quite clearly rejected by the unanimous Supreme Court decision in United States v. Nixon. I think that is right, not only as a matter of law but as a matter of principle. Otherwise, the President could thwart the powers of the courts in cases of criminal trials, for example. Mr. GETTYS. Thank you.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you.

Next, we shall hear from three persons from the Library of Congress, Paul L. Berry, Director, Reference Department; John C. Broderick, Assistant Chief, Manuscript Division; and Ms. Adoreen M. McCormick, Legislative Liaison Officer.

We are very pleased to see all three of you.

STATEMENT OF PAUL L. BERRY, DIRECTOR, REFERENCE DEPARTMENT, ACCOMPANIED BY JOHN C. BRODERICK, ASSISTANT CHIEF, MANUSCRIPT DIVISION, AND ADOREEN M. McCORMICK, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON OFFICER

Mr. BERRY. We appreciate the opportunity to testify on H.R. 16902, a bill to establish a commission to study rules and procedures for the disposition and preservation of records and documents of Federal officials. For many decades the Library of Congress, through its Manuscript Division, has been the repository of many of the Nation's most important historical materials, including the papers of 23 Presidents. Those of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and James Monroe were entrusted to its care by Act of Congress and Executive order in 1903. Since that date the Library has assiduously sought to preserve papers of the Presidents and of other Federal officials whose papers were essential to a full understanding of our national history. A table appended to this statement summarizes for the record the history of the Library's acquisition of Presidential papers. By means of the Presidential Papers program, authorized by Public Law 85-147 in 1957 and supported by appropriations, the Library has issued detailed indexes for its Presidential papers and has released microfilm editions for sale to libraries and other research institutions. Most Presidential papers have come into the Library's custody by gift, although papers of the four early Presidents mentioned previously were purchased by the Government in the 19th century. Acquisition of such materials by gift or purchase is consistent with the principle that the personal papers of the President were indeed personal property, subject to his own disposition or that of his estate. The papers of 20th century Presidents have-with one exception-been placed voluntarily in the Library of Congress or in Presidential libraries administered by the National Archives and Records Service. The changing character of the Presidential office as well as recent political controversies have combined to inspire widespread and thoughtful deliberation about the distinction of public and personal property in such material. These developments have been alluded to in prior testimony before this committee. The Library of Congress believes that creation of a study commission would be desirable in order to explore fully the ramifications of such changes in Government organization, the proliferation of papers and records associated with the Presidency, and related issues.

Because we feel the responsibility of such a commission is considerable and the issues with which it will deal extremely complex, its mem

bership should represent the various branches of Government and the particular departments most affected by possible change as well as members of the public and appropriate professional groups. To achieve this end, the Library respectfully recommends that the Commission include one representative each from the Association of Research Libraries and the American Politcal Science Association. Research libraries are the custodians of a substantial portion of historical papers of Federal officials, and political scientists are professionally involved with such materials in their research. In our opinion, likewise, the Commission would be strengthened by the designation of the Archivist of the United States and the Librarian of Congress as ex officio members. These two officials are the custodians of records of the Government and almost all Presidential papers as well as the papers of a large number of Federal officials. They are, moreover, professionally concerned on a day-to-day basis with the historic issues to be studied by the Commission.

The bill before you does not refer to the questions of copyright status and the protection of various private rights in the content of official records and documents. This is a difficult problem involving both technical legal issues and important questions of public policy. We urge that the mandate of the Commission, as stated in the bill or explained in the record of your committee, include full consideration of the copyright issues presented, and that the Copyright Office, which is a department of the Library of Congress, be consulted for technical advice during the Commission's deliberations.

There are some verbal discrepancies in H.R. 16902, minor in themselves perhaps but the source of possible confusion later on. Section 3315 (2) defines Commission as the National Study Commission on Federal Records and Papers of Elected Officials. In section 3316, however, the Commission is identified as the National Study Commission on Federal Records and Documents of Federal Officials. There are two discrepancies here:

1. Section 3315 uses the term "elected officials," and section 3316 uses the term "Federal officials." In section 3317, however, members of the Federal judiciary are included in the scope of the Commission study. Since these officers are not elected officials, the discrepancy should be eliminated by clarification in sections 3315 and 3316. In the Library's view, all Federal officials, elected or appointed, shall fall within the Commission's scope of inquiry.

2. Section 3315 uses the phrase "Federal records and papers," and section 3316 uses the phrase "Federal records and documents." In the Library's view, the Commission should be designated the National Study Commission on Records and Papers of Federal Officials, and this designation used throughout the bill. To prefix "records and papers" with the modifying "Federal" begs the question on one of the major issues for study: namely, the differentiation of personal from public property in the files of public officials.

In summary, the Library supports the purpose of H.R. 16902 and assures this committee that it will cooperate in furthering the work of the propsed Commission. From our standpoint we recognize a number of complexities in the issues before such a Commission, but it would be more appropriate to identify these in statements and other testimony before the Commission when it has been established.

[The material follows:]

PRESIDENTIAL PAPERS IN THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS (PRINCIPAL ACCESSIONS)

1 These papers were on deposit at the Library of Congress a number of years before the gift was formalized.

Mr. BERRY. We will be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Thank you very much, indeed. I wonder if I could ask you, with respect to the microfilming of the Presidential papers presently housed in the Library of Congress, if you have microfilmed all 23 President's papers?

