vol. 13, no. 12

- American

Civil Liberties

Union-News

Free Press

Free Speech

_ Free Assemblage

"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."

Vol. XIII

SAN FRANCISCO, DECEMBER, 1948

No. 12

Fed. Circuit Hears L.A.

Contempt Cases On Dec. 10

The Federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, on

December 10, will hear arguments in the cases of

ten persons who were held in contempt of court

for refusing to answer certain questions in a

Federal Grand Jury investigation of Communist

activities in Los Angeles county. The witnesses

refused to answer the questions on the ground

that their answers might tend to incriminate

them.

The questions were as follows:

Do you know the names of the county officers

of the Los Angeles County Communist Party?

Do you know the table of organization and

duties of the Los Angeles County Communist

Party?

Federal District Judge Pierson M. Hall refused

to grant bail pending an appeal in the case. An

application for bail was then made to Presiding

Judge Wiliam Denman of the Ninth Circuit Court

of Appeals and he ordered the ten released on

$500 bails each.

Judge Denman decided there was a substantial

basis for the appeal. `In my opinion," he said, "`it

is a rationally conceivable contention that the

appellant's defense would be that he had no

connection whatsoever with the Los Angeles Com-

-munist Party; that he did not even know the

names of its county officers or the table of

organization and duties of that party, and that an

admission that he had such knowledge would be

offered as evidence from which a jury could infer

that he had such a connection." The Southern

California branch of the Union appeared as friend

of the court on behalf of the defendants.

Thereafter, on November 22, U.S. Attorney

James M. Carter asked the entire Circuit Court

to vacate Judge Denman's order granting bail.

He argued that the appellants could not be con-

victed under the Smith sedition law if they ans-

wered the questions. On the other hand, the appel-

lants argued that they would be put in peril of

prosecution under the Smith Act if they answered

. the questions; that while the questions appeared

to be innocent, the answers could be used as links

In a chain of evidence against them. The Court's

decision is still being awaited as the "News" goes

to press.

High Court Asked to Grant

Citizenship to Socialist

The appeal of a college educator denied citi-

zenship solely because he was not optimistic

about the future of U. S. capitalism was sup-

ported by the ACLU in a brief presented to the

Supreme Court last month.

The appeal was brought by Samuel Morris

Wixman, World War I veteran and lecturer in

economics, who had been refused naturalization

papers by lower Federal courts.

The Union brief stated:

"A reading of the entire record shows that

the petitioner fully supports the constitution and

political system of the United States, that his

radicalism is entirely in the field of economics

and is not more radical than economic theories

which have been widely espoused in recent years

in this country.

"A disposition toward the good order and hap-

piness of the United States does not require a

belief in the efficacy of laissez faire economics.

To insist that socialism or collectivism are detri-

mental to the happiness of the U. S. would be

to place a straitjacket upon economic evolution

and to ignore the tremendous increase in social

control of industry which has won popular ac-

ceptance in the last few decades."

The Union's brief was signed by Charles A.

Horsky, of the Washington, D. C. bar, and

Julien Cornell, Osmond K. Fraenkel, and Arthur

Garfield Hays of New York.

PART OF SAN FRANCISCO LAW REGULATING USE OF

AMPLIFIERS FOR OUTDOOR MEETINGS HELD INVALID

City Attorney John J. O'Toole of San Fran-

cisco last month handed down an opinion to the

Police Committee of the Board of Supervisors

that a portion of San Francisco's sound truck

ordinance "is unconstitutional as a violation of

the Constitutional guarantee of freedom of

speech."

Thank You!

The office takes this means of thanking its

500 supporters (a record number), who last

month sent in contributions and pledges to-

ward the Union's $13,500 budget for the fiscal

year ending October 31, 1949. We appreciate

your loyal support and hope you won't mind

our failure to acknowledge the receipt of your

contributions. We hope you will agree with us

that the time and money such acknowledg-

ments require is better spent on the civil lib-

erties issues that are overwhelming us.

We trust that those who have not yet con-

tributed toward our budget drive will do so

without delay. We would like to dispose of

our fund-raising activities just as swiftly as

possible in order to concentrate on the han-

dling of civil liberties issues. Your coopera-

tion will be appreciated.

Finally, about 175 of the more than 400 per--

sons whose memberships expired in November

have not yet gotten around to sending us their

renewals. You can save us a lot of clerical

work by sending us your renewals just as

promptly as possible.

Immigration Service Ends

Unlawful Jail Detainers

I. F. Wixon, District Director of the Immigra-

tion and Naturalization Service in San Francisco,

last month informed the Union he had given

instructions to his men to discontinue the prac-

tice of "hold" orders against aliens who are

arrested by the City police. Mr. Wixon stated he

was not aware that the practice was being

followed and that it did not meet with his ap-

proval. The Union contended that the practice

constituted a denial of due process of law.

The Union's complaint arose when it discovered

that an alien Chinese, who had posted bail on a

shoplifting charge (which was subsequently dis-

missed), was nevertheless being held in jail on

the orders of an Immigration Inspector. No war-

rant for the alien's arrest had been issued by the

Immigration Service. It was explained that the

"hold" had been placed against the alien to

enable the Immigration Inspector to investigate

the alien's status in this country. After a delay

of several hours, the alien was released upon the

Union's intervention in the case.

Denver Trio Released on

Bail After ACLU Intervention.

