SENATE BILL CALLS FOR FBI INVESTIGATION OF CASES INVOLVING TREASURY AIDES
Document Type:
Collection:
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST):
CIA-RDP57-00384R001200230002-4
Release Decision:
RIFPUB
Original Classification:
K
Document Page Count:
1
Document Creation Date:
November 17, 2016
Document Release Date:
July 5, 2000
Sequence Number:
2
Case Number:
Content Type:
NSPR
File:
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
CIA-RDP57-00384R001200230002-4.pdf | 114.91 KB |
Body:
Approved For Release 2000/08/25: CIA-RDP57-00384R001200230002-4
Senate Bill Calls for FBI Inve stgation
Of Cases involving Treasury Aides
By Edward F. Ryan
Post Reporter
A backstage struggle for
clear priority to investigate
any Treasury personnel ac-
cused of bribery, corruption or
other serious crime has moved
into the open with Senate con-
sideiation of a bill assigning
such probes to the FBI.
A major underlying issue is
whether the FBI or the inspec-
tion division of the Internal
Revenue Service would investi-
gate future allegations of
wrongdoing by employes of the
Nation's tax-collectipn agency.
The bill was Introduced by
Sen. John J. Williams (R-Del.)
as a sequel to his activities in
airing some chapters of the
Internal Revenue scandals that
became the target of all-out
congressional inquiry in 1951
and 1952.
The Williams bill already
has been approved by a Senate
Judiciary Subcommittee head-
ed by Sen. William J. anger (R-
N. Dak). The_ next decision is
up to the Judiciary Committee,
which is also headed by Lan-
ger.
Current indications are that
Senator Williams has "made a
sale" with his bill. His biggest
ammuniton has been drawn
from examples of how Treasury
failed to clean out the Internal
Revenue Bureau before it be-
came a politically explosive
scapdal center.
There is, however, a strong
indication the bill may be
modified to meet some sharp
objections by Treasury officials.
They fear the, bill would go
much further than its an-
pounced intent of giving un-
questioned jurisdiction to the
FBI to investigate crimes by
Treasury personnel. They have
.warned that the actual result
may be to give a big batch of
new powers to the Attorney
General to conduct all sorts of
housekeeping inquiries in Gov-
ernment agencies that up to
now have been in the hands of
the agency heads.
Justice officials disclaim any
wish to obtain such sweeping
new powers. They say they
want only to have a law that
will say clearly that the FBI
is to investigate allegations of
crime by Treasury personnel
just as it now does in all other
Federal agencies.
Criticism much sharper than
anything presented in the open
Senate hearings on the Wil-
liams bill is being fired at the
measure in private conversa-
tions by some officials. The
public discussion has com-
plied fully with the rules of
team play.
But in informal conversa.
tions, some officials express
concern that the net result of
the bill would be to confer on
the FBI virtually the sole
power of decision on what in-
vestigations to make and what
not to make in Government
agencies. These critics feel
that the Justice Department,
over the years, and particularly
during the revenue scandals,
had troubles enough to account
for without reaching for more.
In other terms, they feel the
long-run Treasury record for
keeping a "clean shop" com-
pares favorably with that of
the Justice Department. Fur-
ther, they feel it's one thing
for Justice to argue that crimes
by Treasury should be investi-
gated by "outsiders," but who,
they ask, will be the outsiders
to investigate crimes by Justice
personnel?
Sen. Williams' bill is fo-
cused upon a sizable list of
crimes: bribery, theft, embez-
zlement, impersonating Federal
officers, false claims or fraud
against the Government, and
others. The bill says that com-
plaints about such crimes re-
ceived in any Federal agency
shall be referred to the At-
torney General, unless respon-
sibility for investigation is as-
signed elsewhere by law. The
bill gives him responsibility for
having the crimes investigated.
A proviso gives Federal
agencies power to make in-
vestigations on which to base
administrative actions.
A second provision, however,
gives the Attorney General
"primary jurisdiction" in in-
vestigating crimes, and says;
"no department or agency shall'
interfere with any such investi-
gation."
One round in the dispute;
over FBI jurisdiction in Treas-!
ury was staged in a House
hearing in early 1951 before
the full tax scandal storm
broke. Treasury officials were
seeking a new statute to author-
ize Secret Service activities
previously authorized in ap-
propriations laws. Justice offi-
cials protested that one sec-
tion, giving Secret Service
agents authority to arrest per-
sons violating Federal laws re.
lating to the Treasury, would
invade FBI authority. Justice
Officials protested there had
been times when the FBI
sought to investigate Internal
Revenue personnel accused of
taking bribes, only to find that
the Internal Revenue people
refused to cooperate in order
to investigate the matter them.
selves.
The protested section was
slightly modified, but remained
In the bill and became part of
existing law. Later, in January.
1952, when the tax scandals had,
reached a climax, FBI Director,
J. Edgar Hoover called pointed
attention to the disputed sec
tion in the Secret Service law.
Hoover noted the section as
finally adopted authorized Se-
cret Service to "detect and ar-
rest any person violating any
laws of the United States in
connection with official mat-
ters administered by and un-
der direct control of the Treas-
ury Department."
"The passage of this law,"
said Hoover, "for all practical
purposes effectively stopped
this Bureau (the FBI) from in-
vestigating such matters (il- ~
legal activities) when Treasury
personnel are involved."
Defenders of the present set-I
Approved For Release 2000/08/25: CIA-RDP57-00384R001200230002-4