The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1954-02-05
The FIFTH Amendment


uge in the Fifth is "the most positive
proof obtainable that the witness is
@ Communist" This, of course, is I'M
true. A witness who refuses to talk
may or may not be Communist. He
may be any of the following:
1. A Communist.
2. Someone, who may or may not
be Communist, who fears that his
answer will be used in chain of evil
dence to prove that he violated the
Smith Act, which makes it unlawful
to advocate the overthrow or destruc-
ton of the government by force or
violence.
3. A non-Communist who has moth
ing to hide, but believes his refusal
to testify will help guarantee con-
stitutional rights.
4. A non-Communist whose views
are disliked by Investigators. If he
does answer questions fully, the inves-
tigators may find some minor discrep-
ancy in his statements and try to
hang a perjury count on him, as
happened to Owen baltimore. Lat
timore answered questions loquacious-
ly and sometimes caustically for days
on end. His past was infinitely eX-
amined. No evidence of espionage or
Communist Party membership by this
man was produced. But because his
memory was fallible, because he gave
the allegedly wrong date of a lunch
con engagement over a decade ago,
I, L1 Il ,O+
tain acquaintance of some Is years
ago were Communists, and because
of a few similar instances, he has
been indicted for perjury, although
other friendly" witnesses like Louis
Budenz, whose testimony contained
contradictions, have not be indicted.
Then there are persons like "The
Dutchman" Grunewald. He has been
charged with many things, but pro-
communism is not one of them. He
resorted to the Fifth Amendment.
And there are persons like the late
Harry Dexter White who, accused of
espionage, did not resort to the Fifth
Amendment, but answered Investigate
ors' questions and denied the charges.
DANGEROUS COURSE
Should the Fifth Amendment be
abridged because it has been abused?
Of course not. The rights of free
press, and the rights of free speech
have been abused. But abridgement
of these rights would be much more
dangerous than their abuse.
So it is with the Fifth Amendment.
Il
midst the hue and cry about subver-
sion is the fact that the period of
greatest danger of internal subver-
sion is long past. Communist sympa-
thizers have been removed from gov
eminent office. Communists and con-
spirators have been prosecuted and
jailed. The country is alert to the dan
ger of infiltration. All this was ac-
complished despite abuse of the Fifth
Amendment.
To tamper with the rights guaran-
teed by that amendment now, during
the period of reaction to disclosures
of infiltration, or at any time, would
be dangerous and undesirable.
AS for Mr. Brownell's suggestion
that witnesses who talk be granted
there is simply no need
for such legislation. Witnesses who
talk already have that immunity. If
any reformed Communist or espio-
mage agent has been prosecuted,
cannot recall the case. Some of them
nave been helpful to the FBI and
20 congressional committees. Some
If them have parlayed their change
If heart into lucrative or well-pub-
icized professions.
The heart of the controversial prin-
,iple in the Fifth Amendment is this:
It supports the legal principle that
he burden of proof is on the prose-
.ution, rather than on the accused.
That principle wants strengthening,
instead of weakening.
Vic Reinemer is a native of Circle,
Montana, and was graduated from
I I