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





Given By 



JOE McCarthy, roy m. cohn, and 









S. Res. 189 

PART 16 

MAY 3, 1954 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Operations 

46620» WASHINGTON : 1954 


JOSEPH R. MCCARTHY, WiscoBsiu, Chairman 
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas 



EVERETT Mckinley DIRKSEN, llUnois JOHN F. Kennedy, Massachusetts 

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

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

Special Subcommittee on Investigations 

KARL E. MUNDT, South Dalcata, Chnirman 

CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan IlENKY M. JACKSON, Washington 


RAr H. Jenkins, Chief Counsel 

THOMAS R. I'ltEWiTi, Assistant Counsel 

RojiEHT A. Collier, Assistant Counsel 

gOLis HORWiTz, Assistant Counsel 

Charles A. Maner, Secretary 



Index I 

Testimony of — 

Adams, John G., counselor to Department of the Army 621 

St. Clair, James D., special counsel for Department of the Army 618 

Stevens, Hon. Robert T., Secretary, Department of the Army Cll 

EXHIBITS i^tro- 

duced Appears 

8. First draft, dated October 19, 1953, proposed statement to be 

delivered at Fort Monmouth 619 * 

9. Corrected draft, undated, proposed statement to be delivered at 

Fort Monmouth 621 * 

10. Draft, undated, proposed statement to be delivered at Fort 

Monmouth 624 * 

11. Mimeographed draft, undated, proposed statement to be de- 

livered at Fort Monmouth 624 * 

•May be found in the files of the subcommittee. 


MONDAY, MAY 3, 1954 

United States Senate, 
Special Subcommittee on Investigations of 
THE Committee on Government Operations, 

Washington, D. O. 
after recess 

(The subcommittee reconvened at 2 : 35 p. m., pursuant to recess.) 

Present : Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota, chair- 
man ; Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen, Republican, Illinois ; Sen- 
ator 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 Symington, Democrat, Missouri. 

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

Principal participants: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, a United 
States Senator from the State of Wisconsin ; Roy M. Colin, chief coun- 
sel to the subcommittee; Francis P. Carr, executive director of the 
subcommittee ; Hon. Robert T. Stevens, Secretary of the Army ; Jolm 
G. Adams, counselor to the Army; H. Struve Hensel, Assistant Secre- 
tary 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. The committee will please come to order. 

The Chair Avould again like to welcome our guests in the committee 
chamber and to advise them of the committee rule that there are to be 
no manifestations of approval or disapproval of any type or any kind 
during the course of the hearing. Please observe the connnittee 



ARMY— Resumed 

Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen ? 

Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, this moi-ning I made what might 
be regarded as an informal suggestion about an executive meeting of 
the committee tonight. I think I would like to formalize that and 



move that there be such a meetinfj with counsel present, for the purpose 
of exploring expeditious conclusion of these hearings. 

Senator Mundt. May the Chair say that during the course of the 
lunch hour I have conferred with colleagues on both sides of the aisle, 
and in conformity with our practice of having an executive session 
whenever any member of the committee desires it, the Chair will now 
call an executive meeting of this committee to take place at 5 o'clock 
in room 357, at which he will invite, of course, the members of the 
subcommittee, Mr. Welch, Mr. Bryan, and Senator McCarthy. That 
will be, as we conceive it, the committee members and our counsel, and 
counsel prepared to talk for the various sides of this dispute. The 
purpose of the meeting is to see whether, with all the disputants in the 
room at the same time, represented by counsel, we can contrive any 
tactics for expediting or shortening the hearings. 

May the Chair inquire — he is asking this question at the suggestion 
of Senator McClellan — may the Chair inquire of Senator McCarthy 
whether that is satisfactory? 

Senator McCarthy. If the Chair would prefer that. Otherwise, I 
would like to have Mr. Cohn there. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair would prefer it, but we want to enter the 
conmiittee room certainly with an area of understanding, and if you 
feel that you would rather have Mr. Cohn there, you may bring him. 

Senator McCarthy. I would, frankly, like to. because the accusa- 
tions made against him are of such nature that I think he should be 

Senator Mundt. Very well, without objection the invitation will be 
extended to include Mr. Cohn. 

Senator Jackson. I assume that all principals would be there. 
Mr. Hensel has not been admitted. There have been charges against 

Senator Mundt. His counsel has been invited. Mr. Bryan is 

Mr. Bryan-. I will be present in Mr. Hensel 's behalf, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator McClellan. I don't want to be technical about this thing, 
but if w^e are going to have counsel there, I think counsel are entitled 
to have their clients there. 

I think you had better just broaden this to include all principals 
and their counsel, so no one can feel that he has been left out of the 

Senator Mundt. The Chair Avill be happy to expand it as widely 
as you desire that he expand it. I think we should stipulate by name, 
however, who is going to be there. 

May the Chair suggest, then, if it is the pleasure of the subcom- 
mittee, that we invite, in addition to those already named, Mr. Hensel, 
Air. Carr, Mr. Cohn, and Mr. Adams and Mr. "Stevens. Is that ex- 
panded far enough, or have we omitted somebody? Mr. Welch? 

Mr. Welch. I represent a moderately large client. I am content 
to be there with full power to represent the Army, and need not bring 
the gentlemen mentioned, although I do not wish to be discourteous 
to them and, above all things, discourteous to the conunittee. I would 
love it if my assistant, Mr. St. Clair, could be there. 

Senator Mundt. He certainly may, under this new rule of expan- 


The Chair was hopeful that we could have a small enouj^h meetinj^ 
so Ave might have some remote possibility of achieving something. 
I am a little bit afraid that the meeting is going to get too large to do 
very much, but if you want to bring Mr. St. Clair, he is certainly 

Are there any others that you feel should be included ? 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I think the idea of the invita- 
tions is an excellent idea. I think the record should be corrected, 
however. IMr. Welch said he would be there representing the Army. 
Mr. Welch will not be there representing the Army. I am sure we 
will all agree. 

IVIr. Welch. Let us just say Mr. Welch will be there, then. 

Senator Mdndt. Very good, sir. 

Senator McCarthy. Let us make it clear you are not representing 
the Army. 

Mr. Welch. I do not say that. Senator. In any event I shall be 

Senator Muxdt. That is one of the disputes this committee has not 
been callad upon to adjudicate, so I hope you will thresh that out 
some place else. At least Mr. Welch will be there; and Secretary 
Stevens, you understand that you have been invited to come if you 
care to come. Mr. St. Clair has been invited to come if he cares to 
come and so has Mr. Adams. We are all clear on that. Eoom 357 at 
5 o'clock. 

]Mr. Welch. I want to say a word about response to a subpena or a 
request. Mr. Cohn this morning indicated that he would like in the 
room a memorandum of a proposed press release related to the Fort 
Monmouth visit. 

It seemed to me you indicated you were working from a draft differ- 
ing from the one that I find. If you have a draft I would like it to 
be produced now. I have our draft. They can go in together. Have 
you a draft, sir, may I ask ? 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohn. 

Mr. CoHN. I would much rather have Mr. Jenkins and his staff go 
into this matter, as they have everything else, and develop the facts 
as they have been doing up to this point, and then when Mr. Jenkins 
is satisfied that we all have produced what we should produce, have it 
for the inspection of the committee rather than go into it now, if 
that would be agreeable. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, you see, I understand that the press 
statement went through 2 or 3 diHerent drafts, and I want to get 
corresponding drafts. If you have your earliest draft, I have our 
earliest draft, and I would like them to go in together so that we will 
know just what we are dealing with. 

Senator Mundt. Counsel advises that the procedure indicated by 
Mr. Cohn has been the procedure followed up to date, and that at the 
proper time all of the various drafts of all the various press confer- 
ences will be introduced. 

Mr. Welch. Then, Mr. Chairman 

Senator Munut. Mr. Welch. 

Mr. Welch. Could we adopt the usual courtroom device of marking 
the Cohn one for identification ? I would like it marked for identifi- 
cation only, and then we will put ours in. 


Mr. Jenkins. It is quite all right, ]\Ir. Welch. 

Mr. AVelch. Will you produce it then, Mr. Colin, so it can be marked 
for identification? 

Senator McCarthy. I don't understand. You are asking us to 
produce your first draft. 

Mr. Welch. AVe are going to produce, Mr. Senator, and put in evi- 
dence, our first draft. I vant marked for identification only your 

Senator McCarthy. We didn't have a draft. You presented a 
draft. I turned down the first draft. I turned down the second 
draft. The third draft was more acceptable 

Mr. AVelch. Then could we have marked for identification the 
successive drafts that were turned down ? 

Senator McCarthy. If you will bring them in. 

Mr. Welch. I just want what you have in your files marked for 
identification. Senator, so there will never be any doubt about what 
you have. 

Senator McCarthy. I don't have your drafts. I know you are 
curious to know whether we have them or not. 

Mr. AVelch. I have no curiosity. 

Senator McCarthy. I will tell you we don't have them. That will 
make you feel easier, I know. 

Mr. AVelch. I don't feel easy until I know what I am dealing with 
in the Avay of written documents. 

You now say that you have no drafts, although when I spoke of 
drafts a moment ago I observed Mr. Cohn nodding in what I took to be 

Senator McCarthy. Just a minute. Your Mr. Adams presented — 
you and I are both testifying — your Mr. Adams ])resented to us 
various drafts of a statement that he wanted me to make. I refused. 
I don't think we have a copy of the statements. 

Mr. AVelch. All right. 

Senator McCarthy. I hope you have. I can tell you what is in the 
statements when I am testifying. 

Senator Mundt. A point of order now. 

Mr. AVelch. We have that draft, both on a belt, so we can hear Mr. 
Adams' voice as he dictated it and on a transcription. I suggest that 
we now have it on the belt version, which is identical, of course, with 
the transcription, so that it may now by the use of a machine, be read 
into the record. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Mundt. Senator JNIcCarthy. 

Senator McCarthy. I am examining Mr. Stevens now. I do want 
to get to the press releases. There are some three of them. I do want 
to get to them. If INIr. AVelch is going to testify, I want him under 
oath and if Mr. Adams is going to testify I want him under oath, but 
I first want to ask Mr. Stevens many questions. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Mc(Jarthy has 30 seconds of his 10 minutes 
this morning. You may proceed with the questioning for the next 30 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Stevens, this morning you Avere talking 
about the cooperation you wanted to give the committee, the fact that 
after we would suspend the hearings you would give us reports. I 
would like to read you a letter, one written from me to you, and if you 


will tell me if you did aiisNYer and if you did not, why not. IMaicli 

Dear Mr. Stevkns : As you will recall whon you, Senator Dirksen, Senator 
Mundt, Senator Potter, and I met several weeks ago, you agreed to instruct the 
Inspector General to complete the investigation on the case of Major Peress, a 
Fifth-Amendment Communist. As you will recall, you agreed to give us the 
names of all individuals that took part in this promotion, the change of duty 
orders from an overseas post, to a post in the United States, and his honorable 
discharge, all of wiiich took place subsequent to the time his file indicated that 
he was not only a Fifth-Amendment Communist, but that he was a graduate 
of a Communist leadership scliool. I would like to make it clear that this 
matter must not be oliscured by the furore and shouting over the case of Private 
Schine. I shall still want all the facts which we discussed with you about 
this Fifth-Amendment Major. Therefore, will you please inform me as to the 
date when the above information will be available. 
Sincerely yours, 

Joe McCarthy. 

After you got this letter, did you contact the Inspector General to 
find out when this information would be available'^ 

Secretary Stevens. I testified on that this morning, Senator 
McCarthy. I testified on that that I had set the Inspector General to 
work when I first asked him to. I wanted 

Senator McCarthy. Did you understand the question? 

Secretary Stevens. I didn't call about the receipt of your letter, 
no, sir. 

Senator McCarthy. In other words, after I wrote- 

Senator Mundt. The Senator's time is up. You had only 30 

Mr. Counsel ? 

Mr. Jenkins. No further questions. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair has none. Are there any from the Sen- 
ators on the right? 

Any from the Senators to the left ? 

Senator Jackson. 

Senator Jackson. Only this, I understood there was a request for 
some documents, drafts of a press release from the Army, this morn- 
ing. I am wondering if they are noAv available and, if so, will they be 
presented at this time in evidence before the committee. 

!Mr. Welch. May I answer? 

Senator Jackson. Yes. 

Mr. ^VELCII. They were described by the Senators as of crucial im- 
portance to the case. We, therefore, upset the Pentagon during the 
noon hour to find them. We did find them and they are here. 

Senator elACKSoN. I ask that they be read into evidence at this time, 
if counsel has had an opi)ortunity to see them. 

Mr. CoiiN. Nor have we, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. At the proj^er time, sir, we will produce those docu- 
ments. I understood this morning that Senator McCarthy requested 
that those dociunents be produced. Frankly, I see no reason why 
they sliould not be produced at this time. It is perfectly in order 
and in view of ]\Ir. Welch's statement, I suggest that the Secretary 
now produce those documents, press releases. 

Mr. Welch. I will hand them 

46620'— 54— pt. 16 2 


Senator McCarthy. May we have the Secretary produce them ? I 
would rather not have Mr. Welch testify. I would rather the Secre- 
tary testify. Mr. Secretary, have you the documents requested? 

Senator Jackson. I think it is my time, isn't it ? 

Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson. 

Senator McCarthy. You are right, it is. 

