vol. 20, no. 12

American

Civil

Union-!

Liberties:

"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."

Free Press

Free Assemblage

Free Speech

VOLUME XxX

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA, DECEMBER, 1955

f NUMBER 12

Citizenship Granted After

8; Years of Waiting

On. November 22, 1955, almost nine years

after her petition for naturalization was filed, a.

Russian-born woman was sworn in as a citizen

of the United States. During that time the Natu-

ralization Service had refused to make any rec-

ommendations as to whether her petition should

be granted or denied, contending more time was

needed for investigation. The woman had worked

for the American Russian Institute and the

People's Educational Center in the 1940's, and

this was believed to be the basis for Service's

delay. Repeated inquiries on her behalf were

made by ACLU Director Ernest Besig ag well as

by former Congressman Franck Havenner.

Further waiting seemed useless, so the ACLU

_ filed a motion, a few months ago, in the federal

court asking that the matter be immediately

_calendared for a hearing. Surprisingly, Federal.

Judge George B. Harris denied the motion on

September 27 with leave to renew in six months,

after Naturalization Examiner Daniel Lyons con-

tended still more time was needed by the Investi-

gation Section of the Naturalization Service. _

ACLU Staff Counsel Lawrence Speiser indi-

cated he would appeal the denial of the motion.

The deadline for filing the notice of appeal was

~ Wovenber 23. --

One day before, on November 22, the petitioner

was sworn in as a citizen after Lyons, who was

- ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_1999 ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log not responsible for the delay, made a recommen-

' ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_1999 ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log dation that her petition be granted.

_ U.S. Supreme Court Refuses

Hearing in C. O. Draftee Case

The following telegram was received by ACLU

Staff Counsel Lawrence Speiser on November 7,

1955:

Petition for Certiorari La Rose Against

Wyman Denied Today. Advise Associate.

--Harold B. Willy, Clerk (US Supreme Court).

This message meant that the Supreme Court

had refused to review the case of a drafted con-

scientious objector, Russell La Rose, for whom ACLUN_1946 ACLUN_1946.MODS ACLUN_1946.batch ACLUN_1947 ACLUN_1947.MODS ACLUN_1947.batch ACLUN_1948 ACLUN_1948.MODS ACLUN_1948.batch ACLUN_1949 ACLUN_1949.MODS ACLUN_1949.batch ACLUN_1950 ACLUN_1950.MODS ACLUN_1950.batch ACLUN_1951 ACLUN_1951.MODS ACLUN_1951.batch ACLUN_1952 ACLUN_1952.MODS ACLUN_1952.batch ACLUN_1953 ACLUN_1953.MODS ACLUN_1953.batch ACLUN_1954 ACLUN_1954.MODS ACLUN_1954.batch ACLUN_1955 ACLUN_1955.MODS ACLUN_1955.batch ACLUN_1956 ACLUN_1956.MODS ACLUN_1957 ACLUN_1957.MODS ACLUN_1958 ACLUN_1958.MODS ACLUN_1959 ACLUN_1959.MODS ACLUN_1960 ACLUN_1960.MODS ACLUN_1961 ACLUN_1961.MODS ACLUN_1962 ACLUN_1962.MODS ACLUN_1963 ACLUN_1963.MODS ACLUN_1964 ACLUN_1964.MODS ACLUN_1965 ACLUN_1965.MODS ACLUN_1966 ACLUN_1966.MODS ACLUN_1967 ACLUN_1967.MODS ACLUN_1968 ACLUN_1968.MODS ACLUN_1969 ACLUN_1969.MODS ACLUN_1970 ACLUN_1970.MODS ACLUN_1971 ACLUN_1971.MODS ACLUN_1972 ACLUN_1972.MODS ACLUN_1973 ACLUN_1973.MODS ACLUN_1974 ACLUN_1974.MODS ACLUN_1975 ACLUN_1975.MODS ACLUN_1976 ACLUN_1976.MODS ACLUN_1977 ACLUN_1977.MODS ACLUN_1978 ACLUN_1978.MODS ACLUN_1979 ACLUN_1979.MODS ACLUN_1980 ACLUN_1980.MODS ACLUN_1981 ACLUN_1981.MODS ACLUN_1982 ACLUN_1982.MODS ACLUN_1983 ACLUN_1983.MODS ACLUN_1984 ACLUN_1984.MODS ACLUN_1985 ACLUN_1985.MODS ACLUN_1986 ACLUN_1986.MODS ACLUN_1987 ACLUN_1987.MODS ACLUN_1988 ACLUN_1988.MODS ACLUN_1989 ACLUN_1989.MODS ACLUN_1990 ACLUN_1990.MODS ACLUN_1991 ACLUN_1991.MODS ACLUN_1992 ACLUN_1992.MODS ACLUN_1993 ACLUN_1993.MODS ACLUN_1994 ACLUN_1994.MODS ACLUN_1995 ACLUN_1995.MODS ACLUN_1996 ACLUN_1996.MODS ACLUN_1997 ACLUN_1997.MODS ACLUN_1998 ACLUN_1998.MODS ACLUN_1999 ACLUN_ladd ACLUN_ladd.MODS ACLUN_ladd.bags ACLUN_ladd.batch add-tei.sh create-bags.sh create-manuscript-bags.sh create-manuscript-batch.sh fits.log

the ACLU had filed a request for a hearing in the

United States Supreme Court. The petition con-

tended that La Rose, a native of Milwaukee, and

former student at Deep Springs school (near

Bishop), California, had been denied the appeals

to which he was entitled by his local draft board.

