Evening star., 1942-01-26
Protecting the Spies

Protecting the Spies
The Roberts Board Of Inquiry lists
high among causes contributory to
the success Of the japanese attack"
on Pearl Harbor certain restrictions
which prevented effective counter
espionage" These restrictions, the
report explains. prevented the Fed
eral Bureau Of Investigation and the
Army and Navy intelligence services
from resorting to certain methods
Of obtaining the content of messages
transmitted by telephone or radio
telegraph over the commercial lines
operating between Oahu and Japan"
Had the F. B. I. and intelligence Off
GERS been permitted to intercept
these messages, the report asserted,
they might have obtained valuable
information"
The restrictions to which the board
referred were threefold-legislative,
judicial and administrative. The
statutory prohibition is a clause in
the Federal Communications Act of
1884 forbidding any person to inter
cept any communications and di-
vulge or publish" them The Supreme
Court has interpreted this phrase as
outlawing any evidence obtained by
law enforcement officers by wire
tapping or any other means of inter-
cepting messages sent by wire or
wireless. The Pearl Harbor report
discloses that the War Department
reinforced these statutory and ju-
dicial restrictions with an implied
warning-and an obviously logical
one-against use Of any illegal
measures" in combating espionage
and sabotage in Hawaii. From this
it is reasonable to infer that by en-
ploying illegal measures our counter
espionage agents in Hawaii might
have been able to obtain information
which would have prevented Pearl
Harbor from being caught off guard
on December 7 last. This natural as
sumption prompts the question: Why
was this dangerous and absurd legal
restriction on effective counter
espionage" permitted to continue in
time Of great national emergency?
That Is long, sad and, in view Of
what has happened in the Pacific, a
tragic story. 1t is story Of too great
concern In some congressional quar-
ters over possible abuses" of wire
tapping and too little concern over
the potential perils involved in what
Justice Jackson, as Attorney Gen.
eral, described as guaranteeing" to
spies and criminals "the safe use of
the channels of wire and wireless"
That Is exactly what the present F.
c. c. Act, in effect, does. Director
Hoover of the F. B. l., Mr.. jackson,
Attorney General Biddle and Presi-
dent Roosevelt are among those who
foresaw the dangers of such a
guaranty. All of them have urged
enactment of special legislation to
permit the F. B. I. and the Army and
Navy intelligence officers to listen in
on tho wire and wireless messages of
spies and saboteurs and to use in
formation thus obtained as evidence
in court. The House passed a bill of
this nature in August, 1910, but
Chairman Wheeler of the Senate In
terstate Commerce Committee. who
disllkes wire-tapping in any form,
allowed the bill to die in a committee
pigeonhole. Representative Hobbs of
Alabama sponsored second bill last
year, but it was defeated in the House
by a close vote, after opponents had
raised the old cry against Invading
privacy of the home" But, as The
Star pointed out at the time, "the
only privacy which the bill sought to
invade was that of espionage agents,
Saboteurs and kidnapers."
So, fantastic as it may seem, our
counterespionage agents in Hawaii
were compelled by law to stand by
helplessly while known spies were
using the wires and radio to plot our
destruction. What is even more in
credible Is that this situation con-
tinues to exist there and elsewhere
to this day, although we are actually
at war. And it will continue to exist
until Congress aWakenS to its grave
responsibility and quickly rectifies its
errors Of Judgment with respect to
wire-tapping legislation.