Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
27581251
label
President - Wright Patman Investigation Background (3)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
27581251
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
President - Wright Patman Investigation Background (3)
citationUrl
collections
Philip W. Buchen Files
Philip Buchen's General Subject Files
subjects
Executive-Legislative relations
Watergate Affair, 1972-1974
Governmental investigations
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
27581251
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1975-10-01
month
10
year
1975
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1972-09-01
month
9
year
1972
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
e9eb24200d4ed55b
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 55, folder "President - Wright Patman
Investigation Background (3)" of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford
Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box 55 of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
Datos of Dean's conversations with Cook:
Sopt. 6,7, 11, of 14; Oct. 2,6, 11, of 12.
Minority loader's lotter: Sept. 28
GERALO F. FORD
WASHINGTON OFFICE:
UNITY BROWN
404 CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
3D DISTRICT, MICHIGAN
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
TELEPHONE: (202) 225-5011
COMMITTEE ON
Congress of the United States
DISTRICT OFFICES
BANKING AND CURRENCY
ROOM 2-1-36 FEDERAL CENTER
74 NORTH WASHINGTON
House of Representatives
BATTLE CREEK, MICHIGAN 49017
TELEPHONE: (616) 962-1551
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
Mashington, D.C. 20515
ROOM 112 FEDERAL BUILDING
410 W. MICHIGAN AVENUE
KALAMAZOO, MICHIGAN 49006
July 9, 1973
TELEPHONE: (616) 381-8290
JOINT COMMITTEE ON
(MON.-WED.-FRI.)
DEFENSE PRODUCTION
The Honorable Sam J. Ervin, Jr.
Chairman
Select Committee on Presidential
Campaign Activities
Senate Office Building
Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. Chairman:
The attached statement is submitted as my response and rebuttal to
the allegations made by Mr. John Dean before your Committee which
involved me in the subject of your hearings.
It is in the format of testimony since I had hoped your Committee
would provide me with an opportunity to present the statement
personally, my requests in this regard to date having been denied.
Since the inter-mixing of my testimony with that of the other
witnesses you intend to call would be most inappropriate, I transmit
for filing this sworn statement in lieu of the giving of testimony
at some future date, although I will be glad to submit to any
interrogation or cross-examination you or the Committee might deem
appropriate at any time.
Respectfully submitted,
GARRY BROWN
Enclosures
LIBERAY GERALD 1. 1040
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:
At the outset, let me express my deep appreciation to you, Mr. Chairman,
and the Committee for providing me with this opportunity to respond in kind to
the allegations made by Mr. Dean in his statement and earlier presentation to
this Committee. To say that I was somewhat dumbfounded to learn of the
allegations made by Mr. Dean is a gross understatement since my participation
in the bipartisan efiort by members of the House Banking and Currency Committee,
which resulted in the denial of the granting of subpoena authority to the Chairman
of our Committee, was in no way connected with the so-called "cover-up" activities
in which Mr. Dean has testified he participated.
Perhaps it would be best for me to provide the Committee with a chronological
statement of what occurred in this regard on the House side, as best I can recall
it, and then provide the Committee with a particularized response to Mr. Dean's
several allegations.
Assuming the concurrence of the Committee in this proposed format of my
testimony, let me proceed with the chronological statement of activities on the
House side, the period of time over which these activities occurred having been
late August of 1972 to October 3, 1972, the latter date being the date of the meeting
of the House Banking and Currency Committee at which, by a vote of 15 to 20, Chairman
Patman's request for subpoena authority was denied.
While back in Michigan fulfilling commitments during the August Recess of the
Congress, on either the late afternoon of August 30 or the morning of August 31, 1972,
I heard on my car radio that the Banking and Currency Committee was interviewing
Mr. Maurice Stans, the Chairman of the Finance Committee to Re-Elect the President,
with respect to the handling of campaign contributions since there appeared to be a
connection between the handling of some of such funds and the Watergate burglary.
Inasmuch as I had not been notified by my office in Washington, nor had I
received any notice in Michigan, that the Committee was meeting for this purpose, I
LIBRARY GERALD FORD
- 2 -
immediately got in touch with my Washington office and determined that Chairman
Patman had not called a meeting, nor had he notified my office of the interviews
with Stans. I then contacted the Banking and Currency Committee staff to
determine the facts with respect to the news broadcast I had heard and determined
that no Committee meeting had been called, but rather that certain members of the
Banking and Currency Committee staff, at the direction of the Chairman, had
individually interviewed Stans. I was unable to ascertain at that time from the
staff the justification therefor or the reasons why Committee members had not been
advised of Chairman Patman's initiation of such investigation by staff members.
In view of the media attention provoked, it appeared to me Patman's action was
prompted by political considerations, so I again called my Washington office and
asked my legislative assistant to carefully examine the Rules of the House and the
Rules of the Banking and Currency Committee to determine by what authority Patman
had initiated such investigation without first seeking the authority of the Committee
and by what authority he could do so without even notifying Committee members. As
a result of such research by my legislative aide, on Thursday, August 31, 1972 I
dictated a letter to Chairman Patman citing the Rules of the House and the Committee
and indicating my displeasure over the fact that he had initiated such investigation
without seeking the concurrence of the Committee or even notifying Committee members.
This Ietter is attached as Exhibit No. 1.
At this juncture, I should point out that to the best of my recollection,
there had been no Committee discussion of our Committee's jurisdiction over, or
involvement in, an investigation of the Re-Elect Committee's handling of
contributions or their possible involvement in the financing of the Watergate
burglary. In short, the Committee staff investigation hit me as a complete surprise.
It being necessary for me to attend the fall Republican State Convention in
Detroit September 1 and 2, I did not return to Washington until late Monday,
Labor Day, September 4.
Inasmuch as the only information I had been able to develop regarding the
GERALB FORD LIBRARY
content of the interviews by Patman's staff members of Stans was from a Republican
staff member who had been present during only a portion of such interviews, I contacted
Mr. Stans to attempt to determine the particulars about the staff inquiry, whether
or not a transcript had been made of such interviews or any other record of the
- 3 -
discussions in order that I might be apprised of the substance of such interviews
to the same extent as were the staff members and Mr. Patman. In the course of my
discussion of the matter telephonically with Mr. Stans, I requested an opportunity
to discuss the matter personally with him and arranged to see him on the morning
of September 6.
In view of Mr. Dean's statements on pages 103 and 104 to the effect that he
and others associated with the White House were aware of and concerned about the
Banking and Currency staff investigation as early as mid-August, I should point
out that my first contact of any kind with anyone from the White House or the
Finance Committee to Re-Elect the President was this call to Mr. Stans on September 5,
1972. (1)
Also, in view of Mr. Dean's association of the Banking and Currency Committee
with what he alleges were cover-up discussions going on at this time, it is essential
to keep in mind the limited scope of the Patman investigation. In his letter to
me, received September 5, responding to my letter of August 31, 1972, Chairman
Patman said that his interest in an investigation was prompted by a letter he had
received from a Committee member who urged either Patman or the International
Finance Subcommittee Chairman to look into possible violations of the Foreign Bank
Secrecy Act by the Committee to Re-Elect the President in connection with the transfer
of some of its funds through Mexico. In addition, and subsequently, Patman brought
into the scope of his interest the circumstances surrounding a $25,000 contribution
to the Committee to Re-Elect the President by one who was interested in a national
bank charter application which was pending. In short, by Patman's own statements,
he was justifying jurisdiction of the Banking and Currency Committee over the
investigation by limiting its scope to the use of banks in the financial transactions
of the Committee to Re-Elect the President, the bank charter matter, and to the
Watergate burglary by virtue of the surfacing of funds in the bank account of
Mr. Barker, one of those who had been arrested for participation in such burglary.
Not satisfied with Patman's response of September 5, 1972, I immediately
drafted a letter to him, which letter was co-signed by several of my Republican
colleagues on the Committee, in which we demanded that Patman call a meeting of
(1) At no time, before, during, and since the period covered by this chronology, have
I discussed the Committee's action or the Watergate matter with the President, Mr.
Haldeman, Mr. Erlichman, Mr. Dean, Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Colson, or any similar person
within the inner-group mentioned by Mr. Dean.
GERMLO FORD LIBRARY
- 4 -
the Committee to discuss the whole matter. Our letter of September 5, 1972 is
attached as Exhibit No. 2.
In view of Patman's rationale for conducting the investigation, in my
interview with Mr. Stans on September 6, I attempted to ascertain the true facts
from him concerning the handling of campaign contributions, the alleged Mexican
"laundering" of such funds, and their apparent ultimate deposit in Barker's bank
account. Mr. Stans informed me he did not know how or why the funds went to
Mexico and ended up in Barker's account, stating that Mr. Gordon Liddy, the general
counsel for the Committee, had been the one who made the decisions regarding how
contributions were reported, handled, etc. under the new campaign expenditure law.
Since my inquiry involved the legality of the handling of such funds, it was agreed
I should talk with Mr. Kenneth Parkinson, who was the new legal counsel for the
Finance Committee to Re-Elect the President, having succeeded Mr. Liddy, whose
services had been terminated.
I met with Mr. Stans personally only this one time, but I may have talked with
him three or four times on the phone. During the course of these conversations, I
am quite sure I suggested that it might be better for Mr. Stans to testify than to
give Patman the opportunity to publicize and take political advantage of Stans'
non-appearance, it being the position of most Republican Committee members that
Patman's interest in an investigation was more political than anything else.
I discussed the application of the Bank Secrecy Act, the campaign expenditure
law, and other aspects of the matter telephonically with Mr. Parkinson several times
and met with him on one occasion of which I am certain and possibly a second time
very briefly, although I cannot specifically recall a second occasion.
During this time, I had asked my legislative assistant, who is an attorney
and a former law clerk for a Federal Court of Appeals Judge, to brief for me the
question of the propriety of the appearance of Mr. Stans and others before our
Committee. In the course of this research done by both my legislative assistant
and myself, it became apparent that such an appearance could prejudice the rights
of those who might be indicted as a result of the grand jury proceedings that were
then in progress. Appreciation of this problem prompted me to write to both the
GERALE paro LIBRARY
- 5 -
Attorney General and Mr. Stans requesting the opinion of the Attorney General
with respect to the propriety of Mr. Stan's appearance as well as the opinion of
Mr. Stans' attorney concerning his own position on the appropriateness of such
appearance. These letters are attached as Exhibits No. 3 and 4, respectively.
At the time of the writing of these letters, Mr. Stans had not, to my knowledge,
decided whether or not he would voluntarily appear before the Committee.
It is this letter of September 8 to the Attorney General which Mr. Dean has
said in his statement, " was, in fact, drafted by Parkinson for Congressman
Brown." I unequivocally deny this charge. The letter to the Attorney General was
dictated by me to my secretary and is my work product in every respect. It is my
best recollection that from the conversations I had with Mr. Stans and Mr. Parkinson
up to this point it appeared to me no decision had been made as to whether or not
Mr. Stans would appear. The decision to write such letters was wholly my own and
stemmed from my concern about the propriety of his appearance regardless of what
his decision might be, such concern having been prompted by the limited research
done by my legislative aide and myself to this time.
It would bE asinine for me to say that in the course of my discussions of
the matter with Stans and Parkinson I did not mention the concern I felt about the
legal ramifications of Mr. Stans' appearance before the Committee and of my belief
that the legal opinions of those most closely involved, namely, the Attorney General
and Stans, should be obtained. In any such discussions, however, it was always a
matter of my apprising Stans and Parkinson of what I proposed to do, rather than
receipt by me of suggestions, requests, urgings, etc. from them.
Although I received no written response from the Attorney General to my letter
of September 8, on September 12 Ralph Erickson, the Deputy Attorney General,
telephoned my office and talked with a member of my staff and advised that he was
calling in response to my letter of September 8 and indicated that the Attorney
General would be happy to talk with me about the matter but did not intend to
respond in writing, suggesting that the questions I had asked were now moot because
in the interim Mr. Stans had notified the Committee that he was declining the
invitation to testify.
LIBRARY GERALD ? FORD
- 6 -
During this period of time, the Banking and Currency Committee, although
considering other legislation, had been embroiled in the controversy about the
conduct of hearings by the Committee into the Patman charges, the scope of which
I have already described. But none of the activities regarding political espionage,
bugging, cover-up, etc. which have now surfaced and which are now being discussed
were known at the time the Banking and Currency Committee was contemplating its
hearings and it must also be kept in mind that Patman's effort to investigate
the matter of the laundered funds and Barker's involvement was analyzed by most of
us at that time as being blatantly political in view of the up-coming election.
Chairman Patman finally did discuss the matter with the Committee and,
although objection was voiced by many of us, he scheduled a meeting of the
Committee for September 14 to receive the testimony of Stans and Phillip S. Hughes,
Director of the Office of Federal Elections, General Accounting Office. This was
the meeting at which Stans declined to appear.
Because Stans had failed to appear voluntarily, Chairman Patman notified the
Committee on September 25, 1972 that he intended to seek the authority of the
Committee to issue subpoenas for Stans and several others at a meeting of the
Committee to be held October 3. When it became certain that the Chairman would
seek subpoena authority, my earlier concern about the propriety of such appearance
was renewed and intensified since in the meantime the legal research done by me
and my office had clearly established the danger of conducting a Congressional
hearing when criminal proceedings were pending regarding the same matter.
As a result, I again wrote to the Attorney General on September 26, 1972,
pointing out to him that although the questions I had raised in my September 8
letter might have become moot after Stans had declined to voluntarily testify,
Patman's plans to seek subpoena authority made my questions and concerns very real
once again. This letter of September 26 is attached as Exhibit No. 5.
Despite my insistence in my letter to the Attorney General of September 26, 1972
for an opinion to be expressed, it wasn't until the late afternoon of October 2 that.
I learned Mr. Henry Petersen, Assistant Attorney General, had replied to my letter
of September 26, not to me, but to Patman. In fact, Patman had received the response
GERALD FORD THERE
- 7 -
from Petersen before I knew that a response had been provided, since I was not
given a copy until I requested the same. This letter from Petersen is attached
as Exhibit No. 6 and is the same as Dean's Exhibit No. 21.
In this regard, I felt at the time that the Department of Justice and the
Attorney General's Office was being most uncooperative and, in fact, was taking
a rather untenable position of not wanting to get involved when my research had
clearly satisfied me that the success of their prosecutive efforts of those who
had been indicted by the grand jury could be seriously jeopardized by public
hearings of the Banking and Currency Committee under the law applicable thereto,
especially the holding in the Delaney case. It having been my position then, and
it continues to be my position, as well as that of Archibald Cox, the Special
Prosecutor, that public hearings in prejudicing the rights of those who have been
accused, necessarily also seriously jeopardize the successful prosecution of these
individuals.
In any case, the Committee met on October 3 and, as is well known, voted
20-15 against authorizing the Chairman to issue the subpoenas he had requested. (2)
Although it is of little pertinence to this chronology, I wish to add that
consistent with my many-times stated position regarding the Banking and Currency
Committee's investigation of this matter, to wit, that such investigation should
await completion of criminal proceedings, I wrote to Chairman Patman in early
January of this year urging him to designate a staff member or hire outside counsel
to monitor the criminal trials of the "Watergate Seven" so that we might be kept
current on the proceedings of those trials so we would be prepared to conduct a
Committee investigation upon completion of the criminal proceedings.
Needless to say, the Chairman declined to grant my request and in a reply
expressing many reasons, closed the door upon any investigation by our Committee.
From the foregoing, it is obvious that Mr. Dean, in his testimony before the
Senate Select Committee, either has stated things to be true which he does not
know to be true or has engaged in absolute falsehoods. More particularly, I recite
the following: (References are to the statement presented to your Committee on
June 25, 1973.)
On page 104, Mr. Dean states: "At some point in time during these
2) In view of Mr. Dean's testimony about the proposed Patman witness list, I should add at this
cint that I attempted to determine who Patman wanted to subpoena, but it wasn't until I received
uch list, hand-delivered at 5:05 P.M. on 10/2/72, the evening before the 10/3/72 meeting, that I
r anyone else, to my knowledge, knew who Patman intended to subpoena and call as witnesses.
FORD
- 8 -
investigations Mr. Parkinson was put in touch with Congressman
Gary (sic) Brown who was a member of the Banking and Currency
Committee."
The fact is, Mr. Parkinson was not put in touch with me, I requested an
opportunity to talk to Mr. Parkinson during my original contact with Mr. Stans
when he could not explain to me the several legal aspects of the handling of funds
by Mr. Liddy, the legal interpretation given to the campaign expenditure law as
it applied to contributions made to the Committee to Re-Elect the President before
and after April 7, 1972, and other aspects of the staff interrogation of Mr. Stans.
Also on page 104, Mr. Dean states:
"To the best of my recollection this may have resulted from
discussions between members of the White House Congressional
Relations staff with the Republican members of the Banking and
Currency Committee to determine who would be most helpful on
the Committee and Brown indicated his willingness to assist."
(emphasis added)
The fact is, I recall no conversation with anyone which could be interpreted
as my indicating a 'willingness to assist." This is especially true if one interprets,
as he must, Mr. Dean's word "assist" as being willingness to assist in the White House
efforts to block the Patman Committee hearings for the second reason he states on
page 103; that being, and I quote
...
"and second, they just might stumble into
something that would start unraveling the cover-up. (3)
It should be pointed out that as of even September 8, 1972, or for that matter
as late as October 3, 1972, to my recollection, there had been no public suggestion
that a "cover-up" was in progress. The fact that I opposed such hearings at that
time because I was satisfied the law made inappropriate and undesirable the conduct
of hearings of our Committee while the criminal proceedings were pending and, in
addition, thought Patman's desire for such hearings was purely political, while
for other reasons the White House may have opposed such hearings, may make our goal
similar, namely, the blocking of the hearings, but it is totally improper to attribute
the same motivation, as Mr. Dean has done.
Again on page 104, Mr. Dean states:
"On September 8th Congressman Brown sent a letter to the Attorney
General regarding the forthcoming appearance of Secretary Stans
and others before the Patman Committee. I have submitted to the
Committee a copy of this letter (Exhibit No. 18), which was, in facty
LIBRARY GERALD FORD
drafted by Parkinson for Congressman Brown." (emphasis adõed)
(3) Although Dean cites no time frame for this statement, it should be remembered
I independently and aggressively had commenced opposing the Patman action as early as
8/31/72 and had no knowledge of what Dean says were on-going conversations within his
group on the subject.
- 9 -
The fact is, this letter was not drafted by Parkinson for me, nor to the
best of my recollection does my letter to the Attorney General contain any input
from Parkinson, although, of course, as I have already indicated I had apprised
Stans and Parkinson of my plans to solicit the opinion of the Attorney General.
On this same page 104, Dean again refers to "Parkinson's drafting the letter for
Congressman Brown," which is a repetition of the previous erroneous statement.
I wish to advise the Committee with respect to this statement that upon
learning of this charge made by Mr. Dean, I knew it to be so completely erronèous
that I sought an explanation for the making of same by Mr. Dean. I attempted to
contact Mr. Parkinson to determine whether or not he, or anyone else to his
knowledge, might have suggested or stated to Mr. Dean that he, Parkinson, had
drafted such letter. Mr. Parkinson was not immediately available and I was unable
to talk with him until the late afternoon of Tuesday, June 26, 1973, Dean's
statement having been made, as you will recall, in his testimony before this
Committee on June 25, 1973. In this telephone conversation with Mr. Parkinson on
June 26, Mr. Parkinson unequivocally denied that he had drafted such letter or
that he, or anyone else to his knowledge, had advised Mr. Dean that such letter
had been drafted by him, Parkinson.
However, in the course of my attempting to learn from Parkinson how Dean
could possibly have made this statement, Parkinson recalled that he had prepared
a draft of a letter at the request of Mr. Dean which he, Parkinson, understood was
to be furnished to the Attorney General as a proposed response by the Attorney
General to my letter of September 8, 1972 (Dean's Exhibit No. 18, my Exhibit No. 3).
and it
requested a copy of this proposed draft which was prepared by Mr. Parkinson for Mr. DeanAis
attached hereto as Exhibit No. 7. It is Mr. Parkinson's further recollection that
subsequent to his preparation of this draft, Mr. Dean took the same for what
Mr. Parkinson understood to be a further review or revision by Mr. Dean. Of course,
this proposed draft was apparently never used as intended since no response was
made at that time to my letter of September 8, 1972.
Although it is relatively insignificant, on page 105 of his testimony, Dean
LIBRARY GERALD P. FORD
- 10
states that no response was sent by the Justice Department to my letter of
September 8 prior to the scheduled appearance of Mr. Stans on September 14;
whereas, although Dean's discussion of this matter on page 105 may be substantially
accurate, I did receive a telephonic response to my letter of September 8 from
Deputy Attorney General Erickson in which, as I have above pointed out, he
indicated no written response would be provided and that he felt the questions
I had raised in my letter of September 8 were moot because of Stan's decision not
to appear before the Committee voluntarily.
On page 108, Mr. Dean states:
"I began receiving increasing pressure from Mitchell, Stans,
Parkinson and others to get the Justice Department to respond
to the September 8th letter of Congressman Brown as a vehicle
that Congressman Brown could use in persuading others not to
vote in favor of the subpoenas. Congressman Brown felt that
with this document in hand he would give the Republicans and
others something to hang their vote on." (emphasis added)
The fact is, I know of no basis for these statements since my only purpose in
writing to the Attorney General on both occasions, that is, September 8 and September 26,
was to attempt to get the Attorney General to recognize the law for what I knew it
to be and to appreciate the prosecutorial problems which would be created by public
hearings of the Committee. I especially know of no basis in fact for the underlined
portion of the foregoing quote from Dean's statement, since I cannot recall having
expressed the same to anyone. However, there can be little question but what such
a letter would have a favorable impact upon other members.
At the bottom of page 108 and on page 109 of Dean's statement he states that
much effort was put forth by many people, including Mr. Timmons, to persuade members
of the Committee to vote against the hearings. I can only speak for this member of
the Committee in this regard, but I do not recall receiving any urging from anyone
at the White House to cast my vote against such hearings.
In fact, I am very certain I had no significant contact from anyone associated
with the Administration or the White House regarding the hearings other than the
contacts I have already discussed with Mr. Stans and Mr. Parkinson.
To the best of my recollection, my only contacts with White House personnel
were insignificant contacts I had in the course of normal legislative business with
Dick Cook, the White House liaison agent for the House of Representatives, who,
BERALD FORD LIBRAR,
- 11 -
rather than suggesting or urging me to take any course of action, merely inquired
of me as to how things were going and whether or not I thought those of us who
opposed the hearings would be successful in our opposition. In my discussions with
other members of the Committee at that time and since, I have yet to find one who
indicated that he or she was pressured in any way to vote as he or she did.
In conclusion, I wish to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the members of the
Committee for your patience in permitting me to provide this probably unnecessarily
lengthy statement. My purpose in doing so was to establish for the record not only
the absence of culpability on my part, but the absence of culpability on the part
of the other members of the House Committee on Banking and Currency in opposing
the Patman investigation, to the extent that I have any knowledge of other members'
actions.
I hope I have satisfied the Committee and the listening, viewing, and reading
audience that what Mr. Dean has concluded was causally related action by the
majority of our Committee to what he was doing at the White House, has no basis in
fact and should not be so presumed. If opposition to action proposed by one's
colleagues, when that opposition is based on principle and proper political
motivation, cannot be voiced without such opposition being interpreted as culpable
conduct and obstruction of justice, then we certainly have reached a sorry state
of affairs in our political and legislative system.
If I have done nothing else, I trust that I have at least somewhat dispelled
the "guilt by association" implicit in Mr. Dean's testimony by his linking of the
House Banking and Currency Committee action with the whole gamut of culpable conduct
about which he has testified.
I will be glad to answer any questions the members of the Committee might care
to pose.
Thank you.
BERRLD FORD LIBRARY
Nomination of Gerald R. Ford of Michigan
to be Vice President of the United States
Nov.5
Hearings before the Committee on
Rules and Administration, U. S. Senate, November 1973.
12S
The CHAIRMAN. Senator Pell?
Senator PELL. In the interest of time, I will limit myself to one
question. I would like to return for a moment to this question of in-
flation and the burdens imposed. particularly. on our older people. The
bill that passed the Senate and is in the House now calls for, I think.
a 7-percent increase. Before it passed the House, would you urge the
President to sign this bill or do you feel that—
Mr. For:n. I believe that if you are going to increase the benefits.
you have to, in all honesty. find additional revenue. Now, I have not
had a chance to study whether this added benefit payment that is pro-
vided in the Senate version requires additional revenue, whether we
have to increase the ceiling so that you are taxing more of the income.
or whether me have to increase the rates. But if we have not provided
in such legislation additional revenues to keep the balance in the
social security trust funds-if The have not provided that revenue-
I would urge that it be vetoed.
I hope that we can provide enough revenue because, in my oninion.
certainly the people in the older age brackets. because of inflation.
need the help. And I want to help them. But I do not want to destroy
the social security concept by not providing sufficient revenues to
finance these additional benefits.
Senator PELL. Thank you very much.
The CHAIRMAN. Senator Bvrd?
Senator BYED. Representative Ford. will you relate to the commit-
tee your role. if any. in the blocking of an investigation by the House
Banking and Currency Committee into the Watergate breakin as pin-
posed by Chairman Wright Patman in October of 1972?
