TULUM EYAL A a COURT ACTION TESTS ‘LEGALITY’ U.S. H-tests challenged LOS ANGELES—Two California lawyers argued some momentous questions before a federal court in Washington last week that may have a profound bearing on the future course of the world. Does a U.S. court have jurisdiction to issue an injunction to halt further nuclear weapon tests? “Is the U.S. Atomic Energy Act unconstitutional because it confers ‘too much power” on an administrative agency to endanger the lives of all the inhabitants of the world? Have members of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission violated constitutional rights by continuing tests? Do residents of other lands— Britain, Canada, France, Jap- an, Samoa, the Marshall Is- lands—have “standing to sue” for an injunction to end tests? The California lawyers argu- ing in the affirmative on these questions were Francis Heisler of Carmel and A. L. Wirm of Los Angeles. They made their pleadings before Washington Judge Richmond Keech in the _his- toric case of U.S... nuclear physicist Linus Pauling, British philosopher Bertrand Russell and others, against U.S. Secre- tary of Defense Neil H. Mc- Elroy and the members of the Atomic Energy Commission. Also at issue in the argu- ment was whether, in conduct- ing nuclear explosions in the Pacific, the U.S. is violating the principle of “freedom of the high seas” and is abridging the rights guaranteed to Pacific Island people — both in the United Nations charter and in the UN trust agreement under which the U.S. administers af- fairs of the Marshall Islands. Ganged up against the Cali- fornia barristers was an array of government counsel, includ- ing representatives of the U.S. Attorney in the District of Columbia, the Attorney General’s office and legal “brass” for the Atomic Energy Commission. They sought to have the Pauling-Russell-et al eases thrown out of court on legal technical grounds with- out a hearing. ‘ Heisler -and Wirin attacked this “bold and callous” effort of the U.S. defense secretary and the AEC to escape’a “full and seaching” inquiry by the court into the grave charges of the Pauling-Russell suit. They pointed out: “The defendants (Defense Secretary and AEC) assert that the Atomic Energy Act contains no limitation (en) ex- tent of radioactive fallout (from tests); that the, act is valid and the actions of the de- fendants legal — even if the detonations create radiation so extensive that it damages the population of the world, their progeny and prospective progeny... “Thus, the defendants ascribe to Congress a power which’ ap- pears to transcend ali constitu- tional limitations. They assert that Congress intended to per- mit such poisoning of the earth’s atmosphere as_ will cause irreparable physical in- jury to -the entire: world population.” Heisler and Wirin argued that what Congress intended and whether the law makers were within constitutional bounds were matters to be proven by evidence in a full trial and could not be escaped by a technical dismissal. They pointed out that, legal- ly, the Defense Secretary and AEC-members, by failing to re- fute any of the charges of fall- out damage the world over, must be assumed to admit all of the physical allegations con- tained in the Pauling-Russell suit and the companion suit on behalf of Pacific peoples brought in the name of Dwight Heine, Marshall Islander. These allegations included the contention that: @ Only a small portion of the 390,000-square mile Eni- wetok Proving Grounds is inside the Trust Territory— the vast part of it being the “high seas.” @ Japanese and other fisher- men are barred from enter- ing the entire area where they have regularly fished in. the past; that if they do .they will be blown to death or seriously injured, and any fish caught will be unfit for human consumption. Further, said Heisler and Wirin, “the defendants admit that past and future detona- tions did and will cause world- wide fallout of radioactive debris, increasing the radio- active strontium content of the soil and contamination of the of the bones of human beings.” food supply of the world and of the bones of human beings.” There is no denial that detonations cause human dam- age “genetically and somatic- ally and cause progeny to be deleteriously affected because of the additional radiation;”’ no denial either that ‘some thousands or tens of thou- _sands of seriously defec‘ive Social Demos block left gov't in Finland HELSINKI—Leaders of the Social Democratic party thus far have prevented formation of a left-wing government in Finland. Now they are striving to form a “non-Communist” government, seeking