Evening star., 1954-09-28
The Mccarthy Indictment

'S 'VaS~Sssby sbNs$k"SHS
The Select Committees indictment of
Senator Mccarthy, on which he faces trial
by the Senate next November 8. draws
strength and gathers force from qualities
such as these: 1t is unanimous. It coldly
examines the hot issue of "McCarthyiSm"
without equivocation, evasion or other var
iations of double talk. It avoids rhetoric
and rests on the facts as set forth in the
evidence. It expresses it's conclusions with
straight from the shoulder candor and
leaves no reader with the slightest doubt
as to their meaning.
Their meaning is that this bi-parti-
san committee, after judicial investigation,
finds Mr.. Mccarthy guilty in all five cate
gorieS into which it Jumped the charges
accepted as relevant. In three Of these,
and for various reasons, it decided against
censure. In two of them, 1t has recommended
cenSure. It has presented to the Senate a
clear-cut choice between eyes" and "No"
In following the committees advice. It has
laid out the ground for Senate debate that
may become historic, not merely for its
effect on Mr.. Mccarthy as an individual
but on the official conduct of Senators in
the future.
Perhaps the most surprising finding of
the committee was in Category l, involving
Incidents of Senator McCarthy's contempt
of the Senate or a Senatorial committee.
For there has been disposition on the
part OF some observers to argue that these
incidents, occurring in another session Of
Congress which passed them over without
action, are water over the dam. Other
Senators have refused or declined to appear
before Senate committees, and have got
away with it, The people of Wisconsin re-
elected Senator Mccarthy in 1852, while he
was under fire and thus rendered their own
verdict it was argued.
The committees findings, however, boil
down to the fact that the Senate is con-
tinuing body, that its committee (the Gill
lette- -Hennings Subcommittee on Privileges
and Elections) was properly constituted and
acted within it's powers and jurisdiction and
that Senator Mccarthy was contemptuous
and contumacious and obstructive to the
legislative process. The Senate and not the
people of Wisconsin is the Judge of Mr..
McCarthy's conduct as Senator. If Sena-
tor McCarthy'S conduct was wrong in 1851,
''52 and '53 the committee seems to say, it is
still wrong and Senator Mccarthy ought to
be censured for it and the Senate ought
to take care of some unfinished business.
The Watkins committee sharply reminds
the Senate that Senator Mccarthy to this
day has not given the Senate or any of its
committees any explanation of three seri-
Gus questions raised in the report of the
Gillette -Hennings subcommittee, rejecting
upon Senator McCarthys character and
integrity" and that this failure to explain
was conduct contumacious toward the
ato n effectiveness
dignity, responsibilities processes and pres
tige." when persons in high places fail
to set and meet high standards" the COM
mittee comments, "the people lose faith.
If our people lose faith our Government
cannot long endure"
The committees recommendation for
censure in the General Zwicker incident
bluntly brushes aside the excuses offered
by Senator Mccarthy and his apologists for
the outrageous and insulting treatment of
that witness. The committee found that
General zwicker's testimony, for which he
was upbraided, still holds up; that there is
no evidence to support the charge that he
was not telling the truth or that he
was Intentionally irritating, evasive. or
arrogant" 1t is gratifying that the COM
mittee finds this performance by Senator
N4SSdA lily WI C11y VI CCIlSuAC, dIl0 bAAot d1
the same time it has cleared General
zwicker of the ugly implications rejecting
upon the competence and character Of an
outstanding officer of the Army.
The report sheds new light on the wis
dom of two decisions which have been sub
ject to some criticism. One was the de-
cision of the Senate itself, in referring the
whole subject of censure and the charges
against Mr.. Mccarthy, to a special commit
tee for investigation and report, instead of
proceeding to vote on the somewhat vague
and even slapdash censure resolution pro-
posed by Senator Flanders. AS result OF
that decision, the matter of procedure is
beyond criticism, and the Senate has an
impressive case, supported by evidence and
argument, on which to vote.
The other decision, so completely juSti-
fed by this report, was that of the Senate
leadership in postponing Senate debate un-
til after the election. It would have been
nothing short of absurd to have recon-
vened the Senate for debate that well
might have lasted on through the election.
The report also does lot to take the Nc
Carthy business out Of the political cam