La Rose was ordered released from the Army

on a petition for a writ of habeas corpus by Fed-

eral Judge George B. Harris which had been filed,

by San Francisco Attorney J. H. Brill, one-time

ACLU Executive Committee member, but the

ruling was reversed by the Ninth Circuit Court

of Appeals.

An appeal from this ruling was made to the

U.S. Supreme Court, which has discretion as to

whether it will or will not hear a case. The high

court does not have to give a reason why it denies

petitions for writs of certiorari (requests for a

hearing) and only grants hearings in about 15

x

per cent of the cases.

La Rose is presently in the guard house at the

Presidio, where an investigation is under way to

determine if desertion charges arg to be brought

against him for twice leaving his army post.

However, other legal measures may be taken

to secure his release. He has retained Los Angeles

attorney J. B. Tietz, Treasurer of the ACLU's

Southern California branch, who specializes in

conscientious objector cases. Tietz has filed a

new petition for a writ of habeas corpus on La

Rose's behalf, contending that because the Army

improperly assigned. La Rose to combatant duties,

his prior induction was rendered illegal. -

An order to show cause on this petition has

been issued by Federal Judge Oliver Carter and

will be heard on December 16.

Pvt. Harley L. Ross, 24-year-old Los Angeles

draftee now stationed at Fort Ord, testified before

the Senate Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights

in Washingon, D.C., on November 18 that he is

scheduled to receive a "General Discharge' be-

cause he invoked his constitutional rights in re-

fusing to sign the Army's so-called loyalty form.

A corporal advised him that filling in the form

was "optional," and no one warned him "`the roof

would fall in" if he refused. Nevertheless, at the

Congressional hearing Ross testified under oath

that he had never beonged to any of the groups

listed in the "loyalty form."

Army Will Take Another Look

Subsequently, Hugh M. Milton II, Assistant

Secretary of the Army, agreed to take another

look at whether the Army has any constitutional

authority to deny an honorable discharge for

invoking constitutional privileges, or to base a

lower grade discharge on admitted pre-service

conduct of a draftee. :

Ross' refusal to sign the "loyalty oath" resulted

in an investigation. Finally, he became the subject

of an Army security hearing on September 6,

: 1955, at which he was represented by Ernest

Record Budget Response

A record response was received last month

to the Union's budget appeal. More than

1100 members contributed over $9000 in

cash (the pledges haven't been added up),

which, together with $500 from the Marin

Chapter ear-marked for the Expansion Fund,

brings the income for November to over

$9500, or more money than the branch has

ever collected in one month.

As is the Union's custom, no receipts or

acknowledgments were sent to subscribers

unless cash contributions were received. That

thrifty procedure saves the Union time and

money better spent on the business of de-

fending civil liberties. But we do want to

thank each contributor in this Scotch man-

ner for his continued support.

While the budget drive has made an excel-

lent start, there is still a long way to go to

meet the Union's goal of $41,000 for the

fiscal year ending October 31, 1955. Twenty-

nine thousand dollars of this budget must be

raised from the present membership. The

remainder will come from the Expansion

Fund, a spring membership campaign and a

special funds appeal.

By the time this issue of the "News"

reaches you, a follow-up appeal will be in

the hands of those who have not yet con-

tributed: You can still save the Union money,

and stretch the value of your contribution,

by responding to this second letter and

thereby saving the expense of the final

follow-up mailing of January 1 to all mem-

bers who have not been heard from by that

time.

Even if your membership does not expire

just now, the Union hopes you will be willing

to make your PRESENT AND FUTURE

contributions at this time. Don't forget that

in so doing you enable the Union to con-

centrate its fund-raising activities with a

minimum of interference with its job of

defending civil liberties. Your cooperation

will be greatly appreciated. .

And, if you are among the more than 400

persons whose gubscriptions expired in No-

vember and who have not yet renewed, you

too can save the Union a lot of office work

`by sending your renewal just as soon as

possible.

}

Probe Denial of Honorable Discharge

Refusing to Take Optional `Loyalty cent

for

atin'

Besig, local director of the ACLU. In addition to

refusing to sign the "Loyalty Certificate for Per-

sonnel of the Armed Forces," Ross was charged

with having in his possession "the Summer 1954

issue of Science and Society, a publication cited -

in 1944 as a Marxist publication. cea

Ross admitted having the publication in his

possession. He explained that it was on the

shelves of his college library and that he wag

teins the particular issue in connection with his

thesis.

Forced Association

It was also charged that "In 1954, you main-

tained a close, continuing association with K.D.H.,

an active member of the Communist Party." Ross

admitted that he knew the individual, but ex-

plained that the Army had assigned him ag his

roommate; that their only association was in

connection with their Army duties and casually

on the post; that he had never associated with

the-man off the base and that he had no knowl-

edge of the man's whereabouts since he was dis-

charged from the Army.

The final allegation was that "On 1 March

1954, on Department of Defense Form 398, `State-

ment of Personal History,' you listed Mrs. M.O.A.,

a member of the Communist Party, as a character

reference." Ross explained that the woman was

the mother of a high school classmate of his; that

he had used her name as a reference when he

went to college because he understood she is

listed in Who's Who In America. Because of this

distinction, he again used her name as a reference

when the Army requested a list of references.

He hasn't seen the woman for five years or more

and has not communicated with her. He has no

knowledge as to her politics.

On Controlled Duties -

Ross was eventually advised that he would be

retained in the Army but-on controlled duties.

