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
4520700
label
Nixon Pardon - Hungate Subcommittee General
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4520700
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Nixon Pardon - Hungate Subcommittee General
citationUrl
collections
Philip W. Buchen Files
Philip Buchen's General Subject Files
subjects
Nixon, Richard M. (Richard Milhous), 1913-1994
Governmental investigations
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4520700
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1974-12-01
month
12
year
1974
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1974-08-01
month
8
year
1974
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
7f4758b7a111ad41
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 34, folder "Nixon Pardon Hungate
Subcommittee - General" 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States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.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.
Exact duplicates within this folder were not digitized.
Digitized from Box 34 of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
Meeting w/Pres 7:30 AM Thurs
(1) Irepare JAddy. (a) late thu. letter w/ resig.
Bacbyrd (10) Time article pressush, quoted
of Ascbelib
leftside (c) all Hangate Cares,
(d) latest Hugate letter
(2). Prepare 16 copies w/ tabs for committee
(3) Press Copies - do in early many
notabs just attach w/ letter
top
20 sets of tabs - A-B-C-D
20 cover folders - 2 hole punched
Need from files
wf
Redo- AQ2'l Bad mes - date fa first Nixa ten
Loose heel book of 20't Bailynd
for Pres. make 5
J.M.
2. legal size bunder
3. catagines - in
/
ti) Caresp. w/ subc - get latest letter
2
(2) Materials furnished subcam - w/ date submitt
subtab
Lost (3) (3) Lazams Memo - degal Memorandur
Fa Heaving (fint pages)
+5) Statement by RN $ dole
(4) Letter accompanying Jawashi So FORD Reig
-(6) Puss Cal No. 1
8/28/74
GÉRALD.A ,&
& 8. Wall St. J. interview wf L.J.
7. Time interview with Gen Haig- date
FORD & 078838 LIBRARY
of
Prior to the Hungate hearing, we put together a book
of various press conferences
President's on 8/28/74
Mr. Buchen's after the pardon
Also wants a full transcript of the Hungate hearing, including
Q & A's.
Mr. B. has our file
attached file is Barry's,
from which I pulled
the transcript, which
Mr. B has.
FORD - 034830 LIBRARY
When mr. B
is finished,
I will put this
away and
return Barry's
file to him.
FORD is QERALD LIBRARY
Is the Pardon Explained
By the Ford-Nixon Tapes?
By Frank Fox and Stephen Parker
"
On November 14, 1973, Buzhardt obtained the Ford-Nixontapes
On the 15th, Ford began testifying at his confirmation hearings
R
ichard Nixon is out of office but not out of power.
in the pornographic publishing trade.
We believe that the source of this power resides in
It was to Gerald Ford that Nixon turned to head off the
over 5,000 hours of secretly taped, candid conver-
threatened investigation of the break-in at the Democratic
sations between Nixon, his aides, and the leaders
National Committee headquarters by the House Committee
of both political parties. These tapes lie, for the moment,
on Banking and Currency, chaired by Congressman Wright
in a well-guarded room in a government building in down-
Patman of Texas. Patman told us on September 9, 1974, that
town Washington, D.C. Among the many voices on these
Gerald Ford was asked by the president to get with Connally
tapes, the most celebrated, aside from Nixon's, is the Mid-
to get something on me When Ford was questioned about
western voice of President Gerald R. Ford, who recently
this by the House Committee on the Judiciary, during his
granted Nixon a full, free, and absolute pardon
confirmation hearings last November, he admitted that be
Even some. of Ford's most patient: observers were out-
had worked to forestall the investigation, but he denied any
raged and mystified, not only by the fact of the pardon
impropriety.
and its timing, but by the accompanying deal that ensured
Ford also had frequent telephone conversations with
Nixon's ultimately regaining control of the White House
Nixon. It was not unusual for Ford to speak with Nixon at
tapes. The available explanations-Ford's simple Christian
least once a week, and one of Ford's White House aides
charity, or his stupidity, or both-have left even the most
considers this a modest estimate. Pages from President Nix-
gullible among us unpersuaded. We believe the doubts will
on's "Daily Diary" for April, 1973, show that Nixon did
continue until those in a position to pursue the truth—
not: hesitate. to place telephone calls to Ford at a time
notably the Congress and Special Prosecutor Leon Jaworski
when the Watergate problem was growing in intensity. In
-get around to the most obvious source of information on
fact, during his confirmation hearings, Ford admitted having
reasons for the pardon-the hours of tapes between Nixon
discussed with President Nixon the break-in at the Demo-
and Ford, and between Nixon and powerful politicians in
cratic National Committee, after it occurred: "I cannot
both parties. It may be that nothing less, and nothing else,
remember whether it was one or more [occasions], but we
will explain the mystery.
have discussed the burglary of the Democratic Party
Ford went on to say that both he and Nixon called it a
When Congressman Gerald Ford made one of his fre-
"stupid, naïve operation." What is important is not how
quent visits to the Oval Office, he was meeting not only
Ford chose to characterize the conversation in hindsight, but
Richard M. Nixon, president of the United States, his friend
the fact that such conversations took place, that they exist
for over 25 years, but, more important, the titular head
and are retrievable from the White House tapes. Further-
of the Republican party, whose creation Gerald Ford is.
more, Ford admitted during the same hearings that he may
It was through the Republican party that Gerald Ford had
have had discussions both in person and by phone with
been able to achieve rewards for his abilities as a lawyer
Nixon on the question of support payments for the Water-
and a legislator. Nixon was the embodiment of everything
gate burglars. If so, these are also on tape.
that Ford was in awe of, or felt indebted to. For a man
Ford, according to one of his long-time assistants, regular-
whose political ambitions were already satisfied, working
ly attended the Tuesday meetings at the White House be-
as a minority leader under Nixon gave Ford an opportunity
tween Republican leaders and Nixon. Ford's appointment
to demonstrate his loyalty and his gratitude-both to his
log for other meetings with Nixon is not available, but his
party and to the president. No assignment which Nixon
aide says they were not infrequent. During the 29-month
described as essential to the interests of the country or the
taping period, Gerald Ford met with Nixon on at least 85
party was too demanding or too distasteful.
separate occasions; during the same period, Ford spoke to
It was Ford who, in November, 1969, threatened the
Nixon over the phone well over a hundred times. By the
impeachment of Justice William O. Douglas, with the ad-
most conservative estimate, the White House tape record-
ministration's blessings. (At the same time, Nixon's nomi-
ings contain over twenty hours of candid conversation be-
nation of Clement Haynsworth to the Supreme Court was
tween Gerald Ford and Richard Nixon
under severe attack by liberals.) After Haynsworth's de-
The last thing that Gerald Ford would have suspected,
feat, Ford delivered one of the ugliest attacks on a sitting
as he sat with the president in the Oval Office or the Execu-
justice ever made by an American politician, suggesting
tive Office Building office, or in the Cabinet Room, or
that Douglas represented international gambling interests,
chatted with him on the phone, was that his every word
political radicals, and "Mr. Ralph Ginzburg and his friends
was being secretly tape-recorded.
"
Haldem plan required the preservation of the White House
tapes, a presidential pardon for Nixon, a pardon for himself
"
he secret White House taping system, which was
regretfully let go by Nixon on April 30, 1973, he has
T
installed on the orders of H. R. Haldeman, Nixon's
remained at the White House through July, using a gues
chief of staff, was in operation between February,
office in the E.O.B. Haldeman, who had originally selected
1971, and July, 1973. At Haldeman's direction,
Alexander Haig to be a National Security Adviser aide for
hidden microphones were placed in Nixon's Oval Office, in
Kissinger, must surely have had a primary role in the selec
the Cabinet Room, in his private office in the E.O.B., and
tion of Haig as his successor, and in the selection of the
in his quarters and office at Camp David An entirely sep-
lawyer who would advise the president on Watergate mat
arate automatic system recorded all of Nixon's telephone
ters, J. Fred Buzhardt. Haig became the White House chie
conversations. With the exception of the Cabinet Room's, all
of staff on May 4; Buzhardt came to the White House six
the concealed microphones were voice-activated. The micro-
days later.
phones in the Cabinet Room were activated only at the re-
The pardon which was finally implemented by Ford or
quest of Nixon or Haldeman, and this was frequently done,
September 8, 1974, was a copy of a plan submitted by Hal
as court/evidence indicates.
deman shortly before Nixon resigned his office. Haldeman's
Senators Hugh Scott; Robert Griffin, Robert Dole, Ed-
plan coupled amnesty for Vietnam war evaders with a pardor
ward Gurney, Roman Hruska, Norris Cotton, Howard Baker,
for Nixon's chief aides and urged the president to pardor
John Tower, Carl Curtis, John McClellan, Russell Long,
himself-"You can do it!" This plan was not implemented
James Eastland, Strom Thurmond, John Stennis. Congress-
by Nixon before he resigned, of course; it was Gerald Fore
men John Rhodes, Leslie Arends, John Anderson, F. Ed-
who carried out the plan shortly after taking office by firs
ward Hébert, Otto- Passman, Carl Albert, Thomas "Tip"
floating a trial balloon on amnesty before the Veterans o
O'Neill. These, and others, are all on tape.
Foreign Wars convention, and finally by the pardon itself
Could any of these men remember precisely what he said
The only plan change-and it is a significant one-was tha
during a particular discussion with Nixon? Of course not;
in the aftermath of the Nixon pardon, Ford had to retrea:
the tapesfare the sole precise record. But these men could
from an immediate pardon for Mr. Nixon's aides in general
not show any-public concern by complaining about it. They
and particularly for Haldeman
would have to look for protection to the very man who had
made the tapes.
A Washington-based reporter covering the Watergat
What must have been even more disquieting was not
story recently described J. Fred Buzhardt as an "interesting
Nixon's knowledge-by and large they could trust him,
complex person who likes to maneuver." Harry Dent, :
if only-because many of their interests coincided with his:
long-time political associate of Nixon's, is more to the
it was Haldeman whom they feared. Most of what Nixon
point: "If you ever need the dirtiest deed done without a
knew and what was on tape, was known to Haldeman.
trace, Fred's your man."
They were in the hands of a man who owed them nothing
Buzhardt made two pre-pardon attempts to transfer the
and to whom they could offer nothing.
White House tapes to San Clemente. The first occurred or
Since politicians never reduce their questionable dealings
August 10 and was stopped by Ford's attorney, Benton L
to writing, only the White House tapes have the essential
Becker. On August 14, Buzhardt lied in announcing that
characteristics of retrievability and independent verification
with the concurrence of Special Prosecutor Jaworski, he
necessary to transform them into a potent political weapon.
(Buzhardt) and James St. Clair, President Nixon's attorney
Comprehensive as they are, though, the tapes are not
had determined that the White House tapes and documents
a totally efficient instrument for the retrieval of politi-
belonged to Nixon and would be immediately returned to
cally damaging information. The sheer quantity of tape,
San Clemente. On August 15, Jaworski denied that he hac
over 5,000 hours, which would take one man, listening for
been consulted, and President Ford, just learning of the
eight hours a day, a year and eight months to review, pre-
decision, countermanded the order.
vents ready access to specific material. Recorded and stored
J. Fred Buzhardt resigned on August 15, but contrary
chronologically, the reels of tape, identified by date and
to published reports, he is still at the White House. The
location, offer only random, if interesting, information.
newly minted press secretary, Ron Nessen, told us tha
Even President Nixon's "Daily Diary," a log which records
Buzhardt is showing the new presidential counsels "how
every waking minute of Nixon's day, regardless of signifi-
the legal offices operate, and bringing them up to date or
cance ("Phone call: 12:32 to 12:33, The President Talked
pending legal matters." When asked whether this has to de
to His Daughter Tricia"), does not describe the subject of
with Watergate or Watergate-related subjects, Nessen saic
conversations. Haldeman's personal logs, however, describe
no, that the White House has a lot of other legal work. A:
the subject of almost every one of Nixon's conversations, as
far as it is known, Buzhardt was hired to work only or
well as the time, place, and parties involved. It is also nec-
Watergate or Watergate-related matters and would hardly
essary to know what one is listening for before one can know
be in position to render advice on concerns he knows noth
where to listen. Only Nixon and Haldeman have such
ing or next to nothing about. So the question remains: wha
knowledge; but by August 7 of this year, only Haldeman, in
is Buzhardt doing at the White House, and why isn't any
a telephoned blackmail threat to Alexander Haig at the
body talking about him?
White House, had the desperate courage to use it.
t is important to understand FORD necessary Buz
nce Nixon was out of office, Haldeman's plan for
I
hardt and Haldeman were to each other as the
avoiding punishment would have three sequential
investigation into presidential participation ir
stages: an arrangement which ensured the preser-
Watergate and Watergate-related crimes became
vation of the White House tapes and access to their
more intense. Haldeman's dismissal had been a cosmetic
indexes; a presidential pardon for Nixon; a presidential
one, with both he and Ehrlichman praised by Nixon as
pardon for himself.
"two of the finest public servants" he had ever known. But
Even though Haldeman (along with Ehrlichman) was
Haldeman had seen how readily Nixon sacrificed Mitchel
friend, a partner in his law firm, and twice manager of
hardt requested and received nine tapes for the same period.
Nixon's campaigns- when the going got tough." He could
Gerald Ford met President Nixon on days which correspond
never rule out entirely the possibility that he might be of-
to at least two and possibly more of the tapes requested for
fered up when the going got tougher. It would be vital for
review by Buzhardt. (John Barker, spokesman for the spe-
Haldeman to keep the incriminating tapes and documents
cial prosecutor's office, told us that his office was aware that
out of the prosecutors' hands. With Haig and Buzhardt on
Buzhardt had reviewed these tapes, which were never sub-
the scene, men who had no way of knowing which evidence
poenaed, but he declined to comment on the implications.
was more or less incriminating to Haldeman and Nixon,
It has been reported, however, that the Watergate prosecu-
Haldeman's guidance in determining whether or not to
tors regard the ultimate tapes agreement as a quid pro quo
answer the subpoenas of the special prosecutor, the Senate
for the pardon.)
Watergate committee, and the House Judiciary Committee
was absolutely essential. Since Buzhardt, as special counsel
N
ow, therefore, I, Gerald R. Ford, President of the
to the president on Watergate, had nominal responsibility
United States
have granted and by these pres-
for conducting the White House defense on a day-to-day
ents do grant a full, free, and absolute pardon unto
basis, and since Buzhardt was the one to give orders in
Richard Nixon, for all offenses against the United
regard to the tapes or documents, Haldeman had to work
States which, he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have
through Buzhardt to protect both his and Nixon's interests.
committed or taken part in during the period from January
Buzhardt's power at the White House increased as time
20, 1969, through August 9, 1974."
passed, but even with the aid of Haldeman's logs, only Hal-
Rarely have so few presidential words accomplished so
deman knew. precisely where to listen for the most dam-
much. President Ford not only pardoned Nixon for federal
aging evidence, and therefore which evidence to suppress.
crimes which he did commit, and which are known, or sus-
As Bernstein and Woodward record in All the President's
pected, but for crimes which he may have committed but
Men, "for more than six months, he [Haig] and Henry
which are still unknown. Attorneys for Haldeman, Ehrlich-
Kissinger had been urging the president to cut his ties with
man, and Mitchell can now argue with some justification that
the three former aides who-had been closest to him and
their clients shouldn't be convicted when Nixon, their leader,
were now the primary targets of the special prosecutor's in-
can't be brought to trial.
vestigation Haldeman, Ehrlichman, and Colson. Instead,
If these subtle but serious considerations escaped Ford,
the president had built his legal defense in concert with the
a Yale Law School graduate, they certainly would not have
three and had continued to meet with them and talk with
escaped the notice of the lawyers advising Haldeman or of
them on the telephone." This was the situation in January,
the two attorneys who negotiated the pardon: President
1974, and although Colson was to defect in early June,
Ford's personal attorney, Benton L. Becker, and Herbert J.
