Skip to main content

Full text of "Special Senate investigation on charges and countercharges involving: Secretary of the Army Robert T. Stevens, John G. Adams, H. Struve Hensel and Senator Joe McCarthy, Roy M. Cohn, and Francis P. Carr. Hearings before the Special Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Government Operations, United States Senate, Eighty-third Congress, second session, pursuant to S. Res. 189 .."

See other formats


rG" 


"^^^HsU^IE 


I^T  <?  <:rr-D 


pr 


SPECIAL  SENATE  INVESTIGATION  ON  CHARGES 
AND  COUNTERCHARGES  INVOLVING:  SECRE- 
TARY OF  THE  ARMY  ROBERT  T.  STEVENS,  JOHN 
G.  ADAMS,  H.  STRUVE  HENSEL  AND   SENATOR 

JOE  McCarthy,  roy  m.  cohn,  and 

FRANCIS  p.  CARR 


HEARING  ,,.| 

BEFORE  THE 

SPECIAL  SUBCOMMITTEE  ON 
INVESTIGATIONS  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON 

GOVERNMENT  OPERATIONS 
UNITED  STATES  SENATE 

EIGHTY-THIRD  CONGRESS 

SECOND  SESSION 
PURSUANT  TO 

S.  Res.  189 


PART  5 


APRIL  26,  1954 


Printed  for  the  use  of  the  Committee  on  Government  Operations 


UNITED  STATES 
GOVERNMENT  PRINTING  OFFICE 
46620»  WASHINGTON  :  1954 


PubVic  Ubrary 
Superiatendet-t  ol 

JUL  1 5  m 


COMMITTEE  ON  GOVERNMENT  OPERATIONS 

JOSEPH  R.  MCCARTHY,  Wisconsin,  Chairman 

KARL  E.  MUNDT,  South  Dakota  JOHN  L.  McCLELLAN,  Arlcansas 

MARGARET  CHASE  SMITH,  Maine  HUBERT  H.  HUMPHKEY,  Minnesota 

HENRY  C.  DWORSHAK,  Idaho  HENRY  M.  JACKSON,  Washington 

EVERETT  McKINEEY  DIRKSEN,  Illinois        JOHN  F.  KENNEDY,  Massachusetts 
JOHN  MARSHALL  BUTLER,  Maryland  STUART  SYMINGTON,  Missouri 

CHARLES  E.  POTTER,  Michigan  ALTON  A.  LENNON,  North  Carolina 

RiCHAiiD  J.  O'Melia,  General  Counncl 
Walteu  L.  Reynolds,  Chief  Clerk 


Special  Subcommittee  on  Investigations 

KARL  E.  MUNDT,  South  Dakota,  Chairman 
EVERETT  McKINLEY  DIRKSEN,  Illinois        JOHN  L.  McCLELLAN,  Arkansas 
CHARLES  E.  POTTER,  Michigan  HENRY  M.  JACKSON,  Washington 

HENRY  C.  DWORSHAK,  Idaho  STUART  SYMINGTON,  Missouri 

Rat  H.  Jenkins,  Chief  Cotnisel 

Thomas  R.  Prewitt,  Assistant  Counsel 

Robert  A.  Collier,  Assistant  Counsel 

SoLis  HORwiTz,  Assistant  Counsel 

Charles  A.  Maner,  Secretary 


L 


CONTENTS 


Page 
Testimony  of  Hon.  Eobort  T.  Stevens,  Secretary,  Department  of  the  Army_      178 


ni 


SPECIAL  SENATE  INVESTIGATION  ON  CHARGES  AND 
COUNTERCHARGES  INVOLVING:  SECRETARY  OF  THE 
ARMY  ROBERT  T.  STEVENS,  JOHN  G.  ADAMS,  H.  STRUVE 
HENSEL  AND  SENATOR  JOE  MCCARTHY,  ROY  M.  COHN, 
AND  FRANCIS  P.  CARR 


MONDAY,   APRIL   26,   1954 

United  States  Senate, 
Special  Subcommittee  on  Investigations  or  the 

Committee  on  Go\'ernment  Operations, 

Washington^  D.  C. 

The  subcommittee  met  at  10 :  30  a.  m.,  pursuant  to  recess,  in  the 
caucus  room  of  the  Senate  Office  Building,  Senator  Karl  E.  Mundt, 
chairman,  presiding. 

Present:  Senator  Karl  E.  ]\Iundt,  Republican,  South  Dakota; 
Senator  Everett  McKinley  Dirksen,  Republican,  Illinois;  Senator 
Charles  E.  Potter,  Republican,  Michigan;  Senator  Henry  C.  Dwor- 
shak,  Republican,  Idaho;  Senator  John  L.  McClellan,  Democrat, 
Arkansas;  Senator  Henry  M.  Jackson,  Democrat,  Washington;  and 
Senator  Stuart  Symington,  Democrat,  Missouri. 

Also  present :  Ray  H.  Jenkins,  chief  counsel  to  the  subcommittee ; 
Thomas  R.  Prewitt,  assistant  counsel;  Ruth  Y.  Watt,  chief  clerk. 

Principal  participants :  Senator  Joseph  R.  McCarthy,  a  United 
States  Senator  from  the  State  of  W^isconsin;  Roy  M.  Colin,  chief 
counsel  to  the  subcommittee;  Francis  P.  Carr,  executive  director  of 
the  subcommittee;  Hon.  Robert  T.  Stevens,  Secretary  of  the  Army; 
John  G.  Adams,  counselor  to  the  Army ;  H.  Struve  Hensel,  Assistant 
Secretary  of  Defense ;  Joseph  N.  W^elch,  special  counsel  for  the  Army ; 
James  D.  St.  Clair,  special  counsel  for  the  Army ;  and  Frederick  P. 
Bryan,  counsel  to  H.  Struve  Hensel,  Assistant  Secretary  of  Defense. 

Senator  JNIundt.  The  committee  will  please  come  to  order. 

The  Chair  wishes  to  express  its  appreciation  to  Mr.  Carroway  for 
having  installed  a  new  loudspeaker  system  which  I  understand  is 
operating  much  more  effectively  from  the  standpoint  of  our  visitors 
in  the  room  and  the  members  of  the  press  than  the  previous  one. 

I  have  been  asked  to  state  that  Senator  Dirksen  is  attending  an  im- 
portant conference  which  will  not  detain  him  perhaps  more  than  15  or 
20  minutes  at  the  outside.  But  he  wanted  me  to  explain  the  reason 
why  has  was  not  here  at  the  beginning,  but  he  w^ill  be  here  shortly 
thereafter. 

The  committee  will  now  come  to  order,  and  Mr.  Stevens  is  here  and 
he  is  seated  at  the  witness  table. 

Here  is  Senator  Dirksen  in  response  to  my  promise.  And  our 
counsel,  Mr.  Jenkins,  will  proceed  with  the  interrogatories. 

177 


178  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  EGBERT  T.  STEVENS,  SECRETARY  OE  THE 

ARMY— Resumed 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Shall  we  proceed  now,  Mr.  Chairman  ? 

Senator  Mundt.  You  may  proceed. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Stevens,  on  last  Friday,  you  had  detailed  the 
events  of  November  7 ;  is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  correct,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Had  you  or  had  you  not  fully  covered  the  events  of 
that  day  when  you  were  dismissed  from  the  witness  stand  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir;  I  fully  covered  them,  Mr.  Jenkins. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  you  now  to  tell  this  committee  when  your 
next  contact  was  with  any  member  of  the  investigating  staff  at  which 
time  anything  was  discussed  with  reference  to  the  issues  in  this  case, 
and  particularly  whether  or  not  any  efforts  were  made  on  the  part 
of  any  member  of  the  staff  to  secure  preferential  treatment  for 
G.  David  Schine? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  "Well,  the  next  direct  connection  with  any  mem- 
ber of  the  staff  came  on  the  16th  of  November. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Will  you  tell  the  members  of  the  committee  what 
occurred  on  that  date  and  where  those  occurrences  took  place? 

Secretary  Si'eaens.  May  I  go  back  just  a  bit  in  doing  that,  sir? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  certainly  may. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Because  the  events  of  the  16th  of  November 
are  related  to  those  of  the  13th  of  November,  That  was  a  news 
conference  that  I  held  in  my  office  in  the  Pentagon.  The  newspapers 
were  very  much  interested  in  the  progress  of  the  Fort  IMonmouth 
investigation  and  in  other  items  of  Army  business.  The  important 
thing,  however,  so  far  as  this  hearing  is  concerned,  was  the  statement 
that  I  made  in  answer  to  a  question  to  the  effect  that  as  of  that 
date,  November  13,  I  knew  of  no  current  espionage  or  spying  at  Fort 
Monmouth. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  you  whether  or  not  you  have  an  exact 
copy  of  the  statement  you  made  to  the  press  on  November  13,  or  are 
you  speaking  from  memory  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  am  speaking  from  memory,  but  I  think  there 
possibly  may  be  one  available.    I  do  not  have  it  here,  Mr.  Jenkins. 

I  beg  your  pardon.    We  do  have  it  here. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Will  you  please  read  that  into  the  record? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  this  is  a  very  long 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Only  that  part  of  it  relating  to  your  statement  with 
respect  to  whether  or  not  there  was  any  current  espionage  at  Fort 
Monmouth. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  will  be  glad  to  do  that,  sir,  but  I  will  have 
to  go  through  it  and  find  out  where  it  was.  I  am  giving  you  the 
recollection  on  what  the  really  important  point  was  in  the  press 
conference. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  While  your  attorney  is  finding  that  portion  of  the 
statement  that  is  relevant,  will  you  pass  on  to  November  16,  and  then 
we  will  go  back  to  the  statement  given  the  press. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  on  November  16,  Mr.  Cohn  came  to 
my  office  with  Mr.  Carr,  and  they  indicated  that  Senator  McCarthy 
was  very  much  displeased  with  my  press  conference. 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  179 

Mr.  Jexkixs.  What,  precisely,  did  they  say,  Mr.  Secretary? 

Secretary  Stevkns.  ]\lr.  Cohii  said  that  Senator  McCarthy  was  mad, 
that  I  had  double-crossed  him,  and  words  to  that  effect. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  ]\Ir.  Secretary,  I  think  Senator  McCarthy  is  trying 
to  ^et  the  attention  of  the  Chair. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Mr.  Jenkins,  I  just  came  in  and  I  missed 
whether  or  not  you  developed  who  instigated  this  meeting,  whether 
Mr.  Cohn  did  or  INIr,  Can-  or  Mr.  Stevens? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  As  of  November  IG,  Senator? 

Senator  INIcCartiit.  The  one  that  we  are  talking  about  now. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Would  you  answer  the  question  asked  by  the  Senator 
from  Wisconsin  as  to  who  initiated  this  meeting  of  November  16? 

Secretary  Stevens.  INlr.  Cohn  initiated  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  ISIr.  Cohn  did.  Now  go  ahead  and  tell  the  events  of 
that  meeting  as  you  recall  them. 

Secretary  Stevens.  As  I  say,  Mr.  Cohn  indicated  that  Senator  Mc- 
Carthy was  very  mad  and  felt  that  I  had  double-crossed  him,  and  that 
he  did  not  believe  my  statement  to  the  press  was  a  correct  one.  Of 
course,  in  the  meanwhile  the  press  had  carried  what  I  had  said  to  a 
considerable  extent;  the  impact  of  which  was  that  I  as  of  that  date, 
November  13,  did  not  know  of  any  current  espionage  or  spying  at  Fort 
Monmouth. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  May  I  ask  you  while  you  are  that  subject,  did  you 
state  in  your  release  to  the  press  that  there  was  no  current  espionage 
at  Fort  Alonmouth,  or  did  you  state  there  was  none  that  you  knew  of? 

Senator  Mundt.  Before  you  answer,  Mr.  Secretary,  the  members  of 
the  committee  are  in  difficulty  because  there  is  a  new  light  added  up 
there  which  shines  in  our  eyes.  From  the  left  side  of  the  chairman  it 
is  difficult  even  to  see  the  witness.  I  think  that  light  has  either  been 
moved  closer  to  the  table,  or  it  has  been  made  brighter,  or  something. 
It  is  very  disturbing.  That  was  not  the  case  last  week.  "Wlioever  is 
in  charge  of  the  light,  please  take  the  necessary  corrective  steps. 

We  will  proceed, 

I  am  sorry  to  interrupt  and  if  you  do  not  have  the  question,  we  will 
ask  the  reporter  to  repeat  it. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  I  could  say,  sir,  I  didn't  make  any  state- 
ment, I  gave  out  no  press  release  as  I  recall  it,  and  it  was  a  question 
and  answer  period  with  the  press. 

I  think  the  important  thing  here  is  what  I  am  quoting  now  from 
this  draft,  I  said : 

So  far  as  the  Army  is  concerned,  it  did  not  have  any  proof  that  there  was  any 
espionage. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Those  were  your  exact  words  ? 
Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 
Mr.  Jenkins  (reading)  : 

So  far  as  the  Army  is  concerned,  it  has  no  proof  of  espionage. 

Secretary  STE^T.NS.  That  is  right. 
Mr.  Jenkins.  Is  that  correct  ? 
Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 
Mr.  Jenkins.  That  was  on  the  13tli  ? 
Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

]\Ir.  Jenkins.  Now,  you  were  discussing  a  conference  between  you 
and  Mr.  Cohn  and  Mr.  Carr  on  November  16.    Had  you  fully  related 


180  SPECIAL   mVESTIGATION 


I 


wliat  had  been  said  to  you  on  that  date  by  either  Mr.  Cohn  or  Mr. 
Carr? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  stated  the  main  points  to  Mr.  Jenkins, 
that  before  and  after  Senator  McCarthy  came  into  the  room,  I  said 
that  I  was  sorry  that  Senator  McCarthy  felt  as  Mr.  Cohn  indicated 
that  he  did,  but  I  certainly  hadn't  intended  to  have  any  such  effect, 
and  I  inquired  where  he  was  and  found  he  was  in  New  York,  and 
1  said  I  would  go  to  New  York  and  see  Senator  McCarthy,  whicbi 
I  did. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Why  did  you  go 


Senator  McCarthy.  Mr.  Jenkins- 


Senator  MuNDT.  The  Senator  will  address  the  Chair  rather  than 
Mr.  Jenkins,  if  he  has  a  point  of  order.  Is  the  Senator  addressing 
the  Chair? 

Senator  McCarthy.  With  the  young  man  here  taking  pictures, 
did  I  understand  the  Secretary  to  say  that  McCarthy  was  in  the 
room  at  that  time  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  said  Mr.  Cohn  and  Mr,  Carr  were  in  the  room. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Correct. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Who  did  the  talking,  Mr.  Cohn  or  Mr.  Carr  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Mostly  Mr.  Cohn. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  remember  anything  whatever  that  was  said 
to  you  on  that  occasion  by  Mr.  Carr  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would  say  that  my  recollection  is  principally 
the  points  made  by  Mr.  Cohn,  and  I  can't  recall  what  Mr.  Carr  said 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  made  no  memorandum  of  that  conversation  at 
the  time? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  you  are  speaking  from  recollection  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  as  a  result  of  what  was  said  to  you  on  thai 
occasion,  that  is  November  16,  you  say  that  you  went  to  New  Yorh 
to  see  Senator  McCarthy  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  did. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  What  was  the  purpose  of  that  visit? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  purpose  of  the  visit  was  that  I  felt  that 
Senator  McCarthy  had  misunderstood  what  I  had  said  at  the  press 
conference,  I  felt  what  I  had  said  at  the  press  conference  was  cor- 
rect, and  I  thought  I  would  like  to  face  right  up  to  it,  discuss  the 
matter  out  and  see  where  we  stood. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  In  other  words,  make  peace  ?  Is  that  what  you  mean, 
Mr.  Secretary  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  wanted  to 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Very  well,  what  was  the  date  of  that  visit  to  New 
York? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  I7th  of  November. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Will  you  tell  what  transpired  on  the  I7th  of  Novem- 
ber between  you  and  Senator  McCarthy  in  New  York  City? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  flew  to  New  York  in  the  morning,  and  I 
took 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  anyone  go  with  you  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Y'es,  Colonel  Cleary,  of  my  staff,  went  with  me, 
and  Mr.  Adams.    I  invited  Senator  McCarthy  and  his  staff  to  have 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  181 

limclieon  M'itli  me  once  again  at  the  Merchants  Chib  in  New  York, 
which  I  have  mentioned  previously.  That  luncheon  I  should  say 
was  around  1  o'clock.  Senator  McCarthy  came  with  IMr.  Cohn  and 
Mr.  Carr,  and  he  also  brought  with  him  Mr.  Sokolslfy,  who  joined 
with  us  throughout  the  period  of  the  luncheon.  I,  of  course,  was 
there,  and  Colonel  Cleary  was  there,  and  'Mv.  Adams  was  there. 

After  a  few  preliminaries,  I  said  to  Senator  McCarthy  or  inquired 
of  him  as  to  why  he  was  so  provoked  with  me,  and  he  indicated  that 
he  thought  that  my  press  conference  had  been  badly  handled,  shall 
we  say;  that  I  hadn't  given  a  correct  picture  as  to  the  situation  at 
Forth  INlonmouth,  and  he  was  quite  put  out  about  it. 

So  we  then  discussed  the  question  of  what  should  be  done  about  it. 
I  indicated  that  I  would  be  willing  to  consider  issuing  a  clarifying 
statement  if  there  was  one  that  appropriately  could  be  issued.  That 
was  discussed.  I  recall  that  Mr.  Sokolsky,  who  sat  at  the  far  end  of 
the  table  from  where  I  was,  took  a  piece  of  paper  and  pencil  and 
began  to  write  some  notes  down,  I  think  trying  to  formulate  some 
possible  area  of  agreement,  if  you  will. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  For  the  purpose  of  clarification,  was  that  or  not  Mr. 
George  Sokolsky,  a  newspaper  columnist? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Very  well.     Go  ahead  now. 

Secretary  Stevens.  JMr.  Cohn  also,  I  believe,  made  a  few  notes  on  a 
piece  of  paper  looking  toward  a  possible  statement,  and  so  did  Mr. 
John  Adams. 

We  had  luncheon.  As  I  recall  it,  that  was  the  day  when  Attorney 
General  Brownell  v/as  making  his  TV  broadcast  with  respect  to  the 
White  case.  After  luncheon  we  moved  into  the  next  room  wliere  I 
had  asked  television  to  be  installed.  "We  watched  that  for  a  while, 
and  finally  there  was,  I  think,  general  agreement  on  a  program  for 
Senator  McCarthy  and  myself  to  hold  a  joint  news  conference. 

By  this  time  I  should  add  that  the  newspaper  people  had  come  to 
the  Merchants  Club  in  rather  substantial  numbers.  Senator  Mc- 
Carthy and  I  went  out  and  visited  with  them,  I  should  think  along 
about  midaf  ternoon. 

The  substance  of  my  statement  was  that  in  saying  that  I  had  no 
evidence  of  current  espionage  or  spying  at  Fort  Monmouth,  I  was 
speaking  for  the  Army,  but  I,  of  course,  was  not  speaking  for  this 
committee.  I  made  that  distinction  clear,  which  clidn't  change  in 
any  way  the  substance  of  my  statement  at  the  press  conference,  to  wit, 
that  I  knew  of  no  current  espionage  at  Fort  Monmouth.  That  is  the 
statement  that  I  made. 

The  Senator  and  I  visited  with  the  press  for  a  few  minutes,  and 
then  that  adjourned. 
I     Shall  I  carry  on,  sir? 

I  Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  have  any  record  of  the  exact  statement  you 
made  to  the  press  in  Xew  York  City  on  this  date,  that  is,  November  17  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Of  course,  it  was  an  extemporaneous  statement. 
I  am  sure  it  is  available  in  the  press  coverage  of  the  event,  but  I  don't 
think  I  have  anything  on  it  here,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Is  it  your  position  that  it  was  in  nowise  different  in 
:  substance  to  your  first  statement  given  to  the  press  at  the  Pentagon  ? 

46620"— 54— pt.  5 2 


182  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Secretary  Si'evens.  No  difference  in  substance.  That  is  the  way  1 
felt  about  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  But  worded  differently? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Designed  for  the  purpose  of,  shall  we  say,  pacifying' 
or  modifying  the  Senator  ? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  I  have  been  cooperating  right  along  with  the 
Senator  and  his  committee,  and  I  wanted  to  continue  to  do  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  Senator  McCarthy  invite  yon  to  come  to  New 
York  City  for  the  purpose  of  that  conference  and  for  the  purpose  of 
making  any  changes,  if  changes  were  made,  in  your  release  to  the" 
press  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir.    I  initiated  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  initiated  that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes.  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins,  You  asked  whether  or  not  you  should  continue,  and 
my  answer  is  yes,  if  you  will,  Mr.  Secretary. 

Secretary  Stevens,  Then,  with  the  meeting  about  to  adjourn,  it 
appeared  that  Senator  McCarthy  and  Mr.  Cohn  and  I  think  Mr.  Carr 
were  planning  to  hold  hearings  in  Boston  or  in  the  Boston  area  the 
next  day,  and  Mr.  Cohn  indicated  that  he  wanted  to  see  Private  Schino 
before  going  to  Boston. 

Senator  McCarthy  indicated  that  he  also  would  like  to  see  Private 
Schine.  So  I  said,  "All  right,  I  am  going  back  to  Washington.  I 
wnll  fly  you  down  as  far  as  McGuire  Air  Base,  which  adjoins  Fort 
Dix." 

So  my  party,  along  with  Senator  McCarthy's  party,  made  that 
flight.  We  landed  at  McGuire  Airbase,  and  we  were  met  there  by 
General  Ryan,  the  commanding  general  of  Fort  Dix,  by  several  mem- 
bers of  his  staff,  and  Private  Schine  was  also  there. 

JSIr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Secretary,  did  you  ever  see  Mr.  Roy  Cohn  person- 
ally subsequent  to  November  17  last  year  with  reference  to  any  issue 
in  this  controversy  and  particularly  with  reference  to  any  effort  on  his 
part  to  secure  preferences  for  Schine? 

Secretary  Stevens.  After  the  I7th  of  November? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Right. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  not,  sir.  ' 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  he  ever  talk  to  you  on  the  telephone  with  refer- 
ence to  Private  Schine,  subsequent  to  November  17,  either  in  a  call 
initiated  by  himself  or  by  you  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  do  not  recall  any  call  at  the  moment. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  Senator  McCarthy  ever  discuss  Private  Schine 
with  you  s-ubsequent  to  November  17? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  When  was  the  next  time,  Mr.  Stevens  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  next  time  was  on  the  10th  of  December. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Where  did  that  occur? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  occurred  at  luncheon  at  the  Carroll  Arms 
Hotel  here  in  Washington. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  What  was  said  on  that  occasion  by  Senator  Mc- 
Carthy to  you  or  to  anyone  in  your  presence  with  reference  to  Schine  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Senator  McCarthy  asked  a  number  of  times  dur- 
ing the  course  of  that  luncheon  if  Private  Schine  could  be  assigned 
to  New  York. 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  183 

IMr.  Jexkins.  Who  was  present  at  that  luncheon,  may  I  ask,  Mr. 
Secretary  ? 

Secretary  STE^'ENS.  Senator  McCarthy,  Mr.  Carr,  Mr.  Adams,  and 
myself. 

JNlr.  Jenkins.  Very  well. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Senator  ]\IcCartliy  asked  on  several  occasions 
why  he  couldn't  be  assigned  to  New  York  at  the  end  of  8  weeks  of 
basic  training. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Hoav  many  times  would  you  say,  in  your  best  judg- 
ment, such  a  question  was  asked  you  or  such  a  request  was  made  by 
Senator  McCarthy  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would  say  about  three,  just  as  a  guess. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  you  whether  or  not  on  that  occasion  I  un- 
derstood that  the  Senator  was  quite  insistent  about  the  matter  or 

Secretary  Stevens.   Yes 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Or  were  those  statements  made  in  a  casual  sort  of 
way? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes;  I  felt  that  through  repetition  he  was 
quite  insistent  about  it.  He  also  said  that  he  knew  of  a  number  of 
cases  where  boys  had  been  given  assignments  after  8  weeks  of  basic 
training. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  know  of  any  case  where  a  boy  had  been 
given  such  an  assignment  after  only  8  weeks  of  basic  training? 

Secretary  STE^^5NS.  No,  sir;  I  didn't. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  What  were  your  replies  to  the  Senator  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  told  him  that  David  Schine,  like  every  other 
boy,  would  have  to  finish  his  16  weeks  of  basic  training. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  what  were  the  reactions  of  the  Senator  to 
that  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  am  sure  that,  of  course  I  am  sure  that 
the  Senator  knew  that  I  meant  it  when  I  said  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  anything  else  of  interest  occur  at  the  Carroll 
Arms  on  November  10? 

Secretary  Stevens.    I  think  that  was  the  principal  event. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  l^Hien  next,  if  at  all,  did  Senator  McCarthy  contact 
you  or  did  you  converse  with  him 

Senator  McCarthy.  I  hate  to  interrupt,  Mr.  Chairman.  But  I 
wonder  if  Mr.  Jenkins  would  again  make  it  clear  who  initiated  this 
meeting. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  this  question  now  :  You  were  talking  about 
this  conference  at  the  Carroll  Arms  on  December  10. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Was  that  meeting  initiated  by  Senator  McCarthy 
or  any  member  of  his  staff  or 

Secretary  Stearns.  By  them. 

Mr.  Jenkins.   By  them? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.   Very  well. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Also,  I  recall  one  other  item  that  the  Senator 
was  talking  about ;  an  assignment  for  Private  Schine  in  New  York. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Will  you  stop  there? 

Senator  Mundt.  The  Senator  has  a  point  of  order. 

Senator  McCarthy.  I  just  wonder,  Mr.  Chairman,  if  the  Secretary 
would  identify  who  he  means  by  "them."    I  understood  Mr.  Adams 


184  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

initiated  this.     And  I  wish  he  would  tell  who  initiated  this  meeting. 

Secretary  Stevens.  My  recollection  is,  Senator,  it  was  originated  by 
your  office. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Very  well ;  you  may  go  ahead. 

Now,  you  say  there  was  one  other  item  of  interest  that  occurred 
on  the  day  of  December  10  that  you  had  not  related  to  the  committee. 
Will  you  do  so  now  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  "Well,  in  connection  with  a  possible  assignment 
of  Private  Schine  to  New  York,  Senator  McCarthy  suggested  that 
he  might  be  useful  in  checking  West  Point  textbooks. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  what  was  your  reply  to  that  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  Private  Schine  would  have  to  finish  his 
16  weeks'  basic  training. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  When  next,  if  at  all,  did  either  the  Senator  or  any 
member  of  his  staff  contact  you  or  you  contact  them  with  reference 
to  David  Schine,  if  at  all? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  the  next  contact  was  the  14th  of 
January. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  What  occurred  then,  Mr.  Stevens,  and  where  did  it 
occur  ? 

Secretary  STE^^NS.  On  that  one  I  initiated  that  meeting 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Very  well. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  was 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  is  January  14,  as  we  understand  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes.  I  was  planning  to  leave  for  the  Far  East 
on  the  17th,  and  I  had  an  extensive  trip  to  the  Eighth  Army,  and  other 
points  in  the  Far  East,  coming  up.  I  wanted  to  have  a  meeting  with 
Senator  McCarthy  before  I  left  so  that  I  could  tell  him  I  was  going. 
And  he  knew  I  would  be  out  of  circulation,  so  to  speak  for  a  while,  so 
I  asked  for  this  meeting ;  and  it  was  arranged  to  meet  at  5  o'clock  in 
the  afteruoon,  or  thereabouts,  at  the  Carroll  Arms  Hotel. 

Mr.  "V^  FECH.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  am  under  the  impression  that  there 
was  an  item  of  contact  in  written  form  that  the  witness  has  passed  by 
inadvertently.  I  call  your  attention,  Mr.  Stevens,  to  a  letter  that  I 
now  show  you. 

Senator  Mundt.  He  may  revert  to  that  and  show  it  in  the  record. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  had  not  forgotten  it,  but  I  can  answer  your 
question  which  related  to  personal  contact.     The  fact  remains 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  have  a  letter  in  your  possession  from  any 
party  in  interest  to  this  controversy? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  From  whom  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  From  Senator  McCarthy. 

JSIr.  Jenkins.  What  is  the  date  of  that  letter? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  letter  is  dated  December  22,  and  it  is  one 
which  has  been  previously  referred  to  in  this  hearing. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr,  Secretary,  will  you  now  read  that  letter  into  the 
record  for  the  benefit  of  this  committee  and  then  file  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir.     [Reading:] 

Hon.  RonERT  T.  Stevens, 
Secretary  of  the  Army, 

The  Pentagon,  Washington,  D.  C. 
Dear  Bob  :  I  have  heard  rumors  to  the  effect  that  some  of  the  members  of  my 
staff  have  intervened  with  your  Department  in  behalf  of  a  former  staff  con- 
sultant, Tmvid  Schine.    This  they,  of  course,  have  a  right  to  do  as  individuals. 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  185 

However,  as  I  have  told  you  a  number  of  times,  I  have  an  unbreakable  rule  that 
neither  I  nor  anyone  in  my  behalf  shall  ever  attempt  to  interfere  with  or  influence 
the  Army  in  its  assignments,  promotions,  et  cetera. 

I  have  discussed  this  matter  with  members  of  my  staff,  some  of  whom  feel  very 
strongly  tnat  in  view  of  the  fact  that  Mr.  Schine  is  over  2G  years  of  age,  attempted 
to  enUst  in  the  Army  when  he  was  18,  was  refused  because  of  a  slipped  disc  in 
his  back,  and  thereupon  enlisted  in  the  merchant  marine,  he  would  never  have 
been  drafted  except  that  the  extreme  left-wing  writers  such  as  Pearson,  et  al., 
started  screaming  about  his  case,  because  he  was  a  consultant  for  our  committee. 
I  realize  that  the  decision  of  the  draft  board  to  reopen  his  case  obviously  was 
unknown  to  you  and  far  below  your  level  of  operations. 

While  I  am  inclined  to  agree  that  Mr.  Schine  would  never  have  been  drafted, 
except  because  of  the  fact  he  worked  for  my  committee,  I  want  to  make  it  clear 
at  this  time  that  no  one  has  any  authority  to  request  any  consideration  for  Mr. 
Schine  other  than  what  other  draftees  get.  I  think  it  is  extremely  important 
that  this  be  made  very  clear  in  view  of  the  present  investigation  which  our  com- 
mittee is  conducting  of  the  Communist  infiltration  of  the  military  under  the 
Truman-Acheson  regime. 

Let  me  repeat  what  T  have  said  to  you  before,  the  course  of  this  investigation 
will  in  absolutely  no  way  be  influenced  by  the  Army's  handling  of  the  case  of 
any  individual,  regardless  of  whether  he  worked  for  my  committee  or  not. 

With  kindest  regards,  I  am 
Sincerely  yours, 

Joe  McCarthy. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Will  3^011  file  that,  Mr.  Secretary,  as  an  exhibit  to  your 
testimony  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  I  will. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  you  had  passed  to  the  events  of  January  14, 
is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Will  you  tell  the  committee  what  occurred  then? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  met  Senator  McCarthy  at  the  Carroll  Arms 
about  6  o'clock  in  the  afternoon. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Was  that  by  appointment? 

Secretary  Si-evens.  Yes,  sir,  initiated  by  me. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Well,  who  was  present  on  the  occasion  of  that  meet- 
ing, Mr.  Secretary  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Senator  McCarthy  and  I  were  present  alone  for 
the  first  part  of  the  meeting,  and  we  were  later  joined  by  a  gentleman 
who  Senator  McCarthy  introduced  to  me  as  Al  McCarthy. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  know  him  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir,  I  did  not. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Have  you  later  learned  that  he  is  not  related  to  Sen- 
ator McCarthy,  for  the  purpose  of  identifying  him? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  Senator  told  me  at  the  time. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now  tell  what  occurred  at  the  Carroll  Arms  at  5 
o'clock  p.  m.  on  January  14  of  this  year. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  explained  my  forthcoming  trip  to  the 
Far  East  to  the  Senator,  and  I  also  told  him  about  the  fact  that  David 
Schine  was  going  to  be  transferred  at  the  end  of  8  weeks  of  basic 
training  to  Camp  Gordon,  which  is  the  provost  marshal  general's 
center  at  Camp  Gordon,  Ga.  I  told  him  that  that  was  where  the 
criminal  investigation  school  of  the  provost  marshal  general's  depart- 
ment was  located,  and  I  indicated  that  if  David  Schine  applied  and  if 
he  qualified,  it  was  possible  that  he  might  finally  be  accepted  in  the 
school ;  but  that  would  depend  first  of  all  on  David  Schine  himself  and 
his  record,  and  secondly,  whether  or  not  he  qualified. 

