« AnteriorContinuar »
This witness has accused this subcommittee of anti-Semitism. He has sent an emissary around to me who told me that this gentleman had been singled out by us for persecution.
Now, that was Mr. Levin, who told me he was one of your close friends.
You presented to the subcommittee what purports to be a bill from the hotel in Detroit in which you were charged $30 and 16–
Mr. HARVEY. M:. Chairman, I move we adjourn.
Mr. LISHMAN. I would like to put this material in the record. We are about to hear
Mr. HARVEY. Mr. Chairman, if we are going to have any more statements from counsel, let's get the press present
and get to the bottom of this. I have this morning in a short period of time looked over this statement and I have never seen a witness maligned as much in public as this man has been and I think the press ought to get the other side of this story, other than just this counsel's story. I say that was not the purpose of this meeting this morning. I move we adjourn at this time.
Mr. LISHMAN. Mr. Chairman, the purpose of the meeting this morning, as I understand it, was to get material subpenaed. We went out of our way to accommodate this witness on his plea that he couldn't get this material to us on the basis that he had military service. We have leaned over backward. We have been in conference with the chairman and others. I want to point out that the witness has misled this committee. He gave us this letter in the record. Here is a letter which states that the accommodations he had were at the rate of $60 a day and not $14 a day and this letter is from the comptroller of the hotel.
Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary inquiry.
Mr. MACDONALD. As I have said earlier, the purpose of this meeting is not to cross-examine this witness. I think the witness now agrees that he wants to be heard at a later time when he can present his case. What you are here for today, as I understand it, and it was my agree. ment to come here, was a very simple meeting in which you were going to respond to the subpena and put matters into the record that were subpenaed about what had transpired in the past, and you were not to testiiy, that you were not to be cross-examined. So when I said that the counsel should be heard, I was not going to the merits of the case at all.
Mr. GARSON. I was not going to the merits, either.
Mr. MacDonald. Well, you were explaining. If you would just put in the record the matters you have brought to us, I think that would bo helpful and the committee can adjourn and you can be heard fully in open hearing at a later time, when we have a chance to examine what is in the records of the subpena and you will have a chance to explain fully the records.
Now, do you agree that that is a fair way to proceed?
Mr. Garson. I think it is fair, but there are some documents here that should be identified.
Mr. MACDONALD. This is what I asked you to do, then you started in with a dissertation of what was right or wrong. Then we got way off the track with something else.
So if you would just identify what you have brought here to put in the record, I would appreciate it.
Mr. DINGELL. I may suggest that the witness has also suggested to us that he was going to present to us a statement which I would like to suggest that he give at a later time in open hearing.
Mr. MACDONALD. I was going to rule.
Mr. MACDONALD. Will you please do what I request and identify what you brought here this morning without getting into the editorial comments surrounding them? Just identify them. We will put them in the record and we will all have a chance to look at them.
Mr. Garson. All right, sir. May I make one statement on the statement made by counsel? I am utterly shocked.
Mr. MACDONALD. I do not think so, and if counsel will agree, I think the statement should be stricken from the record.
Mr. LISHMAN. If I may say so, Mr. Chairman, this subcommittee, and I know myself and the staff, we have never at any time indulged in any discrimination or attempts to "get" any individuals.
Mr. MACDONALD. Mr. Lishman, we all agree to that. It is not a matter before us. I would just like to have the matter that we have before us this morning as the identification of exhibits that were requested by subpena.
Mr. GARSON. This is exhibit 1.
Mr. Garson. Then I am attaching to it an affidavit which I just received today as part of exhibit A.
Now, I am attaching to the letters concerning my travel which was requested in the subpena and the material concerning my trips. They are all in here.
Mr. MACDONALD. That will be exhibit B.
Mr. Garson. That is exhibit B. There is no statement here. They are simply the letters. That is what he asked for. I am giving him the letters.
(See Appendix R, p. 862.)
