Chapter 28 20 Subcommittee-2

Pauling arrived at his Caltech office on Monday morning, less than 24 hours after being rescued.The news of his disappearance had spread in all directions through news reports, and everyone in his research team was very worried.At this time, they hung a banner "Welcome to Dr. Pauling's return" on the door of Pauling's office.A secretary personally baked a box of cakes with a picture of a toy man hanging from a cliff, and a beautiful woman swimming in the water below.There was a short cheer as Pauling arrived.Pauling looked at the cake, ignored anyone, retreated into his office, and closed the door behind him.The small group that had gathered to welcome him back was stunned.After a while, a small note was sent under the office door; Pauling asked to cancel his class and all invitations for the day.

No one knew what to do.Pauling's son-in-law Cam, like everyone else, is not far away.After they called him, they explained the situation to him.Cam gently knocked on the door of Pauling's office, then walked in and talked with Pauling for a while.Some situations are not good.Pauling seemed to be very aware of the surrounding situation, but he couldn't say a word.Cam decided to take him home. On the way home, Pauling said nothing.Eva arranged for him to go to bed, but he remained silent.His health doctor checked his body and told everyone that the shock brought by the cliff incident put him in a very tense state. There was no serious illness, and everything would be normal after resting in bed for a few days.

Those few days were the strangest days of Pauling's life.Most of the time, he lay silent in bed, letting Eva take care of himself.Linda brought his newborn grandson to visit his grandfather, and Pauling burst into tears.It was the first time anyone had seen him so emotionally vulnerable, he had completely lost control of himself. The night he hung on the cliff exploded his inner world that had been tightly closed.The pain, the emotional hurt and humiliation he endured over the years, from the death of his father to being forced to resign as chair of the chemistry department at Caltech, every political attack on his This matter had been deeply buried in his heart.He swallowed his anger and ignored everything.He suppressed his anger and kept his emotions from being hurt, but, in fact, he was hurt anyway.At Caltech, in Washington, in the news media, his pride had been bruised, his character had been insulted.He did not reveal this feeling to anyone, except perhaps Eva.All of this, although he swallowed it all in his stomach, did not disappear after all.Many unpleasant past events, once tightly hidden in his heart, now, after the horrible experience of hanging on the edge of the cliff, he poured out his bitterness all at once.

For the first time in his life Pauling was a sentimental man in those days.It is a means of restoring balance.Once the emotion can be vented, the heart will be cleared. In fact, he didn't take all this in his heart. The most important thing is that after 40 years of training and practice, he has become a rationalist. I don't want to let myself fall into the trap of emotional impulse.Therefore, almost instinctively, he quickly got rid of the state of emotional fluctuations and regained his former balance.It's a means of protecting yourself and a way of avoiding pain. The experience was therapeutic instead, giving him a much-needed break, a release of enormous psychological stress, and a return to self-control.During the next two weeks he started talking, getting out of bed, reading the newspaper, doing some revision work on The Nature of the Chemical Bond, and writing several letters.It seemed that he might return to his normal life before long and began to think about the important reports he had promised.

On February 13, he appeared in public for the first time since his cliff death.He spoke at a small Hollywood event about fallout and international agreements.Earlier that day, France tested its first atomic bomb in the Sahara, becoming the fourth country to join the Atom Club and the first to send radioactive fallout into the atmosphere since a moratorium on nuclear testing began in late 1958.Since this was an act provoked by the West, the Soviets immediately announced that they would no longer abide by their pledge not to conduct nuclear tests. In order to cope with this sudden situation, Pauling once again devoted all his energy to propaganda and speech activities.Throughout the spring, he gave more than forty important speeches to various groups, large and small.Such groups include: Freedom Forum and Peace, Kiwanis Clubs and Rotary International chapters, high school student organizations and church groups, to name a few.Despite the French experiments and the threatening statements of the Soviets, the Geneva talks seemed to be making encouraging progress for several months.Eisenhower seemed determined to sign a document before he left office, so there was hope that the last few hurdles would be cleared when the East-West summit meets in Paris in May.

However, in early May, the meeting broke up again.The shooting down of the top-secret American U-2 over Russia was a great shame for Eisenhower, who had previously vowed never to conduct such flights.It also kills any chance of finalizing a test ban agreement at the Paris summit.The Atomic Energy Commission's McCone and Teller took advantage of the collapse of international negotiations to mount renewed pressure for new nuclear weapons tests.The pendulum of public opinion began to swing again, this time leaning towards a harder line against the Soviets, even arguing for a delay in signing a partial test-ban treaty.