During  the  course  of  this  meeting,  on  4  or  5  occasions  Senator  Mc- 
Carthy brought  up  the  question  of  whether  or  not  David  Schine  could 


186  SPECIAL    mVESTIGATION 

be  assigned  to  New  York  City  when  his  training  was  over.     I  said  that 
David  Schine  would  linve  to  finish  his  training. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  the  Senator  tell  you  why  he  would  like  to  have 
Schine  assigned  to  the  New  York  Citj  area  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir,  he  did  not  tell  me  why,  but  he  per- 
sistently asked  me. 

]\Ir.  Jenkins.  You  said  4  or  5  times,  Mr.  Stevens  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir,  that  is  correct. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Very  well. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  anything  of  interest  occur  on  that  occasion  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  think  possibly  one  item,  and  that  was 
that  I  was  somewhat  sensitive  to  this  being  asked — this  question  about 
David  Schine  being  assigned  to  New  York  City  after  his  training— 
so  when  it  came  up  it  made  an  impression  on  me  and  finally  I  said  to 
Senator  McCarthy,  "Now,  you  wrote  me  a  letter  dated  December  22" — 
the  one  that  I  have  just  read  into  the  record,  Mr.  Jenkins — "in  which 
you  said  that  there  was  not  to  be  any  pressure  or  anything  of  that 
kind  put  on  the  Army,  and  I  would  just  like  to  remind  you  of  that 
letter."    The  Senator  dropped  that  particular  point. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  you  whether  or  not  you  and  Senator  Mc- 
Carthy ever  subsequently  to  that  time  discussed  David  Schine. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  left  on  the  17th  for  the  Far  East  and  I  did  not 
get  back  until  the  23d  of  February,  and  I  don't  think  we  did. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  believe  you  stated  that  subsequent  to  November  17 
you  never  had  any  conversation  with  Mr.  Roy  Colin  with  reference  to 
Schine,  is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  recall  any,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  So  your  last  conversation  with  the  Senator  was  on 
January  14,  this  year. 

Secretary  Stevens.  With  respect  to  Schine,  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  Mr.  Frank  Carr  ever  contact  you  or  discuss  with 
you  Schine  subsequent  to  the  17th  of  November? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  recall  that  he  did,  no,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  Mr.  Secretary,  you  state  in  your  pleadings,  as  I 
recall,  that  no  less  than  65  telephone  calls  were  made  to  you  or  to  your 
subordinates  with  reference  to  favors  or  preferential  treatment  to 
David  Schine.    Is  that  correct  or  not  ? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  Telephone  calls  on  the  subject  of  David  Schine. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  From  the  McCarthy  investigating  committee,  you 
mean,  or  members  of  its  staff  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir.  There  were,  I  think,  all  told  about 
that  number. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  65? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  As  I  recall  you  state  that  there  were  some  19  personal 
contacts  with  you  or  members  of  your  staff  with  reference  to  David 
Schine,  is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Making  a  total  of  84  contacts  either  in  person  or  by 
telephone  with  reference  to  either  a  commission  or  preferential  treat- 
ment for  Schine ;  is  that  correct? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  would  say,  Mr.  Jenkins,  with  reference 
to  Schine. 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  187 

JSIr.  Jexkins.  Witli  reference  to  Schine  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  By  that  do  you  mean  that  not  all  of  them  were  in 
the  form  of  requests  for  leaves  of  absence,  escaping  KP,  and  things 
of  that  kind  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  a  large  number  of  them  were — I  know 
a  large  number  of  them  were  for  that  purpose,  but  I  would  not  want 
to  say  that  every  one  of  those  84  contacts  in  which  the  subject  of 
Schine  Avas  discussed  was  for  specific  preferential  treatment.  Most 
of  tliem  I  think  were. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  On  the  occasion  of  the  last  conversation  you  had 
with  the  Senator  on  the  14th  of  January  you  had  then  been  in  office 
approximately  1  year,  lacking  perhaps  a  couple  of  weeks;  is  that 
correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  About  3  weeks ;  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  During  that  year's  period  state  whether  or  not  you 
received  calls  or  were  contacted  personally  with  reference  to  any  other 
soldier,  inductee,  or  draftee,  in  any  comparable  number  of  times  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Positively  not. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Stevens,  I  want  to  ask  you  this  question:  Did 
you  feel  that  these  efforts  and  attempts  on  the  part  of  this  staff  on 
behalf  of  Schine  were  made  by  Senator  INIcCarthy  personally,  indi- 
vidually, or  as  a  United  States  Senator  on  the  one  hand ;  or  that  they 
were  made  by  him  not  only  as  a  Senator  but  also  as  a  member  of  the 
so-called  McCarthy  investigating  committee,  with  all  of  its  judicial 
powers,  we  will  say?  What  were  your  impressions  with  respect 
to  that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  My  impression  was,  Mr.  Jenkins,  that  Mr. 
Cohn 

Mr.  Jenkins.  My  question  was  with  reference  to  Senator  McCarthy, 
to  begin  with. 

Secretary  Ste\t;ns.  Yes,  sir.  I  was  going  to  relate  that,  if  I  may. 
I  was  going  to  say  my  impression  was  that  Mr.  Cohn  was  tremendously 
interested  in  Mr.  Schine  and  in  having  special  treatment  for  Mr. 
Schine. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  mean  Mr.  Cohn  as  Mr.  Roy  Cohn  individ- 
ually, or  Mr.  Cohn  occupying  the  powerful  position  that  he  did  as 
chief  counsel  for  this  investigating  committee  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  mean  occupying  the  powerful  position  that 
he  did  of  chief  counsel  for  this  committee. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  feel  that  he  used  his  office  in  an  attempt  at 
a  perversion  of  the  rules  of  the  Army  with  reference  to  the  treatment 
accorded  an  inductee  or  draftee  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  do.  ' 

Senator  McCarthy.  Mr.  Chairman? 
Senator  Mundt.  Your  point  of  order  ? 

Senator  McCarthy.  I  think  it  might  be  well,  in  view  of  this  line 
of  questions  that  Mr.  Cohn  "exerted,"  that  Mr.  Stevens  be  asked  to 
produce  the  Inspector  General's  report  on  just  what  consideration 
Mr.  Schine  got.  I  am  curious  to  know  what  special  consideration  he 
got.  I  think  it  should  be  in  the  record.  I  am  suggesting  that  you  do 
this  out  of  order.  ISIr,  Jenkins  may  have  in  mind  doing  this  later. 
I  don't  know. 


188  SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Cliairman,  may  I  state  I  am  about  ready  to  cross- 
examine  the  witness,  and  I  do  ask  the  Senator  to  be  patient.  I  think 
those  matters  will  be  clarified. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Certainly. 

Senator  Mundt.  May  the  Chair  remind  all  the  members  of  the  com- 
mittee and  the  counsel  for  both  sides  that  under  the  rules  by  which  we 
operate,  the  counsel  is  to  proceed  without  interruption  save  only  for  a 
point  of  order,  and  it  is  a  little  bit  disruptive  of  counsel's  line  of  think- 
ing if  members  of  the  committee  or  members  of  the  counsel  endeavor 
to  anticipate  the  questions  he  is  about  to  ask. 

Senator  McCaktht.  I  would  like,  if  I  may,  for  the  record,  to  get 
some  information  from  the  Chair.  We  do  not  have  nearly  as  many 
admirals  here  as  generals 

Senator  Mundt.  That  would  not  be  a  point  of  order. 

Senator  McCarthy.  There  is  a  question  I  w^ould  like  to  ask  you.  I 
would  like  to  know  whether  any  of  these  generals  are  here  at  the  re- 
quest of  the  subcommittee,  or  whether  they  are  here  at  the  request  of 
someone  from  the  Pentagon. 

Senator  Mundt.  The  Chair  will  say  that  the  only  person  here  this 
morning  at  the  request  of  the  subcommittee  is  Secretary  Stevens,  who 
is  seated  behind  the  microphone. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Senator  Mundt.  You  may  proceed. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  have  related  your  impressions  and  opinions  with 
reference  to  elforts  or  pressure  on  the  part  of  Mr.  Cohn. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Getting  back  to  my  previous  question  with  reference 
to  Senator  McCarthy,  do  you  recall  what  the  question  is? 

Secretary  Sti:vens.  If  it  is  not  asking  too  much,  I  would  appreciate 
having  it  repeated,  Mr.  Jenkins. 

Senator  Mundt.  Is  counsel  able  to  repeat  it? 

]\Ir.  Jenkins.  I  don't  mind  repeating  it. 

Senator  Mundt.  You  may  repeat  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  consider  that  these  requests,  these  conversa- 
tions, these  statements  you  have  related  on  the  part  of  Senator  Mc- 
Carthy with  respect  to  Schine,  were  made  by  him  as  a  person,  an  in- 
dividual, or  a  United  States  Senator  on  the  one  hand ;  or,  on  the  other 
hand,  not  only  as  a  United  States  Senator  but  as  chairman  of  the 
powerful  investigating  committee  which  he  headed,  with  all  of  its 
judicial  powers?  In  what  capacity  did  you  consider  he  was  acting, 
Mr.  Stevens,  in  these  various  requests  made  of  you  by  him  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Mr.  Jenkins,  at  first  I  thought  that  it  was,  you 
might  say,  a  sort  of  personal  thing  in  some  way.  That  was  the  way  it 
began.  But  as  it  went  along  over  a  ])eriod  of  time  and  continued  to 
recur,  and  the  chief  counsel,  Mr.  Cohn,  showed  the  vigorous  interest 
that  he  did  in  the  subject,  I  finally  had  no  other  course  than  to  con- 
clude that  Mr.  Cohn's  activities  were  with  the  knowledge  and  approval 
of  the  chairman  of  this  committee. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  take  it  that  you  knew  that  these  various  requests 
and  pressures  you  have  detailed  were  occurring  simultaneously  with 
the  investigation  of  this  committee  of  a  department  of  the  Army,  to 
wit.  Fort  Monmouth  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  189 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  ]\Ir.  Secretary,  I  will  ask  you  whether  or  not, 
in  your  opinion,  Mr.  Frank  Carr,  a  party  in  interest,  considering  his 
participation  in  this  general  pattern  you  have  detailed,  sought  to  and 
did  use  his  office  in  an  effort  to  secure  favors  for  David  Schine? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would  say,  Mv.  Jenkins,  that  Mr.  Carr's 
activities  in  this  connection  were  extremely  limited  by  comparison 
with  INIr.  Cohn's.  I  don't  think  that  he  had  nearly  the  interest  in 
the  subject.  He  was  present  at  times  when  it  came  up.  I  don't  think 
he  did  anything  to  keep  it  from  coming  up. 

By  the  same  token,  in  my  particular  firsthand  contact  with  it,  Mr. 
Carr  did  not  have  anything  like  the  pressure  approach  to  it  that  Mr. 
Cohn  did. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  would  say,  generally,  his  attitude  was  a  passive 
one? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Very  largely. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Stevens,  I  want  to  ask  you  this  final  question  on 
direct  examination  and  you  may  consult  your  counsel  if  you  desire 
before  you  answer  it. 

Is  there  any  other  fact  or  are  there  any  other  facts  or  circum- 
stances in  support  of  the  charges  you  have  made  against  the  investi- 
gating committee  about  which  I  have  not  asked  you  on  direct  examina- 
nation  that  you  now  want  to  relate  to  this  committee  ? 

(The  witness  consulted  with  his  counsel.) 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think,  Mr.  Jenkins,  that  Mr.  Adams  has  a 
great  deal  of  information  that  will  be  presented  and  which  is  related 
to  many  of  the  areas  or  points  which  I  directly  came  in  contact  with 
this  thing. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  am  talking  about  the  matters  peculiarly  within 
your  own  personal  knowledge. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  I  have  substantially  covered  that,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  This  is  in  the  form  of  a  statement. 

Senator  Mundt.  Counsel  may  proceed. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  appreciate  the  fact  that  my  position,  Mr.  Stevens, 
is  a  peculiar  one,  representing  the  committee,  representing  neither 
the  Army,  nor  the  Senator  or  members  of  his  staff.  And  that  in  a 
proper  appraisal  of  the  value  of  your  testimony,  a  proper  evaluation 
of  it,  a  cross-examination  is  proper  so  that  the  committee's  attention 
may  be  called  to  any  matters  that  are  proper  to  bring  out  on  cross- 
examination.     You  appreciate  that  fact,  do  you  not  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  further  know  the  charges  have  been  preferred 
against  you  and  Mr.  Adams  by  Senator  McCarthy  and  the  members 
of  his  staff? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  know  what  those  charges  are  and  you  have  read 
his  document? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Stevens,  your  charges  in  the  main  against  the 
Senator,  indeed,  as  I  recall,  the  only  charge  you  made  was  that  he, 
Mr.  Cohn,  and  Mr.  Carr  sought  to  use  undue  and  improper  influences 
to  secure  preferential  treatment  for  one  G.  David  Schine,  that  is 
correct,  isn't  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

46620°— 54— pt.  5 3 


190  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 


' 


Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  I  ask  you  this :  In  making  a  proper  appraisall 
in  what  efforts,  if  any,  were  made  by  the  Senator,  and  the  members'j 
of  his  staff,  is  it  not  proper  in  yonr  opinion  to  give  consideration  to 
the  work  in  which  David  Schine  was  engaged  with  this  committee  and 
to  the  work  in  which  the  committee  was  engaged  ?  Is  that  right,  in 
yonr  opinion  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  they  were  entitled  to  give  that  consider- 
ation. 

ilr.  Jenkins.  In  short,  a  dozen  calls  by  Senator  McCarthy  or  any 
member  of  his  staff  with  reference,  we  will  say,  to  me,  who  is  not  es- 
sential, might  be  considered  unusual  and  extraordinary,  and  you  might 
consider  that  unfair  pressure  was  being  brought  to  bear  upon  you,  is 
that  correct? 

Seretary  Stevens.  I  am  afraid,  sir,  that  I  didn't  quite  follow  that 
question. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  All  right,  hypothetically,  assume  that  Senator  Mc- 
Carthy and  the  members  of  his  staff  put  in,  we  will  say,  a  dozen  calls 
for  a  man  who  was  engaged  in  nonessential  work,  a  ditchdi,'i;ger,  and 
I  mean  no  reflection  on  a  ditchdigger.  Might  that  not  be  considered 
an  extraordinary  number  of  times  for  intercession  on  behalf  of  that 
particular  individual  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

:Mr.  Jenkins.  Assume,  on  the  other  hand,  that  that  number  of  calls 
and  that  number  of  contacts  were  made  by  and  on  behalf  of  a  man 
who  had  special  training  in  the  investigation  of  espionage  and  of  in- 
filtration of  Communists  in  the  Army  and  other  departments  of  the 
Government,  whose  work  of  vital  importance  to  the  national  defense 
and  security.  Under  those  circumstances,  Mr.  Stevens,  is  it  not  your 
opinion  that  the  same  number  of  calls  put  in  for  the  latter-described 
man  would  not  be  considered  extraordinary  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  it  would  be  considered  extraordinary. 
And,  if  I  may,  sir,  I  would  like  to  go  back  to  your  first  question  on  this 
subject,  because  I  am  not  sure  but  what  I  misunderetood  it.  It  seems 
to  me 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Well,  the  question  is  this:  What  would  be  extraor- 
dinary for  one  man  would  not  be  extraordinary  for  another,  de- 
pending on  the  character  of  work  the  man  is  in,  am  I  right  or  not  ? 

Secretary  Sttevens.  There  could  be  a  difference,  yes,  sir. 

]Mr.  Jenkins.  That  is  what  I  am  getting  at. 

Now,  INIr.  Stevens 

Secretary  Stevens,  Could  I  go  back,  because  on  your  first  question, 
dealing  with  this  situation,  you  asked  me  a  question  about  whether  or 
not  it  was  proper  to  take  David  Schine's  qualifications  into  account 
or  something  of  that  sort. 

_  I  think  that  the  place  and  time  to  do  that,  [Mr.  Jenkins,  was  prior  to 
his  being  drafted  and  not  after  he  was  drafted  by  selective  service 
which  is  a  completely  independent  arm  of  the  Government.  I  think 
once  the  selective-service  process  worked  that  it  was  then  incumbent 
upon  Senator  McCarthy  and  his  staff  not  to  make  calls,  such  as  you 
referred  to,  to  the  Army. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Then  it  is  your  opinion  that  after  the  processes  of 
the  draft  have  been  fully  completed,  and  executed,  and  the  subject 
IS  drafted  and  in  the  Army,  that  regardless  of  his  qualifications  or 
the  character  of  work  in  which  he  is  engaged,  be  it  the  investigation 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  191 

of  espionage  or  otherwise,  that  any  effort  on  the  part  of  anyone 
on  his  behalf  is  improper? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  Avon't  say  any  effort.  I  think  it  is  perfectly 
all  right,  and  it  wonld  all  come  out  anyway  through  the  testing  that 
we  do  with  all  of  the  boys  that  come  into  the  Army  as  to  what  his 
qualifications  were.  And  if  Senator  McCarthy  wanted  to  call  it  to 
jour  attention,  I  would  have  no  objection  to  it.  But  I  do  object 
\iolently  to  the  amount  of  attention  that  was  devoted  in  this  par- 
ticular case. 

Air.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Secretary,  is  it  not  a  fact  that  you  did  make 
concessions  to  David  Schine  with  reference  to  leaves  of  absences, 
passes,  and  so  on  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Mr.  Jenkins,  we  did,  and  the  reason  we  did  it  is 
because,  as  I  said  on  Friday,  we  did  not  want,  or  I  did  not  want,  the 
Army  to  be  in  the  position  of  obstructing  the  work  of  a  committee 
of  Congress  that  at  that  time  was  engaged  in  investigating  the  Army. 
Therefore,  since  this  consultant  to  this  committee's  staff  had  been  taken 
by  selective  service,  and  had  been  inducted  in  the  Army,  or  was  about 
to  be,  my  position  was  that  in  the  tapering  off  process  from  the  time 
lie  left  his  assignment  as  consultant  to  this  connnittee  until  he  became 
100  percent  Army  private,  that  it  was  reasonable  during  that  change- 
over or  transition  period  that  he  should  be  made  available  for  com- 
mittee business,  for  committee  business  alone,  if  it  did  not  interfere 
with  his  training. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  you  did  do  that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  he  was  given  an  extraordinarily  large  number 
of  passes  and  leaves  of  absences,  wasn't  he? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  correct,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  JNIr.  Stevens,  that  was  because  he  was  a  con- 
sultant on  a  committee  attempting  to  and/or  tracking  down  infiltra- 
tion of  communism  in  the  Army,  wasn't  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  is  right,  isn't  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  starting  with  that  as  a  major  premise,  I  ask 
you  now  to  give  the  Stevens  versions,  if  I  may  refer  to  it  thusly,  of 
the  investigation  by  Senator  McCarthy  and  his  staff  of  Fort  Mon- 
mouth. I  want  your  version  of  the  work  that  was  done  by  the  Sen- 
ator and  his  staff,  the  character  of  work  they  did,  the  importance  of  it 
in  your  opinion,  and  the  necessity  for  it,  or  the  lack  of  necessity  for 
it  as  relating  to  Fort  Monmouth. 

Secretary  Stevens.  All  right,  sir.  The  formal  hearings  which  were 
in  executive  session  of  this  committee  in  the  case  of  Fort  Monmouth, 
started  on  October  8,  1953. 

I  assumed  there  had  been  work  done  by  the  staff  of  this  committee 
prior  to  the  opening  of  those  hearings.  The  Army,  itself,  had,  of 
course,  been  carrying  on  investigatory  work  at  Fort  Monmouth  as  well 
as  elsewhere  throughout  the  Army  system,  and  continuously  so. 

We  were  aware  of  the  history  at  Fort  Monmouth.  We  wanted  to 
be  sure  that  our  security  situation  was  in  good  shape  and  certainly 
that  there  was  no  espionage.  We  collaborated  very  closely  with  the 
FBI  in  respect  of  Fort  Monmouth,    We  took  up  under  the  new  criteria 


192  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

of  the  new  administration  matters  of  security,  looking  into  cases  where 
there  could  be  any  possible  question. 

I  think  prior — in  fact,  I  know  that  prior  to  the  formal  opening  of  the 
Fort  Monmouth  hearing,  there  had  been  six  suspensions  in  Fort 
Monmouth  for  security  reasons — in  other  words,  cases  where  individ- 
uals—  where  there  was  no  question  of  loyalty  involved  but  for  one 
reason  or  another,  either  because  of  derogatory  information  or  because 
the  person  might  talk  too  mucli,  or  something  of  that  kind,  those 
cases — it  was  that  type  of  case  that  were  the  six  that  were  suspended 
prior  to  October  8. 

]Mr.  Jenkins.  They  would  be  poor  security  risks  at  Fort  Monmouth, 
is  that  right  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  They  might  be. 

]\Ir.  Jem  KINS.  I  understand.  You  are  saying  now  that  they  were 
suspended  as  a  result  of  the  efforts  of  your  agency  and  not  that  of  the 
McCarthy  committee,  is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir ;  that  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Six  of  them  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Six  of  them. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Prior  to  the  opening  of  the  formal  hearings  by  Sen- 
ator McCarthy  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Following  the  opening  of  the  hearings  and  up 
to  this  time  there  had  been  an  additional  29  suspensions. 

]\Ir.  Jenkins.  As  a  result  of  the  McCarthy  investigation? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir ;  as  a  result ;  I  would  like  to  answer  this 
way,  if  I  may,  because  I  think  you  have  given  me  an  extraordinarily 
difficult  question  and  I  would  like  to  answer  it  to  the  best  of  my  ability. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  are  entitled  to  explain.  I  think  maybe  we  are 
entitled  to  a  yes  or  no  answer,  and  then  you  are  certainly  entitled  to 
explain.  But  if  you  can't  answer  it  yes  or  no,  answer  it  the  best  way 
you  can.     You  know  my  question. 

You  say  that  you  procured  the  suspension  of  six  men,  civilian  em- 
ployees at  Fort  ]\Ionmouth  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  think  it  is  in  this  record  abundantly  that  Fort  Mon- 
mouth is  the  site  of  a  radar  installation,  is  it  not  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir;  for  research  and  development  of  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Research  and  development  and  it  is  tremendously 
important  to  the  security  of  the  Nation  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Primarily  where  defenses  against  the  atomic  and  the 
hydrogen  bombs  are  set  up;  is  that  right,  Mr.  Stevens? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would 

Mr.  Jenkins.  It  is  one  of  the  sites? 
^  Secretary  Ste\tens.  Yes,  sir.      I  prefer  not  to  elaborate  on  that, 
sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Very  well. 

You  had  procured  the  suspension  of  six  men;  is  that  correct? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Prior  to  the  entrance  of  Senator  McCarthy  into  the 
picture  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 


SPECIAL   mVESTIGATION  193 

Mr.  Jenkins.  We  are  askino;  you  now  for  your  version,  and,  of 
course,  with  tlie  understanding  that  when  the  time  comes  we  will  get 
the  McCarthy  version. 

Secretary  STE^T.NS.  Correct ;  that  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Have  any  of  those  six  men  suspended  as  a  result  of 
your  efforts  been  reinstated  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Mr.  Jenkins,  you  asked  me  to  give  my  story 
about  Fort  Monmouth,  and  I  want  to  go  through  that  to  the  best 
of  my  ability.  On  the  other  hand,  if  you  want  to  go  into  the  detail 
of  every  single  one  of  those  cases 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Xo,  sir.  I  have  no  intention  of  doing  that  whatever. 
It  is  just  the  simple  question:  Were  any  of  them  ever  reinstated? 
I  am  referring  to  the  six  men. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  can't  answer  that ;  but  I  can  say  this :  That 
out  of  the  total  of  35  who  were  involved,  the  6  originally  suspended 
and  21)  later,  13  of  those  have  been  reinstated  in  nonsensitive  posi- 
tions; that  is  to  say,  clerical  or  other  type  of  jobs  where  classified 
material  is  not  available  to  them.  That  is  due  to  the  fact  that  thus 
far  no  charges  of  sufficient  substance  have  been  put  together  to  afTect 
these  13  people. 

So  they  have  been  reinstated  in  nonsensitive  positions  pending 
further  investigation  of  their  cases  to  see  in  a  fair  American  way 
whether  or  not  charges  can  be  preferred. 

Now,  in  respect  to  the  other  remaining  22  cases,  16  of  those  have 
been  heard  by  hearing  boards  in  the  First  Army  area.  Those  hear- 
ing boards  are  in  process  of  making  reports  on  these  cases.  I  don't 
have  any  reports  on  any  of  them  as  of  this  present  time. 

The  six  remaining  cases  of  suspended  employees  at  Fort  Monmouth 
remain  to  be  heard  by  a  hearing  board. 

I  would  like  to  say  that  thus  far,  and  we  have  indication  that 
this  will  continue,  there  has  been  no  case  in  which  any  one  of  these 
35  people  has  pleaded  the  fifth  amendment  or  refused  to  answer  any 
questions  that  have  been  put  to  them. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Senator  Stevens — pardon  me.  Mr.  Secretary,  I 
don't  know  wliether  that  would  be  a  promotion  or  not. 

Senator  Mundt.  The  Chair  didn't  like  that  "pardon  me." 

Mr.  Jenkins,  I  will  apologize  to  the  chairman. 

Were  there  27  suspensions  as  a  result  of  the  McCarthy  investiga- 
tion? 

Secretary  Stevens.  My  answer  to  that,  if  I  have  to  answer  it  yes 
or  no,  would  have  to  be  no.     Then  I  have  to  say  but. 

Mr.  Jenkin?.  All  right,  say  but  and  explain  why. 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  reason  I  say  but  is  that  I  think  it  is  prob- 
ably true  that  as  a  result  of  this  committee's  activities  some  of  those 
suspensions  took  effect  sooner  than  they  otherwise  would  have. 

Mr.  Jenkijss.  How  many  would  you  say  occurred  sooner  than — 
what  you  are  saying  to  the  committee  now,  I  think,  is  that  if  Senator 
McCarthy  had  stayed  out  of  the  picture  you  would  ultimately  have 
accomplished  the  same  result  that  he  did ;  is  that  right  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  But  don't  you  consider,  Mr.  Secretary,  that  time  is 
of  the  essence  in  the  detection  of  infiltration  of  Communists  in  the 
Army? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  certainly  do,  sir. 


194  SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION 


' 


Mr.  Jenkins.  And  that  the  expediting  and  the  segregation  and  the 
pinpointing  of  one  with  communistic  leanings  is  quite  important  ? 

Secretary  Stevens,  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  concede  that  the  ]\IcCarthy  committee  brought 
about  that  result  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  They  speeded  up  the  suspension,  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Speeded  it  up  ?     How  many  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  think  I  could  answer  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Twenty-odd  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  jui^t  don't  know. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Twenty-odd  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  will  try  to  give  you  an  answer  to  that  ques- 
tion, but  I  don't  have  an  estimate  of  it  now. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  At  least  there  are  twenty-odd  still  under  suspension, 
aren't  there  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Twenty-two,  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Twenty-two  still  under  suspension? 

Secretary  Ste\t;ns.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  for  the  purpose  of  clarification,  I  want  to  ask 
you  this  question:  What  person  or  group  of  persons  or  board  is  re- 
sponsible, is  charged  with  the  duty  of  making  an  order  effectuating 
a  suspension  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  action  originates  with  the  commanding  of- 
ficer of  the  particular  installation. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  was  General  Zwicker? 

Secretary  Stevens.  General  Lawton. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  General  Lawton  at  Fort  Monmouth;  is  that  correct? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  It  originates  with  him  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Is  it  consummated  by  him  or  is  it  reviewed  by  a 
board  ? 

Secretary  Ste^t:ns.  It  is  reviewed  by  the  First  Army  Headquarters 
and  then  reviewed  here  in  the  Department  of  the  Army  by  what  is 
known  as  a  screening  board. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  In  other  words  the  suspension  is  brought  about  by 
Army  personnel  exclusively  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Army  personnel  either  in  or  out  of  uniform; 
yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  neitlier  Senator  McCarthy,  Cohn,  nor  Carr  had 
one  thing  to  do  with  determining  whether  or  not  a  suspension  should 
be  made;  they  simply  revealed  the  facts  in  an  investigation,  and  then 
your  personnel  having  those  facts  before  them  ruled  that  the  facts 
were  sufficient  to  justify  a  suspension ;  is  that  correct? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  correct,  but  I  would  like  to  add  to  it  that 
we  had  facts  available,  also. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  do  not  know^  exactly  what  you  mean  by  that  state- 
ment. 

Secretary  Stevt:ns.  I  was  not  sure  from  the  way  you  stated  it,  Mr. 
Jenkins,  as  to  whether  you  meant  that  the  McCarthy  committee  had 
supplied  all  of  the  information  on  which  these  suspensions  took 
place. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  the  McCarthy  committee  supply  any  informa- 
tion that  was  before  this  board,  the  commanding  general  and  the  per- 
sonnel of  the  Army,  when  these  suspensions  were  put  into  effect  ? 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  195 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would  say  they  supplied  some  information. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  would  say  they  did  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  you  would  say,  and  I  believe  you  have  said,  that 
their  efforts  resulted  in  expediting  the  suspension  of  these  men  under 
question  about  whom  there  was  some  question  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  To  some  extent;  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  is  correct;  is  it  not? 

Sscretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  Mr.  Secretary,  you  are  not  trying  to  minimize 
the  efforts  of  the  IMcCarthy  committee;  are  you? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Am  I  trying  to? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Yes,  that  is  what  I  am  asking  you. 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir,  I  don't  feel  that  I  am  trying  to  minimize 
the  efforts  of  the  committee;  I  am  simply  trying  to  get  out  here,  as  I 
know  you  want  me  to  do,  all  of 

Mr.  Jenkins.  This  committee  wants  you  to  do  it,  and  so  do  I. 

Secretary  Si'evens.  The  facts  I  have  in  respect  to  Fort  Monmouth. 
My  own  feeling  is  that  it  was  a  greatly  overexaggerated  situation. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  that  reflects  your  feelings  and  opinions,  does 
it  not,  of  that  very  statement  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  it  was  a  greatly  overexaggerated  situation  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  All  right,  Mr.  Stevens.  I  believe  that  you  have  al- 
ready stated  that  you  as  Secretary  of  the  Army  were  vitally  interested 
in  cleaning  out  subversives  or  those  about  whom  there  was  any  ques- 
tion at  the  earliest  possible  moment.    That  is  right ;  is  it  not  ? 

Secretary  Ste^^ns.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  you  concede  that  Senator  McCarthy  and  his 
staff  did  that  very  thing;  do  you  not? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  concede  that  Senator  McCarthy  and  his  staff, 
through  the  investigation,  speeded  up  to  some  extent  the  suspension 
of  some  people;  but  we  had  information  about  all  of  these  people 
and  the  action  would  have  been  taken,  but  they  speeded  it  up  to  a 
certain  extent. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  But  the  point  is  that  it  had  not  been  taken,  had  it, 
Mr.  Secretary? 

Secretary  Stevens.  It  was  in  the  process. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  had  not? 

Secretaiy  Stevens.  It  was  in  the  process  of  being  taken ;  yes,  sir. 
You  see,  under  the  new  security  regulations  in  the  Government,  all 
of  these  types  of  cases  were  automatically  under  a  new  review. 

Mr.  tlENKiNS.  Ultimately,  you  say  you  would  have  accomplished 
the  same  result  ? 

