the rest of China, probably would be under the Communist Chinese control by the end of 1950.

Senator HUNT. May I ask the Secretary a question?

Secretary ACHESON. May I just finish my statement?

Senator HUNT. I should like to ask the Secretary, he speaks of the fact that this was the policy of all interested departments as of that date. Do you include the military department in that statement? Secretary ACHESON. Yes, sir.

Chairman RUSSELL. All right, Mr. Secretary.

Secretary ACHESON. I was just ending up by saying that, therefore, this paper that you have before you is not a paper at which you can look to prove that the State Department attitude or policy was different from that of the other branches of the Government; it was not.

This paper here was an information paper; a paper taking an attitude in the event of a contingency, which was to occur.

It must be judged, I submit, on that ground. Now, it may be that if you were in my place, you would not have attempted to try to minimize the effect of the fall of Formosa by such information as we have been discussing; maybe that, in your judgment, wasn't the right thing to do; maybe if you had tried to do it you would have done it differently.

But the paper relates to the wisdom and the propriety of what was attempted to be done, which was to minimize the fall, which everyone had agreed was inevitable, rather than as an exposition of United States policy or State Department policy. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Chairman RUSSELL. Mr. Secretary, the Senator from Wisconsin has a question.

EFFECT OF DECLASSIFICATION IN VIEW OF PREVIOUS PRESS REPORTS

Senator WILEY. Mr. Secretary, there is one question that occurs to me-rather, two questions that relate to this controversy.

The first is, now that the AP and UP have given out this rather formidable text, what is the difference between that and the harm that is going to be done-if there is any harm-by declassifying it?

Secretary ACHESON. Senator Wiley, some harm has been done by this leak in the stories which grew out of it, but there is a vast difference between a story which rests on what some reporter says and an official statement by the Government of the United States that this is an official document.

Senator WILEY. Let me get that, Mr. Secretary. Don't I understand that the gist of this document is simply this: At that time the evaluation of your Department, and, as I understand you to say, the other departments, of the situation in the Far East, was that Formosa was liable to fall, and in order to minimize the fall, you thought it advisable to put out these statements. Now, isn't that the sum and substance of the purpose and the objective, and would have been the result if Formosa had fallen?

Secretary ACHESON. Well, it is not what I have said, Senator, that we thought it advisable to print this document. We thought it advisable that that statement should be made along the line, as described, under treatment in the document to minimize the effects of the fall.

RESPONSIBILITY FOR FORMULATING DOCUMENT

Senator WILEY. Now, the second question is that, in the request for the names of those who formulated it, is there some special reason why their names should not be given?

Would it damage the public interest, or would it be in the nature of a state secret? It seems to me that the very withholding of those names lends some suspicion that they might not even be there.

I just wondered what the reason for that was?

Secretary ACHESON. I stated the reason, Senator Wiley, in the letter to Senator Russell.

There is no state secret involved in the matter at all.

I think there is an important matter of sound administration. If, every time there is a dispute about some action which was taken, instead of putting the responsibility on the responsible officers who are in charge, and that is myself and my senior assistants, we bring out the names of every individual, no matter how unimportant to the Department, who had anything to do with it, you will very easily destroy the morale of the Department and people will be building records to defend themselves, rather than throwing themselves into the work of the Department.

These people involved are not senior officers. They are not people who can defend themselves in matters of public controversy.

There has already developed in the Department a most unfortunate reluctance of many people to work in those areas of the Department which are highly controversial, because they believe, and I am afraid, rightly believe, that even though they serve the best interests of the United States, and do their work faithfully, they are apt to be accused, and have a great deal of trouble made for them.

Therefore, it seems to me that since I am the officer responsible, and do not, in any way attempt to duck that responsibility; and since Mr. Sargeant, who is the senior officer under me, is responsible and does not attempt to duck his responsibility, that whatever you want to know, you can get from us.

There is no name here, which, in and of itself, I would not be quite willing to give you; no one is involved here that you are suspicious of; but just as a matter of sound administration, I think it is a matter that should not be pressed.

Senator MORSE. Mr. Chairman?

Chairman RUSSELL. Senator Morse.
Senator MORSE. I ask to be heard-

Senator MCMAHON. Louder, please.

Senator MORSE. I wish to be heard for just a minute on a legal problem that concerns me, in regard to this particular issue.

WISDOM OF DECLASSIFYING DOCUMENT

May I say, as I indicated the other day before the committee, Mr. Chairman, that I think this is somewhat of a tempest in a teapot, in that I see no reason why this document should not have been declassified by the State Department, in view of the fact that its contents are pretty well known anyway, as a result of the leak from Tokyo; and furthermore, I think the State Department can make clear, if it is a fact, that the document does not represent State Department policy,

on the issues that are raised in the document, but what the document really is, in fact, is a rationalization of America's position in the field of world diplomacy, as a result of the contemplated loss of Formosa, which did not come to pass.

But, be that as it may, Mr. Chairman, let us assume, hypothetically, that the State Department wishes to hold to its view that the document should not be declassified, for whatever reasons it wishes to lay down in support of the view, I call the committee's attention to these facts which I think-these are the facts:

COMMITTEE PROCEDURE FOR OBTAINING DOCUMENTS

That when this committee organized itself for this investigation, and it agreed upon a policy that the chairman, upon written request of the members of the committee, should request of the various departments the submission of certain secret documents for the inspection of the committee, or committee members.

The Chairman, as far as I know, without exception, has cooperated with each member of the committee, as he has received our letters, by writing a letter to the department concerned, whether it was the Defense Department, State Department, or any other department, for the submission to this committee, for its inspection, of secret documents.

Chairman RUSSELL. Pardon me, Senator.

