T.
"j(9 9iMLjk^^
/
~Sn
Given By
^^.SUPT. v>r .DOCUMENTS
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
I
HEARING
BEFDRE THE
SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE ON
INVESTKiATIOJS'S OF THE COMMITIEE ON
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
EIUHTY-THIKD CONGKESS
SECOND SESSION
PUKSUANT TO
S. Res. 189
PART 19
MAY 5. 1954
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Operations
UNITED STATES
GOVEUNMKXT I'KINTIXG OFFICE
46620" WASHINGTON : 1954
Boston Public Library
Superintendent of Documents
2EP 8-1954
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
JOSEPH K. McCAUTIIY, Wisconsin, Chairman
KAKI. E. MUNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas
MAK(;AKET chase smith. Maine HUBEKT H. HUMPHKEY. AJiiuKsoia
HENRY C. DWOKSHAK. Idalio HENKY M. JACKSON, Washington
EVEKETT Ml KINI.EY DIKKSEN, Illinois JOHN K. KENNEDY. M.\ssacliusct is
JOHN MAi{SHAI.L BUTLER. MarjTanti STUART SYMINGTON, Missouri
CHAKLES E. POTTER, Michigan ALTON A. LENNON, North Carolina
KiCHARD J. O'Melia, General Cuunnel
Walteu L. Reynolus, C/Mf/ Clerk
Special Subcommittee on Investigations
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota, Chairman
EVERETT MCKINLEY DIRKSEN, Illinois JOHN L. MfCLELLAN, Arkansas
CHARLES E. POTTER, Miohijian HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington
HENRY C. DWORSHAK, Idaho STUART SYMINGTON, Mi.ssouri
Ray H. Jenkins, Chief Coi(u»ei
THOilAS R. PltEWiTT, Assistant Counsel
Robert A. Collier, Assistant (■ounscl
SOLis HoiuviTZ, Assistant Counsel
Charles A. Maneu, Secretary
II
CONTENTS
Page
Index I
Testimony of —
Collier, Ivobert A., assistant counsel, Special Subcommittee on Investi-
gations 720
Stevens, Hon. Robert T., Secretary, Departm-^nt of the Army 720
III
SPECIAL SENATE INVESTIGATION ON CHARGES AND
COUNTERCHARGES INVOLVING: SECRETARY OF THE
ARMY ROBERT T. STEVENS, JOHN G. ADAMS, H. STRUVE
HENSEL AND SENATOR JOE MCCARTHY, ROY M. COHN,
AND FRANCIS P. CARR
WEDNESDAY, MAY 5, 1954
United States Senate,
Special Subcommittee on Investigations of the
Committee on Government Operations,
Washington^ D. C.
Tlie subcommittee met at 10 : 45 a. m., pursuant to recess, in the
caucus room of the Senate Office Building, Senator Karl E. Mundt,
chairman, presiding.
Present : Senator Karl E. Mundt, Republican, South Dakota ; Sena-
tor Everett McKinley Dirksen, Republican, Illinois; Senator Charles
E. Potter, Republican, Michigan; Senator Henry C. Dworshak, Re-
publican, Idaho; Senator John L. McClellan, Democrat, Arkansas;
Senator Henry M. Jackson, Democrat, AVashington; 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 Army ; and Frederick P.
Bryan, counsel to H. Struve Hensel, Assistant Secretary of Defense.
Senator Mundt. The committee will please come to order. The
Chair would like to begin the hearing this morning with the not alto-
gether novel or startling announcement that the guests are here at
the pleasure of our committee. We are happy to have you in the com-
mittee room. We have a standing rule of the committee that there
shall be no manifestations of approval or disapproval at any time,
and the officers have a prevailing order from the committee to politely
escort from the room those who decide for themselves to violate that
committee injunction. May the Chair say he was very happy— and
I believe his memory is correct — that there have been no interruptions
from the audience of any kind this week. Nobody has violated the
rules and made manifestations of approval or disapproval.
We are ready to begin the proceedings.
Itlr. Welch. Mr. Chairman.
715
716 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator Mundt. Have you a point of order, Mr. Welch?
Mr. Welch. I have a statement bearing- on my relations with Mr.
Jenkins that I would like to make. I have informed Mr. Jenkins of
my desire to make it.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins has advised the Chair that you have
so informed him that it deals with the general discussion we had
yesterday morning. I think it perfectly appropriate that you should
have the opportunity to make the statement.
Mr. Welch. It is quite short. Yesterday in a open hearing I stated
that by unanimous vote of the subcommittee at its executive session
the previous evening a resolution was passed directing its special
counsel, Mr. Jenkins, to confer with me and others in an effort to reach
a formula to expedite or shorten these hearings. I stated that pur-
suant to that resolution Mr. Jenkins conferred with me. I further
stated that I would not be satisfied with a formula whereby Senator
McCarthy would follow Mr. Stevens and be subjected to an, exam-
ination and cross-examination and that the hearing would then be
ended.
I stated that Mr. Jenkins concurred with me in my opinion that
this should not be done. Mr. Jenkins has conferred with me about
what was said and it is now^ my opinion that my statement of yester-
day morning left an erroneous impression, all of which was inadver-
tent on my part. What occurred was this : Mr. Jenkins agreed with
me that the termination of this hearing on that formula would not
enable any of the parties to present all of the facts pertaining to the
issues. He did not express his opposition to such a formula, as he
has always indicated that the question of curtailing or terminating
this hearing was entirely up to the subcommittee.
Senator Mundt, Does that conclude your statement, Mr. Welch ?
Senator IVIcCarthy. Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy, a point of order.
Senator McCarthy. Not exactly a point of order, Mr. Chairman.
There are two matters I would like to bring up. No. 1, the question of
how long Mr. Stevens has been on the stand has been raised very fre-
quently. He has been here a long time now. At the rate we were
going yesterday, it will take many, many days to finish the cross-exam-
ination of ]\Ir. Stevens. I have had one of my staff give me an
estimate of the time we spent on the questions and the time on the an-
swers and the interruptions.
Yesterday the best estimate we could get is that we spent between
20 and 25 minutes asking questions and the rest of the time was used
up on what I considered very length}^ answers — I assume the Secre-
tary thought he was answering correctly — and with interruptions.
Keep in mind, of course, that Mr. Stevens is the accuser and I have no
choice but to ask the questions. My staff has been accused of using im-
proper pressure.
Nevertheless, Mr. Chairman, I think it is not exactly proper to keep
one man on the stand as long as Mr. Stevens has been kept here. I
would like very nuich, therefore, to have a meeting of the committee
this noon to see if we cannot work out some system whereby w^e can
give the Secretary a long weekend off so he can come back next Monday
and start fresh. I just do not like to keep him here under these lights
the rest of this week. I don't wish to discuss it now, Mr. Chairman,
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 717
but T would like to have a meetiuo; of tbe committee tliis noon, if wo
could, in executive session so we could discuss what I have in mind.
Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, I move that we proceed with
the hearings.
Senator" MuNDT. The Chair would like to inquire, if I may, of
Senator McCarthy whether this recjuest for an executive session deals
with trying to find some way, if he understands it, either of ex])editing
the heaVings or whether it is a suggestion that we find a way, if possi-
ble, to change the order of witnesses so Mr. Stevens, who has been
under the lights and before the committee for a long time, could have a
refresher period — I understood 3'ou to say perhaps until next Monday.
Senator McCarthy. May I say, Mr. (Chairman, I was not suggesting
the executive session for the purpose of ex]>editing. As I said before,
I would not talk to Mv. "Welch except under oath after the breaking of
the agreement which we made the other day. I merely want to talk to
the members of the committee about some way of giving Mr. Stevens
fi rest. He has not asked for one. He has not communicated to me
that he wants one. I have had no indication from him that he wants
a rest. I think he is entitled to one, and I would like to discuss with
the committee a change in the ground rules without establishing a
precedent so he can be taken off.
Senator Jackson. We are not going to change the rules, are we, in
the middle of the game ?
Senator Mundt. I would think no, but if we could find a way, it
seems to me, to call some other witness and give Mr. Stevens a rest, the
Chair, speaking for himself alone, feels that Mr. Stevens is entitled to
a rest. He has been here a long time. He would certainly be per-
suaded tremendously by any suggestion which would not destroy the
equity of the hearings or change the rules, but which would give Mr.
Stevens a rest.
Do you wish to have a committee meeting for that purpose?
Senator Jackson. Mr. Chairman, I suggest that if we proceed to
put the monitored telephone calls into the record, that will take some
time, and it would give JNIr. Stevens an opportunity to defer his testi-
mony until all those telephone conversations are placed in the record,
which was acted upon by the committee so long ago I cannot remem-
ber— over a week, I guess.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, in that connection I would like
to ask a question, if I may. There will be a question of which moni-
tored calls are competent as to testimony, whether they are accurate,
whether we have all of the monitored calls. I understand — if 1 am
wrong, Mr. Jackson, I wish you would correct me — I understand that
someone in the Army has supplied you with copies of all monitored
calls. I have never seen a single one yet. "Was I misinformed, Senator
Jackson?
Senator Jackson. I have not received copies.
Senator McCarthy. Have you seen copies of them ?
Senator Jackson. I have not seen copies of the monitored calls. I
have heard about them.
Senator jSIcCarthy. In other words, you have seen them ?
Senator Mundt. The Chair will call an executive committee meet-
ing at 2 o'clock in my office, and I hope from it will come some formula
by which we can relieve Mr. Stevens for the rest of the afternoon, .uid
we hope he can eet a rest, which he deserves.
718 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCarthy. I have another point, definitely a point of
order.
Senator Mundt. I want to be sure the committee members under-
stand we will have an executive committee meeting in my office at 2
o'clock. You may be there, Senator JNIcCarthy, and if you are there I
think it is only fair for Mr. Welch to be there. We will be glad to have
you come.
Mr. Welch. The Senator has said such ungrateful things about me,
sir, I think I should not care to attend.
Senator Mundt. You may come, if you care to come. Have you a
point of order?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, Mr. Chairman, a point of order. I under-
stand the committee met and decided, and I think rightly so, to put
in monitored phone calls if it is proven that you have all the calls and
that they are complete. I understand that at least some members of
the committee on both sides of the aisle have either received copies
of the calls or have been fully informed as to the contents of the calls.