Secretary'  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  But  Senator  McCarthy  accomplished  it  before  you 
had  the  opportunity  to  do  it;  is  that  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir;  I  do  not  quite  agree  that  that  is  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  do  not  agree  to  that.  Now,  I  understood  you 
did,  Mr.  Secretary. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  that  I  stated — I  do  not  want  to  in  any 
way  evade  Mr.  Jenkins  in  any  questions.  I  want  to  call  them  exactly  as 
I  see  them.    As  I  see  this  case,  through  the  efforts  of  the  committee, 


196  SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION 

there  was  expedited  to  a  certain  extent  some  of  the  cases  in  which 
the  suspensions  took  place. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  very  good,  I  think  that  answers  the  question. 
You  would  say,  therefore,  that  Senator  McCarthy  and  his  staff  did  an 
important  piece  of  work  that  enhanced  national  security — time  being 
of  the  essence  in  the  detection  of  Communists  or  Reds  or  "pinks"  or 
whatever  you  want  to  call  them — in  the  Army  or  any  other  branch 
of  the  Government,  is  that  not  correct? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  question,  Mr.  Jenkins,  I  will  have  to  ask 
the  reporter  to  read  because  it  is  a  rather  long  one  and  I  am  not 
sure  I  can  grasp  it. 

Senator  Mundt.  Will  the  reporter  read  the  question. 

(The  question  was  read  by  the  reporter.) 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  certainly  agree  it  is  correct  to  find  the 
security  risks,  loyalty  cases,  and  act  on  it  fast.  There  is  no  question 
about  that.  We  are  all  in  accord  on  that  completely.  The  only  thing 
that  I  say  in  regard  to  this,  Mr.  Jenkins,  is  having  said  that  in  my 
opinion  Senator  McCarthy's  investigation  did  speed  up  to  a  certain 
extent  in  a  certain  number  of  cases,  I  would  go  on  and  say  that  in 
respect  of  the  whole  overall  situation  which  is  referred  to  in  your 
question,  that  I  think  it  would  have  been  far  more  effective  if  we  had 
not  pursued  the  publicity  tactics  that  went  with  this  investigation. 
I  think  that  that  did  a  lot  of  harm  in  a  lot  of  ways. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  charge  Senator  IMcCarthy  with  the  publicity 
that  his  investigations  entailed  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  whenever  Senator  McCarthy  holds  an 
executive  session 

Mr.  Jenkins.  The  press  is  there,  I  am  sure. 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir.  The  press  is  there,  and  they  are  not  in 
the  executive  session,  of  course,  but  when  the  session  is  over.  Senator 
McCarthy  gives  them  a  rundown  of  how  he  feels  the  thing  transpired. 
And  I  feel  that,  right  or  wrong,  a  great  deal  of  misinformation  and 
excitement  was  caused  by  the  reports  that  he  developed  after  these 
executive  sessions. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And,  Mr.  Stevens,  you  wanted  it  stopped,  didn't  you? 

Secretary  Ste\'t:ns.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And,  consequently,  you  wanted  Senator  McCarthy's 
investigation  stopped,  didn't  you? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir ;  I  didn't  want  it  stopped. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  didn't  want  it  stopped  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,,  one  of  the  charges  made  against  you  is  that 
you  sought  to  discredit  his  conunittee  and  the  importance  of  the  work, 
and  do  you  recall  that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  never  did  any  such  thing. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  you,  if  you  haven't  here  this  morning,  on 
the  witness  stand,  damned  him  with  faint  praise,  so  to  speak.  Haven't 
you  done  that  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir;  I  think  that  I  have  given  him  credit 
for  having  expedited  to  a  certain  extent  some  of  those  cases  at  Fort 
Monmouth. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Haven't  you  here  on  the  witness  stand  this  morning 
minimized  the  importance  of  his  work  in  the  investigation  of  Fort 
Monmouth  ? 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  197 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  have  told  you  that  the  work  would  have  got- 
ten done  anyhow. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  understand  it,  but  you  further  told  us  that  time  was 
of  the  essence,  and  it  is  always  too  late  to  lock  the  barn  when  the  horse 
is  stolen,  you  know  that.  And,  Mr.  Stevens,  there  are  now  20  men 
still  under  suspension,  after  a  lapse  of  6  months,  suspended  by  you 
and  your  personnel,  partially  as  a  result  of  the  work  of  the  McCarthy 
committee;  is  that  not  correct? 

Secretary  S'rE\'ENS.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  May  I  ask  you  at  this  point,  who  is  responsible  for 
the  reinstatement  of  those  men  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  know  that  I  can  give  that  information 
under  the  Presidential  directives. 

jSIr.  Jenkins.  If  it  violates  a  directive,  or  confidential  information, 
I  withdraw  the  question.    Is  that  your  answer  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir;  until  I  have  had  a  chance  to  look  it  up. 
And  if  it  doesn't  violate  it,  I  would  certainly  like  to  put  it  in,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  Mr.  Stevens,  you  understood  all  along  that  one 
of  the  consultants  of  this  very  committee  whose  work  we  have  been 
talking  about  was  one  G.  David  Schine  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  understood  that,  did  you  not? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  understand  that  he  was  somewhat  of  an 
authority  on  communism,  and  had  written  at  least  a  pamphlet  on  that 
subject  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  that  I  knew  that  he  had  written  a 
pamphlet ;  yes. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  ever  ask  him  to  mail  to  you  that  pamphlet  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  recall  having  done  so.  I  might  have; 
I  don't  recall  having  done  so,  Mr.  Jenkins. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  hand  you  a  letter,  if  we  can  find  it.     [Laughter.] 

Senator  Mundt.  The  Army  has  had  similar  difficulties,  I  might  add, 
about  finding  letters. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  withdraw  the  question.     I  am  sorry. 

I  hand  you  a  letter  dated  September  21,  1953,  rather,  a  copy  of  a 
letter  reading  as  follows : 

Hon.  J.  P.  Stevens, 

Secretary  of  the  Army, 

Washincjton,  D.  C. 
My  Dear  Mr.  Stevens:    As  I  promised,  I  am  sending  to  you  a  copy  of  the 
Definition  of  Communism  which  I  hope  you  will  find  interesting.     It  was  cer- 
tainly a  pleasure  to  see  you  the  other  morning,  and  I  hope  to  see  you  again  in 
the  near  future. 

With  very  best  wishes,  I  am 
Cordially  yours, 

G.  Da\td  Schine, 
Chief  Consultant,  Senate  Invcstiyating  Subcommittee. 

Will  you  please  examine  that,  Mr.  St.  Clair,  and  hand  it  to  the 
Secretary. 

Then  tell  the  committee  whether  or  not  you  received  the  original  of 
that  letter,  together  with  a  pamphlet  entitled,  "Definition  of  Com- 
munism," by  G.  David  Schine,  which  I  likewise  now  hand  you  for  your 
inspection. 


198  SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  I  think  I  recall  this  now,  Mr.  Jenkins.  I 
am  not  J.  P.  Stevens,  to  whom  this  letter  is  addressed 

Mr.  Jenkins.  But  you  did  receive  that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  assume  that  I  must  have  received  the  letter, 
because  I  now  recall  having  seen  a  copy  of  this  pamphlet.  I  also 
recall  that  I  attended  a  meeting  of  this  committee  in  executive  session 
on  September  21,  1953,  and  no  doubt  Dave  Schine  must  have  spoken 
about  this  thing  at  that  time. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  know,  therefore,  that  David  Schine  was  a 
consultant  member  of  Senator  McCarthy's  investigating  committee? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  knew  prior  to  his  induction  in  the  service,  which 
was  on  November  3,  as  we  understand  it 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  he  was  actively  engaged  with  Senator  McCarthy 
and  his  staff  in  the  investigation  of  Fort  Monmouth  ?  You  knew  that, 
didn't  you  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Stevens,  the  first  knowledge  that  you  had  that 
the  Army,  of  which  you  were  the  Secretary,  was  about  to  be  investi- 
gated by  Senator  McCarthy,  was  when  you  were  on  the  weekend  of 
Labor  Day  in  the  State  of  Montana ;  is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  It  was,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  do  not  know,  of  course,  when  the  Senator  and 
his  staff  made  their  plans  for  the  investigation  of  the  First  Army 
area,  do  you? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  Mr.  Jenkins. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  read  of  the  proposal  of  the  Senator,  to  make  this 
investigation,  in  a  ncAvspaper  in  a  drugstore  in  a  town  in  Montana? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir;  that  was  with  reference  to  the  three 
original  cases  in  New  York  City. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  In  the  Army  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Their  names  were  given? 

Secretary  Ste\tens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  immediately  went  to  the  railroad  station  and 
sent  the  Senator  a  telegram,  did  you  not? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  did. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Up  to  that  time,  you  had  never  contacted  him,  had 
you? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  had  never  been  to  Fort  Monmouth  yourself  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir.    I  went  on  October  20. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  But  I  say  up  to  that  time 

Secretary  Ste\t3ns.  Correct. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  is,  the  early  part  of  September,  you  had  never 
been  to  Fort  Monmouth,  had  you  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir ;  I  had  not. 
_  Mr.  Jenkins.  Up  to  that  time  you  had  never  directed  your  inves- 
tigating agency  specifically  to  pinpoint  Fort  Monmouth  and  inves- 
tigate it,  had  you  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes ;  I  had. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  had  done  so  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  199 

]\Ir.  Jenkins.  Was  that  a  general  order  to  investigate  all  of  the 
Army  posts,  or  particularly  Fort  Monmouth  'i 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  as  I  told  you,  sir,  we  had  extremely  close 
contact  with  the  FBI  in  regard  to  Fort  Monmouth,  and  that  was  a 
little  bit  different  from  the  usual  run  of  directives  that  might  go  out. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Asking  my  question  again,  had  you  at  that  time 
specifically  called  in  your  investigating  agency  and  said :  "Go  to  Fort 
Monmouth  and  see  what  is  going  on  up  there?"    Had  you  done  that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  hadn't  personally  called  them  in  and  told 
them  to  go  to  Fort  Monmouth,  that  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  It  was  a  general  order  to  investigate  everything  and 
everybody  connected  with  the  Army,  as  we  understand  it,  is  that  cor- 
rect? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir;  that  is  not  correct. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Very  well. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  not  correct,  on  account  of  the  reference 
that  I  made,  and  I  liope  I  don't  have  to  belabor  this  point  because 
I  just  don't  like  to;  but  as  I  say,  we  had  very  close  relationship  with 
the  FBI  in  regar<l  to  this  particular  matter. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  But  you  had  no  relationship  at  that  time  with  Sena- 
tor McCarthy  and  the  McCarthy  committee,  did  you  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  So  did  you  cut  your  trip  short  to  come  back  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  contacted  Senator  McCarthy  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Upon  coming  back,  is  that  right,  Mr.  Secretary? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Immediately. 

Mr,  Jenkins.  Now,  Mr.  Stevens,  the  truth  of  the  matter  is  that  on 
that  first  meeting  with  Senator  McCarthy  you  sought  in  every  hon- 
orable way,  I  will  say,  possible  to  get  him  to  desist  and  to  let  you 
carry  on  that  work,  did  you  not  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  In  the  first  meeting  with  Senator  McCarthy? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Yes,  sir. 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir, 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  did  not? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  say  you  never  did  at  any  time  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Get  him  to  cease  and  desist  ? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Yes,  sir. 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Stevens,  let  me  ask  you  this  question.  I  know 
you  are  human.  Irrespective  of  what  efforts  you  made  or  didn't  make, 
you  would  rather  he  had  not  undertaken  this  investigation  of  Fort 
Monmouth  and  have  left  it  up  to  you,  had  you  not  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir,  I  would  not  say  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Well,  would  you  deny  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  What  do  you  mean,  would  I  deny  it? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  say  you  won't  say  it.  I  am  asking  you  if  you 
will  deny  it. 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  because  I  say 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  don't  deny  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir,  I  say 


200  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Mv.  Jenkins.  You  know  what  the  question  is.  You  would  rather 
he  had  not  initiated  the  investigation  and  left  it  up  to  you. 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir.  I  am  perfectly  agreeable  to  working 
with  Senator  McCarthy's  committee  or  any  other  committee  of  the 
Congress  on  any  subject  that  alTects  the  Department  of  the  Army.  I 
consider  it  not  only  a  duty  but  a  privilege  to  work  with  these  com- 
mittees. 

I  approached  my  whole  relationship  with  the  Congress  on  that 
basis. 

May  1  make  one  minor  correction,  Mr.  Jenkins,  because  I  think  that 
inadvertently — this  has  just  come  into  my  mind — that  I  made  a  slight 
mistake  in  response  to  one  of  your  questions.  That  is  when  you  asked 
me  if  I  cut  my  trip  short  in  Montana.    I  think  you  asked  me  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Yes,  I  did. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  I  said  yes  as  we  were  going  along.  I 
didn't.  I  had  planned  to  leave  there  on  Labor  Day  and  fly  back,  and 
I  did  that.  I  think  I  indicated  in  my  wire  to  Senator  IVIcCarthy  that 
I  was  returning  by  the  following  morning.  That  is  a  minor  thing, 
but  I  don't  want  to  have  it  on  the  record  incorrectly. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Stevens,  on  numerous  occasions  in  your  direct 
examination  you  have  told  of  initiating  visits  with  the  Senator  and  his 
staff  and  of  calls  with  the  Senator  and  his  staff;  have  you  not? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  have  told  of  initiating  visits  to  New  York  City; 
is  tliat  right  ? 

Secretary  Ste\tkns.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  believe — when  did  you  first  hear  that  there  was  a 
person  in  this  world  named  G.  David  Schine  ? 

Secretary  Ste\tens.  I  believe  that  was  on  the  8th  of  September,  Mr. 
Jenkins. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Is  that  the  time  that  you  had  coffee  at  the  breakfast 
table  in  the  Schine  apartment ;  that  is,  the  apartment  of  his  father  and 
mother  ? 

Secretary  Steven.  No,  sir ;  this  was  when  I  returned  from  the  West 
and  first  visited  Senator  McCarthy  on  the  8th  of  September. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  When  was  it  tliat  you  had  breakfast  or  coffee  in  the 
Schine  apartment  in  New  York  City  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  was  the  16th  of  September. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  knew  then  who  David  Schine  was,  did  you  not? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  knew  that  he  Avas  on  the  McCarthy  committee 
and  that  he  was  subject  to  be  drafted  ?    That  is  right,  is  it  not  ? 

Secretary  Stevtsns.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  you  knew  that  he  was  the  son  of  a  multimil- 
lionaire ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir ;  I  would  not  say  I  knew  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  The  son  of  very  wealthy  parents  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  do  not  think  that  I  had  any  knowledge 
of  the  financial  position  of  the  Schine  family  other  than  walking  into 
the  apartment  that  morning  and  seeing  that  it  was  a  very  nice  place. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  knew  then  that  he  was  a  controversial  figure,  did 
you  not,  Mr.  Secretary,  and  had  been  talked  about  on  the  radio  and 
written  up  in  newspaper  columns,  particularly  with  reference  to  his 
draft  status? 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  201 

Secretary  Ste\Ti:ns.  I  know  there  had  been  considerable  discussion 
about  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  you  went  with  Senator  McCarthy,  or  at  the 
invution  of  the  Senator,  to  the  very  home  where  this  boy  lived  on  Sep- 
tember 16,  did  you  not? 

Secretary  STE^'ENS.  That  is  right. 

INIr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  not  feel  like  such  a  visit  might  compromise 
you  or  cause  some  criticism  ? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  No,  sir;  I  did  not.    I  felt 

]Mr.  Jenkins.  Very  well.    Excuse  me.    Go  ahead,  Mr.  Secretary. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  was  going  to  say  that  I  was  in  New  York  at 
that  time.  The  first  contact  with  Senator  McCarthy  was  on  the  8th  of 
September,  and  I  v/as  anxious  to  follow  it  up  and  do  all  I  could  to 
expedite  whatever  actions  miglit  be  necessary.  I  thought  wdiile  I  was 
in  New  York  I  would  like  to  see  the  Senator,  and  so  I  contacted  him 
and  he  suggested  that  place  of  meeting.  I  would  have  met  him  any- 
where ;  it  did  not  make  any  difference  to  me. 

JNIr.  Jenkins.  ]\Ir.  Secretary,  did  you  ever  at  any  other  time  become 
a  guest  in  the  Schine  home  in  New  York  City  ? 

Secretary  Stfa-ens.  Not  in  the  home,  sir.  I  referred  Friday  to  the 
dinner  that  I  attended  in  the  Waldorf ;  it  was  not  in  their  apartment. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Given  by  David's  father  and  mother? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right, 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Attended  by  Mr.  Cohn  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  understood  they  gave  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  By  Senator  McCarthy  and  Mr.  Cohn  and  Mr.  Cohn's 
father,  a  jurist  in  New  York  City,  and  attended  by  all  of  those  parties 
and  others,  I  believe  you  say. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Including  a  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Berlin? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Will  you  identify  them? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Mr.  Berlin,  I  believe,  is  president  of  the  Hearst 
publications  in  New  York. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Had  pressure  been  brought  to  bear  upon  you  at  that 
time  on  behalf  of  Schine ;  that  is,  at  this  dinner  party  given  in  New 
York? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Had  pressure  been  brought  to  bear  on  me? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Yes. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  the  question  had  been  up  of  a  commission 
and  various  things  which  I  have  detailed  in  the  course  of  my  testi- 
mony, Mr.  Jenkins ;  yes. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  you  found  out  that  calls  had  been  coming  in 
for  David  Schine  since  mid- July,  did  you  not,  and  you  knew  it  at  the 
time  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  you  went  for  the  second  time  and  became  a 
guest  of  this  boy's  father  and  mother? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  Mr.  Jenkins,  I  was  in  New  York. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  don't  say  that  there  is  anything  wrong;  it  is  up 
to  the  committee  to  decide  that. 

Secretary  Stevens.  May  I  give  you  just  a  little  bit  of  background 
on  that ;  that  is,  that  I  went  to  New  York  on  my  own  initiative,  with 
the  invitation  of  the  Senator,  to  attend  the  Fort  Monmouth  hearings  on 


202  SPECIAL    INl^ESTIGATION 

the  13th  and  14th  of  October.  I  invited  Senator  INlcCarthy  and  his 
staff  to  liinclieon  with  me  on  both  of  those  days.  At  some  time  during 
the  course  of  October  13,  Senator  McCarthy  invited  me  to  come  to 
dinner  that  night.  Now,  I  think  he  had  lunch  -with  me  and  I  had 
dinner  with  him.  I  paid  no  particular  attention,  frankly,  as  to  where 
1  was  going  or  what  we  were  going  to  do. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Was  it  the  next  morning  that  David  Schine  drove  you 
somewhere  in  his  automobile  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  It  was ;  the  morning  of  October  14. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  October  14  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Are  you  sure  about  that  date  ? 

Secretary  Ste\t3ns.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  October  14  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Where  did  he  drive  you? 

Secretary  Stevens.  He  drove  me  from  the  corner  of  32d  Street 
and  Park  Avenue  down  to  the  courthouse  in  lower  Manhattan. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  there  was  a  discussion  between  you  and  him 
then  with  respect  to  his  Army  status,  was  there  not  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  I  believe  you  said  you  knew  discussions  had  been 
carried  on  since  mid- July. 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Or  for  a  period  of  some  2  or  3  months  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  you  knew  that  he  Avas,  in  all  likelihood,  a  future 
draftee? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir.  Well,  I  thought  he  was  going  to  be, 
but  I  did  not  know,  of  course.    It  was  up  to  Selective  Service  entirely. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Stevens,  did  you  ever  have  your  photograph 
taken  with  G.  David  Schine  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  there  were  a  lot  of  photographers  around 
down  there  at  that  hearing,  and  it  could  be. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  But  did  you  ever  at  your  suggestion  at  a  meeting 
anywhere,  any  time,  say  that  "I  want  my  picture  taken  with  David" 
and  have  it  done  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  am  sure  that  I  never  made  a  statement  just 
like  you  made  it  there.  I  mean,  if  there  was  a  picture  being  taken 
and  there  were  people  around,  I  might  be  very  apt  to  say,  "Well, 
let  us  all  step  in  here  and  have  a  picture,"  but  I  do  not  think  that  I 
ever  made  any  demand  to  have  my  picture  taken  with  David  Schine. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  did  not  say  "demand,"  but  was  your  picture,  after 
David  Schine  was  drafted,  ever  taken  with  you  alone  at  your  sug- 
gestion, anywhere? 

Secretary  Stea'ens.  After  he  was  drafted  ? 

]\Ir.  Jenkins.  Yes. 

Let  me  show  you  a  picture,  Mr.  Stevens,  for  the  purpose  of  refresh- 
ing your  recollection.  I  ask  you  whether  or  not  that  is  a  photograph 
of  you,  the  Secretary  of  the  Army,  and  David  Schine,  a  private  in 
the  Army. 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  203 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  unfortunately  can  recognize  myself,  but  I 
could  not  guarantee  the  soldier. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  My  question  is,  Is  that  a  photograph  of  you,  the 
Secretary  of  the  Army,  and  G.  David  Schine,  a  private  in  the  Army'^ 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  me;  that  is  certainly  me,  and  I 
assume 

Mr.  Jenkins.  "What  do  you  say  about  the  soldier  boy  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  do  not  knoAv  whether  that  is  Schine  or  not. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Well,  Mr.  Stevens,  you  know  Schine,  do  you  not? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes. 

]\[r.  Jenkins.  You  know  him  well? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  picture  does  not  look  very  much  like  him. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  have  had  meetings  with  him  and  have  been  in 
his  home  and  have  been  in  automobiles  with  him.  What  is  your  best 
impression  about  whether  or  not  that  was  David  Schine  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  it  probably  is. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  think  it  probably  is? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  remember  when  and  where  it  was  made? 

Secretary  Stevens.  This  was  made  at  the  Maguire  Air  Force  Base. 

Senator  Mundt.  The  photographers  will  abide  by  the  rule  to  take 
their  pictures  from  a  kneeling  or  sitting  position.  It  is  difficult  for 
other  people  to  see  what  is  going  on. 

Senator  Jackson.  I  could  not  get  the  answer  to  that  question. 

Senator  Mundt.  I  will  have  to  ask  the  photographers  to  abide  by 
the  rule,  and  that  is  pretty  clear. 

Senator  Jackson  could  not  get  the  answer  to  the  question. 

Senator  Jackson.  I  heard  something  about  Maguire  field. 

Senator  Mundt.  The  question  was,  Where  was  the  picture  taken  ?  I 
think  the  Secretary  has  not  answered. 

Will  you  repeat  the  question,  Mr.  Counsel,  and  let  the  Secretary 
answer  it  all  over  again  ? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  The  question  was,  What  was  your  best  impression 
as  to  where  the  picture  Vv'as  taken  ? 

WTiat  about  that,  Mr.  Secretary  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  am  sorry,  sir,  I  hate 

Mr.  Jenkins.  What  is  your  best  impression  about  that  picture, 
where  and  when  was  it  taken  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  My  best  impression  of  this  picture  is  that  it  was 
taken,  the  title  says,  and  I  imagine  that  is  correct,  at  Maguire  Air 
Force  Base,  which  I  referred  to  earlier  this  morning,  as  having  been 
the  airport  adjoining  Fort  Dix,  where  I  stopped,  and  after  the  meeting 
in  New  York,  on  November  17,  which  I  gave  you  the  detail  on  this 
morning.  And  I  would  say  that  this  is  a  picture  of,  undoubtedly, 
David  Schine,  and  a  rather  grim  looking  picture  of  the  Secretary  of 
the  Army. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  After  the  meeting  in  New  York,  of  November  17 ;  is 
that  right? 

Secretary  Stevens.  May  I  hasten  to  say  to  you,  sir,  that  I  have 
many,  many  times  had  my  picture  taken  with  privates  of  the  United 
States  Army,  and  I  hope  that  I  may  have  that  privilege  for  a  long  time 
in  the  future. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  How  many  would  you  say  ? 


204  SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yfell,  if  you  took  tliem  by  groups,  like  over 
there  in  Korea,  it  would  run  into  the  thousands. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Well,  there  are  about  IV^  million  of  them  altogether, 
are  there  not  ? 

What  had  occurred  on  that  meeting  of  November  17,  in  New  York, 
in  short? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  was  the  meeting  where  I  went  up  to  see 
Senator  McCarthy  to  see  if  we  could  get  together  on  the  news  con- 
ference that  I  had  held  in  Washington  on  the  13th. 

Mr,  Jenkins.  You  went  up  to  make  peace  with  Senator  McCarthy, 
didn't  you,  to  stop  this  investigation? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir,  I  didn't  go  up  there  to  stop  the 
investigation. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  It  wasn't  designed  for  that  at  all. 

Now  getting  back  to  Schine  now,  Mr,  Stevens,  isn't  it  a  fact  that 
you  were  being  especially  nice  and  considerate  and  tender  of  this  boy, 
Schine — wait,  wait,  wait,  wait — in  order  to  dissuade  the  Senator  from 
continuing  his  investigation  of  one  of  your  departments  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Positively  and  completely  not. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  The  treatment  you  accorded  Schine  then  was  just 
what  you  accorded  every  other  private  in  the  Army  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  certainly  would  treat  privates  in  the  Army, 
one  and  all  of  them,  the  same. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  why  did  you,  the  Secretary  of  the  Army,  having 
released  a  statement  in  which  you  said  that  there  was  no  current 
espionage  at  Monmouth,  why  did  you,  when  you  found  out  from  Cohn 
that  the  Senator  was  displeased,  take  it  on  yourself,  in  your  high 
position,  and  having  made  that  statement  no  doubt  with  the  advice 
and  consent  of  those  around  you,  including  your  superiors,  to  go 
traipsing  off  to  New  York  City,  hunting  up  this  man,  to  change  your 
statement  and  make  peace  with  him,  and  why  then  if  you  weren't 
afraid  of  him 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  did  it  because  I  wanted  to  continue  my  policy, 
which  is  a  complete  one,  of  cooperation  with  the  Congress  of  the 
United  States. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Well,  you  did  go  up  there,  and  you  did  make  con- 
cessions in  that  statement,  you  gave  it  out  worded  differently,  didn't 
you? 

Secretary  Stevens.  As  I  said,  I  don't  think  there  was  any  change 
in  substance,  and  I  didn't  so  regard  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Well,  it  seemed  to  pacify  the  Senator. 

Secretary  Stevens.  He  will  have  to  speak  for  that,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Very  well.     Mr.  Secretary,  I  call  your  attention 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  beg  your  pardon.  I  didn't  catch  that.  Did 
you  ask  me  a  question  ? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  am  about  to. 

Now,  you  have  denied,  emphatically,  that,  as  I  understand  it,  that 
you  even  wanted  the  Senator  to  discontinue  his  investigation  of  Fort 
Monmouth,  is  that  right  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Mr.  Jenkins,  may  I  take  this  opportunity, 
please,  to  make  a  little  statement  on  this  subject?  I  testified  last 
Friday  at  length  with  respect  to  the  luncheon  meeting  of  November  6, 
in  my  office,  where  the  subject  of  the  Fort  Monmouth  inquiry  was 
discussed  at  length.     I  also  indicated ■ 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  205 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  don't  think  it  is  responsive  to  the  question.  And 
I  object  to  it. 

Senator  Mundt.  Will  you  ask  the  question  and  see  if  we  can  get 
the  Secretary  to  respond  ? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  you  whether  or  not  this  is  a  part  of  the 
testimony  you  have  given  in  this  case  on  Friday  of  last  week.  It  is 
with  reference  to  my  question :  Did  you  want  him  to  lay  off  of  you  or 
Fort  Monmouth  or  quit  his  investigating  there.     And  you  denied  it. 

And  I  will  ask  you  if  you  stated  this : 

Well,  we  left  here  by  plane  and  flew  to,  I  think  it  was,  Eatontown,  N.  J.  There 
was  a  fair  amount  of  discussion,  of  course,  about  the  Fort  Monmouth  discussion, 
on  the  plane  going  down.  I  had  gained  the  impression  on  the  previous  meeting, 
which  was  the  l^ith  of  October,  in  New  York,  that  Senator  McCarthy  was 
approaching  the  point  where  he  felt  i^hat  he  would  turn  the  prosecution,  if  you 
will,  of  the  investigation  over  to  the  Army.  I  think  this  was  discussed  some  on 
the  plane. 

So  you  did  talk  to  him,  I  gather  from  that,  about  turning  the 
investigation  of  Fort  Monmouth  over  to  the  Army,  is  that  correct  or 
not? 

Secretary  Stfvens.  Certainly.  But  I  still  think  that  I  am  entitled 
to  make  a  statement  I  was  going  to  make. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  certainly  think  so,  too,  and  there  is  no  disposition  to 
deny  you  that  privilege. 

Secretary  Stevens.  May  I  go  ahead  with  that? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Certainly. 

Senator  Mundt.  Proceed,  Mr.  Secretary. 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  point  I  was  going  to  make  is  this:  that 
at  the  November  6  luncheon  where  the  Fort  Monmouth  thing  was 
discussed,  I  said  I  didn't  like  this  constant  hammering  in  the  headlines 
of  the  Army,  because  I  thought  it  gave  a  picture  to  the  public  of  con- 
siderable espionage  or  spying  at  Fort  Monmouth  which  was  not  in 
accordance  with  the  facts.  That  is  what  I  objected  to.  I  therefore 
wanted  to  handle  this  job  myself,  but  I  specifically  said,  and  I  think 
you  will  find  it  in  my  testimony,  that  I  wanted  to  make  progress  re- 
ports to  Senator  McCarthy  and  that  if  we  weren't  doing  the  job  right, 
1  assumed  that  he  would  come  right  back  into  the  picture. 

So  at  no  time  did  I  want  him  to  cease  and  desist  unless  we  were 
capable  of  doing  the  job  ourselves,  in  which  case  there  was  no  necessity 
for  it,  provided  1  kept  him  informed  as  to  what  was  going  on. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  All  right,  it  was  your  idea — and  1  believe  you  just 
reiterated  your  position — that  the  time  had  then  come  for  the  Senator 
to  let  the  Army  take  over  on  condition  that  you  render  to  him  from 
time  to  time  progress  reports,  and  if  you  weren't  doing  a  masterful 
job  of  it,  then  he  would  step  back  in.    Is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  about  the  way 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  is  about  the  way  it  was.  Then,  Senator — Mr. 
Stevens 

Senator  Mundt.  We  all  get  confused.  We  have  so  many  generals 
and  Senators  and  Secretaries. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  don't  know  to  whom  to  apologize. 

Senator  Mundt.  I  am  sure  the  recorder  will  record  it  properly.  Let 
there  be  no  apology.    Just  proceed. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Then  what  you  are  saying  is  that  you  didn't  ask  the 
Senator  to  stop  his  investigation  of  Fort  Monmouth,  but  merely  to 


206  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

suspend  it  and  give  yon  a  cliance  to  carry  on,  and  then  if  you  failed, 
to  tal^e  over  again;  is  that  correct? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  is  correct.  So  insofar  as  his  charge  against  you 
that  you  tried  to  stop  the  investigation  of  Fort  Monmouth  is  con- 
cerned, that  is  not  correct.    You  merely  tried  to  get  it  suspended  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right, 

Mr.  Jenkins  That  is  right.  I  think  that  you  wanted  as  long  a 
suspension  as  possible,  didn't  you  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  suppose  that  I  probably  did.  On  the 
other  hand,  if  we  didn't  do  the  job  and  do  it  properly,  I  wouldn't  want 
a  long  suspension.  The  stakes  here  were  too  big.  The  security  of  the 
country  was  involved.    I  wanted  all  the  help  I  could  get  on  doing  the 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Let  me  ask  you  this,  Mr.  Stevens:  Is  it  not  a  fact 
that  a  suspension  is  in  effect  a  stoppage  just  as  the  Senator  has 
charged  ? 

