||18 TWENTY-THIRD ANNUAL REYNOLDS LECTURE account by the very persons they accused. Nothing could be ascertained, as Professor Leon Green has pointed out, about their mental stability, their morality, their veracity, their motives, their prejudices, their accuracy of observation, their desire to be important, their attitude towards their victim.22 On behalf of those who initially promulgated the loyalty program it may be said in charity that they did not fully appreciate the significance of their acts. Dean Acheson confessed as much when, writing in 1955, he stated: ... It was not realized at first how dangerous was the practice of secret evidence and secret informers, how alien to all our conceptions of justice and the rights of the citizen . . . Experience proved again how soon good men become callous in the use of bad practices. Familiarity breeds more than contempt, it breeds indifference. What was, at first, designed for cases which it was thought would be serious, sensitive, and rare, became commonplace and routine. Now, in cases involving no secret agent or sensitive position, a person may be branded as of doubtful loyalty and dismissed on evidence by persons whose identity not even his judges know and whose words, summarized for them, are withheld from the defendant.23 An answer to the above observations is not to be found in the repeated comment that the loyalty program relates only to government employees, and no one has a right to such employment. If it is conceded arguendo that the strict letter of the Constitution is not violated by an arbitrary discharge, certainly the spirit of that document is trangressed by dismissals "without a fair hearing for a cause which imputes disgrace, lack of honor, loss of reputation, or lack of patriotism. . . ."24 Justice Douglas would go further. He has asserted that if the reason an employee "was condemned was his beliefs and opinions, then the government also transgressed the First Amendment." He then observed: The Constitution contains no guarantee of employment in any field. But it does contain guarantees that government may not do certain things to the citizen. Foremost is the command of the First Amendment that government will make no law penalizing the citizen for his beliefs, his conscience, and his utterances. A loyalty order that casts a citizen into the outer darkness because of his speeches and beliefs does just that.25 Finally, in appraising the significance of the loyalty program we should not assume that only a few were affected thereby. Reference has heretofore been made only to the general program. In addition, special loyalty programs were instituted for seamen and waterfront workers, for those 22. See Green, Public Destruction of Private Reputation â€" A Remedy? 38 Minn. L. Rev. 565, 573 (1954). 23. Acheson, A Democrat Looks at His Party 128-129 (1955). 24. See O'Brian, National Security and Individual Freedom 36 (1955). 25. Douglas, The Right of the People 120 (1958).