Skip to main content

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

See other formats




Given By 


JOE McCarthy, roy m. cohn, and 









S. Res. 189 

PART 26 

MAY 11, 1954 

Printed for the use of the Committee ou Government Operations 



46620* WASHINGTON : 1954 I 


Boston Public Library 
Superintendent of Documents 

SEP 8 -1954 

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



EVERETT Mckinley DIRKSEN, Illinois JOHN F. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 

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

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

Special Subcommii^tee on Investigations 

KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota, Chairman, 


Rat H. Jenkins, Chief Counsel 

Thomas R. Prewitt, Assistant Counsel 

ROBERT A. Collier, Assistant Counsel 

SOLis HORWITZ, Assistant Counsel 

Charles A. Maner, Secretary 







TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1954 

United States Senate, 
Special Subcommittee on Investigations of the 

Committee on Government Operations, 

Washington, D. C. 

The subcommittee met at 11 : 37 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 ; Sen- 
ator Everett McKinley Dirksen, Republican, Illinois; Senator Charles 
E. Potter, Republican, Michigan; Senator Henry C. Dworshak, Re- 
publican, Idaho; Senator John L. IMcClellan, Democrat, Arkansas; 
Senator Henry M. Jackson, Democrat, Washington; and Senator 
Stuart Symington, Democrat, Missouri. 

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

Principal participants: Senator Joseph R. INIcCarthy, 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; 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, Assist- 
ant Secretary of Defense. 

(At 10 : 40 a, m. the following colloquy occurred :) 

Senator Mundt. The Chair wishes to make an announcement : He 
has just had a telephone call from Senator Dirksen, who advises him 
that — the first order of business being the resolution that he was going 
to submit and that he has drawn up — advises me that he is changing 
it and that he is in the process of having it typed and consequently 
has requested that we defer the opening until 11 : 30. So we will con- 
tinue to stand in recess until 11 : 30, and the witness will be dismissed. 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, let us proceed with the testi- 

(There was further discussion out of hearing of the reporter.) 

Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, I move that witnesses be heard 
until Senator Dirksen is ready to come in with his revised resolution. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair is in no position to consider motions 



until he calls the meeting to order. I simply made an announcement 
that Senator Dirksen had requested that in line with the understand- 
ino^ that he was to make his motion the first order of business. He 
called me and asked me to state that he was getting the thing typed 
up and mimeographed and it was announced as a courtesy to him that 
we w^ould defer the opening of the hearings until 11 : 30, which the 
Chair has said he would do. The witnesses will be dismissed until 
11 : 30. We will reconvene promptly at 11 : 30. 

Senator Mundt. The committee will come to order. 

The Chair would like to welcome our guests to the committee room 
and advise them, if they have not been here before, that we have a 
committee rule requiring that there be no audible manifestations of 
approval or disapproval of any kind at any time. You are w^elcome to 
be here so long as you comply with that rule. The officers in the 
audience have a standing instruction from the committee to politely 
escort from the room immediately any of our guests who violate the 
terms under which they came into the committee room. 

I want to say again that the audience has been perfectly magnificent 
through these long hearings and that the officers have done a splendid 
job. We hope that those conditions will continue. 

The Chair had agreed at the conclusion of the meeting yesterday, 
the business meeting which preceded the hearing, to recognize Senator 
Dirksen for the purpose of making a motion. He has it now typed 
out. Copies are available for the members of the committee and the 
press, and I will distribute them and then recognize Senator Dirksen. 

Senator Dirksen. 

Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, first of all let me apologize to the 
committee for discommoding its session this morning. The answer 
is very simple. The days are extremely long. There is so much work 
to be accomplished that I just find it almost impossible in the space 
of an 18-hour day to get around to everything. Then sometimes my 
feeble talents are not too facile in seeking to interpret viewpoints and 
human reactions when it comes to language. 

There are, as a matter of fact, only two modifications in this motion, 
apart from the motion that I made yesterday. 

Mr. Chairman, I shall submit it formally now and I will read it for 
the benefit of the committee. 

Senator Mundt. I wished to inquire whether Mr. Welch and Mr. 
Steveiis has a copy. 

Mr. St. Clair, here is an extra copy. 

Mr. St. Clair. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Bryan. Do you have a copy for me, Mr. Chairman ? 

Senator Mundt. Yes, sir. 

Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, as I go along I shall note the two 

I move that the testimony of Secretary Stevens be conclnded on the adoption 
of this motion ; that Senator McCarthy be then called for testimony and for 
direct and cross-examination ; that on the conclusion of Senator McCarthy's 
testimony the public hearings be recessed 

and this next proviso, Mr. Chairman, is new — 

Provided, That other witnesses requested by any principal for rebuttal may be 
called into executive session forthwith and such tesfcimony be made public 


That is the new matter. 

That committee counsel be instructed to survey the charges and testimony, 
and interview all witnesses suggested by any party concerned as well as any 
other witness whom the chairman or counsel deem necessary and then report his 
resum(§ of the statements of all witnesses and any other facts brought to the 
attention of counsel, to the subcommittee which subcommittee shall then deter- 
mine whether further public hearings are necessary ; that at the conclusion of 
the testimony by Senator McCarthy the regular subcommittee shall resume its 
normal functions under the rules of the Senate with respect to any matters not 
related to the pending controversy. 

and this next phrase, Mr. Chairman, is new : 

With the understanding that no investigation of military installations or 
personnel shall be undertaken until the subcommittee has concluded the pending 
Investigation ; and that subcommittee counsel conclude his survey and make his 
report to the subcommittee not later than June 10, 1954. 

I think the new language, Mr. Chairman, speaks for itself pretty 
well, and I have nothing else by way of explanation to make, except 
that in my judgment in the public interest in a time of tension, I trust, 
that we can get the hearings recessed. I think first of all that this 
resolution is within the rule, that it is within the jurisdiction of the 
subcommittee as I interpret the rules that were adopted for the conduct 
of tliis hearing. 

I sincerely hope, Mr. Chairman, that the principals can agree, be- 
cause we have gone far afield and we have departed somewhat already 
from the essential and the simple issues that were involved, namely, 
the charge of improper conduct made by the Army and the answers 
and the countercharges made by Senator McCarthy and the staff to 
the effect that these were inspired by certain motives that have already 
in part been ventilated before this hearing. 

That is the whole story in a nutshell. 

Senator Dworshak. I will second the motion. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Dw^orshak seconds the motion. It calls 
for discussion. The Chair will be happy to recognize first any mem- 
bers of the committee who might want to speak on the motion. 

Senator McClellan-. Mr. Chairman, I suggest you again inquire 
of the principals whether they have agreed to this motion. 

Senator ]\Iundt. The Chair expects to inquire of the principals 
concerning their reaction. Senator McClellan. I want to offer first 
of all to the members of the committee the opportunity to say what 
they might want to say, as a courtesy to my colleagues on the com- 

Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, perhaps one explanatory word 
might be necessary with respect to the first item of new matter in- 
cluded in the present motion. It came about as a result of a question 
that was raised by Mr. Welch at one of the hearings in room 357, 
where he raised the question of possible rebuttal. This language is tho 
result of my rather modest speculations on that point, and I read the 
language again: Provided that other witnesses requested by any 
principal for rebuttal may be called in executive session forthwith, 
and such testimony be made public immediately. That does make 
the testimony available. It does not intrude upon the continuity of 
the proceedings. But if some point of major moment should arise 
that was bitterly contested, there would then be a chance to bring a 
witness into executive session for the purpose of offering rebuttal on 
that point. 


Senator Potter. Will the Senator yield at that point? 

Senator Mundt. The Chair recognizes Senator Potter. 

Senator Potter. Would that include a witness being called to submit 
new evidence, new testimony ? 

Senator Dirksen. Well, I thought perhaps it ought to go only to 
rebuttal, and so I have used the word rebuttal. 

Senator Jackson. Would the Senator yield at that point? 

Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson. 

Senator Jackson. Well, it seems to me that misses the whole point, 
if I understand the pleadings in this controversy. There is yet to be 
heard initial charges by some of the principals that are in the form 
of charges and countercharges. The Senator's motion limits the testi- 
mony after Senator McCarthy's appearance only to rebuttal testimony. 
In other words, you can only rebut testimony offered in this public 
hearing. But if I read the documents that have been presented to this 
committee as the foundation of the charges on which the committee 
started the investigation, it includes from each of the principals 
denials of charges and also charges of an affirmative nature by each 
of the principals. By the very nature of this motion, it will mean that 
any witnesses after two of the principals have been heard can only 
testify in rebutting testimony given in this open hearing. 

Senator Dirksen. That matter, Mr. Chairman, I thought was con- 
sidered by the other language in the resolution, with reference to the 
responsibilities of counsel to take statements of witnesses and to make 
further examination, to report a resume, and then for the committee 
to determine whether further public hearings should be reinstated at 
a later date. 

Senator McCarthy. May I ask a question, Senator Dirksen ? 

Senator Jackson. May I finish the question I was asking ? It will 
only take a moment. 

With reference to the directive in the motion for the counsel to inter- 
view witnesses, I would like to inquire of counsel if it is not true that 
he has already interviewed the witnesses in accordance with the 
directives from the committee at the outset of the hearing. 

Senator Dirksen. That was done in accordance before 2,400 pages of 
testimony were taken. 

Senator Jackson. I think counsel can answer that question. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins ? 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, as far as we now know, we know that 
we have interviewed all of the principals to this controversy. As far 
as we now know we have interviewed all corroborative witnesses. I 
might say, however, that from time to time all of the parties to this 
controversy are presenting to us additional witnesses whom we are 
interviewing in executive session. We never know, Senator Jackson, 
when we have finished, but we have done just precisely what I have 
now stated. 

Senator Jackson. Yes. Well, it is natural that there would be new 
witnesses from time to time that would have to be interviewed because 
of testimony developed in the hearing. But it is my understanding, 
then, that all of the principals have been interviewed and a lot of 
collateral witnesses previously. 

Mr. Jenkins. You are entirely correct. 

Senator Jackson. So this motion, instead of asking to interview 
witnesses for the most part, should be worded to reinterview witnesses. 


Senator Mundt. If the Chair interprets the motion correctly, it 
seems to me that it provides both for reinterview, if there be such, and 
interviewing any other witness that the chairman or the counsel and 
the Chair — the Chair would interpret "chairman" there to mean com- 
mittee — deems necessary and report his resume of the statements. 
The element that is new to the committee, of course, at least as far as 
the Chair is concerned and I am sure it is true of other committee 
members, the counsel has interviewed the witnesses but we have not 
been given a summary or resume of what they have said. 

Senator Jackson. That is correct. But it wouldn't be necessary to 
recess the hearings and have counsel reinterview the witnesses. All 
we need to get from counsel is a summary of the information that 
counsel has received in connection with the interview of those witnesses. 
I think it is just duplication. 

Senator ISIundt. Is the chair correct in his interpretation of the 
motion that that provides for interviews or reinterviews and a sum- 
mary of information so that the committee may know what counsel 
has determined in the course of his interview ? 

Senator Dirksen. Very definitely. 

Senator McCarthy. May I ask a question of counsel ? 

Senator Mdxdt. Yes, anyone who is involved here, may ask a 

Senator McCarthy. This is the first time that I have seen the 
resolution. It differs materially from the one suggested yesterday. 
I would like to ask Senator Dirksen if I am correct in this interpreta- 
tion of it. No. 1, that McCarthy take the stand immediately, and be 
subjected, of course, to as much examination and cross-examination 
as any counsel or member of the committee wants, that if, during my 
testimony any of the principals feel that they can contradict what I 
am saying, that they have a right to call w^itnesses then in executive 
session ; that their testimony be made public. No. 1. 

No. 2, that this interruption of my testimony be confined to re- 
buttal and at the end of it and his staff complete their survey of the 
evidence, any additional w^itnesses they feel they must interview, and 
that we are giving them a time limit of 30 days, but that if they want 
to come in sooner than that, and I am very interested in this, if they 
can come in sooner than that and render a report, I assume this would 
not preclude them from coming in sooner, is that right? 

Senator Dirksen. That is correct, and June 10 was adopted partly^ 
on the suggestion of counsel to make sure there would at least be 
ample time to complete the complete survey. 

Senator McCarthy. Let me ask just one other question, Mr. 
Dirksen. You refer to military installations. Let us see what is the 
exact language : 

* * * matters not related to the pending controversy, with the understanding 
that no investigation of military installations or personnel shall be under- 
taken * * *. 