I have not seen any of the calls. I do not think in view of the fact
that Mr. Welch has seen all the calls, some of the committee members
have, I believe it is only fair that I have access to those monitored
calls also, so that I can check with my staff and determine whether or
not they think that all of the calls have been included, whether some
Isave been held out. I think this is doubly important, Mr. Chairman,
in view of the evidence we had yesterday in regard to file stripping. I
want to be sure there is no monitored stripping.
Senator Mundt, The Chair holds that is a proper request that you
may place before the executive meeting at 2 o'clock.
Senator McCarthy, I would like permission of the Chair to read
into the record a wire which I sent to Mr. Stevens this morning.
Senator Symington, I second the motion of Senator McClellan, It
is now after 10 minutes to 11. I move the committee go to work.
Senator Mundt, The Chair feels the wire should not be read, be-
cause the Senator is not testifying at this time. He may release any
telegram he cares to the press, if he cares to, but he does not believe
it should be incorporated into the record.
Senator McCarthy. Then I would like to pass this wire to the
Chair Avith the request that he subpena the material mentioned
within this wire. It has to do with the letter from J. Edgar Hoover,
having to do with security risks at Fort Monmouth. May I pass that
to the Chair?
Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen?
Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, as everyone knows. Government
is a continuous process. I get a little distressed over the fact when
high administrative officials are immobilized day after day if it isn't
necessary.
We haven't called on Mr. Hensel. It is undetermined as to when
we shall get there. There are so many tensions on the international
horizon and, as everyone knows, he is Secretary for the International
Security Affairs. Certainly it isn't necessary to have both him and
his counsel here. I wonder if the committee couldn't agree to let
Mr. Hensel go back to work until such time as we have to have him.
Senator Mundt. Is there any objection from any member of the
committee to dismissing Mr. Hensel until he is called by the com-
mittee ?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 719
Senator McCleixax. Mr. Cliainnan, I don't know whctlier Mr.
Hensel has requested that he be released from attendance. If he
has, then I am willinoj to ^rant it. If Mr. Hensel feels that his
presence here is needed in his own interest and in defense of the
charoes aoainst him, I don't think this committee has any ri<>ht to
order him to stay away until he is called.
Senator Mundt. Does the Chair understand any implication on the
part of the Senator from Illinois that we were orderin<r Mr. Hensel
to leave the room? I didn't get that. I thou^dit it was that we were
not ordering him to be here.
Senator Dirksf.x. That is right.
Mv. Bryax. Mr. Chairman, it is certainly true that as Assistant
Secretary of Defense for International Security Aftairs, Mr. Hensel
has numerous matters of prime importance to the Nation piling up
on his desk.
I would say this: That if we can have an understanding that Mr.
Hensel's nanie will not be brought into the hearings in his absence,
he will be prepared to return at any point and on any day or at any
time wlien the suggestion is made that his name may come into these
jn'oceedings, and we shall come back.
If that is satisfactory to the Chair, satisfactory to everybody here,
Mr. Hensel, I am sure, would appreciate the opportunity to attend
to his important official duties.
Senator Muxdt. Mr. Bryan, may I have your attention? ISIay the
Chair ])ut it this way: It is obviously ]3retty difficult to be sure that
Mr. Hensel's name might not be mentioned. But we should be able
to aaree that none of the issues involving him would be discussed.
If the Chair can get unanimous consent now from all members of
the committee and staff, and counsel for all parties involved, that he
may raise a point of order and sustain it against any discussion of the
issues involving Mv. Hensel in his absence, if I can get that assurance
now, then I would think Mr. Hensel might safely absent himself from
the hearing.
Does the Chair hear any objection to that ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman.
Senator INIuxdt. Senator McCarthy?
Senator McCarthy. I don't quite understand tlie Cliair's sugges-
tion. Do you mean in cross-examining witnesses we cannot mention
Mv. Hensel's name ? I may say in that connection I intend to examine
the Secretary this morning on a question which he was clearly being
generous in, I will say, in error yesterday. He testified yesterday ISIr.
Hensel was not present when he returned from a meeting with the
Chair, myself, Senator Dirksen, Senator Potter. The night that some-
one thought np the smear, apparently, on Mr. Cohn and Mr. Carr, I
find out Mr. Hensel was present and that Mr. Stevens apparently had
a considerable conference with him. So I will bring up that question.
Senator Muxdt. I would assume for such questions Mr. Hensel
ought to be present. I don't know.
Senator McCarthy. I want to make it clear that I will not refrain
from asking witnesses pertinent questions about Mr. Hensel. When
Mr. Adams is on the stand, I will ask him about Mr. Hensel. I will
say this, Mr. Chairman, I certainly will be glad to go along with the
Chair insofar as not raising any new issue as far as Mr. Hensel is
concerned, but I can't refrain from questioning these witnesses as
4GG20°— 54— pt. 19 2
720 SPECIAL ESrVESTIGATION
they appear. It is doubly true, Mr. Chairman, in view of the fact
that one of the allegations -which we have is that Mr. Hensel master-
minded the smear. I don't think Bob Stevens did. I can't help,
therefore, but ask questions about him. May I say also, Mr. Chair-
man, for the benefit of ]\Ir. Hensel and his counsel while they are here,
I am not sure this has been set forth clearly and concisely enough so
that they are fully warned. I do think the allegations in our specifica-
tions are broad enough to cover it, and I want to notify Mr. Hensel
that Avhen he gets on the stand, and when other witnesses are on the
stand, I will discuss in some detail, from the stand])oint of motive on
his part, his activities in Europe after he was notified that he would
be given the job he has now got. From the standpoint of motive.
Senator Mfndt. The Chair believes, Senator Dirksen, in view of tlie
type of questioning that the Senator said he is going to be engaged in
this morning, Mr. Hensel might properly want to be here.
Mr. Bryan. Mr. Chairman, I think we will at least remain through
this morning.
Senator Mundt. Very well, sir. Counsel Jenkins?
IMr. Jenkins. Mr. Cliairman, yesterday afternoon the committee
instructed me to confer with J. Edgar Hoover with respect to a copy
cf a letter allegedly in the files of the Intelligence Department of the
Army, and to clarify that issue this morning. I am now prepared to
do so. Prior to so doing, I desire to ask the Secretary one question.
TESTIMONY OF HON. EOBEET T. STEVENS, SECEETARY OE THE
AEMY
Mr. Jenkins. Mr, Stevens, since yesterday afternoon, have you or
not, through yourself or those under your command examined the files
of the Intelligence Department at the Pentagon with special reference
to the original of the letter about which you were questioned yesterday
afternoon ?
Secretary Stevens. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. State whether or not such a letter was found in that
file or any other file.
Secretary Stevens. No, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. Now", Mr. Chairman, I desire the Secretary to stand
aside momentarily and let me clarify that issue. I desire to call as
the next witness my assistant counsel, one of my assistant counsel, and a
member of my staff, Mr. Robert A. Collier.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Collier, will you take the witness stand, please.
Mr. Collier, will you raise your right hand. 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 ?
JVIr. Collier. I do.
Senator Mundt. You may be seated, sir.
TESTIMONY OF EOBEET A. COLLIEE
]\f r. Jenkins. Will you please state your full name ?
]Mr. Collier. Robert A. Collier.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Collier, you are a member of my staff, assistant
counsel ; is that correct?
Mr. Collier, Yes, sir.
SPECIAL INVKSTIGATION 721
]\rr. Jenkiks. ]\rr. Collior. formerly have you or not been employed
by the Federal Bureau of Iiivesti<2;ation'^
\Mr. CoLLiEK. I was, sir. 1 was employed from April 1, 1911, until
October 2G, 1951.
Mr. Jexkixs. You were present yesterday afternoon when a dis-
cussion occurred with respect to a letter. Will you give the date of
the letter, Mr. Collier? It has escaped me.
Mr, Collier. January 26, 1951.
]\fr. Jexkins. At which time the committee instructed me, either
myself or by some member of my staff, to confer personally with Mr.
J. Edgar Hoover, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
JMr. Collier. I was present,
Mr. Jenkins. Were you present?
Mr, Collier, Yes, sir,
Mr. Jenkins, I will ask you whether or not at the close of the
meeting I assigned that task to you.
Mr. CoixiER. You did, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. State whether or not pursuant to that, Mi'. Collier,
you conferred with Mr. Hoover personally.
Mr. Collier. I did.
]\rr. Jenkins. At what time, approximately, yesterday afternoon
or evening?
Mr. Collier. From approximately 5 : 15 until approximately 7: 15,
Mr. Jenkins. During the course of your conversation with Mr.
Hoover, I will ask you whether or not he called upon j'ou to procure
ajid show to him tlie copy of the letter about which we are talking,
]VIr. Collier. Yes, sir; he did.
Mr, Jenkins, I believe dated January
]\fr. Collier. Twenty-sixth, 1951.
Mr. Jenkins. January 26, 1951. As a result of that recpiest of Mr.
Hoover, did or not you go to Mr. Cohn's office and procure that copy ?
Mr. Collier. I did.
Mr. Jenkins. And then take it to Mr. Hoover?
JVIr. Collier. I did.
JMr. Jenkins. Was it shown to him?
Mr. Collier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. Mv. Collier, now at this time, without my taking the
time and still in the interest of expediting the hearing, I ask you to
chronologically relate the incidents of that conference with INIr,
Hoover, what was done ]Hirsuant to the request of the connnittee, and
what was said to you by Mr. Hoover.
Mr. Collier. Upon receiving your instructions, I con.imunicated
with the FBI and Avithin a very short period of time obtained an
ni)pointment with JMr. Hoover. I went to see him, having advised
liim of the date and the type of letter involved. Mr. Hoover at that
time informed me that they had not found such a letter. He did have
another letter of the same date.
In order to be perfectly sure that they had obtained the correct
letter, I returned to the Senate Office Building and obtained from Eoy
Cohn, in Senator McCarthy's office, the letter wdiich I now have in my
hand and which was the one produced yesterday by Senator JMc-
( "arthy. I took that letter to JMr. Hoover, and at that time he com-
pared this letter with the letter in his possession of the same date.
722 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
I can now report to you that Mr. Hoover advised me that this letter
is not a carbon
Mr. Jenkins. Identify the letter when you say "this letter."
