 It's time for the Lawn Gene Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour brought to you every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, a presentation of the Lawn Gene Wettner Watch Company, maker of Lawn Gene, the world's most honored watch, and Wettner Distinguished Companion to the World Honored Lawn Gene. Good evening. This is Frank Knight. May I introduce our co-editors for this edition of the Lawn Gene Chronoscope? Larry Lusser from the CBS television news staff and Kenneth Crawford, National Affairs Editor for Newsweek magazine. Our distinguished guest for this evening is the Honorable Herbert H. Lehman, United States Senator from New York. Senator Lehman, you're one of the most outspoken of the liberal Democrats in Congress. What are your ideas about the legislative program for the next session of the 83rd Congress? Well, Mr. Lusser, I think that there are as many important and vital issues before Congress this year as I have ever known. There, among others, there's the Taft-Hartley Act, the Appropriations for our Defense, Reciprocal Trade and other foreign trade questions, foreign aid, atomic energy, taxation, water power, and those are just the main issues. There are many others of very great importance too. Now, I believe that if the President demonstrates real leadership and if he approaches these important questions in a spirit that is influenced as little as possible by politics, we may have a useful session. Otherwise, I think we will accomplish very little or nothing. What do you think this is going to be a time of crisis to you, really? What do you think foreign aid, for example, should be cut back? I do not. I certainly do not. I think that I think one of the most important things that we can possibly do is to help our allies abroad, the other free nations, strengthen themselves economically and in a military way. If we don't, we're going to find ourselves quite alone in this fight against the totalitarian government. What about our defense position now, Senator Lehman? Do you think you approve of the cutbacks in our budget there? Well, I certainly very strongly disapprove of the cutbacks last year. I voted against them, particularly the cutback of five billion dollars for our Air Force because I felt the Air Force and our air power was the most important part of our defense. I voted against them and I spoke against them on the floor of the Senate. Now, this year, I certainly hope that we're not going to allow our desire for a balanced budget important as that is to influence our appropriations for defense because it's not going to do us the least bit of good. If we have a balanced budget and haven't got sufficient defense to defend our country and the security of our country, so I very much hope that we are going to make appropriations adequate for our defense in every way and I particularly want to emphasize our air defense. Senator. I certainly shall work and vote for such appropriations. Senator, you have been one of the leaders in the whole matter of civil rights legislation. You've got nowhere in the last session, I believe. Do you think you stand any better chance in this session? I don't know. I've been very much disappointed as a matter of fact that our president has not made his position clear on civil rights and has not urged the adoption of a civil rights program in this country. What specific measures do you have in mind, Senator? Well, I would have liked to have seen him speak out on Fair Employment Practices Act, various matters that affect and result in discrimination against minority groups. I would have liked to have seen him go through with what he promised to do in the campaign. In other words, take every possible means of bringing about a revision of the McCarran-Walter Act. Well, you've been a fierce critic of that McCarran-Walter's Immigration Act. Now, do you think it should be amended or would you have put an entire substitute bill in? Well, some of my associates and I, eight senators and twenty-four congressmen have put in a bill. The bill bears my name, but it's the joint effort of many different members of Congress, which is a complete revision of the McCarran-Walter Act. Now, I want to be perfectly frank with you, Mr. Lissau. I think the McCarran-Walter Act is a bad bill, bad act, and should be revised or there should be an enlightened, humane, practicable, and workable bill passed as a substitute for the McCarran Act. I said to Mr. Crawford a minute ago that I had hoped that the President of the United States would back up his pledges during the campaign and recommend very substantial revisions. He has not done so. I hope he will do so. I still have such confidence in him, in his integrity that I am hopeful that he will. If he doesn't, and unless there is a change in the climate, I'm very frank to say that in my opinion, there is very little chance of getting through Congress of the United States at the coming session. A drastic revision of the McCarran-Walter Act. It's going to come just as sure as the sun will rise tomorrow morning. I know that. But I'm not sure that it's going to come this year unless we have powerful help in support of our position. I was about to say that speaking of the political climate, what are your views, sir, on the procedures of the Senate Investigating Committees? I think you've had some remarks on that. Well, I've made quite a few remarks in various times. Let me answer this way if I may. Some little length. Mr. and sir, I fully appreciate, as every American must, the need of safeguarding our internal security. I have fought communism for a great many years, just as I have fought Nazism, fascism, and all other forms of totalitarianism. And we must not relax our vigilance for a moment against internal subversion. But at the same time, we must not indulge in vigilantism. Now, the issue, so far as I am concerned, is not McCarthy as an individual. The issue far transcends any one man or a small group of men. It relates to the campaign which has been carried on for a year or a year and a half, a