I think that is open to interpretation and I would like to know 
now whether or not that would preclude the regular committee in 
going into defense plants where we have so many, roughlj^, I think, 
130 Communists. It would not preclude us from that. 

Senator Dirksen. Definitely not. The words "military installa- 
tions" are used there for exactly wliat it means. It must be a military 

46620°— 54— pt. 26—2 


installation as such, a fort, a cantonment, any base of any kind, and 
military personnel. 

Incidentally, I have included that because on reflection it occurred 
to me that it wouldn't be quite the fair thing to develop an advantage 
on one side or the other by having an investigation of a matter that, 
while not directly related to this controversy, is in the same broad 
field and might be diversionary in character. I think very properly 
speaking it ought to be included here. 

Senator McCarthy. May I say, Senator Dirksen, if I might take 
10 seconds, I felt I understood the resolution fully, but I wanted to 
have the explanation on the record in case it is adopted so there can 
be no question at some future time. 

Senator Dirksen". I hope I made that clear. 

Senator Potter. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Potter? 

Senator Potter. I would like to ask Senator Dirksen two questions. 
This motion that you have presented is a vehicle for the hearings 
from here on in. Do you anticipate that if this procedure is adopted 
all the pertinent facts in the controversy will be ascertained ? 

Senator Dirksen. I haven't the slightest doubt about it. I think 
that already there is so much testimony on the record with respect 
to the original charges and the countercharges that the rest of it 
certainly we can gather without too feebly immobilizing the com- 
mittee for carrying on, for one thing, and at a spectacular plane, for 

Senator Potter. Also, all the pertinent facts will be made public ? 

Senator Dirksen. Very definitely so. Even the transcripts that 
might be taken in executive sessions would be made public immedi- 
ately within the language of this resolution. 

Senator JMundt. The Chair was about to inquire of Senator Dirk- 
sen on that particular point. As I understand, this resolution pro- 
vides that regardless of what testimony might be sought and secured 
in executive session, it would all be transmitted to the public much 
in the fashion that it was done in the MacArthur hearings, which as I 
recall, w^as that about every hourly period a full transcript was given 
to the press. 

Senator Dirksen. That is correct. 

Senator Mundt. Do I further understand that this would not pro- 
vide for the conclusion of these hearings, but would simply provide 
for the putting of McCarthy on the stand and getting his testimony 
and then during the interim period provide for the counsel to report to 
the committee members those facts which we have not secured from 
the executive testimony, at which time we would then determine 
whether further public hearings would be required or necessary? 

Senator Dirksen. That is very explicit in the motion. 

Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington. 

Senator Symington Mr. Chairman, this is a long resolution and 
I suggest that before we have any decision on it we study it. It is 
my understanding that Mr. Stevens is not feeling well. It would 
be my suggestion that we find out, if we could, how much longer 
the testimony of Mr. Stevens is desired by Senator McCarthy and 
his staff, and that we proceed now to examine the witnesses and that 


we take this matter up some time later, after we have had a chance 
to thoroughly study it. 

Mr. CoHN. I might say, if Mr. Stevens is not feeling well, I don't 
want to ask him any questions until he is feeling well. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair has tried several times to find out how 
many questions would be asked of the Secretary, without avail, and 
he has always gotten the same answer. I see no reason to pursue 

I will say that Secretary Stevens has not told the Chairman he 
isn't feeling well and he looks perfectly fine and physically fit as far 
as the Chair can see from here. 

Secretary STE^'ENS. The witness is feeling fine. Senator Mundt. 

Senator Mundt. I am delighted to hear that. At all events, I think 
Senator Symington may raise a valid point as far as the Chair is 
concerned. It is a long resolution. It is the first time he has had a 
chance to see it. He wants to know exactly what is in it and he wants 
everybody to know what is in it before he goes around and inquires 
of the various entities their reactions. If the Senator's proposal is 
that lie feels it would be justice to defer that until 2 : 30, that is some- 
thing whicli I say might merit the consideration of the committee, 
Senator Symington. 

Senator IMcClellan. Mr. Chairman, so far as I am concerned, I 
am ready to act, and I may say this 

Senator Mundt. The Chair is ready to act. 

Senator McClellan. I simply want to hear what the parties to this 
controversy have to say about it. I understood the Chair to say yester- 
day, unless they agreed to this motion, he could not support it. I 
would like to have that information made available now for my own 

Senator Mundt. The Chair, if we decide to vote on this now — I was 
simply responding to Senator Symington's suggestion. He said he 
thought we should have more time to study it. If other members 
require more time to study it 

Senator McClellan. I am not opposing it if anybody wants to take 
more time to study it, but as I study it I want to know what the attitude 
of the principals are with respect to it and whether they have agreed 
to it or now consent to it. 

Senator JMundt. The Chair will certainly ascertain that at the 
proper time, and the proper time would be now if we decide to vote on 
it now. If we decide that committee members should have more time 
to study it 

Senator Syimington. I will vote on it now, I was opposed to it 
before and I am opposed to it today. 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, I ask for the information 
from the principals as a matter of guidance for me before I proceed 
further. I see no reason why they cannot be asked just at this time. 

Senator Mundt. Very well, if you think they have had enough time 
to study it, the Chair will propose 

Senator McClellan. If they haven't, they can say they haven't. 
I just want to find out. 

Senator Mundt. Before he asks that question, let me ask each of the 
principals this question, because the Chair wants to say something in 
his own behalf as to his position on the vote on tliis matter since I have 
been referred to by my distinguished ranking colleague. I shall make 


clear what will motivate my vote and I would like to do it in my own 
words. Before doino; that and before asking them to express any 
opinion on tlie resolution, may I simply make this simple request of 
each of you : Whether you have had sufficient time in your opinion to 
read over the rather long resolution so that when I ask the question 
you will be prepared to make a reply or whether you would prefer to 
wait, say, until the 2 : 30 session to do that. I will inquire first on that 
point then of Senator McCarthy. 

Senator McCarthy. I would want to ask one further question of 
Senator Dirksen in regard to the interpretation of this language. 

Senator Muxdt. Don't ask it now. I just want to find out what 
your thinking is. 

Senator McCarthy. I will be ready to answer immediately as soon 
as I have an interpretation of two words. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Bryan, would you like to have an opportunity 
to discuss this with your client, and wait until 2 : 30, or would you 
say you are ready to make a decision ? 

jNIr. Bryak. Mr. Chairman, I have just seen this resolution in its 
altered form for the first time. 

Senator Mundt. I know that. 

Mr. Bryan. I have some pretty well crystalized views as to what 
my thinking is. But my client is not here, and I think at least my 
client should have the o))portunity to see the resolution and for me 
to discuss it with him. That is not, Mr. Chairman, to be interpreted 
as any lack of decision on what my attitude will be. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair would seem to feel that is a perfectly 
legitimate position. He is not a lawyer, but if he were a lawyer for 
a client, he would think he would want to consult with his client on 
something as significant as this. 

Mr. Bryan. You express it perfectly. 

Senator Mundt. I see no reason for asking Mr. Welch this question, 
because since there is a party who wants to wait until 2 : 30, I see no 
reason to stampede them in this decision. 

Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, I think nobody yet has put 
their hands on Mr. Welch. I think he has the right to decide whether 
he is being forced to give his opinion or not. 

Senator Mundt. If you insist, then, I will ask Mr. Welch whether 
he feels that at this time he has had a chance to study this thing ade- 
quately so that he can answer the question that he knows the Chair 
will ultimately ask, or whether he would like more time to read it over. 

Secretary Stevens. May I make a statement on this point ? 

Senator Mundt. Surely. 

Secretary Stevens. I made a statement yesterday afternoon that I 
thought that all the witnesses should come before this committee in 
public hearing and get the facts in this case before this committee. 
I have not changed that point of view. I have no agreement, Senator 
McClellan, with anj^body. I still think we must get the facts out on 
this table through calling in public the witnesses who can be seen by 
the. members of this committee and by those in this room, and by those 
on television, as they give the testimony, similarly to what I have 
done as I have sat here over the days. I do not want to be interpreted 
in making these remarks as in any way being an obstructionist. I 
have profound respect for the elective offices in this country and for 


the committees of this Congress <and for tliis committee. It goes 
without saying that whatever decision may be taken by this committee, 
the Army will abide by it. But insofar as the Army is concerned, at 
the present time we do not subscribe to the idea of putting witnesses 
into executive session. 

Senator IMundt. Each person having expressed himself and Mr. 
Bryan deciding he would like to consult with his client, the Chair 
suggests we vote on this at 2:30 this afternoon, at which time all 
parties will have had an opportunity to consult. And at which time 
the Chair will ask specifically the question which he has in mind, and 
which he has announced publicly he will vote, when it comes his time to 
vote. I assume, then, Mr. Counsel, that we can continue with the 
examination of the witnesses. 

Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, may I make a short statement 
at this time ? 

Senator Mundt. Certainly. 

Senator Symington. As I understand the resolution, just as a mat- 
ter of common sense and fairness, not of law, I have just written it 
down as I read it, 2 of the 3 McCarthy principals have subjected 1 of 
the Army principals to vigorous and intense cross-examination over a 
period of some 14 days, 13 perhaps. On the basis of the proposal that 
is now suggested by my friend and distinguished colleague from Illi- 
nois, 1 of these 2 McCarthy principals would never have to answer 
in public hearing under oath a single question. 

Mr. Chairman, I do not think that is fair or proper. And I want 
to say again that I am opposed to all executive hearings. 

I believe the people have the right to form their opinions in open 

Thank you. 

Senator Mundt. Are there any other committee members who would 
like to express themselves on the resolution before we proceed with 
the interrogation of Secretary Stevens ? 

Senator Jackson. I just have this brief statement to make in con- 
nection with Senator Dirksen's motion, which in my opinion does not 
permit all of those accused to take the stand. I would like to quote 
from President Eisenhower's remarks made in this city November 23, 

If we are going to continue to be proud that we are Americans, there must be 
no weakening of the codes by which we have lived, by the right to meet your 
accuser face to face. 

I hope my colleagues will give serious thought to this very wise pro- 
nouncement by President Eisenhower. 

That is all. 

Senator Mundt. Do any of my other colleagues have a statement? 

Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, I must make one observation. I 
have gi-eat res])ect for the President of the United States, and I can 
subscribe to that statement, and I think here, of course, accusers and 
accused have confronted each other. Secondly, it is for the committee 
to determine whether public hearings shall be reinstated at a later 
date and testimony taken from others relevant to the issue that is before 
us, so it can be expeditiously resolved. So there is nothing untoward 
in this proceeding it becomes the responsibility of a committee of the 
legislative branch of the Government to take this action. It is ours 


and we cannot delegate it or alienate that responsibility from our- 
selves. I am glad to accept it and I am glad to meet it. 

Senator Jackson. Mr. Chairman, I merely wanted to observe that 
if this motion is adopted, charges that have been made against some 
of the principals in public will not be answered in public. It should 
obviously be answered in the same forum where the charges w^ere 
made. And I may say, also, that a part of this case is not just the 
right of an individual to rebut, to answer testimony, but based on 
the record that is before this committee, which was the basis of this 
investigation, is the right of the principals to make charges as well as 
to answer them. This motion forecloses once and for all the right 
of principals who have not been heard and who will not be heard in 
public; it forecloses their right to even make those accusations even 
m executive session, let alone the deni^^l in a public session. 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman ? 

Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan. 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, I will withhold my remarks 
until you get ready to act on the motion. At that time, I will have a 
suggestion to the committee. 

Senator Mundt. Since this seems to be the testimonial hour, we 
have some reluctance apparently to begin with the interrogation of 
the witness, the Chair would like to make a statement or two in con- 
nection with this colloquy. 

In the first place, the Chair has been desirous from the start of 
trying to find some more appropriate manner by which to settle this 
unpleasant business than by doing it in this committee room, by this 
committee which has part of its personnel involved. For that reason, 
on numerous occasions I spoke out in public, on the radio and in press 
conferences, protesting against this procedure and I protested it by 
my voice and by my vote in the executive sessions when we decided 
to have this committee undertake the task, I hope that at some time 
my colleagues on the committee will see fit to vote that the notes and 
the minutes of that executive session w^iich are securely locked up 
in the safe in my office, shall be made part of the public record. 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, I so move. 

Senator Stmington. I second the motion. 

Senator Mundt. Is there any opposition ? 

By unanimous approval, we will make public, then, as fast as the 
shorthand reporter can transcribe it, the notes of the opening session. 
It will help to get more of the facts on the record. 

