associates in Texas, and Estes had had the highest recommendations. Senator ERVIN. As a matter of fact, this tragic story, as far as Mr. Estes is concerned, is sort of like that of Judas. Judas could undoubtedly prove a good character as long as he continued to associate with the Lord and good disciples and up until the time he accepted the 30 pieces of silver. Mr. Estes, at one time seemed to enjoy a high reputation, but has fallen from his high estate, because he accepted a temptation, the same temptation to accumulate not just the 30 pieces of silver, but a considerable amount more. It is one of these unfortunate situations where a man who enjoyed good repute fell from his high estate because of his desire to acquire material possessions. Secretary FREEMAN. That seems to be the case, Senator, yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other comments or questions by my colleagues? Is there objection, then, to us recessing over until 10 o'clock in the morning? Senator CURTIS. What would be the order of business in the morning? The CHAIRMAN. Would you like to have the Secretary come back at that time? Senator CURTIS. I will abide by the chairman's decision. The CHAIRMAN. I am not trying to avoid him testifying. In fact, I intend to ask him some questions. Senator CURTIS. That answers my question. If you intend to have him back, that will be all right. The CHAIRMAN. Well, we have to go over to the Senate floor. We cannot start now and make any real progress this afternoon. I assume there would be questions for the Secretary. I am just trying to make an adjustment here to accommodate the convenience of all of us, I think. The committee will stand in recess until 10 o'clock in the morning. Mr. Secretary, will you return? Secretary FREEMAN. All right, sir. (Members present at the recess were: Senators McClellan, Jackson, Ervin, Muskie, Mundt, and Curtis.) (Thereupon, at 4:32 p.m., the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Friday, June 29, 1962.) DEPARTMENT POOLED OF AGRICULTURE HANDLING OF COTTON ALLOTMENTS OF BILLIE SOL FRIDAY, JUNE 29, 1962 U.S. SENATE, PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met at 10:12 a.m., pursuant to Senate Resolution 250, agreed to February 7, 1962, in the caucus room, Old Senate Office Building, Senator John L. McClellan (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, of Arkansas; Senator Henry M. Jackson, Democrat, of Washington; Senator Sam J. Ervin, Jr., Democrat, of North Carolina; Senator Edmund S. Muskie, Democrat, of Maine; Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, of South Dakota; and Senator Carl T. Curtis, Republican, of Nebraska. Also present: Donald F. O'Donnell, acting chief counsel; Paul E. Kamerick, assistant counsel; Philip W. Morgan, chief counsel to the minority; and Ruth Y. Watt, chief clerk. The CHAIRMAN. The subcommittee will come to order. (Members present at the time of reconvening: Senators McClellan, Jackson, Muskie, and Curtis.) The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Secretary, you will resume the witness stand, please, sir. I may ask, if after the intermission now, have you thought of something else you might wish to add to your original testimony before we proceed with any questioning? TESTIMONY OF ORVILLE L. FREEMAN, SECRETARY OF Secretary FREEMAN. I don't believe so, Senator. The Chair will ask you a comparatively few questions this morning. There are two reasons why I should do so. First, because it may very well be more practical to interrogate you after the hearings have progressed further and we will have a more complete record on which to base inquiry; and, second, because I don't want to monopolize our limited time. There are other members of the committee who I am sure desire to ask you a number of questions. For that reason I shall be comparatively brief in my inquiries this morning. You say certain steps have been taken, Mr. Secretary, beginning on page 5, in item c: "Steps to coordinate" and then on page 6, item 8, you say "steps to strengthen." Then on page 9 you point out the creation of a subcommittee. Tell us about the steps you refer to in items 7 and 8. Can you give us a little more information about it? Secretary FREEMAN. Senator, "a" under "8" points out that in cases involving personnel irregularities on the part of county-elected committeemen or their staff, that those irregularities should be reviewed in terms of the disciplinary action which results by the Washington office. This resulted primarily because we felt that in the Dill and the Oklahoma case, Dill and the other gentleman, that merely a 15day suspension for the offense in question was not adequate. We wanted to make it clear to the whole county system that personnel irregularities that fell short of a