Mr. Form. Senator Byrd. I do not have the full details here, but I
can give you the salient points.
Chairman Patman had proposed sometime in October of 1972 that
his committee. the Committee on Banking and Currency in the House.
undertake an investigation of certain American banks in trading or
handling accounts between an American bank and a foreign bank.
And Chairman Patman wanted subpena authority to carry out this
investigation.
A number of members of that committee on the Republican side and
several on the Democratic side were opposed to giving that authority
to Mr. Patman. A number of our Republicans on that committee came
to me and said. "Jerry. ITC think you ought to call a meeting SO that
πe on our side of the aisle could bring the leadership un to date. and
perhaps the leadership would give some counsel to the Republican
members of the Committee on Banking and Currency."
So as the Republican leader of the House. upon this request. I called
a meeting. iTe met with the Republican members of that committee
on one or two occasions. They brought us up to date. Tie talked
about That the policy onght to be in the committee. but there
no Republican Party decision made. The action taken by the Repub
licans nins. T think. five Democrats was, I think, to deny Chairman
Patman that nower of subpena.
Senator BYRD. You may be aware that John Dean testified to the
Senate Watergate Committee on June 25 of this year that House Re
publican leaders "acted at the request of the White House it. block that
investigation." ITere you in contact with anyone at the White House
is
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
129
during the period of August through October 1972 concerning the
Parman committee's possible investigation of the Watergate breakin?
Mr. Ford. Not to my best recollection. The best and, I think most
authoritative answer to this question is one that Representative Jerry
Brown of the Third District of Michigan submitted to the Ervin
mittee.
(ongressman Brown was very much involved as a member of the
Committee on Banking and Currency, and his name was much more
closely identified with this problem than was mine.
As a result, he prepared the very detailed statements which I under-
sood were put in the record of the Ervin committee. He was never
called to testify. But I would be glad to submit that statement by
Congressman Brown because it goes into this whole question in very
great depth.
I think it might be helpful to the part of this record if the chairman
of the committee would so permit.
The CHAIRMAN. You may supply them for the record.
Mr. FORD. I will, sir.
[The statement referred to follows:]
STATEMENT OF How. GARRY E. BROWN, A MEMBER OF CONGRESS FROM THE STATE
OF MICHIGAN, SUBMITTED TO THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON PRESIDENTIAL CAM-
PAIGN ACTIVITIES
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, at the outset, let me express my
deep appreciation to you, Mr. Chairman, and the Committee for providing me with
this opportunity to respond in kind to the allegations made by Mr. Dean in his
statement and earlier presentation to this Committee. To say that I was some-
what dumbfounded to learn of the allegations made by Mr. Dean is a gross under-
statement since my participation in the bipartisan effort by members of the House
Banking and Currency Committee, which resulted in the denial of the granting of
subpoena authority to the Chairman of our Committee. was in no way connected
with the so-called "cover-up" activities in which Mr. Dean has testified he
garticipated.
Perhaps it would be best for me to provide the Committee with a chronological
statement of what occurred in this regard on the House side, as best I can recall
it, and then provide the Committee with a particularized response to Mr. Dean's
several allegations.
Assuming the concurrence of the Committee in this proposed format of my testi-
mony. let me proceed with the chronological statement of activities on the House
side, the period of time over which these activities occurred having been late
August of 1972 to October 3, 1972. the latter date being the date of the meeting of
the House Banking and Currency Committee at which br 2 vote of 15 to 20,
Chairman Patman's request for subpoena authority was denied.
While back in Michigan fulfilling commitments during the August Recess of
the Congress, on either the late afternoon of August 30 or the morning of 10-
gust 31, 1972, I heard on my car radio that the Banking and Currency Committee
was interviewing Mr. Maurice Stans, the Chairman of the Finance Committee
to Re-Elect the President, with respect to the handling of campaign contributions
since there appeared to be a connection between the handling of some of such
funds and the Watergate burglary.
Inasmuch as I had not been notified by my office in Washington. nor had I
received any notice in Michigan, that the Committee was meeting for this pur-
post. I immediately got in touch with my Washington office and determined that
Chairman Patman had not called a meeting. nor had be notified my office of the
interviews with Stans. I then contacted the Banking and Currency Committee
staff to determine the facts with respect to the news I had heard
and determined that no Committee meeting had been called. but rather that
extain members of the Banking and Currency Committee staff. at the direction
of the Chairman. had individually interviewed Srans. I was unable to ascertain
at that time from the staff the justification therefor or the reasons why Commit-
members had not been advised of Chairman Patman's initiation of such
investigation by staff members.
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
130
In riew of the media attention provoked, it appeared to me Patman's action
was prompted by political considerations, so I again called my Washington office
and asked my legislative assistant to carefully examine the Rules of the House
and the Rules of the Banking and Currency Committee to determine by what
authority Patman had initiated such investigation without first seeking the
authority of the Committee and by what authority he could do SO without even
notifying Committee members. As & result of such research by my legislative aide.
on Thursday, August 31. 1972 I dictated a letter to Chairman Patman citing the
Rules of the House and the Committee and indicating my displeasure over the
fact that he had initiated such investigation without seeking the concurrence of
the Committee or even norifying Committee members. This letter is attached as
Exhibit No. 1.
At this juncture, I should point out that to the best of my recollection, there
had been no Committee discussion of our Committee's jurisdiction over, or involve-
ment in. an investigation of the Re-Elect Committee's handling of contributions
or their possible involvement in the financing of the Watergate burglary. In
short, the Committee staff investigation hit me as a complete surprise.
It being necessary for me to attend the fall Republican State Convention in
Detroit September 1 and 2. I did not return to Washington until late Monday.
Labor Day, September 4.
Inasmuch as the only information I had been able to develop regarding the
content of the interviews br Patman's staff members of Stans was from a Repub-
lican staff member who had been present during only a portion of such interviews.
I contacted Mr. Stans to attempt to determine the particulars about the staff
inquiry, whether or not a transcript had been made of such interviews or any
other record of the discussions in order that I might be apprised of the substance
of such interviews to the same extent as were the staff members and Mr. Patman.
In the course of my discussion of the matter telephonically with Mr. Stans. I
requested an opportunity to discuss the matter personally with him and arranged
to see him on the morning of September 6.
In view of Mr. Dean's statements on pages 103 and 104 to the effect that he and
others associated with the White House were aware of and concerned about the
Banking and Currency staff investigation as early as mid-August. I should point
out that my first contact of any kind with anyone from the White House or the
Finance Committee to Re-Elect the President was this call to Mr. Stans on Sep-
tember 5, 1972.1
Also, in riew of Mr. Dean's association of the Banking and Currency Committee
with what he alleges were cover-up discussions going on at this time. it is essen-
tial to keep in mind the limited scope of the Patman investigation. In his letter to
me, received September 5, responding to my letter of August 31, 1972, Chairman
Patman said that his interest in an investigation was prompted by a letter he had
received from a Committee member who urged either Patman or the International
Finance Subcommittee Chairman to look into possible violations of the Foreign
Bank Secrecy Act by the Committee to Re-Elect the President in connection with
the transfer of some of its funds through Mexico. In addition, and subsequently.
Patman brought into the scope of his interest the circumstances surrounding a
$25,000 contribution to the Committee to Re-Elect the President by one who was
interested in a national bank charter application which was pending. In short. by
Patman's own statements, he was justifying jurisdiction of the Banking and Cur-
rency Committee over the investigation by limiting its scope to the use of banks
in the financial transactions of the Committee to Re-Elect the President, the bank
charter matter. and to the Watergate burglary by virtue of the surfacing of funds
in the bank account of Mr. Barker, one of those who had been arrested for par-
ticipation in such burglary.
Not satisfied with Patman's response of September 5, 1972, I immediately
drafted a letter to him, which letter was co-signed by several of my Republican
colleagues on the Committee. in which we demanded that Patman call a meeting
of the Committee to discuss the whole matter. Our letter of September 5, 1972 is
attached as Exhibit No. 2.
In view of Patman's rationale for conducting the investigation. in my inter-
view with Mr. Stans on September 6, I attempted to ascertain the true facts from
him concerning the handling of campaign contributions. the alleged Mexican
1 At no time, before. during. and since the period covered by this chronology. have I di-
cussed the Committee's action or the Watergate matter with the President. Mr. Haldeman
Mr. Erlichman, Mr. Dean Mr. Mitchell. Mr. Colson. or any similar person within the Inner
group mentioned hy Mr. Dean.
FORD
GERALD
131
endering" of such funds. and their apparent ultimate deposit in Barker's bank
went. Mr. Stans informed me he did not know how or why the funds went to
govico and ended up in Barker's account, stating that Mr. Gordon Liddy, the gen-
will counsel for the Committee, had been the one who made the decisions regard-
::: how contributions were reported, handled, etc. under the new campaign ex-
--nditure law. Since my inquiry involved the legality of the handling of such
truls, it was agreed I should talk with Mr. Kennerh Parkinson, who was the
legal counsel for the Finance Committee to Re-Elect the President, having
increded Mr. Liddy, whose services had been terminated.
I met with Mr. Stans personally only this one time, but I may have talked
with him three or four times on the phone. During the course of these conversa-
tions, I am quite sure I suggested that it might be better for Mr. Stans to testify.
"In to give Patman the opportunity to publicize and take political advantage of
Stans' non-appearance, it being the position of most Republican Committee mem-
lers that Patman's interest in an investigation was more political than anything
die.
I discussed the application of the Bank Secrecr Act. the campaign expenditure
law, and other aspects of the matter telephonically with Mr. Parkinson several
times and met with him on one occasion of which I am certain and possibly a sec-
and time very briefly. although I cannot specifically recall a second occasion.
During this time, I had asked my legislative assistant, who is an attorney
and a former law clerk for a Federal Court of Appeals Judge, to brief for me
the question of the propriety of the appearance of Mr. Stans and others before
our Committee. In the course of this research done by both my legislative assist-
ant and myself, it became apparent that such an appearance could prejudice the
rights of those who might be indicted as a result of the grand jury proceedings
that were then in progress. Appreciation of this problem prompted me to write
" both the Attorney General and Mr. Stans requesting the opinion of the Attor-
nry General with respect to the propriety of Mr. Stans' appearance as well as the
opinion of Mr. Stans' attorney concerning his own position on the appropriateness
of such appearance. These letters are attached as Exhibits No. 3 and 4, respec-
tively. At the time of the writing of these letters. Mr. Stans had not, to my
knowledge, decided whether or not he would voluntarily appear before the
Committee.
It is this letter of September 8 to the Attorney General which Mr. Dean has
said in his statement, was, in fact, drafted by Parkinson for Congressman
Brown." I unequivocally deny this charge. The letter to the Attorney General
was dictated by me to my secretary and is my work product in every respect. It is
my best recollection that from the conversations I bad with Mr. Stans and Mr.
Parkinson up to this point it appeared to me no decision had been made as to
whether or not Mr. Stans would appear. The decision to write such letters was
wholly my own and stemmed from my concern about the propriety of his ap-
pearance regardless of what his decision might be. such concern having been
prompted by the limited research done by my legislative aide and myself to this
time.
It would be asinine for me to say that in the course of my discussions of the
matter with Stans and Parkinson I did not mention the concern I felt about the
legal ramifications of Mr. Stans' appearance before the Committee and of my be
lief that the legal opinions of those most closely involved, namely. the Attorney
General and Stans, should be obtained. In any such discussions. however. it was
always a matter of my apprising Stans and Parkinson of what I proposed to do,
rather than receipt by me of suggestions. requests. urgings. etc. from them.
Although I received no written response from the Attorney General to my let-
ter of September S. on September 12 Ralph Erickson. the Deputy Attorney General,
telephoned my office and talked with a member of my staff and advised that he
was calling in response to my letter of September $ and indicated that the Attor-
ner General would be happy to talk with me about the matter but did not intend
to respond in writing. suggesting that the questions I had asked were now most
because in the interim Mr. Stans had notified the Committee that he was de
clining the invitation to testify.
During this period of time. the Banking and Currency Committee. although
considering other legislation, had been embroiled If the controverst about the
conduct of hearings by the Committee into the Parman charges, the scope of
which I have already described. But none of the activities regarding political
expionage, bugging, cover-up. etc. which have now surfaced and which are now
being discussed were known at the time the Banking and Currency Committee
was contemplating its hearings and it must also is kept in mind that Patman's
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
132
effort to investigate the matter of the laundered funds and Barker's involvement
was analyzed by most of us at that time as being blatantly political in view of the
up-coming election.
Chairman Patman finally did discuss the matter with the Committee and
although objection was voiced by many of us, he scheduled a meeting of the form.
mittee for September 14 to receive the testimony of Stans and Phillip S. Hughes
Director of the Office of Federal Elections, General Accounting Office. This Hilr
the meeting at which Stans declined to appear.
Because Stans had failed to appear voluntarily, Chairman Patman notified
the Committee on September 25. 1972 that he intended to seek the authority of
the Committee to issue subpoenas for Stans and several others at a meeting of the
Committee to be held October 3. When it became certain that the Chairman
would seek subpoena authority. my earlier concern about the propriety of such
appearance was renewed and intensified since in the meantime the legal research
done by me and my office had clearly established the danger of conducting a
Congressional hearing when criminal proceedings were pending regarding the
same matter.
As a result, I again wrote to the Attorney General on September 26, 1972
pointing out to him that although the questions I bad raised in my September
letter might have become moot after Stans had declined to voluntarily testify.
Patman's plans to seek subpoeza authority made my questions and concerns Terr
real once again. This letter of September 26 is attached as Exhibit No. 5.
Despite my insistence in my letter to the Attorney General of September 20
1972 for an opinion to be expressed. it wasn't until the late afternoon of October:
that I learned Mr. Henry Petersen, Assistant Attorner General, had replied "
my letter of September 26. not to me, but to Patman. In fact, Patman had received
the response from Petersen before I knew that a response had been provided
since I was not given a copy until I requested the same. This letter from Peterser
is attached as Exhibit No. 6 and is the same as Dean's Exhibit No. 21.
In this regard. I felt at the time that the Department of Justice and the 11thr
new General's Office was being most unenoperative and, in fact. was taking :
rather untenable position of not wanting to get involved when mr research Ind
clearly satisfied me that the success of their prosecutive efforts of those nho had
been indicted by the grand jury could be seriously jeopardized by public hear-
ings of the Banking and Currency Committee under the law applicable there:-
especially the holding in the Delaney case. It having been my position then
and it continues to be my position. as well as that of Archibald Cox. the Special
Prosecutor, that public hearings in prejudicing the rights of those who have
been accused, necessarily also seriously jeopardize the successful prosecution of
these individuals.
In any case, the Committee met on October 3 and, as is well known, roted 20-15
against authorizing the Chairman to issue the subpoenas he has requested."
Although it is of little pertinence to this chronology. I wish to add that (of.-
sistent with my many-times stated position regarding the Banking and Current
Committee's investigation of this matter, to wit. that such investigation short
await completion of criminal proceedings, I wrote to Chairman Patman in early
January of this year urging him to designate a staff member or hire outside COUR-
sel to monitor the criminal trials of the "Watergate Seven" so that we might !-
kept current on the proceedings of those trials so we would be prepared to Mr-
duct a Committee investigation upon completion of the criminal proceedings
Needless to say. the Chairman declined to grant my request and in a reply P.X.
pressing many reasons. closed the door upon any investigation br our Committe.
From the foregoing. it is obvious that Mr. Dean, in his testimony before the
Senate Select Committee. either has stated things to be trne which he does
know to be true or has engaged in absolute falsehoods. More particularly. I revin
the following: (References are to the statement presented to your Committee "
June 25, 1973.)
On nage 104. Mr. Dean states: "At some point in time during these investion
tions Mr. Parkinson was put in touch with Congressman Gary (sic) Brown who
was a member of the Banking and Currency Committee."
2 In view of Mr. Dean's testimony about the proposed Patman witness list. I should X
at this noint that I attempted to determine who Patman manted to subpoena. but it
until I received such list. hand delivered at 5 :05 P.M. on 10/2/72. the evening before "
10/3/72 meeting. that I or anyone else, to my knowledge. knew who Patman intended :-
subpoena and call as witnesses.
FORD
GERALD
133
The fact is, Mr. Parkinson was not put in touch with me. I requested an oppor-
tealty to talk to Mr. Parkinson during my original contact wtih Mr. Stans when
::e could not explain to me the several legal aspects of the handling of funds by
Mr. Liddy, the legal interpretation given to the campaign expenditure law as
it applied to contributions made to the Committee to Re-Elect the President before
and after April 7, 1972, and other aspects of the staff interrogation of Mr. Stans.
Also on page 104, Mr. Dean states:
"To the best of my recollection this may have resulted from discussions between
members of the White House Congressional Relations staff with the Republican
members of the Banking and Currency Committee to determine who would be
most helpful on the Committee and Brown indicated his willingness to assist."
Emphasis added.)
The fact is, I recall no conversation with anyone which could be interpreted RS
my indicating a "willingness to assist." This is especially true if one interprets, as
he must, Mr. Dean's word "assist" as being willingness to assist in the White
House efforts to block the Patman Committee hearings for the second reason he
states on page 103; that being, and I quote
"and second, they just might
stamble into something that would start unraveling the cover-up.'
It should be pointed out that as of even September S. 1972, or for that matter
as late as October 3. 1972, to my recollection, there had been no public suggestion
that a "cover-up" was in progress. The fact that I opposed such hearings at that
time because I was satisfied the law made inappropriate and undesirable the
conduct of hearings of our Committee while the criminal proceedings were pend-
ing and, in addition. thought Patman's desire for such hearings was purely
political, while for other reasons the White House may have opposed such hear-
ings. may make our goal similar, namely. the blocking of the hearings, but it is
totally improper to attribute the same motivation, as Mr. Dean has done.
Again on page 104. Mr. Dean states :
"On September Sth Congressman Brown sent a letter to the Attorney General
regarding the forthcoming appearance of Secretary Stans and others before the
Patman Committee. I have submitted to the Committee a copy of this letter
Exhibit No. 18), which was, in fact, drafted by Parkinson for Congressman
Brown." (Emphasis added.)
The fact is, this letter was not drafted by Parkinson for me, nor to the best
of my recollection does my letter to the Attorney General contain any input
from Parkinson. although of course, as I have already indicated I had apprised
Stans and Parkinson of my plans to solicit the opinion of the Attorney General.
On this same page 104. Dean again refers to "Parkinson's drafting the letter for
Congressman Brown," which is a repetition of the previous erroneous statement.
I wish to advise the Committee with respect to this statement that upon
learning of this charge made by Mr. Dean. I knew it to be SO completely erroneous
that I sought an explanation for the making of same by Mr. Dean. I attempted to
contact Mr. Parkinson to determine whether or not he, or anyone else to his
knowledge, might have suggested or stated to Mr. Dean that he. Parkinson. had
drafted such letter. Mr. Parkinson was not immediately available and I was
unable to talk with him until the late afternoon of Tuesday. June 26, 1973. Dean's.
statement having been made, as you will recall, in his testimony before this
Committee on June 25. 1973. In this telephone conversation with Mr. Parkinson
on Jnne 26, Mr. Parkinson unequivocally denied that be had drafted such letter
or that he, or anyone else to his knowledge, had advised Mr. Dean that such.
letter had been drafted by him, Parkinson.
However. in the course of my attempting to learn from Parkinson how Dean
could possibly have made this statement, Parkinson recalled that be had prepared
a draft of a letter at the request of Mr. Dean which he. Parkinson. understood
was to be furnished to the Attorney General C3 c proposed response by the-
Attorney General to my letter of September S. 1972 Dean's Exhibit No. IS. my
Exhibit No. 3). I requested a copy of this proposed Craft which TAS prepared by
Mr. Parkinson for Mr. Dean and it is attached hereto 25 Exhibit No. T. It is Mr.
Parkinson's further recollection that subsequent 77 his preparation of this draft.
Mr. Dean took the same for what Mr. Parkinson understood to be a further-
review or revision by Mr. Dean. Of course. this proposed draft was apparently
never used as intended since no response was made at that time to my letter of
September S, 1972.
3 Although Dean cites no time frame for this statement. It should be remembered I inite-
pendently and aggressively had commenced opposing the Patman action as early as STI/T2
and had no knowledge of what Dean says were on-going conversations within his group on
the subject.
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
134
Although it is relatively insignificant. on page 105 of his testimony, Dean states
that no response was sent by the Justice Department to my letter of September 8
prior to the scheduled appearance of Mr. Stans on September 14: whereas, at-
though Dean's discussion of this matter on page 105 may be substantially accurate.
I did receive a telephonic response to my letter of September S from Deputy
Attorney General Erickson in which, as I have above pointed out, he indicated
no written response would be provided and that he felt the questions I had
raised in my letter of September S were moot because of Stan's decision not in
appear before the Committee voluntarily.
On page 103, Mr. Dean states:
"I began receiving increasing pressure from Mitchell. Stans. Parkinson and
others to get the Justice Department to respond to the September Stii letter of
Congressman Brown as a vehicle that Congressman Brown could use in persuad-
ing others not to vote in favor of the subpoenas. Congressman Brown felt that
with this document in hand he could give the Republicans and others something to
harg their vote on." (emphasis added)
The fact is, I know of no basis for these statements since my only purpose in
writing to the Attorney General on both occasions, that is, September S and
September 26, was to attempt to get the Attorney General to recognize the law
for what I knew it to be and to appreciate the prosecutorial problems which
would be created by public hearings of the Committee. I especially know of no
basis in fact for the underlined portion of the foregoing quote from Dean's
statement, since I cannot recall having expressed the same to anyone. However.
there can be little question but what such a letter would have a favorable impact
upon other members.
At the bottom of page 10S and on page 109 of Dean's statement he states that
much effort was put forth by many people, including Mr. Timinons, to persuade
meinbers of the Committee to rote against the hearings. I can only speak for this
member of the Committee in this regard, but I do not recall receiving any urging
IT
from anyone at the White House to cast my vote against such hearings.
In fact, I am very certain I had no significant contact from anyone associated
with The Administration or the White House regarding the hearings other than
the contacts I have already discussed with Mr. Stans and Mr. Parkinson.
To the best of my recollection, my only contacts with White House personnel
were insignificant contacts I had in the course of normal legislative business
with Pick Cook, the White House liaison agent for the House of Representatives.
who, father than suggesting or urging me to take any course of action, merely
inquired of me as to how things were going and whether or not I thought those
of us who opposed the hearings would be successful in our opposition. In my dis-
cussions with other members of the Committee at that time and since, I have yet
to find one who indicated that he or she was pressured in any way to vote as he
or she did.
In conclusion, I wish to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the members of the
Committee for your patience in permitting me to provide this probably unneces-
serily lengthy statement. My purpose in doing so was to establish for the record
not only the absence of culpability on my part, but the absence of culpability on
the part of the other members of the House Committee on Banking and Cur-
rency in opposing the Patman investigation, to the extent that I have any knowl-
edge of other members' actions.
I hope I have satisfied the Committee and the listening, viewing, and reading
audience that what Mr. Dean has concluded was causally related action by the
majority of our Committee to what he was doing at the White House, has no
basis in fact and should not be so presumed. If opposition to action proposed by
one's colleagues. when that opposition is based on principle and proper political
motivation, cannot be voiced without such opposition being interpreted as culpa-
ble conduct and obstruction of justice, then we certainly have reached a sorry
state of affairs in our political and legislative system.
If I have done nothing else. I trust that I have at least somewhat dispelled
the "guilt by association" implicit in Mr. Dean's testimony by his linking of the
House Banking and Currency Committee action with the whole gamut of culpa-
ble conduct about which he has testified.
I will be glad to answer any questions the members of the Committee might
care to pose.
Thank you.
Senator BYRD Mr. Ford. you undoubtedlv would recall any conver-
sation you might have had during that period of Angust-October with
the President, with Mr. Haldeman. Mr. Ehrlichman, Mr. Dean. or any-
w
FORD
GERALD
135
.ne at the White House, in connection with the proposed investigation
in the Patman committee. Do you recall any such conversations that
would indicate that the White House wanted you to lend your efforts,
it leader, to blocking such an investigation?
Mr. FORD I can say categorically, Senator Byrd, I never talked with
the President about it, or with Mr. Haldeman, Mr. Ehrlichman, and
Mr. Dean. I know emphatically I had no conversation with them now.
Almost daily, during my period as Republican leader in the House,
I talked with Mr. Timmons, or someone in the Legislative Liaison Of-
fice of the White House, but even in this case I do not recall any con-
versations concerning this particular matter.
Senator BYRD. Was there any discussion between you and Mr. Tim-
mons or between you and the other members of the Patman committee
or any of your colleagues in the House to the effect that the investiga-
tion would possibly be harmful to the President, harmful to his reelec-
tion chances in the then upcoming Presidential election, or to the
Republican Party generally ?
Mr. FORD. As I recall the two meetings that I attended, both of
which I called, the real issue that was discussed-and Jerry Brown's
memo or prepared statement probably expresses it better than I can-
was that Mr. Patman, the chairman of the Committee on Banking and
Currency in the House, was going about the matter in the wrong way.
And as I recall, statements were made he was going on a fishing
expedition.