After ACLU intervention, Supreme Court Jus-

tice Wiley B. Rutledge recently ordered the re-

lease on bail of a man and two women who were

jailed in Denver for refusing to tell a Grand

Jury whether or not they are Communists. Jus-

tice Rutledge set bail at $1000 for each and

ruled that it could be paid to the Supreme Court

clerk, an unusual procedure.

The three, Mrs. Jane Rogers, Nancy Werth-

eimer and Irving Blau, were convicted of con-

tempt on September 23 by a Federal District

Judge in Denver, who ordered them held without

bail. The Circuit Court of Appeals had also re-

fused their release on bail pending appeal.

The ruling, requested by the American Civil

Liberties Union, is based on a recent United

States Supreme Court decision which outlawed a

Lockport, New York, ordinance forbidding the

use of a sound truck without permission of the

chief of police.

The San Francisco ordinance provides that "It

shall be unlawful for any person to maintain...

any loud speaker or sound amplifier . . . without

first procuring from the Chief of Police ...a

permit authorizing the same." The ordinance

also provides that the Chief may issue permits

in the following cases only: 1. the making of

charitable appeals; 2. during, and as part of

public events; 3. in publishing affairs of interest

to the general public; 4. in connection with public

events. "Any permit issued hereunder is revoc-

able at the pleasure of said Chief of Police."

"It appears from the provisions of Section 43,"

the City Attorney declared, "that issuance of a

permit is, in the words of the New York decision,

placed in the `uncontrolled discretion of the chief

of police.' :

"The section leaves the question of what con-

stitutes `matters of interest to the general pub-

lic' up to the chief of police for determination.

Section 43 also provides the permit is revocable

at the pleasure of the chief of police.

"Section 43, therefore, insofar as the provisions

thereof grant uncontrolled discretion in the chief

of police as to persons who will be granted per-

mits, is unconstitutional under the decision in the

New York case."

On the other hand, the City Attorney declared

that the section of the law requiring a permit to

be secured from the Chief of Police, is valid, be-

cause under the law as interpreted by the opinion,

"the requirement of the Section . . . would

(merely) amount to a requirement for notifica-

tion to the Chief of Police by the intended (c)

user... 2

Before the ACLU appealed to the Board of

Supervisors for relief, three cases had arisen in

which the Chief of Police had refused permits for

amplifiers for street meetings. ,.The first case

arose on May 22, 1948, when Charles R. Garry, a

candidate for Congress, was denied a permit in

connection with a political meeting scheduled

for San Francisco's Embarcadero. `Such permits

are not issued for the purpose stipulated," the

Chief declared.

On June 3, 1948, the Joint Action Committee

of the Maritime Unions was denied a permit for

a loud speaker in connection with a waterfront

meeting. The Chief was reported as having told

Pat Tobin, Committee Chairman, that sound

equipment could be used in public meetings ``only |

if the meeting is in the general public interest."

Also, on May 28, 1948, the ACLU itself ap-

`plied to the Chief for a permit "to use a sound

amplifier in connection with a meeting to be held

on the Embarcadero "to discuss the subject of

`Restraints on Freedom of Assemblage in San

Francisco.'"" The Chief advised the Union that

the place of the meeting was acceptable. `How-

ever, the meeting must be conducted without the

benefit of voice amplification, as your application

for a permit to operate a loud speaker is denied."

Immediately thereafter the Union challenged the

constitutionality of the law before the Board of

Supervisors and requested that the matter be

referred to the City Attorney for an opinion.

_ The Union also has challenged the constitu-

tionality of Berkeley's sound truck ordinance.

Several months ago the City Manager assured

the Union that the matter would be investigated.

Apparently a new ordinance is under considera-

tion. No effort was made to enforce the present

ordinance during the recent political campaign.

Page 2

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

Union Files Brief in

Williams Murder Case

Attorneys for the American Civil Liberties

Union last month filed a brief as friend of the

court in the New York State Court of Appeals

on behalf of Samuel Titto Williams, 19-year-old

Negro now under death sentence.

The Union's brief. was based on the fact that

although the jury recommended life imprison-

`ment, Judge Louis Goldstein sentenced Williams'

to death solely because of material contained

in Williams' probation report. The Union con-

tended that Williams had never had opportunity

to confront or cross-examine or rebut these

charges made against him. Before Goldstein

used such material as a basis for increasing

the sentence, the Union stated, Williams should

have been granted a hearing on the matters

in the report.

Williams was convicted of murdering 15-year-

_ old Selma Graff in her home in Brooklyn en

April 20, 1947. At the time of sentencing, Judge

Goldstein said: "If this jury had had before.

it the facts contained in the probation report

the recommendation for life imprisonment would

never have been made."

According to Union attorneys John Finerty,

Herbert M. Levy and Robert Markewich, who

signed the brief, the damning probation report

the judge referred to contained not a single con-

viction, only accusations and opinions.

Said the brief: "If the decision of the lower

court is permitted to stand, the defendant will

have been deprived of his life upon facts not

ascertained at a hearing of any kind what-

soever .. . If constitutional safe-suards are to

be given a defendant during a trial for even a

traffic offense, which may result merely in the

payment of a fine, it is anomalous, to say the

least, that a death sentence can be imposed in

complete disregard of these constitutional safe-

suards .. 3 2

The material contained in Williams' probation

report included charges but no convictions

against him of burglary when he was 11 years

old, and of being a wayward minor: a conclusion

reached without proof by the police that Wil-

liams probably attempted to ravish Selma

Graff; "indications" that Williams is a "psycho-

pathic liar:" information from a detective who

said he had seen Williams taking obscene photo-

graphs, although there is no indication that

such information was ever sworn to; reported

identification-by a seven-year-old infant-as a

man who sexually abused her, but without

charges ever having been brought.

