APPENDIX BLetters Regarding the Presidential Letter of May 17, 1954
October 9, 1956Hon.Dwight D. Eisenhower,The President of the United States,The White House, Washington, D.C.Dear Mr. President: At your press conference on Thursday, September 27, 1956, you were asked whether your letter of May 17, 1954, to Secretary of Defense Charles E. Wilson was being misused as authority to restrict information from the public.This question was posed by Mr. Clark Mollenhoff of the Des Moines Register and Tribune.You stated that if Mr. Mollenhoff would put the question in writing—which I understand he has done—it will be answered.This particular letter and its misuse by a number of Federal departments and agencies has been a great concern to the Special Subcommittee on Government Information. Although the letter, and the accompanying memorandum from the Attorney General, granted authority to one particular agency to refuse information to a specific committee of Congress in a single instance, 19 departments and agencies have cited the letter as authority to refuse information to the public or the Congress.This occurred in agency answers to the subcommittee’s questionnaire of November 7, 1955, on information practices and policies as well as during subcommittee hearings with executive officials.Enclosed is an intermediate report, adopted unanimously by the House Government Operations Committee, on the subcommittee’s study of restrictions on information. The problem of misuse of the May 17, 1954, letter is discussed on page 90 and at other points.When the answer to Mr. Mollenhoff’s question has been prepared and transmitted to him, the subcommittee would appreciate receiving copies of it and any other comments you have on the matter.Respectfully,John E. Moss,ChairmanTHE WHITE HOUSE,Washington, October 17, 1956.Hon.John E. Moss,House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.Dear Mr. Moss: This will acknowledge your October 9 letter to the President asking that you be supplied with copies of the answer to a question submitted by Mr. Clark Mollenhoff of the Des Moines Register and Tribune.The answer to this question has not yet been given. However, as soon as it is, we will get in touch with you.Sincerely,Gerald D. Morgan,Special Counsel to the President
October 9, 1956
Hon.Dwight D. Eisenhower,The President of the United States,The White House, Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. President: At your press conference on Thursday, September 27, 1956, you were asked whether your letter of May 17, 1954, to Secretary of Defense Charles E. Wilson was being misused as authority to restrict information from the public.
This question was posed by Mr. Clark Mollenhoff of the Des Moines Register and Tribune.
You stated that if Mr. Mollenhoff would put the question in writing—which I understand he has done—it will be answered.
This particular letter and its misuse by a number of Federal departments and agencies has been a great concern to the Special Subcommittee on Government Information. Although the letter, and the accompanying memorandum from the Attorney General, granted authority to one particular agency to refuse information to a specific committee of Congress in a single instance, 19 departments and agencies have cited the letter as authority to refuse information to the public or the Congress.
This occurred in agency answers to the subcommittee’s questionnaire of November 7, 1955, on information practices and policies as well as during subcommittee hearings with executive officials.
Enclosed is an intermediate report, adopted unanimously by the House Government Operations Committee, on the subcommittee’s study of restrictions on information. The problem of misuse of the May 17, 1954, letter is discussed on page 90 and at other points.
When the answer to Mr. Mollenhoff’s question has been prepared and transmitted to him, the subcommittee would appreciate receiving copies of it and any other comments you have on the matter.
Respectfully,John E. Moss,Chairman
THE WHITE HOUSE,Washington, October 17, 1956.
Hon.John E. Moss,House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Moss: This will acknowledge your October 9 letter to the President asking that you be supplied with copies of the answer to a question submitted by Mr. Clark Mollenhoff of the Des Moines Register and Tribune.
The answer to this question has not yet been given. However, as soon as it is, we will get in touch with you.