This means he is still regarded as a security risk

but not dangerous enough to receive an "Unde-

sirable" discharge. He will receive a `General

Discharge," under honorable conditions, but this

type of discharge is not the one usually given to

(Continued on Page 2, Col. 3)

Army Will Screen Security :

Cases Before Induction

The Defense Department announced last month

that, under new regulations, it will investigate

alleg8d security risks before they are inducted

into the Armed Services instead of afterward, as

now.

Possible security risks will apparently be dis-

covered through Defense Department Form 98,

which requires a man to say whether or not he

has been in any way connected with a group on

the Attorney General's list. If a draftee rests on

- constitutional grounds in refusing to fill out the

questionnaire or submits any "derogatory infor-

mation" he will be subjected to a full investigation

before being inducted.

Sen. Thomas J. Hennings, in interpreting the

new regulations, said they mean, "If-the services

decide not to induct a man, the man will be re-

leased to civilian life without any mark or stigma

indicating the basis on which he was found un-

suitable."

On the other hand, if the man igs inducted, he

will be entitled to an honorable discharge if his

service conduct: merits it.

The ACLU has not yet received a copy of the

new regulations and does not know whether they

affect pending security cases or those in which

eee or general discharges were previously

issued.

Page 2

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

December, 1955

O'Connor Fined for Contempt

in First Amendment Case

Author Harvey O'Connor was found guilty of

contempt of Congress by U.S. District `Judge

Joseph C. McGarraghy last month. O'Connor

"rested on the First Amendment in refusing to

answer questions of Senator Joseph R. McCarthy

during a Senate Permanent Subcommittee on

Investigations probe of U.S. overseas libraries.

He was fined $500 and given a suspended one-

year jail sentence.

Usual Questions Asked

`Connor refused to answer questions concern-

ne his alleged membership in the "Communist

conspiracy." He later denied such membership.

The subcommittee hearing dealt with the ques-

tion of whether books purchased by the govern-

`ment for use in U.S. Information Service libraries

abroad resulted in royalties being paid to alleged

Communist authors.

"The naked question in this case," said the

ACLU in opposing the prosecution, "Is whether

the government can investigate any author of

any book. We say that this broad question is

involved for the reason that every book published

and copyrighted in the United States occupies a

place in the Library of Congress; almost every

newspaper is purchased by one or another gov-

ernment agency. All these are used by govern-

ment personnel at some time or another for some

purpose. Therefore, if inquiries into associations

of those who write books is possible in Mr. O'Con-

nor's case, it is possible in the case of every

author, of the editor of every newspaper. (c)

Impact on Freedom Clear

"The obvious impact on freedom of speech is

clear. Being subpoenaed before a congressional

committed is hardly the most pleasant experience.

Those who have or ever had any associations

which might be suspect, or which they consider

might later be suspect, those who take any un-

popular approach in their books, would inevitably

be compelled to go cautiously, to refrain from.

association and not speak or write freely upon

the most vital subject matter of the day.... To

subject the writer of every book to the risk of

subpoena, if he be suspect in the eyes of a con-

gressional committee, is to put the price of free-

- dom of expression t9o high." ot

The ACLU also declared that the McCarthy

Committee's inquiry into the authors of bodks

purchased by the government was outside the

scope of its charter to investigate the "econ-

omy and efficiency' of government operations.

"Whether the author was or was not (a Commu-

nist Party member) is obviously not relevant to

the efficiency of the government in using such

books." :

State Supreme Court Voids

Piedmont Private School Ban

The State Supreme Court ruled on October 27,

in a 4 to 8 decision, that Piedmont's ordinance

prohibiting construction of private schools in the

city's residential zone-98.7 per cent of Piedmont

-is unconstitutional.

The case arose from an attempt by the Roman

Catholic Welfare Corporation to build a parochial

school in Piedmont, but a building permit was

turned down because of the ordinance. A petition

was then filed seeking to void the ordinance.

The ACLU submitted a friend of the court brief

contending that the ordinance deprived private

schools.of equal protection of the law since public |

schools were allowed, and that it also infringed

on religious freedom.

The majority opinion, written by Justice Jesse

Carter, ruled that the ordinance was "unconstitu-

tional and void because of its arbitrary and un-

reasonable discrimination against private schools,"

Joining in the majority opinion, which affirmed

a unanimous decision of the District Court of

Appeals, were Chief Justice Gibson and Justices

Shenk and Traynor. They pointed out that the

ordinance effectively excluded all private schools

from Piedmont and that there was no justification

because private elementary schools create the

same problems of traffic, noise and. safety as

public schools. -

- Justice Carter also held that parents have the

right to have their children educated in schools

of their choice in their immediate locality.

Justice B. Rey Schauer, who wrote a minority

opinion concurred in by Justices Edmonds and

Spence, criticized the majority opinion as ``gener-

ally opening residential areas in all cities to pri-

vate schools."

Along with the ACLU, the American Jewish

Congress also filed a friend of the court brief in -

support of the Catholic position.

Government Suppressing News and

information of Public Interest

Abuse of President Eisenhower's directive

shutting off testimony in the McCarthy-Army

hearings of a Senatorial investigating committee

in May, 1954, was seen by Washington newspaper-

men and members of Congress as a major cause

of increasing secrecy in many branches of the

Federal Government, according to a report made

public last month by the American Civil Liberties

Union. The report says that while both the

Republican and Democratic administrations of

the last ten years have been guilty of censorship

at the source of news, against the public interest,

`invisible government is now worse than at any

time in many years.

Report Written by Veteran Newspaperman

The report urges the American Civil Liberties

Union to endorse the efforts now being made by

the Freedom of Information Committee of the

American Society of Newspaper Editors to break

down barriers of secrecy in Federal agencies.