1974, the defection made Haldeman's presence, if only
Miller Jr., Nixon's attorney.
through Buzhardt, all the more necessary. The White House
Benton L. Becker, a former Justice Department lawyer
was moving toward the most critical juncture in Watergate.
under Attorney General John Mitchell, is currently under in-
Jaworski was taking his demands for evidence to the Su-
vestigation for income tax evasion, for which the Justice De-
preme Court; the House Committee on the Judiciary, which
partment has just recommended his indictment. Becker has
had subpoenaed scores of tapes, was drafting its articles of
an interesting history. In 1970, he was retained by Ford and
impeachment. Buzhardt's heart attack on June 13, then, was
several other congressmen to handle the legal matters in their
a blow to everyone around Nixon. For Haldeman, Buz-
attempt to impeach Justice Douglas. One of Becker's jobs
hardt's absence must have been intolerable. As if respon-
was to develop evidence damaging to Douglas. To that end,
ding to these needs, Buzhardt, who had had a serious heart
Becker sought to interview Louis Wolfson, who was con-
attack, returned to the White House within four weeks.
nected to the Parvin Dohrmann Co., which was in serious
So, through the summer of 1974, the Nixon and Halde-
legal difficulties, and whose founder, Albert Parvin, was a
man defenses remained linked ideologically, politically, and
casual acquaintance of Justice Douglas. The implicit thrust
perhaps criminally.
of Becker's letter requesting an interview with Louis Wolf-
son was that in exchange for information damaging to Jus-
Access to the White House tapes was limited to Nixon
tice Douglas, Becker would seek to help Wolfson out of his
and Haldeman and later to Nixon, Haldeman, Fred Buz-
legal difficulties.
hardt, and Rose Mary Woods. Each time a tape was re-
Herbert Miller, Nixon's attorney, has the dubious distinc-
moved from the vault, an entry was made in a lending file
tion of being the lawyer who defended former Attorney
by John Bennett or Raymond C. Zumwalt, noting the time
General Richard Kleindienst, and who succeeded not only
of the request for a specific tape, the person who requested
in negotiating a plea to a misdemeanor when Kleindienst's
it, the length of time the tape was kept out, and the time
crime of perjury was actually a felony, but in managing to
and day the tape was returned. Additionally, the recipient
have sentence passed by a judge who suspended Klein-
of a tape had to sign a receipt for it.
dienst's meager 30-day sentence and then praised him as "a
On Thursday, November 15, 1973, Gerald Ford was
dedicated public servant." Miller has the further distinction
scheduled to begin testifying before the House Committee
of having represented William O. Bittman. Bittman, who
on the Judiciary hearings into his nomination to be vice-
was the attorney for Watergate burglar Howard Hunt, had
president of the United States. At the hearings, Ford was
received $75,000 in a Manila envelope secretly left by An-
questioned about his past contacts with President Nixon,
thony Ulasewicz next to a phone booth in the lobby of
including discussions with the president. His answers were
Bittman's office building. Bittman claimed that he saw noth-
brief and general. The hearings went from November 15
ing suspicious in this method of fee collection and, rep-
through November 26.
resented by Miller, was never even indicted.
On November 14, 1973, Fred Buzhardt had obtained from
With the nation's finest and most highly respected consti-
John Bennett tapes of meetings which President Nixon had
tutional lawyers willing to render public service, with the
held 52 months before, in early March, 1971. On November
entire Justice Department certainly available for such a
19. Buzhardt returned these tapes to the vault, according to
historic and delicate task, these two men, Benton L. Becker
Bennett's lending file. On Friday, November 30, Fred Buz-
and Herbert J. Miller Jr., working in secret with Richard
hardt obtained the same tapes at 1:25 P.M. He returned
Nixon, Ronald Ziegler, and Gerald Ford, negotiated the
"
When Haldeman told Haig he 'could send Nixon to jail,' h
intention was to frighten Haig rather than to blackmail Nixon
I
n order for Nixon to secure a full, free, and abso-
Jute pardon before he was indicted, without having
N
0 one should underestimate the courage born
desperation or the fear that the prospect of a lo
to admit any criminal guilt, at a time when over
prison term generates. For those who are servi
56 per cent of the public was opposed to a pardon,
sentences, and particularly for those who have be
and at a time when a pardon would gravely injure the
indicted and face prison sentences from Judge Sirica's CO
Republican party in the coming November elections and
-especially Haldeman, who faces a possible 25-year S:
severely handicap Ford's attempt to win a full term in 1976
tence-Watergate is practically a life and death matt
Nixon and Haldeman would have had to possess an im-
Given the resources still remaining to Haldeman-the tap
mensely powerful weapon. If such a weapon existed any-
their indexes, and his knowledge-no one should dor
where it would exist in the White House tapes-conver-
Haldeman's determination to convert a defeat into victo
sations which could be politically fatal to Ford, or to other
Haldeman's August 7 telephone call to Nixon, dema:
Republican and possibly even Democratic leaders
ing a pardon, was taken by Haig. During their conver
So, before a pardon could be or would be granted, it
lion Haldeman said he could "send Nixon to jail" if
would be necessary for Ford and Nixon to reach an agree-
didn't get it-a tactic designed to frighten Haig rather th
ment on the disposition of the tapes which offered sufficient
to blackmail Nixon. If Haig was to convey to Nixon Hal
security to both Ford and Nixon. In fact, the tapes agree-
man's request for pardon with the proper urgency, H
mentswas negotiated and accepted by both parties before
would have to understand what a powerful figure Hal
the details of the pardon were settled. By Friday, August 6,
man was. Nothing would convey this to Haig more eff
the agreement was signed by Nixon. The negotiations were
tively than the kind of power Haldeman had-a pov
conducted by the same men who would settle the details
based on knowledge which could be fatal. (The first rep
surrounding the pardon: Becker, Miller, and Ziegler.
of this conversation came from Alexander Haig one moi
The tapes agreement is the quid pro quo in the pardon
after Gerald Ford took office; a day later, the White Ho
deal and the key to understanding the real significance of
denied that a "blackmail" attempt had been made.)
the tapes agreement is in the language of paragraph ten:
Haig was frightened, and he refused to continue the C
the administrator [Arthur Sampson, head of the General
versation until Nixon's attorney James St. Clair got on
Services Administration] may upon receipt of an appropriate
line (a fact the White House did not deny) Haldema
written authorization from the counsel to the President [Ford]
threat alerted Haig, and presumably others, to the very r
provide for a temporary redeposit of certain of the materials to
menace a desperate Haldeman posed to Nixon and to a
a location other than the existing facility
provided
however
one else who might have had questionable dealings W
that no diminution of the administrator's responsibility to pro-
Nixon, conceivably including Gerald Ford.
tect and secure the materials from loss, destruction, unauthorized
At the very least, Haldeman's request for a pardon V
copying or access by unauthorized persons is affected by said
ill timed. Nixon's responses in the month preceding his
temporary redeposit.
ignation were passive and deeply ambivalent. On the eve
This provision, should Ford choose to exercise it, would
his resignation, it is doubtful that Nixon could have ac
give him effective control over any tapes and documents
aggressively enough to pardon Haldeman and the others,
which could prove politically injurious to himself or to other
even himself, as Haldeman had urged him to do.
public officials. Under the terms of this provision, Ford may
Moreover, a Nixon pardon of Haldeman, given the
retain any tapes he wishes, and, "temporarily redepositing"
cumstances under which Nixon was leaving office, mi
them, keep them in the White House or other secure lo-
conceivably have been contested. Friends of Halden
cation, although he may not alter or destroy them. At
say that Nixon refused to grant Haldeman a pardon beca
the president's request, Buzhardt-with Haldeman's help—
"he didn't want to queer his own pardon deal."
would be able to locate and segregate any tapes which he
The problem, then, was how to defuse Haldeman. To t
did not want to return to Nixon. Perhaps just as important
end, St. Clair, in the early afternoon of August 9, telepho
from Ford's point of view, this provision does not clearly
Haldeman's attorney, John Wilson, and said, "I underst.
provide for Nixon's continued access to tapes which are
you have some papers for us." Wilson said that he did, :
"temporarily redeposited" by Ford; it only guards such
asked if two hours would be too long to take in sending th
tapes against destruction, unauthorized access, or unauthor-
over. St. Clair said that was all right, and Haldeman's I
ized copying. It does not specify just who has access to
don request was sent to the White House.
them under conditions of "temporary redeposit"-a term so
St. Clair's request for the papers can be seen only as
vague as to cover one day to ten years. (When asked to
attempt to pacify Haldeman, since pardon for Haldeman
comment on this interpretation of paragraph ten, the spe-
others had already been rejected in the aftermath of Hal
cial prosecutor's office said it "would not dispute it.")
man's telephone conversation with Haig. And, W
The balance of the agreement is intended to provide Nixon
Nixon went on television that night, he, of course, resig
and his agents with continued control of materials which do
without mentioning pardon for anyone.
not affect Ford. But even a subpoena for this material would
When, shortly after assuming office, Gerald Ford lear
be subject to Ford's compliance, as well as Nixon's.
from Haig the details of the Haldeman call, the significa
This single provision-paragraph ten-can have the effect
of Haldeman's threat-in view of his own past dealings V
of making the entire arrangement for controlling the tapes
Nixon and in terms of his own/future-could not have
a standoff, a carefully controlled stalemate in which the
(caped him. Although there were calls between Ford
vital interests of each man would be protected. Not sur-
Nixon prior to Nixon's pardon, it was Buzhardt who 1
prisingly, this agreement is to continue in force for not less
to San Clemente and back on August 20. If Ford felt thr
than five nor more than ten years, a period which coincides
ened by Haldeman and Nixon he would have to hold ou
with the longest possible incumbency of President Ford.
both of them the possibility of a pardon. At Camp Da
Once an agreement on the tapes was concluded, a pardon
on April 29, 1973, Haldeman had had such private as
for Nivon and Haldeman could be granted
ances-from Nixon. who had reneged on them. Priv
assurances, therefore, would longer satisfy Haldeman,
Ford, nurt
/
on consultation and compromise, con-
nor protect Ford. Only a public statement on a pardon
sulted with no one in granting the pardon-not even Jawor-
could be trusted to placate him.
ski. His aides were not asked for advice so much as told
If Ford wanted to give Haldeman and Nixon a public
what he intended to do-most of them only shortly before
assurance, showing that an important shift from his earlier
he went to face the cameras. His old friends in Congress re-
position on pardon had occurred ("The American people
ceived only last-minute notice. Ford could not consult with
wouldn't stand for it"), he could not have chosen a better
anybody; for Ford to listen to compelling arguments against
vehicle than his press conference of August 28, during
the pardon at this time-and then to reject them-would
which he said that he would consider a pardon for Nixon,
only raise súspicions about his motives.
but only after legal action had been taken. For obvious po-
When Ford's Press Secretary Jerald terHorst was in-
litical reasons, Ford had to take a somewhat moderate posi-
formed of Ford's intentions, a day before the pardon, he
tion on pardon, one which had at least had some consistency
let Ford know that he would have to resign. A terHorst
with his earlier statement; at the same time he had to give
resignation over the pardon would be a severe blow to
a very clear public signal to Haldeman and Nixon. It was a
Ford's new administration, but Ford could not afford to
necessary balance of minimums. Ford must have hoped this
compromise on the smallest detail; what he was about to do
would suffice But if Nixon had to wait to be indicted and
was Nixon's and Haldeman's irreducible minimum.
possibly convicted before he could be pardoned, what could
On Friday, Ford concluded the tapes agreement. Ford
Haldeman expect? Moreover, an indictment of Nixon pene-
pardoned Nixon on Sunday. A pardon for Haldeman was
trated Nixon's bottom line, which was to avoid, at all costs,
all that was left undone.
a legal pronouncement of guilt.
It was obvious that the best way to pardon Halde-
Nixon would.go to any lengths to avoid a historical ver-
man would be to include him in a general pardon for
dict of guilt based on conclusions of law. One has only to
all the Watergate offenders. But that would have to be
look at Nixon's resignation speech, his "triumphant" depar-
tested for public and political reaction. On Monday, Sep-
ture from the White House, his statement in accepting Ford's
tember 9, Jack Hushen, who had temporarily replaced
pardon, and his attempts to resign from both the California
terHorst as press secretary, announced that the administra-
and the New York state bar associations before they could
tion had under study a general pardon for all those involved
disbar him, to understand this
Watergate. The congressional and public outcry that this.
If Ford intended his statement to be a signal which would
proposal engendered rivaled the criticism which accompa-
assure Haldeman and Nixon on the matter of pardon, Halde-
nied the Nixon pardon. It must have become clear to Ford
man and Nixon, each for somewhat different reasons, could
and to Haldeman that to proceed to issue a general pardon
only have received it with shock, outrage, and fear.
for all the Watergate offenders would risk the undoing of the
plan which had been carried out so successfully thus far. The
S
hortly after Ford's press conference on August 28,
alternative hit upon was not a retreat from a general par-
the message must have been delivered: if Halde-
don, it was a change in rhetoric. Instead of pardoning all
man had to face a conviction, he would no longer
those who were involved in Watergate, the White House
feel obligated to protect anybody. And if anyone,
would now consider pardons for Watergate offenders on a
other than Nixon, was in a position to strike a deal with
case-by-case basis. To have retreated any further would
aworski in return for immunity or a reduced or suspended
have been unacceptable to Haldeman, who had to be satis-
sentence, it was Haldeman. On Friday, August 30, Ford
fied at all costs. That is where the matter stands now.
tasked his counsel, Philip Buchen, to undertake the legal re-
The question is, when will the political atmosphere per-
search that would have to precede a pardon for Nixon.
mit Haldeman to receive his pardon? Before the trial? Un-
The agreement on the tapes and the pardon were sepa-
likely. After the trial but before sentencing? Probable. After
rate but linked: in return for an arrangement for controlling
sentencing and before appeal? Most probable.
the tapes, which would protect Ford's vital interests, Ford
would grant an immediate pardon to Nixon and Haldeman.
On September 3, Ford's personal attorney, Benton Becker,
S
ince Nixon's "triumphant" departure from the
White House, few changes have taken place at San
met with Herbert Miller, Nixon's attorney, to work out an
Clemente and Key Biscayne. Nixon's staff of 21,
agreement for control of the tapes. When Benton Becker
which is paid for by Ford out of his own White
was dispatched by Ford to San Clemente on Thursday, Sep-
House maintenance fund, is roughly equal in size to Presi-
tember 5, his instructions were to tell Nixon and Miller,
dent Johnson's staff when he was in office. He has the use
with whom he traveled, that an immediate pardon was
of government transport, helicopters and jets, and free lodg-
"probable," not certain. In the laundered language of law-
ing at American embassies and consulates throughout the
yers, the inference would be unmistakable: a pardon would
world. All this in addition to his total annual $97,000 gov-
be forthcoming as soon as, but no sooner than, the tapes
ernmental pension, $96,000 for his staff, and $100,000 worth
agreement was signed by Nixon. The tapes agreement was
of free office space. He has begun writing letters to heads of
not just the first item on the agenda at the San Clemente
foreign governments.
meeting; from Ford's and Becker's point of view, it was the
If Haldeman is indeed pardoned, the dimensions of
only item of consequence. What would remain to be dis-
Nixon's and Haldeman's power will become clear. The
cussed was not the pardon but the nature of the statement
steady procession of clients to the Western White House
that Nixon would make in accepting the pardon. An ad-
will begin in earnest, particularly for those who have large
mission of guilt by Nixon would obviously help Ford with
problems which call for large and expensive solutions. We
congressional and public reaction. It is doubtful that Ford
will witness brokerage at the national level on a scale never
really expected to get it. With the tapes agreement still un-
before thought possible; and the concerns of politics are
signed, Nixon could and did resist any attempt to elicit
national, the claims of commerce are global.
from him a public admission of guilt. Becker and Ford
At Key Biscayne, which Nixon has not yet visited since
gave in. Nixon signed the tapes agreement on Friday, Sep-
his departure from office, nothing of consequence has been
tember 6, and Becker flew back to Washington with It the
altered. The detail of Secret Service men is still present, as
next morning. On Sunday morning, September 8, Ford par-
it is at San Clemente. Even the sophisticated presidential
doned Nixon. The wording of Nixon's statement remained
worldwide communications system is being maintained.
unknown to Becker and Ford until Nixon issued it.
Everything is in readiness.
Gat's birl
U.S.
