Evening star., 1953-07-02
Nelson
Continued From First Page.

NeISOn
Continued From First Page.)
a policeman assigned to the
committee went home with Nell
son. The officer was told by
Nelson that the book was mot
all together as yet" But the
policeman examined other pa
pers and discovered a ledger
concerning numbers operations.
Used as Evidence.
Nelson. according to the record,
told the officer he could have
the papers. Although they were
not the ones specifically demand
ed by the committee, the police
man turned them over to the
committee. They were later used
as evidence at the trial.
Nelson's freedom of choice
had been dissolved in a brooding
omnipresence of compulsion," the
appellate court said.
AT no time did the committee
or its staff inform Nelson that
he would be allowed counsel OF
that he had a right to refuse to
testify or to produce personal
papers with regard to self in
eliminating matters.
His home was invaded his
files searched and his papers
seized, all without process of any
Declaring that Nelson's long
time gambling activities and
earlier brushes with the law are
no excuse for relaxing constitu.
tional safeguards" the opinion
stated, If there is anything tc
suggest that a congressional
committee hearing is less awe
some than a police station or q
district attorneys office, anc
should therefore be viewed diff
ferently, it has escaped oul
notice :"
Use of Records Prejudicial.
The opinion pointed out tina
courts and committees rightly
require answers to questions
But neither may exert thi
power to extort assent to in
vasions of homes and to seizures
of private papers. Assent SO ex'
torted is no substitute for law
full process"
The court declared that ad
mission of the evidence wa
prejudicial to all of the appel
lants. And the opinion declared
that a large part of other evi.
sdence introduced against Nelson
.may have resulted directly from
the Governments use of the il.
legally seized papers. Such evi.
dence was also inadmissible >
the opinion held.
In pointing up it's contention
that Nelson had been coerced
the court declared that, before
the committee obtained his
agreement to let them see" the
red account book, 1T had char.
acterized his conduct as very
dark and very suspicious very
discriminating -"
Prettyman Cites Record.
In his dissenting opinion
Judge Prettyman declared he
did not find any illegal search
or seizure. He cited the recorC
as showing that "at no point die
Nelson offer any objection either
to pertinency or of privilege"
He brushed off the fact that
the committee had promised tt
return the papers to Nelson al
the very earliest date" because
Judge Prettyman said, Nelson
had first volunteered to get the
books before the promise wa.
made.
1T seems pertinent to me
that" Judge Prettyman wrote
"as a matter of fact, Nelson die
not claim in his motion to sup
press the evidence in the District
court that the obtaining of this
material from him by the com.
mittee was illegal; he claimed
that the obtaining of the ma
terial by the United States at.
torney from the committee was
an illegal search and seizure. -
Nelson Claim Recalled.
Judge Prettyman cited Nelson.
contention that he had a definite
assurance that they would be re-
turned to him and that no per-
mission was ever given by him
to the committee to permit any
other persons to examine the
documents.
To me this is a clear state
ment that the possession of the
documents by the committee it.
self was deemed by Nelson tc
have been with his permission
even at so, late q date as the
time when he was moving fol
SUPPRESSION of the evidence"
Il think we ought not to spir
out a search and seizure where
none exists in fact" Judge
Prettyman wrote. mo one
think is more emphatic l think
than ! am in respect to the
constitutional projections of pri-
vacy both of person and of prop
erty. But we ought not to trans
mute invitation into invasion,
admonitions normal in judicial
proceedings into illegal compul-