May the Chair continue by saying that he is tremendously im- 
pressed by the fact that a great many thoughtful Americans not 
motivated by partisanship, either from a Democrat or a Republican 
standpoint, are generally concerned by the fact that the Secretary 
of the Army and a large group of distinguished and able and im- 
portant associates, and eight members of the United States Senate 
and a considerable portion of their staff, are tied up here day after 
day after day after day, trying to adjudicate this wordy and unwhole- 
some situation. We find ourselves, it seems to me, in a world where 
the whole cause of freedom is being challenged by tremendous forces. 
It is tremendously hard for the Chair to believe that in that kind of 
world, with that kind of challenge, when the enemy has an atomic 
bomb, when there is danger that all of our structures of civilization 
can be shaken or shattered, it is terribly hard for the Chair to honestly 


believe that this is the most important business to which the Secretary 
of War, the Secretary of the Army, and his associates, and these eight 
members of the Senate and their associates can devote themselves. 

It seems to me, furthermore, that there should be enough give and 
take, there should be enough concern about this common danger and 
the effort to save in this age of survival our way of life, that wo 
could find some more appropriate and speedier method for adjudi- 
cating this miserable business in which we find ourselves involved. 

It seems to me we should find some more constructive purpose to 
which we can devote our time. 

The Chair is very much impressed by the long and careful efforts 
made by Senator Dirksen in proposing his series of motions. The 
Chair has not supported any of them in the past because he has felt 
that it is his duty as one of the adjudicators to make sure that no 
formula for changing the rules, for shortening the hearings or termi- 
nating them or taking them off the air should be engaged in which 
any one of the three entities involved would say they considered to 
be un-American or unjust or unfair. 

The Chair has not voted for such resolutions in the past. The 
Chair will not vote for such resolution in the future if there are entities 
among us who this afternoon will say they consider an honest effort 
to try to reduce the scope of this hearing to fall within the category 
of injustice or dishonesty or un-Americanism or unfairness. 

Having said that, the Chair would like to say that in his opinion 
this is a pretty fair approach. I cannot agree at all with what Sena- 
tor Jackson says when he says this denies the privilege of everybody 
to be heard because this keeps the status open, this provides something 
which I think this committee might well have had a long time ago, 
which would have been helpful in expediting the hearings, and that 
is an adequate opportunity to consult with counsel concerning the 
facts he has which we do not have, because he has had a chance to 
interview, he tells us, all of the principals and all of the witnesses. 

I am persuaded a great deal by the fact that this provides that op- 
portunity, provides us a chance to find out what has occurred in 
executive session, in executive testimony. 

With those full facts before us, I think we can more intelligently 
decide whether more open hearings are desired or whether they are 

Having said that, the Chair reaffirms his position, however. He 
feels that in this body of responsible men, everybody must be equally 
aware of the kind of world in which we live, the kind of challenges 
that confront us, the kind of duties that beg for our attention. But 
if there be those among us who this afternoon are going to say they 
consider this resolution to be unfair, that they consider this resolution 
to be unjust, that they think that it is more important to protract and 
continue these open hearings under the present system with the 
present rules, going on and on, then the Chair is going to vote to sup- 
port that position because they have a right to insist on their concept 
of justice. But the Chair believes the responsibility for prolonga- 
tion and the responsibility for protraction should be firmly fastened 
upon those who say they want that to occur rather than upon the 
members of this committee, who on both sides of the aisle have devoted 
a tremendous amount of time, first of all, to trying to find competent 


counsel, which we secured, and then determining a rule of procedure 
which would be fair and equitable despite the fact that the wrong 
committee is trying to do the right job, despite the fact that we have 
been pushed to try to adjudicate a situation in which some of the 
personnel of this committee is involved. 

Then we devoted long and careful attention to try to find a format 
for making the presentation of charges and countercharges. We have 
been going on continuously. Unless we make some change, we are 
going on continuously, and the Chair believes for many long, melan- 
choly weeks in the future, during Avhich time all of us in this room 
who have other responsibilities will have to deny themselves the right 
to measure up to those duties because of this responsibility. 

The Chair has nothing further to add. 

Senator McClellan. JMr. Chairman, I would like to make just one 
observation : 

I have repeated over and over how I regard these charges, how 
serious they are. May I say if the charges against Secretary Stevens 
and his staff are true, then the presence of Secretary Stevens and 
his staff here in this hearing room means that they are doing less 
harm to their country while they are here than they would be doing 
if they were in the Pentagon. 

Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman ? 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington. 

Senator Symington. Some days ago I presented that if, for the 
security of the country or for any other reason, we should get ahead 
with the regular business of this subcommittee, that the staff of the 
subcommittee interested in those problems could be transferred to an- 
other committee in order that the matters at hand, like Communists 
in defense plants, could be proceeded with. I still make that recom- 
mendation this morning. 

I agree with my distinguished colleague from Arkansas, about the 
gravity of these charges. Very grave charges have been made against 
the Army, and very grave charges have been made against the chair- 
man, the chief counsel, and the executive director of this committee. 
As I read this memorandum or resolution, despite those charges the 
resolution provides that this committee, before these charges have 
been adjudicated, should go right ahead. 

That is all I have to say, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Just to keep the record straight, the Chair has 
never said that these charges are not important. They are important. 
The Chair does not believe they are as important as the threat from 
communism abroad or the threat of communism at home. The Chair 
does not believe that in this resolution is incorporated anything which 
would prevent this committee from endeavoring to adjudicate and 
report to the public the full set of facts, and the public has a right 
to have the full set of facts. The Chair is tremendously interested in 
putting those representatives of the Army who are here and these 
representatives of the Senate who are here back on the job of survival 
and protecting this country. The Chair wants it clearly understood 
that if these hearings are protracted, he will be here, and he believes 
we should meet morning and afternoon and nights and Saturdays 
from now on if we are going to continue them, if they are that im- 


portant. He will be here, but he will be here with tears in his eyes, 
because he believes there are other duties to which everybody involved 
in this controversy should be devoting himself. I hope and I pray that 
during the noon hour men will search their souls and their consciences 
to determine whether there is not something more important than try- 
ing to protract these things in public as we have been, and still with- 
out doing violence to justice, find some other way to adjudicate the 

The Chair says now, so that all parties will know, if j^ou say to me 
at 2 : 30 you think this is unfair to take off television and off the air 
and change the rules, the chairman is going to vote to provide for 
those who insist upon it that which they consider to be equity and 
justice and fairness in the form of procedure. 

Senator Stiviington. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Potter is recognized. I am sorry. 

Senator Symington. I beg your pardon. 

Senator Potter. Mr. Chairman, I think in all of this discussion we 
have missed the main point. We are trying to ascertain facts as a 
result of charges made on the part of personnel in the Army and 
countercharges made on the part of Senator McCarthy and members of 
his staff. We never promised that we were going to run in competition 
with INlilton Berle. We only promised that we would ascertain the 
facts and let the public know the facts. What concerns me is the 
belief that public opinion in this country is not favorable to this 
type of public brawl. They want to know the facts, but they are not 
interested in having the dignity of the United States Senate, the dig- 
nity of the administration, being lowered with each day of this hear- 
ing. Our prestige abroad has greatly suffered as a result of these 
hearings. I think we must take into consideration any vehicle to 
ascertain the facts, and do it as quickly as possible, so that the prestige 
of this great Nation of ours will not unduly suffer as a result of this 
public diplay of personality clashes between the legislative branch of 
our Government and the executive branch of our Government. 

I sincerely hope that we can devise a vehicle which will ascertain all 
the facts and do it quickly, so that we can get on with the more im- 
portant business of our Government and so that our prestige at home 
and abroad will again have the place in the sunlight which it deserves. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington, you addressed the Chair? 

Senator Symington. I vranted to just set the record straight. If in 
any way — I don't think I did — but if in any way I implied that you 
did not think these charges on both sides were grave, I most humbly 
apologize for that implication, because I never thought it and I did 
not mean to say it. 

Senator Mundt. I am sure you didn't say it and I am sure you didn't 
imply it, but I wasn't sure but what the television audience didn't 
imply it or infer it from what you said. 

I think they are serious. But I do not think they are the most serious 
business confronting the United States today. While I think that 
every person in this room who is involved in the controversy should 
have and must have a full chance to maintain his reputation and 
defense, that more important than individuals and more important 


than reputations is the future of America, and we have some pretty 
serious business to be done. We are at the crossroads now and will 
determine this afternoon whether we are going to find a way to shorten 
these hearings which the parties to the dispute will consider fair and 
equitable, or whether we set our teeth into this thing for another 2 
months, perhaps, and perhaps longer, while the interminably long 
list of witnesses is called up and discussed in public, and at the con- 
clusion we make a report, as we wonld make it under any of the pro- 
posals before us, whether it be the McClellan or the Dirksen motion, 
or if we want to continue on ad infinitum. 

I think we are now ready to interview the witness. 

Senator McCarthy. ]\Ir. Chairman ? 

Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy. 

Senator McCarthy. I hesitate taking any time at all after we spent 
about 2 hours talking about how we are going to rush this thing 
through. But I would like to make my position crystal clear. As far 
as I am concerned, as the Chair knows, I did not initiate this. It 
was initiated by Mr. Stevens and Mr. Adams. 

As far as I am concerned, I will lean over backwards to do anything 
humanly possible to try and close up this circus so we can get back 
to the work of digging Communists out of Government, graft, cor- 
ruption, and fraud. That is the work of the committee. 

The only reason why I am not passing upon Senator Dirksen's mo- 
tion this morning is that I would, during the noon hour, like to get 
the interpretation of some of the language in it so we won't have a 
long drawn out hassel about this at some future date, period. 

Senator Muxdt, It is 12 : 25, if the Chair's watch is correct. I 
don't know if we should start for 5 minutes. Senator Jackson sug- 
gests we go around for one round of questions. 

We will certainly go around until 12 : 30. Mr. Jenkins ? 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, I have no questions to ask the 

]Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman ? 

Senator Mundt. The Chair will pass. Mr. Welch ? 

]\Ir. Welch. I would like to make a remark about the Secretary, 
if I may, and about his physical condition. 

Senator Mundt. I think under the latitude which we have extended 
ourselves, this morning, sir, you should have that right. 

Mr. Welch. Thank you. 

At the conclusion of the hearings yesterday, the Secretary went to 
his home, to me a very unusual thing. In the course of the evening 
I called Mrs. Stevens and I learned that he liad had a shot of penicil- 
lin yesterday because of a virus infection. He had concealed that from 
me in what' I considered to be typical fashion. It was given to him 
by an Army doctor. 

I asked her if he had a personal physician and she said, "No, but 
I have." I said, "Would you have your personal physician look at 
the Secretary this evening?" That was done and the same physician 
looked at him again this morning. That physician reported that the 
Senator could go on. 

Senator Jackson. The Secretary. 


Mr. Welch. That the Secretary could ^o on. I have learned in 
the course of the morning that the Secretary has today had a second 
shot of penicillin. He attempted to conceal that from me. He wants 
to say "I am feeling fine. I can go on for 30 days, if need be." But 
1, while I somewhat admire him, I am not totally convinced that he 
feels as fine as he would like to have you believe. 

It seems to me that it would be a gracious act for the committee to 
say now that we will suspend with the Secretary at least until he is 
through his penicillin shots, and that we would take up the testi- 
mony of some other principal. Observe, if you will, the word 

I do not think we ought to go off into collateral witnesses, if the 
Secretary is excused at this moment, but there are other principals 
leady whose interrogation could begin. 

Senator ]\IcCartiiy. Mr. Chairman, may I say that this is one of 
the few times that I agree with Mr. Welch. If the Secretary has 
been having penicillin shots, if he has a virus infection, he should 
not be on this witness stand. I think I should make it clear for 
the record, however, that when we talk about 13 days, that that is 
rather a deceptive figure. Take, for example, we will give him credit 
for being on the stand a half-day today. It was taken up by speeches 
on how we can cut this short. But I do say that if the Secretary has 
been receiving treatment for any ailment, such as a virus, I know what 
it is like, I think it would be completely unfair to him, unfair to 
the committee, to have him testify. So far as I am concerned, I would 
have no objection at all to his stepping down now until such time 
that he feels that he would like to return to the stand. 

Senator Muxdt. It seems to me, Senator Jackson, with that ex- 
planation, which you didn't have when you suggested that we con- 
tinue now 

Senator Jackson. And which I didn't know about, of course. I 
acted on the Secretary's statement that he was feeling well. 