Secretary  Ste\tens.  No,  I  wouldn't  think  so. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  wouldn't  think  so ;  you  wouldn't  so  consider  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  the  staff  work  would  go  right  along, 
and  presumably  they  would  be  in  constant  touch  with  them.  They 
would  give  us  additional  information  as  it  was  available.  No,  I 
wouldn't  say  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  belong  to  a  social  club  in  New  York  City 
called  the  Merchants  Club  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  you  whether  or  not  at  the  very  inception 
of  this  matter  you,  as  a  member,  made  arrangements  at  the  Merchants 
Club  for  the  McCarthy  committee  to  be  entertained  there,  to  get 
their  meals  there  from  time  to  time  without  any  limitation,  and  that  in 
the  end  the  sum  total  of  the  bill  was  to  be  sent  to  you  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  said  that  I  would  like  to  have  them  use  the 
club,  which  was  near  the  courthouse,  during  that  week  that  hearings 
were  being  held,  which  I  think  was  the  week  of  the  12th  to  the  16th  of 
November ;  including  the  13th  and  14th  when  I  was  there.  I  wanted 
those  facilities  to  be  available  to  the  Senator  and  his  staff  if  they 
wanted  to  use  them. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Then  your  answer  to  my  question  is  "Yes." 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  he,  investigating  you  or  the  Army,  and  his  staff 
were  to  eat  at  your  expense,  without  let,  without  hindrance,  with  no 
limitation. 

Did  you  think,  Mr.  Secretary,  that  it  was  within  the  bounds  of 
propriety  for  you  to  do  that  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Completely. 

Mr,  Jenkins.  Completely  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  was  not  done  for  the  purpose  of  mollifying  or 
pacifying  him  or  anything? 

Senator  Symington.  I  didn't  hear  the  question.  Will  you  repeat 
it,  counsel? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  said  the  arrangements  to  have  the  Senator  and  his 
stall'  be  his  guests  at  his  expense,  eating  and  so  forth,  was  not  done  for 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  207 

the  purpose  of  mollifyino;  or  pacifying  the  Senator  to  get  him  to  sus- 
pend his  investigation  of  Fort  Monmouth. 

Senator  Symington.  Thank  you. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  AVhat  do  you  say  about  that  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  say  it  certainly  was  not  done  for  that  purpose, 
Mr.  Jenkins. 

JNIr.  Jenkins.  What  purpose  was  it  done  for  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  A  friendly  matter  of  convenience,  when  you  get 
right  down  to  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Well,  ]\Ir.  Stevens,  there  was  quite  a  scene  at  Fort 
Dix  on  October  20,  was  there  not  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  You  mean  Fort  Monmouth. 

Senator  McCarthy.  I  would  like  to  request  counsel,  if  he  would,  for 
fear  the  wrong  impression  may  have  been  created,  to  ask  the  Secretary 
whether  or  not  we  ever  accepted  the  invitation,  whether  we  actually 
ate  at  the  Merchants  Club 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  they  or  did  they  not  avail  themselves  of  that 
privilege  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes;  they  did. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  They  did?    All  right. 

Senator  McCarthy,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  would  like 

Senator  Mundt.  This  has  to  be  a  point  of  order,  the  Chair  insists. 
Counsel  has  requested  that  he  not  be  interrupted  in  his  interrogatories 
except  for  a  point  of  order. 

Senator  Jackson.  A  point  of  order,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Mundt.  I  will  recognize  Senator  McCarthy  if  he  has  a 
point  of  order. 

Senator  McCarthy.  I  have,  Mr.  Chairman.     I  would  like 

Senator  Mundt.  What  is  the  point  of  order  ?     Will  you  state  it  first  ? 

Senator  McCarthy.  I  am  not  sure  if  you  and  I  have  the  same  im- 
pression of  what  a  point  of  order  is. 

Senatf>r  Mundt.  May  I  say  that  the  Chair's  impression  is  that  a 
point  of  order  has  to  go  to  the  relevancy  and  the  materiality  of 
question?. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Let  the  Chair  decide  whether  this  is  a  correct 
point  of  order.  I  would  like  very  much  that  Mr.  Jenkins  question  the 
Secretary  as  to  whetlier  or  not  we  ever  availed  ourselves  of  that  invi- 
tation when  Mr.  Stevens 

Senator  Mundt.  May  the  Chair  say  he  would  not  construe  that  to 
be  a  poijit  of  order  but  it  would  be  a  perfectly  proper  question  for 
Senator  McCarthy  to  ask  Mr.  Stevens  when  lie  is  cross-examining  him. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Mr.  Chairman,  could  I  finish  my  request  that 
counsel  go  into  that  matter  because  I  think  otherwise  there  will  be  the 
impression  created  that  the  Chair  and  the  staff  were  eating  at  Mr. 
Stevens'  expense  when  he  was  not  present.  We  were  his  guests  on 
several  occasions.  He  was  our  guest  on  several  occasions.  I  think 
that  should  be  cleared  up. 

Senator  Mundt.  That  would  not  come  under  the  heading  of  a  point 
of  order  as  far  as  the  chairman  is  concerned.  It  is  a  proper  question 
for  Senator  McCarthy  to  ask ;  it  is  a  proper  question  for  anybody  to 
ask.  But  the  rules  of  procedure  are  that  tliere  be  interruptions  only 
for  points  of  order. 

Senator  Jackson,  have  you  a  point  of  order  ? 


208  SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION 

Senator  Jackson.  I  have  this  point  of  order.  I  would  like,  and  I 
think  it  is  important,  that  a  clarification  be  made  as  to  the  rules  that 
apply  to  all  of  us  up  here  at  the  head  table.     Do  I  understand 

Senator  Syimington.  Can  we  fix  the  microphones  so  that  the  ques- 
tions are  asked  and  understood  ? 

Senator  Jackson.  Do  I  understand,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  I  can  make 
a  point  of  order  and  request  that  a  question  be  asked  by  counsel  ? 

Senator  Mundt.  The  Chair  has  just  ruled  on  that  to  say  tiiat  a  point 
of  order  can  be  asked  only  dealing  with  questions  of  materiality  or 
relevancy.  So  I  would  think  not,  on  v\'hether  you  could  challenge  any 
question  being  asked  on  that  basis. 

Senator  Jackson.  I  think  these  rules  should  be  strictly  enforced. 

Senator  Mundt.  The  Chair  has  ruled  on  the  point  of  order  in  con- 
formity with  Senator  Jackson's  position.     Counsel  may  proceed. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  Mr.  Stevens,  you  have  told  about  the  events 
of  October  20  when  you  say  there  was  an  explosion  on  the  part  of 
Eoy  Cohn ;  is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  was  at  Fort  Monmouth  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Fort  JMonmouth ;  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  When  he  was  not  admitted  to  the  holy  of  holies,  so 
to  speak? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  you  were  told  the  substance  of  the  statements 
made  by  Mr.  Cohn  on  that  occasion,  were  you  not? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Why,  Mr.  Stevens,  did  you  see  fit,  considering  your 
high  office,  to  publicly  there  and  in  the  presence  of  all  who  were  con- 
vened, offer  an  apology  for  what  you  had  considered  a  proper  and 
correct  act  on  your  part  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  first  of  all,  it  wasn't  public. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  It  was  in  the  presence  of  all  those  assembled  there, 
was  it  not? 

Secretary  Stevens.  It  was. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  is  what  my  question  embraces. 

Secretary  Stearns.  Yes ;  but  it  was  not  a  public  statement. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Wliy  did  you  do  that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  And  also,  the  question  came  up  about  it  the 
other  day,  about  whether  or  not  that  was  an  apology,  and  I  said  I 
would  like  to  think  that  over;  that  first  I  said  it  was,  but  I  wasn't 
sure  that  was  exactly  the  right  word. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  May  I  read  your  testimony.  It  is  brief,  and  the 
committee  will  decide  whether  it  is  an  apology  or  not. 

Well,  I  said  it  was  too  bad  there  wasn't  time  available  at  the  door  of  the 
laboratory  to  make  all  of  the  necessary  inquiries  about  who  was  cleared  for 
what,  and  therefore  I  made  that  on-the-spot  decision,  and  I  certainly  did  not 
intend  to  offend  anybody  by  it,  but  I  did  the  best  I  could  and  I  did  not  intend 
it  as  any  offense  to  Mr.  Cohn  or  anyone  else. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Was  that  in  the  nature  of  an  apology,  Mr.  Secretary? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would  say  that  it  was. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Will  you  read  on,  sir  ? 
Mr.  Jenkins  (reading)  : 

Very  well,  you  may  proceed. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would  say  it  was  in  the  nature  of  an  apology. 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  209 

Now,  if  I  am  not  reading  correctly,  I  invite  your  counsel  to  come 
up  here  and  check  it. 

I  d(iu"t  know,  sir.  I  am  trying  to  rethink  that  one  over  as  to  whether  "apology" 
is  the  ri.sht  word.  I  think  that  I  had  not  done  anything  that  was  wrong  on  the 
one  hand,  and  I  felt  it  in  my  heart  I  had  dune  what  was  right,  and  I  tried  to 
prt>tect  the  interests  of  the  United  States. 

Now,  that  is  it  in  full. 

Now,  Mr.  Secretary,  the  question  is  this:  Why  did  you,  in  your 
exalted  position  as  head  of  the  Army,  so  to  speak,  there  on  that 
occasion,  after  you  had  done  what  you  said  was  right  and  proper, 
in  the  presence  of  all  tliose  assembled  humble  yourself,  so  to  speak, 
or  kowtow  to  this  young  man,  and  make  that  statement,  whether  it 
could  be  construed  as  an  apology  or  not,  if  it  wasn't  designed,  if  it 
wasn't  a  part  of  a  pattern  on  your  part  to  at  all  times  keep  the  good 
will  of  the  McCarthy  committee  so  that  they  would  lay  off  of  you 
and  Fort  JMonmouth?     What  is  your  explanation  of  that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  My  explanation  is  that  it  was  part  of  my  desire 
to  work  with  the  committees  of  Congress.  I  had  no  thought,  in  trying 
to  smooth  over  the  feelings  of  Mr.  Cohn,  that  I  was  in  any  way 
attempting  to  stop  the  investigation.  I  think  from  the  latter  part 
of  the  language  you  read  from  my  previous  testimony,  that  that 
word  "apology''  hit  me  pretty  fast,  and  as  I  look  back  on  it,  Mr. 
Jenkins,  I  am  not  sure  I  know  exactly  what  the  right  word  to  use 
en  the  darned  thing  is.  I  think  it  was — I  know  it  was  an  effort  on 
my  part  to  smooth  over  a  situation  which  had  gotten  a  little  bit  out 
of  hand  as  far  as  Mr.  Cohn  was  concerned,  and  I  guess  we  have  all 
been  faced  with  situations  like  that,  where  we  tried  to  make  some 
appropriate  remark  that  would  make  the  fellow  who  feels  he  was 
offended  feel  a  little  bit  better  about  it,  and  that  is  what  I  attempted 
to  do.  The  word  that  applies  to  it,  I  leave  to  you,  sir,  in  those 
circumstances. 

Mr.  Jenkins.    Did  you  know  a  lieutenant  named  Corr? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  met  him,  and  I  don't  know  him. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Have  you  learned  that  when  that  alleged  explosion 
took  place,  and  I  wasn't  there,  and  I  don't  know  what  was  said,  that 
a  lieutenant  in  the  x\rmy  named  Corr  went  to  a  high-ranking  officer 
there,  and  said,  "Why  do  we  have  to  take  such  insults  from  Mr.  Cohn ; 
why  do  we  have  to  cater  to  him?''  and  have  you  learned  that  young 
man  said  that? 

Secretary  Ste^'ens.  I  heard  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Have  you  promoted  him? 

Senator  McClellan.  Let  us  get  his  answer,  and  I  don't  know  what 
he  said. 

Senator  ISIundt.  To  the  last  question. 

Secretary  Stevens.   As  far  as  I  know  he  has  not  been  promoted. 

Senator  Symington.  Can  we  identify  whom  we  are  talking  about? 

Secretary  Stevens.  He  is  the  aide  to  General  Lawton,  the  com- 
manding general. 

Senator  Symington.  Apparently  the  Democratic  microphones 
aren't  working ;  they  are  getting  a  little  better  now. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  Mr.  Secretary,  we  have  discussed  the  ques- 
tion of  whether  or  not  you  sought  to  discredit  the  McCarthy  com- 
mittee, and  the  other  charge  is  that  you  sought  improperly  to  stop 
its  investigation  of  Fort  Monmouth. 


210  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

I  read  you  now  an  excerpt  from  your  testimony  given  last  Friday, 
and  I  ask  you  to  state  Avhether  or  not  it  is  correct,  to  wit : 

Now,  at  the  luncheon,  I  discussed  with  them  the  Fort  Monmouth  investigation, 
and  I  told  them  that  I  felt  that  it  had  served  its  purpose. 

AVhat  does  that  mean  if  it  doesn't  mean  that  you  told  them  that  it 
was  at  an  end  or  should  be  suspended  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  By  that  I  meant,  Mr.  Jenkins,  that  it  served 
the  purpose  of  certainly  bringing  this  thing  to  the  forceful  attention 
of  the  Department  of  the  Army,  and  the  Secretary,  and  all  of  us. 
That  is  what  I  meant  by  "served  its  purpose,"  as  I  think  you  will  find 
there. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Noav  let  me  read  on  and  see  if  that  is  what  it  means. 

That  we  were  on  top  of  everything  that  they  had  given  us,  and  we  were 
following  up,  and  we  had  had  information  on  every  name  that  had  been  turned 
up  anyway,  and  that  I  wanted  to  have  the  Army  carry  out,  and  if  you  will, 
subject  of  this  committee,  in  the  sense  that  I  said  I  would  render  progress 
reports  as  to  how  we  were  doing. 

That,  in  substance,  is  what  you  said,  and 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  I  repeat,  wasn't  that  a  request  for  a  suspension 
by  tlie  Senator  of  his  activities? 

Secretary  Steat^ns.  "Well,  as  I  have  explained  before,  sir,  I  didn't 
like  this  hammering  of  the  Army  over  the  head,  and  that  is  the  thing 
that  was  bothering  me,  and  it  wasn't  the  investigation  itself.  I 
wanted  the  Army  to  handle  this,  and  try  to  get  the  situation  back  into 
reasonable  perspective  insofar  as  the  public  was  concerned. 

In  addition,  we  had  a  morale  problem. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  All  right,  do  you  recall  that  their  charges,  some  men- 
tion is  made  about  you  appealing  to  the  Senator  personally  on  the  idea 
that  you  would  be  driven  from  your  job  if  he  didn't  quit  and  let  you 
alone  and  discontinue  his  investigation  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  testified  on  Friday  that  if  this  thing  was  pur- 
sued and  the  erroneous  impression  was  getting  out  to  the  public,  if 
that  was  continued,  that  it  could  well  result  in  driving  me  from  office. 

Senator  McCarthy  said  that  that  isn't  Avhat  he  wanted. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  remember  the  specifications  in  his  charge  that 
you  at  the  Pentagon  in  your  office  told  the  McCarthy  committee  that 
if  they  did  not  lay  off  of  you  and  discontinue  these  investigations  that 
you  had  been  in  office  only  10  months  and  it  would  result  in  your  dis- 
missal from  office  ?    Was  such  a  charge  made  by  them  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  language,  INIr.  Jenkins,  I  do  not  accept 
at  all. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  But  that  is  the  charge  made  in  substance  in  the 
writing,  in  the  specification  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  And  I  do  not  accept  it  at  all. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  understand  that.  Now  let  us  see  how  close,  Mr. 
Secretary,  you  come  to  having  made  that  statement.  I  repeat  your 
testimony  of  last  Friday.    This  is  Secretary  Stevens : 

It  isn't  cut  off,  Mr.  Jenkins,  but  I  think  this  is  important,  that  in  respect  to  the 
matter  that  I  mentioned  before,  namely,  the  hammering  over  the  head  of  the 
Army  persistently,  creating  the  impression  that  there  was  espionage  in  a  big 
way  at  Fort  Monmouth  which  I  say  was  not  so,  that  I  told  Senator  McCarthy 
and  his  associates  that  I  had  btHin  in  office  for  10  months,  and  I  had  some 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  211 

responsibilities  that  I  had  assumed,  and  that  if  they  kept  on  with  these  headlines 
which  in  my  opinion  were  utterly  unfair,  that  they  could  drive  me  out  of  otiice 
if  they  wanted  to. 

You  did  say  that,  Mr.  Secretary  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir ;  I  certainly  did,  and  I  stand  on  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Wasn't  that,  Mr.  Stevens,  a  personal  appeal  to  a 
United  States  Senator  and  the  members  of  his  staff  to  at  least  sus- 
pend, which  I  believe  you  have  already  admitted  you  asked  them  to 
do  ?  Wasn't  this  an  additional  appeal  to  quit  or  suspend  so  that  you 
could  continue  your  tenure  of  office  beyond  that  10-month  period  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  wasn't  thinking  a  thing  about  my  tenure  of 
office,  Mr.  Jenkins.     I  didn't  ask  for  this  position. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  understand  that,  but  why  did  you  mention  it  ?  You 
said  you  had  been  in  office  only  10  months. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  wanted  to  have  the  Department  of  the  Army 
and  the  United  States  Army  treated  fairly,  and  I  felt  it  was  not  being 
treated  fairly. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Was  this  investigation  of  Fort  Monmouth  an  unfair 
treatment  of  the  Army,  considering  the  results  obtained  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  results  so  far  as  the  publicity  was  con- 
cerned were  extremely  unfair. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  But  as  far  as  the  results  obtained  outside  of  the  pub- 
licity, was  it  unfair  to  the  Army  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Oh,  no ;  it  was  not  unfair  to  the  Army  to  speed 
up  the  suspension  by  a  certain  length  of  time  of  a  certain  number  of 
cases.  That  was  perfectly  O.  K.  But  it  was  not  fair  to  the  Army, 
and  it  was  not  fair  to  the  American  people,  to  create  in  the  minds  of 
the  public  and  of  the  services  the  idea  that  there  was  a  lot  of  current 
espionage  going  on  at  Fort  Monmouth  when  such  was  not  the  case. 

Senator  Mundt.  Counsel  advises  he  wants  to  start  on  another  line 
of  questioning.  It  is  12 :  30,  so  we  will  suspend  until  2 :  30  this  after- 
noon. 

(Whereupon,  at  12 :  30  p.  m.,  the  hearing  was  recessed  until  2 :  30 
p.  m.  of  the  same  day.) 

X 


l-'i^'^b't'^'^ 


^felf 


SPECIAL  SENATE  INVESTIGATION  ON  CHARGES 
AND  COUNTERCHARGES  INVOLVING:  SECRE- 
TARY OF  THE  ARMY  ROBERT  T.  STEVENS,  JOHN 
G.  ADAMS,  H.   STRUVE  HENSEL  AND   SENATOR 

JOE  McCarthy,  roy  m.  cohn,  and 

FRANCIS  p.  CARR 


HEARING 

BEFORE  THE 

SPECIAL  SUBCOMMITTEE  ON 

INVESTIGATIONS  OF  THE  COMMITTEE  ON 

GOVERNMENT  OPERATIONS 

UNITED  STATES  SENATE 

EIGHTY-THIRD  CONGRESS 

SECOND  SESSION 
PURSUANT  TO 

S.  Res.  189 


PART  6 


APRIL  2G,  1954 


Printed  for  the  use  of  the  Committee  on  Government  Operations 


UNITED  STATES 
GOVERNMENT  PRINTING  OFFICE 
46620*  WASHINGTON  :   1954 


Boston  Public  Library- 
Superintendent  of  Documents 

JUL  15  1954 


COMMITTEE  ON  GOVERNMENT  OPERATIONS 

JOSEPH  R.  MCCARTHY,  Wisconsin,  Chairman 

KARL  E.  MUNDT,  Soutli  Dakota  JOHN  L.  McCLELLAN,  Arkansas 

MARGARET  CHASE  SMITH,  Maine  IHIP.ERT  H.  HUMPHREY,  Minnei-ota 

HENRY  C.  DWORSHAK,  Idalio  HENRY  M.  JACKSON,  Washington 

EVERETT  MCKINLEY  DIRKSEN,  Illinois      JOHN  F.  KENNEDY,  Massachusetts 
JOHN  MARSHALL  BUTLER,  Maryland  STUART  SYMINGTON,  Missouri 

CHARLES  E.  POTTER,  Michigan  ALTON  A.  LENNON,  North  Carolina 

Richard  J.  O'Melia,  General  Counsel 
Walter  L.  Reynolds,  Chief  Clerk 


Special  Subcommittee  on  Investigations 

KARL  E.  MUNDT,  South  Dakota,  Chairman 

EVERETT  MCKINLEY  DIRKSEN,  Illinois      JOHN  L.  McCLELLAN,  Arkansas 
CHARLES  E.  I'OTTER.  Michigan  HENRY  M.  JACKSON,  V/ashington 

HENRY  C.  DWORSHAK,  Idaho  STUART  SYMINGTON,  Missouri 

Ray  H.  Jenkins,  Chief  Counsel 

THOMAS  R.  Prewitt,  Assistant  Counsel 

Robert  A.  Collier,  Assistant  Counsel 

SOLis  HoRWiTz,  Assistant  Counsel 

CHARLES  A.  Maner,  Secretary 

n 


CONTENTS 


Page 
restimony  of  Hon.  Robert  T.  Stevens,  Secretary,  Department  of  the  Army_      214 

III 


SPECIAL  SENATE  INVESTIGATION  ON  CHAEGES  AND 
COUNTEECHARGES  INVOLVING:  SECEETAEY  OF  THE 
AEMY  EOBEET  T.  STEVENS,  JOHN  G.  ADAMS,  H.  STEUVE 
HENSEL  AND  SENATOE  JOE  McCAETHY,  EOY  M.  COHN, 
AND  FEANCIS  P.  CAEE 


MONDAY,   APRIL  26,    1954 

United  States  Senate, 
Special  Subcommittee  on  Investigations  of  the 

Committee  on  Government  Operations, 

Washington,  D.  C. 
after  recess 

(The  hearing  was  resumed  at  2 :  40  p.  m.) 

Present :  Senator  Karl  E  Mundt,  Republican,  South  Dakota,  chair- 
man; Senator  Everett  McKinley  Dirksen,  Republican,  Illinois;  Sena- 
tor Charles  E.  Potter,  Republican,  Michigan;  Senator  Henry  C. 
Dworshak,  Republican,  Idaho ;  Senator  John  L.  McClellan,  Democrat, 
Arkansas;  Senator  Henry  M.  Jackson,  Democrat,  Washington;  and 
Senator  Stuart  Svmington,  Democrat,  Missouri. 

Also  present :  Ray  H.  Jenkins,  chief  counsel  to  the  subcommittee. 
Thomas  R.  Prewitt,  assistant  counsel.     Ruth  Y.  Watt,  chief  clerk. 

Also  present :  Senator  Joseph  R.  McCarthy,  a  United  States  Sena- 
tor from  the  State  of  Wisconsin ;  Roy  M.  Colin,  chief  counsel  to  the 
subcommittee ;  Francis  P.  Carr,  executive  director  of  the  subcommit- 
tee ;  Hon.  Robert  T.  Stevens,  Secretary  of  the  Army ;  John  G.  Adams, 
counselor  to  the  Army;  H.  Struve  Hensel,  Assistant  Secretary  of 
Defense;  Joseph  N.  Welch,  special  counsel  for  the  Army;  James  D. 
St.  Clair,  special  counsel  for  the  Army;  and  Frederick  P.  Bryan, 
counsel  to  H.  Struve  Hensel,  Assistant  Secretary  of  Defense. 

Senator  Mundt.  We  will  proceed. 

Mr.  Welch.  I  want  to  say  a  word  of  thanks  to  you,  sir ;  and  I  spoke 
of  your  great  power  a  day  or  two  ago,  and  on  that  occasion  I  had  no 
microphone  and  now  I  have  not  one  and  not  two  but  three. 

Senator  Mundt.  That  is  good. 

Before  the  questioning  resumes  the  Chair  would  like  to  make  a 
statement  on  behalf  of  the  committee.  When  I  returned  to  the  office 
this  noon,  I  found  that  we  have  had  a  great  deluge  of  telegrams  from 
across  the  country  accusing  the  committee  of  stopping  some  of  the  live 
TV  broadcasts,  and  they  are  complaining  because  the  broadcasts  that 
they  were  receiving  on  Thursday  and  Friday  are  no  longer  available. 

The  Chair  simply  wants  to  restate  the  policy  of  the  committee  con- 
cerning television  and  radio.  We  stated  that  the  hearings  would  be 
open  for  television  cameras  and  for  radio  reporting  provided  it  was 

213 


214  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

done  without  revenue  to  tlie  broadcasting  companies  in  the  nature  of 
sponsored  advertising. 

We  have  no  control,  nor  do  we  desire  to  exercise  any,  over  which 
networks  carry  the  programs  and  which  do  not.  Certainly  the  tele- 
vision cameras  are  no  convenience  to  tlie  witnesses,  I  am  sure,  and  no 
convenience  to  the  committee  members.  But  we  labor  in  this  higlily 
illuminated  atmosphere  solely  in  the,  interest  of  giving  the  public  tlie 
full  set  of  facts  on  television,  on  radio,  if  the  networks  clesire  to  provide 
them  as  a  public  service. 

Neither  does  the  committee  assume  any  responsibility  for  any  broad- 
casts which  are  screened  or  cut  or  replayed  which  do  not  cover  the 
entire  proceedings  of  the  hearings.  Any  complaints  that  the  public 
has  to  make  concerning  prejudice  or  bias  for  partial  and  fragmen- 
tary reports  should  be  directed  to  the  broadcast  companies  and  not  to 
the  committee. 

Mr.  Jenkins  may  proceed  with  the  questioning. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EOBEET  T.  STEVENS,  SECEETAHY  OF  THE 

APtMY — Resumed 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Chairman,  before  proceeding  with  further  cross- 
examination  of  Mr.  Stevens,  I  think  it  proper  at  this  time  to  state 
for  the  purposes  of  identification  that  the  gentleman  sitting  on  the 
immediate  left  of  iSlr.  Struve  Hensel  who  has  now  been  declared  a 
party  in  interest  to  this  controversy  is  his  personal  attorney,  Mr. 
Frederick  Bryan,  of  New  York  City. 

Mr.  Stevens,  as  I  recall,  the  last  question  I  asked  you  prior  to 
adjournment  for  the  lunch  hour  was  whether  or  not  in  your  opinion 
this  investigation  of  Fort  Monmouth  was  unfair  to  the  Army  consider- 
ing the  results  obtained.  A  transcript  of  the  record  discloses  that 
your  answer  was  as  follows : 

The  results  insofar  as  the  publicity  was  concerned  were  extremely  unfair. 

Do  you  recall  giving  that  as  your  answer  to  that  question  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  you  this,  Mr.  Stevens:  Do  you  not  think 
that  it  was  a  salutary  thing  for  the  American  public  to  know  that 
there  was  an  active  agency  such  as  the  McCarthy  committee  investi- 
gating alleged  infiltration  of  Communists  in  the  Army  and  other 
departments  of  the  Government? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir;  I  think  it  was  a  good  thing. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  A  good  thing  for  the  public  and  a  bad  thing  for  the 
Army? 

Secretary  Stevens.  A  good  thing  for  the  public  to  know,  sir ;  and, 
as  I  said  before,  I  completely  favor  working  with  these  committees  in 
investigations,  and  the  only  thing  that  I  objected  to  was  the  manner 
in  which  the  hearings  were  held  and  the  publicity  was  generated. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  Mr.  Stevens,  on  or  about  the  10th  day  of  March 
of  this  year,  you  released  a  document  called  A  Series  of  Events,  and 
which  was  published  in  the  newspapers,  as  I  recall,  on  March  11;  is 
that  correct? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Wlien  you  say  "released,"  sir,  we  sent  them  to 
the  members  of  this  committee  and  to  the  Members  of  the  Congress 
who  had  asked  for  it,  and  we  did  not  make  it  public. 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  215 

Mr.  Jenkins.  It  was  made  public,  however,  on  the  11th  day  of 
]\Iarch,  was  it  ? 

Secretary  Ste'st^ns.  Yes,  sir. 

!Mr.  Jenkins.  And  the  countercharges  or  certain  memoranda  of  the 
McCarthy  committee  were  released  the  following  day  2 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  I  believe  that  this  series  of  events  which  you 
sent  to  certain  members  of  this  committee  contained  how  many  differ- 
ent events?  Anyway,  it  was  embodied  in  approximately  34  pages; 
is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  it  was  published  in  the  newspapers? 

Secretary  Stevens.  It  was  published. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  When  did  you  begin  the  preparation  of  that,  Mr. 
Stevens,  of  that  document,  consisting  of  34  pages? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  didn't  prepare  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  May  I  ask  who  did  prepare  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  It  was  prepared  in  the  office  of  or  under  the 
General  Counsel  of  the  Department  of  Defense. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  What  is  his  name  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  His  name  is  Mr.  Hensel. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Struve  Hensel  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now  a  party  of  interest  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  say  it  was  prepared  in  his  office? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  said  under  his  supervision  in  his  office. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Who  did  prepare  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  gentleman  that  I  talked  to  was  Mr.  Brown. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  the  preparation  of  that  was  supervised  by  Mr. 
Struve  Hensel  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  I  believe  is  correct.  And  I  think  it  is 
covered  by  the  letter  that  transmitted  the  chronology  to  Senator 
Potter. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Have  you  read  Mr.  Hensel's  reply  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Actually  I  have  not  read  it  in  detail ;  no,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Have  you  read  of  it  in  the  newspapers  and  you  know 
what  it  is  in  the  main  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

INIr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  know  that  he  disclaims  any  personal  knowl- 
edge whatsoever  of  the  events  that  occurred  from  mid-July  up  until 
your  last  contact  with  Senator  McCarthy  on  January  14  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  think  he  had  any  connection  with  it 
at  all. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Not  only  had  any  connection  with  it,  but  he  had  no 
knowledge  of  it,  did  he  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  think  he  had  any  knowledge  of  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Any  knowledge  of  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Can  you  explain  why  he  supervised  the  preparation 
of  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Why  he  supervised  the  preparation  of  it? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Yes ;  not  having  any  personal  knowledge  ? 


216  SPECIAL   IN^^ESTIGATION 

Secretary  Stevens.  AVell,  he  later  began  to  have  knowledge  of  it, 
and  I  think  that  you  said  up  to  January  14,  and  I  think  Mr.  Hensel 
began  to  have  knowledge  of  it  somewhere  around  about  the  26th  or 
25th  of  February. 

]\Ir.  Jexkins.  You  say  there  was  a  Mr.  Brown  who  actually  pre- 
pared it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Mr.  Brown,  I  understand,  is  in  the  General 
Counsel's  office  in  the  Department  of  Defense. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Where  did  Mr.  Brown  get  his  information  upon 
which  he  prepared  that  34-page  document  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  He  called  upon  the  Department  of  the  Army  to 
submit  its  files  containing  the  material  related  to  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  the  files  contain  all  reports  of  all  these  conversa- 
tions, Mr.  Stevens,  or  was  the  report  made  by  you  or  Mr.  Adams 
from  memory  ? 

Secretary  Ste\'ens.  I  only  know  about  the  part  that  I  was  con- 
nected with  myself.  That  is,  Mr.  Brown  came  to  the  office  and  we 
discussed  the  parts  of  which  I  had  direct  knowledge. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  From  time  to  time,  in  early  September,  beginning 
with  your  trip  from  Montana  back  to  Washington,  did  you  daily,  or 
upon  the  occurrence  of  these  events,  make  a  memorandum  of  them, 
or  did  you  later,  just  prior  to  March  and  in  early  March,  from 
memory  compile  a  record  of  these  events? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Most  of  my  material  was  from  memory.  Some 
of  it  was  from  memoranda,  letters,  and  other  things. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  have  testified  about  a  meeting  in  the  Schine 
apartment  on  September  16. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  you  if  it  isn't  a  fact  that  that  meeting  is 
not  mentioned  in  either  this  34-page  compilation  of  events  nor  in  the 
specifications? 

While  your  attorney  is  looking  for  that  information,  will  you  give 
us  the  full  name  or  the  initials  of  the  Mr.  Brown  who  prepared  this 
34-page  document  under  the  supervision  of  Mr.  Hensel,  and  his  of- 
ficial position  with  the  Department  of  Defense  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  will  get  it  for  you,  Mr.  Jenkins. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Very  good. 

