“No official of the Government,” the Senator wrote, “no matter how high his position can properly claim privilege when a committee of Congress is seeking the facts in respect to corruption.”
Senator Kefauver stated: “In these circumstances a claim of privilege is tantamount to suppression of evidence of possible crime and corruption. Not even the privilege of attorney-client can be used for such a nefarious purpose.”
Sherman Adams hid out behind the protective walls of the White House, unavailable for questioning by Congress and unavailable for questioning by the press. “Executive privilege,” as smoothly practiced by the Eisenhower administration, made it appear that Adams was invulnerable to attack, or even questioning, on any of his activities. Perhaps he was the cold and clean New Hampshire granite of the legend of Sherman Adams. Perhaps he was the dispassionate, efficient barrier against the corrupting influences of personal and political favoritism. But, even if Sherman Adams were the puritanic guardian of good government as pictured, the idea of surrounding any man’s activities with such arbitrary secrecy was a bad principle. It was an open invitation to misuse of power and influence that few could withstand.
At the July 27, 1955, press conference I questioned President Eisenhower to determine what he knew of the activities of Sherman Adams in the Dixon-Yates affair.
“Mr. President,” I said. “There has been testimony of the SEC Chairman [J. Sinclair Armstrong] that Sherman Adams intervened before the SEC, which was a quasi-judicial body. Testimony was given by the chairman on that score.
“The Democrats are contending that there was something improper in intervening with any quasi-judicial body. I wonder if you looked into that and if you have any comment you would like to make about it.”
The President replied that he had “looked into it only to this extent: I am sure that Mr.—head of the commission—has given the entire story. I understand that he is back before the committee. And certainly if he has omitted any details, he should give them now.”
The President continued: “And I believe that Governor Adams has informed the Senate committee that he hasn’t a single detail to add; that the story has been told and that is all there is to it.”
Garnett Horner, the White House reporter for the Washington Star, came in with another question:
“In connection with the Dixon-Yates matter, and in view of the fact that the Senate investigation subcommittee recently brought out the first time the part played in initiating the Dixon-Yates contract by Adolphe Wenzell, of the First Boston Corporation, which corporation later became the financing agent for Dixon-Yates. In view of all that, do you believe your directions last summer for disclosure of the complete record in the case were carried out by the agencies [the Bureau of the Budget and the Atomic Energy Commission] concerned?”