^3 .r<■^f^ ^ ^^^
SPECIAL SENATE INVESTIGATION ON CHARGES
AND COUNTERCHARGES INVOLVING: SECRE-
TARY OF THE ARMY ROBERT T. STEVENS, JOHN
G. ADAMS, H. STRUVE HENSEL AND SENATOR
JOE McCarthy, roy m. cohn, and
FRANCIS p. CARR
SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE ON
INVESTIGATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE ON
UNITED STATES SENATE
S. Res. 189
MAY 4, 1954
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Operations
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
46620* WASHINGTON : 1954
Boston Public Library
Superintendent of Documents
SEP 8 -1954
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
JOSEPH R. MCCARTHY, Wisconsin, Chairman
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas
MARGARET CHASE SMITH, Maine HUBERT H. HUMPHREY, Minnesota
HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idaho HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington
EVERETT Mckinley DIRKSEN, Illinois JOHN F. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
JOHN MARSHALL BUTLER, Maryland STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan ALTON A. LENNON, North Carolina
RicHAED J. O'Melia, Oeneral Counsel
Walter L. Reynolds, Chief Clerk
Special Subcommittee on Investigations
KARL B. MUNDT, South Dakota, Chairman
EVERETT MCKINLEY DIRKSEN, Illinois JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas
CHARLES E. POTTER, Michigan HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington
HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idaho STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
Rax H. Jenkins, Chief Counsel
Thomas R. Peewitt, Assistajit Counsel
ROBERT A. Collier, Assistant Counsel
SOLis HORWiTz, Assistant Counsel
Charles A. Manee, Secretary
Testimony of —
Adams, John G., counselor, Department of the Army 697
Stevens, Hon. Robert T., Secretary, Department of the Army 674, 701
J. •■ duceii Appears
13. Letter from John G. Adams, Counselor, Department of the onpuge on puue
Army, to Senator Joseph McCarthy, October 15, 1953 697 698
SPECIAL SENATE INVESTIGATION ON CHAEGES AND
COUNTEECHARGES INVOLVING: SECRETAEY OF THE
ARMY EOBEET T. STEVENS, JOHN G. ADAMS, H. STEUVE
HENSEL AND SENATOE JOE McCAETHY, EOT M. COHN,
AND EEANCIS P. CAEE
TUESDAY, MAY 4, 1954
United States Senate,
Special Subcommittee on Investigations or the
Committee on Government Operations,
Washington^ D. C.
(The hearing was resumed at 2: 10 p. m., pursuant to recess.)
Present : Senator Karl E. Muiidt, Eepublican, South Dakota, chair-
man ; Senator Everett McKinley Dirksen, Republican, Illinois ; Sena-
tor Charles E. Potter, Republican, Michigan; Senator Henry C.
Dworshak, Republican, Idaho; Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat,
Arkansas; Senator Henry M. Jackson, Democrat, Washington; and
Senator Stuart 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. Cohn, chief
counsel to the subcommittee; Francis P. Carr, executive director of
the subcommittee; Hon. Robert T. Stevens, Secretary of the Army;
John G. Adams, counselor to the Army ; H. Struve Hensel, Assistant
Secretary of Defense ; Joseph N. Welch, special counsel for the Army ;
James D. St. Clair, special counsel for the Ai'my; and Frederick P.
Bryan, counsel to H. Struve Heiisel, Assistant Secretai-y of Defense.
Senator Mundt. The committee will please come to order.
Once again may I remind our guests that we will appreciate it if
they will comply with the rules of the committee to abstain from any
manifestations of approval or disapproval at any time during tlie
course of the hearing. You are here as guests of the committee. We
are happy to have you here, but tlie officers have strict instructions to
enforce that rule.
The committee will come to order. I believe we had just concluded
a 10-minute round, so the Chair would conclude that we start with
<;ounsel, if he has any questions at this time.
Mr. Jenkins. No questions, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. The Chair has no questions at this time. Senator
McClellan, I think, is en route. Here he comes.
Senator McClellan. I pass.
674 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator MuNDT. Senators to my right, all pass ?
Senators to my left, all pass?
Mr. Welch. I pass.
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy, you, or Mr. Cohn?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Cohn.
TESTIMONY OF HON. ROBERT T. STEVENS, SECRETARY OF THE
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Secretary, I believe that the last thing we were talk-
ing about was the security situation at Fort Monmouth and what this
committee did and whether or not there was interference with what
we tried to do. I would like to address myself to that, if I may.
Are we both agreed now, sir, that a substantial number of members
of the Julius Rosenberg spy ring had worked in 1940 at Fort Mon-
Secretary Ste\'ens. I don't feel competent to testify on that.
Mr. CoiiN. Mr. Stevens, I would suggest, if it is agreeable to the
Chair, if you would want to talk to any of your aides, Mr. Adams
or anyone who might have that information at any point, I would
certainly welcome that so we could get on with the examination.
Mv. Jenkins. IMr. Chairman, the question of whether or not there
were Communists or subversives at Fort Monmouth in 1940 is wholly
immaterial, and the question should not be asked the Secretary. It
is my advice to the committee that the Secretary should not be required
to answer that question.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Jenkins, I am just trying to tie this in with the
current situation when Mr. Stevens became Secretary, and I can't very
well do that unless I can get in at least a minimum of background.
Mr. Jenkins. We held before recess, Mr. Cohn, that you were en-
titled to ask the Secretary whether or not at the time he assumed the
responsibilities of his office there were Communists at Fort Monmouth
or there were people at Fort Monmouth with whom you can show a
connection with the Rosenbergs who were there in 1940.
Mr. Cohn. Very well, sir.
Senator INIundt. Counsel is right. The point of order is upheld, and
Mr. Cohn will try to ask his questions in keeping with that inter-
pretation of the rules.
Mr. Cohn. Very well, sir.
IMr. Stevens, when you became Secretary of the Army were there still
employed at the sensitive radar center at Fort Monmouth a person or
persons who had been connected with Julius Rosenberg, the atom spy ?
Secretary Stevens. Mr. Cohn, I just don't know.
]\Ir. Cohn. Mr. Secretary, you sat in on sessions of our committee
when you heard testimony to that eft'ect produced ; have you not?
Secretary Stevens. I have heard things about this but I don't know
of my own certain knowledge about it, jSIr. Cohn. I do know that we
have suspended since I have been there 35 people who we believe
needed investigations as security risks.
Mr. Cohn. Our executive sessions commenced on August 31. How
many of those 35 were suspended before that time ?
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman?
Senator IMundt. Have .you a point of order ?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 675
]Mr. Welch. The date Mr. Cohn meutioiied ?
Mr. Cohn. August 31.
Senator Mundt. August 31.
Mr. Welch. What began then ?
Senator ]\Iundt. The executive hearings of the subcommittee. Is
Secretary Steatns. On what?
Mr. Cohn. On Communist infiltration in the Army Signal Corps.
Mr. Welch. Oh. That is another matter. I am talking about Fort
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Welch, I wasn't asking you a question, sir. I was
asking Mr. Stevens.
Mr. Welch. A point of order then. This is not a Fort Monmouth
investigation, which I think is the point to which we are limiting this
Senator McCarthy. I didn't understand that. Did Mr. Welch say
he thought we were limiting the inquiry to Fort Monmoutli ?
Mr. Welch. I thought this portion of the inquiry was limited to Mr.
Stevens' knowledge about subversives or poor security risks at Fort
Monmouth. Now the August date indicates some inquiry other than
Senator McCarthy. I don't understand counsel. Is he objecting
because Mr. Cohn is asking questions about tlie Army Signal Corps
rather than the Fort Monmouth part of the Signal Corps?
Mr. Welch. Yes, precisely. This witness was askecl about security
risks at Fort Monmouth. Then suddenly we switched the film and
bring in some inquiry not connected wath Fort Monmouth. I don't
think that is fair to the witness.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohn.
Mr. Cohn. Thank you, sir.
Possibly we can make everbody happy on this point. I used Fort
Moimiouth as an abbreviation for the Army Signal Corps. Fort
Monmouth is the Army Signal Corps. If Mr. Welch prefers that
I spell out and indicate Army Signal Corps, I will do that.
Mr. Welch. And the location, sir.
Senator Mundt. And I think the question should be pointed and
sharp and precise, and I believe that Mr. Welch's point of order is
well taken that the witness has a right to know exactly to what you
are referring in your question.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, if the witness doesn't know, it
isn't Mr. Cohn's fault. The witness has gotten all of the executive
session hearings. They were called to his attention the other day.
I asked the Chair to put in the first executive session testimony on
August 31. If he hasn't gotten the information with a whole bevy
of aides around him, it isn't Mr. Cohn's fault.
^Ir. Jenkins. I am sure, Mr. Chairman, tliat the charges of the
]*JcCarthy committee refer to Fort Monmouth, and the allegation is
made tha"t the Secretary of the Army and Mr. Adams attempted to
stop the investigation of Fort Monmouth. It is my advice to the
committee that the question slicuM be directed to Fort JMtonniCuth
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Chairman, I might
Senator McCarthy. May I ?
676 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator Mundt. Do you have a point of order, Mr. Colm?
Senator McCarthy. I have a question, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy.
Senator McCarthy. The investigation that was tried to be stopped
involved the Army Signal Corps installations. The home and heart
of those installations are at Fort Monmouth, Mr. Chairman. In
Washington you will find the administration offices. In New York
you will find telecommunications lab doing work for Fort Monmouth.
It is completely impossible for us to restrict the — if I may have the
attention of counsel, too — it is completely impossible for us to restrict
the questioning to one portion of the Signal Corps which happens to
be the heart of the operations. We must go into the question of Com-
munists in all other branches of Fort Monmouth, if you may call it
that, or call it the Signal Corps, if you like.
Senator Muxdt. The counsel desires to consult his notes here as to
just what was contained in the charges.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, of this I am convinced ; otherwise I
again state that the charge specifically was that Mr. Adams and Mr.
Stevens sought to bring about a cessation of the investigation of the
McCarthy committee of subversives and the infiltration of bad security
risks at Fort Moim^iouth.
The Secretary necessarily came here prepared to defend that charge,
and that charge only. If the scope, if the range of the inquiry is
broadened, then that necessarily would result — are these the specifi-
cations ? I want the specifications.
Mr. CoHN. Mr. Jenkins, may I respectfully, sir, call your attention
to specification No. 6?
Mr. Jenkins. Will you read it, sir?
Mr. CoHN. 16. I am sorry. [Reading:]
On or about September 7, 1953, and directly following the first executive session
of subcommittee bearings on instances of Communist infiltration in the Army
after the exposure of a fifth-amendment Communist employed as an Army civilian,
Chairman McCarthy publicly announced his determination to pursue these in-
vestigations to the point of calling those connected with the personnel and loyalty
procedures of the Army responsible for the clearing of Communists. Secretary
Robert T. Stevens then communicated with the chairman and commenced a series
of efforts to interfere with the investigation, to stop hearings, and to prevent
various of his appointees from being called by the subcommittee.
I must submit, Mr. Jenkins, I see no reference or limitation to Fort
Mr. Jenkins. IMay I ask, Mr. Cohn, to what specification
Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins has the floor.
Mr. Jenkins. What number do you refer to in the specifications ?
Mr. Cohn. I have just read 16, and the final thing I will read is
Senator Mundt. Are you reading from your specifications or the
Army's ? The counsel has the Anny's before him.
Mr. Cohn. I am reading from ours, Senator. Specification 19 :
After mid-September, when the chairman directed open hearings —
And I ask your attention to this phrase, if I may —
on Communist infiltration in the Army, Mr. Stevens named John G. Adams to
the post of Army Counsel for the principal purpose of "handling the committee"
in persuading it to cease its investigation of Communist infiltration in the Army.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION C77
Twenty-one and twenty-three are jnst the same way, sir, "Connnunist
intiltration in the Army." Tliore is no limitation on Fort Momnouth,
the physical base or even the Army Signal Corps as such. It is Com-
munist infiltration in the Army.
I\Ir. Jenkins. May I have one moment, Mr. Cohn, to confer with the
Mr. CoHX. Of course, Mr. Jenkins.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Cohn?
Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins.
Mr. Jenkins. You have just demonstrated the fact publicly that
even I can make a mistake. Apparently, I am in error. Your
charges are broad enough to cover this inciuiry. I withdraw my
Senator Mundt. The Chair would like to add that in the opening
session he read a statement of the charges and countercharges which
Avas prepared jointly by Senator McClellan, Mr. Jenkins, and the
Chair, and in that it says:
These countercharges were formalized In a statement signed and filed with
the siibcommittee under date of April 10, 1954, in which they generally allege
that Mr. Stevens, Mr. Adams, and Mr. Hensel attempted to discredit what is
generally referred to as the McCarthy Investigating Committee and to force a
discontinuance of further attempts by that committee to expose Communist
Infiltration in the Army, and in which it is further charged that Mr. Stevens
and Mr. Adams made constant threats to trade off preferential treatment for
Private Schine as an inducement to the subcommittee to halt its exposition
of the mishandling of Communist infiltration in the military.
Since that was read at that time, and the committee proceedings
have been going on for 9 days, within the purview of that scope of
charges and countercharges, the Chair must hold the questions are in
Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan.
Senator McClellan. I just wish to make this observation. I fully
agree that the charges are broad enough to cover my investigation
that the subcommittee might have been conducting with respect to
Communists in the Army. But, Mr. Chairman, many of these ques-
tions are not relevant to the charge, and the charge is that he under-
took to stop those investigations.
Now, lets us try to find out what he did. if anything, to stop or
bring about a stop, or a cessation of the investigations anywhere in
the Army, that had for their purpose discovering and ferreting out
Mr. Cohn. I hope to do that, sir, if I may.