"Defendant, in short," said the ACLU brief

"was sentenced to death in complete disregard

of the jury's recommendation, upon unsworn

statements, coming often from anonymous

sources .. . It cannot be too strongly em-

phasized that it was precisely on the matters

which resulted in the death sentence that de-

fendant was denied his constitutionally given

rights to cross-examine, to be confronted with

`witnesses and not to be deprived of his life

' without due process of law. The sentence of

death was not only shocking but in violation

of the statute and the State and Federal Con-

stitutions."

Union Seeks Clarification of

Wes? Indies Immia, Pracedure

ACLU staff counsel Clifford Forster last

month queried the Departments of State and

Justice on the exact procedures governing the

admission of West Indian immigrants into the

United States.

In a letter to the Visa Division of the State

Department. Forster wrote: `There would seem

to be a policy. which mav be entirely inadver-

tent, the effect of which is that natives of the

West Indies possessions of Great Britain. who,

we understand, are entitled to immigrate to this

countrv under the English quota. are often made

to wait about a year before their annlications

have been cleared. Ovr understandine is that in

view of the large British auota. it is never ex-_

hausted and that consequently citizens of Great

Britain coming from England are able to obtain

clearance within a few months at most."

Forster pointed out another anparent ineaual-

| ity in a letter to the Department of Justice: "Tt

is our understanding that regulations regarding -

pre-examinations wrovide that natives comine

from contiguous territories or from the West

`Indian islands must return to their homeland

in order to make proper entry into this coun-

try. Citizens from other foreign countries, how-

ever. have the privilege of going. for example,

to Montreal to obtain their visas. In view of the

fact that in the case of British West Indian na-

tives such requirements entail a real hardship,

it has been suggested that the regulations were

adopted solely to discriminate against such per-

sons because of their color."

The California Supreme Court on November 1

handed down a curious 4 to 2 decision holding

that picketing for the purpose of securing propor-

tional employment of Negroes is unlawful since

it would establish a closed Negro shop as to those

positions and hence would be an arbitrary dis-

crimination based on race alone. The Court de-

cided that the issue came within its decision in the

Marinship case, in which it was held that one may

not have a closed shop and a closed union at the

same time in order to discriminate against racial

minorities. Justice Schauer wrote the prevailing

opinion. Justices Carter and Traynor: dissented.

A petition for a rehearing is now pending before

the court.

The case arose in 1947. At that time six

representatives of certain organizations picketed

the Canal Store of the Lucky grocery chain in

Richmond, California. The pickets carried plac-

ards with the following legend: "LUCKY WON'T

HIRE NEGRO CLERKS IN PROPORTION TO

NEGRO TRADE-DON'T PATRONIZE." The

picketing was peaceful and the statements

truthful.

Lucky obtained an injunction to restrain the

pickets from picketing for the purpose of compel-

ling "the selective hiring of negro clerks, such

hiring to be based on the proportion of white and

hegro customers who patronize . . . (Lucky)

stores." When the picketing nevertheless con-

tinued, the pickets were held in contempt of court.

The District Court reversed the convictions only

to have its decision reversed by the State Supreme

Court.

The dissenting justices argued that the Marin-

ship decision did not apply. "In the present case,"

said Justice Traynor, "petitioners seek, not a

monopoly of the jobs available, but only a share

of those jobs that they believe they would have

had if there had been no discrimination against

them. ... There is no reality in the reasoning

that those who seek to secure jobs where they

have an opportunity to enlist public support on

their behalf are thereby seeking illegal discrim-

ination in their favor, for the fact remains that

everywhere they turn for jobs they are likely to

encounter the barrier of discrimination. (c)

"The picketing in this case is directed at per-

Va. Poll Tax Fight in Roanoke

Being Readied for Next Step

The American Civil Liberties Union fight

against the Virginia poll tax came into focus

recently when Judge John Paul, in the U. 0x00A7S.

District Court in Roanoke, Va., denied a 17-part

complaint brought by attorney Moss Plunkett on

behalf of Dorothy Bentley jones, 24-year-old

Negro, to permit her to vote without payment

of the tax.

However, Judge Paul excepted from his denial

one paragraph in the complaint and ordered Mr.

Plunkett to present evidence to support it. That

one paragraph is the real core of the entire com-

plaint.

The excepted paragraph, number 10, states:

"The requirement of the Constitution and laws

of the State of Virginia that a person pay the

poll tax in order to vote was imposed solely for

the purpose of preventing Negroes from voting

and has had the intended effect of preventing

Negroes from voting."

ACLU attorneys, now preparing evidence to

support the statement, will rely in large measure

on statements made by officials at Virginia's

Constitutional Convention of 1901, when the poll

tax was enacted. At that convention, according

to the Journal of the Proceedings, Senator Car-

ter C. Glass stated flatly:

"The chief purpose of this Convention is to

amend the suffrage clause of the existing Con-

stitution. It does not require much prescience to

foretell that the alterations which we shall make

will not apply to `all persons and classes with-

out distinction.' We were sent here to make dis-

tinctions. We expect to make distinctions. We

will make distinctions."

