vol. 16, no. 12

American

Civil Liberties

Union-News

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."

Free Press -

Free Assemblage

Free Speech -

ea

VOLUME XVI

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, DECEMBER, 1951

No. 12-

U.S. Orders Chinese Students

Net To Return To Red China

The United States is not permitting certain

alien Chinese, who came to this country as stu-

dents, to return to their homes in Red China.

Acting under a war-time statute and a Presiden-

tial proclamation of 1941, under which the Gov-

ernment may restrict the travel of aliens whose

departure would be prejudicial to the interests of

the United States, the Immigration Service has

ordered Chinese scientists to remain here until

further notice.

Last September, nine Chinese students, return-

ing to China after completing their studies in the

United States, headed for Hong Kong on the

American President liner Cleveland. When the

vessel reached Honolulu on the 25th, Immigration

_ Service inspectors ordered the students to dis-

embark with their hand luggage. A week later,

each student was served with a notice ``not to.

depart or attempt to depart from the United

States until you have been notified that this order

has been revoked," under penalty of being "fined

not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more:

`than five years, orkoth.")

Seven of the nine students returned to the

mainland, paying for their own passage, while the

remaining two, a priest and a business administra-.

tion student, were allowed to proceed to China

f atter waiting in Honolulu for three weess. Theic

- trunks reached San Francisco late in November.

The ECA program is assisting the Chinese stu-

dents who are in want. For example, one man is

having his lodging paid for at the Chinese YMCA

in San Francisco and he also receives $2.50 a day

in meal tickets which are good only at Foster's

`Lunch at the rate of 60c tor breakfast, 80c for

lunch and $1.10 for dinner.

A surgeon who held fellowships in American

hospitals for more than two years is now deliver-

ing parcels for Macy's department store in San

Francisco. Of the seven students who returned to

the mainland after being stopped in Honolulu,

four are now in San Francisco, two are in Los

Angeles and one is in Philadelphia. The students

are free to go wherever they wish so long as they

remain in the United States.

Many other Chinese students have been denied

departure permits. They have training in such

fields as chemistry, medicine and astronomy.

Since they have completed their studies they

would like to return to their wives and children in

China. All of them held temporary American visas

which permitted them to remain in the United

States for only a limited period. It appears now

that they are likely to remain in the United States

until hostilities in Korea come to an end,

|Sectarian Activity in School

On October 31 the following item ap-

_ peared in the Galileo High School (San Fran-

cisco) "Bulletin"; `Father Joseph Scanlon will |

address Catholic students-boys and girls-

at a meeting in the auditorium at 2:40 on

Wednesday. Passes to attend this meeting may

be procured from registry teachers. Registry

teachers are requested to keep a record of

those getting passes.

"All Catholic boys and girls will find this

meeting of great benefit to them."

Mr. Ras E. Johnson, the principal, in- |

formed the Union that Father Scanlon's talk

| would concern itself with a Catholic retreat.

He stated he had given permission for the use

of the auditorium during school hours without

consulting the Superintendent's office.

The Union at once got in touch with Dr.

Herbert C. Clish, Superintendent of Public

Schools, who readily agreed that this sectarian

activity was in violation of the State and Fed-

eral Constitutions and Education Code, requir-

ing separation of Church and State. The meet-

ing was promptly cancelled.

Special "Loyalty

Oath" Terminated by

U.C. Regents as Delaying Tactic Fails

Two years, seven months and twenty-two days

after a "loyalty" oath was first proposed and

adopted at the University of California, the Board

of Regents, meeting November 16 at Berkeley,

voted, 12-5, against reconsideration of their Octo-

ber decision to support the McLaughlin motion

- to rescind the signed "loyalty" requirement as a

condition of employment, and the years of the

oath came to an end. (See the November issue of

the ACLU-News for full details of the October

meeting.) - .

Voting against reconsideration and in favor of

termination were Regents Fenston, Hagar, Hag-

gerty, Hansen, Heller, McLaughlin, Olson, Simp- -

son, Sproul, Steinhart, Toll and Merchant. Voting

for reconsideration were Regents Ahlport, Dick-

son, Erhman, Nimitz and Pauley. Governor Earl

Warren, a firm opponent of the oath, was absent

from the meeting, as were Regents Collins, Jordan, (c)

Knight, McFadden, Neylan, and Sprague, all of

whom had supported the "loyalty'' declaration.

The motion for reconsideration was made by

Regent Ahlport and was seconded by Regent

Pauley. Noting the absence of Board members

who might have supported his motion, Ahlport

admitted his move was a "rear-guard"' action only, (c)

but an action, in his opinion, none the less neces-

sary.

Support for the motion came from Regent Ehr-

man, who denounced the abrogation of the declar-

ation as "untimely" while the Tolman case, con-

testing the issue, was still under judgment by the

Mrs. Knauff Granted Entry

To U.S.; 3-Year Fight Ends

After three years in and out of court, Mrs.

Ellen Knauff has finally won the right to enter

the U.S. The end of her fight came when Attorney

General J. Howard McGrath approved an order

of the Board of Immigration Appeals admitting

Mrs. Knauff for permanent residence. It marked

a finish to the government's long campaign to

send her back to Germany.

Mrs. Knauff had been held in detention on Ellis

Island for almost three years. It was not until

March, 1950-close to two years after she arrived

-that she had her first formal hearing. She was

charged then with having spied for a Czechoslo-

-vak mission in Frankfort, Germany, where she

and her husband were U.S. Army civilian em-

ployees; her attorneys showed that the evidence

against her was hearsay without any corrobora-

tion whatsoever. The appeal bhoard's decision held

that deportation could not be based on such

evidence.

