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 

, , ,-j--r-. •{-■—-;. '■'■^ri 




JOE McCarthy, roy m. cohn, and 









S. Res, 189 

PART 47 

JUNE 1, 1954 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Operations 


46620' WASHINGTON : 1954 

Boston Public Library 
Superintendent of Documents 

OCT 2 7 1954 

JOSEPH R MCCARTHY, Wisconsin, Chairman 

KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota 
EVERETT Mckinley DIRKSEN, Illinois 

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

JOHN L. McCLELLAN, Arkansas 
HENRY M. JACKSON, Washington 
JOHN F. KENNEDY. Massachusetts 

Special Subcommittee on Investigations 

KARL E. MUNDT, South Dakota, Chairman 


Rat H. Jenkins, Chief Counsel 

Thomas R. Pbewitt, Assistant Counsel 

Robert A. Collier, Assistant Counsel 

SoLis HoRwiTZ, Assistant Counsel 

Charles A. Maner, Secretary 




Appendix 1853 

ndex I 

restimony of^ 

Cohn, Roy M., chief counsel, Senate Permanent Subcommittee on 

Investigations 1796 

Driscoll, Sirs. Mary, secretary to Senator Joe McCarthy 1816 


Intro- Ap- 

duced pears 

on on 

page page 

31. Memoranda, dated October 2, 1953— March 11, 1954. 1820 1853 



TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 1954 

United States Senate, 
Special Subcommittee on Investigations of the 

Committee on Government Operations, 

Washington^ D. G. 
after recess 

(The hearing was resumed at 2: 10 p. m., pursuant to recess.) 

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

Also present: Ray H. Jenkins, chief counsel to the subcommittee; 
Thomas R. Prewitt, assistant counsel; Charles Maner, assistant 

Principal participants present: Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, 
United States Senator from the State of Wisconsin; Roy M, Cohn, 
chief counsel to the subcommittee; Joseph N. Welch, special counsel 
for the Army ; and James D. St. Clair, special counsel for the Army. 

Senator Mundt. The committee will please come to order. 

The Chair would like to begin the afternoon session by welcoming 
our guests and advising them of the standing committee rule that at 
these open hearings the guests of the committee are asked to refrain 
completely from any audible manifestations of approval or disap- 
proval of any kind at any time. 

The uniformed officers that you see before you and the plainclothes 
men seated among you have standing orders from the committee to 
remove immediately from the room politely but finnly and without 
any further instructions from the Chajr any of our guests who for 
reasons known to themselves choose to violate the terms of the agree- 
ment under which they entered the room, namely, to completely refrain 
from audible manifestations of approval or disapproval. 

When we concluded the morning session, Counsel Jenkins was inter- 
rogating in cross-examination of Mr. Roy Cohn. Mr. Jenkins, voii 
may resume at th,is point. 




Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Cohn, do you now have ready and prepared and 
ready to turn over to this committee the documents, memoranda, data 
prepared by Mr. Schine or as a result of the conferences between Mr. 
Schine and the members of the committee after his induction in the 
Army ? 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Jenkins, during the lunch hour, we imposed on Mr. 
Maner of your staff to come up and showed him this vast bulk which 
we have. We started going through it for the purpose of eliminating 
the names of confidential informants which were not called for by 
the subpena. We have made a certain amount of progress, and I can 
make a partial production now, sir, with the assurance that at the end 
of the day or tomorrow, whenever else it might be, with a member of 
your stall working along with us, we will continue go^ng through the 
material and turn it in as we go along. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, in that connection, just to 
speed this matter up, I have several members of the staff available. 
If Mr. Jenkins would have one member of his stafi' — I would have no 
objection at all to having the minority counsel work with them, with 
the understanding, of course, that no names of informants be di- 
vulged — if they would go through the balance of the material and 
bring up what would appear to bear on the Schine work. 

Senator Mundt, Do yon have a member of the staff available, Mr. 
Jenkins ? If so, that could continue during the course of the hearings 
this afternoon. 

Mr. CoHN. I was go,ing to say, Senator Mundt, I could be there, 
and I wonder if we could do it after the hearing. I know you want 
Mr. Schine there, and I think he follows the hearing on television. 

Mr. Jenkins. I think I can furnish Senator McCarthy with one of 
the members of my staff to assist in the preparation of that work. I 
would be happy to do so, Mr. Chairman and Senator. 

Senator Mundt. Very well. This afternoon and this evening you 
should be able perhaps to complete check,ing the part of the files that 
has not been checked. In the meantime, you may present for the 
acceptance of the committee the material which you have been able 
to isolate thus far. 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington ? 

Senator Symington. The minority counsel, Mr. Eobert Kennedy, 
will be there also. 

Senator Mundt. That is perfectly all right. 

Senator McCarthy. That is with the understanding, Mr. Kennedy, 
that is with the understanding that you will not divulge the names 
of any confidential informants. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins, you may continue. 

Mr. Cohn. Sir, the first folder will give you — contains drafts of 
notes bearing on the interim and annual reports of the subcommittee, 
one which Dave Schine worked. I discussed these in some detail 
with Mr. Maner and so has Mr. Schine and I think he has a general 
idea of what some of these are about. I might state we did not un- 
fortunately save all of the drafts. As a matter of practice, we do not 
save the drafts of any of our reports. We do have the end product, 


>inf]^the reports themselves, and we do liave some notes witli reference 

> earlier drafts. Some of them I notice are in Mr. Schine's hand- 

ritino;. We are submittin<^ those to you here, sir, in one folder. 

I have some other material here which we have gone throuch on 

ork Mr. Schine did wliile lie was with the connnittee, communications 

ritten by him whicli v,e have all looked over and determined that 

lere is nothin*; in here which would violate security or disclose the 

ame of a confidential informant. 

Mr. Jenkins. Nor is there anything in the first folder that would 

lolate security, is that correct? 

.Mr. CoiiN. I don't think so. These are just the notes bearing on 

le interim and annual reports and I don't see anything in those which 

)nld violate security. 

Mv. Jenkins. Mr. Colin, are you filing those now with this com- 
littee, the folder? 

^Iv. CoiiN. I am submitting them to you, sir, pursuant to your di- 
xt ion, for whatever use you might see fit. 

Mr. Jenkins. There are no restrictions attached now, Mr. Cohn? 

Mr. CoiiN. I am certain none placed by me, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. x\s far as you are concerned or as far as Senator 
IcCarthy is concerned, they are available for inspection by each and 
very member of this committee ? 

Mr. CoiiN. Yes. sir. 

]\[r. Jenkins. That is clearly understood? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

]\[r. Jenkins. Mr. Cohn, you are preparing or working this after- 
.0011 with the end in view^ of presenting to this committee the balance 
f tlie documents, data, work done by Mr. Schine representing the end 
esult of the work that he did for the committee after his induction 
nto the Army, is that correct ? 

JNIr. CoHN. I am giving you everything. 

ISfr. Jenkins. You are giving us everything? 

IMr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. There is deleted from it the name of any informants, 
is we understand ? 

JNIr. CoiiN. Yes, sir. 

IMr. Jenkins. And those are the only deletions? 

Mr. Cohn. Well, sir, there is a question about things which are 
lecurity information. I don't know what you want to do about that. 

Mr. Jenkins. But they are being filed with the committee ? 

Mr. Cohn. I don't know if a decision has been reached on that 
n not, sir. 

jSIr. Welch. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch. 

]\Ir. Welch. I don't know just what my position is going to be 
vith respect to these files, but I can certainly simplify it for everyone. 
^s I think Mr. Cohn knows, I am interested in the work, just as you 
veie, Mr. Jenkins, your question embraced the work, Mr. Schine's 
vork product after induction. I understood the witness to say he 
las now produced everything that Mr. Schine did while with the 
lommittee. Or are these after induction folders ? 

]Mr. Cohn. No, sir. The notice to produce covered work done by 
lim during the time he was with the committee. There was sort of 


a second category of work done between the time we knew he wa; 
going to be inducted and the timo he was actually inducted. Then 
material after his induction. Of course, after his induction, then! 
was only the very limited work he did while doing his Army training 
at the same time. The bulk of that w^ork, as far as written work wa 
concerned, was on the interim report and certain sections of tb 
annual report of the subcommittee. We did not keep the drafts 
However, there are in existence some of the notes concerning thi 
drafts and I am submitting those for your inspection now. Thi 
second folder 

Mr. Welch. ]\Ir. Chairman, before w^e leave that, I hope th 
w^itness wnll furnish in one folder Private Schine's complete worl 
product, or in a series of folders, his complete work product afte: 

Mr, CoHN. Mr. Welch talks about a work product, Mr. Jenkins 
Maybe I haven't made clear the way in which the committee functions 
We don't produce a work product or anything like that. What W' 
do with reference to these reports, particularly, was we got togethe 
the various people who had worked on the investigation, and we pre 
pared the report and it underwent several drafts. It was then sub 
mitted, as the members of this committee know, those who were mem 
bers of the committee then, to the members of the subcommittee, the; 
made suggestions and changes, and eventually the end produc 

I have already given Mr. Welch that end product in the form o 
the three interim reports. There were some others witL which Schin 
had nothing to do. I believe I have given Mr. AVelch the annua 
report, and Mr. Schine worked on certain sections of the annua 

I am now, in addition, in a folder given to you, sir, and Mr. Welc' 
is certainly welcome to it, what notes we have wath reference to th 
proration of these interim reports. We did not, unfortunately, sav 
all of the drafts prepared by Schine and myself and other staff mem 
bers and work done by Senator Mundt, Senator Dirksen, Senate 
Potter, and Senator McCarthy. 

All we have is some isolated notes and things of that kind. I hav 
assembled some of those together here in a folder. I am now filing 
those with the committee for your inspection and that of Mr. Welch 

The second folder which I have is some work which Schine dit 
when he was a very — a very small portion of the work which Schin 
did when he was with the subcommittee. 

We have gone over this during the lunch hour and there is noth 
ing — no reason why that can't be filed. The third thing which I wa 
about to come to, are certain minutes, or stenographic minutes made 
of staff interviews conducted by Dave Schine in the month prior t< 
his being inducted into the Army, because you will remember. Mi 
Jenkins, you asked me what steps we took to have Schine clean up hi; 
w ork before he went in. I think I told you that certain things weri 
done. One of them was that we called in for examination witnesses oi 
whom he had information. We had a stenographer there and we le 
Mr. Schine question those witnesses' and get that information down S( 
we would have it. 

That is confidential. It has never been released publicly. There art 
references in here. These go from October 8 through 2 or 3 days 



before Mr. Schine was inducted. I think until the day before he was 

There are matters in here, sort of executive session type of material, 
sir, there are matters in here concerninoj allefjations against wit- 
nesses which niiirht be unfounded, thiugs whicli this committee would 
ordinarily not make public, because they would constitute a reflection 
ui)on the person under invest io;at ion. and it might be an unwarranted 
reflection if he could explain away the derogatory information. But 
we are submitting to you, sir, the interrogatories or questioning con- 
ducted by Mr. Schine during tluit period of time in these volumes 

Well, sir 

Mr. Jexkins. Mr. Cohn, this one question I don't think will inter- 
rupt you. I am sure what Mr. Welch has in mind, and I believe I 
have asked for it myself, I think this one question will embrace pre- 
cisely what he wants and what I have heretofore asked for : Can you 
in one folder segregate from everything else in your file that pertains 
to the work done by Dave Schine, embrace in that one folder docu- 
ments and memoranda that will fully reflect the type and the charac- 
ter and the extent of work done by Schine after November 3 ? 

Mr. Cohn. No, sir; we can't fully reflect the type or character of 
work, because 

Mr. Jenkins. Can you substantially do so ? 

Mr. CoHN. Sir, I can only tell you again what I have been saying 
for 3 days. I don't even think you can substantially do it. You 
(an do it to this extent: Some of the work that he did, and perhaps the 
most important, certainly one of the most important things, was work- 
ing on the preparation of these interim reports. I can tell you in 
some detail just about how these interim reports were written, just 
what Schine did with reference to them, why he had to do anything, 
and why we tried to avoid having him do anything and were unsuc- 

Mr. Jenkins. There are no documents to reflect that preparatory 
work, or are there ? 

Mr. CoHN. Actually, sir, there are. 

I\Ir. Jenkins. There are some documents which do contain his notes 
and do reflect to some extent his preparatory work ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

]Mr. Jenkins. Can you isolate those now? 

Mr. CoHN. I have done so, sir. 

]\fr. Jenkins. You have already done that? 

Mr. CoiiN. Yes, sir. They are in this folder. 

Mr. Jenkins. Does the first folder reflect the work done by Dave 
Schine subsequent to November 3? 

Mr. CoiiN. This folder does not reflect all or even a good part of 
the work he did subsequent to November 3, because a good deal of the 
work he did was talking to various staff members about investiga- 
tions and problems and witnesses he had handled when he was with 
the committee. That would not reduce itself to written form. 

Mr. Jenkins. Part of it was documented and part not? 

Mr. CoHN. I would say very little was documented. There is some. 
I have to tell you that, sir. For instance, we found here a witness list 
I)repared by Mr. Schine, giving the names and in some cases the phone 

4CG20°— 54— pt. 47 2 


number and the approximate location of "witnesses he had handled 
when he was with the committee, whom he thought we ought to take 
up and deal with, now that he was in the Army. 

We talked that over during the noon hour, sir, and some of the 
witnesses I believe work for the Government, others have not been 
otherwise exposed, and I believe it was Senator McCarthy's position 
that to furnish that list which was prepared by Mr. Schine when he 
was in the Army would give away the names and in some cases the 
telephone numbers and locations of some of these witnesses, and he 
thought that that should not be done, sir. 

In that same folder there are other notes Mr. Schine made, putting 
down his recollection as to certain derogatory information we had 
received, and in those cases, too, sir, there might be a revelation of the 
source of that information. It was Senator McCarthy's position — 
and I must say, sir, with all respect, from the staff standpoint I think 
it is a very well taken position — that we should not be required to 
make public the names and phone numbers of these informants, even 
though it is work done by Dave Schine after his induction into the 

I have that in this folder here. 

In addition to that, sir, apparently a couple of the staff members 
who went to see him did discuss certain matters with him and did 
prepare memoranda, or something like that, after having talked with 
him. Those will be examined later this afternoon or are being exam- 
ined now to see whether or not production of those will or will not 
reveal the name of confidential informants. If they will, we will 
not submit them. If they will not, sir, we will be very happy to sub- 
mit them. 

Mr. Jenkixs. In short, now, as we understand it, Mr. Cohn, you 
will submit in 1 jacket or 1 file, isolated from everything else 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Documents and data and memoranda reflecting the 
work done by Mr. Schine subsequent to November 3 which does not 
reveal the names of informants or security risks ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir, and on the statement, sir, that this was not a 
business of producing writings or producing work. 

Mr. Jenkins. I understand. The committee will have to take 
yours and other members of the staff's word for additional work that 
he did. We understand that. 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Very well. 

Now, Mr. Cohn, you have examined some 11 memoranda, have you 
not, that were delivered to the Chairman of this committee back in 
March ? Suppose I pass these memoranda to you, Mr. Cohn. 

Mr. CoiiN. Yes, surely. 

( Documents placed before the witness. ) 

Mr. Jenkins. I will ask you to identify those memoranda for the 
benefit of the record. 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. May I look at them for a moment ? 

Mr. Jenkins. Yes, indeed. 

(Mr. Cohn examining documents.) 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. What are they, Mr. Cohn, for the benefit of the rec- 


]\rr, CoHN. As far as I know, sir, tliey are memoranda from Sena- 
tor McCarthy's file concernino; various of these matters in our rela- 
tions with JMr. Adams and Mr. Stevens. 

]Mr. Jenkins. How many, if any, of those memoranda were dictated 
or prepared by you ? 

Mr. CoiiN. Just one moment. 

jNIr. Jenkins. Yes, indeed. 

(Mr. Colin examinino- documents.) 

Mr. CoHN. I would say that the Xovember 6 one was probably dic- 
tated by me. 

]\[r. Jenkins. Is that the second memorandum there in the file ? 

]\[r. CoiiN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. It was probably dictated by you? Let's talk about 
that, Mr. Cohn. 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. You may go ahead and answer the question fully. 

Mr. Cohn. Whatever you say. 

Mr. Jenkins. Examine the rest of them and tell the committee how 
many of those memoranda were dictated or prepared by you or under 
your supervision. 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. I would say November 6, November 17 prob- 
ably, sir. I notice I mention my name last, which means I probably 
dictated it. 

Mr. Jenkins. That is out of a sense of modesty, I take it. 

]\Ir. CoHN. No, sir. It is just standard procedure. 

Mr. Jenkins. November 6, November 17, is that correct ? 

JNIr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

December 9. 

Mr. Jenkins. December 9. 

Mr. CoHN. January 14. 

Mr. Jenkins. January 14. 

Mr. CoHN. That is it, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Cohn, I will ask you whether or not there are two 
memoranda dated December 9 ? 

INIr. CoHN. Yes. I was referring to the first one, which bears my 
name, sir, and was dictated by me. 

JSIr. Jenkins. There are 11 in all, are there not? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr, Jenkins. Of the 11, four of them were dictated or prepared by 
you or under your supervision ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Is that correct ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Taking up these memoranda, Mr. Colin, particularly 
the first one, November 6  

Mr. CoiiN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. I will ask you to read that to the committee, and then 
I will ask you to file that as an exhibit to your testimony. 

Mr. CoHN. Surely. Do you want me to read the whole thing? 

]\Ir. Jenkins. As I remember, it isn't long, and I am sure the com- 
mittee would be interested. 

Mr. CoHN. You want me to read it out loud, sir ? 

Mr. Jenkins. I beg your pardon ? 


Mr. CoHN. You want me to read it out loud ? 
Mr. Jenkins. Yes. 
Mr. CoHN (reading) : 

Friday, November 6: At the request of Mr. Stevens, Senator McCarthy and 
Roy Cohn vrent to Steven's office at the Pentagon for lunch. John Adams was 
present. Stevens asked us to outline what evidence would be produced at our 
scheduled public hearings on the Army Signal Corps, which we did. Stevens said 
that if we brought out everything he would have to resign. He said he had been 
in office for 10 months and would have to take responsibility. He said they were 
particularly worried about seeking to identify those who were responsible for 
not acting to get rid of Communists and security risks, in the Army and who had 
ordered their reinstatement. 

Mr. Stevens asked that we hold up our public hearings on the Army. He sug- 
gested we go after the Navy, Air Force, and the Defense Department instead. 
We said first of all we had no evidence warranting an investigation of these other 
departments. Adams said not to worry about that because there was plenty of 
dirt there and they would furnish us the leads. Mr. Stevens thought this was 
the answer to his problem. 

We said this was not possible because we have already planned our next investi- 
gation which was one of subversion in defense plants handling Government and 
military contracts. He asked why we did not start on that and we told him we 
were jammed up trying to get out our reports to file, and with the Monmouth 
investigation and that Dave Schine was about to enter the Army and had much 
Information and material on reports and investigations that we could not get 
along without. 

Mr. Stevens said he would arrange for Dave to complete the work over weekends 
and after training hours. We said this would be satisfactory and if Dave was 
willing to do this work after hours, it would help to some extent. 

After lunch. General Ridgway, General Trudeau, and General Mudgett came 
in and we reviewed our evidence on the Signal Corps for their benefit. Senator 
McCarthy reiterated in their presence that he would cooperate as much as possible 
but that under no circumstances would there be a whitewash of the Army situa- 
tion, because one reason a new administration was elected was to prevent the 
covering up of Communists and those who protect them. 

Mr. Jenkins. Now, you have been investigating Fort Monmouth 
and subversives in Fort Monmouth since August, I believe ? 

Mr. CoHN. Well actually 

Mr. Jenkins. You had laid the groundwork for it months prior 
to that, hadn't you ? 