I  ask  you  if  it  isn't  a  fact — as  I  understand  it,  you  testified  here 
last  Thursday  or  Friday — Friday,  I  am  sure — that  on  the  occasion  of 
this  meeting  in  the  Schine  apartment  in  New  York  City  on  Sep- 
tember 16,  Senator  McCarthy  asked  you  for  a  commission  for  David 
Schine?  Isn't  it  a  fact,  JNIr.  Stevens,  that  in  neither  this  34-page 
document  entitled  "Events"  or  the  specifications  filed  as  charges  here 
was  sucli  a  meeting  mentioned  ?    Is  that  correct  or  not  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  it  is,  but  that  is  being  checked,  Mr. 
Jenkins. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Can  you  explain  to  this  committee  why  such  an  im- 
portant event  as  that,  in  which  this  first  request  allegedly  was  made 
by  the  Senator  to  you  was  omitted  from  both  the  events  and  tlie 
specifications? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  I  don't  know  why  it  was. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  don't  know  why? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  217 

Mr.  Jenkixs.  Do  you  think  that  your  recollection  now  as  you 
testify  here  under  oath  is  better  than  it  was  when  these  events  and  the 
specifications  were  prepared? 

Secretary  STE^^:NS.  I  suppose  as  I  have  thought  about  this  thing, 
my  memory  naturally  has  been  sharpened  up,  Mr.  Jenkins,  on  some 
points.  As  to  why  that  particular  item  was  not  in,  if  it  was  not  in, 
I  just  don't  know. 

JNIr.  Jenkins.  You  certainly  gave  it  serious  consideration  before 
that  list  of  events  was  prepared,  did  you  not,  IMr.  Stevens? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  don't  know  that  I  did.  I  don't  know 
that  that  chronology  originally  published  was  necessarily  intended  to 
cover  every  single  thing.    Mr.  Brown  will  have  to  tell  us  about  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  As  we  understand  it,  that  is  the  first  overt  act  on  the 
part  of  the  Senator  in  seeking  preferential  treatment  for  David 
Schine.  Now,  is  your  explanation  of  the  leaving  of  that  out  in  the 
events  and  the  specifications,  a  lack  of  memory  on  the  subject;  or 
that  you  forgot  to  include  it  ?    Is  that  your  explanation  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  just  don't  know  why  it  was  left  out. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  testified  further  about  a  meeting  on  September 
21  here  in  Washington.  I  will  ask  you  whether  or  not  on  that  occasion 
General  Partridge  was  present  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  he  was. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Isn't  it  a  fact  that  likewise  in  both  your  34-page 
document  entitled  "Events"  and  your  specifications,  that  meeting  was 
entirely  omitted  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  was  an  executive  meeting  of  this  com-« 
mittee. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Is  that  your  reason  for  having  omitted  it  in  your 
events  as  well  as  in  the  specifications,  the  fact  that  it  was  an  executive 
meeting  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  It  was  an  executive  meeting,  yes,  and  I  didn't 
consider,  since  the  issues  here  were  not  discussed,  that  there  was  any 
particular  reason  to  include  that  executive  meeting  of  this  committee. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  have  included  in  both  your  events  and  specifica- 
tions, references  to  certain  executive  meetings,  have  you  not,  Mr,  Sec- 
retary. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right ;  yes. 

Mr.  Jenkins,  Then  do  we  understand  that  the  reason  it  was  omitted 
was  not  because  it  was  an  executive  meeting,  but  because  there  was 
nothing  of  interest  discussed?    Is  that  now  your  explanation? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  wouldn't  say  that  there  was  nothing  in  the 
course  of  the  hearing  that  was  not  of  interest  discussed,  but  it  was  an 
executive  session  and  I  would  not  have  felt  at  liberty  to  discuss  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  There  were  discussions  bearing  upon  the  issues  of  this 
controversy,  were  there  not,  Mr.  Stevens,  and  to  which  you  testified 
in  your  direct  examination? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  that  General  Partridge  did  appear  as  a 
witness,  yes.  I  don't  know  whether  it  had  to  do  with  the  issues  which 
we  are  talking  about  here  or  not. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Will  you  identify  General  Partridge  and  where  he 
fitted  into  your  scheme  of  things  in  the  Army  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  General  Partridge  was  the  Assistant  Chief  of 
Staif  G-2,  which  is  in  charge  of  intelligence. 

Mr,  Jenkins,  In  charge  of  intelligence? 

46620°— 54— pt.  6 2 


218  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins,  It  was  a  part  of  his  duty  to  investigate  the  infiltra- 
tion of  Communists  or  espionage  in  the  Army,  wasn't  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  later  remove  him  from  that  post? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir.  We  had  a  new  Chief  of  Staff  come  in 
in  August  of  last  year,  and  in  the  course  of  the  new  Chief  of  Staff 
taking  over,  it  is  the  perfectly  normal  procedure  for  him  to  make 
changes  in  the  Chief  of  Staff  positions.  He  made  a  number  of  them, 
including  General  Partridge. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  know  when  General  Partridge  was  relieved 
from  his  post  of  intelligence  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  can't  remember  the  exact  date. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Approximately. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  should  think  it  was  probably  November. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  While  the  McCarthy  investigation  was  in  progress, 
wasn't  it,  Mr.  Secretary? 

Secretary  Si"evens.  I  think  so,  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  think  so.  Isn't  it  a  fact  that  you  told  Senator 
McCarthy  and  members  of  his  staff  that  Partridge  knew  nothing  what- 
ever about  intelligence  or  the  duties  pertaining  to  that  particular 
post  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  positively  not  a  fact. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Positively  not  the  fact.  He  was  removed  not  by  you 
but  by  the  Secretary  of  Defense  or  Chief  of  Staff? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  Chief  of  Staff.  General  Ridgway  made 
changes  in  his  staff  and  he  brought  in  General  Trudeau  from  Korea  as 
G-2  in  charge  of  intelligence. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Secretary,  you  further  testified  on  direct  exami- 
nation about  a  meeting  of  September  28.     Do  you  recall  that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  I  don't  recall  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  don't  recall  that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  At  the  moment,  no,  I  don't.  Could  you  refresh 
my  memory  on  it? 

JNIr.  Jenkins.  Be  that  as  it  m.ay,  the  meeting  of  September  28  is 
mentioned  neither  in  the  34-page  compilation  of  events  nor  the  speci- 
fications.   That  is  correct,  isn't  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  that  is  correct. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  The  record  will  show,  of  course,  what  your  testimony 
was  about  the  meeting  of  September  28. 

Now,  on  September  29  I  will  ask  you  whether  or  not  that  was  the 
occasion  of  the  wedding  day  of  Senator  McCarthy  ? 

Secretary  Ste\'ens.  It  w\as. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  attended  that  wedding? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  did. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Upon  the  invitation  of  the  Senator  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Correct. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  you  if  you  didn't  sit  at  that  wedding  or 
stand  with  one  G.  David  Schine. 

Secretary  Stevens.  In  very  close  proximity  to  him. 

Mr.  Jenkixs.  In  close  proximity  to  him,  and  talked  to  him  on 
that  occasion  ? 

Secretary  Sitlvens.  That  is  right. 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  219 

Mr.  Jexkins,  Did  you  make  an  engagement  to  see  him  at  a  later 
date  on  that  occasion  ? 

Secretary  Stevexs.  I  don't  think  I  did. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  don't  think  you  did?  Do  you  deny  that  you 
did^ 

Secretary  Stem^ns.  I  do  not  recall  that  I  did. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  If  you  did,  would  you  have  any  idea  of  the  purpose 
of  a  future  meeting  between  you,  the  Secretary  of  the  Army,  and 
this  boy  who  was  not  then  in  the  Army  ? 

Secretary  Stev-ens.  Yes.  I  think  it  entirely  possible  that  David 
Schine,  if  he  wanted  to  talk  to  me,  wanted  to  talk  about  his  future 
military  position. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  But  didn't  you  initiate  the  conversation  and  tell  him 
that  the  following  day,  or  shortly  thereafter,  you  wanted  to  see  him 
and  talk  to  him,  and  that  it  was  no  time  or  place  to  talk  to  him  on 
the  wedding  day  of  the  Senator  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  recall  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  don't  recall  it  and  you  don't  deny  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  recall  it  and  I  do  not  deny  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Will  you  examine  there,  and  I  am  sure  your  lawyer 
will  assist  you,  your  events  of  October  2.  And  while  that  is  being 
done,  let  me  ask  you  the  question :  Isn't  it  a  fact  that  in  the  document 
referred  to  as  "Events,"  you  state  that  Roy  Cohn  spoke  to  you  about 
David  Schine  on  October  2,  whereas  in  your  specifications  you  say 
that  both  Cohn  and  Carr  sought  special  favors  for  David  Shine  ? 

State  whether  or  not  that  is  the  fact.  And  if  you  have  any  ex- 
planation of  that  discrepancy,  you  may  give  it  to  the  committee  at 
this  time. 

Secretary  Stevens.  "Well,  I  think  that  I  said,  in  my  testimony  on 
this  point,  that  Mr.  Cohn  did  most  of  the  talking  on  the  subject.  I 
do  not  recall. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Your  specifications  are  before  you,  and  you  may  be 
positive  about  it,  Mr.  Secretary. 

Mr.  Welch.  Mr.  Chairman,  could  I  say  a  word  about  this  case — 
now  I  hear  myself.  Mr.  Jenkins  would  be  quick  to  say  that  our 
specifications  were  prepared  with  great  speed  and  under  great  pres- 
sure. I  am  frank  to  say  they  were  finished  in  the  small  hours  of  the 
morning.  I  think  Mr.  Jenkins  would  do  me  the  credit  of  saying  we 
were  more  closely  on  schedule  on  our  specifications  than  was  the 
other  side. 

Be  that  as  it  may.  They  were  also  the  specifications,  or  also  based 
on  information  from  Mr.  Adams.  But  I  would  like,  although  it  is  not 
comfortable  for  me  to  say  so,  that  if  there  are  defects  in  the  speci- 
fications of  omission,  the  chances  are  very  good  that  my  young  friend 
whom  I  so  greatly  admire,  and  myself,  are  very  much  to  blame. 

Mr.  Stevens  did  not  stand  at  my  standup  disks  late  at  night  while 
we  whipped  those  out.     It  was  Mr.  St.  Clair  and  I  who  did  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Chairman,  it  is  of  course  a  difficult  task  to  inter- 
rupt such  a  gracious  gentleman  as  Mr.  W^elch,  but  those  are  proper 
matters  for  him  to  show  on  cross-examination;  and  your  opportunity 
will  come. 

Now,  Mr.  Stevens 

Mr.  Welch.  I  beg  your  pardon. 


220  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  Mr.  Stevens,  did  you  not  go  to  Mr.  Allen  Dulles 
on  October  15,  with  reference  to  David  Scliine,  and  particularly  with 
reference  to  getting  a  commission  for  him  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  went  to  Mr.  Dulles,  but  it  was  not  on  October 
15. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  When  was  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  It  was  on  the  28th,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  beg  your  pardon. 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  October  28. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  went  personally.  Who  was  Allen  Dulles  at 
the  time? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  He  was  director  of  the  Central  Intelligence 
Agency,  and  still  is. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  that  is  a  Department  of  the  Army  where  men 
especially  qualified  in  investigations  are  sent  for  training  and  for 
commissioning? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No.  It  is  a  completely  independent  agency, 
and  it  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  Army,  except  to  the  extent  that  its 
work  is  coordinated  with  Army  and  other  military  services. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  say  that  was  on  October  28  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Nearly  2  months  after  you  say  these  importunities 
started  by  the  committee  for  favors  for  Schine,  is  that  right? 

Secretary  Sitsvens.  That  is  right,  yes. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  At  whose  instance  did  you  go  to  see  Allen  Dulles, 
was  it  your  own,  or  that  of  the  Senator,  or  Mr.  Cohn,  or  anyone  else  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  This  matter  came  up  on  the  telephone,  and 
Mr.  Cohn  called  me  and  said  that  he  had  two  matters  in  mind  with 
respect  to  Mr.  Schine.  One  was  a  possible  furlough  that  might  be 
granted  immediately  on  Mr.  Schine  s  being  inducted,  and  the  other 
was  the  possibility  that  CIA  might  have  some  use  for  Mr.  Schine. 

I  said,  "Well,  I  will  go  and  ask  Mr.  Dulles  if  he  can  use  Mr. 
Schine."  And  I  did  that.  And  he  said  that  he  could  not  use  him, 
and  I  so  reported  to  Mr.  Cohn. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  If  he  could  use  Mr.  Schine  in  what  capacity? 

Secretary  Stevens.  In  any  capacity. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Well,  did  you  consider  that  an  act  on  your  part 
designed  to  favor  David  Schine  ? 

Secretary  Ste\-ens.  I  considered  it  as  an  act  of  cooperation  as  a 
result  of  the  telephone  conversation  when  ]\Ir.  Cohn  called  me  with 
res]-)ect  to  David  Schine. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  you  whether  or  not  mention  is  made  of  that 
act  on  your  part,  regardless  of  how  this  committee  construes  it,  in 
either  the  34-page  compilation  of  events  or  the  specifications? 

Secretary  Ste\-ens.  I  will  ask  if  I  may,  that  the  attorney  look  that 
up  and  see.     I  can't  answer  it  at  the  moment. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  ever  tell  Schine,  yourself,  that  you  wanted 
him  in  Intelligence? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  I  wanted  him  in  Intelligence? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Right. 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  I  don't  remember  that.  I  have  talked,  I 
remember,  in  the  early  part  of  this  thing  there  was  a  good  deal  of 
discussion  like  the  time  1  rode  down  with  him  in  the  car  from  uptown 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  221 

New  York,  which  I  discussed  on  Friday.     Intelligence  matters  were 
discussed. 

Mr.  Jexkins.  With  Schine? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes. 

^Ir.  Jenkins.  And  that  was  during  the  period  of  the  McCarthy 
investigation,  wasn't  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Now,  Mr.  Secretary,  that  was  not  a  part  of  your  pat- 
tern to  hold  this  boy  Schine  as  a  sort  of  a  hostage,  and  use  him  as  a  bait 
for  the  pui'i^ose  of  abating  this  investigating,  was  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Certainly  not,  and  if  he  was  a  hostage,  so  are 
hundreds  of  thousands  if  not  millions  of  young  American  hostages 
when  they  are  doing  their  duty  in  the  service  of  their  country. 

Senator  Mundt.  May  I  inquire  whether  the  counsel  has  produced 
the  information  so  that  the  Secretary  can  answer  the  question  which 
is  being  held  in  abeyance  ? 

Mr.  St.  Clair,  are  you  ready  ? 

Mr.  St.  Clair.  I  cannot  find  it,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  believe  you  had  a  meeting  about  which  you  testified 
on  November  6,  Mr.  Secretary,  in  your  office;  did  you  not? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  will  you  tell  us  again  who  was  there? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Senator  McCarthy,  Cohn,  Carr,  Adams,  and 
myself,  for  one-half  of  the  meeting ;  and  then  for  the  last  half  of  the 
meeting  General  Ridgway,  General  Trudeau,  and  General  Mudgett. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  will  ask  you  w'hether  or  not,  Mr.  Secretary,  you  on 
that  occasion  likewise  invited  one  G.  David  Schine  to  attend  as  your 
guest,  November  6,  at  wdiich  time  you  had  the  table  set  and  had  a  chair 
there  for  G.  David  Schine  and  then  expressed  great  disappointment 
that  he  did  not  attend  with  the  Senator  and  his  staff  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  David  Schine  at  this  time  was  in  the 
Army,  and  he  had  gone  in  on  November  3,  and  he  was  assigned  as  you 
know  in  the  first  instance  to  temporary  duty.  First  Army,  in  New  York, 
with  the  idea  of  being  available  for  committee  work. 

Now,  if  David  Schine  was  in  Washington,  on  that  particular  day, 
I  would  have  been  glad  to  have  him  come  along  as  a  member  of  the 
staff  of  this  committee.  I  do  not  recall  having  specifically  invited  him 
to  the  luncheon. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  say  he  was  in  the  Army  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Don't  you  know  that  he  did  not  report  to  Fort  Dix 
until  November  10, 4  days  after  the  date  about  which  I  am  questioning 
you? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  I  know  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Very  well.  Now,  Mr.  Secretary,  I  observe  that  in 
answer  to  certain  questions  I  ask  you,  you  are  extremely  positive,  and 
here  you  don't  appear  to  be,  apparently. 

I  ask  you  again,  isn't  it  a  fact  that  you  specifically  requested  Sena- 
tor McCarthy  and  Roy  Cohn  to  bring  G.  David  Schine  to  the  Penta- 
gon to  your  office  on  November  6,  for  a  luncheon  with  you  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  If  he  was  in  town,  I  would  have  been  delighted 
to  have  him. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  I  submit,  Mr.  Chairman,  is  not  an  answer  to  my 
question. 


222  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATIOISr 

Now,  I  ask  it  a^ain,  did  you  or  did  you  not,  on  November  6,  invite 
David  Schine  to  the  Pentagon  to  your  office  for  lunch  with  Senator? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  I  definitely  do  not  recall  having  done  so. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Well,  to  refresh  your  recollection,  do  you  remember, 
Mr.  Secretary,  that  you  had  a  table  set  with  food,  all  ready  for  all 
your  guests,  and  that  there  was  one  vacant  chair  there  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  recall  that  detail.  It  may  well  have 
been. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  remember  that  that  was  for  the  absent 
invitee,  G.  David  Schine  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir,  I  do  not  recall  that. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  remember  telling  Senator  McCarthy  and 
Roy  Cohn  that  you  were  especially  disappointed  that  David  Schine 
did  not  attend  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  do  not. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  deny  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Do  I  deny  it  ? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  deny  inviting  David  Schine  to  your 

Secretary  STE^'ENS.  I  have  no  recollection  of  having  invited  David 
Schine.    I  would  have  been  delighted  for  him  to  come. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  would  have  been  delighted  for  him  to  come? 

Secretary  Stevens.  If  they  wanted  to  bring  him  as  a  member  of 
the  staff. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  In  spite  of  all  of  these  terrific  efforts  to  high-pressure 
you,  you  still  would  have  been  delighted  for  David  Schine  to  come  on 
November  6  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  For  the  reason  that  the  Fort  Monmouth  investi- 
gation was  the  principal  subject  for  discussion. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  not  tell  Senator  McCarthy  and  Eoy  Cohn  on 
that  occasion,  the  6th,  that  you  wanted  your  picture  taken  with  David 
Schine? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  doubt  very  much  that  I  did. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  doubt  any  other  event  of  November  6  about 
which  I  have  asked  you  ?  You  seem  to  be  pretty  positive  about  the 
picture,  and  rather  hazy  about  whether  you  invited  him  there  or  not? 

Secretatry  Stevens.  I  do  not  recall  having  invited  David  Schine. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  If  the  Senator  and  Eoy  Cohn  and  others  testify 
that  is  the  fact,  you  are  not  in  a  position  to  deny  it  ?  Is  that  what  you 
are  saying? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would  like  to  hear  the  testimony. 

INIr.  Jenkins.  You  would  like  to  hear  their  testimony. 

What  possibly  could  have  been  your  purpose  in  inviting  David 
Schine  there  on  the  6th  day  of  November  to  lunch  with  vou,  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  Army,  if  it  were  not  for  the  purpose  of  offering  tidbits, 
so  to  speak,  sweet  morsels  of  tidbits  to  lull  to  sleep  this  three-headed 
monster  that  you  say  was  about  to  devour  you  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  certainly  had  no  such  idea,  Mr.  Jenkins. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Why  would  you  have  wanted  him  there  if  not  for  that 
reason  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Only  because  he  was  a  member  of  Senator  Mc- 
Carthy's staff,  and  if  Senator  McCarthy  wanted  him  to  come,  it  would 
have  been  perfectly  all  right  with  me. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  He  was  then  a  draftee  in  the  Army  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION"  223 

TSlv.  Jenkixs.  Great  pressure  had   been  exerted  upon   you,   you 


Secretary  Stev-ens.  That  is  ri^jlit. 

]Mr.  Jexkins.  For  preferential  treatment. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  yet  in  spite  of  all  that,  and  in  spite  of  all  this 
investifration  that  was  going  on,  you  now  deny  that  the  only  purpose 
you  could  possibly  have  had  in  mind  in  getting  him  there  was  to  pacify 
the  Senator  and  get  him  off  of  your  neck  at  Fort  Monmouth? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  completely  deny  tliat. 

;Mr.  Jenkins.  Of  that,  now,  you  are  positive  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  am  100-percent  sure. 

Mr,  Jenkins.  Is  that  right? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

I\[r.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Secretary,  thank  goodness  I  am  about  through. 
One  other  serious  charge  has  been  made  against  you,  and  that  is,  from 
time  to  time  you  offered  up  a  bigger  bait  even  than  David  Schine  to 
this  committee  to  let  you  alone,  to  wit,  the  Air  Force  or  the  Navy,  it 
being  alleged  that  you  tried  to  divert  this  committee  from  the  Army 
to  the  Air  Force  or  the  Navy.    What  do  you  say  about  that  charge  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  say  it  is  an  unequivocal  lie. 

Mr.  Jenktns.  That  is  one  phase  of  this  investigation  about  which 
your  memory  hasn't  failed  }'0u  ? 

Secretary  Ste\'ens.  It  certainly  has  not. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  want  to  read  you  an  excerpt  from  your  testimony.  I 
believe  you  have  admitted  that  you  did  try  to  prevail  upon  the  com- 
mittee to  suspend  the  operations  as  far  as  the  investigation  of  Fort 
Monmouth  is  concerned. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  wanted  to  change  the  type  of  hearing.  As 
far  as  the  investigation  was  concerned,  it  could  go  right  along. 

;Mr.  Jenkins.  This  is  from  the  record  of  April  23 : 

Question : 

Now  you  were  telling  about  a  statement  you  made  to  the  effect  that  if  this 
thing  continued  and  these  headlines  were  emblazoned  upon  the  front  page  of  the 
papers,  it  would  drive  you  out  of  oflSce. 

I  believe  you  admitted  that.    Here  is  the  answer  you  gave : 

I  said  that  it  could ;  that  such  a  thing  could  happen.  And  Senator  McCarthy 
said  that  that  was  not  his  intention.  We  discussed  further  the  question  of  how 
to  handle  this  Fort  Monmouth  situation.  Senator  McCarthy  then  said  that  he 
was  planning  to  look  into  some  situations  in  industrial  plants,  and  I  stated  that 
the  Army  and  in  fact  the  whole  Defense  Department  was  very  much  interested 
in  that  subject  and  had  problems  connected  with  it. 

I  will  ask  you,  wasn't  that,  Mr.  Stevens,  an  invitation  on  your 
part 

Secretary  Ste\-ens.  It  was  not. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Wait.    I  haven't  finished. 

[Continuing:]  To  seek  to  divert  Senator  McCarthy  and  his  staff 
from  the  Army  to  industrial  plants  and  other  phases  not  connected 
with  the  Army?  Wasn't  that  there  your  intention  when  you  stated 
that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  It  definitely  was  not.  If  you  want  me  to  give 
you  a  little  background  on  that 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  ever  intimate  or  suggest  or  did  your  at- 
torney, Mr.  Adams,  to  your  knowledge  ever  suggest,  that  there  was  a 


224  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

ripe,  juicy  field  in  other  departments  of  the  Army  or  in  the  Air  Force 
or  in  the  Navy  for  investigation  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Never. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  know  of  a  map  that  was  on  one  occasion 
drawn  by  your  attorney,  Mr.  Adams  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  have  heard  of  it.    I  never  saw  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  It  was  drawn  during  the  course  of  a  conversation 
between  him  and  Roy  Cohn,  wasn't  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  what  I  have  been  tokl. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  make  an  investigation  of  tliat  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  An  investigation  of  the  map? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Yes,  of  why  your  Lawyer  woukl  draw  a  map  in  the 
presence  of  Roy  Cohn,  showing  the  different  departments  of  the 
United  States  Army,  the  different  areas. 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  I  didn't  make  any  investigation  about  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  All  right,  then  you  deny  that  what  you  said  to  the 
Senator  with  respect  to  investigating  industrial  plants  was  designed 
to  get  a  suspension  or  to  divert  him  to  some  other  field  of  endeavor? 
Is  that  your  testimony  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Exactly. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  believe,  Mr.  Chairman,  you  may  take  the  witness. 

Senator  Mundt.  Thank  you,  Mr.  Jenkins.  In  approximately  90 
minutes  you  will  have  another  chance. 

In  my  10  minutes  I  would  like  to  start,  Mr.  Stevens,  by  reading  the 
first  paragraph  of  your  specifications,  dated  April  13.    It  says : 

The  Department  of  the  Army  alleges  that  Senator  Joseph  1{.  McCarthy,  as 
chairman  of  the  Permanent  Subcommittee  on  Investigations  (hereinafter  called 
tlie  subcommittee)  of  the  United  States  Senate,  and  its  chief  counsel,  Roy  M. 
Cohn,  as  well  as  other  members  of  its  staff,  sought  by  improper  means  to  obtain 
preferential  treatment  for  one  David  G.  Schine,  United  States  Army,  formerly 
chief  consultant  of  the  subcommittee,  in  that 

Then  it  lists  29  specifications. 

I  would  like  now  to  break  down  the  specific  parts,  insofar  as  your 
own  personal  knowledge  is  involved,  that  each  of  the  three,  to  wit, 
Carr,  Cohn,  and  McCarthy,  may  have  played  in  the  specific  manner 
of  utilizing  improper  means  to  obtain  preferential  treatment.  Let's 
go  first  to  Mr.  Carr. 

Are  there  any  specific  occasions,  to  your  personal  knowledge,  that 
Mr.  Carr  used  improper  means  to  obtain  preferential  treatment  for 
Private  G.  David  Schine? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  indicated  this  morning  that  in  the  meetings 
that  Mr.  Carr  attended,  he  w^as 

Senator  Mundt.  Passive. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Passive  about  it,  and  Mr.  Cohn  did  most  of  the 
talking.  However,  Mr.  Adams  had  far  more  meetings  with  Mr.  Carr 
than  I  did. 

Senator  Mundt.  I  am  questioning  you  solely  now  from  the  stand- 
point of  your  own  personal  knowledge. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  Mundt.  Part  of  the  task  of  this  subcommittee  is  to  find  out 
one  by  one  about  these  three  individuals,  whether  they  used  improper 
means.  I  am  talking  now  strictly  about  Mr.  Carr  and  strictly  about 
your  own  personal  knowledge.  At  any  time  did  Mr.  Carr  engage  in 
improper  means,  in  your  opinion,  to  seek  preferential  treatment  for 
G.  David  Schine? 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  ,  225 

Secretary  Stevens.  Not  nearly  to  the  extent  that  Cohn  did. 

Senator  Mundt.  To  what  extent  and  on  Avhat  occasions? 

Secretary  Stevens.  It  is  very  hard  to  define,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  I 
am  not  trymo;  to  evade  it.  I  think  Frank  Carr  took  a  relatively  inac- 
tive part  in  the  whole  situation  that  we  are  discussing  so  far  as  my 
personal  knowledge  is  concerned. 

Senator  Mundt.  In  all  events,  Mr.  Carr  has  been  charged  in  this 
presentation  with  some  very  serious  misbehavior. 

Secretarv  Stevens.  That  is  correct. 

Senator  IMundt.  In  justice  to  you  and  in  justice  to  him,  I  think  our 
connnittee  should  know  specifically  when  and  what  he  did  Avliich  was 
improper. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  that  will  no  doubt  come  out-- 

Senator  Mundt.  Insofar  as  you  know. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Insofar  as  I  know,  a  relatively  inactive  part. 

Senator  JNIundt.  Does  the  Chair  understand  that  insofar  as  you 
know,  you  absolve  him  of  engaging  in  improper  means,  and  if  not, 
when  and  where  did  he  do  something  improper? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  would  say  this :  I  think  Mr.  Carr  might 
have  been  a  little  more  active  in  trying  to  stop  some  of  the  conversa- 
tions that  went  on,  and  he  did  not  do  that. 

Senator  Mundt.  What  did  he  do  positively  that  was  improper? 

Secretary  Stevtjns.  Well,  he  would  sit  there  and  listen  to  Cohn 
make  these  statements  and  possibly  in  a  mild  way  take  part,  but 
nothing,  I  saj^,  of  more  than  a  passive  or  inactive  nature  so  far  as  my 
personal  knowledge  of  Carr  is  concerned. 

Senator  Mundt.  Well,  may  I  say,  Mr.  Stevens,  that  I  think  that  you 
owe  it  to  the  committee  and  to  INIr.  Carr,  either  to  say  that  insofar  as 
your  own  personal  knowledge  is  concerned  you  absolve  him  of  charges 
of  improper  treatment,  or  that  you  specify  the  way  and  the  time  in 
which  he  was  improper. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  will  have  to  do  a  little  thinking  about 
that,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Mundt.  You  may  think. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Do  you  mean  I  have  to  think  right  now  ? 

Senator  Mundt.  Yes. 

ISIr.  Carr  is  being  charged  right  now  and  I  think  you  should  be 
specific  about  it. 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  He  is  being  charged  by  the  Department  of  the 
Army,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Mundt.  I  am  not  trying  to  absolve  him  as  a  result  of  your 
testimony,  but  I  am  trying  to  find  out  whether  your  testimony  impli- 
cates him  or  absolves  him. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would  say  the  testimony  of  others  would 
implicate  him  far  more  than  any  testimony  of  mine. 

Senator  Mundt.  Let  us  stick  to  the  testimony  of  Bob  Stevens  and 
the  information  that  Bob  Stevens  has  for  our  committee. 

Of  your  own  personal  knowledge,  are  you  charging  him  with  im- 
proper treatment,  improper  means  or  improper  inducements,  or  in- 
timidation ;  or  are  you  as  far  as  your  own  personal  relationships  are 
concerned  absolving  him? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  say,  I  think  that  Carr  could  have  stepped 
up  and  stopped  some  of  this  conversation  that  went  on,  and  he  didn't 
do  it  on  the  other  hand. 

40620'— 54— pt.  6 3 


226  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Senator  Mundt.  Is  that  the  extent  of  your  charge,  that  Mr.  Carr 
failed  to  step  up  and  stop  either  Senator  McCarthy  or  Mr.  Cohn  from 
saying  things  that  you  think  they  should  not  have  said? 

Secretary  Stevens.  If  he  had  given  any  indication  of  doing  that,  I 
would  ahsolve  him. 

Senator  Mundt.  Is  that  the  extent  of  your  charge,  that  he  failed  to 
step  up  to  stop  them  from  saying  things  that  you  thought  were 
improper? 

Secretary  Stex-ens.  As  I  say,  Carr  took  part  in  a  minor  way,  in  these 
discussions  that  took  place. 

Senator  Mundt.  What  did  he  do  beyond  failing  to  step  up  to  stop 
Senator  McCarthy  or  Mr.  Cohn  from  saying  things  that  you  thought 
were  improper ;  what  else  did  he  do,  if  anything  ? 

Senator  INIcCartiiy.  Mr.  Chairman,  one  very  brief  point  of  order, 
I  think  that  the  record  should  show  that  Mr.  Carr  has  no  jurisdiction 
over  my  chief  counsel,  Mr.  Cohn,  nor  over  the  chairman. 

Senator  Mundt.  That  is  something  that  you  may  bring  up  in  cross- 
examination,  and  I  don't  believe  that  is  a  point  of  order.  I  don't 
suppose  that  Mr.  Stevens  would  be  in  possession  of  that  information. 

I  am  trying  to  find  out,  in  justice  to  Mr.  Carr,  and  I  am  sure  that 
you  want  to  be  fair 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  do. 

Senator  Mundt.  Just  exactly  the  extent  of  the  charge  that  you  are 
now  leveling  from  your  own  personal  knowledge  against  Mr.  Carr. 

You  have  said  that  you  charge  him  with  sitting  there  passively  and 
not  trj'ing  to  stop  Senator  McCarthy  or  Mr.  Cohn  when  they  talked 
to  you  about  Schine. 

Secretary  Stevens.  And  taking  minor  parts  in  the  conversation. 

Senator  Mundt.  The  chairman's  time  has  expired. 

Senator  McClellan. 

Senator  McClellan.  Mr.  Secretary,  what  authority  do  you  have 
with  respect  to  granting  commissions  in  the  Army  ? 