high standard of ethics in the Government would be dealt with sharply by ways of discipline. Also, on the acreage allotment transfers from eminent domain pools, each of them heretofore will be reviewed in Washington because it was my conclusion that it was not sound policy for a county committee to pass on a question which would naturally have with it a good deal of local pressure, shall we say, because it would be desirable for the whole county. In other words, they weren't really making a decision on this as between people and administration within that county. They were really determining whether or not allotments could come within the county that would benefit the whole county. As such, I felt the decision ought to be reviewed by Washington. The CHAIRMAN. Now you have taken steps to assure there will be no recurrence of local county committees simply cooperating to the end that they might benefit their own county and their own economy by getting additional cotton acreage through this practice? Secretary FREEMAN. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. The present system is weak, is it not? Secretary FREEMAN. The system prior to the adjustments in regulations we have made was weak in that regard, yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. It was weak in that the county committee could, upon its judgment, determine in response, maybe to local pressure, to make a judgment removing cotton acreage that properly belonged to one State to another State and to their own county without any proper check of authority, superior authority, against such action? Secretary FREEMAN. I think that is an accurate statement, Senator, yes. The CHAIRMAN. That is primarily one of the things that has permitted this present situation to develop? Secretary FREEMAN. It would be my judgment that it is. The CHAIRMAN. Now, you think you have taken adequate corrective steps to prevent a recurrence? Secretary FREEMAN. Yes, sir. I would combine with the point just made the amendment of the regulations back in December long before Mr. Estes was indicted which required and set down as specific stand ards that in order for someone to transfer an allotment into that county the purchaser must continue farming operations comparable to those that he followed prior to that transfer. If there was any kind of side arrangement by way of payment between the seller and the buyer, the transfer would also be voided. In other words, long before the Estes case arose there were more detailed and specific standards set down whereby the county committees could measure clearly what they could and couldn't do. This was then supplemented by the additional regulation which did follow the indictment to the effect that the Washington office would pass on all pool allotment transfers. The CHAIRMAN. I understand as of now, and from here on, there will be no transfer of cotton allotments from the eminent domain pool without Washington approval. Secretary FREEMAN. That is the regulation today, yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. You have those regulations or directives now, so that you feel confident they will be enforced? Secretary FREEMAN. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Because this should not occur again. Secretary FREEMAN. That is correct. The CHAIRMAN. I am gratified that you have taken such action. You speak of directives to insure that in any case involving irregularities, these irregularities will be brought to the immediate attention of the Administrator of the Agricultural Stabilization Service. What is the regulation that presently assures this? Secretary FREEMAN. May I call the chairman's attention to an instruction relating to transfer of pooled allotments, eminent domainnotice PA-4, issued May 8, 1962. The CHAIRMAN. That is May 8? The CHAIRMAN. Do we have a copy of that? Secretary FREEMAN. I don't know. The CHAIRMAN. We do not have a copy. Will you supply a copy? Secretary FREEMAN. Yes, sir. It provides for prior approval by the Deputy Administrator, State and County Operations, of all requests considered after May 11, 1962, for transfer allotments from the eminent domain pool and post approval review of all 1962 allotment cases approved on or before May 11. We will submit this for the record. The CHAIRMAN. I will have to suspend for a moment to take a telephone call. (At this point Senator McClellan withdrew from the hearing room.) Senator JACKSON. This is a regulation that is dated, I believe, Mr. Secretary, May 8, 1962? Secretary FREEMAN. Yes, sir. Senator JACKSON. The regulation will be marked "Exhibit No. 12" and printed in the record. (The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 12" for reference and is as follows. It may also be found in the files of the subcommittee.) |