Sincerely,Gerald D. Morgan,Special Counsel to the President
October 26, 1956Mr.Clark R. Mollenhoff,Des Moines Register and Tribune,National Press Building, Washington, D.C.Dear Clark: At the press conference on September 27, 1956, you asked the President whether “all employees of the Federal Government, at their own discretion, can determine whether they will testify or will not testify before congressional committees when there is no security problem involved.”In the President’s letter of May 17, 1954, to Secretary Wilson, the President set forth the general principles that are to govern all employees in the executive branch concerning their testimony, or the production of documents, relating to their conversations or communications with, or their advice to, each other on official matters. In his press conference of July 6, 1955, the President further amplified the principles set forth in this letter as follows:“If anybody in an official position of this Government does anything which is an official act, and submits it either in the form of recommendation or anything else, that is properly a matter for investigation if Congress so chooses, provided the national security is not involved.“But when it comes to the conversations that take place between any responsible official and his advisers, or exchange of mere little slips, of this or that, expressing personal opinions on the most confidential basis, those are not subject to investigation by anybody. And if they are it will wreck the Government.”In so writing to Secretary Wilson, and in further amplifying these principles, the President was exercising a right, which is his, and his alone, to determine what action is necessary to maintain the proper separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of the Government. In the orderly administration of the Government,the head of each executive agency directs the manner in which these principles are enforced.The underlying reasons for these principles are set forth in the President’s letter of May 17, 1954. It is essential to efficient and effective administration that employees of the executive branch be in a position to be completely candid in advising each other on official matters. It is essential, if channels of information are to be kept open, that confidences among employees should not be breached.It will continue to be this administration’s policy to keep the Congress and the people fully informed of what is being done in the executive branch. An employee is not free merely to exercise his own discretion but in the final analysis information will be withheld only when the President or agency heads acting under the President’s authority or instruction determine it is contrary to the public interest to disclose it.All of the above, of course, is subject to the Executive order dealing with the classification of information in the interest of security, and to the various statutes and regulations of the department and agencies relating to information to be held in confidence.I hope this answers your inquiry.Sincerely,Gerald D. Morgan,Special Counsel to the President
October 26, 1956
Mr.Clark R. Mollenhoff,Des Moines Register and Tribune,National Press Building, Washington, D.C.
Dear Clark: At the press conference on September 27, 1956, you asked the President whether “all employees of the Federal Government, at their own discretion, can determine whether they will testify or will not testify before congressional committees when there is no security problem involved.”
In the President’s letter of May 17, 1954, to Secretary Wilson, the President set forth the general principles that are to govern all employees in the executive branch concerning their testimony, or the production of documents, relating to their conversations or communications with, or their advice to, each other on official matters. In his press conference of July 6, 1955, the President further amplified the principles set forth in this letter as follows:
“If anybody in an official position of this Government does anything which is an official act, and submits it either in the form of recommendation or anything else, that is properly a matter for investigation if Congress so chooses, provided the national security is not involved.
“But when it comes to the conversations that take place between any responsible official and his advisers, or exchange of mere little slips, of this or that, expressing personal opinions on the most confidential basis, those are not subject to investigation by anybody. And if they are it will wreck the Government.”
In so writing to Secretary Wilson, and in further amplifying these principles, the President was exercising a right, which is his, and his alone, to determine what action is necessary to maintain the proper separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of the Government. In the orderly administration of the Government,the head of each executive agency directs the manner in which these principles are enforced.
The underlying reasons for these principles are set forth in the President’s letter of May 17, 1954. It is essential to efficient and effective administration that employees of the executive branch be in a position to be completely candid in advising each other on official matters. It is essential, if channels of information are to be kept open, that confidences among employees should not be breached.
It will continue to be this administration’s policy to keep the Congress and the people fully informed of what is being done in the executive branch. An employee is not free merely to exercise his own discretion but in the final analysis information will be withheld only when the President or agency heads acting under the President’s authority or instruction determine it is contrary to the public interest to disclose it.
All of the above, of course, is subject to the Executive order dealing with the classification of information in the interest of security, and to the various statutes and regulations of the department and agencies relating to information to be held in confidence.
I hope this answers your inquiry.
Sincerely,Gerald D. Morgan,Special Counsel to the President