For Pauling, the U-2 incident was further proof that the United States was a stubbornly persistent opponent in the test ban negotiations. This country always seemed to be looking for faults to mess things up.This is tantamount to plotting to let the cold wind of the Cold War continue to blow.At this time, the central content of Pauling's speech not only stayed on the terror of nuclear weapons, but also involved how he saw how the military industry group dominated US policy.At the head of this group was Teller, and what Pauling called "a small but influential handful" gathered around Teller. "Militarists, business tycoons, hydrogen bomb scientists and politicians around the world are sparing no effort in seeking a way to continue the Cold War with the aim of imposing their own will on the nations of the world," he added. The clique of militarists and business tycoons "is our enemy".

In mid-May, Pauling and Eva drove to Berkeley, where they planned to deliver more speeches.They heard news from the radio that a jury of the Un-American Activities Committee was scheduled to hold a trial in San Francisco, and many people, most of whom were students, staged strong protests outside the City Hall.They also heard reporters describe the situation at the scene, saying that the police used fire hydrants and batons to drive away the demonstrators. The protest turned into a small riot; to the prison van.The scene was broadcast on television that night, and the American public was generally shocked.

Pauling was very excited.In his view, any action against the Commission on Un-American Activities is a good thing.But the fact that this time the protest included American college students was all the more significant because throughout the 1950s this group had been politically inactive.The San Francisco riots actually marked the beginning of a new anti-government student movement, an event of great significance in the development of the New Left.The next day, Pauling delivered a speech at a rally in Union Square as scheduled.After the meeting, he and Eva joined the picket line of thousands of protesters in solidarity with the students' just actions.A large crowd gathered outside City Hall, chanting slogans against the Un-American Activities Commission and protesting the government's brutal treatment of students.Pauling told reporters that the Un-American Activities Investigative Committee is immoral and should be disbanded.He added: "In recent years, American students have been quite slow to protest, demonstrate or participate in political activities. I think it is really encouraging that American students are starting to wake up now. .”

senate home security subcommittee In June, Pauling toured the East Coast for peace speeches.During that time, he gave a speech at a women's group in Washington that Eva was very fond of.The group's full name is the Women's International League for Peace and Liberty.After the meeting, he was surrounded by adoring crowd. They thanked him for his exciting speech, hoped to get his specific guidance, and handed him some materials, including newspaper clippings, about an upcoming event and a poem dedicated to him.Pauling thanked everyone and stuffed most of the materials into his pockets.It wasn't until he returned to the hotel room where he was staying and took off his coat that he emptied the materials out of the bag.Then, start reading this mess of materials.Suddenly, he stopped, and one of the materials thrust into him after these meetings was a subpoena ordering him to appear before an executive session of the Senate Home Security Subcommittee.He had to check the exact date twice.He had to be there on Monday, June 20th - the morning of the day after tomorrow.

It is indeed unexpected to send a subpoena in this way.Still, this type of interference from the Senate Homeland Security subcommittee is not uncommon.Pauling had previously served on this subcommittee.It was created by the Senate in 1951 to complement the activities of the House Un-American Activities Committee, which by then was already known as anti-Communist.The Senate Home Security Subcommittee, chaired successively by a series of conservatives, staged a series of scandalous hearings that shocked the country in the 1950s, pointing fingers at the Foreign Affairs Bureau, youth organizations and the influence of the Communist Party in the television industry.The subcommittee listed Pauling as one of the leading figures in favor of the Communist Party platform in 1956, and in 1957 threatened to summon him to the subcommittee to answer questions about whether there were Communists behind him against nuclear testing petition activities.More recently, the subcommittee's acting chairman, Thomas Todd, threatened to hold a hearing to ascertain whether the organization