Now, the members on our side of the aisles in that committee were
concerned about the procedure and the dangers that that procedure
might lead to a precedent. I think, in all honesty, that was the basic
thrust of the action of the Republicans. And I think every Republican
on the committee voted to deny that responsibility or that power to the
chairman. And I think they were joined in that vote by five Democrats,
as I recall. So a majority of the committee turned down the authority.
Senator BYRD. But as I understand you, any efforts that you may
have contributed toward the stifling or impeding or blocking of such
investigation by the Patman committee were not born of your feeling,
or at least your feelings as expressed to anyone, that such an investiga-
tion would be harmful to the President, harmful to his chances of
reelection, or harmful to your party
Mr. FORD. The answer is no, Senator Byrd.
Senator BYRD. Now, Mr. Ford, as you know, the Attorney General
of the United States wears two hats. He is the chief law enforcement
officer of the United States and, at the same time, he is the chief po-
litical adviser to the administration, regardless of whatever adminis-
tration may be in power, whether it be a Democratic administration or
Republican administration. Do you believe that the Attorney General
should participate in partisan political activity such as the congres-
sional elections of 1974, or do you think he should stay in a bipartisan
stance such as that traditionally taken, let us SEF. by the Secretary of
State?
Mr. FORD. Certainly the Secretary of State and the Secretary of
Defense should refrain from partisan political activity. The Attorner
General does not have quite the same responsibilities as the two previ-
ously mentioned, but I do believe that he should certainly be circum-
spect, because as the principal law enforcing officer of the Government
:
FORD
GERALD
LIGRARY
Nomination of Gerald R. Ford of Michigan to be Vice President
of the United States -- Report of the Committee on Rules and
Administration - November 23 1973/
90
DELAY IN CALLING UP HOUSE CONFERENCE REPORT ON 1972
FEDERAL ELECTION DISCLOSURE LAW
The CHAIRMAN. The effective date of the 1972 Federal election disclosure law
was delayed some 5 weeks in the House, from December 14, 1971, to January
1972, because of the failure to call up a conference report for final House action.
An enormous fundraising drive was conducted by Maurice Stans during the
5-week period prior to the effective date of the law. He raised, reportedly, more
than $11 million for President Nixon during this period. The Stans drive was
based on the premise that contributions should be made at that time by all
donors who wanted to keep their contributions secret from public scrutiny. Were
you ever approached by anyone from the White House, the Nixon Campaign
Committee, or the executive branch concerning the issue of delaying final passage
of this legislation by the House?
Mr. FORD. To my best recollection, Mr. Chairman, nobody contacted me from
any of those areas that you mentioned.
The CHAIRMAN. Did you ever discuss the issue of delaying that legislation
with any Members of Congress or with anyone else?
Mr. FORD. Well, naturally, in the job that I had, I had to know what was
coming up, what was to be programed at any one time on the floor of the House.
I do not now, nor did I then control the programing of legislation. That is
the responsibility of the majority party. I may have asked if it was coming
up. I may have made some comment, but in any case I was not the person who
would make the final decision.
BLOCKING INVESTIGATION BY HOUSE BANKING AND CURRENCY
COMMITTEE OF WATERGATE BREAK-IN
Mr. Patman, Chairman of the House Banking and Currency Com-
mittee tried to go into the captioned matter prior to the election last
November. The Republican members of the Committee opposed such
action. Thus it is appropriate to know what part Mr. Ford played in
blocking the investigation at that time.
The record shows his answers to questions propounded.
Senator BYRD. Representative Ford, will you relate to the Committee your
role, if any, in the blocking of an investigation by House Banking and Currency
Committee into the Watèrgate break-in as proposed by Chairman Wright Patman
in October of 1968?
Mr. FORD. Senator Byrd. I do not have the full details here, but I can outline,
give you the salient points.
Chairman Patman had proposed sometime in October of 1972 that his Com-
mittee, the Committee on Banking and Currency in the House, undertake an
investigation of certain American banks in trading or handling accounts between
an American bank and a foreign bank. And that the Senator-Chairman Patman
wanted subpoena authority to carry out this investigation.
A number of members of that Committee 02 the Republican side and several
on the Democratic side were opposed to giving that authority to Mr. Patman
A number of our Republicans on that Committee came to me and said, "Jerry,
we think you ought to call a meeting so that we on our side of the aisles could
bring the leadership up to date, and perhaps the leadership would give some
counsel to the Republican members of the Committee OR Banking and Currency."
So my position, as the Republican leader of the Honse, st his request, called
a meeting. We met with the Republican members of that Committee on one or
two occasions. They brought us up to date
We talked about what the policy ought to 22" = the Committee, but there was
no Republican party decision made.
The action taken by the Republicans pins. the fire Democrats was, I think,
to deny Chairman Patman that power of subpoena.
Senator BYBO. You may be aware John Dear restified to the Senate Watergate
Committee on June 25 of this year, that Enter Republican leaders "acted at the
request of the White House to block that investigation"
Were you in contact with anyone at the White House during the period of
August through October 1972 concerning the Patman Committee's possible in-
vestigation of the Watergate break-in?
x
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
91
Mr. FORD. Not to my best recollection.
The best and, I think, the most authoritative answer to this question is one
that Representative Jerry Brown of the Third District of Michigan submitted to
the Ervin Committee.
Congressman Brown was very much involved as a member of the Committee
on Banking and Currency, and his name was much more closely identified with
this problem than mine.
As a result, he prepared the very detailed statements which I understood were
put in the record of the Ervin Committee.
Senator BYRD. Mr. Ford, you undoubtedly may recall now any conversation
you might have had during the period of August-October with the President, with
Mr. Haldeman, Mr. Ehrlichman, Mr. Dean, or anyone at the White House, in
connection with the proposed investigation by the Patman Committee.
Do you recall any such conversations that would indicate that the White House
wanted you to lend your efforts as a leader to cloaking such an investigation?
Mr. FORD. I can say categorically, Senator Byrd, I never talked with the Presi-
dent about it, Mr. Haldeman, Mr. Ehrlichman, and Mr. Dean.
I know emphatically I had no conversation with them now.
Almost daily, during my period as Republican leader in the House, I talked
with Mr. Timmons, or someone in the Legislative Liaison Office of the White
House, but even in this case I do not recall any conversations concerning this
particular matter.
Senator BYRD. Was there any discussion between you, Mr. Timmons, or between
you and the other members of the Committee or any of your colleagues in the
House to the effect that the investigation would possibly be harmful to the
President, harmful to his re-election chances in the then upcoming Presidential
election, or to the Republican party generally?
Mr. FORD. As I recall the two meetings that I attended, both of which I called,
the real issue that was discussed, and Jerry Brown's memo or prepared statement
probably expresses it better than I can, was that Mr. Patman, the Chairman of
the Committee on Banking and Currency in the House, was going about the matter
in the wrong way. And as I recall, statements were made he was going on a fishing
expedition.
Now, the members on our side of the aisle in that Committee were concerned
about the procedure and the dangers that that procedure might lead to as a
precedent.
I think, in all honesty, that was the basic thrust of the action of the Repub-
licans. And I think every Republican on the Committee voted to deny that respon-
sibility or that power to the Chairman. And I think he was joined in favor by
five Democrats, as I recall.
So the majority turned down the authority.
Senator BYRD. But as I understand you, there was no-as I understand you,
any efforts that you may have contributed towards the stifling or the impeding or
the blocking of such investigation by the Patman Committee was not born of
your feeling, or at least your feelings as were expressed to anyone, your feeling
that such an investigation would be harmful to the President and harmful to his
chances of re-election or harmful to your party or harmful to his re-election?
Mr. FORD. The answer is no, Senator Byrd.
INFLATION
Senator PELL. Notwithstanding the fact that this administration has been
beset by many troubles, I think there is one national domestic problem that is
probably of more concern to everyone today than any other problem, and that
is the question of inflation.
I was wondering what you saw as your contribution toward ending this
tendency toward inflation?
Mr. FORD. I agree the greatest domestic problem The have today is inflation. I
think there are four ways you can go about trying to remedy it.
First, you have to identify where the major areas of inflation are.
No. 1 is food. No. 2 is petroleum.
Other than those two areas. I think we have made a reasonably good battle
with considerable success against inflation, but food and petroleum are serious-
The Congress asked that the President approve an agricultural bill aimed at
increasing supply. I think this is good legislation. I believe it will help alleviate
some of the problems as to the supply of food, and that would mean a holding of
the line, hopefully a reduction in the cost of food.
2
FORD
BERALD
LIBRARY
Nomination of Gerald R. Ford to be the Vice President of the U.S.
Hearings before the Committee on the' Judiciary,
House of Representatives, November 1973
156
Mr. EDWARDS. In hindsight, do you think your decision was correct?
Mr. Ford. Well, it is somewhat bolstered by legal scholars. There has
been no definitive decision. I think I could produce as many scholars
who believe as I do as others might produce for their viewpoint. So I
think it is an unresolved matter where there is an honest difference of
opinion.
Mr. EDWARDS. Had you discussed the matter previously with the
Více President before he came to the Speaker's?
Mr. FORD. I had on two occasions. as I recollect, at his request, not
to just discuss his possibly submitting his letter to the Speaker, but to
Jet him give me and one other Member of the House an opportunity
to hear his side of the story, which he told both of us on some two
occasions. At the time, in both of those instances, he inferred in the
first and talked more affirmatively in the second that he might come
up and see the Speaker with this letter requesting action. I did not know
however. the day that he did it until I understood he was in the Speaker's office,
Mr. EDWARDS. Did he discuss with you the rather large extent of his
criminal involvement before. in these previous discussions, in these
discussions before you met in the Speaker's office?
Mr. Ford. He discussed with me and one of my colleagues the allega-
tions that were alleged, not the full extent of them, and his willingness
to take an oath that they were untrue.
Mr. EDWARDS. Did he discuss his plan to submit the matter to the
House of Representatives with the President?
Mr. FORD. With the President?
Mr. EDWARDS. With the President.
Mr. FORD. I am not familiar one way or another with that.
Mr. EDWARDS. He did not tell you at these previous meetings whether
or not he had discussed the matter with the President?
Mr. FORD. He did not.
Chairman RODINO. Your time has expired.
Ms. Holtzman?
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Thank you. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Ford, it is very late in the day and you have been patient after
a long day, 2 days really of grilling, and I have a few questions to
ask of you at this point.
The first regards a report in October 1972 by the staff of the House
Banking and Currency Committee which uncovered a number of
serious allegations regarding the reelection campaign of President
Nixon, including information that large amounts of campaign con-
tributions had been traced to one or more of the Watergate suspects.
about a secret Republican fund of at least $350,000 available that was
being used for intelligence-gathering purposes, that a Mexican bank
had been used to launder large amounts of campaign funds, that
a Federal bank charter had been granted to a large Nixon campaign
donor in unusual haste, and that top officials in the Presidential cam-
paign had ordered the bugging of Democrats National Headquarters
as well as the surveillance of bank accounts of Democratic Congress-
men and officials.
According to your testimont in the Senate, I understand that you
as a Republican leader played a role in the stopping of the investign-
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
157
tion plan in connection with the report by the Banking and Currency
Committee investigation. This is not my question, Mr. Ford; let me
finish.
Now, I understand also from your testimony that although you
met with Mr. Timmons of the White House virtually every day,
you did not discuss with him these matters of the allegations in the
Banking and Currency staff report and you did not discuss the
White House role or White House interest in stopping the investiga-
tion by the Banking and Currency Committee; is that correct?
Mr. FORD. Well, fust I should make one correction. I never testified
before the Ervin committee.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. No, no, I mean before the Senate Rules Committee,
I said before the Senate.
Mr. FORD. Oh, I thought you inferred Senator Ervin's committee.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. I set forth a story there and I have subsequently
included in the testimony over there the detailed statement that our
colleague, Mr. Brown, submitted to the Ervin committee involving
the whole matter.
Mr. Form. Now, I said over there that-and by over there I mean the
Senate committee-that I did not discuss the action that I took, which
was to call two Republican meetings of members of the Banking and
Currency Committee with Mr. Timmons or anybody else.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. I understand. What I wanted to ask you was. did
you discuss with Mr. Timmons or with anybody else at the White
House whether or not the allegations made by the Banking and Cur-
rency staff had any basis in fact or not.
Did you discuss with them, let's say up to the period of November 1?
Mr. FORD. I do not remember discussing those allegations with any-
body on the White House staff in 1972.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. OK.
Well, my question then is really-it goes on the action that you
took investigation. with respect to that proposed Banking and Currency Committee
In a letter, as I understand it, reported in the press on November 1,
1972, you called the committee staff report the worst form of last-
minute smear tactics, and I am concerned that this was done without
2
an apparent attempt to verify with the White House people the charges
that had been made by that committee.
Mr. Ford. Well, my release in that regard was predicated on the
information that was given to me by the members on our side of the
aisle of the Committee on Banking and Currency.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Well, as I understand it then, these committee
meetings-and I read Mr. Brown's. Congressman Brown's statement-
the problem that they felt with the Patman-proposed investigation
leader, attended these sessions.
was that it was going to be a fishing expedition, and you. as minority
3
Did you ever inform them one way or the other that you had no
information charges? one way or another as to the truth or falsity of these
Mr. FORD. I was asked by several members on our side of the aisle
on that committee to call the committee together. That was and is a
responsibility, as the Republican leader in the House, to get groups
like that together when they have a problem. I did it. I presided.
FORD
GERALD
LISRARY
158
They discussed the position that they as a group ought to take in
those hearings or in those committee meetings, and in the course of
the discussions at those several meetings, comments were made I.V
various members as to the information they thought might be avail-
able. and they thought that Mr. Patman was going on a fishing
expedition. and they had beliefs they thought were sound, and, them-
fore. decided to rote to postpone any action.
I think all the Republicans voted one way with the help of five
Democrats.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. I understand that but I, as I said, was concerned
and still am concerned that statements were made in an attempt to
block that committee investigation, and some of the charges out of
which it arose have subsequently turned out to be true, without real
4
investigation it seems by anyone as to whether or not those charges
had any basis in fact.
Mr. Ford. Well, I think what disturbed a number of members was
that Patman committee, which is the Committee on Banking and
Currency, has limited jurisdiction. It does not have the broad juris-
diction of the Ervin committee in the Senate that can cut across
jurisdictional lines between one standing committee and another. The
Subcommittee on Banking and Currency has rather arbitrary juris-
dictional limits and some of the things that were included in, as I rec-
ollect, in Mr. Patman's prospective investigation, and some of the
things that subsequently turned up in the Ervin committee were well
beyond the jurisdictional limits of Mr. Patman's Committee on Bank-
ing and Currency.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. But I take it that the laundering, the use of inter-
national banks, which still appears to turn out to be the case, for
5
the use of illegal campaign funds, probably did fall within the juris-
diction of that committee.
Mr. FORD. Yes, I gather that particular item did, and I would not
argue that but some of the other items were, I think a little beyond
the Banking and Currency Committee jurisdiction.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. That might be.
I would like to turn to another area. I am sure I am not going to
have time to finish it, but I feel it is importance simply to dispel any
remaining cloud that might arise at a future time.
I must say that I myself have reviewed the very intensive financial
investigation which has been made both by the IRS people and by the
committee staff, and I must say that I personally, and I am sure many
other people, are relieved that the stress thus far, and it has been
virtually complete, have shown that you personally have not profited
from your public trust, aside, of course, from your salary.
Mr. FORD. Thank you.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. And your honorariums. But πe do live in a time
of enormous public distrust of various political people and in view of
the charges that have been surrounding the White House itself with
respect to campaign contributions and alleged favors done in response
to those campaign contributions, I would like to raise some instances
that have come to our attention which do not reflect any improper
conduct on your part, but I would like to give you the opportunity
under oath to dispel any possible impropriety at this time SO that
nobody can say that we, as a committee, did not review this area and
you were not given an opportunity to comment on it.
LIBRARY GERALD FORD
706
Mr. FORD. I probably would have given it to my then administrative
assistant, Mr. Meyer, and he would have communicated with Mr. Visit
or Mr. Morton.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Well, I would like to draw your attention again to
another letter that was contained in the-files transmitted to me he
Wednesday by Mr. Becker, in which you are writing again to Mr. Ger-
don and it is dated March 21, 1972, and in the second paragraph you
bottom: say-this is a letter apparently signed by you, has your name at the
I must also thank you for your generous check made out to the D.C. Committee
to Re-elect Gerry Ford. I am turning this check over to the Chairman of this
Committee and did want you to know my personal gratitude.
Does this letter in anyway refresh your recollection as to whether
the chairman of that committee, Mr. Mark, might have kept records 35
to campaign contributions?
Mr. FORD. That was 3 thank you letter to Mr. Gordon.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Right.
Mr. FORD. As I indicated 2 moment ago, Mr. Gordon was a very long
and dear friend of mine. He apparently sent me or my office a check
and I transmitted it to Mr. Mark.
This does not refresh my memory as to the procedure that Mr. Mark
or Mr. Morton used. That was something that was internal as far as
they were concerned.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Does this letter in anyway refresh your recollection
as to the amount of the contribution made by Mr. Gordon ?
Mr. FORD. I am sorry.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Do you recall at this time the amount of the con-
tribution made by Mr. Gordon to the District of Columbia Committee!
Mr. FORD. I do not recall precisely, but it would be a fair guess that
it would be about $500.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Thank you. I notice on top of the letter a notation
"campaign." Does that refer to any file called "campaign?
Mr. Ford. It is not in my handwriting. I assume that is a notation
-for the filing setup, and presumably this was a letter in that file that
was given on your request.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Well, if there is such a file marked "campaign" from
which this came, I wonder if you would be kind enough to have your
staff review it and allow our staff to examine it. Perhaps it contains
other indications of campaign contributions to the District of Columbia
Committee in 1972.
Mr. FORD. I will be very glad to, and I think that is how we got these
other letters.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. That mav be. Thank you, Mr. Ford, in that respect.
I also wanted to clarify the record with respect to my questions on
the Banking and Currencv Committee investigation. I gather it was
your testimony that you did not have any conversation with Mr. Tim-
mons or anybody else in the 11 nite House regarding either of the
following: One, an intention on the part of the White House to squelch
the Banking and Currency Committee investigation, and second, the
6
truth or falsity of any of the allegations made.
My question is, we talked about. prior to November 1, 1972, and that
was your testimony, that you dia not have such conversations. I would
just like to clarify the date. Would that go back to the time at which
FORD is LIBRARY
707
the Banking and Currency Committee worked, became public around
toward the latter part of August 1972?
Mr. FORD. I believe so. As I recall my testimony, I said I never called
Mr. Timmons on this matter specifically. I also said in the course of
our discussions about many legislative matters we might have discussed
very generally the situation there, but I never called him nor he called
me concerning these particular problems in the Committee on Banking
and Currency.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Well, I did not mean to misconstrue your testimony.
I thought that that was the gist of it.
But getting back to around the end of August deadline, the only
conversation you might have had are the ones you just referred to now?
Mr. FORD. That is my best recollection.
Ms. HOLTZMAN Can you recall now what conversations you had with
Mr. Timmons, even though they may have occurred in the context of
another phonecall or about another subject?
Mr. FORD He may have asked me the status of, one, any legislation
before the committee; and two, my appraisal of what the committee
might do. But it would not go into him urging me to do something with
our members of the committee or any Democrats on the committee or
118
8
my saying I had done this, because they are not involved in it, and my
only role was getting our members and our side together.
Ms. HOLTZMAN. Did he express to you at any time, let us say toward
the end of August 1973, to the beginning of November, any concern
9
he might have had about the status of the Banking and Currency
Committee investigation?
Mr. FORD. That is a long time ago, and the details of that kind of a
conversation I could not actually relate to you. Whenever we talked
1110
about that matter it was in general terms, not as to action requested by
them or action taken by me.
Chairman RODINO. The time of the gentlelady has expired.
All requests for time have expired.
Mr. CONYERS. 1 question is outstanding. I was granted 10 minutes.
Chairman RODINO. The gentleman was asked as to what time, and
the gentleman asked for 10 minutes and that 10 minutes has expired,
and other members yielded to the gentleman. Now, is the gentleman
making any further request for time?
Mr. CONYERS. I have several questions, Mr. Chairman, that I would
like to get on the record, and I would ask for a sufficient amount of
time to develop them.
Chairman RoDINo. What is a sufficient amount of time?
Mr. CONTERS. Five minutes. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman RODINO. Five minutes. The gentleman is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mr. CONYERS. I thank the Chair.
Mr. Ford, is it true that you helned Mr. Kellogg in his attempt to
obtain an ambassadorship?
Mr. FORD. I was asked to endorse an ambassadorship that Mr. Kel-
logg wanted.
Mr. CONYERS. Right. Did he not make 2 substantial contribution to
the Republican National Committee?
Mr. Form. It is my understanding that Mr. Kellogg. prior to the
is
FORD
election of 196S or in 1968. made a contribution of $30,000 to the New
York State Republican campaign fund. Sometime in 1969, virtually
GERALD
LIBRARY
Confirmation of Gerald R. Ford as Vice President
of the United States
DISSENTING VIEWS OF MS. ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN
I cannot in good conscience recommend that this House confirm
Gerald R. Ford as Vice President of the United States. First, the
Judiciary Committee's investigation remains incomplete in two criti-
cal respects: the constitutionality of Mr. Ford's taking office and cer-
tain unresolved conflicts in his testimony. Second, despite Mr. Ford's
personal affability and the rectitude of his personal finances, he does
not meet the high standards which, under the 25th Amendment, we
are bound to apply to his nomination.
The Constitutional Impediment
Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution prohibits a Representative,
during his term, from appointment to "any civil Office under the Au-
thority of the United States
the emoluments whereof shall have
been increased during such time." In this term Congress has passed
Public Law 93-136, which increased the civil service retirement bene-
fits for the Vice President. There is little question that this increased
benefit constitutes an "emolument."
Unfortunately, this Committee did not adequately explore whether
this emolument is a bar to Mr. Ford's assuming office when confirmed.
No witnesses were heard on this question, and no legal memoranda
were available to the Committee when it disposed of this question.
Yet, the question is a serious one. The constitutional debates and the
policy of the emoluments clause would indicate that it applies to an
appointed vice president. I have attached an analysis prepared by a
Professor at the Yale Law School indicating that the confirmation of
Gerald Ford as Vice President might well run afoul of Article I,
Section 6.
This House has an obligation to assure that whoever is confirmed
does not serve under a constitutional cloud. At this stage of the pro-
ceedings no such assurance can be given. Clearly, if remedial legisla-
tion is needed to perfect the confirmation, it ought to be enacted now.
The Unresolved Conflicts in Mr. Ford's Testimony
A second and equally important unresolved problem concerns Mr.
Ford's statements about his role in the effort, which some have alleged
was initiated and coordinated by the White House, to halt the investi-
gation into certain aspects of the Watergate affair by the House Bank-
ing and Currency Committee in late summer and fall of 1972. In his
Senate testimony, the nominee admitted having organized two meet-
ings for Banking and Currency Committee Republicans to "discuss"
the investigation, but he firmly denied acting to halt the investigation
at the behest of the White House.
Indeed, Mr. Ford broadly and explicitly denied having discussed
the matter of the investigation with any White House official during
the entire period that the proposed investigation was an issue in the
House. See page 284 of typed Senate Transcript.)
(65)
66
On the last day of his testimony before the House, however, Mr. Ford
for the first time made sworn statements which indicated that he had
indeed discussed the matter of the Patman investigation with Mr.
Timmons, a White House liaison officer. (See pages 706-707 of House
typed transcript.)
Mr. Ford's House testimony therefore calls into question his testi-
mony before the Senate. Because this testimony came at the very end
of the hearings, it was impossible to pursue further the nature and
content of the "general" discussions Mr. Ford then recalled, and to
resolve the contradiction with earlier testimony. To do so before the
nominee is confirmed is imperative, because at a time when the Ameri-
can people are clamoring for absolute candor from their national lead-
ers, the House would do a disservice both to them and to the nominee
by leaving unresolved in the record a disturbing and serious contra-
diction about a matter bearing directly on Mr. Ford's fitness for the
Vice Presidency.
I am therefore constrained to recommend that action on the con-
firmation be postponed until this problem and the constitutional ques-
tions are answered.
Obligations under the 25th Amendment
By requiring Congress to act as the surrogate of the American peo-
ple, the 25th Amendment places a heavy burden on the Members of
this House. Under any circumstances, we must scrutinize a nominee
for Vice President in light of his fitness for the Presidency. In these
times, however, when the nation is enfeebled by the public's loss of
faith in its leaders, and when, thus enfeebled, we are nearly over-
whelmed by the most serious conjunction of domestic and foreign pol-
icy problems we have faced in many years, we must insist that the
person we confirm as Vice President can, if he becomes President, re-
capture public confidence and give us honest, compassionate, imagina-
tive and outstanding leadership.
Mr. Ford does not meet this test.
The Secret Bombing of Cambodia
Unfortunately, he cannot claim truly high marks for candor. Know-
ing full well that Mr. Nixon had lied to the American people about the
secret bombing of Cambodia, Mr. Ford nonetheless gave his personal
assurance on the floor of the House in 1970 that Mr. Nixon had never
deceived the Congress or the public. Should we accept as a potential
President a man who shrugs off as "political license" his own failure
to be candid with his colleagues and the public, and who affirmatively
defends, as Mr. Ford did during our hearings, the right of a President
to lie?