Senator McCleli.an. I would like for us to get started at it.
Senator McCarthy. May I say if we would have less number of
speeches by the Senators when Mr. Cohn is speaking, we would get
Senator McClellan. May I say to the Senator that I have listened
to a lot of his speeches around here.
Senator McCarthy. While I still have the floor, may I say that
one of the things that I admire about our counsel, counsel selected
by the committee, is that he is a man who is apparently willing at
all times to examine the record, listen to the arguments, and has no
4G620°— 54— pt. 18 2
678 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
pride of a previous decision, vrliicli I think is a mark of a big man.
I think \YQ are lucky that we have a counsel as competent as we have.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohn, I believe, has the floor and was asking
questions. His questions have been ruled in order, provided they go
to the relevancy of the issues at stake.
]Mr. CoiiN". Now, Mr. Stevens, for 6 months following the time
you became Secretary of the Army, was one of the key officials at
the radar laboratories in Fort Monmouth a man who had been an
associate of Julius Rosenberg and a man who had taken from those
laboratories to his home some 43 secret and classified documents?
Secretary Stevens. Mr. Cohn, I told j'ou that I know in general
about the 35 cases. I do not have the detail of them.
I think that Mr. Jenkins ruled this morning that we would not
go into the individual 35 cases. If we are going to, then within the
limit of Presidential directives I will have to get somebody that
knows the detail of those cases to discuss them. I do not know the
detail of the cases.
]Mr. CoiiN. Mr. Secretary, if I might say, I am asking you, sir,
about a case of which I will try to show you have direct, personal
knowledge, and a case in connection with which, sir, we will try
to show there was interference with the subcommittee's investigation.
Mr. Jenkins. May I clarify my statement, Mr. Secretary, for your
You are entirely right with respect to my ruling. But prior to the
recess for the lunch hour, JSIr. Cohn asked you whether or not there
were any Communists in the Signal Corps. I recall your statement
was that there were none. In view of that question and that answer,
I then ruled that Mr. Colin, while he is not permitted to go into each
individual case and show the merits of that case, that he is entitled to
show that there — if he is able to do so — that there was in fact a Com-
munist or were in fact Communists at this radar installation or in the
That, as I remember, was
Secretary Stevens. Mr. Jenkins, I thought Senator McCarthy was
talking about Fort Monmouth. I was definitely under that impression.
I directed my answer to his questions on that basis. Then the first
thing I find out is that he commences talking about the Federal Tele-
comnnmications Laboratory which is a subsidiary of the International
Telephone & Telegraph Co., located in Nutley, 50 miles away, in which,
so far as I know, there are no employees of the Army.
That is the first that I knew that he was talking about anj^thing
except Fort Monmouth.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, in view of what I remember about the
questions, I think you were entirely justified in your conclusion that
the Senator was directing his inquiry with reference to Fort Mon-
mouth, and I suggest, Mr. Cohn and Senator McCarthy, that you
direct the Secretary's attention to the particular area in which you
claim there were Communists in all fairness.
Senator Mundt. I think we realize that Communist infiltration in
the Army is included in the charges and countercharges.
Mr. Cohn and Senator McCarthy in fairness to the Secretary should
make very clear when they ask questions whether they are dealing
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 679
Tvitli a certain section of the Army, or Fort Monmoutli or Telccom-
niiinications, "wherever it happens to be.
Secretary Stevens. Mr. Chairman, I reserve, I hope, the right to
make one more statement because in the course of his remarks Senator
McCarthy accused me of having made "a false" statement. I did not
make any false statement. He changed the scene on me without any-
body knowing it.
Mr. CoiiN. The questions which I am putting to the Secretary now
concern an important oflicial in the radar laboratories, physically at
Fort Monmouth. So there can be no possible misunderstanding about
Mr. Secretary, at the time you became Secretary of the Army and
for some 6 months thereafter was a section head in the Evans Signal
Laboratory — could you tell me what the Evans Signal Laboratory
was ? You know that.
Secretary STE\Ti:NS. It is a research and development lab.
Mr. CoHN. Of radar?
Secretary Stevens. That is one of the things ; yes.
Mr. CoHN. At Fort Monmouth?
Secretary Stevens. That is right.
Mr. CoHN. Dealing with highly sensitive work?
Secretary Stevens. That is correct.
Mr. CoHN. When you became Secretary of the Army, was a man
by the name of Aaron Coleman a section head in this secret radar
laboratory at Foi-t Monmouth?
Secretary Ste\t:n8. I know that Coleman had been employed there.
1 don't know whether I am allowed to say this under the security
regulations or not. I will have to ask.
(The Secretary conferred with his aides.)
Secretary Stev'en. Yes, apparently it has been publicly announced
that he was suspended.
Mr. CoHN. So there is no doubt about that, Mr. Secretary, I read
Secretary Stea^ens. He was suspended, I believe, the latter part of
Mr. CoHN. September 28 is the date, I believe, sir.
Secretary Stevens. I don't remember the exact date.
Mr. CoHN. If I might read so there is no doubt about this, from
the public record of the job description of Mr. Coleman and ask you
if this is not correct, sir :
Mr. Coleman at Fort Monmouth is responsible for planning, organizing, direct-
ing, coordinating, and programing the work of a large organizational segment
engaged in the research, development, design, and construction of large-scale
antiaircraft systems for employment by the Army all over the world. The urgent
need for the centralized direction of large numbers of various antiaircraft
weapons, guided missiles, rockets, guns, countermeasures for defense against
atomic bombing attacks has been repeatedly emphasized by Army field forces.
This organizational section is also engaged in the design and development of
new computers, displace, tracers, and similar equipment, required for com-
pletely integrated systems. The dollar value of the total internal and external
effort on these systems is at approximately $32 million for fiscal years 1946 to
19.5.3 inclusive. Approximately $10 million is to be expended during fiscal
year 1952, for the design and development of new equipment.
That is the job description of this man, Aaron Coleman, who you
tell us was the section chief at this secret radar laboratory at Fort
Monmouth when you became Secretary. I will now ask you, sir, if
680 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Coleman did not continue as section chief handling some of the
most secret material in this Nation until September 28, 1953 ?
Secretary Stevens. I can't answer that. I will check it up and find
out for you.
Mr. CoHN. If you want to ask some of your associates ?
Secretary Ste\'ens. I will check it up and find out. I don't have
that personal knowledge.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Stevens
Senator Mundt. He is trying to find out if he can get some counsel
on that question.
Secretary Stephens. The answer is that he was on a restricted non-
classified job for nearly a year. His clearance had been revoked in
January or February of 1953.
Mr. CoHN. By whom had that been revoked ?
Secretary Stevens. By whom it had been revoked ? By the proper
authority. I will find out exactly who if you like.
Mr. CoHN. Could you tell us whether or not that had been revoked
by General Lawton after General Reichelderfer had refused to
Secretary Stevens. Probably by General Lawton.
Mr. CoHN. Was that after General Keichelderfer had refused to
revoke it ?
Secretary Stevens. I don't know.
Mv. CoHN. Was Mr. Coleman, this man concerning whom I am
interrogating you, emploj'ed at Fort Monmouth until September 1953 ?
Secretary Stevens. On a restricted, nonclassified job; yes.
Mr. CoiiN. Until what date in September 1953?
Secretary Stevens. Late September. I don't remember the date.
Mr. CoHN. Was there any restriction on his access to and com-
munication with people he had worked with in the Evans Signal
Secretary Stevens. People?
JMr. ConN. Yes.
Secretary Stevens. I suppose he could talk with people, sure.
ISIr. CoHN. He was there on the premises, was he not, sir ?
Secretary Stevens. That is right.
j\Ir. CoiiN. He was still an employee of the Signal Corps at Fort
Secretary Stevens. That is correct.
Mr. CoHN. And that is until September 28, 1953 ?
Secretary Stevens. Late September.
Mr. CoHN. Now, sir, was Mr. Coleman — is it a matter of public
record that Mr. Coleman had attended Young Communist League
meetings with Julius Rosenberg?
Secretary Ste\'ens. I just don't know. I may have heard some
testimony on that in one of your hearings, but I can't recall all of
that, Mr. Cohn.
Mr. CoHN. Mr. Stevens, wouldn't that be an awfully important
thing to recall if a man who still had been working at Monmouth
until September 28 and had occupied for some time a very sensitive
Secretary Stevens. I do not recall it.
Mr. Cohn. You don't recall that?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 681
Secretary Stevens. I do not recall it. It may have been so. It
may not have been so. I just don't know.
Mr. ConN. Can you recall this, sir? Can you recall whether or
not Aaron Coleman had been continuously at Fort Monmouth in
spite of proof that he had taken 43 classified, including some secret,
documents from their proper place in the laboratory, and that on a
raid of his home by security officials those documents had been found
in a bureau drawer?
Secretary Stevens. Mr. Cohn^ as I told you, I cannot testify on
every 1 of these 35 cases in detail. I am under Presidential restric-
tions in connection with it, for one thin^. And on the other, if
you want to go into the 35 cases, then I will ask counsel to give me
the right to put somebody on this stand who can testify as to the
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, may I say this to you, sir : You were
asked whether or not specifically there were any Commumsts at Fort
Monmouth. As I recall your answer was in the negative.
The only reason the committee is permitting this line of interroga-
tion at this time is to give Mr. Cohn an opportmiity to prove in fact
tliat there was a Communist or there were Communists at Fort Mon-
mouth during j'our regime as Secretary of the Army.
I want to state to Mr. Cohn at this time that the committee has no
disposition in my opinion to hear in detail the facts with reference
to all of the alleged Counnunists if there were more than Mr. Coleman
there, and I do suggest to counsel that he not go into too much detail ;
that he establish and go to the point now, if possible, of whether or
not Coleman was a Communist and then I trust we will pass on to
another line of inquiry.
Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan ?
Senator McClellan. If we want to establish whether there were
Communists there, should we not undertake to establish it under oath ?
I don't know whether Coleman is a Communist. No one has sworn
that he is. He may be. But the test : Does this witness know he is
a Communist ? If he doesn't, that ends it, unless you bring some proof
here that he is a Communist.
Mr. Jenkins. Senator McClellan, in my opinion, sir, very respect-
fully, sir, your objection goes to the weight of the, testimony of the
Secretary of the Army rather than the admissibility of his testimony.
He may know and he may not know, but counsel has a right to elicit
information from him to determine whether he does.
Senator McClellan. He can ask him if he knows, and if he says
he does, then he can inc|uire about it. If he does not know^, then wlio
IS there here who has said that he is a Communist?
]\Ir, Jenkins. It is my understanding that he is leading up to that
at this time.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy will be heard on a point of
Senator McCarthy. I am not sure whether you call this a point of
order. I want to correct a misstatement made by the very competent
Senator from Arkansas, and I know he did not make it personally,
he made it only because he was not at the hearings and did not hear
the testimony, he made the statement that there v.as no sworn testi-
682 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
mony that Mr. Coleman was a Communist. The Senator is in error
Senator McClellan. I said no testimony before this committee,
and until there is sworn testimony that he is a Communist, then I
don't see how we, if we are going to adhere to the American standards
of justice, can call him a Communist.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, may I say that — may I say to
Senator McClellan that there is sworn testimony before this committee
in open session — this is the investigating committee, the Permanent
Investigating Committee — on December 8, in open session, that Mr.
Coleman was a member of the Young Communist League, which is a
branch of the Communist Party. If Senator McClellan had been
there, he would know that. I am not accusing him of anything
wrong for not being there. I am just correcting him because he has
said that there was no evidence before this committee that this man
was a member of the Communist Party. There is sworn testimony
that he was a member of the Young Communist League, which is a
branch of the Communist Party. That information was transmitted
to Mr. Adams' office.
Senator McClellan. May I inquire of the distinguished Senator if
the witness did not appear in person before your committee and under
oath deny the charges ? Isn't that true ?
Senator McCarthy. The witness denied he was a Communist ; ad-
mitted he went to Communist Party meetings with Julius Rosenberg.
There was sworn testimony that he was a member of the Young Com-
Senator Symington. A point of order, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Have you concluded, Senator McClellan ?
Senator McClellan. All I want to do, Mr. Chairman, is to proceed
with the issues that are before this committee. If we want to waste
time, that is all right. But I know, when we are sticking to the
issues that are here before this committee to be resolved, and we are
getting pretty far afield.
Senator McCarthy. May I say, Mr. Chairman, I cannot be too
much impressed by the Senator's claim that we should stick to the
issues, that we are getting far afield. I didn't hear the very able
Senator from Arkansas argue or make speeches the other day wlien
we were talking* about Dave Schine's boots, or when we spent 2 days
on a picture. We are on a very important issue right now, the issue
of whether or not the Secretary of the Army knew that there were
Communists at Fort Monmouth when he stated to this committee
under oath that there were none, and v/hy when he gave the categories
of those who were suspended, he omitted stating that one of the
categories included a young man who stole secrets from the radar
laboratory, men who had been named as members of the Communist
Party, as part of the Rosenberg spy right.
Mr. Chairman, this is the very heart and soul of this investigation.
If we can argue for 2 days about whether or not Dave Schine wore
shoes that fit him, whether or not he ate a steak in New York, I think
we can spend 10 minutes, 10 minutes, Mr. Chairman on this question
of Communist infiltration into the most important, the most secret,
radar installations of this countrv.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 683
Senator McCleixan. 'S^r. Cliairmaii. I may say to the distinguished
Senator tliat the Sen.ator from Arkansas did not question Mr. Schine
re<i:arding the statements he has made, but those things were elicited,
as I recall, from the Senator's side of the table.