Elsewhere in the Journal appears the follow-

ing statement by a Mr. Hancock: "T believe that

one of the greatest evils that ever cursed this

country . . was committed when unlimited

Negro suffrage was placed upon her people by

the Government of the United States... I be-

lieve that the prepayment of a poll-tax, and a

reasonable educational and qualification tax is

"all that is necessary to accomplish this object''

(disfranchisement of the Negro).

The American Civil Liberties Union plans to

take the poll tax case to the U.S. Supreme

Court if lower courts rule unfavorably.

Picketing To Secure Proportional Hiring Of

legroes Is Unlawful, Says Ca

lif. High Court

suading Lucky to take action that it may lawfully

take on its own initiative. No law prohibits Lucky

from discriminating in favor of or against

Negroes. It may legally adopt a policy of propor- |

tionate hiring. The picketing confronts Lucky

with the choice of adopting a policy that is not

illegal in itself or risking the loss of patronage

that may result from the picketing. Had Cali-

fornia adopted a fair employment practices act

that prohibited consideration of the race of ap-

`plicants for jobs, it might be said that the demand

for proportional hiring would be a demand that

Lucky violate the law. Neither the Legislature

nor the people have adopted such a statute, ..."

Justice Traynor also contended that if picket-

ing is "conducted to disseminate information,

limitations that differentiate picketing from other

forms of speech should not be invoked. The (c)

picketing here is of this type. The facts of the

dispute were fully presented by the banners. Since

the picketing was not being carried on by a labor

union, no generally observed rules of labor unions

against crossing picket lines were brought into

play and no deliveries were interfered with. All

that was involved in the case was an orderly ap-

peal to the public cofpled with a clear and truth-

ful statement of the facts of the dispute. Under

such circumstances the unlawful objective doc-

trine may not be invoked to differentiate picket-

ing from traditional modes of communication.

To do so unreasonably interferes wiith petitioners'

right to publicize the facts of their dispute."

The ACLU of Northern California intervened

in the case as amicus curiae. Its brief was pre-

pared by attorneys Robert E. Herman and Her-

bert Prashker of the New York bar and was

presented to the Court by attorney Philip Adams

of San Francisco.

The Union brief had argued that "That the

right to picket peacefully, for lawful purposes, is

not limited to a `labor dispute.'

"The right to picket does not derive from the

fact that a labor dispute is involved. Its springs

from the underlying fact that a matter of public

concern is involved, and that any lawful device

used to bring publicity to bear on such an issue is

protected by our constitutional guarantees. The

test is, accordingly, whether an issue of public

concern is at the heart of the dispute."

The brief also points out that if the pickets had

"called a public meeting at some other place in

town, at which speakers exhorted the audience

to fight racial discrimination by boycotting stores

which practice it and naming Lucky Stores, we

do not believe the present proceeding would be

here on appeal before this Court. Such public dis-

cussion, on a matter concededly one of free con-

cern, is clearly within the free speech doctrine."

Attorneys for the pickets are considering an

appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court if the State

Supreme Court denies a rehearing in the case.

Indian Comm. Urges Krug to

Fulfill Promises to Alaskans

Chairman Jay B. Nash of the ACLU's Indian

Civil Rights Committee last month wrote to

Secretary of the Interior Julius A. Krug urging

that his department "set the record straight"

in the matter of promises made to Alaskan

natives and as yet unfulfilled.

Nash said that ACLU had "found much to

praise in the activities of the present administra-

tion toward the protection of the rights of min-

orities." However, he described the' administra-

tion record with the natives of Alaska as "a

dark page." :

Specifically, Nash listed four promises made

in the last two years that have not been carried

out: On Dec. 9, 1946, two unfulfilled promises

were made. First that the lands of the Barrow

Eskimo Community would be reserved for those

people, and second, that the lands of the Kluk-

wan natives should be marked out and pro- -

tected.

Furthermore, in June of 1946, Nash continued,

the Interior Department promised that the lands

of any Alaskan native group requesting it would

be marked out. Several Indian groups asked

for hearings to accomplish the marking out,

but none has been held.

Lastly, in the summer of 1947, Nash said,

Assistant Secretary of the Interior Warne held

_a hearing at Shungnak, Alaska, to determine the

area used and occupied by the Eskimos of that

region. The decision in that case has been de-

layed.

Earlier, Warne had publicly stated that the

U.S. could hardly win the Alaskan loyalty

necessary to national defense by

failing on

pledges.

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

Page 3

Financial Report for Fiscal

Year Ended Oct. 31, 1948

The A.C.L.U. of Northern California ended its

fiscal year on October 31 with a deficit of $71.65

in its Operating Fund. Expenses for the fiscal

year reached a record high of $11,258.41 while

the Union's income was $11,186.76, also a record

high. The Executive Committee voted to meet the

deficit from Reserve Funds.

Reserve funds on October 31 consisted of $3000

in U.S. Treasury bonds and a balance of $392 in

the bank after the Operating Fund deficit was

deducted. Nevertheless, the Reserve Fund ac-

count showed an increase of exactly $3.75 at the

end of the year. In other words, from the stand-

point of the over-all financial picture for the

year, the Union's accounts showed an increase in

Net Worth of $3.75 for the fiscal year.

The Union ended the fiscal year with the

largest paid-up membership in its 14-year history.

