◆ SpookStack

2 — » Wit (Rev. a 7657 q' ) f CONGRESS NOW UNCERTAIN Watkins Decision Seems to Call for Clear Definition of the Aims of Inquiries 220 ay casmeemours - . ELT WASHINGTON, June 22— ere was a good deal of mys- Ufication in Congressional com- mittee circles this week over the meaning the probable im- pact of the Supreme Court's de- cision In the Watkins case, in which a convicfion for contempt ,of the House Committee on Un- American Activities was re- iversed on the ground that the ‘committe had exceeded its suthority. — The decision is generally re- garded as one of great signitf- teance, for—onstensibly, at least ~it imposes a judicial check- rein on Congressional investi- gators that has not been present jheretofore. But just what its practical effecta may be, and the extent to which established committes procedures may be altered or curtailed in conse- quence, is not at. all clear at _this point, John T. Watkins had been convicted for refusing to give the Un-American Activities Com- mittee namea of people with iwhom he had associated during a period in which he admittedly had dealings with Communists in the labor movement. He dis- cussed his own activities freely, “but refused as a matter of con- “selence to identify others sot known positively to him as Com- munist ‘party members, In eso “IC would be difficult to imagine mmittees could, under this new & leay explicit authorizing reso- stricture, be required to rewrite lution” than that under which) {and secure appropriate pas- the Un-American | Activities ‘sage of—their basic authoriza- Was—end still is—functioning. tions. This would mean defining That resolution, adopted orig-| [the scope and purpose of the in inally in 1938, and automatically vestigative program in such 8, renewed by every succeeding ¥Y ga to set out clearlyf the Congress, directa the committee wlative goals sought and the to enquire into “un-American ‘areas of information needdi to aaeente activities,” “the té&ecomplish it, on of subversive and un- prove be American propagands instigated] + | * ale sould well ute aif from foreign countries,” and “all! .* other questions in relation there- to that would aid Congress in| any necessary remedial legiala- wa in leating up to this conclu- A‘ some well-informed persons aion the justices observed that, the field see it, investigative Restricted Activities 7 / Persong intimately familiar! | \ NOEKED . A - * e Foe 4 eee Aaa NOT RECORDED 13391, 1 1952 with Congressional committee Procedurer are virtually unani- a a und by the strict procedural! d evidentiary rules of sourtal ’ f law, many committees have|.. Wash. Post and abit of “mak Times Herald ou go along.” me he cane as ny . . Wash. News doing be did wot take refuge ini While the court addressed it-| Wash. Star any of the usual constitutional self to Congressional commit-|: N. Y. Herald protections, contending onlyWtees iz general fn a practicat!*;: Tribune that he believed much questionaljsense its message is directed tol> to be improper and outaide thefithose committees which engage N.Y. Journal- committee's jurisdiction. in exploratory activities in . American Court's Ruling rior te eave, purpose is N.Y. Mirror ' In a 6-to-1 decision the court ‘upheld Mr. Watkins and laid down the principle that Con- gressional committees must be guided by a clearly defined ‘legislative purpose in their in- N. Y. Daily Newg —- N.Y. Times ES |eurity sub-committee, which are Daily Worker parts of the standing committee|y The Worker structure, arg auch special andlj New Leader ; ad hoc committees as those novadevers witnesses to testify Bshon racketeering, lobbying and Date JUN 2 3 1962 ‘tuted althority, not dee te ee Eat oe