Senator Muxdt. And the further fact that it is virtually 12 : 30 ; the 
Chair would like to suggest this, that it would not be necessary, in 
order to get answers to the questions that the Chair is going to ask 
before we pass on this resolution, and Senator McClellan agrees that 
I should ask, it would not be necessary for the Secretary to be here at 
2 : 30 unless he wants to be for that purpose. I think Mr. Welch can 
confer with him through the noon hour. Let me implore this, now, 
and then we are going to adjourn, that let me implore Mr. Hensel, 
Senator McCarthy, Secretary Stevens, Mr. Welch, and Mr. Bryan who 
speaks for Mr. Hensel, that all of you will go to your respective shops 
during the lunch hour and hold yourself carefully in readiness to con- 
sult if you want to with Senator Dirksen or our counsel. If there are 
some modifications in this that would enable you to then say it is fair 
and just, I hope you will make them, or if you feel it is fair and just 
now, I hope you will say so. The Chair does not believe that there 
is much to be gained after 2 : 30 this afternoon, again trying to change 
the rules of procedures if we set ourselves to this grim business from 
now until the Fourth of July or whenever it is completed. Counsel 
will be available. Senator Dirksen will be available, and they are the 
two that sit on the committee. If you have any suggested changes or 


reports, at 2 : 30, we will take this up, and, Mr. Stevens, you will not 
be called as a witness this afternoon. You can authorize Mr. Welch 
to speak for you. 

Senator JMcCarthy. Mr. Chairman, may I suji;gest also that when 
we meet this afternoon that we find out how the various parties feel 
about this, that we vote on it and that we not waste day after day after 
day bj long-winded campaign speeches. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair certainly believes we can vote this after- 
noon. He is not going to undertake to deny Senators the right to be 
heard. However, we will meet at 2 : 30 this afternoon. 

(Whereupon, at 12 : 30 p. m., the hearing recessed, to reconvene at 
2 : 30 the same day.) 



Adams, John G 982 

Army (United States) 971, 977, 978, 980, 981 

Berle, Milton .- 981 

Bryan, Frederick P 977, 983 

Communists 973, 980, 982 

Department of the Army 971, 977, 978, 980, 981 

Dirksen, Senator 969, 979, 982, 983 

Dirksen resolution 969 

Eisenhower, President 977 

Federal Government 977, 981, 982 

Government of the United States 977, 981, 982 

Hensel, H. Struve 983 

Jackson, Senator 979, 982 

MacArthur hearings 974 

McCarthv, Senator Joe 970-974, 976, 977, 981-984 

McClellan, Senator 976, 983 

Military installations 973 

Military personnel 973, 974 

Pentagon 980 

President of the United States 977 

Secretary of the Army 970, 974-977, 979, 980, 982-984 

Secretary of War 979 

Senate of the United States 978-980, 981 

Stevens, Robert T 970, 974, 979, 980, 982-984 

Testimony of 975-977 

United States Army 971, 977, 978, 980, 981 

United States Government 977, 981, 982 

United States President 977 

United States Secretary of War 979 

United States Senate 978-980, 981 





JOE McCarthy, roy m. cohn, and 








S. Res. 189 

PART 27 

MAY 11, 1954 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Operations 

46620" WASHINGTON : 1954 

Boston Public i^. ;rary 
Superintendetit of Documents 

SEP 8 -1954 


JOSEPH K. McCarthy, Wisconsin, Chairman 
KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas 



EVERETT Mckinley DIRKSEN, Illinois JOHN F. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 

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

Richard J. O'Melia, General Coitnxel 
Walteb L. Resnolds, Chief Clerk 

Special Subcommittee on Investigations 

KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota, Chairman 


Ray H. Jenkins, Chief Counsel 

THOMAS R. Prewitt, Assistant Counsel 

ROBERT A. CoLLiEB, Assistant Counsel 

SoLis Horwitz, Assistant Counsel 

Charles A. Maneu, Secretary 



[ndex I 



TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1954 

United States Senate, 
Special Subcommittee on Investigations of the 

Committee on Government Operations, 

Washington^ D. d 


(The committee reconvened at 2 : 50 p. m., pursuant to recess.) 

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

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

Also present : Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, a United States Sen- 
ator from the State of Wisconsin ; Roy M. Cohn, clijef counsel to the 
subcommittee ; Francis P. Carr, executive director of the subcommit- 
tee; Hon. Robert T. Stevens, Secretary of the Army; John G. Adams, 
Counselor to the Army; Joseph N. Welch, special counsel for the 
Army; James D. St. Clair, special counsel for the Army; and Fred- 
erick P. Bryan, counsel to H. Struve Hensel, Assistant Secretary of 

Senator Mundt. The committee will come to order. 

As is his custom, the Chair will start by welcoming the guests who 
have come to our committee room, and reminding them that they are 
here as the guests of the committee and, consequently, must comply 
with one standing rule that the committee has asked the Chair to 
enforce. That is, there are to be no audible manifestations of ap- 
proval or disapproval from any member of the audience at any time 
or in any way. The officers in the room have been instructed by the 
Chair and by the committee to politely escort from the room, without 
any further orders, anybody who violates the conditions under which 
you enter this chamber as our guests. You know what they are. No 
audible manifestations of approval or disapproval at any time in 
any way. 



The committee will come to order, and under the arrangements under 
■which we recessed, the Chair was to recognize Senator Dirksen to dis- 
cuss his motion or to propose his motion, if he has made any changes in 
it during the course of the luncheon hour. 

Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, two minor modifications have 
been made in the motion as it was presented this morning. The first 
one, of course, is the elimination of the words "for rebuttal" in line 6 
or 7, in line 6 of the resolution submitted this morning; and there has 
been inserted after the word "forthwith" the words "and a full and 
complete transcript of such" and then "testimony." 

Those are the only two modifications made in the resolution. 

Senator McClellaNj Wliat are the insertions, "forthwith" with 

Senator Dirksen. In line 6, the words "for rebuttal" have been taken 
out so the language Avill read "requested by any principal may be called 
in executive session forthwith," and then afterward, after "forthwith," 
the words inserted "and a full and complete transcript of." So it 
reads : "and a full and complete transcript of such testimony be made 
public immediately." 

Mr. Chairman, there is little that I need to say with respect to this 
motion other than what I observed this morning, with the exception of 
one thing. I think some question arose as to whether or not tlie con- 
tinuity of testimony might be disturbed by a meeting in executive ses- 
sion. I had no such thought in mind, because if, for instance, this 
resolution were adopted and Senator McCarthy took the stand, cer- 
tainly it would not mean that the continuity of his testimony be dis- 
turbed throughout the day. This contemplates, of course, that any 
executive session that may be held would be held at the end of the 
day so as not to intrude upon the testimony of the witness. 

I think I ought to make that clear. 

Senator Mundt. I think all of the members of the committee dis- 
cussed this motion pretty fulsomely this morning, but certainly tlie 
Chair has no disposition to deny to any Senator the right to comment 
on it further if he cares to before he goes around the table to discuss 
with the various entities involved in this controversy whether they 
consider it is in the interest of fairness and equity or whether they 
protest against it as being sometliing which they consider the com- 
mittee may have devised which is unfair or unjust. 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan ? 

Senator McCiiEixAN. Do you intend to ask the principals the ques- 
tion you have said you would ask them ? 

Senator Mundt. I do, sir, the principals or their counsel. 

Senator McClellan. I would like to have their answer before I 
comment on it. 

Senator Mundt. Very well. The Chair has said publicly and wants 
to reiterate now in his own words that while he feels individually and 
personally that Senator Dirksen has evolved a formula for shortening 
these hearings which persuades the Chair to consider it in the interest 
of expedition and in the public interest because it does not close the 
hearings, it reserves to the Chair and to the committee acting together 
the right to reopen them at any time and in any way, and it does put 
in balance the testimony up to the time that we switch into a different 


procedure because it provides that Senator McCarthy must testify 
under oath before any change is made in the program. The Chair 
has held if there are entities here who through their counsel feel that 
this would l3e something unjust or unfair, the Chair would not vote 
for such a procedure. He wants this committee to continue to com- 
mand the respect of the participants in the controversy, and the public, 
and he thinks he can do that only if whatever arrangement is finally 
made, whether it seems to be satisfactory or unsatisfactory for others, 
is considered by the people involved to be in the interest of fairness. 

With that background he wants to go around the table, starting first 
with Senator ]\IcCartliy, and ask him whether in his opinion if we 
adopt this resolution and if the Chair votes for it, he feels that he has 
confidence enough in what is set out in that resolution and in the com- 
mittee and the way it will be interpreted so that he would not protest 
against it on the basis of its being unfair or unjust. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman ? 

Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy. 

Senator McCarthy. May I make a request of the Chair? I have 
agreed to so many succeeding proposed agreements to cut down the 
length of the hearing and get back to our work, and I find that the 
very able counsel, Mr. Welch, for reasons which I am sure he con- 
siders completely valid — and I am sure he has been completely honest 
in this — has disagreed. Before I start agreeing to my 29th agreement, 
I would like to know whether or not it is acceptable to Mr. Welch. 
Otherwise, we are just wasting our time. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair ])roposes to go around the triangle in 
the same order that he has been going around this path for some time 
now. He would appreciate it if the Senator from Wisconsin would, 
on his own individual responsibility, say insofar as he is concerned 
whether he would consider this as unfair or unjust because, as he 
knows, and as the ( hair has expressed himself, if either Mr. Hensel or 
Mr. Welch says it is unfaii or unjust, regardless of what the Senator 
says, then the Chair will not vote in favor of such a resolution. 

Senator McCarthy. I will be glad to do that, Mr. Chairman. I am 
speaking not only for myself but for the two young men on my staff 
who have been implicated in this matter. They have told me I could 
speak for them. I^t me say that I heartily approve of that portion 
of the resolution which provides that I must take the stand under oath 
and be subject to complete and full cross-examination. I think any- 
thing less than that would leave the public disturbed, not satisfied. 
I am somewhat disturbed about those portions which provide for 
executive session testimony. May I say the reason for that has 
nothing to do with my confidence in the committee. I think that we 
have had better press coverage of this hearing, more accurate coverage, 
let's put it that way, than any other hearing I have been in. I believe 
one of the reasons for that has been the influence of television, because 
when millions of people see what is going on, they pick up their 
paper, they don't quite like what some of the left-wingers say — I 
would like to say this is no reflection upon the vast number of working 
press, men who visit my office every day, who are completely honest, 
completely competent. I am referring to some of the bleeding heart 
columnists. Television has kept them straightened out a bit. For 
that reason I approved of this all being on television. However, if 


the committee thinks that this will shorten the hearinjifs so that we 
can ^et back to the work which we should be doins:, I would say that 
I will be more than happy to rely upon the jiulj^ment of the -vote of 
the committee and will make no objection. That goes for Mr, Carr — 
rifjht, Frank? 

Mr. Carr. That is riijht. 

Senator McCARiiiy. Does it go for you, Koy ? It goes for Mr. Carr, 
Mr. Colin and myself, period. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Bryan, over the lunch hour you have had 
opportunity, I presume, to consult with your client. I would like to 
direct the same question to you. Now that you have had an oppor- 
tunity to read this resolution, I would like to inquire of you whether, 
on tlie basis of the resolution as it is presented to you, and your 
knoAvledge of the committee and its counsel, whether you would have 
contidence that this procedure could operate without doing injury 
to your client from the standpoint of being unfair or unjust. 

Mr. Bryan. Mr. Chairman, I have had an opportunity to confer 
with my client, and, as I anticipated, my client's views just are entirely 
the same as mine were when the resolution was presented this morning. 
Tou will recall that I asked for an opportunity to confer with him 
only for the reason that he hadn't seen the resolution. I was quite 
confident as to what his views would be. Mr. Hensel's position is 
unchanged. Certain unsupported charges have been made against 
him in the answer filed by Senator McCarthy to the so-called Army 
charges which were presented to this committee. These charges have 
been categorically denied by Mr. Hensel. No proof has been offered 
in support of these charges. As a matter of fact, the testimony thus 
far, in my judgment, contradicts them. We know the facts and we 
know that these charges cannot be supported. As I pointed out yes- 
terday, there is thus far not the slightest evidence in this record to 
support them. Having made the charges, it is up to a man who makes 
charges to prove them. In this country at least, thank God, a person 
is not yet required to undertake the burden of proving his innocence 
of unsupported charges made aginst him without proof. I say to this 
committee, Mr. Chairman, and to the members of this committee, 
that there is and can be no proof in sup])ort of these charges, and at 
the approi)riate time I will move before this committee to dismiss 
the charges as to Mr. Hensel on the merit for complete failure of proof, 
and I confidently expect this committee will grant such a motion. 
The charges will then stand as unproven. I, therefore, see no reason 
for Mr. Hensel, under present circumstances, or foreseeable circum- 
stances, to oppose this resolution. We are consequently willing to go 
along with it. However, I Misli to make it very plain that if there 
is any evidence put into this record designed to implicate Mr. Hensel, 
I reserve the right to refute such evidence by the testimony of Mr. 
Hensel himself and such other witnesses as we may deem necessary 
to call. Under such circumstances, I -will insist that Mr. Hensel be 
heard just as anyone who bears witness against him has been heard by 
this committee. 

