Evening star., 1954-12-28
Peters
Continued From First Page.)
ZAP wirephoto.

Continued From First Page.)
time is overdue and the appro-
pirate occasion is here"
Basic Questions Posed.
The basic questions which the
labor group wants the court to
decide are:
/. Whether a Federal Govern
ment loyalty or security hearing
Is required by the Constitution
to accord with due process.
2. Whether a hearing accords
with due process if the accused
is not informed of the identity
of his accusers and is not pro-
vided with the opportunity to
confront and cross-examine his
accusers, and the decision is
made (by the hearing board or
department head on considera-
ton of information not revealed
to the accused.
Going beyond the dismissal OF
DR.. Peters as a single individual
who contends he was subjected
to "star chamber" proceedings,
the present brief warned:
"The Governments industrial
personnel security program is
the twin Of the Government &
old Federal employees loyalty
program and the more recent
employe security program. These
hearings have substantially the
same provisions and are all pre-
cisely alike in the typesof hearing
permitted.
Fear Of Extension Cited.
'Hence it Is not just the pub
lie employe who seeks protection
here but every man and woman.
scientists. engineer, professional,
or just plain worker employed
privately in our vast defense in
dustry and subject to dismissal,
like DR.. Peters, when the Gov
ernment's security clearance Is
denied. We are before this
court because of our conviction
that the narrowing or elimina-
tion of due process will, If
extended to all Government po-
sitions. inevitably be applied to
the bulk Of our entire working
population. In time OF emer-
gency substantially all industrial
activity is defense-related."
The brief contended that due
process Of law, as guaranteed by
the Constitution. requires al
least a fair notice to an accused
person and an opportunity to de-
fend himself. It charged that
DR.. Peters as well as many mil.
lions of citizens publicly and pri.
vately employed. now subject tt
the Governments security pro.
grams. have no opportunity tc
defend in any meaningful sense
The brief noted that the Fed
Grafton of Scientists of America,
the head of the National Acad-
emy of Scientists, and many
others have repeatedly chal-
lenged "the lack in the Govern
ment'S loyalty and security pro-
grams of those procedural rights
which Americans have rightfully
come to regard as inviolate." It
complained that a person SUBJ
jected to a loyalty or security
hearing has no protection
against the bias" of confidential
informants and also has no way
OF counteracting mistakes in
identity or other errors on
the part of investigators or In
formants.
Private Employers Hit.
"Such hearings" the brief
continued. 'are not held to
punish for past conduct. Rather,
the controlling consideration is
fear of future behavior as
guessed at from past alleged
conduct.
Even with q free people, due
process ever stands uneasily.
Today in many fields the stand-
ing is precarious. Encouraged
by the presence Of the Govern
ment personnel security pro-
gram, private employers arro-
gate to themselves the right to
determine. without even the
facade Of q hearing, that em-
ployes are security risks. It
becomes more and more true
that no one is so highly placed
in America tsuch as former Sec
retary Of state Acheson) or so
lowiy placed In obscurity (such
as Mrs. Annie Lee Moss) as to
be certain that his reputation
viii not be ruined and his liveli-
hood prejudiced tomorrow by o
legislative hearing or other ac-
tion lacking in due process"
the President worked this morn
ing on = arevised draft Of the
State Of the Union message be
win deliver before 4 joint session
Of the Senate and House January
8. He planned to play golf tnia
afternoon 4 threatened rain
held on.