Secretary  Stfa'ens.  Commissions? 

Senator  McClellan.  Yes.  Direct  commissions  as  was  requested 
for  Mr.  Schine? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  Well,  I  never  have  granted  one. 
_  Senator  ]\IcClellan.  Who  has  the  authority  ?     And  I  want  to  de- 
cide the  source  of  the  appeal  and  of  whom  it  was  made,  and  what  you 
did  about  it. 

Assuming  that  his  application  had  been  found  proper  and  he  was 
qualified,  who  would  have  made  the  decision  to  grant  a  commission 
or  who  made  the  decisions  to  reject  the  request? 

(Tlie  witness  consulted  with  his  counsel.) 

Senator  ]\IcClellan.  Do  we  have  to  have  that  much  conference  to 
find  out  who  had  authority  to  grant  a  direct  commission? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Most  of  that,  most  of  that  was  delegated,  the 
authority  for  that  delegated  to  the  technical  services,  that  is,  like 
the  Corps  of  Engineers,  or  the  Judge  Advocate  General,  or  the  Chemi- 
cal Corps. 

Senator  McClellan.  Well,  who,  what  position,  or  who  occupies 
what  position  can  accept  or  approve  an  application  for  a  direct  com- 
mission and  grant  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  chief  of  a  technical  service  in  my  name. 

Senator  McClellan.  In  your  name? 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  227 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  Do  the}^  come  to  you  directly  ? 

Secretary  Ste\^ns.  No. 

Senator  McClellan.  Do  they  ever  reach  you  ? 

Secretary  Ste\'ens.  No,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  Do  you  ever  pass  judgment  on  them? 

Secretary  Ste\'ens.  No,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  It  is  done  by  somebody  under  your  command 
or  under  your  direction? 

Secretary  Stevens.  And  I  delegate  it. 

Senator  McClellan.  Wlien  they  make  the  decision,  if  they  make  a 
decision  rejecting  an  application  for  a  commission,  is  it  then  carried 
to  you  for  your  approval,  for  your  review,  or  for  any  action  whatso- 
ever ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Senator  JSIcClellan.  Well,  tell  us  exactly  what  happened  in  the 
case  of  Schine  ?  Who  undertook  to  prosecute  the  request  for  a  direct 
commission  for  him  'i 

Secretary  STE^•ENS.  Well,  General  Reber  was  first  contacted  by 
Senator  McCarthy. 

Senator  McClellan.  Well,  he  was  just  a  liaison  man  between  the 
Hill  over  here,  between  the  Congress  and  the  Department? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  McClellan.  So  he  conveyed  the  message  to  someone? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  McClellan.  To  whom  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  he  filled  out  an  application,  and  it  was 
the  Adjutant  General's  Office  that  processed  it. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  Adjutant  General  processed  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  McClellan.  Schine  went  there  to  fill  out  the  application? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  McClellan.  And  he  did  fill  it  out  there? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Finally  he  did ;  yes,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  Finally  he  did.  How  many  trips  did  he  make 
down  there  to  fill  it  out  ? 

Secretary  Stearns.  I  think  two. 

Senator  ]\IcClellan.  Do  you  know  why  he  didn't  fill  it  out  com- 
pletely the  first  time  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  Well,  you  took  no  action  on  it  until  he  made 
the  second  trip  and  completed  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  McClellan.  Now,  what  action  was  taken  on  that  applica- 
tion after  he  completed  it,  tell  us  what  happened  to  it  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  it  was  referred  to  the  technical  service, 
in  this  case,  the  Transportation  Corps. 

Senator  McClellan.  Who  is  the  technical  service  now,  who  is  at 
the  head  of  it  and  who  passed  on  the  application  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  General  Yount  was  the  head  of  it. 

Senator  McClellan.  General 

Secretary  STE^'ENS.  Yount,  Y-o-u-n-t.  He  is  Chief  of  Transpor- 
tation. 


228  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Senator  McClellan.  Is  he  the  one  that  rejected  the  application? 

Secretary  Stevens.  He  said  that  having  looked  over  the  applica- 
tion and  seen  wliat  tlie  qualifications  were,  and  what  the  needs  of 
his  service  were,  that  they  had  no  place  open  for  a  commission  for 
that  particular  qualification. 

Senator  McClellan.  Who  did  he  ^ive  that  report  to? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Back  to  the  Adjutant  General,  I  would  assume. 

Senator  McClellan.  He  reported  to  the  Adjutant  General  after 
examining  the  application  that  he  wasn't  qualified  or  that  they  had 
no  place  for  an  officer  of  his  qualifications? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  McClellan.  Then  what  occurred?  Did  you  pass  on  it 
at  that  time? 

Secretary  Stev^ens.  Then  the  Adjutant  General  would  have  notified 
General  Reber,  and  he  in  turn  would  notify  Mr.  Schine. 

Senator  McClellan.  When  it  was  taken  up  with  you  direct,  either 
by  Senator  IMcCarthy,  or  by  Mr.  Schine,  or  Mr.  Cohn,  what  did  you 
do,  if  anything,  to  try  to  get  him  a  direct  commission?  Did  you 
take  any  action,  any  positive  action  to  try  to  prosecute  that  applica- 
tion successfully? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  the  action  was  turned  down  by  the  Depart- 
ment of  the  Army.    That  was  the  end  of  it  as  far  as  we  were  concerned. 

Senator  McClellan.  Did  you  have  the  authority,  if  you  had  wanted 
to  do  it,  as  Secretary  of  the  Army,  to  overrule  the  action  that  had 
been  taken  by  j'our  subordinates  in  turning  down  the  application  and 
grant  him  a  commission? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would  say  that  I  had  the  authority  to  do  it, 
but  I  couldn't  conceive  of  doing  such  a  thing. 

Senator  McClellan.  You  couldn't  conceive  of  doing  that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  You  have  never  done  it  for  anyone  else? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  Therefore,  you  risked  their  judgment  and 
relied  upon  their  decision  with  respect  to  whether  an  applicant  is 
qualified? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  So  I  want  to  ask  you  this  question :  State 
whether  you  did  everything  you  and  your  subordinates,  with  respect 
to  this  application  of  Mr.  Schine  for  a  direct  commission,  that  you 
would  do  and  have  done  for  all  others  who  have  so  applied? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Everything. 

Senator  McClei-lan.  Do  you  spend  as  much  time  on  every  one  of 
them  as  you  have  spent  on  this  one  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  never  had  one  that  was  in  the  same  possible 
category  as  this  one. 

Senator  McClellan.  Well,  what  has  placed  this  one  in  a  different 
category  to  the  others? 

Sjcretary  Stevens.  This  constant  and  repeated  contact  in  regard 
to  Schine  as  represented  by  my  summary  of  65  telephone  calls,  19 
meetings,  and  so  forth. 

It  was  a  question  of  accumulated  effect  of  many,  many  individual 
actions,  winch  totaled  up  to  pressure  that  we  were  under. 
Senator  Mcndt.  Sorry,  the  Senator's  time  has  expired. 
Senator  .McClellan.  I  was  just  getting  started. 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  229 

Senator  IMuxdt.  Senator  Dirksen,  of  Illinois. 

I  think  the  Senators  will  learn  to  apj^reciate  the  value  of  10  minutes. 

Senator  McClellan.  I  still  favor  unlimited  debate,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Mundt.  Well,  we  will  all  have  another  turn  at  bat,  approx- 
imatelv  an  hour  and  a  half  hence. 

Senator  Dirksen.  Mr.  Secretary,  I  have  just  a  few  questions.  First 
let  us  refer  to  the  Fort  Monmouth  meeting  at  which  time  some 
members  of  the  oroup  who  were  there  could  not  gain  admission  to  the 
toji-secret  laboratory. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  Dirksen.  What  type  of  clearance  is  required  to  enter  that 
laboratory  ? 

Secretary  Ste\'ens.  That  would  be  very  top  clearance. 

Senator  Dirksen,  Is  that  what  they  call  Q  clearance? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No;  that  wouldn't  be  a  Q  clearance.  Top 
secret. 

Senator  Dirksen.  Top-secret  clearance? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator "  Dirksen.  Now,  do  Senators  automatically  have  that 
clearance  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  think  they  do.  Senator  Dirksen._ 

Senator  Dirksen.  But  in  any  event,  some  distinction  might  be 
made  between  a  Senator  and  a  member  of  his  staff  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  was  my  feeling,  that  anybody  that  had 
been  elected  to  Congress  was  entitled  to  visit  the  laboratory. 

Senator  Dirksen.  The  party  left  Washington  and  went  to  Fort 
Monmouth,  and  I  just  assume  that  evidently  the  clearances  were  not 
provided  for  before  they  left  Washington.     Was  that  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  We  didn't  know  exactly  what  our  plans  for  the 
day  would  be  until  we  got  there.  Senator.  As  far  as  I  know,  no  par- 
ticular preliminary  planning  was  done.  The  result  was  that  when  we 
came  to  that  particular  lab  the  question  of  proper  clearance  came  up. 
We  couldn't  settle  the  whole  business  in  a  matter  of  3  or  4  minutes,  so 
I  made  my  on-the-spot  decision  and  unfortunately  Mr.  Cohn  didn't 
like  it. 

Senator  Dirksen.  Where  would  clearance  have  to  be  obtained  to 
enter  that  particular  establishment? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  I  would  say  that  clearance  would  have  to  be 
made  by  our  Intelligence  people. 

Senator  Dirksen.  And  made  on  an  individual  basis  in  each  case? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  Dirksen.  Somewhere  it  was  not  made  for  the  staff;  obvi- 
ously they  could  not  enter  that  particular  structure. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  Dirksen.  The  only  reason  for  the  question  is  that  the 
record  indicates  that  you  apologized  about  the  matter,  and  I  just 
wondered  whether  that  fact  entered  into  your  apology,  some  frustra- 
tion that  having  made  the  trip  up  there  is  was  impossible  for  every- 
one to  go  into  the  laboratory. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  wasn't  it.  I  dislike  the  use  of  the  word 
"apology"  even  though  I  used  it  as  Mr.  Jenkins  read  it  from  the 
record.  I  have  rethought  about  it  and  I  feel  that  it  was  much 
more  in  the  nature  of  an  explanation  than  it  was  an  apology.  It 
wasn't  anything  to  do  with  the  fact  that  plans  had  gotten  compli- 


230  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

cated  there  or  anything.  I  was  sorry  that  Mr.  Cohn  or  anyone  else 
was  distressed. 

Senator  Dirksen.  Yoii  testified  a  little  while  ago  that  General 
Partridge  was  shifted  from  his  position  as  Chief  of  G-2.  There 
were  also  other  changes  in  the  staff? 

Secretary  Si-evens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  DiRKSEX.  But  you  didn't  particularize  and  say  how  many. 

Secretary  Stevens.  For  example,  the  Vice  Chief  of  Staff,  and  the 
Chief  of  Information,  to  mention  two  that  I  can  think  of  offhand. 

There  have  been  a  lot  of  other  changes,  too,  which  I  can  particu- 
larize for  you  if  you  would  like  to  have  them,  Senator. 

Senator  Dirksen.  It  is  not  material  except  to  indicate  whether  this 
stood  by  itself 

Secretary  Stevens.  Oh,  no. 

Senator  Dirksen.  Or  whether  there  were  a  number  of  changes. 

Secretary  Stevens.  There  were  a  number  of  changes  made.  It  is 
routine  procedure  with  an  incoming  new  Chief  of  Staff  to  so  staff  his 
organization  that  he  has  the  people  that  he  wants  to  handle  that  tre- 
mendous job  in  the  way  that  he  thinks  it  should  be  handled. 

Senator  Dirksen.  Going  back  for  a  moment  to  the  application  of 
Mr.  S^'hine  for  a  commission,  did  you  examine  the  written  applica- 
tion and  are  you  familiar  with  Avhat  is  in  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No;  I  am  not  personally  familiar  with  that 
written  application. 

Senator  Dirksen.  There  has  been  very  little  testimony  thus  far 
Avith  respect  to  qualifications,  but  if  you  are  not  familiar  with  the 
application  itself,  what  the  principal  recitals  are,  namely,  the  facts 
that  would  have  to  be  the  foundation  for  consideration  for  a  com- 
mission or  for  intelligence  duty,  I  presume  that  question  ought  to  be 
directed  to  some  other  person.  So  if  you  have  no  firsthand  familiarity 
Avith  the  application,  I  shall  not  press  it. 

Secretary  Stevens.  No.  I  haven't  studied  the  application  person- 
ally. 

Senator  Dirksen.  That  is  all  for  the  moment,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Mundt.  Senator  Jackson? 

Senator  Jackson.  Mr.  Secretary,  what  gave  rise  to  the  release  of  the 
so-called  chronology  of  events  which  I  think  was  released  on  March 
11? 

Secretary  Stevens.  What  gave  rise  to  it? 

Senator  Jackson.  Yes. 

•Secretary  S'it:\t:ns.  I  would  say.  Senator  Jackson,  that  it  was  an 
increasing  interest  on  the  part  of  the  Senators  and  Congressman  on 
this  Hill  that  gave  rise  to  it. 

_  Senator  Jackson.  At  what  time  did  you  reach  the  so-called  break- 
ing ])oint  111  your  relations  with  the  chairman  of  the  committee  and 
the  stu f r  ?  I  have  listened  very  carefully  to  all  of  the  events,  meetings, 
teleplionc  calls,  and  so  on,  that  occurred  over  a  period  of  time  dating 
back  to  your  return  from  ]\Iontana,  and  until  after  your  return  from 
the  Far  East.  About  what  time  did  you  decide  to  put  down  on  paper 
what  was  going  on  and  to  do  something  about  it? 

Sccretai-y  Stevens.  This  chronology  that  you  referred  to  was  pre- 
pared, I  would  say,  during  the  first  week  or  10  days  of  March. 

Senator  Jackson.  What  I  am  trying  to  get  at,  what  was  the  break- 
ing point  (     1  on  had  all  these  meetings  and  conversations  which  later 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  231 

resulted  in  serious  charges.  What  happened,  what  took  place,  that 
made  it  necessary  for  you  or  someone  under  your  direction  to  send  the 
chronology  of  events  and  charges? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  am  afraid  I  have  been  slow  in  getting  your 
question. 

Senator  Jackson.  Maybe  my  question  was  not  very  clear.  I  am 
sitting  over  at  this  side  of  the  table  trying  to  find  out  just  what  went 
on. 

Secretary  Stea-exs.  What  had  happened  was  that  the  question  of 
Schine's  training  at  Fort  Dix  had  become  a  matter  of  some  interest 
to  the  Congress  of  the  United  States.  We  had  received  a  fair  number 
of  letters  in  regard  to  the  matter,  extending  over  a  period  of  several 
weeks.  We  acknowledged  those  letters  and  said  we  were  looking  into 
the  matter  and  would  supply  information  later  on. 

Time  went  by,  and  more  inquiries  came  in,  and  it  finally  got  to  the 
point  where  this  information  had  to  be  made  available  to  this  com- 
mitte  and  to  other  Members  of  the  Congress  who  had  inquired  about  it. 

Senator  Jackson.  At  what  point  in  this  chronology  of  events  did 
you  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  requests  and  demands  made  of  you 
were  improper  and  had  gone  beyond  the  point  of  propriety  ?  Do  you 
have  any  idea  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would  say  that  that  information  started  to 
accumulate  back  during  the  early  period  of  training  of  Scliine  at 
Dix,  and  it  built  up  increasingly  as  time  went  on. 

Senator  Jackson.  You  had  reservations  from  the  very  beginning 
that  it  was  a  cumulative  sort  of  thing? 

Secretary  Stearns.  I  won't  say  that  I  had  reservations,  but  it  began 
to  be  apparent  that  ISIr.  Schine,  Private  Schine,  was  something  of  a 
problem  to  the  commanding  oilicer  at  Fort  Dix,  and  this  began  to 
become  public  property  over  a  period  of  time,  and  Members  of  the 
Congress  got  interested  in  it. 

Senator  Jackson.  Word  was  being  rumored  around  that  requests 
of  an  unusual  nature  were  being  made  in  behalf  of  Mr.  Schine? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  that  was  rumored  around. 

Senator  Jackson.  Who  prepared  this  chronology  of  events?  Do 
I  understand  that  it  was  a  Mr.  Brown  in  IMr.  Hensel's  office? 

Secretary  Steatsns.  That  is  right. 

Senator  Jackson.  According  to  the  statement  appearing  in  U.  S. 
News  &  World  Eeport  of  March  12,  1954,  in  which  your  charges  and 
the  charges  of  Senator  McCarthy  and  the  staff  were  printed,  it  was 
stated  that : 

It  is  not  a  report.     It  is  John  Adams'  version  of  the  situation — 

This  is  coming  from,  I  believe.  Senator  McCarthy  and  Mr.  Colin  and 
Mr.  Carr.     This  is  a  direct  quote : 

It  is  not  a  report.  It  is  John  Adams'  version  of  the  situation.  There  has  been 
issued  a  twisted,  distorted,  untrue  version  written  by  a  man  who  has  a  special 
interest  in  the  situation. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Of  course,  I  think  that  is  a  completely  inaccu- 
rate and,  in  itself,  unfair  statement. 

Senator  Jackson.  That  statement  is  not  true  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Senator  Jackson.  Could  you  tell  the  committee — as  I  understand  it, 
Mr.  Brown  in  Mr.  HensePs  office  prei)ared  this  ? 


232  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  rijrlit. 

Senator  Jackson.  Why  was  it  sent  to  the  Department  of  Defense  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  You  see,  Senator  Potter  wrote  the  Secretary  of 
Defense  a  letter  on  this  subject,  dated,  I  think  it  was  the  8th  of  March, 
and  he  put  down  some  very  pointed  questions.  The  Secretary  of 
Defense  wanted  to  be  in  a  position  to  answer  Senator  Potter's  letter. 
The  chronology 

Senator  Jackson.  Normally— Mr.  Secretary,  I  do  not  mean  to  break 
in,  but  normally  wouldn't  you  send  the  material,  that  is,  prepare  it  in 
your  office  and  send  it  to  the  Secretary  of  Defense  for  his  reply «  That 
is  what  confused  me. 

Senator  Mundt.  The  Senator's  time  has  expired,  but  you  may  an- 
swer the  question. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Could  I  have  it  read,  Senator? 

Senator  Jackson.  I  will  state  it  again  very  briefly : 

Normally  when  a  letter  is  sent  to  the  Secretary  of  Defense,  a  letter 
of  inquiry,  relating  to  the  Army,  wouldn't  the  Army  normally  prepare 
that  information  and  forward  it  to  the  Secretary  and  let  the  Secretary 
send  tiie  reply  covering  the  information  sent  by  the  Army? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  that  frequently  happens,  Senator.  That  is 
normal  procedure. 

Senator  Jackson.  In  this  case,  however,  it  was  not  done  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  John  Adams  is  the  Department  Counselor,  and 
I  think  that  had  a  bearing  of  why  it  went  up  to  the  Department  of 
Defense. 

Senator  Jackson.  I  understand  I  had  only  6  minutes. 

Senator  Mundt.  I  beg  your  pardon.  I  was  told  the  time  was 
up.    The  timekeeper  was  in  error.    You  have  4  minutes  more. 

Senator  Jackson.  I  understand  I  have  4  minutes  in  which  to  expire. 

Mr.  Stevens,  can  you  tell  us  about  this  agreement  whereby  the  Army 
granted  passes  at  Fort  Dix  to  Private  Schine?  Now,  let  me  just  con- 
tinue that  by  stating  that  according  to  the  Army  report : 

On  Decemlier  6,  1053,  General  Ryan  telephoned  Mr.  Adams  from  Fort  Dix  and 
stated  the  matter  of  handling  Private  Schine  was  becoming  increasingly  difficult 
since  the  soldier  was  leaving  the  post  nearly  every  night. 

Now.  on  page  11  of  your  statement  of  Friday,  I  mean  of  your  state- 
ment of  charges,  you  are  quoted  as  saying  that  you  had  told  General 
Ryan  that  Schine  should  be  made  available  upon  the  request  of  the 
committee  staff  over  week  ends  when  required  to  complete  Schine's 
work  for  the  committee  and  provided  that  it  did  not  interfere  with  his 
training. 

Then  the  statement  of  charges  submitted  by  Senator  McCarthy's  in 
paragraph  13  of  the  charges  state  that,  and  I  quote : 

to  call  participation  in  arrangements  to  have  Private  Schine  devote  many  hours 
over  and  al)()ve  Army  training  which  could  otherwise  have  been  spent  in  recrea- 
tion, tn  tlie  completion  of  vital  committee  work,  a  request  for  preferential  treat- 
ment defies  reason.  All  such  arrangements  were  made  with  the  full  concurrence 
of  Mr.  Stevens. 

Now,  can  you  just  tell  the  committee  about  this  arrangement  or 
whatever  it  was  at  Fort  Dix?  First,  Avas  it  understood  that  Private 
Schine  could  leave  the  fort  at  night  after  the  completion  of  his  training 
or  was  it  just  week  ends,  or  Avas  it  any  time  the  committee  requested 
his  release  for  committee  work? 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  233 

Secretary  STE^^:NS.  Senator  Jackson,  it  was  at  any  time  that  the 
committee  actually  needed  him  for  work,  providin*;  it  didn't  interfere 
with  his  training  and  also  providing  that  it  was  under  General  Kyan's 
jurisdiction  to  make  a  determination  on  whether  or  not  it  complied 
with  those  provisions. 

Senator  Jackson.  But  you  see  on  your  statement  of  charges,  I 
believe  on  page  11,  you  stated  that  you  told  General  Ryan  that  he 
should  be  made  available  upon  the  request  of  the  committee  staff  over 
weekends. 

Xow,  what  was  the  operating  arrangement  at  Fort  Dix?  I  realize 
that  it  may  not  have  been  a  written  document,  but  what  sort  of  an 
understanding  was  the  general  operating  under?  I  take  it  that  Gen- 
eral Ryan  found  it  a  bit  difficult  to  carry  out  his  directives. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right.  The  original  arrangement,  you 
will  recall,  Senator  Jackson,  was  temporary  duty  to  New  York. 

Senator  Mundt.  I  am  sorry,  this  time  it  is  official  and  your  time 
is  up. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  hadn't  finished  my  answer. 

Then,  that  was  changed  to  being  available  for  committee  work,  from 
Fort  Dix  when  actually  needed  by  the  committee  and  providing  it 
didn't  interfere  with  his  training.  At  first  that  was  believed  to  be 
needed  on  an  evening  during  the  course  of  a  week,  would  he  be  made 
in  the  nature  of  weekends,  but  when  the  question  came  up  that  if  he  was 
available  providing  it  was  legitimate  committee  business  and  did  not 
interfere  with  his  training,  that  also  Avas  permitted  subject  to  General 
Ryan's  view  of  the  individual  situation. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  just  want  to  tell  the  Chair 
that  I  have  something  which  I  consider  of  extreme  importance  in 
regard  to  this  investigation  and  if  m.y  turn  comes  up  when  I  am  absent, 
Mr.  Cohn  will  take  it. 

Senator  Mundt.  Thank  you. 

May  the  Chair  ask  the  timekeeper  not  to  take  from  Senator  Potter's 
time  the  answer  of  Secretary  Stevens,  and  we  will  charge  that  time 
to  Mr.  Jenkins  because  he  has  time  to  spare,  and  nobody  else  has. 

Senator  Potter.  I  think  it  generous  action  of  the  chairman. 

Mr.  Secretary,  I  have  to  preface  my  question.  I  would  like  to  state 
this,  that  I  am  neither  a  counsel  for  any  of  the  parties  nor  am  I  a 
devil's  advocate  in  this  controversy. 

I  would  like  to  ask  this  one  question :  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  there 
was  an  original  chronological  outline  of  the  order  of  events  that  was 
prepared  in  your  office,  or  in  the  Department  of  the  Army  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would  say  there  was  a  file  of  papers,  Senator 
Potter,  containing  a  lot  of  material,  which  was  subsequently  put 
together  into  this  chronology,  and  everything  that  was  in  that 
file  is  available  to  this  committee. 

Senator  Potter.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  certain  statements  which  now 
appear  in  your  statement  of  specifications  were  made  available  to  the 
press,  or  were  printed  in  the  press,  several  weeks  prior  to  the  time 
that  the  Members  of  Congress  received  the  chronological  outline  of 
the  order  of  events  which  you  have  submitted  ? 

Secretary  Stevt.ns.  That  may  be  so,  Senator  Potter,  but  if  so  I  don't 
know  how  it  was  done. 

Senator  Potter.  You  have  no  knowledge  as  to  whether  that  so-called 
leak  came  from  the  Army  or  from  other  sources  ? 


234  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Secretary  Stevexs.  All  I  can  say  is  that  I  can  only  speak  for  myself, 
and  I  assure  you  that  it  did  not  come  from  me. 

Senator  Poiter.  Have  you  heard  that  a  leak  had  occurred  in  the 
Department  of  the  Army  concerning  this  chronological  order  of  events 
before  Members  of  the  Congress  received  the  report? 

Secretary  Sj'evexs.  Oh,  you  mean  the  chronology  of  events  as  finally 
submitted  to  the  committee? 

Senator  Potter.  Not  as  finally  submitted,  but  in  its  original  form. 

Secretary  Ste\-ens.  Will  you  repeat  that  question  for  me.  Senator, 
or  can  it  be  read  by  the  reporter? 

Senator  Potter.  The  question  is  whether  you  had  any  personal 
knowledge  as  to  whether  members  of  your  staff  had  leaked  this  infor- 
mation to  the  press  prior  to  the  time  that  the  Members  of  Congress 
received  the  chronological  order  of  events  in  its  final  form;  I  am 
speaking  now  of  the  information  contained  in  its  original  form  or  as 
you  cite  in  the  files. 

Secretary  Stevexs.  I  know,  of  course,  that  there  was  original  form, 
as  you  call  it,  Senator,  and  I  have  heard  that  there  were  newspaper 
people  who  were  aware  of  what  was  in  that.  But  I  personally  didn't 
have  a  copy  of  it,  and  I  certainly  had  nothing  to  do  with  any  leak  in 
connection  with  it.     I  did  hear  rumors  that  it  had  leaked. 

Senator  Poiter.  Did  you  question  any  of  your  staff  as  to  whether 
they  had  leaked  this  information  to  the  press? 

Secretary  Stevexs.  I  didn't  personally  question  them,  no;  but  evi- 
dently from  what  you  said  it  did  leak.  "\Anio  saw  it  and  when,  I  don't 
know. 

Senator  Potter.  I  am  sure  you  are  familiar  with  the  fact  that  it 
was  more  or  less  an  open  secret  for  a  month  that  the  Army  had  in  its 
possession  this  report,  and  the  fragmentary  information  that  came  to 
my  attention — and,  I  assume,  to  the  attention  of  other  Members  of 
Congress — was  the  basis  for  my  request  that,  if  the  Army  had  this 
information,  the  committee  certainly  should  receive  it  and  take  what- 
ever action  was  necessarj-. 

Secretary  Stevexs.  Sure,  I  certainly  agree  with  that.  Senator.  I 
know  a  number  of  people  who  saw  the  report  that  you  are  referring  to. 
Evidently,  from  what  you  say,  some  newspaper  people  saw  it.  I 
would  be  surprised  if  any  of  them  had  a  copy  of  it. 

Senator  Potter.  When  did  it  come  to  your  knowledge  that  the 
Department  of  the  Army  was  keeping  a  chronological  report  of  this 
controx  ersy  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  It  came  to  my  knowledge  after  my  return  from 
the  Far  East  on  the  r;d  of  February. 

Senator  Potter.  You  had  no  knowledge  of  it  prior  to  that  time  ? 

Secretary  Stevexs.  That  is  correct. 

Senator  Potter.  If  I  may  switch  to  another  subject,  during  the 
cross-examination  this  morning  there  was  much  discussion  concerning 
the  number  of  persons  let  out  at  Fort  Monmouth  because  they  were 
security  risks. 

Secretary  Stevexs.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  PorrER.  How  many  of  the  men  -who  were  suspended  as 
security  risks  Mere  suspended  without  the  Army  having  any  prior 
knowledge  that  they  were  security  risks  until  Senator  McCarthy's 
conunitlee  stai'ted  this  investigation? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Not  a  single  one,  as  far  as  I  can  recall. 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  235 

Senator  Potter.  In  other  words,  it  is  your  testimony  that  the  Army 
had  a  report,  and  they  were  investigating  all  the  persons  that  were 
later  separated  as  security  risks. 

Secretary  Stevens.  As  far  as  I  know,  that  is  correct ;  all  of  them. 

Senator  Potter.  I  would  like  to  revert  to  your  statement  which  had 
some  interest  to  me.  I  would  like  to  ask  this  one  question  on  your 
report  of  chronological  events :  How  many  other  Members  of  Congress 
requested  this  report? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  that  there  was  something  like  8  or  10, 
Senator. 

Senator  Potter.  Eight  or  10  Members  of  Congress? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes. 

Senator  Potfer.  I  think  as  long  as  my  name  has  been  brought  into 
this  question  of  asking  for  the  report,  I  should  state  this :  When  I 
received  the  report,  the  only  persons  who  saw  it,  other  than  myself, 
were  Senator  McCarthy,  Senator  Dirksen,  and  Senator  Mundt.  So 
the  publication  of  this  report  did  not  come  from  my  office. 

Mr.  Stevens,  I  was  interested  in  your  statement  in  which  I  believe 
you  made  four  points  of  the  efforts  made  in  behalf  of  the  committee 
staff  to  secure  preferential  treatment  for  Mr.  Schine.  I  note  that 
efforts  were  made  to  release  Mr.  Schine  from  KP  duty.  Would  you 
elaborate  on  that,  because  it  happened  that  in  my  first  24  hours  in  the 
Army  I  served  17  hours  on  KP,  and  I  have  a  little  personal  interest  in 
how  that  could  be  done. 

Secretary  Stevens,  Senator  Potter,  I  can't  give  you  the  detail  on 
that  because  I  just  don't  have  it.  General  Kyan,  however,  is  available, 
and  will  testify  if  you  wish  him  to,  with  respect  to  all  the  details  of 
this  matter.  I  personally  have  not  been  able  to  follow  all  the  day-by- 
day  activities  of  Private  Schine  or  other  privates  in  every  camp  that 
we  have  in  the  United  States  Army.  We  have  some  other  problems 
we  have  to  deal  with  too.  General  Ryan  would  be  glad  to  give  you 
the  detail  on  that. 

Senator  Potter.  Do  you  know  whether  Private  Schine  was  relieved 
from  KP  duty  or  not  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  It  is  my  impression  that  he  was  relieved,  but  I 
am  not  sure  of  that.     I  would  rather  have  General  Ryan  testify  on  it. 

Senator  Mundt.  Senator  Symington  is  recognized  for  10  minutes. 

Senator  Symington.  Mr.  Secretary,  I  have  just  a  few  questions 
here. 

As  I  understand  it,  you  testified  that  the  draft  boards,  the  records 
and  the  organization  itself,  are  not  under  the  Army,  is  that  correct? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  correct. 

Senator  STmNCTON.  At  a  point  you  mentioned  that  the  Army  at 
Fort  Monmouth  is  working  with  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation 
in  connection  with  espionage  at  Fort  Monmouth.  I  do  not  want  to 
take  my  10  minutes  in  having  you  explain  that  to  me,  but  I  would 
appreciate  your  making  up  for  the  record  some  details  with  respect 
to  that  situation  which  you  feel  the  public  could  know  about.  In 
other  words,  what  was  the  nature  of  the  relationship,  how  were  they 
working  with  the  Army  at  Fort  Monmouth.  Will  you  do  that,  please, 
for  the  report  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes.  Senator  Symington,  may  I  coordinate 
that  with  ISIr.  Hoover  of  the  FBI  in  doing  it  ? 

Senator  Symington.  Of  course. 


236  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

I  would  like  to  ask  this  question :  Are  you  the  head  of  the  Army,  or 

is  General  Ridf^way  ?  ,       ,    <.  i      » 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  am  the  head  ot  the  Army. 
Senator  Symington.  Do  you  believe  in  civilian  control  of  the  mili- 
tary services  ? 