Written by Allen Raymond, a veteran newspaper-

man, the report was sponsored and approved by

the American Civil Liberties Union, and its direc-

tors have authorized its "widest possible dis-

semination."'

A statement by the ACLU Board of Directors,

accompanying the report, says, `Mr. Raymond's

study amply-documents our initial concern that

agencies of the government are suppressing news

and information of public. interest. The Union is

aware, however, that exposure of the abuse is, by

itself, not an answer to the questions of public

policy to which exposure of abuse gives rise."

Mr. Raymond, while recognizing the preroga-

tive of the Executive to withhold appropriate in-

formation said it was being withheld ``in the great

majority of instances by many agencies on mat-

ters having nothing to do with national security."

- Summary of Facts

A summary of the facts contained in the Ray-

mond report follows:

1. "A trend toward ever increasing secrecy

within the Executive branches of the Federal gov-

ernment has been going on during the Truman

and Eisenhower administrations."

2. "This trend has been recognized and fought

continually by the Freedom of Information Com-

mittee of the American Society of Newspaper |

Editors since 1949, but their efforts thus far have

been ineffective in turning the tide."

3. "It is a fair consensus among Washington

correspondents that abuses of the power in Fed-

eral agencies to suppress information of value and

interest to the nation were never so rampant as

now."

4. "According to the correspondents, this wide-

spread abuse of Executive power ig exercised in

the great majority of instances by many agencies

on matters having nothing whatever to do with

national security."

Power of Press Curtailed

5. "It is a fair consensus that these abuses

have already curtailed the power of the press and .

of Congress itself to be of service to the people

by finding out what goes on in government; that

they have been accompanied by an arrogation of .

powers within the Executive of doubtful consti- correspondent. His newspaper career covers 37

tutionality; so far ifiadequately challenged; that

they have advanced to the point where the civil

liberties of the people themselves are threatened;

and that some prudent remedial action by Con-

gress is necassary."

6. "The power of a free and unlicensed press

to be useful to the people in this matter is

curtailed in great degree by two factors: (a) a

widespread distrust of the press itself by large

segments of the population, as, for example, in

the labor movement; (b) the rise in recent years

of two government-controlled media, radio and

television, which themselves gre in constant dan-

ger of unwarranted dictation, concerning their

powers of public discussion, by the Federal Com-

munications Commission."

~7. "This problem of news suppression in the

Federal government has been recognized by the

leaders of both the Republican and Democratic

parties in Congress for the past decade, and can-

not by any stretch of imagination be set down

properly as a political, partisan issue as between

the two parties."

: Congressional Inquiry Under Way

8. "At the moment this problem has not be-

"come one of widespread public concern but has

so far impinged on the consciousness of Congress

and the Press that a Congressional inquiry is now

under way."

9. "Departments and agencies of the Federal

Executive, now under fire by Congressional and

reportorial critics, include: The Department of

Agriculture, the Post Office Department, Treas-

ury Department, Justice Department, Federal

Trade Commission, Atomic Energy Commission,

Bureau of the Budget, Securities and Exchange

Commission, Department of Health and Welfare,

Defense Department, and others."

10. "Criticism by the press refers to long-

standing practices of the Congress itself in regard

to Executive Committee sessions in which prof-

fered legislation of interest to great numbers of

citizens is often killed with no opportunity for the

public to know the vote of committee members;

and an increasing tendency among cabinet offi-

cers to fail to hold those press conferences which |

under our presidential system have offered the

only opportunity for public interrogation of cabi-

net officers concerning their management of their

departments." S /

Recommendations

Among recommendations Mr. Raymond pro-

posed to curb the abuse of Government secrecy

are the following:

1, "Further study by . .. appropriate non-

governmental agencies, divorced as far as pos-

sible from partisan politics, of laws such as

the Administrative Procedures Act, the Atomic

Energy Act, the Federal Communications Act,

and numerous others which now restrict the flow

of information to the people." | e

"Such a study would consider whether all their

provisions are useful or sound, or whether they

need amendment. It further would consider

whether new legislation, of a positive nature,

would further the cause of informed self-govern-

ment by the people of the country. Two sugges-

tions for such legislation have been made to me

during this study, which I submit herewith for

your consideration."

(a) "The establishment within the Federal

government of an independent agency to repre-

sent the public interest in the de-classification of

records hitherto kept secret, and to work for

increased disclosure. Such an agency might play

a role analagous to that of a public defender in

the courts, set up to balance a prosecutor's office."

(b) "The extension of the act, which now re-

quires registration of lobbyists in Congress, to

cover lobbyists in the executive agencies of gov-

ernment, so that the public and Congress may

acquire further knowledge of the influences

brought to bear by private interests in obtaining

executive favor." :

Non-Governmental Study |

2. "Help in creating a permanent, non-govern-

mental study of the performance of the three

major media of public information in this coun-

try, the press, radio and television, in the handling

of news about government and the defense of civil

liberties; a study entrusted to such privately en-

dowed colleges and universities as have earned

through long years the trust of an informed pub-

lic. Such a study well might include research into

the relative power of the printed word, and oral

or visual means of communication as used by

these major media of public information, in trans-

ferring thought from one mind to another, and

thereby influencing public opinion."

Mr. Allen Raymond is an author and foreign

years, including service as chief of the New York

Times London Bureau, chief of the New York

Herald Tribune Rome and Tokyo Bureaus and

World War II was correspondent for the Saturday

Evening Post. :

Probe Denial of Honorable

Discharge in Security Case

(Continued from Page 1, Col. 3)

soldiers who have given satisfactory service.