Senator Jackson. I have been quite generous this morning in yield- 
ing time. I wanted to get this one point cleared up that was not 
brought up by myself but to keep the testimony in an orderly way 
sc that we can understand what is being requested. 

Mr. Jenkins. Senator Jackson, will you yield, so I may ask one 
question ? 

Senator Jackson. Yes. 

Senator McClellan. I suggest that counsel produce this testimony 
on his time. 

Mr. Jenkins. That is all right. 

Senator Mundt. Is that agreeable, Senator Jackson ? 

Senator Jackson. That is fine. 

Senator Mundt. May the Chair first inquire whether this is a full 
answer to the subpena which the Chair signed and sent off with 
somebody this morning, which called for all of the press releases, and 
the transcripts and the notebooks of Mr. Adams dealing with this 
press conference ? 

Mr. Welch. I thought I made it clear. The belt on which the dicta- 
tion was recorded is in the courtroom and, by use of a machine which 
we have here can be played into this record, if you wish. 

Mr. Jenkins. And I believe you said, Mr. Welch, in the voice of 
Mr. Adams ? 

Mr. Welch. In the voice of Mr. Adams. May I say, Mr. Jenkins, 
I have not checked the belt against this, but I have been informed 
that it has been checked and is absolutely accurate. 

Mr. Jenkins. I merely want to identify this document. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Counsel — may I address this to counsel 
rather than to the Chair — Mr. Counsel, as you know, what I want is 
the original draft, and the final drafts. 

Mr. Jenkins. I will read that into the record now. Senator, if you 
will allow me to do so. 

Senator McCarthy. I want to know if you have both drafts or the 

Senator Mundt. The counsel will explore those facts, and after 
which there will be 10 minutes allocated to the Senator from Wiscon- 
sjn, at which time he may explore if his questions are not answered. 

Senator Jackson. Mr. Chairman, the reason I asked that it be 
brought in at this time is that it be in compliance with the request 
made by Senator McCarthy this morning, and I think it should be 
purely limited to the request. I would not want to see extraneous 
matters brought out. It was only to keep this record in an orderly 
way that I asked that this matter be followed up immediately at this 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, you were being questioned this morn- 
ing with respect to a proposed press release. Do you recall that? 

Secretary Stevens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. And, at tliat time, Senator McCarthy was discussing 
with you or rather interrogating you with respect to a proposed press 


release dated October 19 and to be released to the press on October 20, 
is tliat correct ? 

Secretary Stevens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. You have handed me now, pursuant to his request 
for a production of that document, what is entitled "Proposed State- 
ment to be Delivered at Fort Monmouth, Drafted 10-19-5-5, Ori<2;inal 
and One." I will ask you, Mr. Secretary, whether or not you have 
examined this document and whether or not it is a proposed i)ress 
release of October 19 and to be released by the Senator as of October 
20? Is that correct or not ? 

Secretary Stevens. Mr. St. Clair examined it. I haven't duly 
examined it, Mr. Jenkins, 

Mr. Jenkins. You say Mr. St. Clair did examine it ? 

Mr. St. Clair. Mr. Chairman ? 

Mr. Jenkins. I didn't get the answer. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Secretary, we didn't get your answer. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Stevens, Mr. St. Clair like myself is not testify- 
ing in the case, certainly not at this time. 

I want to return this draft to you and ask you to examine it, because 
apparently tHis committee, this investigating committee, may consider 
it of importance. 

Senator McCarthy. Could I see it a moment also ? 

Mr. Jenkins. Senator, I would like to have it identified first. 

Examine it and state whether or not it is the document I just now 
asked you about. 

Senator Jackson. Could it be marked for identification to keep the 
record clear? 

Mr. Jenkins. After it has been identified, Senator, yes. He may 
identify it and he may not. 

(Document handed back to Secretary Stevens.) 

Secretary Stevens. Mr. Jenkins, counsel informs me that he has 
compared this transcript with the belt, and it is the same. I haven't 
done that myself. 

Mr. Jenkins. That it is identical and the same ? 

Secretary Stevens. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, I will ask you Avhether or not you 
have any other memoranda or documents containing any other pro- 
posed press release, except the one you hold in your hand? 

Secretary Stevens. Is there one more draft ? 

Mr. Jenkins. We want all the drafts of all documents containing 
a proposed press release at this time. 

Secretary Stevens. Right. 

Mr. Jenkins. While you are getting the additional document and 
for the purpose of positively identifying the document you have been 
holding in 3'our hand, may I ask Mr. St. Clair a question? He may 
be sworn. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. St. Clair, do you object to standing and being 

sworn ? 

Mr. St. Clair. No, I do not. 

Mr. Jenkins. As far as I am concerned, Mr. St. Clair, let me make 
it perfectly clear that it is not at all necessary, but for the 

Mr. St. Clair. Thank you, Mr. Jenkins. 

Mr, Jenkins, But for the purposes of (his record, it may be that 
some party in interest might desire it to be done. 


Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, tlie real trouble with this- 

Senator Mundt. A point of order, Mr. Welch ? 

Mr. Welch. Yes. The real difficulty is that these documents come 
from Mr. Adams' file, and he could put us all straight in a hurry if you 
put the documents in front of him. 

Mr. Jenkins. Let me ask Mr. St'. Clair one question. 

Senator Mundt. Just a minute. 

Has counsel withdrawn his suggestion that he be sworn, or where 
do we stand on that? 

Mr, Jenkins. For purposes of positive identification and in order 
that there be no question about it, let the witness be sworn. I am sure 
you don't mind, Jim. 

Mr. St. Clair. Not at all. 

Senator Mundt. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are 
about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 
truth, so help you God ? 

Mr. St. Clair. I do. 



Mr. Jenkins. Mr. St. Clair, have or not you compared the document 
now before you, dated October 19, 1953, with a recording which was 
furnished you at the Pentagon and which was in the voice of Mr. 
John G. Adams? 

Mr. St. Clair. I have, Mr. Jenkins. 

Mr. Jenkins. I will ask you whether or not the dor^nment now be- 
fore you and about which I have been questioning Mr. Stevens is a 
precise and accurate, verbatim reproduction of the dictation of Mr. 
Adams containing the proposed press release? 

Mr. St. Clair. It is, Mr. Jenkins. I made one change. I changed 
the word "of" to the word "on" on the second page, made in ink. 
That is my change. 

Other than that, it is a verbatim copy of the belt that I heard. 

]\Ir. Jenkins. You transposed the word "of" over the word "on"? 
Did I understand you correctly? 

Mr. St. Clatr. The word "of" is in typewriting, but on the belt it 
reads "on," as I heard it, and I made that change in ink, 

Mr. Jenkins. So it is a verbatim account of that dictation by Mr. 

Mr. St. Clair, As I have changed it, yes, Mr. Jenkins. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Adams' voice was reproduced, was it, Mr. St. 
Clair, and did you recognize it? 

Mr. St. Clair, I recognized it, I am reasonably sure. It was on a 
Dictaphone machine, and this is a belt that perhaps you are familiar 
with that is in general use in many offices. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr, Chairman and Mr. Welch and Senator McCarthy, 
if there is now any question about the authenticity, the genuineness 
of the document to which we are referring, I Avould like to call Mr. 
Adams for one question. If there is no question about it, then I would 
like to have that proposed press release read into the record at this 
time. What do you say ? 

Senator McCarthy. Just one thing, I don't think I would ques- 
tion the authenticity. I am sure this young man would not lie about 


this. Tlie thing that I want, however, is No. 1, the first press release 

Mr. Jenkins. "We are going to get that momentarily. 

Senator McCarthy. I would like to have it established now whether 
this is the first or second. 

No. 2, I would like to see the document so that my staff can tell 
me whether this is the first press release or not. 

Mr. Jenkins. AVill you now pass the document to us to which we 
have been referring, Mr. St. Clair? 

Senator McCarthy. Keeping in mind that we did not draft this. 
It is an Adams-Stevens press release. 

Mr. Jenkins. Miss Kuth, before it is passed to Senator McCarthy, 
will you let the reporter identify it? 

Senator Mundt. It will be marked as "Exhibit No. 8." 

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 8" and may 
be found in the files of the subcommittee.) 

Mr. Jenkins. Going back to the Secretary, do you know whether 
or not 

Senator Mundt. Do you know whether or not you have discontinued 
qeustioning Mr. St. Clair? If so, we will unswear him. 

Mr. St. Clair. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I may now 
be considered to be unsworn ? 

Senator Mundt. That is correct. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, do you knoAV whether or not that is 
the first proposed press release, the one that has now been identified 
by the reporter dated October 19 ? 

Secretary Stevens. It is so marked and I imagine it is. 

Mr. Jenkins. Is it the first one that was prepared by you or anyone 
at your instance ? 

Secretary Stevens. I didn't prepare it. 

Mr. Jenkins. At your instance or by Mr. Adams? 

Secretary Stevens. Prepared by Mr. Adams. 

Mr. Jenkins. As far as you know is it the first one prepared by 

Secretary Stevens. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you have in the files at the Pentagon or with 
you today any other draft of any other proposed press release ? 

Secretary Stevens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Will you refer to it and tell us the date of it ? 

Secretary Stevens. It is undated. 

Mr. Jenkins. Perhaps Senator McCarthy would prefer that we 
-wait for further questioning until he has examined the document 
that has been filed. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Counsel, this would appear to be one of the 
drafts that were submitted to me with the request tliat I make this 
statement. I don't believe this is the first draft. I think if we are 
going to go into this, that should be developed. 

I frankly would rather continue the interrogation of Mr. Stevens. 
I have no objection to this being |Ait in the record at this time, how- 
ever, with the understanding tliat we question Mr. Adams or the 
stenographer, whoever the Chair or counsel suggests, to get all of 
the drafts. That looks like one of the drafts. 


Mr. Jenkins. Senator McCarthy, while you are busy examining 
that draft, we are busy exploring the question of another draft at this 
time. You were busily engaged reading that one. 

Mr. CoHN. I believe this is the second draft. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Stevens, do we understand th^t you now have 
before you another draft of another proposed press release? 

Secretary Ste\tens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. By whom was it prepared? 

Secretary Stevens. As far as I know, Mr. Adams. 

Mr. Jenkins. At his dictation? 

Secretary Stevens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did you know whether it preceded the one that has 
now been handed Senator McCarthy, or whether it was subsequent 
thereto ? 

Secretary Stevens. I don't know of my own certain knowledge, but 
he tells me it is the succeeding draft or cleanup primarily, not in 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Adams tells you that it is a succeeding draft? 

Secretary Stevens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. That is, it was made subsequent to the one the Sena- 
tor now holds in his hand ? 

Secretary Stevens. That is right. 

Mr. Jenkins. And you say it was prepared at the instance or dicta- 
tion of Mr. Adams ? 

Secretary Stevens. That is right. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did you compare it with the transcription of Mr. 
Adams, that is, with his dictation on the machine? 

Secretary Stevens. No, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did Mr. St. Clair do that? We will have to swear 
him again. 

Mr. St. Clair. I have no objection to being sworn again. I would 
be willing to stipulate that I would be considered as being sworn to 
save time. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did you compare it, Mr. St. Clair? 

Senator Mundt. Such a stipulation will be accepted for that 

Mr. Jenkins. Did you compare it with the dictation of Mr, Adams, 
the one Mr, Stevens now has ? 

Mr. St. Clair. I did not, Mr. Jenkins. The draft that is before 
me now is a so-called cleaned up draft of the original dictated one, 
as I understand it. There are a few changes in grammar, some 
changes in punctuation. Other than that, so far as I can determine, 
there are no changes in substance. 

Mr. Jenkins. Have you heard played from the recording the dicta- 
tion of Mr. Adams from which this cleanup draft was made? 

Mr. St. Clair. No, I haven't, because I believe there is none, Mr. 
Jenkins. I think the one the Senator has before him was dictated^ 
From the one the Senator has before him there were penciled nota- 
tions made on it from which the draft I have in front of me was 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, I can shorten this appreciably if I 
may be permitted to ask Mr. Adams 1 or 2 question about it. 

Mr. St. Clair. Shall I consider myself now unsworn ? 


Senator Mundt. You are unsworn, and the Chair will now swear 
Mr. Adams for the purpose oi asking Mr. Adams questions on this 
one question only. 

Do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give will be 
the truth, the Avhole truth, and nothing but the truth ? 

Mr. Adams. I do. 


Senator Mundt. Mr. Counsel ? 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Adams, it is understood, and I take it it is a fact 
that you dictated the proposed press release of October 1953, is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Adams. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. What document does Mr. Stevens now have in his 
hand, the second one about which he was interrogated, and being sup- 
posedly a proposed press release? Identify that, will you, please? 

Mr. Adams. The document I hold in my hand, sir, is a corrected 
copy of the first draft. I did not dictate to a machine to make the 
corrected copy. I merely corrected a copy of the first draft in pencil 
and had it retyped. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you mean by that, Mr. Adams, the document you 
now hold in your hand is a corrected copy of the draft of October 19? 

Mr. Adams. That is correct. This also was prepared on October 

Mr. Jenkins. It is not a new or different document except insofar 
as certain corrections were made ? 

Mr. Adams. That is right. 

Mr. Jenkins. Who made the corrections ? 

Mr. Adams. I did, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Which document did you submit to the Senator to be 
released to the press ? The one you now have in your hand ? 