Senator Mundt. Let me be precisely sure, now, that the Chair under- 
stands your reply. It is my responsibility inasnnich as my vote is 
actually being sort of cast by proxy, either by Senator McCarthy 
or by you or by Mr. Welch, in the interest of fairness and justice. 
Does the Chair take it from that, as he thinks he does, that you raise 


1)0 protest at this time to this proposed proceeding on the basis of it 
beiiijr unfair or unjust? 

Mr. BuYAN. You specifically asked me, Mr. Chairman, whether in 
my view the resolution violates any ])riuciples of fairness, justice 
or equity as far as my clients is concerned. 

Senator Ml'ndt. That is correct, sir. 

Mr. Bhyan. I reply to you, as far as my client is concerned, with 
the reservations I made and that I think are quite plain, I do not con- 
sider that the resolution is objectionable from that point of view. 

Senator Mundt, Thank you, sir. 

Now Mr. Welch, may I repeat what I have said as best I can to 
each of the other two members of the counsel. The Chair would like 
to know, because he has stated |)ublicly how his vote will be determined 
on this issue, whetlier or not in your opinion, after having read the 
|)roposed Dirkseu resolution as modi lied, you would feel and your 
client would feel that you have confidence enough in the procedures 
set forth and in Ihis committee in its capacity to interpret this, 
so that you would not protest against this ])rocedure on the basis of its 
being unfair or unjust to your client. 

Mr. Wfxcii. Mr. Chairman, this is not an easy moment for me. 
I came down from Boston in the guise of a sim])le trial lawyer. 1 
supposed 1 would try to dig up some (piestions to ask witnesses and 
then if I didn't like the answer, ask another one. 

Instead of getting a chance to do that sort of thing, I listened to 
these remarks here of the future of our country, and how grave all 
this is, and then somebody says to Mr. Welch, "Won't you make some 
kind of a decision?" When we get to that moment, I kind of wish 
I were back in Boston, just as I suspect Mr. Jenkins kind of wishes at 
times he were back in Tennessee. 

Now I have in my family a virus and some penicillin and so forth, 
and I have temi)orarily lost contact with my client. When I had con- 
tact with him, he said to me that some three and a half lines near the 
bottom of this resolution could come out, and those I will read : 

*  * with tlie understanding that no investigation of military installations or 
personnel shall be undertaken until the subcommittee has concluded the pending 

Mr. Stevens asked me to say that he had no desire to insist on those 
words, and that he was always in favor of any investigation properly 
conducted of the military so that he would do without those words. 

Now as tr the resolution, exce])t for that, Mr. Stevens took the posi- 
tion this morning that he wotdd abide, as I recall his statement, by any 
decision this committee made, but that he felt that a full and fair 
hearing in the open was recpiired. 

1 cannot recede from that position without an opportunity to con- 
sult with him, which I think 1 should have. His position was clear, 
and I did not come back expecting to find a new resolution. I will 
say one thing, that Senator McCarthy and I are the very closest to 
an understanding between each of them that we have ever been. l)e- 
cause he said that lie was somewhat disturbed by the portion of this 
ruling calling for executive hearings and I am equally disturbed. 
It does seem to me, Mr. Chairman, that as to the five principals it 
would be far better to have their statements heard in public as was 
the case with Mr. Stevens. 

46620*— 54— pt. 27 2 


You will recall that to some extent Mr. Adams has been on the stand 
so that the committee could see him, and 1 nmst say two members of 
what I should call the opposition have been on the stand shortly. 

But Senator McCarthy, I do share your uneasiness about that por- 
tion calling for executive hearings. My own feeling would be that 
the country, this committee, would be happier if we dealt with the 
five principals plus such subsidiary witnesses as are naturally called 
to check their principal testimony in open hearing and then that we 
could have all kinds of flocks of afiidavits as to how many passes Mr. 
Schine had, under what circumstances or things of that sort. 1 here- 
fore, my position is as follows, Mr. Chariman: 

Without consultation with my client and what you might call an 
order from him to agree to this proposed resolution, I can only say 
that there is no change that I am aware ot, as I sit here, from his 

position this morning. , , , i ^i o 4. 5 

Senator Mundt. May the Chair say that he heard the Secretary s 
statement this morning. He noted in his statement that there was 
no mention of whether the Secretary considered this to be an untair 
or uniust procedure. He noted the Secretary did express approval 
and a preference for hearing all of the witnesses m open session, i he 
Chair has not quite had an answer from you, sir, as to whether you, on 
behalf of vour client, under all the circumstances and after having 
studied the resolution, whether you want to interpose an objection to 
this on the basis that you or your client would consider this to be an 
unfair or an unjust procedure. „,.,.., j- I 

Mr Welch. Mr. Chairman, with all humility, sir, because ot your j 
very brave statement of how you will vote de])ending upon the ans^yer > 
to that, I think I ought not to answer that without consultation with 

my client. 

Senator MuNDT. I think that is appropriate. 

May I inquire whether your client is where he can be reached by 
telephone so you could confer with him now ? We would like to vote 
this resolution either up or down, and get on with the business, it 
possible. We have taken a long time in discussing it. 

I was very much in hopes you could be in consultation with your 
client during the noon hour. , , i 3 

Mr. Welch. We were, but you see, a new and somewhat changed 
resolution has come up. I believe I could reach him by telephone if 
you would like me to. . . . 

Senator Muf^nx. I would surely very much appreciate it, because it 
you are going to cast my proxy, both you and 1 want it to be cast intel- 

There is a private telephone right here, sir. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman 

Senator Mundt. How to get there? 

Mr. Welch. For one thing, how do I get there, and I would just 
as soon go to some other telephone. [Laughter.] 

Senator Mundt. Surely. We will be in recess while you do. 

(Brief recess.) 

Senator Mundt. The committee will come back to order, please. 

Mr. Welch has returned to the committee room. The Chair, as 
always, will be happy to hear Mr. Welch. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, due to the wonderful invention of tele- 
vision, the Secretary was able to follow what had happened. 


Senator Mlnut. That is the be?t compliment TV lias had yet. 

Mr. Wki-cif. He was therefore ready to talk. He said that there 
did not seem to him to be sufficient chan<;e in the resolution from this 
morniiijT to alter the statement that he then made. I siJi)])ose that is 
all you need to hear from him. We talked at some "[reater length, but 
that is the substance, the important substance of what he had to say. 

Senator AIunut. Of course, Mr. Welch, you leave the ('hair very 
much in doubt with that type of statement, because he listened very 
carefully to what the Secretary had to say this morninc;, and from 
the standpoint of its relevancy there is one factor that Aveighs most 
iieavily in the mind of the (chairman, and that is, regardless of 
whether any entities to this dispute feel that these suggestions will 
expedite the hearings, move them more quickly, move them more satis- 
factorily, the ('hair is interested primarily and I might say basically 
as to whether or not any parties to this dispute feel that making this 
effort and this attem]:)t will in their opinion do violence to them from 
the standpoint of equity and justice. 1 am sure that you must have 
discussed this with the Secretary, and the Chair very much hopes that 
you will give him iin answer on which he can base his vote. 

Mr. Welch, Mr. Chairman. 1 did not need to he clairvoyant to be 
able to say to the Secietary, "You know what the Chair is going to 
ask me." He said. "Yes, I do." I said, "Well, what is your answer 
to that?" I think I quote him accurately when I say he said, "Well, 
primarily it is up to the committee to decide what is fair and just 
and equitable, but 1 don't myself think it is fair and just and equitable 
that I should be stuck on the stand for 14 days and tihat one or two of 
the parties on the other side, and perhaps one on my side, Mr. Adams, 
should never be there at all." 

So I dealt with it. Mr. Mundt, and that is what he said. 

Senator Poitrk. Mr. (^hairmaii. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Potter? 

Senator PorrER. Let's plow that long, hard furrow. 

Senator Mundt. It is still a little hard for the Chair to get a specific 
answer to a specific question, which he would like very much to have, 
because he proposes to try to cast a specific vote. 

Senator Jackson. May I ask 

Senator Mundt. May I ask you, then, Mr. Welcli, speaking on the 
basis of your consultation with the Secretary, and si)eakiiig as his 
counsel, whether you would at this time enter a ])rotest against this 
procedure on the basis that you feel it Avould be unfair and unjust? 

Mr. AVelcti. Mr. Chairman, I am not so sure it is fair or just to 
Welch to say that to him. I reported what my client's position is, sir. 
I would rather not add anything to that. It seems to me that what 
he said was quite clear. If this conunittee in its wisdom decides to run 
these hearings this way, 3'ou will see a kind of feeble grin from Mr. 
Welch and a smile from the Secretary when he is better and back. 
We Avill accept any decision that is made, gracefully. But I do not 
propose to sit at this microphone and use any form of words which 
could later be interpreted as my having made a deal about this 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. May the Chair finish this, please. 


Since the Chair's vote is involved in this he feels he has a ri<rht to 
interrof];ate the witness and try to find out exactly how his proposed 
proxy is interpretino; the question which he asks. It is a little difficult, 
sir, for the (yhair to be sure as to what the Secretary has in mind if 
you who talked with him are not sure what he had in mind. So you 
can tell me whether you are now sayinj^, either on your own re])re- 
sentation or his, that you believe if the Chair were to vote for this 
proposal, you would consider it to be an unfair or an unjust practice. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, 1 will tell you what I will say, and 
that is I have another dime in my pocket if you want me to go put 
it in the phone again. 

Senator MuNDT. I wish you would do that, sir, because 1 would like 
to have an answer to my question so I can vote as I told the American 
people I would. Will you please call again and we will give you 
another 10 minutes. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. We stand in recess. 

Senator McCarthy. P'or my information can I ask this question : 
I wonder if I was misinformed over the noon hour. I stayed in my 
office and got a sizable number of calls from Senators who were 
honestly trying to cut this short. I was informed that the changes 
that were made in the resolution presented this morning, with the 
exception of one, were made on the request of Mr. Welch. Mr. Welch 
now comes back and says this is a new resolution as far as he is con- 

Senator Mundt. You are asking questions which the Chair cer- 
tainly cannot answer because this is not his motion. He is trying to 
determine how to vote on a motion. He has made a commitment, 
perhaps an uuAvise one, but he has said that if any of the entities to 
this dispute are going to state that they considered this, what the 
Chair considers reasonable effort to bring this to a more expeditious 
conclusion, if they say it is unfair or unjust, the Chair will not vote 
for such a proposal. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Since we are in recess and have asked Mr. Welch 
to leave, I feel Ave should not discuss it publicly while he is away. 

Senator McCarthy. Could I have the Chair's attention until Mr. 
Welch returns. I think this is very important. I am led to believe 
certain things occurred during the noon hour. I was led to believe — 
I reluctantly agreed to Mr. Welch's suggestions. I would like to know 
whether or not they were liis suggestions and if they were, why this 
stage play. I would like to have the Chair's attention when Mr. 
Welch returns. 

Senator Mundt. The committee will come to order. Mr. Welch 
has returned to the committee room and the Chair will be very pleased 
to hear from him at this time. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, what the Secretary said is in two parts : 
A. he does not wish to accept from the Chairman a proxy to cast your 
vote. He thinks, Mr. Chairman, that that is outside his province. 
Secondly, as to fairness, he says, "I continue in my view that the pro- 
posed resolution would not result in fairness." 

Senator Mundt. He says he thinks it would not result in fairness? 

Mr. Welch. Would not. 


Senator Mdndt. The Chair is certainly then prepared to vote. Is 
tliere other discussion ? 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Mundt. Are we ready for the vote ? 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan. 