Mr. Cohn. Sir, there was a preliminary investigation which started 
back in the spring. 

Mr. Jenkins. And you had had numerous conferences with both 
the Secretary of the Army and Mr. Adams prior to November 6, had 
you not, Mr. Cohn ? 

Mr. Cohn. I wouldn't say numerous. I would say there were a few, 

Mr. Jenkins. You had several, as a matter of fact, had you not? 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. With both Mr. Stevens and Mr. Adams? 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Why had you not made a memorandum of any 
previous conversation with the Secretary or his attorney, Mr. Cohn? 

Mr. Cohn. I believe we did, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Well, you had not made any yourself, as we under- 
stand it? 

Mr. Cohn. No, but Mr, Carr made one of the October 2 meeting 
with Mr. Stevens and, sir, I would not have seen the necessity of us 
both doing it. 


Mr. Jexkins. Did you know that Mr. Carr had made tliat mcnio- 
raiuhini of October 2? 

Mr. CoHN. I can't say that I did, sir; no. 

Mr. Jenkins. You did not participate in the dictation or prepara- 
tion of it? 

Mr. CoHN. No, sir. 

]\lr. Jenkins. Did you know of its existence until this matter came 
to public li<Tht in March? 

Mr. CoHN. 1 can't say that I did, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. But you, on your own initiative and alone, prepared 
the one of November 6 ? 

Mr. CoHN. No, sir, it wasn't quite like that. It was not on my own 
initiative and alone, 

Mr. Jenkins. What was it like? 

INIr. CoHN. First of all, I believe Mr, Carr was with me. As I recall 
it, I believe that was dictated after we had come back to this building 
from the meeting in Mr. Stevens' office, and I believe Senator Mc- 
Carthy, as he had done before on another occasion as I remember it, 
in a different investigation, told me to dictate to Mary Driscoll a 
synopsis of what had gone on at the meeting. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did Senator McCarthy direct that you dictate this 
memorandum of November 6 ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir, as I recall it he did. I don't recall that it was a 

Mr. Jenkins, Where did you dictate it? 

Mr. CoHN. In Senator McCarthy's office. 

Mr, Jenkins, To whom? 

Mr. CoHN. Mary Driscoll, 

Mr. Jenkins, She is the Senator's secretary? 

Mr. CoHN. That is right. She is his personal secretary. She is the 
one to whom you dictate something. 

Mr. Jenkins. That is not your office, is it, Mr. Cohn? Your office is 
in 101 in this building. 

Mr. CoiiN. Actually, sir, I don't have an office as such. We have a 
room in 101 with 1 desk and 1 chair. That is used jointly by Mr. Carr 
and myself. The person who gets there first occupies the chair. In 
addition to that, I would say I spend a good deal of my time up in and 
around Senator McCarthy's office. I don't know which I call home 
when I am down here, but I am in both of them a good deal. 

Mr. Jenkins. To whom was the one of October 2 dictated? 

Mr. CoHN. I don't know that of my own knowledge, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did Mr. Carr tell you who he dictated it to? 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir, 

Mr, Jenkins, To whom did he say? 

Mr. Cohn. Mary. 

Mr. Jenkins, Mary Driscoll ? 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir, 

]Mr. Jenkins. To whom were the other nine dictated? 

Mr, Cohn. I can't say, sir, of my own personal knowledge. I would 
say that most of them were dictated to Mary Driscoll. 

Mr. Jenkins. Three additional were dictated by you, we under- 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. To whom were they dictated ? 


IVIr. CoriN. Sir, I can say with possible exceptions that anything I 
dictated in Senator McCarthy's office would be dictated to Mary. 

Mr. Jenkins. But you have not said that you dictated your four in 
Senator McCarthy's office, did you? 

Mr. CoiiN. I did, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. All four of them? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. And your best recollection is that Mary Driscoll took 
the notes and dictation? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir, except in very rare instances I will do my dic- 
tation on something like that to Mary, unless she is not there. I might 
give it to Madeline 

Mr. Jenkins. You have secretaries that take dictation in room 101, 
have you not ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Several? 

Mr. CoHN. That depends again. We have, but recently, in the past 
few weeks, there has been a realinement in the office setup, so that I 
think 3 or 4 of them have been moved down to 101. Prior to that 
time, I believe there was one, sir. Frances Alinis. 

Mr. Jenkins, Was Frances Mims in room 101 working there? 
That was her headquarters during the months of October, November, 
December and months subsequent thereto ? 

Mr. CoHN. I think so, sir. I couldn't be positive. But we can 
check that very easily. 

Mr. Jenkins. But four of these, you beinrr the author of those four, 
were dictated to Mary Driscoll in Senator McCarthy's office? 

Mr. CoiiN. Yes. sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. AA^here were the originals left, Mr. Cohn? 

Mr. Cohn. I don't have any idea, Mr. Jenkins. All I did was 
dictate them. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did you sign them ? 

Mr. CoiiN. No, sir. I never have. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did you ever see them after they were signed ? 

Mr. Cohn. No. sir. I might say this : I don't think I ever signed 
any memoranda. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you know where Miss Driscoll kept those 
memoranda ? 

Mr. Cohn. No, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. You never had occasion to call for them since that 

Mr. Cohn. No, sir ; I have not. 

Mr. Jenkins. And it is your understanding that — do you know 
how many of these memoranda were dictated by Mr. Carr ? 

Mr. Cohn. 1 could count, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. I will ask you to do that. 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir ; 1, 2,^3, 4, 5, 6. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did you say 5 or 6 ? 

Mr. CoiiN. Six, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Six by Mr. Carr ? 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Je^'kins. Four by you ? 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 


Mr. Jenkins. And one by Senator ISIcCarthj 2 

Mr. CoHN. I think that is it. 

Mr. Jenkins. Did Mr. Carr tell you that he dictated all of his to 
Mrs. Driscoll ? 

Mr. CoiiN. Yes, sir; I think he said he frave them all to Mary, yes. 

Mr, Jenkins. Did tlie Senator ever tell you to whom he dictated 
his memoranda ? 

Mv. CoiiN. Yes, sir ; I am sure he said INIary Driscoll. 

Mr. Jenkins. Then is it your opinion now that Mary Driscoll took 
in shorthand and typed these 11 memoranda that you have before you? 

JNIr. CoiiN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Is that correct ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Have you ever asked — Is it Mrs. or Miss ? 

Mr. CoHN. Mrs. 

Mr, Jenkins. She is a married lady ? 

Mr. ConN. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Have you ever asked Mrs. Driscoll to ascertain 
whether or not she could tind her orio;inal shorthand notes ? 

Mr. CoiiN. No, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. You have not made inquiry about that ? 

Mr. CoHN. There w'as discussion about it, sir. I am pretty sure 
that Mrs. Driscoll and I suppose nobody up there kept shorthand 
notebooks, I think to get a picture of that office, Mr. Jenkins, I don't 
know if you have ever been up there, but 

Mr. Jenkins. I haven't had the pleasure and the honor yet, 

Mr. CoHN. I don't know if it is a pleasure 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you mean the Senator is not methodical in the 
keeping of his records ? 

Mr. CoiiN. It is not a question of being methodical, but when you 
get seven or eight thousand letters a day, and you have cartons of 
letters and documents and things just all around the place, sir, it is — 
I suppose it is just about the busiest office in this building. 

Mr. Jenkins. When were these 11 memoranda gotten together, 
Mr. Cohn, and presented to Chairman Mundt? 

Mr. CoHN. They were given to Chairman Mundt, as I understand 
it, at his request, by Frank Carr some time after this — after it was 
determined that — — 

Mr. Jenkins. It was about the 12th day of March, was it not ? 

Mr. CoHN. That is undoubtedly right, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you know where Mrs. Driscoll found those docu- 
ments ? 

Mr. Cohn. I don't know of my own personal knowledge, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. How she was able to isolate them from the various 
files and assemble them and turn them over to Senator Mundt? 

Mr. CoHN. No, sir; I can't say I know of my own personal knowl- 
edge where she found them. I have a good idea. They would all be 
in the files. 

IMr. Jenkins. Would they have all been in one file ? 

Mr. CoHN. I can't answer that, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Cohn, would you consider it out of order if we 
asked you to step aside and called Mrs. Driscoll in and questioned her 
about these documents ? 


Mr. CoiiN. It is not my judgment, sir. Whatever you say. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, I think perhaps that should be done 
at this time. 

Senator Mundt, Very welh 

Is Mrs. Driscoll in the room, or available ? 

Senator McCarthy. Mr, Chairman, I am enjoying Mr. Jenkins' 
dramatics a good deal. But I haven't criticized when calling wit- 
nesses about giving them 48 hours' notice. I think if Mrs. Driscoll is 
going to be called, she should be given at least a half-hour for some- 
one to tell her. 

Mr. Jenkins. Senator, I think Senator McCarthy is quite right 
about it. There is no disposition on my part to embarrass anybody, 
and if Mrs. Driscoll wants 30 minutes' notice to prepare to come here 
and testify, it is all right with me. And, Senator, I assure you I am 
not trying to engage in any dramatics. I am not capable of doing it 
if I desired to do so. 

Senator McCarthy. May I say, Mr. Jenkins, she may want to comb 
her hair and put some powder on, or something, I don't know. I may 
say, we have had a rule in the committee that witnesses get a reason- 
able warning before they are called. I am sure INIary is willing to 
testify at any time, but I would like to give her a chance to have suf- 
ficient notice. When do you want her produced ? 

Mr. Jenkins. Within 30 minutes. Senator. That is your sugges- 
tion, and I think it is entirely feasible. 

Senator McCarthy. I think she will be available. 

Senator Mundt. I think that is a good suggestion. I thought she 
was in the room and maybe had been notified. We will give her 30 
minutes' notice. 

Senator McCarthy. I will go down and notify her myself. 

Senator Mundt. The committee will be in order. 

Counsel, you may proceed. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Cohn, in the document that you prepared, dated 
November 6, you stated there 

Mr. Cohn. I dictated it, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. November 6. You dictated it ? 

Mr. Cohn. I think Mr. Carr was with me on that occasion. 

Mr. Jenkins. You stated that Mv. Stevens, as Secretary of the 
Army, requested that you discontinue your investigation of Fort 
Monmouth and go after the Navv and Air Force. That is correct, 
isn't it? ^ " . _ 

Mr. Cohn. I say that is the substance of it, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. 1 ou have it before you, Mr. Cohn ? 

Mr. Cohn. Sure. 

Mr. Jenkins. I want to read from your testimony, page 4040 of the 
record : 

Now, Mr. Cohn, an allegation is made, and one that the committee may consider 
a very serious allegation, the allegation being by you and Senator McCarthy 
that on that occasion, November 6, Mr. Stevens made some remark or made some 
statement about your desisting from further investigation of Fort Monmouth 
and going after the Navy and Air Force. I want you to tell as nearly as you 
can this subcommittee precisely what the Secretary of the Army said on that 
occasion with respect to that subject. 

Mr. Cohn. Of course, I can't give you the exact words, Mr. Jenkins. The 
substance was that Mr. Stevens felt if we would look at Communist infiltration 
in the Navy and the Air Force for the while and give the Army a rest, that that 
would be welcome. 


That is your testimony. 
Mr. Coiix. Yes, sir. 
Mv. Jenkins. Further : 

What ro^ply was made to tliat sngrgeption? 

I\Ir. CoHx. The reply l)y the chainiiaii was a imnihcr of points. I remenil)er 
one or two of them were that first of all we could not start an investiyation, we 
had no facts warrantin.ij; snch an investigation at that time. It is required 
before you start investigatiiis some place you have to have a preliminary in- 
vestigation, lay the groundwork, and that takes weeks and sometimes months, 
niat second of all we did not even li;ive the information on which to predicate 
that preliminary investigation, and the Senator did not think that was feasil)le. 
He went on to explain that our next investigation was all set anyway, and that 
that was not of the Navy or Air Force, hut involved Communist infiltration in 
defense plants, the presence of current Communist Party meml)ers in defense 

Then ac^ain : 

I might say that, on the question of following that up, Mr. Jenkins, on the 
question of information which we were lacking, tliat Mr. Adams did make a 
comment that there was no problem about that, that he could get us the 

And further: 

The substance of what he said was that he could help us get information on 
the Navy and Air Force. I might say that the convei'sation changed when the 
Senator mentioned that our next investigation was of Communist infiltration 
in defense plants, because Mr. Stevens or Mr. Adams immediately said that if 
we were to investigate Communists in the defense plants, that that might involve 
the Defense Department itself. Defense Department personnel, and that that 
would be very helpful to Mr. Stevens because it would remove the Army as the 
sole object of the committee's investigation on Communist infiltration in the 

Is that correct, Mr. Cohn ? 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. Then, Mr. Cohn, didn't you undertake to make it 
clear that what the Secretary desired or acquiesced in was that you 
spread your investigation to inchide not only the Array and the Navy 
or the Air Force, but defense plants, and the Secretary said that that 
would to some extent take the heat ofi and give the Army a rest? 

Mr. Cohn. Xot quite, sir. I don't think he was exactly pressing 
to have the Army continue along with the Navy and the Air Force 
as one of the objects of the investigation. As I recall it, the substance 
of what he said was : Could we go into the Navy and the Air Force 
for a while and leave the Army alone. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, subject to the examination of IMrs. 
Driscoll, at this time I have no further questions to ask Mr. Cohn. It 
may be that I will desire to do so after I have questioned Mrs. Driscoll. 

Senator Mundt. Very well, then, we will begin under the 10-minute 
rule whereby each member of the committee has 10 minutes and 
counsel for both sides have 10 minutes. 

The Chairman will question first, in conformity with our agree- 

When did you first come with the Government, Mr. Cohn? 

Mr. Cohn. I first went with the Government, Senator Mundt, right 
after I got out of law school in November of 194:7, I believe it was. 

Senator Mundt. November 1947? 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

4CG20°— 54— pt. 47 3 


Senator Mundt. What was your first position with the Government ? 

Mr. CoHN. My first position with the Government was law clerk — 
photostat operator in the office of the United States district attorney 
for the southern district of New York. 

Senator Mundt. Appointed by whom? 

Mr. CoHN. I was appointed by John F. X, McGoughey, then United 
States attorney, now Federal judge in New York, the man who was 
the prosecutor of the 11 first-string Communist leaders before Judge 
Medina, a great man. 

Senator Mundt. Were you considered Democratic or Republican 
patronage at that time, or was this a civil-service job ? 

Mr. CoHx. I don't think I took a civil-service examination. I don't 
know what kind of patronage they considered me, sir. I had known 
Mr. McGoughey. I had known his chief assistant, Mr. Saypol. I 
went down to see them and asked for the job, and I got it. 

Senator Mundt. That was in New York City ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. It is very possible, sir, that I did get a recom- 
mendation from the Democratic — it would have been the Democratic 
organization of New York City. 

Senator Mundt. You are a registered Democrat? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir, I am. I was — I am a registered Democrat. 

Senator Mundt. When did you first come to Washington, D. C? 

Mr. CoHN. I first came to Washington, Senator Mundt, in the 
summer of 1952. 

Senator Mundt. Who appointed you to come to Washington in 

Mr. CoHN. I was appointed to come to Washington by the Hon- 
orable James P. McGranery, who was then Attorney General of the 
United States, sir, if I might say another Democrat who did a great 
job in fighting Communist infiltration in this country. 

Senator Mundt. Jim McGranery is a personal friend of the chair- 
man, and while he regrets he is not a Republican, he does recognize 
him as a very fine and successful Attorney General. 

Mr. CoHN. It was an honor to serve under him, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Let me ask you how you got that position. 

Mr. CoHN. I got it in this way, sir; I was on the way to Europe 
for a vacation after the second string Communist trial in New York, 
and the boat was about 10 minutes out of the harbor, just sailing down 
the harbor, when I was called to the telephone. I don't think I knew 
there were telephones on boats. I was told the Attorney General of 
the United States was on the phone. I thought it was a friend of mine 
playing some kind of joke. It was not. It was Attorney General 
McGranery, whom I had not met. He telephoned me and asked 
me — ^he told me he knew about the work I had done up in New York 
for the Department of Justice and asked me if I would come to Wash- 
ington to work with him. That was in July of 1952. 

Senator Mundt. Your name had been brought to his attention, I 
presume, by this previous employer of yours ? Did you ever ascertain 
how Judge ]\IcGranery learned about you ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. I don't know quite how to put it. I was 
the specialist in the prosecution of Communist spies and subversives 
for the Department of Justice up in New York, which is the largest 
Department of Justice office in the country, and after the Rosenberg 
case and the Remington case and the Communist trials, sir, I suppose 


Judge ^McGranery knew Mint I had been special izinjT in this type 
of work and niiii;ht have heard some things about me from my 

Senator Mundt. Did you remain in the employment of the Govern- 
ment all through the duration of the Democratic administration ? 

Mr. CoiiN. I did, sir. I remained in the employment of the Gov- 
ernment all through the duration of the Democratic administration. 
I resigned the day I was appointed chief counsel of this committee. 
Senator Muxdt. Which was subsequent to the election of President 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. It was in January of 1953. 
Senator Mundt. You testified something about the Executive order, 
the Truman order, and then you referred to a Presidential order of 
April 27, 1953, which would be an Eisenhower order. 
JNIr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. "Were you with the Government at the time of that 
Truman order? 

Mr. CoHN Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Tell us as concisely as you can what that provided. 
Mr. CoHN. Well, sir, about the best word I have heard which was 
used to describe it was the word "blackout." That order placed a 
blackout on loyalty and security information being made available to 
congressional committees. In other words, it put a seal of secrecy 
on these loyalty and security files of Government employees. 

That is my understanding of the order. I might be inaccurate to 
some extent. 

Senator Mundt. You testified that the order issued by President 
Eisenhower on April 2", 1953, gave a somewhat freer hand to inves- 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. In what respect did the Eisenhower order relax 
what you call the "blackout" Truman order? 

Mr. CoHN. Sir, in order to answer that properly, I would m ant to 
study both orders so I can give you more or less of a distinction on it. 
I do know^ that the Eisenhower order provided for the reexamination, 
I believe, of all loyalty cases, all loyalty and security cases. I believe, 
sir, that the Eisenhower order provided that the Loyalty Bonrd be 
made up not of people from the same department in which tlie em- 
ployee v^orked, and wiio might be his friends, but from the outside, 
or from other departments or agencies, and there were various other 
things in tliere which I believe, sir, were designed to make easier the 
detection of Communists and securitv risks. 

Senator Mundt. You say you Avere in the Government at the time 
of the Truman order ? 
Mr. CoHN, I was, sir. 

Senator Mundt. What was the relationship between the executive 
brancii of the Government and the investigating arms of Congress 
prior to this Truman order ? Was there another order that had been 
issued prior to that, and was this a tightening up or a relaxation of a 
prior order, or was this a new order ? 

Mr. Cohn. Sir, I can only assume this, but i assume that since there 
was a necessity for that order, it meant that until this order came 
about, that the Congress and the committees did have freer access to 


loyalty and security information on the part of Communist and sub- 
versives in Government, and that this order would take away some 
of that information from the Congress. 

Senator Mundt. Do you know the date of the Truman order ? 

Mr. CoHN. No, sir ; I don't know the exact date. 

Senator Mundt. Do you know the year ? 

Mr. CoHN. 1948, 1 believe. I am not sure. 

Senator Mundt. 1948? 

Mr. CoHN. I believe so, sir. And I could be wrong. I am subject 
to correction. 

Senator Mundt. You do not recall whether or not that order was 
initiated during the course of the committee investigation of the so- 
called Hiss situation ? 

Mr. CoHN. I think it was, sir. I tie that in in my mind with the 
"red herring" remark concerning the Alger Hiss investigation. 

