Mr. MAHAN. They filed an injunction and it took several years for the injunction to go through court. It finally went to the Supreme Court and they said we could go ahead with the case. Senator MCCLELLAN. When was that? Mr. MAHAN. That was 2 years ago. POSTPONEMENT OF TRAIL Senator MCCLELLAN. What has happened to it since then? Mr. MAHAN. Then the Justice Department, which prosecutes the case, asked for a continuance, based on a decision to be made by the Supreme Court. Naturally, the attorneys for the W. E. B. DuBois Club agreed with the Justice Department that the case would be postponed. Since we do not have our own investigators, there is nothing we can do but postpone the case, based upon the petition of the Justice Department, agreed to by the DuBois Club's attorneys; so it was postponed. The case they have based this on has since been decided and we can go ahead with the case. Senator MCCLELLAN. You can't? Mr. MAHAN. We can. EFFECT OF KOLOD DECISION Senator MCCLELLAN. You now can go ahead with the DuBois case? Mr. MAHAN. Yes. Senator MCCLELLAN. When was it resolved so you knew you could proceed? Mr. MAHAN. March 10, 1969, when the case of Kolod, et al v. United States were decided. The Kolod case, Senator, dealt with guidelines to be used in relation to electronic surveillance. In other words, they did not want the court, after we heard the case, to require the Government to give to the attorneys for the club the electronic logs, all of them, and they wanted guidelines under which electronic logs would be given to them in relation to crossexamination. In understanding that your bill has passed the Senate that would take care of this situation and is now pending in the House. Because of that, I think that our hands will be untied in the future and we won't have this situation. Senator MCCLELLAN. At the present time your hands are still tied? Mr. MAHAN. In some of these cases like when the Senator MCCLELLAN. Some of them you don't have even one member. Mr. MAHAN. That is right. In this case they have not told us they want a continuance and they have received their notices. Senator MCCLELLAN. They have asked for a continuance? TRIAL DATE Senator MCCLELLAN. Have you taken any action to resume proceedings to bring it to a hearing? Mr. MAHAN. That is right; we have sent out the order to start the case in New York on July 14. Senator MCCLELLAN. It has been set for that date? Mr. MAHAN. Yes. Senator MCCLELLAN. All right. That is the only matter pending before you? PENDING INVESTIGATIONS AND ANTICIPATED CASES Mr. MAHAN. That is the only matter pending before us, Senator. I personally think that we are going to be busy because the problems that face the Attorney General, that I have to assume face him. are going to be resolved by what the Senate has done to this bill and what the House hopefully will do in relation to this subject. Senator MCCLELLAN. Are you saying that you are proceeding and now it depends upon the final enactment of the bill that passed the Senate? Mr. MAHAN. No, because there was another bill passed in 1968 that took care of electronic surveillance subsequent to 1968. So the cases that can be tried begin after 1968 and may not have the electronic surveillance problem in them, Senator. I think those would be sent to us for trial. Senator MCCLELLAN. They have cases down there that do not involve electronic surveillance? Mr. MAHAN. I am absolutely confident they do, Senator. This is one thing I would like to submit for the record. This is the letter I received from the Assistant Attorney General that names one organization that was started after 1968. The reason for the letter, I wanted the Senate to know that what the Board has done in the past is worthwhile to our country. You will see that our Board has had 23 front cases that involved thousands of people as members, and because of our hearings, Senator, there are only three of these organizations still alive today. They died after the hearing and dissolved. I feel that if this Board is allowed to operate, like it should, for the good of our country, that that will happen in the future. LETTER OF ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL J. WALTER YEAGLEY Senator MCCLELLAN. Do you want the letter of Assistant Attorney General J. Walter Yeagley placed in the record. Mr. MAHAN. Yes, sir. Senator MCCLELLAN. All right, it may be placed in the record. (The letter follows:) Department of Justice June 4, 1970 Honorable John W. Mahan 811 Vermont Avenue, N. W. Dear Mr. Mahan: This is in reply to your letter of May 27, 1970 attaching a list of the organizations against which the Attorney General filed petitions with the Board for determination that they were Communist-front organiza tions. Of these organizations, the following are the only ones which are functioning groups: National Council of American Soviet Friendship, Inc. Veterans of the Abraham Lincoln American Committee for Protection Late last year, the W. E. B. Dubois Clubs of America stated that it would be absorbed into a new revolutionary Marxist youth organization when it was formed. The founding convention of the new organization, Young Workers Liberation League, was held February 7-9, 1970, at Chicago, Illinois, and we have no reported activity of the W. E. B. DuBois Clubs of America since that time although the organization still maintains a telephone listing and mailing address in New York, New York. Sincerely, 1. Walters Heagley J. WALTER YEAGLEY Assistant Attorney General 46-370 O 70 - 57 SUGGESTED STATEMENT FROM DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE RESPECTING ITS INTENDED ACTIONS Senator MCCLELLAN. Now do you think maybe the Board could do a lot of good if it was used? Mr. MAHAN. That is correct. Senator MCCLELLAN. That is what you say? Mr. MAHAN. Yes. Senator MCCLELLAN. Let me ask you this. The House has gone along with the matter and I have supported this in the past. Mr. MAHAN. I know you have. Senator MCCLELLAN. I don't know what effort will be made now, what opposition will appear in the Senate against this item. I am trying to give you the opportunity to make a case if you have one for continuing your appropriation. I wonder what we can get from the Justice Department on this? Mr. Clerk, do you have anything from the Justice Department ? The CLERK. No. CHAIRMAN'S LETTER TO ATTORNEY GENERAL AND REPLY Senator MCCLELLAN. I think we should find out. I will request the Attorney General to file a letter or statement for this committee advising what action the Justice Department is going to take. I will insert my letter and his reply, when received, at this point in the record. (The letters follow :) June 26, 1970 The Honorable John N. Mitchell Attorney General of the United States Department of Justice Washington, D. C. Dear Mr. Attorney General: I am enclosing for your consideration a copy of the transcript of testimony at the subcommittee hearing on the 1971 fund requirements for the Subversive Activities Control Board. The House bill allowed the full budget estimate of $401,400 for operating expenses of the Board for the ensuing fiscal year. As you perhaps know, the case load of this activity is abbal at the present time; in fact, no organization cases have been referred to the Board since 1965. In light of this condition, I request that you submit a statement setting forth the Department's views as to the probable certification or assignment of cases to this Board within the next fiscal year. appreciate a prompt reply. Sincerely yours, I shall Enclosure John L. McClellan |