Ross' service record discloses that he has given

such satisfactory service, and officers and men

who know his record so testified.

Feeling that he had been dealt with unjustly,

Ross sent a copy of the transcript of his hearing

to the Senate Subcommittee.on Constitutional

Rights. They became interested in the case and

consulted Ernest Besig about it. As a result, a

subpoena for Ross' appearance in Washington was

issued and served upon him by the U.S. Marshal

on November 4,

"Usual Army Snafu

On November 5 the Army granted him tem-

porary duty in Washington, D.C., to appear on

November 16. He was to leave on November 7.

Plane tickets were furnished to him, but then the

jittery Army got into its usual snafu and the

orders were revoked. Someone in Washington

was apparently afraid that if Ross reported to

the military in Washington the Congressional

committee might get the impression they were

briefing him. Eventually, everything was straight-

ened out and he left for Washington on November

12 and testified on November 18.

December, 1955

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

Page 3

Let Freedom Ring

High Court Test of Security Program

`The Supreme Court last month agreed to re-

view one aspect of the federal employee's security

program under Executive Order 10450 when it

decides whether Kenrich M. Cole, former Food

Drug Administration Inspector, was properly

fired from his job even though he did not hold a

' "sensitive" position-one having access to classi- .

fied military information. Cole wags accused of

associating with Communists and belonging to.

the Nature Friends of America, an organization

on the Attorney General's list. The Cole case is

the first one to reach the Supreme Court testing

ue constitutionality of the President's security

order.

Panel Named to Study Security Rules

The 12-man bi-partisan commission to study

the Federal security program was named last

month and it met with the immediate approval

of Fulton Lewis, Jr. It includes such persons as

Senator John Stennis of Mississippi, Lloyd Wright

of Los Angeles, past president of the American

Bar Association, and Representative Francis E.

Walter of Pennsylvania, all of whom are ex-

tremely emotional on the matter of securing the

American people from communism. One can only

hope that despite the generally inferior caliber

of the commission it will produce an unbiased and

conscientious survey.

Racial Segregation Outlawed

Segregation of whites and Negroes in public

parks, swimming pools and golf courses was out-

lawed by the U.S. Supreme Court last month. As

in. the matter of segregation in public schools, the

several decisions won't end such segregation once

and for all. It will, no doubt, take many more

court actions and many more years before racial

segregation in public facilities is ended. Racial

segregation is on the way out, but its adherents

will do everything in their power to delay attain-

ment of that goal. :

Blow at Faceless Informers

U.S. District Court Judge Luther Youngdahl

last month decided that applicants may not be

denied passports on the' basis of secret informa-

tion. "When the basis of action by any branch |

of the Government remains hidden from scrutiny

and beyond practical review," said the court, "the

seeds of arbitrary and irresponsible Government

are sown." Judge Youngdahl said that the use of

confidential information should be confined to

obtaining factual data. The State Department was

directed to give the applicant, Leonard B. Boudin,

a hearing within 20 days. The decision reminds

one of the recent action of the Court of Appeals in

San Francisco which has insisted on the right of

confrontation in port security cases.

Civil Liberties Award for Stiles Hall

Our congratulations go to the University

YMCA, Stiles Hall, Berkeley, on receiving a

$5000 award from the Fund for the Republic last

month for its consistent effort to strengthen civil

liberties, to maintain free expression, and to in-

crease equality of opportunity for racial minori-

ties. This means that we're really congratulating

Harry L. Kingman, Executive Secretary from

1932 to 1953, and his successor, William Davis.

Dr. Meiklejohn, Testifies

Dr. Alexander M. Meiklejohn, vice-chairman

of the ACLU of Northern California, and dis-

tinguished teacher, author and civil libertarian,

testifed before the Senate Subcommittee on Con-

stitutional Rights (the Hennings Committee) on

November 14, in support of his contention that

the First Amendment means what it says, and

that a citizen has an absolute right to criticize

the government. His testimony received nation-

wide press coverage. We hope to reprint some of

Dr. Meiklejohn's testimony in the next issue of

the "News." oe

New Pamphlet Available

The ACLU now has available a supply of the

latest revised edition of Osmond K. Fraenkel's

excellent, pamphlet, "The Supreme Court and

Civil Liberties,' which discusses various sec-

tions: of the Bill of Rights as interpreted by

the high court's decisions. Four hundred and

ninety-eight cases are described in the revised

edition, ninety-six more than appeared in the

last edition which was published in 1952. The

pamphlet was first published in 1937. |

The 106-page pamphlet, which contains full

legal citations of the cases, can be purchased

for 50c a copy by writing to the American Civil

Liberties Union, 503 Market St., San Francisco

5, Calif. Quantity prices will be provided on

request.

Right of Confronte

Court of Appeals in iP

On November 18 the Coast Guard advised the

ehairman of the Security Appeal Board in San

Francisco to continue hearings under its water-

front screening program until the Justice Depart-

ment decides whether it will appeal the far-reach-

ing Federal Court of Appeals decision in Parker

vs. Lester, handed down on October 26, and/or

revise its outlawed procedures. All hearings

scheduled for November, including four in which

the ACLU was providing counsel, were suspended

the day after the decision was handed down.

Law Upheld, Procedure Denounced

In its decision, the Court of Appeals "in view

of the emergencies referred to in the Act" upheld

the exclusion of security risks from employment

on merchant vessels, but not in the manner

adopted by the Coast Guard. The trial court had

held that in such proceedings `opportunity for

confrontation and cross-examination of adverse

witnesses cannot be afforded a petitioner without

destroying the security program." The Court of .