After she was ordered deported, Mrs. Knauff's

case came up twice before the U.S. Supreme

Court. Both times the high court sided with the

government holding that her admission would be

"prejudicial to national security." Last summer,

however, Mrs. Knauff won a rehearing of her

case by the Board of Immigration Appeals. The

board's decision on August 29, reversed its pre-

vious ruling and led to the formal approval this

month by Attorney General McGrath.

In Congress, Mrs. Knauff had strong backing

for her fight, mainly from Rep. Francis E. Walter -

of Pennsylvania who pushed a bill through the

House to authorize her entry. ACLU intervened

in the case several times-twice to support special

bills to grant her entry pending disposition of the

case, and again to urge the Justice Department to

allow hearings.

In a wire to ACLU, Mrs. Knauff thanked the

union for "`helping me obtain justice."

State Supreme Court, and who suggested further

that termination of the declaration requirement

would be against the wishes of the faculty of the ~

University, an irony available to him in view of the -

overwhelming faculty vote, announced March 22,

1950, in favor of including an acceptance of the

Regents' anti-Communist policy as a part of

University contracts. I

John Francis Neylan, leader of the fight to

/ maintain the requirement, sent a note to the - 7

Board announcing that he would support the mo- |

tion to reconsider, feeling that it was "appropri-_

ate" to do so until a decision on the Tolman case

was announced, There was no other comment.

This victory in the fight for civil liberties must

be considered in the light of two factors that ~ ty

contributed most decisively to its achievement:

first, it is to be noticed that the motion to repeal __

the declaration requirement was made because

the faculty was already subject to the require-

ments of the Levering Act oath, and the special

_ Regents' declaration was thus made redundant;

and second, it took a change in the membership of

the Board of Regents, a change made necessary

`hy the deaths of certain pro-oath members, before (c) _

a majority in favor of rescinding the "loyalty"

declaration could be obtained. These sobering con-

siderations seriously limit the extent of the vic-

tory, and this limitation should be recognized.

The faculty is still subject to the necessity of

periodically declaring itself `loyal'; it ig more

firmly tied than ever to the Regents' anti-Com- |

munist policy; and it can look back to its experi-

ence of almost three years of fighting the oath - A

only with uncertain assurance of its part in the

final victory. It can hardly be claimed that the _

faculty took the firm and uncompromising stand

in defense of its freedoms that it might have been

expected to take, and it is uncertain that its

position now is any less encumbered by challenges -

to its integrity than it was on March 25, 1949,

when the first draft of a loyalty oath was adopted (c)

by the Regents. i aig

The decision of the Regents on November 16

marked the end of a chapter in the current history

of the state of civil liberties in this country. If

there was a note of triumph at the final moment, |

it was not without the suspicion of hollowness.

-J.E.

Many Thanks! |

The ACLU office takes this means of ;

thanking the 700 persons who last month

sent in contributions and pledges towards the

Union's $17,200 budget for the fiscal year |

ending October 31, 1952. As is the Union's ;

custom, no receipts or acknowledgments :

were sent to subscribers unless a cash con- |

tribution was received. That procedure saves

the Union time and money better spent on :

the business of defending civil liberties. -

If you have not yet contributed toward the ;

Union's '52 budget, won't you please do so

without delay. The Union would like to dis- .

pose of its fund-raising activities just as }

swiftly as possible in order to be able to con- -

centrate on its main job. Even if your mem- |

bership does not expire just now, the Union -

hopes. you will be willing to make your

PRESENT and FUTURE contributions at |

this time. Your cooperation will be appre-

ciated. . =

And, if you are among the more than 200 |

persons whose subscriptions expired in No-

vember, you can save the Union. a lot of office :

work by sending your renewal just as soon |

as possible. oe

Page 2

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

Mother Deprived Of Child

Because Of Opinions

Questions of fundamental democratic rights

were raised by an American Civil Liberties Union

affiliate last month when it filed a "friend of the

court" brief in the New York State Court of Ap-

peals in a child custody case.

The New York Civil Liberties Union intervened

in behalf of Mrs. Ann Strasser DeCarava, who

lost custody of her 6-year-old daughter to Mrs.

DeCarava's mother, Mrs. Molly Portnoy.

Asserting that freedom of opinion and religion

as well as racial discrimination, are involved, the

NYCLU asked the appeals court to decide to what

extent such issues should govern custody rulings.

Mrs. Portnoy won custody of the child after

charging her daughter with neglect and untfit-

ness. The NYCLU brief pointed out that Mrs. De-

Carava was accused of Communist activity three

years ago, of failing to rear her daughter in the

Jewish faith, and of bringing her up in an "un-

desirable' neighborhood-an interracial area

where she lives with her second husband, a Negro.

"Surely it can be no ground for depriving a

mother of her child that, as is alleged in the

(grandmother's) petition, `her present husband is

of a race and religion different from that of the

infant'," the NYCLU brief, signed by Osmond K.

- Fraenkel, as counsel, declared.

"That this was probably the prime motive be-

hind the institution of these proceedings is a fair

inference from the circumstance that no proceed-

ings were instituted until after petitioner learned

of this marriage, although the other grounds al-

leged in the petition had long been known to her...

