Justified By The So-Called
Federal Analegy
Some supporters of the Dirk-
sen Amendment seek to justify
it on the ground that the appor-
tionment of one house of a state
legislature on a non-population
basis is analogous to the manner
of representation provided by the
Constitution for the Congress. Of
course, this "justification" has al-
ways been the rural politician's
first line of defense in opposing
any change in the status que. The
fact is, however, that the so-called
"federal analogy" is misleading
and false. | :
The underlying rationale upon
which representation in the Unit-
ed States Congress is based is
that the United States is a fed-
eration of independent sovereign-
ties. The presently existing man-
ner of representation provided
for under the Federal principle
was demanded by certain of these
independent sovereignties before
they would agree to relinquish a
portion of their sovereignty to
establish a central government. .
On the other hand, a state is
net truly a federation of coun-
ties and political subdivisions im
the sense that the latter preceded
the former. To the contrary, the
state is the creator and the local
governmental units are the cre-
ated. Moreover, representaticei in
some state legislatures is based
upon an artificial division of the
state into senate er house dis-
tricts. Certainly these districts
have no independent significance
and are not, by any stretch of the
imagination, sovereign or quasi-
sovereign entities. To speak of
federalism within a state is to
reduce a great principle te an
absurdity. :
The equality required by the
Fourteenth Amendment to the
United States Constitution is
equality of people - not geogra-
phy. Reliance on a so-called "fed-
eral analogy" is simply an after-
_the-fact rationalization offered in
defense of the indefensible,
grossly malapportioned state leg-
islatures.
Conclusion
The Dirksen amendment to
provide voter inequality and mi-
nority control of state legisla-
tures should not be adopted. It
denies the most basic right of
citizenship - the right of every
American to a full or equal vote.
The next chapter in the strug-
gle for voting rights in our Na-
tion, after adoption of President
Johnson's Voting Rights Bill,
should not be such a backward
step.
Equality of man is the great
ideal upon which our Nation was
founded. It is also the towering
ideal on which our leadership of
the free world depends. :
We must not allow the issue
here to be so beclouded by poli-
ticians and politics as to mislead
the unorganized majority inte en-
slaving themselves to well organs.
ized self-interest minority control
forever. We deplore such tightly
organized minority control in-
other nations. Yet it could hap-
pen in our Nation for many who
say they are for President John-
son's Voting Rights Bill say they
are also for the Dirksen amend- ..,,
ment. In fact, they may be linked __
as a "package" by supporters of
the Dirksen amendment. But, in
reality, the two are totally at war
in fact and principle. In all good
conseience I urge that in the
words of President Johnson "It
is wrong to deny any person full
equality because of the color of
his skin" and "It is wrong to
deny any American full equality
for any reason." Denial of equal-
ity denies all that America stands
for. Again quoting President
Johnson: _
"Every American citizen
must have an equal right to
vote. There is no reason which
can excuse the denial of that
right. There is no duty which
weighs more heavily on us
than the duty we have to en-
sure that right."
- The Dirksen amendment is.
contrary to what President John-
son here states. Every American
should have not only an "equal
right to vote" but also an equal
vote.
I urge you to do all you can to
insure the defeat of the Dirksen
amendment.
Livermore
Meeting
May 6th "
ACLU members, friends and
the public in San Leandre, Hay-
ward, Pleasanton and Livermore
are invited to a meeting in the
Choral Room of Livermore High
School (600 Maple Street, Liver-
more), on Thursday, May 6 at
8 p.m.
Ernest Besig, Executive Direc-
tor of ACLUNC will discuss cur-
rent activities of the organization.
ACLU NEWS.
MAY, 1965
Page 3
~ remaining.
- California Legislature
The campaign to overturn the United States Supreme
Court's
decision requiring one man, one vote has been
intensified in Washington and in California. In- California
the campaign is spurred by what the Sacramento Bee editor-
ijalized as an "unholy alliance" between state senators and
lobbyists for special interests.
In Washington, D. C., hearings
are still being conducted on the
Dirksen Amendment, the focus
of efforts to overturn the one
man, one vote rulings, by a sub-
committee of the Senate Judici-
ary Committee. An article in The
Reporter of April 22, 1965 states
that the "Senate hearings ae
have had the effect of reinforce-
ing the position of the opponents
of the Supreme Court decision
. . . Senators, representatives,
`and state legislators have testi-
fied for the amendment. Only a
few Senatorial voices in opposi-
tion have been heard at the hear-
ings, and just one big-city mayor,
Richard J. Daley of Chicago,
found time to testify against it."