Appeals, speaking through Judge Pope, disagreed.

"That statement," said the court, "is too strong.

Obviously it would be a simple matter to set up

regulations which protect the individual affected

in respect to notice and an opportunity to be -

heard. Such a system might make more work for

the investigating officers, and pose more diffi-

culties. But security proceedings would not be

destroyed."

The trial court while requiring the alleged

grounds for the screening to be provided had

added that the sources of information could be

withheld or the sources of information might dry

up. It declared that the "bill of particulars need

not set forth the source of such data, nor disclose

the data with such specificity that the identity

of any informers who have supplied such allega-

tions or data will necessarily be disclosed to the

said seaman or to other persons." The Court of

Appeals declared "The question is: Is this system

of secret informers, whisperers and talebearers

of such vital importance to the public welfare

that it must be preserved at the cost of denying

to the citizen even a modicum of the protection"

traditionally associated with due process?"

Justice Jackson Quoted

The Court of Appeals found the answer to its

question in the emphatic language of the late Mr.

Justice Jackson who declared that, "The most

scrupulous observance of due process, including

the right to know a charge, to be confronted with

the accuser, to cross-examine informers and to

produce evidence in one's behalf, is especially

necessary where the occasion of detention is fear

of future misconduct, rather than crimes com-

mitted..." :

The court noted that its `determination will

remove from the investigative agencies, to some

degree, a certain kind of information and that, in

the future, some persons will be deterred from

Request High Court Review

Of Murder Verdict |

On the basis of new evidence, uncovered after

a jury had returned a guilty verdict in a 1952

murder trial, the New York Civil Liberties Union

hag filed a petition with the U.S. Supreme Court

asking that it review the judgment of the New

York State Court of Appeals in the case.

~The New York court, in a 4-3 decision handed

down in July, upheld for the second time the con-

viction of Leonardo Salemi for first degree murder

in the February, 1952, slaying of Walter Forlenza

in a New York bar. Salemi was convicted on testi-

mony of Paul H. (Whitey) Janson, sole witness

to the murder, and James Forlenza, who had

stated that his brother identified Salemi as his

assailant during a hospital visit shortly before

his death.

Jacob Shientag and Max Fruchtman, counsel

for Salemi, had sought a new trial after it was

disclosed that Janson was committed to Bellevue

Hospital ag psychotic at the conclusion of the

trial and wag later confined to a state hospital,

and that hospital attendants and others said that

they had not seen James Forlenza enter his

brother's room. A hospital doctor had further

gtated that the victim's physical condition at the

time was such that in all probability he could not

have spoken.

A motion for a new trial before General Ses-

sions Judge Jonah J. Goldstein was denied in

May, 1955. Salemi, who was sentenced to die in

the Sing Sing death house last July, has been

granted a stay of execution by State Court of

Appeals Judge Chas. A. Demond pending decision

of the High Court on whether it will issue the

writ of certiorari, an order for review of the case.

tion Upheld By

ori Securify Case

carrying some of these tales to the investigating

authorities. It is unbelievable that the result will

prevent able officials from procuring proof any

more than those officials are now helpless to pro-

cure proof for criminal prosecutions. But surely

it ig better that these agencies suffer some handi-

cap than that the citizens of a freedom loving

country shall be denied that which has always

been considered their birthright. Indeed, it may

well be that in the long run nothing but beneficial |

results will come from a lessening of such tale-

bearing. It is a matter of public record that the

somewhat comparable security risk program di-

rected at Government employees has been used

to victimize perfectly innocent men, The objec-

tive of perpetuating a doubtful system of secret

informers likely to bear upon the innocent as well

as upon the guilty and carrying so high a degree

of unfairness to the merchant seaman involved

cannot justify an abandonment here of the ancient

standards of due process.

All Persons Affected

"It should be noted that the rights of the indi-

vidual here considered are also fundamental in

the sense that if they are limited, qualified or

non-existent in the case of merchant seamen, they

can be modified or limited or held non-existent as

applied to all other persons... ."

The court also sounded the following warning:

"Furthermore, in considering the public interest

in the preservation of a system under which un-

identified informers are encouraged to make

unchallengeable statements about their neighbors,

it is not amiss to bear in mind whether or not

we must look forward to a day when substantially

everyone will have to contemplate the possibility

that his neighbors are being encouraged to make

reports to the F.B.I. about what he says, what

he reads and what meetings he attends. It may

be possible that we have reached an age when our

system of constitutional freedom and individual

rights cannot hold its own against .those who,

under totalitarian discipline are prepared to in-

filtrate not only our public services, but our

civilian employments as well. In the event of war

we may have to anticipate Black Tom explosions

on every waterfront, poison in our water systems,

and sand in all important industrial machines.

But the time has not come when we have to

abandon a system of liberty for one modeled on

that of the Communists. Such a system was not

that ordained by the framers of our Constitution. __

It is the latter we are sworn to uphold."

`Ninety Days to Appeal

The Government has 90 days from the date of

the decision, or January 24, in which to appeal

_to the U.S. Supreme Court. It seems almost cer- |

tain that such an appeal will be taken. At the

same time, it is not unlikely that the Coast Guard

will in the near future issue new regulations

making some concessions to the Court of Appeals

decision.

