ment under such circumstances as to warrant the conclusion-not otherwise rebutted by the evidence that they have engaged in such activities as a result of direction, domination, or control exercised over them by the Communist movement.

"(c) Persons, regardless of the formal state of their affiliation with the Communist Party, as to whom there is reason to believe, on the balance of all the evidence, that they are going abroad to engage in activities which will advance the Communist movement for the purpose, knowingly and willfully of advancing that movement.

"§ 51.136 Limitations on Issuance of Passports to Persons Likely to Violate Laws of the United States. In order to promote the national interest by assuring that the conduct of foreign relations shall be free from unlawful interference, no passport, except one limited for direct and immediate return to the United States, shall be issued to persons as to whom there is reason to believe, on the balance of all the evidence, that they are going abroad to engage in activities while abroad which would violate the laws of the United States, or which if carried on in the United States would violate such laws designed to protect the security of the United States.

"§ 51.137 Notification to Person Whose Passport Application Is Tentatively Disapproved. A person whose passport application is tentatively disapproved under the provisions of § 51.135 or § 51.136 will be notified in writing of the tentative refusal, and of the reasons on which it is based, as specifically as in the judgment of the Department of State security considerations permit. He shall be entitled, upon request, and before such refusal becomes final, to present his case and all relevant information informally to the Passport Division. He shall be entitled to appear in person before a hearing officer of the Passport Division, and to be represented by counsel. He will, upon request, confirm his oral statements in an affidavit for the record. After the applicant has presented his case, the Passport Division will review the record, and after consultation with other interested offices, advise the applicant of the decision. If the decision is adverse, such advice will be in writing and shall state the reasons on which the decision is based as specifically as within the judgment of the Department of State security limitations permit. Such advice shall also inform the applicant of his right to appear under § 51.138.

"§ 51.138 Appeal by Passport Applicant. In the event of a decision adverse to the applicant, he shall be entitled to appeal his case to the Board of Passport Appeals provided for in § 51.139.

"8 51.139 Creation and Functions of Board of Passport Appeals. There is hereby established within the Department of State a Board of Passport Appeals, hereinafter referred to as the Board, composed of not less than three officers of the Department to be designated by the Secretary of State. The Board shall act on all appeals under § 51.138. The Board shall adopt and make public its own rules of procedures, to be approved by the Secretary, which shall provide that its duties in any case may be performed by a panel of not less than three members acting by majority determination. The rules shall accord applicant the right to a hearing and to be represented by counsel, and shall accord applicant and each witness the right to inspect the transcript of his own testimony.

"8 51.140 Duty of Board to Advise Secretary of State on Action for Disposition of Appealed Cases. It shall be the duty of the Board, on all the evidence, to advise the Secretary of the action it finds necessary and proper to the disposition of cases appealed to it, and to this end the Board may first call for clarification of the record, further investigation, or other action consistent with its duties. "§ 51.141 Bases for Findings of Fact by Board. (a) In making or reviewing findings of fact, the Board, and all others with responsibility for so doing under §§ 51.135-51.143, shall be convinced by a preponderance of the evidence, as would a trial court in a civil case.

"(b) Consistent and prolonged adherence to the Communist Party line on a variety of issues and through shifts and changes of that line will suffice, prima facie, to support a finding under § 51.135 (b).

"§ 51.142 Oath or Affirmation by Applicant as to Membership in Communist Party. At any stage of the proceedings in the Passport Division or before the Board, if it is deemed necessary, the applicant may be required, as a part of his application, to subscribe, under oath or affirmation, to a statement with respect to present or past membership in the Communist Party. If applicant states that he is a Communist, refusal of a passport in his case will be without further proceedings.

"§ 51.143 Applicability of Sections 51.135-51.142. When the standards set out in § 51.135 or § 51.136 are made relevant by the facts of a particular case to the exercise of the discretion of the Secretary under § 51.75, the standards in §§ 51.135 and 51.136 shall be applied and the procedural safeguards of §§ 51.13751.142 shall be followed in any case where the person affected takes issue with the action of the Department in granting, refusing, restricting, withdrawing, cancelling, revoking, extending, renewing, or in any other fashion or degree affecting the ability of a person to use a passport through action taken in a particular case. "For the Secretary of State.

"W. K. SCOTT, "Acting Deputy Under Secretary."