Senator McClefxan. Senator McCarthy was addressing the Chair 
first, and I do not wish to interrupt him. 

Senator McCarthy. If the Chair is ready for a vote, I will be glad 
to defer this, but I am completely 

Senator Mundt. Suppose you wait until after we have voted if it 
isn't on this particular point, because we will then resume the com- 
mittee business. 

Senator McCarthy. This might be enlightening to the committee, 

Senator Mundt. If it is on this point the Chair has secured for 
himself the information he needs, but other committee members might 
require some more. The Chair would be glad to hear it. 

Senator McCarthy. Let me ask this : I think the Chair and counsel 
know what I am about to discuss. Would you prefer I w^ait until after 
the vote? If so, I will be glad to. 

Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan. 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, I have previously announced 
that I would, and I do now, oppose the resolution or motion submitted 
by the Senator from Illinois. It may be, Mr. Chairman, that the die 
is cast and that this motion is destined to pass. I do not know. But 
before voting on it, each of us has to take the responsibility for inter- 
preting it, and trying to understand how it will operate and what its 
consequences will be. I have undertaken to do that. May I say 
this, Mr. Chairman : I believe I have proper and due deference for 
all and to all of the parties to this controversy, but I may say that 
their opinion of w4iat is fair and unfair did not have to be invoked 
or brought into play by me, to place my interpretation on this resolu- 
tion, its effect, and its consequences. I took into account, Mr. Chair- 
man, what I conceive to be the other party in interest to this contro- 
versy, the American people, and the welfare of our Government. I 
have undertaken to interpret it, and I give you my interpretation 
of it. No. 1, it is not a formula for expediting these hearings; it is 
a formula for stopping, for suppressing, public hearings which this 
committee unanimously voted at the time the hearings were ordered. 
Xo. 2, it denies to the principals, Mr. Adams, Mr. Cohn, ]\Ir. Carr, and 
Mr. Hensel, the o]-)port unity to defend under oath in public the serious 
charges that have been made against (hem, and denies them the oppor- 
tunity to face their accusers in public, or to sustain the grave and 
serious charges they have made against each other by giving public 
testimony under oath to support and to sustain those charges. 

Mr. Chairman, this is not just a right, just a right of the parties to 
this controversy, of the principals, but it is their solemn obligation 
and duty to do it, a duty that if they undertake to shirk it, the full 
power, insofar as this committee has it, should be exercised to com- 
pel them to do it. 

Third, this resolution in effect proposes that tliis committee under- 
take to resolve tliose grave issues on the report of counseFs interviews 


of witnesses, including principals to this controversy. As an alter- 
native to that, or in addition to that, that we proceed in executive 

Mr. Chairman, there is not one indication that if this joh is to be 
done and be done thorou<2;hly and completely that executive hearings 
will shorten the proceedings. There is not the slightest indication 
of it. 80 what is the purpose of it? Whether the author of it so 
intended or not. and I certainly charge no bad faith, the results and 
(•onse(juences will be to carry on this investigation out of view of the 
public that is interested, away from the press who is entitled to be 
])resent, and some one has referred to television, out of the view 
of television. 

I am not so concerned about television. What is the objection? 
I did not invite them here, but what is the objection? We are per- 
forming a public duty, a public trust, I may say, one of the most un- 
])leasant and one of the most disagreeable ones I have ever had to 
perform in the course of my public service. 

Mr. President, I cannot vote for it. If it is adopted, if this resolu- 
tion IS adopted, in my opinion it will be a flagrant travesty on Amer- 
ican standards of justice and equity, committed by this committee in 
the name and to the discredit of the United States Senate. 

Mr. President, Mr. Chairman, in the interest of expediting these 
hearings to a fair and just and equitable conclusion, I therefore offer 
as a substitute the following motion: That after each of the princi- 
pals to this controversy has testified in chief, and if I may comment 
there, Mr, President, that i.s, to have the opportunity to present their 
case before they are cross-examined, that each member of the sub- 
committee have 1 hour, six 10-minute periods each, for the interroga- 
tion of the witness, and that each ]n'incipal side or their attorney, 
have 4 hours each for interrogating said principal witness. The 
counsel for the committee shall contijuie to question such witnesses 
under existing rules. And when all such time has ex{)ired, the wit- 
7iess shall be excused. 

That is the motion, Mr. Chaii-man, that I offer as a substitute. And 
may I say this, that it will fix a time limit. It is quite a long time, 
T know. I am not trying to deny anyone full opportunity to get the 
facts out on the table, to let the truth be known. And if anyone would 
seriously insist that this time limit is too short, I would consider 
amending it or modifying it to make the time longer. 

Senator McCarthy. Will the Senator yield? 

Senator McClellan. But may I say this, Mr. Chairman, as to the 
time reserved to me for 1 h-jur for each witness, at six 10-minute peri- 
ods, I intend to continue in most instances to ]>ass, to save that much 
time. But this, if we are interested, Mr. Chairman, in bringing this 
hearing to a final conclusion at some time, this just applies to the 
principals, we can bring it to a conclusion with every one of the 
ju'incipals treated fairly and equitable, and we can perform our duty 
consistently with the standards of procedure and justice that are 
customarily followed, traditionally followed, in Anierican jurispru- 

Senator Mundt. Would the Senator consider the request of the 
Chair that he do not offer his amendment as a substitute, but permit a 
vote to be held on the Dirksen amendment, which it seems to me has 


a right to be heard on its own merits, and then offer his as a separate 
resolution immediately thereafter, assuming the Dirksen amendment 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mun»t. This suggestion is in the interest of giving each 
motion a chance to be lieard on its own merits. 

Senator McClellan. If 1 am assured — I don't know what the out- 
come of tlie Dirksen amendment vote will be. If it should be a(lo})ted, 
theii I could not offer this motion. I only ofl'er it now as a substitute 
so that the committee can take its choice between the two. If it rejects 
mine, then, of course, there would be no vote on the Dirksen resolution. 
Vice versa, if it adopts the Dirksen resolution, I could get no vote on 
this substitute. 

If there is any way to vote on the two, I am ready. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair recognizes, of course, the right of the 
Senator to offer his amendment as a substitute, but having in mind 
the effort we went to to determine the attitude of all the entities on the 
particular proposition before us, the Chair felt it might be better to 
have a vote on each on its own merits rather than having diffusion of 
the issue involved. Certainly if the Senator insists on offering it as 
a substitute 

Senator McClellan. May I ask this, Mr. Chairman. I am not 
trj'ing to obstruct or to insist upon any particular technicalities. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair understands perfectly. 

Senator McClellan. I just do not want to be foreclosed from a vote 
by this connniitee on this proposal. If the Chair will seek and get 
unanimous consent that the Dirksen resolution be voted on first, and 
then, irrespective of the outcome of that vote, that this resolution 
then will be the next order of business and be voted on, then I have no 
objection to following the Chair's suggestion. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair will undertake to solicit such unanimity 
if he can. May we have unanimous consent on behalf of the subcom- 
mittee that, regardless of the vote on the Dirksen amendment, we will 
then vote on the McClellan proposal? 

Senator Dirksen. I object. 

Senator Mundt. You object. 

Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington. 

Senator Symington. I believe that Senator McClellan, in case the 
Dirksen amendment wins, has the right to have his amendment voted 
on, and therefore if the Dirksen amendment wins, I will move that the 
matter be taken up by the full connnittee. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair awaits now a second to the McClellan 

Senator Jackson. I second the motion. 

Senator Mundt. It is seconded by Senator Jackson. I would assume 
that we "would want to go around and inquire of the various entities 
involved. Senator JVIcClellan 

Senator Dikkskn. Are you about to vote, Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Mundt. This would be on the McCUellan substitute. 

Senator McClellan. I didn't offer this to please any of the jjrinci- 
pals to this controversy. I offered it as a motion to the committee. 
It is now pending. If any member of the committee wishes to discuss 
it, I have no objection, and if any member of the principals suggests 


that the time is not Jidoquate, 1 would be ^lad to hear on that. If they 
want more time, I am not trying to cut oflf anybody's time. I am try- 
ing to limit the time with the idea of expediting the hearings, and in 
the hope that by so doing we may eliminate a lot of irrelevancy and 
immateriality, and possibly succeed in having the questions confined 
to the issues. 

Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman. 
Senator Mdndt. Senator Dirksen ? 

Senator Dirksen. I have only one connnent to make on the substi- 
tute. As 1 understand it, I would regard it as a breach of our under- 
standing with Senator McCarthy at the time he was telephoned in 
Dallas to see whether or not he subscribed to the rules that were 

Senator Mundt. The Chair has only one comment, and that is that 
while it is an effort and might conceivably save a little time, 1 think 
it might work in the other direction. As the (yhair has rapidly cal- 
culated the time under the McClellan amendment, it would provide 
for about 4 days of cross-examination for each witness. He would 
ho])e that after 1 or 2 or 3 of the major witnesses have been heard, we 
could certainly dispose of witnesses more rapidly than that. 

The Chair would have to say, because he believes the Dirksen amend- 
ment has a right to be heard on its own merits, if it is voted for as a 
substitute, the Chair would have to vote in the negative, quite regard- 
less of the consideration of the merits of the McClellan proi)osal. 
Any body else? 

Senator McClellan. I am ready. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr, Chairman, does the Senator ])ropose that 
the time he suggests be limited to questioning? How about the 
speeches? I have been here the last 2 or 3 days rather ill listening 

to all these 

Senator McClellan. The Senator can control that as much as any- 
body else. 

Senator McCarthy. Let me finish, please. I think we owe a little 
courtesy here. I didn't interrupt you. 

I am asking a civil question. We s])end about 90 percent of our 
time now on speeches. I am asking you this question. _ Your resolu- 
tion provides a certain length of time for each individual. Would 
their speeches be subtracted from that time or will we still have an 
hour or two of speeches every morning and every afternoon ? 
Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman. 
Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan. 

Senator McClellan. I have observed since these proceedings 
started that when a point of order was raised, speeches were made, 
and that time was not taken out of him who had the floor for question- 
ing witnesses. Certainly the remarks of the committee, anything per- 
taining to procedure at the start of hearings or any time during the 
course of hearings, whether regarded as speeches with respect to 
procedure or any other remarks that members of the committee may 
make with respect to the proceedings, at a time when they are not 
occupying their time to question witnesses— that time would not be 
charged against any of the particiimnts to this controversy. 
Senator McCarthy. Mr. McCh^llan, will yon yield? 
Senator McClellan. I will be glad to. 


Senator McCarthy. This question is beino; asked in all seriousness. 
You are making a sucffjestion here of certain limitations. If you 
would amend your motion to provide that anyone who makes a speech 
about shortening the hearinp;s would lose that much time from his 
period of questioning, I would say that your motion would have some 
more merit. I believe we can never end these if we are going to spend 
half of each day making speeches. 

Senator McClellan. Well, Mr. Chairman, I may say to the Senator 
again I will submit my record against his with reference to s])eeches. 
I have no intention of making speeches except on some motion or 
point of order merely to explain my position. I think I have pretty 
well adhered to that. 

A while ago when I offered this substitute motion I think I directed 
my remarks to it in stating my reasons why I felt it should be adopted 
and the reasons why the original motion to which this is a substitute 
should not be adopted. 

Senator McCarthy. This is just a question for my information. 
Senator. I don't know yet whether or not, if each Senator has an 
hour, that any speech he makes is subtracted from that hour. It is 
a simple question. I am not ar<Tuing. I am just asking the question 
so I will know what your motion is. In other words, you follow 
me — if Senator X has an hour to question, we will say, a witness over 
here and if X uses 50 minutes in making a speech, does he still have 
an hour to question or does he have only 10 minutes ? 

Senator McClfxlan. IVIr. (chairman, in answer to that question I 
would say that if any Senator during his period of questioning gets 
out of order, or any participant, any of the principals or his attorney, 
or any other member of this committee can raise a point of order and 
that time that it occupies to resolve the point of order will not be taken 
out of anyone's time. 

If he is making a speech, if no one objects he is consuming his 
time or getting a little nearer the end, but if he is making a speech and 
an im])roper one, the Senator from Wisconsin can promptly object 
and fTQt a ruling from the Chair. 

Senator Mundt. Are you ready for the vote on the substitute? 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman ? 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, do you want to be heard ? 

Mr. Welch. I would like to be. I think I have very little right 
to be heard, but I would like to be. 