Executive Committee

American Civil Liberties Union

of Northern California

`Sara Bard Field

! Honorary Member

_Rt. Rey. Edw. L. Parsons

Chairman |

Dr. Alexander Meiklejohn

Helen Salz

,_ Vice-Chairmen

Fred H. Smith, IV

Secretary-Treasurer

Ernest Besig

Director

Lawrence Speiser

Staff Counsel -

Philip Adams

Prof. James R. Caldwell

William K. Coblentz

Wayne M. Collins

Rabbi Alvin I. Fine

Laurent B. Frantz

Rey. Oscar F. Green

Alice G. Heyneman

Prof. Van D. Kennedy

Ruth Kingman

Seaton W. Manning

Prof. John Henry. Merryman

Rey. Harry C. Meserve

Rey. Robert W. Moon

William M. Roth

Clarence E. Rust

Prof. Laurence Sears

Theodosia B. Stewart

Stephen Thiermann

Kathleen D. Tolman

Franklin H. Williams

Se ee

Page 4

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION-NEWS

December, 1955

American Civil Liberties Union-News

Published monthly at 503 Market Street, San Francisco 5,

Calif., by the American Civil Liberties Union

ot Northern California.

Phone: EXbrook 2-3255

ERNEST BBSIG............. Ce 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 and Fifty Cents a Year.

Fifteen Cents per Copy SD

Financial Report for Fiscal

Year Ended October 31, 1955

The American Civil Liberties Union of North-

ern California ended its fiscal year on October 31

with nothing left in its Operating Fund, but with

no deficit, either.

While the year's expenditures had been budg-

eted at $29,600, the income in the Operating Fund

was $28,582.32, exactly $665.45 less than the in-

come of the previous year. This decrease results

from a decline of 127 in the paid-up membership

to 3347. And, the drop in membership comes

about. because for the first time in four years

there was no spring special membership cam-

paign, except in Marin county, which did its usual

fine job.

On the other hand, the Union's income from

all sources increased from $31,863.06 in 1954 to

$35,122.08 in 1955. This increase is attributable

. especially to last June's Special Funds Appeal

which netted $3768.14.

_ Here is the way your money was spent from

November 1, 1954, to October 31, 1955:

OPERATING FUND

Income

General Receipts ... 20.0 $28,582.32

Expenditures

Salaries and Retirement. . $19,613.55

Printing and Stationery... 2,581.31

Rent. 7 ee: 2,285.00

Postage ...... oe 1,371.00

Telephone `and Telegraph. 762.41

Taxes and Insurance..... 549.06

Furniture and Equipment. 586.34

Traveling and

Trameportation .:...... 628.64

-ublications ... 7... 5.1. 91.66

(c) Miscellaneous ........... 57.05

Marin Membership

pCampaion =. 2. 8. 56.30

Total Expenditures ...... ee . $28,582.32

Balance on Hand te s. 0.00

_ RESERVE FUNDS

Receipts

On Hand 11/1/54... $ 5,494.44

_ Receipts (Interest) and

o240 Surplus........ 277.62

Total Receipts... $ 5,772.06

ro Expenditures

Treasury Bond, |... $ 32.74

Trans. to Expansion Fund. 1,000.00

Total Expenditures .............$ 1,032.74

Balance on Hand. 2 $ 4,739.32

DEFENSE FUNDS

Receipts Expend. On Hand

John W. Mass...$ 67.00 $ 384.25 $ 321.39

Tax Exemp. Loy.

Gath 2. 385.00 195.05 189.95

Schuyten Cases. . 42.00 a 661.00

Mollie Thorner . 66.25 12.00 54.25

Hancock v. Burns 56.75 41.50 15,25

Buchalter Case. . 20.25 4.95 15.30

Rebecca

Wolstenholme..: 59.50 ..... - 59.50

Legal Def. Fund

(General) .... 2,184.65 492.70 1,840.61

Total = $2,881.40 $1,130.45 $3,157.25

EXPANSION FUNDS

Income

From Reserve Funds....... $1,000.00 -.

Bal. from Memb. Camp

HUNG 32 907.64

mpecial Gilt ...7. 5) 1,000.00

Marin Chapter... 300.00

Increment Marin Memb.

DOVE a 275.00

Special Funds Appeal...... 1,808.64

Motale Ne $5,291.28

Expenditures

None

Prayers in S.F. Schools

Upheld by Legal Adviser

Irving G, Breyer, Legal Adviser for the San

Francisco Public Schools, disagreed with an opin-

ion of California Attorney General Edmund G.

Brown, and on November 15 upheld a "non-sec-

tarian and non-denominational" prayer used in

the kindergarten and some elementary grades of

the San Francisco schools. Subsequently, the

School Board, as a matter of policy, approved use

of the prayer.

The prayer reads as follows:

"We thank Thee, God, for the food we eat;

For family and friends we meet;

For books we read and songs we sing;

._ We thank Thee, God, for everything."

Ruled Breyer: "Since the thesis of a Supreme

Being is neither sectarian nor denominational, the

prayer or song under discussion is not prohibited."

Mr. Breyer conceded there were no court cases on

the subject and that his ruling was based on public

practices where there is a reference to God.

Last June 10, Attorney General Brown de-

clared: "It hardly seems open to debate that a

public school teacher may not be required to recite

a daily prayer, for no one may be compelled to

perform a religious ceremony as a condition of

his employment by the state or subdivision of the

state. By the same token, neither may any public

school student be required to participate in the

offering of prayers. . . . It is true that the majority

of our people are Christians or Jews, so that

simple prayers to a Supreme Being would not be

incompatible with the views of most students in

the public schools. Nevertheless, even atheists

and agnostics are protected in their beliefs by the

Constitution... . For atheist or agnostic children,

daily prayers would be a constant reminder of the

conflict between home and school, and might well

be a disruptive element which would weaken the

moral influence of parent and teacher alike."