Opposition to the Dirksen
Amendment and _ similar _ pro-
posals has been largely limited
thus far to the ACLU, the Amer-
ican Jewish Congress and the
AFL-CIO.
State Legislature
The state legislature has begun
to move into high gear with only
six weeks of the regular session
Action has-been
taken on many of the bills which
the Sacramento office of the
ACLU has been following.
The free speech controversy at
the University of California con-
tinues to draw attention. In the
Senate, the Rules Committee
heard extensive debate on two
resolutions (SRs 12 and 13), in-
troduced by Senator Jack
Schrade (R., San Diego), aimed
at pressuring the Regents into.
disciplinary. action against the
students and faculty members
who were involved in the free
speech demonstrations last fall.
The Rules Committee, after op-
position from the University's
lobbyist, Frank Kidner, took the
resolutions "under submission',
a euphemism which generally
means defeat.
-Mulford Bill
In the Assembly, a measure
(AB 1920; Mulford, R., Berke-
ley) designed to give University
and state college authorities
power to expel non-students
from college and University
property was given a rush pas-
sage. The bill, as amended (pre-
sumably at the instance of the
University), would create a new
erime of trespass. It would em-
power designated University and
state college authorities to eject
(generally) a non-student or non-
faculty member if "it reasonably
appears to [such authorities]...
that such person is committing
any act likely to interfere with
the peaceful conduct of the ac-
tivities" of a campus. The treat-
ment given AB 1920 is illustra-
tive of the overwhelming opposi-
tion of the public to the Univer-
sity demonstrations. After an
agreement between the Speaker
"pf the Assembly and Mr. Mul-
ford, the Assembly waived the
time limits on hearing the meas-
ure, attached an emergency
clause allowing the bill to take
immediate effect on signing by
the Governor) and passed it by a
yote of 62-14. Efforts to sub-
stitute clearer provisions were
overwhelmingly rejected. The
bill is now pending before the
Senate Judiciary Committee and
ACLU NEWS
MAY, 1965
Page 4
~eontribution to the
is expected to pass easily the
remaining legislative hurdles.
University Demonstrations
Another effort to deal with the
University demonstrations in the
Assembly has not fared as well.
A measure (AB 570; Lanterman,
R., La Canada), which would re-
quire the State Scholarship Com-
mission to forfeit the scholar-
ship (for a year) of any award
winner `who violates any [Uni-
versity or state college} ... rule
during the course of a demon-
stration . .. while on the cam-
pus .. .", has been delayed by
the Assembly Education Com-
mittee for clarifying amend-
ments.
Conformity Oaths
A more depressing indicator
of the repressive civil liberties
climate in the legislature was
the Assembly treatment of a bill
which would require an addi-
tional oath of non-disloyalty of
nominees for political office. AB
467 (Allen; D., Los Angeles)
would require the taking of the
Levering oath by any nominee
for elective office. The new oath
would be in addition to another
oath required of nominees and
a third required of successful
candidates for office. The Allen
pill passed the Assembly by a
vote of 46 to 21. It has been sent
to the Senate Elections Commit-
tee.
A. more positive note was
struck when the author (Danne-
meyer, D., Orange County) of a-
loyalty oath for lobbyists (AB
529) declined to pursue the
-measure before. the Assembly
Rules Committee.
Obscenity Bills
The Assembly Criminal Proce-
dure Committee defeated on a
tie vote (5-5) an obscenity bill
(AB 1313; Barnes, R., San Diego)
which would have struck (gen-
erally) the protections for art
and literature from the existing
California obscenity law. A series
of other repressive obscenity
bills concerning the standards
for matter distributed to minors
and the procedures for obscenity
trials are set for hearing before
the same committee on April
27th. Action on these measures
will be reported in a future
issue.
Public Employees
The legislature made a modest
political
rights of public employees in the
passage of AB 33 (Danielson: D.,
Los Angeles) which would allow
a public employee to _ solicit
funds for the passage or defeat
of a ballot measure affecting
conditions of work. But the legis-
lature detracted from the protec-
tions given participants in the
election process by the pasage of
AB 168 which would make it a
crime to circulate anonymous
campaign literature which is
"designed to .. . defeat any
candidate for . .. public office
by reflecting upon his . . . polit-
ical action . -' Both of the
above measures were signed by
the Governor.
