Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1948-08-15
Court of Public Opinion

Chairman Thomas of the House Com
mittee on Un-American Activities inter-
rupted the statement of a witness on
Friday to interject: The best court, and
we are conducting it, is the court Of public
opinion"
If one looks for justice in a court of
public opinion, one looks for it in the worst
of all possible courts. Mobs deliver their
verdicts in the court of public opinion.
The founders of this country set up a
separate and independent judiciary to
protect citizens from courts of public
opinion. They wrote into the Constitution
certain basic rights of the individual
which would prevent determination of his
guilt or innocence in court of public
opinion Some of the greatest traditions
of the law are rooted in past tragic mis-
carriages of justice by courts of public
opinion.
Mr.. Thomas unwittingly has put his
finger on the very thing that should dis
turb citizens who have some reverent
affection for justice. He likens his COM
mttee proceedings to those of a court,
which he calls court Of public opinion.
The suggestion that his committee hear
ings constitute process for determining
guilt or innocence is dangerous one.
There are indeed, certain Similarities
between the committee proceedings and
the proceedings of court Of law. Wit
nesses are summoned and they'a are sworn.
There is a prosecutor There is testimony
and there is cross examination. There is
power to punish for contempt.
But where is the counsel for the de-
Tense, with his right to examine and cross
examine witnesses? Where is the Judge
who enforces the rules of evidence? Where
Is that great body of the law, built up
through centuries of trial and error, which
controls the machinery for administration
of justice?
There is jury in Mr.. Thomas metaphor
It Is the public. But 1t is a jury that forms
its opinion on some but not all, of the
facts. 1t is a Jury that functions under
no instructions, as to what it must con-
slider and what it must discard. 1t is
Jury that is selected without regard to
qualifications to pass on the evidence, that
is bound by no oath for discharge of high
responsibility. Public opinion is often
sound in it's ultimate conclusions. But it
verdicts, while the verdicts can inflict
devastating punishment.
Chairman Thomas and his colleagues,
especially Representative Mundt, who has
been active in the direction of the hear
ingS, have given the accused an Oppor
tunity to defend themselves as best they
can. They have tried to be fair in that
respect, letting a man speak for himself
after having been publicly accused of
about as black crime as the books con-
tain Some of the witnesses have made
effective rejoinder; others have placed
themselves under more suspicion than ever
by the nature of their replies
The iniquity is that an innocent by
stander who becomes involved can never
recover the damage to his reputation that
can be inflicted by the circumstance of
proceedings in the court Of public opin-
ion" So let us take these congressional
Investigations for what they are-neces-
sary efforts, often successful, to ferret out
facts that otherwise would remain hidden,
dangerous to the innocent as we'll as to
the guilty.
But let us not confuse their function
with the function Of the criminal courts,
which is the calm and judicial determine
ton between guilt and innocence. Let
us avoid conception of such hearings as
the court of public opinion" For such
courts are not equipped to uphold the
cause of Justice.