was under Communist influence if the National Committee for Sound Nuclear Policy did not clear out suspected red insiders; In Pauling's words, the group's leader, Norman Cousins, had "succumbed" to Todd's majesty and began imposing what was essentially a loyalty check on its members.The decision split the organization's leadership and paralyzed the nation's largest and most influential peace organization.In Pauling's estimation, the Senate Homeland Security subcommittee is exactly the same as the House Un-American Activities Committee, another example of government corruption. However, why issue a subpoena at this time?The most obvious root is Todd.Todd was an unusual senator, one of Connecticut's first Democrats.He appears to be trying to carve out a unique status for himself nationally, no matter how he is remembered as a traditional Liberal-Conservative who has now served two terms in one and the same from a northern state.He was active in the Senate campaign, speaking out against the Soviets and supporting the development of what Teller called the "clean bomb."He quickly became the man in the Democratic Party clamoring desperately for continued experimentation to keep America strong.When he was nominated to serve as acting chairman of the Senate Home Security Subcommittee, he wasted no time in using that body to investigate and attack the National Committee for Sound Nuclear Policy and other anti-nuclear groups.Pauling naturally became his next target. Todd's approach was also encouraged by Benjamin Mendel, director of the subcommittee's research office.Mendel used to be a master of investigations conducted by the Un-American Activities Committee of the House of Representatives. Since 1951, he has followed Pauling and investigated Pauling, and Pauling became one of his favorite targets.He had interrogated the dissident scientist at the subcommittee's orders in 1957; this was unsuccessful due to political considerations, but he continued to collect material on Pauling's anti-nuclear activities.After Pauling made public the contents of his World Scientists Petition in 1958, Mendel wrote a note to the subcommittee's chief adviser, Jules Thorwain, stating: "You may have noticed that this There is a message in one document to the effect that Linus Pauling is using Communist methods to get past the U.S. government, and it would certainly be interesting to summon Pauling for details in this regard." When Mendel reviewed Pauling's file for Todd, the incoming senator quickly concluded that Pauling was likely a "fellow traveler" with the Communist Party who had collected signatures from behind the Iron Curtain for his 1958 petition Strong momentum.Although the petition has been in the past two years, Pauling's condemnation of American militarism is more than ever.According to Todd's reasoning, if nuclear testing were to resume at all, it would have to be shown that the activities of figures like Pauling were part of the Communist Party's "peace offensive."Todd's attack on the National Committee for Sound Nuclear Policy has paid off, and the review of Pauling will surely be another blow to such peaceful groups, and perhaps help strengthen the Democratic Party's staunchly anti-communist reputation in an election year, Todd approves The action to arraign Pauling. He didn't expect what kind of ending he would get. After Pauling saw the subpoena, he called Willing immediately.The next day, Welling came to Washington.In the hotel room where Pauling lived, the two discussed for hours.Judging by the language of the subpoena — which calls for Pauling to testify “to give what you know of any test-ban propaganda campaign participated in or supported by Communists, and the activities of the Communist Party or the Communist Front” — the two agree that , the Senate Homeland Security Subcommittee will definitely use the entire file on Pauling, especially the accusations that McCarthy has used in the past.But it is really difficult to formulate a countermeasure in such a short time after receiving the notice, and it is not clear what Todd will ask.Both Pauling and Willing had been through this sort of thing before, and both knew that a witch hunt against a person on trumped-up charges could damage that person's reputation without offering any evidence.Todd used the bait-and-fish strategy.If you don't want to be his trophy, the only way is to put him in a position to be attacked instead.They realized that for the time being they had to use the tactic that Pauling had used so successfully on the passport issue: a powerful propaganda campaign through the news media. The day before his scheduled court appearance, Pauling held a press conference.At the meeting, he told every reporter who came that the subpoena of the Senate Homeland Security Subcommittee was clearly