Implied Consent
A Senate Committee for the
first time has reported out a bill
(SB 42; Collier, D., Yreka) re-
quiring an alleged drunk driver
to take a chemical test for in-
toxication or forfeit his driver's
Favorable
Decisions in 3
Security Cases
Continued from Page 1-
ed, a suit was filed in the U.S.
District Court seeking declara-
tory and injunctive relief and
contending that the man was
legally entitled to a discharge
that reflects the character of his
service. The Army Discharge Re-
view Board last month decided
it would reconsider the matter -
and granted an Honorable Dis-
`charge.
Third Case
The third and final case in-
volved a young engineer who
needed a security clearance at
his private employment because
he worked in an area where
others were handling security in-
formation. The Government rec-
ommended against granting a se-
curity clearance because five
years ago he had been hospital-
ized for three months because of
mental illness. A young Air
Force psychiatrist who examined
the employee took the position
that any person who has had
schizophrenia doesn't fully recov-
er; that while there was no
present lack of judgment, the
employee's illness could be ex-
pected to have a continuing ef-
fect and it would cause a signifi-
eant defect in his judgment and
reliability.
Testimony Excluded
During the course of cross-ex-
amination by Ernest Besig, it
was disclosed that in forming
his opinion the psychiatrist had
access to a secret file which
could not be made available to
the employee's counsel. As a re-
sult, his testimony was excluded
and the employee was re-exam-
ined, this time by a Navy doctor,
a man with much wider experi-
ence than the first expert. The
latter expressed the opinion that
the employee "does not suffer
from an illness that would affect
his judgment and reliability. The
prediction of the possibility of
a recurrence of an acute psy-
chosis is risky, but there is bet-
ter than a 50% chance that he
will be able to maintain his
present state of excellent remis-
sion for many years."
Old Fashioned Idea
Two psychiatrists for the
young man expressed the opin-
ion that he was not a security
risk. "I feel,'' said one outstand-
ing psychiatrist, "that the De-
partment of Defense is laboring
under a somewhat old fashioned
idea that once the diagnosis of
`schizophrenia' is made, the per-
son is `fixed' for life. As you are
undoubtedly aware . . . schizo-
phrenia is a kind of wastebasket
diagnosis that rarely carries the
ominous implications that it did
in the old days of the asylums.
The young psychiatrist who ex-
amined Mr. ............ at Travis was
undoubtedly influenced by the
confidential material he had on
hand and, since he was just leav-
ing the service, his involvement
in thoroughly understanding the
case may have been minimal."
He concluded that the em-
ployee's illness "was of a type
that is not uncommon in college
students and is born of a combi-
nation of extreme stress, little
sleep and poor nutrition. His last
several years of excellent per-
formance should be enough evi-
dence that he has recovered from
this temporary mental disorder.
license for a period of six
months.
Many other bills still await leg-
~islative action. In the few re-
maining weeks the legislature
must. consider bills requiring
counsel for indigents at both the |
trial and appellate levels, liber-
alizing the requirements of bail,
notifying an arrested person of
his rights, and a number of bills
concerning civil rights. These
measures and others will be the
subject of future issues. -Cole-
man A, Blease.
-Family Membership .
ACLU Policy Statement
Opposing `Shared Ti:
1e
"Shared time" encompasses a number of different pldns,
some of which may present no substantial constitutional
problem. This policy statement applies to those plans which
permit pupils in sectarian schools to enroll as part-time
pupils in public schools and to satisfy the compulsory
education requirements of their
state through a combination of
public and religious school cur-~
ricuia.
The ACLU believes that such
"shared time' programs present
grave constitutional and_ civil
liberty problems under the Es-
tablishment Clause because of
the substantial benefit that such
programs confer upon sectarian
schools and because of the joint
involvement by secular and
church authorities in decision-
making on matters affecting re-
ligion.
1. "Shared time" programs in-
volve "aid to religion." Al-
though the Supreme Court in
Everson v. Board of Education
narrowly upheld the payment of
funds directly to parents for
transportation costs of parochial
school children, the Justices
unanimously subscribed to the
following principles, which have
frequently been reiterated:
Neither a state nor the fed-
eral government can .. . pass
laws which aid one religion,
aid all religions, or prefer one
_.religion over another . .. No
tax in any amount, large or
small, can be levied to support
any religious activities or in-
stitutions, whatever they may
be called, or whatever form
._they may adopt to teach or
practice religion.