R

DEPARTMENT OF STATE-FOR THE PRESS

October 1, 1952, No. 771

PEIPING "PEACE CONFERENCE"

Asked for comment on the so-called Peiping Peace Conference and reports that a number of Americans are allegedly attending as delegates, Secretary of State Dean Acheson at his news conference today made the following extemporaneous reply:

This conference is, of course, an obvious propaganda operation in which the Chinese Communists, while taking an active part in defying the United Nations and carrying the war into Korea and while they are joining with the Soviet government in its violent "hate campaign," are continuing to hold "peace conferences." I think this deceives nobody.

In regard to your other question about the Americans, we have heard reports that certain American citizens were attending. From the reports that we have gotten, we think we have about 15 of these Americans identified. Now, some of them were in China already. However, no persons have been issued passports to attend this conference or have asked for passports to attend the conference. All passports have been stamped since May 1, "Not valid for travel to China * We are now making efforts to find out whether any of the people that we have identified have obtained passports on false information furnished to the Department or whether they have violated the instruction which is on the passport. That is stamped on it as I have said and there are appropriate statutes which cover both of these cases. 256

S

DEPARTMENT OF STATE-FOR THE PRESS

October 31, 1955, No. 630

The Secretary of State announced today in Geneva that United States passports will henceforth not require special validation for travel to the following countries in the European Soviet bloc: Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Rumania, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Instead of the previous endorsement necessitating special validation for travel in those areas passports will now carry the following stamp:

"This passport is not valid for travel to the following areas under control of authorities with which the United States does not have diplomatic relations: Albania, Bulgaria, and those portions of China, Korea, and Vietnam under Communist control."

257

T

DEPARTMENT OF STATE-FOR THE PRESS

February 3, 1956, No. 57

UNITED STATES NOTE TO HUNGARY OF FEBRUARY 3, 1956

The Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs, Mr. Jacob D. Beam, today presented the following note to the Minister of the Hungarian People's Republic:

The Secretary of State presents his compliments to the honorable the Minister of the Hungarian People's Republic and has the honor to refer to the note addressed to the Minister on September 1, 1955, and to the related note and accompanying memorandum addressed to the Hungarian Ministry for Foreign Affairs by the American Legation in Budapest on July 1, 1955. These communications protested against the harassment of local employees of the American Legation by the Hungarian authorities and the resultant impairment of normal and proper functions of the American Legation and pointed out that the United States Government was thereby forced to effect some measure of reciprocity of treatment by terminating all information activities of the Hungarian Legation in Washington except those conducted wholly within its own premises. The Hungarian Government made no reply to the United States note of July 1. Moreover, the response of the Hungarian Government on September 30 to the further United States note of September 1 served no purpose other than deliberately to misrepresent the scope of the restriction placed upon the Hungarian Legation—a misrepresentation repeated on several subsequent occasions in public statements of high officials of the Hungarian Government.

The Hungarian official press announced on January 15, 1956, that the Budapest Court and the Military Tribunal of Budapest had jointly tried and convicted Bela Kapotsy and Cornel Balas, both employees of the American Legation in Budapest, "for intelligence work on behalf of a foreign power, for seditious acts and other crimes." Mr. Kapotsy was sentenced to life imprisonment; Mr. Balas, to a term of 8 years.

Mr. Kapotsy and Mr. Balas were arrested on February 24 and June 23, 1955, respectively. The American Legation, despite its repeated requests, has never received from the Hungarian Government any satisfactory explanation or justification of the detention of these employees. Their trial, like their arrest, their detention incommunicado, and all other phases of the proceedings against them, was cloaked in secrecy. There are, in addition to these 2 individuals, 7 other local employees of the American Legation who were taken into custody by the Hungarian authorities during the period 1951 to 1954 without explanation to the American Legation and whose whereabouts and fate are unknown to the Legation.

Neither Mr. Kapotsy, Mr. Balas, nor any other employee of the American Legation in Budapest has engaged on behalf of the United States Government in activities such as those charged against Mr. Kapotsy and Mr. Balas.

The Hungarian press announcement of January 15 also referred to the cases of Andrew Marton, Hungarian correspondent of the Associated Press for many years, and his wife, Ilona Marton, Hungarian correspondent of the United Press. The conduct of the Hungarian Government has been similarly arbitrary and secretive in this instance. Mr. Marton, who was arrested on February 25, 1955, was sentenced to 6 years' imprisonment for alleged espionage and sedition; Mrs. Marton, who was arrested on June 23, 1955, was sentenced to 3 years' imprisonment on the same charges. The protracted detention incommunicado and subsequent imprisonment of the Martons have not only deprived the Associated Press and the United Press of the legitimate professional services of those experienced local reporters; they have also seriously prejudiced free access to news sources within Hungary and must therefore be regarded as an abridgment of freedom of the press.