"Whatever may be'the difficulties arising from

mixed marriages . . . what right has a grand-

parent, to interfere by taking a child away-or

the state to support her in her claim ?"'

~The NYCLU's brief asserted that the question

of religion likewise is "equally irrelevant to any

proper proceeding for the custody of a child."

"It is by now well settled that the state has no

power to interfere with a parent's religious, up+

bringing of a child," the brief pointed out. "If it

cannot do so directly, it should be equally im-

proper to accomplish the same result by authoriz-

ing such interference through a writ of habeas

_ corpus." eo

' The brief discounted Mrs. DeCarava's "neglect"

of her daughter because of alleged Communist

activities as bearing on the case since the pur-

_ ported activities occurred while she and the child

were living with Mrs. Portnoy and not after she

- `was with her second husband.

Emphasizing the NYCLU's opposition to any

form of totalitarianism, the brief held never-

theless that political opinion should not influence

a decision in the case.

"There surely is no warrant for depriving a

mother of her child even if she is a Communist,"

the brief said. ``We should,-of course, expect one

of the Communist countries to hold a mother un-

fit who rejected the prevailing orthodoxy. Are

we to be sad imitators?"

Urge McCarran Comm. Revise

Procedures In IPR Probe

The American Civil Liberties Union last month

called on Senator Pat McCarran to reform the

procedures of the Senate Subcommittee on In-

ternal Security probing the Institute of Pacific

Relations. The IPR has been accused as being

under Communist control and influencing U.S.

Far Eastern policy.

The Union urged Sen. McCarran to allow coun-

sel for the IPR to cross-examine witnesses and to

have access to IPR files, now in exclusive custody

of the committee. These lacks were criticized by

the ACLU spokesman as "serious violations of the

spirit of due process of law." -

Noting the Committee's continued retention of

the IPR files, the Union asserted "It is obviously

unfair to question persons about letters written

years ago without giving them an opportunity to

examine such letters. The boundaries of human

memory often makes it impossible to recall pre- '

cisely the details of events that took place years

before. The accusations against the IPR have

keen based on those files; an adequate defense

must also be based on the files .. . To refuse would

certainly abrogate the right of a fair hearing to

an organization under investigation in a serious

matter." _

The ACLU also termed the Committee's failure

to permit cross-examination of witnesses unfair

both to IPR and to the Committee. "Under our

democratic code any person accused should he

granted the right to interrogate his accusers so

as to ascertain the validity of the charge. How

else can justice be done? Moreover, the Commit-

tee's purpose of obtaining information is best

Union Protests Ban on Max Sohackiwails

Appearance on Univ. of Calif. Foru

The ACLU of Northern California last month

protested to Dr. Hurford E. Stone, Dean of Stu-

dents at the University of California, against the

University's refusal to allow Max Schachtman,

leader of the Independent Socialist League, to de-

bate with Prof. Francis Herrick of Mills College

on the question, "Can the Churchill Conservative

government provide a better solution for Britain's

internal problems than the Labour Party?"

`While the campus organizations which invited

Mr. Schachtman to speak may have violated the

University's Rule 17 in not securing its approval

of their speakers," the, Union's letter declared,

"we think that rule in itself violates basic demo-

cratic rights and should be abolished. It means, in'

effect, that there is no freedom of discussion by

students on the campus." :

Dr. Stone defended the banning of Mr. Schacht-

man on two grounds: 1, that the requirements of

Rule 17 were not met; and, 2, that the organiza-_

Supreme Court Agrees To

Hear `Group Libel' Test Case

The United States Supreme Court will consider

the constitutionality of state "race'' or "group

libel" laws this term when it reveiws the case of

Joseph Beauharnais, convicted last year by a

Chicago municipal court for having defamed

Negroes.

ACLU had petitioned the high court for a writ

of certiorari (an order to review) in the case.

While opposing Beauharnais' views, ACLU cham-

pioned his right to them and questioned the le-

gality of the Illinois law, which is similar to the

statutes of several other states.

As founder and president of the White Circle

League of America, Beauharnais circulated peti-

tions in Chicago calling upon white people to

`preserve and protect white neighborhoods from

the constant and continuous invasion, harassment

and encroachment by the Negroes." The Illinois

law under which he was convicted forbade the

publication and exhibition of lithographs which

showed Negroes in an unfavorable light. His con- -

viction was later upheld by the Illinois Supreme

Court, which later denied a petition for rehearing.

In its petition, ACLU pointed out that "as so

often has been said, if the right of free speech

means anything at all it means freedom for the

expression of opinions we hate as well as those

with which we agree." It is ACLU's contention

that the Illinois law contravenes the First Amend-

ment as well as the due process clause of the

Fourteenth `Amendment.

The ACLU's action in the case drew applause

last month from the Chicago Tribune and the

Washington Evening Star. Said the Tribune: "It

is greatly to the credit of the Civil Liberties Union

that it is bringing the appeal on Beauharnais' be-

half. Beauharnais' circulars, to judge from a few

we have seen, are as distasteful to the members

of the Civil Liberties Union as they are to us and

to everyone else who isn't a bigot. Accordingly,

the decision to come to Beauharnais' defense could

not have been an easy one to reach, That it was

the correct decision, however, we do not doubt

for a moment." The Star's comment was: "The

Supreme Court has agreed to review the case, and

the constitutional issue will be settled there.

Meanwhile, the Civil Liberties Union is perform-

ing in the best tradition-in the tradition that the

freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution cannot

be edged around with ideological considerations

but must be equally available to all."'

achieved only when cross questioning is permitted.