In Marin County, Deputy District Attorney E.

Warren McGuire took a position directly opposed

to that taken by Mr. Breyer and advised the Sau-

salito School Superintendent that it was unlawful

to recite a prayer similar to one used in San

Francisco.

Thereafter, Supt. Boyle announced that the

prayer had been abandoned, but later admitted

to the ACLU that it was again being used. The

ACLU has requested a copy of the prayer and

information as to the use of prayers in Sausalito -

schools.

3 Hearings and 3 Clearances

For Alleged Security Risk

A high-ranking Army reserve officer was re-

cently cleared on security charges following a

hearing in which he was represented by Ernest

Besig, ACLU director. This is the third time he

has received a loyalty or security clearance fol-

lowing receipt of charges and a hearing, and the

third time he has been represented by the ACLU.

On the first occasion, in 1950, he received a

clearance for a "sensitive position" in the Federal

Civil Service under the Truman loyalty program.

On the second occasion, in 1954, he received a

security clearance from the Western Industrial

Personnel Security Board in connection with his

employment for a private employer who holds a

defense contract requiring access to classified

military information. The Army hearing was held

last July. :

The second and third hearings were substan-

tially repeat performances. The principal charge

on each occasion has been that the man has a

brother and a sister-in-law who are alleged to be '

Communists. i

The reason for the three clearances is that they

involve different arms of the Federal government.

If the man becomes involved with another Federal

agency where a security check is required, he will,

no doubt, have to go through the same thing once

again. Moreover, there is nothing to prevent the

Army or the Personnel Security Board from re-

opening the man's case.

Cal. Federation for Civic

Unity Conference Dec. 9-11

The California Federation for Civic Unity, the

statewide coordinating agency for organizations

and individuals interested in inter-group rela-

tions and civic unity, will hold its Tenth Annual

Convention at Asilomar, California, on the week-

end of December 9, 10 and 11.

Delegates to the convention will hear talks by

prominent speakers and participate in technique

workshops. While the theme of this year's con-

vention is Fair Employment Practices and Voter

Registration, speakers and workshops will cover

a variety of civil rights and minority-group sub-

jects, according to Irving Rosenblatt, Jr., presi-

dent of the organization.

School Book Selection Policy

Commended By Marin Chapter

Trustees of the Tamalpais Union High School

District were given a unanimous vote of commen-

dation last month by the board of directors of

the Marin chapter, American Civil Liberties

Union of Northern California, for their policy

statement. on textbook selection.

The trustees, at their October meeting, made

public a statement which declared in part: :

"., . we should furnislf opportunities for stu-

dents to discuss significant controversial issues

appropriate to their maturity under the direction

of competent teachers. The school through con-

stant teaching of the established truths of our

American heritage furnishes a foundation and a

framework. The student as a citizen should be

able to evaluate controversial issues from this

training."

Milen Dempster of Mill Valley, chairman of the

Marin ACLU board, declared:

"The action of the trustees is in keeping with

the highest traditions of American democracy

and education, and the ACLU of Marin is more

than happy*to commend such a thorough, well-

thought-out statement which recognizes that

schools have an obligation to teach controversial

matters."

Dempster cited particularly that section of the

trustee statement which declares that. schools

should furnish students the opportunity to (1)

analyze current problems, (2) gather and organ-

ize pertinent facts, (3) discriminate between fact

and opinion, detect propaganda, (4) draw intel-

ligent conclusions, (5) respect the opinions of

others, (6) respect the principle of majority rule

while (7) respecting the rights of minorities.

The ACLU Marin group voted its commenda-

tory action at its November meeting, held at the

home of Mrs. Helen Kerr of Sausalito.

Federal Housing "Loyalty

Oath" Invalid In Wisconsin

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court refused

to review the decision of the Wisconsin Supreme

Court holding the "Gwinn rider" to be unconsti-

tutional. Under that law, tenants in federal hous-

ing projects are required to sign a "loyalty oath"

stating whether or not they belong to organiza-

tions on the Attorney General's list.

Nevertheless, the Government will continue to.

insist that tenants sign "loyalty oaths" every-

where but in Wisconsin. It takes this position

because the high court did not declare the Act

to be unconstitutional but merely refused to re-

view the lower court decision.

The loyalty oath requirement is being chal-

lenged by about 18 tenants in various states. The

Wisconsin court held that the oath deprived tey-

ants of the rights of free speech and assembly

guaranteed by-the Constitution.

Similar cases are on file in New York, the

District of Columbia, Washington, Colorado, Ili-

nois and California. Two test cases in Northern

California are being handled by the ACLU of

Northern California. In the latter cases the lower

courts reached opposite conclusions.

In a Richmond, Calif., case the lower court.

found the law abridged constitutional guarantees,

`but in San Francisco, in the Mollie Thorner case,

Municipal Judge C. Harold Caulfield upheld an

eviction proceeding. The case is now on appeal

to the Appellate Department of the Superior

Court. Mrs. Thorner is still living in the North

Beach project despite her refusal to sign the oath.

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

De .for 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 $1.50 a year.)

2. I pledge $....2....... per month. Or $0 per yr.

3. Please enter my subscription to the NEWS ($1.50

per Gear) ee

Hnelosed please find $_ = = = Please bill

Wee a

INA) eo ee es

Strect 5 ee ee

City andsZOne ee ee

Ss oe ea Occupation ===. = =

0x00B0