Senator Mundt. It has been ruled, IMr. Colin, that you may con-
tiinie to question the Secretary about his knowledge, if he has any.
Secretary Stevens. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Yon may proceed.
Secretary Stevens. Senator McCarthy has just made quite a state-
ment, and I Avould like to be sure, for the benefit of the committee
and all who are listening and interested, as to just what the record
Now, I testified this morning with respect to the very thing that
is now being talked about, to wit: The 35 suspended personnel at
Fort Monmouth, and I would like to specifically ask the Chair to
have read now the record of what my testimony was to see how it
coincides with the statement that Senator McCarthy has just made.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Mundt. May the Chair inquire whether or not the testi-
mon}^ of this morning — is that it?
Se<:retary Stevens. Yes.
Senator Mundt. Whether the testimony of this morning is available
so that you can read it? I think it is a legitimate request that the
Secretary has made, on the question of this morning, and he asks it
to be repeated since there seems to be some doubt in his mind as to
whether or not it dealt with the issues at hand. We will ask that the
reporter repeat the question and the answer.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, first may I make a point ?
I think to reread the Secretary's long, evasive answers would be
in the nature of cruel, inhuman treatment upon the committee.
Senator Mundt. The Secretary has requested that the question be
read and the answer be read, if the reporter has it. We would like
to have it read.
Secretary Stkvens. I would want just that part that I referred to.
Senator Mundt. Here, you can read it yourself. It is page 1626.
(Document referred to was han-ded to Secretary Stevens for
Senator Mundt. The Chair has been asked to announce for the
benefit of the press the spelling of the man's name who has been in
question. It is Aaron Coleman — A-a-r-o-n C-o-l-e-m-a-n.
Are you ready, Mr. Secretary ?
Secretary Steven. Yes, sir.
Senator Mundt. You may read the question and the answer then
that you wanted to have read. Will you tell us the page number,
Secretary Stevens. It is page 1632.
Mr. Jenkins. Do I unclerstand, Mr. Stevens, that you have stated that none
of those 3.5 suspensions was a ComTnunist?"
Secretary Stevens. So far as I know, that is the fact.
Mr. Jenkins. Your statement
Secretary Stevens. And none of them plead the fifth amendment that I know of.
INIr. Jenkins. I am not asking about the fifth amendment. Your statement is
that none of them was or is a Coiiimunist as far as you know?
684 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION"
Secretary Stevens. That is right. Of cour.se, the investigations are going on
on those people, as you know, Mr. Jenliius. We don't yet know the outcoaie of
all of them.
That, Mv. Chairman, is the record.
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy or INIr. Cohn, you may proceed.
Mr. CoHN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, I believe my last question was this, sir : Is it a fact
that Aaron Coleman during the first 6 months of j'our administration
continued at Fort Monmouth in spite of the existence of records show-
ing that he had previously taken from the radar laboratory some 43
documents, some of them secret, and that those documents had been
seized when security officers raided his home ? You know that, do you
not, Mr. Stevens ?
Secretary Stex'ens. I have said before that I cannot testify on all
the details of every one of these cases.
Mr. CoHN". You remember this one particular item ?
Secretary Stevens. The answer to the question is that Mr. Coleman
was continued on a restricted, nonclassified job for nearly a year.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, may I make a suggestion before the
time is counted out. The specific question now is whether or not you
knew — no, not whether you knew, but whether or not this man Aaron
Coleman had taken from the plant where he was working 45 classified
documents, to his home, and that they were discovered in a bureau
drawer. Is that a fact or is it not a fact ? Just get a direct answer.
Secretary Stevens. It is a fact, I believe, although I think I must
Mr. Jenkins. You are entitled to.
Secretary Stevens. By stating that there is a lot of information in
connection with that case and in connection with the thing that you
have just cited that I think should be brought before this committee
if you want to go into all that detail and I don't feel competent to do it
because I don't know all the facts.
Mr. Jenkins. Very well.
Now a direct question has been asked and a direct answer has been
given. As I understand, the time is up.
Senator Mundt. Mr. (John's time is up.
Mr. Jenkins. I pass, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. The Chair passes. Senator McClellan?
Senator McClellan. Pass.
Senator Mundt. Senators to the right ?
Senators to the left ?
Senator Symington, I have one question I would like to ask.
Senator JNIundt. Senator Jackson, do you have any questions?
Senator Jackson. No que.stions.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington has a question.
Senator Symington. Mr. Secretary, how long have you been in the
Secretary Stevens. How long have I been Secretary ?
Senator Symington. As Secretary of the Army.
Secretary Stevens. Since February 4, 1953.
Senator Symington. How many people are under your command in
the Army ?
Secretary Stevens. Approximately 2 million.
Senator Symington. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION €85
Senator IMundt. Any other Senators?
Mr. Welch. Nothing now.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohn or Senator McCarthy, 10 mmutes.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Colin.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Stevens, we now have, as I understand it, you tell us
as a fact that Coleman was continued on despite evidence that he had
taken these 43 documents from the radar laboratory to his home.
Secretary Stevens. I am not testifying with respect to the docu-
ments. I will get you somebody who will testify on that if you want.
I don't feel competent. He continued on a restricted nonclassified job
from January or February until the latter part of September when
he was suspended. And his case is now mider review.
]\Ir. Cohn. Yes, sir. And I think we have it that he continued at
Momnouth until September 28, and tliat he had taken these docu-
ments to his home. That brings me to my next question.
You know, do you not, ]\Ir. Secretary, that this committee began an
investigation of the Coleman case to ascertain how, in view of the
proof of his association with Eosenberg, in the Young Communist
League; and the fact that each had taken these secret documents from
the laboratory, he could have been allowed to continue at Fort Mon-
mouth until after the committee began its investigation ? You know
tliat, do yon not, sir ?
Secretary Stevens. I don't yet know — I don't know that Mr, Cole-
man is a Communist. His case is still under investigation. I testified
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, that wasn't the question. The ques-
tion was do you know that this committee, the McCarthy-Cohn-Carr
committee, was investigating and did investigate as to why Coleman
was permitted to stay on after he had taken these documents to his
Secretary Stevens. I know they investigated Mr. Coleman ; yes, sir.
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Stevens, is it not a fact that your office attempted to
impede the investigation of those responsible for the continuation of
Coleman in tlie face of the evidence of the theft of these documents ?
Secretary Stevens. It is certainly not a fact as far as I know.
I would like to call your attention to the fact that I called Fort ]Mon-
inouth on the phone on October 2, when you were in my office
Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir.
Secretary Stevens. Because you said you were having difficulty
there. I called General Lawton and instructed him to give this com-
mittee the very fullest cooperation.
Mr. Cohn. That is with reference to talking to employees working
at Fort Monmouth. Did you in that same conversation tell General
Lawton there were certain things which he should not disclose to the
Secretary Stevens, I don't recall that. I know that I wanted full
cooperation. I talked to him right while you were there, and within
the limit of Presidential directives I wanted him to go the limit.
Mr. Cohn. My question was, sir, if I didn't make it clear. Did you
in that same phone conversation tell General Lawton there were things
which you did not want liim to disclose to the committee ?
Secretary Stevens. I might possibly have mentioned files.
4CC20°— 54— pt. 18 3
686 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. CoHN-. Anything besides files that you recall?
Secretary Stevtsks. I don't recall anything.
Mr. CoHN-. Right.
Now, Mr. Secretary, do you recall that this committee in this all-
important case asked you to produce, you and Mr. Adams to produce,
the personnel file of Aaron Coleman laef ore the committee ? That is a
file which is not covered by any Presidential directive or anything
Secretary Stevens. I personally don't recall the request. Very
likely Mr. Adams would, but I don't.
INIr. CoHN. Well now, Mr. Stevens, do you not recall that when that
file was supplied, your office represented that it was a true and com-
plete file, that when we examined it
Secretary STE^^NS. I have no recollection of that whatever.
Mr. CoHN. I am going to try to refresh it for you, sir. I am going
to try to show that all of this took place right in your presence.
Mr. Stevens, do you not recall that that file was furnished, that
there was a representation to us that it was a true, complete, and full
file, but that the fact was that there liad been stripped from the file all
evidence showing that Coleman had taken these secret documents from
the laboratory to his home ?
Secretary SxEVE^rs. I have no such recollection. And in submitting
files we have to operate within the limits of Presidential directives,
which prohibit the disclosure outside of the executive department
of information rebiing to loyalties of past, present, and prospective
Mv, CoiiN. INIr. Secretary, I am not talking about the loyalty files.
I am talking about Coleman's personnel file, which the Presidential
directive has held to be completely inapplicable.
I will now ask you, sir. Is it not a fact that when that personnel file
was submitted to this committee it had been stripped of all relevant
information showing that Coleman, this associate of Julius Rosen-
berg, had taken these secret documents from the radar laboratory?
Secretary Stevens. I have no recollection of that whatever.
Mr. CoiiN. Mr. Secretary, did not I, in the presence of Senator
McCarthj^, state to 3'ou on the morning of October 14, 195o, that your
office in this crucial case, had given us a stripped file when it had repre-
sented it had given us a true and complete file?
Secretary STE^^3NS. I have no recollection of any sucli statement.
J^.Ir. CoiiN. To refresh your recollection, Mr. Secretary, may I hand
j^ou volume G of the executive session testimony of this subcommittee
and direct your attention to the flyleaf indicating that you were
])resent and to page 042, indicating remarks made to you about the
stripping of this Coleman file on that occasion ? Mr. Jenkins, did you
want to see this first ?
Mr. Jenkins. Not at all. I am assuming, of course, there is a
proper basis for your question, Mr. Cohn.
Mr. CoHN. I represent to you there is a proper basis.
Secretary Stem^ns. I would be interested in knowing Avhat it is.
Mr. CoiiN. Mr. Stevens, if you will look at page 612 it will refresh
Secretary Ste\t:ns. I still contend that there are 2 million people
I am responsible for, and I can't know everything about every file, and
do not. I have tcstided that on there 35 cases, which includes Mr.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 687
Coleman, that up to the present time, s« far as I know, he is not a
Communist, but his case is under investigation along with the 34
others, and it may develop that he is. But we have to use the good,
old American due process of fair play to find out whether or not that
is so. And I do not know at the present time that Mr. Coleman is a
Senator McCarthy. Why don't you k)ok fii^t. before you answer?
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Stevens, perhaps I can clarify the matter with
you at this time and enable us to get along. The questions now are not
directed as to whether or not Coleman was a Communist. Frankly,
I think we have gone into that question thoroughly and enough, as
much as I intend to permit if I have anything to do with it. The
question now is this: Mr. Cohn asked you whether or not you were
asked for the personnel file on Aaron Coleman, to whom the McCarthy
committee seems to attach considerable importance. Your answer
was that you, as I recall, that you did furnish him with a personnel
file on Coleman.
Secretary Stevens. No, sir ; I didn't state that.
Mr. Jenkins. Well, did you or did you not?
Secretary Stevens. I have no recollection of being asked to fur-
nish it. I don't personally remember ever having furnished a person-
nel file. That would not be my function, Mr. Jenkins.
Mr. Jenkins. Do you recall having a conversation — ^this doesn't
come out of your time, Mr. Cohn — do you recall having a conversa-
tion with Mr. Cohn or any member of the committee with respect to
this man Aaron Coleman?
Secretary Stevens. I remember I was present — I think I was pres-
ent during part of Coleman's testimony in the hearing.
jMr. Jenkins. Were you present at any executive or open hearing
when Coleman's case was investigated by the McCarthy committee?
Secretary Stevens. That was an executive meeting, as I remember it,
in New York.
Mr. Jenkins. You do not recall being asked for the personnel file
on Coleman ?
Secretary Stevens. I don't recall being asked for it, no.
Mr. Jenkins. Then his next question was whether or not you rep-
resented to him that a personnel file on Coleman was a complete file,
and, as I remember, you say you have no recollection of that ?
Secretary Stevens. That is correct.
Mr. Jenkins. His next question was wdiether or not in fact that file
had been stripped, and the information regarding Coleman's having
taken certain documents to his home had been taken from the file, and
your answer to that is ^hat you do not remember? Is that right?
Secretary Ste\ti:ns. I do not know.
Mr. Jenkins. You do not remember.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I think that subject has been explored suffi-
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, he has not answered — Mr.
Chairman, we have handed him a document to refresh his recollection,
and for some reason or other he doesn't seem to want to refresh his
I think, Bob, if you would look before you start to talk, it may be
a good thing.
Senator Mundt. The Secretary may examine the document.
^88 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. St. Clair. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Have you a point of order?
Mr. St. Clair. I have a point of order. It seems to me the proper
thing for me to do would be to read the testimony that Mr. Cohn is
referring to, if I may have the permission of the chairman and the
Mr. Jenkins. Suppose you have the Secretary read it. That would
be better. As I remember, you and I have been unsworn.
Senator Mundt. Counsel is correct. The Secretary certainly may
read it. The committee would also like to know it.
Mr. CoHN. I believe it begins on the bottom of page 642. It is a
statement by me, addressed to Secretary Stevens. It begins, "Mr.
Senator Miindt. The bottom of page G12. You may read it
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Have you a point of order?
Mr. Welch. Yes. I suggest that this be shown Mr. Jenkins and
that he pass on the question of whether it should be read at all and
order it read if it should be read.
Mr. CoHN. It is perfectly agreeable. I will be glad to have Mr.
Jenkins see that.
(Document handed to Mr. Jenkins.)
Mr. CoHN. I think, Mr. Jenkins, on the bottom of page 642, it says,
"Mr. Cohn" and the first words are "Mr. Secretary."