How else can truth be served?"

In emphasizing the importance of cross-exami-

nation, the Union pointed to the campaigns, in-

cluding ACLU's, to have this procedure adopted

by all congressional investigating committees. "Re-

cent resolutions, one by Senator Kefauver, have

been introduced to attain this goal. Even the

House Un-American Activities Committee, in its

recent hearings, has adopted this procedure. This

right is essential to due process of law and must

transcend all political or partisan issues. We urge

it in the matter of the IPR just as we urged it in

behalf of Senator McCarthy when a Senate Rules

subcommittee held hearings on a resolution to

oust him from the Senate.

"At a time when democratic principles are

being tested in the world-wide struggle against

Communist tyranny, we cannot adopt tactics

which parallel this tyranny. Failure to observe

the rights contained in our Bill of Rights, espe-

cially ey a congressional committee representa-

tive of the democratic process, can only under-

mine faith in the democratic system. This faith is

our ultimate security and strength."

tion Mr. Schachtman represents is on the Attorney

General's list. "This evidence, until established as

inaccurate or illegal, was regarded as sufficient

cause to disapprove the proposed speaker in ac-

cordance with established policy of the Regents in

connection: with Communism in the University,"

says a statement issued by Dr. Stone. Just what

Regent resolution, if any, Dr. Stone had in mind is'

not indicated in his statement.

On the second point, the Union took the posi-

tion that `"`a student organization should be as free

as any other responsible group of citizens to in-

vite speakers to address them on any subject. We

Americans should never be afraid of ideas. Citi-

zens and, especially, students should have the

right to hear persons who are in the forefront of

controversy even though they are associated with

groups on the Attorney General's list or some

other list."

Not so long ago, Dr. Stone, in a public state-

ment declared that ``Complete freedom is given for

student forum debate on campus with respect to

all public isssues regardless of their controversial

nature . . . Numerous off-campus speakers are

brought in for these discussion groups, the only

restrictions being that they be qualified `and

that no Communists will be brought in.. ."

The fact is, of course, that there is no "com-

plete freedom" for forum discussion on the U.C.

campus, because the University reserves the right

to grant or withhold a permit for a speaker to

appear. That was the policy when Rule 17 was

adopted on October 5, 1939, and the revision of

that rule on June 1, 1949, which has just come to

the Union's attention, does not depart from that

policy. 4 :

To be sure, Rule 17 does contain some brave

words as to the University's intentions. For ex-

ample, "The University recognizes a responsibility

to invite or approve the inviting of qualified out-

side speakers on important public problems, in-

cluding religious and political problems, for the

purpose of promoting the intellectual development

of its students ...'' At the same time, "Meetings

or events which by their nature, method of pro- |

moting, or general handling, tend to involve the

University in political or sectarian religious activi-

ties in a partisan way will not ke permitted. Dis-

cussion. of highly controversial issues normally

will be approved only when two or more aspects

of the problem are to be presented by a panel of

qualified speakers."

It would appear that the University blows hot

and cold on the issue of freedom of discussion for

students. It tries to give the impression that the

students enjoy freedom of discussion on the cam-

pu, when, as a matter of fact, it is rigidly con-

trolled.. While the University may be within its

legal rights in limiting freedom of speech for

students, the question still remains whether it is

sound policy.

Such a restrictive policy has been supported by

some on the ground that the University must take

a protective attitude toward the students because

of their immaturity. It is quite true, of course, that

freedom entails certain risks. Should not a free

society take these risks even with Uinversity

students? Unfortunately, the tendency of the

times is to defend ourselves against totalitarian

ideas by adopting the methods and devices of

totalitarians to a greater or lesser degree.

_ A University should be a market place for free

exchange of ideas. It cannot accomplish its high

purpose if its faculty is restricted by a special

loyalty oath, or if the freedom of discussion of its

students is limited by a Rule 17.

Boston, Michigan Bar Assns.

Act to Screen Communisis

Two more bar associations-Boston's and the

state of Michigan's-have taken the first steps

toward screening out Communist lawyers.

Boston attorneys, in a special poll, voted 673

to 140 to ask the state supreme court to remove (c)

Communists from the bar and to close the door

to any future "`subversive'' members. The lawyers

also went on record for a loyalty oath for all new

members., By a vote of 603 to 206, they lined up

behind expelling any attorney who didn't sign the

oath within a reasonable time. Less than one-third

of all the association's members voted in the poll.

Michigan's bar, by a 275 to 151 tally, adopted a

proposal to ask the state supreme court to amend

the Canons of Professional Ethics. The proposed

amendment would make subject to disbarment

proceeding any lawyers who commit an "act of

disloyalty," as well as those found guilty of fraud,

deceit, perjury, theft, and embezzlement.

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

Page 3

OPEN FORUM

BILL OF RIGHTS DAY `

On December 15 this country will celebrate the

160th Anniversary of the adoption of the Bill of

Rights.

XN

COMMITTEE CHANGES

Joseph S. Thompson, for many years Secretary-

Treasurer of the ACLU of Northern California,

last month resigned from the Committee. The

latter regretfully accepted his resignation, and

elected him Honorary Treasurer. Fred H. Smith,

IV was elected to replace Mr. Thompson as Secre-

tary-Treasurer.

At the same time, the Executive Committee

- elected Rev. Oscar F. Green to fill the unexpired

term of Mr. Thompson, while Kathleen D. Tolman

was elected to fill another vacancy on the Com-

mittee.