Mr. BERRY. All are filmed, except the papers of President Jefferson; the film for Jefferson has been virtually completed and is now being edited.

Mr. BRADEMAS. You say you have made those microfilm copies available for sale?

Mr. BERRY. That is right.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Have you excluded for security or other reasons, any of the papers of the Presidents from the microfilming?

Mr. BERRY. In these 23 collections there are no exclusions. Everything has been included. There are no restrictions at the present time on any of the materials in any of these 23 collections. There very well may be some restrictions in other collections that include Presidential items, but in these 23 major collections there are no restrictions.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Can you tell us something of the Library of Congress' handling of papers of other officials of the GovernmentMembers of the House and Senate, and Justices of the Supreme Court, as well as other officials of the Government such as Cabinet officers rank, and high appointive officials?

Mr. BERRY. The Library has always endeavored to acquire as broadly as it could in the field of American historical personages. In the past 10 years we have received congressional papers from Members of Congress such as Senator Anderson, Congressman Celler and others. We have papers from several of the Supreme Court Justicesthe Frankfurter papers are well known-as well as Cabinet members such as Henry Wallace and other Federal officials. Some of these collections which I assume you are asking about do have restrictions at the present time. If you would like further details, Dr. Broderick could provide them or we have a list if you would like the record of these papers we have received within the past 10 years.

Mr. BRADEMAS. You recommend that additional members be appointed to the Commission to represent the various branches of Government and the particular departments most affected by possible change, as well as members of the public and appropriate professional groups.

Is there a danger of the Commission becoming too large and unwieldly? Further, as to the Archivisit and the Librarian, what would the relationship be? Would you recommend that they both become ex officio members of the commission? Do you see any conflict between their responsibilities as members of the Commission, on one hand, and the responsibilities which H.R. 16902 would impose on the Archivist and Librarian in their capacities to provide technical support

services to the Commission?

Mr. BERRY. No. I think they could provide service better by being members. I think the Archivist and the Librarian would provide staff support but I think perhaps the Commission might be better served by having these two officials present at their deliberations to provide guidance based on their past experience. As to the size of the committee, I do know adding members does increase the size and could cause problems. Mr. BRADEMAS. What are the principal headaches you have experienced in dealing with Presidential papers?

Mr. BRODERICK. Most of the Presidential papers in our custody go back some time. The last major acquisitions of 20th century Presidents occurred really in the 1930's, and 1940's. Most of these collections except for the Theodore Roosevelt papers, were from donations by widows of the Presidents. And in some cases, restrictions on access or use of these papers was retained by the widow during her lifetime. This has not been a problem or headache but has been a part of the administrative mechanism whereby access to these papers required a pro forma agreement except by the donor of the papers.

Mr. BRADEMAS. I will yield to Mr. Hansen of Idaho, for such questions as he might have.

Mr. HANSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In looking over the list of Presidential papers you have furnished with your testimony, the last one President Coolidge, let me ask what is the status of Presidential papers after the Coolidge administration? Mr. BERRY. They are in the various Presidential libraries.

Mr. HANSEN. To what extent are copies of these records available to the Library of Congress?

Mr. BERRY. They might be available if they were microfilmed editions.

Mr. BRODERICK. The Harding papers have been microfilmed and the Library of Congress has acquired them.

Mr. HANSEN. Would it be your judgment the practice in the last three or four decades at least, of depositing Presidential papers in individual libraries has inhibited in any way the access to the public which exist presumably themes of those in your custody or the Library of Congress?

Mr. BRODERICK. No, I do not think so. The mixture of the kinds of papers in Presidential libraries has necessitated some administrative mechanism on highly classified material, national security material and that type of thing. The growth of the Presidency and the enlargement of the volume of papers has been more responsible than anything else in delays in making these papers available.

Mr. HANSEN. Has the Library requested any kind of assistance with respect to the advocation of any kind of uniform methods to facilitate access to the information contained in the papers?

Mr. BRODERICK. The manuscript division has devised an orientation program for new employees sent there by the National Archives in order to enable them to better handle the personal papers among Presidential library holdings.

Mr. HANSEN. Thank you.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Gettys.

Mr. GETTYS. I have no questions. I do appreciate your coming here today.

Mr. BRADEMAS. I am sure, as we begin to mark up this bill in subcommittee, we may have problems that we should like to consult the three of you on and I hope Mr. Berry, Mr. Broderick, Ms. McCormick, you will assist us at that time.

Mr. BERRY. Certainly.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Our next witness is Mr. Herman Kahn, associate librarian for manuscripts and archives, Yale University Library. He is also the former director of the Franklin D. Roosevelt Library and former Assistant Archivist of the United States. We are very pleased to have you with us, sir.

STATEMENT OF HERMAN KAHN, ASSOCIATE LIBRARIAN FOR MANUSCRIPTS AND ARCHIVES, YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

Mr. KAHN. Thank you. My statement will be brief but I hope you will put to me any questions you may wish to ask. I appreciate very much the opportunity that has been given to me by this committee to make a statement on H.R. 16902, which is entitled, a bill to establish a commission to study rules and procedures for the disposition and preservation of records and documents of Federal officials.

These are strange times for those of us who, like myself, have for several decades been asking that more public attention be given to the thorny public policy issues that have arisen about the ownership and control of papers of Federal officials. The catastrophic events of the last year have focused intense public interest on this matter. Sud