The Banking and Currency Committee Investigation
The nominee's judgment also comes into question when we examine
his leadership role in killing the House Banking Committee's Water-
FORD
gate investigation before the 1972 presidential election. The Commit-
tee's staff had uncovered evidence that illegal campaign funds had been
used to finance the Watergate break-in and that high White House of-
ficials were implicated in the affair. Mr. Ford admits that he helped
LIBRARY
block the investigation.
of
TODAY SHOW
JOHN DEAN INTERVIEW
TOM BROKAW: If ever there was a contemporary author in
America, who needs no introduction, it is John Dean who was counsel
to President Nixon, a man who served him during the Watergate
coverup, who subsequently testified against him, and in fact,
served time in prison, as a result of his own role in Watergate.
He is now the author of a book called "Blind Ambition",
a book about the Watergate coverup, about the atmosphere in
the White House at the time.
Mr. Dean is with us here on "Today" this morning, with
Carl Stern, NBC News Correspondent, who covers the Justice Department
for us on a regular basis, and còvered, gave much of his life,
in fact to the coverage of Watergate.
Mr. Dean, first of all, there are some new developments
in this book. You describe how President Nixon first raised
the possibility of blocking the initial Congressional investi-
gation, or initial Congressional hearings into Watergate, hearings
that Congressman Wright Patman of Texas wanted to call, and
he. raises the possibility of using Jerry Ford, who was then
House Minority Leader, to block those hearings.
Did the White House think of Gerald Ford as a stooge?
JOHN DEAN: I don't think a stooge is the right word.
They certainly thought of Jerry Ford as somebody who would do
their bidding, when it needed to be done; and with the Patman R.
FOND
GERALD
[2]
hearings, it was something that concerned all of us at that
stage of the coverup very much, and as you will recall from the
book, the President says that he wants Ford to get in, and do
his part to block those very untimely hearings at the time.
BROKAW: One of the ways which you had hoped to put pressure
on Patman was to detail some questionable campaign contributions
that he may have received, and when you had a discussion about
this with Bill Timmons, who was then heading up the Congressional
liaison from the White House, he said: That's a sensitive point,
because Ford. may have some problems in that area as well.
What were the problems that Gerald Ford may have had,
in campaign contributions?
DEAN: Bill did not elaborate at the time. He knew that
I had sent one of the lawyers from the re-election committee
to check the records of the members of the Patman committee;
and I had those, in fact the day I was in the office, talking
with Bill about this; and he said that, John, he said, I don't
think this is a very good idea, because some of our guys, and
Jerry, may have some problems along this line; so he said don't
raise it; and I agreed.
CARL STERN: Perhaps the most disturbing matter raised,
though, in your discussion in the book about Gerald Ford, and
the efforts made to derall the Patman hearings in October of
1972 is the thought that Mr. Ford did have very intimate
R. FORD
GERALD
[3]
contact with White House staff people, in planning precisely
how to do this. Now, Mr. Ford testified during his own confirmation
hearings that he didn't have any such contact, or at least,
he didn't recall any. Did Mr. Ford tell the truth about that?
DEAN: Well, I don't recall, Carl, precisely what Mr.
Ford said at the time of his confirmation hearings to become
Vice President. All I'm recalling are the facts as I remember
them, and I remember very clearly that Bill Timmons told me
on a number of occasions how he was working with Mr. Ford, and
Mr. Ford was doing his part, after the White House started that
initiative.
STERN: Timmons has denied having had any contact with
Ford. Who had contact with Ford?
DEAN: Well, I don't necessary say it was Timmons himself
that was having the contact. But somebody on his staff--
STERN: Who?
DEAN: --and it was Dick Cook, the man who had once worked
with the Patman Committee, before he had later joined the White
House--with the individuals.
STERN: How do you know that?
DEAN: Well, I talked to Dick about it. It came up in
Presidential conversation that Dick was a man who had been working
on it. Bill Timmons, as you'll recall at the time was on the
FORD
witness list as one who would be called before the Patman
Committee.
So Bill was very sensitive about his own involvement in trying
,MBRARY
to block the hearings. Dick Cook was the man who did the
[4]
legwork, and dealt with Mr. Ford, and the other members of the
Committee.
STERN:: Did he report back as to any of his conversations
with Gerald Ford?
DEAN: To me, or to the White--
STERN: To any meeting that you were present at?
DEAN: Well, of course. Yes.
STERN: Give me an example.
DEAN: Well, I can recall Dick coming back, and telling,
for example, how Jerry was going to call a meeting of the minority
members in Les Aaron's office, off the House floor, and really
tell them what they should do on, the day of the vote, and how
they should hold together, and things of this nature.
STERN: And what should they do? They should block those
hearings from going forward?
DEAN: That's correct.
BROKAW: Well, now, let me read you, if I may, Tom, what
the transcript of the Ford confirmation hearings said. I won't
read the whole thing. But the question is from Senator Byrd.
"Were you in contact with anyone at the White House during
the period of August to October, 1972, concerning 'the Patman
Committee's possible investigation of the Watergate break-in?
Answer, Mr. Ford: Not to my best recollection."
Do you think Mr. Ford would have recalled that? Is that
likely, that he wouldn't have recalled it?
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
[5]
DEAN: I would be surprised, if he didn't recall it. He
knew Dick Cook from a number of years. He knew Dick Cook worked
at the White House. I would be very surprised, if he didn't
know the White House's interest, in not having those hearings
go forward.
STERN: So, do you believe that Mr. Ford did not tell
the truth, when he said to this committee under oath, that he
did not recall any such contact?
DEAN: I believe not recollecting is a very safe answer
for him.
STERN: My question is: Do you believe he lied?
DEAN: I don't want to say that. 1'11 stand on the facts,
as I know them.
BROKAW: And what are the facts, as you know them, about
the extent of Gerald Ford's knowledge of what had happened during
Watergate? Did he perceive this as only a political problem,
probably embarrassing to the White House, or did he understand
the real nature of what was going on, what you were attempting
to do?
DEAN: Well, I don't think that anybody had briefed Mr.
Ford, or Mr. Ford had any intimate knowledge as to what was
going on. I think it was very clear that the White House didn't
want this investigation going on, just before an election. I
think that anybody who was in Washington during the days of
Watergate and the cover-up didn't need much to know that
FORD & LIBRARD CERALD
[6]
something wrong had gone on, and there were efforts to keep
it quiet, but I don't know of any specific briefings that Mr.
Ford was given; certainly I didn't give him any, nor do I know
of Timmons, or Cook, or anybody else giving him any.
BROKAW: This business about Gerald Ford possibly having
some problems in the campaign contribution area has now received
some attention. It's well known as well that the Special Prosecutor
has been looking into campaign contribution areas in President
Ford's political background. Has anyone from the Special Prosecutor's
Office talked to you?
DEAN: No. They have not:
BROKAW: Have you volunteered any information to them?
DEAN: No. I have not.
BROKAW: of any kind.
STERN: If Mr. Ford did not tell the truth in this matter,
concerning the contact with the White House, and I don't want
to harp on that, but it's an awfully important point. It's
perhaps the most important point that emerged from the confirmation
proceedings from Mr. Ford. If he didn't tell the whole truth
on that occasion, that's a pretty big matter.
DEAN: Yes, indeed, it is.
STERN: So I want you to understand what you're saying
to us here. It's important.
in my book, just as the way they happened, the way I recall
DEAN: Well, I'm reporting the facts, and they're reported GERATO FORD
very vividly them happening, during those days.
[7]
STERN: Mr. Ford was about the last of the major Republican
figures to stick with Mr. Nixon in 1974. Why do you think that
was so?
I mean, two weeks before the resignation, he was still
saying Mr. Nixon was Innocent, will be proved so.
DEAN: Well, he was then Vice President, as you recall,
and it seems that was a rather natural thing for a man's Vice
President to do, would be to stay with his President; and I
would think that would be more a political explanation that
anything as to involvement, or intimate knowledge, or anything
of that nature, Carl.
BROKAW: Can you think of any other role that Gerald Ford
may have played in behalf of the White House, during the course
of Watergate, apart from this attempt to block the Wright Patman
Investigation?
DEAN: Not to my knowledge. It's possible that came up
in leadership meetings, when Mr. Ford was still the minority
leader in the House, and was asked questions about what's the
impact of the politics of Watergate having on the Congress,
and things of that nature. But specific roles? This was one
that came up, and as I report in the book, and is on a tape.
The President wanted Mr. Ford to get involved, and to help to
FORD
stop those hearings.
BROKAW: And there was no question that somebody did make
LIBRARY
contact with him, and that he did subsequently have meetings
in an effort to block the Patman hearing?
[8]
DEAN: There's no question in my mind, Tom.
BROKAW: John Dean, author of a new book called "Blind
Ambition."
Thank you very much.
*
#
*
END OF FIRST INTERVIEW DAY
BROKAW: John Dean, one of the principal figures in Watergate,
the man who testified against Richard Nixon, after serving him
as counsel, and subsequently served time himself, now the author
of a book called "Blind Ambition".
We're here on "Today" this morning with Carl Stern and
Mr. Dean to talk about some of his reflections on the time that
he served, not in prison, SO much as he served in the White
House as counsel to the President.
Do you think that had there not been a John Dean, had
you not come forward, in the fashion that you subsequently were
forced to come forward, that the country would have found out
about Watergate in any event?
DEAN: Tom, I don't really know. It's a tough question.
It's a, you know, 'what if' question, and it's hard to say.
I think that much might have come out in some time. I'm not
sure it would have come out, as quickly as it did, maybe not
as completely, as it did. But I really can't, I can't give
you a good, crystal ball answer on that one.
STERN: In the book, even for those who followed Watergage
closely, there are things in here that I never knew before
DEPALO LIBRARY
Some items in this folder were not digitized because it contains copyrighted
materials. Please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library for access to
these materials.
Containment
139
they're going to get it, right?" Haldeman nodded his approval, and
the President glanced at me.
"That's an exciting prospect," I remarked flatly, mustering my hos-
tility toward those who threatened the cover-up. I was trying to sound
like a vicious prize fighter and doing a poor job, but I seemed to be
pleasing the President. I was taking each apple he handed me, polish-
ing it and passing it back.
I felt the anger in the room subside. We turned to remaining prob-
lems. Congressman Wright Patman's planned hearings on the Water-
gate money transactions posed the biggest obstacle, I informed the
Containment
II
141
obtain the next batch of cash. On this note, he and Herb walked out
of my office like pallbearers. Now Kalmbach was out; LaRue was in.
Such encounters deflated my confidence, but Haldeman usually
pumped me back up. A few days after the Kalmbach ceremony, he
saw me in the hall and invited me into his office for a chat. Bob had
become very friendly and increasingly open. He had to make a few
quick calls, so I wandered around his office examining his mementos.
He had a beautiful tapestry from the China trip which I admired, but
T returned to my favorite artifacts: the three dried bullfrog car-
142
II
BLIND AMBITION
hearings. It's going to come to a head pretty soon. Patman's got to
get his committee to vote him subpoena power, and it's a close ques-
tion whether we have the votes to kill it. I've been talking to Bill
Timmons* and Stans and Petersen on this thing, and Mitchell is work-
ing on it, too. We think we can give our guys a leg to stand on by
telling them that an investigation will cause a lot of publicity that will
jeopardize the defendants' rights in the Liddy trial. But that may not
be enough. We really need to turn Patman off."
"Call Connally," said Haldeman "He
Statement By Richard K. Cook / October 12, 1976 1 6:00 p. m.
There are countless lies and only one fact in Mr. Dean's statement.
Since the original Watergate hearings, at no time has Mr. Dean or
anyone else ever hinted that I played such a role in connection with the Patman
investigation. Nor have I ever been questioned by the several Watergate
investigative Committees or the Special Prosecutor. Now in order to sell
books, he has remembered something that he has never before chosen to
recite. My family. and I deeply resent this cheap huckstering at our expense.
Specifically, the one fact that rings true is that John Dean was the
only person who ever suggested that I communicate with the then Minority
Leader of the House, Gerald Ford. Former President Nixon never did.
Haldeman never did. Ehrlichman did not. Bill Timmons never did. Despite
John Dean's repeated and frantic requests, I never spoke with Mr. Ford about
the need to deny Mr. Patman's request for subpoena power. With the gift
of his own testimony and hindsight, I now know why John Dean was so worried,
for he has admitted to being present at planning meetings that led to the
Watergate break-in.
Moreover, anyone who knew Mr. Ford and his style of leadership as
House Minority Leader would agree that such intrusion by the White House would
have been most unwelcome and shunned. Even on political issues -- which
the Patman hearings were thought to be at the time -- Mr. Ford would have
deeply resented suggestions that he assert his dominance over the
Minority Member of a standing Committee at a President's request
GERAL banking LIBRANI
- 2 -
If there is one single reason why the late Chairman Patman was denied
his subpoena authority by a bipartisan majority of his own committee it is
because John Dean lied to me in the presence of witnesses.
In August or September, 1972, when it appeared that Chairman Patman
was serious in his pursuit of the funding of the Watergate break-in, virtually
everyone in Washington thought his action was politically motivated. I shared
that opinion, but having been employed by the Banking Committee for the five
years 1964-1969, I had a high respect for his investigative staff. For that
reason, I asked two Minority staff members of the Committee to join me in
a private meeting in the Executive Office Building with John Dean and Maurice
Stans. At the outset of that one-hour meeting I asked Dean and Stans, "Is there
any substance whatsoever to Mr. Patman's charges?" Dean assured us that
there was none. He lied to me. He lied to two former colleagues of mine who
were and are universally trusted by Democrats and Republicans alike in the
Congress.
From that day forward, despite Mr. Dean's frantic pleas, I stayed
in contact with just two people, one staff man and a Republican member of the
Committee -- and then only to check on the status and schedule of the Committee's
deliberations. At the time, I had far more important legislative matters
to
attend to, as strange as that may seem today.
GERAL
LIBRARY
But there is no need to take my word for it. All the press has to do,
or the Congress for that matter, is to interrogate or seek sworn testimony
from some 40 or 50 members and staff of the House Banking and Currency
Committee. Surely, even John Dean's vicious lies and clever distortions
would be hard pressed to explain a four-year conspiracy of silence on the
- 3 -
charge Gerald Ford prevented a full investigation by the House Committee
on Banking and Currency. If that's not good enough, then we should ask the
members and staffs of the Ervin Subcommittee, together with the Rodino
and Eastland Committees, what their investigations of the Patman episode
revealed. It seems to me that should settle once and for all that Mr. Dean
has lied.
After all of that, if the public still believes John Dean over the
word of three Committees of the Congress, then he has brought off the stunt
of the century.
The key question remains: is John Dean telling the truth when he
insinuates that President Ford distorted the truth under oath before the
Judiciary Committees of the Senate and House ?
There is no question in my mind that the President told the truth.
And several score Democratic and Republican members of Congress and
staff, I am confident, would confirm this.
LIBRARY GERALD R. FORD
November 27, 1973
MEMORANDUM
To:
Peter W. Rodino, Jr., Chairman
From: Bob Trainor
Re:
Request to Reopen Ford Confirmation Hearings
I have carefully reviewed the correspondence forwarded
to you by Representative Elizabeth Holtzman requesting that
the Ford confirmation hearing be reopened to permit clafi-
fication of what she believes to be contradictory statements
uttered by Mr. Ford concerning his involvement in the Watergate
cover-up. In support of her request she references three
allegedly inconsistent statements: (1) Mr. Ford's testimony
before the Senate Rules Committee on November 5, 1973; (2)
Mr. Ford's testimony before this Committee on November 26,
1973, and; (3) an affidavit submitted to this Committee on
November 26, 1973, by Mr. William Timmons of the White House
staff.
An analysis of these three alleged inconsistent statements
discloses that, in fact, they are not inconsistent at all.
First, Ms. Holtzman cites Senator Robert Byrd's inquiry of
Mr. Ford appearing on pages 128-29 of the printed Senate hear-
ings. In pertinent part the inquiry and response are as follows:
Senator Byrd: Were you in contact with anyone
at the White House during the period of August
Through October 1972 concerning the Patman Com-
mittee's possible investigation of the Watergate
breakin?
Mr. Ford: Not to my best recollection. The best
and, I think most authoritate answer to this
question is one that Representative Jorry (sic)
Brown
submitted to the Ervin Committee.
i
FORD
(Congressman Brown's statement was then submitted
GERALD
for the record)
LIBRARY
-2-
I believe that Mr. Ford's response to Senator Byrd's
question was predicated on Mr. Ford's belief that Senator
Byrd wished to determine if any contact was made with the
White House for the specific purpose of receiving instruc-
tions or information relating to the possible Banking and
Currency Committee investigation. While Mr. Ford's answer
indicates that he could not recall any contact with the
White House for the specific purpose of receiving instruc-
tions, he expresses an awareness of Mr. Brown's contacts
with the members of the Administration during this period.
Furthermore, I believe that Ms. Holtzman's account of
Mr. Ford's testimony before the Senate is misleading in the
way in which it is presented. Ms. Hottzman recounts in the
text of her letter Mr. Ford's answer to Senator Byrd's in-
quiry in the following manner:
Mr. Ford: Not to my best recollection. (At
284.) Almost daily I talked to Mr. Timmons,
or someone in the Legislative Liaison Office
of the White House but even in this case I do
not recall any conversations concerning this
particular matter. (At 286.)
In truth, all matter appearing after the first sentence
"Not to my best recollection (At 284.)" was in response to a
second question offered by Senator Byrd appearing on pages
134-35 of the printed Senate hearings. Specifically, Senator
Byrd's question and Mr. Ford's response is as follows:
Senator Byrd: Mr. Ford, you undoubtedly would
recall any conversation you might have during
that period of August-October with the President,
with Mr. Haldeman, Mr. Ehrlichman, Mr. Dean, or
anyone at the White House, in connection with
the proposed investigation by the Patman Committee.
Do you recall any such conversations that would
indicate that the White House wanted you to lend
your efforts as a leader, to blocking such an in-
vestigation? (emphasis added)
&
FORD
Mr. Ford: I can say categorically, Senator Byrd,
I never talked with the President about it, or
GERALD
with Mr. Haldeman, Mr. Ehrlichman, Mr. Dean. I
LLERARY
know I had no conversation with them now.
Almost daily, during my period as Republican
leader in the House, I talked with Mr. Timmons, or
someone in the Legislative Liaison Office of the
White House, but even in this case I do not recall
any conversations concerning this particular matter.
-3-
It is my interpretation that Mr. Ford's answer was strictly
in response to the question of whether he had received instruc-
tions from the White House to lead the effort to block the
Patman investigation rather than, as Ms. Holzaman would have you
believe, in response to the question of whether he had ever,
under any circumstances, discussed the Patman matter with Timmons.
In light of the above, Mr. Ford's testimony before the Com-
mittee on November 26, 1973, stating that while he never contacted
the White House or Timmons specifically for the purpose of dis-
cussing the possible Banking and Currency investigation, he may
have briefly and generally mentioned the proposed investigation,
does not in any way seem inconsistent with his earlier Senate
testimony.
An examination of the affidavit submitted by Mr. Timmons
does present some question as to the total accuracy of Mr. Ford's
statements relating to the Patman investigation. On the one
hand, Ford admits that he may have generally discussed the matter
with Timmons, while Timmons categorically denies ever having com-
municated with Ford on the issue. The severity of this incon-
sistency is slight when viewed in terms of the inability of Ford
to recall specific instances where he may have spoken with Timmons
about the matter. Ford spoke in terms of his conversations with
Timmons on this issue as possible occurrences, stating "we might
have discussed very generally the situation there," and "/H/e may
have asked me thatstatus of
"
Ms. Holtzman suggests on page 3 of her letter that Mr. Timmons'
affidavit is deficient in that it covers only the period from
September 21 through October, rather than the entire period begin-
ning in August. It appears that Mr. Timmons did not intentionally
omit the month of August from his sworn statement but was asked
only to consider the "Fall" of 1972. The significance of this
one month omission is, at best, slight, since the vote taken by
the Banking and Currency Committee considering the authorization
of subpoena power did not take place until October 3, 1972. Any
concerted effort, it could be argued, to obstruct the investigation
certainly would have occurred just prior to the vote.
Of Further note is the fact that the Banking and Currency
Committee refused to authorize the subpoena power by a vote of
20 to 15. While all of the Republicans present for the vote (14)
cast their ballot in opposition to the resolution, they were
joined by six Democrata to defeat the resolution. It is apparent
FORD
therefore, that it took a bipartisan effort to defeat Mr. Reuss'
resolution. and was not purely a Republican effort.
GERALD
-4-
Ms. Holtzman refers in her letter to John Dean's testi-
mony before the Ervin Committee and urges that he be called
to testify before this Committee. John Dean, in his testimony,
never referred to Mr. Ford by name as a target of White House
pressure to obstruct the Banking and Currency investigation.
Moreover, Congressman Garry Brown submitted to the Watergate
Committee a lengthy statement detailing the Administration's
involvement in the matter. He did not indicate that Ford was
involved in any way nor was he ever called to appear before
the Committee to explain his statement.
In this regard, it is important to remember that this Com-
mittee is in receipt of a letter from Senator Ervin stating
that his Committee has uncovered no information that in any way
bears on the qualifications of Mr. Ford to be Vice President of
the United States.
FORD i LIBRARY
WASHINGTON
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
AFFIDAVIT
I, WILLIAM E. TIMMONS, being duly sworn according
to law, do hereby swear and affirm that during the Fall
of 1972 I had no communications, written or oral, with
Rep. Gerald R. Ford in regard to any proposal or
intention of the Banking and Currency Committee of
the House of Representatives to conduct an investigation
and/or hold hearings on the Watergate. break-in and
related issues.
WILLIAM E. TIMMONS
Sworn to and subscribed
before me this 26th day of
November, 1973.
My commission expires may 31,1978 31,
NOTARY PUBLIC
FORD & LIBRARY 938839
957
but that I wasn't going to suggest filing any lawsuit or taking any
action that was not well founded.
I had talked with Mitchell, Ken Parkinson, and Paul O'Brien about
the matter and Mr. Parkinson informed me that he was working on
several potential counteractions. I requested that he submit a memo-
randum to me as soon as possible because there was great interest at
the White House in a counterattack, including the interest by the
President. On September 11, 1972, Mr. Parkinson submitted his
memorandum to me and after the memorandum, I redrafted his docu-
ments for submission to Haldeman. I have submitted to the committee
copies of both Mr. Parkinson's memorandum and the memorandum
I submitted to Haldeman.
[The documents referred to were marked exhibit No. 34-19.*]
Mr. DEAN. You will note that my memorandum of September 12,
1972, to Mr. Haldeman has a "P" with a checkmark in the upper
right-hand corner, which indicates that the document was forwarded
directly to, or reviewed by, the President. I later learned that the
President was pleased and wanted a full followup on the items in the
memorandum. The markings on the memo are Mr. Haldeman's
markings.
It was also about this time, later July-early September, that I
learned during a meeting in Mitchell's office that Mr. Rhoemer Mc-
Phee was having private discussions with Judge Richey regarding
the civil suit filed by the Democrats. I believe this fact was known to
Mr. Mitchell, Mr. LaRue, Paul O'Brien, and Ken Parkinson-and
later again by McPhee-that Judge Richey was going to be helpful
whenever he could. I subsequently talked with Mr. McPhee about
this, as late as March 2 of this year, when he told me he was going to
visit the judge in the judge's rose garden over the weekend to discuss
an aspect of the case.
MEETING WITH THE PRESIDENT-SEPTEMBER 15, 1972
On September 15 the Justice Department announced the handing
down of the seven indictments by the Federal grand jury investigat-
ing the Watergate. Late that afternoon I received a call requesting
me to come to the President's Oval Office. When I arrived at the Oval
Office I found Haldeman and the President. The President asked me
to sit down. Both men appeared to be in very good spirits and my
reception was very warm and cordial. The President then told me
that Bob-referring to Haldeman-had kept him posted on my han-
dling of the Watergate case. The President told me I had done a good
job and he appreciated how difficult a task it had been and the Presi-
dent was pleased that the case had stopped with Liddy. I responded
that I could not take credit because others had done much more diffi-
cult things than I had done. As the President discussed the present
R.
FORD
status of the situation I told him that all that I had been able to do
was to contain the case and assist in keeping it out of the White House.
GERALD
I also told him that there was a long way to go before this matter
would end and that I certainly could make no assurances that the day
LIBRARY
would not come when this matter would start to unravel.
*See p. 1173.
958
Early in our conversation the President said to me that former
FBI Director Hoover had told him shortly after he had assumed office
in 1969 that his campaign had been bugged in 1968. The President
said that at some point Te should get the facts out on this and use
this to counter the problems that we were encountering.
The President asked me when the criminal case would come to trial
and would it start before the election. I told the President that I did
not know. I said that the Justice Department had held off as long as
possible the return of the indictments, but much would depend on
which judge got the case. The President said that he certainly hoped
that the case would not come to trial before the election.
