Evening star., 1950-03-23

The appeal to the Supreme
Court CT the Dorothy Bailey case
will hinge essentially on the
meaning of one word" evidence"
This was disclosed last night
by an attorney for Miss Bailey.
whose dismissal from her $4,000
a-year Government job on dis
loyalty grounds was upheld yes
terday by the United States Court
OF Appeals in a 81 decision.
Were going to stress in our
appeal" explained Milton v. Free
man of the law firm OF Arnold,
Forbes & Porter, "the question of
whether the Executive order (set-
ting up the Loyalty Boards) is
intended to have employees fired
on anonymous information"
Edgerton Dissents.
The majority opinion of the
Appeals Court was written by
Judge E. Barrett Prettyman. with
Judge James Proctor concurring.
Judge Henry w. Edgerton dis
sented.
Miss Bailey, who lives in the
1900 block Of Butterworth place
NV, was suspended from her
Job in November. 1948. and was
dismissed the following February.
She was the first Federal employe
to be fired after exhausting all
administrative appeal procedures
provided by the loyalty check sys-
tenn.
1t developed, in the series of
loyalty hearings. that Miss Bailey
was accused of membership in
the Communist Party. Although
she emphatically denied this and
pleaded to be confronted with her
accusers. the request was refused
for security" reasons.
Judge Edgerton has stated our
position very WE'LL" observed Miss
Bailey's attorney. The judges
dissent had quoted President Tru-
mans order:
'The standard for refusal of
employment or the removal from
employment in an Executive de-
partment or agency on grounds
relating to loyalty shall be that,
on sll the evidence, reasonable
grounds exist for belief that the
person involved is disloyal to the
Government Of the United States"
Comment on Evidence.
Then Judge Edgerton continued:
Despite the plain words all the
evidence the court rules that the
order requires no evidence and
authorizes findings based on un-
sworn, confidential reports of un-
sworn statements OF anonymous
informants as to their belief con-
corning an employees affiliations.
I think the order does no such
thing"
The majority opinion likewise
quoted the Executive order but
added:
Appellant says that evidence
does not include, in our jurispru-
dence, information secretly dis
closed to a hearing tribunal. That
Is certainly true, but the ques-
ton is whether the President
used the term in its jurispruden-
tial sense or whether he merely
meant information We think
he meant the latter"
Punishment Upset.
Miss Bailey had been barred by
the Loyalty Board from Federal
service for three years. This was
overruled by yesterdays decision
which held the time restriction
constituted punishment some
thing the Executive order does
not contemplate.
Theoretically" said Mr.. Free
man "she could apply for a job
tomorrow. That's one reason
why we say the decision is wrong.
If they (the Government) have
the right to dismiss her. they
certainly have the right to say
she cart get another job"
When she was discharged, Miss
Bailey was in the training section
Of the United States Employment
Service.
I've been looking for work since
and haven't been able to find any,"
she said, after a television inter-
view last night over WMAL-TV,
The Stars television station.
Pointing out that she had been
with the Government for Is years,
ever since she left college, Miss
Bailey declared. 1--WE always