I have forwarded every request, undoubtedly; but I have handled them, as a matter of procedure, through the Defense Establishment. If any material from the State Department were requested, for example, I have requested the Department of Defense to obtain it for us.

With the exception of that portion of the statement, you are correct. Senator MORSE. I am glad to have the chairman's explanation of the procedure he has followed.

My conclusion is, however, still accurate, namely, that the chairman has seen to it that the request of any member of this committee for inspection of the secret documents has been properly transmitted to the officials concerned through, as the chairman now explains, the Secretary of Defense.

And, as far as I know, and there may be exceptions to this, but as far as I know, the committee has received from the departments concerned, their fullest cooperation, including, in this instance, for example, the submission to this committee of a document of the State Department which has it classified, apparently, as "Confidential."

Now, I would like to raise two or three legal questions, Mr. President. I have not changed my view, or my feeling that this ought to be declassified, but I think the committee has to give very careful consideration to the precedent that it establishes, by way of procedure, at this point in our hearing.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS OF DECLASSIFICATION BY COMMITTEE VOTE

Let us assume now that when we get through with the discussion of this issue this committee votes to release this document to the public over the protestations of the State Department.

It seems to me that if we do that, we are then likely to find ourselves in a position where the State Department in the future may wish to fall back upon whatever legal rights it may have in the premises in respect to future documents and take the position that when we request a secret document for the inspection of the members of the committee, the State Department runs the risk if it supplies the document of having it not only submitted to the committee for the executive hearings and inspection of the individual members of the committee, but runs the risk by a majority vote of the committee of its being inspected by the world, and therefore the State Department would have to make a decision under those circumstances as to whether or not it wants to rely upon whatever powers it has as an arm of the executive branch of the Government to deny to this committee future documents.

I think that is a rather serious procedural controversy for us to get into, if we can work out an arrangement short of it, because I am still of the opinion, Mr. Chairman, that this committee would not have the power to subpena from the State Department a document which in the opinion of the State Department is a highly secretive document.

Therefore, if we proceed just because we have physical possession of a document to release it, as we would be able to do if we wanted to exercise that power, we ought to consider at this time what our future relationship is going to be with the State Department in getting other documents for our secret inspection, with the State Department in turn running the risk of having those documents released by a majority vote of this committee.

In my opinion, there is a fundamental legal question raised by this controversy about which constitutional lawyers could debate ad infinitum, and I only express my present legal conclusion-namely, we do not have the power to subpena such documents in the first instance if the executive branch of the Government doesn't want to release them to us.

In the second place, the chairman called my attention yesterdayand he can raise it in greater detail, but I think it ought to be mentioned the chairman called to my attention yesterday a section of the Espionage Act, which I think ought to be very carefully considered by the members of this committee, before they declassify this document, if they decide to declassify it, as to whether or not at least the chairman of this committee and I am not so sure, Mr. Chairman, but every member of the committee that might vote for the declassification of this document and its release to the public, might be guilty of a crime under the Espionage Act if the State Department does not give consent to its declassification.

In other words, I think now is the time to raise the flag of legal caution, Mr. Chairman, in this controversy. I think we ought to be certain that we are on absolutely sound ground legally before we vote here to overrule the State Department-and that is what our vote to declassify will constitute-because I think, as a lawyer, all of our colleagues ought to be forewarned that you are dealing here with a very serious matter when you move to declassify a secret document in view of the language of the Espionage Act.

PLEA TO DEPARTMENT OF STATE TO DECLASSIFY DOCUMENT

Therefore, I close, Mr. Chairman, with the plea to the State Department that I think under the circumstances that have developed, the contents of this document pretty well known the world around right now, and under those circumstances we had better consider the bowl of milk has been spilled, the Humpty Dumpty is off the wall, you can neither get the milk back in the bowl or Humpty Dumpty put together again; so you had better declassify this and move on to the next issue.

I do think, Mr. Chairman, that we ought to also make clear to these departments that if we are going to ask for secret documents, it ought to be upon the gentleman's understanding that we are not going to get those documents into our physical possession and then publicize them, because if I were Secretary of Defense or Secretary of State under those circumstances, with the obligations that those men have under the separation-of-powers doctrine to the executive branch of the Government, I wouldn't release a document in the first instance, if I couldn't rely upon the committee not to release it to the public without the approval of the department concerned. Senator KNOWLAND. Mr. Chairman.

Chairman RUSSELL. Senator Knowland.

OTHER LEAKS AND DECLASSIFICATIONS

Senator KNOWLAND. Apropos of the remarks made by the Senator from Oregon, in the first place it seems to me that in view of the fact that the State Department itself, at its own discretion, in order for what many people honestly believe was an effort to undermine the Government of the Republic of China, declassified large numbers of documents in the so-called China white paper, but many of us believed did not declassify all the documents relating to the situation. and particularly some which might have thrown a different light upon the subject; in view of the fact that the question of the Espionage Act has been raised-and I shall not be personally intimidated on that situation-I call your attention to the fact that there is prima facie violation of the espionage laws by the release of the Wake Island document to the New York Times when it was still classified, not confidential, but top secret, and when the information released not only includes the material which finally was declassified and made available, but includes some of the material which is still in the document in its classified state in our security room.

So that if there are to be any prosecutions under the Espionage Act, the No. 1 business of the executive branch of this Government should find out who of the 44 or 50 people who have a copy of the Wake Island notes released a copy of those notes while still classified as top secret, and why was it done, Mr. Chairman? Because it was felt that that would bolster the case of the people who had removed General MacArthur.

Now I hope that out of these hearings there will come an area of agreement in which we can get a substantial number of the members of this committee, regardless of their partisan affiliation, to finally unite on a report, but I say that that will not be augmented in my judgment if in a document which some of us feel does have