Senator Mundt. That is the Chair's remembrance of it, since it 
occurred at the time that the Chair was acting chairman of that com- 
mittee, but I would want to be sure whether there had been some 
previous order. So since 1948 down to date, there is some kind of 
Presidential order which exists between the legislative investigative 
branch of the Government and the executive branch ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. You were talking about two telephone conversa- 
tions, Mr. Cohn, and I jotted down at the time that you testified about 
one of them and not the other. One was September 16 and one was 
September 21. 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Do you recall which one you testified about ? 

Mr. Cohn. Well, sir, I believe they were both meetings with Mr. 
Stevens on which Schine was discussed. 

Senator Mundt. These are meetings ? 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

Senator ]\Iundt. And I think you testified about the one on Sep- 
tember 16. 

Mr. Cohn. I think you are right, sir. 

Senator Mundt. You did not testify about the one on September 21 ? 

Mr. Cohn. No, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Will you tell us what occurred at the meeting? 
First of all, where was the meeting held on September 21 and who 
was present ? 

Mr. Cohn. It was this way : It was downstairs in this building on 
the first floor, where this subcommittee was having an executive ses- 
sion hearing on Communist infiltration in the Army, dealing with 
literature. I remember, sir, looking up at the dais now, that Senator 
Potter was present during part of this meeting because I remember 
that Senator Potter was discussing plans for the investigation of 
Korean war atrocities, which Senator Potter presided at and held 
hearings about, during subsequent months. That meeting was held on 
September 21, and I had a conversation with Mr. Stevens about Dave 
Schine which led to certain things on that date. 

Senator Mundt. Who else was present that overheard the conversa- 
tion, if anyone? 

Mr. Cohn. I don't think anybody, sir. 


Senator Mundt. Just you and Mr. Stevens? 

Mr. Coiix. Yes. Mr. Stevens, as I recall it, was sitting down at 
the end of the table, waitinc; for the session to be<2;in, and he called me 
over. Pie told me that he Avas looking? forward to usingr Dave Schine 
in the Army on these intelligence matters and Communist matters, 
and he felt that Dave would be a very fine addition, and (hat he would 
be able to use his work. He asked me about this famous delinition of 
communism which Dave had written, and said he had been talking to 
some people in the Army about Dave, and that he would like a copy 
of this delinition of communism. I tried to get one down in the com- 
mittee room, I don't think we had one, and I called up Dave and told 
him that Mr. Stevens wanted a copy of that definition. ]3ave there- 
upon mailed a copy to Mr. Stevens, mentioning in the letter that "pur- 
suant to recpiest," or "as I promised, I am sending you a copy of that 
definition.'' That was the conversation that took place on that 
occasion, sir. 

Senator Mundt, On that occasion, did you suggest to Mr. Stevens 
anything about a commission for David Schine? 

Mr. CoHN, I did not, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Did you suggest anything to him about where he 
might be located or the duties that he might have if he were inducted 
into the Army? 

Mr. CoHN. No, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Is the only thing of any pertinence whatsoever 
that took place in that conversation, the matter that you have already 
related, then, about this definition of communism that Schine had 
worked on ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. Mr. Stevens said he was planning to use Dave 
in some capacity, even talked to some people over in the Army, men- 
tioned this definition, said he did not have a copy of it, although he 
had heard about it, and could I get a copy of it to him. 

Senator Mundt. At any subsequent time, did you ever try to follow 
through and try to get Mr. Stevens to use Mr. Schine in an intelligence 
capacity ? 

Mr. CoHN, Sir, the next thing that happened, I believe Mr. Schine 
will tell you about it, was a discussion he had with Mr. Stevens on 
September 29. The next discussion I had with Mr. Stevens was on 
October 2 in Mr. Stevens' office when Mr. Stevens went into some 
detail about the general situation, concerning the use of Communist 
literature and things of that kind, and stated that he had determined 
to use Dave Schine to help him in these matters. 

Senator Mundt. My time has expired, I am advised. 

Senator McClellan? 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Colin, I know you have been asked twice 
if you are a Democrat. You don't mean that you and I are members 
of that party of treason for 20 years, do you ? 

Mv. CoHN. Sir 

Senator McClellan. Are we? 

Mr. CoHN. I certainly don't think that I am a member of a party 
that stands for treason, sir. 

Senator McClellan. I agree with you. That is all I wanted to 

^Ir. CoHN. I did have an ex])lanation to make, sir. 

Senator McClellan. All right. 


Mr. CoHN, In fairness to Senator McCarthy about that, sir, I know- 
to what you refer, I know the speeches which he has made along those 
lines, and I do say this, sir, that there were people within our great 
party who, I feel 

Senator I agree with you. I just wanted to know if 
you agreed with me. 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir; I agree with you with this qualification. I 
agree with you with the qualification that there have been people in 
this party of ours 

Senator McClellan, Both, haven't they ? 

Mr. CoHX. Yes, sir. You are very right, sir. There have been 
people in both parties who I believe, sir, have put politics above party, 
and who have covered up Communist infiltration. 

Senator McClellan. Do you agree with me there are some still in 
there doing that, both parties ? 

Mr. CoHN. Sir, I have enough trouble trying to do this job here, and 
I would rather not get into a question of political philosophy. 

Senator McClellan. All right. Let me ask you now, Mr. Cohn — 
let's try to differentiate betw^een three documents, if we may. 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Senator McClell^vn. There is the document original in this case, 
of chronological events by the Army. 

Mr. CoiTN. Yes, sir. 

Senator McClellan. Do you remember when it was issued ? 

Mr. CoHN. March 11. 

Senator McClellan. I don't remember the date. And published ? 

Mr. CoiiN. Yes, sir. 

Senator McClellan. Thereafter, when the committee determined 
to investigate the charges and the countercharges that were made by 
release to the press by your side of the case shortly after the chrono- 
logical document appeared in print, that the committee requested both 
sides to file charges and specifications ? 

Mr. CoiiN. Yes, sir. 

Senator McClellan. You recall that? 

Mr. Cohn. I do, sir. 

Senator McClellan. In response to that request, the Army did file 
its so-called charges and specifications? 

JSIr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Senator McClellan. Following that, a statement was submitted 
and the title of it as it appears — I have what purports to be a mimeo- 
graphed copy of it, and I assume it is correct — "Statement Submitted 
at Request oi Temporary Subcommittee." You have that one before 
you. If you will get it. 

Mr. CoHN. If I don't, I will get it right away. 

I have it, sir. 

Senator McClellan. You may want to refer to it. 

Mr. Cohn. I have it right here. 

Senator McClellan. This is a mimeographed copy, and I wanted 
it to conform to yours. If there is any error in it, I would like to know 
it as we go along. 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Senator McClellan. It is not dated. The one I have is undated. 
Do you have the date ? 

Mr. CoiiN. April 20, 1953, stamped on it, sir. 


Senator McClellan. Stamped on it April 20? 

]\Ir. CoHN. I don't Ivnow what that means, sir. I suppose that is the 
date it was filed. I am not sure. 

I ;. Senator JNIcClellan. It is addressed to Senator Karl E. Mundt, 
room 248, Senate Office Buildinp;, Washington 25, D, C, "Dear Senator 
Mundt " 

Mr. ConN. Yes, sir. 

Senator McClellan. You have that document before you, have 
you ^ 

JNlr. CoiiN. I do, sir. 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, at this point I should like to 
ask whether these charges and countercharges, the charges of the Army 
that were submitted in response to the committee's request, and also 
those submitted by Senator McCarthy, Mr. Cohn, and Mr. Carr — if 
they have been made a part of the official record in this case, in this 

Senator Muxdt. Only insofar as they have been testified to. Sen- 
ator McClellan, under oath. Some of the charges made by the Army 
vere included in Mr. Stevens' original statement. The statement of 
A})ril 13 was not incorporated as a part of his testimony. 

Senator McClellan. I now move, Mr. Chairman, that they be in- 
corporated as a part of the permanent record of the hearings. 

Senator Mundt. You mean the statement of April 13 by the Army ? 

Senator McClellan. I mean both the chaiges and countercharges. 

Senator Mundt. D o I hear a second ? 

Senator Potter. Second. 

Senator Dikksen. IVIay I supplement tliat? It would occur to me, 
Senator McClellan, that logically they ought to come at the very 

Senator McClellan. At the very beginning. I thought they had 
been, and someone called to my attention that they hadn't. 1 know 
we all intended to. 

To get the record straight, I accept that as an amendment, to let 
it appear in the very beginning. 

Senator Dikksen. Following the opening statement of the chair- 
man of the committee. 

Senator Mundt. "With that understanding, those in favor say "aye" ; 
contrary "no." 

It is unanimously approved.* 

Senator McClellan. I want to make certain they are a part of the 

Xow I read, Mr. Cohn, the first paragraph of the document that 
you have before you, which for identification purposes we will term 
the countercharges that are filed and now a part of the record of this 
committee. I read the first paragraph : 

This statempnt is being submitted on behalf of Frank Cai-r, executive director 
of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Roy Cohn, the chief 
counsel, and myself as chairman of the subcommittee. It is being submitted in 
accordance with the request of your temporary sul)committee. 

The copy I have appears to have been signed by Senator McCarthy, 
by him personally and by him as chairman ; is that correct ? 

Mr. CoiiN. His signature appears in mimeographed form, sir. I 
think the fact is that he did not personally affix his signature to it. 

^ The above documents are printed under separate cover as Supplement to Hearings. 


Senator McClellax. Whether there is a signature to it or not. I 
just want to ask you this question. 

Mr, CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Senator McClellan. Does that first paragraph of this document 
state the truth, that it is filed on your behalf ? 

Mr. CoHN. Surely. 

Senator McClellan. You acknowledge it, then, as your document 
as well as the others identified ? 

Mr. CoHN. Surely. ', 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Cohn, I refer to your testimony, I be- 
lieve the day your first testified — what is the date of that? — on page 
3939. I shall read from that. May 27, 1 believe, Roy. 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. That is all right, sir. Go right ahead. 

Senator McClellan. I will read from the transcript, a question 
which Mr. Jenkins asked. [Reading:] 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Cohn, it is alleged by you — and I am getting down now to 
the specific allegations — that the Secretary of the Army and his counsel used 
improper means and methods in their efforts to halt the work of the McCarthy 
committee, particularly at Fort Monmouth. I now ask you to tell the members 
of this committee when the first overt act was committed in that respect, by 
whom and where? 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. I don't believe, Mr. Jenkins, that we have characterized 
any of these acts of IMr. Stevens or Mr. Adams with the use of the adjective 
"improper" or anything else. We have set forth what the facts are. I will do 
that now, sir, at your direction. 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

Senator McClellan. I wish to call your attention to that before I 
proceed to interrogate you. 

Mr. Cohn. Yes, sir. 

Senator McClellan. But I w,ill ask you first, before I proceed, do 
you now or do you not term the actions that you charged and testified 
to against Mr. Stevens and Mr. Adams as improper ? 

Mr. CoiiN. Sir, I believe that that is a matter for the committee to 
judge. What I tried to do here, Senator McCellan, is tell you what 

Senator McClellan. You are not willing to say that you term 
them improper? 

Mr. Cohn. Sir, I am not willing to characterize or pass judgment 
upon, so to speak, the acts of the Secretary of the Army and Mr. 

Senator McClellan. I will read some of your language to you, 
then, and let you tell us how you jntended for us to interpret it, if 
you are not willing to say that it is improper. 

Mr. Cohn. I feel, sir, that that is a matter for this committee to 

Senator McClellan. I understand, but you have acknowledged this 
as your document, and I want to know what you meant by it if you 
didn't mean improper. 

Mr. Cohn, Surely, sir. 

Senator McClellan. No. 1, the second paragraph : 

We are submitting herewith what we consider to be pertinent data concerning 

And I call your attention to this — 


nttempt by two Army civili;ins, Mr. Robert T. Stov(Mi.s nnd IMr. Jdbn O. Adnms, 
to discredit the investisatiiis coiuiuittee and to force a discontinuance of our 
hearings, exposing Communist iutiltratiou in their Department. 

JNlr. CoHX. Yes, sir. 

JSeiiator McClellan. Do you state now under oath that that allega- 
tion is true or false ? 

Mr. CoHN. That they attempted to discredit the committee and to 
force us to discontinue our hearings ? 

iSenator McClkllan. Yes, sir. 

]\lr. CoHXc That is true, sir. 

ISenator ^IcClellan. You state under oath that is true ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, sir. 

Senator McClellax. That these tAvo, Mr. Stevens and IMr. Adams, 
did attempt to do that ? 

Mr. CoHN. Yes, they did, sir. 

Senator McClellan. Are you willing to say whether that is i)roper 
or inijiroper ? 

Mr. CoHN. Sir, perhaps it is a difference of terminology, but it is 
important to me. 

Senator McCi-JJXan. How would you characterize it, then, if you 
wouldn't say "improper''? I think that is about the mildest term 
you could use. 

Mr. CoHN. That is just it. Senator McClellan. If I can avoid it, 
I don't want to characterize it at all. I want to tell what happened, 
what Avords I remember having spoken and what acts committed, 
and then leave it to the committee to judge just what the legal or 
moral effect of those acts might be. 

Senator McClellax. Do you know of anyone who wouldn't regard 
an attempt of that kind as being improper? I just can't see it. I 
don't know why you hesitate to say it is improper. 

Mr. CoHx. Sir, the only thing is this: I did point out that they 
certainly tried to get us to stop the investigation. There is no doubt 
on this earth about that. 

They are not the first people who have tried to do that. Most 
agencies which are being investigated don't want to be investigated, 
and they want the investigating committee to stop. They tried to 
get us to stop; the answer is there isn't any doubt on earth about 

Senator McClellax. The time has run out. 

Time got us stopped before we got started. 

Senator Muxdt. Mr. Jenkins ? 

Mr. Jenkixs. I observe that Mrs. Driscoll is now in the room. I 
would like for Mr. Cohn to stand aside and let me ask Mrs. Driscoll 
a few questions. 

Senator Muxdt. Mrs. Driscoll, take the witness stand, please. 

Senator McCarthy, Roy, would you sit there with Mrs. Driscoll ? 

IMr. CoHx. It would be a pleasure, sir. 

Senator Muxdt. Would you stand and be sworn, please, Mrs. Dris- 
coll. Do you solemnly sw^ear the testimony you are about to give will 
be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you 

Mrs. Driscoll, I do. 

46620°— 54— pt. 47 4 



Mr. Jenkins. Are you Mrs. Mary Driscoll ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mrs. Driscoll, I believe you are secretary to Senator 
McCarthy ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I am. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mrs. Driscoll, we don't hear you very well. 

Senator Mundt. Would you pull the microphone a little closer to 
you and speak a little louder ? 

Mr. Jenkins. I don't believe you are close enough yet, Mrs. Dris- 
coll. Would you pull your chair up a little'^ 

You are secretary to Senator McCarthy ? 

Mrs. Driscoll, I am. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mrs. Driscoll, do you take his dictation or a part 
of it? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. Your office is where? What is the office number? 

Mrs. Driscoll. 428. 

Mr. Jenkins. 428, this building? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. I will ask you to examine a file now before us, Mrs. 
Driscoll, containing some 11 dili'erent memoranda, beginning, I be- 
lieve, with October 2, as the date of the first one, is it not ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. Where did you get those memoranda, Mrs. Driscoll, 
together ? When did you assemble them and put them in that file, in 
the jacket in which they are now contained? 

Mrs. Driscoll. They were put in here as they were filed. 

Mr. Jenkins. Were they put in there as they were dictated and 
typed ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. The first one is dated October 2; is that correct? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. And by whom was it dictated, Mrs. Driscoll? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Frank Carr. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you recall his having dictated that particular 
memorandum ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I couldn't. 

Mr. Jenkins. You say you could not? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I could not recall an individual memorandum that 
was dictated. 

Mr. Jenkins. You have no distinct, independent recollection of the 
document of October 2 being the first one you have before you? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you have any independent recollection of any 
of those documents, Mrs. Driscoll, being 11 in number? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't believe I have any independent recollection 
of any of these, Mr. Jenkins. I couldn't. I have too much dictation. 

Mr. Jenkins. You say you take too much dictation ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. To have an independent recollection of any one 
particular paper. 


' INIr. Jexkins. Ycf:. Do you recall — if you will examine tlie second 
' one, dated November G, is it not ? 

^Irs. Driscoll. Yes. 

JNIr. Jenkins. Do you recall Mr. Colin dictating either that or any 
other of those documents to you, Mrs. Driscoll? 

JMrs. Diuscoix. I liave no independent recollection of them, but I 
am sure that he dictated some of these to me. All of tliese that say 
from Mr. Cohn were obviously dictated by him. Otherwise I would 
not have put his name on the paper. 

Mr. Jenkins. How many young ladies or ladies or gentlemen are 
there in your office who take dictation? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I would be the only one who would take his. 

]\Ir. Jenkins. You are the only one ? 

INlrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you mean they make you answer those 7,000 letters 
a day, Mrs. Driscoll ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I believe you misunderstand me. I am the only one 
who would take this type of dictation. We have other young ladies 
in our office who take dictation on mail. 

Mr. Jenkins. What do you mean by that type of dictation? 

Mrs. Driscoll. When Frank and Roy come upstairs and want to 
dictate a memorandum, if they can't see the Senator and want to leave 
a note for him, I am the obvious person to take it. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you have your notes? You take shorthand, of 
course ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. And I presume that you took those memoranda in 
shorthand ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I think probably all of them were dictated. Maybe 
there might be a few here where they would just scribble out a note in 
their own writing and give it to me and I would copy it. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you have your original shorthand notes, I take it, 
Mrs. Driscoll ? 

IMrs. Driscoll. No, I don't, Mr. Jenkins. I never keep shorthand 

Mr, Jenkins. You do not? Well, you have a shorthand notebook 
in which you take shorthand dictation ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right, and when that notebook is filled and 
I have finished typing everything in it, I destroy it. 

Mr. Jenkins. You destroy it ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I always have. 

Mr. Jenkins. Is there any reason for that ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. They are just in the way. I don't want to keep them. 
They aren't of any value. I have never kept them in all the years I 
hav'^. worked. 

Mr. Jenkins. How many years have you been there ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I have been with the Senator almost 6 years. 

INIr. Jenkins. And you have never had occasion to refer back to 
notes that you took ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do you have copies of those memoranda ? 

!Mrs. Driscoll. Carbons of these? 

Mr. Jenkins. Yes, copies of the ones you now have before you. 



Mrs. Driscoll. I think perhaps we have, because we copied these 
when they were released for the press, and I am sure we must have 
extra copies in the office. 

Mr. Jenkins. You say you copied those when you released them to 
the jDress ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is ri(?ht. 

Mr. Jenkins. You are talking about the release of March 12 ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't recall the date, but I think it was about that 

Mr. Jenkins. About that time. It was a day or so after the Army 
release, was it not? 

Mrs. Driscoll, Eight. 

Mr. Jenkins. And was it after the Army release, Mrs. Driscoll, 
that you made copies and released the original or a copy to the press ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I think so. 

Mr. Jenkins. You think so. When the Army release was made, 
Mrs. Driscoll, you then had those memoranda in the particular jacket 
in which they are now, is that what you are telling us ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. This looks like the same file. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. What is that jacket marked? What identification 
does it have on it ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Investigations committee. 

Mr. Jenkins. Investigations committee? Well, it has nothing on 
it to indicate what the particular phase of investigation the commit- 
tee was carrying out there ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Jenkins. It just has investigations committee on it? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Jenkins. You have a lot of files down there, Mrs. Driscoll? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. How many would you estimate ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I couldn't possibly estimate. 

Mr. Jenkins. You have a lot of files on the Fort Monmouth in- 
vestigation ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. Would you estimate how many ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 

Mr. Jenkins. You have a lot of files on the Voice of America 
investigation ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. And a lot of them on the Government Printing 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Jenkins. And that particular file, now, is just identified by the 
words "investigating committee"? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Jenkins. Is that all? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is all it says. 

Mr. Jenkins. How did you know where to go to look for that file, 
Mrs. Driscoll, when you were called upon to produce it ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I can't tell you that, Mr. Jenkins. 