Secretarv  Stevens.  I  do.  .    .     i     j.        .        j.   , 

Senator  Symington.  Do  you  consider  that  it  is  the  function  of  the 
Secretary  to  have  the  Department  put  in  the  best  possible,  most  proper 
position  with  tlie  Congress  and  the  people? 
Secretarv  Stevens.  Yes,  I  do. 

Senator  "Symington.  AVould  you  consider  it  proper  to  do  your  best 
to  have  the  Army,  which  you  head,  and  yourself  be  in  the  best  pos- 
sible position  with  this  committee  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  am  not  sure  I  follow  that,  sir. 

Senator  Symington.  I  will  repeat  it.    Would  you  consider  it  proper 

to  do  your  best  to  have  the  Army,  which  you  head,  and  yourself,  to  in 

turn  be  in  the  best  possible  position  it  can  be  with  this  committee? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  want  to  do  the  best  I  can  along  that  line,  sir, 

with  tliis  committee  and  the  other  committees. 

Senator  Symington.  Was  your  interest  in  stopping  the  committee's 
investigation  at  Fort  Monmouth,  or  stopping  the  publicity,  or  both, 
or  what? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  did  not  want  to  stop  the  investigation.  I 
wanted  to  change  the  nature  of  the  hearing,  or  at  least  to  have  the 
publicity  that  was  given  out  come  nearer  to  reflecting  the  actual  facts 
than  was  tlie  case  at  Fort  Monmouth. 

Senator  Symington.  Mr.  Secretary,  if  a  committee  of  the  Congress 
witli  proper  authority  expresses  interest  in  any  particular  situation, 
does  not  tliat  mean  that  that  particular  situation  is  automatically  ex- 
pedited in  the  Army  itself? 
Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  Symington.  The  next  question  I  would  like  to  ask,  Mr. 
Secretary:  As  I  understand  it,  you  did  not  prepare  these  charges,  is 
that  correct  ? 

Secretary  STE^^:Ns.  That  is  right. 

Senator  Symington.  If  you  had  prepared  them — as  I  remember  it, 

they  were  signed  by  your  counsel,  Mr.  Welch 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  That  is  right. 

Senator  Symington.  If  you  had  prepared  them  following  the  ques- 
tioning of  the  Chairman,  would  you  have  left  the  name  of  Mr.  Carr 
out? 

Secretary  S'it.vens.  Would  I  have  left  the  name  of  Mr.  Carr  out? 
Senator  Symington.  Yes,  as  one  of  the  three  principals. 
Secielary  S'ravENS.  No,  I  don't  think  so. 

Senator  Symington.  I  woukl  like  to  say  in  Mr.  Carrs  interest,  Mr. 
Secretary,  tliat  I  wasn't  very  happy  about  your  replies  to  those  ques- 
tions, personally.  I  do  not  know  whether  it  is  in  order  to  say  that. 
Now  I  would  like  to  ask  this  question:  I  believe  you  said  that  Mr. 
Schine  was  assigned  to  New  York  before  November  10  and  then  the 
counsel  said  something  about  Mr.  Schine  not  being  in  the  Army  until 
November  10.     Clear  that  up  for  me,  will  you? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  original  plan  was  to  put  him  on  temporary 
duty  with  the  First  Army  in  New  York  on  the  day  he  was  inducted, 
which  was  November  :).     Shortly  thereafter.  Senator  McCarthy  indi- 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  237 

cated  that  he  would  like  to  have  that  temporary  duty  in  New  York 
canceled,  and  thereafter  Mr.  Cohn  indicated  that  as  long  as  the  week 
had  moved  along  a  certain  length  of  time,  he  thought  that  Schine 
should  stay  off  over  the  weekend  in  order  to  do  committee  work,  and 
that  was  done. 

Senator  Symingtox.  I  did  not  mean  to  interrupt  you.     Had  you 

finished  ? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  Yes. 

Senator  Symington.  I  would  like  to  ask  the  question  another  way, 
then :  At  the  time  you  had  the  lunch  in  the  Pentagon,  was  Mr.  Schine 
in  the  Army  or  was  he  not  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  He  w\as. 

Senator  Symington.  My  final  question,  Mr.  Secretary:  Whatever 
the  agreement  was  with  respect  to  Mr.  Schine,  why  was  it  made  and 
how  was  it  violated  ?  In  other  words,  if  it  was  agreed  that  Mr.  Schine 
should  be  off  every  night,  then  why  is  there  any  complaint  when  he 
did  get  off?  If  it  is  not  agreed  that  he  should  get  off,  then  why  did 
General  Ryan  have  to  telephone  to  get  permission  to  get  him  off? 
There  seems  to  be  some  difference  there. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  the  agreement  w\as  that  Mr.  Schine  was 
to  be  available  for  committee  business,  and  frankly  there  seemed  to 
be  a  lot  of  committee  business. 

Senator  Symington.  Well,  I  don't  wish  to  pursue  it,  but  if  an 
agreement  was  that  he  could  be  off  for  committee  business,  and  the 
statements  made  were  that  he  was  going  to  be  off  for  committee 
business,  then  why  is  it  violation  of  an  agreement? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  perhaps  there  may  be  involved  a  question 
of  what  is  committee  business. 

Senator  Symington.  Well,  who  decided  that  is  wasn't  committee 
business  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Who  decided  that  it  wasn't? 

Senator  Symington.  Yes. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  there  was  a  further  provision  that  it 
could  not  interfere  with  his  training.  Senator,  and  so,  of  course,  with 
that  provision  General  Ryan  had  that. 

Senator  Symington.  That  was  part  of  the  agreement? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  Symington.  And  the  decision  was  made  that  the  number 
of  times  he  was  asked  to  get  off  for  committee  business  did  interfere 
with  his  training  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  If  it  did,  then  he  was  not  supposed  to  get  off. 

Senator  Symington.  Well,  did  it,  in  your  opinion,  or  General  Ryan's 
oi^inion? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Interfere  with  his  training? 

I  would  rather  have  General  Ryan  testify  on  that  because  he  actually 
knows. 

Senator  Symington.  I  have  no  further  questions,  Mr.  Chairman, 
at  this  time. 

Senator  IMundt.  Senator  Dworshak. 

Senator  Dworsiiak,  I  have  no  question. 

Senator  Mundt.  Mr.  Welch,  you  now  have  10  minutes  and  3  micro- 
phones. 

Mr.  Welch.  At  this  moment,  I  want  to  ask  only  one  question,  which 
I  unhappily  dealt  w^ith  in  the  form  of  a  statement  of  my  own.    Is  it 


238  SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION 

a  fact,  Mr.  Stevens,  that  the  specifications  that  were  drawn  and  signed 
by  me  as  your  counsel,  were  drawn  without  your  active  participation  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  correct,  on  short  notice. 

Mr,  Welch.  And  did  you  learn  that  Mr.  St.  Clair  and  I  worked 
overtime  and  a  way  after  dark  on  the  night  that  they  were  prepared  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  did. 

Mr.  "Welch.  That  is  all  at  the  moment. 

Senator  Muxdt.  Now,  Mr.  Cohn. 

Mr.  CoHN.  Mr.  Stevens,  there  is  one  matter  that  concerns  me  very 
deei)ly  here,  and  that  is  the  matter  of  Frank  Carr.  I  was  one  of 
those  Vho,  I  might  tell  you,  attempted  to  persuade  him  to  give  up  one 
of  the  top  jobs  in  the  Federal  Bureau  of  Investigation  to  come  with 
our  committee,  and  now  in  the  specifications  filed  by  the  Army  there 
is  a  charge  that  improper  means  Avere  used  to  get  preferential  treat- 
ment for  Mr.  Schine  by  Mr.  Frank  Carr  on  October  2,  1953,  in  that 
Mr.  Carr  on  that  date,  and  I  quote : 

Sought  to  induce  or  persuade  the  Secretary  of  the  Army  to  give  Schine  some 
kind  of  special  assignment  and  some  liind  of  special  treatment. 

Xow,  is  that  charge  made  by  you  true  or  is  it  false?  I  think  in 
justice  to  Mr.  Carr  that  should  be  acknowledged  at  this  time. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  just  want  to  check  the  reading. 

Well,  Mr.  Cohn,  it  is  like  I  said  before,  in  my  mind,  that  ]\Ir.  Carr 
was  not  nearly  as  active  in  that  conversation  as  you  were,  but  he  was 
there,  and  in  my  opinion  took  a  lesser  part  in  it. 

Mr.  CoHN.  JNIr.  Stevens,  will  you  tell  Senator  INIundt,  please,  sir, 
and  the  committee  any  one  word  that  was  spoken  by  Frank  Carr 
about  Dave  Schine  on  that  day  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  can't  recall  the  exact  words. 

Mr.  Cohn.  Do  you  recall  that  any  words  were  spoken  by  him  about 
Dave  Schine  on  that  date? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  recall  that  he,  in  a  minor  way,  backed  you  up 
in  connection  with  the  statements  you  were  making. 

Mr.  CoHN.  Mr.  Stevens,  is  it  not  a  fact  that  in  the  series  of  events, 
this  o4-page  report  released  by  the  Army,  under  date  of  March  11, 
1953,  in  giving  a  detailed  recital  of  what  took  place  on  October  2,  you 
si)ecifically  said  that  all  of  the  talking  about  Dave  Schine  had  been 
done  by  me  and  you  did  not  even  mention  Mr.  Carr's  name? 

Secretary  Ste\ens.  I  said  that  Mr.  Carr  played  a  minor  part. 

Mr.  CouN.  Sir,  I  am  trying  to  ask  now  whether  Mr.  Carr  played 
any  i)art,  and  if  he  did,  I  would  like  you  to  tell  the  committee  just 
what  part  he  did  play. 

Senator  Mundt.  the  Chair  believes  in  fairness  to  all  of  the  ques- 
tuiners,  and  it  is  perfectly  proper  that  the  witness  have  time  to  consult 
notes  and  counsel;  that  those  considtations  the  timekeeper  should 
take  out  of  (he  10  minutes  so  that  nobody  is  deprived. 

Mr.  Cohn.  Thank  you  very  much. 

Senator  M(Cai;tiiy.  Mr.  Chairman 

Senator  Mindt.  lie  is  about  to  answer  a  question. 

Senator  McCaiithy.  AVhile  Mr.  Stevens  is  consulting  his  notes  may 
1  explain  to  the  Chair  that  I  was  absent  for  a  number  of  minutes 
here  because  I  was  interviewing  a  witness  whom  I  think  will  have 
jnfonnation  of  tivmendous  importance  to  this  committee,  and  I  am 
seeing  him  again  tonight,  and  1  will  give  the  Chair  a  report  tomorrow 
morning. 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  239 

Senator  Mundt.  That  statement  will  have  to  come  out  of  Mr. 
Cohn's  ten  minutes,  but  that  is  all  right. 

Mr.  Stevens. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  my  recollection  remains  as  I  have  indi- 
cated; namely,  that  Mr.  Carr  took  a  minor  part  in  this  particular 
discussion. 

Mr.  CoHN.  Mr.  Stevens,  in  the  Army  events,  and  I  want  to  start 
with  this  first;  you  are  the  only  possible  witness  on  your  side  as  to 
this  particular  conversation,  are  you  not,  and  the  only  three  people 
who  were  present  were  yourself,  Mr.  Carr,  and  myself;  is  that  right? 

Secretary  Stevexs.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  CoHisr.  So  that  there — by  the  way,  do  you  have  a  monitoring 
machine  installed  in  your  office  to  take  down  what  is  said? 

Secretary  Stevexs.  I  do  not. 

Mr.  CoHN.  I  see.  So  that  the  only  three  people  there  were  your- 
self, myself,  and  Mr.  Carr;  is  that  right ? 

Secretary  Stevexs.  That  is  correct. 

Mr.  CoHN.  So  that  if  there  were  any  improper  conduct  by  Mr. 
Carr,  and  if  he  had  used  any  improper  means  to  get  preferential 
treatment  for  Private  Schine  or  anyone  else,  you  would  be  the  only 
one  in  position  to  know  that  other  than  us;  is  that  right?  What  I 
mean  to  say  is  you  would  be  the  only  source  of  information  for  Mr. 
Welch,  and  the  other  people  drawing  up  this  account  of  what  hap- 
pened in  your  office  on  October  2,  when  only  three  people  in  the  world, 
Secretary  Stevens,  Cohn,  and  Carr  were  present  ? 

Secretary  Stevexs.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  CoHX.  I  would  now  ask  you,  sir,  whether  or  not  it  is  a  fact  that 
when  you  gave  a  full  account  of  what  happened  on  that  day  in  the 
Army  event  number  G,  dated  October  2,  1953,  you  specifically  said 
that  the  discussion  about  Schine  was  stated  by  Mr.  Cohn,  and  that 
there  is  no  mention  whatsoever  of  Mr.  Frank  Carr  having  partici- 
pated in  that  conversation  ? 

Secretary  Stevexs.  Certainly,  that  is  true;  but  that  doesn't  mean 
that  Mr.  Carr  didn't  participate  in  the  conversation. 

Mr.  CoHX.  Are  you  now  saying  he  did,  sir  ? 

Secretary  Stevex'^s.  In  my  opinion,  he  did,  that  is  my  recollection. 

Mr.  CoHX.  Would  you  tell  the  committee  what  he  said,  please  ? 

Secretar}^  Stevexs.  I  cannot  tell  you.  I  said  you  did  most  of  the 
talking,  and  Carr  backed  you  up  in  what  I  have  referred  to  as  a  minor 
or  lesser  way. 

Mr.  CoHX.  Can  you  remember  one  word  that  Mr.  Carr  said  on  the 
subject  of  Schine? 

Secretary  Stevexs.  I  say  in  a  very  minor  way. 

Senator  INIcCarthy.  May  I  interrupt,  Mr.  Cohn  ? 

Secretary  Stevens,  I  have  been  trying  to  follow  your  answers,  both 
to  Senator  Mundt  and  to  other  Senators,  and  Mr.  Cohn,  when  asked 
you  about  this,  and  you  say  that  Carr  backed  up  Mr.  Cohn. 

Do  I  understand  that  you  mean  he  backed  him  up  by  silence  or 
backed  him  up  by  conversation,  and  if  he  backed  him  up  by  conversa- 
tion, then  let  us  have  the  conversation. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  first  of  all,  he  did  nothing  to  stop  the 
conversation. 

Senator  McCarthy.  All  right,  now  we  have  silence.  From  there 
let  us  go  on. 


240  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Secretary  Ste\t:xs.  And  secondly,  Mr.  Cohn  did  most  of  the  talk- 
ing, as  the  chronology  indicates  but  Mr.  Carr,  in  my  recollection,  also 
in  a  lesser  way,  a  far  lesser  way,  brought  up  the  same  thing. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Look,  Bob,  you  are  accusing  Frank  Carr  of 
something  very  serious. 

Secretary  Stev-ens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  McCarthy.  You  say  that  he  tried  to  improperly  influence 
you.  Now,  if  he  said  something  that  was  improper,  we  should  know 
what  he  said.  If  he  didn't  say  anything  improper,  and  if  you  can't 
remember  anything  improper,  then  you  should  tell  us.  Let  me  say 
this :  I  think  that  j^ou  are  tiying  to  give  us  an  honest  account. 

Secretary  Ste\t-ns.  That  is  right. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Some  of  my  friends  don't  agree  with  that,  I 
may  say. 

]Mr.  CoHN.  I  am  not  one  of  those,  Senator. 

Senator  McCarthy.  I  think  it  is  only  fair  to  ask  of  you  to  tell 
us  what  Frank  Carr  did  that  was  improper. 

Secretary  Stevexs.  AVell 

Senator  McCarthy.  What  you  are  doing  here.  Bob,  j^ou  are  asking 
a  young  man  to  be  discharged  from  his  job  because  of  improper 
conduct.    And  you  can't  tell  us  what  it  is. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  Senator,  the  Department  of  the  Army 
has  put  in  this  bill  of  particulars,  and  I  think  that  there  will  be  other 
material  that  will  come  before  the  committee  that  will  bear  on  this. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Just  a  moment.  If  Mr.  Cohn  will  yield  for  a 
moment,  you  say  the  Army  put  in  this  bill  of  particulars.  No.  1, 
may  I  have  it,  the  Army  did  not  put  in  the  bill  of  particulars.  You 
and  Mr.  Adams  put  in  the  bill  of  particulars,  and  we  are  talking 
about  one  specification  on  or  about  October  2.  That  is  a  conversation 
between  you,  -Mr.  Carr,  and  Mv.  Cohn,  and  here  is  what  your  bill  of 
particulars  says.    It  says: 

On  or  about  October  2,  1953,  Mr.  Cobn  and  Mr.  Francis  Carr,  executive  di- 
rector of  tlie  subcommittee,  while  discussing  detailed  plans  for  the  conduct 
of  investigation  by  the  subcommittee  at  Fort  Monmouth,  N.  J.,  sought  to  induce 
or  persuade  the  Secretary  of  the  Army  to  arrange  for  the  assignment  of  Mr. 
Schine  to  a  post  in  the  New  York  City  area,  upon  his  induction  into  the  Army, 
on  the  ground  that  it  was  considered  desirable  by  Mr.  Cohn  to  have  Mr.  Schine 
availal)le  for  consultation  with  the  staff  of  the  subcommittee  to  complete  certain 
work  which  was  alleged  Mr.  Schine  was  familiar. 

Now,  the  only  witness  other  than  JSIr.  Carr  and  Mv.  Cohn  who  can 
testify  to  that  is  3'ourself. 

Secretary  Stevexs,  That  is  right. 

Senator  McCarthy.  This  specification  must  be  based  upon  your 
statement,  I  assume,  to  your  coimsel  ? 

Secretary  Stevexs.  That  is  right. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Now,  just  for  your  own  benefit,  and  I  am  not 
trying  to  entrap  you  at  all,  I  think  the  Secretary  will  agree  with  me 
on  that,  on  page  226,  Mr.  Secretary,  ]Mr.  Jenkins  asked  this  question : 

Did  Mr.  Carr  make  any  statement  whatever  insofar  as  your  recollection  enables 
you  to  answer  that  question? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Do  you  mean  with  respect  to  David  Schine? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  Mr.  Carr  make  any  statement  at  that  conference,  and  did  he 
intercede  for  Schine? 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  241 

Answer — this  was  only  last  Friday,  Bob — 

I  do  not  recollect  that  he  did,  I  think  the  conversation  on  Schine  was  entirely — 
was  entirely — 
with  Mr.  Cohn. 

Now,  I  think  you  should  tell  us  today  whether  you  are  changing 
that  testimony,  and  if  so  why,  and  why  since  Friday  only  a  matter  of 
a  limited  number  of  hours  you  suddenly  want  to  implicate  Frank  Carr 
in  this. 

Has  something  occurred  to  make  you  change  your  mind? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  Senator,  of  course  as  I  ponder  over  these 
events  and  attempt  to  probe  my  memory  and  get  the  facts  before  the 
committee 

Senator  McCarthy.  Could  I  ask  the  young  man  to  move  to  one  side 
so  I  can  see  the  witness,  or  if  he  can  get  down  a  little  lower.  Will  you 
do  that? 

Senator  Mundt,  Go  ahead. 

Secretary  Stevens.  As  I  say.  Senator,  when  one  is  probing  a  mem- 
ory, as  hard  as  I  am  probing  mine,  in  order  to  get  all  of  the  facts  before 
this  committee,  you  do  sharpen  up  things  as  you  go  along.  I  didn't 
in  that  direct  examination,  I  couldn't  recollect  any  specific  thing  that 
Frank  Carr  had  said  on  this  particular  date,  and  I  cannot  recollect  the 
specific  thing  now. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Mr.  Secretary,  can  I  interrupt  you,  here  is  a 
most  serious  charge  made  against  my  chief  of  staff,  a  young  man  with 
a  record  of  10  years  with  the  FBI,  head  of  their  subversive  squad. 
And  you  make  this  charge,  and  you  say  that  Frank  Carr  improperly 
tried  to  influence  you.     You  do  that  in  your  specifications  1  day. 

Senator  Mundt.  Senator,  your  timie  is  finished. 

Senator  McCarthy.  I  would  like  to  finish  the  question  so  when  it 
comes  around  he  can  answer.  You  make  the  charge  1  day  that  Frank 
Carr  did  something  improper  and  then  you  appear,  under  oath,  and 
you  say  he  said  nothing.  And  then  3  days  later  you  say  yes,  maybe 
he  said  something,  and  maybe  he  didn't,  and  you  don't  know,  and  you 
think  he  did,  and  maybe  it  was  his  silence. 

Now,  I  won't  have  a  chance  to  ask  you  questions  again  for  about  90 
minutes.  In  the  meantime,  I  wish  you  would  have  your  counsel  or 
someone  ponder  that  question  and  try  it  and  give  me  an  answer  to  it. 

Senator  Mundt.  Mr.  Jenkins. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Stevens,  I  will  ask  you  this  question  by  way  of 
further  cross-examination :  Did  Senator  McCarthy  ever  at  any  time 
threaten  you  in  case  you  did  not  do  things  for  Schine  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  he  ever  use  any  vituperative  language? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  Mr.  Cohn  ever  at  any  time  make  any  threats 
against  you  if  you  did  not  do  the  things  for  Schine  that  he  asked  you 
to  do? 

Secretary  Stevens.  According  to  my  information,  to  which  I  have 
testified,  he  made  some  threats  against  the  Army. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  But  did  he  personnally  ever  make  any  threats  to  you? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Personally  to  me  ?     No. 


242  SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION 

Mr,  Jexkins.  I  take  it  that  you  mean  the  threat  or  alleged  threat 
at  Fort  Monmouth  on  October  20?  Are  those  the  threats  to  "which 
you  refer  i 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  part  of  them ;  yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  A  declaration  of  war? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  a  further  complete  investigation  of  the  Army? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  ever  communicate  those  threats  to  his  boss, 
his  superior,  Senator  McCarthy? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  Senator  McCarthy  knew  all  about 
them,  I  would  think. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  didn't  ask  you  that.  Did  you  ever  yourself  con- 
vey those  threats  to  Senator  McCarthy  ? 

Secretary  Sn:vENS.  I  did  not  personally,  but  Senator  McCarthy 
was  right  there  on  the  occasion  at  Fort  Monmouth  when  this  all 
happened. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  believe  that  Senator  McCarthy  was  in  the  labora- 
tory with  you,  was  he  not  ? 

Secretary  SrEVENs.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  When  this  alleged  explosion  took  place? 

Secretary  Ste\^ns.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  did  not  tell  Senator  McCarthy  what  you  under- 
stood Mr.  Cohn  had  said  on  that  day  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  didn't  personally  tell  him,  no. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  The  Secretary  of  Defense  is  your  immediate  superior, 
is  he  not  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  vou  convey  those  threats  to  him  or  inform  him 
that  such  threats  had  been  made,  Secretary  Wilson  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  think  that  I  did,  probably. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  convey  them  to  the  Commander-in-Chief  of 
the  Army? 

Secretary  Ste\tns.  To 

Mr.  Jenkins.  To  the  President? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Did  you  convey  that  information  to  anyone? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Oh,  yes,  sir,  people  within  my  own  organiza- 
tion who  knew  about  it. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Mr.  Secretary,  you  have  told  about  tendering  your 

Slane  to  Senator  McCartliy  and  the  members  of  his  staff  to  go  to 
loston,  is  that  right? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  What  was  the  date  of  that? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  was  on  the  I7th  of  November. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  How  did  you  return  to  Washiiigton? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  Maguire  Air  Force  Base  there  was  kind 
enough  to  send  me  down  on  a  small  plane  they  had  there. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  tendered  the  services  of  your  regular  plane  to 
the  Senator  and  his  staff  to  use  in  being  conveyed  to  I3oston  on  that 
occasion  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  don't  have  a  regular  ])lane. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  The  plane  that  you  initially  went  up  in? 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  243 

Secretary  Stevens.  This  is  a  United  States  Air  Force  plane  tliat 
comes  out  of  what  they  call  the  pool. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  What  was  the  purpose  of  that,  Mr.  Secretary,  if  it 
wasn't  to  court  favor  with  this  committee  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  The  purpose  of  it  was  to  cooperate  and  make  it 
possible  for  Senator  McCarthy  and  his  staff  to  get  to  Boston  at  some 
reasonable  hour.  They  had  committee  business  there  the  next 
morning. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  That  was  on  November  17  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  After  these  threats  had  been  made  by  Mr.  Cohn,  you 
say  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  And  after  all  of  this  controversy  had  been  going  on 
between  you  and  the  committee  for  weeks  and  weeks  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  In  your  specifications  No.  8,  which  were  filed,  as  I 
recall,  on  the  13th  of  this  month,  it  is  stated  thusly,  and  I  ask  you  to 
refer  to  specifications  No.  8  in  your  bill  of  particulars : 

These  requests  were  coupled  with  promises  to  limit  or  terminate  hearings  of 
committee  on  Fort  Monmouth — 

Secretary  Stevtsns.  Wait  until  I  catch  this.  What  is  the  number, 
sir? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  No.  8.  Will  you  now  read  to  the  committee  your 
specification  No.  8  filed  against  the  LIcCarthy  investigating  com- 
mittee ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  "On  or  about  November  6",  sir?  Is  that  the 
one  you  mean? 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Specification  No.  8,  if  you  will  read  that. 

Senator  Mundt.  Of  your  presentation  dated  April  13.  Perhaps 
you  are  looking  at  the  wrong  memorandum. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Not  the  events,  but  the  specifications. 

Secretary  Stevens  (reading)  : 

On  or  about  November  G,  1953,  Senator  McCarthy,  Mr.  Cohn,  and  Mr.  Carr 
sought  to  induce  and  persuade  Secretary  Stevens  and  Mr.  Adams  to  arrange  for 
the  assignment  of  Private  Schine  to  New  York  City  to  study  and  report  evidence, 
If  any,  of  pro-Communist  leanings  in  West  Point  textboolis.  Mr.  Cohn,  in  the 
presence  of  and  with  the  consent  of  Senator  McCarthy  and  Mr.  Carr,  sought  to 
induce  and  persuade  Secretary  Stevens  and  Mr.  Adams  to  arrange  to  make 
Private  Schine  available  for  subcommittee  work  while  he  was  undergoing  basic 
training  at  Fort  Dix,  N.  J.  These  requests  were  coupled  with  promises  reason- 
ably to  limit  or  to  terminate  subcommittee  hearings  on  Fort  Monmouth. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  In  other  words,  that  was  the  consideration  they  of- 
fered you.  In  their  request  of  you  to  assign  Schine  to  the  New  York 
area,  the  inducement  or  consideration  offered  you  on  that  occasion, 
according  to  you,  was  to  limit  or  terminate  hearings  of  the  committee 
on  Fort  Monmouth,  is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir ;  I  wouldn't  say  that  was  correct. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Is  that  not  wdiat  is  stated  there,  that  they  offer  you  a 
consideration  with  promises  to  limit  or  terminate  the  hearings  of  the 
committee  on  Fort  Monmouth  ?  Is  that  not  what  you  have  said  in  that 
specification  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  have  been  talking  about  the  hearings,  Mr. 
Jenkins,  not  the  investigation.    I  have  tried  to  make  it  clear 


244  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Mr.  Jexkixs.  To  limit  or  terminate  the  hearings  of  the  committee 
on  Forth  Monmouth.  That  is  the  consideration  offered  you,  is  it  not, 
Mr.  Stevens,  according  to  you  ? 

Secretary  STE\'E]SiS.  It  is  the  hearings  that  I  have  been  complaining 
about,  not  the  investigation. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Does  not  that  indicate  that  you  wanted  these  hear- 
ings— isn't  it  further  evidence  that  you  wanted  these  hearings 
terminated  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  have  testified  that  I  wanted  the  hearings  got- 
ten under  control  so  they  would  not  have  the  very  bad  effect  that  they 
were  having,  both  in  the  public  mind  and  on  the  Army. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  I  believe  you  further  testified  that  you  wanted  the 
hearings  as  well  as  the  investigation  suspended. 

Secretary  Ste%'ens.  No,  sir. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  You  have  not  thus  testified  today  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir,  not  the  investigation,  sir.  The  investi- 
gation, I  said,  should  continue  on,  and  I  would  make  progress  reports 
from  time  to  time. 

Mr.  Jexkins.  Then  you  deny  that  that  statement  in  your  specifica- 
tion No.  8  indicates  that  you  wanted  the  hearings  limited  or  termi- 
nated ?    You  deny  that  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  said  that — I  think  I  used  the  language  that  I 
thought  that  the  Fort  IMonmouth  hearings  had  served  their  purpose. 
In  other  words,  they  pointed  the  thing  up,  they  focused  the  Army's 
attention  on  this  matter.  We  were  getting  into  it.  We  wanted  the 
investigation  to  carry  on,  but  to  let  us  handle  the  thing  unless  and 
until  we  demonstrated  that  we  couldn't  handle  it  and  clean  this 
situation  up. 

Mr.  Jenkins.  Do  you  know  why  Senator  McCarthy  or  his  staff 
would  have  said  to  you,  "Now  you  assign  Schine  to  the  New  York  area 
or  let  him  study  the  context  of  the  West  Point  textbooks,  and  if  you 
will  do  that  we  will  limit  or  terminate  the  hearings  of  our  committee 
on  Fort  Monmouth"  ?  Do  you  know  why  they  would  have  held  out 
such  a  consideration  to  you  if  you  had  not  previously  asked  for  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  As  I  said — I  seem  to  have  difficulty,  Mr.  Jen- 
kins, in  trying  to  make  this  point  clear — at  the  meeting  in  New  York 
on  the  14th,  at  the  luncheon,  I  got  the  impression  that  Senator 
McCarthy  and  his  committee  were  about  ready  to  turn  this  investiga- 
tion, the  prosecution  of  this  investigation,  over  to  the  Army.  We  are 
now  talking  about  the  Gth  of  November.  My  thought  was  if  they  had 
anything  in  mind  along  about  the  14th  of  October  of  turning  the 
investigation  over  to  the  Army,  certainly  by  the  6th  of  November  that 
would  be  true. 

IVIr.  Jenkins.  IVIr.  Chairman,  I  have  no  further  questions. 

Senator  IVIundt.  Mr.  Secretary,  I  dislike  to  revert  to  this  discussion 
about  Frank  Carr,  but  I  think  that  I  should  temporarily  do  so,  in 
justice  to  Mr.  Carr ;  because  part  of  the  reason  for  asking  for  specifica- 
tions on  both  sides  of  this  was  so  that  this  committee  could  know  spe- 
cifically what  it  was  that  was  being  charged  against  each  one  of  the 
principals,  so  that  the  principal  could  in  turn  resi^ond  and  reply  to  the 
charges. 

When  we  had  General  Smith  and  General  Reber  here,  I  think  they 
both  testified  in  your  presence  that  they  did  not  consider  it  improper 
for  Members  of  Congress  or  individual  citizens  or  friends  or  relatives 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  245 

of  inductees  to  request  consideration  for  a  commission  provided  that 
tliey  felt  that  they  had  the  qualifications  for  a  commission. 

Do  you  share  that  reaction  as  expressed  by  Generals  Reber  and 
Smith? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  it  is  perfectly  all  right  for  it  to  be  asked 
for,  one  time. 

Senator  Mundt.  So  that  merely  being  present  at  a  meeting  where 
such  a  commission  was  being  solicited  would  not,  I  take  it,  in  your 
opinion,  comprise  on  the  part  of  Mr.  Carr  the  utilization  of  improper 
means? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  Senator,  I  am  trying  my  best.  And  one 
thing  I  don't  want  to  do  is  I  don't  want  to  be  unfair  to  Mr.  Carr  or 
anyone  else. 

Senator  Mundt.  I  am  sure  that  that  is  correct. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  want  to  have  it  exactly,  the  truth  out  just 
exactly  as  it  was.  I  cannot  recall  specific  language  by  Mr.  Carr. 
I  therefore  have  to  go  on  my  recollection  of  the  meeting  in  which  the 
conversation  with  respect  to  Mr.  Schine  was  definitely  led  by  Mr. 
Cohn,  and  in  my  opinion  Mr.  Carr  in  a  much  lesser  way  was  interested 
in  the  same  thing. 