Mr. Adam. Insofar as I can remember, sir, 1 submitted only the 
jsecond draft. 

Mr. Jenkins. And that is the one you now have in your hand ? 

Mr. Adams. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Will you please hand that or have it handed to the 
reporter to be identified and then it may be marked to the Senator 
for inspection. 

Senator Mundt. It will be marked "Exhibit No. 9." 

(The document above referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 9" and 
may be found in the files of the subcommittee.) 

Mr. Jenkins. While that is being done, are there any other pro- 
posed press releases that you ever dictated at any time that are in 
existence or that are nonexistent? 

Mr. Adams. Insofar as I can recall, there are no proposed press 
releases that I ever released which would have any bearing on this 
subject and which we were intending to ask Senator McCarthy to issue 
other than the document now in this room. 

Mr. Jenkins. Then, the only press release that you ever prepared 
to be released by Senator McCarthy with respect to the subject under 
inquiryj that is. Fort Monmouth, the investigations and the hearings 
pertaining to Fort Monmouth, are the two documents now in the pos- 


session of the Senator, the last one being a corrected copy of the first ; 
is that correct ? 

Mr. Adams. I will say that is correct, and I would like to say one 
thing further. 

Mr. Jenkins. You may. 

Mr. Adams. These documents were prepared on October 19. They 
went into the files on about October 21 or 22. I have not looked into 
the files since then up until a couple of weeks ago. My recollection is 
that draft No. 2, now before Senator McCarthy, is the one that I sub- 
mitted to him. I do not recall that a third draft was prepared. 

Mr. Jenkins. Is it the one that you discussed with him on October 

Mr. Adams. It is my recollection that it is. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did you ever discuss with him any other press release 
prepared either by you or by him, with reference to the subject under 
investigation ? 

Mr. Adams. Insofar as I can recall, I did not. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you say positively, Mr. Adams, according to your 
best recollection, that the document dated October 19, 1953, is tlie only 
one prepared by you or at your instance, and discussed with Senator 

Mr. Adams. I would like to make one further statement on this sub- 
ject, if I may, Mr. Chairman. My recollection is that I dictated this 
document into this machine on the afternoon of the 19th of February. 
I revised the document and draft No. 2 was sent by messenger by me 
at about 4 o'clock in the afternoon to Mr. Cohn after a telephone con- 
versation from me in which I suggested that he look the draft over. 
I do not recall that there were any revisions of the draft, either on the 
afternoon of the 19th or on the 20th. My files contain no copies of 
anvthing subsequent to draft No. 2. I have searched the files carefully. 

Mr. Jenkins. And your files contain no draft of any document con- 
taining a proposed press release prior to October 19; is that correct? 

INIr. Adams. ]\Iy files contain nothing except the two documents. 
Perhaps my files contain only two things, this tape from which draft 
No. 1 was prepared, and draft No. 2, the thermofax copy which is now 
in front of Senator McCarthy. There are no other records. I have 
no recollection of ever having destroyed any copies. 

Mr. Jenkins. And your memory contains 

Mr. Adams. My memory contains nothing that I haven't told you. 

Mr. Jenkins. Very well. Does anyone care to cross-examine? 

Senator Mundt. We were with Senator Jackson. He has some of 
his 10 minutes left, if he cares to continue. 

Senator Jackson. Do I understand that exhibit 8 — was that typed 
off today or is this the original ? 

Mr. Adams. It was typed off today. That is the original typed copy 
which we call the first draft. 

Senator Jackson. Typed from the tape ? 

Mr. Adams. Typed from the tape and the tape is here, if you wish 
to hear it. 

Senator Jackson. May I ask, was there a typed copy made at the 
time it was dictated into the machine? 

Mr. Adams. There was, sir. 

Senator Jackson. Where is that copy ? 


Mr. Adams. I think that is the copy which I corrected by pencil and 
then had draft No. 2 prepared, I do not find any tissues or any type- 
written copy of draft No. 2 in my files. I find only what we call a 
thermofax copy which is a photograph of draft No. 2. 

Senator Jackson. The thing that I am a little puzzled about is I 
understood what was requested was the original typed copy from tlie 
machine. Now, I don't — where is that original? 

Mr. Adams. The original that was typed up from this machine, I 
presume it Avas destroyed after it had been recopied with my correc- 
tions on it. That is the standard practice in my office. 

Senator 'Jackson. And then the final draft of that became what is 
now known as exhibit No. 9 ? 

Mr. Adams. That is correct, sir, and the original, although — the 
original typed copy although it may have disappeared, it exists on 
this tape in my voice, if you wish to hear it, dated October 19, 195;]. 

Senator Jackson. But exhibit No. 9 is in the original form ? 

Mr. Adams. That is correct. 

Senator Jackson. When was that typed? That was typed, ready 
for mimeographing? 

Mr. Adams. No, sir, it was typed, but I don't think we mimeographed 
it. It may have been, but I don't recollect it. 

Senator Jackson. When was it typed ? 

Mr. Adams. It was typed in time for us to put it on the airplane 
en the 20th. 

Senator Jackson. Twentieth of what? 

Mr. Adams. Twentieth of October 1953. 

Senator Jackson. That is all. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Potter or Senator Dworshak? Senator 
Symington ? 

Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, there are quite a few questions 
I would like to ask. But this witness has been on the stand, and this 
is the eighth day. He is one of six principals. 

In the interest of expediting this hearing, which is creeping along, 
I will pass. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch ? 

Mr. Welch. None from me. 

Senator Mundt. May the Chair remind Senator McCarthy tluit 
Mr. Adams is on the witness stand for the purpose of answering 
questions only about this press release and upon conclusion he will 
be unsworn. 

Senator McCarthy. I only have two questions and then Mr. Cohn 
will take over the questioning. 

Mr. Adams, it is correct, isn't it, that I never did issue this press 
release that the Army had prepared for me to issue ? I told you tluit 
I would issue my own press releases ? 

Mr. Adams. Mr. Chairman, I understood the authenticity was all 
that was to be inquired into. Is that correct ? 

Senator McCarthy. Is it correct that I refused to issue this or 
wouldn't authorize it to be issued? 

Mr. Adams. Is that correct? 

Senator Mundt. I am not advising counsel, but it seems we were to 
talk about the press release. If we are going to talk about the press 
release, I see no reason why we shouldn't conclude that now. 

46620"— 54— pt. 16 3 


Senator McCarthy. I don't press the question, Mr. Chairman. I 
can ask Mr. Stevens. If Mr. Adams does not want to answer it it is 
all right with me. 

Mr. Adams. I am perfectly willing to answer it. I thought I was 
bound by certain restrictions as to what I should answer about. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair will be glad to hear the advice of 
counsel as to whether he can best expedite the hearings by getting an 
answer to this question or by unswearing the witness and do it some 
other time. 

Mr. Jenkins. I think it would expedite the hearing if he will answer 
that question. 

Mr. Adams. Senator McCarthy did not issue the press release. 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Adams, if I suggest to you, sir, that there is a prior 
draft and a subsequent draft to this, would I be incorrect? 

Mr. Adams. The prior draft to the document in your hand is the 
one on this tape insofar as I can remember. I recall no subsequent 
draft. There may very well have been one. My files contain none. 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Adams, is this not a subsequent draft, if I may, sir 
[indicating document]. I have another copy in mimeographed form 
which might aid in refreshing your recollection, sir. 

Mr. Adams. I don't recognize these. It may very well be. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair suggests that the document now under 
question be introduced as exhibit No. 10 and marked accordingly — 
10 and 11 if you have two documents. 

(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibits Nos. 10 and 11" 
and may be found in the files of the subcommittee.) 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, I am — I may be a little dense at this 
table. I understood the Senator to say that you had no copies in your 
file, Mr. Cohn. Was I incorrect ? 

Mr. CoiiN. I have no copies of the prior draft, Mr. Welch. When 
you were interrogating me I had not seen w^hat you had, and I could 
have no conceivable way of knowing what you were talking about. 
Having examined it, I am now in position to state, and I will state 
under oath, that there was a prior draft submitted to us which I still 
have not seen; that there is a subsequent draft, a copy of which we 
have in the Senator's files, and I have produced it here. 

Mr. Welch. Could that be marked for identification? 

Mr. CoHN. Certainly, sir, and I would be glad to have that handed 
up to you. 

Senator Mundt. For the information of Counsel Welch, may I re- 
mind him that Mr. Cohn is not under oath at this time. If you wish 
to cross-examine him when he is under oath, you may have that 

Go ahead, INIr. Cohn. 

Mr. Cohn. In the interest of expediting matters here, Mr. Chair- 
man, I will renew the suggestion if I might, sir, that I made before. 
Namely, that we developthis entire matter with Mr. Jenkins and 
his statf as we have done in other instances. 

I believe we have already indicated what we would like to subpena 
in connection with this, and having made that development and es- 
tablished the fact it might then come into the hearing without con- 
suming all of this time. 

I would be very happy to do that with Mr. Jenkins and his staff as 
we have done so many other things. 


]\Ir. Jenkins. Mv. Chairman, it is satisfactory to me, but I would 
like to ask Mr. Adams a question at this time. 

Senator McCarthy. Could I ask one question, Mr. Jenkins, first? 

Senator Mundt. You still have some time of your 15 minutes. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Adams, is it correct that you prepared a 
certain number of drafts of a proposed press release and suggested 
that I release those in my name ; had them mimeographed for release, 
and that I refused to release those and told you that if you released 
them in my name I would have no choice but to repudiate that as any 
document coming from me? 

Mr. Adams, That is not correct. Senator. If you will restate the 
question, I can answer it, but you made no such statement that you 
wouldn't have any choice but to repudiate it. 

Senator McCarthy. In other words, is the rest of it correct, that 
I said I would not release it ; that I was not allowed to release it under 
my name ? 

Mr. Adams. I don't think that is quite correct. 

Senator McCarthy. Let me ask you this 

Senator Mundt, Will the Senator break his questions down in 
shorter statements ? 

Senator McCarthy. Yes. 

In any event, you did — and I don't accuse you of any wrongdoing ; 
you were doing a job that you thought you were doing exactly ac- 
cording to your boss in the military — in any event, you prepared a 
press release before you went to Fort Monmouth which was to be 
released after we left Fort Monmouth by me? 

Mr. Adams. If you accepted it. 

Senator McCarthy. If I accepted it. You felt that that was a 
good release and it wouldn't hurt anyone concerned, I assume, and 
that would be a benefit. To narrow this down, I told you that I felt 
I could not release that; that I felt it indicated we were dropping 
the investigation; that we were not; and that while parts of the press 
release were acceptable, I could not release it under my name because 
I felt it would be construed by the press to mean that we were with- 
drawing from the investigation of communism at Fort Monmouth, 
and we were not. Is that substantially what I told you ? 

Mr. Adams. Yes. 

Senator McCarthy. As a result of that, this release was not issued 
at all? 

Mr. Adams. That is right. 

Senator McCarthy. I have no further questions. 

Mr. Jenkins. May I ask a question? 

Mr. Adams, Mr. Cohn handed to you another document or memo- 
randum and asked you whether or not that was another proposed press 
release prepared by you. Is it or not? 

Mr. Adams. I don't know, Mr. Chairman. As I stated to you, I 
had searched my desk, I had found only one copy. I have no recol- 
lection of destroying any copies prior or subsequent to it. I searched 
my memory. I have no recollection of any document other than this 
one that is before Mr. Cohn. 

]\Ir. Jenkins. Did you examine the document just now handed to 
you by Mr. Cohn ? 

Mr. Adams. I did, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Have you read it ? 


Mr. Adams. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. As I recall, he handed you a mimeographed docu- 
ment; did he not? 

Mr. Adams. That is right. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did or not you prepare that document, Mr. Adams? 

Mr. Adams. I don't know. I would like to search the files in my 
office and see if we have any mimeographed records which would in- 
dicate that it was done. I have no recollection of it now, as I told you. 

Mr. Jenkins. Is it dated? We have not seen it. I haven't seen it. 

Mr. Adams. I don't remember whether it was dated or not. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair suggests that all of these various drafts 
be submitted to counsel so he can ask questions and have all the evi- 
dence before him. 

Are there any more drafts? 

Mr. Jenkins. Then as we understand, Mr. Adams, you don't know 
and have no recollection as to wliether or not you prepared the draft 
contained in the mimeographed copy handed to you by Mr. Cohn ; is 
that correct? 

INIr. Adams. I do not. Might I say this, IMr. Chairman and Mr. 
Jenkins: I have a vague recollection — I am not quite sure of this — 
that while we were at Fort Monmouth, during the day General Law- 
ton's office mimeographed the document for us. I am not sure that 
the document that was shown to me is the document that was mimeo- 
gra])hed. I had not remembered it until this moment. 

Mr. Jenkins. Would that have been a document dictated or pre- 
pared by you? 

Mr. Adams. I am not sure. I think it was. I am not sure what it 

Mr. Jenkins. Is it different in substance to the document that you 
say you handed to Senator McCarthy to be issued to the press? 

]\Ir. Adams. The document which was prepared at Fort Monmouth 
which I recall as having been mimeographed at Fort Monmouth, I 
don't remember. I don't know what it was. It may have been a 
press release. If it was a press release, it was probably the press 
release which Mr. Cohn handed me in mimeographed form. I do not 
recall the circumstances of the mimeographing at Fort Monmouth 
other than General Lawton, I think, volunteered to get it done during 
the day. 