There were exactly 1378 members in good stand-

ing, besides 286 separate subscribers to the

"News," or a paid mailing list of 1664. The

Union has more than doubled its membership in

the past five years. On October 31, 1943, the

membership stood at 624. At the end of the pre-

vious fiscal year the membership stood at 1225.

Here is the way your money was spent from

November 1, 1947, to October 31, 1948:

Income

General Receipts. 0... oe $11,186.76

Expenditures

_ Salaries and Retirement........ $6,913.32

Printing and Stationery... 2,072.17

Rent (c) 2 713.00

Postate 2) 527.00

Wel and Tel. = 231.65

Taxes and Insurance.............. 208.81

Furniture and Equipment...... 170.58

deaveling os 2 146.74

Miscellaneous 42.48

Publications =. 4 143.31

mpecial Cases, 6) 89.35

Total Expenditures ___..... 11,258.41

Deficit, Oct 31; 19048 4 $ 71.65

RESERVE FUNDS

Balance on hand, Oct. 31, 1947... $3,388.75

- Income, 1947-48 (Int.)_. $ 89.19

Expenditures: .

Devic 22 $ 71.65

Treas. Bonds 14.29 85.94

3.25

Balance on hand, Oct. 31, 1948... $3,392.00

ACLU Protests Dropping

Workers Ed. Program at Mich.

The ACLU wrote a letter to Governor Kim

Sigler of Michigan recently, protesting the sus-

pension of the Workers Educational Program at

the University of Michigan and urged that it be

reinstated. The letter called attention to the part

played by the General Motors Corporation in

effecting the curtailment of the program, an

educational program for adults.

The letter, signed by members of the Union's

Academic Freedom Committee, stated: "It is in-

deed unfortunate in these times, when freedom

of expression is being denied people in other

parts of the world, to have a state tax-supported

institution abandon an entire program because

of alleged subversive teaching by one instructor

on the staff."

The committee further pointed out that Uni-

versity President Alexander G. Ruthven had

completely exonerated the program, which was

discontinued after Adam K. Strickler, of the

General Motors staff, had charged before a

Congressional subcommittee that one instructor,

Samuel Jacobs, was teaching Communist pro-

-paganda in a WEP class.

Following Strickler's charges, a meeting of

the State Board of Regents, called by Gov.

Sigler, discontinued funds allocated to the

Workers Educational Program.

Correction

The Union is sorry to report that there was an

error in a release from the Union's national of-

fice that appeared in the November, 1948, issue -

of the News. That release stated that the Au-

thors' League is listed among organizations of

"subversive" nature on a California Civil Service

Commission loyalty questionnaire, whereas in

fact the group is listed in that manner by the

Los Angeles County Civil Service Commission.

_. The Authors' League is a well-known "organ-

ization of more than thirty-five years' standing

which is expressly prohibited from engaging in

political activities by its by-laws." Efforts are

being made to have the group's name removed

from Los Angeles county's subversive list.

`LOYALTY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES'

By PAUL A. PORTER

Former Chief, Office of Price Administration

I believe that a psychosis of FEAR is being

created among large groups of our citizens by

the loyalty program embodied in the President's

executive order of March 21, 1947, and the theat-

rics of the House Committee on Un-American

Activities.

I further believe that if the present trend of

events continues a dark and shameful chapter o

American history isin the making. .

I will not here undertake any legal analysis to

establish one thing that most lawyers concede-

that the competition between the executive and

the legislative to out-do each other in "purging"

alleged subversives does shocking violence to our

traditional constitutional principles.

But just consider these things-

Because of our own feeling of insecurity we

have already condoned the abandonment of these

precepts-

That guilt is personal .. . that the accused is

entitled to be confronted by the witnesses against

him .. . that there is a presumption of innocence

until guilt is proved .. . that our cherished free-

doms of speech and assembly are sacrosanct .. .

and that the opinions of any American citizen are

ACLU Stand on Free Forum

Discussion Draws Ed. Approval

Advertising Age, published in Chicago, has

tacitly endorsed the stand taken by ACLU in

condemning the contract existing between `""Amer-

ica's Town Meeting of the Air" and the Ameri-

can Broadcasting Company.

The program's producer, George V. Denny, has

agreed to give ABC exclusive broadcast rights

to the show, which is commercially sponsored.

In return, ABC has agreed to accept no similar

program. ACLU takes the point of view that

this contract excludes others from the right of

forum-type free discussion.

Denny vetoed Ted. Granik's program "Ameri-

can Forum of the Air," thus keeping it from

being broadcast by ABC. The program was then

scheduled over Mutual Broadcasting System.

Advertising Age commented editorially in its

November 8th issue that from a business stand-

point, Denny was simply protecting his own

program from a competitive one on the same

network.

However, the publication continues: "But the

public relations implication is less admirable. It

seems to suggest a monopoly in forum-type dis-

cussion vested in one man and enforced by that

man against another who is, in effect, a busi-

ness competitor. He who proclaims free speech

reserves it for himself."

Immig. Service Abandons Plan

To Move S.F. Detention Area

The Immigration Service in San Francisco an-

nounced last month that it had abandoned plans

to take over the wartime Navy station next to the

Tanforan race track in San Bruno as a detention

area. The reason stated was that the Govern-

ment's lease has only one more year to run.

The present detention quarters have been con-

demned by many agencies as unfit for human

habitation because the detainees are unable to

enjoy fresh air, sunshine and outdoor recreation

while being held for months on end in the jail-like |

surroundings on the 12th and 13th floors of the

Appraisers Building in downtown San Francisco.

