 It's time for the Lawn Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour, brought to you every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. A presentation of the Lawn Jean Wittner Watch Company, maker of Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Lawn Jean. Good evening, this is Frank Knight. May I introduce our co-editors for this edition of the Lawn Jean Chronoscope? Mr. William Bradford Huey, author and analyst, and Dr. J.B. Matthews, former director of research for the House Committee on Un-American Activities. Our distinguished guest for this evening is the Honorable Pat Carney, United States Congressman from New York. General Carney recently on our program, we've had several guests who have been critical of the congressional investigations now underway. You, of course, are a member of the House Committee on Un-American Activities. So tonight, sir, our viewers would like to hear from you some explanation of what the committee is doing. First of all, sir, this supposes investigation into the clergy. Now, is it true that the House Committee on Un-American Activities is considering an investigation of the clergy? It is not true. The only cries or criticism that the House Committee on Un-American Activities has had comes from the left-wing element of this country. Do you know of any, or does the committee have any evidence of the fact that some members of the clergy may be tools of communist propaganda? Yes, the committee does have that knowledge. Well, do you think then that it would be proper for the committee to investigate members of the clergy? We feel, Mr. Huey, that the investigation of communism and communism in this country should take place wherever it be found, whether it be in labor unions, in churches, or in any phase of our national life. But you're saying to our viewers that the committee does not now have any plans to investigate communism in the churches. That's absolutely true. May I interject a question? General Kearney, if it were clearly established by preliminary investigation, that the four leading pro-Soviet propagandists in America today are clergymen, that certainly would be a good reason for investigating those four particular clergymen, would it not? Certainly would, doctor, and they would be investigated. That's right, regardless of their denomination. Regardless of their denomination. They cannot hide behind a yalu river and have sanctuary from exposure. You cannot serve two masters, sir. In other words, what you're saying, sir, is that you do not have any plans to investigate the churches or communism in the churches. But if you have evidence of individuals who may not be connected with the church themselves, but who are clergymen, you intend to investigate. That is absolutely correct. Now, sir, moving on from the church investigation to the matter of the schools, there is a great deal of fear in the country, or there's said to be a considerable fear about the investigation of the schools. It's been said that academic freedom is being threatened. Now, sir, first of all, do you agree with a man like Senator Taft, who says that under certain conditions, it would be proper for communists to teach in our schools? I'm very sorry to disagree with a great American, Senator Taft, on that point. You feel that no communist should be allowed to teach in any public school? I do not believe that any member of the Communist Party should be allowed to teach in our public schools or our colleges or universities. Isn't it true, General Kearney, that the Communist Party has issued directives to its members who happen to be in the teaching profession that they must utilize every opportunity to propagandize their students? That is... You've seen those in... That is absolutely so. Now, sir... A great many people, may I say this, a great many people are simple enough, shall I say, to believe that the Communist Party of America is the Communist Party of America and not a part of an international conspiracy against our former government. And it's about time some of them woke up. Well, sir, you, of course, are a former military man, you are a distinguished attorney, as well as being a member of Congress. Do you feel that there have been any violations of individual rights before your committee? Yes, I would say there has been one or two to my knowledge. And what is the nature of that type of... Well, for instance, let me just cite this as an example. We've had one professor before us who, in his teens, was a member of the Communist Youth League. He stayed with that organization approximately a year. He found out what it was, what its aims and objectives were, and he left that organization and has never been associated with that Communist Youth Movement or the Communist Party since that time. Well, now, was he called before your committee? He was called before our committee and with those types of cases, I disagree. I say that the committee should not call. Was that a public hearing? That was a public hearing. Do you think that he cleared himself publicly or that he brought derogatory information on himself? No, I think the individual himself was cleared years ago by his own acts. I'm saying that by the simple act of hailing him before the committee, however, you did him some damages in the business. I think we did. And it's your belief? That's what we try to keep away from. We do everything possible to bend backwards in other words. Let me ask you this. Isn't it to your general procedure little understood by the public that all witnesses are first heard in executive session or at least heard by staff members before they appear before the committee? That's absolutely so, doctor. And in case the staff members in consultation with the committee or the committee members themselves consider their testimony irrelevant or in no way incriminating