Mr. Collier. This is the letter produced yesterday by Senator Mc-
Carthy. This is not a carbon copy or a copy of any communication
prepared or sent by the FBI to General Boiling on January 26, 1951,
or any other date. The FBI has in its files a letter
Mr. Jenkins. Are you now stating what Mr. Hoover personally
told you ?
Mr. Collier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. You may proceed.
Mr. Collier. The FBI does have in its files a file copy of a letter
dated January 2G, 1951, the same date, prepared and sent by the FlU
to General Boiling, which Avas a 15-page interdepartmental memoran-
dum. A carbon copy of that Avent to Maj. Gen. Joseph F. Carroll,
United States Air Force.
Mr. Hoover, in comparing the two documents, advised me that the
form of the carbon copy which I have, the one introduced, and the
yellow copy of the FBI memorandum prepared on January 26, are
materially different in form.
I can recount for you, as Mr. Hoover advised me, the difference in
that form.
For purpose of identification, I will refer to the document intro-
duced yesterday as the carbon copy and to the yellow copy in the
FBI files, the 15-page memorandum, as the FBI original. On the
FBI original the words "Federal Bureau of Investigation"' is printed
in large block letters across the top of the page. On the carbon copy
the words "Federal Bureau of Investigation" is typed. The date,
January 26, 1951, appears directly beneath the type "Federal Bureau
of Investigation" on the carbon cop}^, and is in a different position
on the page of the FBI original.
The carbon co]xv has across the top "Personal and Confidential via
liaison." The FBI original has in the upper righthand corner the
words "Confidential via liaison."
The memorandum, the FBI original, is in the form of a interde-
partmental memorandum. It is not signed. It merely carries the
name of the Director and the FBI. The carbon copy would indicate
a signature was to be affixed.
The FBI original was addressed to Maj. Gen. A. E. Boiling. The
carbon copy is addressed to Major General Boiling, the initials "xV. R."
being left out.
The same words "Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2, Department of the
Army," appear on both documents. In the FBI original the addi-
tional words "The Pentagon" appear. That is not on the carbon
copy, and the words "Washington, D. C." appear on both documents.
The FBI original has the word "From" and then the words "John
Edgar Hoover, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation." That is
not on the carbon copy.
The FBI original has the word "subject" and then typed thereon
"Aaron, A-a-r-o-n, Hyman H-y-m-a-n Coleman, C-o-l-e-m-a-n, Es-
pionage— K." The "R" stands for Russian and
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I am not sure I understood.
You say that is the FBI copy you are talking about.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION" 723
ISIr. Collier. Yes, sir. In otlipr words, tlio siil)]cct Aaron Coleman,
Espionaoe — K, appears on the FBI oriji'nial. It does not appear on
the carbon copy.
This carbon copy carries the salutation "sir." The FBI original
carries no salutation.
This carbon cop}' is two and one-cpiarter pages in length. The
FBI original is 15 pages in length.
The carbon copy at the end carries the words "sincerely yours,
J. Edgar Hoover, Director." That, of course, did not a])])ear at the
end of the FBI original, but actually a[)peared in the "To" "From"
relation in the beginning.
The carbon co])y shows no carbon copy being sent to anyone else.
Senator j\1cCarthy. Could I interru])t, Mv. Chairman?
Senator ]\[unut. Have you a point of order?
Senator McCarthy. Yes. I think it would be proper at this time,
as a point of order, that we rhow that I had vrired Mr. Stevens and
asked him to produce the additional pages that we did not have. I
thought it was eight pages. Now, the young man sa3'S it is 15 pages.
I believe I asked for eight pages. I think the record should show
that I had wired INIr. Stevens and told him that I would ask to
have the additional Dages subpenaed.
Senator IMrNor. The Chair suggests you bring that out in your 10-
minute period that you have for questioning.
Senator McCarihy. Let me ask the Chair, has the Cliair acceded to
my request, the request made to Mr. Stevens also by wire, that the
additional pages be subpenaed, the pages which I do not have? I
think they should be sub])enaed.
Senator ISIuxdt. The Chair has not had time to examine the tele-
gr;\m which you sent to the desk.
Mr. Collier. I would like to pass to the Chair the diagram which
I have drawn which will give you a more visual reference to the two
letters which I have brought out.
Senator Symixgton. Mr. Chairman, may I make a point of order?
When the witness discusses the carbon copy, he might say the alleged
carbon copy.
Senator IMcCarthy. A point of order, Mr. Chairman. I would
like to know who alleged it to be a carbon copy. We have never
alleged it to be a carbon copy.
]\ir. Je>;kixs. Mr. Collier, you may proceed.
Senator jMuxdt. Proceed, Mr. Collier.
INIr. Collier. The FBI original, on the last page thereof, shows the
following:
CO, Jliijor General Joseph F. Carroll, Director, Special Investigations, the
Inspector General, U. S. A. F.
Now, that is the difference in form alone. I am distinguishing
between form and substance. Mr. Hoover advised me, and examined
the 2 documents in my presence, advised me that the substance of
the original FBI 15-page memorandum and the substance of the 2^/4-
page carbon copj^, contain information relating to the same subject
matter, and that in some instances exact or identical language appears
in both documents.
(^ther than that, Mr. Hoover feels that to further clarify it v.ould
reveal, possibly reveal, the substance of the documents themselves.
724 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
On that point, Mr. Hoover asked me to inform you that he respectfully
refers the committee to the Attorney General for his opinion as to
whether or not the contents can be made public in line with security
requirements. And since the language is, in some instances, identical,
that would apparently go for both documents.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Collier, have you in detail related all of the
events transpiring in your conference with Mr. Hoover?
Mr. Collier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Jenkins. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Just one question. The Chair is not certain, and
I am not sure that you can answer this question, but did you determine
whether the FBI original was in the files of the military and available
to Secretary Stevens?
Mr. Collier. I will go back to tlie question that Kay asked me. I
did not complete it. On that point, I determined that the yellow
copy in the FBI file, which is the file copy, carries the following hand-
written notations concerning the original :
Delivered to Colonel Cramer, G-2, 1-27-51, W. R. P.
Those initials are those of a liaison representative of the FBI,
Wesley P. Reynolds.
The carbon copy to Major General Joseph F. Carl, according to a
handwritten notation on the yellow, was delivered to Gill Levy,
O. S. L, 1-29-51, E. S. S., the initials standing for Ed S. Sanders.
Senator Mundt. In other words, those originals were apparently
delivered in 1951?
ISIr. Collier. They were, sir.
Senator Mundt. And were delivered to G-2 at that time?
Mr. Collier. The memorandum is dated January 26. It was de-
livered personally by Mr. Wesley P. Reynolds to Colonel Cramer on
1-27-51. The carbon copy was delivered personally by Mr. Ed
Sanders to O. S. L, on 1-29-51.
Senator Mundt. The Chair understands that the white papers that
you hold are not an exact duplicate or replica of the yellow sheets
which you held.
Mr. Collier. The yellow being my notes.
Senator Mundt. The yellow being from the files of the FBI and the
white from Senator McCarthy ?
Mr. Collier. No, sir. The yellow sheets are merely my own notes,
my handwritten notes. The yellow copy of the 15-page document I
did not examine because it contains security information. I did not
go into the substance of the document itself. I did not feel entitled
to. I received my information from the examination made by Mr.
Hoover. That yellow copy is now in the possession of the FBI.
Senator Mundt. Now I understand. You were quoting Mr. Hoover,
then, when you said that in some instances the language was identical,
that the subject matter was identical, and that as Mr. Hoover inter-
prets the security laws, the subject matter, both of the FBI copies and
of the copies from Senator McCarthy's files, because they deal with
an identical subject, should not be revealed in public short of a ruling
of the Attorney General. Is that correct ?
Mr. Collier. I want to make it clear. INIr. Hoover did not, of
course, refer to this carbon copy when he stated that, because actually
this is not a carbon copy of any FBI document. He was referring to
SPECIAL INVKSTIGATlOISr 725
his own document, the 15-pa^e memorandum, when he su<!;<2;ested that
"I respectfully refer you to the Attorney (General for his opinion,"
Senator Mundt. lou were speakintr for yourself, then, when you
said that because J. Edgar Hoover had told you in some instances the
Linouajje was identical, the subject matter was identical, that you be-
lieved that without authorization from the Attorney General we
should not discuss the subject ?
]\rr. Collier. That is correct. Mr. Hoover made no comment con-
cerninir this carbon copy.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mdnut. Just a minute. The Chair would then think,
jMr. C/Ounsel, that we would not want to subpena the FBI original,
certainly, without getting some opinion from the Attorney General.
Mr. Jenkins. Counsel entirely agrees with the chairman.
Senator ]\Iundt. Have you a point of order?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out,
I think this should be ex])lored with INIr. Hoover. As far as I know,
if the Chair Mill refer to page 2 of the hearings where this letter
lists the names of individuals at Fort Monmouth, I understand the
FBI report gives the names of informants and information. That
security information was omitted from this copy, call it what you
may, which I have.
I would like to know, Mr. Chairman, and the witness has not
covered that, apparently he can't because he says he has not examined
the letter, whether or not all portions of this document, which was
Senator Mundt. That is a question which you should address to the
witness, not to the Chair. It would not be a point of order, I don't
think.
Senator McCarthy. No, Mr. Chairman, it is a request of the Chair,
raid this is a very, very important matter, Mr. Chairman. It is a
request of the Chair that I am making.
I am making the request that someone from the FBI be called to tell
ns whether or not all of the language in the document submitted yester-
day is not identical to the language in the document submitted to the
military, with the exception of where we list the name of an individual
and put the word after it "derogatory," in some cases not derogatory,
that tlie FBI report actually contains all the information.
I should think we should ask Mr. Hoover whether or not he would
object to having put into the record — this is a request I am making
of the Chair. May I finish, Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Is it a point of order?
Senator IMcCarthy. I am making a request of the Chair, a very im-
portant request. The request is this : We have a document here con-
cerning Fort Monmouth, Communists at Fort Monmouth, and a warn-
ing relating to them. I want to know, Mr. Chairman, if the Chair will
not now call someone from the Bureau who can bring down the docu-
ment they have, not for public exhibition, and tell us whether or not all
the language is not identical, except that in this document the indi-
viduals are merely named and all security information is left out of
this document, where in the FBI document the security information
is included.