Ml. Jenkins. For the purpose of identifying this, as we understand
it, it is a transcript of the hearings of an executive session of the
McCarthy committee on October 14, 1953. Is that correct?
Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins?
Mr. Jenkins. It is obvious to me that this would aid the Secretary
in refreshing his recollection. Do I understand you want me to read
it, Mr. Welch?
Mr. Welch. If you
^ Mr. Jenkins. I think it will tend to refresh the recollection of the
Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins will read it for the benefit of the
subcommittee and counsel and Mr. Stevens.
Mr. Jenkins (reading from page 642 of the transcript of the execu-
tive session of the McCarthy committee of October 14, 1953) :
Mr. Cohn. Mr. Secretary, we want to call your attention to the fact that at
this time we were down at Monmouth and the Army made available as it has an
as of all Government agencies, the personnel files, not the loyalty and security
'lies but the personnel files of various people under investigation. We examined
the file of Mr. Coleman and took copious notes from it and, as a matter of fact,
some documents were of great interest and we made verbatim copies of them.
Instead of taking the files with us and bringing them back here, they asked us
over at Monmouth if we would let them make photostats, and they would have
their records complete. We agreed to that, and when the photostats arrived we
found that the files had been stripped of some of the most relevant documents.
It so happens that some of the documents of which we had made verbatim copies
Now, Mr. Secretary, apparently Mr. Cohn — I will read on :
We wanted to call that to your attention. In the case of the Coleman file
there had been removed from it all papers indicating the search of his home by
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 689
the Security and Intelligence Division, anrl the fact that he hart been suspended
and the fact that these classilied documents had been removed by him from the
Evan* Signal Laboratory and found in his home. I would say that the files were
handled by G-2 in the Pentagon and we understand they left Fort Monmouth
On how nmny occasions did you remove classified documents from the Evans
Signal Corps Laboratory?
Mr. Coleman. I don't remember.
Apparently he is talking to Coleman.
Mr Secretary, I have read to you now what Mr. Cohn said to you
<m October 14 and I am sure that you get the import of the statement
that he made there, that is, that at that time they examined the per-
!-onnel file of Coleman, they took copious notes from it, and instead
of bringing the original file with them back to their office they took
photostats, that when they examined the photostats they ascertained
that the file had been stripped and that valuable information had been
n-itliheld and that the photostats did not contain the entire personnel
Do you understand what Mr. Cohn said to you on that occasion ?
Secretary Stevens. Yes ; I think I do.
Mr. Jexkins. All right. The question is whether or not that en-
ables you to refresh your recollection as to whether or not this per-
sonnel file of Aaron Coleman had been stripped when it was sent
to him; that is, when the photostatic copies were sent to him.
That is correct, Mr. Colin ?
Mv. CoiiN. Exactly correct, Mr. Jenkins.
Secretary Stevens. That is the first time I heard that read or read
it myself. It seems to me — it strikes me — that the important things
is that the copious notes and verbatim copies were made of all the
things presumably in the file that they wanted. If I heard this cor-
rectly, the information was made available, the notes were made,
some of them verbatim. Am I correct ?
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, I read it as correctly as I could, and
you are at liberty to check it. The import of it is plain. I have
tried to condense it in my statement to you. There Mr. Cohn made
a charge to you, in your presence, that he asked for the personnel
file on Aaron Coleman, that it was shown him, that he made copious
notes from it, that instead of taking the original file with him you
told, him you would send him photostats, that the photostats did not
contain all of the original file, and that it had been stripped of valu-
able pertinent iiif ormation.
Do you recall his making a statement to you in executive session
of that import ?
Secretary Stevens. No, sir; I don't recall that I told him I was
going to send him a file. I just don't handle files.
Mr. Jenkins. That isn't the question. You heard that charge and
apparently it was a serious charge made to you, involving your com-
mand, by "Mr. Cohn. on October 14. Do you recall his making that,
I might sa}' , serious charge against you ?
Secretary Stevens. Franlly, I don't, but this transcript here, as
I say, this is the first time I have seen it or heard it
?.ir. Jenkins Then this transcript from which I have read does not
refresh your recollection on that subject ?
Secretary Stevens. Well, I just have no recollection, Mr. Jenkins,
of handling any files at any time in regard to these matters.
690 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION"
Senator Potter. A point of order, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Senator Potter will state it.
Senator Potter. I am wondering if the transcript shows any reply
that the Secretary might have made to that statement.
Mr. Jenkins. I was going to ask the Secretary that, Senator Potter.
Mr. Secretary, I observe in reading that transcript that the tran-
script contains no reply made by you whatever to that charge. That
does not refresh your recollection ?
Secretary Ste\^ns. No. I assume that that must have been an
executive hearing of this committee with somebody on the stand, Mr.
Coleman, and I presume I was sitting as an invited guest in the hear-
ing and that for some reason Mr. Cohn addressed himself to Mr.
Secretary even though I was, of course, not on the stand. I have no
recollection of having said anything about the files. Mr. Cohn has
evidently informed me here about them.
Mr. Jenkins. But you say you have no recollection of saying any-
thing about the file. Do you have any recollection of Mr. Cohn's
saying anything about the file or making that charge there?
Secretary Stevens. That certainly is a true transcript of the hear-
ing, so it is quite obvious he did say something about the file.
Mr. Jenkins. But it has escaped your memory, is that right?
Secretary Stevens. That is right. I don't have any recollection of
having undertaken to do anything and I cannot recall ever having
handled a personnel file, because I just don't have time to do that
kind of thing.
Mr. Jenkins This was an investigation of a particular individual
named Aaron Coleman at the time, it being alleged that he is a Com-
munist or a subversive, and in the light of these charges, that you
were attempting to thwart or to stop their investigations at Mon-
mouth, this subject was then under discussion in your presence, this
charge was made, including the charge that the file had been stripped
of the fact that Coleman had secretly taken from the installation some
forty-odd classified documents to his home and hidden them there,
that being a part of the statement made by Mr. Cohn to you, and your
answer now is that you have no memory of such an allegation or
charge or accusation whatever, is that correct ?
Secretary Stevens. That is absolutely true.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohn, this was not taken out of your time.
You have the remainder — how much is left, may I ask the timekeeper ?
You have 6 minutes.
Mr. Cohn. Senator McCarthy.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Stevens, could I have your attention?
Mr. Stevens, would you consider it a rather serious matter, if, during
this period of great cooperation with the committee, a personnel file
had been stripped in the Pentagon and given to us and represented as
a complete file? Would you consider that a serious matter?
Secretary Stevens. I assume. Senator McCarthy, that we are op-
erating under the Presidential directives that govern it.
Senator McCarthy. We are talking about a personnel file, Mr.
Secretary. We are not talking about loyalty files.
Secretary Stevens. Personnel file.
Senator McCarthy. Tliere is no Presidential directive prohibiting
a committee's getting a personnel file, is there?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 691
Secretary Stkvens. I didn't hear that question.
Senator McCarthy. I said there is no Presidential directive pro-
hibiting a committee's getting a personnel file, is there?
Secretary Stevens. I think that is correct.
Senator McCarthy. Now, let us keep in mind
Senator Mundt. Is that correct? Is there a directive or is there
Mr. Jenkins. He said there is no directive against it.
Secretary Stevens. We are not supposed, as I understand the laws
and directives that govern, we are not supposed to give out informa-
tion dealing with loyalty matters in these files, no matter what kind of
a file you call them.
Senator McCarthy. All right, let us get back to things that couldn't
possibly be loyalty matters.
The fact that a man was suspended and rehired, and you don't give
the reason for the suspension and rehiring, would that be a loyalty
matter ? Is that not strictly a persomiel matter ?
Secretary Stevens. Of course, I am testifying here on something
that I have no recollection of, and I have to do it on the basis of talking
with Mr. Adams there.
( Secretary Stevens conferred with his aids. )
Senator Mundt. Will the reporter repeat the question ? I think the
Secretary is laboring under a misapprehension as to the question.
Secretary Stevens. What I am trying to ^et straight in my mind
is that there are very strict regulations covering the giving out of in-
formation bearing on loyalty. It is not supposed to go outside of the
executive branch of the Government. If there is loyalty information
in any file, I don't care what file it is, that information under the pre-
vailing Presidential directives, as I understand them, should not be
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy.
Senator McCarthy. Now, let's get this picture clearly in mind.
Tlie staff went to Fort Monmouth, and General Lawton following the
Presidential directive refused to allow them to see the loyalty file,
allowed them to examine the personnel file.
At that time the staff made notes from the personnel file, not the
loyalty file, and they asked for the privilege of taking the file along.
They were told that the file would be sent on to the Pentagon, photo-
stated, and sent to it.
Now, do you think it was proper to strip that personnel file, not
knowing, of course, not knowing that they had the notes, to strip the
personnel file, give it to us with the representation that that was the
full personnel file, in this very important case; if those handling this
case, Mr. Secretary, were honest, don't you think when they stripped
tliat file, if they felt they had some reason that, in common honesty,
they would send along a note saying, "We have removed certain mate-
rial from this file," or do we have a different idea about it ?
Secretary Stevens. I do not think they could give out information
Senator Mundt. T'he Senator's time has expired.
Mr. Jenkins. I want to clarify one thing in my mind. We are talk-
ing about a personnel file on Aaron Coleman, are v»e not?
692 SPECIAL im^ESTIGATION
Secretary Stevens. That is right.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, is that a classified or a loyalty file
covered by a Presidential directive, or is it not?
Secretary Stevens. Well, there was evidently loyalty information
in it, Mr. Jenkins. I don't ever recall having seen the file, sir, so I
would like to get somebody to testify that can give you the first-hand
facts. I can't give them to you.
Mr. Jenkins. In other words, if a personnel file contains some
loyalty information, then is it your position that you would have the
right to strip the loyalty information from it?
Secretary Stevtsns. You not only have a right, but you have to do it,
or you violate the law.
Mr. Jenkins. Who passes on where the line of demarcation is,
whether it is a routine ])ersonnel file that you are permitted to give to
the committee or whether it is a loyalty file. Who passes on that?
Secretary Stevens. It would either be the G-1 or the G-2 of the
Mr. Jenkins. Could you ascertain what individual, pinpointing his
name, handled this Aaron Coleman file and sent either all of it or a
part of it to the McCarthy committee? Is it possible to ascertain
Secretary Stevens. I think it would be ; yes, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. How long would it take?
Secretary Stevens. I don't know. I hope maybe we can find out by
Mr. Jenkins. If a part of that file contained information to the fact
that Coleman had taken from the installation where he was working
forty-odd secret documents or classified documents from the installa-
tion to this home, would that be classified as a loyalty document, or
would it not?
Secretary Stevens. I just cannot answer that, ]\Ir. Jenkins. I have
never stripped anything like that. I don't know. I don't know where
the line is drawn. It would be the people handling the security mat-
ters that would know, and I would like to get somebody up here that
handled the file that can answer your questions, because I cannot
answer them. I don't have any first-hand knowledge of it.
Mr. Jenkins. That is why I asked j^ou if you did or did not. If it
was stripped, as has been charged here now, in substantiating the
charge of the McCarthy committee that you did not cooperate in their
investigation of personnel at Fort Monmouth, if it were stripped of a
part of that file, is it your policy, when such a thing occurs, a personnel
is sent to this investigating committee to advise the committee that it
is not the complete file, but that there has been deleted from it certain
loyalty information ? What is your policy ?
Secretary Stevens. I think the committee would understand that,
Mr. Jenkins. I think they would understand that we do not give out
and cannot under existing Presidential directives, give out loyalty
information. I think the committee understands that.
Mr. Jenkins. Now, Mr. Secretary, Mr. Cohn charged on October 14
that he had seen that file, that he had made copious notes from it. If
that file contained loyalty information, then would it not have been
violating the directive if you had permitted him to look at it with
his own eyes ?
Secretary Stevens. I think it would have been, Mr. Jenkins.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION C93
Mr. Jenkins. So if th?re was a Presidential directive covering it,
it was violated initially prior to or on Octobor 14 ?
Secretary Stevens. In my opinion that is a correct statement.
Mv. Jenkins. I have no further questions.
Secretary Stevens. Can I, in the interest of expeditin*}; this hearing,
read about six lines from a rej:)ort, a published report of this committee?
Senator Mundt. You may take it out of my time.
Secretary Stevens. Thank you, sir. This is a report of an open
hearing of this committee, presided over by Senator McCarthy, on
December 8, 1953.
We have been discussing here cooperation or lack of cooperation, and
I am merely trying to expedite the tiling, if I can throw some light
on this. I quote the following from Senator McCarthy :
I think for the record, at this time, we should malie it clear that we have been
getting what I consider good cooperation from the Army, and all of the indi-
viduals who will be questioned here as to their alleged Communist activities have
been individuals who have been in the Signal Corps for a number of years, and
tlie Army has indicated that they are just as anxious to get to the bottom of this
as we are.
Is not that correct, Mr. Cohu?
Yes, Mr. Chairman, absolutely.
That is the present administration of the Army?
Mr. CoHN. That is correct.
I cite this from the published records of this committee as the testi-
money of Senator McCarthy and Roy Cohn, as of December 8, and
there are other instances that can be cited ; that they were getting good
cooperation from the Army.
I therefore don't understand what all this is about, lack of coopera-
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Mundt. Have you a point of order?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to ask the Chair to order the Secretary to produce the
letter which they wrote to us after we caught them stripping the file
in which they gave their explanation for the stripping. Such a letter
is in existence.
Senator Mundt. Are you asking the committee to subpena ?
Senator McCarthy. To subpena that letter.
Senator Mundt. Do you know the date of it ?
Senator McCarthy. It was after we caught them stripping the file.