Mr. Garson. I am giving the committee as exhibit C these groups of documents which pertain to my travel. It consists also of a receipt for a hotel room down in Myrtle Beach and a receipt from the hotel bill that I have from the Denver Hilton Hotel. These are the only hotel bills I have. I just did not keep them. I am just putting them in.
I am also including as exhibits the following documents which pertain to my travel. These are documents—this group of documents consists of the work that I have been doing on the recodification and realinement of the Interstate Commerce Act.
Mr. MACDONALD. If I could interrupt to ask you, were these exhibits that you are talking about now asked for in the subpena?
Mr. Garson. The subpena requested all documents pertaining to my travel. This is part of the material that I discussed at the meetings that I attended and I think the committee should have the benefit of knowing what I have been doing as secretary and what I have been doing in attending the various meetings.
Mr. MACDONALD. Could I ask the counsel, do you care for those exhibits?
Mr. LISHMAN. I would not have any objection to them. They are not responsive to the document, but it will not cause any harm to
anyone. They are objective in that they are copies of what the gentle.
Mr. Garson. This is the work that I have been accomplishing.
Mr. GARSON. Now, the other documents that I have here, and which I refer to in the exhibits, consist of the proposed rules of discovery that I have worked on for the last 2 years and which I am submitting as part of the work that I have been doing.
Mr. MACDONALD. Could I interrupt at that point and ask you to take a look at that? You want an early hearing about this thing, as you say, and I think rightly so. How long do you think it will take to print all that stuff up?
Mr. Garson. These do not have to be printed, but they can be men. tioned in the record.
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Chairman, may I observe this?
Mr. DINGELL. This meeting is convened today for the purpose of receiving certain information in response to subpena. I believe the committee has a general understanding that the witness will be recalled at a later time for full opportunity to testify in public hearing, on which notice will be given to the press and at which everyone will have an opportunity to be present. I would urge. Mr. Chairman, and I believe the Chair could appropriately rule at this time that we will receive nothing this morning which is not in the subpena and which was not to be presented to this committee except in response to the subpena and afford the witness a later opportunity to present these other matters in the fashion and at a time when he makes his appropriate appearance before this committee.
Mr. MACDONALD. I agree with the gentleman from Michigan.
Mr. MACDONALD. I agree with the gentleman from Michigan, and that is why I asked the Counsel if that is the material he wanted under the subpena. He indicated, as I remember his words, that it is no harm to the record. If Counsel indicates that he does not think they are necessary, I would be prepared to rule on it.
Mr. DINGELL. I would ask that the Counsel be permitted and he directed by the Chair to proceed to review with the witness whether the documents are submitted to this committee in appropriate response to the subpena.
Mr. MACDONALD. I have already asked that question. I have already had an affirmative response from the Counsel. I would be happy to rule
Mr. DINGELL. I think he ought to handle it.
Mr. LISHMAN. As far as having these speeches that Mr. Garson made at various conventions, there is no harm in having them in the record. As a matter of fact, we can get them. They are undoubtedly printed in the proceedings of the various motor carrier conventions.
Mr. GARSON. Not all of them.
Mr. LISHMAN. Or associated warehouse conventions. The material that we were interested in, Mr. Chairman, is to show a pattern of the acceptance of unauthorized augmentation, not only by this witness. We have already in the record, Mr. Chairman, an exhibit showing 13 examiners of the Interstate Commerce Commission who accepted travel expense from parties who are participants in the proceeding before them. We were not singling anybody out. We have gone into the vouchers of Commissioners Tuggle
Mr. HARVEY. Mr. Chairman, this is not responsive to your question.
Mr.LISHMAN. I would say this
Mr. LISHMAN. I have handled many investigative committees, both here in Congress and outside and I have never seen an instance where in response to a subpena, the witness is permitted to load the record with self-serving statements. He is required to present the material called for in the subpena. The explanation can come on the witness stand.
Mr. MACDONALD. The Chair is about to rule.