Senator Mdndt. The Chair would suggest that the Senator from
Wisconsin first interrogate the witness, when lie comes to his time, as
726 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
to wlietlier he can proTide that information. It is possible that he can,
Senator McCarthy.
Senator McCartht. All ri2;ht.
Senator MuNDT. Senator McClellan?
Senator McClfxlan. Mr. Chairman, I make a point of order that
the document that is presented to us here, ^Yhich we have not read, if
incomplete, if it contains only 3 pa^jes out of a 15-page document, then
the best eviclence is the document itself, which is available unless it is
prohibited for security reasons.
If it is prohibited by security reasons, then these excerpts from it are
not admissible at this hearing. If it is not prohibited, under the
security order and directive of the President, then the original docu-
ment in full and complete is the best evidence and should be produced.
I therefore, Mr. Chairman, suggest that this document that is not
identified other than as containing some of the names and some state-
ments in the original document, has no place in these hearings until it
is established that the original document is not available or, if, for
security reasons it cannot be made available, then no part of it can be
made available at this hearing.
Senator Mundt. If the Chair understands the suggestion of Senator
McClellan, it is this : That we have our counsel undertake to determine
now from the Attorney General whether we can have made available
the 15 sheets, and if so, we can then make our own comparison as to
whether or not the material is left out, what was left out, and what is
retained. If we are not able to get the 15 sheets, and since they deal
with identical subjects, then none of the material should be admitted
for security reasons, is that right?
Senator McClellan. That is correct.
Senator Muxdt. Do you have a point of order, Senator McCarthy ?
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, while I agree considerably with
what the Senator from Arkansas said, I would say that I think it
should be made clear that we are not now requesting and never have
requested that the security information about these specific individuals
be made a part of the record. That is in line with the ruling of coun-
sel, My. Jenkins. I do think that the language of the letter, if this
language is correct and verbatim — and I have every reason to believe
it is — that the language of the letter contains nothing of a security
nature except that it warns, admonishes those in charge of Fort
Monmouth.
Senator Mundt. The letter is not admissible.
S?nator McCar-jht. The Chair has stated that unless the entire
15 ])ages could be made a part of the record, none of it could. I want
to disagree with that, Mr. Chairman. I think you can delete, as there
apparently was deleted in this letter, the security reports on each
specific individual. The rest of the letter, I think, is extremely im-
portant.
Senator Mundt. Tlie Chair is ready to rule. Unless his ruling is
upset by his colleagues on this committee, he will rule that the counsel
for the committee should seek from the Attorney General the permis-
sion suggested by Senator McClellan, which has been restated by him
and by the Chair.
Senator Jackson. A point of order, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 727
Senator Jackson. Dops not the committee have the responsibility,
in view of the fact that there is now or was introduced yesterday
afternoon a letter which purports to have come from Mr. J. Edgar
Hoover and which we are now advised did not come from him — does
not this connnittee have the responsibility to ask the Attorney General
or somebody where that letter came from ? Mr. Hoover's name is being
used, and 1 take it from the witness that he — that is, Mr. Hoover —
has denied the existence of this letter. Is that correct?
Mr. CoLUEK. This letter is not a copy of any document prepared
by the FBI.
Senator Jackson. Or one that he sent out?
Mr. CoLLiKR. That is correct.
Senator Jackson. 1 think the committee has a grave responsibility
here to determine where that letter came from.
Senator Mundt. I think that would be a separate request, and it
might well be a proj^er one, but I think what we want to find out im-
mediately is w^iether or not we have a letter or a letter in a memo-
randum, an inner office communication, which is admissible in evidence.
Mr. Counsel, if you will determine that and try to get it available for
evidence, if it does not violate rulings of the Attorney General.
Mr. Jenkins. That will be done, Mr, Chairman.
Senator Mundt. That will be done. I may state a point of order.
Senator McCarthy. A point of order, Mr. Chairman. The Chair
says you should request of Mr. Brow^nell permission to use the entire
15-page document. I would like to ask the Chair to request that if
you cannot use the entire 15-page document — I assume he will rule
against you on that because it contains the names of informants — ask
him whether or not we can use that portion of the document which was
submitted yesterday. Find out whether this is a verbatim copy of the
FBI memorandum or letter and, if so, whether there is any objection
to introduction of the part of the document, omitting the names, which
I submitted yesterday.
Senator Mundt. The Chair suggests that that would be perfectly
proper to find out whether we could include any or all or at least
enough to find out Avhether that is a verbatim copy. We will get from
him whatever we can for use as evidence in this case.
Have you a further point of order?
Senator McCarthy. I have. Mr. Jackson has made a completely
false statement. He said I represented yesterday that this came from
Mr. Hoover. I made it very clear that I had never received anything
from J. Edgar Hoover ; that this was not received from Mr. Hoover.
Mr. Jackson knows that.
Senator Jackson. I am not saying that you said it came from Mr.
Hoover. Here is a letter purporting to come from Mr. Hoover. It is
signed by him.
Senator McCarthy. Would you like to get the evidence on it before
you make wild statements ?
Senator Jackson. I am not making wild statements. The commit-
tee— and certainly it was pretty clear from the testimony yesterday or
the discussion here that this was a letter purporting to have been
signed by J. Edgar Hoover. I think we ought to know where it came
from.
40620°— 54— pt. 19 3
728 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCartht. Mr. Chairman, a point of order. Mr. Jackson
has tried very deliberately to create the impression that this did not
come from J. Edgar Hoover. I am sure the evidence will show that
this did come from J. Edgar Hoover and that there has been omitted
from it . , ,
Senator Mundt. You can take that up in testimony with the witness.
Senator McCarthy. If Mr. Jackson is going to testify, I have to
correct his misstatements, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. He has testified. You have testified and neither
testimony has been under oath. The Chair suggests that counsel
proceed.
Senator Jackson. A point of order, Mr. Chairman. I want the rec-
ord to show that on yesterday, so that we have clear the understand-
ing
Senator Mundt. May the Chair suggest if you are willing to wait
until your 10-minute time comes, because it will be just a minute.
Senator Jackson. I want to make the ]wint in connection with the
point of order previously made.
Senator Mundt. Very well, a point of order.
Senator Jackson. That on page 1722 of the record of yesterday, I
asked the question :
May I ask this question? I am a little confused. This is a copy of a letter
that is being introduced.
That is quite clear. I made that statement. It wasn't denied.
Again, this is what Mr. Jenkins said on page 1723.
Senator McCarthy. Are you reading what you said, Mr. Jackson ?
Senator Jackson. I just read what I said. Now, I am reading
■what Mr. Jenkins said on page 1723 :
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—?
And again, on page 1724, Senator McCarthy said this —
I want to question the Secretary as to whether or not the original of this and
other letters like it are in his file.
Then again, on page 1725 of the record, this is what Senator
McCarthy said :
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 statement is untrue.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Jackson. That is pretty clear-cut. May I repeat that,
Mr. Chairman?
Senator McCarthy. Is this a point of order?
Senator Jackson. It is a point of order. The point is that the
representation was made that yesterday this was not represented as
a copy of a letter from ^Mr. Hoover. This is Senator McCarthy's
statement on page 1725 :
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 statement is untrue.
That is Senator McCarthy's statement.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman ?
Senator Mundt. Have you a point of order ?
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 729
Senator McCarthy. I very definitely have, of the same nature as
Mr. Jackson's. We have a docinnent here which, according to all the
information I have, is verbatim, a report given from the FBI. It
should be in the Army files. I sent a wire this morning to the Sec-
retary asking for the addendum showing the derogatory material on
each side. I think it is important for Mr. Jackson not to make these
statements and try to create these impressions when he hasn't seen the
letter. If he will look at it, I believe he will find each and every word
is identical to the original letter with the exception of the fact that
where there is listed the names of Fort Monmouth employees and the
word "derogatory" put after it in the FBI report you will find the
derogatory information and perhaps the names of the informants.
If that were included in this letter, Mr. Chairman, then it would be
objectionable. We would be violating the rule by submitting it to
the committee. That security information is not in the letter. The
meat of the letter is here, and I would suggest that we proceed now
fo examine this young man and see if he can give us this information
or not.
Senator Jackson. Point of order, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. The Chair will state that he has already ruled that
"ounsel is to secure from the Attorney General the eviclence which
we can get if available to us, which will determine the answers to the
questions now being discussed under the guise of a point of order.
Once we get that evidence, certainly the documents before us can be
compared and the facts brought out. I suggest. Senator McClellan,
you proceed with the questioning.
Senator McClellan. Did you discuss with Mr. Hoover or inquire
of him how many copies of that 15-page memorandum were made?
Mr. Collier. The FBI presently has in its file the yellow file copy.
The original was sent to General JBolling and a carbon copy was sent
to General Carroll. To my knowledge, no other copy is in existence.
Senator McClell^vn. Did he state to you specifically whether any
other copies were released or transmitted to anyone else at the time ?
Mr. Collier. Yes, sir. The yellow copy indicates the distribution
of all copies, and the only distribution shown on the yellow copy was
that the original went to General Boiling and a carbon copy went to
General Carroll. The other distribution would not be shown.
Senator McClellan. In other words, the records of the FBI, ac-
cording to Mr. Hoover, indicate that there w^as only the original which
went to General Boiling and the yellow carbon copy which was placed
in the permanent FBI files. Is that correct?
Mr, Collier. That is what the yellow shows. I don't want to speak
for Mr. Hoover, It may be that
Senator McClellan. I think it is pretty important to find that out.
I would like for you to inquire of Mr. Hoover about that.
Mr. Collier. All right, sir.
Senator McClellan. I would like to trace this letter or this memo-
randum. If this information that is alleged to be a part of that docu-
mem did not come from Mr. Hoover, and no other letter was released,
then the only source it could have come from was the security files of
the Army.
Mr. Collier. Let me say, again, Senator McClellan, that Mr. Hoover
said that this w^as not a carbon copy or a copy of any communication,
sir.
730 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McClellan. I am talking about the information in this
document that has been presented to us. It had to come from either
the carbon copy in the FBI files or from the original that went to the
Army.
Mr Collier. I will check on that. The United States Air Force
received a copy.
