Evening star., 1952-11-29
Critics Riddle
PIantoWithho|d
Police Pensions
Proposal Affecting
Firemen Also Hit as
Glass Legislation

Class Legislation
An almost unrelieved barrage Of
criticism against proposed legisla-
ton to give the District Com
missioners greater control over po-
lice and f1remen's pensions had the
Citizens Advisory Council wonder
ing about the measures worth to-
day.
Nine witnesses testified on it at
the councils public hearing yes
terday. All but one lambasted 1t,
mainly on the grounds that the
proposal amounts to "class legisla-
ton"
The measure would empower the
Commissioners to revoke the PEN
sion Of policemen or firemen who
refuse to testify before a legal
body on the ground of possible
self-incrimination. The city heads
would have the same authority in
cases where there employees are
"habitual drunkards" or are guilty
of lewd and lascivious conduct, or
found to have committed, "here-
tofore or hereafter" any offense
involving moral turpitude while an
active member Of the force.
Judges Of Facts.
Under these provisions, the
Commissioners themselves would
apparently be the sole judges Of
the facts. While it is true that
the present law places such power
in the Commissioners hands in
cases involving habitual drunk
enness and lewd conduct, a court
conviction must figure in the
moral turpitude section of the
statute.
The proposed amendments
would at least provide for hear
ings in any case.
The lone approving voice at the
proceedings yesterday was that of
Deputy Police Chief Howard v.
Covell, speaking for Chief Robert
V. Murray. Inspector Covell read
a statement previously made by
the chief, agreeing with the Sem
ate Crime Investigating subcom-
mittee that any person taking an
oath of public Office should forfeit
his job land all benefits derived
therefrom," if he asserts the
self-incrimination privilege guar
anteed by the Constitution.
Lutz Disagrees.
Inspector Clarence H. Lutz, one
of Chief Murray's top aides and
president of the Policemen's Asso-
citation. differed with his boss.
Since the proposed law affects
only one class of city employees,
Inspector Lutz declared, it is class
legislation.
1T makes us out as the only
group likely to betray it's trust,
which is not true" the official de-
clared. why single us out when
other city and Federal employees
are Susceptible?"
Fire Chief Millard H. Sutton
Joined in the view that the law
should apply to all District en-
ployes. He was backed also by
officials of two flre-fighters asso-
Citations.
Attorney Charles E. Ford added
his booming voice to the chorus.
Mr.. Ford represents former Police
Chief Robert j. Barrett, whose re-
fusal to testify before the Sem
ate subcommittee on certain of
his finances was largely RESPONSE
BILE for the proposed legislation.
Sees Change in Amendment.
He charged that the law was
an attempt to write into the
Fifth Amendment a proviso that
all but cops and f1remen are en-
titled to the privilege against self
incrimination."
Policemen and firemen, Mr..
Ford added, have been picked
on long enough and as long as
this goes on how can you expect
their morale to be good?"
The Washington Board of
Trade, represented by Henry
Lerch, also criticized the class
legislation aspects. Mr.. Lerch
added that the proposal seemed
to penalize employees who exercise
their constitutional right against
self determination.
Walter B. Castonguay of the
Randle Highlands Citizens Asso-
citation declared he failed to see
one logical reason why this bill
should be passed"