◆ SpookStack

jt in private, and th 9916 be civen fo the cummitice which was to be appointed, and should be given to then, afier the committee had compicicd its investiga- tion, ifhould decice which names were to be mide public. In that connection, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the body of the Riconp, at this point, statements by the Senator from Iowa [Mr. HICKENLOOPER: and myselt, ex- plaining how it happened that certain names were made public, There being no objection, the state- ments were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows; Excerpts FaomM THE CoONGnrssIONAL RECORD ExpuaininG Wity Namiis Were Mabe Puaiic 1, Remarks of Sernutor HICKENLOGPER. Con+ GREFSIONAL RECORD, April 5, 1950, pages 4957, 45565. 2. Remurks of Senator McCantHY, Cone GerestoNAL RECORD, March 30, 1950, pages 4434, 4450. Senater Hicker Looper, Recosp, Apr o, 1gsct: “As a member of the subcommitice of the Committre on Foreign Relations now engaged in the inqu:ry into the charges of the Senator from W.scansin, I should like to say that on the day on which the Senator from Wisconsin made his speech at some leneth on the floor of the Scuate, in which he referred to certain cases by number, and go forth--I think 1t was the 20th of Feb- ruary—-at that tirse i.e Senator fromm Wis- contin repeatedly ‘d ahd restated on the four of the Senate that he did not want to make nemes puble, thet he would not tell the names to the Senate in public; and, time after time, the Senator from Iilnois, the majority leader, rose to demand that he give the names in pubic, 50 Lhe whoic coun- try wourd kiow who the people were that Were suspected. "The Senator from Wisconsin repeatedly baic, “No, IT will mot make them public. The Senator from Kentucky, Mr. WITHERS, rose and said he wanted ta see the lst of names. The Senatcr from Wisconsin said, ‘Come to my Office in the morning and I will show you the names.’ The Senator from Kentucky said, ‘Cau Il make them public? I intend 7:3 make them public if I see them." The Senator from Wisconsin said, ‘No; if vou fre going to make them public, I shall not give you the names’ “The CONGRKESSIONaL REConp is reriete with such statements on the question of the pub- licity of the names, “It is a raatter of fact also that the funior Senator fiom Massuchusetts and I, both at the first extcuthve mecting of the Bubcommitiee, succested and proposed the procedure, that the subceminitee meet in CONGRESSIONAL executive session, cali ihe Srnuator from Wis- eonsin before it, and ask him to disclose the names in private, ty,ether with whatever information he had in connection with the names; but the majorty of the subcominittee Bald no, thls must Ue brought out in public. So they held their frst hearing, requiring the Senator from Wisconsin to come, in pubs lic, t@ nuarme the names. J tell the Senator that. Af he is not familiar with it, merely _ to keep the factual history of the publicity _ of these names accurate. "T shoud like to suy also that so far as IT am concerned, while we did not have the Machinery to set up a court of inquiry such as the Conadian spy-ring case called for, wa did propose and urge that an inquiry in secrecy without naniin names be made with the facts collected, But we were overruled, and the Scuator frum Wisconsin was re- “quured, or requested, tu coms before the com- miitee in pubue hearing, with Kietg livlts, television, uud all tie rest of the fanfare of CONGRESSIONA:, RECORD—SENATE such an emotions, occasion, there to Bring out his cases, name names, and produce facts.” . Senator McCartuyy, ConGRESSiGNAL Rrecoan, March 30, 1950: “There hos heen considerable criticism by @ number of well-meaning peupl. of the naming of names in public before tie indi= viduals have an opportunity to be heard. “Ik might be well, therefore, to briefly cite the record as to why names have been named in public rather than in private. On the 20th of February, as the Senate Wii] recall, T gave to the Senate in some detail al cases of individuals whom I stated the nies indi- cated ranged ail the way from being bad security risks to very dangerous individuals. “At that time I pointed out that perhaps some of these individuals would be abie to produce facts to offset the effect of the mate- rial in the files and show that they were actually loyal employees. T stated in effect— and whiie I have not had an opportunity to check the number of times in the Reconro, my office tells me that I did so over a dozen times—that I would consider tt extremely improper and untiar to name namie. in ube lic wefore the incividuais had @ chunce 10 appear in executive session. "The leader of the Democratic Purty, Mr, Lucas, however, on five separate occasions, demanded that the names be publicly named. His first demand was on page 2943 of the Recorb, Again, on page 2046, he had this to ody. “T want to remain here until he names them. That is what IT am interested tn.’ “Again, om pace 2049, he said: “Wil the Senator tell us the name of the man for the Recorn. We are entitled to know who he is, I say vnis in a.) serious- ness.” “Again, on page 2053, he said: “"The Senator should hame names before that committee." “Acain, on page 2063, he said: “Why does the Senator refuse to divulge names before the Senate?’ “Mr. Withers, also. on Almost countless cccesions heceied me ior the names, siai-~ ing. on page 2063: “Does the Senator realize that I, like all others, am curious to know the names? When the Senator gives the cases the ve ople and the country at large are entitled to know who they are.’ “At that time I. in answer ta the urging of the Senator irom, MMindis end tie Senator from Kentucky, stated that I would not give the names in public unless a majority of the Senate demanded that they be made public, and this is all a matter of record. “After the committee had been appointed and Senator Tydings made chairman, he saw me on the floor of the Senate and stated that & public hearing had been scheduled and asked if I wou'd be ready to uppenr and testify, At that time I urged that the hear- fogs be in executive session and reminded him of the statemcats which I made on the Senate floor. “He informed me that the first hearings would be public nud that later we would go into executive sessium. Later Iwas lafcrmed by the press that Mr. Tyding: hid mada a statement that I could presiit my cases us I saw fit. “Lagain contacced him and told him that, Hf such were the case, I thought the names shouid be given in executive session, but was again informed that the first hearlngs would be public. “Ll then contacted my enllengue, Senator HICKENLOUPER, and told him that while I thought this might be good poiitics for the majority members of the committee because of the position in which it would place me, that it was so unfair to some of the indl- viduels who might be able to nroduce evi- Gence giving them & clean bill of Bealth sometling should be done, Aucusi "Senior HicKENLOOPER Infurmec me *.. Was nothing that he or Serstor Lopes c¢ cc Because Senator Tydings had made announcement hut the first hearings - be open and !t was not even brought vote, inasmuch as Senator MceManon Senator GREEN .9 cbviously went along Aum. “At the time of whe first public he efter I had bevun to testify. and hac ready passed Gut to the gnembers o: yress the firs: case covering Judge Ec:. Senator Tyding then told me that ¢. cared to, We would go into executitve ses: “tHe of cOUrsc, Knew full well that i- into executive session, 60 far ag the Kez case was concerned, would ba meanir. iter I had cotimenced the case and ha: the evidence thereon to the press. "’ Rad tried tao make it clear thar Kenyon case was presenied 45 one of a quence which i had hoped to present frst morning. if I had been allowed tc + ceed. I felt that it was Important, ne. much from the standpoint cf Judge yon, but rather os a typical case ts the complete incompetence of the L Board for vir : ti that f1 this can files contaimes more tae. .8 docu snowing memLership In organizations | us subversive or Communist-front—the: gardless of this, the Loyalty Board mn: even Went throigh the movions of asi: the judge for ar. explanation as to why jolned these organizations. which the + retary of State himself had s:ated were - agence that an employee was a bad se: risk. “After bel.g held fo the Eenyon cas. petty bickering for 2 days during ww". according to my staff, I cecupled apy: mately 5 percent si the time the com.cn) adjourned over the week ead and «.. yoat Judge Kenyon would be called witness, “Therchairman of the committee * magnanimous.y fered that the other ¢ waich I was prepsred to present the auy be given tr executive s-ssion, Tous condemn or criticize the chairman jor “ Tmaneuver, Pottially, ft was extre: clever. However, after presenting or: te show how the Loyalty Board wore. case which bappened to *i a Woman would seem unusual in the extreme the committee retire Into executiive ¢- to consider the cuses cf "ese proit State Departi.ent officials .:. whose t ties the publiz waa so vitally interes’. “I might say that while at the time ! toast the Senator from Tilinsis was wi wrong 1 demanding the names be ° public and while I originally was ver: disturbed by Ser.ater Tydings’ very c. maneuvering of the names Into p.. print, Iam mot toc sure that perhaps - good has not bees. accomplished. “After all, an individual who takes 1 Clavernment position must sealize that the good of the couniry his actio.. motives ehowlc be subfectcc to the ¢. serutiny. After al, the aim. and obj. ~ of the group whos have been forrautls:. lather @isastreus far easterm = olicy be subjected pubhiy to a eoig and sea.. light. Thers’sre, J am mot wo sui the Senate nmouciority leader and tis men of the cimraittee mar net ba: @ SErvic: us the rt @ S€rvic: is the country wit insisted that t... ames be maue pur. the other mcaueuvered those Gaines ... public press.” Mr. McCAxlHY. Mr Presias: was pointed cut so clearly by the & - from Towa (Mr. Hichenivorer), be. Senator Tyu.nrs, then chairman c. subcommittee making the investi: who is no loszeer with us. insist. the first sev ucss be heid in putin formed eotimntiry =