Sen fit or McClellan. All right. That is all.
Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen?
Senator Dihksen. Mr. Collier, you did not have opportunity to ex-
amine the text of the copy in the FBI files?
Mr. Collier. Senator Dirksen, I purposely avoided examining it.
Senator Dirksen. You would therefore have no opportunity or did
not have opportunity and would not know whether language was
identical insofar as the pages available are concerned ?
Mr. Collier. Well, Mr. Hoover did say that it contains information
relating to the same subject matter and that in some respects the exact
hmguage in both documents is the same.
Senator Dirksen. That is- all.
Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson ?
Senator Jackson. In talking with Mr. Hoover, did he say that the
two letters were similar? That is, the one presented here yesterday
and the interdepartmental memorandum, that is; that the FBI for-
warded to the Army and a copy to the Air Force? Or were they
entirely different?
Mr. Collier. I don't want to put words in his mouth. He did not
use the word "similar"; no. But, again, I will use his language, that
in some respects the language in both documents is the same.
Senator Jackson. In one case it is a three-page letter, I believe.
Mr. Collier. Two and one-quarter pages.
Senator Jackson. Two and one-quarter and the other is 15 pages?
Mr. Collier. Fifteen pages; yes, sir.
Senator Jackson. Is the letter that was presented to the committee
yesterday a synopsis of the interdepartmental memorandum that the
FBI sent?
Mr. Collier. Well, to answer that question, I would have to char-
acterize it myself. If you w^ant my characterization, based upon
what my examination of it
Senator Jackson. Based on your conversation with Mr. Hoover.
Mr. Collier. This is, understand, my opinion. He did not make
this statement and it is not to be attributed to him. Don't indicate
that in any way. It is purely my statement. It is my opinion that
the document presented here yesterday is a summary of the 15-page
document.
Senator Jackson. In the form of a letter ?
Mr. Collier. The form as distinguished from the substance was
materially changed ; yes, sir.
Senator Jackson. The point is that it is represented that these two
documents are the same.
Mr. Collier. They contain the same language in some respects.
Senator Jackson. Yes; but I am talking about throughout.
Senator Mundt. I believe Mr. Collier testified he did not have an
opportunity to read the 15 pages. It is a bit unfair to him to ask
him to tell if it is the same if he didn't read it.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 731
Senator Jackson. I mean based on your conversation -with Mr.
Hoover?
]\Ir. Collier. They do relate to the same subject matter, that is what
Mr. Hoover said, that they do rehite to the same subject matter.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman?
Senator IMundt. Does the Senator have a point of order?
Senator McCarthy. Yes, sir; a point of order.
Mr. Jackson has just stated without qualification that it was repre-
sented that this was a carbon copy of the same. If he had examined
the letter, he Avould find that on paije 2 it is indicated in parentheses
that security information is omitted in two different places.
I think before the Senator makes these statements he should exam-
ine yesterday's document unless he has the reluctance that Mr. Stevens
had to glance at it.
Senator Jackson. Well, I haven't had a chance to see a copy of it.
It was marked "personal," I believe, and "confidential" on the letter,
and it was su<i;n:ested that the matter be first taken up with the FBI
before we all started reading it. I didn't read it.
Did Mr. Hoover indicate to you where this letter that was intro-
duced and presented to the committee yesterday might have come
from ?
Mr. Collier. That was the first time, of course, that he ever saw it.
The only document in the Bureau files is the carbon copy or the yellow
copy of the 15-page memorandum. This is not a copy of any docu-
ment in the Bureau files.
Senator Jackson. That is all.
Senator Mundt. Senator Potter?
Senator Potter. Mr. Collier, did Mr. Hoover in his conversation
with you state that it was possible that they could give a summary of
the 15-i3age document without having a copy of this document in their
file?
Mr. Collier. Xo. 'No; I would say that Mr. Hoover searched the
files, had the files searched, and the only memorandum that was sent
to General Boiling on that date was the 15-page memorandum and
there is no other — there is no copy of this [indicating], or anything
like it in the Bureau files. The only thing is the 15-page interdepart-
mental memorandum that was sent to General Boiling and a carbon
copy to General Carroll.
Senator Potter. Is it my understanding that that letter that you
hold in your hand is not signed but it is typed "J. Edgar Hoover"?
]\Ir. Collier. The difference, basically, is that this is in the form of
a letter. It starts out with a salutation of "Sir" and at the end "Sin-
cerely yours, J. Edgar Hoover, Director."
"Whereas, the FBI original 15-page document was in the form of
"Date: January 26, 1951; to: Major General A. R. Boiling; From:
John Edgar Hoover, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation," and
that was set out.
Xo signature appeared on that document. That is not the type of
document that is signed.
Senator Potter. Did Mr. Hoover express to you any interest about
that document?
Mr. Collier. Xo, sir. ^ I merely talked to him concerning the facts
as to whether or not this was authentic. I did not get an opinion
from him. I did not ask for it and he did not volunteer it.
732 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator Potter. Did he express any opinion as to whether the Army
or the Air Force, who had, I assnnie, tlie large 15-page document,
could have made a synopsis of the 15-page document in the
21/2-pf^ge letter that you now have and sent it out as a report from
J. Edgar Hoover ?
Mr. Collier. I can state categorically that Mr. Hoover in my
presence did not venture any such opinion.
Senator Potter. Thank you. That is all, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington ?
Senator Symington. Mr. Collier, am I correct that Mr. J, Edgar
Hoover asked you or suggested to this committee that prior to the
publication of this document, that it be — that the matter be consulted
with the Attorney General of the United States to see whether the
publication of the document was in the interests of the security of
the United States ? _
Mr. Collier, That is correct. Senator Symington.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, 1 hope that v»e carry out the
recommendations of Mr. Hoover in that regard prior to releasing the
document.
Senator JNIundt. The Chair ruled that he would do that, at the
suggestion of Senator Symington, some 10 minutes ago.
Senator Symington. ^lay I then say that I reemphasize that it be
done, Mr. Chairman.
Senator IVIundt. It will be done.
Senator Symington. I would like to point out, if I may, to the
committee that yesterday I made a notice of the fact that the docu-
ment was not signed by JNIr. Hoover. One of the reasons for doing
that is that I have received a great many documents from Mr. Hoover
during my term of office in the executive branch of the Govermiient.
I never received one in this form.
That is all I have, Mr. Chairman.
Senator ]\Iundt. Senator Dworshak ?
Senator Dworshak. Mr. Collier, do you know enough about the
procedure in the FlU to know whether it has been customary when
carbon copies of any letters are furnished to have the Director sign
his name or whether the name is merely typed by the stenographer?
Mr. Collier. I spent a little over IQi^ years in the FBI. The
last six I spent in an administrative capacity writing such memoranda
as this, so I have some knowledge of them. The memorandum that
was sent on January 26, 1951, is, as I said, an interdepartmental
memorandum. It does not, on the original, carry any signature or
any initial. The yellow copy in the Bureau files does carry the sig-
nature of the person who actually prepared the memorandum, dic-
tated it, and the ty])ist who typed it, as well as those approving that
memorandum. In some instances those go all the way to ISIr. Hoover,
and he personally initials them. In some instances when he is out
of town on business, someone else does it in his behalf.
Tliis memorandum which I have in my hand, which is the one
brought in, is in the form of a letter — "Sir" and "^"ery sincerely
yours" — which would require, then, a signature, J. Edgar Hoover.
The memorandum is different from the form being used at that time.
The interdepartmental memorandum, may I adcl, is the type that
"Was then and is used by the FBI in corresponding with other Gov-
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 733
ernment departments and agencies in tlie general course of its
business.
Senator Dworsiiak. Is it customary or not for Mr. Hoover to sign
a carbon co|\y of a letter like that ?
Mr. Collier. He would not sign the carbon copy of a letter that
goes out over his signature. He would sign the original.
Senator Dworsiiak. His name would be typed by the stenographer
on such a copy ?
j\Ir. CoLLiKR. Yes, sir.
Senator jMundt. Mr. "Welch ?
Senator jNIcCartiit. Mr. Chairman, just a question on the order
of questioning.
Senator Muxdt. You will follow Mr. Welch.
Senator ^McCarthy. I understood the Chair to say at the opening
of the session that ]Mr. Welch would have the first opportunity to
question his witnesses, that I would have the first opportunity to
question mine. This young man is called for the purpose of testify-
ing in regard to a document which I asked to have introduced. While
I don't— —
Senator JMuxdt. The Senator is right as far as understanding the
rule of the Chair is concerned, but Mr. Collier was here neither as
an Army witness nor as Senator McCarthy's witness but as a com-
mittee witness; so the Chair, exercising his jurisdiction, has called
on Mr. Welch.
Mr. Welch. Mr. Collier, am I correct in thinking that you did not
read the 15-page document in the files of the FBI 'i
Mr. Collier. You are correct. I purposely avoided it because it
contains security information.
Mr. Welch. I do not know what your answer will be, but may I
ask whether or not you read the short document about which I shall
question you in a moment ?
Mr. Collier. It has been a little hard, I will admit, to carry it
around all night and not read it to some extent. However, I will
say truthfully that insofar as possible I have avoided reading the
entire document. I merely read it with the idea of identifying it.
Mr. Welch. That, Mr. Collier, is because you are as sharply aware
as I am that it is a crime to hand these documents around, is that
right 'i
Mr. Collier. That, I am afraid, sir, will have to be your character-
ization, not mine.
Mr. Welch. You know it is a crime to disclose this security in-
formation, do you not?
Mr. Collier. As I understand it, there is a Presidential directive
which requires all personnel to refrain from disclosing any informa-
tion containing loj'alty or security data.
Mr. Welch. Were you in the courtroom yesterday when I declined
to read the letter?
Mr. Collier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Welch. And when Secretary Stevens declined to read the
letter?
Mr. Collier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Welch. I have observed as of now so far as it was humanly
possible for you to do so, you have declined to read the letter, is that
right, sir ?
734 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Collier. I have, sir.
Mr. Welch. Would you hand me this hot document which I will
not read '^ I wish to call your attention only to what I saw yesterday.
You, of course, have read the address, haven't you ?
Mr. Collier. Yes, sir, I have. I read the address and part of the
form rather than the substance.