Still another vacancy on the Committee has re-

sulted from the resignation of Arnold F. Campo,

who is associated with the United Steel Workers.

His organization has transferred him to Washing-

ton, D.C.

POLITICAL POLICE

The Berkeley Police Department has refused to

confirm or deny a report that its "security detail'

takes pictures of persons attending street meet-

ings in Berkeley, particularly at Sather Gate.

COAST GUARD SCREENING

The Union received information last month that

five San Francisco maritime workers who had pre-

viously been cleared by the Coast Guard `after

hearings were suddenly screened as security risks.

In another development, this time in Seattle,

two stewards are under indictment for violating

the Magnuson Act because they sailed on vessels

without receiving security clearance.

ATTACK ANSWERED

Last month Ernest Besig appeared on station

KRDU in Dinuba to answer an attack on the Union

made by commentator John M. Banks a year ago.

Mr. Banks echoed the Tenney Committee report

which brands the Union as a Communist front and

a transmission belt for Communism. The attack

on the Union sprang from its opposition to the

McCarran Internal Security Act, which Mr. Banks

was supporting while plugging for the election of

Senator Nixon. The fifteen minute address was

printed in full in the November 8 issue of the

Dinuba Sentinel.

REFUGEE GRANTED CITIZENSHIP

A naturalization issue handled by the ACLU

was successfullly terminated last month when

the Jewish refugee was granted citizenship. The

petition had been delayed for almost two years

because of an anti-semitic witness who seemed to

_ take the position that all Jews are Russian Jews,

and all Russian Jews are Communists. The witness

said she had gained the general impression that

the alien was against our form of government,

Act.

Oklahoma Supreme Court

Upholds Loyalty Oath }

Seven ex-faculty members of Oklahoma A. and M.

College who carried a fight against a loyalty oath

to the state supreme court have lost on all counts.

The seven had been fired from their jobs when

they refused to sign the oath.

Passed last spring, the oath applied to `every

officer and every employee of the state, county,

school district, municipality, public agency, public

authority, or public district." In essence, it con-

sisted of three parts: a standard oath of allegiance

to the United States; an oath that the signer has

not been a Communist or a member of a Commun-

ist front as defined by the U.S. Attorney General

within the past five years; an oath that the signer

will bear arms if necessary in defense of the

United States.

_--.

Ohio State Eases 'Gag Rule' -

Ban On Campus Speakers _

After widespread protests by the Cleveland

Civil Liberties Union, the Cincinnati branch of

ACLU and other organizations, the president of

Ohio State University, Dr. Howard L. Bevis, has

relaxed the gag rule which permits him to screen

all speakers visiting the university's campus.

Bevis announced November 8 that three groups

of speakers may appear on the campus without

prior screening by him: Those (1) invited by

faculty members to speak in classes to "make a

proper contribution to classwork;" (2) heads of

religious organizations recognized on the campus;

(3) speakers invited by off-campus organizations

recognized by the university.

mainly because he had opposed the Taft-Hartley etait ants Gace Gadictment

Wy 2 :

Permanente Hospitals and the Permanente

Health Plan have announced a policy of requiring

their employees to establish their loyalty `to the

satisfaction of Permanente." After getting ex-

actly nowhere in discussing this policy with at-

torneys for these groups, the Union sent identical

letters to Henry Kaiser, the Trustees of the Per-

manente Hospitals and the Permanente Health

Plan, as well as Dr. Sidney Garfield, the Super-

intendent of the hospitals, requesting a conference

"on many phases of the questions raised by your

procedures." The letter was ignored.

Many of the Union's members belong to groups

that have contracts with Permanente for medical

services. It is urged that such members request

their groups to insist on a clarification of Per-

manente's loyalty check program. In addition, the

Union's staff will confer with the officers of such

groups requesting their intervention in the matter.

It would also be helpful if individual members of

Permanente requested a clarification of the

loyalty program.

The Union's letter follows:

The American Civil Liberties Union, as you

undoubtedly know, has played, for over thirty

years, an important part in guarding the political

freedom of Americans, in so far as it is guaran-

teed by the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of

the United States.

For that reason the Northern California branch

of the Union is deeply disturbed by the impres-

sion, now spreading through the community, and

confirmed by conference with your officials, that

you have assumed a judicial and punitive author-

ity over your employees, expressed in the words,

"the loyalty to our Government of all Permanente

employees must be established beyond question."

We are further informed that, in the exercise

of that authority, you have adopted "the follow-

ing definite and clear policy":

"No person will knowingly be accepted or con-

tinued as an employee whose loyalty to the United

States Government is not established to the satis-

faction of Permanente.

"The fact that a doubt exists regarding the

Permanente Won't Discuss Its Loyaliy Program

With Union; Other Groups Asked to Intervene

loyalty of an individual, whether such doubt ex-

ists because of the individual's poor judgment or

intention, will make employment or the continu-

ance thereof with this organization impossible."

The Civil Liberties Unon does not challenge the

demand that citizens of the United States shall

be loyal to their country. On the contrary, every

every action of the' Union is an expression of that

demand. But, for that very reason, the Union finds

itself compelled to call attention to the extreme

"disloyalty" of the procedures described by the

words quoted above. They violate both the intent

and the spirit of the Constitution in its provisions

for the political freedom of our people.