The President then asked me about the civil cases that had been
filed by the Democratic National Committee and the common cause
case and about the counter suits that we had filed. I told him that the
lawyers at the reelection committee were handling these cases and that
they did not see the common cause suit as any real problem before the
election because they thought they could keep it tied up in discovery
proceedings. I then told the President that the lawyers at the reelec-
tion committee were very hopeful of slowing down the civil suit filed
by the Democratic National Committee because they had been making
ex parte contacts with the judge handling the case and the judge was
very understanding and trying to accommodate their problems. The
President was pleased to hear this and responded to the effect that,
"Well, that's helpful." I also recall explaining to the President about
the suits that the reelection committee lawyers had filed against the
Democrats as part of their counteroffensive.
There was a brief discussion about the potential hearings before the
Patman committee. The President asked me what we were doing to
deal with the hearings and I reported that Dick Cook, who had once
worked on Patman's committee staff, was working on the problem.
The President indicated that Bill Timmons should stay on top of the
hearings, that we did not need the hearings before the election.
The conversation then moved to the press coverage of the Watergate
incident and how the press was really trying to make this into a major
campaign issue. At one point in this conversation I recall the President
telling me to keep a good list of the press people giving us trouble,
because we will make life difficult for them after the election. The
conversation then turned to the use of the Internal Revenue Service
to attack our enemies. I recall telling the President that we had not
made much use of this because the White House did not have the clout
to have it done, that the Internal Revenue Service was a rather demo-
cratically oriented bureaucracy and it would be very dangerous to try
any such activities. The President seemed somewhat annoyed and said
that the Democratic administrations had used this tool well and after
the election we would get people in these agencies who would be re-
sponsive to the White House requirements.
The conversation then turned to the President's postelection plans
to replace people who were not on our team in all the agencies. It was
at this point that Haldeman, I remember, started taking notes and he
also told the President that he had been developing information on
which people should stay and which should go after the election. I
recall that several days after my meeting with the President, I was
talking to Dan Kingsley, who was in charge of developing the list for
GERALD
959
Haldeman as to people who should be removed after the election. I
told Kingsley that this matter had come up during my conversation
with the President and he said he had wondered what had put new life
into his project as he had received several calls from Higby about the
status of his project within the last few days. The meeting ended with
a conversation with the President about a book I was reading.
I left the meeting with the impression that the President was well
aware of what had been going on regarding the success of keeping the
White House out of the Watergate scandal and I also had expressed to
him my concern that I was not confident that the coverup could be
maintained indefinitely.
BLOCKING THE PATMAN COMMITTEE HEARINGS
I would next like to turn to the White House efforts to block the
Patman committee hearings. As early as mid-August 1972, the White
House learned through the congressional relations staff that an inves-
tigation was being conducted by the staff of the House Banking and
Currency Committee, under the direction of Chairman Patman, into
many aspects of the Watergate incident. The focus of the investigation
at the outset was the funding of the Watergate incident, and other
possible illegal funding that may have involved banking violations.
The White House concern was twofold: First, the hearings would
have resulted in more adverse preelection publicity regarding the
Watergate, and second, they just might stumble into something that
would start unraveling the coverup.
The initial dealings with the Patman committee and the reelection
committee were handled by Mr. Stans and Mr. Parkinson. However,
as the Patman committee proceeded. Stans called for assistance from
the White House. I was aware of the fact that the Patman investi-
gators had had numerous conversations with Parkinson and the inves-
tigators themselves came to the Republican National Convention to
interview Stans on August 25, 1972. Upon Mr. Stans' return from the
Republican Convention he met with the investigative staff of the Pat-
man committee, which I believe occurred on August 30. He was
accompanied at both these interviews by Mr. Parkinson.
At some point in time during these investigations Mr. Parkinson
was put in touch with Congressman Garry Brown. who was a member
of the Banking and Currency Committee. To the best of my recollec-
tion, this may have resulted from discussions between members of the
White House congressional relations staff with the Republican mem-
bers of the Banking and Currency Committee to determine who would
be most helpful on the committee, and Brown indicated his willing-
ness to assist.
On September 8, Congressman Brown sent a letter to the Attorney
General regarding the forthcoming appearance of Secretary Stans and
others before the Patman committee. I have submitted to the com-
mittee a copy of this letter, which was. in fact. drafted by Mr. Parkin-
son for Congressman Brown.
[The letter was marked exhibit No. 31-20.*]
Mr. DEAN. It is my recollection that Secretary Stans was scheduled
to appear before the Patman committee for formal testimony on Sep-
*See p. 1181.
9:60
tember 14. Prior to Parkinson's drafting the letter for Congressman
Brown, I had been asked to discuss the matter with Henry Petersen,
which I did. I told Petersen of the problem and asked him for his feel-
ing about Stans and others appearing before the Patman committee
and what effect that might have on either the grand jury or the indicted
individuals once the indictments were handed down. I recall that
Petersen had very strong feelings that it could be very detrimental to
the Government's ability to prosecute successfully the Watergate case,
but he said he would have to give some thought to responding to Con-
gressman Brown's letter. I had several additional discussions with
Petersen and later with the Attorney General, when Petersen indicated
he did not think he could respond before the scheduled appearance of
Stans on September 14.
The Justice Department did not feel that it could write such a letter
for one individual regarding the Patman hearings and was very reluc-
tant to do so. I also had conversations with Mitchell about this and
reported the matter to Haldeman and Ehrlichman. The Justice De-
partment felt that for them to write such a letter would look like a
direct effort to block the hearings and I frankly had to agree. There-
fore, no response was sent prior to the scheduled September 14
appearance of Stans and Mr. Parkinson himself informed the com-
mittee that Stans would not appear because he felt it would be detri-
mental to the then pending civil and criminal investigations.
It was after my September 15 meeting with the President where
this matter had been briefly and generally discussed and, as the subse-
quent activities on the Patman committee became more intense that
the White House became more involved in dealing with the Patman
committee. On September 25, Chairman Patman announced that he
would hold a vote on October 3 regarding the issuing of subpenas to
witnesses. With this announcement the White House congressional
relations staff began talking with members of the committee as well
as the Republican leadership of the House.
I recall several conversations with Mr. Timmons and Dick Cook
regarding this matter as well as conversations with Haldeman. Tim-
mons and Cook informed me that there was a daily change in the list
of potential witnesses and the list was ever growing and beginning
to reach into the White House itself. In discussing it with Haldeman
I asked him how he thought the Patman hearings might be turned off.
He suggested that I might talk with Secretary Connally about the
matter because Connally would know Patman as well as anybody. I
called Secretary Connally and told him the reason I was calling. He
said that the only thing he could think of. the only soft spot that Pat-
man might have, was that he had received large contributions from a
Washington lobbyist and had heard rumors that some of these contri-
butions may not have been reported.
I discussed this matter with Bill Timmons and we concluded that
several Republicans would probably have a similar problem so the
matter was dropped. At this time I cannot recall the name of the
lobbvist whom Secretary Connally said had made the contributions to
Mr. Patman. Timmons and I had also discussed that probably some
of the members of the Banking and Currency Committee would have
themselves potential campaign act violations and that it probably
FORD & DERALO LIBRARY
would be worthwhile to check out their reporting to the Clerk of the
House. I told Timmons I would look into it.
961
On September 26 I received a report I had requested from Parkin-
son after he had one of his associates check the reports of the members
of the committee with the Clerk of the House. After I received the
document from Parkinson, a copy of which I have submitted to the
committee, I decided it would be a cheap shot to get into anything of
this nature.
[The document referred to was marked exhibit No. 34-21.1]
Mr. DEAN. Accordingly, I never reviewed the document that Park-
inson submitted and I have not reviewed it to this day.
While the White House had received through its congressional re-
lations staff informal reports as to who was likely to be subpenaed,
Chairman Patman made public his list on October 2, 1972. The indi-
viduals for whom subpenas were to be requested was extensive and in-
cluded several people who had varying degrees of knowledge regard-
ing the Watergate and related matters. This list, for example, included
Alfred Baldwin, Jack Caulfield, persons from the finance commit-
tee, Sally Harmony, Fred LaRue, Clark MacGregor, Mr. Magruder,
Mr. Mardian, Mr. Mitchell, Rob Odle, Bart Porter, Hugh Sloan, Stans,
Timmons, and myself. I have submitted to the committee a copy of the
entire list.
[The document referred to was marked exhibit No. 34-22.2]
Mr. DEAN. As the names on the list had continued to evolve, it be-
came increasingly apparent that the White House did not want the
hearings to be held. For example, Bill Timmons took a much greater
interest in the project when he realized early on that his name was
among those who would be called. I say this not because Timmons had
any reason not to appear because I know of no illegal or improper
activity on Timmons' part, rather he had been working to prevent the
hearings from occurring in the first instance through his conversations
with the Republican leaders and members of the committee. This he
knew would put him in an awkward position.
I began receiving increasing pressure from Mitchell, Stans, Parkin-
son and others to get the Justice Department to respond to the Sep-
tember 8 letter of Congressman Brown as a vehicle that Congressman
Brown could use in persuading other Republicans not to vote in favor
of the subpenas. Congressman Brown felt that with this document in
hand he could give the Republicans and others something to hang their
vote on. I had continued my conversations with Henry Petersen and
after the indictments had been returned he said that indeed he did feel
that the Justice Department should issue such a letter because of the
potential implications of the breadth of the Patman hearings. The let-
ter was sent on October 2, 1972. I have submitted to the committee a
copy of Congressman Brown's letter 3 and Assistant Attorney General
Petersen's response.
[The document referred to was marked exhibit No. 34-23.4]
:
Mr. DEAN. A number of people worked on getting the votes necessary
GERALD
FORD
to block the Patman committee hearings. Mr. Timmons discussed the
matter with the House Republican leaders who agreed to be of assist-
ance by making it a matter for the leadership consideration. which
resulted in direction from the leadership to the members of the com-
LIBRARY
1 See p. 1183.
2 See p. 1190.
a Congressman Brown's letter appears as exhibit 34-20.
$ See p. 1194.
962
mittee to vote against the hearings. I was informed that Congressman
Brown had been working with several members on the Democratic side
of the Patman committee to assist in voting against the hearings or as
an alternative not to appear for the hearings. Timmons informed me
that he was also in direct contact with one of the leaders of the south-
ern delegation who was being quite helpful in persuading the south-
erners on the committee not to vote for the subpenas or in the alterna-
tive not to appear at the meeting on October 3. Also Mitchell reported
to me that he had been working with some people in New York to get
the New Yorkers on the committee to vote against the hearings. He
told me, and I cannot recall now which members of the New York
delegation he referred to, that he had assurances that they would
either not show up or would vote against the hearings. I in turn passed
this information on to Timmons, but I did not tell him the source of
my information. On October 3 the vote was held and the subpenas
were defeated by a vote of 20 to 15 and another sigh of relief was
made at the White House that we had leaped one more hurdle in the
continuing coverup.
On October 4, however, Chairman Patman requested a GAO in-
vestigation and I was asked by Stans what this would mean. I told
him that this would be primarily between himself and the GAO but
that since GAO had no subpena power to compel testimony, the scope
of their investigation would have limits. He said he felt that he could
work with Elmer Staats, who was an old and good friend, and not let
this matter get out of hand with the GAO. On October 10, Chairman
Patman decided to proceed without subpena power, and sent letters
to MacGregor, Stans, Mitchell, and mvself. Everybody who received
such a letter declined to appear and Patman held his hearings with
empty witness chairs and, as I recall the press accounts, "lectured"
the missing witnesses.
THE SEGRETTI MATTER
I would now like to turn to the so-called Segretti matter. I have
been informed by committee counsel that the subject of alleged po-
litical sabotage will be taken up in subsequent hearings. However, I
have been asked to explain in full the pattern of coverup which
evolved in connection with the Watergate and related matters and my
explanation would be less than complete in presenting my knowledge
of the subject if I were to omit the so-called Segretti matter. While the
Segretti matter was not directlv related to the Watergate, the coverup
of the facts surrounding Mr. Segretti's activities was consistent with
other parts of the general White House coverup which followed the
Watergate incident. I will not go into extensive detail at this time,
rather I will give the highlights of the pattern that was followed
regarding the dealings of the White House with Mr. Segretti.
I first heard of Mr. Segretti when Gordon Strachan called me in
late June and told me that the FBI had called a friend of his by the
name of Donald Segretti, and requested to interview him in connection
with the break-in at the Democratic National Committee. Strachan
asked if I would meet with Segretti. I told him that I would and
Strachan arranged a meeting at the Mayflower Hotel where Segretti
was staying. Strachan gave me a very general description of Mr. Se-
R.
FORD
LIGHT
1509
Senator MONTOYA. Now, referring to the President's news conference
on August 29, 1972, and I will quote from that conference, a reporter
asked this question:
Mr. President, would not it be a good idea for a special prosecutor, even from
your standpoint, to be appointed to investigate the contribution situation and also
the Watergate case?
Answer:
The PRESIDENT. With regard to who is investigating it now, I think it would
be-it would be well to know that the FBI is conducting a full field investigation.
The Department of Justice, of course, is in charge of the prosecution and present-
ing the matter to the Grand Jury. The Senate Banking and Currency committee-
I presume he meant the House—
is conducting an investigation. The General Accounting Office, an independent
agency, is conducting an investigation of those aspects which involve the cam-
paign spending law. Now with all these investigations that are being conducted,
I don't believe that adding another Special Prosecutor would serve any useful
purpose.
Now, you stated before that there was a move at the White House
to try to stop the House Banking and Currency investigation, and you
presented testimony as to what went on in the White House in the
background.
Now, was this going on under auspices of anyone close to the
President?
Mr. DEAN. Well, of course, on September 15 I had had a discussion
with the President about this. He had asked me about the Banking
and Currency Committee investigation. He had asked me who was
handling it for the White House. I had reported that Mr. Richard Cook
was the man who had formerly worked with the Banking and Cur-
rency Committee as a member of the minority staff. was very familiar
with the members of the committee, and at the conclusion of my report
I recall him saying that he wanted Mr. Timmons to get on top of the
matter and be directly involved in it also.
Senator MONTOYA. And that was about the time that he was making
this statement to the press?
Mr. DEAN. Well, that preceded-that is correct. Of course, it was
September 15 that that arose in his office directly and we are talking
about a press conference in August, and during the following weeks, of
course, there was an ever-increasing effort of the White House to deal
with the Patman committee hearings as I have so testified.
Senator MONTOYA. When did the President tell you this? Was it
before August 29 when he made the statement at the press conference
or after?
Mr. DEAN. It was after, September 15.
Senator MONTOYA. It was approximately 17 days later.
Mr. DEAN. That is correct.
Senator MONTOYA. 17 or 13 days.
In the same, and as he went along, the President said as follows:
2.
FORD
The other point that I should make is that these investigations, the investiga-
tion by the GAO, the investigation by the FBI, by the Department of Justice have
at my direction had the total cooperation of the-not only the White House but
GERALD
also of all agencies of the government.
LIBRARY
1510
I want you to pay special attention to this. This is quoting the
President still.
In addition to that, within our staff under my direction Counsel to the Presi-
dent, Mr. Dean, has conducted a complete investigation of all leads which might
involve any present members of the White House staff or anybody in the Govern-
ment. I can say categorically that his investigation indicates that no one in
the White House staff, no one in this Administration presently employed was
involved in this bizarre incident.
Now, I ask you this question: With respect to any project that you
handled directly for the President where a report was required
wouldn't you assume that if this is true that you would have been
required to file a report?
Mr. DEAN. Yes, sir.
Senator MONTOYA. And also if, assuming that this was true, wouldn't
that report be available at the White House?
Mr. DEAN. That is correct.
Senator MONTOYA. And so assuming the correctness of the Presi-
dent's statement then it necessarily follows that if you made a complete
investigation at his behest, and for him, that the President should
produce that Dean report?
Mr. DEAN. I already believe that the White House has indicated
there was no Dean investigation. I think that is one of the inoperative
statements. [Laughter.]
Senator MONTOYA. But it is still your testimony that you were not
requested by the President to make a report to him or to conduct this
investigation.
Mr. DEAN. Not at that time, Senator; that is correct.
Senator MONTOYA. All right.
I want to go into this a little further the matter of the San Clemente
conferences.
Now, did you discuss specifically with Mr. Haldeman, with Ehrlich-
man and others who might have been attending their matters directly
dealing with the so-called coverup?
Mr. DEAN. Yes, we did.
Senator MONTOYA. Now, will you as succinctly as possible, as briefly
as possible, relate for the record now just exactly what those discus-
sions were with respect to the coverup?
Mr. DEAN. Well, we had a lengthy discussion ranging over 2 days,
and I have estimated between 12, 14-10, 12, 14 hours—I do not know
how many hours totally were spent in a discussion, that basically were
focusing on how to deal with this committee. At the end of that dis-
cussion, on the last day of the discussion, on Sunday afternoon, what
I described as the bottom line question came up, because everything
depended upon the continued silence of the seven individuals who had
either been convicted or had pleaded guilty. Would they remain silent
during the duration of these hearings? I was asked that question.
I said, I cannot answer that question, because I do not know. All I
know is that they are still making money demands.
Preceding that, there had been a good bit of discussion between Mr.
Haldeman and Mr. Ehrlichman and back and forth to Mr. Mitchell as
to who was going to raise the necessary money. I reported to them that
R.
03
FORD
there was nothing I could do, this was out of my hands, that Mr.
LIBRARY
Firefighting
53
man of the Senate Judiciary Committee, had become even friendlier
to the Administration since Mitchell had assured him he would face
no Republican opposition in his reelection campaign. He chaired the
Kleindienst hearings to our advantage.
When Colson finished chewing on Kleindienst, we began assessing
in earnest. We faced the nearly impossible task of proving a negative-
of showing there was no collusion involved in the ITT settlement.
After reviewing the documented history of the ITT case, I knew
that Dita Beard's memo conveyed a hopelessly inaccurate, almost
naïve view of the Administration's workings. She appeared to be puff-
ing up her own influence by ignoring the
Breaking Point
199
Bud looked at me stoically. "Listen, John, if the damn thing's
going to come out, it's going to come out." Bud had been a tough
cookie at the White House; now he looked like Sir Thomas More
facing the executioners bravely. "I'll tell you something. I haven't
really had a good day since I went over there to Transportation. I'm
troubled by my confirmation hearings up in the Senate. I think I may
have crossed the line up there. I tell you, I thought about saying this
was all national-security stuff, but I decided just to sort of dodge it.
I don't even like to read back over my testimony."
He's worried about perjury, too, I thought. I decided to get him off
the subject. "How strong is Hunt's hand on this, Bud? Did John ap-
prove this Ellsberg thing?"
are
A12
THE WASHINGTON POST
R1
Thursday, Sept. 23, 1976.
Dean Book Accuses
Ford on Watergate
By Jules Witcover
he said "even in this case I do not
Washington Post Staff Writer
recall any conversations concerning
Former Nixon aide John W. Dean
this particular matter."
III says in his soon-to-be-published
Jake Lewis, the House Banking and
book that he was told Gerald R. Ford
Currency Committee staff aide who
had knowledge of, and discussed tac-
worked most closely with Patman. on
ties in, the White House's effort to
the Watergate matter. said yesterday
block- Watergate investigation be-
that after the Nixon White House
fore the 1972 presidential election.
tapes were made public. Patman tried
Dean, in his book, "Blind Ambi-
to get the Senate Watergate committee
tion," says former Nixon congres-
to subpoena tapes from Sept. 15 to
sional liaison chief William E. Tim-
Oct. 3, 1972. He hoped, Lewis said,
they would reveal whether Nixon's
mons told him he (Timmons) in Sep-
orders had been carried out, and by
tember, 1972, had discussed with Mr.
whom.
Ford the possibility of trying to black-
But the tapes still have not been
mail Rep. Wright Patman (D-Tex.)
made public, he noted. Concerned
into dropping his planned inquiry.
that they might be lost or destroyed
Lewis said, Patman on Aug. 8, 1974
The idea was rejected by Mr. Ford
the day President Nixon announced
and Timmons, Dean says.
his resignation, wrote to the House
Timmons, now a Washington lobby-
Judiciary Committee urging that all
ist, said yesterday he did have a con-
tapes be kept intact.
versation with Dean about using a re-
Dean writes in his book, to be pub-
port of an alleged illegal campaign
lished in November by Simon and
contribution to deter Patman. But
Schuster, that former Gov. John B.
Timmons said he rejected it outright.
Connally of Texas told him he had
Timmons said he never discussed that
heard in Texas that Patman, now de-
ceased; may have "received some con-
or any other tactic for sidetracking
the impending investigation with Mr.
tributions from an oil lobbyist" that
he had not reported.
Ford.
Dean says he asked the Nixon cam-
At the White House, Richard B.
paign committee's lawyer, Kenneth
Cheney, President Ford's chief of
Parkinson, to check into campaign con-
staff, said last night the White House
tributions to Patman and other mem-
would stand on Mr. Ford's testimony
before two congressional committees
bers of the committee, and had passed
Connally's idea on to Timmons,
in 1973 that he had never had any
"Timmons, who met regularly ith
conversations with anyone in the
Jerry Ford, had explored with him
White House about blocking Patman's
proposed investigation.
Connally's suggestions about Patman,"
Dean writes in the heek.
BERALD
FORD
LIBRARY
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
B.
Bill Stanton:
This is my recollection of the one and only time Ford ever
had a meeting with the Minority Members of the B&C Cmte with
prespect to the Patman investigation: It was members of the
Cmte who asked to meet with Ford. Forfd did not request the
meeting. The reason members wanted to meet with im, this was
usual procedure when we were to take a position where other
members of the minority (not members of the Cmte) might be
affected by a minority Cmte action. I don't know who asked
him, but pex presume it was Bill Widnall. At the meeting
Ford mostly sat, smoked his pipe and listened. The discussion
whent along the following line: If Patman limited probe just
to laundered money in South America, the Cmte had no objection.
The Cmte was da adamantly opposed to unlimited use of subpeone
power which gave the imporession that it was a political withc
hunt two days before adjournment of Congress and one month
before election. Some members of the Cmte felt by simply
not showing up, they would lack a quorum. It was them unanimously
decided that if Patman asked for unlimited subpona power, the
members would vote no and at the smae time ask Patman, if his
probe were not political, to call the members back the day after
the election and we would be glad to cooperate. Ford's only
remarks were to concur with our decision that a month's delay
made sense and that we were taking the right action. Wright
Patman never accepted the minority members' challenge and
never called a meeting. The best of my recollectionxwk shortly
after this instance, Senator Kennedy looked at the subject matter
and decided not to call for an investigation basically becuase
he felt it was not under the jurisdiction of his committee.
Mr. Dean, whatever he says in his book, speaks for himself. I
know of at least 1/2 k dozen highly respected present and former
Members of Congress who will verify my statement. 11
is
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
EXHIBIT NO. 1.
CARRY BRI WN
PASHINGTON DIFICE
30 DISTRICT, MICHIGAN
404 CANNON HOUSE Orrice Bunding
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
COMMITTEE ON
TELEPHONE: (202) 225-5011
BANKING AND CURRENCY
Congress of the United States
DICTRICT OFFICE:
COMMITTEE ON
ROOM 2-1-36 FEDERAL C. NTER
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
House of Representatives
74 NORTH WASHINGTON
BATTLE CREEK, MICHIGAN 49017
JOINT COMMITTEE ON
TELEPHONE: (616) 962-1 51
Washington, D.C. 20515
DEFENSE PRODUCTION
August 31, 1972
The Honorable Wright Patman
Chairman
House Committee on Banking and Currency
2129 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. Chairman:
I was shocked and dismayed to learn that yesterday certain staff members of
the Banking and Currency Committee conducted an ad hoc hearing regarding the
financial transactions involved in the so-called Watergate bugging incident
and called former Secretary Stans as a witness without any authority to do
so and, even more disturbing, members of the Committee were not notified of
this session nor were we given an opportunity to be present.
Surely I do not need to remind you of the Rules of the House and the Rules
of the Committee on Banking and Currency which expressly prohibit the very
type of proceeding which occurred; the Rules of the House applicable being:
Jefferson's Manual and Rules of the House of Representatives
Rule XI., $735. (f) (1) Each committee of the House (except the
Committee on Rules) shall make public announcement of the date,
place, and subject matter of any hearing to be conducted by the
committee on any measure or matter at least one week before the
commencement of that hearing, unless the committee determines that
there is good cause to begin such hearing at an earlier date. If
the committee makes that determination, the committee shall make
such public announcement at the earliest possible date. Such
public announcement also shall be published in the Daily Digest
portion of the Congressional Record as soon as possible after such
public announcement is made by the committee. (Emphasis added)
Rule XI., 8735. (h) Each committee may fix the number of its members
to constitute a quorum for taking testimony and receiving evidence,
which shall be not less than two. (Emphasis added)
And, the applicable Rules of the Committee on Banking and Currency being:
Rules of Procedure of the Committee on Banking and Currency
Rule 3. A majority of the members of the Committee shall
BERALD FORD LIBRAR
The Honorable Wright Patman
- 2 -
August 31, 1972
constitute a quorum for the purpose of reporting any bill or
making decisions on any matters before the Committee; two or
more members of the Committee shall be present for the purpose
of hearing witnesses and taking testimony. (Emphasis added)
Rule 4. The date, time, place, and subject matter of all hearings
shall be publicly announced at least one week before the commence-
ment of that hearing, unless the chairman and ranking minority
member determine that there is a good cause to begin the hearing
at an earlier date to the extent feasible. If the chairman and
ranking minority member make that determination, the committee
shall make such public announcement and provide telephonic and
written notice to the members of the Committee, at the earliest
possible date. Such public announcement also shall be published
in the Daily Digest portion of the Congressional Record as soon
as possible after such public announcement is made by the committee.