Mr. Jenkins. How is that ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I can't tell you that. That is my way of filing. 


Mr. Jenkins. Mrs. Driscoll, I did not <iet your answer. The 
chairman said that your reply was "that is just my way of filing." 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is ri<^ht. 

]\Ir. Jknkins. In other words, you carry a lot of it in your memory, 
is that it? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. AAlio asked you to get those memorandums on March 
12. or a day or so prior thereto? 

JNIrs. Driscoll. Tlie Senator. 

JNIr. Jenkins. Senator McCarthy? 

JNIrs. Driscoll. Yes 

Mr. Jenkins. Was that after the release of the Army's document? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I think so. 

Mr. Jenkins. And so without any index or anything of the kind, 
you just consulted Mrs. Mary E. DriscolTs mind and knew where it 
was and went and got those memoranda ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. [Laughter.] 

]\lr. Jenkins. Did you recall the contents of any of them? 

Mrs. Driscoll, No, Mr. Jenkins, but he asked me to get what mem- 
oranda we had on the subject, so I went through 

Mr. Jenkins. AVhat did he say, what memoranda did he say he 
wanted '': 

Mrs. Driscoll. Any memoranda pertaining to the conversations 
Avith Frank or Roj^ or memoranda from Frank or Roy or other statf 
members to him on that particular subject. 

Mr. Jenkins. What particular subject, Mrs. Driscoll? 

Mrs. Driscoll. His conversations with Mr. Stevens. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Stevens. Is that what he said ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Well, I can't tell you exactly what the Senator said. 
I couldn't tell you that. 

Mr. Jenkins. Very well, Mr. Chairman. Those are all the questions 
I care to ask. 

Mrs. Driscoll, will you examine those memoranda and tell us 
^siiether or not they are the originals, written up by you, or whether 
they are copies? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I think, ]\Ir. Jenkins, they may be the originals as 
typed up by me, but I couldn't tell you positively. 

Mr. Jenkins. Your best impression is they are the originals? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Of course, they are on an original, but whether 
they are the ones that were first typed, in the very first instance, 
I couldn't tell you that, because when they were copied in the bustle 
of getting them all ready, getting enough copies for the press, the 
originals, those done in the first instance, may have gotten away, 
mav'^ have gotten out. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, I think it is a very fine time for me 
to dispossess myself of those documents. I have had them in my 
possession for more than 2 months now and it has been a source of 
a lot of worry for fear they might be lost or misplaced. I am going 
to ask Mrs. Driscoll to file all 11 of them, Mrs. Driscoll. They now 
become a matter of public record and I am completely dispossessed of 

Your answer will be, I take it, that you so file? 
Senator Mundt. They will be received and marked with the proper 
exhibit number. 


(The documents referred to were marked "Exhibit No. 31" and will 
be fomid in the appendix on p. 1853.) 

Senator Mundt. JMay the Chair inquire if they are the originals 
which were presented to you in a sealed envelope ? 

Mr. Jenkins. Correct, and which I thought were originals or 
copies, and they are the originals delivered to me by the Chairman, 
and I am now completely dispossessed of them. 

Senator Mundt. Have you concluded? 

Mr. Jenkins. I have concluded, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Just for the purpose of correcting the record, I 
think Mr. Cohn or you testified earlier that I had requested Frank 
Carr to produce those original memoranda on March 12. I am sure 
that was not the day, because I was not selected for this unhappy posi- 
tion as chairman until some days later. It was the afternoon of the 
day when I was selected as chairman that I called Frank Carr and 
said I believed as long as I was chairman I should have possession 
of the original documents, and he procured them and delivered them 
to my office late that afternoon. 

We can establish the exact date by goinjj back to the date when we 
held the executive meeting at which time I was designated as 

Senator Symington would like to see the originals. Could you pass 
them up to the table ? 

I think I have just one question, Mrs. Driscoll. This file in which 
you kept the originals, was that a file in your office or in Senator 
McCarthy's office, or was that down in the committee room, a com- 
mittee file? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Those were kept in Senator McCarthy's office. 

Senator Mundt. This was a personal file which you kept for him ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Eight. 

Senator Mundt. It was not a committee file ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Senator Mundt. Senator McClellan? 

Senator McClellan. Just to clear that up, 'Mrs. Driscoll, you have 
testified to other files in your office with respect to other investigations 
and such matters. You do not mean for the committee to understand 
that any committee files are up there? They are all personal files, 
personal memoranda, and so forth, relating to some investigations; 
is that correct? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is correct. 

Senator McClellan. Not committee files ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, sir. 

Senator McClellan. So if one had looked in the committee files 
prior to the time this controversy arose, these would not have been in 
the committee files, would they? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No; they would not have been. 

Senator McClellan. They were regarded as personal files? 

Mrs. Driscoll. They were personal. 

Senator McClellan. That is all, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen ? Senator Jackson? 

Senator Jackson. Mrs. Driscoll, do you ordinarily put your initials 
on your typewritten documents ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. On letters, yes. On memorandums, no. 


Senator Jacksox. On memorandums you do not. Where are the car- 
bon copies of this file? This is the original, I understand, which is 
beincr introduced in the record. 

Senator Mundt. Yes. 

Senator Jackson. These were all tjq^ed up on the dates that appear 
on the memorandums ? 

]\Irs. Driscoix. I couldn't say that, Senator Jackson. They were 
either dated the day they were dictated to me or within a day of two 

Senator Jackson. I meant within 

Mrs. Driscoll. Within a very short period. 

Senator Jackson. Within a reasonable period of time, a few hours 
after you had received the dictation, mayba that day, the next day, or 
the day after? 

Mrs. Driscoll. INIaybe the day after, maybe a couple of days later. 

Senator Jackson. Are there any other memorandums that have been 
dictated by Mr. Cohn or Mr. Carr? Is that the usual practice in the 
office ? 

JVIrs. Driscoll. Memorandums on what ? 

Senator Jackson. Other matters relating to committee work. 

INlrs. Driscoll. Oh, yes. 

Senator Jackson. There are a lot of memorandums, then, in the 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Senator Jackson. They appear in the files now ? 

Mrs, Driscoll. If they are personal memoranda to the Senator, 
they are in the file. 

Senator Jackson. Which would be in the Senator's office? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Right. 

Senator Jackson. That is all. 

Senator Mdndt. Senator Potter? 

Senator Potter. I have no questions. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington ? 

Senator Syimington. I have just one question. 

Do you use more than one typewriter ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes ; I do. 

Senator Sy]mington. Where are the carbon copies of these? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Do you mean the carbons that were made at the 
time they were originally typed? 

Senator Symington. That is right, Mrs. Driscoll. 

Mrs. Driscoll. They may have gone out with the press copies or 
there may be a copy or two in the office. 

Senator Symington. No further questions. 

Senator INIundt. Senator Dworshak ? 

I believe now we reverse our procedure, since we changed sides in 
the controversy, and we will call on Senator McCarthy each time 
first, and then Mr. Welch. Senator McCarthy or Mr. Cohn, do you 
have any questions? 

Senator McCarthy. Only one question. 

Are you satisfied with your job? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes, sir. 

Senator Mundt. It isn't fair to make her say that under oath. 

Mrs. Driscoll. I am happy to. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch ? 


Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make an arrangement 
where I can sit by Mrs. Driscoll as I ask her about these. Could I 
have a chair by the witness? 

Mr. CoiiN. Mr. Chairman, if I might be heard on that, I have not 
received a formal retainer, but I am sitting here with Mary Driscoll, 
and I wonder why Mr. Welch couldn't just ask questions from the 
same place the Senators do and the same place we did when we were 
in Mr. Welch's position. 

Senator Mundt. It would seem to me appropriate, Mr. Welch, that 
at least you do not sit so close to the witness that you could overhear 
what her counsel is saying. That would seem a bit unfair. 

Mr. Welch. I want her to look at the memorandums as I do. I have 
never seen them yet. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington has them now. 

Mr. Welch. I thought it w^ould be a convenience if I sat near her as 
I examine her. [Laughter.] 

Senator Mundt. The Chair believes that there are some printed 
copies of the memorandums around which have been identified as 
being completely accurate. If one of my friends at my left would 
loan Mrs. Driscoll a printed copy, that would serve the purpose. I do 
think it a bit unfair to deny counsel to these witnesses the same right 
you had, and that is the right to talk to them on a confidential basis. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, may I say I certainly don't 
blame Mr. Welch for making that request, but I think it should be 

Mr. Wei-ch. Having glanced at them in a hurry, I believe I can 

Senator Mundt. We identified previously, Mr. Welch, the fact that 
the printed copies which you so thoughtfully had made were authentic 
and correct, so if you will take one of those and give Mrs. Driscoll the 
original, you can proceed from where you are without any confusion. 

Mr. Welch. I think she had better have the originals. 

Senator Mundt. And you have the printed copies. I think they 
are letter perfect, as far as similarity is concerned. 

Mr. Welch. Mrs. Driscoll, it is always somewhat awkward and 
difficult to cross-examine a lady, but I must ask you one or two or 
perhaps more questions about this file. 

When did you make the file up ? When did you just start making 
the file ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. AVhen were these papers put in this folder ? Is that 
what you mean ? 

Mr. Welch. No. When did you make the cover? 

Mrs. Driscoll. At the time the first memorandum was dictated, 
I would say, although I don't have any recollection of that. 

Mr. Welch. About October 2, 1963 ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is the date of the first memorandum. 

Mr. W^elch. What did you write on it? 

Mrs. Driscoll. "Investigations Committee." 

Mr. Welch. That is all it says, "Investigations Committee"? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is all it says. 

Mr. Welch. I think, however, you told us that the way you knew 
whether or not anything was to go into the file was whether or not it 
had to do with Mr. Stevens; is that right? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, no. 


Mr. Welch. What was the test or the tests as to what went into 
this file? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Anything ])ertuinino; to the first memorandum that 
was dictated was put in this folder, and then anything else 1 got on 
the same subject. I naturally i)ut it in the same folder. 

Mr. Welch. What was the subject? That is my point. 

]Mrs. Driscoll. The first memorandum pertains to a conversation 
with Stevens. 

Mr. Welch. That is what I understood you to say. 

Mrs. Driscoll. So anything after that pertaining to conversations 
with ]\Ir. Stevens, anything along that line, I put in the same folder. 

Mr. Welch. That is what I understood you to say, Mrs. Driscoll. 

The first memorandum is marked "Confidential." What is there 
confidential about it? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't think I can tell you that, Mr. Welch. When 
the boys dictate to me and ask me to mark a memorandum "confiden- 
tial." I do, but I don't ask them why. 

Mr. Welch. What is the effect of marking it "confidential"? 

Mrs. Driscoll. You mean what it means to me personally? 

Mr. Welch. Yes. 

Mrs. Driscoll. Why, it just meant that he wanted me to give this 
to the Senator, and that was all. 

Mr. Welch. Well, I notice the one of December from Mr. Cohn 
is also to the Senator and is not marked "confidential." Do you 
observe that? 

Mrs. Driscoll. What is the date? 

Mr. Welch. December 9. 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is from Mr. Carr. 

Mr. Welch. I am sorry. 

Mrs. Driscoll. The one I have is from Mr. Carr. 

Mr. Welch. There are two on that date. Look at the little short 

Mrs. Driscoll. I have it now. 

Mr. Welch. That one is not marked confidential, is that right? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. Similarly what I call the No. 5 one, which is from 
P'rank Carr to Senator McCarthy, is not marked confidential. That 
is the second in my printed copy it is the second and longer 1 of those 
2 on December 9, 1953. 

]Mrs. Driscoll. This one 1 have is marked confidential. 

Mr. Welch. It is ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. AVelch. So both the ones dated December 9, 1953, are marked 
confidential ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, they are not, Mr. Welch. 

Mr. Welch. Neither? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Don't you have a copy in front of you? The short 
one is not marked "confidential" and the long one is marked 

Mr. Welch. I am sorry. On the printed ones — and we tried to 
be very careful — the one from Frank Carr to Senator McCarthy dated 
Deceniber 9, 1953, as I have it in print here before me is not marked 

46620°— 54— pt. 47 5 


Senator McCarthy. May I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that Mrs. Dris- 
coll is not responsible for the misprinting on the part of Mr. Welch. 
She has the original. Mr. Welch had an exact copy of it. He is now 
reading from his own misprinted copy. I think that is rather unfair 
to the witness. 

Mr. Welch. The last thing I would wish to be is unfair to Mrs. 

These were printed by us and read back to a member of Mr. Jenkins' 
staff, and I now understand that on the one dated December 9 from 
Frank Carr to Senator McCarthy the word "confidential" should 
appear ; is that correct, Mrs. Driscoll ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. The one from Frank Carr to Senator McCarthy? 

Mr. Welch. From Frank Carr to Senator McCarthy. 

Mrs. Driscoll. The word confidential appears on this one. 

Mr. Welch. But on the one from Roy Cohn to Senator McCarthy, 
it does not appear? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. You may not know, but is there a significant difference 
between the two, as to the way in which you handle them, whether 
they were marked confidential or not? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, I don't know. 

Mr. Welch. And no significance in the word "confidential" appear- 
ing on the one from Frank Carr to Senator McCarthy, dated October 
2, being the first one ? 

M^s. Driscoll. It is not significant to me, Mr. Welch. 

Mr. Welch. I am sorry. 

Mrs. Driscoll. It is not significant to me. If they dictate to me 
and say, "Mark this confidential," I mark it confidential. If they 
don't, I don't. 

Mr. Welch. Now, directing your attention to the first one, dated 
October 2, what did you do with it after you typed it? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I gave it to Senator McCarthy. 

Mr. Welch. How do you know that ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Well, maybe I couldn't say that I gave it to him, but 
normally, when Frank or Roy dictate a memorandum to me, to give to 
the Senator, then I type it and give it to the Senator or leave it on his 
desk for him to see. 

Mr. Welch. I would assume so. And then it would come back to 
you to file ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. He would give it back to me to file, or .sometimes he 
would destroy it. 

Mr. Welch. And would put on it the word "file"? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Do I write on it the word "file"? 

Mr. Welch. No, does he write that on it ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 

Mr. Welch. How can you tell if he has seen it? 

Mrs. Driscoll. He hands it to me. 

Mr. Welch. He hands it to you, so you remember that he handed 
you this one ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I do not have any independent recollection of the 
Senator actually, physically handing me the paper, but we do that all 
the time. 


Mr. Welch. It is quite all ri^lit, Mrs. Driscoll, I am not attacking 
you. When he handed that one to you, did he suggest to you that you 
make a file for these memoranda 'i 

Mrs. Dkiscoll. No. The Senator doesn't do that. He knows we 
will put them away. 

Mr. Welch. I am sorry. 

Mrs. Driscoll. The Senator didn't say to put them away. He just 
said file it. 

Mr. Welch. It was just filed without any directions? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. And you decided to start a new file, is that right? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Well, this w'as a new subject. This was the first 
memorandum that we had on it. So there wouldn't be anywhere to 
put it except in a new folder. 

Mr. Welch. And you put it in a folder marked as you have 
indicated ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. Noav, when the second one came long, the one indicated 
November G, that begins, "At the rc(]uest of Mr. Stevens," and referred 
to Secretary Stevens as did the first one, is that correct ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. And I assume from 

Mr. CoHX. Excuse me one moment, please. I just wanted to talk to 
Mrs. Driscoll for 1 minute. 

Mr. Welch. You may. 

Now, as I understand you, after Mr. Cohn dictates that sort of a 
memorandum to you, you don't do anything but type it and put it in 
the file, is that right ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. After being sure that the Senator has seen it. 

Mr. Welch. Well, this one isn't directed to the Senator. 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, but a memorandum for the file, he naturally 
would want to see what is going in. 

Mr. Welch. Perhaps I was just a little stupid about that. So this 
one went to the Senator also, even if directed to the file ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I would say so, although I couldn't absolutely be 
positive of it. 

Mr. Welch. Then he threw it — strike that out. Would he put it 
in an outgoing basket or hand it to you for file ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Well, he usually just has a lot of things on his desk 
and after he was finished with them, he hands them to me and asks 
me to put them away. 

Mr. Welch. Having handed it to you, you understood some way 
\'ou were to file it, of course 'i 

Mrs. Driscoll. Certainly. 

Mr. Welch. And the file was indicated to you by the word "Stevens" 
1 take it, in the first line, is that right ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. Now, I observe that the third memorandum was also 
dictated by Mr. Cohn, is that right ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Which one do you have reference to now ? 

Mr. Welch. I ought not to use numbers, because it will confuse you. 
The one of November 17, 1953. 

Mrs. Driscoll. Which says "memorandum for files" ? 

Mr. W^ELCH. Memorandum for files. 


Mrs. Driscoll. I don't believe I could tell you positively whether 
Mr. Colin or Mr. Carr dictated it. 

Mr. Welch. Well, Mr. Cohn has told us that he did. 

Mrs. Driscoll. All right. 

Mr. Welch. If he has told us so ; is that correct ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Why, yes, if he said he did. 

Mr. Welch, Right. And that, again, has the word "Stevens" or 
"meeting with Stevens" so you knew where to put that one; is that 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. From that word. 

Now look at the next one, which is December 9, 1953. That is a 
memorandum from Mr. Cohn to Senator McCarthy. Was that also 
dictated to you ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. And 

Mrs. Driscoll. You understand, Mr. Welch, that I am almost posi- 
tive that all of these were dictated, but you did hear me say that I 
couldn't say absolutely. Sometimes they may have been little written 

Mr. Welch. Now, did that go to tlie Senator — Pardon me, Mr. Cohn. 

Mr. Cohn. Right. 

Senator Mundt. The Senator's time has expired. 

We will start around the wheel. It being the seventh inning, I sug- 
gest we recess for 5 minutes, and then reconvene. 

( Brief recess. ) 

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

Will you see if that is a rollcall or a quorum call, please ? It sounds 
like a rollcall to me. We will find out. 

(Discussion off the record.) 

Senator Mundt. It is a vote, and we will have to go over and vote 
and come back. We will stand in recess for another 10 minutes. 

(Brief recess.) 

Senator Mundt. The committee will please come to order, the 
Senators having returned from a rollcall vote on the floor. I think 
it is unnecessary to remind our audience about our rule against mani- 
festations of approval or disapproval, because I presume most of you 
were here when the recess began. I am sure you will comply with 
the regulations of the committee. 

We have just concluded one turn around the wheel at asking ques- 
tions, and now it reverts back to Counsel Jenkins. Do you have any 
further questions at this time ? 

Mr. Jenkins. No further questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair has none. We will come back to Sen- 
ator McClellan a little later. He hasn't returned from the floor yet. 

Senator Dirksen ? 

Senator Dirksen. No questions. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson? 

Senator Jackson. No questions. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Dworshak, have you any questions? 

Senator Dworshak. No questions. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington? 

Senator Symington. No questions. 


• Senator Mundt. I presume that next is Senator McCarthy. Do 
you have any questions? 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I have a question. I am not 
sure that the Chair would consider it technically a question, but I 
think it is something that in my 10 minutes I should bring up. 

I Avas just over on the floor of the Senate, and I notified Senator 
Flanders that I intended to ask a question concerning him. Senator 
Flanders this morning on the Senate floor made the statement that our 
conuuittee had not yet — I am reading from the press story — "had not 
yet dug into the real heart of the mystery." 

I think if Senator Flanders has any information about the heart of 
the mystery, he should not merely refer to it on the Senate floor. I 
think "he should be willing to do what the Eepublican Senators here 
have done, namely, take the oath and testify to what that mystery is. 

He also says that mystery "concerns the personal relationship of 
the Army Private G. David Schine, staff assistant Koy Cohn, and 
the Senator." 

Again, Mr. Chairman, if the Senator from Vermont, Mr. Flanders, 
has any information, I think that the Senators want to get that. I 
think he should be willing to come down here under oath and testify. 