intended to cut off the public's access to information about the nuclear test, which in essence was a violation of human rights.This was Pauling's first shot in an openly arduous battle. When Pauling and Welling arrived at the hearing, they learned that the hearing would be postponed for a day because the Senate was in full session.They were also informed that the first hearing would be held in an executive session and would be closed to the press and the public.This is an often-used first step that allows the subcommittee to gather and sift through relevant information before holding a public hearing. Pauling and Willing soon felt that they could never accept such an arrangement.Both of them knew in their hearts that by holding the court in private, the subcommittee could single-handedly control the release of the news, so it could control the public opinion circle, thus depriving Pauling of the sharpest weapon in his hand.They immediately negotiated with relevant parties and insisted on a public hearing. Some members of the subcommittee read an editorial in the Washington Post the next morning.The editorial severely criticized Todd, calling it "very stupid political harassment."After private consultations, the subcommittee agreed to make the hearing public.The doors of the hearing room of the new Senate Office Building opened, and activists from the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, led by Eva, swarmed in.Whatever else might happen, Pauling at least has a sympathetic audience. The silver-haired Todd Hammer called the hearing open.First of all, he asked Pauling to rest assured that "we have no hostility here, no hostility towards you at all", and said "I personally have no malice towards you". Not to torture you, or harass you, or trouble you."So far, Pauling and Welling's strategy has worked. Pauling then testified under oath.Subcommittee advisor Sowyane brought the meeting down to business right away.At this time, why Pauling appeared on this occasion became very clear. There was only one center of Sowynn's question: If Pauling did not have the support of a large organization that is likely to be the Communist Party, how could it be possible for Pauling to enlist so many people to join him? Sign a petition to the United Nations?Dressed in a neat, well-fitting suit, Pauling answered every question with courtesy and impeccability. Would he be willing to provide the subcommittee with a few lists of petition signatories?Yes, although he has no such obligation; as for the names of these people, the subcommittee should know them, and it is not difficult to get them from the United Nations. Would he be willing to provide the subcommittee with the names of those to whom he had sent letters seeking signatures?Willing, and he's happy to do so; once back in Pasadena, find a list of these guys, and it'll be available. Would he be willing to provide the subcommittee with the names of those who helped fill out the petition, and those who signed more than once?At this point, Pauling hesitated for a moment. "I feel an obligation to care for the people who have served this petition," he said. “I fear they will also be summoned to this subcommittee for scrutiny, as I have been treated here.” He asked why the request was made.Todd replied that some inconsistencies were found in the petition that was actually sent to the UN.For example, he had a letter on hand about Pauling claiming that the number of signatures on the petition sent to the United Nations did not match the number of signatures on the petition received there, so he wanted to give Pauling a clarification This point of opportunity.Pauling thinks this statement is unreasonable, and he can be sure that the number he said is the actual number sent. (Pauling was correct; Todd got the wrong information from his men.) Sowyane again asked Pauling to name those who helped distribute the petition.Welling and Pauling whispered for a while, and then asked for an adjournment.After the two walked out of the evidence room, they started talking.Pauling felt that he should firmly refuse to hand over the names of those who circulated the petition. Otherwise, the subcommittee would surely issue subpoenas to some of them to investigate their background and beliefs; Just like McCarthy asked for the list back then, Pauling would never be that kind of informer.But, Welling warns, be aware of the consequences you face: If you resist providing the subcommittee with information they want, they can charge you with contempt of the statute; if the subcommittee upholds that charge, they can sentence you to jail .To avoid directly answering this question, the only legal precedent ever is to invoke the Fifth Amendment.But, Pauling said, if I declined to answer questions because of the possibility of personally being implicated, I could be found guilty right away.I don't want to invoke the Fifth Amendment. Are there any other strategies?Together, the two decided to take a riskier approach.Instead of citing the Fifth Amendment, Pauling would invoke the First Amendment's rights to free speech and free petition, refusing to answer the above question.So far, there has been no precedent for invoking the First Amendment to defend oneself against a charge of "contempt of Congress."Willing said so to Pauling, but we can try.There isn't much else to do anymore, and as far as the First Amendment is concerned, it's always welcome for the news media.Pauling and Welling prepared a written statement in haste. As the hearing resumed, Pauling put on his half glasses and began to read a statement to the subcommittee: "The distribution of petitions is an essential element of the democratic process in our country, and to abolish or obstruct it would be a tribute to the police state. Going one step further. Whatever assurances the subcommittee may give us about what the list of those concerned will do, I am sure someone will use it to exact revenge on these passionate, high-minded, high-spirited people of peace." His voice was It was interrupted by the warm applause from the audience organized by Eva. Thornwain reminded Pauling that refusing to answer charges could lead to contempt of Congress.One senator pointedly asked him if he knew about the Willard Uphurs case.Uphurst, a university professor, was serving a year in prison for refusing to answer a similar question.Pauling knew what the senator wanted to say to him, but he ignored it and continued to answer other questions.He flatly refused the subcommittee's request to name the person who helped him distribute the petition. Todd told Pauling that he had until August 9 to hand over the list, and the hearing was over. Pauling, who was polite and reasonable throughout the hearing room, lost his temper in front of reporters when he walked down the hallway at the end of the hearing.His petition was "not inspired by the Communist Party," he told reporters, "I inspired them."He attacked Todd and the Senate Homeland Security Subcommittee for trying to stifle free speech and the freedom to petition the government. "Do you think someone is pointing fingers at me - threatening me? That's my idea! If I'm going to take a chance, I'm going to do it." Newspapers across the country carried Pauling's speech, along with a staggering number of editorials in support of Pauling.By 1960, more and more people began to realize that some investigative committees affiliated to Congress had trampled on the rights of witnesses for many years on the grounds of national security, turning the investigation into a public farce.Advisors to these committees have no qualms about subpoenaing those they wish to investigate, discrediting them, throwing them into public debate, and making all the statements they want with a single subpoena.Those arraigned for a hearing are forced to appear in court and are forced to answer endless questions. McCarthy's abuse of power had aroused public distaste; Pauling's daring to defy Todd's actions now fueled a deeper sense of the need to constrain and regulate the conduct of these investigative committees.Nearly every major national newspaper ran an editorial page with angry denunciations of the Senate Home Security Subcommittee. The "Honolulu Advertiser" said: "Since the official policy of the United States is to stop nuclear testing... such an investigation is really redundant." Todd's hometown of Connecticut, "The Hartford Times" said: "Dr. If you act with conscience, there is no reason for the Senate to interfere." The Texas "Austin American" said: "When I read that Dr. Pauling refused to bow to this domineering committee, my blood boiled. I am very proud of him." "Washington Post" said: "If you dare to challenge the power, justice can be done. Professor Pauling provides a shining example for this." The Weekly also softened Pauling's attitude, puzzled by Todd's decision to bring such "a weirdo" to the public, saying that "naive flattery to the left made him a controversial figure".Only a handful of newspapers, mostly in states in the Deep South, have endorsed the Senate Home Security subcommittee. Seeing that he might be completely defeated, Todd began to prepare a series of long articles, refuting the newspapers that attacked him, listing various activities of Pauling's ambiguous relationship with the Communist Party, and trying to convince people that his request to know the names of the people involved was completely innocent. .But he was no match for Pauling in terms of writing, argument, and drive. On the night of June 21, just hours after his subcommittee hearing, Pauling addressed a large gathering of peaceful people at Johns Hopkins University and called on the audience to write an open letter to Todd, “On the Say none of you want me to go to jail for defying him," he said, prompting a storm of applause from the audience.The next morning, he detailed his political harassment to viewers of NBC's "Today" show.He again began a series of articles and letters devoted to his case.Solidarity poured in from all around, with donations from people who had never met him before to help him pay for the legal proceedings. After Willing's efforts, the hearing was postponed until October, so that Pauling and Eva could continue to give speeches everywhere.Threats from the subcommittee seemed to reinvigorate them. Together, they led a mass “walk for disarmament” in Los Angeles on July 9 that attracted more than 4,000 people—the first protest march most Angelenos had ever seen.Afterwards, they went to Europe for a short visit.The two traveled across the Continent, delivering impassioned speeches to many audiences.Later, they stopped in Geneva and held private talks with ambassadors from the United States, Britain, the Soviet Union and other countries on the issue of negotiating the test ban.Todd's actions not only did not eliminate Pauling's influence, but made Pauling more important in people's minds.Pauling's trip to Geneva was particularly encouraging.Pauling noticed that the ambassadors, one by one, assured him that they were close to a deal, which gave him more confidence and determination to continue his campaign to influence public opinion. In August, Pauling returned home.He fought Todd on another front.He filed legal action before the Senate Homeland Security Subcommittee, asking a judge to issue a public judgment finding that he has the right to deny the subcommittee's unreasonable demands.The legal basis for this is that the subcommittee's request is not only irrelevant to the investigation, but also constitutes an unreasonable search and seizure.Adding the Fourth Amendment to the First Amendment, while using the judiciary of government to combat the abuses of Congress, is a brilliant legal move.However, the result was not successful.In district court, government lawyers argued that a ruling in Pauling's favor "would spell the end of any legislative process" because every witness who attended the hearing could run to court before being investigated. In the second half of August, the judge decided that Pauling's prosecution should not be accepted, because it was a matter for the legislature and the judiciary should not interfere.Pauling and Willing appealed against the decision. Meanwhile, Pauling continued to use public relations to increase the pressure.Every time he speaks he attacks the Senate Homeland Security Subcommittee.Thousands of letters began to hit Todd and his Senate colleagues.Some letters have dozens of signatures, and there are even letters with hundreds of signatures.At Washington University in St. Louis, the birthplace of the Pauling petition, more than a hundred faculty members signed a letter of protest; 17 professors at the University of Pennsylvania also wrote a letter.Residents of Pasadena and Caltech faculty sent hundreds of letters.There are also protests from all over the world. From Germany, Japan, Norway, Mexico, the United Kingdom, and India, from Nobel Prize winners, well-known peaceful people and ordinary people in the country, there are voices of justice, all praising Bao Lin's "indomitable fighting spirit" strongly condemned the brutal actions against this "great American man caught in the prison of McCarthyism". Throughout the summer and early fall, Todd was on the run.On the one hand, he has to deal with all kinds of questioning from the outside world, and on the other hand, he has to check the preparation of the summary report on Pauling's court hearing in June.When Pauling read a copy of the report, his spirits lifted even more.Todd intends to title the report "Communist Infiltration and Exploitation by Pressure Groups."Pauling carefully compared this copy with the mimeographed transcript of the hearing and found that some elements of his testimony had been cut out—the material, he felt, had been edited because the cutouts benefited him --Besides, senators can rearrange what they have said, but Pauling has no such opportunity.After reading the report, Pauling found evidence that Todd had deliberately asked questions to mislead the public.For example, Todd compared the number of signatures Pauling claimed to have sent to the U.N. with the actual number of signatures, at which point Pauling had obtained a complete and correct copy of the petition from the U.N. — proving his reported numbers That's right - the text was on file the day the hearing was held.In a similar situation, Thorwain once suggested that Pauling for some reason concealed the fact that the Russians had signed the petition, but it is clear from the documents held by the subcommittee that Pauling did not do so. Do. All this, and something else—"You know it's false," Pauling wrote in a letter for correction to Todd, who had been held accountable for his testimony—now , Pauling was convinced, Todd and his subcommittee were not acting honestly.So Pauling held another press conference.At the meeting, he accused the Senate Home Security Subcommittee of political harassment against him, which he also dismissed as "an act of discrediting the face of the United States and the American people." "Either way, we're going to have to work on something like this sooner or later, but we're not particularly worried about the end result," Eva once told a friend. "However, it's a pity that Linus' talent is wasted on this kind of thing." Summer was coming to an end, and Todd had had enough of Pauling's anger, and decided to fight back in his own way on his own forum.It seems that Pauling’s contempt of Congress is a crime that is difficult to establish—besides, it needs the unanimous approval of all senators, but many senators have received letters in favor of Pauling from their subordinate voters—however, he There are other ways to let Pauling taste his power, he wants to expose Pauling's true intentions to all the people.His men began to compile Pauling's alleged Communist activities into a solid case. The Senate Home Security Subcommittee has set a second hearing date for Pauling on Oct. 11.Before then, the PR battle reached a fever pitch.Pauling planned to place a half-page ad in the newspaper, detailing Todd's harassment of him, asking all Americans to help eliminate "overreach and the overturning of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights" by several congressional committees. The New York Times declined to run the ad, citing defamatory text, but The Washington Post published the article.Todd countered with another lengthy essay, arguing that his actions were nothing more than "a request for cooperation based on reputation and reason."Pauling asked for the hearing to be postponed; Todd flatly refused.The Emergency Committee for Civil Liberties also published an advertisement signed by hundreds of liberals; Todd ordered his staff to review the signatures one by one to see if anyone had ties to the Communist Party. The New York Times editors called the subcommittee's pursuit of Pauling "part of a routine policy of harassment"; Todd voluntarily sent papers from the June hearing to people he believed could influence public opinion Record. Outside his Washington hotel on the night of October 10, Pauling received a summons ordering him to appear in court the next morning and to bring the required signed records and forwarded letters. The hearing room was packed with reporters and observers.Among them was Eva, neatly dressed and wearing a hat.However, the subcommittee seat was left vacant.托德是唯一的一个在10月11日听证会上露面的小组委员会成员，其他委员似乎个个都有要紧的事需要他们亲自去处理。但是，缺乏支持好像并没有使这位来自康涅狄格州的参议员心烦意乱。他在宣布开会以后，宣读了一篇长达12页的声明，辩称他进行这次调查是光明正大的事。读了6页之后，他问鲍林和威林，要是他就此打住，让声明的余下部分记录在案，他们是否介意。威林表示同意，但有一个条件，就是他这份声明在正式发表以前，得让鲍林有机会阅读并作出必要的答复。接下来，托德立即转入实质性提问阶段。你有没有带来所需的签名原件？鲍林已经带在身边，一共有好几卷，且已用红色封面装订成册。 然后，听证会重要的一幕开始上演：你带来了请愿书散发者名单的书面材料吗？ 鲍林还来不及开口回答，听证室后排座位上站起来一个很难形容的男子，高声宣布自己就是协助散发请愿书的人之一，并称他因此而感到十分自豪。鲍林回过头来想看看是谁。全场突然响起了一片掌声。此人名为赫伯特·杰赫尔，本地的一位大学教授。他先向托德深深鞠了一躬，转过来又向听众弯腰致礼，然后就坐了下去。鲍林会心地笑了起来。 鲍林然后转身面向托德，回答了他的问题。“我不想让这些人成为小组委员会进行政治报复的对象，”他说。“我本可以同意这样做，使自己得到保护，但是，我必须首先保护那些无力保护自己的人。”他仍拒绝提供散发者的名单。 这一时刻，人们预料托德会站起身来，指控鲍林蔑视国会。会场上鸦雀无声，大家都在屏息等待将会发生什么结果。然而，预料的高潮并未出现。托德只是简单地说，“很好，”然后对他的首席顾问索怀恩使了一个眼色。 这第二次听证会的真实企图终于显露出来了。鲍林不会背上蔑视国会的罪名，但也得不到新的机会充当自我牺牲的英雄。接下去又将是老一套的忠诚调查。索怀恩一句也没有询问散发请愿书的事，却不厌其烦地查问鲍林作为共产主义事业支持者的详细背景。你到过东柏林吗？你是否会见过罗森伯格？你有没有参加旧金山抗议非美活动调查委员会的活动？ 中午休会时，鲍林在大厅里碰到了一个怒气冲冲的年轻人。他对鲍林说，应当将鲍林驱逐出境。鲍林回答道，那可是一个大问题，因为他本人是土生土长的美国人，没有地方可以去。 下午，索怀恩又提出了一系列索然无味的问题——有些问题甚至是荒唐可笑的——你是否清楚，在你的请愿书上签名的苏联科学院院士中，有些人是共产党员？有些问题则别有所指，全是为了证明鲍林已腑首听命于共产党的目标和意图，并且与他们一鼻孔出气。你是否知道，在你的请愿书上签名的人中，有一个日本人汤川秀澍博士，他曾得到过列宁奖金？不，鲍林回答道，他只知道秀澍博士得到过诺贝尔物理学奖①。你是否支持过马丁·卡门在申领护照问题上的斗争？根据调查，他曾向俄国人传送秘密情报，因而被剥夺了出国的权利。鲍林回答说，他参加了这一斗争，然而，他提醒索怀恩，卡门已经得到平反昭雪，且已恢复名誉，他打赢了这场官司，后来又重新领到了护照。正如《纽约时报》专栏撰稿人穆雷·肯普顿指出的那样，表面上看，鲍林是在“接受审查，然而，大家心里明白，他根本就不应受到审查”。 ①汤川秀澍（1907—l981），日本物理学家，曾任京都基础物理研究所所长（1953—1970），提出一种使核结合在一起的核力理论，预言介子的存在，获1949年诺贝尔物理学奖。 在下午的会议上，威林搞到了托德那份开场白的全文，了解到后面六页对鲍林进行了直接攻击，在“与共产党控制的组织关系暧昧或支持共产党活动”的罪名下，罗列了二十几个鲍林有过联系的可疑团体的名称。在中午休会期间，参议院国内安全小组委员会就向媒体散发了这份声明。看来，参议员托德心里在打着算盘，这一次，鲍林肯定只能充当为自己辩护的角色了。 听证会在沉闷拖沓的气氛中缓慢进行。索怀恩询问了鲍林有关三十多个团体和二十五名个人的情况。采用的仍然是好莱坞式装模作样的岁月里沿袭下来的那套标准的程式和节奏：你认识在你的请愿书上签名的某某先生吗？你知道某某先生曾被指控是一个众所周知的共产党阵线组织的一名成员吗？你曾是某某组织的一名成员吗？你是否知道，某某团体曾被非美活动调查委员会列为共产党阵线的一个组织吗？这一切，实在是全凭联想来扼杀个性的一种训练，极尽诋毁之能事的一幕闹剧！ 经过五个小时的听证，这幕闹剧总算收场了。托德大步走到鲍林跟前，说，“并不是什么大不了的事，是不是？”鲍林转过身来，根本就没有理睬，径直走了出去。