Mr. Jenkins. Well, were you there, Mr. Adams, for the purpose of 
getting Senator JSIcCarthy to issue a press release ? 

Mr. Adams. No, not primarily. 

Mr. Jenkins. Well, were you there for that purpose secondarily? 

Mr. Adams. No. 

Mr. Jenkins. You say "No" ? 

Mr. Adams. I say "No." I was there accompanying Mr. Stevens 
in the inspection of Fort Monmouth. 

Mr. Jenkins. But as we understand it you did hand to Senator 
McCarthy a proposed press release which has been the second docu- 
ment introduced here within the last few minutes ; that is correct, isn't 

Mr. Adams. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. And that was not released ? That is correct ? 

Mr. Adams. No document was released. 


Mr. Jenkins. And you say now that you have no recollection, one 
way or the other, as to whether or not you prepared the mimeographed 
copy handed to you by Mr. Cohn to be released by Senator McCarthy ? 

Mr. Adams. I say that. That is correct. 

Mr. Jenkins. So that if Mr, Cohn says that that did occur, I take it 
you are not in a position to deny it, Mr. Adams; is that it? 

Mr. Adams. If he says that I did it, I am not in a position to deny it ? 

Mr. Jenkins. That is my question. 

Mr. Adams. I have a pretty good memory. I don't remember this. 

Mr. Jenkins. That is what I asked you, whether or not you have 
any recollection. 

Mr. Adams. I said I have no recollection of having prepared it, 
and I have a pretty good memory. The mere fact that he says some- 
thing doesn't make it true. 

Mr. Jenkins. There was no intimation of that. What is your best 
memory on it? Did you or did you not prepare this document con- 
tained in this mimeographed copy ? 

Mr. Adams. I have already given you my best recollection. I don't 
recall the second or third document, the one that is mimeographed. I 
don't know where it was prepared. There is a possibility that in my 
files, or in the mimeograph room of the Pentagon we will find a 
record that that document was mimeographed. I don't recall it. 

Mr. Jenkins. Well, if you found a copy of this mimeographed 
record in your file in the Pentagon, would that refresh your recollec- 
tion any more than this original mimeographed one ? 

Mr. Ax)ams. It certainly would. 

Mr. Jenkins. It certainly would ? 

Mr. Adams. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. I have no further questions. 

Senator Mundt. Do any of the Senators to my right have any 
questions that they care to ask ? 

The Chair would like to ask Mr. Adams one question. Is there a 
difference between the wording in the mimeographed version, wherever 
it was prepared, and the version which you dictated originally into 
the machine ? 

Mr. Adams. There is a considerable difference. I didn't read the 
mimeographed version very closely, but it appeared to me the principal 
difference between it and the one I dictated was that there were sub- 
stantial deletions. 

Senator Mundt. There were deletions ? 

Mr. Adams. That is correct. The mimeographed docum.ent ap- 
peared to be about half as long as the original document. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair would like to observe that he just got a 
passing glimpse from all of these exhibits, but I understood the one 
from your machine was 2 pages and the mimeographed one was 2 

Mr. Adams, That is correct. 

Senator Mundt. Senator McClelLan? 

Mr. Adams. I might state something else. 

Senator Mundt. You may. 

Mr. Adams. About 2 weeks ago I attempted to find the press release 
that I thought I liad prepared for Fort Monmouth. I couldn't find 
anything except the document we introduced. My recollection then 


was that I hadn't prepared the document which ended up as being 
that long. When I was asked by Mr. Stevens this morning in re- 
sponse to a question from the Chair as to whether or not I had a 
document, I stated that I had in my files, I did not think I had the 
final document because I was not sure, but nevertheless the only thing 
I have in my files is the document which was prepared from this 
machine. I have no record of anything else, and no memory of any- 
thing else. I have some uncertainty as to whether or not the document 
given to Senator McCarthy was 2 pages long or 1. 

Senator Mundt. Does the Chair gather from that you have some 
recollection of having seen a press release which you thought to the 
best of your recollection was one page long? 

Mr. Adams. I had no recollections then, I have no recollections 
now of it, but I had a feeling that the document was longer than I 
remembered it being. I think it would be germane to the issue, Mr. 
Chairman, so that the people who are listening to this could under- 
stand, if the first document and the second document were read. We 
are talking about something here, and I don't think that anybody 
other than us can understand it, unless the first document of this 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, I heartily agree with Mr. Adams, 
that that should be done, that those documents should be read into 
the record at this time. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair thinks that is an excellent idea, be- 
cause he has not had an opportunity to read any document, and I am 
sure that is true with other members of the committee. Senator 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, I understand the documents 
or the first one that you propose to read was dictated and that you have 
the recording of that dictation. I therefore suggest to keep them in 
their chronological order, that the tape recording of the dictation be 
introduced first. Then, you can compare for accuracy from there on. 

Mr. Jenkins. I think it an excellent suggestion. 

Senator Mundt. May the Chair suggest in the interest of expedit- 
ing the hearings, then, that the playing of the recording be done now 
and that the counsel follow the playback with the original copy so 
that we can dispose of those two documents at one time. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy. 

Senator McCarthy. I am willing to agree that the typewritten 
document is the same as the recording. Mr. St. Clair says it is. 
Therefore, I think we can save a lot of time by reading the typewritten 
document. I have no objection to playing the recording. 

Senator Mundt. Let me ask this question : Is there anybody con- 
nected with the committee or with either counsel that insists that we 
have the recording so that we can validate the first copy or may we 
accept the first copy as being authentic? The Chair hears no objec- 
tion. We will accept the first copy as being authentic and ask the 
counsel to read it. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch. 

Mr. Welch. I was immensely attracted to the validity of the dic- 
tated draft from the machine. I suppose some member of the com- 


mittee would say they would like to hear it. It is as fast as any other 
way. Let us have it that way. 

Senator Mundt, If you question the validity, we will have it read, 
we will have the recording read, and have the counsel follow on the 
playback and see if it is accurate. 

Senator McCarthy. May I ask : Does ]\Ir. Welch question the fact 
that his junior assistant, Mr. St. Clair, has checked this with the 

Senator Muxdt. Mr. Welch is not a witness at this time. He has 
not been sworn; consequently, no questions may be directed to him. 

All the Chair can say is Mr. Welch raised the point of order, for 
what reason only he knows, and I can't find out as he is not a witness. 
He wants to have it played and checked. 

Senator Jackson. Mr. Chairman, it is probably faster to play the 
recording than to read it. Lefs go ahead and have it over with. 

Senator Mundt. Very well, sir. 

Senator McCarthy. Can we have the record very clear that there 
is no proof at this point that this is the first document that was pre- 
pared ? There were succeeding documents, each one apparently a 
little shorter, in an attempt to get me to finally accept one. 

I think, if we are going to have this played, then I would like to 
question Mr. Adams as to whether there was a ])revious document. 

Senator Mundt. You have that right when your time comes. 

All we are trying to establish now is whether all of these documents 
are identical and, if not, what changes were made. 

They are all in evidence. No member of the committee has had 
a chance to find out what is in any of them. We Avill play the record- 
ing, counsel will follow it, and we will establish the validity, which 
no one seems to question about it. 

Do you have it there, Mr. Adams ? 

Mr. Adams. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Very well. 

Will the controlman be sure that the microphone in front of Mr. 
Adams is on? 

(Whereupon the recording was played and not able to be under- 

Senator Mundt. The counsel advises the Chair this is a rather futile 
procedure, because he cannot understand it. 

Mr. Jenkins. Let's read the memorandum. 

Senator Mundt. If Mr. Welch will withdraw his objection, we will 
have the counsel read the memorandum, which no one seems to question. 

Mr. Jenkins (reading) : 

I have been very favorably impressed by all that I have seen today at Fort 
Monmouth and also have been very impressed by the aggressive steps being 
taken both here at this post by General J^awton, the post commander, and by 
Secretary of the Army Stevens in Washington to improve security measui-es at 
Fort Mf)innouth and throughout the Signal Corps. 

The facts which the McCarthy subcommittee have developed with respect to 
security violations and subversion at Fort Monmouth have all been brought 
to the attention of the Secretary of the Army and the transcripts of all 
executive sessions have now been submitted to the Army for evaluation and 
study in connection with the various security cases now being processed by the 
Army. Additionally, I intend to submit the transcripts of the hearings to the 
Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation for a determina- 
tion as to whether perjury has been committed by certain witnesses who liave 
concealed material information from the committee, and also to assist the FBI 


in further investigations of individuals wliose names were brought before the 

I have every confidence that Secretary Stevens and the Army will move im- 
mediately and effectively to continue the investigations already imdertaken by 
the subcommittee. I have assured Secretary Stevens that the subcommittee is 
available to assist the Army however needed in stamping out subversive elements 
in the Army, and that the subpena power by which a congressional committee 
can determine facts from reluctant witnesses or ex-employees, but which is not 
ordinarily available to the head of a department, is available to the Army from 
this committee on the Army's request provided the Army encounters difficulties 
in its investigations of subversives and needs help. 

I know that there are many thousands of competent, able, and completely loyal 
Americans in the employ of the Signal Corps at Fort Monmouth. To these 
many people I can only say that I am proud as a citizen and as a Senator of the 
work that they are doing. The fact that a very small group, a very small fraction 
of 1 percent of all of these employees have past records of political beliefs 
and association of the type to render them suspect is no reflection on the many 
other faithful employees. Loyal employees know that they are loyal and they 
.should have no concern. Equally, those few whose records are not acceptable 
know the reasons for their predicament. They are the few had apples who are 
tainting the barrel. I believe that our recent hearings have brought their names 
out and that from here forward the Army should be able to finish the job we 
have started. 

There are still some witnesses under subpena by the subcommittee and they 
will be heard later this week in New York in executive session. Following those 
hearings, it is our present plan to hold open hearings on the same subject, 
probably in New York. At these hearings those individuals whose past records 
or performances are such as to have cast such a bad light over Fort Monmouth 
will have an opportunity to defend themselves publicly. Those who are unable 
successfully to do so, of course, will be branded for all to see. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Jenkins? 

Senator Mundt. May the Chair inquire of Mr. Jenkins whether 
inadvertently he omitted one phrase from the reading of that report 
which is in all other particulars identical with this report, except that 
at the bottom of the second paragraph of this report add the words 
"in an unfavorable light"? Was that omitted inadvertently, or did 
it not appear? 

Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Yes? 

Senator Symington. May I suggest in order that we can all get 
clear in our minds these 3 memorandums — 4, I am told — that copies 
of them be made and that they be put in chronological order, 1, 2, 3, 
and 4, and then that any deletions or additions in 3 from 1 and 2, or in 
4 from 1, 2, and 3, be made in brackets, and that these be made up 
tonight and given to the committee and the press tomorrow so we will 
understand what we are talking about. 

Senator Mundt. That was the suggestion originally made by Mr. 
Colin, Senator Symington, which the Chair thought was good, but it 
has been decided by the committee to proceed on this basis, which 
makes it rather difficult. 

Senator Symington. I would like to expedite the hearings and to 
understand what we are talking about. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, may I say I heartily agree with 
what Senator Symington has suggested. It is identical with the 
suggestion made by Mr. Cohn. There is only one additional point I 
would like to make. People hearing this read may get the impression 
that I released this. I wonder if it could be made very clear now 
that this is one of the releases prepared by Mr. Adams which I refused 
to release. 


Senator Mundt. I think that is clear in tlie record. I think it is 
perfectly proper, Mr. Counsel, that we follow Mr. Cohn's suggestion 
on this, because it is rather confusing. There are changes in the word- 
ings of the various documents. It is difficult for the press and others, 
and the committee, to catch them. 

Mr. Adams. I would like also to make the ])oint that Senator Mc- 
Carthy contends that this press release that I offered liim is- one which 
proposed to stop the hearings, and I would like tlie connnittec to read 
that press release and see whether or not that press release does propose 

Senator Mundt. We will have all four of the releases before us 
tomorrow, at which time we can read them and analyze them. 

AVithout objection, Mr. Adams will be unsworn- 

Senator McCarthy. Before he is, Mr. Chairman 

Senator Mundt. Have you another question ? 

Senator McCautht. Not a question, but I would like to have Mr. 
Adams now instructed to check with his secretary for any other re- 
cordings, to see if he can't find the original press release as proposed. 

May I ask one question: Am I correct in this, Mr. Adams, that 
there were successive releases offered to me — whether it was 2, or 3, 
or 4, or 5, you may not remember today. I know you were busy at 
that time. But is it true that there were successive releases offered to 
me, each one deleting some of the material I objected to in an attempt 
to get a press release that 1 would release under my name? 

Mr. Adams. You say are you correct. 1 think you are not correct. 

Senator McCarthy. How many releases were submitted to me? 

Mr. Adams. As I have stated to you, my records indicate only this 
one which 1 sent to Mr. Cohn. He showed me the document a mo- 
ment ago, and he asked me if that was another version. It was pre- 
pared on a sort of paper which we never use in the Pentagon, and 
I suspect that if it was another version, ])erhaps he drafted it and 
sent it back to me. I am not sure about that. 

Senator McCarthy. You are not sure about that ? 