* * *
Rule 12.
Seven days prior notice shall be given to all
members of the Committee of any proposed Committee or subcommittee
inquiríes and investigations other than routine requests for
reports and information in connection with bills and resolutions
pending before the Committee. Similar notice shall be given to all
member (sic) of the Committee of any proposed studies and reports
by the Committee or any subcommittee, and of any print or document
to be filed with the Clerk of the House or printed as a House
document. Such prints or documents shall clearly indicate that
the views expressed therein do not reflect the views of any member
of the Committee not a signatory thereto.
* * *
I will not question, although many may, the wisdom of our Committee becoming
involved in still another investigation of this matter although several other
investigations of the incident are already in progress. However, I do lodge
my serious protest to such an investigation being initiated and conducted. by
staff personnel without any authorization from the Committee and even without
at least this member's knowledge.
I demand that the staff be instructed to immediately cease and desist from
any further investigation of this matter until such time as you have called
the Committee together for the purpose of discussing and determining appropriate
Committee action.
The Watergate incident is a serious matter and is deserving of as full and
complete an investigation as is possible. I totally concur in the need and
FORD & LIBRARY OERALD
The Honorable Wright Patman
August 31, 1972
the right for the Congress, as well as the public, to be fully informed
regarding all of its ramifications. In fact, the very nature of this
matter dictates each member's personal involvement, not the involvement
of only staff members engaging in a frolic of their own.
Respectfully,
GARRY BROWN
cc: All Members of Committee on Banking and Currency
FORD & LIBRARY CERALD
EXHIBIT NO. 2.
GARRY BROWN
WASHINGTON OFFICE:
30 DISTRICT, MICHIGAN
404 CANNON House Or rice BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
COMMITTEE ON
TEITPHONE: (202) 225-5011
DANKING AND CURRENCY
Congress of the United States
DISTRICT OFFICE:
COMMITTEE ON
ROOM 2-1-36 FEDERAL CENTER
COVERNMENT OPERATIONS
Douse of Representatives
74 NorTH WASHINGTON
BATTLE CREEK, MICHIGAN 49017
TELEPHONE: (616) 962-1551
JOINT COMMITTEE ON
Washington, D.C. 20515
DEFENSE PRODUCTION
September 5, 1972
The Honorable Wright Patman
Chairman
House Committee on Banking and Currency
2129 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Thank you for your letter of explanation relative to the activities being
carried on by staff members of the Banking and Currency Committee relative
to the Watergate affair and your interpretation of your authority under the
Rules of the House and the Rules of the Committee concerning your authority
to assign staff work and authorize staff investigations in the absence of any
Committee action.
At the outset, let me put aside once and for all the suggestion you have
incorporated in your letter that my objection to the conduct of this inves-
tigation by staff members is an "attack" upon the investigation itself and
the jurisdiction of our Committee to conduct such an investigation. You
seem to have missed the thrust of my letter wherein I repeatedly objected to
the investigation by staff members without the authorization of the Committee
and even without the Committee's knowledge. Specifically, I said:
I will not question, although many may, the wisdom of our Committee
becoming involved in still another investigation of this matter
although several other investigations of the incident are already
in progress. However, I do lodge my serious protest to such an
investigation being initiated and conducted by staff personnel
without any authorization from the Committee and even without at
least this member's knowledge.
And, in my letter to you of August 31, 1972, I further said:
The Watergate incident is a serious matter and is deserving of as
full and complete an investigation as is possible. I totally
concur in the need and the right for the Congress, as well as the
public, to be fully informed regarding all of its ramifications.
In fact, the very nature of this matter dictates each member's
personal involvement, not the involvement of only staff members
engaging in a frolic of their own.
In further critique of your response of September 5, 1972, let me state that the
GERAL# FORD LIBRARY
The Honorable Wright Patman
2 1.0
September 5, 1972
activities of the staff members in interrogating Mr. Stans cannot be con--
sidered "normal staff procedures," under any circumstance as you have
suggested, and such activity on the part of staff members with respect to
a matter which you have described as one "carrying
...
serious political
implications" can only be viewed as highly unusual, especially so in the
absence of any Committee authorization to initiate an investigation.
Your letter attempts to suggest that Mr. Stans somehow imposed himself upon
the staff members as a witness when you say that "Mr. Stans appeared volun-
tarily to answer questions at my request.' I trust you don't believe that
Mr. Stans and I are politically naive enough to accept the proposition that
his refusal to appear at your request would have been benignly neglected and
silently received by you.
In addition, I take serious issue with the innuendo incorporated in your
letter to the effect that I consider an investigation of the Watergate
incident às a mere "frolic." The use of that term in my original letter, and
as again referenced herein, could only have been interpreted by any reasonable
person as suggesting that staff members do not have the same obligation of
accountability to constituents and the people of the country as a whole as
do the Members of Congress. To that extent they have much greater freedom
of activity, and I need not point out to you that on occasion this freedom
of activity of staff members has even reached the point of being irresponsible.
In summary, I restate my basic contention; namely, that the investigation of
the Watergate incident to the extent that it falls under the jurisdiction of
our Banking and Currency Committee should be an investigation discussed with
and authorized by the full Committee; and, to the extent testimony, answers
to questions, or whatever you wish to call it, are to be taken from persons
having knowledge about the matter, Committee members shall be fully apprised
and informed of such plans and intentions.
For the reasons above set forth, I request that you immediately call a meeting
of the Committee for the purposes of informing the members of the status of
the investigation which has been conducted by staff members as well as the
areas of concern within the jurisdiction of the Committee which you feel
should receive further attention from the Committee and its staff.
Inasmuch as we have a meeting scheduled for tomorrow morning at 10:00 A.M.,
I request that before continuing with the markup of the Housing Bill we
GERALB FORD LIBRARY
The Honorable Wright Patman
September 5, 1972
devote such time in Executive Session as is necessary to properly apprise
the Committee members regarding this matter.
Rany Respectfully, GARRY BROWN Burn
I concur in the request for a meeting for the purposes stated as set forth
in the last paragraph of Representative Brown's letter.
Biel Fremal
Colburn J.
Ben
Prin assur
bluillesms
John H Rospect
Norm F. Per
FORD i LIBRARY GERALD
LG:22-A
November 5, 1973
The Honorable Gerald R. Ford
H-230, The Capitol
Washington, D. C.
Dear Jerry:
Pursuant to our telephone conversation today, I am forwarding to you herewIth
a copy of the sworn statement I filed with the Ervin Committee relative to
the allegations made by Mr. Dean when he testified before that Committee
early this summer.
Although my statement makes no direct reference to Dean's allegations concerning
Involvement of the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives
relative to the Patman hearings, the statement does correctly reflect the
general sltuation which existed at that time. As a practical matter, Mr. Dean
at no time during the course of his direct testimony before the Ervin Committee
alleged that you personally had been in any way Involved, his references In
that testimony having been to "the Republican leadership of the House" (page
106 of his testimony); "Republican leaders" (page 188); and, "House Republican
leaders" (page 109).
Rather than In connection with Dean's testlmony, I believe your name became
associated with the Patman hearings through press reports at that time to the
effect that you had mot with the Republican members of the Banking and Currency
Committee. Of course, as you know, you did meet with us on two occasions, but
each of those meetings had been requested by Mr. Widnall, the ranking member,
and the other Republican members of the Committee primarily for the purpose of
apprising you of the slauation which existed and to seek any advice which you
and Mr. Arends might care to proffer.
In addition and as was noted by the media at that time, at the request of the
Republican members of the Banking and Currency Committee you sent a letter to
all Republican members of the Committee urging them to be present for the vote
on October 3, stating It to be your opinion, and properly so, that our system
of criminal Justice dictated against Congressional hearings while criminal
proceedings were pending. Of course, this is the position taken by even
Archlbald Cox when he urged the Ervin Committee to suspend Its hearings earller
FORD & GERALD LIBRARY
The Honorable Gerald R. Ford
- 2 -
November 5, 1973
this year.
I regret that I cannot provide a more substantive response to any suggestions
which may have been made that you were In any way Improperly Involved In the
Banking and Currency Committee action, but as you know It Is next to Impossible
to "prove the negative."
With best regards,
Sincerely,
GARRY BROWN
Enclosure
LIBRARY GERALD
Amusements
Financial
Classified
Metroe
Comics:
Obituarion
Crossword
Sportax
Editorials
A22
Style:
Fed. Diary
TV-Radios
Citasified 323-62008
15a Beyond Washington,
OCTOBER 4, 72
Phone 223-6000
Circulation 223-6100
Maryland and Virginia
10c
Bugging
Hearings
Rejected
House Panel
Defeats Bid
By Patman
By Bob Woodward
and Carl Bernsteim
Washington Post Staff Writers
andi
The House Banking and
and
Currency Committee, aftęr
began
a week of heavy Republican
estigation
lobbying, voted: 20 to 15
escape
yesterday against holding
ight
D.C.
public hearings. on the
including
Wafergate bugging incident
widely
and alleged irregularities in
figures
President: Nixon's re-elec-
tion campaign financing.
which in-
AIL 14 Republicans in attend-
nvieted of
anee, four Southern Demo.
adieted
on
crats and two other Democrats
the large
voted: against Committee
the cene
Chairman Wright Patman's r
BP Bob: Burchette-The Washington Postr
quest: for the hearings.
got under
Reps. William At Barrett (II-Pa.). left, and.
reil call prior to: the vote. one whether tom
They thus apparently ended.
Jons- that
Wright Patman (D-Tex.). await. outcome of
conduct hearings im the Watergate case.
any chance of & full airing been
the jail
fore election day of issues
suspi-
wingly. as-
stemming from: the now cele
of derei-
time the
W elfare Compromise Killed;
brated break-ins and alleged
bugging of the Democrats'
an attic
Watergate headquarters in
barbed
June.
one
Indes
New Reform Bid in Doubt
Rep. Garry Brown, (R-Mich.);
the key figure im engineering
Director
the defeat, acknowledged. in
said
last
am interview that her worked
three
By Spencer Rich.
So far, the White House has another item of social legis-
with the Justice Department
leave
refused. all compromises, in-
lation suffered a possibly
Washington Post Staff Writer:
and Rep. Gerald R. Ford (R-
Investiga-
sisting on the House-passed:
(atal. setback: when conserva-
The Senate yesterday killed
Mich.), the House minority
lisciplinary
version of its own proposal.
tives defeated, 196 to 188, an
leader, to block the hearings.
the Ribicoff welfare compro-
A plan even closer to the ad-
attempt to send the minímum
Brown denied a charge by
mise by a 52to-34 vote dealing
shattering
ministration program than the
wage bill to conference with
possibly.
fatal
Patman that the White House
the more generous. Senate
blow
of
welfare
one- sponsored: by: Sen. Abra-
brought "all" kinds of pres-
version. Story on Page A17)
td:
for
the
rest.
of
this
hame A. Ribicoff (D-Conn.),
In place of the hodgepodge
sure," but added: "T. would
which was defeated yesterday,
of current state programs for
have to presume: that the
adminise
is being introduced by Sem
families with minor dependent
White House wouldn't want
Unloss
the
Nixour
Adlai E. Stevenson III (D-III),
further attention: paid to this
trations
endorsem
some
new
children, with monthly bene-
compromise between- its own
but the administration hasn't
indicated endorsement: Ribi-
fits, ranging between $60 in
I'm not so stupid to have to be
the
tower
Family
Assistance:
Plan
and
Mississippi and $835 in Con-
told.")
the mores generous Ribicoff
coff and Gaylord Neison (D-
necticut, the administration
Im opposing the hearings;
plan.
likely
that
Wis.) taunted the White House
originally
preposed:
и
federal
Brown
and
other
Lappears
refusing
it
has
payments
$200
month
Committee» members. contend.
that ther propostd- inquiry
'Wandering Funds' of GOP
Now Topic for Banking Unit
By Bob Woodward
and Carl Bernstein
Campaign 72
wa
Washington Post Statf Writer's
Rep. Wright Patman (D Tex.)
& LC
chairman of the House Bank-
ing and Currency Committee.
said yesterday that he will call
a meeting of his Committee
next week to discuss "the
strange wanderings of Repub-
A.1
W.P.
HijackerGets
Because
you
have
established
your credibility with us we do
not feel the need for continu
Life: Silent
10g the work strike
Visibls moved Hards shook
On $300,000
dohnson's hand warmly and
said Men of Lorton I want
to thank you
By Paul Edwards
He said the four days of
mass bargatning had changed
Confessed are preate Freder
the community's image of Lan
ton prisoners
K W. Hahneman was sent
The week demonstrated
need to life imprisenment
Hardy said, how a segment of
esterday without saving pub
the community which has
11 why be hijacked an East
been rejected has not lost
their manhood and their
n airlines jet or what he did
ability to be gentlemen
th the $303,000 ransom with
1 know my career is on the
ich he parachuted into the
line right now There are
nduran Jungle last May 8
those who want me to leave
this job." Hardy said Adding
Since he surrendered to
that he was eligible for reture
officials in regucigalpa,
nduras. on June 3. Hahne-
ment in June, he said "I do
not run from a fight I want
n apparently has told only
change and I will stay and
court-appointed attorneys
try to bring about that
details of the hijacking.
change"
has instructed them not to
Hardy's comment about ad-
them even if it would
versaries referred to mounting
him.
criticism in some quarters of
lahneman told American
law enforcement and in Con
mbers of the American Em
FREDERICK W. HAHNEMAN
3
See LORTON, A6, Col. 1
staff in Tegucigalpa that
silences lawyer
money was taken by a con
from Panama and depos
in a "Chinese Communist
nk account in Hong Kong
GOP Opposition Perils
use in supporting unspect
"causes" in Latin Amer-
R.
U.S. Attorney Brian Get
House Watergate Probe
0
hgs said in an interv that
ahneman has stood by this
Renald Kessler
nk story. but We don't be
H:wit
wener
ve 1L We think the
attempt to who will vote to postpone it or
= under his contral
Bur
won't
be
there
to
vote."
he
ere is nothing we can
out it."
has
run
into
said
Hahneman could be
opposition
Brown said there has not
5 parole in 13 years and
postpone
any
been any White House direc.
ettings said the effect
tive to stop the probe. al-
after
the
presiden.
ssing money on Hahneman's
though he said he talks with
role chances is something
White House aides almost
entirely
has been spear- daily about many matters. in.
"All the News
That's Fit to Print"
The I
VOL. CXXII No. 41,892
1978 The New York Times Company
HOUSE PANEL BARS
PRE-NOV.7 INQUIRY
INTO BUGGING CASE
Decision Virtually Rules Out
Congressional Hearings
Until After the Election
WHITE HOUSE ACCUSED
Patman Charges Pressure
-Six Democrats Among
Majority in 20.15 Vote
For . York Times
WASHINGTON, Oct 3-The
House Banking and Currency
Committee rejected today, 20
to:15 a proposal to hold public
hearings on certain aspects of
the alleged hugging of the Dem-
NYT
P.1
10/11/72
ceiling on Federal spending in
off
the current year.
without explanation this eve
Although Die White House
The spending ceiing. which
nmg by Ronald Ziegler the
By HRISTOPHE LYDON
would not provide
was approved by a vote of 221
White House preas sectetary
M.
Resinger's
CHR
AGO,
Oct
to 163, would give Mr Nixon
Shortly after 6 PM. Mr
Pans during the day, the (11)
George McGovern detailed to
unrestricted authority to either
Zieglet and that word had been
pp here was that
mght his plans for withdrawal
cut or eliminate Federal spend
received from Mr Kissinger
in
his decision to stay 111 Parts
from Vietnam. including it VISIT
ing programs to keep spending
the last half hour: that he
came after he met with the
to Harfor by Las Vice President
to the $250 billion maximum
would hold another session to
The ceiling would be 111 effect
French Loreign Minister, Mau
to speed the of America
morrow with Le Due The, 11
only for the current fiscal year,
nce humann, following the
member of the North Vietnam
prisoners
which began July I
third negotialing session with
ese Politburo, and Xuan Thuy,
Drawing the hoice Heaver
the North Vietnamese
Nixon Praises Vote
the chief North Vietnamese
himself and President Nixon as
Mr humann. who for
Mr. Nixon issued a statement
negotiator at the larger sem-
"four more years of war or four
praising the House for its
public peace talks.
weeks has been expressing
years of peace," Mr. McGovern
loptumism over the outcome of
"responsible" action, about an
Mr. Kissinger, the President's
the current phase of the talks
hour after the vote.
national security adviser, will
Transcript of the McGovern
public and privately, called on,
He urged the Senate to take
fly home tomorrow evening, the
address is on Page 29.
White House added.
President Pompidou immediate
"quick and positive action" on
built on year old campaign
the measure "without creating
White House spokesmen de-
Continued on Page 10, Column 1
pledges and told a national
any loopholes, so that excessive
television audience that 11
spending and inflation can be
held in check and higher taxes
Patman Bids 4 Nixon Aides
elected President he would take
the following steps
can be avoided."
GHalt the hombing of North
Whether the Senate would
Testify on Watergate Case
Vietnam and end all militar:
honor his request was not
and political support of South
clear
Vietnam's military Government
Senator Mike Mansfield of
next Jan. 20, Inauguration Day
Montana, the majority leader,
WASHINGTON, Oct 10
$Soon afterward send Sar
tative
said just before the House vote
Representative Wright Patman
Shriver, his Vice President,
It.
that if the spending ceiling
announced today that the
to Hanoi "to speed the arrange
were passed. you might As
House Banking and Currency
ments" for the return of Amer-
ends
well abolish Congress" be-
Committee would meet Thurs-
icah prisoners.
cause Congress would have
day in another attempt to in-
IAllow the Vietnamese to
given away its constitutional
ision
vestigate the break in and
work out their own settlement.
power to control Government
alleged bugging of the Demo-
and cooperate to see that any
Army
spending
cratic headquarters
scttlement, including a coali-
Democrats Lose Fight
The Texas Democrat, who IS
tion government, gains inter-
But the Democratic leaders
the committee chairman, issued
national recognition
times
in the House had also opposed
copies of letters to four promi-
qAt the conclusion of the
10-Jus-
the ceiling, and they were
nent advisers to President
war, request Congress to adopt
list said
voted down
Nixon asking them to appear
"an expanded program for our
impro-
A key difference between the
voluntarily at the session.
veterans."
on in a
Senate and the House may be
The chairman's effort to hold
qGive jailed and exiled draft
on last
in the attitudes of the chair-
public hearings came after re-
The New York Times
evaders "the opportunity to
revious-
men of the committees with
jurisdiction over the spending
ports this morning in The Wash-
Representative Wright
come home." He did not use
ter as a
ington Post that the incident
Patman talks to newsmen.
the word "amnesty."
icial.
ceiling
Order the closing of Ameri-
In the House, the chairman
had been part of a larger espio-
Rehn-
nage and sabotage campaign the Nixon campaign finance
can bases in Thailand, but only
of the Ways and Means Com-
majority
mittee, Wilbur D. Mills of Ar-
against the Democrats, waged committee
"after all our prisoners have
against
kansas, was the leading advo-
on President Nixon's behalf
All four were invited to bring
been returned
o were
cate of the spending ceiling.
One of those invited was
along any books and records
Quiet Persuasion
y's sur-
The chairman of the Senate
John Wesley Dean 3d. counsel
in their possession dealing with
The heart of Senator Mc-
r. Rehn-
Finance Committee, Russell B.
to the President. The lawyer
various aspects of the incident
Govern's plan was not in the
ant At-
Long of Louisiana, on the other
is known to have conducted a
Mr. Patman indicated a par-
few fresh particulars but was
testified
hand, has indicated that he
secret White House investiga-
ticular interest in financial
in his reaffirmation that quiet
al basis
wants to see some limitations
tion of the June 17 break-in at
transactions linked to it
persuasion in place of the
on the President's budget-cut-
the party headquarters in the
There was no indication that
current bombing would free the
explan-
ting authority written into the
Watergate complex.
any of the four would testify
prisoners within 90 days. The
15-page
bill.
Also asked to testify were
voluntarily. A Republican mem-
same three months. he said.
sued as
The Finance Committee may
John N. Mitchell, former chair-
ber of the committee, Repre-
would permit the removal of
sts' de-
try to meet, hold a hearing and
man of the Committee to Re-
sentative Ben B Blackburn of
troops and "all salvageable
himself
take action on the measure all
elect the President: Clark Mac-
Georgia, told newsmen that
American military equipment
Gregor, the present chairman,
Mr. McGovern's speech, re
olumn 1
Continued on Page 13, Column 1
and Maurice H Stans, head of
Continued on Page 27, Column 1
corded last Sunday in Washing
ton, was aimed at a prime-time
Laotian Tribe Fears U.S. Will Abandon It
audience that included more
than 20 million viewers en the
Columbia Broadcasting System
and a number of other stations
ELD
across the nation
The setting of Media
Years
ern's speech was the of
ietnam-
the Senate majority leader
village
Mike Manisticld. 111 the Capito
Dua
Hammers at Nixon
among
rich
Beyond his own peace plans
THE NEW YORK TIMES WEDNESDAY OCTOBER " 1972
rs to Testify Tomorrow on the Watergate Case Father Tows 3
ested there would Nixt. are reported to be en- said today that private inves- physical bug or tap." she said.
But They Dro
for him after the
rolled Democrats
tigators for her had found evi-
"their investigator, Nicholas
The Post charged in its article
dence that wiretaps had been
who is now an
Beltrante, heard a voice say as
EDGARTOWN, Mass Oct
without citing further examples,
placed on her Washington and
orney General of
that Federal investigators had
New York Congressional of
he dialed a local number: (UPI)-A 41-year-old man tow
so said that Mr.
never said whom
reported that the intelligence
fices
""Bob, they're dialing a Wash- 10g his three dead sons, reache
ing for when the
operations included the follow.
She asked Speaker Carl A)-
ington number-start monitor- shore today after swimmir
made and had put
ing activities
bert of Oklahoma to conduct 8
ing.''
through the night in storm
Following members of Dem.
further investigation into the
by saying. "Don't
The private investigator's re- seas when his boat sank
matter
p.40
NYT
recommended surrender
dents at Wheaton College
the Demo
and withdrawal.
nearby Wheaton, III, "Settit
nominee's blueprint 101
"It seems to me that the
the moral tone of this natio
merican involvement
whole thrust of the statement
is the most serious respect
ar in Indochina
may be based on some sort of
idealism. which IN fine." he
bility of the next Presit
ures Forecast
said
A little more than an
g to the demands of
But to base negotiations and
later, the Demos no
tnam and the Viet-
national unity policy simply
poted Mayor Datey and
out any concessions
on idealism, and not on realism
of his precinct captains
her side, the Defense
and not facing up to the real
Sherman House here
declared, would "as
world in which we live IS abso
corned beef and cabbage
re" of a range of
lutely the most dangerous thing
and an exchange of PO
tiations on such sub-
that we can do if we are going
homilies
niting strategic weap
to have success in future nego
Associated Press
Senator McGovern
ing forces in Europe
tiations any place in the world,"
Senator George McGovern being applauded by Mayor
organizational politics."
ng the threat of con
he said
Richard J. Daley at a stop Tuesday night In Chicago.
"great statesmar supere
Middle East.
poses the Vietnam war
ionally televised ad.
a good man if mar of
night, which McGov.
Nixon Aides Balk on Watergate Hearing
rity declared Mayor
described as one of
'First Great Turn
mportant of the cam-
South Dakota Demo-
It was WHO
d, if elected, to stop
even
the
most
basic
inquiries
The
letter
which
the Presidential candida
was
ag
ng, end the flow of
WASHINGTON,
Oct
11
It
IS
the
first
time
that
a
Prese
gressively
by
the
paper
first great turn toward
upplies to Saigon,
Four of President Nixon's ad
dential campaign has been publisher Wham Doeb in edi-
with a huge rally here
within 90 days the
visers declined today to appear carried on as if it were being total KS on Mr 25K16
month Mt McGovern ..
American military
before the House Banking and
operated
as
a
secret
society
came
yesterday
when
and be said that the Ma
up
again
outh Vietnam, Laos
Currency Committee to answer
The letter from the attor The Washington Post charged assistance
at
a
funds
odia, and, after the
questions about the break-in at
neys is an insult tolevery single that a White House aide had event for 10,000 persons
American war pris-
the offices of the Dem crati
American who believes in free taken redit for writing the night had helped to ma
draw United States
National Committee
and open elections It an at etter
the most heart warm 17
rom Thailand and
The chair
regant
act
It
is
an
amazing
Matilyn
Berger,
a
Post
stirring most deeply grat
evening" of the ampa 20
rom the waters off
man Representative
performance
for
people
who
porter
said
that
on
Sept
Patman of Texas, had asked
are
supposed
to
X
seeking
the
Ken
W
Glawson,
The two speeches toda
Hugh Scott, Repub-
the four men to testify volun
votes of the people
for
of
for
vor
McG
were
dist
Walter
the
and
them
hnsylvania, the Sen-
tarily at a session scheduled
dive
hran
y floor leader. said
tomorro morning The full
commentator for the Columbia wrote the The Post to
they
served
to
committee refused to issue
Broadcasting System said in an ported that Mr Clawson had
fort
S
combine
spiritual
as "shocked at his
subpoonas in the case
that
last
making
25
with
politica
rference in the des.
pra
The
four
who
declined
Mr
day
man
called
and
search
people of South
ment
Mr.
