Notes between Richard E. Neustadt and Stephen J. Spingarn

THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON the July 5, 1950 NOTE FOR MR. SPINGARN: It seems to me there are strong arguments against having any public hearings, Even if the medical testimony were open, it would attract all kinds of sensation-hungry people and might easily get headlines in the sensational press, Without open hearings, there is a good chance at this juncture that the investigation won't get much play in the press. On the other hand, even if the committee has a good advisory board, gets good medical testimony and makes a dignified report, that report itself may leave the public con- fused and unbelieving, because there has been no publicity for the medical side of the case. If it were not for the Korean situ- ation which may keep this out of the headlines, I would for that reason have favored open hear- ings for the medical presentation. As things stand now, I would think you could compromise for closed hearings, but release the medical testimony some days in advance of the committee report, and accompany that release with a press briefing and a question and answer period on the part of the committee medical advisory board. You also mentioned the possibility of releasing the testimony of agency security officers. I'd be scared of this if there is any way to avoid it. R.E. R. N.