I don't know the date, but the Secretary would have it.
]\Ir. Jenkins. May I suggest that using your time you ask the Sec-
retary whether or not he did write you such a letter. It may not be
necessary to subpena it.
]\Ir. Welch. It is obvious that the letter, if any, is in their files.
Why not fish it out ?
jNir. CoHN. We have been trying to locate it. We do not have this
INIay I say this, which may be helpful to the Secretary on this point ?
Tlie fact is" this: I may suggest, and I hope the Secretary will correct
me if I make an improper suggestion, that after I made this state-
ment to the Secretary in executive session the Secretary and Mr.
Adams advised us, "Yes, we were right," the file had been stripped
of this vital information ; and that the excuse given was they subse-
quently determined that it was loyalty information and for that reason
694 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
had stripped it from the file without telling us that there had been
these deletions from the file.
We say, sir, that a formal letter was written to us either by Mr.
Stevens or by Mr. Adams, saying, as best I remember, saying "this
material was in the file, the personnel file, and it is not privileged
material. We have subsequently found that it was loyalty material
and we stripped it from the file. Since you now "
Senator Mundt. Is it your position that this is a letter you received ?
Mr. CoHx. Yes, sir, "Since you now know that this material was
in the file, we will show it to you."
Mr. Welch. Mr, Chairman, once again
Senator Mundt. Is this a point of order?
Mr. Welch. Yes. Mr. Cohn talks about a letter in his file. I don't
think his description of it is the equivalent of the letter itself.
Senator Mundt. It seems to me if there is such a letter in existence
it is perfectly proper that we subpena it and it be brought in so we
can see it. We don't know if there is such a letter or not.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Cohn says there is. He says it was written to him.
Let us see if they have it.
Senator ]\IcCarthy. May I say in view of the reluctance of Mr.
Welch to voluntarily furnish the letter, that you order it subpenaed.
Senator Stjnungton. A point of order, Mr. Chairman. There has
been no reluctance on the part of counsel to furnish the letter. The
Secretary said he didn't have the letter, and he would get the letter
as soon as he could. That is not reluctance.
Mr. Welch. It is worse than that. I understand Mr. Cohn to say
he has the letter in his files. We don't need to monkey, let us get
it out and look at it.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohn said he didn't have the letter.
Mr. Cohn. May I make my position clear? Mr, Welch has, of
course, misrepresented what I said. We do not have the letter.
We could not locate it. I told you if we could, we would be more
than happy to have it here. It is only because we cannot locate it
that we are asking the Secretary and his office to produce his copy.
Mr. Jenkins. May I clear it up, Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, you have heard Mr. Cohn's state-
ment which I think Mr. Cohn should have put in the form of a
question rather than a statement. His statement — and I w^ill put
it in the form of a question — is this: Do you recall telling Mr, Cohn
or anyone on the committee that the personnel file on Aaron Cole-
man was in fact stripped?
Secretary Stevens. I do not.
Mr. Jenkins. And that the reason it was stripped was because
the deletions were of a loyalty nature ?
Secretary Stevens. I do not recall that.
Mr. Jenkins, Very well.
Mr. Secretary, did you write a letter to the McCarthy investi-
gating committee with respect to the personnel file of Aaron Cole-
man and particularly with reference to any reason why certain
information was deleted from it? Was such a letter written by
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION" 695
Secretary Stevens, Mr. Colin indicates that there was snch a letter
vritten, either by me or Mv. Adams, and frankly I can't understand
■vvhy he cannot find it in his own lile.
]\Ir. Jenkins. I know. I think you and Mr. Cohn are doing plenty
of arguing. I am asking you, Mr. Secretary, whether or not — and I
do it in the kindliest spirit, Mr. Secretary, please understand that—
did you write such a letter to the INIcCarthy investigating committee?
Secretary Ste\tens. I don't remember having done so, but I want
to say to you, Mr. Jenkins, that whatever papers, documents, anything
there is in the Department of the Army that will help get the truth out
here on the table, it is yours for the asking.
J\lr. Jenkins. I am sure of it, but I know you have millions of them
over there and we want to pinpont this if we can.
Secretary Stevens. We will start a search for that one right now.
jNIr. Jenkins. Now, your statement is that you have no recollection
of writing such a letter ?
Secretary Ste\'ens. I personally don't recall having done so. I
misht have done so.
^.Ir. Jenkins. Do you know whether Mr. Adams or anyone under
your command wrote such a letter explaining the deletions from
the Aaron Coleman personnel file?
Secretary Stevens. I assume they did from what Mr. Cohn said.
Mr. Jenkins. You assume Mr. Adams did, you mean?
Secretary Stevens. I assume somebody did.
]Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, I will ask you to please, in coopera-
tion with Mr. Welch and Mr. St. Clair, examine again your file when
you go back to the Pentagon after this hearing, and determine
whether or not you have any copy of any letter written to the Mc-
Carthy committee explaining the deletions from the Coleman per-
Secretary Stevens. We will do that.
Mr. Jenkins. If you do find any memorandum or copy of a letter,
produce it in the morning.
Secretary Stevens. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. Have I explored that subject sufficiently ?
]Mr. Cohn. As far as the stripping of the files, Mr. Jenkins. I would
certainly wait until the copy of that letter has been produced.
j\Ir. Jenkins. Very well.
Senator Mundt. The Chair has no questions.
Senator McClellan ?
Senator McClellan. No questions.
Senator Mundt. Any Senators to my right ?
Senators to my left ?
Senator Jackson. Only this
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson.
Senator Jackson. If we start on these 35 cases which I understand
are now pending before the Loyalty Review Board, we are going to
be here a long time just on these cases.
Mr. Jenkins. I assure you. Senator, we are not goin^ to be if I have
anything to do with it. We have permitted the committee to go into
one case only, and that in more detail than I had anticipated. From
now on out I serve notice that I am going to object to going into the
merits of a single other one of the 35 suspended employees at Fort
696 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Monmouth. That is my position and it will remain so until this com-
mittee overrules me.
Senator Jackson. In connection with the request made a moment
ago about si>pplying the letter and other information in connection
with the alleged stripping of this file, I think there ©ught to be a com-
plete statement submitted to the committee what you mean by strip-
ping. I Avould like to know whether there was intention to mislead
Senator McCarthy and Mr. Cohn by removing in a rather clandestine
way tlie material relating to Mr. Coleman as to the elimination of thesa
documents — I mxcan as to the removing of certain documents to his
I would also like to ask the witness at this time, if he knows, wliat
was done with this material that was taken from the file ? Was it kept
at Fort ]\Ionmouth or was it turned over to G-2 or what happened
Secretary Stevens. I don't know. I will have to find out for you,
Senator Jackson. I think there ought to be a complete statement.
The word "stripped" is used here and I, as one member of the com-
mittee, want to know whether or not there was an attempt to mislead
the committee, and whether or not this material taken from the file was
secreted away someplace.
I would also like an opinion from legal counsel whether the material
removed from the file is considered to be material within the Executive
order. I would like a legal opinion on that.
That is what all this time is being taken about, I guess. I would like
to know whether or not that material that was removed from the file
came within the Executive order. If it did, I assume. Mr. Chairman,
that it should not have been in the personnel file, that it should have
been in the loyalty file.
Senator Mundt. From which counsel should the opinion come ?
Senator Jackson, The legal opinion ought to come from the De-
partment of the Army and be submitted to the counsel for our
Mr. Jenkins. I would like to have a copy of the directive relied
upon by the Secretary prohibiting the introduction of loyalty infor-
mation. I would like to have a copy certified or photostat, of the loy-
alty information allegedly stripped from the personnel file of Aaron
Senator Jackson. I would also like to know when — there has been
a lot of talk here, and there is so much going on and on and it is so hard
to follow this — I would like to know when these documents were
removed by Mr. Coleman to his home, the documents that were sup-
posed to be of a classified nature. Were they removed recently or was
it a long time ago ? I can't tell from all the testimony.
Senator Mundt. That may have been included in tke stripped
Senator Jackson. I have been told that it was 1946.
Secretary Stevens. I can't recall the date. Senator Jackson, but we
will certainly include that information in our statement.
Senator Jackson. May I ask this last question, just to clarify the
Mr. Jenkins has read into the record a statement by Mr. Cohn from
the executive session of October
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 697
Mr. Jenkins. Fourteenth.
Senator Jackson. Fourteenth.
Was any request made of you at that time to give a reason for the
removal of the material alleged to be loyalty information from Mr.
Aaron Coleman's file? The statement is made by Mr. Cohn in the
transcript about this matter. I find no response in the transcript from
It leaves this whole question up in the air, and I would like to know
when you supply this information whether or not you did give an
answer at that time in response to the question that Mr. Cohn had put
to the witness, I guess, or to the committee.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Do you have a point of order ?
Mr. Welch. I have the key to the whole thing. The letter has been
found, the one ]\Ir. Cohn can't find in his files. It was signed by Mr.
Adams and I would love to see it go in evidence. It unravels the whole
thing so swiftly vre will all be ashamed of the time spent on it.
Mr. Jenkins. I think it ought to be introduced at this very instant,
Mr. Welch. Certainly.
Senator Mundt. It is entered as an exhibit, and counsel will read
(The letter was entered as an exhibit.)
INIr. Jenkins. For the purpose of identification now, Mr. Secretary,
have or not ,vou examined a carbon copy of a letter dated October 15,
1953, and addressed to
Senator Jackson. Why don't we swear Mr. Adams. It is a letter
from Mv. Adams.
Mr. Welch. The letter is signed by Mr. Adams.
Senator McCarthy. If Mr. Adams says he wrote that, I will con-
cede he did without his being put under oath.
Mr. Jenkins. I think in all fairness to everybody this letter should
be read. I don't know the contents of it. Now, Mr. Chairman, I want
Mr. Adams back on the witness stand for this purpose only and for
no other purpose.
Senator Mundt. Will you stand up, Mr. Adams ? Do you solemnly
swear the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
Mr. Adams. I do.
Senator Mundt. Will the reporter record the fact that this be en-
tered as exhibit No. 13.
(The letter heretofore mentioned was marked as "Exhibit 13" and
will be found on p. 698.)
TESTIMONY OF JOHN G. ADAMS, COUNSELOE rOR THE AEMY—
Mr. Jenkins. You are still Mr. John G. Adams?
Mr. Adams. I am, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. You were sworn yesterday, Mr. Adams, and then un-
Mr. Adams. And sworn again today, sir.
IVIr. Jenkins. Mr. Adams, you identified yourself yesterday and
the official position you hold with the Army ?
698 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Adams. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. You now have before you a carbon copy of a letter
as T recall dated October 15, 1953; is that correct?
Mr. Adams. I do, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. Addressed to whom?
Mr. Adams. Hon. Joseph R. McCarthy, chairman, Permanent In-
vestigating Subcommittee, United States Senate.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Adams, will you now read into the record the
contents of that letter ?
Mr. Adams. I will, sir. [Reading :]
Dear Mr. Chairman : It is understood that a representative of tbe Civilian
Personnel Office at Fort Monmouth, N. J., made available to members of the
staff of your committee the entire personnel file on Aaron H. Coleman, despite
the fact that the file In question contained information relating to loyalty and
security investigations and procedures which the Army is proliibited by Presi-
dential directive from transmitting outside the executive branch.
When this file was photostated and sent to the Department of the Army in
Washington for transmittal to your committee, photostats of those documents
relating to loyalty and security matters were withdrawn in accordance with
customary procedure established pursuant to the Presidential directive. Ac-
cordingly, the photostats sent to your committee were not as complete as the
original file which members of your staff had already inspected.
Since the prohibition against furnishing loyalty and security information out-
side the executive branch has already been violated in the Coleman case by
action at the field installation, Secretary Stevens feels that no useful purpose
will be served, in this particular ease, by withholding from your committee
photostats of documents which your staff has already Inspected. At the express
direction of the Secretary, therefore, there are forwarded herewith photostats
of six documents with accompanying attachments.
In the lower lef thand corner are listed the six documents forwarded
therewith. The enclosures are photostats of form 52, form 84, form
72, and form 50, each of which is a loyalty or security form. I cannot
further identify them without having them in front of me, a photo-
stat of the letter to the commanding general. Fort Monmouth, from
Col. J. D. O'Connel, October 2, 1946, which I recall as being a docu-
ment having to do with a reprimand given to Coleman on one occasion,
and a reprimand with endorsement dated October 2'1, 1946. That is
the complete mail.
Mr. Jenkins. The original of which was mailed in the United
Mn. Adams. No, sir ; that is not correct. X was in New York attend-
ing the executive hearings. My staff in Washington was in contact
with me by telephone. And on the occasion, Mr. Stevens was in New
York also on the 13th and 14th of October.
As I recall, my staff advised me by telephone that this was coming
up. They sent it on the Secretary's airplane which was coming
up to get him. I went out with the Secretary on the evening of
the 14tli and picked up this letter, which was dated the next day,
the day I intended to deliver it. I picked up this letter, took it
downtown and signed it.
That is my recollection of the means by which this was transmitted
to the committee.
Mr. Jenkins. And was it transmitted by hand ?
Mr. Adams. Yes, sir, by hand.
Mr. Jenkins. From you to Senator McCarthy, Mr. Colm, or Mr.
Carr? To whom?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 699
Mr. Adams. I think to INIr. Cohn. ]My recollection is not accnrate.
Mr. Jenkins. In New York?
IVIr. Adams. In New York, at the United States Court House, Foley
Mr. Jenkins. On the IStli of October?
Mr. Adams. That is my recollection. I may be wrong; on one day.
ISfr. Jenkins. Anyway, within 1 or 2 days after the charge had
been made against the Secretary by ^Ir. Cohn in executive session
on October 14, is that correct ?
