The Nation: Whatever the Result, Let Us Proceed

I have what I consider the most solemn and substantial assurances of my absolute independence. There are absolutely no restraints on my freedom to seek evidence, including presidential tapes and documents.

-Special Watergate Prosecutor Leon Jaworski, Nov. 8

Solemn assurances have a way of evaporating under pressure in Richard Nixon's White House, as Prosecutor Jaworski discovered to his dismay last week. With Nixon pursuing yet another twist in his survival strategy;this time one of delay and resistance to continuing demands for Watergate evidence -a new clash loomed between President and prosecutor. Echoing Archibald Cox, the special prosecutor Nixon had fired last October for refusing to desist from pursuing presidential evidence, Jaworski said that he will not hesitate to go into court to get whatever White House documents and tapes he considers vital to his investigation (see box next page).

Jaworski conceded in an ABC television interview that much evidence had been acquired from the White House-a quantity later detailed by Deputy Presidential Press Secretary Gerald Warren as 17 tapes and some 700 documents. But the special prosecutor disputed Nix on's public statement that all of the material had been surrendered "voluntarily." Said Jaworski: "Any idea that this material has been spoon-fed to me is in error. I have had to go after it. I have had to designate precisely what I wanted." It is, of course, the nature of specific evidence, rather than mere quantity of documents, that is significant to a prosecutor.

Historic Vote. In his tug of war with the President, Jaworski held a strong advantage. The previous legal battle waged for similar documents by Cox had been victorious on two court levels-and likely would succeed again. Nor could Nixon afford to risk another public explosion by firing Jaworski, as he had Cox. The President apparently is gambling on the White House belief that the public, weary of Watergate, wants the affair swiftly resolved. Despite Nixon's State of the Union declaration that "one year of Watergate is enough," however, no quick resolution-short of resignation-is likely.

If there had been any doubts about that, they were convincingly erased last week in an historic vote by the House authorizing its Judiciary Committee to "investigate fully and completely whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise its constitutional power to impeach Richard M. Nixon, President of the United States of America."

Although by no means a test of sentiment on whether Nixon should, indeed, be impeached, the overwhelming vote of 410 to 4*was a powerful demonstration that the House is united on the need for an inquiry. Only the second such move in U.S. history, the vote was one of the highest "yea" counts ever recorded on a major issue before the House.

With galleries only half filled despite the portentous occasion, House Judiciary Chairman Peter Rodino introduced the authorizing resolution by aptly quoting what British Statesman Edmund Burke had said in 1771 when the British Parliament was considering an impeachment case. "We stand in a situation very honorable to ourselves and very useful to our country, if we do not abuse or abandon the trust that is placed in us," said Rodino.