Mr. PICKLE. The question before us, as I understand it, is do we accept this material which the witness has offered to submit, which the Counsel says does no damage? Can the Chair rule that this can be admitted whether the committee uses it or not?
Mr. MACDONALD. I am to about to rule and if you take exception to the ruling that the Chair is about to give, that is your privilege. I rule that all material that was brought here in response to the subpena and marked by the witness, as indicated by the witness, is acceptable. All material that does not pertain to a direct response to the subpena is ruled unnecessary. I do not care whether it does no harm or harm. If it is not in response to the subpena, it is not accepted.
Mr. DINGELL. But opportunity will be given for later insertion, Mr. Chairman, when the witness
Mr. MACDONALD. When the witness is under cross-examination by the committee.
Mr. HARVEY. Mr. Chairman, may I suggest, if the chairman is not going to do it, that they give a witness an itemized receipt for all items turned over today, knowing of the hard feeling that has been demonstrated to exist between the counsel and the witness.
Mr. LISHMAN. I resent that. There is no hard feeling.
Mr. HARVEY. I think it has been shown here today. Just so we do not get into a hassle later on and somebody says I furnished it and somebody else says you didn't furnish it.
Mr. MACDONALD. In response to the inquiry, I would think it is the usual practice that a receipt be given and identified.
Mr. LISHMAN. In your opening statement, Mr. Chairman, you stated that that would be done.
Mr. MACDONALD. I agree with the gentleman. I think it is already covered.
Mr. DINGELL. May I suggest that it might be appropriate at this time to recess the committee for a period of approximately 15 minutes
to afford the counsel opportunity to review the papers and ascertain whether or not they are in full conformity with the subpena, to afford appropriate receipt for the papers, indicating for the record what are received
Mr. MacDONALD. No; the Chair does not intend to recess this committee. After the hearing has adjourned, it has been stated both by the counsel and the witness that proper response has been made to the subpena.
Mr. LISHMAN. I don't know, I haven't seen the papers.
Mr. MACDONALD. A receipt should be given to the material offered by the witness.
I also point out to the counsel that if he finds the subpena was not completely lived up to as far as practicable by the witness, at the next hearing, he can indicate what material has not been offered to this subcommittee and can obtain it at that time inasmuch as nobody is going to question this witness, nor is the witness going to discuss the right or wrong of what is in the exhibits. Mr. Pickle? Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary inquiry.
Since the chairman has ruled that he would admit or accept that material which is in response to the subpena and not the material which is not in response, is it the chairman's decision, or recommendation that that decision of either acceptance or inclusion is left to the counsel of the committee?
Mr. MACDONALD. No, I have made the ruling and I do not think-
Mr. MACDONALD. The subcommittee as a whole. The counsel has a very active role in the subcommittee, as we all know, but he does not run the subcommittee, the chairman does. I am acting as chairman and I have ruled and that is it.
Mr. DINGELL. Excepting, Mr. Chairman, we now need an identification of the documents which are submitted in response. We have at this time, unfortunately, a rather cluttered record in which we have never clearly identified the documents received, whether they are in appropriate and complete compliance with the subpena of the committee.
Mr. MACDONALD. Do you have any further exhibits?
Mr. GARSON. Yes, my checkbooks and checks, which is what they want.
Mr. MACDONALD. Is that in response to the subpena?
Mr. MACDONALD. How far down the alphabet did you get, "D" or “C”? This will be "C" or "D."
Mr. GARSON. “D."
Mr. MACDONALD. The checkbooks of the witness will be marked as exhibit D and accepted.
(A list of the material submitted in response to the subpena follows:)
JULY 9, 1970. Received from Mr. H. Neil Garson, Secretary of the Interstate Commerce Commission, this date, in response to a subpoena of the Special Subcommittee on Investigations, House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, the fol. lowing items, which, at a later date, will be returned to Mr. Garson :
(1) Mr. Garson's statement, which was to be given July 9, 1970, together with 19 appendices relating to his official travel as a representative of the ICC, and a