Then in a bit of name calling, he refers to McCarthy as "'Dennis 
the Menace." He says : 

Does the assistant have some hold on the Senator? Can it be that our Dennis 
the Menace, so effective in making trouble for his elders, has at last gotten 
into trouble himself? Does the committee plan to investigate the real issues 
at stake? 

Mr. Chairman, this is a statement by the Senator from Vermont in 
the nature of a question. I have been very patient with the Senator 
from Vermont as he has engaged in his diatribes over the past number 
of weeks. I have felt that he is a nice, kind, old gentleman. I won- 
dered "udiether this has been a result of senility or viciousness. 

In any case, we can't let him continue to intimate that he does have 
information, without calling him. 

Mr. Chairman, I may say that in this statement on the Senate floor 
he does more than any man I have ever heard to inflame racial and 
religious bigotry. It is a vicious thing. It is a dishonest thing. 
He brings in the question of Jewish people, Protestant people, Cath- 
olic people. May I say, IVIr. Chairman, that of the three top people of 
our committee, the chief counsel, the chief of staft', and myself, one 
happens to be Jewish, one happens to be Protestant, and one happens 
to be Catholic. All of us are very active in our particular faitlis. 
That has interfered not even in the slightest in this exposure of 

I think that it is dishonest b?yond words for a Senator to take the 
Senate floor and try and inject religious and racial bigotry into this 
cft'ort to expose conmiunism. 

May I say, Mr. Chairman, also, quoting the Senator, he refers to 
the "incredible success of tijipping Kepublicans into a detailed and 
relentless search for some significant evidence of subversion in the 
Eepublican administration." 

Mr. Chairman, I am sure that the chairman of this committee, who 
has done such an outstanding job in the Alger Hiss case, who did 
such an outstanding job on the House Un-American Activities Com- 
mittee, will agree that when you get to the issue of treason you can't 


start drawing party lines. I am sure that the very able chief counsel, 
who has done such an excellent job of brinoing out the evidence, 
cross-examining on both sides, will agree that when we get to the 
question of subversion there should be no party line. 

I would like now, Mr. Chairman, to ask the Chair to subpena the 
Senator. I would like to ask the Chair to request that the Senator 
from Vermont come before this committee and, under oath, tell us 
what he knows about the real heart of this mystery, have him tell us, 
for example, what he knows about Dennis the Menace, by which he 
refers to me, being in trouble. I would like to know what that trouble 
is, Mr. Chairman. I would like to get it under oath. 

Mr. Chairman, the Senator from Vermont has so often talked about 
the waiving of senatorial immunity and coming out in the open and 
giving the facts. I think that he should not be reluctant to do this. 

May I say, Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, while normally it is the 
practice in the Senate, as the Chair knows, to notify a Senator if he 
is to be attacked on the Senate floor, I was not notified. However, 
I did notify Mr. Flanders that I was going to discuss his statements 
and I invited him to be here and I suggested that I would ask the 
Chair to give him the opportunity to make any statement which he 
had to make. 

I understand that the Senator is not here. 

That is the end of the question. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair will follow his customary procedure 
in refraining from commenting upon any of the comments that his 
colleagues make, either on or off the floor. 

Mr. Welch, you have 10 minutes. 

Mr. Welch. Mrs. Driscoll, you, I take it, are the Senator's No. 1 
secretary, is that right? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. And I take it you are quite a busy person ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. You handle all of his mail ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. When you say handle it, wdiat do you mean ? 

Mr. Welch. Well, do j^ou have anything to do at all with the mail 
that comes in ? Do you open it all, for example ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I see it all. 

Mr. Welch. And you take his dictation ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. Both memorandums and letters? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. Are there some girls down in the subcommittee office 
who take dictation ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I suppose so, Mr. Welch, but I don't know very about the operation of the committee. 

]SIr. Welch. Do you ever go down there ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Earely. 

Mr. Welch. And you don't know those girls ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I know them personally to speak to, but that is all. 

Mr. Welch. How many are there ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't know. 

Mr. Welch. How many do you know? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I know 6 or 7, I probably know all of them to 
speak to, but I don't know how many there are. 


Mr. Welch. Now, ^vhnt members of the staff are free to pjive you 

J i station? 

]\[rs. Driscoll. Well, I would take dictation from any member of 
tlie staff who asked me to. 

Mr. Welch. Then they are all entitled to claim you at any time, 
is that riiilit^ 

Mrs. Driscoll, 1 don't know whether you would call it entitled or 
not, but certainly I would be courteous enough to take any dictation 
they asked me to. 

Mr. Welcil And what members of the staff, say in the past months, 
have dictated to you? 

Mrs. Driscoll. ]\Ir. Carr, has, and Mr. Cohn, Mr. — I can't tell you 
wlio else. I know they have, those two have. 

jNIr. Welch. They have. Now, I want to ask you a question or two 
about the dates on these memorandums. You have told us, I think 
tiiat they are dated at or about the time when the dictation was given 
to you. 

Mrs. Driscoll. I think so. 

Mr. Welch. Suppose that the dictation was given to you, say, on 
the 10th, and you didn't get to transcribe it until the 11th. Would 
you date it the 10th or the 11th ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I have no set pattern. 

Mr. Welch. I am sorry ? 

INIrs. Driscoll. I have no set pattern. I can't tell you. 

]\rr. Welch. In any event, if the date, say, the 11th, just to take 
an arbitrary date, ap})ears on the memorandum, that would mean that 
either it was dictated and typed on that day — which it could mean, 
could it not ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. Or it could mean that it was typed on that day and 
dictated earlier? 

JNIrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

]\Ir. Welch. So that whenever we see a memorandum with a date 
on it, it must have been dictated on that date that appears on it or 
on a day or 2 or perhaps 3 days earlier ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Earlier. 

Mr. Welch. And that has to be true of each, doesn't it ? 

]\[rs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. Do you have any forms in your office for use in dic- 
tating memoranda ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. What do you mean form ? 

Mr. "Welch. Well, I will try to tell you so that you will understand. 
I think perhaps your answer is no. In my office, we have a form 
printed up, which says Hale and Dorr, 60 State Street, memorandum. 
Do you have anything that says memorandum on the top of it? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I think we have memorandum pads in the office that 
say that, but it isn't something that we would type on 

Mr. AYelch. Of the size of the Senate memorandum pads that we 
have here ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right, and the smaller one. 

Mr. Welch. My question is : Do you have a letter-size memorandum 

;Mrs. Driscoll. We do not. 


Mr. "Welch. All your memorandums go as appears here on plain 
paper ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 5 

Mr. Welch. I think yon have told ns that you had more than one 
typewriter in your office ? Is that right ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. ' 

Mr. Welch. And beginning back in October of 1953, you were, I 
take it, using more than one typewriter ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I frequently do. 

]SIr. Welch. What different makes did you have ? 

IMrs. Driscoll. I would have to go look at them. Typewriters — 
there are Remingtons and Eoyals and IBM's. I don't know what 
other kind. 

Senator McCarthy. Would you lean a little closer to the mike ? 

Mr. Welch. I hear you use the word IBM. Does that mean an 
electrical machine ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. Is the Roj^al electrical or not ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, it is not. 

;Mr. Welch. And the other one you mentioned was what ? 

IMrs. Driscoll. I think we have some Remingtons, but they are not 

Mr. Welch. You have one at your desk ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. What is that one? 

Mrs. Driscoll. The one there now is an IBM. 

]\Irs. Welch. That is an electrical typewriter ? 

]\Irs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. Now, will you look at your copies of these memoran- 
dums that you have in front of you, and taking the one of October 2, 
1953, tell us, if you will, on what machine that was typed? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I couldn't tell you, I don't know. 

IMr. Welch. You don't know? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't recognize the typing as coming from a cer- 
tain machine. 

Mr. Welch. Y^'ou must do a great deal of typewriting? 

INIrs. Driscoll. I do, I do so much that I wouldn't know a detail 
like that. 

Mr. Welch. Do you occasionally get up and leave your desk to go 
to some other desk to typevv'rite a letter ? 

Mrs. Drf.scoLL. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. The one at your desk is an IBM, is that right? 

Mrs. Driscoll. There is an IBM at my desk now. 

Mr. Welch. Was there then ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't recall. I don't know. 

Mr. Welch. Can't you — the secretaries in our office are very talka- 
tive about their typewriters. Don't you know when you got the one ! 
you've got now ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. N6.^ 

]\Ir. AVelch. You don't know how long you have had it? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 

Mr. Welch. You can't tell us whether you have had it a month or 
two or longer than that ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 


IMr. Welch. And you don't know, :Mrs. Driscoll, what kind of a 
machine you Avere usino- in October lUoH ? 

]Mrs. Driscoll. No, Mr. Welch, I don't. 

Mr. Welch. You have no memory at all ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. A typewriter is a typewriter, and I don't pay 
any attention to the type of typewriter. 

Mr. Welch. You are a pararjon of virtue. My secretaries are al- 
ways kickinf^ about them and wanting a new one. You don't pay 
any attention to them. 

Can you tell us or can you give lis any idea, Mrs. Driscoll, of the 
name or make of typewriter that was used on the memorandum of 
October 2, 1953 ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I could not possibly tell you, Mr. Welch. 

Mr. Welch. And can you do anything for us on the next memo- 
randum of November 6? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 

Mr. Welch. Can you do anything for us on the memorandum of 
November 17? 

Mrs. Driscoll. As to the kind and make? No, I can't. I just 
don't know. 

Mr. Welch. Or December 9 ? 

You can't help us ? 

Mrs, Driscoll. I cannot tell you what make of typewriter was used. 

Mr. Welch. Either of these memorandums dated December 9, you 
can't tell us on what machine you typed them ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, I can't, Mr. Welch. 

Mr. Welch. Or the one of December 17, is that correct? 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman ? 

Senator Mundt. A point of order ? 

Senator McCarthy. I have heard about everything now. But ques- 
tioning this young lady about what kind of typewriter they used a 
year ago seems to be about the height of something or other. Ob- 
viously she can't know, and she is typing all day long and much of 
the time, what particular typewriter she used a year ago. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch is soliciting from the witness that 
information, and she seems to be answering them directly. So the 
Chair believes the questions are appropriate. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Senator, it couldn't be worse than just stupid of 
me to ask. I am interested to know whether these memorandums are 
the real McCoy or not. You know that, don't you ? 

Senator McCarthy. I wasn't accusing you of being stupid. 

Mr. Welch. Now, through what date have we demonstrated your 
inability to recall or identify the typewriter you had used ? December 
21 — had we reached that date ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. You are asking me questions, Mr. Welch. I am 
afraid I can't tell you that. 

Mr. Welch. I believe I asked you about December 21 when the 
Senator interrupted. You cannot identify the typewriter? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I have said I cannot identify the typewriter on 
which any of these memorandums were written. 

Mr. Welch. Now will you tell us this, will you look at them good 
and hard like an expert will, and tell us how many typewriters were 
used ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, I don't think I can tell you that. 


Mr. Welch. Can yovi give us any idea why you bobbed around from 
one typewriter to anotlier in your office? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Well, 1 don't think that I necessarily bobbed around. 
I tliink maybe at times there was one kind of typewriter on my desk 
and for one reason or another it was changed and there was another 
on there. 

Mr. Welch. Yes. When were those changes made ? 

ISIrs. Driscoi.l. I don't know. 

INIr. Welch. Were there any such changes made? 

Mrs. Dkiscoll. There could have been. 

Mr. Welch. It could have been. But how long have you had the 
typewriter at your desk which you are now using? 

Senator McCarthy. May I interrupt there, Mr. Welch? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I have had difficulty hearing you. I wonder if you 
would try and lean a little closer to that mike, if you would. 

Mr. Welch. Do you know the question that is pending, Mrs. 

Mrs. Driscoll. How long have I had the typewriter that is at my 
desk now. How many consecutive days it has been at my desk? Is 
that what you mean? 

Mr. Welch. I mean just what any simple guy would mean when he 
says how^ long have you had the typewriter that you have got at your 
desk now. 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't know. 

Mr. Welch. You don't know ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 

]\rr. Welch. You have had it a week at least, haven't you? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Oh, I guess. 

]Mr. Welch. And a month ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't know. 

Mr. Welch. You don't know that? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, Mr. Welch. As I have told you before, I do 
not pay attention to the typewriters, and I cannot answer those ques- 
tions because I don't know the answer. 

Mr. Welch. You want us to understand that you cannot tell us 
whether or not that lovely machine that you use every day is 30 days 
old or less ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Oh, you can't — you are not asking about the age of 
the machine? 

Mr. Welch. I am talking about its age — do you get them new or 
secondhand ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. We get both kinds. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch's time has expired. 

Mr. Jenkins ? 

Mr. Jenkins. No further questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair has none. 

Senator McClellan ? 

Senator McClellan. No questions. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Dirksen ? 

Senator Dirksen. Mrs. Driscoll. how many offices are there in the 
suite that you occupy on the fourth floor ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Four. 

Senator Dirksen. Ynu work long hours, I take it ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes, I do. 


Senator Dirksex. You are probably there — or I slioukl rather put 
it in tlie form of a question : xVre you there when other uieuibers of 
tlie staff leave ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Every day. 

Senator Dirksen. So you have your choice of four oflices in which 
to work ? 

ISIrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Senator Dirksex. I presume jou are there when visitors call on 
the Senator. 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Senator Diiiksex. Obviously you couldirt use that office to do any 
typing wlien there are visitors. 

jNIrs. Driscoll. Well, I don't think I follow you, Senator Dirksen. 

Senator Dirksen. I am thinking of your four offices. Probably all 
of them are equipped with typewriters. 

JNIrs. Driscoll. Yes, all except 

Senator Dirksen. Certainly all my offices are equipped with type- 

]\lrs. Driscoll. All except the Senator's private office. 

Senator Dirksen. So sometimes you can work in one office and 
sometimes in another ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Senator Dirksen. Do you work in the front office, the reception 
office, if the others are occupied ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Generally speaking, I work in the third office from 
the front, and if I want to type something that is marked "confiden- 
tial"' and there are a lot of people around my desk, as there frequently 
are, I will go to another desk and type it; or in the late evening when 
everyone else is gone, and there is no one there, then I frequently go 
to the front office to work so as to hear the door when it comes open, 
people come in, and also to hear the phone. The phone only rings in 
that room. That happens very often. 

Senator Dirksen. There are a number of desks in each one of the 
working offices in addition to the office occupied by the Senator ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Senator Dirksen. And all of those desks, I take it, are equipped 
with typewriters ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Every one, except the administrative assistant. 

Senator Dirksen. Would it be possible under given circumstances 
to drop down in one office or another, or at one desk or another, and 
use whatever typewriter is there ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. It happens every day. Senator. 

Senator Dirksen. The typewriters vary according to make. Under- 
wood, Kemington, Royal ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Just like the girl who occupies the desk. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Jackson ? 

Senator Jackson. Just one question, now that it has been brought up. 

In your office, do you secretaries move from desk to desk, or do they 
have their own stenographic desk ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Each girl has a desk. 

Senator Jackson. That is what I didn't quite understand. Each 
girl has her own desk ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 


Senator Jackson. But do you use various desks ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. As I have just told Senator Dirksen, on occasion 
if I want to type something at my desk and there are people around 
it who I don't want to see the typing while they stand over me — 
it may be at lunch time when some of the other desks are vacant — 
I will use that desk if I want to. The girl may be out on vacation, 
she may be out sick, and I will use that desk. 

Senator Jackson. Then who uses your desk ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No one. 

Senator Jackson. You just move? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't mean to say that no one ever sits at my desk, 
but if I have left my desk there is a reason for it. 

Senator Jackson. Normally 

Mrs. Driscoll. If somebody sits down at my desk to use the phone 
or maybe if somebody wants to use the typewriter, they could sit 
down and use mine. I don't say they don't. 

Senator Jackson. Generally speaking, you use your desk for what — 
90 percent of your work ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Oh, yes. 

Senator Jackson. It is only on rare occasions that you would be 
using some other desk? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Well, once in a while Avhen there is something I 
don't want to type with a lot of people around me, or something 
like that, I will move. Then in the afternoons, I move when it is very 
late. I am always there when everyone else is gone. It is not unusual 
for me to go to the front office to work for an hour or however long 
I am going to be there, so I can hear the phone and so if anj'one comes 
in I will know it. 

Senator Jackson. Do the other secretaries do the same ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. The other secretaries leave at 5 : 30, and they don't 
have occasion to do that. 

Senator Jackson. That is all. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Potter ? 

Senator Potter. Mrs. Driscoll, I believe you are referred to as the 
executive secretary, the chief — there is an administrative assistant? 

Mrs. Driscoll. We have. 

Senator Potter. And you are the next to the administrative assist- 
ant in the office, is that correct ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Well, we don't have any fancy titles in our office. 

Senator Potter. You are the chief lady in the office, as far as sec- 
retarial work is concerned, is that correct ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I guess so. 

Senator Potter. How many people are there in the office in which 
you work? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Eleven. 

Senator Potter. Eleven in your office ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I think so, yes. 

Senator Potter. The Senators should vote for a new office building. 

Mrs. Driscoll. I wish they would. 

Senator Potter. That is all. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington '« 

Senator Symington. Mrs. Driscoll, I have just one question. 

In the folder you have there with the originals in it, there are two 
clearly different typewriters. I am not sure that there are not more 


tlian 2, but I was sure there are 2. Which one of tliose two is by your 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is the same question, Senator Symington. I 
can't tell. I just don't recognize 

Senator Symington. You mean you type every day at a typewriter 
and you don't know which one of the typewriters is the one that makes 
the letters this high and which one makes it that high [indicating] ? 

Mrs. Dkiscoll. I can't take dictation and tell you if it were written 
on a Eoyal or a Remington or Underwood. 

Senator Symington. So you don't know whether the typewriter you 
have is the one that makes the large letters on your desk, or the one 
that makes the small letters? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Generally speaking, most of our typewriters make 
the small ones. There have been times w^hen we have had the others 
in there. 

Senator Symington. There are some of the larger size in those 
that you have there. I was wondering whether that was the type- 
writer by your desk, or whether it was the one that made the smaller 
letters ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. You mean at the time this page was typed ? I can't 
tell you whether this typewriter was sitting beside my desk then or not. 

Senator Symington. No further questions, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Dworshak has none. 

Senator McCarthy ? 

Senator McCarthy. I think in view of the fact that we have gone 
into this question of typewriters, may I ask you how many typewriters 
are there in the office, roughly ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. There are 10 girls, and each girl has a typewriter 
and I think there are 1 or 2 extra ones there. There are 10 or 11. 

Senator McCarthy. The typewriters are constantly being serviced, 
are they ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes, they are. 

Senator McCarthy. So as of today normally one of the typewriters 
might be taken out and a new tyj^ewriter put in ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Senator McCarthy. On your desk, when a typewriter is being serv- 
iced, they put in a new typewriter and take your old one, and then it 
goes to someone else's office ? 

Mrs. Driscoix. Usually, unless you want to give your typewriter 
up and exchange it for a new one, then I suppose they send it to some- 
one else's office. 

Senator McCarthy. Get closer to that mike. 

Mrs. Driscoll, If you send it down to be repaired or cleaned, unless 
you ask for a different typewriter or a new one, they w^ould bring that 
one back. 

Senator McCarthy. I see. I don't know the importance of this 
typewriter investigation, but I am just curious now to know what the 
system is. You have about 10 or 11 typewriters in your office, and if 
1 typewriter is taken out, another typewriter is put in, right? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Senator McCarthy. In other words. Senator Jackson may have the 
typewriter one day and that is taken down to be serviced, and he gets 
a different typewriter, and when his ty]:)ewriter has been cleaned it 
may come back to our office. Or am I wrong in that ? 