Fortunately, the waterfront strike has cut the

population of the present detention quarters to

about 100. When shipping is resumed, however,

it won't take long before 400 to 500 aliens are

again crowded into the depressing surroundings

that have led to many suicides and attempted

suicides.

FEP Ordinance Proposed

For City of Oakland

Councilman Vernon Lantz, at the request of

the Mayor's Committee on Civic Unity, on No-

vember 26 introduced an ordinance which would

make it a misdemeanor for "any head of depart-

ment, official, agency, board or division" to dis-

criminate in employing persons `because of race,

creed, color, national origin or ancestry."

The ordinance, which directs the Mayor, with

the approval of the council to appoint an Anti-

Discrimination Commission of three members to

serve for three years each, and fixes a maximum

penalty of $500 fine or six months' imprisonment

on conviction, will be given a second reading on

December 2.

The proposal applies merely to practices within

the City government and to contractors doing

work for the city, but not to private employment.

his private possession-not to be abridged, co-

erced, classified-or otherwise tampered with.

Yes-we are doing violence to these basic

values of American freedom.

And-this I will emphasize-the voices raised

in protest or even in comprehension of this dan-

gerous erosion of our liberties are few-few and

hesitant.

When a voice is raised in defense of the Bill of

Rights, it usually opens apologetically with a song

of hate against our former Russian ally. Of

course, our security is menaced by Russia and

the Communist conspiracy of world revolution.

BUT-I maintain-we should defend the Bill of

Rights for the sake of the Bill of Rights-and

not out of fear of Russia.

I am thinking of the casualties at home in this

cold war. These casualties include government

employees ranging from obscure te prominent.

Some have been wrongfully accused of a crime

analogous to treason because-say-they con-

tributed a dollar to the cause of loyalist Spain in

their student days a decade ago. You think that

an exaggeration? Well, I'd like to show you my

law firm's files! Some people have been assailed

-and this I know-for doing no more than many |

in this audience have done when they've been

asked to chip in to this or that cause.

I know, for example, one man who signed, in

March, 1941, a public petition to the President

and the Congress arguing that the Communist

Party should not be outlawed. He was questioned

about that! But-Governor Dewey himself has

taken the same stand in this campaign. J know

another man who now stands charged with dis-

loyalty-hbelieve it or not-because it is alleged,

he questioned and criticized the loyalty program

itself!

Is it any wonder that people are frightened?

I say that the tyranny of some types of loyalty

investigations places a premium on mediocrity

and a penalty on protest. Why, if it is carried .

far enough, one could not even advocate peace!

He might incur the risk of being accused of dis-

loyalty-or, at least, of being eccentric and mis-

guided.

Why, if left unchecked, these programs could

injure someone because he spoke in favor of

family-size farms in the irrigated valleys of cen-

tral California!

That hasn't happened yet. But let me tell you

some things that have happened.

For the high crime of disloyalty-which I have

never been able to distinguish from treason-

an indictment is drawn. Usually a messenger is

dispatched to the suspect's home .. . after work-

ing hours....

I have had many instances recited to me, so I

know what I'm talking about. There's a peremp-

tory knock on the door... the delivery of a letter

marked "personal and confidential.' Then follow

sleepless nights and worried days. . ... What was

that outfit I gave a dollar to? Who was that man

I chatted with at a cocktail party? ... Was I

being disloyal when I said-and who hasn't said

it-"I wish all the bums that are in would be

thrown out."

Many Americans agree with what I feel. Gen-

eral Eisenhower knows the danger of pillorying

Americans for holding opinions. John Lord

O'Brien spoke out against the present drift.

I propose-Mr. Andrews-three things: -

1. A moratorium by both the Congress and the

Executive branch in this political competition to

expose sus pects-not spies-for neither has

caught or convicted anyone who has really en- -

dangered America.

2. Recognize that there is a danger of espion-

age, fifth columns and subversive activities in the

present international atmosphere. BUT place re-

liance upon experts-experts trained in the field

of detection and counter-espionage-to protect

our security.

3. And-this is my hole card, I wish the next

President would designate General Eisenhower to

head a committee to study the present uncon-

trolled drift toward suppression of ideas-and

suppression of all freedoms, including the free-

doms of inquiry, of the campus, of the graphic

arts, of radio, of the screen. Yes, and even of the

town hall and the cracker barrel. I wish General

Eisenhower would be appointed to appraise the

dangers and disasters of political demagoguery

in abolishing our freedoms while pretending to

protect our security.

I believe that under General Eisenhower's

guidance we could get a report which would con-

firm for us that our strength and protection lie in

the perpetuation of basic human freedoms-and

not in their suppression.-The foregoing speech

was delivered at the 17th Annual New York Her-

ald Tribune Forum, held at the Waldorf-Astoria

Hotel, New York, October 19, 1948.

_ Ten Cents per Copy

and

Page 4

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

American Civil Liberties Union-News

Published monthly at 461 Market St., San Francisco 5,.

Calif., by the American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California.

Phone: EXbrook 2-3255

ERNEST BESIG a Editor

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

Post Office at San Francisco, California,

under the Act of March 3, 1879

Subscription Rates-One Dollar a Year.

-151 cE ISD

N.Y. Lower Court Upholds

Released Time Program

The Supreme Court of New .York (a trial

court) on November 15 sustained the State De-

partment of Education in granting "released

time" periods for school children to receive re-

ligious instruction off school grounds.

