From The Enemy Within by Robert F. Kennedy, 1960

. . . other labor unions, in addition to the Teamsters, including ones against whom no charges of corruption had been made or were ever made, began actively trying to stop us.

A great deal of the opposition was based on the fear that the death of one Democratic Senator at that time might shift the balance of the Senate and make Senator McCarthy chairman of our Committee. The labor leaders and a considerable segment of the Senate were disturbed at the possibility that this investigation might fall under his direction.

Toward the end of January a move developed to create a �select bipartisan committee,�² with four Senators from the Labor Committee and four from our Committee. There was considerable interest in who the members would be. Senator McCarthy, as the senior Republican on the Permanent Subcommittee, would naturally be one of those selected. An attempt to bypass him failed when Senator McClellan and Senator Ervin stated that unless Senator McCarthy was a member, they would not serve. The previous two years, while Senator McClellan had been chairman of the investigating committee, he had received more assistance from Senator McCarthy than from either of the other two Republicans, and he felt it would be manifestly unfair to pass him over at this juncture. It was therefore agreed that McCarthy should be made a member.

    ² A select committee is one appointed by the United States Senate to perform a particular task. The McClellan Committee was specifically given jurisdiction to look into matters involving corrupt influences in labor-management relations. A select committee is set up for a specific period of time; it goes out of existence after it has performed its function, whereas a regular committee continues year after year.

Senator McCarthy, realizing there was some hesitation about even establishing the select committee because of the possibility that he might become chairman, agreed that Senator Ives of the Labor Committee should be the vice chairman. This solved the last major problem. It was then simply a question of the make-up of the rest of the Committee.

Very few of the Democrats on the labor Committee were willing to accept a position on it. My brother and Senator McNamara agreed to serve. My brother did so reluctantly, feeling that one Kennedy connected with the Committee was enough. Senator Goldwater joined Senator Ives as the other Republican from the Labor Committee. Senators Mundt and McCarthy agreed to represent the Republicans from the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Senator McClellan, of course, accepted and was made chairman. Senator Ervin of North Caroline was appointed when the other two Democratic members, with more seniority, declined.

The Select Committee was established and went into operation on the thirty-first of January, 1957. he original members were McClellan, Ives, Kennedy, McNamara, McCarthy, Ervin, Mundt and Goldwater.

( pages 23-4 )

 

Most of our hearings were held in the spacious caucus room just off the marble stairway on the third floor of the Senate Office Building. This stately chamber, with its vaulted ceiling and red carpets, its arching windows, marble pillars and glistening chandeliers, is steeped in tradition.

Here in 1912, in the first use of the room, the Senate conducted its hearings into the sinking of the Titanic. Here Albert Fall, the Secretary of the Interior in the Harding administration, was exposed as corrupt; here Tom Thumb, in a famous play for publicity during an investigation, once sat on the knee of J. Pierpont Morgan; here the star of Senator Joseph McCarthy rose and fell. And here in this room the McClellan Committee—more properly called the Senate Select Committee on Improper Activities in the Labor of Management Field—conducted its public hearings in an effort to learn more abut a menacing enemy within our national economic framework—an enemy that is the shame of our nation.

Hearings were conducted over a period of two and a half years and included over five hundred open hearing sessions. During this time we heard 1,525 sworn witnesses (343 of whom took the Fifth Amendment) give testimony that filled fifty-odd volumes and totaled more than fourteen million words.

( pages 165-6 )

 

. . . The record will show that, aside from Senator McCarthy—one of whose greatest mistakes was that he was loyal beyond reason to Roy Cohn and G. David Shine—Congressional committee members as a rule have bee unwilling to stand up and be counted on behalf of a staff member who meets with difficulties. . . .

( page 172 )

 

As for me, I had gone into Government work by way of the Justice Department, which I entered directly from law school. After an interval in 1952 during which I handled my brother�s senatorial campaigning against Henry Cabot Lodge, I returned to Washington and went to work for Francis Flanagan, a former FBI man who was the general counsel for the Senate Permanent subcommittee on Investigations. About the same time Senator McCarthy, who was chairman of the Committee, hired Roy Cohn as chief counsel. It was a confusing situation, with three of us working for Flanagan and all the rest of the staff working for Cohn. When Cohn took complete charge of the staff in June, 1953, I left.

In February, 1954, after about eight months with the Hoover Commission, I returned as minority counsel of the Committee at the request of the Democratic members. Most of that year was devoted to the Army-McCarthy hearings, and when the Democrats took control of the Senate in January, 1955, I became chief counsel. Two years later . . . the Select Committee was set up and the investigative and clerical staff expanded.

( pages 176-7 )

 

Much of the criticism of Congressional committees could be avoided by sound investigative work before a case is presented. I was an assistant counsel to the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations when Senator McCarthy was its chairman. I lasted only six months. With two exceptions, no real research was ever done. Most of the investigations were instituted on the basis of some preconceived notion by the chief counsel or his staff members and not on the basis of any information that had been developed. Cohn and Schine claimed they knew from the outset what was wrong; and they were not going to allow the facts to interfere. Therefore no real spade work that might have destroyed some of their pet theories was ever undertaken. I thought Senator McCarthy made a mistake in allowing the Committee to operate in such a fashion, told him so and resigned.

( page 307 )

 

When a Congressional committee abuses its power, the remedy is to point it out and to get rid of those responsible. For this ,it seems to me, we have a built-in safeguard in the public press. All Congressional committees� work is subject to public scrutiny, more so really than the work of any other group. If a witness is abused, if an investigation is unfairly or improperly conducted, if Senators or staff members stoop to unethical practices, the press is always present to expose it. The press serves as a sort of safety valve against the violation of civil rights. This is not the ideal, obviously, because often there is a delay in obtaining a cure for the abuses; nevertheless the press, the responsible part,* is a potent and powerful safeguard.

This is one of the reasons I am strongly against having committee proceedings in private. (I am discussing here our kind of operation and obviously not matters dealing with national security.) In the first place they do not remain private, for the choice morsels are leaked to the press. Certainly we saw that during the days of the McCarthy Committee and even in our own Committee. I don�t remember one executive session where anything of any significance that we discussed did not get out to the press. This can be extremely unfair, for invariably, only one side of a story is leaked. Secondly, I think the public is entitled to know what is going on and should have as full information as is possibly. Public knowledge is a major deterrent to abuse.

This is a serious matter. It seems to me that where a public body is dealing with persons� reputations as we were, the press has an obligation and responsibility to remain vigilant.

( pages 312-3 )

New York Harper Brothers, 1960.

    * I wish I knew where to find the �responsible part� of the press ; I have mainly seen the exact opposite. To me, certain individual authors eventually may prove to be largely reliable. The Press when considered as a whole sinks below the level of the meanest of its members.

(WPT)

http://www.rotten.com/library/history/huac/McCarthy_Hearings_Part_1/

Kennedy, Robert F., 1925-1968. Title(s) The enemy within. Edition [1st ed.] Publisher New York, Harper [1960] Paging 338 p. illus. 22 cm.