support among the most right wing parties in parliament. Late last week President Kekkonen asked. Eino Kilpi, leader of the Péople’s Demo- cratic Union — with 50 seats, the biggest single party in parliament — to form a gov- ernment. Eino Kilpi immediately ap- proached the Social Demo- cratic party, now split into two groups in parliament, the Leskinen group with 38 seats and Skog group with 13-seats. He suggested formation of a left-wing government which would command a slim ma- jority of 101 of the 200 seats in parliament. But the Social Democrats refused. This in an about-face for the Skog group which last week was reported to bein favor of a ‘People’s Front” government. Now President Kekkonen has asked Onni Hituner, par- liamentary leader of the Soc- ial Democrats, to form a new government. He. has approached all the other parties in parliament except the People’s Demo- cratic Union, even the righi- wing National Coalition party and Swedish People’s party. If this manoeuvre succeeds, then Finland will be back to the unstable right coalition government which has _ be- devilled the country’s econo- my since 1948, when the Left coalition was broken up. Traditionally the Speaker is drawn from the biggest party, but the Social Democrats nominated one of their right- wingers, Fagerholm, who nevertheless was decisively defeated by Sukselainen, Ag- rarian party candidate. While it is possible that the moves to produce yet an- other shaky “anti-Communist” coalition may succeed, it can only be’ a temporary ex- pedient, BERTRAND RUSSELL children may be expected to be produced by the explosion of nuclear weapons each year at the average rate of the past seven years.” Heisler and Wirin upbraid- ed defense attorneys for de- scribing Dr. Pauling, Lord Russell, the Marshall island- ers, Japanese fishermen and other plaintiffs as “self-ap- pointed champions of the whole world.” Said. they: “These plaintiffs are alleg- ing injuries to their own lives, liberties and properties; that the radiation created damages the population of the world only indicates the extent of the Defense Secretary’s and AEC members’ illegal con- duct.” To refute the defense con- tention that non - resident aliens among the plaintiffs — the Marshall Islands, Sa- moans, the Japanese fisher- men and Hiroshima bomb vic- tims — had no right to join in the Pauling-Russell -suit, Heisler and Wirin quoted numerous declarations of the U.S. Supreme Court to the contrary. “International law is part of our law, and violations of that law by citizens of the U.S. to the injury of non-resi- dent alien friends are cogniz- able by American courts,” the lawyers pointed out. Judge Keech took under submission the motion of the government lawyers for dis- missal of the historic case. He took under submission, also, the proposal of Heisler and Wirin that a temporary res- training order be _ issued against the Secretary of De- fense and the AEC pending anticipated lengthy trial of the case and a decision on the plaintiffs’ request for perman- ent banning of further nuclear tests by the U.S. August 15, 1958 — Miller's. conviction quashed WASHINGTON — _— el Court of Appeals last quashed the sonvielitt, ! Arthur Miller, out American playwright © of a Salesman), for © iD of ‘Congress by @ roe trict Court in Wee last. year. ; 5 The charge followeagis ler’s refusal to tell the di hunting Un- Americal ij ties Committee the mate ) people with whom a if ed Communist meetiie’ } 1947. re In a statement ~ through his lawye! Ae I ington: Miller said: i “TJ can only nope action and this decisi” rt cating my action W) ot some small contribu ward eliminating the ° of Congressional © and particularly tows? of ping the inhuman P a making witnesses in act! long past friends a? ances.’ ae to He was son ned , il and 4 days in jal : gus? The sentence W@ and Miller appealed ysl After last year’s declared: “I decided io fend myself pecausé believe a man nas an informer to me profession freely in the States.” He had been © two counts of con of one of these convicl io! reversed the follow}? of Last week’s reve second conviction # Ft solidates the preach been made in Mev Many - others: eee Miller, had claimé : stitutional rights First Amendment Poo wer questions pu is ‘ witch-hunting pod ant But until last yer to the First Amen been in vain. Miller told thé one can Affairs Come year that he retus wer its questions © pee of conscience ® 49 he did not wan ies persons whom “oil d nvi tomb nocent of wro? member party, but he sa 1940 to 1947 heat. to Communist P28? nt h that someone mec : thought he ha f member. ' PACIFIC TRIBU