Dr. CRAIN. Not really, because I considered that the mailtapping was unconstitutional and illegal, as the briefing officer said; I agreed with him. I had a higher morality in this.

Mr. WIGGINS. You took this out in 1958?

Dr. CRAIN. Yes. To my knowledge, the reason was to demonstrate to Dean Acheson, former Secretary of State then practicing law, to demonstrate to him that this was going on. I was hoping he would help me to stop this.

Mr. WIGGINS. Do you have any other documents that you took from the CIA in your possession?

Dr. CRAIN. Not that I know of, I don't believe I did. I am quite sure this is the only one, and the reason I did this and never returned it to the file. That is probably why I have it. I don't remember planning to hold it and reveal it 16 years later. As far as I know, I had forgotten I had it for a long time.

Mr. WIGGINS. Well, it raises a question. The mailtapping could be useful but we have a problem in the Government. People, for reasons which they deem to be good and sufficient, make unauthorized copies of correspondence and files and take them from their employer without the consent of the employer. I regard that to be at least questionable on moral if not on legal grounds.

It relates to this whole matter of surveillance. I am pleased that I have your assurance and testimony under oath, and you can review your testimony. You are sure you don't have other documents from the CIA in your possession?

Dr. CRAIN. Yes; the only other document I have is a letter from Alan Dulles thanking me for my years of service, et cetera, when I resigned.

Mr. WIGGINS. How did your testimony come to the attention of this committee?

Dr. CRAIN. I assume from newspaper accounts of my revelation. Mr. WIGGINS. When was that made?

Dr. CRAIN. In January of-no; either late December or early January.

Mr. WIGGINS. Of this year?

Dr. CRAIN. Yes; 1974 or 1975. Incidentally, Mr. Wiggins, I might say with respect to the observation you made, there is one other recommendation I would offer that we encourage an informing system like this; that we set up an ombudsman at least within the intelligence community and maybe for all Government employees and for private citizens, to have a small staff of people under a blue ribbon group, say, impeccable people, to whom anybody can repair.

Any Government employee or citizen could raise a complaint that, if in his judgment, something was going on illegal or unconstitutional or improper. This ombudsman would be a safe, clear, et cetera, place for such. If such a person had been available in 1959, I think we would have avoided a lot of grief we are going through now; I would have gone to him.

Mr. WIGGINS. I respect that. It certainly has some merit and we ought to consider it. But, I am frankly particularly concerned with your taking this from the CIA, as a former member of that Agency making copies of CIA documents without the knowledge of the Agency

and removing unem and then discussing them when that person alone feels that the public interest would be served by their disclosure.

That is what, really, I am talking about, not about you. Let's talk about the problem then, instead of this illustration. There is a problem there to which this committee, perhaps, or this Congress ought to address itself; do you agree?

Dr. CRAIN. I am not sure there is, sir. As I indicated, I think there is a very good case for not having any covert operations at all. It is too easy to hide behind these things, too easy to do illegal and unconstitutional and immoral things, too easy to violate civil liberties and rights behind the classification of secret and so on. I do believe all of us have ultimately a higher morality. If you don't have these accessive classifications you don't have this problem.

I saw a dissertation on file with the CIA that was classified because somebody in the CIA put a stamp on it.

Mr. WIGGINS. I Won't press the point. Clearly there is a moral issue involved with respect to an employee taking an employer's documents without his consent; and that can't be avoided.

I yield the balance of my time.

Mr. KASTEN MEIER. I would like to comment on that before I recognize the gentleman from Massachusetts. I think during the impeachment inquiry we ran into it repeatedly, people making copies, as I recall, of documents which were meant for some other purpose being in some other file. I think the principle seems to be they are their own documents. Whether this was reprehensible or not, I think Mr. Wiggins raises an excellent issue here. I don't know if we can resolve it or not. I recognize the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Drinan.

Mr. DRINAN. Did you speak about these matters between 1959 and 1965?

Dr. CRAIN. Yes; I did on many occassions, including publicaly and on television.

Mr. DRINAN. Are you revealing anything new that has not been revealed before?

Dr. CRAIN. Maybe a couple of minor details, that is all.

Mr. DRINAN. Has the CIA contacted you?

Dr. CRAIN. No, they have not.