Mr. Adams. The third version which he offered me, which was 
mimeographed, I suspect is the thing that was mimeographed at Fort 
Monmouth. But I think the thing that should be repeated. Senator, 
and made crystal clear is that the thing the Army proposed to you 
is the document which Mr. Jenkins read into the record. 

Senator McCarthy. Just this one question, Mr. Adams. Is it your 
testimony under oath now that you know that the document Mr. 
Jenkins read is the iirst proposed press release that you made to me? 

]\Ir. Adams. That is my recollection. That is the only thing I have 
in my files. At least it is the only thing we have been able to find. 

Senator Symington. Before we continue this argument, with re- 
spect to these • 

Senator McCarthy. It is not an argument, just questions. 

Senator Symington. Can't Ave get into the record the four docu- 
ments so we can understand and analyze them as the discussion 
proceeds ? 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, that is the procedure that Mr. 
Cohn suggested. Mr. Jackson objected to that. I don't like to leave 

Senator Jackson. I objected ? 

46020'— 54— pt. 16 4 


Senator ]\IcCartiiv. You Avere the one who suggested that the docu- 
ments be put in the record. 

Senator Jackson. What did I object to? 

Senator McCarthy. You objected to Mr. Cohn's suggestion, namely 
that all the matters be developed by the staff. 

Senator Jackson. No. 1 merely requested that the request of Mr. 
Cohn— and if I may, I will read it right now — be carried out. On 
page 1380 of the hearings this morning Mr. Cohn said 

Senator JMcCartiiy. May I make a point of order ^ 

Senator Jackson. Yes. I don't think these documents carry out 
his request. 

Senator McCarthy. I think you are right. 

Senator Jackson. This is what Mr. Cohn said this morning to 
Secretary Stevens : 

Do you know whether he suhmitted to Senator McCarthy a statement eallin£? 
for the stcppins of hearings at Fort Moiuiionth? 

Secretary Stkvictvs. I know there was a statement discussed on the plane, 
Mr. Cohu. and that is my recollection of the statement. 

Mr. CouN. Did that statement, sir, contain langnase calling for the stopping 
of hearings at Fort Monmouth V 

Secretary S'if.vens. I have no recollection that it did. 

Mr. Cohn. Mr. .lenkius, sir, in view of the fact that this is crucial to our case I 
woiild ask now, as I believe is perfect procedure, tliat the Se-ieiary lie dire.'i d 
to produce the original of a draft statement submitted to us by Mr. Adams on 
October I'J. a draft of a statement to be made by Senator McCarthy on October 20 
so that we can let it speak for itself. 

I assnme it is perfectly j)roper that these statements be submitted 
in evidence at tliis time. That is what Mr. Cohn requested. 

My point is tliat the documents as presented here do not bear on the 
point made by Mr. Cohn, namely, that the hearings were supposed to 
contain a statement in the ]iress release tliat they be stopped. I am 
wondering if tliere is such a docnment because we are wasting a lot of 
time on a request that a])parently at this point, at least, there is no 
documentary evidence to supj:)ort. 

Senatfjr AIundt. The Chair understands the proceedings, and I 
don't believe you have raised a point of order against them. 

These various documents will be mimeographed and placed before 
the committee tomorrow morning, so they can speak for themselves. 
At tlie present time no member of the committee has had a chance to 
examine all four documents. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, in view of Mr. Adams' state- 
ment Avliich he vohmteered tliat there is nothing in even the second 
draft wliicli would indicate that they were asking that the hearings be 
called off, I Avonld lilceto read to Mr. Adams two brief excerpts and ask 
for his interpretation. 

No. 1 — this is the document prepared by you, Mr. Adams. This is 
exhibit No. 8, the one read by Mr. Jenkins into the record: 

I have every confidence that Secretary Stevens and the Army will now imme- 
diately and effectively continue the investigations already undertaken by the 

And No. 2: 

I believe that our recent hearings have brought their names out and from here 
forward the Army should be able to finish the job we have started. 

No. 1, is — let me finish, Mr. Adams. Is this the language you 
wanted me to make public? 


Mr. Adams. May I see it? 

Senator McCarthy. I have marked on paj^es 1 and 2 where I read. 
Mr. Adams. Yes. I wanted to make it public with the final para- 
graph which says : 

There are still some witnesses under subpena by the subcommittee and they 
will be heard later this week in New York in executive session. Following these 
hearings it is our present plan to hold open hearings on the same suliject 
probably in New York. 

That doesn't mean closing the hearings. 

Senator McCarthy. Let us see now. What does this, when you 

Mr. Adams. Read the whole memorandum in context. 

Senator McCarthy. Let us keep our tempers. 

Let us make this clear, Mr. Adams. I am not accusing you of any 
wrong intent. Don't interrupt, please. Please don't interrupt until 
I finish. 

Mr. Adams. Are you accusing me of anything? 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, a point of order. 

Senator Mundt. Counsel will state it. 

JVIr. Jenkins. Mr. Adams has successfully gotten in his statement 
that nowhere in that document does he request the cessation of Sena- 
tor McCarthy's work with respect to Fort Monmouth. Senator Mc- 
Carthy has successfully gotten in his contradiction of that statement. 
The document speaks for itself. It has been heard by all present and 
by all listening. 

It is the prerogative of this committee and of this committee alone 
to interpret that document and to determine whether or not Mr. 
Adam's theory is correct or Senator McCarthy's theory is correct. 

I see no point in further argument between these two parties, and 
I suggest that the examination or cross-examination of the Secretary 
of the Army now be resumed. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair will uphold the point of order on the 
basis that we do not have the documentation before us. It is impos- 
sible for the subcommittee to follow these questions about it. This can 
be resumed tomorrow morning when we have the mimeograplied 
copies. Mr. Adams, you are temporarily unsworn. Mr. Counsel, we 
will start with you on the go around with Mr. Stevens. 

Mr. Jenkins. I have none. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Have you a point of order ? 

Senator McCarthy. Before Mr. Adams leaves 

Senator Mundt. He has been unsworn. We cannot permit him to 
testify when not under oath. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. A point of order? 

Senator McCarthy. Yes. Mr. Adams read the last paragraph of 
this document. I think he shoidd make it clear that that was the only 
paragraph that was dictated and partially agreed to by Mr. Colin. 
Otherwise you have a different impression. 

Senator Mundt. The documents will be available later in the hear- 
ings and then Ave will have copies of them. Then, we can go into that. 

Senator Symington. I think we ought to have Mr. Adams answer 
that question. Either we are going to continue to talk about these 


documents, or in accordance with tlie counsel's recommendations, we 
are going to stop. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, the documents speak for themselves. 
It is the exclusive prerogative of this committee to determine the 
meaning, whether or not the theory of Mr. Adams is correct or that 
of Senator McCarthy is correct. The point is not one in order and 
I suggest that we proceed with the examination of the Secretary of 
the Army. 

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

Senator Mundt. The Chair would like to add that the documents 
v/ill be before us tomorrow morning and the subcommittee members 
can ask questions intelligently and will know what is in the documents. 
At the present time, none of us have read the documents. 

Senator Jackson. Mr. Chairman, I do not think there should be 
included in the record an unsworn statement that the last paragraph 
of the document was dictated by Mr. Cohn, unless we have testimony 
on it. That is all. I mean, the document can't speak for itself, Mr. 
Counsel, if that statement is correct, because if that is true, then I 
think in fairness we ought to have sworn testimony to support it. 
Otherwise, the document does not speak for itself, because it has been 
introduced in evidence as purporting to have been dictated by Mr. 
Adams, if I understand the testimony. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Adams made the definite state- 
ment that the document did not make any statement with reference 
to the discontinuance of the investigation of Fort Monmouth. Sen- 
ator McCarthy contradicts that statement and places a different inter- 
pretation upon the document. It is not within the province of either 
Mr. Adams or Senator McCarthy to place their construction on that 
document. This committee will do so according to the plain, ordinary, 
natural intent meant of the language used therein. And I see no point 
in further quibbling or arguing between those two respective parties 
to this controversy. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Mundt. Do you have a point of order, Mr. Welch ? 

Mr. Welch. I have. 

Senator Mundt. You may state it. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, if the experiment of playing the record 
into the machine would have worked, you would, I think, have found 
that all of the memorandum was in the voice of Mr. Adams and none 
of it in the voice of Mr. Cohn. 

I therefore suggest that Mr. Jenkins take possession of the belt and 
make a transcription of that under whatever circumstances he chooses 
and see if there is a change in voice when you reach the last paragraph. 

Senator Mundt. You have submitted the belt, and under the sug- 
gestion outlined by Mr. Cohn, counsel has all of these documents and 
all of the paraphernalia, and all the belts, and will try to present to the 
subcommittee evidence tomorrow morning to which we can interro- 
gate the witnesses with all the facts at hand. 

Senator McCarthy. Under the guise of a point of order, Mr. Welch 
tries to create the impression that Mr. Cohn has been in Mr. Adams' 
office. He knows full well tliat is not true. 


He has talked to INIr. Adams. He knows Mr. Cohn has never been 
in his office. We talked about that last paragraph being dictated ; he 
knows what is meant by that very, very well. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, may I suggest that we proceed with 
the examination ? 

Senator Mundt. We will proceed with Secretary Stevens, as the 
Chair has been endeavoring to do for the last 10 minutes. I admit 
he has forgotten how much time Avas left. 

We will start with Senator McCarthy examining Mr. Stevens. 

Senator McCarthy. I don't think I had 10 minutes. 

Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan suggested I had the floor inter- 
rogating Mr. Stevens. If I had, I will yield now to Senator Mc- 

Senator McCarthy. I was reading a letter to Mr. Stevens, I believe, 
when we shifted to the documents. 

Senator Mundt. That was the Chair's impression, but Senator 
McClellan corrected me. 

If you are corre<.'t, you may continue with your 10 minutes. 

Senator McCarihy. I have no objection to Senator McClellan 
taking the floor. 

Senator McClellan. Senator McClellan doesn't want the floor. He 
only wants everybody to hurry. 

Senator Mundt. Will the timekeeper advise Senator McCarthy how 
much of the interrupted 10 minutes he has? 

Senator Jackson. Let's start afresh. 

Senator Mundt. AVe will start with a new 10 minutes. You may 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Stevens, do you still recall the content of 
the letter of March 15, 1954, that I read you, or would you rather have 
me pass that to you, or would you rather have me read it over? 

Secretary Stevens. May I see it, Senator? 

Senator McCarthy. Certainly. 

(Document handed to the witness.) 

Senator McCarthy. The penciled notations on the bottom are mine 
and did not go into tiie original letter. 

Secretary Stevens. Yes, sir ; I recall the letter. 

Senator McCarthy. You received the letter. Could I have it back ? 

In this I requested the information. I requested you to tell me 
when I would get the information that you promised us with regard 
to the promotion of Peress, is that right ? 

Secretary Stevens. That is right? 

Senator McCarthy. Did you answer that letter, Mr. Secretary? 

Secretary Stevens. No; I don't think I did. 

Senator McCarthy. That is an example, I assume, of your usual 

Secretary Stevens. I take exception to that, Senator McCarthy. 

Senator McCarthy. Wiiy didn't you answer the letter? 

Secretary Sievens. I didn't know when the material would be 

Senator McCarthy. Why didn't you Avrite me to tell me that? 

Secretary Stevens. I had a lot going on. 

Senator McCarthy. Could you not have contact with the Inspector 
General and ask him when the information would be available? 

Secretary Stevens. Yes, I could have done that. 


Senator McCarthy. It was a ratlier important matter, wasn't it? 

Secretary Stevens. Senator McCarthy, the Inspector General had 
instructions from me to do this job and do it right, and when the 
material was available I was obligated to supply you with whatever 
names came out of the report. 

Senator McCarthy. You said you had instructed him to get this 
information for you in February. On March 15 I write and I tell you 
I want "all the facts which we discussed with you about this fifth 
amendment major, and therefore will you please inform me as to the 
date when the above information will be ?ivailable." You felt it was 
unnecessary to answer that, I gather; is that correct? 

Secretary Stevens. I didn't know the data. 

Senator McCarthy. You felt it was unnecessary to answer that 
letter ? 

Secretary Stevens. I was already committed and still am and will 
be, to produce the information you want, Senator McCarthy. 

Senator McCarthy. The question was. Did you feel it unnecessary 
to answer that letter? 

Secretary Stevens. I don't recall having that. 

]Mr. Jenkins. Pardon me. 

Mr. Secretary, you have not given him a direct answer to that ques- 
tion. He has asked you that question three times. I do dislike so 
much interrupting and making those suggestions, but we will get 
along. His question is : Did you think it necessary to answer the let- 
ter ? That is very simple. Did you or not ? 

Secretary Stevens. I guess perhaps I didn't give it the proper 
amount of consideration. 

Senator Symington. The question, Mr. Secretary, is: Did you or 
did you not think it was necessary to answer? 

Secretary Stevens. I personally did not think it was necessary to 
answer that. 

Senator McCarthy. I see. 

Then let's take another letter, of ISIarch 3, 1954, and I ask you to 
follow this and tell me whether you remember having received this : 

My Dear Mk. Stevens : By letter on February 1, 1954, I asked — 

February 1. This should be March 15, 1 gather — 

I asked you to furnish the names of the persons responsible for the promotion, 
honorable discharge — 

strike that. 

