(4 of 7)
"Senator McCarthy knew that General Zwicker was a loyal and outstanding officer who had devoted his life to the service of his country . . . was strongly opposed to Communists and their activities . . . was cooperative and helpful to the staff of the subcommittee in giving information with reference to Major Peress . . . opposed the Peress promotion and . . . honorable discharge, and that he was testifying under the restrictions of lawful executive orders. Under these circumstances the conduct of Senator McCarthy . . . was inexcusable."
"Grave Errors." When it discussed the charges on which it did not recommend censure of McCarthy, the Watkins committee often employed a sharply thorned charity. This was its attitude toward the charge that McCarthy had misused confidential security documents. There was no doubt, the committee found, that the 2¼-page summary of an FBI document that McCarthy attempted to inject into the Army-McCarthy hearings contained classified information affecting the security of the U.S. His offer to make the document public "was an assumption of authority which itself is disruptive of orderly governmental processes . . . and incompatible with the basic tenets of effective democracy." In this act McCarthy "committed a grave error" and "manifested a high degree of irresponsibility."
But after voicing these sharp criticisms, the committee drew the kind of distinction that McCarthy cannot understand: "The committee recognizes, however, that at the time in question Senator McCarthy was under the stress and strain of being tried or investigated . . . He offered the document in this investigation which was then being contested at every step by both sides. The contents of the document were relevant to the subject matter under inquiry . . . These mitigating circumstances are such that we do not recommend censure . . ."
This same form of charity appeared in the committee's decision on the charge that McCarthy had encouraged Government employees to steal classified documents and give them to him. McCarthy's public statements on the subject, it found, were equivocal. They might be construed to mean that he merely wanted legitimate evidence of wrongdoing, or they might be interpreted as an invitation to purloin classified secrets. His statements open to the latter interpretation were "deemed improper." But, giving McCarthy the benefit of. the doubt, the committee voted against censure on this charge.
Careful Reasoning. When it considered the charge that McCarthy had unfairly attacked Vermont's Senator Flanders, the committee made another careful distinction. McCarthy's comment on Flanders had been brutal; "I think they should get a man with a net and take him to a good, quiet place." But this was an attack on an individual senator, because he had made "provocative speeches" about McCarthy on the Senate floor and had marched into a televised session of the Army-McCarthy hearings to serve notice that he was about to make another one. It was not an attack on a Senator for an official action he had taken as a member of a committee, as in the Hendrickson case. While McCarthy's remarks were "highly improper," the committee ruled that the circumstances did not justify a recommendation for censure.