damages and to get an injunction. to prevent raiding or undue harrassing of the coffeehouse.

Few days later, at a big public meeting, with a few dozen cops straining at the leash but under orders not to make any speeches, there was a general debate on the whole question (just what was the question, exactly?) presided over by Police Commissioner Thomas J. Gibbons. Gertrude Fitzpatrick of 2036 Sansom St. presented a petition demanding the Humoresque be closed as a public nuisance. She was "sick of the place" she said and she didn't believe "a 23 year old boy is responsible enough to run a coffeehouse in the first place." Milo MacGoldrick of 2034 Sansom St. called the shop a gathering place for homosexuals. "It is offensive and a damned effrontery."

Eugene John Lewis of 2018 Rittenhouse Square also had a petition from 22 persons attacking another raided coffeehouse, The Gilded Cage. Lewis said he'd been in the place several times and had complained to police 12 or 15 times that he saw "homosexuals and lesbians and young girls with older men' in there.

More speeches on both sides. When atty. Samuel Diamond said court action—rather than police raids would have been the proper way to cope with alleged nuisances, Commissioner Gibbons had to restrain Captain Rizzo who suddenly rushed forward. There was the Commissioner tugging on the Captain's coat and refusing to permit Rizzo to make a speech. Gibbons made one though: complaining that we —that is, the police-"are not on trial," and alleging that one 14 year old girl had admitted going to the Humoresque to meet lesbians. In reply to a question suggesting the police department was acting

one

from anti-intellectual bias, Gibbons said not so-"We have quite a few intellects in the department ourselves." Rizzo then made his speech anyhow.

Little evidence was presented that the coffeehouses are actually gayand readers tell us that only a small percentage of the people in these places are gay. This is simply nothing more than vicious and quite capricious police persecution of nonconformist groups.

On the other hand-homosexuals do have a right-and should exercise that right-to patronize any coffeehouse, bar, or other public establishment, and any manager of such a place of business who refuses service to a person simply on the grounds of believing that person to be homosexual, can be sued for damages. Any manager of a business does have a right to refuse to serve, or even to eject, persons whose behavior is improper, illegal, immoral or boisterous.

But, whoever wishes to stand up for his rights has to know it won't be easy. Rights that are guaranteed by the Constitution are nonetheless forbidden under many state and local ordinances. Such ordinances are illegal, but the person who sets out to prove it has a tough row to hoe. However, homosexuals are never likely to have any rights til they are willing to fight for them.

And back to the coffeehouseswhy not a few gay coffeehouses? Up to now, bars have been almost the only public places homosexuals could gather-and since many homosexuals don't drink-seems to me the coffeehouse would be a good addition to the limited social facilities available.

ROUNDELAY

Guatemalan president Fuentes' appointment of his husky cousin,