Senator  JNIundt.  You  keep  using  the  phrase,  I  believe,  that  Mr. 
Carr  played  a  minor  part. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  Mundt.  Now,  I  ask  you,  sir,  if  we  leave  it  as  ambiguous  as 
that,  just  how  are  we  going  to  find  out  from  Mr.  Carr,  when  he  is  a 
witness,  whether  or  not  he  played  that  minor  part  which  you  seem 
unable  to  define. 

Don't  you  think  in  justice  to  him  that  you  should  search  your 
memory  to  the  point  where  you  discover  what  minor  part  he  played  or 
else  insofar  as  your  testimony  is  concerned  state  that  you  are  not 
endeavoring  to  implicate  him  as  being  guilty  of  improper  methods? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Mr.  Chairman,  I  agree  with  that  completely.  I 
think  that  I  certainly  should  search  my  memory  to  the  very  limit  of 
my  ability  and  I  can  assure  you  that  that  is  what  I  am  trying  to  do. 
I  dislike  to  the  nth  degree  to  say  or  do  anything  that  would  be  unfair 
to  anybody  like  Mr.  Carr. 

Senator  Mundt.  Thank  you.  Because  it  is  almost  impossible  for 
this  committee  to  interrogate  him  about  the  charges  until  they  are  de- 
fined ;  you  appreciate  that. 

Very  well.  I  am  not  sure,  Mr.  Secretary,  that  this  question  should 
be  directed  to  you,  and  if  it  should  not  you  may  tell  me  to  whom  it 
should  be  directed.  But  in  your  statement  on  page  152  which  you  read 
on  Frida}^  30U  said  that  Schine  had  obtained  15  passes  from  the  post, 
and  that  the  majority  of  new  personnel  received  only  3  passes.  Are 
you  in  position  to  tell  us  why  those  15  passes  were  procured,  and  what 
for,  and  in  response  to  what  pressure,  and  what  he  did  at  the  time  he 
took  those  passes  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  am  not  personally.  But  we  have  witnesses 
that  will  be  available. 

Senator  Mundt.  Will  you  name  the  witness  to  whom  I  should  direct 
those  questions  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  would  say  General  Rielly  and 

Senator  Mundt.  General  Kielly  and 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes. 


246  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Senator  Muxdt.  I  want  to  read  you  now  the  telegram  that  you 
included  in  your  testimony,  dated  JMarch  12,  and  it  is  the  telegram 
which  you  stated  you  received  from  Senator  McCarthy,  That  is  on 
page  161  of  the  transcript. 

In  view  of  news  stories  this  morning,  re  Colin  and  Schine,  would  appreciate  if 
you  would  make  it  clear  to  the  press  that  the  only  time  you  and  I  ever  discussed 
the  subject  of  a  commission  for  David  Schine  was  in  his  presence,  at  which 
time  I  urged  and  you  fully  agreed  that  his  case  had  to  be  treated  the  same  as 
the  case  of  any  other  draftee,  and  that  we  agreed  that  any  other  handling 
of  the  case  in  view  of  the  investigation  of  the  Army,  would  be  extremely  bad  for 
the  committee  and  the  Army,  and  that  David  Schine  was  preseni  and  fully  agreed 
with  us  in  the  matter. 

Your  only  comment  in  your  statement  was  that  the  "important 
thing  to  note  is  that  he  admits  having  taken  up  with  me  the  matter  of  a 
commission  for  Schine."  The  Chair  agrees  that  that  is  important,  and 
he  thinks  it  is  also  important  to  know  whether  or  not  the  statements 
contained  in  that  telegram  were  correct  or  incorrect. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  that  they  are  incorrect,  in  the  latter 
part  of  the  telegram. 

Senator  Mundt.  Will  you  point  out  where  the  inaccuracies  or  the 
inadequacies  were? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Because  I  don't  think  Senator  McCarthy — I 
have  no  recollection  of  Senator  McCarthy,  and  I  would  have  had  a 
recollection  of  it,  stating  that  all  of  this  business,  it  could  all  be 
handled  just  like  everybody  else.  That  part  of  the  telegram  is  not  in 
accordance 

Senator  Munext.  To  the  best  of  your  recollection,  he  never  made 
any  such  statement  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  Mundt.  Otherwise  the  telegram  is  correct?  That  is  the 
statements  in  the  telegram? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  have,  I  believe,  testified  to  the  fact  that  Sen- 
ator McCarthy  on  at  least  one  occasion,  took  this  up.  He  states  here 
"that  the  only  time,"  and  I  am  not  prepared  definitely 

Senator  I^Iundt.  It  would  not  make  any  difference  in  the  chairman's 
mind  from  "the  only  time"  or  "at  least  once." 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  mean 

Senator  Mundt.  Unless  you  are  sure  there  was  a  second  time. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes. 

Senator  ]\Iundt.  Are  you  sure  there  is  a  second  time  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  am  not  testifying  to  that  effect  now,  sir,  no. 

Senator  Mundt.  To  the  best  of  your  present  recollection,  the  state- 
ment in  the  telegram  is  correct,  except  the  parts  to  which  you  have 
already  drawn  our  attention? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  including  tliat  reference  to  "only  took  it 
up  one  time."    I  am  not  subscribing  to  that  at  this  time  ? 

Senator  JMundt.  Are  you  denying  that  at  this  time  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Xo,  sir. 

Senator  Mundt.  You  are  just  saying  you  are  not  sure? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  :Mundt.  There  has  been  a  lot  of  testimony  about  Fort 
Monmouth,  atid  the  fact  that  some  of  the  ]5ersonnel  employed  in  the 
defense  establishments  may  have  been  guilty  of  subversive  conduct. 
May  I  ask,  are  some  or  most  of  the  secret  devices  which  are  developed 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  247 

in  the  laboratories  at  Fort  Monmouth  ultimately  processed  or  fabri- 
cated by  private  defense  establishments? 

Sacretary  Stevens.  A  lot  of  it  is ;  yes,  most  of  it. 

Senator  Muxdt.  So  that  if  unhappily  there  are  subversive  elements 
in  private  defense  establishments  working  on  the  processes  developed 
at  Fort  Monmouth,  that  would  be  placing  the  security  of  our  country 
in  jeopardy,  would  it  not? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right,  and  that  is  the  point  that  came 
up  at  the  luncheon  on  November  6,  when  I  said  this  was  a  problem 
for  the  whole  Defense  Establishment. 

Senator  Mundt.  One  other  question.  On  page  245,  we  have  had  a 
lot  of  discussion  about  the  apology  or  explanation  or  whatever  word 
most  aprpopriately  fits  your  conversation  in  which  you  said  you 
tried  to  calm  down  Mr.  Cohn.  You  have  said  nothing  up  to  now 
as  to  what  Mr.  Cohn  might  have  said  in  response.  Did  your  explana- 
tion placate  him,  or  was  he  as  irritated  as  ever  after  you  concluded? 

Secretary  Stevens.  From  where  I  sat,  I  couldn't  hear  that  he 
said  anything,  and  if  he  did  it  was  not  within  my  hearing. 

Senator  Mundt.  This  explanation  must  have  been  made  to  him  in 
his  hearing? 

Secretary  Ste'\t:ns.  Oh,  yes,  sir. 

Senator  Mundt.  You  directed  your  remarks  to  him  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  correct. 

Senator  Mundt.  And  as  far  as  you  can  recall,  he  did  not  say  any- 
thing ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  didn't  hear  him  say  anything. 

Senator  Mundt.  Could  you  tell  by  looking  at  him  whether  he 
seemed  placated  or  whether  his  irritation  was  there? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  maybe  it  helped  a  little,  but  I  think 
Mr.  Cohn  was  still  very  provoked. 

Senator  Mundt.    Senator  McClellan? 

Senator  McClellan.  To  get  this  back  in  proper  perspective,  I  have 
listened  to  this  testimony  and,  according  to  my  recollection  of  it  there 
are  some  eight  specific  requests  and  different  requests,  requests  of  a 
different  nature,  for  preferred  treatment  for  Mr.  Schine.  I  want  to 
ask  you  about  these.  I  will  try  to  ask  you  in  their  chronological  order 
as  I  remember  the  testimony,  and  I  will  ask  you  to  answ^er  and  state 
whether  they  are  true. 

The  first  request  that  came  to  you  was  for  a  direct  commission  in 
the  Army ;  is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stev-ens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  second  request  was  for  a  direct  com- 
mission in  one  of  the  other  branches  of  the  service ;  is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Ste\"ens.  That  was  another  occasion.  I  am  trying  to 
think  of  the  chronology  of  it,  Senator. 

Senator  McClellan.  Maybe  the  chronology  is  not  all-important. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  correct. 

Senator  McClellan.  Such  a  request  was  made. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  The  third  I  have  here  is  a  commission  in  the 
intelligence  service  under  Mr.  Dulles,  and  you  said  you  went  over 
yourself  to  try  to  secure  that  for  him. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 


248  SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION 

Senator  McClellan.  That  is  three.  The  fourth  I  have  here  is 
that  if  he  was  inducted  into  the  service,  they  wanted  him  then  re- 
assigned to  the  committee  to  do  committee  work.  Was  that  a  request 
for  a  peimanent  reassignment  to  the  committee? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Tliere  were  several  requests.  One  was  lor  tem- 
porary duty  in  New  York 

Senator  McClellan.  I  know  about  the  temporary  duty,  but  I 
understood  from  the  testimony — if  I  am  wrong  I  want  to  be  cor- 
rected— tluit  there  was  a  request  when  lie  got  into  the  service  to  be 
reassigned  to  the  committee,  to  serve  the  committee  as  he  had  before. 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Senat(~.r  McClellan.  Is  that  true  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  but  there  was  a  request  when  he  got  into  the 
service  to  have  him  assigned  directly  to  New  York  without  basic 
training. 

Senator  McClellan.  I  know  that.  But  there  was  no  request  for 
him  to  be  reassigned  back  to  the  committee  to  serve  the  committee? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  I  was  mistaken  about  that.  Then  there  was 
a  request  that  he  be  assigned  to  the  New  York  area. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  What  service  was  he  to  perform  there  under 
that  request? 

Secretary  Stevens.  One  suggestion  was  to  check  West  Point 
textbooks. 

Senator  McClellan.  That  was  a  letter  request,  was  it  not?  What 
was  he  to  do  when  he  was  first  to  be  assigned  there  and  when  the 
chairman  changed  his  mind  about  it  and  said  that  he  considered  that 
it  might  not  be  well  to  do  that — what  was  he  to  do  on  that  first 
request  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  was  to  do  committee  work. 

Senator  McCarthy.  A  point  of  order,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Mundt.  State  your  point  of  order. 

Senator  McCarthy.  There  is  no  testimony,  Senator  McClellan — 
I  am  sure  you  are  mistaken  on  this — that  the  former  chairman  ever 
asked  Mr.  Schiiie  to  be  assigned  to  the  committee  or  that  he  ever 
changed  his  mind.  The  only  testimony  on  that  is  that  when  I  heard 
he  was  assigned  to  the  committee  I  requested  he  not  be  assigned  to 
the  committee. 

Senator  McClellan.  This  may  have  been  in  the  preinduction 
period  that  he  was  to  be  assigned  there.  You  testified — someone  has 
testified,  and  I  think  you — that  later  the  information  came  to  you, 
I  think  through  Mr.  Cohn,  that  the  chairman  had  changed  his  mind 
about  that  and  thought  it  might  not  be  advisable  because  the  press 
would  get  hold  of  it  and  make  something  out  of  it.  Didn't  you  so 
testify  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir.   I  learned  about  that  from  JMr,  Adams. 

Senator  McClellan.  Anyway,  you  learned  of  that.  You  have 
so  testified.    I  know  it  is  in  the  record  somewhere. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  All  right,  that  is  another  request. 

The  fifth  I  have  here  I  believe  was  to  be  assigned  to  New  York 
or  assigned  to  West  Point  to  check  the  textbooks  at  West  Point  with 
respect  to  any  Communist  propaganda  in  them;  is  that  correct? 


SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION  249 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Senator  McClellan,  I  don't  want  to  impose 
on  your  10  minutes,  but  I  just  wonder  as  a  personal  favor  if  you 
would  request-  of  the  Secretary,  and  make  it  very  clear,  that  at  no 
time  did  I  ever  request  that  Mr.  Schine  be  assigned  to  my  committee, 
that  the  only  conversation  I  ever  had  with  the  Secretary  was  when  I 
called  and  told  him  it  would  be  a  great  mistake  to  draft  a  man  and 
assign  him  back  on  the  committee. 

Senator  Mundt.  Points  of  order  will  not  be  counted  against  the 
10  minutes. 

Senator  McClellan.  I  am  asking  the  Secretary  to  testify.  I  am 
asking  him  the  questions.  I  assume  he  will  undertake  to  state  the 
facts.  That  is  all  I  want.  I  am  trying  to  get  the  number  of  different 
requests  for  what  may  be  or  may  not  be  preferred  treatment  for 
Mr.  Schine.    I  have  mentioned  five  of  them. 

The  sixth  one,  I  believe,  was  that  you  have  testified  that  he  wanted 
special  privileges  after  he  was  in  the  service  in  that  he  was  to  be  given 
liberty  or  was  to  be  given  leave  contrary  to  the  general  leave  gi'anted 
to  other  enlisted  men. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  McClellan.  You  granted  that. 

Secretary  Stevens.  For  committee  work,  yes,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  I  think  you  testified,  unless  I  am  wrong  about 
this,  that  Mr.  Schine  himself  suggested  to  you  that  he  would  make 
a  good  Undersecretary  or  Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Army,  did  he, 
when  he  drove  you  over  to  camp  that  morning  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Words  to  that  effect,  yes,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  So  it  adds  up  to  about  seven  specific  requests. 
Did  anybody  follow  up  Mr.  Schine's  request  to  you  about  how  well 
he  could  serve  you  in  your  office  ?  I  don't  want  that  charged  against 
anyone  else  if  no  one  else  followed  that  up.  Was  any  such  request 
ever  made  of  you  or  any  suggestion  made  to  you  by  either  Mr.  Cohn 
or  Mr.  Carr  or  Senator  McCarthy  with  respect  to  that,  that  you  take 
him  in  your  office  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir ;  Senator  McCarthy. 

Senator  McClellan.  Senator  McCarthy  did  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  McClellan.  So  we  have  established  here  at  least  definitely 
seven  special  requests  for  assignments  for  privileges  for  Mr.  Schine. 

Senator  McCarthy.  A  point  of  order,  Mr.  Chairman. 

Senator  Mundt.  The  Senator  will  state  his  point  of  order. 

Senator  McCarthy.  I  wonder  if  the  Secretary  would  make  the 
record  clear  as  to  whether  I  asked  for  an  assistant  secretaryship  or 
under  secretaryship  for  Mr.  Schine. 

Senator  McClellan.  That  is  what  I  asked  him. 

Senator  McCarthy.  I  would  like  to  know  which.  State  which  it 
was. 

Secretary  Stevens.  He  said  that  he  thought  it  would  be  a  good  idea 
to  make  use  of  what  he  called  Dave  Schine's  special  qualifications, 
and  in  that  connection  he  suggested  either  as  a  special  assistant  to  me 
on  matters  of  communism  or  as  a  special  assistant  to  the  Chief  of 
the  Intelligence  Division  of  the  Staff,  our  G-2. 

Senator  McClellan.  Then  for  special  assistant  instead  of  just 
assistant  ? 


250  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Secretary  Stevens.  Special  assistant. 

Senator  McClellan.  Is  that  the  only  difference? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I  didn't  get  the  idea  that  he  suggested 
that  he  should  be  made  Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Army. 

Senator  McClellan.  Well,  I  wanted  to  clarify  it.  He  was  to  be 
made  a  special  assistant  to  you  but  not  Assistant  Secretary  of  the 
Army. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  correct. 

Senator  McClellan.  Is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  Now  let  us  clear  it  as  to  Mr.  Schine,  also.  Did 
Mr.  Schine  request  that  he  be  made  a  special  assistant  to  you,  or  as 
an  Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Army  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Not  an  Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Army,  a  spe- 
cial assistant  to  me. 

Senator  McClellan.  A  special  assistant? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  So  that  no  request  was  made  of  you  to  make 
him  an  Assistant  Secretary  of  the  Army  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No  request. 

Senator  McClellan.  All  of  the  requests  were  as  special  assistants 
to  you,  to  perform  a  specific  service. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  That  was  in  connection  with  his  alleged  quali- 
fications as  Communist  investigator,  is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  correct. 

Senator  McClellan.  Did  you  look  into  his  qualifications  to  de- 
termine whether  he  was  suitable  to  perform  that  service  in  your 
office  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  I  felt  that  no  young  man  of  draft  age  should 
be  brought  into  my  office  as  a  special  assistant  on  anything. 

Senator  McClellan.  So  you  did  not  undertake  to  inquire  into  his 
qualifications  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Not  for  that  purpose,  no,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan.  Not  for  that  purpose.  Now,  let  me  ask  you, 
reverting  back  to  my  former  questioning  at  the  other  10-minute  pe- 
riod that  I  had,  you  did  have  and  you  do  have  the  authority  if  you 
want  to  do  it,  to  overrule  the  subordinates  to  whom  the  applications 
are  referred  if  they  reject  an  application  for  a  direct  commission;  as 
Secretary  you  have  the  authority  if  you  want  to  exercise  it,  to  over- 
rule their  decision  and  to  order  a  direct  commission  granted,  do 
you  not  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  am  sure  I  must  have  that  power,  Senator. 

Senator  McClellan.  You  do  have  that  power  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  the  way  I  understand  it,  yes,  sir,  that 
I  could  do  it,  but  it  is  academic  with  me  because  I  never  would  do  it. 

Senator  McClellan.  You  never  would  do  it? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No. 

Senator  McClellan.  All  right,  if  you  had  done  it  in  this  case,  do 
you  think  that  that  would  have  satisfied  the  request  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well 

Senator  McClellan.  What  I  am  pointing  out,  the  implication  is 
here,  you  just  as  well  face  it,  sir,  the  implication  is  here  that  you  were 
trying  to  buy  off  this  committee  from  investigating  the  Army. 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION"  251 

Now,  if  thcat  is  true,  you  did  have  the  authority  to  grant  the  com- 
mission, and  order  it  granted,  didn't  you? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  McClellan".  You  refused  to  go  that  far  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  certainly  did. 

Senator  McClellan.  Now,  if  you  were  undertaking  to  influence 
them,  and  that  was  your  purpose,  and  all  of  these  associations  with 
them  and  permitting  all  of  these,  what  you  are  terming,  impositions 
on  your  about  special  requests,  then  you  did  have  the  power  to  grant 
what  they  were  seeking,  didn't  you  i 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  did. 

Senator  McClellan.  Is  that  correct  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  correct,  Senator  McClellan. 

Senator  McCarthy.  A  point  of  order. 

Senator  JNIundt.  The  Senator's  time  has  expired,  and  I  will  listen 
to  the  point  of  order. 

Senator  McCarthy.  I  think  that  question  is  completely  improper 
and  unfair  and  the  implication  is  that  this  chairman  could  have  been 
Ibought  oflf.  All  of  the  evidence  is  that  this  chairman  could  under  no 
circumstances  have  been  bought  off  on  this  investigation. 

Senator  McClelan,  You  can  take  whatever  you  want  from  it,  but 
the  implication  is  here,  and  he  has  been  questioned  about  it,  as  to  his 
efforts  to  try  to  stop  an  investigation ;  and  I  am  asking  him  the  ques- 
tion if  that  was  the  purpose  according  to  implications  of  questions 
that  have  been  asked  him  he  did  refuse  to  do  what  he  could  have  done 
that  might  have  satisfied  the  situation. 

Senator  McCarthy.  Mr.  Chairman,  a  point  of  order.  I  just  want 
to  point  out  that  the  implication  there  is  that  the  chairman  could 
have  been  bought  off,  and  there  is  no  evidence  that  this  chairman  ever 
could  have  been  bought  off  any  hearing,  and  never  will  be  bought  off 
any  hearing. 

Senator  Mundt.  IMay  the  Chair  remind  the  audience  that  they  are 
here  as  the  guests  of  the  committee  and  there  will  be  no  manifestations 
of  approval  or  disapproval.  That  is  the  first  violation  that  we  have 
had  from  the  audience,  and  I  am  not  going  to  ask  at  this  time  that  the 
officers  remove  from  the  room  those  participating,  but  I  am  going  to 
ask  that  hereafter  without  further  instructions  from  the  Chair  those 
violating  our  standing  orders,  the  officers  will  kindly  correspondingly 
remove  them  from  the  room. 

Senator  Dirksen. 

Mr.  Welch.  I  believe  it  is  a  point  of  order.  It  is  that  it  is  4 :  40 
p.  m.,  and  I  am  a  strong  believer  in  union  hours  when  I  am  working 
in  a  courtroom. 

Senator  Mundt.  INIay  the  Chair  say  that  at  the  request  of  his  col- 
leagues on  the  committee  who  have  not  gone  around  the  table  the 
second  time,  he  has  suggested  that  each  member  of  the  committee 
be  given  his  additional  10  minutes;  unless  I  am  overruled  by  the 
committee,  of  course,  your  point  of  order  will  be  sustained.  But  I 
would  like  if  we  could  give  those  at  the  edges  of  our  committee  the 
same  opportunity  those  in  the  center  have  had. 

JNIr.  Welch.  I  bow  to  that. 

Senator  Mundt.  We  will  try  to  go  around  the  table  including  your 
10  minutes  and  then  Senator  McCarthy  and  then  recess. 


252  SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION 

Senator  Dirksex.  Mr.  Secretary,  I  assume  that  if  passes  were 
granted  to  private  Schine,  that  they  were  in  writing  from  day  to  day, 
very  likely,  and  signed  by  his  immediate  commanding  officer. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  think  they  were. 

Senator  Dirksen.  Was  there  any  formal  memorandum  to  the  com- 
mandant at  Fort  Dix  sugesting  that  he  be  given  passes  day  after  day 
to  carry  on  committee  assignments  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Senator  Dirksen.  There  is  nothing  in  writing  then  to  cover  that 
matter? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  No,  sir. 

Senator  Dirksen.  Was  there  anything  in  writing  with  respect  to 
assignment  to  kitchen-police  duty? 

Secretary  Ste\t:ns.  As  I  say,  Senator  Dirksen,  I  really  don't  know. 
I  just  haven't  been  able  to  follow  all  of  the  details  of  Private  Schine 
and  other  privates,  and  General  Ryan  I  am  sure  will  be  able  to  answer 
those  questions.  But  I  just  can't  do  so  because  I  don't  have  the 
information. 

Senator  Dirksen.  But  insofar  as  you  and  General  Ryan  are  con- 
cerned, there  is  no  written  memoranda  covering  weekend  passes,  non- 
assignment  to  KP  duty,  and  that  sort  of  thing? 

Secretary  Stevens.  No,  sir. 

Senator  Dirksen.  That  was  all  verbal,  if  there  was  an  under- 
standing? • 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  Dirksen.  Now,  Mr.  Secretary,  I  want  to  return  to  one 
matter  that  came  up  last  week.  There  are  96  Senators.  Can  you,  in 
a  general  way,  state  how  many  times  you  have  received  telephone  or 
other  requests  from  other  Members  of  the  Senate  on  either  side  of  the 
aisle,  with  respect  to  direct  Reserve  commissions  in  any  branch  of  the 
Army  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  cannot  recall  a  single  instance  personally. 

Sejiator  Dirksen.  Let  us  put  it  on  this  ground,  and  say,  were  the 
request  many,  or  were  they  few  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  So  far  as  my  knowledge  of  it  is  concerned, 
almost  total  absence  of  them.  In  other  words,  I  don't  recall  a  single 
call  by  a  Senator  to  ask  me  for  a  direct  commission. 

Senator  Dirksen.  Now,  would  those  requests  more  properly  go  to 
the  Adjutant  General,  General  Bergen? 

Secretary  Stevens.  They  would  go  first  into  our  Office  of  Legisla- 
tive Liaison. 

Senator  Dirksen.  General  Reber  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  and  then  they  would  be  processed  around 
and  based  on  the  qualifications,  and  in  due  course  the  information 
would  come  back  to  General  Reber,  or  Colonel  Houck,  currently  Colo- 
nel Houck's  office,  and  he  would  get  back  in  touch  with  the  Senator. 

Senator  Dirksen.  The  question  has  only  two  purposes,  and  that  is 
this :  By  contrast  to  decide  what  the  situation  was  with  respect  to  other 
requests  for  commissions? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Yes,  sir. 

Senator  Dirksen.  And  secondly,  the  general  practice  that  is  in- 
volved. There  has  been  some  comment  in  the  press  and  in  the 
columns  to  the  effect  that  this  may  have  run  into  the  thousands,  and 
I  am  trying  to  reconstruct  my  own  recollection  over  a  longer  period  of 


SPECIAL   INVESTIGATION  253 

time  which  covers  nearly  20  years  in  the  House  and  in  the  Senate,  to 
decide  how  many  times  I  may  have  called  the  Army  or  the  Navy  in 
the  interest  of  a  commission.  And  if  I  ever  did,  I  want  it  known  to  all 
of  the  world  that  you  are  free  if  there  is  any  telephone  call  to  cover  it, 
to  lay  it  right  out  on  the  table.  And  I  shall  freely  confess  my  sins  in 
public,  if  that  is  the  case,  because  I  don't  want  to  do  that  which  is 
improper  or  ever  get  to  the  point  where  we  have  a  political  Army. 

Now,  I  have  an  idea  that  I  have  called  the  Army  on  some  cases. 
OfFhand,  I  wouldn't  remember  what  they  are.  Offliand,  I  would 
say  that  I  don't  think  that  I  have  pressured  too  much,  although  I 
shouldn't  make  that  confession  in  public,  because  some  of  my  con- 
stituents who  might  be  interested  in  commissions  might  feel  that  I 
am  not  doing  my  duly  if  1  don't  pressure  you.  But,  having  been  a 
private  in  the  Army  long  ago,  and  having  bsen  a  humble  shavetail 
long  ago,  I  can  readily  understand  the  attitude  of  people.  But  I  am 
just  Avondering  now  about  the  general  practice  of  Members  of  both 
the  House  and  the  Senate  calling  either  the  heads  of  the  various  mili- 
tary establishments,  the  heads  of  the  various  bureaus,  or  the  Secre- 
taries themselves,  what  the  practice  is,  and  to  what  extent  they  do 
bear  down  and  what  the  comparison  would  be  between  those  and  the 
instant  case  that  is  before  us,  insofar  as  the  allegation  and  the  testi- 
mony are  concerned. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  can't  recall  another  instance  of  where  Sen- 
ators have  called  in  connection  with  a  commission.  Certainly  there 
is  nothing  with  any  pressure  attached  to  it. 

Senator  Dirksen.  So  your  answer  would  be  that  the  number  of 
calls  that  you  have  received,  by  and  large,  are  rather  few  in  number  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Very  few. 

Senator  jDirksen.  And  devoid  of  pressure,  generally. 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  Dirksen.  In  other  words,  they  are  more  nearly  the  nature 
of  an  inquiry? 

Secretary  Stevens.  That  is  right. 

Senator  Dirksen.  In  the  hope,  perhaps,  that  the  situation  is  such 
that  there  might  be  favorable  consideration  given  ? 

Secretary  Stevens.  Senator  Dirksen,  I  am  speaking  as  the  Secre- 
tary, you  see,  and  I  am  not  speaking  to  the  communications  that  may 
go  into  the  Office  of  Legislative  Liaison.  I  am  talking  about  the  stand- 
point of  the  Secretary,  what  pressure  is  the  Secretary  under  from  the 
standpoint  of  and  in  the  matter  of  direct  commissions  in  the  Army. 
And  I  would  say  in  m_y  experience  that  practically  none. 

Senator  Dirksen.  I  talked  to  General  Eeber  about  it  on  occasions, 
I  am  sure,  and  we  alw^ays  like  to  maintain  pleasant  relationships  with 
your  liaison  officers.  But  I  am  wondering,  out  of  your  conversations 
with  your  bureau  heads,  with  the  other  Secretaries,  Secretary  for  Air 
and  Secretary  for  the  Navy,  whether  out  of  the  general  information 
t!iat  has  come  to  your  attention  there  have  been  many  requests,  much 
pressure,  or  whether  the  statements  that  one  has  seen  in  the  j)ress  from 
time  to  time  are  not  on  good  ground. 

Secretary  Stevens.  Well,  I,  of  course,  can  only  speak  for  the  De- 
partment of  the  Army,  of  my  firsthand  knowleclge,  and  I  have  had 
practically  no  pressure,  as  I  have  said,  and  I  think  if  there  had  been 
any  substantial  pressure  in  the  Air  Force  or  the  Navy  I  would  have 
known  about  it,  because  Secretary  Talbert  and  Secretary  Anderson 


254  SPECIAL    INVESTIGATION 

are  both  good  friends  of  mine.  We  meet  regularly,  and  a  thing  like 
that  would  undoubtedly  have  come  up,  Senator  Dirksen. 

Senator  Dirksen.  To  be  more  specific,  Mr.  Secretary,  I  have  great 
regard  for  Dave  Lawrence,  of  the  U.  S.  News  &  World  Report.  He 
is  a  very  objective  and  factual  reporter.  It  runs  in  my  mind  that 
he  did  do  a  column  recently  in  which  he  indicated  that  this  whole 
story  ought  to  be  made  public  about  all  the  requests  that  have  been 
referred  to  the  Army,  N^avy,  and  Air  Force  by  Members  of  the  Ho.ise 
and  Senate  in  behalf  of  commissions,  compassionate  discharges,  and 
that  sort  of  thing. 

I  would  just  like  to  know  the  truth  of  it,  now,  whether  we  are 
such  sinful  people  that  we  have  been  trying  to  convert  this  into  a 
political  Army,  because  if  we  have,  I  want  to  do  penance  and  get 
on  sack  cloth  and  ashes  right  now.  So  you  make  a  general  state- 
ment on  that,  Mr.  Secretary,  if  you  will. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  see  no  evidence  of  making  it  a  political  Army 
at  all,  Senator  Dirksen.  There  is  a  large  volume  of  matters  that  are 
handled  by  the  Office  of  Legislative  Liaison  which  handles  in- 
cidentally, correspondene  from  all  kinds  of  sources  in  large  volume, 
mostly  inquiries  for  information.  If  it  got  to  be  a  case  of  tremendous 
pressure,  I  would  think  in  due  course  I  probably  would  know  about  it. 

Senator  Dirksen.  l\niether  this  question  is  particularly  germane 
to  the  instant  inquiry,  I  leave  for  counsel  to  decide  and  object  if 
he  sees  fit,  but  has  the  custom  grown  up  when  a  Senator  or  a  Con- 
gressman calls  with  reference  to  a  matter  of  this  kind,  that  a  little 
note  is  inserted  in  the  file  with  just  two  letters  on  it,  "P.  I.";  and 
that  doesn't  mean  Philippine  Islands,  that  means  "political  influ- 
ence." Are  those  inserted  in  the  files  when  requests  are  made  for 
commissions? 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  have  never  seen  one. 

Senator  Dirksen.  That  answers  the  question,  I  think. 

Senator  Mundt.  May  the  Chair  say  that  he  has  consulted  with  the 
members  of  the  committee,  and  out  of  deference  to  our  union  friend 
from  Boston,  we  are  going  to  resume  in  the  morning  with  questions 
from  Senator  Jackson,  and  will  adjourn  at  this  time. 

May  the  Chair  have  the  attention  of  the  Secretary  long  enough  to 
be  sure  that  we  understand,  as  I  think  I  am  correct,  that  during  the 
interim  you  are  going  to  search  your  mind  concerning  Mr.  Carr, 
and  in  the  morning  either  particularize  the  charge  or  withdraw  it 
against  Mr.  Carr. 

Secretary  Stevens.  I  am  certainly  going  to  search  my  mind  and 
try  to  do  that. 

Senator  Mundt.  We  stand  in  recess  until  10 :  30  tomorrow  morning. 

(Whereupon,  at  4 :  55  p.  m.,  the  hearing  was  adjourned  until  10 :  30 
a.  m.j  Tuesday,  April  27, 1054.) 

X 


BOSTON  PUBLIC  LIBRARY 


3  9999  05442  1738