Patman
invitation
were
ind
mper
nated
Frank
available
suggesting
for
the
Democrat
their
Wesley
3d.
counsel
the
the
Mr McGovern has deno
and leaving out
President
Ma
ess before an
Gregor
the Vietnam war as
Mr.
stood
for
the
behind
decred the Nixon
emy."
Refelection
letter
of
tion
as
and
Joins Attack
dent
John
N
Mitchel
Mr.
who
wanted
The
creasing!) the
drug
day show over the
and
Mauri
H
the ampai a
Stans
M:
ren
iroadcasting Com-
Nixon
chief
fund
greater
exposuring
that
clin
raiser
George
Beach
cation to the principles
Senator
McG
nat founders
sion network this
was
ir McGovern said
Letter by MacGregor
being
given
the
Mrs
Shewlet:
Barker
an
in eme Edman e
gram,
as
meant to imply that
against
that
sistant
given
director
is
on
the
tampus
::
In
a
letter
to
Mr
Patrian,
President
Nixon
The
said
said
that
she
had
never
seen
1
trip South etham
Mr
MacGreg
said
that
he
that
the
ratio
looked
ms when be spoke
like
about
or
heard
If
Paul
Morrison
evangelica
would accompany the President RO per cent for Mr
and
that
the
center
had
no
of removing
all
mentalism in religion
his campa zn trip to Atlanta and 20 per cent for Mr records
beating
his
name
American military
growing UD in the
tomorrow and that therefore The caller said that he The Canuck remark was
Dakota household of his
his
schedule
does
the phrase should
not
permit
wanted
to
warn
Mr
Crankite
leged
to
have
occurred
at
The
Joseph McGovern a
an appearance
to the equipment
that newsmen covering the Seed
mentalist Methodist
being used now by
M- MasGregor, a former campaign were beginning to Senator Robert J Dole of
House member, said was notice the favoritism and that Kansas thairman of the Re-
Distortion Detected
ased in Vietnam
Robert J Dole of mittee understanding did that the they he did anted to warm him bef re publican National Committee
He spoke of
chairman of the
raies
permit
an
expose
it
issued
1
five-page
statement
would
National Commit
witnesses be called without
Mr Cronkite said that he today in which he assailed
serv in the Young M
d the McGovern
notice This point was also had told the caller that this Senator George McGovern on
Workers Band and
nappropriate, rre-
raised by the Nixon commit-
was not true and had hung up
the
Watergate
issue
strict for my king" that
di hypocritical
lawyers
The next day, Mr ronkite said
in a letter to Mr Patman on
Difficulties Described
bade dancing, card pia
he called Mr Mankiew who
drinking, smoking and mo
Ford. the House
der, criticized the
behalf of Mr. Mitchell. Mr.
told him he had never made the
Mr. Mankiewicz and some
But his upbringing
nply a formula for
Stans and Mr. MacGregor, the call
other Democrats have been him. he said with religious
t take-over in Sale
lawvers said that computtee
3 Watergate Defendants
telling of various campaign dif. victions that shaped his
rules required that prospective
Meanwhile, three of the de-
ficulties and unexplained x the mota dimens of
cGovern is unreal
witnesses be given public no.
fendants in the Watergate bug
currences The McGovern ad life as a great but tahink
Republican added
tice at least a week in advance
g.ng indictments contended to
viser has suggested that the ly troubled. nation
eany, president of
They also asserted that an
day that they had been the ob-
Republicans were responsible He emphasized that be
an Federation of
investigation of the break
jects of telephone tapping and
but has provided no evidence not quarrel with the cons
Congress of In:
in which listening de-
other surveillance in recent
He recalled A telephone call tional principle of separate
inizations, who has
vices were allegedly to be in.
weeks
to the office of George Meany chur and state but comp
endorse any Presi-
stailed at the Democratic of
fices the Watergate complex
Lawyers representing the
the labor leader in which ed that 10 had been
idate, said of the
had not been authorized by the
three men, G Gordon iddy
someone who identified hini- into "the practice of separa
oposal. "Instead of
E Howard Hunt Ir and James
self as Gary Hart, another Mc of faith from politics the
Hanor's responsi
committee and that the panel.
refusing to issue subpoenas,
W McCord Jr. filed papers in
Govern aide rather peremp ration of mor ality from
tinuing the blood
Federal District Court here to-
tonly told Mr Meany go
opponents of our
had voted against holding hear
day giving details of the report
to New York to meet with the He implied difference
Ky do nothing but
ings
ed incidents They were among
Demo indidate Mr Hart approach between Press
Cooperation Alleged
A number of court papers fried
denied making the call
He $330
nited States
House Comment
They contended that Mr
in the case today
It
was
also
said
no
President
has
the
itans had "fully cooperated in
Mr Liddy said in his affidavit
ne
who
posed
as
incox
to
A
House declined to
the speech, but it
every way with YOUR commit
that he had been followed on
the
M
GOVERN
television
büyer
that
face
the
is
an
feepest
that President
tee They had an
one OCCASION by two men in a
trist
considering a na
swered numerous questions"
sedan while driving on a Wast
speech
within
us
during a private meeting earlier
ingion freew and in another
network
But
said
that
&
Presid
io broadcast this
with the ommittee staff
in
ident
yesterday,
followed
and
profound
subject was not
and
regemera
NYI p.33 10/3/72
Lucy said in an interview
President of the United States
The AFI C10 executivelterday by
including: Air fare, accommo-
The hicago meeting elee ted
if he had a mind to- could
dations with private bath. break-
a five man steeting committee
have done a con job on the
fasts, museum pass, special
to diaft a constitution for a
whole American people.
lunch in Naples, special dinner
group to be called the Coah
"As to the gram investiga
in Rome, rental CAT (you just
tion of Black Trade Untonists
tion, I don't know what will
find but we're going to investi
pay for mileage), shopping dis-
Workers and the Poor
Rate the hell out of it."
counts, welcome ktails, wine
The coalition will conduct "
Mr Gray said he had taken
tasting, discounts on meals,
membership drive to enlist
under my own wing,
night lub entrance. coral "good
black unton members through
15 break in and bugging of
luck" charm, and more! For
out the country, Mr. Lucy said.
Democratic National Headquar
more information, mail the
11 will also embark on an 111.
ters at the Watergate office
coupon.
tensive effort to organize poor
building that resulted in the in
blacks, he added.
du tment of seven men, includ-
There are about 2 million
mg two former White House
Alitalia Airlines, four De-
black members of trade unions
constitants and the former
I partment, 660 Fifth Ave-
The total number of blacks in
chief of security for the Com-
nue. New York, N.Y.
the work force is estimated at
nuttee for the Re-election of the
10019
9.8 million
President
Please send me more
The new coalition will not be
Mr Gray said he did not
information about the
a black "separatist" or even a
subscribe to'the thesis that the
"civil rights" organization, Mr
Administration could not inves
"Serenade." NYT-RC-10-$
Lucy explained It will work
tigate itself
within the trade union frame
"Anyone who writes that is
Name
work for black workers and
really leveling a general indict-
the black community, he said.
ment against all public offi
Address
"But before now there has
cials," he said.
been no forum for black mili-
"Look at the Watergate," he
City
State
Zip
tancy within the trade union
said "If the President of the
movement." he asserted
United States were so minded,
V- Travel
The decision by George Meany
he would have had to give an
and the executive couned of
order to the Attorney General,
Alitalia
the labor federation to refrain
who would have had to order
name WORLD APLICE
from endorsing a Presidential
the Assistant Attorney General
candidate this year was the
for the Criminal Division and
catalvst that created the move
the Acting Director of the F.B.I.,
toward R national black labor
who would have had to order
organization
1.200 agents. He would have to
Nixon Impact Cited
control the United States At
torney of the District of Colum
"The AFI C10 decision
bia and the men and women of
did not take into consideration
the grand jury.
the negative impact that Nixon
"Even if some of us are
has on the poor, especially the
crooked, there aren't that many
black poor," Mr. Lucy said
that are. 1 don't believe every-
"There is no way black union
one is a Sir Galahad, but there's
ists are going to remain neutral
not been one single bit of pres-
in this election," he declared.
sure put on me or any of my
However, the goals of the
special agents."
new coalition go far beyond
this year's election, and will
Inquiry Delay Asked
deal with matters of particular
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 (UPI)
concern to black workers, he
The Justice Department told
said.
the House Banking Committee
For example, the new organ-
today that R committee investi-
ization would not support the
gation of the Watergate bug-
President's continuation of the
ging incident at this time would
A 15
Banking Panel to Vote on Wat
By Bob Woodward
some Democrate sas they CX generally declined to discuss politically motivated
the Secr
and Carl Bernstein
pect gorous opposition to the the case on the grounds that Watergate case is all Me: the
Washington Post Statt Willer
investi_ation from the White such discussion would preju. Govern has going for him and
Chairman Wright Patman of
House
dice the rights of the accused Brown said.
Nixo
the House Banking and Cur The decision on whether to That position was echoed In announcing the Oct 3 stroy
THE WA
Panel to Vote on Watergate Probe
RE
crats say they ex- generally declined to discuss politically motivated
the Secretary Maurice H. Stans. quest by George Washington
opposition to the the case on the grounds that Watergate case is all Me the chief Nixon fund raiser. University law professor John
from the White such discussion would preju- Govern has going for him." and published reports that top F Banzhaf 111 that the court
dice the rights of the accused. Brown said.
Nixon campaign officials de- appoint a special prosecutor in
on on whether to That position was echoed In announcing the Oct 3 stroyed financial records rele. said the federal court has no
st full public air- again yesterday by Rep Garry Banking Committee meeting vant to the case
the Watergate case Richey
Л
the FBI, ching Chief U.S. DIS
triet Court Judge John J Siri
ca's order restricting out of
court comment on the Water
gate case. have recently re-
fused to discuss the investiga
tion
Gray. in Dallas on a tour of
FBI field offices, told report
ers there yesterday that
he felt he was covered by
Sirica's order
HAS IT!
But the acting FBI director
did say that "there is no arm
of government we would fail
SHAPS
PATERSON
Nixon Aides
Snub House
EVERYTHING YOU ALWAYS
Probe Call
BUT WERE AFRAID TO
By Bob Woodward
and Carl Bernstein
1st Time Ever in the USA!!
Washington Post Blatt Writers
Four of President Nixon's
:top aides and former aides
PATERSON Enlarger
"have declined to appear
woluntarily today before the
with 2 YEAR
10/13/72
A.6 w,P
Patman Lectures Empty Seats
As Nixon Aides Fail to Appear
11
By Karlyn Barker
Congress press for an investi-
President's re-election commit-
Washington Post Staff Writer
gation of the Watergate issue,
tee chairman said "The Wash
The chairman of the House
said the absence of the wit.
Banking and Currency Com-
ness "will be the political
ington Post is elevating gossip
turning point in the polls as
to front page news
...
be.
mittee lectured to four empty
M- Nisse shows
cause it is frustrated that the
W.P.
Prolongs
and me in the 1972 presidential
10/11/72
campaign."
With McGovern long com-
Paris Talks
mitted to end the American
is
share of the warfare in Viet-
nam, Laos and Cambodia
within 90 days of his election,
White House announced
he made no claim that he was
night that presidential en-
producing any dramatic new
Henry A. Kissinger would
variation on his own program.
end
his talks in Paris with
Instead, he elaborated on his
Vietnam's negotiators
proposals, which he claimed
fourth day today.
"will work," and charged that
surprise announcement
President Nixon, by contrast,
neveral hours after
has "broken" his war-ending
House press secretary
pledges with a still-unfulfilled
L. Ziegler told report-
"secret plan" to stop the kill-
that Kissinger would re-
ing.
late last night after three
The senator's delivery of his
of talks,
plan to end "a hated war"
news came as CBS re-
was probably the -most effec-
sed
tive performance of his cam-
that Hanol would be
to accept South Viet-
paign. He spoke in strong
moral tones, but with calm
President Nguyen Van
deliberateness, and said that
as the leader of one of
in 1954 France elected a new
factions in a coalition
president, Pierre Mendes-
ernment, "if you make a
Rep.
tastic supposition" that he
France, with a "very similar"
route out of Indochina war-
accept such a coalition
rnment for à neutral
fare, which he fulfilled
"within three months."
Vietsam.
John
McGovern made no direct
Democrat
who returned Monday
reference last night to the cur-
rent negotiations in Paris be-
Bills Voted
from several weeks in
th Vietnam, said he had
tween presidential envoy
Henry A. Kissinger and North
told this by " North Viet-
Vietnamese Politburo member
Sabotage Charges
Pr.George's
ese who speaks with au-
Le Due Tho, which the White
ity."
House last night said will con-
By Karlyn Barker
By Philip A. McCombs
was noted here that the
tinue for an unprecedented
and Bob Woodward
Washington Post Sta.K Writer
Communist demand has
fourth day today.
Washington Post Staff Writers
The Prince George's County
ys been not merely the de-
The senator evidently was
The McGovern) camp last
Council overwhelmingly up
are of Thieu, but the basic
betting, however, that no mat-
night accused the Republicans
proved yesterday a controver
acturing of the govern-
ter what may emerge from the
of more acts of attempted po-
sial zowing law that allows
in Salgon.
Paris talks, it cannot produce
head of only one of three
litical sabotage and Rep.
construction of the Latgo
by election day. Nov. 7, the
sports arena on public park
pings in a soalition - the
sweeping exit from the war
Wright Patman (D-Tex.) re-
land and seeks to protect the
ent rulers in the South, the
that he advocates. Indeed,
newed his effort to open à
project from a legal challen
Communist opposition and
there is no claim of that inside
congressional investigation in-
The Council also
to the Watergate
Nixon committee
mission.
mökesman for the GAO
the remaining 20 per cent to
publicans described some of
Clawson, a White
There has also been
said yesterday, however, that
Nixen. "But everybody's get
the plans,
linked to the poll-
statement by Alfred C: Beld-
bis office "may not have the
ting suspicious-better give
age in the Post
win 111, who has been granted
time dr authority" to do all
more to Nixon," the Map.
Roger Lee Nixt, the attor
flatly denied the
immunity from prosecution,
that Patenan has asked by the
klewiez impersonator said.
ney, told CBS reporters in
lows that one plan was to
that. he participated In the
Oct 26 deadline.
Mankiewicz anid that Cron.
print up "bogus tickets or
reported that
bugging conspiracy and saw
There was no indication yes.
kite later told him of the im-
extra tickets" for Democratic
had linked the
transcripts of the bugging
terday whether any of the
personator's call and "said
fund-raisers, particularly those
incident
addressed to a presidential
four Republican aides asked to
the guy was definitely not
of Sen. Muskle,
campaign
of
polit
aide and members of the re-
testify before the Committee
just a crank."
Nixt said these extra tickets
and sabotage
election committee.
would appear Thursday.
Manklewicz said the other
"would be given to people so
Democrats.
Patman said U.S. District
A spokesman for the re-elec-
recent examples of alleged dis-
that when the dinner was ac-
an, chairman of
Court Judge John J. Sirica's
tion committee said he did not
ruption and Intelligence gath.
tually held, there'd be confu-
anking and Cur
amended order issued last Fri-
know what response MacGre-
ering included:
sion because too many people
alttee, cited the
day "clears the way for these
gor and Stans would have
. A telephone call to McGov.
would be there and this would
sing again for the
witnesses (Mitchell, Macy
"and I don't believe in saying
orn finance personnel by some.
Irritate the Democrats in a
gressional inves-
Gregor, Stans and Dean) to
things r don't know."
one impersonating Kirby Jones
way and create a problem in
subpoens powers
appear voluntarily
There
There was no response from
of the McGovern staff asking
the Muskle campaign."
is no legit mate reason for
either Mitchell or Dean, but a
for information on how much
tergate bugging
Nixt said he was told "1
was refused by
them not to appear." /
spokesman for Patman said be
was given to the McGovern
would get paid good for it,
STAR
of his Commit-
Sirica has earMer prohibited
expected that at least some of
campaign by Stewart Mott, the
that money was no problem."
WIN
the fair would show up for the
General Motors heir.
out-of-court comment on the
Meanwhile, reports were cir-
HOW
Watergate incident on the
hearing
. A request by another per-
culating in the McGovern
be called the
WHIL
ether for a 10 a.m.
grounds that It would preju-
"Judge Sirica has given
son claiming to be a Taiwan
camp that some of the initial
neeting because
dice the case of seven defend-
them permission to talk and
diplomat seeking information
information concerning t h e
ants indicted in the Watergate
that was their only excuse be-
on McGovern's long-range cam-
medical history of Sen. Thom-
of the past
fore," said the spokesman.
paign schedule.
as Eagleton came from Repub-
reatly intensified
break-in and alleged bugging
of Democratic National Com-
"They'll have to come up with
A telephone call by some-
lican sources. McGovern
11
of the matter."
mittee headquarters.
another reason or they'll sim-
one posing as an aide to cam-
dropped Eagleton from the
asked to testify
ply have to start talking."
paign manager Gary Hart re-
ticket after it was disclosed
an's Committee
On Friday. however, Sirica
The spokesman said that if
questing campaign chairman
that the senator had received
acGregor, chair-
said his ruling was not in-
the witnesses did not show up,
Lawrence F. O'Brien to stop
psychiatric treatment.
Committee to Re-
tended to affect congressional
"then the Committee will con-
criticizing Hart.
Robert Boyd, chief of the
esident: Maurice
activities, political debate or
sider voting to subpoena
Another telephone imper-
Washington bureau of Knight
committee's fi-
news media reporting.
them."
sonator alleging to be Oliver
newspapers which received the
an; John Mitch-
Patman sald he did not
Members of the Committee,
Tyrez, the McGovern TV
first tip on Eagleton's back
THE NEW YORK TIMES, FRIDAY OCTOBER 13. 1972
head,
PATMAN BALKED
Aide to Nixon's Camp
ON WATERGATE
Continued From Page 1, Col. 6 partment for an
team formed by W
of the re-election committee, aides last year The
Fails Twice to Get Enough
including its former chairman,
put together to plug
John N. Mitchell But the re-
to the press after L'
Democrats for Quorum
tion in The New Yor
spending
ceiling
ports did not give the source
details concerning tr
by
the
full
of the information.
iimiting nuclear arm
Efforts to reach Mr. Mirch-
By E. W. KENWORTHY
tween the United
both the Senate
Special York Times
ell today were unsuccessful.
Soviet Union
moved quickly
WASHINGTON, Oct. 12-
No evidence has been found,
The group incl
less contro-
Any prospect of a Congres.
either, that the seven men
Liddy, a former
Actions
to.
reau of Investigat
the
following:
sional investigation before Elec-
informed anyone on the com-
and E. Howard Hunt
approved a com-
tion Dav inter the break-in at
mittee orally about their in-
Central Intelligence
to
channel
$30-
the Democratic National Com-
telligence-gathering activities
erative and
revenues to
mittee and the alleged financial
at the Watergate, the sources elist. Both Mr. Lidd
and counties
said.
five years Sen-
irregularities connected with it
Hunt are among the
Although committee money
sons indicted in the
expected tomor-
apparently evaporated today
was used to finance the
Wright Patman, chairman of
According to sourc
the
bill
to
the
Watergate operation. evidence
the case Mr Liddy
the House Banking and Cur-
gathered thus far indicates that
Senate
and
the
rency Committee. failed twice
Hunt would 20 to M
G Gordon Liddy, the com-
to collect enough committee
when the intelliger
a compromise
mittee's former finance coun-
Democrats to make a quorum.
Associated Press
needed information
construct
sel, who is one of the seven
bill
send-
On Oct 2 the committee
Robert C. Mardian
Justice Department
men indicted in the case, ar-
voted 20 to 15 against a mo-
an agency of the
White House.
ranged for the money on his
the
tion DV Mr Patman that would
investigate a particu
approved
own.
Gen Creighton
poenas to-compel testimony by
have enabled him to issue sub-icrat is reported to be reluctant In
Last December
The $350.000 that was later
be Army Chief
to
head
an
investigation.
disclosed to have been in the
vote
of
84
to
2
40 witnesses and the produc-
any event, it is doubtful wheth-
is
needed.
fion of documents
er he could mount one before
safe of Maurice H Stans, Presi-
dent Nixon's chief fund-raiser.
Washing
passed and sent
He sought to determine how the election.
at the time of the Watergate
a bill to prohibit
$114,000 in Nixon campaign
In another development to-
operation was there for
unicipalities from
contributions was funneled
day. Mr. O'Brien asked Phillip
reasons that were not con-
Oct. 12. 197
on
airline
pas-
from a Mexico City bank, to
S. Hughes, director of the Of-
Houston. to Washington, and
nected with the operation, the
THE PRESIDE
ticket sales
fice of Federal Elections in the
sources said
be certain limited
ultimately to the Miami bank
General Accounting Office, an
Activities. Preside
They would not disclose the
only until next
account of Bernard L Barker,
investigating arm of Congress,
reasons but said that details
had a morning mee
who was one of seven men ar-
to inquire into the activities of
Republican
Cong
approved
com-
rested in the June 17 break-in
about the money would come
the "November Group, inc."
leaders. later he
a
out at the trial of the seven
authorizing
$2
at Democratic headquarters in
Nixon flew to Atlan
This group was incorporated
men and "will surprise some
next years the Watergate complex here
in New York State on Feb. 8,
to
eiderly,
In that vote 14 of the com-
people."
MAJOR POSITI
the
1972, and its purpose, accord-
Some of the information col-
Defense. The Sen
sportation,
mittee's 15 Republicans ioined
four Southern and two North-
ing to Republican officials, is lected in the investigation of
firmed by an S4 to
and home delivery
to conduct the President's ad- the case, according to one of
nomination of Gen
House
is
expected
ern Democrats to defeat the
ipproval
hairman, a Democrat of
vertising campaign.
those who took part in the in-
W Abrams as Army
tomorrow
Staff.
approved a Texas One Demox rat and one
Mr. O'Brien alleged that "the quiry, dealt with the relation-
compromise de Republican were absent.
November Group itself has not ship of Mr. Mardian to men in
CONGRESS
priations
bill.
the
Mr Patman called the meet
registered as a political commit- volved in the Watergate affair
Floor A
World
War
=
today ostensibly to ques-
tee, or in any way accounted While an assistant attorney
Ships.
The
2-billion below tion four Nixon aides-John
for the monies transferred to general, Mr. Mardian served as
and
it."
the liaison in the Justice De-
Sen
ate
a
requests
The
N Mitchell, former chairman
act
before
send
of the Committee for the Re-
to
the
White
election of the President; Clark
Mar Gregor, his successor: Mau-
approved and sent
rice H Stans, the President's
a bill providing
chief fund-raiser, and John
controls
over
Wesley Dean 3d. counsel to
and authorizing 0
the President, who has already
mined
done an in-house investigation
has
before
the Watergate incident for
lar
bill
butlet
Mr
Nixon
whether
final
a
was
never
any
likeli
bill
will
come
Bood that these four would
How does you
respond to Mr Patman's HIVE
the
34
L+1
THE 1972 CAMPAIGN
THE NEW
2D CAMPAIGN TOUR
PLANNEDFORNIXON
President to Visit New York
OH Next Tuesday-G.O.P.
Legislators Speak out
By ROBERT B. SEMPLE Jr.
special to the New York Times
WASHINGTON Sept. 19
F
President Nixon will fly to New
York next Tuesday to kick off
the second tour of his re-elec-
tion campaign.
Mr. Nixon, who will pay A
brief visit to Texas Friday and
Saturday morning, is scheduled
will
They reported that The
declared,
the
Bhd Nixon Administration
elt he needed an opportunity
Heedy IH American cities es-
they
Congress shows mature fe-
to explain his view of the
pecially will be dealt a heavy,
straint on spending
country and what he felt
painful blow.
Senator Hugh Scott of PeHH-
it should aspire to and to
Mr. McGovern has wrestled
sylvania minority leader, was
try to dispel fears among the
for some time with the dif-
asked- whether he could clear
electorate that he was a radical.
ficulty of providing aid to
The
up apparent confusion between
assertions by Administration
Despite Senator McGovern's
Catholic and other religious
ation
aides on Sept. 7 that there
recent success with crowds
schools that could be recon-
would be no tax increases in a
during his travels across the
ciled with the constitutional de-
Seria
mand for the separation of
today
country and his own apparent
ents
second Nixon term and a state-
ment yesterday by George P.
growing confidence, many of
church and state.
those following the campaign
He has visited Catholic edu-
paro
S
Shultz, Secretary of the Trea-
discerned a degree of uncer-
cators for discussions, as he
socia
sury, that "sooner of later" the
question of tax Increases would
tainty about the national im-
did last month in Kenosha, Wis.