Nixen
60
the utmost security measures for the secrecy
of our deliberations and records. Yet I have
little doubt as to the inherent power of the
Court to protect the confidentiality of its inter-
nal operations by whatever judicial measures
may be required.
Although Professor Arthur Selwyn Miller and a col-
laborator have recently argued to the contrary, Miller
& Sastri, Secrecy and the Supreme Court: On The
Need For Piercing the Red Velour Curtain, 22 Buff.
L. Rev. 799 (1973), it has always been recognized that
judges must be able to confer with their colleagues,
and with their law clerks, in circumstances of absolute
confidentiality. Justice Brennan has written that Su-
preme Court conferences are held in "absolute secrecy
for obvious reasons." Brennan, Working at Justice, in
An Autobiography of the Supreme Court 300 (Westin
ed. 1963). Justice Frankfurter had said that the
"secrecy that envelops the Court's work" is "essential
to the effective functioning of the Court." Frankfur-
ter, Mr. Justice Roberts, 104 U. Pa. L. Rev. 311, 313
(1955).
Congress, too, has seen fit to hold to such a privilege.
It is a long established practice of each House of Con-
gress to regard its own private papers as privileged.
No court subpoena is complied with by the Congress
or its committees without a vote of the House con-
cerned to turn over the documents. Soucie V. David,
448 F. 2d 1067, 1081-1082 (D.C. Cir. 1971). This prac-
tice is insisted on by Congress even when the result
may be to deny relevant evidence in a criminal pro-
&
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
61
ceeding either to the prosecution or to the accused
person.⁴¹
Similarly, when President Kennedy refused to dis-
close to a Senate Subcommittee the names of Defense
Department speech reviewers, the Subcommittee,
49 See e.g., 108 Cong. Rec. 3626 (1962), showing Senate adop-
tion of a resolution permitting staff members and former staff
members of a Senate Committee to appear and to testify in a
criminal proceeding against James Hoffa but forbidding them
from taking any documents or records in the custody of the
Senate and from testifying about information that they gained
while employed in the Senate. In explaining the resolution to
the Senate, Senator McClellan said in part: "The Senate recog-
nizes it has certain privileges as a separate and distinct branch
of Government, which it wishes to protect." Id. at 3627.
On July 16, 1970, counsel for 1st Lt. William L. Calley, Jr.,
moved in his court-martial proceeding for production of testi-
2
mony concerning the My Lai incident that had been presented
to a subcommittee of the House Committee on Armed Services
in executive session. Calley claimed that his testimony would be
exculpatory of him and would help him establish his defense in
the court-martial. The subcommittee Chairman, Rep. F. Ed-
ward Hebert, refused to make the testimony available, advising
defense counsel on July 17, 1970, that Congress is "an inde-
pendent branch of the Government, separate from and equal to
the Executive and Judicial branches," and that accordingly
only Congress can direct the disclosure of legislative records. He
concluded from this that the material requested by the defense
was not within the rule of Brady V. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83
(1963), nor subject to the requirements of the Jencks Act, 18
U.S.C. 3500. Subsequently the military court issued a subpoena
to the Clerk of the House of Representatives. The Speaker
laid this before the House on November 17, 1970, 116 Cong. Rec.
37652 [1970] but to date the House has taken no action nor
given any indication that it will supply the information sought.
On October 4, 1972, the United States Senate bluntly refused,
via Senate Resolution, a judicial subpoena for inter alia, docu-
mentary evidence in the criminal case of United States v. Brew-
ster, then pending in the federal district court, District of Co-
lumbia. 118 Cong. Rec. S. 16, 766 (92d Cong., 2d Sess.).
&
;
GERALD
62
speaking through Senator Stennis, relied on the privi-
lege of confidentiality Congress enjoys in upholding
the President's claim of privilege:
We now come face to face and are in direct
speech
conflicts with the established doctrine of separa-
tion of powers
***
I know of no case where the Court has ever
made the Senate or the House surrender rec-
ords from its files, or where the Executive has
made the Legislative Branch surrender records
from its files-and I do not think either one of
them could. So the rule works three ways, Each
is supreme within its field, and each is responsi-
ble within its field. (Committee on Armed
Services, U.S. Senate, Military Cold War Es-
calation and Speech Review Policies, 87th Con-
gress, 2d Sess., 512 [1962].).
On June 12, 1974, the United States Senate em-
phatically reiterated its position on privilege by deed,
as well as by word. Senator Eastland, Chairman of
the Judiciary Committee, urged, at the request of the
an
Special Prosecutor, passage of a resolution permitting
come
a staff attorney to file a trial affidavit with the Special
Prosecutor. Without objection, S. Res. 338 was passed.
It reads in part:
Resolved, That by the privilege of the Senate
of the United States no evidence under the
control and in the possession of the Senate of
the United States can, by the mandate of
process of the ordinary courts of justice, be
taken from such control or possession, but by
its permission.
*** (Sections 2-4) ***
LIBRARY BERALD P. FORD
63
SEC. 5. The said Peter Stockett, Junior, may
provide information with respect to any other
matter material and relevant for the purposes
of identification of any document or docu-
ments in such case, if any such document has
previously been made available to the public,
but he shall respectfully decline to provide in-
formation concerning any and all other matters
that may be based on knowledge acquired by
him in his official capacity either by reason of
documents and papers appearing in the files of
the Senate or by virtue of conversations or
communications with any person or persons.
The considerations of public policy that required
the deliberations of the Constitutional Convention be
held in confidence for half a century 50 and made it
imperative that judges and members of Congress be
permitted to work under conditions of absolute con-
fidentiality are particularly compelling when applied
50 The Framers understood perfectly well that enlightened
decision-making requires the kind of frank and free discussion
that can only be had when confidentiality is absolutely assured.
On May 29, 1787, one of the first acts of the Constitutional
Convention was the adoption of the following rule: "That noth-
ing spoken in the House be printed, or otherwise published, or
communicated without leave." 1 Farrand XV. It was not until
1819, that the Journal of the Convention, a mere skeleton of
motions and votes, was made public. The fullest record of the
proceedings of the Convention is in Madison's Notes. As late
as 1831, 44 years after the Convention, Madison thought it was.
not yet appropriate for those Notes to be made public, 3 Far-
rand 497, and they were not published until 1840, four years
after his death. 1 Farrand XV. President Madison thus antici-
pated the view of the most distinguished modern student of the
Constitution, Paul Freund, who has said "I sometimes wonder
irreverently whether we would have had a Constitution at all if
the Convention had been reported by daily columnists." Hughes,
The Living Presidency 33n. (1973).
is
GERALD
FUKD
64
to presidential communications with his advisers. As
stated by the President on July 6, 1973, in his letter
to Senator Sam J. Ervin:
No President could function if the private
papers of his office, prepared by his personal
staff, were open to public scrutiny. Formula-
tion of sound public policy requires that the
President and his personal staff be able to com-
municate among themselves in complete candor,
and that their tentative judgments, their ex-
ploration of alternatives, and their frank com-
ments on issues and personalities at. home and
abroad remain confidential.
This has been the position of every President in our
history, and it has been specifically stated by Presi-
dent Nixon's immediate predecessors.
Writing his memoirs in 1955, President Truman ex-
plained that he had found it necessary to omit certain
material, and said: "Some of this material cannot be
made available for many years, perhaps for many gen-
erations." 1 Truman, Memoirs X (1955). President
Eisenhower stated the point with force on July 6, 1955,
in connection with the Dixon-Yates controversy:
But when it comes to the conversations that
take place between any responsible official and
his advisers or exchange of little, mere slips of
this or that, expressing personal opinions on the
most confidential basis, those are not subject to
investigation by anybody, and if they are, will
wreck the Government. There is no business
that could be run if there would be exposed
every single thought that an adviser might
have, because in the process of reaching an
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
12 LW 2262
The United States LAW WEE
11-20-73
comply with the reporting and dis-
-USDC DistCol (three-judge
[Text] It should first be noted that
closure sections of [FECA]."
court); American Civil Liberties Un-
Mr. Cox was not nominated by the
Public disclosure and reporting of
ion, Inc. V. Jennings, 11/14/73.
President and did not serve at the
membership lists clearly cast a chill-
President's pleasure. As an appointee
ing effect upon an individual's right
of the Attorney General, Mr. Cox
to associate freely and to voice per-
Government Personnel
served subject to congressional rather
sonal views through organizational
than Presidential control. The Attor-
ties.
ATTORNEYS-
ney General derived his authority to
Title III delegates to enforcement
hire Mr. Cox and to fix his term of
personnel wide discretion in the ad-
Acting Attorney General's discharge
service from various Acts of Con-
ministration of this piece of legisla-
of Watergate Special Prosecutor,
gress. Congress therefore had the
tion. Its provisions, however, as they
without finding of "extraordinary
power directly to limit the circum-
presently exist, "provide inadequate
improprieties 01 his part," is illegal.
stances under which Mr. Cox could
standards by which the supervisory
[Text] [The Acting Attorney Gen-
be discharged and to delegate that
officers are to be guided, leaving
eral] suggests that the instant case
power to the Attorney General Had
open the possibility that these admin-
has been mooted by subsequent events
no such limitations been issued, the
istrators
*
may
interpret
Ti-
and that the court as a discretionary
Attorney General would have had the
tie III so as to require disclosure state-
matter should refuse to rule on the
authority to fire Mr. Cox at any time
ments from groups and organizations
legality of the Cox discharge. This
and for any reason. However, he chose
whose regulation is beyond the pur-
view of the matter is more academic
to limit his own authority in this re-
view of [FECA]."
than realistic, and fails to recognize
gard by promulgating the Watergate
the insistent demand for some de-
Special Prosecutor regulation pre-
A decla ration of unconstitutionality
gree of certainty with regard to these
viously described. It, is settled beyond
is a serious matter. Accordingly, it is
distressing events which have engen-
dispute that under such circum-
incumbent upon this court "to avoid
dered considerable public distrust of
stances an agency regulation has the
unnecessary confrontations by at-
Government There is a pressing need
force and effect of law, and is bind-
taching to the statute in question, if
to declare a rule of law that will give
ing upon the body that issues it. * *
*
at all possible, a construction which
guidance for future conduct with re-
Even more directly on point, the
is compatible with its plain language,
gard to the Watergate inquiry.
Supreme Court has twice held that
consistent with the underlying ra-
While it is perfectly true that the
an executive department may not dis-
tional and free from constitutional
importance of the question presented
charge one of its officers in a man-
deficiency." It is our opinion "that the
cannot alone save a case from moot-
ner inconsistent with its own regula-
contested operational language of Ti-
ness, the congressional plaintiffs be-
tions concerning such discharge. See
tle III is susceptible to a limited and
fore the court have a substantial
Vitarelli V. Seaton, 359 U.S. 535
narrow construction which will at
and continuing interest in this litiga-
(1959); Service V. Dulles, 354 U.S. 363
once remove any chilling effects * *
*
tion. It is an undisputed fact that
(1957). The firing of Archibald Cox in
as well as obviate the necessity of
pending legislation may be affected
the absence of a finding of extraordi-
this court having to invalidate the ti-
by the outcome of this dispute and
nary impropriety was in clear viola-
tle. Indeed, one circuit court has SO
that the challenged conduct of the
tion of an existing Justice Depart-
held."
defendant could be repeated with re-
ment regulation having the force of
In U.S. V. National Committee for
gard to the new Watergate Special
law and was therefore illegal.
Impeachment, 469 F.2d 1135 (2nd Cir.
Prosecutor if he presses too hard, an
Defendant suggests that, even if
1972) the court avoided ruling upon
event which would undoubtedly
Mr. Cox's discharge had been unlaw-
an acknowledged serious constitu-
prompt further congressional ac-
ful on October 20, the subsequent
tional question surrounding the lan-
tion. This situation not only saves
abolition of the Office of Watergate
guage of Title III by holding that an
the case from mootness, but forces
Special Prosecutor was legal and ef-
advertisement, strikingly similar to
decision. End Text]
fectively discharged Mr. Cox at that
the one with which we are here con-
The Department of Justice regula-
time. This contention is also without
cerned, was in and of itself insuffici-
tion that set forth the duties and re-
merit. It is true that an agency has
ent to classify the sponsor as a poli-
sponsibilities of the Office of Water-
wide discretion in amending or re-
tical committee. "Noting that the leg-
gate Special Prosecutor provided that
voking its regulations. However, we
islative history surrounding [FECA]
he was to remain in office until a date
are once again confronted with a situ-
revealed that [c]ongressional con-
mutually agreed upon between the
ation in which the Attorney General
cern was with political campaign fi-
Attorney General and himself. It also
voluntarily limited his otherwise
nancing, not with the funding of
provided that he "will not be removed
broad authority. The instant regula-
movements dealing with national
from his duties except for extraordi-
tion contains within its own terms a
policy,'
*
the court promulgated a
nary improprieties on his part." Less
provision that the Watergate Special
dual statutory test limiting the reach
than four months after the appoint-
Prosecutor (as opposed to any par-
of Title III: (1) the determinative
ment of the Special Prosecutor, he
ticular occupant of that office) will
phrase 'made for the purpose of in-
was fired, not for an extraordinary
continue to carry out his responsibili-
fluencing.' is to include only those ex-
impropriety, but for insisting upon
ties until he consents to the termina-
penditures 'made with the authoriza-
White House compliance with a court
tion of that assignment. This clause
tion or consent, express or implied, or
order that was no longer subject to
can only be read as a bar to the total
under the control, direct or indirect,
judicial review. Three days after the
abolition of the Office of Watergate
of a candidate or his agents,' and
Special Prosecutor was dismissed, the
Special Prosecutor without the Special
(2) Title III is applicable 'only to
Acting Attorney General rescinded
Prosecutor's consent, and the court
committees soliciting contributions or
the underlying Watergate Special
sees no reason why the Attorney Gen-
making expenditures the major pur-
Prosecutor regulation. The issues pre-
eral cannot by regulation empose such
pose of which is the nomination or
sented are whether the prosecutor
a limitation upon Minself and his
election of candidates."
was lawfully discharged while the
successors.
This court fuily agrees with the Sec-
regulation was still in existence, and,
Even if the court were to Hold
ond Circuit's reading of Title III. Such
if not, whether the subsequent can-
otherwise. however, it could not-con-
a construction is in accord with the
cellation of the regulation lawfully
clude that the defendant's Order of
primary concern of FECA.-Parker, J.
accomplished his discharge.