INIr. Adams. Th.at is correct, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. So you now say that there was furnished to the ISIc-
Carthy committee vrithin 1 or 2 days of the executive hearing of Oc-
tober 14, the entire personnel file on Aaron Coleman, including loy-
alty information, is that correct, Mr. Adams ?
Mr. Adams. Mr. Jenkins, the paper speaks for itself. I do not
remember the portfolio that was submitted.
Mr. Jenkins. Very well, I have no further questions.
Senator ISIcCauthy. Mr. Counsel, I woukl like an answer to that
Senator Mundt. We will get down to you in a minute. You will
be given 10 minutes in due course.
Senator McCarthy. I would like to get an answer to that question.
Mr. Jenkins. I asked a question of Mr. Adams, and as the chair-
man pointed out it will be Senator McCarthy's turn probably now.
Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan, any question?
Senator jNIcClellan. No questions.
Senator Mundt. Any Senators to the right?
Any Senators to the left ?
Senator Symington. I have a question.
If I may take my time, I would like to address a question respect-
fully to the counsel.
Mr. Counsel, this is the ninth day that this man has been on the
?tand. My impression is that he is getting confused on some of his
answers, more than he did before. I have just jotted down here 12
people who, wdien a specific piece of information was desired, were
sworn in in order to give that information to the committee. Several
limes in his testimony today, as I remember it, Mr. Stevens has said
that he did not have the information because it was something with
which he had no direct connection of any kind whatever, and he said
he could furnish somebody who would have it and who could give the
I would like to respectfully suggest, in order to expedite the hear-
ings— we have had people like Mr. Adams, Mr. Schine, Mr. Juliana,
Tklr. Anastos, INIrs. Minis, the counsel himself swore himself once ; we
have had Mr. Welch sworn, we have had Mr. St. Clair sworn, we have
had Sergeant ]\Ianchester. These are ones I happened to jot down in
the past couple of minutes.
Mr. Jenkins. And the suggestion has been made that Senator Sym-
ington be sworn. Don't forget that. Senator.
Senator Symington. Let us not discuss Senator Symington now.
Let us discuss the problems of this committee.
j\Ir. Jenkins. That was said facetiously.
700 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senfitor Syjiixgtox. If the counsel would like to continue a discus-
sion with respect to me beint^ sworn, I would like to accommodate him
at this time.
Mr. Jenkins. I believe I said that was said facetiously to the
Senator Symington. I thank the counsel.
Now, to try to get to my point, Mr. Counsel, if you will allow me,
sir, I Vvould like to suggest that when this man has been on the stand
9 days in this liearing says that he has somebody who can give the
information with the premise which you so well pitt when you said
we wanted the truth, that he be allowed to furnish that person and we
go to the next question.
That is the point of my recommendation.
Mr. Jenkins. May I suggest to the Senator that that is the identi-
cal procedure we have just followed? The Secretary advised, as I
recall, that such a letter had now been found and had been written
by Mr. Adams. The counsel suggested that he stand aside and let
Mr. Adams take the witness stand.
Senator Symington. I think the counsel and I agree with liim, but
somewhere between 30 minutes and an hour ago the Secretary said
he did not have the information, he had never had anything to do
with files, per se, and he said, as I remember the testimony, if we
would let somebody that he could get up on the stand and give us
the facts, that person in this case could give us the facts.
Mr. Jenkins. I answered that in my statement this morning, Sen-
ator Symington. It is now my purpose, unless I am directed other-
wise by this committee, to put on every witness, every party in interest,
every substantiating witness, by whom any fact may be proved or
disproven during the course of tliis investigation.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, I think I made my point. I
hope I have, and I have no further questions.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Jackson. No questions.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, you have 10 minutes to ask questions,
or do 3'ou want to raise a point of order ? The questioning has gotten
around to you. It is your turn.
Mr. Welch. I am not going to ask questions. I did want to raise
a point of order, if that is the appropriate phrase. It was just by
accident that I was able to find this revealing letter in this courtroom,
and except for my ability to find it, or, more accurately, for the ability
of the men behind me to find it, we would have floundered around
with accusations against Stevens with respect to a letter which he
never wrote, but which when produced ended all the foolisliness and
got this hearing hack on the wheels. I agi'ee with Senator Syming-
ton, it just makes no sense to talk to Secretary Stevens about letters
when it turns out (a) that Cohn has lost them and (b) that when we
find the copy Stevens didn't write it.
Senator Mundt. The Chair would like to remind counsel that when
Secretary Stevens stated that the letter was written by Mr. Adams,
Mr. Adams was called on the stand, said he did write the letter, you
produced the letter, and that is the way to make headway. Mr. Cohu
or Senator McCarthy.
Senator McCarthy. May I see the letter, please ?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 701
Mr. Jenkins. To complete this record, INIr. Adams, I ask you to
file that letter as an exhibit.
Senator Mundt. It was marked and has already been filed.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Adams, may I ask you a question? You
have heard Mr. Welch just refer to this as foolishness. Would you
consider it foolishness to have a file stripped and not tell the com-
mittee it was stripped, presented to the committee as a complete
INIr. Adams. We told the committee by this letter that it had been
Senator McCarthy. After we caught you redhanded then you gave
us the material.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman.
Senator McCarthy. L^t us see if that isn't true. He didn't give
us this material until after we told you that our notes showed the
file had been stripped. Up until that time, you sat in the room, did
you not, knew we had the file, knew we were questioning Mr. Cole-
man on the basis of that file, never raised your voice to tell us the
file had been stripped.
Mr. Adams. Senator, as I recall, there was no time during the fall
or winter during my negotiations with you and your staff, when I
failed to tell you that we also took from the file loyalty and sex^urity
information. I never kept that a secret from you.
;Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, may I remind the Chair that Mr.
Adams was put on the witness stand at this time out of order for 1
]iurpose and 1 purpose only, and that was to identify and introduce
in the record the letter sent to Senator McCarthy on October 15.
Senator INIcCarthy. May I say I don't mind witholdin^^ my ques-
tioning of Mr. Adams until later. I will ask all the questions at one
Senator Mundt. Very well.
I think the point of the counsel is exactly correct. He was brought
in to identify the letter and to read it, and questions that you have
to ask him about his attitude toward the situation you can ask him in
due course when he becomes a witness.
Are there any other questions you care to ask of Mr. Adams about
identifying the letter or whether he did identify it or whether he
wrote it ?
Senator IMcCarthy. I think it is sufficiently identified, Mr. Chair-
man. This appears to be a copy of the letter that we received.
Senator Mundt. Without objection, Mr. Adams may step down and
be unsworn again, and Mr. Stevens will step back.
TESTIMONY OF HON. EOBERT T. STEVENS, SECEETARY OF THE
Senator McCarthy. I believe I was questioning Mr. Stevens; was
Senator Mundt. Yes. Your turn has come. You have 10 minutes.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Stevens, I have before me the letter which
was written after Mr. Cohn called to your attention the fact that the
personnel file had been stripped, a letter sigued by Mr. Adams. I
702 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
would like to ask you whether this statement made in the letter is
true or not. It says:
At the express direction of the Secretary, therefore, there are forwarded here-
with photostats of six documents with accompanying attachments.
Did you and Mr. Adams discuss the stripping of the file? Did
you tell him to forward to us the documents which we told him had
been removed from the file?
Secretary Stevens. That letter whick you hold in your hand, Sena- ||
tor McCarthy, would indicate that I did. I would have difficulty in
recalling the conversation with Mr. Adams, but I presume that I
discussed it, with him and that this letter resulted.
Senator McCarthy. You don't remember any conversation witli
Mr. Adams at any time in regard to the stripping, or whatever word —
what word was it — the withdrawal, as Mr. Adams said, of material
from the personnel file? You don't recall that at all as of today?
Secretary Ste^tns. We were trying to abide by the directives that
we work under at all times, Senator McCarthy.
Senator McCarthy. Did you hear my question, Mr, Secretary?
Secretary Stevens. And we discussed the application of those Presi-
dential directives to your files.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Secretary, a number of the Senators have
raised the question that you are being kept on the stand too long. If
you would try to answer the questions
Secretary Stevens. I am trying very hard to.
Senator McCarthy. The question is this, and it is very simple:
Now that your memory is refreshed, do you recall discussing with
Mr. Adams the removal of material from the Coleman file, keeping in
mind that Coleman was the man, the friend of Julius Rosenberg,
identified as a member of the Young Communist League, that he
had stolen secrets from the radar laboratory. I assume you would
consider him a rather important person, perhaps even more important
than a private. It seems that your memory should be fairly fresh on
that after I refresh it, and I now ask you the simple question, and
if you will just answer it we can go on to another subject: Let me
repeat, do you now remember whether or not you ever discussed v,ith
Mr. Adams the removal of material from Coleman's personnel file
before it was given to the committee ?
Secretary Stevens. I do not recall any such conversation.
Senator McCarthy. Thank you for your answer.
Do you recall ever taking the files in regard to Fort Monmouth
personnel before our committee started its investigation?
Secretary Stevens. Would you restate that, sir, or if I may have
the reporter read it?
Senator McCarthy. Do you recall ever seeing or getting a report
from any ©f your subordinates in regard to certain Fort ]\Ionmouth
personnel before our committee started its investigation?
Secretary Stevens. There has been work done by my organization
ever since I went into office, Senator McCarthy, affecting all installa-
tions as well as Fort Monmouth.
Senator McCarthy. Would you try to answer the question, Mr.
Secretary ? Would the reporter read the question to the Secretary ?
Senator Mundt. The reporter will read the question.
(Whereupon, the question referred to was read by the reporter as
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 703
Secretary STE^'ENs. Yes; I recall that, Senator McCartliy.
Senator McCarthy. Did you either see or get a report from your
subordinates in regard to FBI repeated reports on certain personnel
in the Fort Monmouth Laboratory ?
Secretary Stevens. I know that we were in very close touch with
FBI at all times on Fort Monmouth.
Senator McCarthy. I am afraid you may have left the impression,
Mr. Secretary, that the FBI was derelict in its duties.
Secretary Stevens. If I did, I wish immediately to correct any such
Senator McCarthy. Good. I am glad you do. We both agree then
that they do a good job.
Secretary Stevens. Yes, sir.
Senator IMcCarthy. Mr. Secretary, I would like to give you a letter,
one which was written incidentally before you took office but which
was in the file, I understand, all during the time you are jn office — I
understand it is in the file as of today — from the FBI, pointing out
the urgency in connection with certain cases, listing the fact, for ex-
ample, that Coleman had been in direct connection with esp.ionage
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, Senator McCarthy, I think it only
fair to this witness that you first establish the fact by him if such is the
fact, that that letter was in his file at the time he came .into office and
during his tenure of office.
Senator McCarthy. I think that point is very well taken.
Senator Mundt. You may proceed, Senator IMcCarthy.
Senator McCarthy. Would someone hand to the Secretary this
JSIr. Welch. My. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Do you have a point of order, Mr. Welch ?
Mr. Welch. I wisli it to be handed first to Mr. Jenkins for him to
rule on its materiality.
Senator McCarthy. ]\Iay I say, ISIr. Jenkins, the reason this is being
submitted, before you rule — you may want to read it first.
]\Ir. Jenkins examined the document referred to:)_
Senator McCarthy. Before counsel advises the Chair, I would like
to give him the reason for this in the sequence w.ith the others.
Mr. Counsel, IMay I give
Mr. Jenkins. We will be slad to hear you. Senator McCarthy.
Senator INIundt. Senator McCarthy?
Senator Jackson. A point of order.
Senator McCarthy. I think, Mr. Counsel, you might go a step fur-
ther. I can understand how this would never have come to the Sec-
retary's personal attention. I want to make it clear that in much of
the mishandling I don't blame the Secretary personally, because he
was only there a short time, but some one was derelict when these re-
peated warnings from the FBI were ignored.
Again I say, Mr. Secretary, I do not think any one realizes better
than I do how busy you have been, and how you couldn't grab every-
thing overnight and take hold of it.
j\Ir. Jenkins. I entirely agree with the Senator. It does not have
to necessarily come to the personal attention of the Secretary of the
Army, but those under his command.
704 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator Jackson. May I ask this question ? I am a little confused.
This is a copy of a letter that is being introduced. I would like to
know how it arrived here to the committee, where it came from, and
how it came here. This is a letter from J. Edgar Hoover, to General
Boiling, back in 1951. How did it get into the hands of the committee ?
Mr. Jenkins. It was handed to me, Senator Jackson, by Senator
McCarthy, who is making it the basis of the cross-examination of the
Secretary of the Army, the purpose of his examination patently being
Senator Jackson. I think it ought to be authenticated.
Mr, Jenkins. I am getting ready to. I hold now on the basis of the
copy of this letter, and on the assumption that no party in interest
and no counsel would refer to a spurious manufactured document that
Senator McCarthy's cross-examination of the Secretary with reference
to this letter is wholly competent
Senator Jackson. Mr. Jenkins, it is a very simple matter. Did the
committee get this from the Army? Was it subpenaed? Is it from
That is the very simple question. How did it come into our pos-
Mr. Jenkins. Which committee, the McCarthy committee or this
this investigating committee?
Senator Jackson. Both,
Mr. Jenkins. It was handed to me just now by Senator McCarthy.
That is all I know of it. It is a proper basis for a cross-examination.
That is very evident from reading the letter.
Senator Jackson. I understand, but it can be readily identified
whether this was a matter that was subpenaed from the Army files or
whether the Army voluntarily gave it to Senator McCarthy.