Senator Mundt You may be heard. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, I have seldom tried a lawsuit in which 
my cross-examination of a witness or a party could be concluded in 
one day's time. We are talking about just that here. I do not deny 
that this is not the biggest lawsuit in which I have ever been engaged, 
because I guess it is, and I stand a little in awe of promising a compe- 
tent cross-examination of anybody in 4 hours. But, Senator McClel- 
lan, I would so much rather have 4 open public hours than to have 
40 in closed session, that I think I would trade the 4 for the 40. I 
would lose this much practically. Mr. Stevens must have been ex- 
amined for something like 40 hours. I would get 36 less hours on 
the other principals. But that is down the drain and I am not going 
to kick. Four hours seems a little short to me, sir, but, as I say, I 
would take it rather than a whole lot of hours behind closed doors. 


Senator McCartfiy. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Munot. Are yon ready to vote on the substitnte? 

Senator Mc(yARTiiY. I will wait until after the vote. 

Senator Mundt. The vote is on the substitnte offered by Senator 
Jackson — by Senator McClellan, seconded by Senator Jackson, and 
the Chair will call the roll. Senator McClellan ? 

Senator McClellan. Aye. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen? 

Senator Dirksen. No. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson ? 

Senator Jackson. No. 

Senator Mundt. Senatoi* Potter? 

Senator Poti^er. No. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington? 

Senator Symington. Aye. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Dworshak? 

Senator DwoRsiiAK. No. 

Senator Mundt. The chairman votes "no." 

The motion is lost. The vote now occurs on the Dirksen proposal 
as originally made and the Chair will call the roll. 

Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, before you vote cm it — — 

Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen. 

Senator Dirksen. I just take this position, Mr. Chairman. This 
has been an honest endeavor, I think to put an end to the derisive effect 
of this hearing upon the American ])eople. 

Every Senator must assume his own responsibility. I have done it 
in the House and Senate for 20 years or more, and I intend to do it 
now. It is a case of measuring little e(]uities against big ones. But 
when you measure the impact of these hearings upon Army morale, 
upon the morale of our peo])le, I think the whole weight is in behalf 
of this resolution. Every endeavor was made to safeguard all parties 
in interest here and give every one a fair share. I fully intend to 
support it. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair would like to say just this, because he 
proposes to vote no on the resolution. He wants to say that he does 
so with a firm conviction that the Senator from Illinois did present 
a very fair and carefully thought-out ])roposal. But because the Chair 
has felt that all parties to this dispute must certainly be sufficiently 
well satistied so that they would not ])rotest publicly against a pro- 
gram as being unfair or unjust, since one of the entities, as he had 
a right to do, has protested against the procedure as being unfair, the 
Chair will vote no, but he wants the Senator from Illinois to realize 
it is not because he doesn't feel he has made a very constructive and a 
very worthwhile and a very honest effort. Senator Potter? 

Senator Potter. Mr. Chaii-man, it is my interpretation of Sena- 
tor Dirksen's motion that Senator McCarthy will take the stand, will 
subject himself to examination and cross-examination as did Secre- 
tary Stevens. So on that score certainly it is equal. That the other 
principals on both the side of the Army and the side of Senator 
AlcCarthy, will be treated in like manner, that testimony will be taken 
in executive session, and the transcription will be given to the public 
on the hour, I believe, or at least given out so that the people of the 
country will have all the facts. If it is deemed desirable and wise 
by the committee to have other principals in public session, that can 


be done by a vote of the committee. The same is true with parties 
on either side. Our purpose in this entire investijjation has been to as- 
certain the true facts. That, Mr. Chairman, is what I, as one member 
of the committee, want to do in this hearing. But by the same token 
I am conscious also of the fact that the display of this hearino; by all 
the media that we have here, does have a great effect on the dignity 
and decorum of the Congress of the United States. It has a great 
effect ujion the respect that the people have for our executive branch 
of the Government. 

If my mail is any indication, I can say to you, Mr. Chairman, that 
the i|jeu])le are sick and tired of this public display, of the constant 

The facts can, I am convinced, be ascertained, which is our sole job, 
by the motion offered by Senator Dirksen. I would vote against this 
motion if I felt there was one iota of truth in the statements that the 
evidence will be put under the rug, or that there would be a whitewash 
of any kind. I can assure you that after Senator McCarthy has been 
on the stand, and if other witnesses have evidence that will throw 
additional light upon this controversy, I, as one member of the com- 
mittee, would vote to have them appear in public session, if necessary, 
to bring out all the facts. But, Mr. Chairman, we have a grave obli- 
gation to the American people, and looking at it overall, our prestige 
in the world is being affected by these hearings going on in the caucus 
room m the Senate Office Building. The prestige of our American 
form of Government is being lowered by these hearings going on in 
this caucus room. I fully appreciate that any person who has had 
charges made against him should have ample opportunity to refute 
those ciiarges. 

I say, Mr. Chairman, that this vehicle here, though it may not be 
perfect, is certainly better than the continuation of this hearing week 
after week, month after month. Mr. Chairman, I am ready to vote. 

Senator Mundt. Are you ready for the vote on the Dirksen pro- 
posal ? 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I would like to be heard on 
this. As the Chair knows, some days ago Mr. Welch made a sugges- 
tion. I reluctantly accepted that. During the noon hour, and if I 
am wrong on this I wish the Chair would tell me, I was contacted, 
1 was by the phone and I was contacted at least a half dozen times 
with the request that I accept the changes that Mr. Welch suggested 
in this document. I reluctantly accepted them. I think I made it 
clear that I felt that while I did not favor his changes, if these were 
his conditions for cutting down the hearings, I would reluctantly 
accept. I was urged to accept by members of the committee. I was 
shocked, and I have seen a great number of different types of lawyers 
in my career as a judge and as a lawyer, I was shocked beyond words 
when I found Mr. Welch came in here and made the statement that 
this resolution was new to him, after he had been making suggestions 
during the noon hour, and after he had approved, apparently ap- 
proved, the document. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I am not going to say he Avas acting in bad 
faith. That is up to the Senators who work with him to decide that. 
I would like to make a suggestion, Mr. Chairman. All before noon, 


we spent our time discussing; tlie question of how we could shorten 
the liearin^^s. We never asked u sin<;le question of a witness. It is 
now 4: 10 in the aftcrnon, so at most, even if the vote is taken inune- 
diately, "vve have 20 minutes left today to ask questions. I would 
sugirest that you just cannot deal in an> manner, shape or form with a 
Welch who consistently makes offers and then comes in here and puts i 
on this act before television. 1 think, Mr. Chairman, that when this i 
vote is taken, Mr. Welch should be i)ut on the stand, he should be j 
asked why he made the ori<ijinal su^jrestion and then "welched" on j 
that; wliy he made the sujjjgestions for the chan<j;es which 1 was urjred j 
to accept and I reluctantly did, and why, after I accepted those chan<Tes, 
he came before this committee and told this committee that this was 
a new document to him, that he knew nothin<>; about it. 

Mr. Chairman, may 1 say that 1 think it is a complete waste of 
time, from now on, to try to do anythinj:: excej)t to <j;o ri<»;iit straight 
through this, hear all the witnesses, unless the motion of the Senator 
from Illinois is accepted. 1 think it is a waste of time to do any 
attempted dealing with Mr. Welch. The pur|)ose of Mr. Stevens 
and Air. Adams is now clear. They succeeded in calling the investi- 
gation of Communists off by making their smear attack upon my staff 
and upon me. It is now clear that Mr. Welch, the attorney for Mr. 
Stevens and Mr. Adams, is not acting in what 1 would call good 
faith when he keeps me at the plione for 2 hours, and I finally accept, 
accept what he thinks is a proper document and he comes in here and 
says, "1 never saw it before." 

Mr, Chairman, I urge that after this motion is acted upon that we 
have no more dealings, no more conversations, about how we can close 
the hearings. Let's hear all the witnesses, hear all of them in public, 
and I will ask that Mr. Welch be called. And, also, Mr. Chairman, I 
would like to make this request, and you perhaps nuiy not be able to 
do this today, but, Mr. Chairman, in view of the fact that this com- 
mittee is acting only in the hearings about 4 hours a day, in view of the 
fact that we have an investigation that we have been working on for 
6 or 8 months which the statute of limitations on criminal prosecu- 
tions is about to run out on, in view of the fact that as of this very 
moment, at 4: 10, on May 11, 1954, there are roughly 100 and some 30 
Communists in defense plants, 1 am going to ask the chair to call a 
meeting of the committee, and 1 will ask the permission then that we 
revoke the rule we originally made. We originally passed a rule 
that there be no hearings while this was in ])rogress. I am sure that 
all of us who voted on that, and I voted for it, felt that we could dispose 
of these hearings in a matter of a week. Now, we realize that with 
the filibustering, procrastination, it may take months. 

Mr. Chairman, I think it is ui'gent that I have the permission of 
the committee. 1 am not askijig for it here, but I "would like to have an 
executive session, and receive the pcnnission of the committee to hold 
hearings every evening, every Saturday, not on the military, but on 
(^ommunists in defense plants which have nothing to do with the 
military. I ask the Chair to call that executive session at his earliest 
convenience so that even while this circus is going on we may be able 
to defeat the purpose of Mr. Welch. Mr. Adams, and Mr. Stevens, 
and proceed to dig out Communists even during this circus. 1 think 
that is of the utmost importance, period. 

Senator Mundt. Are you ready to vote? 


Mr. Welch. IMr. Chairman. 

Senator Mdnot. Mv. Welch? 

Mr. Welch. I think I am entitled to be heard at least to this 

Senator Mundt. I think so, sir. 

Mr. Welch. Unless my ears deceived me, the Senator from Wis- 
consin said I was on the telephone with him for something like an 
honr at adjournment. The Senator from Wisconsin knows I did not 
talk to him at adjournment or at any other time. I did not talk to 
Mr. Cohn. I did not talk to ]\Ir. Jenkins. I need not say I did not 
talk to any Senator sittini? on that side of the table. 

Senator McCarthy. May I ask Mr. Welch this, with the Chair's 
permission. May I ask Mr. Welch this: Certain changes were made 
in this document. Were those changes made at your suggestion to 
anyone else? 

Mr. Welch. They were not. 

Senator McCarthy. You mean you knew nothing about these? 

Mr. W'ELcri. They were not, 1 did not even hear of any of those 
changes until I came to this roouL If you would like to know what 
I did, I ate some lunch and I lay down on a good, long couch in my 
room with my bead on my arm and rested. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair believes we should proceed with the 

Senator IMcCarthy. No, no, Mr. Chairman. Here is a very im- 
portant point. ]Sfr. Chairman, may I have the Chair's attention? 

Senator Mundt. The Chair has recognized Mr. Jenkins. The Chair 
has recogjiized the committee counsel, Mr. Jenkins. 

Senator AIcCartjiy. I have not concluded. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do 1 have the floor, Mr. Chairman ? 

This colloquy between the Senator — the statements made are wholly 
out of order. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that we should now pro- 
ceed to take a vote on the resolution or on the motion, and then act 
accordingly and proceed with the presentation of the ])roof, which I 
assure the Chair and the committee I am ready to do. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair is prepared to call the roll. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair will state in response to the Senator 
from Wisconsin 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair is about to answer the Senator's re- 
quest. The Chair has consistently held that whenever any of the 
members of the subcommittee or counsel for any individual requests 
that a meeting of the subcommittee be called to consider matters that 
they want to bring before us, he will call that meeting and he will 
call the meeting the Senator has requested, and listen to his suggestion 
at that time. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. I would like to have the vote. 

Senator McCarthy. I have a very important point here, Mr. 
Chairman. I have made the statement that I have received telephone 
calls, that I stood by my phone this noon, and I was led to believe — 
I am not going to name the Senators or who did it — let me finish 
this, Mr. Chairman. I insist on finishing my sentence. 

Senator Mundt. One at a time. 


Senator McCarthy. I insist on finishing, Mr. Chairman. May I 
finish tliis, Mr. Chairman ? 

Senator Mundt. Proceed. 

Senator McCarthy. I have made the statement that over 2 hours 
this noon I was being called repeatedly by Senators and others who 
led me to believe that these changes were suggested by Mr. Welch ; 
that he wanted, for example, the word "rebuttal" removed; that he 
wanted other words inserted. And if Mr. Welch was lying on his 
couch asleep, I am not going to ask that the Senator take the stand, 
but I do think it should be made very clear by the Chair, who knows 
about the conversation — I am not saying the Chair himself made the 
calls — I think it should be made very clear that I had no indication 
that this was not coming directly from Mr. Welch, and I think that 
should be cleared up, because I spent a lot of time accepting what 
I thought were Welch's proposals. 