October 23 revolding the regulation
11-20-73
The United States LAW WEEK
42 LW 221
was legal. An agency's power to re-
Insurance
Master and Servant
voke its regulations is not unlimited-
such action must be neither arbitrary
UNINSURED MOTORISTS-
RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR-
nor unreasonable. In the instant case,
Michigan law requiring automobile
Attorney's client is not liable, une
the defendant abolished the Office
accident victim to give notice within
theory of respondeat superior,
of Watergate Special Prosecutor on
six months after accident of intent
injuries resulting from automob
October 23, and reinstated it less
to make claim against uninsured mo-
accident that occurred while att
than three weeks later under a vir-
torist fund is unenforceable against
ney, in intoxicated condition, V
tually identical regulation. It is clear
victim who files claim against such
driving home after representing clit
that this turnabout was simply a
fund and fails to give such notice un-
at trial.
ruse to permit the discharge of Mr.
less state official who administers
The client employed the attorr
Cox without otherwise affecting the
fund can show prejudice by such
to represent him at a trial being CC
Office of the Special Prosecutor-a
failure.
ducted some 150 miles away from 1
result which could not legally have
attorney's office. Pursuant to t
been accomplished while the regula-
The Michigan Motor Vehicle Acci-
tion was in effect under the circum-
dent Claims Act requires that the
employment, the attorney drove
own automobile to the site of
stances presented in this case. De-
Michigan Secretary of State be noti-
fied within six months after the ac-
trial where, during the morning,
fendant's Order revoking the origi-
tried the case. What the attorney
nal regulation was therefore arbitrary
crual of a cause of action that an
that afternoon is not known, but
and unreasonable, and must be held
automobile accident victim intends to
is agreed that he performed no ot
to have been without force or effect.
make a claim against the Michigan
services for the client. That eveni
uninsured motorist fund. The victim
Plaintiffs have emphasized that
while returning to his home, the
in this case filed a claim but failed to
over and beyond these authorities the
torney was involved in the accid
give such notice, and the Michigan
Acting Attorney General was pre-
out of which the present controve
Secretary of State's motion for ac-
vented from firing Mr. Cox by the
arose.
celerated judgment was granted.
explicit and detailed commitments
The relationship between an att
[Text] [Elven though some no-
given to the Senate, at the time of
ney and his client is, under Kar
tice requirement may be permitted, a
Mr. Richardson's confirmation, when
law, one of agency to which the g
particular provision may still be con-
the precise terms of the regulation
eral rules of agency apply. Thus, th
stitutionally deficient. We must con-
designed to assure Mr. Cox's inde-
was a principal and agent relati
sider the time specified in the notice
pendence were hammered out. What-
ship between the client and the
for an extremely short period may be
ever may be the moral or political
torney wherein the attorney was
unreasonable. What period is reason-
implications of the President's deci-
client's agent in matters respec
able in part depends on what purpose
sion to disregard those commitments,
the litigation. However, the fact 1
the notice serves. Because we cannot
they do not alter the fact that the
there was an agency relationship
commitments had no legal effect. Mr.
say with certainty what purpose the
tween the attorney and the ci
legislature had in mind in providing
Cox's position was not made subject
does not necessarily lead to the (
to Senate confirmation, nor did Con-
for this notice, we are not prepared
clusion that, under the doctrine
gress legislate to prevent illegal or
to say that the six month period pro-
respondeat superior, the client is
arbitrary action affecting the inde-
vided by this statute is unreasonable
cariously liable for the attorn
as a matter of law.
pendence of the Watergate Special
tortious conduct toward the inju
The failure to give notice may re-
Prosecutor.
parties. The liability of a principle
sult in prejudice to the fund accord-
The Court recognizes that this case
his agent's negligence is contro
ing to whatever reason justifies the
emanates in part from congressional
by a determination as to whether
notice requirement. Whenever the
concern as to how best to prevent
the time of the negligent act,
Secretary claims to have been preju-
agent was engaged in furthering
future Executive interference with
diced by the lack of notice, he should
principal's business to such a de
the Watergate investigation. Al-
be afforded the opportunity to show
that the principal had the "righ
though these are times of stress, they
such prejudice.
direct and control" the agent's at
call for caution as well as decisive ac-
While we decline to declare that the
ities. If there was no right to di
tion. The suggestion that the ju-
notice requirement of $ 18 is consti-
and control, the principal is not
diciary be given responsibility for the
tutionally defective, we hold that only
cariously liable for his agent's
appointment and supervision of a
upon a showing of prejudice by fail-
tious conduct.
ure to give such notice. may the claim
new Watergate Special Prosecutor,
At the time of the accident,
against the fund be dismissed. I End
for example, is most unfortunate.
attorney was not engaged in the
Text]-Kavanagh. J.
therance of his client's busines
Congress has it within its own power
Brennan and Coleman, JJ., dis-
to enact appropriate and legally en-
such a degree that it could be
sent.
that the client has the right to a
forceable protections against any ef-
--Mich SupCt: Carver V. McKernan,
and control the attorney's phy
fort to thwart the Watergate in-
10/17/73.
conduct. The client. according to
quiry. The courts must remain neu-
stipulation of fact, had no righ
tral. Their duties are not prosecutori-
BRIEFING AND
direct or control the attorney's CI
al. If Congress feels that laws should
room activities; if he had no
be enacted to prevent Executive in-
ARGUING
to direct the attorney's court
terference with the Watergate Special
FEDERAL APPEALS
activities. even less did he ha
Prosecutor, the solution lies in legisla-
right to direct or control the a
By FREDERICK BERNAYS WIENER
tion enhancing and protecting that
ney's homeward journey. The a
office as it is now established and
"Must" reading for
ney was free to go where he de:
not by following a course that places
the advocate
by whatever means he chose. Ac
ingly, the client is not vicari
incompatible duties upon this par-
$13.25
liable for the consequences of th
ticular court End Text]-Gesell, J.
torney's mfisconduct.-McWillian
-USDC DistCol; Nader V. Bork,
BNA BOOKS
1231 25th St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20037
-CA 10; Brinkley V. Farmers
11/14/73.
vator Mutual Insurance Co., 10/:
42 LW 2268
The United States LAW WE
11-20-73
Taxation
tion treatment under Section 1033 of
the President to the Attorney Gen-
the Code will not be available.
eral that the President will not exer-
NONRECOGNITION TREATMENT-
The Service does not follow the
cise his constitutional powers to ef-
decision of the United States Court
fect the discharge of the Special
Sums business received under in-
of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in
Prosecutor or to limit the indepen-
surance contract that provided for
the case of Shakertown Corp. V. Comr.,
dence that he is hereby given, the
fixed per diem payments whenever
277 F.2d 625 (CA6 1960), reversing
Special Prosecutor will not be re-
specified causes suspended business
T.C. Memo 1959-22, which held that
moved from his duties except for
operations, and also provided that
the nonrecognition provisions of Sec-
extraordinary improprieties on his
insurer could reduce payments when-
tion 1033 of the Code were available
part and without the President's
ever business' per diem net profits
with respect to the proceeds of an
first consulting the majority and
plus fixed charges, for preceding 12
insurance contract similar to the one
the minority leaders and chair-
months, fell below fixed amount are
described above. [End Text]
men and ranking minority mem-
ordinary income not eligible for In-
ternal Revenue Code Section 1033
-IRS; Rev.Rul. 73-477, 11/5/73.
bers of the Judiciary Committees
of the Senate and House of Ep-
nonrecognition treatment.
resentatives and ascertaining that
[Text] An insurance contract pro-
United States
their consensus is in accord with his
vides for per diem payments of 35x
proposed action. [End Text]
dollars whenever specified causes sus-
ATTORNEYS-
-Justice Dept., Order No. 551-73,
pend business operations. The con-
11/7/73.
tract also provides that the insurer
Office of Watergate Special Prose-
can reduce the per diem coverage
cution Force, directed by Special Pros-
whenever the insured's per diem net
ecutor appointed by Attorney Gen-
profits plus fixed charges, for the
eral, is established.
preceding twelve months, fall below
The Office of Watergate Special
News Note
35x dollars.
Prosecution Force shall be under the
Section 1033 of the Internal Reve-
direction of the Special Prosecutor.
nue Code of 1954 provides, in general,
The Special Prosecutor is assigned the
JUDICIAL CIRCUITS
for the nonrecognition of gain when
following specific functions: to con-
The Commission on Revision of the
all of the proceeds of an involuntary
duct any kind of legal proceeding,
conversion of property are used to
Federal Appellate System, in its pre-
civil or criminal, that U.S. Attorneys
purchase qualified replacement prop-
liminary report, recommends the ad-
are authorized by law to conduct,
erty.
dition of two new federal judicial
and to designate attorneys to conduct
Treas. Reg. Sec. 1.1033(a)-2(c)(8)
circuits. Under the commission's pro-
such legal proceedings; to approve or
provides as follows: "The proceeds of
posal, the Ninth Circuit, which today
disapprove the production or disclos-
includes nine western states and ex-
a use and occupancy insurance con-
ure of information relating to mat-
tends from Alaska to the Mexican
tract, which by its terms insured
ters within his cognizance in response
border and from Hawaii to Idaho and
against actual loss sustained of net
to court orders; and, to exercise the
profits in the business, are not pro-
Montana, would be split into two new
authority vested in the Attorney
ceeds of an involuntary conversion
circuits. Arizona, Nevada, and the
General relating to immunity of wit-
but are income in the same manner
two southern judicial districts of
nesses in congressional proceedings.
that the profits for which they are
California, which include Los Angeles
The above listing is illustrative, and
substituted would have been."
and San Diego, would be placed in a
is not intended to limit the authority
new Twelfth Circuit, while the new
If an insurance contract insures
of the Special Prosecutor in any
Ninth Circuit would include the
against a lost property right (i.e., the
manner.
northern and eastern districts of
right to use property), nonrecogni-
The Special Prosecutor shall have
California as well as the other states
tion treatment under Section 1033 of
full authority for investigating and
in the present Ninth Circuit
the Code is available with respect to
prosecuting offenses arising out of
The present Fifth Circuit, which
the proceeds if the requirements of
the unauthorized entry into the
includes Florida, Alabama, Georgia,
Section 1033 are otherwise satisfied.
Democratic National Committee Head-
Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, will
Flaxlinum Insulating Co., 5 B.T.A. 676
quarters at the Watergate, offenses
also be fashioned into two new cir-
(1926), acq., 1942-2 C.B. 7, Piedmont-
arising out of the 1972 presidential
cuits. Three different plans for re-
Mt. Airy Guano Co., 3 B.T.A. 1009
election, allegations involving the
alignment remain under active con-
(1926), acq., 1942-2 C.B. 15. But, if the
President, the White House staff, or
sideration. Under the first plan, one
insurance contract insures against
presidential appointees, and any other
circuit would include Florida, Ala-
lost profits and fixed charges, the
matters that he consents to have as-
bama, and Georgia, and the other
proceeds are ordinary income, and
signed to him by the Attorney Gen-
would include Texas, Louisiana, Mis-
nonrecognition treatment under Sec-
eral.
sissippi and the Canal Zone. The
tion 1033 is not available. Maryland
[Text] In exercising this authority,
second plan would put Mississippi
Shipbuilding and Drydock Co. V. U.S.,
the Special Prosecutor will have the
with Florida, Alabama and Georgia,
409 F.2d 1363 (CtCls 1969); Interna-
greatest degree of independence that
thereby creating a two-state circuit
tional Boiler Works Co., 3 B.T.A. 283
is consistent with the Attorney Gen-
of Louisiana and Texas. The third
(1926), acq., V-2, C.B. 2 (1926).
eral's statutory accountability for all
plan is similar, except that Arkansas,
In the situation described above,
matters falling within the jurisdiction
which is presently in the Eighth
the insurance contract insures against
of the Department of Justice. The
Circuit, would be placed in the Lou-
lost profits and fixed charges because
Attorney General will not counter-
isiana-Texas Circuit.
it permits a reduction of the coverage
mand or interfere with the Special
Senator Roman L. Hruska, Chair-
based on profits and fixed charges
Prosecutor's decisions or actions. The
man of the Commission, requests that
experience. Thus, the insurance is de-
Special Prosecutor will determine
any comments and, suggestions be
signed to reimburse the taxpayer for
whether and to what extent he will
addressed to the Executive Director
a loss of net profits and fixed charges.
inform or consult with the Attorney
of the Commission, Professor A. Leo
Accordingly, under the policy de-
General about the conduct of his
Levin at 209 Court of Claims Build-
scribed above, insurance proceeds will
duties and responsibilities. In ac-
ing, 717 Madison Place, N.W., Wash-
be ordinary income, and nonrecogni-
cordance with assurances given by
ington, D.C., 20005.
29466
RULES AND REGULATIONS
Effective
date.-This
er
shall
be-
that a hearing is held. Objectio may
be
§ 0.132 of Subpart W of Part 0 of Chap-
come effective on October 25, 1973.
accompanied by a memorandum or brief
ter I of Title 28, Code of Federal Regula-
(Sec. 409(c) (1), 72 Stat. 1786; (21 U.S.C. 348
in support thereof. Six copies of all doc-
tions is amended, to read as follows:
(c) (1)).)
uments shall be filed. Received objec-
tions may be seen in the above office
§ 0.132 Designating officials to perform
Dated October 16, 1973.
the functions and duties of certain
during working hours, Monday through
offices in case of vacancy therein.
SAM D. FINE,
Friday.
Associate Commissioner for
(a) In case of vacancy in the office of
Effective date.-This order shall be-
Compliance.
Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney
come effective on October 25, 1973.
[FR Doc.73-22609 Filed 10-24-73;8:45 am]
General shall, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 508,
(Sec. 409(c) (1), 73 Stat. 1786; (21 U.S.C. 348
perform the functions and duties of and
(c) (1).)
act as Attorney General. In case of
PART 121-FOOD ADDITIVES
Dated October 16, 1973.
vacancy in both the office of Attorney
Subpart F-Food Additives Resulting
General and the Office of Deputy Attor-
SAM D. FINE,
From Contact With Containers or Equip-
ney General, the following officials shall
Associate Commissioner for
ment and Food Additives Otherwise
perform the functions and duties of and
Affecting Food
Compliance.
act as Attorney General, in the follow-
[FR Doc.73-22611 Filed 10-24-73;8:45 am]
ing order of succession:
SANITIZING SOLUTIONS
(1) Solicitor General
The Commissioner of Food and Drugs,
Title 28-Judicial Administration
(2) Assistant Attorney General, Crim-
having evaluated the data in a petition
inal Division
(FAP 3H2923) filed by West Chemical
CHAPTER I-DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
(3) Assistant Attorney General, Anti-
Products, 42-16 West St., Long Island
[Order No. 546-73]
trust Division
City, N.Y. 11101, and other relevant ma-
PART 0-ORGANIZATION OF THE
(4) Assistant Attorney General, Civil
terial, concludes that the food additive
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Rights Division
regulations (21 CFR Part 121) should
(5) Assistant Attorney General, Office
be amended, as set forth below, to pro-
Abolishment of Office of Watergate Special
of Legal Counsel
Prosecution Force
vide for the use of isopropyl alcohol as
(6) Assistant Attorney General, Tax
an optional adjuvant, rather than as a
This order abolishes the Office of
Division
required ingredient, for sanitizing food-
Watergate Special Prosecution Force.
(7) Assistant Attorney General, Land
processing equipment and utensils that
The functions of that Office revert to the
and Natural Resources Division
contact food.
Criminal Division
Dated October 23, 1973.
Therefore, pursuant to provisions of
By virtue of the authority vested in
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
me by 28 U.S.C. 509, 510, and 5 U.S.C.
ROBERT H. BORK,
Act (sec. 409(c) (1), 72 Stat. 1786 (21
301, the Office of Watergate Special
Acting Attorney General.
U.S.C. 348(c) (1))), and under the au-
Prosecution Force is abolished. Accord-
[FR Doc.73-22825 Filed 10-24-73;8:45 am]
thority delegated to the Commissioner
ingly, Part 0 of Chapter I of Title 28,
(21 CFR 2.120), $ 121.2547 is amended in
Code of Federal Regulations, is amended
Title 32-National Defense
paragraph (b) (5) to read as follows:
as follows:
CHAPTER XIV--RENEGOTIATION BOARD
§ 121.2547 Sanitizing solutions.
1. Section 0.1 of Subpart A, which lists
the organizational units of the Depart-
SUBCHAPTER B-RENEGOTIATION BOARD
REGULATIONS UNDER THE 1951 ACT
ment, is amended by deleting "Office of
(b)
Watergate Special Prosecution Force."
PART 1472-CONDUCT OF
(5) An aqueous solution containing
2. Subpart G-1 is revoked.
RENEGOTIATION
elemental iodine, hydriodic acid, α-(p-
nonylphenyl) omega-hydroxypoly(oxy-
Order No. 517-73 of May 31, 1973,
Hours of Business
ethylene) (complying with the identity
Order No. 518-73 of May 31, 1973, Order
Section 1472.6(e) (2) Hours of business
prescribed in § 121.2541(c) and having a
No. 525-73 of July 8, 1973, and Order No.
is amended by deleting the phrase "8:30
maximum average molecular weight of
531-73 of July 31, 1973, are revoked.
a.m. to 5:00 p.m." and inserting in lieu
748) and/or polyoxyethylene-polyoxy-
This order is effective as of October, 21,
thereof the phrase "8:00 a.m. to
propylene block polymers (having a min-
1973.
4:30 p.m."
imum average molecular weight of
Dated October 23, 1973.
(Sec. 109, 65 Stat. 22; 50 U.S.C.A., App. Sec.
1,900) Additionally, the aqueous solu-
1219.)
tion may contain isopropyl alcohol as an
ROBERT H. BORK,
optional ingredient.
Acting Attorney General.
Dated October 19, 1973.
