Thursday, Feb. 22, 1962 University Daily Kansan
Page 3
Group Voices Support for 'Operation Abolition' -
(Continued from page 2)
the use of fire hoses. Jacobs adds: "Sheriff Carberry did make a qualified statement that he had been 'toold' by the local police, who are not under his jurisdiction, that the turning on of the fire hose was occasioned by an 'act of violence against a uniformed officer,' but he also said that he had not seen this act himself."
That Carberry had "not seen this act himself" is hardly news, since this has been maintained by Carberry and by others rebutting Jacobs' original allegation. As Carberry put it: "I was present at City Hall on each day except during the noon recess of Friday, May 13. The acts of violence by demonstrators and the defensive action by the City Police took place during this noon recess." The point is that Carberry, not present when the alleged violence occurred, could not of himself be an authority as to whether it happened or not. Jacobs' original article deceptively tried to make the sheriff an authority for the assertion that it did not happen.
The sheriff's rebuttal, and Jacobs' retreat, make it clear that the original Jacobs' effort was erroneous and misleading.
Q. DID William Wheeler, West Coast investigator for the committee, admit there were "distortions" in the film?
A. No. Wheeler acknowledged that there were two inaccuracies of sequence in the film, both technical in nature, in the course of arguing that the film was an authentic representation of what occurred in San Francisco. Burton White, with whom Wheeler was debating, used the word "distortions" to characterize these two inaccuracies, and
Wheeler assented to his opponent's remark in passing. This exchange has been lifted out of context to make it appear that Wheeler questioned the authenticity of the film—whereas the entire burden of his argument was precisely the opposite. The exchange is as follows: WHEELER: "Are you basing the whole fact that everything is a lie because these two minor incidents occurred?" WHITE: "No, I am basing my discussion on the fact that the film does have inaccuracies, does have distortions." WHEELER: "... we have admitted that."
Q. THE film refers to Vernon Bown, a man arrested during the demonstrations, as a "Communist professional agitator." The student committee protesting the film says: "The truth is that the HUAC itself, in its Friday morning hearing, indicated that Vernon Bown is not a member of the Communist Party." Concerning the film's statement that Bown was charged with sedition in Kentucky, the student committee says: "The film omits the vital background in the case. Mr. Bown was guarding the home of a Negro family which had been threatened by racists in a Southern state. The house was subsequently bombed by a group of segregationists in an automobile, and Bown was indicted for the bombing." And: "The film did not tell us that these charges were thrown out by the courts, and that Bown was never convicted of these 'crimes.'" What are the facts about these allegations?
A. Each of these charges against the film is an outright distortion. During the Friday morning hearing referred to, the committee did not repudiate the identification of
of congressional business, and finally canceled after the relevant information had been turned over to local authorities — at the request of the California Teachers Association.
Criticisms Made -
It does not inform us that the sound-track which accompanies the film which was shot inside the hearing room during the demonstrations of the subpoenaed persons was a composite track made up of several tapes taken both inside and outside the hearing room.
The film fails to tell us what really went on inside the hearing room. The film does show the squeelled attempts of dissenting witnesses to read their statements. It does not show the freedom granted to "friendly" witnesses to read theirs.
(Continued from page 2)
of such evidence the film offers no proof other than the assertion of the sound-track that such an event occurred. It is further to be noted that no person was arrested for the act of rushing the barricades. In spite of the attempts made by the H.C.U.A. to capitalize upon confused and inaccurate reports of the events which were promulgated the day of the demonstrations, the public record clearly shows that the film's assertions are not true.
These are some of the means whereby the film distorts the record. In addition, the film tries to smear the residents of the Bay Area who protested its three-day hearings in San Francisco. This the H.C.U.A. attempts to do in this film with its traditional and, by now, hackened innuendoes to the effect that anyone who criticizes the Committee must be either a Communist or is, in some mysterious way, a Communist dupe.
What is the committee's real motive in supporting the distribution of this film? The answer is quite simple: In the face of an amorous groundswell of opposition from highly reputable sources the Committee has been driven to desperate, almost hysterical attempts to justify its existence.
What have been the results? The Committee's activities have not produced a single significant piece of legislation. Perhaps this should
Rep. Gordon Scherer stated in a House speech, May 5, 1960:
Bown as a "professional Communist agitator." In fact, it heard considerable testimony identifying him as just that—but indicating that, in an intraparty squabble, his section had been ousted by the state Communist headquarters. The hearing focused on a petition by Bown's section seeking readmitance to the party. The impact of the episode, far from clearing Bown of subversive taint as the student committee seeks to suggest, is precisely the opposite.
We must keep in mind that the House Committee on Un-American Activities can have but one legitimate function: to conduct investigations which would provide information for necessary remedial legislation. That is the sole justification for any legislative body.
"An examination of 101 files shows that . . . 97 teachers were actually served at their homes. Only four were served at their schools — and this was done only because of the inability of the serving officers to locate them at their residence..."
