Constitution Protects Even Scapegoats

Because the rights of the unpopular were carefully written into the United States Constitution, the federal courts have always been stumbling blocks to temporary majorities. Whether the contemporary crusade has been liberal or conservative, courts have usually fulfilled their obligation to remind the public that no cause, no matter how popular, can exceed the limits of the Constitution.

A momentous case in point is Federal Judge Luther Youngdahl's dismissal of four of the perjury counts against Owen Lattimore. If the American public has ever desired a scapegoat for the victory of Communism in China, it has been Lattimore. Ever since Senator McCarthy called him the "top Soviet agent in America," he has taken a continual barrage of mud. By last November his name had been so completely blackened that even defenders of the Truman Administration's Asian policy shied from debating the charges that he was an agent of Soviet conspiracy.

Yet Senator McCarran's Internal Security subcommittee could find no evidence of treason on his part. Instead, they indicted him on seven counts of perjury. If imprisoned because of any one of them, he will thenceforth be known as the "convicted perjurer-traitor" by large segments of the American press and public, so it is as convenient a charge.

This is the standard scapegoat 'ritual. But Youngdahl, former Minnesota governor, has held it up, for the moment at least. In a decision as courageous as it is thoughtful, he has given the public a needed lesson in Constitutional law. Reminding that McCarran's questioning had no legal purpose but to gather information for legislation, he pointed out that perjury indictments must be relevant to that purpose to be valid. Interrogation about a man's opinions cannot be grounds for trial. Lattimore was asked whether he was a "Communist sympathizer" and whether he knew whether certain of his associates were Communists. When he denied it, he was indicted.

Youngdahl said that accusation on these bases was in effect forcing a jury to pure speculation and forays into a man's inner mental processes, both severe tampering with Federal rules and the Sixth Amendment. He also pointed out that some of the perjury counts were so vague as to violate a person's Constitutional privilege of having the nature of the charges against him made known. Although he did not rule on the last three counts, including the charge that Lattimore read secret documents, Youngdahl doubted if any of them could stand.

Of course, Youngdahl stands to be roundly denounced for reminding Senators that scapegoats also have Constitutional rights. The people who assumed Lattimore guilty from the moment he was accused will say Youngdahl, a staunch Republican, has sold out to pro-Communists. But Youngdahl can weather these attacks with a clear conscience. In a time of crisis, he has proven that the judiciary is still the best guardian of Constitutional liberties.