[FR 73-22824 Filed 10-24-73;8:45 am]
W. WHITEHEAD,
Any person who will be adversely af-
Chairman.
fected by the foregoing order may at any
[Order No. 547-73]
[FR Doc.73-22712 Filed 10-24-73;8:45 am]
time on or before November 26, 1973,
file with the Hearing Clerk, Food and
PART 0-ORGANIZATION OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Title 41-Public Contracts and Property
Drug Administration, Rm. 6-86, 5600
Management
Fishers Lane, Rockville, Md. 20852, writ-
Subpart W-Additional Assignments of
ten objections thereto. Objections shall
Functions and Designation of Officials
CHAPTER 3-DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,
show wherein the person filing will be
To Perform the Duties of Certain Offices
EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
adversely affected by the order, specify
in Case of Vacancy, or Absence Therein
PART 3-3-PROCUREMENT BY
with particularity the provisions of the
or in Case of Inability or Disqualification
NEGOTIATION
order deemed objectionable, and state
To Act
Miscellaneous Amendments
the grounds for the objections. If a hear-
DESIGNATING OFFICIALS TO ACT AS
ing is requested, the objections shall
Chapter 3, Title 41, Code of Federal
ATTORNEY GENERAL
state the issues for the hearing, shall be
Regulations, is amended as set forth
supported by grounds factually and
This order amends the Department
below. The purpose of these amendments
legally sufficient to justify the relief
regulations designating officials of the
Department of Justice to act as Attorney
is to establish policies and procedures
sought, and shall include a detailed de-
General in case of a vacancy in that
relative to the issuance of letter
scription and analysis of the factual in-
Office.
contracts.
formation intended to be presented in
By virtue of the authority vested in
It is the general policy of the Depart-
support of the objections in the event
me by 28 U.S.C. 508, paragraph (a) of
ment of Health Education and Welfare
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL. 38, NO. 205-THURSDAY, OCTOBER 25, 1973
RULES AND REGULATIONS
SUIDE
Watergate, all offenses arising out of the
States Attorneys, shall cooperate to the full-
) Promotion of applicants retroac-
1972 Presidential Election for which the
est extent possible with the Special Prose-
tively, who would have been promoted
Special Prosecutor deems It necessary and
cutor.
during regular promotion cycles but were
sporopriate to assume responsibility. allega-
2. Budget. The Special Prosecutor will be
inadvertently or improperly excluded
tions involving the President, members of
provided with such funds and facilities to
the White House staff, or Presidential ap-
carry out his responsibilities as he may rea-
from consideration during such cycles;
pointees, and any other matters which he
sonably require. He shall have the right to
and adjustment of their pay accounts
consents to have assigned to him by the
submit budget requests for funds, positions,
accordingly.
Merney General.
and other assistance, and such requests shall
(3) Promotion of applicants to grades
In particular, the Special Prosecutor shall
receive the highest priority.
held immediately prior to reenlistment
have full authority with respect to the above
3. Designation and responsibility. The per-
who were inadvertently or improperly
matters for:
sonnel acting as the staff and assistants of
reenlisted in a lower grade.
Conducting proceedings before grand juries
the Special Prosecutor shall be known as the
(4) Awards of basic allowance for
And any other investigations he deems
Watergate Special Prosecution Force and
necessary;
shall be responsible only to the Special
subsistence to applicants entitled
Reviewing all documentary evidence avail-
Prosecutor.
thereto.
able from any source, as to which he shall
Continued responsibilities of Assistant At-
(5) Authorizing participation under
hate full access;
torney General, Criminal Division. Except for
the Retired Serviceman's Family Protec-
Determining whether or not to contest the
the specific investigative and prosecutorial
tion Plans and the Survivors Benefits
assertion of "Executive Privilege" or any
duties assigned to the Special Prosecutor.
Plan where failure to elect to participate
other testimonial privilege;
the Assistant Attorney General in charge of
was through no fault of the applicants.
Determining whether or not application
the Criminal Division will continue to exer-
should be made to any Federal court for a
cise all of the duties currently assigned to
(ii) The Executive Secretary of the
grant of immunity to any witness, con-
him.
Board, after assuring compliance with
sistently with applicable statutory require-
Applicable departmental policies. Except as
the above conditions, will announce the
ments, or for warrants, subpoenas, or other
otherwise herein specified or as mutually
final action on applications processed
court orders;
agreed between the Special Prosecutor and
under this subdivision.
Deciding whether or not to prosecute any
the Attorney General, the Watergate Special
individual, firm, corporation or group of
Prosecution Force will be subject to the ad-
individuals:
ministrative regulations and policies of the
(10 U.S.C. 1552)
Initiating and conducting prosecutions,
Department of Justice.
framing indicuments, filing informations. and
Public reports. The Special Prosecutor may
By order of the Secretary of the Air
handling all aspects of any cases within his
from time to time make public such state-
Force.
jurisdiction (whether initiated before or
ments or reports as he deems appropriate
STANLEY L. ROBERTS,
after his assumption of duties), including
and shall upon completion of his assign-
Colonel, USAF, Chief, Legisla-
any appeals;
ment submit a final report to the appropri-
Coordinating and directing the activities
tive Division, Office of the
ate persons or entities of the Congress.
of all Department of Justice personnel, in-
Duration of assignment. The Special Prose-
Judge Advocate General.
cluding United States Attorneys:
cutor will carry out these responsibilities,
[FR Doc.73-23875 Filed 11-6-73; 8:45 am]
Dealing with and appearing before Con-
with the full support of the Department of
gressional committees having jurisdiction
Justice, until such time as, in his judgment,
over any aspect of the above matters and
he has completed them or until 8 date mu-
Title 32A-National Defense, Appendix
determining what documents, information,
tually agreed upon between the Attorney
CHAPTER XIII-ENERGY POLICY OFFICE
and assistance shall be provided to such com-
General and himself.
mittees.
EPO REG. 1-MANDATORY ALLOCATION
In exercising this authority, the Special
[FR Doc.73-23693 Filed 11-6-73;8:45 am]
PROGRAM FOR MIDDLE DISTILLATE
Prosecutor will have the greatest degree of
FUELS
independence that is consistent with the At-
Title 32-National Defense
Removal of Limitation Imposed by Term
torney General's statutory accountability for
CHAPTER VII-DEPARTMENT OF THE
"Customs Territory of the United States"
all matters falling within the jurisdiction
AIR FORCE
of the Department of Justice. The Attorney
EPO Reg. 1 for the Mandatory Alloca-
General will not countermand or interfere
SUBCHAPTER G-BOARDS
tion Program for Middle Distillate
with the Special Prosecutor's decisions or
PART 865-PERSONNEL REVIEW BOARDS
Fuels was published in the FEDERAL
actions. The Special Prosecutor will deter-
SUBPART A-AIR FORCE BOARD OF
REGISTER of October 16, 1973 (38 FR
mine whether and to what extent he will in-
CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
28660) which became effective Novem-
form or consult with the Attorney General
about the conduct of his duties and respon-
This amendment is added to show
ber 1, 1973. The purpose of this amend-
sibilities. In accordance with assurances
the delegation of authority to the Air
ment is to amend the definition of the
given by the President to the Attorney Gen-
Force Board for the Correction of Mili-
term "State office" and the reference in
eral that the President will net exercise his
tary Records to correct certain military
the section entitled "Coverage of Pro-
Constitutional powers to effect the discharge
records.
gram" in those regulations to remove the
of the Special Prosecutor or to limit the in-
Subpart A. Part 865, Subchapter G of
limitation imposed by the term "customs
dependence that he is hereby given. the Spe-
Chapter VII of Title 32 of the Code of
territory of the United States." Under
clal Prosecutor will not be removed from his
dutles except for extraordinary improprie-
Federal Regulations is amended by add-
the meaning assigned that phrase by
ties on his part and without the President's
ing a new paragraph (a) (5) to § 865.12,
general headnote 2 to the Tariff Sched-
first consulting the Majority and the M1-
to read as follows:
ules of the United States (19 U.S.C.
mority Leaders and Chairmen and ranking
1202), the Virgin Islands are excluded
Minority Members of the Judiciary Commit-
§ 865.12 Action by the Board.
from coverage under the Program.
tees of the Senate and House of Representa-
(a)
Because of the emergency nature of
tives and ascertaining that their consensus
(5) Delegation of authority to correct
this regulation due to the possibility of
13 In accord with his proposed action.
certain military records.
present and prospective shortages of
STAFF AND RESOURCE SUPPORT
(i) The Air Force Board for the Cor-
middle distillates, it has been determined
1. Selection of Staff. The Special Prosecutor
rection of Military Records is authorized
that this amendment shall become effec-
shall have full authority to organize, select,
to take final action on behalf of the Sec-
tive on November 7, 1973.
and hire his own staff of attorneys, investi-
retary of the Air Force, under 10 U.S.C.
EPO Regulation 1 (38 FR 28660) is
gators, and supporting personnel. on a full or
1552, in approving the correction of
amended as follows:
part-time basis, in such numbers and with
military records, provided such action:
1. In Section 2 Definitions the term
such qualifications as he may reasonably
(a) Has been recommended by the Air
"State office" is amended by deleting the
require. He may request the Assistant At-
torneys General and other officers of the De-
Staff; (b) is agreed to by the Board;
phrase "within the Customs Territory"
partment of Justice to assign such person-
and (c) falls into one of the following
which follows the word "territories" so
not and to provide such other assistance as
categories:
as to make the definition read as follows:
he may reasonably require. All personnel in
(1) Restoration of leave unduly
"State office" means, with respect to each
the Department of Justice, including United
charged to applicants.
of the 50 States, the District of Columbia,
FEDERAL REGISTER, VOL 33, NO. 214-WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1973
or objections regarding the
posed
In $ 71.181 (38 FR 435), the follo
headed by a Director. Accordingly, Part
armandment.
transition area is amended to read
o of Chapter I of Title 23, Code of Fed-
No objections have been received and
ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI
eral Regulations, is amended as follows:
the proposed amendment is hereby
1. Section 0.1(a) which lists the or-
adopted without change and is set forth
That airspace extending upward from 700
ganization units of the Department, is
feet above the surface within a 10-mile
below.
radius of Lambert St. Louis International
amended by adding "Office of Watergate
This amendment shall be effective 0901
Airport (latitude 38'44'50" N., longitude
Special Prosecution Force" immediately
Gmt., January 3. 1974.
90'21'55" iV.): within 5 miles southeast and
after "Office of Criminal Justice."
This amendment is made under the
8 miles northwest of the Lambert St. Louis
2. A new Subpert G-1 is added im-
authority of section 307(a) of the Fed-
International Airport runway 24 ILS local-
mediately after Subpart G, to read as
eral Aviation Act of 1958 (49 U.S.C.
izer northeast course, extending from the 10-
follows:
1343), and of sec. 6(c) of the Department
mile radius area to 12 miles northeast of
of Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 1655
the runway 24 OM; within 5 miles southwest
Subpart G-1-Office of Watergate Special
Prosecution Force
(c)).
and 9 miles northeast of the Lambert
St. Louis International Airport runway 12R
Sec.
Issued at Kansas City, Missouri, on
ILS localizer northwest course; extending
0.37 General functions.
October 16, 1973.
from the runway 12R OM to 12 miles north-
0.38 Special functions.
west of the OM; within a 7-mile radius of
AUTHORITY: 28 U.S.C. 509, 510, and 5 U.S.C.
A.I. COULTER,
St. Charles Smartt Airport, St. Charles, Mis-
301.
Director, Central Region.
souri (latitude 33'56'00" N., longitude 90*-
25'00" W.): within an 3-mile radius of Civic
Subpart G-1-Office of Watergate Special
In § 71.181 (38 FR 435), the following
Memorial Airport. Alton. Illinois (latitude
Prosecution Force
transition area is amended to read:
38"53'30" N., longitude 90°03'00" W.): and
SPENCER, IOWA
that airspace extending upward from 1,200
§ 0.37 General functions.
feet above the surface within a 33-mile
The Office of Watergate Special Pros-
That airspace extending upward from 700
radius of St. Louis International Airport;
ecution Force shall be under the direc-
feet above the surface within a 5-mile radius
within 6 miles southwest and 9 miles north-
of the Spencer, Iowa Municipal Airport (lati-
tion of a Director who shall be the
east of the St. Louis VORTAC 328* radial,
tude 43'09'45" N., longitude 95'11'30" W.);
Special Prosecutor appointed by the At-
extending from the 33-mile radius area to
and within three miles each side of the Spen-
36 miles northwest of the VORTAC: within
torney General. The duties and respon-
cer VOR 320* radial, extending from the 5-
5 miles northwest and 8 miles southeast of
sibilities of the Special Prosecutor are set
mile radius zone to 8 miles northwest of the
the Maryland Heights VORTAC 243° radial,
forth in the attached appendix below
VOR: within 3.5 miles each side of the Spen-
extending from the 33-mile radius area to
which is incorporated and made a part
Cer VOR 129° radial, extending from the 5-
19 miles southwest of the VORTAC; within
hereof.
mile radius zone to 15 miles southeast of the
the area bounded on the west and northwest
VOR; and that airspace extending upward
by the east and southeast edge of V-148. on
S 0.38 Specific functions.
from 1.000 feet above the surface within 4.5
the northeast by the 33-mile radius area, on
miles northeast and 9.5 miles southwest of
The Special Prosecutor is assigned and
the southeast by the northwest edge of
the Spencer VOR 320' radial. extending from
delegated the following specific func-
V-238* and on the south by the north
6.5 mus southeast of the VOR to 18.5 miles
boundary of V-88: within a 40-mile radius
tions with respect to matters specified in
northwest of the VOR; and within 5 miles
of Scott AFB (latitude 38'32'30" N., longi-
this subpart:
northeast and 9.5 miles southwest of the
tude 39"51'05" W.); excluding the portion
(a) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 515(a), to
Spencer VOR 129* radial, extending from 6.5
overlying the State of Illinois; that airspace
conduct any kind of legal proceeding.
miles northwest of the VOR to 22.5 miles
extending upward from 2,500 feet MSL
civil or criminal, including grand jury
southeast of the VOR.
within the area bounded on the northeast by
proceedings, which United States attor-
[FR Doc.73-23600 Filed 11-6-73;8:45 am)
the southwest edge of V-335, on the east by
neys are authorized by law to conduct,
the Missouri-Illinois boundary, on the south
by the north edge of V-190 and on the west
and to designate attorneys to conduct
[Airspace Docket No. 73-CE-22]
by the east edge of V-9: and that airspace
such legal proceedings.
PART 71-DESIGNATION OF FEDERAL
extending upward from 4,500 feet MSL
(b) To approve or disapprove the pro-
within the area bounded on the north by the
duction or disclosure of information or
AIRWAYS, AREA LOW ROUTES, CON-
south edge of V-83, on the northeast by the
files relating to matters within his cos-
TROLLED AIRSPACE, AND REPORTING
southwest edge of V-9W, on the south by the
nizance in response to 3 subpoena, order,
POINTS
north edge of V-72, on the west by a line
or other demand of 2 court or other av-
Transition Area; Alteration
5 miles west of and parallel to the St. Louis
thority. (See Part 16(B) of this chapter.)
VORTAC 200° radial, and on the northwest
On Page 23338 of the FEDERAL REGISTER
by the southeast edge of V-238; within the
(c) To apply for and to exercise the
dated August 29, 1973, the Federal Avi-
area bounded on the north by the south edge
authority vested in the Attorney General
ation Administration published a notice
of V-12. on the southeast by the northwest
under 18 U.S.C. 6005 relating to immu-
of proposed rule making which would
edge of V-14N, on the southwest by the
nity of witnesses in Congressional pro-
amend $ 71.181 of the Federal Aviation
northeast edge of V-175, and on the north-
ceedings.
Regulations 50 as to alter the transition
west by a line 5 miles southeast of and paral-
lel to the Jefferson City, Missouri VOR 041*
The listing of these specific functions is
area at St. Louis, Missouri.
radial, and within the area bounded on the
for the purpose of illustrating the au-
Interested persons were given 30 days
northeast by the southwest edge of V-52 and
thority entrusted to the Special TOSC-
to submit written comments, suggestions
the Missourl-Illinois boundary. on the south
cutor and is not intended to limit in any
or onlections regarding the proposed
by the north edge of V-N, and on the north-
manner his authority to carry out his
amendment.
west by the southeast edga of V-63.
functions and responsibilities.