Mr. Welch. Right. I think I will do no wrong if I read the head-
ing: "Federal Bureau of Investigation, Janu.ary 1^6, 1951." Are you
following me, sir'^
]\lr. Collier. Yes, sir.
Mr. Welch. Then appears the words which I read yesterday and
which startled me so: "Personal and Confidential via Liaisoiu" Is
that right?
Mr. Collier. That is correct.
Mr. Welch. Then this purported carbon co])y of a letter has this
appearing: "Major General Boiling, Assistant Chief of Stall', G-2,
Department of the Army, Washington, D. C, Sir." Is that correct?
Mr. Collier. That is correct.
Mr. Welch. Now, passing the body of it and going only to the con-
clusion, it appears at the bottom of it : "Sincerely yours," comma, and
then typed in capital letters "J. Edgar Hoover, Director." Is that
right ?
Mr. Collier. That is correct, sir.
Mr. Welch. INIr. Collier, as I understand your testimony this docu-
ment that I hold in my hand is a carbon copy of precisely nothing, is
that right ?
Mr. Collier. I will say that Mr. Hoover informed me that it is
not a carbon copy of a memorandum prepared or sent by the FBI.
INIr. Welch. Let us have it straight from the shoulder. So far as
you knoAV, it is a carbon copy of precisely nothing?
Mr. Collier. So far as I know, it is, yes, but that again is a con-
clusion.
Mr. Welch. So far as you know, this document in this courtroom
sprung yesterday by Senator McCarthy is a perfect phony; is that
right?
Mr. Collier. No, sir. That is your conclusion. I will not draw
such a conclusion.
Mr. Wel(^h. You just told us it is a carbon copy of precisely noth-
ing, haven't you ?
Mr. Collier. I have said it is not a copy of a document in the FBI
file. I will not say that it is a copy of nothing because if it was typed
as a carbon there must have been an original.
Mr. Welch. You would think so, but we can find no trace of an
original, can w^e?
Mr. Collier. Not yet.
Mr. Welch. Anywhere?
Mr. Collier. No, sir.
IVIr. Welch. No, sir. If no original of this document can be found,
will you go along with me, sir, with my quaint English when I say
it is a copy of precisely nothing ?
Mv. Collier. You are assuming that the original cannot be found?
Mr. Welch. Tliat is right. ^
Mr. Coi.LiKR. My investigation yesterdav was to determine whether
this was an authentic document. I have made no investigation to
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 735
determine whether the original can be found or not. It may be that
it can be found.
Mr. Welch. You can't find a copy of it in the FBI place, can you?
Mr. Collier. No, sir.
INIr. Welch. No^y, you do not on your investigation — strike it out.
You are not as you sit in this chair in possession of a sirigle fact
which will allow you to believe that the document which I now
show you is a carbon copy of any existing original letter?
Mr. CoLLiEK. I made an examination yesterday to determine whether
this was a copy of a document prepared or sent by the FBI. I have
not made any examination to determine whether it is a copy of an
original now in existence.
Mr. Welch. Have you any doubt, sir, that it was presented in this
room as if it were a carbon copy of a letter signed J. Edgar Hoover,
Director, and addressed to Major General Boiling?
Mr. Collier. I was present when it was presented, and I do not
now remember the exact manner in which it was presented.
Mr. Welch. Did you have any doubt, sir, that your superior, Mr.
Jenkins, was handed a document which he believed to be a carbon
copy of a letter ?
Mr. Collier. That would be for Mr. Jenkins to say.
Mr. Welch. Did you believe it was a carbon copy of a letter when
you first heard it in this room?
Mr Collier. It was referred to as a copy of a letter.
Mr. Welch. Yes, sir.
Mr. Collier And I observed it. I can draw no further conclusion
from it.
Mr. Welch. And now, as you sit in this room, you are unable to
tell us on all the information you have been able to obtain last
night
Senator Mundt. Somebody raised a point of order from the audi-
ence, which the Chair will overrule. I will ask the audience to please
refrain from any audible comment.
Mr. Welch. I don't know whether we have a radio audience or not,
but I was disturbed by someone in the back of the room.
Senator Mundt. One of the officers, I think, spoke a little loudly
in talking to one of our guests. W^ould you repeat your question, Mr.
Welch, or have the reporter do it.
Mr. Welch. Would you read it as far as I have gone ?
(The reporter read from his notes as requested.)
Mr. Welch (continuing). Whether or not this letter is a cari)on
cop3' of any letter actually in existence ?
Mr. Collier. I am unable to make that statement, because my exam-
ination last night was directed at one pur))ose and one purpose only,
and that was to determine the authenticity of this particular docu-
ment with documents in the Bureau files.
Mr. Welch. All right. Now I want to try some more simple
language on you, sir: You know what we have here purports to be a
carbon copy of a real letter, don't you ?
Mr. Collier. It is a carbon copy of a letter.
Mr. Welch. Now, if I were to use the simple words which I think
you will understand, and say to you is this document the real McCoy
or a phony, which of those two words would you use ?
736 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Senator McCaruiy. Mr. ( hairman?
Mr. Collier. 1 would pick neither. Mr. Welch, may I say to you
this
Mr Welch But suppose I asked you to choose bet wen the two,
which would come more nearly to the point
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairnicin.
Senator Mundt. The Senator from Wisconsin is addressing the
Chair and so is counsel. I will recognize counsel first.
Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Y\''elch, I must say that Mr. Collier has answered
that question you have just asked him, and I do not think your last
question is a proper question because it has hertofore been answered
by Mr Collier.
Mr. Welch. I do
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy, have you a point of order?
Senator McCarthy. Yes. I think the Chair should insist upon
certain rules of honesty on the part of counsel for Mr. Stevens and
Mr. Adams. If he examined this document wdiich he considers so
hot he wouldn't ask these questions of the young man, because he would
see that on the second page it very clearly indicates that there is
omitted security information. He knows that and should know it, and
as I say, I think there should be certain rules, even on your part, Mr.
Welch, certain rules of honesty in cross-examination.
Senator Mundt. The Chair has not read the letter and Mr. Welcli
has not read the letter, so I suppose we labor under some difficulties.
Mr. Welch. We do. I have higher standards in respect to my own
conduct in respect to these documents than the Senator and his staff
does. I do not think it is proper for Mr. Collier to read it and he has
declined to read it. I do not think it would be proper for Mr. Welch
to read it and he has declined to read it. I await watli much interest
the Senator's explanation of how it reached his hands and whether
he read it.
Senator Mundt. Have you concluded your questions?
Mr. Welch. 1 have.
Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy has 10 minutes.
Senator McCarthy. JNIay I make it very clear that as far as I am
concerned, the Truman directive, or any other directive, will preclude
me from examining material bearing ui)on the security of this Nation.
I am very surprised when I find Mr. Welch here worried about dis-
closing information on Communists, sitting back and slyly approving
the violation of the law insofar as eavesdropping is concerned and
monitoring. So there is no question about Mr. Collier, Mr. Chairman,
there will be no ])ersonal and confidential material where it shows that
someone is covering u]) and hiding Communists.
Now, Mr. Collier, I am going to ask you, in view of Mr. Welch's
questions, to examine the second page of this letter, the top of it — I
am not going to ask you to read what you find there, but ask you
whether that does not indicate that there has been omitted background
security information on an employee, the parenthetical expression.
]\Ir. Collier. Senator, I am unable to say whether anything has been
omitted, because I have not examined the original document.
Senator JNIcCarthy. I will ask you to examine the co]5y which you
have, look at the top of the page and see if you do not find in paren-
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 737
tlieses the explanation that security information on a certain employee
has been omitted from this letter.
JVIr. Welch. JNIr. Chairman, I think
Senator Mundt. Have you a point of order?
Mr. "Welch. Yes. Counsel should rule as to whether or not this
■witness may properly examine this document. It is not in my prov-
ince to rule.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman?
Senator Muxdt. May the Chair sugfiest to Senator McCarthy that
if we succeed as we hope we will, in gettinf^ from the Attorney General
the material which has been requested, we will then all have before
us the document so we can make a comparison.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, we are interested in the truth
here. ]\[r. Welch is apparently afraid of it. I am asking the sim])le
question of whether or not the document on its face doesn't show that
security information was omitted, and that it does not show that
this never could deceive anyone, to indicate that all of the FBI security
information was included. I ask this question of the witness.
I will insist. Mr. Chairman, that it be answered unless the committee
votes me down on that. There is no reason why anyone should be
afraid of the truth insofar as this document is concerned.
Mr. Collier. Senator McCarthy, may I say that I, as an assistant
counsel to Mr. Jenkins, am here to get the facts. I don't think it is our
purpose nor our right to draw conclusions in any form. I have ex-
amined this document, as I have so testified, at the beginning and at
the end, in order to establish what kind of document it is, in order to
identify it. I have not read the contents.
The part you speak of is on page 2. I feel that in view of the security
requirements I should not read that second page.
Senator AIcCarthy. I am asking you to look at the top of page 2,
which contains nothing in regard to security, but shows that the secu-
rity infoi-mation was omitted. I ask you to look at that parenthetical
expression. It is very important to establish that fact now, in view of
the repeated statements by Mr. Welch that this was a phony, and that
anyone had a right to believe that all of the security information was
in it.
]\Ir. Chairman, it is important to get at the truth of this right now.
Mr. Collier. Senator McCarthy, I feel that I must respectfully
decline to read it and determine those facts from it.
Senator McCarthy. I am going to ask the Chair
Senator Mundt. The Chair believes the witness has a right to de-
cline to read confidential information if he prefers not to read it and
the Chair will not order him to read it if he so declines.
We are waiting for a ruling from the Attorney General to cover
precisely the points that the Senator is now discussing.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Collier, let me ask you this question, drop-
ping down to page 2, to the end of paragraph 2, do you find in effect,
that the information concerning the individuals listed has been
omitted ?
Mr. Collier. No, sir; I have not made that observation. I have
looked at page 2 ; I find tiiat on page 2 there are a list of names.
Senator McCarthy. Noav, if you have looked at page 2 before you
should not refuse to look at it right now.
738 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr, CoLMFR. I only looked at it to determine what it looked like.
T can identify page 2 by the list of names on it and nothing more. And
I don't know the names. I merely know that there are a series of
names on the page. I have not read it.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Collier, you were appointed by Mr. Jen-
kins to find out whether or not this is a du])lioate of information or a
summary of information in regard to Communists at Fort Monmouth
or in the military.