As I say, I don't want anyone to take the stand and give me details 
about it, but I think in fairness to me those calls that were made 
should be summarized by someone so it is very clear that I was led to 
believe that I was accepting an offer by Mr. Welch. 

I think that is reasonable, Mr. Chairman. I think it is very 

Senator Mundt. The Chair cannot go into all the colloquies that 
all the Senators and all the people interested in this discussion had 
during the lunch hour. You will have to take Mr. Welch's word for 
it that he was asleep on his couch. 

The Chair will say that Senator McCarthy advised him that he 
felt that this proposal would be acceptable to him and that the Chair 
had been led to believe by those in consultation with him that it was 
acceptable to others. Apparently we know now that it was not. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Welch. May I correct the record in one respect, Mr. Chairman. 
I did not say I was asleep on my couch. I was not that lucky. But 
I was reclining on it. 

Senator Mundt. Very good, sir. We stand corrected. 

The Chair will now rule that the time has come to vote on this mo- 
tion which is before the committee, unless some other voting member 
wants to be heard. 

Senator McCarthy. A point of personal privilege, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy. 

Senator McCarthy. I think in decency and honesty it should be 
made clear that representatives of this committee did lead me to 
believe in at least half a dozen phone calls that someone from the 
military — Mr. Welch is the man they indicated — was making these 
suggestions and that that is why I accepted them. Unless that is made 
clear, Mr. Chairman, the impression will go out that there is no basis 
for this. I think it is just common decency, Mr. Chairman. I wish 
you would talk to your counsel. If it was Mr. St. Clair and not 
Mr. Welch, we should know that. Either somebody was deceiving 
the committee or someone on the committee was being overly zealous 
in urging me what to do. 

Mr. Chairman, may I finish? I think this is awfully important. 
It is a question of my veracity at stake. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair 


Senator McCarthy. Just a minute, Mr. Chairman. Is it too much 
to ask that the Chair consult with his colleagues and then either 
confirm or deny the fact that I was standing by my phone for 2 
hours and received repeated calls and was led to believe that these 
suggested changes were made at the suggestion of !Mr. Welch? I 
think that is a reasonable request, Mr. Chairman, 

Senator Mdndt. The Chair does not believe anybody's veracity is 
at stake. I think Mr. Welch adequately explained that at the begin- 
ning when he said he did not have an opportunity to consult with his 
client during the lunch hour. We recessed the committee twice this 
afternoon so he could consult with his client on the proposed changes 
and advised the committee that his client felt that they would be 
unfair to his interests if we were to adopt them. 

Senator ^McCarthy. One further question, Mr, Chairman, Will the 
Chair ask Mr. St. Clair whether he was the man? I would like to 
know who it was who made these suggested changes. 

Senator IMundt. I don't think it is the purpose or the part of the 
Chair to interrogate counsel for any of the entities to this dispute. 
We have tried diligently all around the table to try to find some work- 
able formula for expediting the hearings which all entities would say 
they considered fair. I will say that Senator McCarthy did agree 
openly and publicly and privately to accept it. So did Mr. Plensel, 
speaking through Mr, Bryan, exercising his right. Mr. Welch advised 
the Chair that his client had told him on the second phone call that 
he thought the proceeding would be unfair and that is what the Chair 
was trying to determine from the very beginning. 

I suggest now that we have a vote on Senator 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan. 

Senator McCt.ellan. First a point of personal privilege. When 
Senator McCarthy refers to "some Senators" I have no way of know- 
ing definitely whether I am included. I wish to say for myself that 
I had no conversation with either Senator McCarthy or Mr, Welch 
during the noon hour. I trust the Senator will make clear, if we are 
trying to clear this up, that he did not include me when he said "some 

Senator McCarthy. Will Senator McClellan yield ? 

Senator McClellan. In all fairness I think you should do that. 

Senator McCarthy. May I make it very clear, Senator McClellan, 
that neither joii nor Senator Jackson nor Senator Symington has 
ever indicated at any time that they wanted to cut these hearings 
short, to me or in my hearing. You have had no contact with me for 
that purpose. You have had no contact with me this noon, no contact 
other than here at the committee table today. 

Senator McClellan. I thank the Senator. I was simply trying to 
clear it up, I don't think you should leave it "some Senators." 

Senator Mundt. Are we ready for the vote ? 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, a point of personal privilege. 

Senator Mundt. State your point of personal privilege. 

Senator McCarthy. The Chair knows, not from his own personal 
conversations with me — the Chair knows the urging that I was under 
at noon to accept these changes. The Chair knows that it was repre- 


sented to me that they were Mr. Welch's. I wish the Chair would make 
that clear for the record. 

Senator Mundt. He has tried to make it as clear as he can from the 
paucity of information which is his that the Chair himself asked 
Senator McCarthy whether he felt that these proposals would be 
acceptable to him. He was the only one the Chair contacted. He did 
not contact Mr. Welch. He did not contact Mr. Hensel or Mr. Bryan. 

I can say only that, because I know no more about it, except that I 
do say that Senator McCarthy was acting in good faith when he was 
led to believe that perhaps there had come about a meeting of minds. 
Unhappily, that meeting of minds has not been brought about. It 
seems to me that now we should proceed with the vote. Maybe there 
has been a meeting of the minds. We will have to have a vote to 
determine that. 

Senator McCarthy. Just one question, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. You may ask it. 

Senator McCarthy. If I may ask the Chair this question : I assume 
there is no doubt in the Chair's mind but what I was led to believe 
that Mr. Welch had made these suggested changes ? 

Senator Mundt. I am not sure that it would be fair to say Mr. 
Welch was involved. I think that it was brought to the Senator's 
attention that this resolution had gone through a series of evolutions, 
and that its author felt and hoped, as did some of the other members 
of the committee, that it was in such a form that those involved would 
think it was a fair and honest and just approach. 

Senator McCarthy. As a final question, Mr. Chairman, after the 
session is over, I wonder if the Chair would do this for me : I wonder 
if he would give me the names of those representing Mr. Stevens or 
Mr. Adams who suggested these chano;es. I think I am entitled to 
that. I was led to believe it was Mr. Welch. If that is untrue, I should 
know who they were. I am not asking for that on the record, Mr. 
Chairman, but I do think I am entitled to that information, because 
when I am dealing with my fellow Senators, I have complete con- 
fidence and trust in them ; I still have. 

If there is a misunderstanding, if it wasn't Mr. Welch who was 
making the suggestion, I would like to know who it was. If the Chair 
would do that after the session is over — period. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair is not much of an investigator; he is 
not much of a judge. He will see what he can do to determine it. 

We will now have the rollcall vote on the Dirksen amndment. 
Senator McClellan ? 

Senator McClellan. No. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen? 

Senator Dirksen. Aye. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson? 

Senator Jackson. No. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Potter? 

Senator Potter. Aye. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington ? 

Senator Symington. No. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Dworshak? 

Senator Dworshak. Aye. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair votes no. The motion fails. 

Senator Dworshak. ]\Ir. Chairman ? 


Senator Mundt. Senator Dworshak. I think I should recognize 
him first because he has said nothing so far. 

Senator Dworsiiak. Prior to the reference by Senator McCarthy 
a few minutes ago, to the possibility of night sessions, I have made 
some notations to remind me to offer a motion which I do at this time, 
that we proceed to hold evening sessions from 7 : 30 to 9 : 30 p. m., on 
each day that any sessions are held by this subcommittee. 

Senator McCleli^n. I second the motion, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. It is moved and seconded that every day that we 
hold sessions we also hold night sessions from T : 30 to 9 : 30. May the 
Chair inquire whether he includes today in that resolution? 

Senator Dwohshak. Yes; I certainly do. 

Senator Mundt. May the Chair state that not knowing about that 
possibility, the chairman of one of the appropriations subcommittees 
of which several members at this table are members had scheduled a 
7 : 30 evening session of the subcommittee on appropriations especially 
to accommodate our committee members. 

Senator Dworshak. That has been postponed until Thursday 

Senator Mundt, Very well. Then the Chair would interpret if the 
motion prevails we would meet again at 7 : 30 this evening. Does any- 
body want to be heard on the motion ? 

Mr. Welch. Could I be heard? 

Senator Mundt. You may be heard. 

Mr. Welch. I don't think the first part will do me much good. I 
look with horror upon sessions of that length, but as 1 said I will do 
it if I have to. But I do want to make this suggestion : If you have 
three session a day, and this applies to all people, that is too long for 
any single witness, and I think you ought to take one witness in the 
morning, a different witness in the afternoon, and a third witness at 
night. Certainly you ought not to take a single witness, particularly 
in cross-examination, for that long a period. I urge that with all my 
power. I have seen enough about lawsuits to know that that is pretty 
tough on the witness, and I would like to add that I am sure we all 
get tired and angry and difficult, and we will be in more squabbles 
in the evening than you could shake a stick at. But, as I say, I will 
go along if I have to. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair can only say that as he interprets that 
motion, that is not included in the motion. 

Do you want to discuss the motion ? 

Senator Dirksen. Mr. Chairman, if the vote is put, I shall vote no. 
I have some other responsibilities as a Senator. I get up early, I stay 
up late, I put in 18 hours a day, and I intend to pursue some of my 
other duties notwithstanding this hearing. 

Senator Mundt. Any other discussion on the motion which has been 
made by the Senator from Idaho? 

Senator Jackson. In view of the fact — as I understand it, Mr. 
Chairman, there are some hearings before the Senate Appropriations 
Committee. Wouldn't it be better to take this matter up in executive 
session tomorrow and make a determination at that time? I am 
ready to vote, if it is the wish of the committee, but I merely make 
that suggestion. I am ready to vote in favor of it, but I think the 
matter probably should be deferred until tomorrow morning so that 


the committee can go over and then have it voted upon at the begin- 
ning of public session in the morning. 

Senator Mundt. Are you offering that in the nature of a substitute, 
Senator Jackson ? 

Senator Jackson. I am offering that as a suggestion to my dis- 
tinguished friend from Idaho, if he will accept it. 

Senator Dworshak. Mr. Chairman, I have no objection to deferring 
the actual vote on this, but I merely wanted to serve notice that we have 
been in session 14 days and have accomplished virtually nothing 
insofar as ascertaining any of the real facts in connection with this 
controversy. And I think that the time has now arrived when this 
subcommittee must decide w^hether it is engaged essentially and pri- 
marily in putting on a TV show for the American people or whether 
we recognize our responsibility to expedite these hearings and to do 
everything within our power to get the facts and then to reach a 
conclusion so that we can devote our time to other important duties. 

Senator Mundt. May the Chair inquire whether, if he calls an 
executive session tomorrow morning at 9:30 to discuss tint, and go 
into other matters that are before the committee, if that will be suit- 
able to the Senator from Idaho, so that he can renew his suggestion 
at that time and perhaps work out a more orderly schedule for hear- 
ings than w^e could do on the spur of the moment here. 

Senator Dworshak. That is satisfactory. 

Senator Mundt. You withdraw your motion temporarily? 

Senator Dworshak. I will, temporarily. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair will announce that in room 357 to- 
morrow morning, at 9:30, there will be an executive session of the 

We stand in recess until 10 : 30 tomorrow morning. 

(Whereupon, at 4:30 p. m., the committee was recessed, to re- 
convene at 10 : 30 a. m., Wednesday, May 12, 1954.) 



Adams, John G COO, 991, 993, 1000, 1004 

Appropriations Committee (Senate) 1005 

Boston 989 

Bryan, Frederick P 1003, 1004 

Carr, Francis P 988, 993 

Cohn, Roy IM 9S8, 993, 1001 

Communists 1000 

Dirksen, Senator 989, 994, 995, 998, 999, 1004 

Dirksen amendment 989, 994, 995, 998, 999, 1004 

Federal Governmont 993, 999 

Hensel, H. Struvo 987, 988, 993, 1003, 1004 

Jackson, Senator 1003 

McCarthY, Senator Joe 93G-994, 996-999, 1001-1005 

McClellan, Senator 995, 996 

McClellan amendment 995, 996 

St. Clair, James D 1002 

Scbine, G. David 990 

Secretary of tl^o Army 989-992, 997, 1000, 1004 

Senate Appropriations Committee 1005 

Stevens, Robert T 989-992, 997, 1000, 1004 

Symington, Senator 1003 





3 9999 05442 1746