No objections have been received and
[FR Doc.73-23606 Filed 11-8-73;8:45 am]
Dated: November 2, 1973.
the proposed amendment is hereby
adopted without change and is set forth
Title 23-Judicial Administration
ROBERT H. BORK.
below.
Acting Attorney General
CHAPTER 1-DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
This amendment shall be effective
APPENDK-DUTTES AND RESPONSISILITIES OF
[Order 551-73]
0901 Gmt. January 3, 1974.
THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR
This amendment is made under the
PART O-ORGANIZATION OF THE
The Special Prosecutor. There is appointed
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
authority of section 307(a) of the Federal
by the Attorney General. within the Depart-
Aviation Act of 1958 (49 U.S.C. 1348),
Establishing the Office of Watergate Special
ment of Justice, a Special Prosecutor to whom
and of sec. 5(c) of the Department of
Presecution Force
the Actorney General shall delegate the and
thorittes and provide the statt and other re-
Act (49 U.S.C. 1655(c)).
By virtue of the authority vested in me
sources described below.
Tested in Mansas City, Missouri, on
is 28 U.S.C. 509, 510 and 5 U.S.C. 301,
The Special Prosection shall have sull au-
Currer 16. 1973.
Shere is hereby established in the De-
thortey for Investigating and prosecusing of-
fenses against the United States actsing our
JOHN R. Walls,
partment of Justice, the Office of Water-
of the unauthoric ed"entry 18to Democratic
Anling Director, Central Region.
gate Special Prosecution Force, to be
National Committee Meadquarters at che
FEDERAL REGISTER, YOU 38, NO. 214-WEDNESDAY. NOVEMBER 7, 1973
342 JUDICIARY
CONGRESSIONAL STAFF DIRECTORY
STAFF
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COURTS, CIVIL LIBERTIES,
COMMIT
AND THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
Robert W. Kastenmeier (D. -Wis.), Chairman
licensing
MAJORITY: (5 D.) Representatives Kastenmeier, Danielson, Drinan, Owens and Mezvinsky.
pilotage,
MINORITY: (4 R.) Representatives Railsback, Smith (N.Y.), Sandman, and Cohen.
marine o
Bldg.
Room
Ext.
water (ex
Fuchs, Herbert
Counsel
RHOB
2137
3926
to the in
Mooney, Thomas E.
Associate Counsel
RHOB
2137
6504
fire prote
houses,
ine Acad
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME
and oper
of the Co
John Conyers, Jr. (D. -Mich.), Chairman
research,
MAJORITY: (5 D.) Representatives Conyers, Sarbanes, Rangel, Thornton, and Owens.
MINORITY: (4 R.) Representatives Cohen, Fish, Froehlich, and Maraziti.
Bldg.
Room
Ext.
Barboza, Maurice A.
Counsel
RHOB
2137
1695
MAJORIT
Gekas, Constantine
Associate Counsel
RHOB
2137
6906
Dinge
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE
Rodino
&
Hate
(17-N
Calif.
Roone
William L. Hungate (D.-Mo.), Chairman
Mass.
MAJORITY: (5 D.) Representatives Hungate, Kastenmeier, Edwards (Calif.), Mann, and
Holtzman.
MINORITI
MINORITY: (4 R.) Representatives Smith (N.Y.), Dennis, Mayne, and Hogan.
Ohio);
Bldg.
Room
Ext.
Steele
Hoffman, Herbert E.
Counsel
RHOB
2137
6406
Miss.
Pauley, Roger A.
Associate Counsel
RHOB
2137
7195
and B
SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, CITIZENSHIP, AND INTERNATIONAL LAW
Joshua Eilberg (D.-Pa.), Chairman
Corrado
MAJORITY: (5 D.) Representatives Eilberg, Waldie, Flowers, Seiberling, and Holtzman.
Everett,
MINORITY: (4 R.) Representatives-Fish, Railsback, Wiggins, and Hogan.
Sutter, L
Bldg.
Room
Ext.
Heyward
Cline, Garner J.
Counsel
RHOB
2137
5727
Still, Fra
Cook, Alexander B.
Associate Counsel
RHOB
2137
5259
Winfield,
Barker, \
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MONOPOLIES AND COMMERCIAL LAW
Sharood,
Bedell, (
Peter W. Rodino (D-N.J.), Chairman
Noah, Vi
MAJORITY: (6 D.) Representatives Rodino, Brooks, Flowers, Seiberling, Jordan (Texas),
McDonnel
and Mezvinsky.
Watt, Dor
MINORITY: (4 R.) Representatives Hutchinson, McClory, Sandman, and Dennis.
Perian, 0
Bldg.
Room
Ext.
Modglin,
Zeifman, Jerome M.
Counsel
RHOB
2137
7709
Hoffman,
Polk, Franklin G.
Associate Counsel
RHOB
2137
6906
Mohler, E
Nevitt, B
ADVISORY GROUP ON IMPEACHMENT
Westcott,
Peter W. Rodino, Jr., (D.-N.J.), Chairman
Lockhart,
MAJORITY: (8 D.) Representatives Rodino, Eilberg, Donahue, Kastenmeier, Edwards
Zeeb, Ma
(Calif.), Conyers, Hungate, and Brooks (Texas).
MINORITY: (7 R.) Representatives Hutchinson, McClory, Smith (N. Y.), Sandman,
Railsback, Wiggins, and Dennis.
IMPEACHMENT INQUIRY STAFF
MAJORIT
Bldg.
Room
Ext.
Bowen
Doar, John Michael
Special Counsel
RHOB
2137
9046
MINORITY
Jenner, Albert E.
Minority Counsel
RHOB
2137
9046
(S. Car
Perian, o
The Che
JAMES LAWRENCE MILLER
ATTORNEY-AT-LAW
SUITE 734 CIRCLE TOWER
5 EAST MARKET STREET
INDIANAPOLIS, INDIANA 42604
TEL. (317) 638-8240
October 6, 1974
Honorable Philip W. Buchen
Counsel To The President
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20600
Dear Mr. Buchen:
The attached Memorandum is submitted with the
thought it might be of assistance to President Ford in
his forthcoming appearance before the Congressional Committee
and in future dealings with the media
Ex-President Nixon's pardon.
Trial Staff, U.S.Attorney
Southern District, Indiana;
1955-1961;
Instructor, Criminal Pro-
cedure, School of Law
Indiana University (1946);
Prosecuting Attorney,
51st. Judicial Circuit
Peru, Miami County, Ind-
iana, Two terms (1938-40;
1941-42);
Executive Director, Commiss.
ion - Judicial and Cong-
ressionalSalaries, Washing-
D.C. (1953-54);
Legal Staff, U.S. Senate
Judiciary Committee, 1953-
1955;
Administrative Assistant
U.S. Senator, Wm.E. Jenner
(Indiana), 1952 Campaign.
*****Don't let this mislead you. - I'm just another "Country
Lawyer" practicing in a big city.
MEMORANDUM
I. PURPOSE:
The media has blown Watergate completely out of
proportion by its unrelenting drumfire of propaganda.
Hatreds have been enflamed in too many hearts to a
degree seldom recorded in American history.
A strong antidote of simplification is in order.
II. THE REASONS FOR CRIMINAL PROSECUTION:
There are only four reasons why anyone should be
subjected to criminal prosecution:
1. To punish the individual in event he is
convicted;
2. By so doing, to discourage him from committ-
ing subsequent crimes;
3. To deter other from committing criminal
offenses; and
4. To protect Society from harm to person and
property bymthe criminal's incarceration.
III. THE OBJECTIVES OF CRIMINAL PROSECUTION HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED:
Punishment:
Richard Nixon is the only President in this Country's
history forced to resign the Presidency. - He has suffered
emotionally to the point his health is impaired even perhaps
to the point of fatality.
Deterrent To Self:
If Richard Nixon has committed a crime or criminal
offenses it was solely because the office of the President
afforded him this opportunity. He will never occupy this post
again. Therefore the opportunity to commit future crimes of
this category have been denied him in perpetuity.
FORD LIBRARY DERALD
Page 2.
Deterrent To Others:
If any future President is foolhardy enough to risk
the plight of shame and humiliation Richard Nixon has already
suffered, then neither would the possibility of criminal pros-
ecution deter him.
Protection of Society By Incarceration:
Crimes generally may be divided into two types of
offenses:
- Against the person; and
- Against property.
Richard Nixon has committed no offense against the
person. No one has been injured. No life has been taken.
His removal from office has stripped him forever of
the power to commit any further offenses against property through
the use of Presidential power.
IV. THE PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW THE WHOLE TRUTH:
In the present Watergate Trials the Special Prosecut-
or representing the Department of Justice has ample opportunity
to reveal the whole truth to the American People.
Coupled with this, Judge Sirica has almost unlimited
latitude to make personal inquiry of each witness so long as
the rights of the Defendants are not prejudiced.
President Ford's pardon of Ex-President Nixon did not
embrace perjury committed 1f he is a witness in these Watergate
proceedings.
If these avenues of information are not sufficient
to enable those interested in revealing the WHOLE truth then
nothing would be gained by the independent prosecution of Richard
Nixon.
Page 3.
V. IN CONCLUSION:
Every objective for which Criminal Prosecution
of an individual has been designed has been achieved, even
without resort to the process.
If another crime had been committed which in every
aspect save one was identical to the Watergate episode, the
media would scarcely have given it passing attention.
The one differentiating element was the position
of power held by those who perpetrated the crime. This one
element enabled the media to blow the offense entirely out
of proportion.
President Ford does not need to apologize to any-
one for his action in pardoning Nixon.
When an issue as controversial as this arises,
it is impossible to satisfy every segment of Society.
Therefore, the President should stand firm by the position
his conscience originally dictated, and place this episode
in its proper perspective and get on with the more important
problems of the Nation.
Respectfully
10-6-74
October 8, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JACK MARSH
FROM:
WILLIAM E. TIMMONS
SUBJECT:
Hungate Subcommittee
Sen. Hugh Scott (R-Pa) urges the President put off
his appearance before subject committee until after
the election. He argues jury selection and congres-
sional recess present ample reason to defer this
hearing. He feels you can negotiate this with
Mr. Hungate.
cc:/Phil Buchen
BERAZE FORD LIBRAGE
October 8, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JACK MARSH
FROM:
WILLIAM E. TIMMONS
SUBJECT:
Hungate Subcommittee
Sen. Hugh Scott (R-Pa) urges the President put off
his appearance before subject committee until after
the election. He argues jury selection and congres-
sional recess present ample reason to defer this
hearing. He feels you can negotiate this with
Mr. Hungate.
cc:/Phil Buchen
LIBRARY GERALD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
10/8/74
Phil has tiee w/
FYI
Bill BW Casselman
ross
GERALD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Jack:
Should we call
Hugh on this.
Obviously it
doesn't seem possible.
T.
LIBRARY GERALD ?
October 8, 1974
Thoted
MEMORANDUM FOR:
JACK MARSH
FROM:
WILLIAM E. TIMMONS
SUBJECT:
Hungate Subcommittee
Sen. Hugh Scott (R-Pa) urges the President put off
his appearance before subject committee until after
the election, He argues jury selection and congres-
sional recess present ample reason to defer this
hearing. He feels you can negotiate this with
Mr. Hungate.
cci/Phil Buchen
L'
WATERGATE SPECIAL PROSECUTION FORCE
United States Department of Justice
1425 k Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005
October 12, 1974
Honorable William B. Saxbe
The Attorney General
U. S. Department of Justice
Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. Saxbe:
Along with my letter of resignation, I beg
to hand you herewith a copy of our latest interim
report which reflects the principal activities of
the Special Prosecutor's office to date.
Two of the results achieved relate to the
mandate directed to this office to investigate
allegations involving the President. Both are
without precedent.
One is the extensive grand jury report on the
involvement of Richard M. Nixon in Watergate cover-
up activities, prepared for the grand jury by this
office and sent to the House Judiciary Committee
last March, after successful litigation through the
trial and appellate courts. While the grand jury
report, which presented the chain of evidence in
detail, has not been published, I am informed that
it served as a major guide for the staff and members
of the Committee in the development of the presenta-
tion leading to the Articles of Impeachment.
The second involved the successful litigation
of a trial subpoena for tape recorded evidence in
the hands of the President of the United States. The
Supreme Court's unanimous decision supporting the
subpoena of the Special Prosecutor compelled the
former President to release, among others, the tape
recording of June 23, 1973, which served as a fore-
runner to his resignation.
FORD
LIBRARY
- 2 -
Although not appropriate for comment until
after the sequestering of the jury in United States V.
Mitchell, et al., in view of suggestions that an
indictment be returned against former President
Richard M. Nixon questioning the validity of the pardon
granted him, I think it proper that I express to you my
views on this subject to dispel any thought that there
may be some relation between my resignation and that
issue.
As you realize, one of my responsibilities, not
only as an officer of the court, but as a prosecutor
as well, is not to take a position in which I lack faith
or which my judgment dictates is not supported by probable
cause. The provision in the Constitution investing the
President with the right to grant pardons, and the
recognition by the United States Supreme Court that a
pardon may be granted prior to the filing of charges are
so clear, in my opinion, as not to admit of doubt. Philip
Lacovara, then Counsel to the Special Prosecutor, by
written memorandum on file in this office, came to the
same conclusion, pointing out that:
"
the pardon power can be exercised at
any time after a federal crime has been
committed and it is not necessary that
there be any criminal proceedings pending.
In fact, the pardon power has been used
frequently to relieve federal offenders of
criminal liability and other penalties and
disabilities attaching to their offenses
even where no criminal proceedings against
the individual are contemplated."
I have also concluded, after thorough study, that
there is nothing in the charter and guidelines appertain-
ing to the office of the Special Prosecutor that impairs
or curtails the President's free exercise of the
FORD
constitutional right of pardon.
I was co-architect along with Acting Attorney
General Robert Bork, of the provisions some theorists
now point to as inhibiting the constitutional pardoning
power of the President. The additional safeguards of
independence on which I insisted and which Mr. Bork, on
former President Nixon's authority, was willing to grant
were solely for purposes of limiting the grounds on which
my discharge could be based and not for the purpose of
enlarging on the jurisdiction of the Special Prosecutor.
- 3 -
Hearings held by the Senate Judiciary Committee
subsequent to my appointment make it clear that my
jurisdiction as Special Prosecutor was to be no
different from that possessed by my predecessor.
There was considerable concern expressed by
some Senators that Acting Attorney General Bork, by
supplemental order, inadvertently had limited the
jurisdiction that previously existed. The hearings
fully developed the concept that the thrust of the
new provisions giving me the aid of the Congressional
"consensus" committee were to insulate me from ground-
less efforts to terminate my employment or to limit
the jurisdiction that existed. It was made clear,
however, that there was no "redefining" of the juris-
diction of the Special Prosecutor as it existed from
the beginning. There emerged from these hearings
the definite understanding that in no sense were the
additional provisions inserted in the Special Prosecutor's
Charter for the purpose of either enlarging or diminish-
ing his jurisdiction. I did stress, as I argued in the
Supreme Court in U. S. V. Nixon, that I was given the
verbal assurance that I could bring suit against the
President to enforce subpoena rights, a point upheld
by the Court. This, of course, has no bearing on the
pardoning power.
I cannot escape the conclusion, therefore, that
additional provisions to the Charter do not subordinate
the constitutional pardoning power to the Special
Prosecutor's jurisdictional rights. For me now to
contend otherwise would not only be contrary to the
interpretation agreed upon in Congressional hearings --
it also would be, on my part, intellectually dishonest.
Thus, in the light of these conclusions, for me
to procure an indictment of Richard M. Nixon for the
sole purpose of generating a purported court test on
the legality of the pardon, would constitute a spurious
proceeding in which I had no faith; in fact, it would be
tantamount to unprofessional conduct and violative of
my responsibility as prosecutor and officer of the court.
- 4 -
Perhaps one of the more important functions
yet to be discharged relates to our final report.