By letter on February 1, 1954, I asked you to furnish the names of the persons 
responsible for the promotion, honorable discharge, and interference in orders 
for Maj. Irving Peress. This request has been reiterated informally since that 
time and on February 24, 1954, you agreed to furnish this information. Some 
time has elapsed. No such report has been forthcoming. I observe that the 
failure to comply and submit the report cannot be due to lack of time and avail- 
able manpower to work on reports emanating from the Army, I am sure you 
can appreciate the importance of this matter in view of the fact that special 
favors were conferred on Peress at a time when Army files indicated his Com- 
munist Party membership and his activity as an organizer for the Communist 

Very truly yours, 

Joe McCarthy, Chairman. 

Did you answer that letter? 

Secretary Stevens. What was the date of that? 

Senator McCarthy. March 30, 1954. 

Secretary Stevens. I don't recall having answered it. 


Senator McCarthy. Would you like to see it and see whether you 
recall having received it? 

(Secretary Stevens examining document.) 

Secretary Stevens. My recollection, Senator — and I will have to 
check this — is that one of these letters I did acknowledge, and it 
said that the report was in process of being gotten up, and we would 
let 3'ou know when we had it. That is my recollection. I don't have a 
copy of my letter. I don't know if you have anything there that you 
received from me. 

Senator McCarthy. Then let me read you this wire: 

April 12, 1954. 
Hon. Robert T. Stevens, 
Secretary of the Army, 

Washington, D. C: 

Would greatly appreciate reply to my letters of March 15 and March 30. 

(Signed) Joe McCARxny. 

Secretary Stevens. I would have to check up and see whether I 
answered either of those, Senator. My recollection is that I had 
sent word to you one way or another that this report was in the works. 

Senator McCarthy. One way or another. What would be the other 
way, Bob ? 

Secretary Stevens. By telephone call to your office. 

Senator McCarthy. If you did, you would have a monitor of that 
call? You would have no trouble checking that telephone call? 

Secretary Stevens. I think we could probably find out about that. 

Senator McCarthy. Incidentally, have you discontinued monitor- 
ing calls since Secretary of Defense Wilson said that that was — I 
forgot what his words were — a reprehensible practice, or something 
that should not be continued, or do you still monitor them? 

Secretary Stevens. That isn't what Mr. Wilson said, as I under- 

Senator IMcCarthy. The language may be wrong, but he did say 
that the practice should be discontinued, didn't he? He con- 
demned it. 

Mr. Jenkins. I hold that is wholly irrelevant to the issues under 

Senator Mundt. The Chair upholds the point of order. It doesn't 
have anything to do with the particular charges at the moment. 

Senator McCarthy. Just a minute, Mr. Chairman. The Secretary 
says that he perhaps answered me by telephone. If he did, it is 
important to know whether he has a record of the phone call. That 
is the only way I can tell. 

Mr. Jenkins. That particular question is proper. 

Senator Mundt. You can ask him if he is monitoring phone calls 
on the date you ask the question, not as of now. 

Senator McCarthy. This wire was on April 12. Let us give you a 
reasonable time to answer it, let us say a week, up to April 19. Were 
you still monitoring telephone calls on April 19, 1954? 

Secretary Stevens. I think the answer is yes. 

Senator McCarthy. So, in view of the fact that I have no record 
of your having written me, you think you may have phoned us. Can 
you check these monitored calls and tell me if and when you answered 


Secretary Stevens. Yes ; if I did, Senator. I don't know whether 
I did nor not, but I have a recollection of getting word to you some- 
how that this report was proceeding and you would get it in due 
course, that is, you would get the names you asked for. 

Senator McCarthy. You think you got it to me somehow, but you 
don't know how? 

Secretary Stevens. No; I don't recall. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr, Secretary, when one of the Senators wrote 
to you for a report on Mr. Schine, who had been active in exposing 
Communists, it took only 2 days to get the report back. When I write 
you about a Communist major, I have to wire you and write you suc- 
cessively over a period from February 1 up to April 12; still no report. 
Would you say that there is any difference in your handling of reports 
on those who are against communism and those who are taking the 
fiftli amendment as to their Communist activities? 

Secretary Stevens, May I have that read back, Senator ? 

Senator Mundt, The reporter will read the question, 

(Whereupon, the question referred to was read by the reporter as 
above recorded.) 

Secretary Stevens. I would not — in other words. Senator, as far as 
Private Schine was concerned we had received inquiries from Con- 
gressmen and Senators over a long period of time with respect to that 
matter, and it finally came to a head at the time of Senator Potter's 

Senator McCarthy. You said 

Secretary Stevens. I also wrote you on the 16th of February and 
told you that I put the Inspector General to work on the thing, all 
about the case and published a letter so you knew I was working on 
that, I had signed my name to a letter stating that we were doing 
a job. 

Senator McCarthy. You told us here repeatedly that you wanted 
to cooperate with the committee, that you didn't want to call oif the 
hearings, that you just Avanted them changed. 

Secretary Stevens. That is right. 

Senator McCarthy, You recall these unanswered letters and wires. 
Is that your idea of cooperation, ]Mr. Secretary? Is that what we 
can expect in the future when the hearings are continued? 

Secretary Stevens, I think since you knew, because I had written 
you on the 16th of February, and you knew exactly what I was 
doing and I said in that letter that when the Inspector (leneral's 
report was complete I would supply the information I had agreed 
to and the memorandum of understanding, you were not left with- 
out information. 

Senator McCarthy. You say you wrote me in February and said 
you were making an investigation ? 

Secretary Stevens, That is right. 

Senator McCarthy. And in March I wrote and said : 

Therefore, will you please inform me as to the date when the above information 
will be available? 

Is it your testimony that because you wrote me in February you 
felt you need not tell me in March if and when the information would 
be available? 


Secretary Stevens. No, not necessarily tliat, Senator, but at least 
you were not in a position of liaving no information, because I had 
written you fully about it on the 16th of February. 

Senator McCarthy. Yousaidyou wrote me fully ? 

Secretary Stevens. That is right. 

Senator McCarthy. Writing me fully was to the effect that you 
would not or could not give me any information at that time, that I 
would get it as some future date. Is that what you call writing me 
fully « 

Secretary Stevens. Well, if you would look at that letter, it was a 
rather complete letter, because in it I told you some of the steps that I 
was taking to make sure there was no other Peress cases coming along. 

Senator McCarthy. Did you ever, uj) to this moment, give me any 
information in regard to those who had given special favors to this 
iif th-amendment Communist ? 

Secretary Stevens. The information. Senator, depends upon the 
Inspector General's report, wdiich, as I testified this morning, I expect 
to receive any day. 

Senator McCarthy. Why do you expect to receive it? Has he told 
you he was going to give it to you ? 

Secretary Stevens. It is just about finished, I think. 

Senator McCarthy. How do you know? You said you have not 
contacted him. 

Secretary Stevens. No, I haven't contacted him, but I just have a 
feeling that the thing must be about ready. 

Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired. 

Mr. Jenkins ? 

Mr. Jenkins. I pass, IVIr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair passes. Any of the Senators to my 

Any of the Senators to my left? 

Senator Jackson. I pass. 

Senator McClelean. I pass. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch ? 

Senator McCarthy, 

Senator McCarthy. Just 1 minute, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. You have 10 minutes. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Cohn. 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Secretary, Senator McCarthy examined you this 
morning, sir, about visits you made to various members of this com- 
mittee in February of 1954. You said about General Zwicker. 

Secretary Stevens. That is right. 

Mr. CoHN. I would now like to ask you, sir, whether or not on Jan- 
uary 20, January 21, and January 22, of 1954, to your knowledge, 
representatives of your office comnumicated with members of this sub- 
committee and said that if Senator McCarthy persisted in his plan 
to call members of the loyalty board who had cleared Communists, you 
would cause — your ofiice would cause to be issued a report concern- 
ing me ? 

Secretary Stevens. I was in the Far East at the time and knew 
nothing about it. 

Mr. CoHN. I know that, sir. Have you since learned that such 
attempts were made? 


Secretary Stevens. T have not, 

Mr. CoHN. Is it your testimony, sir, that no information has reached 
you since your return ? 

Secretary Stevens. I have been told that Mr. Adams called on some 
members of the committee, yes, but I wasn't present. 

Mr. CoiiN. Were you told, sir, that Mr. Adams said to those mem- 
bers of the committee that if subpenas are received on members of this 
loyalty board which cleared Communists, a nasty report would be 
circulated about Roy Cohn ? ^ 

Secretary Stevens. I certainly am not familiar with any such thing. 

Mr. CoHN. Have you been told that, sir ? 

Secretary Stevens. No ; I haven't been told that. 

Mr. Cohn. Have you discussed that with Mr. Adams ? 

Secretary Stevens. Have I discussed that? Yes; I discussed with 
Mr. Adams the fact that he went and called on some of the Senatoi'S ; 
that is correct. I know that he did, I know that he called on some, 
but I wasn't there, and I don't know what the conversation was. 

Mr. Cohn. Did he call on them, sir, to stop the issuance of subpenas 
to membere of the loyalty board w^hich cleared Communists? 

Secretary Stevens. I think you ought to ask Mr. Adams that, be- 
cause I was in the Far East. 

Senator Mundt. You will have to limit your questions as to whether 
the Secretary knows anything about that. 

Mr. Cohn. My only inquiry, sir — maybe I didn't make it clear — 
is directed to the Secretary's knowledge as to whether Mr. Adams told, 
on his return, that he, Mr. Adams, had communicated with various 
members of the subcommittee and had tried to stop the issuance of 
subpenas to members of the loyalty board which cleared Communists. 

Secretary Stevens. I don't know anything about that. I am sure 
that we were w^orking within the limits of the Presidential Executive 
order to cover this situation in regard to loyalty boards. 

Mr. Cohn. Mr. Stevens, I would like to leave this topic, if I could 
get an answer to this question: When you came back from the Far 
East, did Mr. Adams tell you that he had communicated with various 
members of the subcommittee in an attempt to stop the issuance of 
subpenas to members of the Pentagon and the Army loyalty board 
which had cleared Communists ? 

Secretary Stevens. He told me that he had called on members up 
here, and it had something to do with the loyalty board, but I don't 
know exactly what was said, Mr. Cohn. 

Mr. Cohn. Mr. Stevens, don't you know that the purpose of those 
visits by Mr. Adams was to stop the issuance of subpenas to members 
of the loyalty board ? Didn't he tell you that, sir ? 

Secretary Stevens. I know that we have these Presidential direc- 
tives that we have to operate within, and I would take it, Mr. Cohn, 
that what you were asking for probably came in conflict with one of 
those directives. 

Mr. Cohn. Sir, if I might say once more, and if I don't make it 
clear, tell me, and I will try to rephrase the question : I would like 
to know if, on your return from the Far East, Mr. Adams told you 
that he had communicated with various members of this subcommittee 
and asked their help to stop the issuance of subpenas to members of 
your loynliy board which had cleared Connnunists? 


Secretary Stevens. He told me substantially along that line; yes. 

Mr. CoHN. Your answer is "Yes." That is all I wanted. 

Secretary Stephens. Substantially along that line, he told me about 
the loyalty board. 

Mr. CoHN. I am sorry, Senator. 

Senator McCarthy. In view of the fact that this concerns counsel, 
I would like to ask you these questions. Did he also tell you that he 
had informed certain Senators that if we issued those subpenas that 
he would issue a report charging Mr. Cohn with misconduct? 

Secretary Stevens. He did not. 

Senator McCarthy. Didn't he tell you, Mr. Stevens, that when he 
contacted certain Senators he told them that if subpenas were issued 
that your Department would issue a report charging misconduct on 
Mr. Cohn-spart? 

Secretary Stevens. He did not. 

Senator McCarthy. When did you first learn, if ever, that such a 
"warning or statement had been made by Mr. Adams or by anyone else? 

Secretary Stevens. I don't know anything about any warning. 

Senator McCarthy. When did you first hear of the report ? I am 
not asking you to pass on whether it is true or not. When did you first 
hear of the report or the allegation that Mr. Adams had made the 
statement that if we issued subpenas for those who had cleared men 
with communistic backgrounds, that if we did that, there would be 
issued a report, a charge, call it what you may 

Secretary Stevens. I never heard any such statement. 

Senator McCarthy. Let me finish — emanating from your Depart- 
ment, alleging misconduct on Mr. Cohn's part? 

Secretary Stevens. I never heard any such statement. 

Senator McCarthy. You never did ? 

Secretary Stevens. No, sir. 

Senator McCarthy. Did you ever come to me and complain about 
any alleged misconduct on Mr. Cohn's part ? 

Secretary Stevens. Did I ever come to you ? 

Senator McCarthy. Yes. 

Secretary Stevens. And complain about Mr. Cohn ? 

Senator McCarthy. Yes. 

Secretary Stevens. I think you were well aware of what our atti- 
tude was with respect to the pressure Mr. Cohn was putting on us. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Stevens, you can answer my question ; will 
you ? Did you ever complain to me of any misconduct or any pres- 
sure on the part of Mr. Cohn ? 

Secretary Stevens. Mr. Adams did, repeatedly. 

Senator McCarthy. You are telling on what Mr, Adams did ? 

Secretary Stevens. That is right. 

Senator McCarthy. I am asking you. Did you, Kobert T. Stevens, 
ever complain to me about any misconduct on the part of my chief 
counsel ? 