Justice Roscoe V. Elsworth dismissed a tax-

payer's suit brought by Joseph Lewis of North

Salem, N. Y., president of the Freethinkers of

America, filed on May 28th of this year.

Lewis, who was represented by the American

Civil Liberties Union counsel Arthur Garfield

Hays, acting privately, based his suit on a ruling

by the U.S. Supreme Court last March, when it

upheld a pleading by Mrs. Vashti McCollum of

Champaign, Ill. Mrs. McCollum had contended

that to use school property supported by tax-

payers and school funds provided by taxpayers

for religious instruction was a violation of the

constitutional principles of separation of church

and state and of her right to free choice of re-

ligious belief.

Justice Elsworth ruled that the Illinois case

and the New York case differ in a number of

respects, and that the U.S. Supreme Court had

not intended to hand down a blanket ruling cov-

ering the entire subject of released time.

He said that in New York school children

leave the school area, that the teachers take no

part in the religious instruction, and that no

public funds are spent. He pointed out that

the only participation by New York schools in

the program is to require from the student's

parent or guardian a statement asking for the

released time to be made available for religious

instruction and proof that the student, once re-

leased, actually attended such instruction.

Justice Elsworth said that the New York

schools make no attempt to influence students

to take the religious instruction, and that those

who do not take it "remain in their classrooms

continuing significant educational work."

Lewis announced that he would appeal the

decision, if necessary, to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Hays, his attorney, charged that if the churches

held their religious instructions after school

hours the students "would play baseball in-

stead." Thus, he argued, allowing time during

the school day was only a "bait to get the child

to church."

Meanwhile, a similar case, backed by the ACLU

and other organizations, filed in July, 1948, op-

posing the constitutionality of released time, is

still pending. It is the case of Tessim Zorach,

Episcopalian, and Mrs. Esta Gluck, Jewish, both

of Brooklyn. :

Since the Supreme Court McCollum decision it

has been the ACLU stand that the decision in-

validates all released time programs.

Leaflet Distributor Freed in

Memphis; Union Card Restored

Charges of disorderly conduct and soliciting

without a license made in Memphis, Tenn., last

April against a young Chicago musician were

dismissed last month when the case was annealed

to the Circuit Court in Shelby County, Tenn.

The ACLU had joined with the Socialist La-

bor Party in assisting 28-year-old Henry Coretz

fight the charges and protest the fine of $51 on

each count imposed on him by Memphis City

Court Judge Perry E. Sellers. Coretz had been

arrested because he was distributing his party's

literature in Memphis.

Following his arrest. his band leader, Benny

Strong, had taken up Caretz's union card. which

effectively deprived him of his means of liveli-

hood, since an AFM membership is essential to

playing with any organized orchestra.

ACLU and the labor party checked with

James C. Petrillo, union head, and with the

Memphis local of AFM and learned that there

was no basis for withdrawing Coretz's card, and

it was promptly restored to him.

When he distributed his party's literature,

Coretz was accused by Memphis Police Com-

missioner Joe Boyle of subversive activity. How-

ever, Circuit Court Judge Floyd Henderson ruled

that no disorderly conduct was involved and

that Coretz was not guilty of soliciting without

a license. Abel Roberts, local ACLU lawyer,

represented him.

Attempted Regul

ition Of `Comic Books'

Raises Free Speech and Press Issues

The Police Committee of the San Francisco

Board of Supervisors last month recommended

establishment of a "citizens review committee"

to examine "comic books" and to seek to eliminate

any that are "objectionable" through conferences

with publishers.

At the same time, the Committee referred to

the City Attorney for his opinion an ordinance

proposed by Supervisor Marvin Lewis which is al-0x00B0

most identical with a Los Angeles ordinance that

is now being challenged in the courts. The pro-

posal provides as follows:

"It shall be unlawful for any person, firm,

corporation or association to sell, give away, or in

any way furnish to any person under the age of

eighteen years any book, magazine or other pub-

lication, other than those publications devoted to

the general dissemination of current news, in

which there is prominently featured an account of

crime, and which depicts, by the use of drawings

or photographs, the commission or attempted

commission of the crimes of arson, assault with

caustic chemicals, assault with a deadly weapon,

burglary, kidnapping, mayhem, murder, rape,

robbery, theft, or voluntary manslaughter."

It will be noticed that the proposal is directed

against publications in which there is "promin-

ently featured an account of crime, etc." When

are stories of crime "prominently featured?" The

standard of guilt is indefinite and uncertain. A

serious injustice can be done if the line between

the allowable and the forbidden is not clearly and

distinctly drawn so that, as the U.S. Supreme

Court recently stated, "an honest distributor of

publications could know when he might be held to

have ignored a prohibition."

In the case alluded to, a New York statute, as

Union's Fears for Future of

Picketing Seen Justified

| A warning, sounded by the American Civil Lib-

erties Union nearly three years ago, to the ef-

fect that picketing as an expression of free

speech would have a stormy career before the

courts and labor boards, was re-echoed during

recent weeks by two major decisions on the

issue.

First, an examiner for the NLRB ruled that

mass picketing violates provisions of the Taft-

Hartley labor law, even when it is "peaceful."

This decision followed a hearing on unfair labor

practice charges brought against the United

Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of Amer-

ica, CIO, by the Cory Corporation of Chicago.

It involved a demonstration of some 2000 mem-

bers and friends before the company's plant on

November 21, 1947.