Mrs. Driscoll. I think if you have a typewriter that needs cleaning 
that belongs to you, that is assigned to you, and it goes down to be 
cleaned, when they finish with it they bring it back; or if you don't 
like it and there is something really wrong with it you can turn it in 
and get another one. 

Senator JSIcCarthy. I see. Then they repair the one that is turned 
in and give it to some other Senator's office? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That you turn in, that is right. 

Senator McCarthy. Thank you. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch. 

Mr. Welch. Mrs. Driscoll, wmII you now look at the first memo- 
randum which is dated December 9, which is quite a short one. Are 
you looking at it? 

JNIrs. Driscoll. Yes, I am. 

Mr. AVelch. How did you determine that that memorandum went 
into this file where you now have it? 

JVIrs. Driscoll. Because it is the same subject matter. 

Mr. Welch. It isn't subject matter Stevens, is it ? 

JMrs. Driscoll. It is the same general thing, Stevens and Adams. 

Mr. Welch. I am sorry? 

Mrs. Driscoll. The same general thing, Stevens and Adams. 

]\Ir. Welch. This memorandmn talks about Adams; does it not? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. Did you have a file on Adams or not? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 

Mr. Welch. Did anyone tell you to put that memorandum in this 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 

Mr. Welch. You just thought it up j^ourstlf ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That naturally follows. 

Mr. Welch. Now look at the next one, if you will. What word 
or words in that, being the second memorandum of December 9, 1953, 
did you rely on as you decided that memorandum went into this file? 

JVIrs. Driscoll. I am sorry, I couldn't hear you. 

Mr. Welch. I will state it again: Looking at the second memo- 
randum dated December 9, 1953, what word or words determined 
for you the destination of that memorandum? 

]\frs. Driscoll. The subject matter of it. 

Mr. Welch. What is the subject matter? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Do you want me to read it to you ? 

Mr. Welch. No, what is the subject matter? 

Mrs. Driscoll. It is a memorandum from Frank Carr to Senator 
IVIcCarthy, relative to a talk he had with John Adams. 

Mr. Welch. Eelative to what? 

Mrs. Driscoll. To a talk he had with John Adams. 

]\Ir. Welch. Is that the subject matter ? A talk with John Adams ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. That wouldn't lead you to put it in this file, would it ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Well, it led me to put it in this file, Mr. Welch. 

Mr. Welch. I know. Did anyone tell you to put it in this file ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No one. 

Mr. Welch. So just those words John Adams some way led you to 
put that memorandum in this file ? 


Mrs. DmscoLL. No, I am afraid you didn't understand me, Mr. 
Welch. I read the entire memorandum and determined from the text 
of it that it should go into this folder, in my opinion, and I was the 
one that did the iilin<>-. 

Mv. Welch. In the first paragraph it has the word "Schine" in it, 
do you see that in the second line? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Of the first paragraph? 

Mr. Welch. Yes. 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, it is in the third line. 

Mr. W^ELCH. I am dealing with the printed copy. That paragraph 
has the word "Schine" in it, doesn't it? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. The next paragraph has the word "Schine" in it 1, 2, 
3, 4, 5 times, does it not ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Well, I haven't counted it. 

Mr. Welch. Has it got it in several times ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I will count them for you. Are you talking about 
the paragraph or the whole memorandum ? 

Mr. Welch. Just the paragraph. 

Mrs. Driscoix. It has it in it once. 

Mr. Welch. The second paragraph ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. Are you referring to the first or the second ? 

Mr. Welch. The first paragraph has it once, is that right? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Do you want to know how many times it appears 
in the second paragraph ? 

Mr. Welch. Yes. Koughly. 

Mrs. Driscoll. Five times. 

Mv. Welch. And in the third paragraph, how many times? 

]\Irs. Driscoll. Three times. 

Mr. Welch. And in the last paragraph ? Once ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. To look at it it would ahnost look as though you might 
index that under "S" for Schine ; would it not ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't file that way. 

Mr. Welch. You indexed the first two under "S" for Stevens ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, I did not. 

Mr. Welch. Did you have a file on Schine ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, sir. 

Mr. W^ELCH. Did you know him? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. Will you look at the one dated December 17, and tell 
me what determined the destination of that memorandum as you put 
it on this file ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. The same thing. 

Mr. Welch. What same thing, the subject matter ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. The subject matter. 

Mr. Welch, The subject matter. And will you tell me the same 
thing in respect to the one of December 21, 1953 ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Subject matter.  „■ 

Mr. Welch. Isn't the subject matter of every one of those para- 
gi^aphs, again, Schine ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Is the subject matter of the paragraph ? 

Mr. Welch. Of each paragraph. Does not each paragraph men- 
tion Dave 



Mrs. Driscoll. That is not the way I determine where to file it. It 
is the sub] ect matter of the entire memorandum. 

Mr. Welch. And the next memorandum also went to this file for 
the same reason ; is that right ? 

JMrs. Driscoll. Are you referring to December 21 ? 

Mr. Welch. Yes. I beg your pardon. I was referring to the De- 
cember 21 last. That was five paragraphs referring to Mr. Schine. 

Mrs. Driscoll. And the one you are talking about now is what? 

Mr. Welch. December 21. I perhaps misread you. That is the 
one that has five paragraphs referring to Schine, but you say the 
subject-matter of it led you to put it on the file that you have before 
you; is that right? 

JMrs. Driscoll. That is right. That is right. 

Mv. Welch. And as to January 9, the same thing applies ; is that 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. And January 14 ? 

Senator McCarthy. May I interrupt Mr. Welch for one minute ? 

Anyone listening to yoiir questions would assume that, I assume, 
this ciid not have to do with the same subject matter. I know that 
you would be the last man on earth to try to deceive anyone. I am 
sure of that. I wonder if you would not make it clear that all of 
the memoranda have to do with the attempted pressure to call off 
the investigation. I think you should do that just for the record. 

Mr. Welch. That, I think, is for the committee to say. 

May I direct your attention to the one dated January 15, 1954? 
That IS very short, isn't it, JMrs. Driscoll ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. I may read it to you : 

Maybe one of tliese days you should speak to John Adams in a friendly way. 
I have tried. He is baiting Koy pretty much lately on the hostage situation. 
They get pretty heated before Roy buys the lunch, but it is going to lead to 

Was the subject matter of that obvious to you ? 

JMrs. Driscoll. Was it obvious to me ? 

Mr. Welch. Yes. 

Mrs. Driscoll. It had to do with Mr. Adams or Mr. Stevens or some- 
thing pertaining to that, and that is why it was put in this folder. 

Mr. Welch. You could tell by looking at it that it belonged on 
this special file here ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I read it, Mr. Welch. 

Mr. Welch. Now, would you look at the one dated March 11, 1954. 
Was that dictated to you on that day ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I think it was, but I couldn't tell you 

Mr. Welch. And transcribed by you on that day ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't know whether it was typed by me that day 
or not. I can't tell you that. 

Mr. Welch, Well, one or the other, was it not? It was either dic- 
tated or transcribed not later than March 11 ? 

JMrs. Driscoll. Yes. It was typed not later than March 11. 

Mr. Welch. That is right. 

Mrs. Driscoll. Well, no, I can't tell you that now, sir. Some of 
these have the date on which they were dictated even though they 


may have been typed the next day. Some of them may have the 
dates on them on which they were actually typed. 1 can't tell you 

about that. 

]\Ii'. Welch. Yes. I think we understand each other. 

JVli'S. Driscoll. I am not sure we do. 

Mr. Welch. When you see the date :March 11, that means that it 
was either dictated on that day or shortly prior to that day ; is that 
correct ? 

I^Irs. DrascoLL. Dictated on that day or shortly prior to that day ? 

Iklr. Welch. Yes. 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is ri^lit. 

;Mr. Welch. That is for dictation. And it was typed on March 11, 
whether dictated or not ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, that is not necessarily true. 

Mr. Welch. Do you mean you might typewrite 

Mrs. Driscoll. I might have dated it the day it was dictated. I 
can't tell you now. 

Mr. Welch. I see. Even though you transcribed the next day ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I may have put the date on which it was 

Mr. Welch. In any event, it would be very close, 1 or 2, or 3 clays, 
in any event ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I think so. 

Mr. Welch. Could I read one sentence of that memorandum to you, 
about the middle sentence. Do you see a sentence beginning in the 
middle of it, "Senator JklcCarthy advised Mr. Seaton"— do you see 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. Welch. May I read that to you. [Heading :] 

Senator McCarthy advised Mr. Seaton that the writer was searching the files 
for memorandums dictated concerning Schiue. 

Were you startled when Carr dictated that to you ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Was I startled ? 

Mr. Welch. Yes. 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 

Mr. Welch. Well, did you say to him, "Mr. Carr, look no further, 
I have got them all in the slickest little package here you ever saw" ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Absolutely not. 

Mr. Welch. Did you tell him his search was silly ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Mr. Welch. 

Mr. Welch. Did you tell him that ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Of course I didn't. 

Mr. Welch. Well, his search was silly when you had them all to- 
gether, w^as it not ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is your opinion. 

Mr. Welch. Well, you had them all together, didn't you ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I am not going to tell Mr. Carr that his search was 
silly or that I have all of them. Maybe I have overlooked one. 

Mr. Welch. Mrs. Driscoll, it is awfully simple. You had them all 
together, did you not? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Maybe I overlooked one. 

ISIr. Welch. But you had what you got here together, did you not ? 

Mvs. Driscoll. At the time this memorandum was dictated ? 

Mr. Welch. Yes. 


Mrs. Driscoll. I couldn't tell you that. I don't know. 

Mr. Welch. What? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't know what time of day this memorandum 
was dictated. 

Mr. Welch. Mrs. Driscoll, you told us you put them in every time 
they came along. Now, you had them all in as nice a package as any- 
one ever saw, on March 11, didn't you ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman ? 

Senator Mundt. Have you a point of order ? 

Senator McCarthy. Yes. I don't mind Mr. Welch heckling this 
witness up to a certain point. He knows, he is running an office, he 
knows that even though a secretary may hand him a file, that he may 
decide to search further for additional information. I have desisted 
from objecting when the heckling has been of a man on the stand. But 
I think when Ave have a young lady here she should be given the 
usual courtesy. 

As I say, Mr. Welch knows there is nothing unusual for Mr. Carr to 
say, "1 will search further for additional information." I have said 
that to this young lady a thousand times, when we have been asking 
for a file. 

Senator Mundt. Proceed, Mr. Welch. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, I have nothing but admiration for Mrs. 
Driscoll. I cannot conceal from the Senator that I have the deepest 
suspicion about the genuineness of these memorandums, and having 
it, I must question her. 

May I ask you this, Mrs. Driscoll: Did you ever find a single 
memorandum to add to this file after Frank Carr dictated that to you ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That question, Mr. Welch, is — you are confusing 
me. I do not know what time of day this memorandum was dictated. 

JVIr. Welch. Yes. 

Mrs. Driscoll. So I can't tell you whether, at the moment it was 
dictated, I had all of these pages together. Suppose he dictated this 
to me in the morning. 

Mr. Welch. Yes? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Maybe I didin't get these together until afternoon. 
You are asking me if 1 had them all and gave them all to Mr. Carr 
at the time this was dictated. I can't tell you that, because I can't 
lemember all those details. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, your time has expired. 

]Mr. Welch. It is a bad time. 
Senator Mundt. The Cliair has no questions. 

Senator McClellan? Senator Dirksen? Any of the Senators to 
my left ? 

Senator Symington. Yes, 1 have a question. 
Senator Mundt. Senator Symington? 

Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, I would like to address a ques- 
tion to you. For some time we have known — it has been around — 
that one person dictated these memorandums, and there has been great 
interest in the memorandums. I would like to ask the Chair if in an 
executive session or at any other time there has been any investiga- 
tion of the memorandums from tlie standpoint of tying the memoran- 
dums up with the typewriters in the office ? Perhaps Mr. Jenkins could 


answer that better than you could, but I tliink it is a question that will 
be asked, so we might as well clear it up now. 

Senator Mundt. That would be a question you would have to 
address to the counsel, because the Chair has never seen these niemo- 
landums up to and including the present time. 

Mr. Jenkins. May I ask Senator Symington specifically what his 
question is ? 

Senator Symington. Specifically, I am asking : Based on the knowl- 
edge of the importance of these memorandums and the fact that I have 
been told before they have been dictated, that the dictation has been 
taken by only one person, and that has been confirmed by this at- 
tractive lady who is now on the stand — I would like to ask if there 
has been any effort on the part of the counsel to check the memoran- 
dums, the originals, against any of the typewriters in the office? I 
know I will be asked that, and I just want to make the record clear. 

Mr. Jenkins. Senator Symington, several days ago, perhaps 2 or 
3 weeks ago, Mr. Tom Prewitt, I believe, of my staff — I am sure it 
was Mr. Prewitt — Mr, Robert Collier of my staff, went to the office 
and questioned Mrs. Driscoll and ascertained at that time, as I remem- 
ber, that Mrs. Driscoll took all the dictation. He was told at that 
time by Mrs. Driscoll that they were typed on different machines, 
and that they were typed at the time they were dictated or shortly 
thereafter, within a day or two thereafter. 

In addition to that, Mr. Thomas Prewitt went to the residence of 
a member of Senator McCarthy's staff, Mr. La Venia, and questioned 
Mr. La Venia about these memoranda. Mr. La Venia made statements 
to Mr. Prewitt which seemed to bear out or corroborate what the 
young lady has testified to here today. 

I do not think it proper. Senator Symington, for me to tell you 
what conclusions were reached by counsel with reference to these 
memoranda, but I have discussed these memoranda with Mr. Welch 
of the Army on more than one occasion. I have not shown the original 
memoranda to him because it would have been violative of the condi- 
tions under which those memoranda w^ere delivered to me. 

There has been no document expert retained to examine these 
memoranda or to comj)are them witli the machines upon which they 
have been prepared. 

Senator Symington, have I answered your question fully or not ? 

Senator Symington. I just want to ask this question, after making 
the statement : I do not know anything with respect to Mr. La Venia's 
position in the matter, nor at this time certainly do I care. But 
inasmuch as the witness here is quite certain that she has taken the 
dictation on all these memoranda but she is very uncertain with respect 
to just what typewriters were used — and I say that in no criticism — 
I was wondering if the counsel checked the memoranda against the 
typewriters in the Senator's office. If it was done, that is what I 
would like to know. If it wasn't done, that is also what I would 
like to know. 

Mr. Jenkins. Senator Symington, that has not been done. 

Senator Symington. I thank the counsel for answering the question. 

Mr. Jenkins. Very well, sir. 

Senator Mundt. Senator Potter? 

Senator Potter, No questions. 


Senator Mundt. Senator Dworshak? Senator McCarthy? Mr. 
Welch? Mr. Cohn? 

Mr. Cohn. Thank yon, Senator Munclt. 

Mary, just to clarify one thing here. I believe yon told this com- 
mittee today, and I think it is the same thing you told Mr. Collier, 
that when these memoranda were shown to the press, at that time, in 
that period of 2 or 3 days — and I think one was sent over to Mr. 
Seaton of the Defense Department — that you and other girls in the 
office retyped copies and made numerous sets of copies; is that right? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Mr. CoHN. I think you told them when you reassembled this file, 
that you could not say under your oath that each copy in here was 
the original made back at the time that it was dictated; is that right? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I testified to that. 

Mr. CoHx. In other words, some of the first copies here might be 
the first copy on retypes which you and the other girls in the office 
made from the original memoranda on March 11 and 12, and during 
those 2 hectic days; is that right? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CoHN. I have no further questions. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch ? 

Mr. Welch. Then once again, you think perhaps the memoranda 
that you have before you weren't even written by you? Typed, by 
that I mean. 

Mrs. Driscoll. I can't tell you that they were the ones typed in the 
original instance. 

Mr. Welch. Any of them ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I can't tell you positively, no. I can't tell you 
positively, no. 

Mr. Welch. I thought, Mrs. Driscoll — I may be wrong, but I 
thought that when you dictated the first memorandum you opened 
the file and put the memorandum in ; is that right ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. When the Senator had finished with it. 

Mr. Welch. Eight. Similarly, when the second memorandum got 
typed, it went in ? 

ISIrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. That will be true as to all of them? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. They all went in within a day or two of the time they 
were typed ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. Then you ultimately exhibited or the Senator and 
Mr. Cohn exhibited the file to the press, did you not? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Mr. Welch. At that moment it was intact? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. The memoranda were removed from the file 
and copied so as to have sufficient press copies. 

INIr. Welch. Do you wish to tell all the press now that you handed 
out copies for all the members of the press when it was released? 

Mrs. Driscoll. We typed them in the office. 

Mr. Welch. Were they handed out? 

Senator McCarthy. If I could answer that, Mr. Welch — Mrs. 
Driscoll could not — we had, I believe, and the press here will know it, 
we didn't have enough copies for all of the press. We had, oh, I 


for<iet. I tliink 6 or 7 copies, roug-hly, for the press. I asked the 
stall' to ^et copies. They were in a treiiiendous rush and they coiikl 
not get them mimeographed. We had 6 or 7 copies, I believe. 

Senator IMundt. Proceed, Mr. AVelcli. 

Mr. Welch. Mrs. Driscoll, draw ing yonr attention 

Senator McCarthy. May I say Mr. Welch, one of the press men 
said it was not 6 or 7, it was only 2 or 3. 

Mr. Welch. I have been informed that there was an immense 
shortage of copies. 

Mre. Driscoll, how many copies were made, if you know, before 
they were handed to the press in any form? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't know. 

Mr. Welch. If any copies were made, lots were made, were there 

Mrs. Driscoll. What do you mean by lots? 

Mr. Welch. All that you could make at one shot, at least. 

Mrs. Driscoll. You can't make over 6 or 7 that are readable. 

Mr. Welch. You would surely make all you could make that were 
readable, would you not? 

Mrs. Driscoll, Yes. 

Mr. Welch. How many can you make on an electric machine that 
are readable, on thin paper ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Six or seven. 

Mr. Welch. At least 7. 

Mr. CoHN. Mr. Welch, I believe the witness says 6 or 7. You 
didn't want to misstate the testimony, did you? 

Mr. Welch. It is not easy for me to hear you, Mrs. Driscoll. 

Mrs. Driscoll. I said 6 or 7. 

Mr. Welch. A minimum, then, of 6 ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I would say. 

Mr. Welch. Was the original file exhibited to the press ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I was not in there, Mr. Welch. I don't know. 

Mr. Welch. Was the original file reassembled ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. This file was reassembled after the press had left and 
all that equipment had been moved out and the whole thing was over. 

Mr. Welch. What was given to the press, thin tissues ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't know. I wasn't in the Senator's ofiice when 
the conference was being held. 

Mr. Welch. What was jDrepared for the press? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Copies of these memoranda. 

Mr. Welch. On what kind of paper? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't know. This kind, maybe the carbons on 
thin paper, maybe they were all made on thin paper, I don't know. 

Mr. Welch. Directing your attention once more to Mr. Carr's 
memorandum of March 11, which is the last one, did you see him 
searching the files for these memoranda ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Did I see Mr. Carr doing that ? 

Mr. Welch. Yes. 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, I did not. 

Mr. Welch. Do you know where he made his search? 

Mi-s. Driscoll. No, I do not. 

Mr. Welch. Did he at some time discover this magic file of yours? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I got the file for Mr. Carr. Not for Mr. Carr, but 
for the Senator. 


Mr. Welch. You got it for the Senator ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Senator McCarthy. Could I have the question? Was that the 
magic file? 

Mr. Welch. I will rephrase it. I will strike and ask it again. 

Senator Mundt. He has stricken it. 

Mr. Welch. W^hen did you on that day get the file that you have 
had in the courtroom today ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. The hour of day ? I don't know.; 

Mr. Welch. I am sorry ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't know the hour of day. 

Mr. Welch. You have no notion at all as to whether it was morning 
or afternoon? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. 

