Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1955-08-15

considered by security boards:
| An Army private was accused
of exhibiting "a hypercritical at
titude towards society that ap-
peared to reflect home indoc-
trination."
An Army Ordnance Depot
boiler fireman was accused Of
having falsif1ed his application
in that he had "cohabitated for
some time with a woman who
was not his wife" (He explained
he did not believe job appli-
cation the place to elucidate his
relations with a woman who is
now his wife,
A Government Printing once
employe was accused by q Gov
eminent Security officer of en-
gaging in ''left-wing talk" and
using the term "second-cla
citizen" Counsel brought out
that what the employee had said
was that he would rather be a
second-claSs citizen IN Missis-
sippi than a f1rst-class citizen IN
Russia.")
An engineer was apparently
suspect, according to his attor-
ney, because a landlady said his
wife held Communist meetings.
The landlady knew that was
what they were because "they
had the candles burning low {.
and they spoke lowly."
A clerk trying to clear him
self of loyalty charges. was said
Ito have consistently been a
.troublemaker, aptagonizer. and
braggart."
A great variety of questions
were put to citizens trying to
clear themselves at loyalty hear
|ings:
An expert geographer with the
Department of the Army was
asked: DO you by nature get |
sort Of a secret, personal salts
faction out of acting as an in
dividualiSt?"
: He was also asked II he had a |
favorite newspaper columnist Of
the day, and a favorite radio or
TV news commentator or news
analysts.
The geographer was not |
cleared by the hearing board, |
but the Security Review Board. |
to whom he complained nf being
quizzed about such matters, sub
sequently cleared him.
An agency lawyer asked a
meat inspector if it wouldn't be
possible for someone Ito walk in
there with a needle full Of some
kind of liquid and stick it into
a carcass and it would be con-
taminated." The meat inspector
replied that it would be possible
for almost anyone in a packing
house to do this.
Half of Accused Cleared
OF the persons involved in the
so cases listed. ~ were cleared,
81 were denied clearance. one
has yet to be heard and one re-
signed.
The average length of proceed
:ngs was COS months. The aver
age counsels time was SO hours.
The average counsers fee was
$409 In SO cases no government
witnesses appeared. Two govern
ment witnesses appeared in five
cases. Two was the largest num-
Der of government witnesses
heard in any case.
In a statement accompanying
release Of the book, Mr.. Yarmo-
linsky said that "a characteris-
tic common to all the programs
is that the burden of proof is
placed upon the employe" and
that the problem of burden of
proof is somewhat different from
what it has generally been con-
sidered to be-"
Raises Six Questions
Mr.. Yarmolinsky raised the
following questions in connection
with what he calls 1.-The more
persistent friction points" in the
security system: 4
Il. Can any more effective
procedure be developed to dis
pose of cases without formal
charges where further investi-
cation or evaluation would indi-I
cate that formal proceedings
were unnecessary?
20. Can greater selectivity be
exercised in drawing charges
against employees so as TO elm
mate so far as possible those
charges which later prove to be
baseless, and so as to distinguish
somewhat among degrees Of
seriousness?
50. Can any mechanism be de-
vised to permit the emplove to
challenge the sufficiency of a
particular allegation without
having first to assume the bur-
den Of disproving it?
Il. To what extent. If any,
can the questioning by the board
be limited so as to avoid possible
confusion between subversives,
and persons who. though hold
ing radical or unpopular views,
do not endangGr the security Of
the United States?
IS. Can anything be done to
avoid the apparently substan-
tial harGships that result from
lengthy suspensions without pay
during the tendency Of these
proceedings, and can anything
be done to accelerate The process
.of decision following the hear
ing?
Is. Can any provision be made
to compel the attendance of re-
luctant witnesses both for and
against the employee, whose pres
ence would rot disclose security
information2"