I now apk you to look at page 2. You will find a list of names. I am
not asking you to read those names off, but I am asking you to tell
us whether or not this copy does not clearly show, that there was
omitted from page 2 all of the FBI reports and these individuals, that
their names are merely listed and the notification after them as to
what was shown, derogatory or not derogatory.
Mr. Collier. Senator McCarthy, as far as I am concerned person-
ally, that goes to the substance of the memorandum itself, and without
a ruling by the Attorney General, which ]\Ir. Hoover has suggested
that the committee secure, I do not feel entitled to read the document
for the purpose of ascertaining the facts you suggest.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Collier, do you mean to tell us you did not
read this document ?
Mr. Collier. I purposely avoided reading this document in its en-
tirety, as I so testified.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I wonder how ridiculous we
can get here. I am trying to have this young man just look at the
letter, he has carried it around in his pocket all night, and tell us
whether or not on page 2 it isn't made very clear that there has been
omitted from this document the FBI security information, and that
there is no security information in this document.
It is a very simple request to be made, Mr. Chairman, and I think
I am entitled to get that answer.
Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman?
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington, have you a point of order?
Senator Symington. I bow- to the chairman with great respect.
Senator Mundt. The witness has stated that he declines to read the
letter. He has been instructed by J. Edgar Hoover that it contains
information which is identical to the information which he felt the
Attorney General should rule upon, and the Chair is not going to order
the witness to do something that he thinks he should not do.
Senator IMcCarthy. JNIr. Collier, you say that the Director told j^ou
the language was identical in some respects; is that correct?
ISIr. Collier. That is correct, in some respects.
Senator McCarthy. Did he tell you that the language Avas identical
in all respects
Mr. Collier. No.
Senator McCarthy. Except that this three-]">age document omitted
the security reports furnished by the FBI ; that other than that the
document is complete?
]\Ir. Collier. No, sir ; he did not state it in that way.
Senator McCarthy. Well, now, what did he tell you?
Mr. Collier. He told me that the language is identical in some re-
spects and that it relates to the same subject matter; that both docu-
ments relate to the same subject matter. That was as far as he felt he
was entitled to go.
SPECIAL INVESTICATIOX 739
Senator IMcCartiiy. Did lio toll you tlierp -was any twistinf;, any
distortinfif, tiny violation of the ]anoua<i;e used in the report that he sent
over, exoe]5t to eliminate the security information?
Mr. Collier. He made absolutely no connnent concerning the lan-
guacfe. He did not characterize it in any manner.
Senator ]\[cCartiiy. Mr. Collier, Avere you not interested Avhen you
Avent over there in finding out whether or not this did in any way
twist or distort or violate any of the original language?
Mr. Collier. Yes, I was originally, but when I determined that the
Director felt that the document was of a security classification and
that he deferred to the judgment of the Attorney General as to whether
or not that should be read by anj'one, including myself, I did not pur-
sue that line of inquiry.
Senator ]\IcCx^rthy. May I ask counsel for the Army, so the At-
torney General will know the attitude of the parties to this dispute,
■whether counsel for the Army will consent to having the 15-page
document, with the security information deleted, and this document
made public so that the press and the public can compare the two
documents ?
Mr. Welch. Thank j^ou, Senator, for finally referring to me as
counsel for the Army.
Senator McCarthy. It was a mistake. I apologize.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch has the floor.
Mr. Welch. It is not in my jurisdiction, sir, to pass on the security
matters. The Attorney General will have to do that.
Senator ]\IcCartiiy. I know. I just asked whether or not we can
transmit to the Attorney General the information that both counsel
for Mr. Stevens and Mr. Adams, as well as Senator McCarthy, re-
quest that they make the 15-page document public if there is deleted
any security information, and that also we make public the document
which I have submitted after deleting the names on page 2.
Mr. Welch. I have not read the document that is referred to. It is
impossible for me to form any judgment of that sort. That would
have to be left to the Attorney General.
Senator McCarthy. I get your attitude very clearly.
Mr. Collier, I assume that you are unable to contact General Boiling
to see whether or not someone in his office had ever made a summary
of the 15-page report.
Mr. Collier. That is correct. I did not make that line of inquiry,
either.
Senator ]\rcCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, may I suggest that Mr. Collier
or someone be designated to contact General Boiling's office and find
out whether or not they made a summary and, if so, the distribution of
that summary and whether or not this is an accurate summary made
bv Boiling's office.
" Senator Muxdt. The Chair will take that suggestion along with
the ones earlier made by Senator Jackson and bring them before the
subcommittee in its executive meeting which we will hold in my office
this afternoon at 2 o'clock.
Senator McCarthy. In any event, Mr. Collier, is it your testimony
that you are of the impression— and you are not attributing this to
Mr. Hoover, but it is vour own perronal impression after talking
with Mr. Hoover— that' this is a summary of the 15-page document?
740 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Collier. Again may I say that ISIr. Hoover did not so char-
acterize it. He did not make any connnent on it. I was asked for my
personal opinion. I give it as such : My personal opinion is that this
document, this carbon copy, is in the nature of a summary of a 15-page
document prepared by the FBI.
Senator JSIcCarthy. Just in closing, ISIr. Collier, may I make it
very clear that in my vigorous examination of you I do not want that
to be construed by anyone to mean that I do not have confidence in
your ability. I am fully aware of your background. I think that
you would make an excellent addition to any staff, period.
Mr. Collier. Thank you.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Cohn has some questions.
Senator Muxdt. Have you finished?
Mr. CoHN. I have some questions.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohn.
Mr. Coiix. Mr. Collier, is this much very clear from what you have
been able to tell us at this time: That on the date Senator McCarthy
mentioned yesterday, January 26, 1951, there was transmitted, under
the name of John Edgar Hoover, to Army Intelligence a document?
]Mr. (>)LLiER. I will restate it, Mr. Cohn. Under date of January
26, 1051, a 15-page FI^I memorandum was prepared. The original
of that memorandum was transmitted to General Boiling's office via
liaison on January 27, and the carbon copy to General Carroll's office
via liaison on the 29th.
Mr. Cohn. Sir, did this memorandum go to the Army under the
name of John Edgar Hoover?
Mr. Collier. Yes, sir. On the memorandum there are the printed
words "date, to, from, and subject"; and beside the word "to" was the
identification, "Major General A. R. Boiling, Assistant Chief of Staff,
G-2, Department of the Army, The Pentagon, Washington, D. C,"
and beside the word "from," "John Edgar Hoover, Director, Federal
Bureau of Investigation."
Mr. Cohn. You say printed. Were they not typewritten?
Mr. Collier. They were typed.
Mr. Cohn. Typewritten words, "From, John Edgar Hoover, Direc-
tor, Federal Bureau of Investigation"?
Mr. Courier. That is correct.
Mr. Cohn. And, sir, is it a fact, on the basis of what you can tell
us now, the subject matter of this 15-page memorandum from Mr.
Hoover to the Army on that date \vas Aaron Coleman, then at Fort
Monmouth, espionaging?
Mr. Collier. I will say this: That after the word "From" and the
designation "John Edgar Hoover, Director, Federal Bureau of In-
vestigation," there followed the word "Subject" and typed thereon
was "Aaron Hyman Coleman, Espionage — R." For your informa-
tion the R stands for Russian.
Mv. Cohn. The "R" stands for Russian.
Senator Mundt. Your time has expired, Mr. Cohn.
Does counsel have further questions? The Chair has none. Any
Senators to my right? Any questions by Senators to my left?
Mr. Welch, any further questions ?
Mr. Welch. Just one question.
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 741
The typewritten document that we have had in the courtroom this
morninii; does not purport to be a summary of anything; does it?
Mr. Collier. I think the document speaks for itself.
Mr. "Welch. INIy question is: It doesn't jnirport, it doesn't say at
the top of it, "Summary,'' does it ?
JNIr. Collier. No, sir; it does not.
INIr. AVelcm. It just looks like a letter beginning with a salutation;
is tliat right ?
Mr. Collier. The salutation "Sir."
Mr. Welch. And ending with
]Mr, Collier. '"Sincerely yours."
Mr. AVelcm. Thank you.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Cohn or Senator McCarthy ?
Senator IMcCartiiy. Just 1 or 2 questions.
Senator Mundt. The Chair expresses the hope we can finish with
Mr. Collier before the lunch hour.
Senator McCarthy. In view of Mr. Welch's question that this doe?
not appear to be a summary, I ask you to look en page 2 and tell us
Avhether or not it does not clearly appear to be a summary, that you
have in parenthesis the definite information that there have been
deletions from this document, of security information. In view of
the fact that you, I assume, do not feel you can answer that, Mr.
Collier, I will state for the record that that is the case, and I hope that
all the Senators will examine this.
I have just one other question to ask of the Chair. In view of Mr.
Welch's statement that was a phony, I ask that the Chair write a letter
to the Director of the FBI, J. Edgar Hoover, and ask him whether
or not this is not an accurate summary merely having deleted the
security information.
Senator Muxdt. The Chair has already stated that he would take
up your earlier suggestion, the suggestion of Senator Jackson and
now your present suggestion, at the executive committee meeting we
have called for 2 o'clock.
Senator McCarthy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Cohn has a few questions.
]Mr. Cgiint. I think we left at this point : This memorandum sent
under the name of John Edgar Hoover, Director of the FBI, to the
Army, dated January 26, and I believe you said delivered on January
27, sir?
]Mr. Collier. That is correct.
IVIr. Cohn. Bears the heading "Aaron Coleman, Espionage-R."
]\Ir. Collier. Aaron Hyman Coleman.
INIr. Cohn. Espionage-iK, and you now tell us that the word "R"'
stands for Russian.
Mr. Collier. Mr. Hoover told me I could say that the "R" stands
for Russian.
Mr. Cohn. So you can tell us this morning that the 15-page memo-
randum was a communication from Mr. Hoover to the Army concern-
ing Aaron Coleman and Russian espionage. Is that a fair statement ?
Mr. Collier. That is what the "To" and the "From" read, and the
subject is Aaron Hyman Coleman, Espionage-R.
