Evening star., 1949-08-26

| tOUUy w MyfOH ". Efti GtCftS u.
torney for John Maragon, be-
fore the Senate "fDe-percenter"
subcommittee tollo,os::
My name is Myron G. Ehrlich
and I am a member of the bar ant
a practicing attorney in the Distric
Of Columbia. l am now counsel o.
record for the witness Johr
Maragon.
1t is believed proper at this tim,
to inform the committee I have ad.
vised and will advise Mr.. Maragor
to stand on his constitutional righ
and refuse to answer certain ques.
tions, II asked him, on the groune
that his answers to those question!
might tend to incriminate him. Thi.
is not done for the purpose of in.
terfering with the work of the com.
mittee but past contacts between
Mr.. Maragon and the committee ane
its counsel have forced me, as hi!
attorney, to conclude that he NIGH
be requested to give testimony
against himself which might tene
to 1ncr1mlnate him.
Charges Contempt Threat.
1t is my information that prior tc
my retention by Mr.. Maragon az
his counsel, he was served with q
number of subpoenas, which I will
show to you, commanding him tt
appear before your committee or
certain dates to give testimony. He
appeared at the place designated in
the subpoenas but there was nc
committee hearing held. The SUBJ
poenas which commanded him to
appear before you were used to
attempt to have him divulge in
formation and to give evidence
against himself to counsel for this
committee. I have further been in
formed that nat the urgence, in
sistence and request of counsel for
the committee, Mr.. Maragon brought
to them copies Of his income tax
returns, bank statements, and per-
sonal documents He was interro-
gated regarding these by committee
counsel, and I am informed threat
ened with contempt proceedings il
he refused to answer the questions
Of committee counsel.
It must be remembered at the
time of his appearances before and
interrogations by counsel for the
committee, and even in his one ap-
pearance before the committee in
executive session, Mr.. Maragon was
not represented by counsel, and at
none of these times was he ad-
vised of his constitutional rights
against self determination.
While I realize that this Is not
a criminal trial in the true sense
it appears there have been extracted
from this witness possible self-in-
criminatory statements by methods
that are in violation of the spirit
and letter of the 5th Amendment
to the Constitution of the United
States. 1t seems that this should
not have been done to this wit
ness nor to anyone else. Mr.. Mara
gon has requested Of counsel fol
the committee, and I have requested
of them the return of copies of the
personal papers and effects loaned
to them by Mr.. Maragon, and they
have failed and refused to return
such papers and effects, or copies
thereof.
Quizzed on Personal Matters.
A reading of the transcript o1
the reported proceedings of the
executive session Of this committee
on July %, 1949, Of the testimony
tof the witness Maragon, conclusive.
lily discloses that other than two OF
|three questions asked him regard.
ling any alleged practice under law.
ful investigatio0@by this committee
the entire questioning was with ref
erence to his purely personal affairs
and the income tax returns of the
witness and his wife. Without at
tempting to impugn the motives o1
certain members Of the committee
or counsel for the committee, I sin.
cerely challenge the Jurisdiction o
this committee to question this wit
ness regarding his personal affair
as 1t did In executive session or
July %, 1949.
! It is my sincere opinion tina
had this witness been represented
by counsel at that time, and dur
ing the times when he was improp.
erly brought before counsel for tn
committee for questioning by them
most of the questions asked hin
would properly not have been an.
swered by him on the advice o1
counsel. In the light Of many news.
Ipaper interviews given out by Ger.
tain members of the committee
and counsel for the committee, t,
the effect that possible crimina
proceedings might be had against
the witness, I deem it my duty
to give him advice at this time MOI
to answer certain questions on the
ground that his answers might tenc
to incriminate him. AS you know
this protection is afforded every
person in the United States under
the fifth amendment to the Con
stitution, which states that no per-
son shall be compelled in any GRIM
inal action to be q witness against
himself.
| Quotes Boyd Decision.
i As this committee well knows, thu
Landmark case on the protecting o.
persons against self-incriminatior
is Boyd versus the United States
reported in ia U. S., Page 616. II
that case it was stated:
But illegitin2ate and unconstitu'
tional practices get their first foot
ing in that way, namely: BY silen
approaches and slight deviation
from legal modes Of procedure. Thi
ministers Son,
|OnFoith oVisi
| D,,a pl~ne