Secretary Stevens. I complained to you about some things when 
you kept trying to get Schine assigned to New York, for example, 

Senator McCarthy. I think you should answer this question, Mr. 
Secretary. There has been considerable complaint that you have been 
kept on the witness stand too long. You will be kept on 


Mr. Jenkins. May I suggest, Mr. Secretary, that the answer to the 
question is very simple and we certainly will get along much more 
expeditiously if you will answer his questions. That is, did you per- 
sonally ever complain to Senator McCarthy about Mr. Cohn and Mr. 
Cohn's alleged efforts to get preferential treatment for Schine ? 

Secretary Stevens. I did not personally do that. 

Mr. Jenkins. That is an answer. Senator. 

Secretary Stevens. And for the reason that most of the pressure was 
coming on to Mr. Adams from Mr. Cohn, and Adams was therefore the 
one that complained. 

Mr. Jenkins. All right. 

Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy ? 

Senator McCarthy. Did you not repeatedly praise Mr. Cohn to me? 

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

Senator McCarthy. Don't you recall ever praising Mr. Cohn ? 

Secretary Stevens. I do not. 

Senator McCarthy. You never said any good about him ? 

Secretary Stevens. I wouldn't say I never said anything good about 
him, but I don't recall going out of my way to praise liim. 

Senator McCarthy. Didn't you repeatedly praise Mr. Cohn to me? 

Secretary Stevens. I do not recall ever having done that. 

Senator McCarthy. Now, Mr. Stevens, as you know, Mr. Cohn has 
a background of having taken a large part in the prosecution of the 
Rosenberg case, the Rosenbergs who were executed, and the William 
Remington, the case of the second-string Communists, and, as you 
know very well, he was the attorney who presented the case before the 
grand jury which exposed 39 Communists in the U. N. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, may I suggest that the Senator may 
ask those questions instead of making statements of fact. 

Senator McCarthy. I will say, are you aware of those facts ? 

Secretary Stevens. Yes ; I know about some of those facts. 

Senator McCarthy. When you were talking to me on various occa- 
sions did we not discuss Mr. Cohn's background and did you not tell 
me that you felt that I was extremely lucky to have been able to per- 
suade Mr. Cohn to come with the committee? 

Secretary Stevens. Senator McCarthy, I am also interested in the 
military records of young people. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, may I suggest that you answer his 
question, please ? 

I dislike interrupting and I hope you know that. But when you do 
answer his questions directly lie goes to another question and we are 
to that extent nearer the end of this investigation. 

Senator INIundt. The Chair will add that, if you can do that, then 
you can make a statement of explanation afterward. 

Secretary Stevens. Can I have the question ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

(The reporter read from his notes as requested.) 

Secretary Stevens. I have no recollection of any such statement. 

Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy? 

Senator McCarthy. Let me ask you this : You say you have no recol- 
lection of any such statement. Do you recollect, Mr. Stevens, in the 
presence of witnesses, discussing with me Mr. Cohn's record of fight- 
ing communism and indicating — I can't quote you verbatim — indi- 


catinof that you felt I was extremely lucky to have secured the serv- 
ices of Mr. Colin ? Do you recall that ? 

Secretary Stevens. No, I don't. I have already testified that I 

Senator McCarthy. The other day you made the statement, in an- 
swer to, I believe it was, Mr. Jenkins' questions — he asked whether or 
not you held a grudf^e or prejudice — I don't know what word he 
used — against Mr. Cohn, and you said, "I would prefer not answering 
that question" ? 

Secretary Stevens. That is right. 

Senator MrCAUTiiY. 1 wonder if you want to have the record stand 
that you don't want to answer whether or not you hold personal ani- 
mosity, personal hard feelings toward this young man? 

Secretary S'itveks. I don't see any reason at this point to change 
the answer I gave to Senator Dirksen's question. 

Senator McCarthy. I am going to turn the questioning back to 
Mr. Cohn. 

Mr. Cohn. ]\Ir. Stevens — do I have some time left. Senator Mundt? 

Senator Mundt. May I inquire of the timekeeper how much time 
is left for the Cohn-McCarthy side? 

Thirty seconds. 

Mr. Cohn. I can neither take a new topic nor see the Secretary. 

Senator McCarthy, I am sorry I turned it back with only 30 sec- 
onds to go. _ In view of the fact that there is only 30 seconds, let me 
ask you this, ]\Ir. Secretary: The other day you were being ques- 
tioned about a telephone conversation made from Mr. Adams to you 
with regard to General Lawton, the commanding officer at Fort Mon- 
mouth, and you were questioned about the subject of that conversa- 
tion. At that time Mr. Jenkins, and I think rightly so, gave you an 
opportunity to refresh your recollection by talking to Mr. Adams, who 
was behind you at that time, so you could tell the committee about 
the telephone conversation. You refused to discuss the matter with 
Mr. Adams at that time. I was very much surprised, in view of the 
fact that you said all this array around you is for the purpose of giving 
you information. 

Let me ask you now 

Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired, so we will have 
to revert back. 

Mr. Jenkins, any questions? 

INIr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, just a few questions, please. 

Do I understand now that when you returned from the Orient you 
went to certain members of this committee — I believe the record shows 
the Eepublican members, and the Democratic members were not 

Senator McClellan. For the sake of accuracy, the Democrats were 
not members of the committee at that time. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did you go to certain members of this subcommittee 
at tliat time, Mr. Secretary ? 

Secretary Stevens. On two different occasions I did 

Mr. Jenkins. Did you go to the members of the subcommittee, or 
did Mr. Adams go, with respect to Senator McCarthy's expressed 
intention or threat, whatever you desire to call it, to have subpenaed 
before his committee certain members of the Loyalty 13oard?. Was 
that you or Mr. Adams ? 


Secretary Si'evens. That was Mr. Adams. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Adams told you about that visit with certain 
members of the subcommittee, did he not, as we understand it ? That 
is correct; isn't it? 

Secretary Stevens. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, was the purpose of that visit by Mr. 
Adams as expressed to you by Mr. Adams, to get members of the sub- 
committee to prevail upon Senator McCarthy not to pursue his avowed 
intention of having members of the Loyalty Board subpenaed as 
witnesses ? 

Secretary Stevens. As I understand it, Mr. Jenkins, with the exist- 
ing laws, directives, and Executive orders governing the making avail- 
able of loyalty information and membership of loyalty boards, and 
that sort of thing, he went there for the purpose of explaining that to 
the Senators in order that they do not subpena something that we did 
not think we could provide under the law. 

Mr. Jenkins. In short, you did not want members of the Loyalty 
Board subpenaed to appear before the McCarthy committee; is that 
right, Mr. Stevens? 

Secretary Stevens. Yes; that is correct, and in line witli the law as 
I understand it. 

Mr. Jenkins. In line with the law or with a directive? 

Secretary Stevens. That is right. 

Mr. Jenkins. That was the only reason? 

Secretary Stevens. Absolutely. 

Mr. Jenkins. Well, Mr. Stevens, did Mr. Adams ever intimate to 
you that at that time he made any statement to any member of the sub- 
committee that if that were done, that is, a member of tlie Loyalty 
Board submitted before the McCarthy committee, he would issue a 
smear on Roy Cohn ? 

Secretary Stevens. No, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Is this the first time you ever heard of such a thing 
as that ? 

Secretary Stevens. It certainly is the first time I ever heard any- 
thing so vividly put as all this has been put. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you tell us — and I don't know — do you tell us that 
it was a violation of the law or a violation of a Presidential directive 
or a directive of the Secretary of Defense to have subpenaed before 
Senator McCarthy's committee any member of the Loyalty Board to 
ascertain why he had cleared what the Senator referred to as a fifth 
amendment Communist? 

Secretary Stevens, Mr. Jenkins, I am not a lawyer, but my under- 
standing of the law is that that would not be in accordance with the 
existing law, directives, and Executive orders. 

Mr. Jenkins. And you say that it was for that reason and for that 
reason alone that neither you nor Mr. Adams wanted Senator Mc- 
Carthy to bring before him a member of the Loyalty Board? 

Secretary Stevens. That is right. 

Mr. Jenkins. That is all I have to ask. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair has no questions. Senator McClellan ? 

Senator McClellan. Just for the sake of accuracy, did you under- 
stand the date about which Senator McCarthy or Mr. Cohn was inquir- 
ing with respect to your conversations with Members of the Senate or 


members of this committee with respect to your alleged threat that if 
members of the Loyalty Board were subpenaed, you would issue a 
smear statement on Mr, Colin — what date was that ? 

Secretary STEMi:NS. That was when I was in the Far East 

Senator INIcClellan. When were you in the Far East, and when did 
you get back ? 

Secretary Stevens. I left on the 17th of January and came back on 
the 3d of February. 

Senator McClellan, Then you were not here on the 19th, 20th, and 
21st, along there, in January? 

Secretary Stevens. Did I say February or January? If I said 

Senator McClellan. Let's get it straight. I don't know whether 
you left here in January or February. 

Secretary Stevens, t will tell you, sir. I was away from the 17th 
of January to the 3d of February in the Far East. 

Senator McClelean. All right. That gets it straight. 

That is all, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to get the date. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen or any member on my right? 

Senator Jackson and any member to my left? 

Senator Jackson. Just one question. 

I understood your testimony in response to the questions put by 
counsel. Mr. Jenkins, that you felt, on advice, apparently, from coun- 
sel, that you could not give the names of the people on the Loyalty 
Review Board or make them available for testimony. 

Secretary Stevens. That was my understanding. 

Senator Jackson. Then later was it agreed at this luncheon that 
you would make them available, at the luncheon on February 24 

Secretary Stevens. No, sir. 

Senator Jackson. The Republican luncheon, not the Democratic. 

Secretary Stevens. That wasn't discussed that day, as I recall it, 
Senator Jackson. 

Senator Jackson. I understood there was an agreement — was there 
not an agreement later to malve the names of these people available ? 

Secretary Ste%t:ns. The agreement as of February 24 was that after 
the Inspector General's report was complete, the names of militai*y 
personnel who had been connected with the Peress case would be made 
available to this committee. 

Senator Jackson. And that would not violate any Executive order? 

Secretary Stevens. No. In appearing before the committee. Sen- 
ator Jackson, they would have to testify within the limits of existing 
Executive orders and Presidential directives. 

Senator Jackson. Your agreement qualified it to that extent? 

Secretary Stevens. That is right. 

Senator Jackson. That is all. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington? 

Senator Stmington. Mr. Secretary, I have no questions, but I 
would like, if I ma.j, to make a suggestion. Apparently this is the end 
of the eighth day, and you are going into the ninth clay. I am sure 
you are handling these questions better than I could, after 8 long days 
of just listening to them. Nevertheless, if I may suggest sir, if you 
will answer yes or no, then if you have something additional that you 
would like to say, I think the hearings would go forward faster*. 


Secretary Stevens. I will be glad to try to do that, Senator Sym- 

Senator Symington. That is all I have. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. AVelch ? 

Mr. Welch. Nothing. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohn or Senator McCarthy? I think it 
was Mr. Cohn. 

Mr. Cohn. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. Stevens, was not the situation concerning members of the 
Loyalty Board identical to the situation concerning the people who 
gave special treatment to Peress? In other words, that they nnist, 
under law, appear before the committee, and, having appeared, they 
may then invoke a Presidential directive as to certain questions? 

Secretary Stevens. You are a lawyer, and you are giving me, 
apparently, the answer. I would have thought there was some dif- 
ference in it, Mr. Cohn. 

Mr. Cohn. I am sure, Mr. Secretary, you are perfectly free to 
consult with Mr. Welch or any of your counsel, who I am sure can 
give you more competent advice on this than I can. But I would 
like to agree with you that the fact is exactly the same, because I 
think that will become very important. 

Secretary Stevens. I wouldn't think it was the same, because a 
loyalt}^ board is a board, and the names that I have agreed to su])ply 
to this committee from an Inspector General report are individual 
officers operating in individual capacities and not as a loyalty board. 

INfr. Cohn. Sir, let's stick to the loyalty board. Can you, with 
advice of your counsel, cite to me any regulation which gives im- 
munity from subpena to members of a loyalty board, any Presi- 
dential directive, regulation, or anything else which says that a 
member of the loyalty board need not physically appear before a 
Senate committee? I say that there is no such in this country. And 
if there is one, I would like to be enlightened. 

Secretary Stevens. May we have the right to submit a memo- 
randum to you in the morning and give you the benefit of the regu- 
lations that are outstanding? 

Mr. Cohn. Whatever Mr. Jenkins 

Secretary Stevens. I am not a lawyer. I can't quote verse and 
chapter on the law. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair understands that Mr. Welch and Mr. 
St. Clair are not necessarily authorities on War Department pro- 
cedure. They are here in a special capacity for this hearing. You 
may like to consult Avith your special counsel, and the Chair will say 
that you may have until tomorrow morning for a memorandum on this. 

Mr. Cohn. I would like to have them tell you or put it in the same 
memorandum whether it is not a fact that there is not one person in 
the United States of America, any citizen, who is immune to appear 
from a subpena. You can cover that in the same memorandum. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair believes that the only thing the Secre- 
tary can testify to is with regard to the War Department. 

Mr. Cohn. Very w^ell, sir. In any event, we do have it as your 
testimony today, that Mr. Adams told you when you returned from 
the Far East that he had gone to various members of this subcom- 
mittee and asked them to prevail upon Senator McCarthy not to sub- 


pena members of this loyalty board which, according to the Senator, 
iiad cleared Communists? 