Mr. Cohn. Can you, Mr. Collier, as having been present in the
room and a member of Mr. Jenkins' staff, tell us from the testimony of
742 SPECIAL mVESTIGATIOjSr
yesterday and the public record, that on the day this memorandiun
was sent over from jMr. Hoover, Aaron Hyman Coleman was the
section head in tlie secret radar laboratory at Fort IMonmouth'^
Mr. Collier. Mr. Cohn, I cannot tell you that of my own personal
knowledge.
Mr. Cdiix. I wonld ask the Chair, then, to take judicial or chairman-
wise notice of the public hearin<i;s of this committee of December 8,
1953, which indicate that. I believe I read the job description of Mr.
Coleman into the record yesterday.
Now, sir, can j'ou tell us whether Senator McCarthy stated with
completely accuracy yesterday that this 15-page memorandum, that
this memorandum by Mr. Hoover, was a warning to the Army that at
the secret radar laboratories at Fort iSIonmouth a group of associates
of Julius Rosenberg and people with Communist records were oper-
ating on a secret link and chain radar project at that time?
Mr. Collier. Mr. Cohn, I cannot tell you of my own personal knowl-
edge. I was busy on some other matters, I Avas in and out of the
room. I didn't hear that complete statement. The record would
speak for itself.
Mr. CoHX. Mr. Collier, I think a key question at this point ''3 this:
Have you also ascertained whether or not the Army has in its fiies at
this time the original of this memorandum from ,1. Edgar Hoover,
concerning Russian espionage and Aaron Coleman of the radar lab-
oratory at Fort ]\Ionmouth ?
Mr. Collier. I did not ascertain that. Mr. Stevens was asked to
furnish that information this morning. As I recall, his testimony
was that he hfid not found this document, but he did not say whether
or not he had the original of the 15 pages. I only know what the
records of the FBI revealed, and that is that the document was deliv-
ered on January 27, via liaison.
Mr. CoHx. Mr. Chairman, at this time might Ave request that an
additional series of documents which Ave have reason to believe Avere
transmitted to the Department of the Army over a period of time in
January — from January 3, 1951, up through the present day, concern-
ing Communist activities of people em])loyed at Fort Monmouth,
memoranda such as this from John Edgar Hoover, Director of the
FBI, to the Army, may Ave ask that those likewise be produced by ^Mr.
Stevens here this morning or this afternoon, that they be made a part
of the record but be Avithheld until such time as a request is made of
the Attorney General, but that the documents be made available and
held in readiness, so that the public may have the story of the FBI
warnings to the Army on the subject.
Senator Mukdt. The Chair suggests that you have Senator Mc-
Carthy make that request of us at executiA^e session. We have already
announced that we Avill subpena all records, all documents, all indi-
viduals connected Avith this case, provided, of course, no security
regulations are violated.
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Collier, just one question. In discussing
this matter with Mr. Hoover, did you get the impression Avhich I may
say I have gotten, that the FBI transmitted all of the information
which they had in regard to Russian or Communist espionage to the
pro])er departments and that any failure to act, any failure to remove
people like Aaron Coleman or anyone else, was not the fault of <he
FBI because they gave all the information they had, conducted
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION 743
tliorou<rli iiivestijiations. but was tlie fault of the people involved as the
sii])ervi?;oi's to the susi->ected espiona<;e aijents^
iSIr. Coi,i,iKi{. ]\Ir. Hoover did not make any such statement to me,
and did not talk about that to me. 1 -will tell you from my personal
experience in the FBI that all information of a security natuie is
promptly forwarded to all interested Government ajjencies, and that
it is not evaluated, it is merely furnished as facts <i;athered. The FBI
does not make any evaluation. It merely furnishes the information as
it i« obtained.
Senator McCArxHY. Just one further question : I ask this bccauso
so many peoi^tle try to blame the FBI when we find Communists in
various dei)artments. It is true, is it not, that the FBI has no power
to hire or fire anyone, their only power is to send down the report,
conduct the investiojation, and hope that the security agencies involved
will act: is that correct?
Mr. CoLLTKif. A^ain, Senator McC^arthy, I am speaking for myself,
from my experience in the FBI. The FBI does not have any power
to hire or fire anyone other than its own personnel. It gathers infor-
mation, in a factual form, forwards that information either in reports
or memorandums to the interested Government officials, and it is in-
cumbent upon them, to properly evaluate it in line with the desires that
they have to use the information.
Senator JNTcCartiiy. One other question now. The fact that the
memorandum had the notation, "espionage, Kussian," would indicate
it was a report upon Russian espionage, would it not ?
J\lr. Goi.rJFK. Again, may I speak from my personal experience. T
am not contributing this in any way to Mr. Hoover, I want to keep that
clear. Fiom my personal experience in the FBI, in pre]")arino' reports
and in gathering information, it is necessary to classify it. We, I say
we meaning the Bureau, arbitrarily has set up certain classifications,
internal security and espionage, and tlien the ''K'' which in this case
stands for Russian, identifies the nationality group.
Senator JMcCarthy. So that then there can be no doubt in anyone's
mind that this report upon a man who is head of the important section
in the secret radar laboratories, was being reported on, a 15-page re-
port, and that had to do with Russian espionage?
Mr. CorxTFR. "Well, I don't want to leave any false impression. The
"espionage-R." is routine. It is not abnormal in any way to be on a
document. That is used under the proper designation and is a rou-
tine classification placed thereon.
Senator McCarthy. By routine, you mean if it deals with Russian
espionacfe, it would be routine to put the "R" on it.
Mr. CoLTJF.R. That is right.
Senator McCarthy. If it dealt with any other type of espionage,
it would not be routine to put the "R" on it?
Mr. CoiJ.TER. The proper designation would be put on it.
Senator ^VIcCarthy. So when you say it is routine — let me get this
straight. We are dealing here now with a secret radar laboratory,
dealing with a report on a man who is head of an important section.
There can be no doubt in anyone's mind, the "R" indicated that the
information in the 15-page report dealt with Russian espionage and
also dealt with Aaron Coleman ?
744 SPECIAL INVESTIGATION
Mr. Collier. That is liard tc answer because you say it dealt- with
Eussiaii espionage. The espionage R is an arbitrary designation that
is given to the type of investigation. Now, it might well be that an
investigation starts out with the allegations that there was espionage
and it would turn into some other type. The espionage R is merely
for filing purposes and for the use of the Bureau in determining how
to carry on the investigation, how to classify it. This is not an un-
usual document in that it has espionage R. Many documents emanat-
ing from the Bureau carry the classification "espionage R."
Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I know that the Chair has
ruled on this, to some extent^ before, but I think this testimony makes
it doubly iin])ortant that we strongly urge the Attorney General to
make available for the public those parts of the document which show
that this did deal strongly with Communist espionage at the radar
phuit.
Senator Mundt. The Chair has already ruled on it over an hour
ago
Senator McCarthy. No further questions.
Senator Mundt. Does anybody have further questions of Mv. Col-
lier? If not, Mr. Collier, you are dismissed and it is fair to say you
have been an excellent witness and we appreciate the forthright,
prompt, decisive answers you have made.
Mr. Collier. Thank you, sir.
Senator Mundt. Mr. Counsel and members of the committee, I be-
lieve it is 12 : 20. I believe we have an executive meeting at 2 o'clock.
What is the pleasure of the coimnittee ? Do you want to recess now ?
We will recess until 2:30 this afternoon, with an executive com-
mittee meeting in my office at 2 o'clock.
(Whereu])on, at 12: 20 p. m.. the committee was recessed, to recon-
vene at 2 : 30 p. m., the same day.)
INDEX
Page
Adams, John G 710, 730, 7:59
Air Force (United States) 722, 723, 730, 732
Army (United States) 720, 722, 728-730, 732-734, 739-742
Army files 72S, 729
Armv Intel lisence (G-2) 722, 734
Assistant Chief of Staff (G-2. Army) 722, 734
Assistant Secretary of Defense (International Secnrity Affairs) 719
Attorney General ('United States) 724-727, 729, 732, 737-739, 742
I'.oUing, Maj. Gen. A. R 722, 729, 731, 734, 73r,, 739, 740
F.rownell, Mr 727
Bryan, Frederick P 719
Carl, Maj. Gen. Joseph F 724
Carr, Francis P 719
Carroll. Maj. Gen. Joseph F 722, 723, 7.31, 740
Cohn, Roy M 719, 721
Coleman, Aaron Hymau 722, 723, 740-743
Collier, Robert A., testimony of 720-744
Communists 72."», 730, 73S, 742, 744
Cramer, Colonel 724
Department of the Army 720, 722, 72S-730, 732-734, 739-742
Dirlvsen, Senator 710
Europe 720
i'ederal Bureau of Investigation (l^Bl) 721-72."),
727, 729-731, 733-735, 737, 738, 740-743
Federal Goyernment 718, 732, 743
Fort Monmouth 718, 72.'), 72(5, 729, 738, 740, 742
G-2 (Army Intelligence) 722, 734
Goyernment of the United States 718, 732, 743
ITensel, H. Struye 718-720
Hooyer, J. Edgar 718, 721-72.J, 727-735, 738-743
Inspector General (USAF) 723
Intelligence Department (Army) 720
International Security Affairs 718, 719
Leyy, Gill 724
McCarthy, Senator Joe 710-719, 721-729, 731, 733, 734, 736-744
McClellan, Senator 718
OSI 724
Pentagon 720, 722, 740
Potter, Senator 719
Presidential directiye 72(i, 733
Radar laboratories (Fort Monmouth) 742, 744
Reynolds, Wesley P 724
Rosenberg, Julius 742
Russian espionage 741-743
Sanders, Ed S 724
Secretary of the Army 710, 720, 723, 724, 728, 731, 73(;, 739, 742
Secretary for the International Security Affairs 710
Special Inyestigations (Inspector General, USAF) 723
Steyens, Robert T 716, 723, 724, 728, 731, 733, 736, 730, 742
Te.stimony of 720
United States Air Force 722, 723, 730, 732
United States Army 720, 722, 728-730, 732-734, 739-742
United States Army (Intelligence Department) 720
United States Attorney General : 724-727, 729, 732, 737-739, 742
United States Goyernment 718, 732, 743
Washington, D. C 722, 740
I
o
BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY
3 9999 05442 1738