fear of intimidation, of calamity, vilification, guilt by association, and destruction of reputation. It has been an attack, not only on large numbers of patriotic Americans such as President Truman, General Marshall, Secretary Atchison, Jessup, and Ambassador Boland, but also on our great institutions, the educational institutions, schools, and colleges. And it is sought to intimidate the press, the stage, the publishing world, and our great churches, even our great churches. And by its unfair procedures and techniques, it has caused disunity at home, distrust abroad, and through intimidation it has paralyzed most of our great government service and has sought to enforce complete orthodoxy and rigid conformity in everything that we do or think about. That's why I'm against McCarthyism. Senator, what about Attorney General Brown-Ell's operation? How do you feel about that and about the legislation he proposes about wire-tapping? Let me say this, Crawford, that I feel very deeply that the recent use and partial disclosures of secret police files was, by Attorney General Brown-Ell, the FBI files, was unwise, improper, and dangerous. And I've said so publicly many times, as you know. In the white case? In the white case. The files of the FBI are filled largely with unsworn material from confidential sources, even with gossip and hearsay, as we all know, most of which is impossible, quite impossible to prove, and which the FBI does not even pretend to evaluate. These files and their contents have always been secret and invalid, lest they lose their usefulness. But in spite of that, the Attorney General saw fit to use and disclose a selected part of one particular FBI file in order to make an attack on the previous administration. That, I believe, sets a most dangerous precedent. Certainly, if an Attorney General, whose duty it is to enforce exact justice, may publicly disclose secret police files on one individual's for his own purpose, and may moreover disclose only such parts of these files as suit his purpose, and at the same time withhold other parts, then, in my opinion, Mr. Crawford, no one in this country is safe from attack. And against such attacks, defense is difficult, if not impossible. Senator, I'd like to go ahead a bit and look in the future. Do you think that domestic or international issues are going to be the key to next year's congressional elections? I don't know. I think it's much too early to judge that. I think it all depends on what happens in Congress this year. I think the people of the United States, in whose intelligence and judgment I have the utmost confidence, are going to decide the election next year on the issues as they arise. It's not possible really to divide internal and domestic and foreign issues completely because they are closely in relation to fence, for instance, foreign trade. Even this issue of McCarthyism, they all have a relationship in both fields of our life. And I believe that we can't today say that we're going to elect a president or elect a Congress on the basis of one narrow classification of issues. I think the people are going to do their own thinking as they always have done and are going to decide on the issues as they are presented to them. As a final question, Senator Liebman, I'd like to ask you this. You've been a successful businessman here in New York. You've been a philanthropist. You've been the governor of New York State, and now you're the representative of New York in the Senate of the United States. And do you feel that there's a special fascination about this great city at this time when Christmas time and all the trees of Park Avenue were lighted up? Well, Mr. and Sir, I'm 75 years old. I was born in the city of New York within almost a stone's throw of this studio. The house in which I was born was built by my father in 1876, was torn down two or three weeks ago. New York always has had a fascination for me. I think it's the greatest city in the world, and I think the people are the greatest people in the world. It's made up of a cross-section of all the nationalities in the world. Men and women who have worked together, who've lived together in amity, understanding, sympathy and goodwill. I think maybe there's a gayer spirit in the air at the Christmas season than ordinarily. Goodwill is spread out, and I hope it spreads out throughout the entire world. Thank you very much, sir. It's been a great pleasure to have you here tonight. Thank you very much. The opinions you've heard our speakers express tonight have been entirely their own. The editorial board for this edition of the Laun Jean Chronoscope was Larry Lusser and Kenneth Crawford. Our distinguished guest was the Honorable Herbert H. Lehman, United States Senator from New York. Will there be a Laun Jean watch in your stocking on Christmas Day? Well, why not a subtle hint to your own personal Santa Claus? There's yet time. Your jeweler still has many beautiful models to show you. Now, here in these diminutive Laun Jean ladies watches is beauty for the adornment of the loveliest wrist, and more important, there is dependability to keep the busy hostess or businesswoman precisely on time. For men in every field of activity, a Laun Jean watch is a priceless possession. No other name on a Christmas watch means so much as Laun Jean. For no other watch has won ten World's Fair Grand Prizes, twenty-eight gold medals, and so many honors for accuracy. Yet, unbelievably, many beautiful Laun Jean watch models are priced as low as seventy-one fifty, each made to the unique Laun Jean standard of excellence, which has won for Laun Jean the title, The World's Most Honored Watch, The World's Most Honored Christmas Gift, premier product of the Laun Jean Wittner Watch Company, since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. This is Frank Knight reminding you that Laun Jean and Wittner watches are sold in service from coast to coast by more than four thousand leading jurors who proudly display this emblem, agency for Laun Jean Wittner watches. This is the CBS television network.