Secretary Stevens. That is about the way I understood it from 
Mr. Adams. 

JNIr. CoHN-. Now, Mv. Stevens, is it not a fact, sir, that in October 
a member of the loyalty board had been subpenaed by this committee 
and had appeared without any legal objection as to his appearance 
having been raised ? 

Secretary Stevens. I don't know. Perhaps that is so. 

Mr. CoHN. Did you ever hear of the name Sherrod East? 

Secretary Stevens. Sherrod East? It doesn't ring a bell. 

Mr. CoHN. Could I refresh your recollection, sir, by telling you he 
was a member of your screening board and that he appeared before 
our committee in executive session in October 1953 and testified with- 
out any legal objection being interposed as to his physical appear- 
ance ? 

Secretary Stevens. You are telling me something that if I knew 
about it has slipped my mind. 

Mr. CoiiN. Sir, I suggest that I spoke to you on the telephone about 
that from your home. 

Secretary Stevens. You may have. 

Mr. Coiin. I don't want to press you on this if you have no recollec- 
tion. Could you refresh your recollection on that overnight, sir, and 

Secretary Stevens. Do you mean on whether or not you telephoned 

Mr. CoHN. On two things. Whether or not you are aware of the 
fact that Sherrod East, a member of this very same screening board, 
had appeared before our committee in October 1953 without any legal 
objection. There was objection, sir, but not legal objection, as to 
his physical appearance; and whether or not you and I discussed 
that on the telephone the night of his appearance. 

Secretary Stevens. Would you supply me with a copy of the tran- 
script, too? 

Mr. CoHN. I think that has already been supplied your office, but 
we will be happy to sujjply— — 

Secretary Stevens. What is the date? 

Mr. CoHN. I think it was October 9. We will be happy to supply 
an additional copy. We will be very happy to supply a copy of that 
to your counsel, sir. 

Secretary Stevens. Thank you. 

Mr. CoHN. And then after you have had a chance to refresh your 
recollection, my question to you, sir, will be if it was proper to do this 
in October why was it not proper to do this in January? 

Secretary Stevens. Well, we might have made a mistake in October. 

Senator McCarthy. Or in January. 

Mr. ConN. Noav, Mr. Stevens, is it not a fact, sir, that the security 
screening board— I will withdraw that and open up a new topic here 
Avhich we think is of considerable importance. Will you agree with 
us, sir, that before this committee began its investigation of the Signal 

Senator McCarthy. May I interrupt, Mr. Cohn ? 

Mr. Cohn. Yes. 


Senator McCaktiiy. Before you go onto another topic, could I have 
the Secretary tell me : Who told you that under the law or Presidential 
regulations, members of the loyalty boards should not answer to a 
subpena? Who advised you of that? 

Secretary Stevens. I think quite a number of people. I think that 
was discussed quite widely within the Department of the Army. 

Senator McCarthy. Name 1 or 2, would you ? 

Secretary Stevens. Well, I would say that the Judge Advocate 
General's Office would certainly be in a thing like that. 

Senator McCarthy. Was it? 

Secretary Stevens. I would say that John Martin, my administra- 
tive assistant, was in it. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, he asked you the specific question of 
whether or not the Judge Advocate General's Office was or was not in 
on that, and so advised you. 

Secretary Stevens. Well, I got my advice from a lot of different 
sources, Mr. Jenkins, and I am sure that would be one of them. 

Mr. Jenkins. I know, but you haven't answered the question. Did 
or not the Judge Advocate General's Office advise you Avliether or not 
it was violative of a Presidential directive or the law to have sub- 
penaed before the McCarthy committee a member of the loyalty board ? 
That is the specific question the Senator asked you, and I repeated it. 

Secretary Stevens. I would say that they did. 

Mr. Jenkins. You will say that they did? Now, you have a direct 
answer, Senator. 

Senator McCarthy. Who in the Judge Advocate's Office? 

Secretary Stevens. I can't give you the name. 

Senator McCarthy. Was it done in writing or verbally ? 

Secretary Stevens. I think it was done verbally, although there 
liave been many memorandums on this whole subject within the De- 
partment of the Army and the Department of Defense. 

Senator INIcCarthy. In other words, memorandums "were written 
to you on this subject of whether or not members of the 

Secretary Stevens. Not necessarily to me, but on the whole subject 
of security. This has been a very big and very wide subject, and 
there has been an awful lot of work done on it by an awful lot of 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Secretary, I am not speaking now of the 
whole subject of the security. It has now been established that Mr. 
Adams did come to the Senators and try to induce them in turn to 
either prevail on me or vote me down so I could not issue subpenas 
to the loyalty board. I believe you have stated, not in so many words, 
but I believe you have stated that the reason for that was that you 
felt that to have them appear would be a violation of either the law 
or some Presidential directive. 

Secretary Si^evtins. That was my feeling about the matter. 

Senator McCarthy. Now, let us restrict ourselves to that subject 
and not to the whole field of security. Have you gotten a memoran- 
dum from any of the legal lights over in the Pentagon so advising you ? 

Secretary Stevens. I would have to look it up, Senator. I don't 
have any here. 

Senator McCarthy. You don't know? 

Secretary Stevens. No, sir. 


Senator McCarthy. Do you know whether Mr. Adams so advi.^ed 
3^011 ? 

Secretary Stevens. I think he probably did. 

Senator McCarthy. You think he probably did? 

Secretary Stevens. Yes. I think we had the matter up with the 
Attorney General. 

Senator McCarthy. Let's net this question and answer clear, if we 
may. I am not speaking now about the rif^ht of someone in the mili- 
tary or any other branch of the Government to refuse to answer certain 
questions, if an answer would violate a rule under which they were 

I am speakino; now of the right of anyone in Government, anyone 
in your department, to refuse to honor a subpena, and just say, "1 will 
not come." 

Do I understand that Mr. Adams, who is here at the end of the table, 
advised you that members of the screening board were immune from 
a subpena, did not have to answer a subpena under the law ? 

Secretary Stevens. No; I wouldn't go that far. But I know that 
it was a matter of sufficient importance so that while I was in the Far 
East the matter was taken up with the Attorney General. 

Senator McCarthy. All right. Now, before you went to the Far 
East, you met with me and asked me not to call the members of the 
Loyalty Board until your return, is that correct? 

Secretary Stevens. I don't recall that; no. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Stevens, didn't you call me up and ask me 
to meet you over at the Carroll Arms? Didn't we spend abount 2 
hours there ? 

Secretary Stevens. Not for that purpose. Not for that purpose. 

Senator McCarthy. Did we discuss that when we were there? 

Secretary Si'evens. I don't recall having discussed that. I re- 
member a number of items that were discussed, but I don't remember 
that one. 

Senator McCarthy. Did you and I discuss this particular question 
we are discussing today, namely that you have no authority to orcier 
anyone not to appear, that they had to answer the subpena but when 
they Avere before the committee then they could refuse to answer any 
question which would violate any order? 

Secretary Stevens. I recall no such conversation at the Carroll 
Arms before I left for the Far East. 

Senator McCarthy. Any place, Mr. Secretary? 

Secretary Stevens. No, sir; I do not. 

Senator McCarthy. You don't recall that we ever discussed this? 

Secretary Stevens. I don't recall it and I am certain that I would 
think a long time before I would say that a member of the Department 
of the Army would not answer a subpena. That is a very serious mat- 
ter, and I would think they would have to answer it. 

Senator McCarthy. jNIr. Secretary, don't you think that I, having 
been chairman of the committee, regardless of whether you liked or 
disliked the way I was acting as a chairman, if you felt that we had 
no power to subpena members of this old screening board, that then 
you should have called me and told me the grounds for that and we 
could have discussed it? 


Secretary Stevens. The matter was taken up with the Attorney 
General, Senator McCarthy. That is the pLace it seems to me that the 
question belongs. 

Senator McCarthy. Did the Attorney General advise you to forbid 
members of the screening or Loyalty Board from appearing ? 

Secretary STE^^NS. I don't know. I was not here then. That is 
while I was away. 

Senator McCarthy. Have you found out since ? 

Secretary Stevens. Have I found out since ? 

Senator McCarthy. Yes. 

Secretary Stevens. No ; I don't have any first-hand information on 
that. I think maybe Mr. Adams will when he testifies. 

Senator McCarthy. Could you find out for us ? 

Secretary Stevens. Surely. I would be glad to. 

Senator McCarthy. Would you search your files and let us know ? 

Secretary Stevens. Yes, sir. 

Senator McCarthy. I believe it has been stated here that at the time 
you were contacting the Republican members of the committee, the 
Democrats were not on the committee at that time. Despite the fact 
that they were not on the committee, did Mr. Adams contact the Demo- 
crat members and discuss the Cohn matter with them and the Schine 
matter with them? 

Secretary Stevens. You will have to ask Mr. Adams who he con- 
tacted. I know he saw some members of the committee. 

Senator McCarthy. Did he tell you that he had contacted the 
Democrats who were not on the committee at that time, in an effort 

Secretary Stearns. He told me, Senator, that he had contacted 
some members of this committee but I don't remember who. 

Senator McCarthy. Did he tell you, Mr. Secretary ? 

Secretary Stevens. I can tell you what I did in the way of contact. 

Senator McCarthy. No; I want to know now what Mr. Adams told 

Secretary Stevens. I think Mr. Adams will have to testify on that. 

Senator McCarthy. No ; what he told you ; not what he did. He is 
your subordinate and I assume he reports to you. 

Secretary Stevens. That is right. 

Senator McCarthy. The question is did he tell you that while he 
was trying to keep me from issuing subpenas to the screening board, 
while he was doing that, he also contacted the Democrat members who 
had previously been on the committee but who were not on the com- 
mittee at that time ? 

Secretary Stevens. No; he didn't tell me that. 

Senator McCarthy. He didn't tell you that ? He didn't talk to you 
about it at all ? 

Secretary STE^^NS. No. 

Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired. 

May the Chair remind the members of the committee that our meet- 
ing is at 5 o'clock in room 357. I think you know the list of invited 

We will recess until 10 : 30 tomorrow morning. 

( Wliereu])on, at 4 : 35 p. m., the hearing was recessed to reconvene at 
10 : 30 a. m., Tuesday, May 4, 1954. ) 



Adams, John G G12-614, 61G, 618-G20, 640, 641-644, 646-650 

Testimony of 621-634 

Army (United States) 613, 615, 623, 629-631, 632, 636, 640, 648, 64!) 

Army Loyalty Board 640 

Attorney General G49, 650 

Carr, Francis P 612 

Carroll Arms Hotel (Washington, D. C.) 649 

Cohn, Roy M 612-615, 622, 625, 627. 630-635, 641-645, 650 

Cohn-McCarthy side G43 

Communist-leadership school (515 

Communist major 638 

Communists 615, 638-640, 642, 647 

Democratic luncheon 645 

Democratic members fi^O 

Democrats 650 

Department of the Army 613, 615, 623, 629-632, 636, 640, 648, 649 

Department of Defense 648 

Department of Justice 629 

Directive (Presidential) 640, 644-646, 648 

East, Sherrod 647 

Executive order 640,644, 645 

Far East 639, 640, 645, 646, 649 

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 629 

Federal Government 649 

Fort Monmouth 613, 617, 621, 625-627, 629-634, 643 

Government of the United States 640 

Hensel, H. Struve 612 

Inspector General 615, 635, 636, 638, 645, 646 

Inspector General's report 638, 645, 646 

Judge Advocate General's Office 648 

Justice Department 629 

Lawton, General 626, 643 

Loyalty Board 643-646, 650 

Loyalty Review Board 645 

Martin, John 648 

McCarthy, Senator Joe 012-644, 646-650 

McCarthy subcommittee 629, 644, 648 

Members of the Senate 644 

New York City 630, 633 

Orient 643 

Pentagon 615, 618. 619, 627. 631, 640, 648 

Peress, Maj. Irving 615,635,636,039,645,646 

Presidential directives 640, 644-646, 648 

Presidential Executive order 640, 644, 645 

Presidential regulation 646, 648 

Press release (proposed, Octolier 20) : 616-618, 620, 624 

"Proposed Statement To Be De^'vpred at Fort Jlonmouth, Drafted Octo- 
ber 19, 1953, Original and On." (document) 617 

Remington, William 642 

Repulilican luncheon 645 

Rosenberg case 642 

Rosenbergs 642 

Ruth, Miss (Ruth Y. Watt) 619 

St. Clair, James D 612, 613, 617, G2S, 629, 646 

Testimony of 618-621 



Secretary of the Army 611-618, 619, 626, 62S-630, 632-G.lO 

Secretary of Defense 637, 644 

Senate of the United States 644 

Signal Corps 629, 680, 647 

Stevens, Robert T 619, 626, 628-630, 632-034 

Testimony of 611-618, 635-G.")0 

United Nations 642 

United States Army 613, 615, 623, 629-632, 636, 640, 648, 649 

United States Attorney General 649, 650 

United States Department of Justice 629 

United States Government 649 

United States Secretary of Defense 637, 644 

United States Senate 644 

United States Signal Corps G29, 630, 647 

United States War Department 646 

War Department 646 

Washington, D. C 629, 637 

Wilson, Secretary of Defense 637, 644 

Zwicker, General 639 




3 9999 05442J[738