"It is clear that the procession as conducted

on the day in question constituted mass picket-

ing in aggravated form," said the NLRB exam-

iner. But newspaper accounts do not indicate

that there was any denial of access to the plant,

interference with traffic, or acts of violence by

pickets which constitute illegality from the ACLU

viewpoint, rather than mass picketing as such.

An appeal to the National Labor Relations

Board is now under way. Professor Herbert

Northrup, chairman of the Union's Committee

on Civil Rights in Labor Relations, said last

month:

"An alarming tendency would appear to be

developing, the ultimate effect of which will be

again to have picketing regarded as a form of

coercion rather than a means of free expression..

Such a trend is due, in part, to abuses of pick-

eting and a misconception of its purpose. Be-

cause we fear that mass picketing which is

peaceful and does not deny access to struck

places of employment may be held illegal-

thereby creating a precedent to limit or outlaw

all picketing--we are asking the National Labor

Relations Board for an opportunity to present

our views on this important problem."

The second blow to mass picketing was deliv-

ered by U.S. Supreme Court when it upheld a

curb on mass picketing by refusing to review

the trial of 35 pickets who were arrested: and

' convicted during a 1946 strike at the Columbia

Studios in Los Angeles. The pickets were

charged with violating a restraining order which

limited picketing activities. The group, in peti-

tioning for a Supreme Court review, contended

the restraining order violated the constitutional

guarantees of free speech and assembly. But

the Court's refusal to review the trial of the 35

pickets has the effect of confirming their con-

victions.

The Union's consistent position has been that

picketing is a means of free speech; picketing

is not illegal if there is no denial of access to

the place picketed or interference with traffic.

interpreted by the courts, forbade "the massing

of stories of bloodshed and lust in such a way as

to incite to crime against the person."' On March

29, 1948, in a 6 to 3 decision, the U.S. Supreme

Court declared that the statute violated the right

of free speech and press because it was vague and

indefinite. "Though we can see nothing of any

possible value to society in these magazines," said

the court, "they are as much entitled to the pro-

tection of free speech as the best of literature."

Not only is the San Francisco proposal of

doubtful validity, but it cannot be enforced. The

proposal does not ban the distribution of `"objec-

tionable" comic books to all persons. It applies

merely to persons under the age of 18. Con-

sequently, the corner drug store may have its

shelves loaded with "objectionable" comic books

without violating the proposal.

There are hundreds of comic book titles that

change every two to six weeks. A minority of

them are alleged to be " objectionable." Under the

proposal, the Police Department would have the ~

difficult task of determining which of the ever-

changing books are "bad." After making that

determination it could not then require the "ob-

jectionable'" books to be removed from the dis-

tributor's shelves. It could only intervene if a sale

of an improper book were made to a person under

the age of eighteen. The San Francisco police

force is just not big enough to perform such a

tremendous task, even if the proposal can stand

the constitutional test.

The ACLU appeared before the Committee to

oppose Mr. Lewis' proposal not as a defender of

comic books, but to urge that in combatting an

alleged evil the City should not sacrifice the

freedom of the press. And, insofar as any of the

books are obscene, the Union pointed out that we

already have obscenity statutes to take care o

the situation. `

In Sacramento the City Council has before it a

variation of the San Francisco proposal. It at-

tempts to limit the prohibition to `"`comic books."

The proposal was introduced in the City Council

after a citizens Committee to Study Comic Books,

made up of representatives of women's groups,

on October 28 last urged the Council to prohibit

the sale or distribution of comic books that con-

tained the following:

1. Sexy; wanton comics. 2. Situations dealing

with crime or criminal deeds. 3. Scenes of sadistic

torture. 4. Vulgar and obscene language. 5. Glam-

orizing of divorce. 6. Religious or racial ridicule.

7. Situations which incite to violence or terror.

This proposal is almost identical with a ``code"

adopted by 13 of the 35 comic book publishers,

except that books dealing with crime would not

be banned but the subject would "not be presented

in such a way as to throw sympathy against law

and justice ...'' The proposed ordinance, how-

ever, is limited to comic books dealing with crime.

Almost fifty cities have taken steps to regulate -

the sale of comic books. Only a few have thus far

adopted penal ordinances. Most cities have sought

the cooperation of wholesalers and distributors

"in some plan of voluntary control or self-

censorship." In a few communities official "cen-

sorship committees" have been empowered to ban

the distribution of comic books which they find

to be "objectionable."

The annual circulation of comic books is said to

be about 720,000,000 copies. The gross business

amounts to about $72,000,000 a year.

_ Besides the legal test in Los Angeles, applica-

tion of an Illinois statute is being challenged in

Chicago.

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION

American Civil Liberties Union of No. CaHf..

461 Market Street, .

San Francisco 5, Calif.

1. Please enroll me as a member at dues of

Gao ees for the current year. (Types of mem-

bership: Associate Member, $3; Annual Mem-

ber, $5; Business and Professional Member,

$10; Family Membership, $25; Contributing

Member, $50; Patron, $100 and over. Mem-

bership includes subscription to the "American

Civil Liberties Union-News" at $1 a year.)

2. I pledge $.. J per month._or $. per yr.

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

per year) sca et ee

Enclosed please find $............2..----c0---+6 Please bill

MO. 8):

IN AMG. ee

Bl Street. sooth ee eee

i] City and Zone

eee USS eee ccaeecenacaee: Occupation. 2