Mr. Jenkins. I can have Senator McCarthy put under oath and
examine him with reference to that particularly point in keeping with
Senator MuNiyr. A point of order, Mr. Welch ?
Mr. Welch, I respectfully suggest that that be done. I am a
laAvj'er and the appearance of what purports to be a copy of a letter
from J. Edgar Hoover in 1951 addressed to some colonel, is that right?
Mr. Jenkins. A major general.
Mr. Welch. The mere fact that we have an impressive looking, pur-
ported copy of such a letter, doesn't impress an old-time lawyer. I
would like to have Mr. J. Edgar Hover say that he wrote the letter and
mailed it. Then we would know what we were dealing with.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy?
Senator McCarthy. I want to question the Secretary as to whether
or not the original of this and other letters like it are in his file. I want
to make it clear that I have gotten neither this letter nor anything
else from the FBI,
Mr. Welch. Where did it come from, then?
Senator Mundt. The Chair wiH rule that Senator INfcCarthy may
ask the witness, if he cares to, whether such a letter is there in the files,
and as to other investigative agencies, the Chair holds that none of
them have to disclose the sources of tlieir information.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 705
]\[r. Welch. Mr. Chairman, I assure you that this purported copy
did not come from the Army files, nor does the Senator for a moment
Senator McCarthy. If Mr. Welch is going to say that there is not a
copy of this in the Army files, he should be sworn, because that state-
ment is untrue.
Mr. Welch. I did not say that. I said that this purported copy
did not come from the Army files, and you know I am quite right, sir.
And I have an absorbing curiosity to know how in the dickens you
got hold of it.
Senator Mundt. IMr. Welch ? The Chair has the floor.
Senator JNIcCarthy. May I say
Senator ]\Iuxdt. The Chair has the floor. I will have to advise you
again, Mr. Welch, that all investigative agencies in this town operate
on the rule tliat they do not have to disclose the sources of their in-
formation. Your absorbing curiosity will have to be satisfied some
other way, I am afraid.
IMr. Welch. By JVIr. J. Edgar Hoover.
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Stevens, would you look at that letter
and tell us. No. 1, whether or not you have ever seen it, or were ever
notified of its contents? I think you should read the letter before you
Secretary Stevens. I would like to have the advice of counsel first as
to whether or not I am at liberty to discuss a letter from J. Edgar
Hoover, because I have grave reservations about discussing at all any
letter written by Mr. J. Edgar Hoover unless I have his specific ap-
proval. I will therefore ask the chairman to give me the ojjportunity
of securing the approval of Mr, J. Edgar Hoover before I discuss any
letter purporting to have been written by him, because I think it is a
very bad j^olicy to discuss these things without Mr. Hoover's know-
ing about it.
Senator McCarthy. Would you like to read it first?
Mr. Welch. INIay I add, Mr. Chairman, and I have the letter in
my hand, and it is headed "Personal and confidential, via liaison,"
which seem to me to be rather severe words of a confidential nature.
I think Mr. Stevens is quite right in saying that this is a matter that
ought to be released by J. Edgar Hoover before w^e deal with it in
Senator Mundt. The Chair would agree that if the letter is marked
"Personal and confidential," that the contents of the letter should not
be revealed without the consent of the sender.
Mr. Jenkins. May I inquire whether or not you desire Mr. Hoover
subpenaed as a witness ? I have held, Mr. Chairman, and I rei:)eat,
that the contents of the letter form a proper basis for cross-examina-
tion of the Secretary of the Army.
I am now inquiring whether or not I am directed or requested to
subpena as a witness mv. J. Edgar Hoover. I shall do so if the com-
mittee, in its discretion, directs it.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, a point of order. A point of
order, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington ?
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, there is nobody in this town
who has more respect and admiration than I have for Mr. J. Edgar
706 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Hoover. This letter is not signed. I would hope that we did not have
to ask Mr. J. Edgar Ho<)ver to come down here and be sworn in as a
witness. It seems to me that all, that wovild have to be done to verify
whether or not the letter, which is marked "Personal and confidential,"
so I am informed, via liaison, which presumably means it w^as de-
livered by hand, is simply to ask Mr. J. Edgar Hoover. The counsel
can do that or anybody else can do that. But you decide, Mr. Chair-
man, as to whether or not you believe it is in the interest of the secu-
rity ©f the United States to have the letter placed in exhibition in this
Senator JSIundt. I think that is a very good suggestion. I think
we all have the highest of respect for J. Edgar Hoover. We know it
would not be necessary to get him down and swear him as a witness.
His word would be correct whether he had ever written such a letter
Senator McCarthy. ISIr. Chairman, I think I would have no ob-
jection to that, but first may I have the Secretary read the letter ? I
don't intend to inquire about the contents if the Chair feels we should
not do that, but I would like to have him read the letter and tell us
whether or not that is a duplicate of wliat he has in his file.
If he cannot tell us that, then he can examine the file and tell us,
and tell us whether or not this is just one of a sequence of letters from
the FBI, complaining about the bad security setup at the Signal
Corps laboratories and giving information on certain individuals.
Mr. Jenkins. You do not mean to read the letter aloud, do you ?
Senator McCarthy. No, just to himself.
Senator Mundt. The Chair holds he can do that without revealing
Secretary Stevens. If it meets with the approval of the Chair, I
would like to not read the letter until I have Mr. Hoover's personal
approval to do so.
Senator McCarthy. That is ridiculous.
Senator Mundt. We are not asking you, Mr. Secretary, to read the
letter aloud, but simply to read it to yourself and see if you have it
in your files yourself.
Secretary Stevens. I think a. personal and confidential letter from
Mr. J. Edgar Hoover is something I would like to talk to Mr. Hoover
about before I am foi'ced to read it. If ]Mr. Hoover gives me the per-
mission, I will be glad to read the letter, I will be glad to testify fully
with respect to it, to the limit of my ability, but I do not think I ought
to be asked to read, to even read at this moment, a letter, personal and
confidential, written by J. Edgar Hoover. That just doesn't seem like
the right thing to do.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman ?
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, if a copy of that letter is authentic,
and I certainly have no basis upon which to doubt or question it at
this time, then the original is in the file of the Secretary of the Army.
It would not be in his file had it not been intended that he or some
subordinate, someone under his command, read it and familiarize
himself with it.
Senator Jackson. A point of order.
Mr. Jenkins. In the file of the Army.
Senator Jackson. We are just w\asting a lot of time, here. I think
that can be settled in the morning when he has time to look at it.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 707
It is a letter, if I iinclerstand it, addressed to Avhom ? General Bollinff.
Who is General Boiling? I assume he was G-2 at that time. I don t
know how it automatically follows that it would be in the files of tho
Secretary of the Army. I assume it is in G-2.
Secretary Stextixs. That is right.
Senator Jacksox. I assume it is in G-2 files.
Secretary Stevens. That is Vvdiere it would normally be.
Senator "Jacksox. Can't that matter be gone over this evening and
come back with a full report in the morning and we can get on with
something else ?
Senator Muxdt. If the Chair understands the suggestion of Senator
Jackson it is that Secretary Stevens have a search made of the G-2
files to see v; hether or not there is a copy of that letter.
Senator Symixgtox. May I make a point of order?
Senator jNIuxdt. I am trying to get the suggestion.
Senator Jacksox. I think you ought to have the G-2 people check
it and find out whether the original of tlie letter that we have before
us today is in their files. That is point No. 1. Point No. 2, check and
find out whether that letter was called to the personal attention of the
Secretary of the Army. Now, if he has no knowledge of it, I assume
all questions relating to the Secretary of the Army at this time are not
material. Am I correct ?
Senator Muxdt. You are exactly correct. They would be immate-
rial and irrelevant. Senator Symington has a point of order.
Senator Symixgtox. IMr. Chairman, when I left the National Se-
curity Resources Board, there was a coordinated group of people, of
which, at that time, as I remember it, Mr. J. Edgar Hoover was the
chairman. The Secretary of the Army, since the summer of 1049,
does not sit on the National Security Council. He therefore, has no
connection with the Central Intelligence Agency or with the Advisory
Commission on Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, which
reports to the National Security Council are identified with. This
letter is marked personal and confidential and is not signed. It is very
possible that it is a letter, I do not know because I have not read it,
but based on the structure of the executive department of the Gov-
ernment, it is entirely possible that this letter was addressed to General
Boiling and is not a letter which is supposed to be shown to the Sec-
retary of the Army. I do not say that is true, but I do say it is
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Muxdt. Senator McCarthy?
Senator McCarthy. May I say I have heard many ridiculous things
across the table, but to say that something dealing with the Commu-
nist activities of men under the Secretary's command should not be
seen by him is the most ridiculous I have ever heard of. Of the letter
here, IVfr. Chairman, all I ask is that the Secretary look at it so he can
search the files and tell us whether or not the original of that letter is
in the files.
Senator Muxdt. The Chair is hearing a great many suggestions and
of those he has heard, he is persuaded most by the one made by Sena-
tor Jackson, which seems to make a considerable degree of sense to
the chairman, that the Secretary take enough of a look at the letter so
that he will recognize it when he sees it in the files and then have a
708 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
searcli made of the files in €r-2 to see whether it was received and report
back in the morning. Is that agreeable to the Secretary?
Secretary Stevens. It is, and all I need to know is the date if some-
one will give me the date.
Senator Mundt. And to whom it was addressed. It was addressed
to General Boiling.
Secretary Stevens. I think we can proceed on that basis and start
expediting a little bit.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, I do not know the contents of
the letter. I do know it is a letter written to the Intelligence Depart-
ment of the Army, marked "Personal" and "Confidential" by Mr. J.
lagree with my colleagues who feel that before the letter is made
public property, the approval of the letter should be requested as far
as its publication from Mr. J. Edgar Hoover.
Senator Mundt. The Chair does not understand there is any dis-
position on the part of anyone to make the contents of the letter public.
Is that correct ?
Mr. Jenkins. That is correct as far as I am concerned.
Senator Symington. I don't see why we are wasting all this time
on a letter that we do not intend to publish or put in evidence.
Senator Mundt. The question, as the chairman understands it, is
whether this warning allegedly by J. Edgar Hoover to G-2 was ever
presented to the Secretary, and I believe the Secretary can find that
out and say "Yes" or "No" without disclosing the contents of the letter
after he has had a chance to make a search of the files.
Senator McCarthy\ Mr. Chairman, I wonder if we could have the
Secretary^ just take a little peak at the letter so he would recognize it?
If you don't want to read it, Mr. Secretary, if you are afraid that you
might get some information
Senator Mundt. The Chair understands that the Secretary has
already said he can identify the letter if w^e provide him with the
name of the addressee and the date.
Secretary Stevens. And the date.
Senator Mundt. He will be able to report in the morning. It is
suggested therefore that we discontinue discussion of the letter at this
time. We operate on that basis.
Senator McCarthy or Mr. Cohn may proceed on some other points.
Senator McCarthy". May I ask that the letter remain in the cus-
tody of Mr. Jenkins ? That is the only copy I have.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, I desire to pursue this question a
little further without revealing one single thing of a confideMtial
nature. I think the committee is entitled to it.
Mr. Secretary, I am certainly not asking you to reveal any of the
contents of this letter. I have read it, and there will be no revela-
tion of the contents of it as far as I am concerned.
If it is a letter from J. Edgar Hoover addressed to ]\Iajor Gen-
eral Boiling, and if it has to do with security risks in the Army,
would or would not the original of that letter, dated January 26, 1951,
properly be in the files at the Pentagon in the Intelligence De-
Secretary Stevens. I would thi»k that is where it would be, yes,
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 709
Mr. Jenkins. Since you became Secretary of the Army, as I under-
stand itj you now have no personal knowledge of this letter. With-
out having read it, you have no recollection of seeing a letter from
]\Ir, Hoover dated January 26, 1951 ; is that correct ?
Senator Mundt. The Chair believes that would be a very difficult
question for the Secretary to answer without having read the letter.
Mr. Jenkins. Very well.
Senator Mundt. Undoubtedly he gets many letters from J. Edgar
Hoover, and it would be a little bit difficult to know whether he had
read one without examining the contents.
]Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Secretary, we understand that you personally
cannot see all correspondence but would this letter be there in the
Pentagon in the Intelligence Department, available to the Intelligence
Department as now operating under you and which has been operating
under you since February 4, 1953?
Secretary Ste\^ns. I would assume so.
]\Ir. Jenkins. You would assume so ?
Secretary STE^^NS. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. It would not, Mr. Secretary, be your duty — and I am
making a statement of fact — to take this letter and to personally carry
out any instructions contained in it, if any there are, but would or
not it be the duty of your Intelligence Department, operating under
you for the past year or more, to take cognizance of this letter and
to do whatever is indicated by the letter ; is that correct or not ?
Secretary Stevens. Yes, I would say that is correct, although I
would feel much better able to answer your questions if I had read
it, which I would prefer not to do, as indicated.
Mr. Jenkins. But Mr. Secretary, are the letters in the Intelligence
Department, all the files, data, documents, information, available to
you as Secretary of the Army ?
Secretary Stevens. Are they available?
Mr. Jenkins. Yes.
Secretary Stevens. Sure.
Mr. Jenkins. Do you or not conceive it your duty — your privilege,
not your duty but your privilege — to personally acquaint yourself
with any facts contained in any documents in the Intelligence De-
Secretary Stevens. It would be utterly impossible, Mr. Jenkins,
Mr. Jenkins. Not your duty.
Secretary Stevens. That is two and a half years old, that letter, and
there are probably several million documents there. I wouldn't have a
possibility of knowing about them all.
]\Ir. Jenkins. "Would there be anything improper in you as Secre-
tary going to the Intelligence Department and examining not only this
document but any other document that is found there ?