If your procedures were generally adopted by

employing enterprises throughout the nation,

they would bring about the setting up of hundreds

of thousands of "private loyalty courts," each of

which would have assumed responsibility for the

making of judgments which it is wholly incom-

petent to make. If such courts, by such procedures

as you suggest, were allowed to condemn Ameri-

can citizens to public disrepute, to deprive them

of their means of livelihood, the entire structure

of political freedom which the Constitution has

built up would be destroyed.

Our Executive Committee gave careful consid-

eration to this entire problem at its meeting of

October 5, 1951. In doing so it was especially

mindful of the substantial impact the Permanente

Hospitals have upon the community and the fact

that these enterprises enjoy a tax-free status.

The Union would welcome an opportunity to

confer with your representatives on many phases

of the questions raised by your procedures, as

they are reported. Our hope is that we shall find

the reports to be inaccurate. But if they are sub-

stantially accurate they indicate a threat to the

principles of the American form of government

against which we are pledged to bring every

available influence of public opinion and of legal

action. We hope, therefore, that our representa-

tives may meet with yours for careful determina-

tion of facts and for mutual understanding of

their meaning.

2d Remington Trial Off; Gov't

-Meves To Dismiss Ist Case

The second perjury trial of William Reming-

ton, based on alleged commissions of perjury at

his first trial for perjury before the Grand Jury

was postponed by District Judge Vincent J. Lei-

bell in New York City Federal Court last month

on the ground that legal questions as to the

validity of the second indictment could not be

properly considered by the court until after the

Supreme Court had ruled on the validity of

ACLU contends, as does Remington, that that

: . indictment was invalid because the Grand Jury

foreman had a financial interest in the' book

written by the prosecution's chief witness.

Almost immediately after the second indictment

was handed down, the Justice Department moved

in the U.S. Supreme Court for permission to with-

draw the original indictment against Remington.

The court reserved decision.

ACLU is opposed to granting permission for

such withdrawal, because of the implication it

would carry that a man indicted for perjury under

an: indictment, which may well be invalid, could

thereafter be indicted for perjury in denying the

basic facts on which the Government relied to

prove the perjury.

$500 REWARD

Last month the ACLU of Northern California

and the Regional Office of the NAACP jointly of-

fered a reward of $500 for information leading to

the arrest, conviction and final imprisonment of

the person or persons who set fire to the house

at 3336 Winkle Ave., Santa Cruz, California,' on

November 3, 1951. The fire caused damage esti-

mated at $3,000. A State investigator declared

there was no doubt that the fire was of incendiary

origin.

The fire was apparently set by persons in the

neighborhood who had learned that a Negro mini-

ster, William Brent, had paid a deposit of $300 to

buy the house. When the Negro came to view the

damages he was advised not to try to move into

the neighborhood since it would bring on a dis-

turbance. On another occasion, he was warned

that he would jeopardize his life and that of his

family if he tried to move into the house. As soon

as the house is repaired, Mr. Brent plans to move

Bail Set Improperly in L.A.

Smith Act Case, Says High Ct.

The U.S. Supreme Court on November 5 de-

cided that no basis had been shown to require

$50,000 bail for each defendant in the Los An-

geles Smith Act prosecutions. The matter was,

therefore, sent back to the District Court, with the

suggestion that a motion should be made for re-

duction of bail in each case. Such motions were

duly made, but the judge is taking his own good

time in acting on the motions, despite the Supreme

Court's declaration that, "Relief in this type of

case must be speedy if it is to be effective."

"Unless this right to bail before trial is pre-

served," said the court, "the presumption of inno-

cence, secured only after centuries of struggle,

would lose its meaning.

"The right to release before trial is conditional

upon the accused's giving adequate assurance that

he will stand trial and submit to sentence if found

guilty .... the modern practice of requiring a bail

bond or the deposit of a sum of money subject to

forfeiture serves as additional assurance of the

presence of an accused. Bail set at a figure higher

than an amount reasonably calculated to fulfill

this purpose is `excessive' under the Highth

Amendment."'

At another point in its decision, the court stated

"It is not denied that bail for each petitioner has

been fixed in a sum much higher than that usually

imposed for offenses with like penalties and yet

there has been no factual showing to justify such

action in this case. The Government asks the

courts to depart from the norm by assuming, with-

out the introduction of evidence, that each peti-

tioner is a pawn in a conspiracy and will, in obe-

dience to a superior, flee the jurisdiction. To infer

from the fact of indictment alone a need for bail

in an unusually high amount is an arbitrary act.

Such conduct would inject into our own system of

government the very principles of totalitarianism

which Congress was seeking to guard against in

passing the statute under whicly petitioners have

been indicted. .

"If bail in an amount greater than that usually

fixed for serious charges of crimes is required in

the case of any of the petitioners, that is a matter

to which evidence should be directed in a hearing

so that the constitutional rights of each peti-

tioner may be preserved."

Page 4

E American Civil Liberties Union-News

Published monthly at 503 Market St., San Francisco 5,

Calil., Oy the American Civil Liberties Union

: of Northern California.

Phene: EXbrook 2-3255

ERNEST BESIG 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.

Ten cents per Copy

Salvation Army's Statement

In Eloise Brown Case

The Salvation Army had no intention to pub-

licize in any way the discontinuance of the em-

ployment ot Mrs. Hloise Brown from the Booth

`Memorial Hospital. It appears now, however, that

releases by Mrs. Brown have created wrong im-

pressions that can only be corrected by a straight-

foward statement trom The Salvation Army.