Mr. DRINAN. They never sought to remind you of your promise of confidentiality?

Dr. CRAIN. No.

Mr. DRINAN. When you speak of Richard Bissell, page 5, are you suggesting he was not really truthful with you?

Dr. CRAIN. I am inclined to view-certainly at that time I believed that he was sincere when he said he didn't know about this; he was as horrified as I about this and he would stop it.

Mr. DRINAN. Did you believe this when he said he didn't know about it?

Dr. CRAIN. At that time I did, yes. It is plausible, even now, he didn't know about it then, even though he was Chief of Clandestine Services. He came aboard in January 1959, I believe. I am not absolutely sure; that is the best of my recollection. It was long after the mail operation had been going.

What I do remember is I went to see Richard Helms who was the Assistant Deputy Director, and he had performed the administration

of that position for some time, as Acting Deputy Director. Conceivably, Mr. Bissell turned to Mr. Helms after my conversation and asked about it and Mr. Helms conceivably told him about it, and may have agreed it was a good operation after all and we should keep it. But it is pure conjecture on my part.

Mr. DRINAN. You indicated that these documents go to the FBI. About how many would be going to the FBI on a daily or yearly basis?

Dr. CRAIN. Well, they had the same copies as we did.

Mr. DRINAN. Why did you say only six letters a day; who screened

them all?

Dr. CRAIN. I assume we all got copies of all the correspondence addressed to the U.S.S.R. and the Iron Curtain area. Under that circumstance it could have been three times that, I just don't remember. One thing, I didn't see it at all. I was in a supervisory capacity and several staff people actually did the processing of the copies that we got in our branch. It may have been many more copies; my own recollection is about six.

Mr. DRINAN. Well, did the FBI have personnel right there to receive these copies?

Dr. CRAIN. I don't remember that. I was just told we were a part of a trilogy who were exploiting the mail. I assume they received the same thing we did.

Mr. DRINAN. You don't actually know too much about it. Have you tried contacting former colleagues of the CIA to get further information?

Dr. CRAIN. We talked about it but you have to perhaps understand the climate of the times and the operation of the "need to know" principle.

Mr. DRINAN. Not then but now?

Dr. CRAIN. Since then.

Mr. DRINAN. You give us fragmentary information that doesn't really add much, and I am just saying you keep saying the same things. Did you go to colleagues or some other sources to try to get a corroborator that this massive surveillance went on? Do you know any more besides these six pages?

Dr. CRAIN. No; nothing short of speculation.

Mr. DRINAN. You haven't tried to find out?

Dr. CRAIN. Well, I haven't had the time or energy to do that. I should say. If I knew where and how to look I would, but I don't have access to probable sources. I could talk to former colleagues, I suppose, and I have placed a couple of phone calls. As I expected, I didn't get too much cooperation from them.

Mr. DRINAN. When did you start to talk about this, when you left in 1969?

Dr. CRAIN. I talked about it right away. I certainly told my students, not to be revealing something to them but as an example of some aspects of politics or government. I didn't always, I am sure, go into this much detail, maybe never.

Mr. DRINAN. There isn't much to tell; you are not telling us very much.

Dr. CRAIN. Well, I agree with you. It depends on the point of view, how much detail, but I didn't bring in copies of the letter to them.

Mr. DRINAN. I hoped to see a real, live, living spy come in here. Well, you told us what you knew and for that I am grateful. Thank you very much.

I yield the balance of my time.

Mr. KASTENMEIER. The gentleman from New York.

Mr. BADILLO. Dr. Crain, you say you have one copy of a letter and it is undeniable proof of the surveillance within the CIA. Do you have the copy with you?

Dr. CRAIN. Yes.

Mr. BADILLO. Will you furnish it to me now ?

Dr. CRAIN. Yes.

Mr. BADILLO. Mr. Chairman, I ask that this letter be introduced as part of the record.

Mr. WIGGINS. I haven't read it. It seems we may be compounding a problem, among many other things.

Mr. BADILLO. As the chairman said, there were hundreds of these letters in the Judiciary impeachment hearings.