Mr. Welch. When did you tell Mr. Carr that you had this file that 
you have produced here ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't think I even told Mr. Carr that. I think 
the Senator probably asked me to get the file and I handed it probably 
to him. I don't recall those details. 

Mr. Welch. All put together? 

Mrs. Driscoll. It came from the file all put together. 

Mr. Welch. Right. Now, can't you tell us, Mrs. Driscoll, what 
time of day it was that you handed that to him ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, I can't. 

Mr. Welch. Can't you tell us what time of day, the girls, as you 
say, tore the file apart and made copies ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't think I can. 

Mr. Welch. You can't tell us ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I don't think so. 

Mr. Welch. Tell us the names of the girls that made the copies? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No. I can tell you the names of the office staff but 
I can't 

Mr. Welch. Tell us the ones who made the copies ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I can't do that, JNIr. Welch. I don't know. 

Mr. Welch. Did you make any of them ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I think I probably did, but T couldn't say. 

Mr. Welch. Which ones did you make? 

Mrs. Driscoll. I can't tell that. 

Mr. Welch. You can't tell that ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, I can't. 

Mr. Welch. Can you name any girl that made any copies for the 
press ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. No, I can't. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Mundt. Point of order ? 

Senator McCarthy. Yes. Our office has as high as five, six or 
seven thousand letters a day. We can't ask this young lady to remem- 
ber who wrote a particular letter, who copies a particular memoran- 
dum months ago. Mr. Welch knows that. This is an obvious attempt 
to try and browbeat this young lady. Does someone think this is 
funny? This is an obvious attempt to try to browbeat this young 
lady into giving an answer which he knows she can't give. She can't 
possibly know who typed any particular letter, any particular docu- 
ment. She is busy from early morning until late at night, doing a 



tremendous job. And montlis later, Mr. Welch, you know this, 
jven in your office you can't months later know just who typed a 
particular letter. 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say in my office you bet 
rour life you can, because the dictation marks are right on it as they 
:^honld be in any workmanlike office. Don't you put dictation marks 
m the letters you write for the Senator? 

Mrs. Driscoll. On the letters they are usually initialed, not always, 
jut they are not on the memorandum. 

Mr. Welch. Now, Mr. Chairman, may I say one other word. The 
last thing I would wish to do Avould be to browbeat a witness of this 
sort. I do not wish to conceal from anyone in this room that I have 
grave suspicions about the authenticity of these memoranda, and I 
think I must now ask the counsel to the committee if he will be good 
enough to have them handed to an expert and examined and an expert 
opinion taken as to their authenticity. 

Mr. CoiiN. I have no objection. 

Senator McCarthy. In view of that statement, I ask that Mr. 
Welch be sworn. If he has evidence that these memorandums are not 
authentic, the committee should have it. If he has not, he should 
admit that. I think it is highly improper for him to make this state- 
ment without having any evidence to back it up. He knows it is not 
true. I think he should be sw-orn now and asked what evidence he 
has, if any, that these memorandums are not authentic. 

Mr. Jexkixs. Mr. Chairman, as I understand Mr. Welch, he has 
now requested counsel for the committee to retain the services of a 
documents expert and to turn these memorandums over to that docu- 
ments expert for examination and a report of the result of his examina- 
tion. Is that correct, Mr. Welch ? 

Mr. Welch. I was a little inattentive. Could I have that heard ? 

Mr. Jenkins. As I understand it, you have now requested me, as 
counsel for the committee, to retain the services of a documents expert 
and to turn these memoranda over to a documents expert for exami- 
nation and for a report as to their authenticity. Is that correct ? 

Mr. Welch. I make that suggestion, sir. 

Mr. Jenkins. And Senator McCarthy, and Mr. Cohn is acting as 
counsel, apparently, for Mrs. Driscoll, and, Mr, Cohn, did I under- 
stand you to say that you have no objection to that w^hatever? 

Mr. Cohn. That is right, sir, but I say this: I think Senator Mc- 
Carthy is exactly correct, sir. I have been in a courtroom for not 
too many years but long enough to recognize things like this, and I 
think if Mr. Welch has some evidence he should make it under oath, 
just as I have been made to come forward, and anyone else has, on 
any issue like this, and take the oath and be subjected to any examina- 
tion and cross-examination. Otherwise, Mr. Welch is free to make a 
loud charge, sir, with no basis for it and leave an erroneous impres- 
sion with the public. When the issue about the picture came up, I 
was put right on the stand and gave my testimony under oath. I 
was glad to, and other things like that. I am sure Mr. Welch would 
be willing to do exactly the same thing here. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Cohn, let's keep the record straight. As I under- 
stand it, Mr. Welch has stated that he had suspicions, and that is as 
far as he has gone, with respect to the authenticity of these documents. 



As I understand it, Mr. Colin, you have no objections to me following 
the procedure suggested by Mr. Welch. ^ 

Mr. CoHN. Sir, I would say this : Mr. Welch, I don't know whetheil j^t 
he meant to or not, has created the impression, at least in my mind, 
that he wants people to think that he has some information or has 
some knowledge that these memorandums are not authentic. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Cohn, he has not said so. He has merely stated 
publicly, on some two or three occasions, within the last few minutes, 
that he had suspicions with respect to the authenticity of these 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman? 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins has the floor. After he has concluded, 
the Chair will recognize the Senator from Wisconsin. 

Mr. Jenkins. As I understand it, Mr. Chairman, such a request 
has been made by me by counsel for the Army or Mr. Stevens and 
Mr. Adams. JNIr. Cohn has acceded to that request. May I ask the 
Senator from Wisconsin whether or not he interposes an objection? 

Mr. Cohn. Don't take it as an accession. I say first Senator Mc- 
Carthy is absolutely right. Let's get Mr. Welch under oath and 
get whatever information he has. 

Mr. Jenkins. I state publicly for all to see and hear, and I pre- 
sume the same people are listening to me as have just listened to Mr. 
Welch, that Mr. Welch has not stated that he has any evidence or 
any grounds upon which to state his suspicion. Am I right, Mr. 

Mr. Welch. Nothing, except what has been said in this room. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, counsel asked me a question, a 
question as to whether I would have any objection to having these 
documents examined by an expert. Absolutely none. But may I 
say this: ISIr. Jenkins knows and the Chair knows it, that when we 
have had suspicions, we have not aired them and shouted about them. 
We have asked Mr. Jenkins to call the witnesses. 

Now, Mr. Welch has stated that he has got suspicions. That means 
to the jury, and the jury is the American people, that means to the 
jury that Mr. Welch is telling them that he has some information to 
the effect that there is something not genuine about these documents. 

Mr. Chairman, we have carefully avoided anything like that. "We 
have asked the Chair to call witnesses in executive session when we 
have had suspicions. 

Now, if Mr. Welch has no information, no evidence of any kind, 
then he should be honest enough to tell us that. He is in effect accus- 
ing this young lady here of perjury. That is what he is doing before 
the microphones. He is saying "I have got suspicions." 

Now, let's hear what those suspicions are based upon. I know all 
about these memorandums, these documents. Mrs. Driscoll does. She 
has testified under oath. Mr. Welch — and I know he is a very, very 
clever little lawyer — if he wants to try and tell the American people 
that he knows something about these documents that will indicate 
they are not genuine, then he should raise his right hand, go down 
here on the witness stand, and tell us why he dares accuse this young 
lady of perjury. That is what he is doing. 

Mr. Chairman, he should be required to do that. I am getting 
awfully sick, away down deep inside, at these innuendoes, someone 


is doing^omething improper. This man Welch has, he has just now, 
there is no question about it, he has tried to create the impression that 
this young lady is guilty of perjury. Let's have him take the stand. 
Let's have him take the oath, and I would like to cross-examine him 
and let our jury of American people see that he has nothing, ab- 
solutely nothing, upon which to base this unreasonable, if I may say, 
Mr. Welch, this dishonest charge against this young lady. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Jenkins ? 

Mr. Jenkins. The jury composed of the American audience ap- 
parently has the same evidence upon which to base any suspicion it 
might have, if it has any, as does Mr. Welch, Senator, because Mr. 
Welch has stated publicly here that his suspicions are his and his alone, 
apparently, and that they are based on the documents themselves 
and what he has heard here this afternoon. 

Senator McCarthy. May I say, Mr. Jenkins — Mr. Chairman. 

Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy ? 

Senator McCarthy. May I say if I were to make the statement 
that I suspected someone of being guilty of perjury, the Chair would, 
and rightly so, ask me to take the stand immediately and have me 

Mr. Welch has gotten by with this now for four or five times. I 
think now we should know whether there is any basis in fact for these 
so-called suspicions. There is no reason why he should not get down 
there and raise his right hand and be sworn and be cross-examined 
the same as any other witness is cross-examined. 

Mr. Jenkins. Mr. Chairman, I desire to make this one further 

Senator Mundt. Mr, Jenkins ? 

Mr. Jenkins. I hesitated to make it a little while ago when my 
dear and esteemed friend, the Senator from Missouri, asked me a 
question, to wit: Whether or not I had had these documents examined 
by a documents expert or compared them with the typewriters in the 
office of Senator McCarthy. The chairman will remember that in 
his presence several weeks ago, when I was investigating this case, 
perhaps either before or shortly after these hearings started, I askecl 
the assistant to the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation 
whether or not such an investigation as was suggested by Senator 
Symington would be feasible or revealing, and I w^as given an answer 
in the negative. That question and those answers were given in the 
office of the chairman of this subcommittee, and in the presence of the 
chairman, and I hope and trust the chairman remembers it. 

Senator Symington. A point of order, please. 

Mr. Jenkins. It was for that reason 

Senator Mundt. Senator Symington desires to interrupt. 

Mr. Jenkins. That we did not engage a documents expert. 

Senator Symington. In the first place, I would ask the counsel to 
correct his statement that I suggested such an investigation. I did 
not, I simply asked whether such an investigation had been made. 

Mr. Jenkins. You are entirely right. 

Senator Symington. Thank you very much, Mr, Jenkins. 

The second point is, I did not ask because I do not know about 
the investigation with respect to the ink and the length of time it had 


been written, or anything of that character, which presumably coun- 
sel, the way he put the question, was talking about. I simply asked 
the counsel, my distinguished friend from Tennessee, whether or not 
because Mrs. Driscoll very frankly said she was very busy and didn't 
know what typewriters she might have used, she didn't know what 
typewriter was at her desk now or before, she never paid any atten- 
tion to the type and character of the typewriters that she used — I 
asked whether the memoranda had been checked against all the type- 
writers in the office in question, and I had no idea when I asked the 
question as to whether or not we were going into the accuracy of the 
memoranda from the standpoint of when they were written, whether 
they were proper. I asked if they had been checked against the 
typewriters, and presumably that was not the question that Mr. 
Jenkins asked the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. 

Mr. Jenkins, Senator Symington is entirely correct, and I did 
interrogate the Assistant to the Director of the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation as to whether or not such an investigation would be 
feasible and revealing. His answer was that since so much time 
elapsed, nothing would avail from such an investigation. 

Senator Symington. I thank the counsel. I want to make this 
point: My chief interest has nothing to do with the individuals in 
this case. My interest in this case is for the armed services of the 
United States and our defense of this country against communism. 

I want to point out to the Chair and the counsel that many charges 
of perjury have in effect been made against the Secretary of the Army 
and his assistants. 

Senator Mundt. Mr. Welch, the Chair feels that if you are going 
to request that the committee go to the expense of hiring a documen- 
tary expert, you should give us some indication at least as to some 
reason why you think such a request would bear fruit. The Chair 
recalls the conversation which took place in his office early in these 
hearings when it occurred to Mr. Jenkins that perhaps such a search 
might be fruitful. The reply was in the negative, as the Chair 
recalls, on the basis of two points : The first was from the standpoint 
of age, as to whether they had been done perhaps since March 11 or 
prior to March 11 or back as far as October 2. We were advised that 
unless documents have aged considerably more than that, it would 
be impossible for any kind of scientific analysis to determine whether 
something had happened 2 months ago or 3 months ago or 4 months 
ago ; that you can't develop that kind of meticulous evidence by scien- 
tific tests. 

The second point is that the typewriters are changed around so 
frequently. Since we have evidence here that we don't know whether 
the documents that are now before the young lady are originals or 
are copies that were picked up after the press conference, it seems 
to me that unless you have some evidence that indicates that such 
a search would be fruitful, we would be putting the country and the 
Congress to considerable expense without a possibility of getting a 
definitive answer. 

If you have such evidence, Mr. Welch, the Chair would certainly 
like to hear it, because if there is some basis for believing that these 
documents are fraudulently presented, of course that is very pertinent 
to the investigation before us. 


Senator McCarthy. Could we have that under oath, Mr. Chair- 
man, if Mr. Welch is going to — I have been sworn. Mr. Cohn has 
been sworn. 

Ser tor Mundt. If Mr. Welch tells me he has such evidence, I think 
it should be presented under oath. If he hasn't 

Mr. Welch. No such statement. My statement is precisely as fol- 

Senator McCarthy. Could we have this statement under oath, 
because I may want to cross-examine. 

Senator Mundt. It will depend upon whether or not he tells us he 
has such evidence. If there is evidence to be presented, of course 
it will be done under oath. If he tells us he has none, it is not neces- 
sary that he be under oath, 

Mr. Welch. It is obvious to me that Mr. Jenkins' mind in some 
earlier day than this worked as my mind has worked today, and he 
considered having the documents examined. When he says to me 
that he finds there is no way that it can be done, that it is neither 
fruitful nor hopeful, I certainly cannot ask that the taxpayers' 
money be used to make such an examination. 

Mr. Jenkins will confirm the fact that he and I have talked about 
this problem in the past, and that we apparently now stand con- 
vinced, he and I, that with the dictation books gone, the switch in 
the typewriters, and the age of the documents, we can't accurately 
check it. That being true, Senator McCarthy, let me say this to you : 
I came into this room, I hope, with the reputation of being a reason- 
ably honest man. I hope to go out with the reputation unimpaired. 
I could not 

Senator McCarthy. Will you yield to me ? 

Mr. Welch. Help being somewhat suspicious about these docu- 
ments, and I still am unconvinced, because of some internal evidence 
in at least one of them. But in any event, I now say to you that if 
there is a riddle, it is wrapped in an enigma that we won't be able to 

Senator McCarthy. Will you yield to me? I would like to ask 

Senator Mundt. Senator McCarthy. 

Senator McCarthy. Mr. Welch has yielded. We have a fairly intel- 
ligent jury, I think, of American people. Whenever I have had any 
claim or statement to make I have been under oath. Mr. Cohn has. 
Everyone else in this case has gone under oath. You have made 
the statement or given the indication that you have some evidence 
to indicate that there is something wrong about these documents. 
That is accusing this young lady here of perjury, of course. 

I do think that you should be willing to go down there and raise 
your right hand and swear that you have no evidence, that all you 
have done is try to raise an implication hoping that you would get 
by with it. 

If you have one iota of evidence, then you should be willing to give 
us that under oath. 

If you have not, Mr. Welch, then you should be willing to tell your 
jury of millions of American people that this claim is just as phony 
and just as false as the claims against Frank Carr were. 


I would like to see yon do that. I intend to co back on the stand 
nnder oath. Mr. Cohn is going back on the stand nnder oath. MrSi' 
Driscoll is under oath. ' 

Why Mr. Welch would not be willing when he makes these state- 
ments to be put under oath, I don't know. I am going to ask the 
Chair to put you under oath before these hearings end. I am going to 
ask him to have you sworn not only on this claim, but upon many of 
the statements that you have made. I want to know if there is any 
basis in fact. I don't think a lawyer has any specific privilege in this 
hearing room. If he makes a false statement, if he makes a statement 
with no basis in fact, then I want him sworn. I am not going to ask 
the Chair to do it now because it is after 5 o'clock, but Mr. Chairman— 
If I can see that clock, I believe it is 5 : 20. I am not asking the Chair 
to do it now, but I am serving notice that I will formally request that 
Mr. Welch be put under oath and be asked to testify. 

Senator Jackson. Mr. Chairman, I have a point of information I 
would like to ask of the counsel. , 

Senator MuNDT. Senator Jackson? aj 

Senator Jackson. I ask this question in order to fully understand 
what counsel has said a moment ago about the determination of the age 
of the documents. Do I understand that there is no scientific means, 
that you were advised by the FBI, of determining the age of a 
document ? 

Mr. Jenkins. Senator Jackson 

Senator Mundt. I think I made the statement. 

Senator Jackson. I am just trying to get the record straight. 

Senator Mundt. In justice to the FBI, we wouldn't want the state- 
ment to go out as being misunderstood. Of course the FBI can deter- 
mine the age of a document, if there is a considerable disparity between 
the ages. The thing we were advised is that you can't determine by 
test where you could narrow down to the point where a week or two or 
a month or two could be determined. In this particular case, it isn't 
a question of going back to a document which might have been several 
years old, which might be faded or yellowed, but they said they 
couldn't tell with that narrow precision whether the document was 
done on Monday morning, the 1st day of September or Monday morn- 
ing, the 1st day of October. 

Senator Jackson. What I want to find out, so we have the record 
straight, is whether or not it is possible to determine the age of a docu- 
ment, whether it is 1 month, 2 months, 4 months, 8 months, 9 months. 
It is all less than a year. That is the question. I would like to have 
for the record some assurance on that, and if it is from the FBI, there 
will not be any argument after the hearings are over. You know what 
will happen; we will have a lot of wires and letters from experts, ex- 
plaining that this is all wrong, that you can determine the age of a 
typewritten document week by week or month by month. I would like 
for my own assurance to have that information. I think we ought to 
have it from the FBI or whoever gave it to Mr. Jenkins. 

Senator Mundt. The Chair would think it perfectly desirable and 
perfectly right for the counsel to talk to the FBI as to just how long a 
time must elapse before they can make a determination. 

Senator McCarthy. I think there is a scientific way to determine 
where the truth is in this matter. When I was a circuit judge back 


in Wisconsin, we nsed quite often a device known as a lie detector. 
I have complete confidence in those lie detectors. I know that maybe 
the Secretary of the Army may feel that it violates his sense of dignity 
to submit himself to it. But I would like to here and now su^jrost 
that Senator McCarthy and all of the principals a^jree to submit 
themselves to a lie detector. I think that in that way, Mr. Chairman, 
we can get a lot of information that otherwise we would not get. 
Lot me make it very clear. I realize you can't force anyone to do that. 
Tliat Avould be violating his constitutional privilege. But if we could 
do that, ]Mr. Chairman, in 1 day, I believe, in 1 day we could end this 
whole hassle we have been in. 

Senator Jackson. Shall we do that on television? 

Senator McCarthy. I would like to say that I would be the first 
to agree to submit to such a test. I think that a lie detector properly 
operated is practically unbeatable. And I think that all of the prin- 
cipals should agree to do that. We might be able to end this thing 
in 24 hours rather than 24 days. 

Senator Mundt. To dispose of the instant case before us, and then 
we will recess until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning 

Senator McClellan. Mr. Chairman, may I make this observation. 
This request that has been made now, I think, has been withdrawn, 
possibly. But the difliculty would be, as I see it, the lady testifies 
that she doesn't know whether these are the ones that were typed 
originally or whether they were the ones that were typed about the 
11th day of March. Is that right? 

Mrs. Driscoll. That is right. 

Senator McClellan. So even if you establish the fact that these 
were typed on the 11th day of March, it would not establish the fact 
whether they were the originals or not. If there is any way to pursue 
it, if there is a suspicion, if one has that suspicion, they have a right 
to pursue it as counsel. But what disturbs me is even if you establish 
the fact that the documents here present were written about the 11th 
day of March, that wouldn't establish the fact that they were phony 
documents. She says she doesn't know whether the originals were 
handed out to the press or whether these are the originals. So unless 
you can clear up that, I don't see where the expense would be justified. 

Senator Mundt. May the Chair say that that was included in what 
the Chair stated when he asked Counsel Welch whether or not he 
could substantiate some reason for going to this expense in view of 
the testimony which is before us, supplemented by the information 
we secured from the FBI. 