As early as last February it was felt by the ad-

ministering officer, Lt. Colonel Pagan, that the

personal ufe philosophy and thinking of Mrs.

Kloise Brown was in discord with the basic and

essential elements of Salvation Army approach to

the people it serves. While no particular criticisms

were directed to the mechanical performance of

_ her job, we attempted to explain to Mrs. Brown

that most essential thereto was carrying forth

the spiritual ministry and. philosophy of `he Sai-

vation Army.

The Salvation Army, as a non-political organt-

zation, must ask of ali associated with it that their

private lives be conducted in harmony with its

spiritual ministry and philosophy. These extra

demands upon our officers and employees are

forced upon us by public expectation. Unlike a

concern With little or no interest in the private

lives of its employees or their morals, we feel that

we must ask of all associated with us private

loyalties and activities commensurate with what

we believe and teach.

- Since February we had failed to find any im-

provement in the attitude of Mrs. Eloise Brown

toward the spiritual philosophy and ministry of

The Salvation Army. `this continued to cause all of

us grave concern.

While it is true that final decision to discontinue

the services of Mrs. Brown in The Salvation Army

Booth Memorial Hospital was reached shortly

after hearing before the Burns Committee, it is

entirely untrue that her resignation was asked.

for simply because she was called before that

Committee for hearing and her attitude expressed ~

at the hearing. The most that can be said is that

her attitude and conduct before the Burns Com-

mittee gave added evidence of our prior determi-

nation that the attitude of Mrs, Brown was not in

harmony with the spiritual philosophies and

ministry of The Salvation Army, which is so im-

portant in our personnel relationships and objec-

tives which we seek. Particularly was such an at-

titude necessary to the work being done by Mrs.

Brown in conjunction with the Booth Memorial

Hospital.

We regret that this matter has reached such an

issue as now appears to be involved. We reaffirm

that our decision reached with respect to Mrs.

Brown has been arrived at on basic principles and

guiding philosophies so essential to the welfare

and objective of The Salvation Army. It has not

been otherwise.

In view of the long standing acknowledged in-

tegrity of The Salvation Army in its dealing with

people and its constant sympathetic attitude to-

ward the employed group, we feel that the fore-

going should satisfy all honest inquiries that The

Salvation Army was justified in its action and

`non-discriminatory in its decision.

Court Orders Release of

Jehovah's Witness From Army

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals last month

ruled that the Army was not entitled to hold a

draftee whose claims as a conscientious objector

had never been considered by an appeal board to

which he had appealed. The board of appeal had

merely rejected the registrant's claim to classifica-

tion as a minister, and refused to pass on the CO

question because the appeal had not specifically

raised that issue. The Court rejected that view

and held that the appeal board was required to

classify the registrant de novo on the basis of his

whole Selective Service record.

The registrant was Milton H. Cox, a Jehovah's

Witness, of San Jose, who reported to the Army

on June 12, 1942: He testified that he did not take

the induction oath. Upon being sent to Alabama,

he left camp upon receiving his first pay check,

and returned to his home in San Jose where he re-

sided openly for almost seven years until arrested

by the FBI.

Bail in the case was provided by the ACLU of

Northern California. The Government may appeal

the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

ACLU Urges The Salvation Army to

Reinstate Dismissed Social Worker

The ACLU of Northern California last month

urged The Salavtion Army to reinstate Mrs. Eloise

Brown to her position as social worker at Booth

Memorial Hospital, Oakland, from which position

she had been dismissed following her refusal to

testify, on constitutional grounds, before the

Burns Committee.

A conference between the Union's director and

Lt. Col. Pagan disclosed that The Salvation Army

had received confidential information concerning

Mrs. Brown immediately following her appearance

before the Burns Committee. Col. Pagan stated

she was unable to say to what degree, if any, this

confidential information influenced her decision

to dismiss Mrs. Brown. At the same time, she de-

clared that as early as last February she had ex-

pressed dissatisfaction with Mrs. Brown (but not

to Mrs. Brown) because as a Unitarian she was

not in sympathy with The Salvation Army's spi-

ritual ministry. The Union suggested that in all

fairness, Mrs. Brown should ke furnished with the

reasons for her dismissal and should also be given

an opportunity to answer.

Following this conference, The Salvation Army,

on November 16, furnished the Union with a state-

ment of its position concerning the case. That

statement appears elsewhere on this page. The

Union was informed on November 28 that The

Salvation Army wished to modify its statement

insofar as it relates to Mrs. Brown's appearance

before the Burns Committee. This matter will be

clarified in the January "News." The Union's

response to the statement reads as follows:

"f want to express to you our deep appreciation

for your consideration in formulating and furnish-

ing to us a statement of your organization's posi-

tion with reference to the dismissal of Mrs. Eloise

Brown as a social worker at the Booth Memorial

Hospital. At the same time, I want to tell you that

it was a real pleasure to discuss this issue in such

a friendly and objective way with Lt. Col. Pagan.

"Ag T understand the statement, the reason Mrs.

Brown was dismissed was because The Salvation

Army felt that she was not in agreement with the

philosophy of the organization, and because it

also felt that her private life was not `conducted in

harmony with (`he Salvation Army's) spiritual

ministry and philosophy.'

"Tt does not appear from the statement whether

Financial Report For Fiscal

Year Ended October 31, 1951

~The ACLU of Northern California ended its

fiscal year on October 31 with a surplus of $176.59

in its Operating Fund. Both the income and the

expenditures reached record figures. The income

was up about $1600 over the previous fiscal year,

while expenditures increased about $1450.