Secretary Stevens. I think in general that is correct. I could con-
ceive of a clocument being in there that might be personally addressed
to somebody that it would not be proper for me to look at.
Mr. Jenkins. Frankly, I think, Mr. Secretary and gentlemen of the
committee, that tliere is nothing wrong in the Secretary reading the
letter in its entirety — he is the Secretary of the Army — or any part of
it that he sees fit, for the purpose of determining tonight whether or not
710 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
the original of it, Mr. Welch and Mr. Secretary, is in the files of the
Intelligence Department of the Army, and for that purpose only. Am
I correct or not ?
Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, I am a rather simple lawyer, but when
I see something
Mr. Jenkins. You are not under oath.
Mr. Welch. When I see a letter above the name of J. Edgar Hoover
and lieaded at the top "Personal and confidential," and apparently sent
by hand, I am so easily impressed, sir, that when I read those letters I
dropped the letter, believing it was improper for me as I believe it was
improper for the Senator to have it in his possession or bring it into
this courtroom, since I understand it is a breach of the law to disclose
any of these confidential matters involving the FBI.
We will find that letter, Mr. Jenkins, if we have to keep 14 colonels
up for 14 nights. We will get it if it is there. After we have got it,
then you will still have the question of what you are going to do with it.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Welch, that request was based on the Secretary's
statement that he saw nothing improper about his examining any
record, tliis or any other record in the Intelligence Department of the
Mr. Welch. I think that is right, but let's first find if it is there,
and that we will do tonight, as I say, if it takes all of us all night to
find it. I think that the suggestion from the Senator
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson.
Mr. Welch. I am so tired, Senator, I was about to say the Senator
from the west coast. I think your suggestion, sir, is correct, and I
would like now to move on, because I cannot erase from my mind this
sense of impropriety in dealing with this letter any further on what I
Mr. Jenkins. Tlien it is not necessary for the Secretary to see it
f urthet' for the purposes of identification.
Mr. Welch. I think not.
Mr. Jenkins. January 26, 1951.
Mr. Welch. We have seen it is single spaced, and we have a pretty
good idea what it looks like.
Senator Mundt. I will ask the Secretary this simple question which
should let us proceed. Are you quite confident that if you see the letter
in cjuestion, Mr. Secretary, in the file, you will recognize it as being the
same as this copy ?
Secretary Ste\'ens. We will certainly identify any letters from Mr.
Hoover on that date. If there are any more, we will bring them along,
Senator Mundt. Very good. Senator McCarthy, will you proceed
to some other questioning besides that dealing with the letter?
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, on other statement. Apparently the
contents of this letter are so involved, so important, so sacred, and
carry with them so many implications even of violation of the law,
that I respectfully decline Senator McCarthy's request that I per-
sonally be the custotlian of this letter, and I now in the presence of
everybody return it to Senator McCarthy.
Senator Mundt. Very good. Now, Mr. Cohn or Senator McCarthy,
you may proceed with questions which do not deal with the letter.
Senator IMcCartrt. Mr. Secretary, let's forget about this letter
for the time being, but let me ask you this question : Have you ever
SPECIAL riSr\T.STIGATION 711
been told that tliere are a series of letters in the files of G-2 from the
FBI, pointing out the dangerous security risks that are being kept
on in the radar laboratories at Fort Monmouth, that those letters
referred to individuals who -were in contact with members of an
espionage ring, some referring to Coleman specifically — I am not re-
ferring to any one letter but a series of letters — alerting the Depart-
ment of the Army to the dangerous situation existing at Fort Mon-
mouth, letters going back over a period of I don't know how many
years ? If that question is too long, I will try and rephrase it.
Secretary Stevens. It is too long.
Senator INIundt. I think you'd better rephrase it. It is pretty long.
Senator McCarthy. Let me ask you this question, Mr. Secretary.
Has it been brought to your attention that there are a series of
warnings from the FBI in regard to the situation at Fort Monmouth,
and that those warnings were disregarded until the committee started
hearings or its investigation?
Secretary Stevens. No, sir, that last part is not right. We in the
Army have been in contact with the FBI in respect to Fort Monmouth
over a long period.
Secretary Ste\t,ns. I would like to give you the chapter and verse
on that, but there again I feel I should have Mr. Hoover's permission
to do so.
Senator McCarthy. Well, if you will just try and answer my ques-
tion. You say you have been in contact with the FBI?
Secretarv Stevens. That is right.
Senator McCarthy. I ask you the simple question, m view of the
fact that there were no suspensions when we started our investiga-
tion, were you warned constantly, and continuously, you and your
predecessor, in regard to many of the people who were suspended after
we started our investigation?
Secretary Stevens. There were suspensions before you started,
Senator McCarthy, as far as I know and believe.
Senator Mundt. I don't believe you get the first part of the question.
I\Iay the Chair again suggest to the Senator if he will ask one question
at a time instead of two or three in the same phrase, it would be
easier for the Secretary, easier for the committee, and will help to
expedite the hearing.
Will you read the question, please ?
Senator McCarthy. Will the Chairman quit browbeating the
counsel ? I will rephrase it and break it up.
Senator Mundt. It is very difficult for either the committee or the
Secretary to get the points in the same question.
Senator I^IcCarthy. I think the Chair makes a good point. I think
the question may have been too long for the Secretary.
Mr. Secretary, are you aware of the fact that the FBI sent a
series of warnings to your Department in regard to the security
situation at Fort Monmouth ?
Secretary Stevens. Yes, sir.
Senator McCarthy. And they named a sizeable number of individ-
uals in the warnings as dangerous to the security, is that correct?
Secretary Ste^-ens. Yes, but I am not prepared to go into individ-
712 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. I clon't want you to. But tliey did give you a
list of names of men they considered as dangerous in that secret work,
is that correct ?
Secretary Ste\'ens. That is what FBI communications usually deal
Senator McCarthy. Well, now, did they in this case ?
Secretary Stevexs. Yes.
Senator McCarthy. They did ?
Secretary Ste\tns. Yes.
Senator McCarthy. Before our investigation started — Mr. Welch,
could I have the attention of the Secretary — before our investigation
started, how many suspensions were there?
Secretary Stevens. I think there were six, as I recall it, Senator.
Senator McCarthy. You said there were six prior to October 14,
I believe, is that correct ?
Secretary Ste\-ens. No; I think I said that there were six prior to
the start of your official executive hearings on, I think it was, the
8th of October.
Senator McCarthy. How many before the investigation was started,
in other words before we started to call in the witnesses to question
how many suspensions ? j
Senator Mundt, Give the Secretary the date on that. He may not
know when it started.
Senator McCarthy. Can you give us the date of the first suspension
under your regime ?
Secretary Stevens. I think most of those were in September, of the
six that I am referring to.
Senator McCarthy. The first hearing of the Signal Corps, not
Fort ]\Ionmcuth specifically, but the Signal Corps, the first executive r
session was August 31. You understand that, do you not? Do you
know when we started to interview witnesses from the physical area of
Secretary Stevens. No, I don't.
Senator McCarthy. You don't?
Secretary Stevens. No.
Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired. Do we want to
have another 10-minute go around ? Or do you want a recess ?
WTiat is the wish of the committee ?
We have been here longer than the customary 2 hours and a half,
hecause we started at 2. Unless there is some objection, I think the
Chair would like to suggest that we recess until 10 : 80 tomorrow
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, before you recess, let me ask one
question. I wanted to ask Senator McCarthy whether he contemplated
inserting that FBI letter in the record.
Senator McCarthy. May I say to Senator Dirksen that would be
entirely up to the Chair. I think first we should have established
whether or not it was received, wliether it is in the files of the Depart-
ment of the Army.
Senator Dirksen. I think the committee then ou^ht to authorize
counsel to accept a statement in the form of a deposition without hav-
ing it sworn, from J. Edgar Hoover, first, as to whether the letter was
written, and secondly as to whom it was written, third the date, gen-
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 713
crally to identify it and then, of course, I think it would be incumbent
upon J. Edgar Hoover to say whetlier or not, in view of the personal
and confidential nature of the letter, whether there is any interdiction
on having it made public.
Senator McCarthy. I wonder if that can be done before we meet
Senator INIuxdt. Counsel can do that, I am sure, during the evening
while the Secretary is trving to determine whether the letter is in the
Senator Dirksen. Now, INIr. Chairman, would you like to entertain
any suggestion about night sessions and Saturday sessions in the inter-
est of expedition ?
Senator Potter. I am glad to see I have someone agreeing with me.
Senator Muxdt. The Chair is willing to meet nights and on Satur-
day if that will expedite the hearing. As usual, he wishes to have
known the desires of the committee which he wishes to have conveyed
Mr. Welch. I think that is a point on which ISIr. Welch and JMr.
Jenkins, and Welch, who is 5 years older, would like to be heard. It
is pretty hard to prepare your facts today, try them today, and then
have an evening session. I think Senator McClellan would not be
without interest in a poor trial lawyer that gets awfully tired.
Senator Mundt. May the Chair inquire whether, in the interest of
expedition it is necessary to spend more hours in the hearings, or
whether you would prefer or whether Mr. Stevens would prefer, be-
cause he has also been subjected to a lot of fatigue, whether you would
rather have hearings on Saturday or in the evening.
Mr. Welch. Hearings on Saturday are equally repulsive because the
Chair knows my lovely habit of going back to my home. My own view
is, if you put in the number of hours we are putting in you will do
about as much good as if you flog your mind when you are tired trying
to prove something. You get into wrangles. My observation about
night sessions is that my temper is short, and that of other people. I
am just opposed as the dickens to night sessions and equally opposed
to Saturday sessions. But I have said before, mine is a small voice.
If I have to do it, I will hitch up my suspenders one more notch and
I will do it, but I hope I don't have to.
Senator Mundt. We will stand in recess until 10 : 30 in the morning,
but the Chair believes we may have to have both night sessions and
Saturday sessions if we do not move more rapidly than we now are.
(Whereupon, at 4 : 24 p. m., the committee was recessed, to reconvene
at 10 : 30 a. m. the following day, Wednesday, May 5, 1954.)
Adams, John G 074, 676, 677, 682, 686, 691, 693-695, 702
Testimouy of 097-701
Advisory Commission on Intelligence 707
Anastos Mr 699
Army (United States) 075-681, OSS, 692, 695-698, 704-708, 710-712
Army civilian 076
Army counsel (Fort Monmouth investigation) 670
Army Field Forces ' 679
Army Signal Corps 075-078, 080, 693, 712
Army Signal Corps installatio:i^J 676
Boiling, General 704, 707, 708
Carr, Francis P aS5, 098
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) 707
Civilian Personnel Office (Luit Llcnmoutii) 698
Cohn, Roy M 083, 085, 087, 089, 692, 693, 696-701, 708, 710
Coleman, Aaron 679-692, 094-099, 701, 703
Communist infiltration in the Army Signal Corps (hearings) 675-678
Communist Party 080, 682, 685, 702
Communists 674, 670-678, 080-683, 085, 087, 702
Department of the Army 075-081, 088, 692, 695-698, 704-708, 710-712
Evans Signal Laboratory (Fort Monmouth) 679, 680, 689
Executive order 096
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) 703, 706, 710-712
Federal Government 688, 691
Federal Telecommunications Laboratory (Nutley, N. J.) 678, 679
Fifth-Amendment Communist 676
Foley Square (New York) 699
Fort Monmouth 674-085. G8S-092, 095, 006, 698, 702, 703, 711, 712
G-1 (Personnel, Department of the Army) 092
G-2 (Military Intelligence) 089, 092, 096, 707, 708, 711
General Staff 692
Government agencies 688
Government of the United States 088, 691
Hensel, H. Struve 677
Hoover, J. Edgar 704-713
Intelligence Department of the Army 708-710
International Telephone & Telegraph Co 678
Juliana, Mr 699
Lawton, General 080, 085, 691
Loyalty files 090, 691, 696
Loyalty Review Board 095
Manchester, Sergeant 699
McCarthy, Senator Joe 675-683, 685-688, 690-708, 710-712
McCarthy-Cohn-Carr committee 085
McCarthy committee 676. 077, 082, 087, 688, 692, 694, 695, 698, 699, 704
Military Intelligence (G-2) 689, 692, 696, 707, 708, 711
Mims, Mrs 699
National Security Council 707
National Security Resources Board 707
New York 676, 682, 687, 698, 699
Nutley, N. J 678
O'Connel, Col. J. D 698
Pentagon 690, 691, 708. 709
Personnel file (Coleman) 690,091,695.702
Presidential directives 078, 085, 086, 690-693, 698, 702
Presidential restrictions 681
Radar laboratories (Fort Monmouth) 678,679,684,706
Reichelderfer, General 680
Rosenberg, Julius 674, 678, 680, 682, 686, 702
Rosenberg spy ring 674, 682
St. Clair, James D 695,699
Schine, G. David 677, 682, 683, 699
Secret radar laboratory 679
Secretary of the Army 674-713
Secretary's ah'plane 698
Security and Intelligence Division 689
Senate of the United States 698
Signal Corps (United States Army) 675-678,680,693,712
Signal Corps laboratories 706
Stevens, Robert T 698-700
Testimony of 674-697, 701-713
Symington, Senator 704
Telecommunitations 678, 679
United States Army 675-681, 688, 692, 695-698, 704-708, 710-712
United States Army Intelligence Denartment 708-710
United States Army Signal Corps 675-678, 680, 693, 712
United States Court House (Foley Square) 699
United States Government 688,691
United States mails 698
United States Senate 698
Washington, D. C 676, ()98
Young Communist League 680, 682, 685, 702
□r^cTnN PUBLIC LIBRARY
3 9999 05442 1738