_ "Shared time" involves aid to
religion and the imposition of a
tax that was expressly con-
demned in the Everson case.
Tax money is no longer being
used incidentally for the child's
protection and health, but is in-
stead being utilized to support
academic programs for children
receiving their basic education
in church schools.
2. "Shared time" programs
involve joint participation of
public and private authorities in
important decisions affecting
education and religion. The Es-
tablishment Clause was drafted
by men of the Eighteenth Cen-
tury who had vivid recollections -
of bitter religious conflicts Its
chief purpose was to enable the
United States to avoid friction
and strife that inevitably accom-
pany the fusion of government
and religion.
"Shared time" proposals in-
volve a substantial reordering of
public and sectarian schools in
which both public and religious
authorities must participate.
This joint decision-making will
touch on the most sensitive
matters-subjects to be taught,
hours to be devoted to particu-
lar courses, textbooks, other
teaching materials, and even
"appropriate" instructors for
each course. It is this transfer-
ance of religious interests and
-disputes to the public arena
that James Madison, the prin-
cipal architect of the Bill of
Rights, warned against in his
historic Remonstrance (para-
graphs 8 and 11). He said:
Public money devoted to pay-
ment of religious costs, educa-
tional or other, brings the
quest for more. It brings too,
the struggle of sect against sect
for the larger share or for any.
Here one by numbers alone
will benefit most, there an-
other. That is precisely the
history of societies which have
had an established religion and
dissident groups.
The foregoing statement was
adopted by the ACLU's national
Board of Directors by a majority
vote on April 4, 1965. :
Clem Miller
Memorial Lib.
Dedication
The Marin Chapter of the AC-
LUNC last month appealed for
contributions of books,
and pamphlets dealing with civil
liberties and civil rights. They
will become part of the new
Clem Miller Memorial Library
collection at the Marin County
Civic Center.
The unique collection will be
dedicated and a bronze plaque
unveiled in honor of the former
First District Congressman on
May 1, at 3 p.m., in the county
library room at the new civic
center in San Rafael in a meef-
ing sponsored by the Chapter.
Speakers at the dedication pro-
gram will include Marin Su-
perior Court Judge Richard M.
Sims, Jr., and Board of Super-
visors President Peter Behr.
Music will be provided by the
Marin Quartet, a string ensem-
ble. Members of the late Con-
gressman's family will attend
the dedication. The public is in-
vited.
Miller was killed in a plane
crash in October, 1962. He was
a founder of the Marin Chapter
and also a co-author of the Li-
brary Services Act.
Sali Lieberman of Mill Valley,
chairman of the planning com-
mittee, said more than $1000 has
already been raised for buying
basic books in the civil liberties
field. Over one hundred books
have already been assembled.
They will carry bookplates de-
signed by Emmy Lou Randall,
Mendocino artist.
Contributions | should be sent ~
to Mrs. Virginia Keating, Li-
brarian, Marin Civic Center. San
Rafael, ear-marked for the
Clem Miller Memorial Library.
The first right of a citizen
Is the right
To be responsible
JOIN TODAY
oe 151
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
Patron Membership
eocvuveeeeoevoeereoevee 2 eee ee 6 6 and @ @
.$100
Sustaining Membership. ..0.. 4%5.- 53. ee oe 0
Business and Professional Membership ............5. 29
Be ee es Pee ee
Associate Membership a
Annual Membership ..
Student Membership
eeeereo eee eee ew eee eH (c) 8 06 O O 7
ec eC eee ec oe eee er eeoeoe eee ee eee e 2
ACLU News Subscription ee PU
NAME.
ADDRESS.
TELEPHONE NUMBER.....
SCO CHHSHCHSHOHHOHSHESHSCHEHRHSOHKEHHHOHSTHHLHOTHHEHHHHHHHTHHHHHOOSS
CCCHOCHOSCHOHHSHAOSSHEHHOHHSHSHEHSSHHHSCHS SHS HHHH CHEST HHHHOH HEHE O*
. AMT. ENCLOSED.
eoeeereeee
503 Market Street
- San Francisco, 94105
papers -