Sena
have to Be faced If Govern-
pact his efforts were having In
tn Issuing his statement to-
ment spending was allowed to
the new discussion of the wis-
day, he noted that the Supreme
soci
keep rising.
dom of an early nationwide
Court had upheld the use of
your
television address.
public school textbooks by hbn-
vide
"There Is no confusion about
it." Mr. Scott said. "If the
'Would Not Like It"
public school students because
ance
Congress will adopt 1 spending
In the meantime, his decl-
a "wide segment of informed
your
opinion, legislative and other-
credit
celling, if the Congress is re-
sion to produce this week sub-
wise, has found that these
childre
L4
sponsible, that is it The Presi-
stantive statements on the
dent believes that if his advice
problems of Appalachia and
schools do an acceptable job
paroch
such all
is followed there is no reașon
parochial schools for those
of providing secular educa-
strategists who have been ad-
tion to their students."
in vie
crease.' why he should Have 1 tax 1
cisions
vocating the use of such state-
For this reason, he said he
Ronald L. Ziegler, the White
ments as a counterbalance to
thought there was "reason to
you for
House press secretary, took
overwh
what have become his standard
believe that further aid to the
our pul
much the same tack IN his
attacks on the Nixon Adminis-
parents and children par-
enrolls
morning briefing. He said the
tration on such issues as Viet-
ticipating In parochial and other
nation
President did not "Intend" to
inflation. ham, taxes, unemployment and
bona fide nonpublic schools
propose tax increases but that
will be upheld by the Court."
Schmi
P
Congress would have the te-
Along these lines he visited
"It is on that basis that after
sponsibility to false revenues
MEM
Gordon Technical High School
careful thought to all the dif-
If It continued to exceed Mr.
The At
this morning, where he was
ficult questions involved," he
Nixon's spending requests.
that can
greeted by an auditorium full
went on, "I want to endorse
Mr. Ziegler took trong ex-
said to
of screaming students.
here this morning a system of
ception. to an article In this
would
First he warmed them up
morning's New York Times
tax credits to aid the parents
with the attacks on the Ad-
court-of
which suggested that pledges
of children attending parochial
ministration's conduct of the
ing of
made at separate briefings on
Vietham war that have become
and schools.' other bona fide nonpublic
for raci
Sept. 7 by Mr. Ziegler and
expected of him.
Court
John D. Ehrlichman, assistant
We would not like it If
He added that he thought the
authorit
to, the President for domestic
bombs were falling AH
FRE proposals Full "by no means cover
der," M
THE NEW YORK TIMES, WEDNESDAY SEPTEMBER 13, 1972
HOUSE UNIT SCANS Oversight May Peril Dem
FUND GIVEN G.O.P.
By AGIS SALPUKAS
Special is The New York times
WASHINGTON, Sept.
The suit, for damages by the
A Secret Report Describes
Democratic party against Re-
publican campaign committee
How Money Went From
is A result of the break-in at
Democratic headquarters may
Mexico to Washington
be In danger of being dismissed
because of oversights by attor-
neys for the Democrats.
WASHINGTON, Sept. 12 (AP)
Judge Charles R. Richey of
Staff investigators for the
the Federal District Court here
decided at hearing today
House Banking Committee say
that he would rule Sept. 20
that is much as $100,000 In
on the motion to dismiss the
Nixon campaign contributions
suit, which asks for $1-million
that came from Mexico was In-
IH damages.
volved In the break-in and al-
If He dismissed the sult, the
leged bugging of the Demeratic
Democrats could probably re-
National Committee offices IA
file It, but this would further
Washing last June 17.
delay the progress of the suit.
Even before the judge's decl-
in a confidential report to the
sion today, the sult had little
full
committee,
investi
chance of coming to trial be-
said
that
at
least
000
may
fore the election.
have
come
from
Mexica
na-
Judge Richey also ordered
tionals, The Investi zators added
the lawyers for the Democrats
Associated Press
that accepting such contribu-
to stop taking depositions from
Hugh W. Sloan Jr., for-
tions would violate Federal law.
people connected with the Re-L
mer treasurer of the Com-
The 000 had been linked to
publican campaign and the
one of five men Irrested IM the
White House until he makes
mittee for the Re-election
break-in at the Watergate
his
of the President, on his
Building The report was prepared on
Hugh Fulling. sloan It. former
way to meet with law-
treasurer of the Committee for
yers in Watergate case.
orders from the chairman of the
the Re-election of the Presi-
Banking Committee, Represen
tative Wright Patman, Democrat
ocrats
dent, appeared attorneys before the but Dem-
today,
O'Brien, who was chairman of
of Texas.
was unclear whether he made
the Democratic National Com-
The report was Accompanied
mittee at the time of the break-
by A directive that not be re-
Mr. deposition. Sloan and Maurice H.
in last June 17 at the Water-
leased to the public, But a copy
Stans, finance chairman of
gate Building.
Associated Press
of the report was obtained
President Nixon's campaign
Judge Richey could dismiss
day with Walter J. Hickel, former Interior Secretary
Jack Anderson, the columnist,
were accused In an amended
on a technicality - that
who made ivaliable to The
complaint to the suit yesterday
Harold Ungar, one of the at-
Associated Press.
of passing $114,000 to a spy
torneys handling the suit for
ans for Last 8 Weeks of Drive
Staffed into I Suitease
squad, refusing to say what the
the Democrats, did not answer
Committee staff Investigators
money had been used for and
a motion to dismiss the suit
said the $100,000 in funds was
destroying the financial records.
within five days of when it was
brought from Mexico to the
The original suit was brought
filed.
of "alks Starts off With
that the Watergate incident
would be "a plus for us IM the
on behalf of awrence F.
The motion was made by
Strategy Meeting Daring
long run, hot minus, "overstate. because
têts Pennzoil Ift Houston, Tex., in early
Corporation headquar-
of ments,' and that there was "A8
Democratic
April where, with Pennzoll ex-
White House Breakfast
evidence that the Watergate has
ecutives present, alon was stuffed with
Kennedy and McGovern
W
Into
suitcase
affected us adversely.
600,000
in
contribu-
for canvassing and
The briefing, according to
lons
collected
in
Texas.
The
Continued From Page 1, Col. 7
"Democratic" victory are being
Mr. MacGre of and Schatot
suitcase
was
then
blaced in the Senator's cam-
He alleged bugging of the
Robert J. Dole, the chairman of
Pennzoli
plane
to
Washington,
State Street at hoon and to an
baign offices across the coun-
nocratic National Committee
the Republican National Com-
the Investi ators said
audience of about 10,600 In be-
try. Television and radio com-
dquarter in the Watergate
was concerned 'mostly
They added that the haste
troit's Kennedy Square later,
mercials used during the pri-
But
discussed Mac- Mr.
Mr.
with the mechanics of the cam- to
necessary to beat the April
was,
according
before going on to Ohio for #
maries are being updated to In-
effective date of new Fed
who Held brief news
Senator Dole, a "very enthusi-
afai election law that required
third performance IN the Cleve-
clude an appeal to "vote Demo-
cratic" on Nov. 7.
later in the day,
astic, well- attended meeting
the naming of all campaign
land Arena.
McGovern state coordinators
been
The 120 state leaders were
contributors who donated more
The day appeared to be an
have been ordered to clear
Bilott, -hour briefing for
the
cheduled to go almost directly
than $100.
outline In minitture of Sena-
campaign appointments with
from
their
briefing
during
lepublican officials Held
which they heard irious ex.
Staff Investi Madrice also stans COA-
tor McGovern's a national strat-
Governors, Mayors or party
The objective according
and labor leaders who opposed
former Sectetary of Commerce
the Senator's nomination,
LIGHT Committee headquar
ligh's chief pollster-to
Mankiewicz the po-
now heads the had Nixon contra- fund-
Mr. Mankiewicz spent
White House reception given by
litical director combine
dicted faising himelf tatements to
campaign
as much of the Democra ticparty
Saturday as a house rues of
MacGregor
the President and Mrs. Nixon.
Salvatore Bontempo, the New
been to the effect
As for the President's cam
the committee and its Investi-
as we can with the McGovern
constituenci which he de-
Jersey
Democratic
prompt handing -down
in plans Mr. MacGre or
gators.
dined Sunday with
that Con ressional râces
scribed as the young, the ml-
would exonet-
Stans's restimony
notities and the liberal suburb-
Camiel, the leader of the
connected
with
be in element in determining
re-election
This,
his
schedule,
ahites In score of key-elec-
Philadelphia Democratic
with
Mr. Stans, according to denied the
ization
toral-vote states.
before The Presidential elec
that Mr Nixon would make
Lon the Democratic challenger
said that Mr Trudeau
three more radio broade asts to
stimped populous New York
sue a statement after
mottow, Triday and Saturday
State and New with #
tomorrow with his Ca
and would address the nation
warning that Mr Vato as
indicated that he w
on television Thursday night at
he referred to the Pre sident
no public comment
730 occlock and 00 Nov 6. the
would bestierdless second
on the stinging per
eve of the election
administration of the Vespair
coke be received at
All the broader will DE
of the auties
He himself was
paid for by the ( committee for
It's not going to do us BAY
DIS parliamentary dis
the Re-election of the Presi
good to be the TO say that
none easily in 80 Eng)
dent
we have the most devástating
my area of Montres:
and murderous nussiles that an
Strategy Unchanged
Under Canada's par.
be conceived by the mind of This final flurry of electronic s, stem, the fact that
man, if they're defending a activity, however, represents servatives were one
country that is beset from with- only a slight, and fully pre- of the Liberals was :
in by the enemies of crime and dictable, departure from Mr
drugs and pollution and divi- Nixon's campaign strategy The
Continued on Page 2,
ston and hatred." he asserted essence of that strategy has
It was Senator McGovern's been to let his subordinates
11th campaign visit to New and surrogates carry out tradi-
Eggs ano
York and his sixth to New tional campaigning on the road
Jersey since Labor Day It was while he tends to Presidential
also the 29th wedding anniver- business at home.
sary for the candidate and his Mr Nixon has campaigned in
wife, Eleanor They celebrated only 10 states since the Repub-
with railies at the Onondaga lican National Convention in
County Court House in Syra- August, including a "nonpoliti-
cuse and in Journal Square in ball visit to Philadelphia, and
Jersey City, followed by' fund ne is at present scheduled to
Continued on Page 27, Column 2 Continued on Page 26, Column 3
House Report Raises Questions
On Nixon Campaign Financing
$30.000 Donation Traced
The Watergate Mystery
By E. W. KENWORTHY
By WALTER RUGABER
Special to The New Y 44 Times
Special to The New York Times
WASHINGTON, Oct. 31-A WASHINGTON, Oct. 31-De-
report by the staff of the House spite 19 weeks of intensive in-
Banking and Currency Commit- vestigation, sensational disclos-
tee raised new questions today ure, and heated political debate,
dimensions
of
the
Water-
Under the state election law.
throughout the state
William L Weiss, Port hester,
candidates and committees or
"I don't see a comparable
N Y. $5,000. Mrs. Albert Las
ganized for candidates are re
storefront effort for McGov
ker, 29 Beekman Place $3,000
quired to file preliminary ex
etn." said di clerk in the Set
Mrs Herbett H Leliman 820
pense statements 10 days be
retary of State's office
Park Avenue $500 Carter
fore the election A final states
The
President's
committee
Burden, a New York City Coun
ment must be filed 20 days based in the Roosevelt Hotel in
cilman. $1,000, Mr and
after the election
New York City, spent $10,237
Cass Canfield, Redford. N Y
"It seeins to me," an analyst
for buttons, including 250,000
$500, Louis Nizer 477 Madison
for the Secretary of State's of
Nixon Agnew buttons. But only
Avenue, $1.000 William Ben
United Press Informational
fice sand, "that a lot of money
President Nixon's name ap
ton, 342 Madison Avenue d
Rockefeller yesterday
was raised for Nixon outside
peared on 850,000 other but
publisher $1,000, Dr Veta
a luncheon address.
the state and spent here, while
tons. The campaign buttons
Rubin, 1080 Filth Avenue an
the McGovern people obtained
were bought from Green Due
anthropologist $5,000 Mr and
a lot of money here and spent
Metal Stamping Company, 55
Mrs. Arthur Krim, 33 East 690
for Nixon;
it in other states."
West 42d Street
Street, $5,077.06
eek 5th Term
Report Raises Questions on Nixon Funds
ADDEN
was placed on the "ina tive"
which made half the loan
Times
Continued From Page 1. Col. 1
table as the Governor
list by the Securities and Ex-
The F D.I.C has a large stake
plored. the staff said, because change Commission in late
in the outcome of the case since
Governor appeared to be
any contributions by foreign 1969.
hundreds of depositors in the
ing himself as he fielded
nationals would be a violation
"This raises an obvious ques-
closed bank may not 201 their
of the law.
tion: Why would Gulf Re
funds unless. the receiver is able
written questions passed
members of the audience
In a response to the report,
sources be transferring large
to recover unpaid JOBOS such
speaker's table after his
a spokesman for the Commit-
sums to an inactive corpora
as the one made to Mr Duncan,
red speech.
tee for the Re-election of the
tion?" the report said
the report said
President termed it a "dishon-
The Washington Post Oct
While unable to off P.
d he been asked by the
est collection of innuendo and
6 quoted Federal Bureau of
$1.3-million owed to 3
Administration to make
fourth-hand hearsay" and
Investigation sources as having
agency the report stated "Dun-
peech? "Yes sir. and 1 ac-
"nothing more than an elev-
said that the subsidiary turned
can is somehow able make
d with great pleasure,
enth-hour attempt to save Mr.
the money over to Manuel
a
$305,000
contribution
ockefeller replied.
Ogarrio Daguerre, the Mexican
form
of
personal
note
to
uld he be Secretary of
Patman's candidate for Presi-
a
or Secretary of Defense
dent from what may be one of
attorney for Gulf Resources.
Committee to Reselect the
the worst defeats in American
For Legal Services
dent"
second Nixon Adminis-
?
political history."
The company. according to
Contributed to Humphrey
have no plans other than
This was the second staff re-
the same reported BI
The
staff
said
port based on an investigation
sources. insists that the money
"the FDIC should make
av where 1 am." he re-
"I have been offered no
into the break-in at and alleged
was for legal services
claim" on the committee and
bugging of the Democratic Na-
But Mr. Ogarrio reportedly
Mr. Duncan for "the amount
seek no jobs."
said he was seeking to
tional Committee headquarters
converted the deposit into four
of the note" to the committee
last June 17 and possible finan-
cashier's checks totaling
The staff said the note had
t the President of the
cial irregularities in fund col-
$89,000 and $11.000 in cash.
been discounted "in the amount
States in carrying out
In this form, the money was
of $10,200.55" by the First
duties" as any citizen lection.
returned to Houston and he-
"That's my only goal After the first report Sept.
National Bank of Washington:
came part of about $700,000
'which holds large balances
y only plan." Mr. Rocke- 12, the committee chairman,
flown to Washington just be-
ed insisted if he would endorse Texas, twice sought the panel's
Wright Patman, Democrat of
for the Committee to Re-elet:
fore the April 7 deadline.
the President."
The four checks ended up in
Mr. Duncan contributed
President Agnew for the approval for the use of sub-
the Miami bank account of
$300,000 to Senator Hubert H.
lican Presidential nomi- poenas to elicit information. He
Bernard I Barker, one of five
Humphrey's campaign for the
in 1976 and what Cabi- was twice refused.
men arrested in the break in
Democratic Presidential nom-
st he would accept in an In the report today, the staff
at the Democratic offices in
administration. Mr several times complained that
nation earlier this year
the Watergate complex. After
its investigators had been ham-
The report also said that one
eller replied that nobody
being converted. to ash, the
of the committee's investigators
any sense" would make
pered by the lack of subpoena
money was returned to re-
had been told by a witness
dorsements beyond 1972
power
election headquarters in Wash-
that Hugh W Sloan, former
ted that a New York City
Money Transferred
ington.
treasurer for the Finance Com-
al election was coming up
Earlier, staff investigators
The staff report raised the
mittee to Re-elect the President
ear, followed by a state-
reported that $100,000 in cam-
question todav whether the
had said that someone had
election New York in
paign funds had been traced
$100,000 was "an illegal cor-
called him to say "thev could
from Houston to Mexico, back
porate contribution disguised
monitor the deposits of Demo-
Rockefeller. who sought
to Houston and then to Wash- through transfer." the use of the
cratic Senators and Congress
Presidentia
to learn of any illegal
W.POST
10/01
P.5
Judge's Gag Order Questioned
The Wo
FRIDAY
By Lawrence Meyer
could." Sirica acknowledged
eral judge about & court
practice law. In 1934, while
Washington Post Staff Writer
that the order could possi-
order. Patman said he had
in private practice, Sirica
House Banking and Cur-
bly prevent Democratic
not spoken to Sirica yester-
used his boxing talents on
rency Committee Chairman
presidential candidate
day. "He gave out his inter.
a Metropolitan police ser-
Nixon Aid
Wright Patman yesterday
view," Patman said, "and I
George McGovern from dis.
geant who, according to wit-
expressed "deep concern" to
felt privileged to give out
cussing the case, but Mc-
nesses, took a swing at Siri-
the judge who nas prohib-
this," referring to the letter.
ca. Sirica left the officer
AIDES, From A1
Govern said he would not be
ited anyone connected with
inhibited by it. Patman
Patman's letter high-
with k swollen eye,
Timmons has declined to
the trial of seven men
said he was confident Con-
lighted a potential constitu-
At that time, residents of
discuss whether he received
charged in the break-in at
gress could proceed with its
tional confrontation Involv-
the District of Columbia did
the Watergate from publicly
ing all three branches of
any memos of wiretapped con-
own investigation, in the face
not have the vote; nonethe-
versations since The Washing-
discussing the case,
of Sirica's order, "but what I
government. Sirica's order
less Sirica served as a volun-
ton Post first asked him about
In a five-page letter to
am concerned about is the
was sought by the defense
teer speaker for the Re-
interpretation which pró-
but was not protested by the
the matter more than two
Chief District Judge John J.
publican National Commit-
Sirica, Patman said that Sir-
prosecution.
weeks ago.
spective congressional wit-
tee. His reward, in 1957, was
nesses might place on your
When it was bointed out
an appointment to the Dis-
A White House spokesman
ou
ica's order may, be sobroad
that it will interfere with an
order." Among the questions
to Sirica Wednesday that
trict Court here by Presi-
said Timmons denies that he
to
investigation Patman hopes
Patman said he wanted to in-
the order might prevent
dent Dwight D. Eisenhower.
ever received any such memos
qu
to hold.
vestigate was the granting
McGovern and other politi-
He is chief judge by virtue
as asserted by Baldwin, who is
Patman said that the Jus-
cal candidates from discuss-
of his seniority.
expected to be a key govern-
to
of a national charter to a
tice Department has used
Minnesota bank following a
ing the June 17 Watergate
On the bench, Sirica has
ment witness in the Watergate
Ba
the case as an excuse to
$25,000 contribution that
break-in, Sirica said, "I
developed a reputation as a
bugging trial.
the
frankly
hadn't
A
968 rivals, Call-
plomácy to work in the next
Ronald Reagan
few days in an effort to, assure
among those groups who
that the campaign fully. ex.
make up the new coalition
Gov Nelson A.
for change in the electorate:
are become his
ploits what most Republicans
the college-educated, the
with Reagan
see as their best opportunity
young. suburban voters, and
imporary chair.
in 16 years for a májor nation-
those earning $15,000 and
convention and
a) victory.
king the speech
Secret Sertice
G
over a year.
The eross section" was
Nikon
asked? "All $ all, did you
Poll, which on
have on overall favorable
fourvyears ago
or unfavorable impression of
only a 2-point
the Democratic conention in
sepective Demo-
To Guard Schmits
Miami?"
ate Hubert H
day reports him
Rep. John G. Schthitz.
Pover- Unterer-
able
able
ed of his rival.
the American party presi-
Total Likely Vehics
McGovern. A
dential candidaté, will so
By Region
East
poll for Time
cetve Secret Service pro-
Midwest
tection, the Treasury De-
172
South
ased today. puts
West
$. margin at 28
By Age
partment announced yes
18-19
30-00
terday.
Aug worth/Post 20 Post
96 and over
and other Indi-
BY Size of Place
The abnouncement, said
Citize
Mr. Nixon's
Suburbe
oGregor aban-
Schmitz had requested
Towns
Rural
= SEVE are t SEEK B
tionary tone he
the protection for himself
By ducation
8th
or
less
on he assumed
and his vice presidential
High school
25 21 *** 27 31 27 USA D 18 30 25
Sure Not 25 ###7 282 NEW I EXP
the campaign
College
go. Asked today
candidate, Tom Anderson.
By income
p7
Under
way Mr. Nixon
Sebmitz, a lameduck
999
14,099
the election."
congressman from Call-
$15,000 and over
. 1972. Chicago Tribune
olied with a flat,
fornia, switched from the
strategists are
Republican to the Ameri-
(ive convention
can party brior to his
Watergate
rovide a prope.
nomination.
for even further
Break-In to
Probed
S
you International
Chairman Wright Patman of
the House Banking Committee
yeste day ordered a staff in-
vest ation of the break in at
the De inderat National Com-
mittees headquarters in
Washington two months ago.
O
The Texas Demoerat, re-
sponding to a request from
Rep. Henry Reuse, (D-Wis.),
told Committee investigators
to report within two weeks on
what Rouse called "the trans-
ter thr ush U.S. and Mexican
hants listed in the
THE WASHINGTON POST F7
the Merry-Co-Hound
DIALAGAIN!
End of Cuba Boycott Is Seen in orks
ing to restore commerelal ties
that It had been left for him tional bank charter to à hold-
By Jack Anderson
with Cuba in exchange say,
th the salety-deposit box be-
the company,
wé reparted in in earlier
for & softening of the Sorjet
fore the deadline The money
Nixon and Youths
column that President Nixon
line in Vietham.
was converted into a cashier's
check, which was turned over
President Nixon was so
has rejected the Idea of in-
cluding Cube IA his campaign
Patman's Probe
on April 11 to President Nif
checred by the youth turnout
on's chief fund faiser, Maurice
for him at the Miami conven-
to reduce East-West tehsions.
House Banking Chairman
tion that he has called for sim-
This is still the word going out
Wright Patman (D-Tet.) has
Stans.
The same check was subse-
Uar youth shows in Chicago,
from the White House
taken steps to block $ national
But after the presidential
bank charter för Dwayne An-
quently cashed by Bernard
Los Angeles and New York
dreas, the soybean tveoon,
Barker, who recruited the sec-
City
electión, #e have How learned,
ond-story squad that was at
His young leaders. However,
be may modify his hard line
whose $25,000 cash contribu-
toward Havana,
tion to the Republicáns has
rested at gunpoint inside Dem
are engaged in a bilstering
The detailed planning has
been traced to the ringleader
ocratic national headquarters
feud over campaign strategy.
already started Lot ending the
of the Mission Impossible
during the early morning
The youth Issues team at the
boycott against Cubs and the re-
crew caught breaking into
hours of June 17.
Republican National Commit-
WA have obtained a photo-
tee wants to "tell It like it 16"
dibitity among the
PAG
tuesday, bd. 3, 1972 THE WASHINGTON POST
Hill Probe of Vatergate Scored
I'm
By Bob Woodward
poena list obtained by The
s William E. Timmons, the
the possession" of Stans, the
President's assistant for con-
chief Nixon fund raiser, and
and Cafi Bernstein
Washington Post includes
gressiohal relations. in the
Hugh W. Sloan Jr., the former
Fly
Washington Post statt Writers
former Attorney General John
Committee's list of proposed
Nixon committee treasurer.
the Justice Department, tol-
N. Mitchell and former Com-
witnesses, Timmons is de-
s Edward Failer, who is
lowing ₫ Republican campaign
merce Secretary Maurice H.
scribed all "an employee of
said on the Committee list to
to block televised congression-
Stans. fn addition, 14 members
the White House who report-
be "&n employee of the Com-
al-Hearings into the Watergate
of the Nixon re-election com-
edly received memos contain.
mittee to Re-elect the Presi-
liig matërial from eavésdrop-
dent and one who has knowl-
star
bugging case, has attempted
mittee and pertinent records
ping efforts directed at the
edge of whether the campaign
to discourage the House Bank-
of eight banks and the Inter-
Democratic National Commit-
committee attempted surveil-
thg and Currency Committee
from opening such an inquiry
nal Revenue Service would be
tee." Reliable sources have
lance of political activities."
said that the ex-FBI agent, Al-
The other White House älde
in a letter sent to Com-
mittee Chairman Wright Pat
subpoensed. An effort t8 postpone any
tred C. Baldwin III, who par-
named on the list is John W.
incl
licipated in the Watergate
Dean III, counsel to the Presi.
man (D-Tex.), the department
congressional Water ate probe
bugging, has said that Tim-
dent, who conducted an In-
expressed the same reserva-
until after the Nov election
tions as President Nixon re-
mons received the memos.
vestigation into the Watergate
has been spearheaded by Rep.
cently cited in opposing any
Garry E. Brown (R-Mich.), who
8 Murray M. Chotlner, who
case, for the President.
last week asserted that within he had the
If described In the Commit-
After receiving the report
I've
further extrajudicial inquity
tée list is an investigator for
of Dean's investigation, Presi-
shtes
dent Nixon said that It ex-
ends to M
committee's own
everyone "presently
Tempa