Reserve funds on October 31 consisted of $3500

in U.S. Treasury bonds, and a bank balance of

$530.88, after the surplus from the Operating

Fund was added. In other words, reserve funds

now aggregate $4,030.88.

- he Union ended its fiscal year with exactly

1855 paid up members. A year ago the figure

stood at 1660. Ever since 1943 there has been an

average yearly increase of about 150 in the Un-

ion's membership.

In addition, there were 272 separate subscribers

to the monthly "News," compared to 268 a year

ago.

Here is the way your money was spent from

November 1, 1950 to October 31, 1951:

OPERATING FUND

Income

General Receipts . 7.7 3 $15,505.22

Expenditures

Salaries and Retirement ..... $8,566.30

Printing and Stationery ..... 3,207.04

Rent 3 a: 1,240.00

Postage: 52. 55.5........... 849.36

Furniture and Equipment .... 469.76

Telephone and Telegraph ..... 267.35

Taxes and Insurance ......... 263.52

National Conference ....... 200.00

Traveling ye: yo es 136.68

Publications -. 7.7.5... 5.5. 4.. 52.18

Miscellaneous ..22...-.-... 76.44

Total Expenditures ......... 15,328.63

Surplus (Transferred to Reserve Funds) 176.59

RESERVE FUNDS

- Balance on hand, Oct. 31,1950 ........ $ 3,807.70

Income:

Interest. 7. 85 46.59

Surplus (Oper. Fund) .... 176.59 223.18

Ou Hand; Oct. 31, 195! 7... ..$ 4,030.88

this subject was ever raised at the time of Mrs.

Brown's employment and that it was a qualifica-

tion for the position. It is suggested, however, that

the subject was discussed with Mrs. Brown in

February, but that no further action was taken

until Mrs. Brown refused to testify before the

Burns Committee. Her refusal to testify is now

offered in the statement as `added evidence' of

your `prior determination that the attitude of Mrs.

Brown was not in harmony with the spiritual

`philosophies and ministry of The Salvation Army.'

_ "When our Committee considered this problem

it was recognized that the failure of a person to

testify before the Burns Committee on constitu-

tional grounds does not permit an inference of

guilt. Consequently, it seems to us that your or-

ganization has fallen into error in allowing Mrs.

Brown's failure to testify to affect your decision

to any degree.

"Tt is my recollection that Col. Pagan informed

me that the question of Mrs. Brown's disagree-

ment with the philosophy of The Salvation Army,

apparently because of her membership in the

Unitarian Church, was-raised by Col. Pagan last

February only in discussions with the Command-

ing Officer in Oakland. The matter was not

pursued further until Mrs. Brown gained noto-

riety for herself and the organization by refusing

to testify on constitutional grounds before the

Burns Committee. It appears that your organiza-

tion was disturbed by the hue and cry that ac-

companied the matter and expected Mrs. Brown

to offer some explanation. When, after several

days, she failed to make a move in that direction,

Col. Pagan called her into her office and, in an in-

terview charged with some emotion and accom-

panied by a refusal of Mrs. Brown to discuss her'

personal problems, she was dismissed.

_ Col, Pagan also disclosed to me that following

the Burns Committee hearing and before her in-

terview with Mrs. Brown she received certain con-

fidential information concerning Mrs. Brown. Un-

fortunately, the information was given to her in

confidence and she stated she was unable to reveal

either the source of the information or its nature.

Col. Pagan also stated with admirable candor that

she was unable to say to what degree, if any, this

confidential. information influenced her decision (c)

to dismiss Mrs. Brown.

"The Union, naturally, is not in a position to de- .

termine whether there are adequate grounds for

dismissing Mrs. Brown. We do feel, however, that

Mrs. Brown is entitled to be informed as to any

and all charges against her, and that she ought to

be given an opportunity of refuting such charges.

This has not been done. Consequently, we are of

the opinion that there has been a failure of due

process or fair procedure that is expected of a

quasi-public organization.

"It may be recalled that we suggested that the

issue should be referred to your own personnel

committee, which could give Mrs. Brown a hear-

ing, or, failing that, the matter could be referred

to an impartial board composed of representatives

of some of the Community Chest agencies.

"T conclude from your statement that it-is not

the intention of The Salvation Army to confront

Mrs. Brown with the reasons for her dismissal,

nor to give her an opportunity to answer. In the

absence of such due process, we are of the opinion

pee Mrs. Brown should be reinstated to her posi-

ion.

"We sincerely trust that you will give this

matter further consideration. We would appre-

ciate hearing your views on this matter in the im-.

mediate future, unless you desire additional time,

pending which we will withhold any public state-

ment on this matter."

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION

American Civil Liberties Union of No. Calif.,

503 Market St. -

San Francisco 5, Calif.,

1. Please enroll me aS a member at dues of

Se for the current year. (Types of mem-

_ bership: Associate Member, $3; Annual Member,

$5; Business and Professional Member, $10;

Family Membership, $25; Contributing Member,

$50; Patron, $100 and over. Membership includes

subscription to the "American Civil Liberties

Union-News"' at $1 a year.)

2. I pledge $3 per month........ or $3: per yr.

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

DERVean). Sk ee ON ee

Enelosed please find $1.52. Please bill

MG:

Name yee ee ee ee

Street ee ee

City and Zone =. 2.2

Occupation, +