Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1948-08-05
A Contrast in Spy Inquiries

~ NOntIuSt III SPy inquiries
1t is regrettable that the current spy
Investigations at the Capitol are not being
conducted more along the lines of the
somewhat similar inquiry by the Royal
Commission in Canada in 1916. Enough
has come out at the hearings SO far to
make it plain that the reports of Com
munist infilGation of the Government
must be exhaustively explored. But the
procedures being used by the House Com
mittee on Un-American Activities are so
different from those used by the Canadian
commission and so fraught with dangers
of injustice to innocent persons as to dis
turb many thoughtful citizens.
Under the Constitution, every accused
person is entitled to know the charges
against him, to face his accuser in court,
to cross-eXamine witnesses and to have
full opportunity to present his side of the
case That is the traditional American
way of doing things. 1t has been an.
nounced that all of those accused in the
present hearings will be given a chance
to answer the allegations of Miss Bentley,
Mr.. Chambers and any others. That is
an improvement over the way in which
the case of DR.. Edward U. Condor has
been handled by the committee. Dr..
Condor still is awaiting an opportunity
to answer the committees grave charge
that he is the weakest link" in our sys-
tenn of atomic security.
But the trouble with this procedure is
that the damage to a possibly innocent
persons reputation is done when his name
first is mentioned before the corps OF
newspaper reporters, radio commentators
and newsreel men. No amount of denials
later, nor even the most convincing proof
of innocence, can undo all the harm done
by the first sensational headlines radio
bulletins and newsreel shots.
Presumably most, if not all, of the testl-
mony now being unfolded already has been
considered by the special Federal grand
jury in New York. That jury has not
handed up any espionage indictments as
yet, although, technically, it is still on
call for further action. 1t is contrary to
practice for Federal grand Nries to issue
reports of the nature of that prepared by
the Royal Commission in Canada. If it
finds that the evidence does not warrant
indictments, it must simply ignore the
testimony, however sensational 1t may be-
The very nature of communism is such,
however, that the public is entitled to
know all that can be learned about its
efforts to subvert civil servants, to steal
state secrets and to inflltrate Government
offices and laboratories To the extent
that congressional committees have
aroused in the public an awareness of the
perils of the communistic conspiracy to
create a fifth column in our midst, the net
result has been good. There appears to
be no other way, than by congressional
hearings, to bring these dangers to atten-
ton of the people. .
But there is seriohs question as to
whether it is necessary or proper to make
the Investigations under the searchlight
of instantaneous publicity and in an at
mosphere not completely clear of political
implications. What contrast there Is
between the present open hearings on Cap
itol Hill and the hearings held in camera
by the Royal Commission! In that highly
effective investigation all testimony was
given behind closed doors, all witnesses
were sworn to secrecy and nothing was
published until the commission had COM
pleted it's inquiry and issued its remark
able report. That report took pains to
point out that number of innocent per-
sons had been named in the evidence and
that these persons had been completely
eXonerated.
An excerpt from the concluding chapter
of the report, is of timely interest: 1.-The
names of certain other persons were men
toned in such a context that it was con-
sidered advisable to examine them and to
investigate their activities. In each case
we were satisfied that their conduct has
been entirely proper and that while the
Russians designed to draw some OF them
into the net in the future, having in an
ticipation of doing so actually given them
cover names, such hopes were in our opin-
ion completely without foundation and
the objects of these hopes were unaware
that they were being considered"
1t is more than likely that some of the
persons named in such dramatic fashion
at the public hearings at the Capitol are
in much the same position as the innocent
persons exonerated by the Royal Commits
sion. Yet, under the procedure here, they
are being held up to public scorn and
condemnation, to combat which their only
hope 1ies in later chance to reply. No
answer ever is as newsworthy as the
initial accusation, however. The injustice
of this system should be obvious to every
fair-minded citizen. And this injustice
tends to weaken public confidence in the
praiseworthy congressional determination