way he is, in order to rid himself Browning argued that the 4th

of guilt feelings."

PEEPHOLE PROSECUTION

In September this column contained a report from England on peephole procedures there, with the comment that the California State Supreme Court had not long ago out-lawed, at least theoretically, such practices within the State (the 1962 Bielecki case, which successfully invoked the 4th Amendment against unreasonable searches and seizures.") But this does not affect police practices on Federal property in California. TIME Magazine for 11/12 reports the same surveillance methods having recently been applied by park rangers in Yosemite National Park, in which holes-disguised as air vents were cut above three toilet stalls at a privately-run resort. "After watching 40 men peacefully come and go," TIME reports, "the ranger and a photographer finally saw two men performing acts that violated both U.S. & California law."

Being on Federal property, they were prosecuted under U.S. law, but the defendants nevertheless appealed their first conviction on the basis of the 4th Amendment, and the earlier dismissal of similar evidence by the California Supreme Court in the Bielecki case. But, TIME states, the U.S. Appellate Court "sharply disagreed and upheld the convictions," noting that "the place is public, and it is properly subject to peephole surveillance because of 'the criminal activities which can and do occur in it. People who choose to commit crimes where they may be seen take the chance that they will be seen.' ''

In a dissenting opinion, TIME continues, Appellate Judge J. R.

Amendment 'protects such privacy as a reasonable person would suppose to exist in given circumstances' and that the ranger invaded that privacy by cutting peepholes that 'constituted actual intrusion' and the resulting surveillance without warrant created what the 4th Amendment condemns-'a general exploratory search conducted solely to find guilt.'

Should this case reach the U.S. Supreme Court, the 4th Amendment long a shield for personal privacy against official invasionswill most certainly receive further examination, along (hopefully) with the country's sex laws as well.

SEX EDUCATION FOR CHILDREN

In a lengthy serialized report in the Chicago SUN-TIMES beginning 10/7, William Braden describes a "model program" for sex education now being conducted in Evanston's primary schools. Involving film strips, slides, drawings, recordings, and lectures, it is described as part of a "Family Life Education" program starting in kindergarten and continuing through junior high. "But it comes to a sharp focus," reports Braden, "at fifthgrade level, where all boys and girls are taught the physiology of reproduction. reproduction." Nothing, it seems, is left to the imagination, or for later discovery, and 10-yr.-olds are said to be writing about sexual intercourse while still spelling it

'sextual intercords." In a program so startlingly thorough, the "perversions" are of course not overlooked. A "school doctor," in a recorded lecture, is quoted on this subject as saying, "there are a few boys and men who want to do this, and you should be on to their tricks and never be alone with them. Such fellows are called homosex-