Mr. WIGGINS. I am not so sure, Mr. Chairman, that the sender of that letter would appreciate having his private correspondence on the front page of a newspaper. I take that as a whole, assuming here the person would be offended also if the FBI or the CIA looked at it and doubly so if it was published. Perhaps I could make a better judgment after glancing at it.

Mr. BADILLO. It has been made public.

Dr. CRAIN. And with the permission of the sender.

Mr. KASTEN MEIER. The chairman is not yet aware of the contents of what has been handed to us.

Dr. CRAIN. It is a xeroxed copy of a copy, so it is not the original copy that we got.

Mr. KASTENMEIER. It has already been made public?

Dr. CRAIN. Yes, on several occasions.

Mr. KASTEN MEIER. Well, without objection the committee

Mr. DANIELSON. I reserve my objection until I have read it.

Mr. BADILLO. May I go on while he reads it?

Mr. KASTENMEIER. Yes. Let me only say that the committee will receive the letter subject to any objection that may come forward from a member of the committee.

In the meanwhile, you may proceed.

Mr. BADILLo. Earlier in the week we heard testimony from Mr. Cotter and the following exchange took place between us:

Mr. BADILLO. Was there any mail cover or mail opening investigation in Miami?

Mr. CoTTER. Not to my knowledge.

Mr. BADILLO. Is it possible that it could have been done without your knowing about it?

Mr. COTTER. It is possible, however, when I was talking to the CIA people the other day, they appeared to be very, very candid; they appeared to tell me, these are the things that happened. There was one here and one on the West Coast and some other place, and the only place the postal service was involved in was the New York City one and the San Francisco one.

Mr. BADILLO. What do you mean, one here, one on the West Coast and some other place?

Mr. COTTER. I didn't question them on the other place but I gather there may have been some other place.

Mr. BADILLO. There could have been one in Miami?

Mr. COTTER. That is correct.

Mr. BADILLO. There could have been one in Chicago?

Mr. COTTER. Indeed.

Do you know if there was one in San Francisco?

Dr. CRAIN. I don't know that, no. The only ones mentioned were the New York and New Orleans office.

Mr. BADILLO. You know of no others?

Dr. CRAIN. This is my recollection, it could be faulty, but I think it is accurate. I took no notes or kept no diary on this.

Mr. BADILLO. Did you actually see men from the FBI; are you sure the FBI was involved?

Dr. CRAIN. No, I am not sure of anything except that we got copies of the mail.

Mr. BADILLO. But you said this was a three-agency operation? Dr. CRAIN. That was what we were told.

Mr. BADILLO. But you didn't see the FBI, you say?

Dr. CRAIN. On other occasions, but not in connection with this. Mr. BADILLO. Can you say of your own knowledge that you know the FBI participated in the mail-opening operation?

Dr. CRAIN. No, I can't. I have been careful what I say always. I have no direct knowledge that the FBI was involved. I have no direct information that the Post Office processed what we had. The only direct testimony I have is I personally handled and saw many copies, hundreds of copies of correspondence. It seemed to me that was at least circumstantial that it came from the Post Office. I don't know where you would get it from otherwise. But, I have no proof the FBI was involved at all, just what the briefing officer said.

Mr. BADILLO. Were you told why the FBI was involved?

Dr. CRAIN. As I recall, reference was made to getting derogatory information on people. You must remember the assumption was in those days by everybody, I guess, that anybody who corresponded with anybody within an Iron Curtain country was automatically suspect, why he was a Commie, that kind of climate.

Mr. BADILLO. The material secured by the CIA was turned over to the FBI?

Dr. CRAIN. No. The copies we got we did what we wanted with; and we did get the dossiers on people, incidentally.

Mr. BADILLO. You shared this with them?

Dr. CRAIN. They got other copies, that was my understanding. Again, I can't prove it.

Mr. BADILLO. Did anybody say they had a court order to permit this?

Dr. CRAIN. No, there wasn't, and I know of no order that would, in my judgment, be sufficient to open all mail to the U.S.S.R. But I didn't hear anything about that, no.

Mr. BADILLO. How would an ombudsman be able to handle this, if he was brought in to handle this-this also is illegal, isn't it?

Dr. CRAIN. This activity is illegal, as you say.

Mr. BADILLO. There is no court that would give such a blanket order?

Dr. CRAIN. Yes, but it was going on according to what I heard, for