The opinion of the court was delivered by: BARD
1. Plaintiffs are an organization claiming to espouse the economic and social needs of democracy.
2. The organization proposes to hold a meeting in Independence Square Park, on the south side of Independence Hall, in the City of Philadelphia, on Saturday, November 1, 1947, from 2 P.M. to 4 P.M., to protest against the activities of a Congressional committee which they claim has subverted the civil rights of the people who are appearing before it.
3. Plaintiffs contacted the Bureau of Police for a permit to hold the meeting, and were informed that the police had no objection to holding such a meeting, but that it would be necessary to contact the Bureau of City Property.
4. Plaintiffs requested permission from Nathan H. Rambo, Chief of Bureau of City Property, to hold a meeting at the time and place indicated.
5. Nathan H. Rambo refused such permission on the ground that this property is not used for public meetings but for public celebrations approved by the City, and for the reason that there may be destruction to the grounds, and that this place was reserved for meetings of a patriotic nature, and that the plaintiff organization was not the proper type of patriotic organization, and because the status of some of the present applicants as to their loyalty to our Country is being questioned at the present time.
6. There does not appear from the evidence that there is any danger of any property destruction.
7. An ordinance of the City, enacted January 8, 1913, prohibits this property to be used for public or private meetings unless they be patriotic meetings to celebrate some event in the history of the City, State or Nation.
8. Public meetings have been held in the past and permits issued by the defendant Rambo, one, within the last year, to protest 'the British terror'.
9. There is no evidence that the proposed meeting will be a clear and present danger to our form of government.
1. The Court has jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter.