[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 3, Chapters 10 - 14]
[Chapter 11. Questions of Privilege]
[C. Basis of Questions of Privilege of the House]
[Â§ 16. Service of Process on House, Its Officers, or Employees]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 1626-1637]
 
                               CHAPTER 11
 
                         Questions of Privilege
 
            C. BASIS OF QUESTIONS OF PRIVILEGE OF THE HOUSE
 
Sec. 16. Service of Process on House, Its Officers, or Employees

Service of Process Naming the House

Sec. 16.1 The receipt of a summons and complaint naming the House of 
    Representatives as the defendant in a civil action pending in a 
    federal court raises a question of the privilege of the House.

    On Dec. 13, 1973,(7) the Speaker (8) laid 
before the House as a matter giving rise to a question of the privilege 
of the House the following summons:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. 119 Cong. Rec. 41258, 93d Cong. 1st Sess. For additional examples 
        see 118 Cong. Rec. 29136, 92d Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 18, 1972; 
        118 Cong. Rec. 17398, 92d Cong. 2d Sess., May 16, 1972; and 117 
        Cong. Rec. 1503, 92d Cong. 1st Sess., Feb. 3, 1971.
 8. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                         Summons in a Civil Action
    [In the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of 
        California, civil action file No. C 73 2092GBH]

        Earle Ray Esgate, Plaintiff, v. Donald E. Johnson, Board of 
    Veterans Appeals, the United States House of Representatives, the 
    United States Senate, the President of the United States, as 
    Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, and as 
    Co-Defendant United States Army and United States Army Medical 
    Corps.
        To the above named Defendant: You are hereby summoned and 
    required to serve upon The plaintiff; acting as his own attorney 
    and whose address is below: plaintiff's attorney, whose address 
    Earle Ray Esgate, 1099 Topaz Ave. Apt. 6, San Jose, California, 
    95117, Phone 296-8182 an answer to the complaint which is herewith 
    served upon you within 60 days after service of this summons upon 
    you, exclusive of

[[Page 1627]]

    the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will 
    be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.
        Date: December 5, 1973.
                                                F. R. Pettigrew,
                                                   Clerk of Court.
                                                       C. Cowne,
                                                     Deputy Clerk.

        [Seal of Court.]

    Along with the summons, the Speaker presented two letters written 
by the Clerk, W. Pat Jennings, relating to the summons:

                                              Washington, D. C.,
                                                December 12, 1973.
                                                   Hon. Carl Albert,
                                                        The Speaker,
                                           House of Representatives.

            Dear Mr. Speaker: On December 11, 1973 I have been served a 
        summons and copy of the complaint in a Civil Action through the 
        United States Marshal by certified mail number 197884 that was 
        issued by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of 
        California.
            The Summons requires the Congress of the United States to 
        answer the complaint within sixty days after service.
            The Summons and complaint in question are attached, and the 
        matter is presented for such action as the House in its wisdom 
        may see fit to take.
            With kind regards, I am,
                                                W. Pat Jennings,
                                  Clerk, House of Representatives.

                                               Washington, D.C.,
                                                December 12, 1973.
                                                Hon. Robert H. Bork,
                 Acting Attorney General of the United States, U.S. 
                             Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.

            Dear Mr. Bork: I am sending you a certified copy of a 
        summons and complaint in Civil Action No. C 73 2092GBH filed 
        against the United States House of Representatives and others 
        in the United States District Court for the Northern District 
        of California, and served upon me through the U.S. Marshal by 
        certified mail No. 197884 on December 11, 1973.
            In accordance with 2 U.S.C. 118 I have sent a certified 
        copy of the Summons and Complaint in this action to the U.S. 
        Attorney for the Northern District of California requesting 
        that he take appropriate action under the supervision and 
        direction of the Attorney General. I am also sending you a copy 
        of the letter I forwarded this date to the U.S. Attorney.
            With kind regards, I am,
            Sincerely,
                                                W. Pat Jennings,
                                  Clerk, House of Representatives.

    Under the provisions of 2 USC Sec. 118, the United States Attorney 
is obliged to appear and defend, upon request of an officer of either 
House of Congress, actions brought against such officer on account of 
anything done in discharge of official duties. Thereafter, the defense 
of the case is under the supervision and direction of the Attorney 
General.

Service of Process on House Officers

Sec. 16.2 The receipt of a summons and complaint naming the Speaker in 
    his official capacity as a defendant in a civil action brought in a 
    federal court raises a question

[[Page 1628]]

    of the privilege of the House, and the matter is laid before the 
    House for its consideration.

    On Feb. 5, 1973,(9) the Speaker (10) laid 
before the House as a matter giving rise to a question of the privilege 
of the House the following summons:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 119 Cong. Rec. 3207, 93d Cong. 1st Sess. For additional 
        illustrations see 119 Cong. Rec. 29, 93d Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 
        3, 1973; 118 Cong. Rec. 17398, 92d Cong. 2d Sess., May 16, 
        1972; 115 Cong. Rec. 24002 91st Con. 1st Sess., Sept. 3, 1969; 
        and 111 Cong. Rec. 2645, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Feb. 11, 1965.
10. Carl Albert (Okla.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  Summons

        The Regent Cecil J. Williams Plaintiff v. Carl Albert, M.C. 
    Speaker, et al. Defendants.
        To the above named Defendant: Carl Albert, M.C., Speaker.
        You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon the Regent 
    Cecil J. Williams, P.P., whose address is 1417 N Street, N.W., 
    Washington, D. C. 20005, an answer to the complaint which is 
    herewith served upon you, within 60 days after service of this 
    summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to 
    do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief 
    demanded in the complaint.
                                                 James F. Davey,
                                                   Clerk of Court.
                                                  Rubin Cuellar,
                                                     Deputy Clerk.

        Date: January 5, 1973.

    Following the presentation of the summons, the Speaker advised the 
House that he had, pursuant to 2 USC Sec. 118, requested the U.S. 
Attorney to represent him in the action. (11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. Civil Action File No. 27-73 (U.S.D.C. D. D.C.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 16.3 The receipt of a summers and complaint naming the Clerk of 
    the House of Representatives in his official capacity as a 
    defendant in a civil action brought in a federal court gives rise 
    to a question of the privilege of the House, and the matter is laid 
    before the House for its consideration.

    On Mar. 26, 1973,(12) the Speaker (13) laid 
before the House as a matter involving a question of the privilege of 
the House a communication from the Clerk of the House advising that he 
had been served with a summons and com

[[Page 1629]]

plaint as a defendant in a civil action (14) brought in the 
Federal District Court for the District of Columbia and further 
advising that he had pursuant to 2 USC Sec. 118, requested the U.S. 
Attorney for the District of Columbia to represent him in the action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 119 Cong. Rec. 9452, 93d Cong. 1st Sess. For further examples see 
        119 Cong. Rec. 29, 93d Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 3, 1973; 118 Cong. 
        Rec. 34040, 92d Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 5, 1972; 118 Cong. Rec. 
        15311, 92d Cong. 2d Sess., May 2, 1972; 118 Cong. Rec. 5025, 
        92d Cong. 2d Sess., Feb. 22, 1972; and 116 Cong. Rec. 31182, 
        91st Cong. 2d Sess., Sept. 10, 1970.
13. Carl Albert (Okla.).
14. Mauro v Jennings et al., Civil Action File No. 447-73 (U.S.D.C. D. 
        D.C.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 16.4 The receipt of a summons and complaint naming the Sergeant at 
    Arms of the House of Representatives in his official capacity as a 
    defendant in a civil action brought in a federal court raises a 
    question of the privilege of the House, and the matter is laid 
    before the House for its consideration.

    On July 16, 1973,(15) the Speaker (16) laid 
before the House as a question of the privilege of the House a 
communication from the Sergeant at Arms advising that he had been 
served with a summons and complaint as a defendant in a civil action 
(17) brought in the U.S. District Court for the District of 
Columbia and further advising that he had, pursuant to 2 USC Sec. 118, 
requested the U.S. Attorney to represent him in the action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 119 Cong. Rec. 23961, 23962, 93d Cong. 1st Sess. For additional 
        examples see 116 Cong. Rec. 28502, 91st Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 
        12, 1970; and 109 Cong. Rec. 10359, 88th Cong. 1st Sess., June 
        6, 1963.
16. Carl Albert (Okla.).
17. Consumers Union of the United States, Inc. v Kenneth R. Harding, 
        Sergeant at Arms of the House of Representatives et al., Civil 
        Action File No. 1328-73 (U.S.D.C. D. D.C.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Service of Supplemental Petition on House Officers

Sec. 16.5 The receipt of a supplemental petition naming House officers 
    as individual defendants in a civil action already pending in 
    federal court against the House and other of its officers and 
    Members raises a question of the privilege of the House, and the 
    matter is submitted to the House for its consideration.

    On Oct. 10, 1972,(18) the Speaker (19) laid 
before the House as a matter involving a question of the privilege of 
the House a communication from the clerk advising that he had received 
an amending and supplemental petition in connection with a case 
(20) pending before the U.S. District Court for the

[[Page 1630]]

Eastern Division of Louisiana naming the Clerk and Sergeant at Arms of 
the House of Representatives as additional defendants in the action and 
further advising that he had, pursuant to 2 USC Sec. 118, requested the 
U.S. Attorney for the Eastern Division of Louisiana to represent them 
in the action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. 118 Cong. Rec. 34583, 92d Cong. 2d Sess.
19. Carl Albert (Okla.).
20. Hillary v U.S. House of Representatives, Albert, Colmer, et al., 
        Civil Action File No. 72-1126.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Service on Capitol Architect

Sec. 16.6 The receipt of a summons and complaint naming the Acting 
    Architect of the Capitol in his official capacity as a defendant in 
    a civil action brought in a federal court gives rise to a question 
    of the privilege of the House and the matter is laid before the 
    House for its consideration.

    On Aug. 12, 1970,(1) the Speaker (2) laid 
before the House a communication from the Acting Architect of the 
Capitol informing the House that he had been served with a summons and 
complaint as a defendant in a civil action (3) brought in 
the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia and advising 
the House that he had, pursuant to 28 USC Sec. 516, requested the 
Department of Justice to represent him in the action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 116 Cong. Rec. 28502, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
 2. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
 3. Civil Action File No. 2296-70 (U.S.D.C. D. D.C.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Service of Process on the Clerk

Sec. 16.7 The Clerk having been served with process, including a 
    subpoena duces tecum issued by a federal court in a civil action, 
    informed the Speaker who laid the matter before the House.

    On Nov. 15, 1973,(4) the Speaker (5) laid 
before the House as a matter involving a question of the privilege of 
the House a communication from the Clerk of the House advising that he 
had been served with a subpena and a notice of the taking of a 
deposition issued by the U.S. District Court for the District of 
Columbia commanding his appearance for the purpose of testifying and 
producing certain House documents and records in connection with the 
case of Nader et al. v Butz et al. (6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 4. 119 Cong. Rec. 37136, 37137, 93d Cong. 1st Sess. For additional 
        examples see 118 Cong. Rec. 6326, 92d Cong. 2d Sess., Mar. 1, 
        1972; 117 Cong. Rec. 47667, 92d Cong. 1st Sess., Dec. 17, 1971; 
        117 Cong. Rec. 47185, 92d Cong. 1st Sess., Dec. 15, 1971; and 
        117 Cong. Rec. 39512, 92d Cong. 1st Sess., Nov. 5, 1971.
 5. Carl Albert (Okla.).
 6. Civil Action File No. 148-72 (U.S.D.C. D. D.C.).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 1631]]

    Following the presentation of the communication, the House agreed 
to a privileged resolution (7) offered by Mr. Thomas P. 
O'Neill, Jr., of Massachusetts, authorizing the Clerk or his designated 
agent to appear in response to the subpena but permitting the 
production of certified copies of only those subpenaed House papers and 
documents subsequently determined by the court to be material and 
relevant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. H. Res. 705.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 16.8 The Clerk of the House of Representatives, having received a 
    subpena duces tecum from a state court, reported the matter to the 
    Speaker who laid it before the House.

    On Apr. 24, 1958,(8) the Speaker (9) laid 
before the House as a matter involving the question of the privilege of 
the House the following communication from the Clerk of the House:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. 104 Cong. Rec. 7262, 7263, 85th Cong. 2d Sess.
 9. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).

                                                   April 17, 1958.
    The Honorable the Speaker,
    House of Representatives.

        Sir: From the Superior Court of the 26th Judicial District of 
    North Carolina I have received a subpena duces tecum, directed to 
    me as Clerk of the House of Representatives, to appear before said 
    court as a witness in the case of Anna Mae Allen et al. v. Southern 
    Railway Company et al., and to bring with me certain and sundry 
    papers therein described in the files of the House of 
    Representatives.
        The rules and practice of the House of Representatives 
    indicates that the Clerk may not, either voluntarily or in 
    obedience to a subpena duces tecum, produce such papers without the 
    consent of the House being first obtained. It is further indicated 
    that he may not supply copies of certain of the documents and 
    papers requested without such consent.
        The subpena in question is herewith attached, and the matter is 
    presented for such action as the House in its wisdom may see fit to 
    take.
          Very truly yours,
                                             Ralph R. Roberts,
                                            Clerk, United States
                                         House of Representatives.

    Following the presentation of the communication and the reading of 
the subpena to the House, a resolution (10) was offered by 
Mr. John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, authorizing the Clerk to 
appear in response to the subpena but permitting the production of 
certified copies of only those subpenaed House papers and documents 
subsequently determined by the court to be material and relevant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. H. Res. 547.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 16.9 The Clerk of the House of Representatives, having

[[Page 1632]]

    received a subpena to appear and testify before a court of the 
    District of Columbia in a criminal case, informed the Speaker who 
    laid the matter before the House.

    On July 13, 1965,(11) the Speaker (12) laid 
before the House as a matter raising the question of the privilege of 
the House, a communication from the Clerk of the House advising that he 
had received a subpena commanding his appearance for the purpose of 
testifying before the criminal bench of the District of Columbia Court 
of General Sessions in connection with U.S. v Washington. 
(13) Following the presentation of the communication and the 
reading of the subpena, the House agreed to a resolution 
(14) offered by Mr. John E. Moss, Jr., of California, 
authorizing the Clerk to appear and testify.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 111 Cong. Rec. 16592, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
12. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
13. Criminal Case No. U.S. 5379-65, U.S. 5380-65.
14. H. Res. 469.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Service of Subpena on the Doorkeeper

Sec. 16.10 When the Doorkeeper of the House of Representatives receives 
    a subpena duces tecum from a federal district court he reports the 
    facts to the Speaker who lays the matter before the House.

    On Apr. 13, 1961,(15) the Speaker (16) rose 
to a question of the privilege of the House and laid before the House a 
communication from the Doorkeeper of the House advising that he had 
received a subpena directing his appearance as a witness and the 
production of certain described papers before the U.S. District Court 
for the District of Columbia in connection with U.S. v Taylor. 
(17) Following the presentation of the communication, the 
House agreed to a privileged resolution (18) offered by Mr. 
John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts, authorizing the Doorkeeper to 
appear in response to the subpena, but permitting the production of 
certified copies of only those subpenaed House papers and documents 
subsequently determined by the court to be material and relevant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 107 Cong. Rec. 5851, 5852, 87th Cong. 1st Sess.
16. Sam Rayburn (Tex.).
17. Criminal Case No. 965-60.
18. H. Res. 256.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Service of Subpena on the Sergeant at Arms

Sec. 16.11 The Sergeant at Arms of the House of Representa

[[Page 1633]]

    tives, having received a subpena from a federal court, reported the 
    facts to the Speaker who laid the matter before the House.

    On Mar. 3, 1960,(19) the Speaker pro tempore 
(20) laid before the House as a matter raising the question 
of the privilege of the House a communication from the Sergeant at 
Arms, as follows:

19. 106 Cong. Rec. 4393, 86th Cong. 2d Sess. An additional example 
        supporting this point may be found at 100 Cong. Rec. 1162, 83d 
        Cong. 2d Sess., Feb. 2, 1954.
20. John W. McCormack (Mass.).

                                                    March 3, 1960.
    The Honorable Sam Rayburn,
    Speaker of the House of Representatives,
    Washington, D.C.

        Dear Mr. Speaker: From the District Court of the United States 
    for the Southern District of New York, I have received a subpena 
    directing the Sergeant at Arms to appear before said court as a 
    witness in the case of the United States v Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. 
    (No. 35-208).
        The subpena in question is herewith attached, and the matter is 
    presented for such action as the House in its wisdom may see fit to 
    take.
          Respectfully,
                                          Zeake W. Johnson, Jr.,
                                                 Sergeant at Arms.

The Speaker pro tempore then instructed the Clerk to read the subpena 
to the House. At the conclusion of the reading, a privileged resolution 
(1) offered by Mr. Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, authorizing the 
Sergeant at Arms to appear in response to the subpena was agreed to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. H. Res. 465.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 16.12 The Sergeant at Arms of the House of Representatives, having 
    received a subpena to appear and testify before a criminal court of 
    the District of Columbia, informed the Speaker who laid the matter 
    before the House.

    On July 13, 1965,(2) the Speaker (3) laid 
before the House as a matter involving a question of the privilege of 
the House a communication from the Sergeant at Arms advising that he 
had received a subpena directing his appearance to testify before the 
criminal branch of the District of Columbia Court of General Sessions 
in connection with U.S. v Washington.(4) After the reading 
of the subpena by the Clerk, a resolution (5) was offered by 
Mr. Hale Boggs, of Louisiana, authorizing the Sergeant at Arms to 
appear and testify. The resolution was

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 111 Cong. Rec. 16529, 89th Cong. 1st Sess.
 3. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
 4. Criminal Case No. U.S. 5379-65, U.S. 5380-65.
 5. H. Res. 456.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 1634]]

agreed to, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Service of Subpenas on House Employees

Sec. 16.13 An employee of the House having received a subpena duces 
    tecum in a federal civil action seeking his testimony and the 
    production of House records in his possession, his superior 
    informed the Speaker who laid the matter before the House.

    On Apr. 25, 1966,(6) the Speaker (7) laid 
before the House as a matter involving a question of the privilege of 
the House a communication from the Clerk of the House advising that an 
employee under his authority had been served with a subpena duces tecum 
commanding his appearance for the purpose of testifying and producing 
certain House records before the U.S. District Court for the District 
of Columbia in connection with Siamis v Chizzo.(8) Following 
the presentation of the communication, the House agreed to a resolution 
(9) offered by Mr. Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, authorizing the 
employee to appear in response to the subpena but permitting the 
production of certified copies of only those subpenaed House papers and 
documents subsequently determined by the court to be material and I 
relevant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. 112 Cong. Rec. 8786, 89th Cong. 2d Sess. For further illustrations 
        see 102 Cong. Rec. 7588, 84th Cong. 2d Sess., May 7, 1956; and 
        101 Cong. Rec. 1215, 84th Cong. 1st Sess., Feb. 7, 1955.
 7. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
 8. Civil Action File No. 1471-63 (U.S.D.C. D. D.C.)
 9. H. Res. 825.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Service of Grand Jury Subpenas on House Officers

Sec. 16.14 The Clerk of the House of Representatives having received a 
    subpena duces tecum from a federal grand jury, informed the Speaker 
    who laid the matter before the House.

    On Feb. 20, 1973,(10) the Speaker (11) laid 
before the House as a matter involving a question of the privilege of 
the House a communication from the Clerk of the House advising that he 
had been served with a subpena duces tecum commanding his appear

[[Page 1635]]

ance and the production of certain House records before the grand jury 
of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. Following 
the Speaker's insertion of the subpena in the Record, the House agreed 
to a privileged resolution (12) offered by Mr. Thomas P. 
O'Neill, Jr., of Massachusetts, authorizing the Clerk to appear in 
response to the subpena but permitting the production of certified 
copies of only those subpenaed House papers and documents subsequently 
determined by the court to be material and relevant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. 119 Cong. Rec. 4490, 93d Cong. 1st Sess. For further illustrations 
        see 118 Cong. Rec. 28285, 92d Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 15, 1972; 
        115 Cong. Rec. 32005, 91st Cong. 1st Sess., Oct. 29, 1969; and 
        113 Cong. Rec. 29374-76, 90th Cong. 1st Sess., Oct. 19, 1967.
11. Carl Albert (Okla.).
12. H. Res. 221.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 16.15 The Sergeant at Arms of the House of Representatives having 
    been served with a subpena duces tecum from a federal grand jury, 
    informed the Speaker who laid the matter before the House.

    On Jan. 16, 1968,(13) the Speaker (14) laid 
before the House as a question of the privilege of the House a 
communication from the Sergeant at Arms of the House advising that he 
had received a subpena duces tecum directing his appearance and the 
production of certain original records before the grand jury of the 
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. After the reading of 
the subpena by the Clerk, a privileged resolution (15) was 
offered by Mr. Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, authorizing the Sergeant at 
Arms to appear and deliver the requested papers and documents in 
response to the subpena. The resolution was agreed to, and a motion to 
reconsider was laid on the table.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 114 Cong. Rec. 80, 81, 90th Cong. 2d Sess. For additional examples 
        see 113 Cong. Rec. 17561, 90th Cong. 1st Sess., June 27, 1967; 
        111 Cong. Rec. 5338, 89th Cong. 1st Sess., Mar. 18, 1965; and 
        99 Cong. Rec. 5523, 83d Cong. 1st Sess., May 25, 1953.
14. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
15. H. Res. 1022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Service of Grand Jury Subpenas on House Employees

Sec. 16.16 Where an employee of the House received a subpena duces 
    tecum issued by a federal grand jury, his superior informed the 
    Speaker who laid the matter before the House.

    On Oct. 19, 1967,(16) the Speaker (17) laid 
before the House as a question of the privilege of the House a 
communication from the Clerk advising that an employee under his 
jurisdiction had been served with a subpena duces

[[Page 1636]]

tecum commanding his appearance for the purpose of testifying before 
the grand jury of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. 
The House then agreed to a privileged resolution (18) 
offered by Mr. Carl Albert, of Oklahoma, authorizing the Speaker to 
permit the employee to appear in response to the subpena.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 113 Cong. Rec. 29375, 29376, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
17. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
18. H. Res. 950.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Service of Court-martial Subpena

Sec. 16.17 The Clerk of the House of Representatives, having received a 
    subpena duces tecum from a general court-martial, informed the 
    Speaker who laid the matter before the House.

    On Nov. 17, 1970,(19) the Speaker (20) laid 
before the House as a matter involving a question of the privilege of 
the House a communication from the Clerk advising that he was in 
receipt of a subpena duces tecum commanding his appearance as a witness 
and the production of certain House subcommittee executive session 
transcripts before a general court-martial of the United States 
convened at Ft. Benning, Georgia. At the Speaker's instruction the 
subpena was then read by the Clerk to the House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. 116 Cong. Rec. 37652-54, 91st Cong. 2d Sess.
20. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Parliamentarian's Note: The Clerk's office was advised (1) that the 
Committee on Armed Services, and not the Clerk, was the proper 
custodian of executive session testimony taken before its subcommittee 
and that an employee of that committee should have been the recipient 
of the subpenas; and (2) that the requested executive session testimony 
could not, under the provisions of House Resolution 15 (91st Congress) 
be released by any officer or employee of the House during an 
adjournment; but that (3) the Committee on Armed Services could meet 
and, pursuant to the House rules, order the testimony to be made 
public.
    The House took no further action on the subpenas.

Service of Notice of Taking of Deposition

Sec. 16.18 The Clerk of the House, having been served with a notice of 
    taking of a deposition in a civil action in which he had been named 
    as a defendant in his official capacity, informed the Speaker who 
    laid the matter before the House.

[[Page 1637]]

    On Mar. 15, 1973,(1) the Speaker (2) laid 
before the House as a matter involving the question of the privilege of 
the House a communication from the Clerk advising that he had been 
served with a notice of the taking of a deposition in connection with a 
civil action (3) pending in the U.S. District Court for the 
District of Columbia. Subsequently, on Mar. 19, 1973,(4) the 
House agreed to a privileged resolution (5) offered by Mr. 
John J. McFall, of California, authorizing the Clerk to respond to the 
notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 119 Cong. Rec. 7955, 7956, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
 2. Carl Albert (Okla.).
 3. Common Cause v W. Patrick Jennings et al., Civil Action File No. 
        2379-72 (U.S.D.C. D. D.C.).
 4. 119 Cong. Rec. 8485, 93d Cong. 1st Sess.
 5. H. Res. 313.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