It is contemplated that this report will be as all-
encompassing as the authority granted this office
permits, consistent with the prosecutorial function
as delineated by the American Bar Association Standards
for Criminal Justice. While this report will be cast
in final form subsequent to my term as Special Prosecutor,
I will be available to the authors for such contributions
and consultations as they deem advantageous.
You are aware, of course, of the position this
office has taken regarding access to former President
Nixon's White House materials for all remaining
investigations and prosecutions. Legislation now pend-
ing, if enacted, will solve the problem. If not enacted,
I shall continue to be available, to whatever extent my
successor desires, for counseling on reaching a solution
to this problem so that all relevant materials will be
forthcoming.
My Deputy, Henry Ruth, and most of the other
members of the staff have worked together since the
creation of the office. Mr. Ruth has a familiarity with
all matters still under investigation as well as those
still to be tried. He has been in charge of all "milk
fund" matters, in view of my recusal. I trust that you
will not mind my offering the suggestion that he be
given consideration to serve as my successor, thus
permitting the unfinished matters to continue without
interruption.
Sincerely,
LEON JAWORSKI
Special Prosecutor
Tuesday 10/15/74
5:50 Howard Kerr called again.
Regarding the 21-page opening statement for the
President's testimony ---- Mr. Marsh believes the President
would probably want Mr. Hartmann to have a look at it
(Hartmann is at home ill ---- so Cdr. Kerr wondred if
you'd want a copy sent outto him)
FORD is 070835 LIBRARY
Washington Star-News
Wednesday, October 16, 1974
Ford to Testify
On Haig's Role
In Nixon Pardon
By Aldo Beckman
Chicago Tribune
President Ford will tell a House subcommittee
tomorrow that eight days before President Nixon's
resignation one of Nixon's top aides asked whether
Ford would pardon Nixon if he resigned, according to
White House sources.
The sources said yesterday that the approach was
made by Alexander M. Haig Jr., Nixon's chief of
staff, who posed a hypothetical question to the then-
vice president. If Nixon decided to resign, could he
count on a full pardon and escape criminal prosecu-
tion, Haig asked Ford.
Ford will tell the House Judiciary subcommittee,
chaired by Rep. William Hungate, D-Mo., that he
made no promises to Haig, and refused to be part of
any deal that would trade a promise of pardon for a
presidential resignation.
NIXON RESIGNED on Aug. 8, effective at noon the
next day. On Sept. 8, Ford announced he was grant-
ing Nixon a full pardon for any crimes he might have
committed as president.
Ford also is prepared to testify that James St.
Clair, Nixon's Watergate attorney, approached him
on Aug. 2, the day after his conversation with Haig, to
tell him of the damaging conversations on tapes the
Supreme Court had ordered turned over to the Water-
gate special prosecutor.
St. Clair told him, Ford will testify, that the conver-
sations were so damaging that Nixon was certain to
be impeached, convicted, and removed from office, if
he didn't resign first.
THE FOLLOWING day, Ford left Washington on a
speaking trip through the South. Although Ford soft-
ened his defense of Nixon, he did declare on several
occasions that he believed that Nixon was innocent of
any impeachable offenses.
In his subcommittee appearance Ford is not ex-
pected to discuss those statements or tell why he
made them after receiving St. Clair's information.
Ford's appearance before the Hungate subcommit-
tee, now set for 10 A.M. tomorrow, will be carried live
on network television. It was delayed for one week,
until after the jury in the Watergate cover-up trial
was sequestered, so that his testimony would not
prejudice jury members.
The hearing was called after the Ford pardon of
Nixon prompted repeated accusations that a deal had
been made before the resignation - a charge that
Ford has denied.
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY
{ca
10/16/74]
1501
Mop
Ford Pardon Testimon
0.00 I
uisng
By Richard L. Lyons
poper
Washington Post Staff Writer
0 no
costing
President Ford's historic
aut
appearance before a con-
by SJ;
gressional subcommittee
com
Thursday will take place in
One
a room that has seen a lot
befa
1S.ION
of history this past year.
имоте
It is Room 2141 of the
Rayburn House Office
Building, the meeting room
of the House Judiciary Com-
cetti
mittee.
sqe g
It was in this room that
said
Mr. Ford appeared nearly a
year ago at the first confir-
UM01
mation hearing for a Vice
Bomn
President.
And it was in this room
that the Judiciary Commit-
1
are
tee met for three months for
ipaut
deliberations that led to rec-
suoo
ommendations that Presi
dent Nixon be impeached.
By Bob Burchette-The Washington Post
It is not a large room.
There is space for about 200
Rep. Bella Abrug (D-N.Y.), who discovered an old
u
chairs, tightly squeezed to-
procedure to get Mr. Ford to testify, has 10 questions.
gether after the television
cameras have been put in
discovered an ancient means
dent of the United States is
place: Judiciary Chairman
of obtaining information
Peter Rodino (D-N.J.) ref-
hereby requested to furnish
called the resolution of insued
uses to move to a larger
the House; within 10 days,
IHS
quiry
room:
with the following informa-
A resolution of inquiry di
tion:
Television will-be there to
rects questions to an official
record the event.live. The
1. Did you or your repre-
of the executive branch. It
President is scheduled to ap-
sentatives have specific
pear before the subcommit
knowledge of any formal
which may invite the official
tee at 10 a.m and is. ex-
to-eome up and answer the
criminal charges pending
pected to spend two or three
the
Hing
is referred. to committee
against Richard M. Nixon
questions.) If the committee
hours reading statement
prior to issuance of the
takes no. action. (the House
and answering questions on
Armed Servicesi Committee
pardon? If. so, what. were,
the factors thats went into
these charges?
we
did not act on Rept Abzug
he le
his decision to pardon Mr.
resolutions) the author may
2. Did Alexander Haig
Nixon for any crime he may
after seven days call for a
refer to or discuss a par-
order
have committed while Presi-
House vote on the resolu-
don for Mr. Nixon with Mr.
Acted
dent.
tion. House approval would
Nixon or his representatives
siden
A spokesman said the sub-
direct the official to reply.
at any time during the week
committee, headed by Rep.
of Aug. 4 or at any subse-
dmir
Rep., Abzug's resolution
William L. Hungate (D-Mo.),
quent time? If so, what
Nixo
asking 10 questions of Mr.
is trying hard to: keep the
promises were made or con-
Ford, and another by Rep.
ich
event just like any other
ditions set for a pardon, if
John Conyers (D-Mich.) ask-
di pla
subcommittee hearing. But
any? If so, were tapes or
ing four more, are before
the fact is it will be the first
transcriptions of any kind
agove
Hungate's subcommittee.
time in at least a century-
made of these conversations
Mr. Ford offered to appear
(ssue
and some authorities believe
or were any notes taken? If
in person to answer them.
dves
the first time ever-that a
so, please provide such
He will not be under oath,
pes
sitting President has testi-
just as members of Con-
tapes, transcriptions or
qvail:
fied before a congressional
notes.
gress are not sworn in when
committee.
testifying on Capitol Hill.
3. When was a pardon for
1 acc
The President will sit at a
Mr. Nixon first referred to
The text of the resolution
use 1
witness table before the
or discussed with Mr. Nixon,
submitted by Rep. Abzug
vem
two-tiered committee bench
or Nixon representatives, by
and co-signed by 13 other
tran
and look up at 11 congress-
you or your representatives
House members:
men, two staff members and
or aides, including the pe-
tion
two television cameras-one
Resolved, that the Presi-
riod when you were a mem-
ved.
directly in front of him and
acco
one to the side rear.
sh
Witnesses usually are pro-
vided with a pitcher of
to n
water and a stack of paper
IS 0
cups. Mr. Ford may get a
osec
glass.
Hungate's nine-member
subcommittee will be joined
by Committee Chairman Ro-
will
dino and the senior Republi-
can, Edward Hutchinson (R-
FORD
The 11 members will
be permitted to question the
President. Subcommittee
AUTO SHOW
GERALD
counsel, who usually ques-
tion, will not.
all this week
LIBRATE
The President is testifying
because Rep. Bella Abzug
The super new cars of '75 are here.
us
be
(D-N.Y.), in her efforts to
All makes, all sizes,
end the Indochina war, re-
spioq Bradley 'uos siq se susu puint
y Set in Historic Room
ber of Congress or Vice
nouncement of the pardon
possession or control relat-
President?
made known to you or your
ing to any pardon which
4. Who participated in
representatives prior to its
announcement, and was it
may be granted to any per-
these and subsequent discus-
sions or negotiations with
approved by you or your
son who is or may be charged
Mr. Nixon or his representa-
representatives?
or convicted of any offense
tives regarding a pardon,
10. Did you receive any re-
against the United States
and at what specific times
port from a psychiatrist or
within the prosecutorial ju.
and locations?
risdiction of the Office of
other physician stating that
Mr. Nixon was in other than
Watergate Special Prosecu-
5. Did you consult with
tion Force
Attorney General William
good health? If so, please
Saxbe or Special Prosecutor
provide such reports.
Leon Jaworski before mak-
Here is the text of the
ing the decision to pardon
resolution submitted by
Mr. Nixon and, if so, what
Conyers:
facts and legal authorities
Resolved, that the Presi-
did they give to you?
dent is directed to furnish
6. Did you consult with
to the House the full and
the vice-presidential nomi-
complete information and
nee: Nelson Rockefeller, be
facts on which was based
fore making the decision
the decision to grant a par-
and, if so, what facts and le-
don to Mr. Nixon, including:
gal authorities did he give
Any representations
to you?
made by or on behalf of Mr.
7. Did you consult with
Nixon to the President.
any other attorneys or pro-
2. Any information or
fessors of law before mak-
facts presented to the Presi-
ing the decision and, if so,
dent: with respect to the
what facts or legal authori
mental or physical health of
ties did they give to you?
Mr. Nixon.
8. Did you or your repre-
3. Any information in pos-
sentatives ask Mr. Nixon to
session or control of the
make a confession or state-
President with respect to
ment of criminal guilt, and,
the offenses which were al-
if so, what language was
legedly committed by Mr.
suggested or requested by
Nixon and for which a par-
you, your representatives,
don was granted.
Mr. Nixon, or his represent-
4. Any representations
atives? Was any statement
made by or on behalf of the
of any kind requested from
President to Mr. Nixon in
Mr. Nixon in exchange for
connection with a pardon
the pardon, and, if so. please
for alleged offenses against
provide the suggested or re-
the United States.
quested language.
The President is further
9. Was the statement is-
directed to furnish to the
To
sued by Mr. Nixon immedi-
House the full and complete
ately subsequent to an-
information and facts in his
er-
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, Wednesday, Oct. 16, 1974
The Pardon of Nixon
"The Best-Prepared Case"
The special prosecutor said that evidence
Was Timely, Legal,
to be presented during the current Water-
gate trial will further enmesh the former
President in the cover-up. Mr. Jaworski,
Jaworski Believes
who won't be participating in the prosecu-
tion, called it "the best-prepared case I've
been associated with."
Mr. Jaworski's attitude about the contro-
He Says Nixon's Acceptance
versial pardon rests on the assumption
Clearly Shows His Guilt
drawn from an early Ford news conference
that President Ford always intended to par-
And More Evidence Is Due
don Mr. Nixon eventually. Thus, to Mr. Ja-
worski, all that is at issue is the timing of
the pardon.
By KAREN J. ELLIOTT
Mr. Jaworski Insists that if Mr. Nixon's
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
case had been allowed to proceed to indict-
WASHINGTON-Special Watergate Pros-
ment and trial, the public would have
ecutor Leon Jaworski sees nothing wrong
learned nothing more about the former
with President Ford's decision last month to
President's role than will come out in the
pardon Richard Nixon.
trial of his former aides. "It's a mistake to
Mr. Jaworski, talking publicly about the
believe there would have been more evi-
controversy for the first time, concedes that
dence for the public if he had been tried,"
the pardon prevented an indictment and
the special prosecutor said.
trial of Mr. Nixon. But he believes that suf-
"If he had been pardoned after indict-
ficient evidence has, or soon will, become
ment, the public would have no new infor-
public to show conclusively that the former
mation. If he had gone to trial, he could
President was guilty of obstruction of jus-
have invoked his Fifth Amendment guaran-
tice.
tees against self-incrimination, pleaded nolo
"The evidence will show he's guilty, just
contendere, or even pleaded guilty, and we
as much as a guilty plea," the special prose-
wouldn't have learned any new details,"
cutor declared during an interview yester-
Mr. Jaworski said.
day in his sparsely furnished office here.
The special prosecutor wouldn't say
Next week, Mr. Jaworski is leaving the job
whether he would have prosecuted the for-
he has held for 11 months and is returning
mer President if Mr. Ford hadn't pardoned
to Houston to resume the practice of law.
him. "Nothing is served by talking about
The special prosecutor believes, further-
hypothetical situations now," he declared.
more, that both the offering of a pardon and
But Mr. Jaworski said that if the former
Mr. Nixon's acceptance of it clearly signify
President had been charged, his trial
his guilt:
wouldn't have come for many months. "We
"A pardon isn't just a beautiful docu-
gave no consideration to doing anything
ment to frame and hang on the wall. You
with the former President until after the
are offered a pardon only because it is be-
cover-up jury was sequestered," he said.
lieved you can be charged and convicted.
A major task still facing the special pros-
You accept it only if you want to be
ecution force is a report to Congress on the
cleared."
Nixon investigation and on other aspects of
An All-Out Defense
the Watergate case. That report will ex-
Mr. Jaworski's attitude about the pardon
clude much evidence against the former
has been a subject of intense speculation
President unless Congress specifically au-
here for weeks. Many have assumed that
thorizes its inclusion. Without such author-
the special prosecutor, who* has gained a
ity, Mr. Jaworski believes, a prosecutor
reputation in Washington for toughness and
can't ethically disclose evidence against a
integrity, objected to the decision. It even
man who hasn't been charged; Mr. Jawor-
has been suggested in recent days that his
ski has asked Congress for authority to
supposed anger over the pardon is what
include such material in the report.
prompted him to resign his post.
"We can paint a very full picture of Mr.
In fact, his statements yesterday
Nixon's role in obstructing justice, but the
amount to an all-out defense of the most
difficulty arises in other areas where we
controversial aspect of the pardon: its tim-
didn't bring charges," he said. The Water-
ing prior to a Nixon indictment and trial.
gate grand jury named Mr. Nixon as an un-
Thus, the Jaworski position could have sig-
indicted coconspirator in the obstruction of
nificant political benefit for President Ford,
justice for which his former aides are being
whose popularity with the public has
tried.
dropped dramatically since he granted the
Mr. Jaworski is turning philosophical as
pardon.
he prepares to leave for a rest at his Texas
The special prosecutor said he has kept
ranch, where he will "watch the deer and
silent on the pardon and on Mr. Nixon's role
in the Watergate
birds and think about something besides
Watergate for the first time in a year.
cover-up for two rea-
sons: He wanted to
Watergate, he believes, has shown that the
wait until a jury was
American governmental system works.
chosen and seques-
"Here are top men in government who
tered for the trial of
haven't been spared from investigation, ex-
five of Mr. Nixon's
posure and conviction," he said.
former top aides,
But he isn't sorry to be leaving. "The
and he wanted to
whole thing is a tragedy," he said. "And I
wait until he had an-
don't get any satisfaction from being in-
nounced his resigna-
volved in a national tragedy."
tion. All that has
happened, and now
Mr. Jaworski is talk-
ing: There will be
more newspaper in-
terviews, a nd on
Sunday he is sched-
uled to appear on NBC's "Meet the Press"
program.
Mr. Jaworski denies that the pardon
prompted his resignation. He said in the in-
terview yesterday that he decided three
weeks ago to resign because he had com-
pleted what he has always considered to be
his primary task-outlining Mr. Nixon's role
in the cover-up.
His own departure, he said, won't slow
the investigations that the prosecutor's of-
fice is conducting into the milk-fund scandal
and into illegal political contributions by
corporations. Action is expected soon
against other companies, he said.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 17, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PHIL BUCHEN
FROM:
KEN LAZARUS
SUBJECT:
Supplemental Statement by the
President to the Hungate Subcommittee
As you know, the most damaging aspects of this morning's hearing
before the Hungate Subcommittee were the unanswered questions
posed by Ms. Holtzman and the likely adverse public reaction to them.