In the matter of the Kentucky sedition case, the student committee has committed an even more flagrant distortion of the record. The case in which Bown was indicted revolved primarily around a man named Carl Braden — who has been identified under oath as a Communist and whose conviction for contempt, for refusing to testify about that identification, has recently been sustained by the Supreme Court. Braden and his wife bought a house in a white neighborhood in Louisville, and turned it over to a Negro couple. The house was subsequently bombed. The Bradens, Bown, and four others formed a "committee"
not surprise us since it has tried to investigate in those areas of free speech and peaceful association in which the Constitution prohibits legislation.
This has not, however, prevented the Committee from persistently and outrageously violating the Constitutional rights of citizens who have been forced to appear before it for interrogation and harassment. A steadily growing condemnation has finally become sufficiently widespread to have a major impact on American society.
THE FILM ASSERTS, "Among the Communist leaders who had an active part in the San Francisco demonstrations were Harry Bridges, who you see here being escorted out of City Hall by police officials moments before the roiiting broke out." While we think that the report published under the auspices of the H.C.U.A. by J. Edgar Hoover contains as many distortions of the events as the film and is primarily a piece of propaganda, let us look at Mr. Hoover's report of this event: "Order had been restored when Harry Bridges, President of the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, suddenly appeared on the scene" (Communist Target-Youth, page 8). The emphasis has been added, and the point is clear both of these assertions cannot be true. In this matter of Harry Bridges, which is one of the few instances where the Hoover report is accurate, it is the report by Mr. Hoover which is correct. (A complete analysis of the Hoover report is available from our organization.) . . .
As to publicizing the names, Arthur F. Corey, executive secretary of the California Teachers Association, has said: "Names of teachers subpoenaed have not been published in southern California and were not announced by the committee in northern California."
to agitate in behalf of the Negroes, and to make it appear that racists had conducted the bombing.
IN THE HISTORIC 1957 Watkins Decision, the U.S. Supreme Court declared; "Who can define the meaning of 'Un-American'? There is no Congressional power to expose for the sake of exposure (Committee investigations) can lead to ruthless exposure of private lives in order to gather data which is neither desired by Congress nor useful to it." . .
The authorities, however, found a portable radio beneath the house, and concluded it had been used to detonate the bomb. Owner of the radio: Vernon Bown who refused to affirm or deny whether he had been under the house, or whether he had taken the radio there.
As for the charges being "thrown out of the courts," this action had nothing to do with the merits of the evidence against Bown. The indictments were dropped after the Supreme Court's decision in "Pennsylvania v. Nelson," which invalidated state sedition laws on principle, and in which neither Bown nor the Bradens figured.
It is impossible to list all the inaccuracies and distortions in the film We have already discussed some of the more flagrant misrepresentations, but there are many others. Let us examine a few:
Q. IT IS charged that in June, 1959, HUAC unjustly subpoenaed more than 100 California school teachers in the presence of their pupils, released their names to the public and then canceled the hearings. What are the facts?
A. The teachers were not subpoenaed in their classrooms, and the committee did not release their names. The hearings were at first postponed because of the pressure
Finally, with respect to cancellation of the hearings, Corey said: "I wish to express the appreciation of the California Teachers Association for the committee's decision to cancel the hearings scheduled in California."
(An article by the Intercollegiate Society of Individualists)
Here They Are! FINAL REDUCTIONS on the university shop's ANNUAL WINTER SALE
These prices are ROCK BOTTOM and will be in effect until the sale is over just a few days from now. Be sure to see these bargains! These are the LOWEST prices in Lawrence on quality men's wear.
Special Group
WOOL SUITS
Reg. Now
69.50 39.95
49.50 29.95
TOPCOATS
(Just seven left)
Reg. 50.00 to 65.00
Now All One Price
$37.95
Special Group
Special Group
17
SPORT COATS
Reg. 35.00 to 42.50
Now All One Price
$25.00
62 prs.
CORDUROY WASH PANTS
Reg. 6.95 — Now $3.00 (It will pay you to buy these even if the length must be altered.)
16 prs. MEN'S SHOES Reg. 18.95 to 21.95 — Now $ \frac{1}{2} $ Price Don't miss these! They'll be located just inside the front door.
Corduroy Suits
(All with reversible vests)
Reg. 29.95 to 32.50
Now $14.95
In these sizes only:
39 short— 39 reg. — 39 long
40 reg. — 40 long — 44 reg.
Winter Jackets
Winter Jackets (Just ten left)
Reg. 19.95 to 35.00 Now $2 Price
18
Famous Brand
TUXEDOS
(All from this year's stock)
Reg. 49.95
Now $39.95
One Large Group
SWEATERS
Reg. 11.95 to 19.95
Now All One Price
$7 each
(Many additional styles
are been placed in this group
46 prs.
DRESS SLACKS
Reg. 12.95 to 17.95
Now 25% OFF
1420 Crescent Rd.
Slight charge for alterations on above mdse.
Across from Lindley
---