The FBI information we can check further, to see whether or not 
they can tell whether something is done 2 months or 4 months ago. 
But we then run into the roadblock established by the evidence that 
we don't know whether the documents before the young lady were 
originals or picked up after the press conference. 

It seems like a futile chase, unless Mr. Welch has some evidence 
to submit, and it seems that if the Chair understands Mr. Welch 
correctly, and I don't know if he does or not, Mr. Welch said his 
suspicions grew entirely out of the evidence that he heard in this 
room, and he did not desire to submit any evidence ; is that right ? 

Mr. Welch. Mr. Chairman, I cannot make it too clear that that is 
so. And I do not wish anyone who hears my voice in this country 


to think that my suspicions were based on anything other than what 
we heard in this room. I cannot make that too clear. 

Senator Mundt. Thank yon. That confirms what the Chair said. 

Senator Jackson. Mr. Chairman, might I ask this question: On 
the file, what is written, Mrs. Driscoll ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. To identify the file here ? 

Senator Jackson. Yes. 

]\Irs. Driscoll. Investigations committee. 

Senator Jackson. When was that written on there ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. When the file was originally made up. 

Senator Jackson. I think that is a matter, if you wanted to check — 
when was that, when the file was first put up, in October? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Yes. 

Senator Jackson. But all the other memoranda in that file, all of 
the other memoranda in the file, you don't know whether that is 
original now or not ? 

Mrs. Driscoll. Don't know whether these are the ones that were 
typed originally ? 

Senator Jackson. The only ones that were original is the file itself. 

Mrs. Driscoll. The folder itself, yes. 

Senator Jackson. The folder itself with the writing that you just 
referred to, investigations 

Mrs. Driscoll. Committee. 

Senator Jackson. But that is original. 

Senator Mundt. May the Chair inquire before we recess whether 
Counsel Welch or anybody else around the committee table desires to 
ask Mrs. Driscoll further questions in the morning, so he will know 
whether to start with her or Mr. Colin. 

Mr. Welch. None here. 

Senator Mundt. Does anyone have any further questions? 

Mr. Jenkins. I would like to ask Mr. Welch one question. 

Senator Mundt. I am talking about Mrs. Driscoll. 

You may step down as a witness, Mrs. Driscoll. 

Mr. Colin will be our first witness in the morning. 

Mr. Jenkins. Do I understand you have formally withdrawn your 
request to me to retain the services of a documents expert? 

Mr. Welch. I have. 

Senator Mundt. We will stand in recess until 10 o'clock tomorrow 

(Whereupon, at 5 : 30 p. m., the committee was recessed, to reconvene 
at 10 a. m., the followirg day, Wednesday, June 2, 1954.) 


No. 31 



Mr. Cobn and I met with Secretary Stevens at the Pentagon to discuss General 
Lawton of Fort Monmouth and his blackout order re Fort Monmouth personnel 
speaking with our staff. Jim Juliana had been advised by Colonel Allen that 
he couldn't talk with any because of an order by General Lawton forbiding 
talking to the Mc<^arthy committee. 

Mr. Stevens was very helpful. He called Lawton and had the order imme- 
diately rescinded statin.ii that it was his policy to cooperate with the Conj^re-'?- 
sional committees. During;- the course of the conversation, Dave Schine's pending 
induction into the Army came up. Mr. Stevens stated that he thought Schine 
should take his initial basic training and that after he had completed his basic, 
that he Stevens would be able to use Schine to his own advantage in the Army. 
He stated that he was very interested in any question of Communism or Com- 
munist intiltration and that he could envision that Dave could be of great assist- 
ance to him, if after basic he could attend some security type school within the 
Army and report to Stevens his observations, based on his experience as an 
investigator in the Communist tield. 

I think that you should kuciw that Mr. Stevens was very helpful and certainly 
indicated that he had no intention of allowing General Lawton to place his 
blackout of Army personnel re their possible contact with this committee. 

IViemorandum for the File 

Friday — November 6 

At the request of Mr. Stevens, Senator McCarthy, Frank Carr and Roy Cohn 
went to Stevens office at the Pentagon for lunch. John Adams was present. 
Stevens asked us to outline what evidence would be produced at our scheduled 
public hearings on the Army Signal Corps, which we did. Stevens said that if 
we brought out everything, he would have to resign. He said he had been in 
office for 10 months, and would have to take responsibility. He said they were 
particularly worried about us seeking to identify those who were responsible for 
not acting to get rid of Communists and security risks in the Axmy, and who had 
ordered their reinstatement. 

]Mr. Stevens asked that we hold up our public hearings on the Army. He sug- 
gested w'e go after the Navy, Air Force, and the Defense Department instead. 
We said first of all we had no evidence warranting an investigation of these 
other departments. Adams said not to worry about that, because there was 
plenty of dirt there, and they would furnish us with leads. Mr. Stevens thought 
this was the answer to his problem. 

We said this was not possible because we have already planned our next inves- 
tigation which was one of subversion in defense plants handling government and 
military contracts. He asked why we did not start on that, and we told him 
we were jammed up trying to get out our reports to file, and with the Monmouth 
investigation, and that David Schine was about to enter the Army and had much 
information and material on the reports and investigations that we could not 
get along without. Mr. Stevens said that he would arrange for Dave to complete 




tJie work over week-ends and utter trainins honrs. We said this would be satis 
factory, find if Dave was willing to do this work after hours, it would help to 
some extent. 

After lunch, General Ridgeway, General Trudeau, and General Mudgett came 
in, and we reviewed our evidence on the Signal Corps for their benefit. Senator 
McCarthy reiterated in their presence that he would cooperate as much as pos- 
sible, but that under no circumstances would there by a whitewash of the Army 
situation, because one reason a new Administration was elected was to prevent 
tlie covering-up of Communists and those who protected them. 

November 17, 1!)53 

At the request of Secretary Stevens he came to New York and asked Senator 
IMcCarthy to have Lunch with him at the Merchants Club. The Secretary was 
accompanied by John Adams. Frank Carr and Roy Cohn were present through- 
out. A friend of the Senator's with whom he had a prior engagement also 
joined the luncheon a bit later. 

The discussion centered about Secretary Stevens press conference in which 
he said there had been no espionage at Fort Monmouth. Mr. Stevens produced 
the correct transcript of the conference and said he had been badly misquoted 
iu the press and the press had absolutely distorted what he said and put in some 
plain untruths. At this meeting Stevens again said he wished that we could get 
onto the Air Force and the Navy and the personnel emi»loyed directly by the De- 
fense Establishment instead of continuing with the Army hearings. 

December 9, 1953 

John Adams said today that following up the idea about investigating the Air 
Force he had gotten specific information for us about an Air Force Base where 
there were a large number of homo-sexuals. He said that he would trade us 
that information if we would tell him what the next Army project was that we 
would investigate. 
Memorandum: From: Frank Carr 

To: Senator McCarthy 
December 9, 1953 CONFIDENTIAL 

I agree that contact with him should be kpt [sic] at a minimum. So far as I 
getting fed up with the way the Army is trying to use Schine as a hostage to pres- 
sure us to stop our hearings on the Army. 

Again today John Adams came down here after the hearings and using clever 
phrases tried to find out, "what's there in it for us" if he and Stevens did some- 
thing for Schine. He refers to Schine as our hostage or the hostage whenever 
his name comes up. I made it clear that as far as I was concerned, I don't per- 
sonally care what treatment they gave Schine, and that as far as I was con- 
cerned, he was in the Army. I did say that I thought it wasn't fair of them to 
take it out on Schine, because we were investigating the Army, or to keep using 
it to try to stop our investigations. I told him the only contact we were au- 
thorized to have with him about Schine was on Investigations Committee busi- 

INIy telling him this does no real good, as he constantly lumps together all his 
talk about Schine with suggestions that we stop holding hearings on the Army. 
I am convinced that they will keep right on trying to blackmail us as long as 
Schine is in the Army. Even though they said he deserved the commission, they 
didn't give it to him because of the left-wing press and they keep trying to dangle 
proposed small favors to him in front of us. Adams, by his attitude makes it 
clear that the Army will do nothing to see that Schine gets into any kind of an 
assignment to which he is qualified, unless we stop investigating the Army. 
When he brought up the "what's there iu it for us" business this morning, I 
told them that I saw no chance of stopping the hearings. I suggest that he talk 
with you. 

This hostage business is getting to be a real thorn in my side and I wish that 
they would either give Schine what he deserves or leave him in the rear ranks 
forever without bothering me about it. 


December 17, 1953 


In talking to John Adams today I learned that General Lawton, who as you 
recall, cooperated fully with the Committee in the exposure of subversives at 
Fort Monmouth, is about to be relieved of his command. I questioned Adams 
very closely on tliis in a friendly manner and tind that the only reason that he 
can give is that Lawton embarrassed the military by helping to make it possible 
for us to expose the incredibly bad security set up which has existed at Fort 
Monmouth. Apparently they were particularly incensed about Lawton's state- 
ment in executive session that it was impossible to get the necessary coopera- 
tion for the clean up until our Committee hearings commenced. 

I don't know what we can do in this matter. Certainly we are not in a posi- 
tion to tell the Army who to promote and who to demote. However, if we are 
to get cooperation from officers in the future we must take some steps to protect 
those from retribution when they cooperate. This proposed revenge against 
Lawton is diflScult to understand in view of the fact that you will recall Stevens 
personally called him and told him to fully cooperate with us. 

If either of you talk to Bob Stevens before I do, I suggest that you bring 
these facts to his attention in that he may not be aware of this situation. 

December 21, 1953 


Following my conversation with you on last Thursday in New York, I think 
you should know that the stafE of the Subcommittee has not called upon Dave 
Schine's time or services except when necessary to the Committee work. As 
you know, he left the committee rather suddenly during the middle of this 
Fort Monmouth investigation. He had done a great deal of work on that and 
the Defense establishment's case involving G. E. 

I agree that contact with him should be kpt [sic] at a minimum. So far as I 
have been able to ascertain there has been no instance where he has missed 
training because of Committee work. I would have been happier had he 
cleaned up all his work before he left, but under the circumstances he could 

As you know, I have on many occasions been pretty curt with Dave about 
the prompt submission of memoranda. However, in this current situation in 
view of the change of plans I cannot criticize him. 

I think you should also know that during the past months since we have 
been closely associated with John Adams, I have on numerous occasions talked 
to him on the subject of Dave Schine. In all instances that I can remember 
the topic either came into the conversation as a natural result of some other 
subject we were discussing or Adams in a facetious vein made some statement 
concerning the "hostage." I have always taken the position that I personally 
had no particular interest in Dave Schine's Army career. However, I have 
upon almost all occasions he has been discussed taken the position that although 
he deserved no special consideration, he certainly should not be penalized 
because of his former connection with the committee. On a number of these 
occasions I have stated that it was my opinion that Schine should get an 
assignment for which he was qualified and in which he could actually be useful 
to the Army in an investigatory position. I have never, however, suggested 
that his assignment should be other than one which he is entitled to by all Army 
standards of fair play. 


Memorandum : From : Frank Carr 

To: Roy Cohn 
January 9, 1954 

I called John Adams about the question of the Insert for the Annual Repoi't 
re the change of the Army Security Program. Also told him you had been 
trying to reach him about Dave not being free Sunday to help with the report. 
He was up in Amherst, Massachusetts, stated that he was snow bound and that 
he couldn't do a thing about it from Massachusetts. I am sure that he doesn't 
want to do anything but I told him you would call. I think he will duck you. 
It is obvious that he doesn't want the part about Army laxity in the report, so 
don't expect Dave to get oft to help. 


January 14, 1954 

From : ROY COHN 

Ji)hn Adams has been in the office again. He said that if we keep on with 
the hearings on the Army, and particularly if we call in those on the Loyalty 
Board, who cleared communists, he will fight us in every way he can. 

As you know, Adams' present assistant, Haskins, was one of those on the 
Board, His last assistant was eased out after we advised Adams of his record. 

Adams said this was the last chance for me to arrange that law partnership in 
New York which he wanted. One would think he was kidding, but his persist- 
ence on this subject makes it clear he is serious. He said he iiad turned down a 
job in industry at $17,.'j(X), and needed a guarantee of $25,000 from a law firm. ^ 

January 15, 1954 [ ^'; 
To : Senator McCarthy [f 

From : Francis P. Carr 

my ii-'' 

Maybe one of these days you should speak to John Adams in a friendly way. 
I've tried. He is baiting Roy pretty much lately on the "hostage" situation. 
They get pretty heated before Roy buys the lunch, but it's going to lead to 


This is to record that on the afternoon of this date in my presence and that 
of Roy Cohn, Senator McCarthy advised Assistant Secretary of Defense Fred 
Seaton that he had heard that a rejjort supposedly prepared by the Department 
of the Army Counselor John Adams concerning alleged pressure by the committee 
upon the Department of the Army and Mr. Adams to obtain preferential treat- 
ment for Pvt. G. David Schine was to be sent to several Democratic Senators 
the same afternoon. Senator McCarthy advised Mr, Seaton that the writer 
was searching the files for memoranda dictated concerning Schine, The Senator '^^'^, 
distinctly stated that he was not suggesting to Mr. Seaton what he could or *' 
should do with the report as far as the distribution was concerned, but that he "■'- 
was (!fifering to Mr. Seaton some of the memoranda prepared by the Subcommittee p 
concerning Schine, The Senator stated that he thought it would only be proper 
for the Department of Defense to consider these memoranda along with any ^^ 
releases of the Adams report. He again emphasized that he was not attempting * 
to dictate to the Secretary the procedure he was to follow but was offering 
to make available the memoranda of the staff for his perusal. Ni 








ams, John G 1801, 1802, 1807, 1814, 1815, 183G, 1838, 1846, 1853-1S5G 

ams report 13,j(; 

Force (United States) 1802, 1806, 1807, 1853, 1854 

Force Base 1S54 

en, Colonel 1853 

iherst. Mass 1855 

my (United States) 1796-1708,1800, 

1802, 180G, 1807, 1810-1815, 1818, 1819, 1827, 1841, 1846, 1853-1856 

my civilians 1815 

my personnel blackout (General Lawton) 1853 

my release 1818 

my security program — .^ 1855 

my Signal Corps 1802, 1853, 1854 

sistant to the Director (Federal Bureau of Investigation) 1848 

sistant Secretary of Defense 1856 

torney General of the United States 1808 

rr, Francis P 1802-1805, 1813, 1816, 1817, 

1819-1821, 1823, 1824, 1826, 1829, 1836, 1839, 1840, 1843, 1853-1856 

.hn, Roy M 1795,1817, 

1819-1821, 1823-1827, 1829, 1838, 1842-1846, 1849, 1850, 1852-1856 

Testimony of 1796-1815 

•llier, Robert 1841, 1842 

)mmunist infiltration in the Air Force 1S06 

hmmuuist infiltration in the Army 1810,1812,1815,1853 

)mmunist infiltration in defense plants 1807 

)mmunist infiltration in the Navy 1806 

mimunist infiltration in the United States 1808 

)mmunist literature 1811 

)mmunist Party 1802, 1806-1812, 1827, 1853, 1854 

)mmunist spies 1808 

jmmunist trials 1808 

jmmunists 1802, 1806-1812, 1827, 1853, 1854 

Dmmunists (second string) 1808 

ommunists in Government 1810 

ongress of the United States 1809, 1810, 1848 

ongressional committees 1809, 1853 

ounsel to the Army 1801, 1802, 1807, 1814, 1815, 1836, 1838, 1846, 1853-1856 

efense Department 1802, 1807, 1842,1853-1856 

efense plants (Communist infiltration) 1807 

Dennis the Menace" 1827, 1828 

'epartment of the Army 1796-1798, 1800, 

1802, 1806, 1807, 1810-1815, 1818, 1819, 1827, 1841, 1846, 1853-1856 

•epartment of Justice 1808 

iirector of the Federal Bureau of Investigation 1847, 1848 

)irksen, Senator 1798 

)orr {see also Hale and Dorr) 1829 

)riscoll, Mrs. Mary B 1803-1806,1815 

Testimony of 1816-1852 

Eisenhower, President 1809 

urope 1808 

Executive order 1809 

ederal Bureau of Investigation 1847, 1848, 1850, 1851 

''landers. Senator - 1827, 1828 

i'ort Monmouth 1802, 1806, 1814, 1818, 1853-1855 

leneral Electric (GE) 1855 

Government Printing Office 1818 

lale and Dorr 1829 



Faskin=! 185 

Hiss, Alger 1810, 182 

House Un-American Activities Committee 1S2' 

Juliana, Jim 185; 

Justice Department 180 

Kennedy, Robert IT.'Q 

Korean war atrocities I'^IO 

LaVeuia, Mr ls]l 

Lawt(m, General 1853, IS-ij 

Lawton's Army personnel blackout ]s."i:i 

Loyalty Board 1809, ls.-,( 

Madeline 18<M 

Maner, Mr 17'.)6 

McCarthy, Senator Joe 1796, lSOO-1806, 1812-1817,1819-1824, 

1826, 1827, 1830-1832, 1835, 1836, 1838-1847, 1849, 1851, 1853-1856 

McCarthy committee 1813, 1814, 1822,1853-1855 

BIcGoughey, John F. X lS(t 

McGranery, James P - 1808,1809 

Minis, Frances 1804 

Mudffett. General 1802, 1854 

Mundt, Senator 1798 

Navy (United States) 1802, 1806, 1807, 1853, 18: 

New York City 1808, 1854-185(] 

Pentagon 1802, IS 

Potter, Senator 1798, 1810 

President of the United States 1809, 1810 

Presidential order (1948) 1810 

Presidential order (April 27, 1953) ISOi) 

Prewitt, Tom 1841 

Remington case 180 

Republican administration 182 

Ridgway, General 1802, 1S54 

Rosenberg, Ethel 1808 

Rosenberg, Julius ISOS 

Rosenberg case 1808 

Saypol, Mr 180sl 

Schine, G. David 1796-1800, 1802, 1810. 1811, 1827, 1837-1839, 1853-18561 

Seaton, Fred 1839, 1842, 1856! 

Second-string Communist' trial (New York City) 1808 

Secretary of the Army 1801-1803. 1806, 1807, 1810, 1811. 181.3-1 

1815, 1819, 1822, 1825, 1826, 1836-1838, 1846, 1848, 1851, 19.5.3-1856 

Senate of the United States 1827-1829 

Signal Corps (U. S. Army) 1802, 1853, 1854 

Southern district of New York (United States district attorney) 1808 

Stevens, Robert T 1801-1803. 1806, 1807, 1810, 1811. 1813- 

1815, 1819, 1822, 1825, 1826, 1836-1838, 1846, 1848, 1851, 1853-1856 

Symington, Senator 1820 

Trial of second-string Communists (New York City) 1808 

Trudeau, General 1802, 18.54 

Truman, President 1809, 1810 

Truman order 1809, 1810 

Un-American Activities Committee (House) 1827 

United States Air Force 1,^02, 1806, 1807, 1853, 1854 

United States Army 1796-1798. 1800, 

1802. 1806, 1807, 1810-1815, 1818, 1819, 1827, 1841, 1846, 1853-1856 

United States Army Signal Corps 1802, 1853, 1854 

United States Attorney General 1808 

United States Congress 1809. 1810, 1848 

United States Department of Defense 1802, 1807, 1842, 1853-1856 

United States Department of Justice 1808 

United States district attorney (southern district of New York) 1808 

United States Navy 1802, 1806, 1807, 1853, 1854 

United States President 1809, 1810 

United States Senate - 1827-1829 

Voice of America 1818 

Washington, D. C 1808, 1813 





JOE McCarthy, roy m. cohn, and 









S. Res. 189 

PART 48 

JUNE 2, 1954 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Operations 

<6620'' WASHINGTON : 1954 


3 9999 05442 1720