It is my opinion that a letter from the President to Chairman Hungate
responding to these questions should be sent and released before
6 p.m. today in order to make the morning newspaper cycle.
These questions will be raised again and it would be in the President's
best interest to have the answers available prior to any press treat-
ment of the Holtzman questions.
A draft letter is attached.
cc: Phil Areeda
Bill Casselman
DRAFT LETTER TO HUNGATE FROM THE PRESIDENT
Dear Mr. Chairman:
Due to the press of time during today's hearing before the
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice relative to the pardon of former
President Nixon, I was not afforded the opportunity to respond to
several questions posed by Ms. Holtzman. In order to complete the
hearing record of the Subcommittee in this respect, I am taking the
liberty of communicating my answers to those questions herewith.
Three of these questions involved the grant of the pardon to
the former President. Why was the pardon issued without some
specification of the crimes for which Mr. Nixon was pardoned? Why
was the pardon granted without obtaining any acknowledgement of guilt?
Did the pardon have the effect of infringing upon the public's right to
know the full story about Richard Nixon's misconduct in office?
- 2 -
22 Op. A. G. 36 (1898) indicates that a pardon is essentially
directed to the nullification of the legal consequences flowing from an
offense. Such an effect is not dependent on knowledge or enumeration
of the offenses involved. It is clear that the power of pardon may be
granted without an investigation of a prosecutorial nature to identify
the details of the specific offenses involved. Indeed, such an investigation
might be an abuse of the power (See Op. A. G. 359 (1820)).
Burdick V. United States 236 U.S. 79 (1915) states that a pardon
11
carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it"(at
95) and 11 Op. A.G. 227, 228 (1865) states: "There can be no pardon
where there is no actual or imputed guilt. The acceptance of a pardon
is a confession of guilt, or of the existence of a state of facts from which
a judgement of guilt would follow. 11
- 3 -
Rather than reducing the possibility of a full public airing of
the facts involved in "Watergate", it is my understanding that the
pardon precludes the former President from refusing to testify as a
witness on Fifth Amendment grounds in any Federal trial dealing with
the facts of this matter. /Murphy V. Waterfront Commission, 378
U.S. 52, 79 (1964)/
One question called for an explanation of the fact that the
services of Mr. Benton Becker were utilized in conjunction with the
staff support provided to me by my counsel, Mr. Philip Buchen. In this
regard, I can only say that I have been acquainted with Mr. Becker for
some time. I have known him to be a thoroughly professional man of
considerable talent and, at the time his legal services were rendered
relative to the pardon, I had no knowledge that he could be the subject
of any criminal investigation whatsoever.
BERRAD FOND VIBRARY
- 4 -
I would also like to address myself to the agreement between
the General Services Administration and former President Nixon with
respect to certain materials, including the tape recordings which have
been the subject of a great deal of notoriety. Paragraph 8 of that
agreement provides that the tapes " shall be destroyed at the time
of Mr. Nixon's death or on September 1, 1984, whichever event shall
first occur. " It is my understanding that this provision is intended to
govern destruction only after September 1, 1979. Although certain people
have misconstrued this section as a potential loophole, I can assure you
that in this and every other respect, steps have been taken to eliminate
any possibility of destruction or alteration of any of these materials.
Finally, I would like to respond to the unfortunate inference that
was case to the effect that the intent behind the tapes agreement was to
insure that any possible tape recordings between myself and the former
- 5 -
President would never come out in public. I have never considered
myself to be a secretive individual. My life has been an open one of
public service. I trust that you and the members of your Subcommittee
will see no need to question my motivations in protecting these materials
for reasons of the highest national interest and not out of fear of
reprisals.
Let me again state my appreciation for the opportunity to
appear before you and your colleagues. I trust that my appearance
marked the beginning of a new and healthy period of cooperation between
our respective branches of government.
FORD is LIBRARI EYES
53
1
would like to specify a few of them for you so that parhaps
2
we can have some of these answered.
3
I think from the mail I have received from all over the
4
country as well as my own District, I know that the people
5
want to understand how you can explain having pardoned
6
Richard Nixon without specifying any of the crimes for which
7
2
he was pardoned, and how can you explain pardoning Richard
8
Nixon without obtaining any acknowledgement of guilt from
9
him.
10
3
How do you explain the failure to consult the Attorney
11
General of the United States with respect to the issuance of
12
the pardon even though in your confirmation hearings you had
13
indicated that the Attorney General's opinion would be critical
14
in any decision to pardon the former President.
15
How can this extraordinary haste in which the pardon was
16
decided on and the secrecy with which it was carried out be
17
5
explained and how can you explain the fact that the pardon
18
of Richard Nixon was accompanied by an agreement with respect
19
to the tapes which in essence, in the public mind, hampered
20
the Special Prosecutor's access to these materials and was
21
done also in the public's mind in disregard of the public's
22
right to know the full story about Richard Nixon's misconduct
23
in office
6
GRD
24
And in addition; the public I think wants an explanation
LIBRARY
25
of how Benton Backer was used to represent the interests of
the United States in negotiating a tapss agreement when at
2
that very time he was under invastigation by the United States
3
for possible criminal charges.
4
7
And how also can you explain not having consulted Leon
5
Jaworski, the Special Prosecutor, before approving the tapes
6
agreement? And I think, Mr. President, that these are only
7
a few of the questions that have existed in the public's mind
8
before and unfortunately still remain not resolved.
9
And since I have very brief time, I would like to ask
10
you in addition to these questions one further one, and that
11
8
is that suspicions have been raised that the reason for the
12
pardon and the simultaneous tapes agreement was to insure
13
that the tape recordings between yourself and Richard Nixon
14
never came out in public. To alleviate this suspicion once and
15
for all would you be willing to turn over to this Subcommittee
16
all tape recordings of conversations between yourself and
17
Richard Nixon.
18
President Ford. Those tapes under an opinion of the
19
Attorney General which I sought, according to the Attorney
20
General, and I might add according to past precedent, belong
21
to President Nixon. Those tapes are in our control. They are
22
under an agreement which protects them totally, fully, for
FORD
23
the Special Prosecutor's Office or for any other criminal
LIBRARY
24
proceedings. Those tapes will not be delivered to anybody
25
until a satisfactory agreement is reached with the Special
October 17, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR:
RON NESSEN
FROM:
KEN LAZARUS
SUBJECT:
Mffect of the Acceptance of a Pardon
It is my understanding that questions regarding the legal effect of
the acceptance of a pardom with respect to the question of guilt
have been referred to you.
In response to these questions you might want to make reference
to the following authorities:
Burdick V. United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915 states that a
pardon ". carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a
confession of it. " (at 95)
11 Op. A. G. 227, 228 (1865) states that "There can be no
pardon where there is no actual or imputed guilt. The
acceptance of a pardon is a confession of guilt, or of the
existence of a state of facts from which a judgment of guilt
would follow. #
FORD
LIBRARY
Cong
testimony
J
Hungate
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 18, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR:
BOB LINDER
FROM:
JACK MARSH Jrn
Would you please order one dozen copies
of the report by the Subcommittee on the
Committee of the Judiciary for President
Ford's appearance on October 17, 1974.
cc: Bill Timmons
Phil Buchen
1920 :- LIBRARY 970079
Presedents
October 22, 1974
appearance
10/17/74
Dear Mr. Clayton:
Thank you very much for your thoughtful letter of
October first, in which you expressed support of
the President's declaion to appear before the
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice.
The President made this appearance on Thursday,
October 17th, and I believe he forthrightly and
candidly explained his reasons for granting a
parden to the former President. I approciate the
fact that you have taken time to write the President
on this matter.
With appreciation,
Sincerely,
Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
Mr. George M. Clayton
1423 Forest Lane #114
Garland, Texas 75042
PWB:JF:em
FORD i LIBRARY 03
Sent copy of Ron
Dessen memo
(10-17.74) 74) dem'
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
October 25, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR:
KEN LAZARUS
149 EOB
FROM:
LIZ O'NEILL
Larry Speakes told me you could provide
information re. acceptance of a pardon
being an admission of guilt -- so
I can reply to this letter.
Thank you.
FORD LIBRARY
10/17/74
Tuesday 11/13/74
11:15 Ann Patterson in Symington's office said that when the
225-2561
President testified on October 17th. when Rep. Holtzmann
interrogated him -- it was understood that he said to
her -- "Your questions are interesting and I'd like to respond
to them in written form."
They want to know if that's true.
Jay will call them and let me know the answer.
I called Symington's office and left word for Miss Patterson
that Jay French would be calling.
GERALD LIBRARY ? FOND
Friday 11/22/74
11:50 Cong. Henry Smith's office called to say the
sixth person in favor of the motion to report
unfavorably on H. Res. 1367 and H. Res. 1370
was Cong. James Mann. I'll let Mr. Marsh know.
cc: Mr. Marsh
Notod P.
BERALD R. FORD
LIBRARY
Friday 11/22/74
10:15
Congressman Henry Smith called and said he thought the
President, John Marsh and you would be interested to know
that today the Hungate Subcommittee on Criminal Justice
passed his motion to report unfavorably on those two privileged
resolutions of inquiry. Cong. Smith moved that the
Subcommittee report unfavorably on H. Res. 1367 and H. Res. 1370
without amendment and recommended that the resolutions be
not agreed to. It passed 6-3. The three opposed were
Holtzman (said he thought she wanted to go on with this thing
for a year), Bob Kastenneier, and Don Edwards. Those in
favor were Chairman Hungate, Cong. Smith, Cong. Dennis,
Cong. Mayne and Hogan (by proxy).
[I am checking his
office now to see who the other one was since he only gave me
five names.] It was adopted 6-3.
This was just the Subcommittee. There will be further full
Committee action. Said he would hope the Committee would
follow their action but he can't guarantee it.
cc:
John Marsh'
Noted
LIBRARY GERALD R. FORD
Forcompletient of
hand delivery Hill
today
P.
FORD is QERALD GRARY
they
y
10:6 if
cilli
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Eva,
I made the notation cc to
Henry P. Smith, III on the original,
made a xerox, and had both sent by
messenger to the Hill. You will obviously
want more copies unless you already.
have some.
Eleanor
12/16
FORD
LIBRARY
Blind copy should 80 to Marsh.
And before dolivering, wo
should osk him if copy
is togo to H. Smith thow
on face,
P.
March advised that "Hon. Herry P.
Smith his nomo III" should ohould have appear copy " with +
D5 copy addressee
N saude
AFV2.
Please make "Eyes Only
copy for Jock Marsh of
reform this tome,
(has Po
been taken to him
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
December 14, 1974
Dear Congressman Hungate:
This letter is in response to your letter of December 10, 1974.
My understanding is that the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice
of the Committee on the Judiciary had anticipated when you
wrote your letter devoting time on December 19, 1974 to an
appearance by former Special Prosecutor Leon Jaworski.
That appearance was intended in part, I am told, to cover
events within his knowledge leading to the pardon of former
President Nixon. Now I have been advised that Mr. Jaworski
will not be appearing at any time during the remaining days of
the 93rd Congress.
I believe it inappropriate for me to try arranging an appearance
by General Alexander Haig to give testimony on the same subject
prior to adjournment of this session of the Congress when without
other desired testimony, no disposition can be made of current
legislative proposals relating to this subject. Also, on De-
cember 15, 1974, General Haig will first assume the position of
Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, and this event will un-
doubtedly require his immediate and, for some period, contin-
uous attention to new responsibilities in Europe.
Your letter does suggest in the alternative that General Haig
make an appearance before your Subcommittee early in the next
session of Congress. Although I am not in a position to give you
a definite response, I believe a determination should await a
review of circumstances at that time, including what legislative
proposals may then be pending before your Subcommittee.
FORD VIBRANE
-2-
I trust that the foregoing will serve your purposes until such
time as there can be common review of the situation in January.
Sincerely,
Thety Buchen
Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
Honorable William L. Hungate
Chairman
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice
Committee on the Judiciary
House of Representatives
Washington, D. C. 20515
cc: Honorable Henry P. Smith, III
and
NINETY-THIRD CONGRESS
PETER W. RODINO, JR. (N.J.) CHAIRMAN
HAROLD D. DONOHUE, MASS.
EDWARD HUTCHINSON, MICH.
GENERAL COUNSEL:
JACK BROOKS, TEX.
ROBERT MC CLORY, ILL.
JEROME M. ZEIPMAN
ROBERT W. KASTENMEIER, WIS.
HENRY P. SMITH III, N.Y.
CHARLES W. SANDMAN, JR., N.J.
WILLIAM L. HUNGATE, MO.
TOM RAILSBACK, ILL
Congress of the United States
ASSOGIATE GENERAL COUNSEL.
DON EDWARDS, CALIF.
GARNER J. CLINE
JOHN CONYERS, JR., MICH.
CHARLES E. WIGGINS, CALIF.
COUNSEL:
JOSHUA EILBERG, PA.
DAVID W. DENNIS, IND.
HERBERT FUCHS
JEROME R. WALDIE, CALIF.
HAMILTON FISH, JR., N.Y.
WALTER FLOWERS, ALA.
WILEY MAYNE, IOWA
Committee on the Judiciary
WILLIAM P. SHATTUCK
H. CHRISTOPHER NOLDE
JAMES R. MANN, S.C.
LAWRENCE J. HOGAN, MD.
ALAN A. PARKER
PAUL S. SARBANES, MD.
M. CALDWELL BUTLER, VA.
House of Representatives
JAMES F. FALCO
JOHN F. SEIBERLING, OHIO
WILLIAM S. COHEN, MAINE
MAURICE A. BARBOZA
GEORGE E. DANIELSON, CALIF.
TRENT LOTT, MISS.
ARTHUR P. ENDRES, JR.
ROBERT F. DRINAN, MASS.
HAROLD V. FROEHLICH, WIS.
Washington, D.C. 20515
FRANKLIN G. POLK
CHARLES B. RANGEL, N.Y.
CARLOS J. MOORHEAD, CALIF.
THOMAS MOONEY
BARBARA JORDAN, TEX.
JOSEPH J. MARAZITI, N.J.
MICHAEL BLOMMER
RAY THORNTON, ARK.
DELBERT L. LATTA, OHIO
ALEXANDER B. COOK
ELIZABETH HOLTZMAN, N.Y.
CONSTANTINE J. GEKAS
WAYNE OWENS, UTAH
ALAN F. COFFEY. JR.
EDWARD MEZVINSKY, IOWA
WENNETH N. KLEE
December 10, 1974
Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Buchen:
The Subcommittee on Criminal Justice of the Committee on
the Judiciary has several legislative proposals pending before
it requiring the full and complete disclosure of facts relating
to the pardon of Richard M. Nixon, Watergate and Watergate
related matters.
To assist the Subcommittee in its consideration of these
proposals, the Subcommittee requests that Alexander Haig appear
before it to testify on his knowledge of and involvement in the
events leading to the pardon of the former President.
President Ford's testimony before the Subcommittee on
October 17, 1974, was essential and of great assistance to the
Subcommittee in developing the facts concerning the issuance
of the pardon. President Ford's testimony, however, highlighted
the significant role played by General Haig in the pardon dis-
cussions. Subcommittee Members believe, therefore, that General
Haig's testimony is vital to the complete and final resolution
of the pardon issue.
The Subcommittee Members are aware of the Senate Armed
Services Committee's recent vote to hear the testimony of General
Haig at the beginning of the 94th Congress. The Subcommittee is
hopeful that General Haig's schedule will permit him to appear
before the Subcommittee at some mutually convenient time during
the remaining days of the 93rd Congress or in the early days of
the next session of Congress.
WLH/bts
Subcommittee on Criminal Justice
cc: Hon. Henry P. Smith, III
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
Peter w Rdid
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515
M.C.
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
Philip W. Buchen
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C.
Hungate
Wednesday 12/18/74
cong.
5:55 Chairman Hungate called. Said this time he has some
pleasant news for you.
Wanted you to know the Rules of Evidence code passed.
Final passage -- House Conference Report --- 363 to 32.
You and Mr. Marsh were instrumental in getting it in
the President's message. Wanted to say thanks for your help.
FORD a LIBRAR 07083