the witnesses are then not heard. Is that not correct? Now, sir, our viewers have heard and read a good deal about the Fifth Amendment and about the protection that certain of your witnesses claim under the Fifth Amendment. Now, first of all, sir, what was the Fifth Amendment to our Constitution designed to do? Well, as an attorney, I would say that our Fifth Amendment in the Constitution of the United States was put there for the sole purpose of protecting a witness from self-incrimination and testifying against himself in a criminal trial. Now, in a criminal trial, are these hearings before Congress, would you call those criminal actions? By no means. So then it's your view that the Fifth Amendment does not apply or should not apply when a man is testifying before your committee? I certainly feel that way and I also feel that by the constant repeated refusals to testify on the grounds that it might incriminate a witness, that I'm sometimes wondering whether or not they're protecting the so-called Fifth Column in this country. Now, about the schools, sir, are you getting the cooperation from any of the schools or colleges themselves in your investigation? Yes, we are. Could you cite one or two colleges that are... Yes, I'd be very glad to cite one and pay tribute to the Board of Trustees and the presidency of this great university, and that's Rector University. They've been particularly cooperative. They certainly have. That's President Jones. President Jones, Louis Jones, I believe. Now, have you met the opposition and some of the colleges have met? Some we have, yes. Some fear that there's so-called epidemic freedom, academic freedom is at stake. What's your feeling, sir, about academic freedom? Well, I think the only... You are concerned about it, of course. I believe the only ones who are fearful of what might happen in these cases are the ones that might have something to fear themselves. You think... You don't believe that there is widespread fear among college people, college professors? No, I don't. Well, sir, as a final question, do you believe that investigations and by Congress are being overdone? You have the feeling that perhaps there's a little bit too much of it now. I think that in some instances, the investigations of the congressional committees are overlapping. You mean the McCarthy committee, the Jenner committee? Some of you are investigating the same things. That's correct. Has there been any effort made to consolidate the efforts of those committees? Yes, there has. And has there been any success? Yes. I think there will be within the next few weeks. Now, do you see an end to these investigations eventually? See an end to them? An end, yes, sir. Well, speaking as far as the House Committee on American Activities is concerned, I can see only an end to that committee when the Communist conspiracy ends. Well, thank you very much for being with us this evening, sir. The opinions that you've heard our speakers express tonight have been entirely their own. The editorial board for this edition of the Lone Gene Chronoscope was Mr. William Bradford Huey and Dr. J.B. Matthews. Our distinguished guest was the Honorable Pat Kearney, United States Congressman from New York. Mr. Huey, you remember, of course, Mr. W.C. Tom Sawyer, Vice President of Freedom's Foundation. Oh, yes, it's a pleasure to see you again, Mr. Sawyer. I'm sure you know, of course, Mr. Huey, why I am here for Freedom's Foundation in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, a non-political, non-profit organization devoted to the task of recognizing and awarding those who, during the current year for the things they say and do, speak out for a better understanding of the American way of life. Freedom's Foundation makes awards in various fields of expression. The 1952 Distinguished National Awards Jury of Freedom's Foundation for the second consecutive year selected the Lone Gene Wittner Watch Company's Lone Gene Chronoscope for a top award in the television category. It is my pleasure to present it to you tonight. Thank you, sir. I'm speaking for the Lone Gene Wittner Watch Company and all of us associated with the Chronoscope. When I say that we are greatly honored by this presentation, it is to us a symbol of the soundness of the platform that the Lone Gene Chronoscope has been built. We have one fundamental policy, and this is, whatever is said here by editors or guests, it must be kept within the bounds of solid Americanism. Beyond that, we recognize differences of opinion, both in domestic and foreign affairs. We believe that in helping the public to understand the issues, we may also be helping to settle the differences. In general, we do earnestly believe that the Lone Gene Chronoscope is working to give us a better informed citizenry. So, on behalf of the editorial board and the staff of the Chronoscope, and also on behalf of Lone Gene Wittner, thank you again, Mr. Sawyer, for this award. And, Mr. Sawyer, we're appreciated very much that you journeyed all the way from Valley Forts to New York to make this presentation in person. And we're sure that the many thousands of friends of the Lone Gene Chronoscope from coast to coast will share our pleasure in this second Gold Medal Award from Freedom's Foundation. We invite you to join us every Monday, Wednesday and Friday evening at this same time for the Lone Gene Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour. Broadcast on behalf of Lone Gene, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, a distinguished companion to the world's honored Lone Gene. This is Frank Knight, reminding you that Lone Gene and Wittner watches are sold and serviced from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jewelers who proudly display this emblem. Agency for Lone Gene Wittner watches. This is the CBS television network.