Hearings

RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR SENATE INVESTIGATING

COMMITTEES

WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1954

UNITED STATES SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON RULES AND ADMINISTRATION,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RULES,
Washington, D. C.

The subcommittee met at 2: 15 p. m., pursuant to recess, in room 318 of the Senate Office Building, Senator William E. Jenner (chairman) presiding.

Present: Senator Jenner (chairman).

Also present: Boris S. Berkovitch, counsel to subcommittee on Rules; W. F. Bookwalter, chief clerk of the Committee on Rules and Administration; Darrell St. Claire, professional staff member, Committee on Rules and Administration; and Judge Robert Morris. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order.

Come forward, Senator McCarran.

Do you care to be sworn to testify, sir?

It is optional.

Do you swear the testimony given in this hearing will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? Senator MCCARRAN. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed, Senator McCarran, with your

statement.

You are the former chairman of the Internal Security Subcommittee of the United States Senate.

Senator MCCARRAN. Yes, sir; and, due to the misguided judgment of mankind, I lost that place.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand that, Senator.

That is why we asked you to come here today, because of your experience as chairman of that subcommittee. We have before us several measures concerning a code for the procedure of congressional committees, and we would like you to testify as to your experience in this field.

TESTIMONY OF HON. PAT MCCARRAN, A UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NEVADA

Senator MCCARRAN. Mr. Chairman, I understand I am here because I was formerly chairman of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary and chairman of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee.

I have with me Mr. Sourwine, counsel of the Committee on Judiciary and associate counsel of the Internal Security Subcommittee.

I will keep my statement on this subject short because my presence is required in another committee even at this very moment.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand.

Senator MCCARRAN. Since I have been called as a result of my former chairmanship, I shall discuss the work of the Internal Security Subcommittee.

At the outset let me say that, while it is the Communist line to attack the Internal Security Subcommittee, and this was true during the period of my chairmanship, I do not know of any instance when any witness before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, during the entire time that I was chairman, ever was denied any right to which he was entitled, or any occasion during that whole period on which any witness before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee was ever mistreated or even handled discourteously.

We never denied a witness the privilege of being accompanied by counsel or of seeking the advice of counsel during the progress of a hearing.

We never denied a witness the right to make a voluntary statement. We never denied a witness the right to make a full and complete answer to any question.

We never denied a witness the right of access to his own testimony. We never released executive testimony without authorization by a majority vote of the committee; and there are many volumes of executive testimony taken before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, under my chairmanship, which are still secret today, in every word, even 2 years or more after it was taken.

The Internal Security Subcommittee has a very broad jurisdiction. Under the original resolution, S. Res. 366, 81st Congress, 2d session, the provisions of which are still controlling under the various continuous resolutions which have extended the life of the committee down to the present time, the Internal Security Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary was empowered and directed to make a complete and continuing study and investigation in three separate areas: First, respecting the administration, operation, and enforcement of the Internal Security Act of 1950;

Second, respecting the administration, operation, and enforcement of all the laws relating to espionage, sabotage, and the protection of the internal security of the United States;

Third, respecting the extent, nature, and effects of subversive activities in the United States, its territories and possessions, including but not limited to espionage, sabotage, and infiltration by persons who are or may be under the domination of the foreign governments or organizations controlling the world Communist movement or any other movement seeking to overthrow the Government of the United States by force and violence.

It should be pointed out that, while this authority is by Senate. resolution, it parallels and reinforces, and is reinforced by, the statutory authority of the committee under the Legislative Reorganization Act, which gives the committee legislative oversight of execution by the administrative agencies of all laws, the subject matter of which is within the jurisdiction of the committee.

If the committee has any questions, I should be glad to answer them. Mr. Chairman, I would like to dwell upon some specific subjects that may have come up before your committee or that may be under your consideration, and I take them by subject, if you please.

Purposeful investigations: Every investigation of the Internal Security Subcommittee has been purposeful. It has had an objective. All hearings have been conducted within the limits of the purposes of the particular investigation to which each applied. There has been no haphazard calling of witnesses, no fishing expeditions.

Results of subcommittee work: Work of the Internal Security Subcommittee has resulted in recommendation and formulation of a substantial amount of legislation.

Another important result of the committee's work has been to inform the American people respecting a number of aspects of the Communist conspiracy in this country.

It is regrettable that the legislative recommendations of the subcommittee have not been pushed more speedily to enactment. It is regrettable also that recommendations of the subcommittee for action by the executive branch of the Government have more often been ignored than followed.

Reports unanimous: Reports of the Internal Security Subcommittee have always been unanimous. Politics has never intruded itself into the committee's work. The work of the committee may have had political results-I think it did have-but it never had political objectives, and the members of the committee, in connection with the work of the committee, always have had the courage of their convictions and always have acted for what they believed to be the best interests of their country, and without regard to political considerations. The fifth amendment: There is much confusion, Mr. Chairman, about the claim of the privilege against self-incrimination under the fifth amendment. Much has been written, and some of it very cleverly, in an effort to demonstrate that a claim of privilege under the fifth amendment is not evidence of guilt. Technically speaking, that is true; but the fact remains that the courts of this Nation have held quite clearly that when a witness declines to answer a question on the ground of his privilege under the amendment he is asserting that a truthful answer to the question might provide at least a link in a chain of evidence which might tend to convict him of a crime. He is thus asserting that there is an existing crime on which the statute of limitations has not run, for which he could be prosecuted and of which he might be convicted. If any of these factors are lacking, the witness does not have the right to refuse to answer under a claim of the fifth amendment privilege.

Hearsay: It is improper to conclude or contend that all hearsay evidence is incompetent or irrelevant or inadmissible. It is an axiom at law that no one understands the hearsay rule unless he understands the execptions to that rule, and those exceptions are many and sometimes complicated.

A congressional committee should have the right to seek and receive any testimony which will shed any light on the subject under investigation. It is for the committee to decide the relevancy and the weight of the testimony.

Power of subpena: The power of subpena always rests with the committee or subcommittee. It is exercised through the chairman. In the absence of committee action to the contrary, the chairman is always presumed to act for the committee; but the committee or subcommittee can always take this power away from the chairman by appropriate action.

« 이전 계속 »

도서