Glasser Resigns at Rutgers, Says Officials Hounded Him

A Rutgers University Law professor, who refused to answer questions before the House Un-American Activities Committee, resigned under the fire of University officials claiming that he was being "hunted and hounded" on false charges dating back as far as 1941.

Abraham Glasser, an associate professor at the Rutgers Law School, thus became the third member of the Rutgers faculty since 1952 to leave the school after invoking the Fifth Amendment before a Congressional committee.

The former Justice Department official, who has been accused again and espionage and Communist associations despite clearance by government agencies, also became the first victim of a recent ruling by the University board of trustees; the new regulation makes use of the Fifth Amendment itself sufficient grounds for dismissal.

Charges that Glasser was engaged in subversive activities on behalf of the Communist Party came to light as early as the spring of 1941 when he was suspended from his Justice Department job on charges of transmitting material to Russian agents.

A four months investigation of the charges followed and Glasser was officially absolved of the specific charges of Communism and espionage, although he was declared negligent in his handling of department files.

After retirement from the OPA in 1946, Glasser served for a brief time in a New York law firm and then obtained an appointment on the Rutgers Law faculty in 1947.

Charges Revived Periodically

The old charges of espionage were revived at periodic intervals, however. A special grand jury in New York City is reported to have considered the accusations in 1947 but took no action in the matter and did not even call Glasser as a witness.

Two years later a subpoena for his appearance was issued by the Un-American Activities committee and then withdrawn. In 1950 both the New York Daily News and columnist Fulton Lewis published articles repeating the spy charges against Glasser. As the Rutgers faculty committee which later reviewed the case pointed out, this long series of incidents apparently developed a feeling of harassment in Glasser's mind and a sharp antagonism toward investigative groups.

The matter finally reached the critical stage in March, 1953, when a spokesman for the Un-American Activities Committee called Glasser a "serious malefactor," and he was ordered to testify before the committee in Washington. Several months previously the Rutgers board of trustees had adopted its policy of regarding use of the Fifth Amendment as valid cause for dismissal, so that Glasser went before the committee with the knowledge that refusal to testify would almost certainly prejudice his position in the University.

Nevertheless, he invoked the Fifth Amendment in response to questions of his membership in the Communist Party during the period in 1941 when the charges of espionage were first investigated.

Suspended Pending Investigation

The day after Glasser's testimony, Lewis Webster Jones, president of the University, termed his actions "clearly in conflict with the policies of the University" and suspended him with pay, pending an investigation of the case by a special faculty committee and by the board of trustees.

In August of 1953, after several months of study, the faculty committee, composed of four of Glasser's colleagues in the Law School, unanimously reported that he had unquestionably violated the fixed policy of the University with respect to use of the Fifth Amendment, and had raised "grave doubts as to his fitness for his position," in the words of the official University statutes.

The committee recognized what it called certain "extraordinary facts" in the case, including "a prior adjudication favorable to Mr. Glasser of the subject matter as to which he invoked the Fifth Amendment, a continuing harassment on the same charges over a 12-year period, . . . Indication of bias and pre-judgment on the part of the House committee." But the group found Glasser "unnecessarily militant," accused him of lack of concern for the University's interest, and called his actions "incompatible with the trustees' policy."

With one member advocating lesser punishment, the committee then recommended that Glasser be allowed to resign without prejudice. The group added that if the refused to do so, no alternative remained but to dismiss him from the University. On Sept. 11, the University accepted Glasser's resignation.